AS12 Chace Farm49

5th April 2014

Mr J StrawHead of Planning PolicyMole Valley District CouncilPippbrookDorkingRH4 1SJ

Dear Mr StrawProspective development of Chace Farm Stud and land south of Sandpipers, The WarrenFollowing the assessment of sites put forward for possible development, recently carried out by Ashtead Community Vision, I am writing to express my concern about and total opposition to any proposal to develop the above two areas of land, referred to as AS12 and AS13 in ACV’s site assessments.Increased traffic and questionable access/availabilityYou will be aware that The Warren is designated as a private road, which, together with the verges, is owned and maintained by the Ashtead Warren Property Association Ltd. The Association would do everything within its powers to deny access to the site. It is also effectively a cul-de-sac, the only entrance and exit being from and on to the busy A24.Although there is a certain level of traffic accessing Ashtead Hospital, once on the private part of the road, past the two brick pillars, traffic is limited to residents’ vehicles and the occasional delivery van. A right of way is granted to Chace Farm but only in favour of the residents of the single dwelling farmhouse and to clients of the livery business in operation there.The land south of Sandpipers, The Warren is in multiple ownership (17 acres divided into five individual strips) with covenants on it, thereby making it only available in the unlikely event that all the owners agree to its acceptability for development. Furthermore there is currently no direct permitted pedestrian or vehicular access to this site.

Residential Area of Special CharacterMole Valley District Council has always regarded The Warren as deserving inclusion in a special category. The Council’s policy EV17 has designated it as a Residential Area of Special Character, endorsed as recently as 2010 in the Ashtead ‘Built Up Areas Character Appraisal’ document. Any development of the green belt land to the south of The Warren would destroy the special qualities and environment that The Warren and its residents enjoy. Indeed, it is highly likely that the value of the ‘spacious houses on generous plot sizes’ (the average plot size overall within The Warren is one acre) would be considerably diminished by any such development, especially those that back on to the land south of Sandpipers, one of which is a Grade II listed property of rare historical significance.

1

Green belt landBoth the above sites fall within the green belt and any further buildings other than the existing farm, stables and former farm cottages (now two semi-detached homes) could only be regarded as encroachment. Furthermore, the effects on pollution that ACV has considered in its assessments would be dramatic (a major as distinct from minor negative), in that there is minimal light and noise there at the moment. Air pollution would also be affected by increased traffic to the sites.You will, I am certain, be aware of recently-published revised Government guidelines that state that the need for new homes should not outweigh the damage their construction would cause to the green belt.

Tracks & bridlewaysAlthough consideration is given to the need to conserve and enhance landscape character and features (ACV’s objective no 13) I do not feel that sufficient importance has been attached to the view from the adjoining tracks and bridleways, which are enjoyed by walkers and riders alike. The ancient boundary hedges running south to the old Roman Stane Street have, however, been identified as of particular historic importance.

General comments regarding Ashtead as a wholeMy husband and I have lived in The Warren, Ashtead for nearly 30 years. We enjoy the ‘village’ community, albeit that of a large village, but fear its being spoilt by any further development. Apart from a few small pockets of infill sites, Ashtead is effectively ‘full’ and its infrastructure would struggle to cope with many more residents.The recent housing development at the former Parsons Mead School site in Ottways Lane has been carried out sympathetically and well. However, there is little scope in Ashtead for any further large-scale development within the already built-up area and any suggestion of sacrificing green belt land to satisfy a perceived need should be strongly resisted. The only possible exception could be the area identified by ACV as AS11 – land south of Ermyn Way, on the Ashtead/Leatherhead border, which arguably prevents merging with Leatherhead, although this role is adequately fulfilled by the existence of the M25. This site in practical terms is within a walk of Leatherhead and its many facilities.There is independent evidence to suggest that there is pressure on doctors’ surgeries, other medical facilities and schools, with virtually no extra-mural opportunities for teenagers. Communications by road have become increasingly difficult over the years, with congestion on the A24 a long-standing problem at peak times. This situation will be exacerbated by the work currently being undertaken, resulting in narrowing of the roadway, in order to provide a cycle lane. The car park at Ashtead Station, although newly enlarged, is nonetheless invariably full before 9.00am, apart from during recognised holiday periods, pushing overflow parking on to surrounding roads, which are awaiting ‘yellow line’ status. Where are all these extra cars to go?In conclusion, I confirm my and my husband’s vehement opposition to the proposition that land at Chace Farm and south of Sandpipers, The Warren should be developed, for the reasons stated earlier in this letter.

