Re: Barnoldswick Forces Memorial Gardens

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 04 Jun 2014, 11:07

In answer to Big Kev, thanks for the offer of patrolling the gardens after 10 pm but one of them is even bigger than you and there's more of them. Unfortunately the reason why I know where they all go and what they do is that a member of my family is one of them so nothing to be proud of there.
In answer to the previous post and any others that come from people who do not live nearby perhaps they should think how they would like a gang of 12 to 15 large youths running past their house in a big gang in the middle of the night. The garage now closes at 10 pm but they are not selling to minors, some of the youths are over 18 and quite big lads. If the police are called, they take ages to arrive and when they do the kids run away before the police can actually get out of their car and reach the gardens. The kids involved are very much in favour of a back access although they would not want to be named of course.
As previous poster said the loggia has now been removed and flower beds are being put in it is now not a hidey hole and the flower beds could run all along the back wall which would make the garden asymmetrical which were Mrs Broughton's wishes.
Those are the main problems that are going to be experienced by residents and as I said before the gardens would still be beautiful and safer with a higher wall at the back with flower beds in front and one controlled access at the front is much safer for children.

Post by **Big Kev** » 04 Jun 2014, 11:13

Enfadado wrote:One thing I would like to say also is that there have been physical threats made against some people who have objected (police informed) and that is another thing that is upsetting the lovely DonDon. I think the situation needs to be resolved calmly and people's feelings treated with genuine concern
Safety and enjoyment for users and residents is paramount.

Have I read this right? This seems a little heavy handed for a democratic society. I am in favour of opening an access, to the rear of the gardens, but certainly wouldn't threaten anyone who objected.

Post by **Big Kev** » 04 Jun 2014, 11:22

Enfadado wrote:In answer to Big Kev, thanks for the offer of patrolling the gardens after 10 pm but one of them is even bigger than you and there's more of them. Unfortunately the reason why I know where they all go and what they do is that a member of my family is one of them so nothing to be proud of there.

If the situation is as bad as I'm reading perhaps an extension of the CCTV system will deter them. As I've said earlier, I've yet to see this gang of marauding undesireables. Whilst I admire your sympathy towards dondon, as you are related to a member of this "gang" perhaps you should be more proactive in alleviating the issue...

Thomo · Post by **Thomo** » 04 Jun 2014, 12:01

Having only just picked up on this due to other pressing activities, I can see where there is much concern. The Town Councillors and other groups are doing their best for all, and deserve support. Whatever they do there will almost always be objections. Like all Towns this one has its share of mindless morons and the big problem is controlling them. Making it hard for them to gather in a given place is not easy, restricting their access helps, as does good illumination, but they will always find somewhere else. Public spirited people can put themselves at risk by trying to help if they act as individuals. It is sad that this site could be used as a battleground between good and bad, that is not what it is for. Twice in recent years I have been faced with intimidating situations in two specific locations. The first was the Fernbank Mill car park area which was resolved by a combination of effort between organised residents, the Mill owners and the Police. The more recent was across from where I now live, the Fosters Arms bus terminus, here there was an additional problem as the youths concerned where of a different ethnic background, they truly believed that they were untouchable! This was again tackled by good co operation with the Police and the land owners. This comes at a price however as individuals can be targeted for reprisal, the better organised acting as a determined group are more likely to succeed.

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 04 Jun 2014, 14:50

As you said Thomo, restricting their access does help which is why more access to the gardens will help restrict them. I also would not recommend that anybody try to confront them unless Kev feels up to it.
Thanks Kev for your suggestion but if you only knew how proactive I have been when others have given up hope. I am a retired Youth Offending worker and even all my psychology and social training does not qualify me to deal with the "problem" mentioned earlier. I have got a bit fed up of being thumped when trying to help and am now trying to enjoy retirement.
I also think it is taking it too far to threaten objectors or in favours and nobody deserves to live in fear. The bloke in question was very large and very drunk and apparently not a pretty sight.
As I said before, all Mrs Broughton wanted was a nice pretty safe place for people to reflect and enjoy.
There is just too much hatred in the world now, how sad.

Post by **PanBiker** » 04 Jun 2014, 16:01

With my admin hat on now I will post that a long standing member of the site has felt it necessary to report one of the posts in this thread as an offensive and personal attack on another member. The member reporting is an observer of this thread and at this time not a contributor.

