RBWM Residents Action Group Needs your Support

Please read these flyers & head over to www.rbwmresidentsactiongroup.co.uk for more info.

This is what RBWM's "Commitment to the Park" & a "Green School" looks like...

This is what RBWM's "Commitment to the Park" & a "Green School" looks like... 36 hours after a councillor assured residents of their "commitment to the park" they ordered this. 

23 TREES IN BRAYWICK PARK TO BE CHOPPED DOWN TO ALLOW BRAYWICK COURT SCHOOL'S "GREEN SCHOOL" CONSTRUCTION WORK

The Braywick Court School website says: "We are a Green School and take our learning outside as often as possible."

TOO BAD THAT TO BUILD A "GREEN SCHOOL" YOU NEED TO FELL 23 TREES TO ENABLE ACCESS TO THE SITE AND FOR ITS CONSTRUCTION. 

(Not to mention that 13 of these trees are also in the Local Wildlife Site).

Details of the proposed construction compound and access for construction traffic to the Braywick Court School site have now been submitted to the Council (CLICK HERE to view - or head to the RBWM planning portal online and search for the Hibbert Road adress). In addition, details of measures to 'protect' the trees adjacent to the site during construction have also been submitted. 

The access to the school from the car park involves the removal of 2 yew trees, 2 holly trees, 2 field maples and the large bay tree in the Nature Centre garden, leaving only 2 yew trees which are to be heavily 'crown lifted' by 4.5m. 

In addition, many of the trees surrounding the site will have their lower branches cut off to raise the canopy (so that HGVs & construction vehicles can drive underneath)  and others will be heavily pruned back away from the school boundary, including the 4 old yew trees to the north of the school. This will result in the building appearing even more overbearing when viewed from the park & the dell, and the local wildlife site below.

IN TOTAL 23 TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED FOR BRAYWICK COURT SCHOOL'S DEVELOPMENT AND 13 OF THOSE TREES ARE IN THE LOCAL WILDLIFE SITE.

If you object these trees being chopped down please  CLICK HERE to email all the relevant RBWM staff and Bray Ward councillors. Ask them to commit to protecting these trees, and also ask who will pay for the re-instatement of the Nature Centre Garden.

The Council's own Planning report from July 2016, (which is what councillors read before voting to the approve planning application), does not mention that ANY trees were going to be removed, and the only tree specifically mentioned in the document they said was to be retained 

"6.23 The Box tree [T63] is to be retained." 

However, we now see, according to the Arboricultural Method Statement of Feb 2017 that this tree, the only one mentioned in the report is actually to be chopped down! Along with 22 others. 



So to re-iterate here in simple terms: 

• The RBWM planning report for the Braywick Court School planning application, which is what the councillors rely on for information about the plans (as do the public), before voting on the application DID NOT MENTION THAT ANY TREES WOULD NEED TO BE CUT DOWN.

• IT NOW TRANSPIRES THAT AT LEAST 23 TREES WILL BE CUT DOWN. Also the only tree specifically mentioned in that RBWM planning report is among those to be chopped down, even tough the report says it would be retained!!

Sound familiar? Remember BPET & Braywick Court School's statements to parents & residents that merely "The existing buildings will be refurbished"?

Why does this 'Green School' require so much destruction, the chopping down of so many trees & ruining this area of such a beautiful park?

Why were they not honest from the outset?

We hope our councillors will stand up to BPET & do something to protect the park and all these trees. Please email them using the 'Act Now' button above.

-----

ALSO, THE 'TREE PROTECTION PLANS' WHICH BRAYWICK COURT SCHOOL HAS SUBMITTED ARE WRONG.

They do not show the trees to be removed in the Nature Centre Garden nor do they show all the proposed lateral pruning and crown lifting and thus are misleading and misrepresent what is being planned. 

THE DIAGRAMS IN THE SCHOOL'S PLANS ARE INCORRECT AND DO NOT SHOW CORRECTLY HOW MANY, AND WHICH TREES THEY WANT TO REMOVE!

(All you have to do is compare the list of trees to be removed in the appendix with the corresponding trees on the diagram and you can see that it is (accidentally on purpose?) incorrect and makes it look like most of them will be unaffected - trees to be removed should be illustrated with dotted edges but are not.)

