Page 241 - MJC submissions

2 PARAS 1 AND 2 WHAT IS THE DEVLOPMENT SITE?

Mr Taylor’s report states:
Paragraph 1.1 the applicant is contracted to purchase the freehold of the entire
development site, as defined on the Site Location Plan.

The wording: “is contracted to purchase the entire development site” is at best ambiguous,
never discusses so why here

The words “is contracted to purchase the entire development site, as defined on the Site
Location Plan” is ambiguous for two reasons but can only mean both the Wealden House
EDF (WH:EDF) site and the Wealden House Life Improvement Centre (WH:LIC) site. First,
does it mean that a contract is already in place or not? What sort of contract is it? Is it, as
suspected, an option or conditional contract subject to planning approval being given? Does
it apply to one or both sites? What and where is the “site location plan”?

Paragraph 2.1 “the application site comprises a large parcel of land located to the west
of Lewes Road. It is one of two principal sites identified for development in the
Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan: the other (immediately adjoining to the north)
contains Wealden House Life Improvement Centre and does not form part of this
application.
The fact that Mr Taylor vaguely refers to a “large parcel of land” raises the odour of
deliberate ambiguity and that the “application site” is not the same as the “development site”.
There is no mention anywhere in the filings for DM/16xxx or DM18.xxxxxx of a
“development site”.

Mr Taylor’s reference to the application site as “It is one of two principal sites identified for
development in the Ashurst Wood Neighbourhood Plan: the other (immediately adjoining to
the north) contains Wealden House Life Improvement Centre and does not form part of this
application”. This is wishful thinking xxxxxx misrepresentation that the WH:LIC site was
identified in AWNP as a one of the two principal sites for development may breach the
Professional Standards of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) of which both Mr Taylor
and Mr Stephen King of MSDC are members.

The “Ashurst Wood Neighbour Hood Plan” is a specific document consisting of 43 pages
submigtted on xxxxx, examined on ---------, 2 March 2016 adopted on ------- and---
nd
Examines whether report was legally compliant----

Appendix 2 Supporting documents and evidence base--- is not AWNP--- Foreword shows that
plan is distinct from supporting docs

It included 2 maps 1 Built up areas etc

Map 2 Proposed housing sites (shows )---- it is miseladind 5 sites---- shows the entire WH
site. It is, in fact, policy map only=== misleading (table of why)
Does not include Map of sites examined and does not seo sheet of

Before adopton referendum on plan----- (much pfraised)----- site 14 had been rejected---

No way villages would have accepted 120 flats on WH sitre---- they approved---- Page5
The fact is that the only reference to the WH:LIC site was in page 24 of the AWNP as follows

E:\Cobasco\Personal, House and computer instructions\EDF and WH Development\MJC Plans theories and
Objectives\CONSOLIDATED SUBMISSIONS\5 Response to disclosures of 8th December.docx