Administrators and Moderators are aware of this and will be monitoring this thread. We do not wish to stifle debate but please keep your comments relevant to the issues being discussed, personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Post by **David Whipp** » 04 Jun 2014, 21:39

At tonight's meeting of the town council, members considered a report from Monday's meeting and the various representations that have been made, for and against, the access onto Mosely Street.

The decision was to support the access being created.

Post by **Stanley** » 05 Jun 2014, 03:52

I agree with both Ian and Kev. If anybody had told me that an innocuous subject like the renovation of a public open space for all the right reasons could have caused so much heat, generated by what might happen, I wouldn't have believed them. Like Kev, I don't recognise this picture of Barlick being a hotbed of gang activity. I also can't see how the design of the garden could exacerbate any bad behaviour that exists at the moment. If my instincts are right, this is an attack on the concept of improving the garden and the target is the TC via Councillor Whipp. If anything about this affair is reprehensible, it is that. I deplore the use of the site for this purpose, it is not the correct forum. Nobody can guarantee that kids will always be seen and not heard. At times this has to be reined in. This is a policing matter and nothing to do with the garden. The sooner this is realised, the better.

Post by **David Whipp** » 05 Jun 2014, 07:00

Thanks Stanley.

I think it's a good thing to have the debate and the OGFB site is one of several places where it's been taking place.

I didn't mention that the town council decision was unanimous. Though others may discount this, it was also taken after genuinely weighing up the pros and cons of the proposal and taking into account what people fear.

There has been nuisance behaviour in the Memorial Gardens, largely centred around it being a drinking den for young people.

Much of the work taking place is designed to reduce the opportunities for this to take place; taking the hidey holes out of use, removing the platform at the back, introducing some lighting, planting prickly stuff in strategic places, opening up the view from Kelbrook Road, reducing the opportunities for tree climbing... Donald Cock pointed out at the meeting on Monday that some people have used the gardens as an enclosed area to allow their dogs off the lead. He thought that having an opening at the back would soon have an effect on that...

I keep repeating myself, but experience at the War Memorial is that creating a through flow of pedestrians reduces inappropriate behaviour; this is also reflected in similar circumstances elsewhere.

One objection to the access is that it would provide a quick exit if the police arrived on Kelbrook Road. (Not that the wall has ever stopped 'wrong 'uns' from making a quick exit.)

What seems to be missed is that an opening would give police the means to go into the gardens unannounced. Maybe any bother makers would still make a quick exit - through the front gate, but surely that's preferable for people living on Park Street anyway?

Post by **Stanley** » 05 Jun 2014, 07:10

All this discussion revolves around unconfirmed fears, never a good place to start from. One thing is certain, the proof of the pudding will be in how the garden is used when completed. That will be the time to discuss any action needed. As I said early on in the debate, I prefer half full glasses to half empty ones. You are right in that the War Memorial is a good example of how access has improved use. I was against that in the first place but I was wrong and freely admit it. I have changed my mind on the evidence and that's what is needed here, evidence, and the only way to get that is to suck it and see. Even taking worst case we are not looking at a repeat of the Brixton Riots here!
One thing I learned about security when I was bringing Ellenroad back to life was that the best security is good lighting, good sight lines giving visibility and populating the site. A through route gives at least two of those criteria.

oldlass · Post by **oldlass** » 05 Jun 2014, 07:27

This is going to be my first and last post o n this web thing as my great grandaughter has helped me do this. I came across this because I was looking at war memorials in Barnoldswick as I lost two brothers and a nephew in the ww2 when I was just 12 years old and within 2 days of one another. I cried and cried for weeks over my big brothers and still cannot watch anything that glorifies war.My two brothers and many others from this town died so that we could live in a free ssociety and have freedom of speech. They would be turning in their graves if they could see how this website has been hijacked to serve some political agenda.
Young Stanley and Master Whipp seem to be having a field day congratulating themselves and anybody who agrees with them and slating those who do not. I suspect that nameless person who found something offensive is probably another one if the Big Brother gang who wants to slap down anybody who dares to object. Personally I have not found anything offensive said on here but I am offended by the whole debate over the small matter of a wall! It is really quite simple, Mrs Broughton donated the Memorial Gardens in honour of those like my brothers who gave their lives for us. It was an enclosed garden for the same reason that a church has only one public entrance, we are reminded as we enter and as we leave that we must never forget
That is what Mrs Broughtoddn wanted, she would probably have a few choice words for young Master Whipp which would no doubt offend his sensibilities. As I will never be on this website againI don't care if I get my wrist slapped and on her behalf I have a few choice words for young Stanley and Master Whipp,
Leave the wall alone, take your bat and ball and go and play at your pathetic politics somewhere else!
May all our loved ones REST IN PEACE and God bless.