So, to make things clearer, here are a couple of corrected images - red circles indicate trees (or groups of several trees) to be chopped down.

Map showing trees to be removed for the construction of Braywick Court School. This image shows the trees in the Nature Centure Garden to be chopped down, in red. The ones in yellow are to be heavily 'crown lifted' to 4.5m (which means any branches up to that height are removed).

-- Another quote from the RBWM Development Control Panel report we now know to be incorrect and misleading:

6.5 Views of the new building would be limited from outside due to the substantial tree cover along the north and east boundaries,from the west due to the existing nature centre building and further trees and vegetation and from the south due to the building’s set back and 2m high brick wall adjacent to Hibbert Road.

Looking at the details of trees to be felled you will see that 5 more tree groups on the Eastern boundary, within the local wildlife site in Braywick Park are to be removed. These are all evergreens that form the bulk of any screening from the road the the listed cottages there. IN TOTAL 10 TREES ARE BEING FELLED ON THIS EASTERN BOUNDARY. You can see them in red in the image above. (Though there are only 6 rings there, some of them represent groups of trees rather than single trees). 

If you know the area then you will understand how important they are for screening of the site and their removal will make this development stand out and be even more visible.

-- And again, another misleading statement from the Council's report before planning permission was approved:

6.39 The closest residential property to the new school is positioned approximately 20m to the east.  Given this separation distance, the orientation of the buildings and the existing tree screening to be retained, together with any additional tree planting considered necessary, it is not considered that the proposal would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of this property in terms of loss of privacy, loss of light or from the development appearing overbearing.

NOT TRUE! THE EXISTING TREE SCREENING IS NOT TO BE RETAINED. 9 OF THE TREES PROVIDING THAT SCREENING ARE TO BE REMOVED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT!! 

(The small box tree (T79) doesn't really provide screening, but the other 9 do for sure.)

IF THESE 23 TREES ARE ALLOWED TO BE CHOPPED DOWN, ALONG WITH THE EXTREME CROWN LIFTING OF 13 OTHER TREES AND THE CUTTING BACK OF 5 OTHERS THE EFFECT ON THE PARK & THE SURROUNDING AREA WILL BE DEVASTATING. THE BUILDING WILL APPEAR EVEN MORE OVERBEARING ON THE PARK AND THE DELL & LOCAL WILDLIFE SITE BELOW. 

A towering blot on the landscape overwhelming the park, not a sympathetic 'green' building tucked away in the corner.

Here's some photos of some of the trees that will be removed from the front of the Nature Centre garden. (These particular ones are to be chopped down purely so that they can build an access road through it for all the HGVs and construction vehicles because there is no other way to get through to the small site.)

RBWM Planning officer's Report contained FALSE STATEMENTS, significant Omissions & was MISLEADING

The council has just advertised the disposal of a section of land adjacent to the Braywick Nature Centre in Braywick Park - as part of the development we campaigned against. [See below for where to write to object to this!]

One of our many points of objection to the planning application was that the school would be taking over public open space in the park.

The RBWM Planning Officer's report to the Development Control Panel, (to help councillors understand the application & advise on whether to approve or reject it) in response to our concern said, incorrectly "There is No Loss". 

Completely UNTRUE. 

RBWM Council's committee report said there would be no loss of open space for the Braywick Court School development, and now they are advertising that there WILL be loss open space.

We raised the point that open space would be lost as one of our objections, but the Council Planning Officer's report said there would be none. Only 3 months later they are handing over this public land.

People should rightly object to this loss of open space.

Objections to the intended disposal must be made in writing and submitted to Emma-Jane Brewerton, Lawyer, Select Business Services: Legal Solutions, Wokingham Borough Council, Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham, Berks, RG40 1BN by no later than 3 November 2016

Excerpt of the Planning Officer's Report to the Development Control Panel

Notice of Disposal in this week's Maidenhead Advertiser

The area in red is the section of land, adjacent to the Nature Centre to be 'disposed of' which will become part of the footprint of Braywick Court School.

Was the planning report deliberately misleading and deceptive?

