Page 14 - Ashbourne Park

STEPS TOWARDS AN AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
And stipulations

2 The Integrated Development (Continued)

For example:

The Transport Statement relies on the MSDC Local Plan of 2004 (and Policy T4 therein) in
under-providing for parking spaces (93 instead of 144) and ignores the applicable
Neighbourhood Policy- ASW21. The Transport Statement dismisses the correct calculation - of Page | 6
144 places - by again relying on the 2004 MSDC Local Plan and policy T5. In fact, the MSDC
Local Plan of 2004 carried no authority [because the council could not demonstrate a five-
year supply of deliverable housing (NPPF §49)]. Thus, according to NPPF §14, ASW21
prevailed and “indicated development should be restricted” to applications which allocated
two parking spaces per unit.

The supposed “golden thread” running through planning policy is a presumption that
sustainable development will be approved, subject to an objective assessment of need (OAN),
compliance with density, design, environmental standards local and national policies.
Counties and districts must have good reason for overruling Neighbourhood Plans, either in
favour of or against development. AWVC is opposed to the current application.

MSDC approved the AWNP’s OAN target of 60 new dwellings up to 2024 and its March
2018 District Plan states;

“3.32. There will be no necessity for the current generation of neighbourhood plans
to increase their housing numbers.”

Thus, there is no need for the proposed development and even less for the integrated
plan.

The application breaches multiple AWNP policies on the protection of the WAONB, AFSSI
etc, the rural environment, sustainability, viability and especially preserving the distinctive
characteristics of the village. Perhaps the most visible act of non-compliance relates to MSDC’s
pre-application recommendations for development of the EDF site based on a 2016 plan by
Robert Davis John West Ltd for 90 dwellings:

Figure 3: 2016 Design Plan for the WH:EDF site