Upper Living Memorial Park: A Possible Skatepark Site- BCTV Film

A film by Montgomery/Socci produced by Maria Dominguez; Upper Living Memorial Park: A Possible Skatepark Site is now available to watch on BCTV for the first time. It was filmed over 8 months ago based on my hand out  submitted to a site selction process requested by concerned citizens which was denied by the selectboard in March 2011. Please excuse  some of the repetition on points and reasons why we think ULMP  just may be the best skatepark location, this was our first attempt at filming. The Upper Living Memorial Park is under utilized in the summer and we think would be an almost ideal location for an expansive skatepark accommodating many various skate type activities within our public recreation park designated for such use and could tastefully coexist with present alternate season ski slope without too much interference.

If you are interested in viewing, please go to BCTV web site, look under “Watch on Demand” then scroll down to to “Miscellaneous Local” and select the above titled film. 


Comments | 30

  • Clarification

    There could be a large flat plaza area above the the terraced contours stepping down to the large bowl area (hard to see in diagram in film) far enough away from ski lift drop off area so as not to interfere with the beginning of winter’s ski run. Remember it is a good possibilty the skatepark will be utilized a couple more months overall than the limited ski season and I think more than justifies it’s creation.

    Also it was confusing about the use of the access road, this could all be worked out, but my thinking was emergency and maintenance use only or handicap drop off maybe a golf cart?

    The main access road speed bumps could be removed during winter months as could the half pipe set up and any metal rails.

    What was described as a security fence to the skate park entrance was meant to be described as security gate checking passes (booth) if it is deemed necessary. This would mean two summer jobs for our youth when including one for overall park supervisor, the rest would be volunteer positions (BASIC). Also there are three possible parking lots if you include the upper ball field lot just above Hockey Rink when not in use.

    As mentioned by “Tomaidh” another possible site exists just above the LMP gardens and could have steps up to this area. Not sure the garden people would be thrilled about this though.

    • Memorial Park

      Thanks Les and Simrin . You did a great job highlighting all the reasons why the skatepark could and should be located at Memorial Park. Bathrooms, concession stands and a pool to jump into after skating.

      • Trying to make the best sense

        Thanks, I really hope this works out someday at LMP and Crowell Lot can remain the great nieghborhood open green space and playground it already is. If the LMP location was actually considered, I would predict a surge of donations may come BASIC’s way.

  • BASIC's Job

    Hi everyone.

    Just want to remind everyone that BASIC, as an ad hoc subcommittee of the Selectboard, has one and only one mission. Plan, Design, and Raise funds for a Skatepark at Crowell Lot.

    BASIC cannot take any other job on. The Selectboard tasked them with a very specific mission. The Selectboard did the same with the West River Park subcommittee, among others.

    Continuing to call on the BASIC committee to become involved and engage with you in siting will just continue to cause frustration on both sides.

    BASIC cannot engage with you, because the Selectboard has only given them authorization to work on the Crowell Lot project – which is more than enough for the committee members to work on.

    You need to go to the Selectboard directly with your issues and either ask them to change BASIC’s mission, or create a new subcommittee, or something else.

    But this is in the Selectboard’s hands, not BASIC’s.

    • Yup.

      Very true. The location was chosen by two Selectboard members, and only the Selectboard can decide to change that decision.

      BASIC was told by the Selectboard to use Crowell, and that’s what they are trying to do.

      Side note: while working on the new Brattleboro History Center, I learned a few things:

      1. Crowell used to be home to many horseshoe pits. “Clank, clank, clank” while being used. (And kids throwing heavy pieces of metal in the park!)

      2. Crowell was a suggested location for a new Police Fire facility a while back, and would have been completely paved, with a large emergency service building put in the center. Both Police and Fire would have come and gone from there.

      3. After Crowell lived there, it was a rooming house for a while.

      • Rationale

        Remember what we could save on not removing established park trees at Crowell, removing hedge, creating artificial and inadequate buffers, installing public bathrooms, relocating and replacing playground equipment, risking unsafe traffic congestion, displacing park uses and their tax paying constituents at Crowell we could afford to put toward a better skatepark with more elbow room.

