The offending schoolyard gateway that some still deny is in the plans

14 September 2013…..Whilst it is understood the bilingual school is withdrawing the current planning application, with an intention to address reasons for refusal and draw up new plans, BH2013/02096 and BH2013/02097 application material is currently still online.  And letters still go to the Argus claiming there will be no access/egress point which would affect the miniature railway or give direct access to the park (from the back of the school area) and singing the praises of the application.
Why the reluctance to look at the planning application documents and ‘fess up?  One drawing shows both the gate into the railway area (leading to the park) and other problems. Why dodge the truth with  letters to the Argus that demonstrate unreliability instead?
Here is a link to the planning application ‘Boundary Treatment’ drawing which, hopefuly, those who are still in denial, will look at so they can face up to some issues and site constraints!  Please note it may load v. slowly.  Planning App BH2013_02096_ Drawing_Gate into miniature railway and park from proposed school
The photos below identify the existing gate area which has been proposed to be re-used for a 1.8m gated school entrance/exit to/from the yard, across the miniature railway, and on through the railway’s own gate in enclosure railings.
The railway occupies a very long strip of land  between the park itself and the entire length of The Engineerium’s back boundary, down past the depot boundary, the electrical sub-station boundary and a terminating bit of the park itself and it is ALL entirely walled off with railings.  There is NO opportunity to move this gate point to anywhere else as some irresponsible types commenting behind the Argus articles suggest is just an amendment.  There is no choice; the Droveway entrance is the sole access point the school could  be allowed to have.   And it runs in two directions – up past City Park and the Co-op to Woodland Drive one way and across Hove Park the other way (to Goldstone Crescent).
The gap between the two sets of tracks either side of the existing/proposed entrance is all there on the drawing.  Its not invisible.  Opposite the depot gate, where the photos were taken from, is the miniature railway’s own railings gate to/from the park .
It is an inexcusable disgrace for two grown men, with formal positions concerning the bilingual school, to have been sending letters to the Argus which mislead readers into believing that there is no opening from the proposed school perimeter which would give access to the park and no problem for the railway.   Their plans show a gate point and a Droveway access – both of which involve directly accessing the park, one way or another, and using it too.

“…. the plans ensure the school will not be directly accessed by the park” Chris O’Grady, Chair of the Bilingual Primary School premises committee.  Read the whole letter (2nd of two)

“….the current plans do not infringe on Hove Park itself or on the wonderful miniature railway, which we all want to protect” Alex Miller, Chair of Bilingual School PTA.  Read the whole letter (2nd of two) 

Schools are a serious business demanding the highest levels of integrity from parents, supporters and those controlling schools, be they local authority schools or Coalition Govt. Free Schools.  A lot of smooth blather that pretzels the truth and attempts to deny what is in the actual planning application itself is unacceptable and the EFA should be looking into why their Free School and its supporters are prepared to do it.  The council has no say, no authority over them.  Only the Coalition Government’s EFA has any authority or say concerning their activities.
Is out of sight, out of mind where these Free Schools are concerned?  One has to wonder….for the long term especially.  How does the EFA propose to keep an eye on all of them, quite apart from occasional OFSTED visits to rate them?

About saveHOVE

Concerned with planning, development and the conservation of historic Hove, we actively seek to prevent inappropriate, negligent and abusive redevelopments!
Aside | This entry was posted in Major Redevelopment, Planning Applications, Schools and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.