Page 233 - MJC submissions

b) Two outline proposals had been submitted: one for a mixture of 70 houses and flats
and another for 68; most of which would be three storeys;

c) The site is suitable for development with a “potential housing capacity” of 50+ units
but continues:
“There is public support for this brownfield development. Two apartment blocks, totalling 14
flats have been built on a former part of the site and development at a similar scale would be
acceptable, but careful design would be needed to respect the character of the adjoining and
neighbouring buildings, including the adjacent Victorian manor house”.
6. This statement is critically important in understanding the current impasse over the
“approved” density or “minimum requirement” of the WH:EDF site.

• The density of the Ashbourne Park site - for the 14 apartments referred to - is
estimated at 28 dwellings per hectare (DdHa);

• If the “scale” were correctly applied to the EDF site – as specified by the Steering
Group - the result would be no more than 22 units, including affordable housing and
not 71 as submitted in the application;

• It is significant that of all of the sites evaluated by the Steering Group and MSDC,
WH:EDF was the only one where a deduction should have been made for ancient
woodland and where DdHa was so grossly excessive (See Attachment 8).

The two figures of “50+” and a derived total of between 20 and 33 units are so discrepant
that it is astonishing that everyone failed to notice it.

I acknowledge that all of the above – including any arithmetical and other errors - are moot
because ASW Policy 5 states that all estimates of capacity and all pre-application advice are
non-binding and that design and scale will be determined at the application stage. This must
be subject to the site being legitimately included in the Neighbourhood Plan, or a new, stand-
alone application.

Gas mains--- shallow—
Outside built up area

Site 14
whilst policy 10 supports residential use on the site, it does not preclude another business use
on the site, but it is felt that residential use would be preferential to the manner has
potentially been vacant at some point in the future (Clip)

0.54 hec==== 0.40 with drives excluded—traversed---much less

Diffs of policy and assessed plans
Sustainability --- why included--

Loss of business---- companies lisy—playschool/creche
Page 27
Northern car park, manorial house, rear gardens and ancient wood land..
Main centre of empoyment

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