    • Basic's Job

      If that is true why have they been so opposed to the possibility of an alternative site ? And why was Basic committee member Adam Hubbard allowed to participate in the mediation proccess? If what RWolver says is true then perhaps there should another mediation with the appropriate parties.

  • BASIC's Job

    Hi Iris

    The mediation process was not about the site. The mediation process was about the impact of the project on the trees in the crowell lot. Alan was involved because of his involvement in the design process.

    The result of the mediation was a smaller version of the park, taking into account distance from trees.

    You can search ibrattleboro and read all of this, as it has been posted many times.

    But mediation was never about moving the site from Crowell Lot.

    It is unfair to continue to call on BASIC to engage in anything to do with resiting the skatepark. Only the Selectboard can do that. The Selectboard would become concerned if BASIC were to deviate from their charged mission

    • False Pretences

      Many major selectboard decisions on this issue enabling the skateboard project to charge forward uni directional were based on misinformation, some of which was supplied by BASIC assuring the public no trees at Crowell Park would be harmed, that was and is simply not the case and for that reason alone along with other unanswered public concerns continually brushed off by their approach to degrade/demean opposition can definitley be taken to task.

      It was obvious to an outside ISA Certified Arborist who was hired to conduct a formal report by a group (11) concerned citizens to assess the condition of trees surrounding the proposed skatepark and the impact/ long term affect the consequences of such development would have on their chances for survival all of which factfinding were completely dismissed by town officials and BASIC at the time when publically presented to them. Now we are paying the price for the misleading rhetoric denying negative impacts that was publically stated at these meetings giving false impressions of impacts to intentionally sway the vote and yes that was their mission.

      As far as the parks and recreation having conducted a formal and documented site selection process at LMP open for public review, this simply never happened on paper either, another misnomer that gave the impression opponents were once again in the wrong. In my opinion, the lack of transparency surrounding the skateboard project and the way it was handled when confronted for explanations is a big disappointment for those in our community who were excluded from participating in a public project we as taxpayers will be paying for as long as we live here in Brattleboro.

      Mediation accomplished little in the way of compromise and did not have the consent of all interested parties to begin with. In my opinion the Appeal certainly sited valid arguments against a significant project moving forward with little disclosure or accountibility of impacts why Crowell was not the appropriate choice and should have never been dropped. I’m sure by doing so, letting the guard down, it was hoped that compromise could be reached without litigation in this disput with a possible site selection process on the horizon, this simply was stonewalled and shut down not allowed to happen regretfully and that’s on town leadership. Instead of seeking some version of a win/win situation, a win/lose was resorted to when town officials took the path of least resistence for the easy way, not bothering to resolve this 2 year heated disagreement that still persists and is unsettled.

  • “Mediation accomplished

    “Mediation accomplished little in the way of compromise and did not have the consent of all interested parties to begin with.” – Rootrunner

    The court ordered mediation was complicated by a number of factors. Here are only a few.

    First, in the interest of historic accuracy, I would like to add that the appeal to the Vermont Environmental Court was an effort to review the Brattleboro DRB decision and the process that led to that decision, not technically about the park’s trees. The appeal was based on existing legal language contained in our town’s zoning ordinances.

    Second, a large number of those identified by the Court (based on public records) as potential “interested parties” failed to respond to the Court by filling out and return the paperwork that was sent to them via certified mail. Most of those who failed to respond to the Court were those who opposed the current plan. Therefore, they relinquished their right to participate any further in that process.

    Adam Hubbard was among those identified by the Court as an interested party (who spoke in support of the skatepark plan) and he followed the Court’s direction and filled out and returned the paperwork necessary in order to participate as an interested party. Therefore, Adam had every right to be present and participate in the Court ordered mediation.

    Prior to the mutually agreed upon mediation date itself, some Court recognized interested parties, who had every legal right to participate in ANY and ALL discussion that would take place at the mediation suddenly withdrew, in writing, their interest in participating further. Therefore, they, too, abdicated their legal right, and civic responsibility, to further participate, as interested parties who opposed the plan still being fought today.

    Five Court recognized interested parties who opposed the plan (including me) chose to show up at the mediation table, as did Adam Hubbard. I entered the mediation after a very sudden and acute health problem emerged only 3 days before the mediation took place. That sudden development, in addition to the deafening lack of voices in opposition (at that time)to the Brattleboro DRB decision to build a skatepark in Crowell Park, combined with my growing realization that BASIC was doing the daunting work they were actually charged to do (even though I did not like it), influenced my decision to try to find a solution at mediation.