copied by email to: Andy Ellis, Ashtead Community Vision

2

Councillor Chris TownsendCouncillor Chris Hunt, Chairman Development Control

CommitteeJason Kerr, Chairman, Ashtead Warren Property Association

Ltd

48Ashtead Warren Property Association Ltd

47Sylvacote and avenue cottage-park lane

Dear Mr Ellis, I live in Park Lane near the development referred to above .I support the proposition of affordable homes being built in Ashtead and felt the houses built close to Ashtead high street just off park lane have been a good addition to the community .

However ,I am particularly concerned by the Access and Travel issues connected with this possible new development as clearly the houses will be built a considerable distance from local shops, schools and public transportation .Park Lane is already extremely busy and quite a dangerous road with heavy congestion .If any development was going to be approved there would need to be significant measures taken to reduce the use by non -local traffic of Park Lane for Access to the A24 and M 25 and significant improvements on the road itself to enable any more local resident vehicles to use the road safely and with minimum impact environmentally .

The problem with the development of this new site is that the houses are too far from local amenities and transportation to be accessible other than by car which means this will significantly add to the number of local resident car users of an already severely congested minor road . I reject the owners view that dwellings would be within easy reach of Ashtead town centre and local services .I also challenge the proposition that this site would be an obvious site to build affordable houses for young families given the lack of local amenities and I would expect firm assurances would need to made about the prices that would be charged for these dwellings so they were accessible to young families . Accordingly I do not think that SA Objective 1 can be a minor positive . The comments on SA objective 2 and 5 seem to demonstrate that the amenities are a long way from the proposed new dwellings and so I fail to see that improvement to wellbeing and health can be determined as a minor positive when the additional traffic consequences of this site will significantly damage the health and wellbeing of those residents and school children already in the environs of Park Lane . I challenge the proposition in SA objective 6 as I consider the contribution of green belt to the Park Lane residents to be of high environmental value. SA objective 8 , 9 and 14 is a Major negative as it will significantly increase car usage on an already congested road which was not built or designed for its current levels of traffic let alone additional local

3

resident traffic. Noise pollution levels are already exceeding acceptable limits for a rural housing area abutting green belt and will be made worse by the development.

I agree with Epsom &Ewell Borough council policy that housing land should be allocated within the boundaries of existing built up areas and that areas of green belt should be retained to ensure that the country side appeal of living on park lane is retained. This development is not within the boundaries of existing built up areas in park lane (as was the previous development mentioned above)but instead extends the area into valuable green belt as it adds to the rural character of the park lane area.

I cannot support this proposal for the reasons given above and the key considerations in the conclusion .

46

4

5

.

43

6

7

42Chase Farm & Land South of Sandpipers It would appear that these two sites are closely associated with each other in more ways than one. I note that an application to develop Chase far was refused in 1956. Any building would be an intrusion into the Green Belt and the Surrey Hills beyond. The current boundary at the southern end of The Warren must not be eroded. Since there is no access to the land at Sandpipers it would require an amendment to the curtilage of the site ultimately to the detriment of the Green Belt and the surrounding area

