Page 77 - All files for Planning Inspectorate update
P. 77

order to minimise the impact on local residents during the construction period and undertake
                       work in accordance with those details”. The application is silent on this and, although we can
                       appreciate the difficulties in reaching agreement at this stage, we believe the developer
                       should include in the application their intentions in this respect so that their adequacy can
                       be assessed.



                   8. There still appears to be inadequate provision for communal storage areas. We can see no
                       provision in the plans for either individual or communal secure storage facilities. This is a
                       common drawback of many blocks of flats. All families, of whatever size, need storage space.
                       These flats are designed to be compact with open-plan living areas and little individual
                       storage. There appears to be no communal storage whatsoever. We feel this is a design flaw
                       that should be addressed.



               In summary we believe that this application shows many of the flaws present in the earlier rejected
               DM/18/1548. The applicant appears to have ignored the vast majority of the individual reasons
               given for objection included in your letter to them of 11 March 2019, including continuing to ignore
               the principles and policies included in the AWNP. It is also a fact that all of these points were
               exhaustively discussed with them during the protracted negotiations over the earlier proposals
               which led to the substantially modified plan which they then withdrew. Clearly they were well aware
               of the deficiencies of their first proposals but have, nevertheless, decided to cynically propagate
               them.

               We therefore believe that this new proposal should also be rejected.


               As we have made clear many times before, we have no objection to the EDF site being developed.
               We would welcome a sympathetic proposal that preserves the character of the area and the village
               and which meets the requirements of local and national planning policy and the specific
               requirements of the AWNP. This is not such a proposal.




               Yours Sincerely,





               A M Tillin
               Chairman, Ashbourne Park Owners’ Association
   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82