Post by **Stanley** » 05 Jun 2014, 07:34

Young Stanley is a) Definitely not young! and b) I have not advanced any opinions about the merits of the case, all I have advocated is moderation. By the way, Big Brothers are by definition anonymous and neither David or I are that, everyone knows who we are, that's more than I can say about you.

Post by **Big Kev** » 05 Jun 2014, 08:06

I detect a theme running through all of this, it's that old chestnut 'people don't like change'. I fully appreciate the intention of the gardens but, sadly, there is a reported minority that don't use them as such. The current improvements look to be addressing these problems, based on similar projects in the town. Surely the encouragement of more "through traffic" will stop it becoming a place to hide in, time will tell.

In a few year's time it will either prove the concept worked or, it'll all be fenced off with no access at all as the police won't have the budget to patrol the area... I would prefer the former. Reading the complaints about the gardens it is currently an area to avoid for many, the current works are seen to be addressing this with a potential solution. Whilst I appreciate people wishing to object I can't see any alternative solution being put forward by them.

Post by **David Whipp** » 05 Jun 2014, 08:17

Thank you Oldlass.

Well, one good outcome of this issue are some new contributing members of the site; I'm sorry that you won't be adding to the debate on other issues.

Mrs Broughton donated the land in thanksgiving that none of her family had died in the war; I don't think she'd be pleased that, within less than 70 years after the war ended, the Memorial Gardens were left to crumble and decay.

The town council has taken a measured decision after considering all the representations made to it. At the discussion the (anonymous) comments on this site were also referred to. On balance, the town's representatives consider that the work being carried out will make better conditions than the situation existing beforehand.

oldlass · Post by **oldlass** » 05 Jun 2014, 09:15

I was only going to make the one post but my great granddaughter has just showed me what Stanley has written back to me. What a horrible, horrible thing to say to an elderly lady Stanley. You always did have to have the last word but this was a particularly nasty one.
I am now going to say goodbye and good luck to you all in your on-going quest for whatever moves you.
Why don't you all do as I am doing today, you do know what today is don't you?
Lets just take time to remember what today is all about and please everybody, just get down off your high horses for one day, today would be a good day to do it.
RIP to those who fell on D-day and the terrible war.
God bless
Elsie

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 05 Jun 2014, 09:50

And God bless you Elsie.
We shall remember them.

Post by **Big Kev** » 05 Jun 2014, 17:03

oldlass wrote:I was only going to make the one post but my great granddaughter has just showed me what Stanley has written back to me. What a horrible, horrible thing to say to an elderly lady Stanley. You always did have to have the last word but this was a particularly nasty one.

Did I miss something or has the "offending" post been removed?

Post by **Wendyf** » 05 Jun 2014, 17:22

Nope.

Post by **PanBiker** » 05 Jun 2014, 17:42

Big Kev wrote:
oldlass wrote:I was only going to make the one post but my great granddaughter has just showed me what Stanley has written back to me. What a horrible, horrible thing to say to an elderly lady Stanley. You always did have to have the last word but this was a particularly nasty one.
Did I miss something or has the "offending" post been removed?

Definitely not Kev, one post in this thread has been reported as offensive by another member as I mentioned in my last post and is currently under review. Nothing has been deleted from the thread though.

Post by **Big Kev** » 05 Jun 2014, 19:14

Thanks Ian. Must be me then, I'm unable to find an offensive post from Stanley in this thread.

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 05 Jun 2014, 20:53

I think there's a bit of a mix up here cos Oldlass posted something to Stanley long after the "offensive" report business.
We love Elsie.

Post by **PanBiker** » 05 Jun 2014, 21:16

What do you mean by mix up?

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 05 Jun 2014, 21:26

I'm confused by Big Kev saying he cant find offensive post frim Stanley but time for bed, joys of Mallirca await me tomorrow.
Nighty night.

Enfadado · Post by **Enfadado** » 05 Jun 2014, 21:28

Too late to spell, sorry folks.

Post by **PanBiker** » 05 Jun 2014, 21:52

Unless I am missing something, all that Stanley said in his last post was that he was not particularity young and that he did not use a pseudonym, what is offensive about that?

If I read your post correctly, have a good holiday.