8

38PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPMENT OF CHACE FARM STUD AND THE LAND SOUTH OFSANDPIPERS, THE WARRENAs a resident of The Warren, Ashtead I write to inform you of my staunch opposition to theproposed development of the land referred to as AS12 – Chace Farm Stud, The Warren and AS13 –Land to the south of Sandpipers, The Warren in the recent site assessments carried out by Ashtead Community Vision (ACV).As has been identified in the assessments carried out by ACV, access to the proposed sites is a significant issue. The Warren is a private road and the existing traffic to Chace Farm Stud is limited to light traffic relating to the livery business in operation at the Farm. The Ashtead Warren Property Association, of which I am a member, owns the roads and verges and has been mandated to employ its significant financial resources to fight unwanted development through legal channels. I fully support this course of action.There is also the issue of covenants that could restrict or even prevent development of the land.There have been previous examples where land has not been developed because the courts have upheld covenants over it. I would support the Ashtead Warren Property Association in its challenge of any development proposal, even to the lands tribunal court of appeal.Other concerns with the proposed development are that it is not at all in line with the keycharacteristics of the local area as it stands, and that the development would result in a significantincrease in light pollution, noise pollution, vibration and fumes if the proposed total of 320 dwellings were permitted. The important role that AS12 plays in preventing encroachment into open countryside, as identified in the ACV assessment, should also not be undervalued.Not fully recognized in the Site Assessment is the significant negative impact any development would have on the views from the adjoining tracks and bridleways, which are frequented by many walkers and riders. My family all regularly use these pathways, it allows us to go out for a circular walk / run without crossing a main road.In addition my daughter shares a horse at Chace Farm and goes riding on all the local bridleways,again without the need to cross a main road. The independence she has enjoyed in being able to ride safely, with school friends and without adult supervision, gets her outdoors, exercising and away from technology. This is no small achievement with today’s teenagers.For further consideration is the major negative impact that any development would have on the setting of the Grade II listed house, Grey Wings, which looks out onto AS13 that has not been fully explored. As I understand it, Planning Policy Statement 5 'Planning for the historic Environment’,states that the effect of a proposed development on the setting of a listed building is a material consideration in determining a planning application. Also, The Warren, a private road, is designated as a Residential Area of Special Character under policy ENV17. It has wide tree lined streets without pavements, few road markings or curbing and any proposed changes to this character should properly meet with staunch opposition.Andy Ellis, Chairman of Ashtead Community Vision is quoted in the Dorking and LeatherheadAdvertiser on February 27th 2014 when being interviewed about the Site Assessments in Ashtead as saying that “…there are more obvious sites available in Mole Valley that should be built on first,..”. I would support this view.Please be assured that I will oppose any development of Chace Farm Stud and the Land south of Sandpipers, The Warren at every stage using every tool available to me, as should the proposed development be approved, it would cause me a substantial loss of amenity value and nuisance.

9

34AS12 As with other sites assessed in this consultation development at this site would contribute to urban “sprawl” of Ashtead`s boundaries- this can be considered as having a negative impact on any remaining Metropolitan Greenbelt. That the western boundary adjoins with the site identified as AS13 should be recognised in this document- any development in this site (AS12) will impact AS13. It is noted that the consultation document correctly acknowledges the “significant” assessment of encroachment as indicated on p26 of the ANFGBBR (6). A with AS11 any replacement of open land with residential accommodation will generate noise through the acts of daily living.

31

29Hi Tony

I wish to support the campaign to prevent Ashtead village being ruined by additional building development.

I am particularly in opposition to proposal AS 13 (area south of sandpipers) as I live on the side of Stag Leys adjacent to this piece of land. I feel it is a privilege to back on to open countryside and when the sheep and lambs are in the field behind it is a pleasure to hear the sounds of the countryside. The field is certainly visible when the trees are not in full leaf and I do not wish to look out on to properties. Please also see my general list of objections below.

I am also concerned about the AS12 (Chace farm) again due to encroachment on the open countryside and for my general reasons listed below. The proposed number of properties to be built on AS11 (near Ermyn Way) has major concerns for me in terms of the volume of houses and the traffic congestion on an already very busy A24 and the Knoll roundabout which backs up on the the M25 junction at peak hours.

My general objections which apply to all of the proposed sites is as follows:

Ashtead is very special because of the amount of green open space. Encroachment on this Green Belt land (it is called “green” for a reason) will substantially detract from the area. It lose it’s unique beauty and appeal and make it just like everywhere else that is being built on, overcrowded and congested, the urban sprawl will just spread

10

out to us. Once the buildings are allowed there is no turning back and Ashtead will never be the same.

Objection to the principal of building on green field sites. They are green so the community can benefit from natural, open spaces.

Traffic – Ashtead is already congested at peak times, access on to the A24 eg from Stag Leys can be very difficult. Most homes now come with 2 cars so the increased vehicles on the road would be considerable. The traffic backs up to Ashtead village one way, the Knoll roundabout and beyond the other. The Lanes area is already a busy cut through for people getting up on to the Downs

Pollution – noise, light and from traffic

Removal of trees and hedges, consequences of losing them visually and to our natural habitats – birds and wildlife

25I am disappointed and extremely concerned that your reviews of the sites at Chace Farm and Sandpipers, both adjacent to The Warren, make no reference to the Grade 2 listed buidling, Grey Wings, my property, which is adjacent to these fielded areas.

This property is listed because it is the earliest known project of Sir Giles Gilbert-Scott, architect of Waterloo Bridge, Battersea Power Station, the Tate Modern, Waterloo Bridge, Liverpool Anglican Cathedral and designer of the iconic British red telephone box, among other things.

