Earlier this week, I received an election notice from one of the major political parties carrying a self-congratulatory message for the way the party had been involved in resolving the problem of the 'DRI Park and Ride' scheme.
The item informed readers that the planning decision was imminent and that the views of local residents have been sought on the possible restrictions to on street parking. The proposed measures would include 'no parking' between 10am and 3pm and sele
ctive double yellow lines close to junctions.
This item is of considerable interest to me, and I guess many others who for many years have suffered the blight of living close to the DRI, especially when we have observed year on year new building on a site that cannot cope with what is being asked of it, especially when there is no care whatsoever for the well-being of residents of the surrounding area.
So what about this 'consultation'? I have certainly not been consulted and my back garden shares the boundary fence with the hospital grounds, and I don't know anyone else who has been consulted. Just what consultation has taken place?
Should we be pleased to read that hospital staff parking throughout the working day is to be replaced by parking restriction out side local dwellings? For residents, surely this is replacing one problem with another?
Before the official response is made that householders have no rights over parking on public roads outside their homes, I would argue that there would be no public roads were it not for the fact that houses were built there and the occupiers pay taxes, local and national, to maintain those roads, so there must be some relationship between the road and each of the houses it serves.
How does the public body of the DRI exercise its duty of care under human rights legislation to its neighbours, local residents, by constantly adding to the building and creating more need for patients, their relatives and friends, and staff to find somewhere to park whilst attending their premises? An off site park and ride merely means that more land will be freed up on which to develop further and the blight will spread even further away from the DRI site. Only the residents of the area will continue to feel the burden of that situation.
To summarise: The DRI continues to develop and build on a site much too small for its purpose. The politicians are jubilant that through consultation – with who is not known – they have replaced one problem with another so far as the residents are concerned.
And we, the residents are expected to be grateful and to vote for them!
Michael Burdis
Zetland Road
Doncaster
The full article contains 459 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
