Page 76 - All files for Planning Inspectorate update

to the envisaged parking areas in what is currently the north car park of LIC. This will
lead to further erosion of the trees and shrubs and render the whole site open to
the Lewes Road rather than secluded, as it is at present. It will also (being
immediately opposite the nine spaces referred to above) constitute, with their
proximity to the entrance from Lewes Road, both a risk of collisions and also traffic
backing up into the Lewes Road as people manoeuvre just inside the entry point to
the site. This is potentially dangerous.

 Policy ASW14 of the AWNP provides that development uses “design that respects
the scale and character of existing and surrounding buildings” and that “the design
of the particular development has addressed and protected the positive features of
the character of the local area”. It is impossible to see how the current proposals
comply in any way with this policy. The rather brutalist “city centre” design is wholly
inappropriate to the character of the immediate area.

We note that when Ashbourne Park was built the developer included design
elements drawn from the architecture of the adjacent LIC, leading to a harmonious
and sympathetic development. The new proposals for the EDF site could do the
same, rather than appearing to be visually more like boxes for storing people in, out
of sight and out of mind.

 We believe the buffer zone between the development and the area of ancient
woodland is still deficient. The original plan for DM/18/1548 showed part of the
proposed estate encroaching into the 15 metre buffer zone. You advised the
architect to rectify this. A revised draft showed the architect had resolved this issue
apart from a section of a parking space that still encroached into the buffer zone.
You again advised the architect to rectify this. This latest plan shows that the parking
space now appears to be clear of the buffer zone. However, a close inspection of the
plan shows that they seem to have simply redrawn the inside line defining the buffer
zone so that it does not intrude into the parking space. A careful measurement of
the indicated buffer zone at this point suggests it to be approximately 13 metres,
not the 15metres required.

 We assume that you will be seeking more input from the police regarding the
security aspects of the new plans form a crime prevention point of view, but it
seems to us that there is no evidence that the objections in this respect raised
regarding DM/18/1548 have in any way been addressed in this application.

6. The application does not address the issue of maintenance of the common areas post
construction. Policy statement ASW9 (i) requires the developer to “show what arrangements
will be made for the future maintenance of common areas”. The application is silent on this
point. The residents of Ashbourne Park self- manage their estate, so we are well aware of
the issues involved and the effort required to maintain the quality of the environment. The
EDF development is significantly bigger and we believe this issue needs to be addressed by
the developer before approval is granted.

7. The application does not address the issues of noise and disruption during the build period.
Policy statement ASW9 (k) requires the developer to “ agree arrangements during the
construction period including hours of work, delivery, parking and storage arrangements in