Grey wings was designed and built between 1910 and 1913, to a "butterfly" design specifically to afford a south/south wetserly aspect across the open rural land at Chace Farm and Sandpipers. The garden of Grey Wings looks out onto these two fielded areas, there is access to them, via a gate. Quite aside from the multiple other stong reasons why these areas are completely inappropriate for development, including that they are designated Green Belt, have considerable natural beauty and wildlife, have no public access whatsoever and are distant from any infrastructure and amenities, to develop them would completely compromise Grey Wings, a culturally and historically significant listed property.

Your reports need to reflect this - I mentioned it in my response to your earlier e mail survey, but the gentleman who presented to Warren residents last week seemed completely unaware of it.

23

I am writing to you in respect of the recent site assessments carried out by Ashtead Community Vision. I live in The Warren in Ashtead and strongly oppose development of Chace Farm Stud, The Warren (AS12) and the Land to the South of Sandpipers (AS13).

11

My opposition is for a number of reasons, but the overriding one is access. The Warren is a private road and both the road and verges are owned by the Ashtead Warren Property Association. At present, there is virtually no impact on The Warren by Chace Farm Stud traffic as it is minimal. If the site were developed with up to 320 dwellings, the effect would be devastating. There is no pavement to The Warren and almost no kerbing and so it is totally unsuited to the vehicular and pedestrian traffic that would result.

The Ashtead Warren Property Association has been authorised by its members to use its considerable financial resources to fight inappropriate development. I wholeheartedly support that position.

Apart from the matter of access, development of AS12 or AS13 as proposed would not be compatible with the character of the area which is designated as a Residential Area of Special Character under policy ENV17. It would also be highly detrimental to the area in terms of light pollution, noise pollution and air pollution. Development would also damage the many footpaths and bridleways whose views would be ruined.

I would also draw your attention to Grey Wings, a Grade II listed building which overlooks AS13. Development of that area would cause significant damage to its outlook and I believe that current planning policy deems this to be a material consideration in determining a planning application.

Development of Chace Farm Stud or the Land to the South of Sandpipers would dramatically affect my property and I will oppose it at every stage.

21

20

PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPMENT OF CHACE FARM STUD AND THE LAND SOUTH OF SANDPIPERS, THE WARREN

I am a resident of The Warren in Ashtead and I would like to advise you of my opposition to the proposed development of the land referred to as AS12 – Chace Farm Stud, The Warren and AS13 – Land to the south of Sandpipers, The Warren in the recent site assessments carried out by Ashtead Community Vision (ACV).

As noted in the assessments carried out by ACV, access to the above mentioned sites is a significant and fatal issue. The Warren is a private road, the existing traffic to

12

Chace Farm is limited to light traffic relating to the livery business in operation at the Farm. Any increase in the flow of traffic will have significant impact on the nature of The Warren and this is something I will oppose vociferously. The road is private and is owned by the The Ashtead Warren Property Association, of which I am a member. I will fully support the use of the Associations considerable financial reserve in using legal action to oppose any proposed development via the legal system if necessary.

There are a number of issues which 1 would like you to consider:

1 I believe there are restrictive covenants on the land affording legal protection over any development.

2 The development is not in line with the character of the local area. The development would lead to significant light and noise pollution. Greenbelt inside the M25 should be preserved as a priority to avoid encroachment into open countryside. An issue clearly identified in the ACV assessment.

3 There will be a tremendous negative impact on the views from the adjoining tracks and bridleways, which are frequented by many walkers and riders. In addition to this, the negative knock on effect that this could have on local businesses e.g. Bike Bean Café who currently host birthday parties where the children explore the countryside around Ashtead and ride along these routes, should be seriously considered. I moved to The Warren because of the easy access to the countryside and I enjoy walking our dog on the bridleways and the views of open countryside currently experienced. A legal battle to preserve one of the main reasons for moving to The Warren and a significant part of our lifestyle, will be a worthwhile investment.

4 For further consideration is the major negative impact that any development would have on the setting of the Grade II listed house, Grey Wings, which looks out onto AS13 that has not been fully explored. As I understand it, Planning Policy Statement 5 'Planning for the historic Environment’, states that the effect of a proposed development on the setting of a listed building is a material consideration in determining a planning application. Also, The Warren, a private road, is designated as a Residential Area of Special Character under policy ENV17. It has wide tree lined streets without pavements, few road markings or curbing and any proposed changes to this character should properly meet with staunch opposition. We will not allow pavements to be positioned along our roads and as per planning policy access on roads without pavements could not be considered and would be a significant safety risk given the increase in traffic that would result.

