Page 23 - MJC submissions
P. 23
STEPS TOWARDS AN AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
And stipulations
5 DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION
AHL’s application is impressively professional and supported by several important statements
and expert reports (Listed at Appendix H). Unfortunately, some supporting documentation is
conflicting and open to misunderstanding. Page | 13
The supporting statements are capable of misinterpretation.
5.1 Design and Access Statement
Paragraph 4.00 states that: “The site offers the potential to provide a high yield of in demand
housing as reinforced in the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan on a brownfield site”;
The statement continues:
“The existing character of the site, as previously noted, is largely utilitarian. An extensive
flat-roof exposed concrete frame and facing brickwork reinforces character.”
“Urbs in rure applies. It is therefore possible to achieve the most effective development
23
of the site;”
“In summary, the high-density urban character of the existing built form combined with
the highly screen nature of the site, presents the opportunity to maximise the
development potential of the land without affecting the character or appearance of the
surrounding locality”
This is a circular and fallacious proposition. The only features that make the existing
site “starkly urban” are the EDF building and Seeboard tower which are to be
removed: thereby reinstating the rural character of the area.
The admission that the intention is to build a “city in the country” is evidence - on its
face - of the application’s non-compliance with planning policies.
The mistaken classification of the area as “starkly urban” opens the door for over-
development, the density of a ghetto and cheap, box like construction. In fact, the
development’s design appears to have been “inspired” by EDF’s starkly urban and
utilitarian features.
Figure 4: Before and after: guess which?
The empty car park reflects the “existing” status of, and traffic flows from, the building.
23 Which means “city in the countryside”