Page 231 - MJC submissions

“Darren Page (of Lytle Associates) said that he thought the parties were close to
agreeing a scheme but confirmed that if the Council allowed the substitution of
drawings the applicant would need to be satisfied that there was a prospect of officer
support on a revised package of proposals. He added that if this was not the case the
current application would probably have to be appealed. Peter Owen stated that it
was his preference for a scheme to now be agreed at a local level rather than go to an
appeal (para 1.21)”

Your email to Mr Tillin of Ashbourne Park Owners’ Association (APOA) on 20 November
th
2018 states:

“The position with the application is that in my judgement the originally submitted
scheme is not something that officers could support. It is for the applicants to seek to
address the concerns that we have with the scheme. If the applicants decide to amend
their proposals, then any new plans would be publicised to interested parties and the
Parish Council (sic= Village Council) could comment on them”.

• The MSDC Brownfield Land Register [Attachment 9] shows a total of 50 dwellings on the
combined “Wealden House” sites of 1.6 hectares: that is a density of 32 DdHa. There is
no explanation of how this incorrect area was calculated, although it is likely to consist of
1.2 hectares of the WH:EDF site (Site 13) and 0.4 hectares of the WH:LIC site (Site 14). If
this is the case, it is again in error because the combined net developable area is 1.2
hectares (0.8 hectares of the WH:EDF site and 0.4 hectares for the WH:LIC site).

In any event, the brownfield report signals an integrated development of 50 units rather than
around 120 as implied in the Design and Access Statement of the original April 2018
application - DM/18/1548

• The Steering Group (consisting of AWVC members and planning experts: see
paragraph 2.3 and Attachment 19) responsible for the 2014 and 2015 Sustainability Reports
(see Attachments 1 and 2) made it clear that the WH sites1 should be developed at a “similar
scale” [to Ashbourne Park] “but careful design would be
needed to respect the character of adjoining and neighbouring buildings”;

Plans---- variations ----

• The area of the WH:EDF site is inconsistently recorded as 1.60 hectares (“TBC”) in the
AWNP “Sites Submitted as at February 2014” [Attachment 3] and 1.47 hectares in
application DM/18/1548 [Attachment 4 Question 21]. In fact, I believe the developable
area (after excluding ancient woodland) is 0.8 hectares;

• The number of dwellings assessed as “potential housing capacity” for the WH:EDF (Site
13): in the Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - SHLAA 470:
Attachment 5a] is shown as “50+” but this density - of 64 dwellings per hectare (DdHa) -
conflicts with the “justification” given one line below on the same attachment which
Page 25
states:

E:\Cobasco\Personal, House and computer instructions\EDF and WH Development\MJC
Plans theories and Objectives\CONSOLIDATED SUBMISSIONS\4a Mr Ashcroft 7th Dec
2018.docx