Go away Moss

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by cashman

41 outa a population of oer 40.000 is really taking the pee outa the general public in my eyes,

66 in actuality Cashy (according to the blurb), in a week long "Public consultation"??? Just exactly who were these 66 demagogues whose opinion represented the multiple minions of Accrington?

It would be interesting to know whose opinions were sought & acted upon to come to the conclusion that they did.

[Retlaw]

I wanted to ad a picture in my first post about the site in front of the market hall but was getting nowhere.
To me this statue is the finest example I can find to depict an Accrington Pal, and would be far better than a dammed dog.

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Trees face chop in £3m town square plans - Accrington Observer
There you go Son...this tells you all about it.

Pals dog, never heard out so daft, that dog ed nowt to do with the Pals, id were a damned stray gedding undert feet,
That picture with the bloody dog was taken on August 2nd 1915, when the Pals A. B. and Burnley Coys marched thro Acc on a recruiting drive, the person taking the picture was hanging out the window of the Commercial Hotel.
That was the one and only time the Pals were in Acc wearing khaki, my eldest daughter bought me a DVD of that event, I freeze framed it ont TV and found several Pals I knew including uncle Walter

[Margaret Pilkington]

Retlaw, a dog is 'safe'...by that I mean it is not something immediately connected with war, death, guns...you know those nasty things that the liberal loonies would like us all to forget...they want everyone to rub the nose of the dog.
To me it feels like the good folk of Accrington are the ones who are having their noses rubbed...but rubbed in that turd that can't be polished.
It is time the council woke up and spent some money on trying to get business into the town.
Do they think that having a town square and tram seats, or trench benches will bring folk into the town? If they do, they are deluded.
And before anyone stamps on me and tells me that it is an effort to improve the town...I will say that they are headed in the wrong direction...just because you are doing 'something' doesn't mean it is the right thing.

[maxthecollie]

What a great council we have. Nothing new here ,same as our M.P. Just ignore the wishes of the council tax payers

[cashman]

Originally Posted by maxthecollie

What a great council we have. Nothing new here ,same as our M.P. Just ignore the wishes of the council tax payers

I honestly think it would be better getting shut of the whole damn lot, ok theres a couple who dont deserve it, lets call them collateral damage, just like they treat the general public.

[Retlaw]

Just one small thing. Its not councill money as far as I'm aware its a special fund of lottery money set up for WW1 projects and had to be applied for. I know you all sey ids wrong bud ids better here than them so called asylum gime gime gimes

[Less]

Every Autumn I see kids doing what we did at their age, collecting the fruit of those trees ready for 'the season'.

Which season? the one and only great conker season that's which season,

I don't know the age of these trees but they do belong to our and our children's history why should they be removed? The centre of Accrington has already been removed in stages, this is just another stage that shows no real thought, everyone that still uses our town centre has so far been able to navigate around and enjoy them, replace them with what?

Twiglets that will be vandalised? A giant redwood to cause controversy for a future generation?

Those trees ain't broken don't try to fix them.

Could it be?

They aren't evergreens and someone has worked out that cutting them down will save X amount of pounds sweeping up the leaves every Autumn?

If they were diseased yes remove them, as it is they are the only part of the centre not cocked up by interfering short term idiots.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Retlaw, you are right it isn't council money.
It is still money that could be used to better the town.
It might be that cutting down the trees is one of the conditions which they have to abide by to get the funding.
I don't know how long the trees have been there. I can't remember a time when they were not there.
They say that these trees stop an uninterrupted view of the market hall.
Personally I would prefer to see the trees.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Retlaw, you are right it isn't council money.
It is still money that could be used to better the town.
It might be that cutting down the trees is one of the conditions which they have to abide by to get the funding.
I don't know how long the trees have been there. I can't remember a time when they were not there.
They say that these trees stop an uninterrupted view of the market hall.
Personally I would prefer to see the trees.

To see the market hall all you have to do is walk nearer, I like the statues on top of it, though perhaps they should be removed because they block the view of the roof?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Less

To see the market hall all you have to do is walk nearer, I like the statues on top of it, though perhaps they should be removed because they block the view of the roof?

Now, c'mon Less...that is far too sensible a solution to be thought up by council members.
And for the part of the year when the trees are bare, they obscure nothing.

[latheaxe]

And dont let people that cant provide any evidence saying that the trees are damaging the buildings.....Thats the latest one!!!

[Barrie Yates]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

The council have applied for planning permission to cut them down.

So the Council have applied to the Planning Committee - isn't the Planning Committee run by the Council? The mind boggles at such a waste of time.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes, indeed. It is farcical.
But as mentioned in a previous post if you are asking yourself for permission, you are sure to get it. Success on a plate,nae bother.

What is dafter is that they will chop down two beautiful mature trees and replace these with striplings...at what cost.
They could leave the two horse chestnuts and save the money for the chopping down,the purchase and the planting of new trees...but it would not surprise me if(when it all comes out) that axing these trees is part of the T's and C's of getting the lottery funding.

We have a rake of shops around what will be the town square, that are empty...but they will waste money on street art(statues) and benches.
We had benches and the council removed them because the street drinkers were using them.
So rather than tackle the street drinkers, the council in its wisdom(?) removed the benches.
Does that make any sense at all?

[Gremlin]

I'm pleased to see you put a (?) after "wisdom" Margaret.