BRAYWICK COURT SCHOOL PLANNING APPLICATION INCLUDES PROPOSAL FOR SINGLE/DOUBLE YELLOW LINES ON HIBBERT ROAD
Hidden away in the pages of the new planning application are proposals to introduce parking restrictions (i.e. single or even double yellow lines) along Hibbert Road, from The Causeway all the way until the junction with A308/Braywick Road.
None of this was mentioned in the School's 'Public Exhibition' in January, or is mentioned in any of the promotional material about the application. It has effectively been hidden.
The School's Transport Assessment in para 4.10 (see photos attached) says this is 'an additional safeguard against parent/carer parking' that 'is a suggestion made by residents'.
We are interested to see (and have requested) any documents where residents would suggest this - as many of us from the area need to park our cars on Hibbert Road (and always have done, long before Braywick Court School ever existed.)
If Braywick Court School's Travel Plan & 'Home School Agreement' is as 'robust' as claimed, then all parents/carers will use the 'Park & Stride' car park by Braywick Sports Ground. That is the key promise which the Travel Plan hinges on, and the School's only, (and unenforceable) answer to residents' concerns about all the extra traffic, access & parking problems a school of this size, on this site will create. Concerns which were shared by the Highway Development Control when they recommended the previous application be refused permission, which led to its withdrawal.
So which one is it? Will all parents access the school & park where the school promises they will, forever, or will they want to to park on Hibbert Road? Sounds like the School admitting its travel plan is completely unenforceable. Which is what we've always said.
Will there be similar restrictions in the Nature Reserve Car Park? No, there can't be, and there is no way of legally preventing parents from dropping off their children there. So why restrictions on Hibbert Road - which only really affect residents?
Is this a cheap attempt at 'payback' against residents that have complained about the previous planning application? Did they expect anyone to even notice? Why wasn't this part of the proposal made clear at the exhibition? What else is hidden in the pages of the new application?
Maybe this is just a set-up gambit so that RBWM can remove the idea of these particular restrictions as a 'concessionary' condition when the application goes to panel so they can be seen to have supposedly listened to residents' concerns?