    I met privately with the remaining four interested parties (all abutters) who opposed the current plan (and who showed up at mediation) and told them my own situation and thoughts and feelings. However, I told them I would certainly proceed with the appeal if they so desired because, as direct abutters to Crowell Park, who actually showed up at the mediation table, they had the most to lose if I dropped the appeal as a result of any agreement that might be reached. After discussion of possibilities, three of the four decided we should accept the proposed agreement that was hammered out during the mediation process. So, a 4- 1 decision was made (by those who bothered to show up at the table), to reach a compromise agreement and drop the appeal. Adam Hubbard also agreed to the compromise, making it 5 to 1 decision (among those who showed up and participated).

    Had more potential “interested parties” been “interested enough” to fill out the forms the Court sent to them, or bothered to show up at the mediation, they too would have had an opportunity to voice their thoughts and concerns, and vote.

    It’s a sad lesson all around. But proponents of a skatepark in Crowell Park should not continue to be penialized after all their efforts due to tragically inept planning and leadership, or for the willful silence of opponents (until they realized the rope had been dropped and they stood to lose), in my honest opinion.

    • PS

      It should be noted that the one remaining opponent at mediation who felt the appeal should go forward, got up and left. And, as I recall, we voted after he walked out. So, I believe we can accurately say that the vote to settle the appeal at mediation was unanimous (which does not imply opponents who agreed did not feel legally hog-tied by the town administration, the town lawyer, and the absence of the Brattleboro Schoolboard who had the leverage to negotiate altnernatives to the current plan, but “chose” not to participate). I personally believe it is possible that their absence at the table may likely have been part of a strategy to limit all possible options.

      “Silence like a cancer grows”

      • It is my understanding that

        It is my understanding that Zippy and one other SOPC member met privately with Adam Hubbard at the Crowell Playground before the mediation. Unfortuantely Zippy failed to invite all the interested parties to that meeting. “Silence like a cancer grows”. It is obviious that decisions were made by few behind the scenes, I don’t believe incomplete paper work or the decision by some not to attend made a difference in the outcome.

        • Inaccurate

          All necessary documentation between the State Environmental Court and interested parties not attending mediation was in fact completed and returned as required by the SEC court appellant judge up until the next step of mediation commenced and was underway which was an optional part of the process as stated by the judge himself in a call in phone conference heard by all parties involved (have all these documentation still on file).

          In addition we participated in a direct line of communication and kept in follow up contact with both mediators(including the first one dropped by Appellant) and who in fact were formally notified by letter explaining because it became apparent the trees were not an issue that could be discussed ( I gather because trees can’t move by themselves) and that mediation was more about keeping the same Crowell Lot location with some tweeked version of the skatepark to be still surrounded by threatened park trees, we reserved the right to decline attendance considering it was in direct contradiction to our original position backed by the findings of a report conducted at Crowell Park by an ISA certified arborist. Our position being, bringing about awareness and attention to the negative impacts that would be suffered because of the skatepark development in the limited confines of an already utilized open neighborhood park and playground area used by many groups who visit the shady part of the park on a regular basis including teens, toddlers and groups such as Families First, Inspire as well as many playgroups and families.

          We wanted to make a positive film entertaining the idea of finding a mutually acceptable location for the Skatepark such as ULMP with so much funding still to go by creating more local support for an alternative site from the opposition. But having the film vanished, or should I say banished, now (for whatever mysterious reason) and all the friction/fallouts of disagreements dredged up from past, currently commented on here, was not our intention but can certainly understand why people are on the defensive.

          I find it amazing how so very few actually commented about the film itself when it was up for viewing. It just goes to show you how many harsh grievances and resentful feelings surrounding the present location of the skatepark we keep returning to feeling taken full advantage of and burnt.

          • ??????????? and ?

            As the only court recognized Appellant in the case, is it possible that you are privy to information that I am not? It seems more likely that I have documents you have not seen. However, I am referring to the list of “interested parties” who were identified by the Court based on the town DRB meeting records. I thought you had that document, too?

