The practice submitted plans to demolish the 1893-built former lodge at Lammas Park, Ealing, which has been vacant for more than 20 years, and replace it with a block of flats rising from four to six storeys tall. It would provide six apartments.While the park is within Metropolitan Open Land, Red + White said the area containing the East Lodge should be considered grey belt land under the terms of the latest National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), as it has been previously developed.Since Saturday (8 January), 1,713 objections have been submitted to Ealing Councils planning department, with just 13 comments made in support of the scheme.AdvertisementMany comments objected to the loss of park space and the demolition of the former lodge building, while others criticised the scheme as overdevelopment.An objection by Ealing Fields Residents Association chair Roger Jarman said the proposal did not protect a cherished open space and that its scale and design were incongruent with the existing character of the area.He said: It is imperative to protect our public land, preserve our historical structures and ensure that any changes to our community spaces are made with full transparency and active public participation.Another objector said: A development of this kind will ruin the look and feel of the park, which should be a protected assets for the enjoyment of residents. This is effectively green belt parkland that should not be built upon.Jarman and several other objectors also raised issues around the ongoing installation of a sustainable urban drainage system in the park that is meant to ease flooding, but has been the subject of a local petition over the space taken up for dangerously deep ponds. Some ask whether the new development might worsen flood risks.AdvertisementThe lodge is not a listed building and is not on Ealings local heritage list. A consultation over expanding the boundary of the Ealing Green Conservation Area which would incorporate the site of the building is ongoing.Red + Whites application states that the proposal for much-needed family homes is on land that the NPPF states should be considered as grey belt. It adds that the uninhabitable lodge has had several unsympathetic alterations, including various utilitarian extensions finished in low-quality materials.Although the proposed building seeks a more contemporary approach, many of the architectural elements to the faade take inspiration from the original building and wider locality, it adds.A design and access statement submitted by the East London-based practice concluded: The scheme is designed with residents well-being in mind, and expresses what it means to optimise site capacity for a residential development, as opposed to simply maximising the development of a site.The much-needed family housing exceeds the national space standards and provides high-quality amenity space with a mixture of gardens, terraces and balconies.As well as the NPPF, other policies that will also be key in determining whether the application can proceed include the London Plan 2012, which stipulates that green belt development should only proceed in exceptional circumstances, and Ealing Councils local plan.A new version of Ealings plan was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate in November, updating a prior 2012 version.Alister Scott, professor of environmental geography and planning at Northumbria University, told the AJ that grey belt is poorly defined under the NPPF.He said this creates the one word everyone from developer to community hates and that is uncertainty.The new grey belt rules will ultimately have to be defined by the courtsScott added that if the council rejects a proposal based on grey belt principles and a developer appeals against it, the NPPF definition would likely be tested in court.John Myers, director of pro-development group the YIMBY Alliance, also told the AJ that the application indicates the exact meaning of the new grey belt rules will ultimately have to be defined by the courts.He added: It may be years before we have full clarity.Last week the House of Lords built environment committee called grey belt changes incoherent and said they would make almost no difference to the governments 1.5 million homes target.The committee said that proposals for more Spatial Development Strategies and reviews of green belt boundaries under local plans will have a much more significant impact on housing delivery than grey belt policy.Red + White has been contacted for further comment.