Page 17 - John Belsey
P. 17
FOOTNOTES
1 Sustainability Report Sites 13 and 14
2 Planning Policy Guidance PPG3 para 57
3 Referred to in paragraph 1 of the MSCD April 2018 SHELAA report paragraph 1.0, possibly
in error
4 If this application goes to appeal, litigation or Judicial Review all of the above exceptions
will be catalogued.
5 Meaning a “city within the country”
6 Which is already has the highest DdHa of Category 3 villages
7 And I believe appropriate warnings and certifications should appear on application forms.
8 I contend that the “proposed development” includes the current application for 71 flats on
the WH:EDF site and a further estimated 50 dwellings on the WH:LIC site.
9 Although unsigned
10 eluded
11 The report by Frank Taylor, town planner states that AH was contracted to buy the site.
12 As he had every right to do
13 Albeit biased
14 Although the version on the MSDC website is unsigned
15 This may be significant for two reasons. The first that it reveals the developer’s interest in
the Wealden House (WH:LIC) site and the second that the plans that had already been
prepared for the integrated development – to achieve density levels – had to breach the
boundaries of adjoining properties.
16 Actually 1.437 ha. Both the Steering Group and MSDC appear to have been careless in
evaluating the site: accepting figures of 1.2, 1.4 and 1.6ha
17 Actually 0.597 ha
18 It omits that the proposal that was subject to pre-application consultation was for 90 units
19 Meaning Ashbourne Park on a site estimated as 0.45 hectares
20 This document is misclassified on the MSDC website as “correspondence”. It is much more
important than that and Mr Taylor is a key player in, if not the driving force of, the current
application.
21 The syntax of this sentence is suspect – given MSDC rejected the idea of 90 units. To match
the context the “advice” is more likely to have been a “maximum of 50 dwellings”.
22 For an eclectic mix of 90 town housing and apartments
Page | 0