            Several of those individuals contacted by the Court did not respond and were thereby eliminated as “interested parties”, long before mediation.

            The judge ordered mediation to take place. He did not mandate that we had to come to mutually agreed on concessions. As you acknowledge, you “reserved the right to decline attendance.” You, and others, walked out over and over and over again. So I am always somewhat interested when you continue to emerge as an almost solitary voice? The parade you are waving to passed by a long time ago.

            As I recall, at one of the last Selectboard meetings where this issue was raised by opponents, one individual promised that legal action against the town would soon follow if the Selectboard did not reconsider their majority position. That might be a better strategy than simply bitching and stamping your feet, or making movies?

          • I don't know what the h e

            I don’t know what the h e double hockey sticks your talking about, I have never walked out of any meeting related to the skatepark issue I have attended (as a matter of fact I make a point of publicly voicing my opinions while present), including most all selectboard meetings involving the skatepark issue, Development Review Board Meetings, numerous Tree Advisory Committee Meetings, School Board Meetings, Conservation Committee Meeting(former) SOPC meetings and still attend RESITE meetings. It’s almost like your trying to purposely antagonize me by distorting actual accounts ruthlessly searching for some degree of humiliation to tap into.

            I did not attend the mediation meeting or approve this political snare to extinguish the opposition for such little gain ( a fence and no less square footage than can already possibly squeeze in Crowell park) so how could I possibly walk out ( Did Herb and Stephanie walk out ?) and I’m not sure those attending were all in agreement on all issues at hand, where’s that document and who exactly signed it, nevermind I really don’t care anymore.

            I hardly think it fair or respectful 3 or 4 people made decisions that would completely disable and squash any futher meaningful action within the public political town process from ever occuring or moving forward for the large and growing constituency of opponents. In short decisions made at mediation in fact killed any future legal options or recourse to show the DRB skatepark building permit granted should have been a under a major increase of park use subject to impact studies ( such as the aroborist report conducted along with noise, traffic and survey of neighborhood concerns ), not minor as was passed along with other issues/ misteps concerning negative impacts neglected but brought before the board at both the inside and outside meetings concerning Crowell Lots development and yes, I attended that one too, but nobody was listening or wanted to listen. Obvious such studies would slow down the process of a project being rubber stamped and rushed through.

            I take issue with you implying I’m the only solitary voice still out here for you to ridicule, whatever substance your dropping/despositing on my supposed solo parade and post as a steadfast opponent of the Crowell skatepark location. I have one word for you “RESITE” (people who want to preserve the Crowell Park not sell it out to the lowest bidder) but I’m done engaging in this futile argument from the past. You made it your own personal decision to drop the Appeal and limit your involvement to brisk commentary on ibrattleboro, that was certainly your prerogitive even though we all contributed to reasons listed on Appeal/ and petitions as a group at one time representing well over a 120 concerned citizens who signed and who can’t always take to time to publicaly speak out at meetings (such as yourself) or who did not care about or want to par take in the petty internal squabbling. To your and Kevin’s credit you brought a tremendous amount of information to the table, but so did others and was a pity to see it single handedly tossed out to the wind out of reach.

            But don’t blow in from out of town, lash out accusatory genralizations, land on this post and attach blame to others who are earnestly trying to get beyond past regressions and make a positive difference by searching out possible solutions outside of court while still living and working in our Community on a full time basis. You don’t see me taking every opportunity to criticize your “pet” projects( which I support) to improve conditions here in town, and please don’t go on about and side track with your very, very commendable efforts ( we all love our pets) to bring awareness to animals left in parked vehicles suffering heat exhaustion ( a great cause), but it’s totally unrelated to the issue at hand, searching for common ground on the skatepark issue.

            Honestly, sometimes I think I must be the one to jump head first into the nearest parked car, turn up the heat, roll up the windows to shut out the insanity and utter embarrassment, sit and bake the sting out of your irritating words and sweat out and purge the toxins, wagging my head, like a bobble, to try and make sense of it all and believe you me, I know that isn’t even funny. You can have the last word Zippy as par for the course, it’s all yours now, you own it, have fun.

          • oh, now I see...

