Page 73 - All files for Planning Inspectorate update

However it is important to recognise that this table is not the planning policy. Irrespective of
the numbers that are set out in the table it remains the case that developments must be
assessed against the relevant polices in the DP and NP to ascertain whether the design of the
proposal is acceptable.”

3. The applicant has submitted on page 38 of the proposal a schematic designed to
demonstrate that “future development of the neighbouring (LIC) site will not be prejudiced
by the proposals” (plan reproduced below). Policy ASW10 of the AWNP provides that any
new buildings proposed for the LIC site should “demonstrate that development can be
achieved without harmful impact on the amenity of the residents of Ashbourne House or
Carlton House”. Even a cursory glance at this plan shows how that amenity would be
drastically and negatively affected by development of the scale implied. We are well aware
that AHL have been in discussion with the owners of LIC and have ambitions to acquire and
develop that site as well. Approval of DM/19/1025 would open the door to gross over-
development of the LIC site as well.

“The Village Council is concerned by the plan…………………. which shows a number of blocks of
flats on the adjacent site (which is allocated for possible residential development in the
Neighbourhood Plan). If the applicant wishes to develop both sites, then the Council would
like to see a comprehensive proposal covering the whole combined site.”

We invite you to consider the following hypothesis.

Were the applicants first (before the EDF site) to be submitting a planning application for
the LIC site along the lines outlined in DM/19/1025 for EDF, then the extent of the
overdevelopment of LIC compared with the existing adjacent Ashbourne Park properties
would be glaringly obvious. Double the number of buildings and massively less green space
on a similar sized plot.

See Plan below