Initial Thoughts & Questions on the new Proposals

We're still having a good look at the new proposals & will post more thoughts officially here once we've had a chance to discuss fully as a group.

First impressions are that it looks like all the same HUGE issues relating to the Travel Plan, Traffic, Access & Parking remain. [Remember the Highway Development Control recommended the original plans be refused based on its size & those same issues - pupil numbers and the site's location are unchanged in these plans so the situation is the same].

We ARE relieved to see plans to use the Nature Centre & build directly on the Park itself have been shelved (although issues of overdevelopment on the site and impact on the Green Belt in various ways remain), so if the Council, their friends at Bellevue Place Education Trust & the School manage to keep bulldozing this scheme forward at least we managed to prevent them doing that. For now at least...

Just a few common-sense questions that pop up:

What happens in the future when the 'travel plan' (which seems to be pivotal in the plans, despite the key elements remaining unchanged from the first planning application) is forgotten & not enforced, but the damage is already done & the buildings built, and parents dropping off and parking in the Hibbert Road Car park, or on Hibbert Road (and the pavement as they have sometimes before) itself?

How do the developers propose to gain access to the site during all the demolition and construction work, if it goes ahead? How much will this damage & disrupt the formal gardens at Braywick Park & the surrounding area, how will all the heavy machinery access the site?

What was the other permanent site that was investigated and why is that not being considered? Or being made public? (When school representatives were asked this at the exhibition some members of the public were told, and others were not. Is the School and BPET telling prospective parents one thing, and residents another? The same goes for the Councillors taking an interest in the issue. Are we being deliberately misled?)

How many of the parents that signed up their kids to the School in the beginning were told that the original School buildings were "out of date, do not meet modern teaching standard requirements and are inefficient in design and had to be replaced" (rather than simply "will be refurbished" as the official school promotion documents said? Again - deliberately misleading statements. Why should we trust them to stick to travel plan promises in the future, for example?).

If the current buildings are "out of date, do not meet modern teaching standard requirements and are inefficient in design & have to be replaced" then why was the site selected for the school in the first place? Why was this hidden from parents and residents at the start?

What happens in the future when the obviously inadequate playground size (with inadequate punctuation!) leads to an application to expand out and 'lease' more land from the Park? Did they already ask for this before at the very beginning?

Has the council leased additional Public Open Space land to the School/Trust over and above the land leased in July 2014? (The plans show a red line extending out into the Public Open Space by the Nature Centre.)

Is a modern, glass fronted, 2 storey, yellow brick, flat-roofed building in keeping with the local setting? (The area is dominated by red brick buildings, some of which date back to the 1700s & are Grade II listed).

Highways Authorities recommend that Planning Permission is REFUSED.

The official Highway Development Control comments have been submitted today and we're pleased to see that they recommend REFUSAL of the planning application.

Hopefully our RBWM Councillors will read the document, all the letters of objection they have received, and the petition signed by 200+ residents, other recommendations for refusal by Bray Parish Council & the Flood Authority, and take them into account when the application is put to the vote.

You can download the original document if you click here (or here) or read it below.

All of the planning documents, the Bray Parish Council's comments (also recommending refusal) and 100+ letters of objection can be downloaded from the RBWM website here.

Site Location

Hibbert Road is a local distributor that provides an alternative link between the A308 Braywick Road and the B3022 Bray Road. The road is also subjected to a 30mph speed limit.

Between its junction with the A308 Braywick Road and the entrance to the Braywick Car Park, Hibbert Road has footways along both sides of the road. However, there is only a single footway on the south side of Hibbert Road running between the car park entrance and The Causeway.

There are no pedestrian facilities along Hibbert Road from The Causeway towards the B3022 Bray Road. To the west of the school there are no pedestrian crossing facilities across the A308 Braywick Road for parents who wish to walk to the school.

The site comprises the school, formerly known as Winbury Primary School and Braywick Nature Reserve and car park.

The school is currently served by an existing access located to the south east of the site that offers wholly restricted views in both directions due to the absence of a footpath and the horizontal alignment of Hibbert Road. The proposed plan shows the retention of this access. However, given the limited views offered the Highway Authority recommend that this access is closed.

Access to the new school will be via Braywick Road car park and through double gates located north-west of the site boundary.