            Yes, participating in mediation was indeed an optional part of the process, made clear by the judge in that phone conference. Maybe you did not understand that if you opted out of his mandate to mediate, you would out of the process thereby, and would no longer have any legitimate stake in the legal process and related decision making from that point on? I thought everyone was clear on that and that’s why they bothered to show up -and have since remained silent on the topic of mediation? We accepted the responsibility of our decisions.

        • Tilting at windmills

          It is very clear that your “understanding” is another erroneously derived misunderstanding – which is in complete conflict with the extensive record as well as with those who have actually participated, including those in the room that day participating in the various discussions that took place. I completely yielded my decision (as the only court recognized Appellant) on pursuing the appeal, or not, to the abutters of Crowell Park seated at the table that day, not Adam.

          Additionally, I have never met with Adam Hubbard in Crowell Park and he will be the first to tell you that we have only ever politely agreed to disagree on the selection of Crowell Park as a site for a skatepark. That said, I have come to respect the long and arduous work of BASIC and better understand what went wrong from the beginning, and Adam had nothing to do with it as far as I can tell.

  • Technical glitch

    Hopefully you all will notice that the film in question has been ‘found’!!! As it were, the original producer temporarily took it down to correct a typo that was noticed. Relax, and dump the brewing conspiracy theories, the producer just wanted it to be as correct as it could be made. When it was taken down, it broke the link, so that’s why it didn’t work for a while. It should be all fixed now, as you can see by the image on the embedded clip of it above.

    Thanks to all who have worked so hard, some for 10+ years, to bring an outdoor skate park to Brattleboro!

    • Yes, Thank you, we honestly

      Yes, Thank you, we honestly had not been informed, and thank you for the past ten years, let’s make this a reality in the right location for all those concerned, open up more of the local funding. I personally think interest is waning and key players are dropping off like flies taking a back seat worn out from the fallout of this dispute concerning location. “We” and others do care and do want a skatepark in the appropriate location, so let’s recharge the interest and make it a reality at ULMP, it has great potential, alot going for it with longterm assets already in place which will be a big money saver in my opinion. No more blame.

      • Hooray

        I started to watch the ULMP video, but something came up and I had to quit. When I returned, it was “off the air”. Boo Hoo.
        Well it’s back now and very compelling, Thanks.

        • Hey Tomaidh

          It’s too weird and unflattering seeing yourself on film first thing in the morning like I just crawled out of a tent groping for that first cup of camp coffee, but I hope the points get across to the viewer and realize this site sits dormant of sport activity most of the summer, let’s make it a two season section of the rec park working with natural contours sensitive to the overall visual impacts, thanks for your positive comment, Les

          • A few fair questions....

            I recall an opponent standing at the microphone at a SB meeting noting that the neighborhood surrounding ULMP did not want a skatepark located there. She then argued that it was unfair for one residential neighborhood to have to accept a plan that another residential neighborhood refused to allow. Much of the argument of opponents has revolved around the inappropriateness of planning a skatepark in a residential neighborhood and that homes and community living spaces are fundamental to quality-of-life and the well-being of individuals, families, neighborhoods, and communities. But that now only applies to Crowell neighbors?

            I think it is an honest question to ask what has changed now? I see the argument that there is space at UMLP, and that is an existing recreational park. But there is also a neighborhood surrounding it and the same increase in traffic will be seen on the road around ULMP, no? And what about the noise we were so concerned about echoing off the hill at ULMP? Has anyone considered these particular neighbors in this proposal, like we all wanted to be considered? If so, what do they have to say about this suggestion? Might the new SB find themselves in another exasperating fiasco if they suddenly saw UMLP a viable alternative to Crowell? We once argued the most appropriate place is downtown. Why is the isolated UMLP now preferred over a paved space downtown? Space, yes. Bathrooms, yes. But what about the impact on someone else’s neighborhood? I think these are fair questions that will be asked sooner or later if an alternative neighborhood is ever considered.

          • FAIR??

