Page 270 - MJC submissions

• 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

60.1 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

Rural exception site
Why it was included

Diffs of policy and assessed plans

Sustainability --- why included--

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

Main centre of empoyment

The WH:LIC site - of an estimated 0.54 hectares - was never fully evaluated;

Sale conditional on planning permissions--- conditional sale

• However, Attachment 7b shows that the Wealden House manorial building, front car
park, drives and back gardens (of an estimated 0.32 hectares) were not “available”,
not assessed, not (or incorrectly) included in referendum and would therefore not
qualify as lawful additions to the AWNP;

• Ashurst Wood Policy ASW 10 relates to the WH:LIC site (14). Map 3 from the AWNP
of March 2016 [Attachment 8] shows that the policy would apply to the entire site of
an estimated 0.4 hectares even though only 0.08 hectares of the Northern car park
were qualified for allocation. The different boundaries of site 14 on Attachment 7a
(identified by site number) and on Attachment 8 (identified by policy reference) have
led an assumption that the entire WH:LIC was validly allocated in the AWNP. This
Page34
does not appear to be the case.

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