Access by Service Vehicles

The submission includes a swept path analysis of a small refuse vehicle manoeuvring to and from the site. As we understand RBWM Waste Management only collects recycling materials from the school and this undertaken by the small vehicle depicted in the plan.

Unfortunately, the submission again is silent on what provisions have been made to collect not only waste materials, but also the recycling materials when the number of pupils reaches 210. The plan excludes details of the waste/recycling storage facility, but infers that a waste vehicle will enter the car park and collect the waste from the main entrance. The distance between a refuse vehicle stationed in the car park and the main entrance exceeds the current guidelines detailed below:

BS 5906:2005 recommends that waste operatives should not be expected to move two- wheeled containers more than 15m between collection point and vehicle, and four-wheeled containers no more than 10m. Collection vehicles must be able to wait legally within 15 metres of all dustbin/sack collection points and within 10 metres of bulk bin collection points.

With reference to the Proposed Site Plan [6APES072/P/050.011 Rev 10] the distance between a vehicle parked in the car park and the main entrance gates exceeds 40m.

Parking Requirements

The previous school and the proposed site offers no off street parking facility. However, as part of the lease agreement 8 parking spaces in the Braywick car park will be given over to the school for staff and disabled users.

With reference to the Authority’s parking standard the new school attracts a parking demand of 1 space per 1 full-time equivalent staff, which includes visitors and parents.

Provisions should also be made either within the school premises or on the highway for a loading area for a school bus/coach and where necessary sufficient space allowed for buses to enter and leave the site safely.

Based upon the submission the servicing arrangement will take place within Braywick Car Park. Unfortunately, the application is silent with regard to whether a bus or coach will be used by the school and whether the appropriate provisions are in place for this.

From a historical context the Highway Authority has received complaints about inconsiderate parking along Hibbert Road, when the former Winbury School operated with 90 pupils. The consequence of some parents parking partly on the footway/carriageway and generally on the carriageway close to the school effectively reduced the free flow of traffic in the area, resulting in sections of Hibbert Road reverting to a one way operation.

Braywick Car Park was not only used by dog walkers and visitors to the nature reserve, but also by parents. The car park currently provides circa 44 spaces which will reduce to about 36 spaces as a consequence of the application.

Traffic Generation

The applicant has undertaken a ‘Mode of Transport to School’ survey for the current school year containing circa 27 pupils. These results when adjusted to reflect the mode of transport for a school with the 210 pupils suggest that 84% of parents will travel by car or taxi, 10% walking to school, and 5% travelling by cycle and scooter.

The Highway Authority is of the view that given the limited opportunities for parents and pupil to travel by foot or cycle, car borne trips are likely to be in the 90% range. The survey was undertaken during September 2014 when the weather conditions are inviting and would attract some parents who would consider adopting other modes of travel. Clearly a more balanced result would have been to undertake a similar survey during the winter months.

Park and Stride

The applicant states that a majority of the pupils will be accessing the school via the purpose built footpath from the ‘Park & Stride’ drop-off point at Braywick Sports and Recreational Ground, and those parents that do drive into Braywick Nature Reserve Car Park will effectively be turned away and asked to use the Braywick Sports Ground. We question how this can be enforced since this is a public car park which the applicant has no control over its use. A further complication is that parents are permitted to park in the Nature Reserve Car Park out of normal school hours.
Presently, there are no restrictions preventing parents from parking in the Nature Reserve Car Park at any time during the day or on Hibbert Road, when dropping-off or picking -up their children.

The submission fails to acknowledge that there will be seasonal variations in the numbers choosing the Park & Stride option, and especially during inclement weather conditions.
Presently, the purpose built path is unlit and can hardly be considered an inviting prospect for parents and staff parked in the Sport Ground during the autumn and winter period. The Highway Authority understands that concerns have also been raised about the adequacy of the access road to the ‘Park & Stride’ and that this would be a further deterrent to parents and staff.

No measures are proposed in the Transport Assessment to address servicing arrangement, the increase traffic generation nor does it acknowledge that these trips will vary significantly during the seasons.