            Please get your facts straight before you come on here and try to nip off an idea before it even has a chance to bud or is given a chance to be properly considered with a site selection process,(maybe bloom for hope of a win/win compromise) take your negativity and spitefulness elsewhere please, I wouldn’t say this to anyone else ( welcome any other criticiums from, other sources) but know where this is coming from and what your up to, it called nothing less retaliatory sabotage and is totally hypocritical reversal of your former statements in the past as a relentlessly staunch and outspoken opponent of the Crowell Park skateboard park site you now seem to supporting, maybe because your moving away, I don’t know. The BASIC committee has three vacancies available to be filled, maybe you could consider filling one. So many others involved in this controversal site at Crowell are packing it up and leaving it behind as a done deal (for others to deal with), it’s hardly done.

            The one skatepark site considered at LMP way back when before BASIC had even formed as an ad hoc committee was located next to the current playground area on the outter edge of park perimeter near Whetstone Brook down below abbutting Brookside condominium complex who were the ones who happened to complain, threatening a lawsuit ( you do know this). If you bothered to watch the film it goes into detail about existing and more than sufficient buffer zones around 180 degrees of Upper Living Meemorial Park skateboard site area with at least two football fields worth of open distance for frontage toward houses far off down below, you just could not ask for better buffers in an existing public recreation park unless you live in a romote village of some sort I don’t know about. Or it was in an urban,commercial, downtown setting such as the Flat Street location, recently leased out for five years for COOP employee parking, the previous selectboard had made it clear they would not give up downtown parking spaces for a skatepark location near the Youth Theater, Public Bathrooms, COOP, and Girls and Boys Club, this had been argued extensively.

            The naturally occuring deep basin feature up over the top to serve as the skatepark bowl area would help mute some of the contact noise, but of course there will be some noise but at an adequate distance. I believe the park should be supervised in the first place to keep things under reasonable control. Don’t take my word for it, I welcome a noise level study to be performed, why don’t you take the initiative yourself borrow some of BASIC’s noise sensory readout equipment, get veritical and take a trip back up since you have so much to say about it, answer some of your own questions and prodding assertions from afar.

            As far as traffic, there are stop signs as cars enter and exit off Guilford road from rt 9 creating a slower less trafficked area with safe off main road parking lots out of harms way, three possible parking lots as a matter of fact, two of which are closer to the ULMP. Maybe you would like to watch the film again (if you watched it the first time) to get a sense of all the other assets and potential readily available at ULMP but not shared compared to the confines of the Crowell Lot site which is lacking basic necessities such as bathrooms just to start with.

          • I still very much believe

            I still very much believe Crowell is a poor site for a skatepark and the decision to put it there was grossly flawed and poorly examined. I have never stated otherwise. I also see the all positive possibilities to LMP you have identified. The disadvantages, as I see them, are as I already said; LMP is surrounded by a residential neighborhood who opposed it long before it was planned for Crowell (and I don’t know what they are saying about this new proposal); it is isolated (which I have always agreed was the one obvious benefit of Crowell, but not as good as downtown) and as such, will require police to drive from downtown to West Bratt to monitor it (which everyone also agrees will be necessary) and will clearly increase driving and traffic on Rt 9 and take police time away from the problems we know we already have downtown.

            I also think it is wise to consider whether such a proposal will be embraced by the new Selectboard (as they are who you will have to convince), as LMP was previously ruled out, after a lawsuit was threatened. I would be stunned if a newly seated SB would open themselves up (and their time) to another organized movement and controversy related to a new skatepark plan that could negatively impact a neighborhood, including a lawsuit by powerful folks in town who originally squashed this possibility? But if they do, I can’t imagine the questions I asked will not be raised?

            The entire history of the dissent over Crowell involves a plan to place it in a residential neighborhood and the potential impact for the people who live there, the disrespect for a neighborhood in the proposed plan, not reaching out to those who live nearest to the proposed plan, a few individuals preferring and then selecting a site and pushing it through while not allowing it to be questioned, and the silence that prevailed while all of this went down. How is what’s happening here different? Then there will (I suspect) be the questions about how much time “the town” has spent on this issue already, so start all over again in the face of a likely backlash. I would want to consider all historical and political facts before putting so much effort into establishing new technical ones that could be defeated by anyone who was paying attention to past messages used to justify opposition to Crowell, including me. The best laid plan made with the best intentions can be an exercise in futility if the planner is not listening. Is that not a lesson learned already? And I don’t see LMP as the best plan for all these many reasons, particularly at this point in the history of the issue.