Andy Ellis, Chairman of Ashtead Community Vision is quoted in the Dorking and Leatherhead Advertiser on February 27th 2014 when being interviewed about the Site Assessments in Ashtead as saying that “…there are more obvious sites available in Mole Valley that should be built on first,..”. I along with all the residents of the Warren I am sure support this view.

Please be assured that I will strongly oppose any development of Chace Farm Stud and the Land South of Sandpipers, The Warren and will support with every means necessary the initiatives of opposition.

13

19Comments on Site Assessment: AS 121. To provide sufficient housing to enable people to live in a home suitable to theirneeds and which they can affordO„« If the development is done in keeping with the surrounding properties, itwould achieve a house per acre at best, which is not what one wouldconsider the target of the necessity to supply affordable homes.2. To facilitate the improved health and wellbeing of the whole populationO„« The proposed development would have a detrimental effect on the ruralcharacter of the land to the south of Chace Farm, which is accessed fromWarrens MeadThe WarrenAshteadKT21 2SNPage 2 of 4public bridle paths and footpaths that adjoin the eastern, southern andwestern boundaries of the site.5. To improve accessibility to all services and facilitiesO„« All services and facilities currently located within easy access of the Warren,are overloaded and oversubscribed to. State and private schools havestudents on waiting lists, doctors are over subscribed etc... this should be anextremely negative aspect for such development since any increase in suchservices and facilities can be done anywhere.8. To ensure air quality continues to improveO„« The construction of housing on the site together with the associatedadditional traffic, would, given the prevailing south westerly wind direction,generate substantial air pollution and a significant decline in air quality for theexisting houses within The Warren and Crampshaw Lane. There would alsobe some detrimental effect on the existing houses in Stag Leys.9. To reduce the level of, and exposure to, noise pollutionO„« Account should be taken of the increased noise pollution, generated by traffic movements and children, that the construction of housing on the site would create immediately and in the long-term for the existing houses within The Warren, Crampshaw Lane and Stag Leys.10. To reduce light pollutionO„« I strongly support the conclusion in the Site Assessment about thedetrimental impact on light pollution.12. To conserve and enhance biodiversity and networks of natural habitatO„« There is no mention of the detrimental effect that the development of the site would have on its indigenous wildlife.13. To conserve and enhance the landscape character and features, the historicenvironment and cultural assets and their settingO„« The importance of the view from the adjoining tracks and bridleways, which are frequented by many walkers and riders, is not fully recognised in the Site Assessment.O„« The major negative impact that any development would have on the setting of the Grade II listed house, Grey Wings, which looks out onto AS13 that has

14

not been fully explored. As I understand it, Planning Policy Statement 5'Planning for the historic Environment¡¦, states that the effect of a proposeddevelopment on the setting of a listed building is a material consideration indetermining a planning application.O„« The Warren, a private road, is designated as a Residential Area of SpecialCharacter under policy ENV17. It has wide tree lined streets withoutpavements, few road markings or curbing.