The School Travel Plan (STP) accompanying the submission states that,
‘Parking on Hibbert Road, Gas Lane or The Causeway is not permitted for school traffic at any time’. To reiterate there are no restrictions preventing parents from parking in these areas.
The STP states that 8 staff and parents using the Early Birds and Evening Owls club will be issued a parking permit. As explained earlier this is a public car park.

The plan also mentions introducing incentive schemes to encourage walking and cycling by staff and parents.

At this point we should mention that the purpose of a School Travel Plan is to encourage parents, visitors and staff to adopt other modes of transport, thereby reducing the dependency on car borne trips. However, there are occasions whereby despite the introduction of the improved measures/incentives, the site location, the traffic conditions and the highway infrastructure is so poor there has not been a commensurate reduction in traffic levels.

Whilst we accept that there may be a number of shared trips and siblings already in attendance at the school, the increase nevertheless is significant and would further increase vehicular activity into the area, short term and ad hoc parking as well as inconsiderate parking on Hibbert Road and parking in Braywick Nature Reserve Car Park.

Much is mentioned about incentivising the parents and staff and introducing an Action Plan with agreed targets and objectives set out in the STP. However, may I remind the applicant that the STP should not be viewed as the panacea for addressing the potential increase in traffic generation and parking associated with this scheme.

The National Planning Policy Framework states,
‘Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the
residual cumulative impacts of development are severe’.

This proposal would lead to a significant increase in vehicular activity into the area. For this and the reasons mentioned above it is our conclusion that the site does not lend itself to further expansion beyond that already permitted. Therefore, we recommend that permission is refused.

HDC Officer: M D Andrews
Date: 30 July 2015

More Parking Concerns

Where will the teachers and other staff park their cars? When the school reaches full size there will be 7 class teachers, along with their teaching assistants plus office staff and catering staff. 

How many cars will this be? We have been told by Simon Ward from Bellevue Educational Trust that there would be 'around 30' members of staff.

Are the teachers going to walk 1/3 mile from the overflow car park by the Rifle Club/Maidenhead Target Shooting Club with all the materials they carry to and from school EVERY DAY? 

The council have already introduced parking restrictions and made 8 spaces 'permit holder only' - before the school has even opened, and when it does in the first year there will only be 28 pupils. 

Is the Borough allowed to simply give this public space to the private use of a free school? Where will everyone else park?

What about deliveries to the school? There will be regular deliveries of supplies for the kitchen as well as all the other materials of books, equipment and supplies. Where will the lorries park & access the site? The public car park?

Where will the waste collection vehicles park to collect the waste? In the road on the dangerous blind bend on Hibbert Road?

When plans were drawn for the new Oldfield School in Bray Road, adequate parking space for all of these requirements was an essential component of the planning application. 

Why should it be acceptable for the plans for Braywick Court School to go ahead without adequate parking provision or, indeed, with the parking provision for this to be taken away from a public amenity car park, which was provided for the use of local residents, and users of Braywick Park?

When planning permission was granted for the new Oldfield School on Bray Road it was only after long deliberation and much scrutiny of the potential traffic and parking issues. 

The planned Braywick Court School will eventually cater for 210 children and their families.  When it was Winbury School this number was at most 90. 

RBWM Council & Bellevue Place Educational trust (who will run the new School) want to take over the existing Nature Centre building in Braywick Park, and build a new building on the park itself - plus a large 2 storey development on the existing school site.

Most of the new school development is on land designated as public open space

Will there be serious consideration of the potential parking and traffic problems, not just on a day-to-day basis but for big school events, sports days, parents' evenings etc?

Even if 7 or 8 parking bays end up reserved for staff, what's to stop other staff members occupying public parking bays all day long? Or parking on Hibbert Road all day long to avoid getting a ticket instead?

Will RBWM have to introduce parking restrictions on Hibbert Road to deal with that? What about residents that need to park outside their houses on Hibbert Road?


CLICK HERE to find out a few simple things you can do to help!

"If they can get away with it, there will be more loss of greenbelt land, which is our heritage, and it is only the public which will oppose this loss"

Well put by Mr. ME Lewington in a letter to the Maidenhead Advertiser this week.

"If they can get away with it, there will be more loss of greenbelt land, which is our heritage, and it is only the public which will oppose this loss."