            I hope I still have every right to question any issue in town I think worth questioning, including the work you are doing, that seems odd to me, without addressing some fundamental historical and political considerations. I own a tiny house there, continue to pay about $3,300 a year in taxes which support the town, its government, and its social programs, support it financially in other ways, spend most of my time in Brattleboro (rather than just “blowing in”, have no idea whether my house will sell, or when, and I still continue to participate in issues that benefit the town. Those are some facts I do hope you will think about, also, before suggesting another conspiracy theory, this one which places me as your villain.

          • Neighbors

            I don’t think it was “all” the neighbors, just the Brookside owners who would have been close to the old site but certainly did not have legitimate grounds to sue in the first place (an idle threat) seeing as the rec park had been established there long before that particular development went in with the original park mission in place to designate this area, 64 acre open area, for sports activity for the benifit of the greater Brattleboro Community not to improve the fews view at tax payers expense. You can not find one viable skatepark site in a 64 acre Recreation Park?, There are at least two others posibilities on the premises, so please reconsider your preconceived thoughts on the matter, take a closer look and keep an open mind.

            The ballpark, playground, and pool activity noise out front close to residences would supersede and possibly drown out most noise generated from up above which in itself has very good and adequate wooded buffer zones to the back and sides. In fact you could say the hockey rink is even a buffer of sorts in that direction. But don’t take my word for it, borrow some of BASIC’s high tech noise sensory readout equipment and set it up recruiting a handful of skaters on access road. Again the skatepark needs to be supervised for many reasons mentioned in the film, so isolation is not a factor and I don’t believe it is isolated being close to, but well spaced out from other park activities.
            I live next door, I think I know how often your here in the physical sense and it is not most of the time as your blinding back spotlight on perpetually 24/7 indicates. If you were infact here maybe you could do some of the physical ground work to better the skatepark situation or maybe you have resigned yourself to no longer contribute in this facet understandably since mediation ended( when as you said yourself, you let up on your grip and dropped the perverbial taught tug rope under tension, (you took charge of) then stood back and watched everyone fall on their asses, but I say you instantly hung other options, left the rope dangling and frayed in the process and forgot who supported that same end of the rope we produced together). If your involvement only consists of and is limited to choosing to interject and contentiously spar when you feel like it on occasion maybe you are less inclined to participate in the real work. Maybe it’s easier to just stick with playing the devil’s advocate and partner in crime on line over criticizing with zero solutions at hand even if these are your actual true feelings on any given day.

            If I can assist an 87 year old man pushing his wife in a wheelchair both who can’t drive at night, to not one, but two School Board meetings and unassisted walk together to many selectboard & TAC meetings concerning the skatepark issue before their health declined, then I’m sure you could have found a way to show up in person if you are in fact here and were involved. Talk is cheap, at least we are sticking our necks out there “again” trying to make a difference, present an alternative to the dark, looming cloud that hangs over Crowell Park stirring up an impending wind to come now picking up pressure against some of it’s resident trees threatened that will feel the push toward a ievitable premature breaking point in my and two ISA certified arborists opinions anyway. By the way there is no conspiracy, it’s just Zippy being Zippy.

            With your commentary the way it is anything can be shot down, it’s time to be hopeful finding positive solutions and move ahead as a community beyond all the doubt (evolve) letting go of all the past verbal hostility circulating around this controversal issue and search for a a better place and that place is Upper Living Memorial Park in my opinion. Please play the Coca-Cola theme song about ” One Part Harmony” and all that ethereal good stuff to fill out the image, or if you must, scratch and ditch the record, switch to and settle for a 4 oz Diet Cola on sale and do nothing, stay protected in the background, maybe because there is a shortage of common will and common respect out there to bundle all our concerns braided for one compromised solution, that, for this issue anyway, maybe just unattainable and we will all end up disappointed in one way or another, what a waste of all the potential of our combined efforts if this is the way it has to be.

            PS The film subtitles misspelled Simrin Socci’s name, It’s Simrin, not Simrim

          • somebody please fix my

            somebody please fix my collar, arghhh!

  • The proposal for LMP as an

    The proposal for LMP as an alternative site seems to have had much more thought put into it than the “plan” to plop one in Crowell by the two individuals who selected it. Is this plan a Resite initiative?