18Dated: 4 April 2014Dear SirRegarding : Prospective Development of Chace Farm Stud and the land south of Sandpipers, The Warren, AshteadI am a resident of The Warren, Ashtead, Surrey. As such, I would ask you to please note my opposition to the proposed development of the Chace Farm Stud, The Warren and also land south of Sandpipers, The Warren. These are referred to as AS12 and AS13 respectively in the recent site assessments carried out by Ashtead Community Vision (ACV). My reasons for opposition are as follows:The many users of the bridleway south of Chace Farm enjoy a wonderful view over the verdant open land of Chace Farm and south of Sandpipers. Any development which resulted in houses and roads covering this land would take away this 'right of pleasure' and tranquil enjoyment for many thousands of people who have for generations used this bridleway.The Warren and Crampshaw Lane enjoy very low light pollution, given that these roads are of low density housing and minimally used and lit roads. If 300 plus houses were to be built on Chace Farm then there would be a significant increase in light levels plus increases in noise levels and pollution from the many additional cars that would use the new housing estate. As such the whole area would change in overall levels of pollution; light, noise and vehicle emissions.Of course, any new housing development would need to optimise the use of land and hence there would be a much higher density of housing on the proposed Chace Farm site and South of Sandpipers than is currently the norm in The Warren, Crampshaw Lane and surrounding roads. This would be out of character with the area and would mark a step change in the environment of the whole area. On a point of important detail, Grey Wings which is a house within The Warren looks out over the Chace Farm land. Grey Wings is a Grade II listed house. Were Chace Farm to be developed then this would seem to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 5 'Planning for the historic Environment' which states that the effect of a proposed development on the setting of a listed building is a material consideration in determining a planning application. Then there is the important matter of access to the proposed sites. While there is special right of way granted for those using Chace Farm for purely the livery business conducted at Chace Farm, there is no other right of way granted. And no further right of way will be granted by the Ashtead Warren Property Association which owns the roads and verges of The Warren. Indeed the significant financial resources of The Ashtead Warren Property Association would be used to resist any attempt to use the roadway of The Warren for access to Chace Farm for any purpose other than the very limited access rights already granted.The Warren is designated as a 'Residential Area of Special Character' under policy ENV17. The Warren enjoys wide roads with no pavements, few road markings or curbing and this adds to the charm of The Warren; indeed a stroll along the roads of The Warren is a delight enjoyed by many over many many years. And fitting its ENV17 designation. There are few roads, unfortunately, still like this in Ashtead and what few there are such as The Warren should be preserved as they are so that Ashtead maintains it's special Village character.I hope and trust you will fully consider these important points with regard to any proposed developments, as referenced above.

15

17

As a resident of The Warren, Ashtead I write to inform you of my staunch opposition to the proposed development of the land referred to as AS12 – Chace Farm Stud, The Warren and AS13 – Land to the south of Sandpipers, The Warren in the recent site assessments carried out by Ashtead Community Vision (ACV).

As has been identified in the assessments carried out by ACV, access to the proposed sites is a significant issue. The Warren is a private road and the existing traffic to Chace Farm Stud is limited to light traffic relating to the livery business in operation at the Farm. The Ashtead Warren Property Association, of which I am a director, owns the roads and verges and has been mandated to employ its significant financial resources to fight unwanted development through legal channels.

There is also the issue of covenants that could restrict or even prevent development of the land. There have been previous examples where land has not been developed because the courts have upheld covenants over it. The board has support from our members to challenge any development proposal and will do so in the same way that Gloucestershire Housing Association Ltd. fought Wimpey in 2011 “George Wimpey Bristol Ltd v Gloucestershire Housing Association Ltd, Court of Appeal - Lands Tribunal, March 14, 2011”.

Other concerns with the proposed development are that it is not at all in line with the key characteristics of the local area as it stands, and that the development would result in a significant increase in light pollution, noise pollution, vibration and fumes if even a fraction of the proposed total of 320 dwellings were permitted. The important role that AS12 plays in preventing encroachment into open countryside, as identified in the ACV assessment, should also not be undervalued.

Not fully recognized in the Site Assessment is the significant negative impact any development would have on the views from the adjoining tracks and bridleways, which are frequented by many walkers and riders. In addition to this, the negative knock on effect that this could have on local businesses e.g. Bike Bean Café which currently host birthday parties where the children explore the countryside around Ashtead and ride along these routes, should be seriously considered.

For further consideration is the major negative impact that any development would have on the setting of the Grade II listed house, Grey Wings, which looks out onto AS13 that has not been fully explored. As I understand it, Planning Policy Statement 5 'Planning for the historic Environment’, states that the effect of a proposed development on the setting of a listed building is a material consideration in determining a planning application. Also, The Warren, a private road, is designated as a Residential Area of Special Character under policy ENV17. It has wide tree lined streets without pavements, few road markings or curbing and any proposed changes to this character should properly meet with staunch opposition.

Andy Ellis, Chairman of Ashtead Community Vision is quoted in the Dorking and Leatherhead Advertiser on February 27th 2014 when being interviewed about the Site

16

Assessments in Ashtead as saying that “…there are more obvious sites available in Mole Valley that should be built on first,..”. I would support this view.

Please be assured that I will oppose any development of Chace Farm Stud and the Land south of Sandpipers, The Warren at every stage using every tool available to me, as should the proposed development be approved, it would cause me, and the majority of the members of the Ashtead Warren Property Association, a substantial loss of amenity value and nuisance.

17