    Are the neighbors around LMP who originally threatened litigation on board with this suggestion? Has an engineering firm yet been consulted? I ask because Stantec, who is also already on board with Crowell, has already been hired for the Crowell plan and has identified it as an appropriate and viable plan, in that can support the existing design. I don’t see the work Stantec has already done being easily dismissed at this point. So I wonder if Resite has gone as far as investing in similar expert consultation that supports LMP as a possibility?

    The points you make are convincing in asking people to consider this suggestion, but issues like traffic, drainage, an actual design, and construction, etc. will also require professional expertise that “could” be more convincing to a new Selectboard who must see merit in reconsidering a plan that already has the stamp of approval of a past SB and the town Park’s and Rec Department, not to mention a thumbs up by a respected consulting engineering firm like Stantec. And, having the folks who previously threatened litigation against the town now supporting this seems key, to me, also. Additionally, past statements by members of the current SB on the skatepark issue suggests that another majority are inclined not to reopen this can of worms to reconsider alternatives. Is there now a sense that they are any more open to an alternative site, based on a professionally supported site selection process?

    • All these types of questions

      All these types of questions are appreciated, appropriate and of course must be asked if you dont want an idea/project( ULMP) with loads of potential to suddenly dissipate and collaspe as a wrong turn or bent pipe dream drained pinched off before it even has an opening to flow and be launched.

      With Santtec, business is business, and naturally they are partial to wanting the business, but one may ask who was their arborist(in house) and what are his credentials, is there an conflict of interest, is there a conflict of interest with the town tree warden and the school board he works for assessing the beautiful Spruce Tree for removal more a question of liability but never a problem before the attention of the skatepark edged in threatening it’s expected longevity and respectible lifespan with decades to go no doubt, yeah it looks to be dead as a doornail, right, not, it needs one cable, well it will be if we keep it up or in it’s case down/felled ? Why are we involving so many park trees in the first place?, This is just not a problem at ULMP.

      What about respectful and adequate buffers for Crowell, close proximity to neighbors, the threat to existing trees, traffic safety, other park activity displacement, alteration and reduction of present valued and designated park’s green and shaded playground area use, impacts of increased of use ie crowds, bathrooms, room for expansion, ect ect, at what point were these studies conducted by an outside impartial entity at Crowell besides the arborist report which drained a concerned groups funding (especially mine) a report from an ISA Certified Arborist with no conflict of interest and a outstanding and respected reputation in his field presented free to the town for consideration but was immediately rejected without explanation by the very selectboard member who “select”ed the Crowell Park site by his own volition abscent of concerns of those living close by?? Yes, it would be the right thing to do a townwide survey/questionere especially concerning the situation with any neighbors involved. But it does have to go somewhere.

      You can’t subject constraints on one skatepark location over the other. Both park locations should be actually assessed and evaluated for comparison for the best cost effective overall “community choice, nobody should be afraid for this process to be completed. I believe too many unjustifiable allowances neglecting/ignoring actual inherent impacts have been granted by the town with intermittent side steps, winging it as they proceed for the Crowell Park site, an empty promise for future corrections/compensation without a thoroughly determined overall park conception that works open to public scrutiny. By contrast most of which are in no way a problem at ULMP to begin with as displayed in film presentation. For example, the mention of spill way drainage and soil composition charts. There needs to be a proven method for REevaluation of all agreed criteria of both sites by outside intervention of a completely non-vested professional company in all fairness when such a dispute is obvious or at the very least a site selection comittee made up of members from both sides of the issue. This could have been avoided if the town (DRB) had determined the creation of a skatepark was a major change of use and should be subject to evaluation availble for public discussion. If anything, the public outcry has proven it is a major change of use!!!

      I think a feasiblilty study supported by donations could be presented to the selectboard for consideration. If ULMP proved to be an equitable alternative location, and I do mean alternative, we are not building two skateparks here and that would be a stipulation, funding would shift to this location and things would start to happen on a positive note breaking free of the present gridlock, and make a skate”park”happen. We all have made mistakes it does’t mean, we can certainly retract those mistakes and get on the same page for the good of the town. The problem is the town has Crowell in their pocket and have tightly cupped it from proper inspection and they don’t seem to want to let it go, let’s hope I’m wrong about that and they finally open their hands to us all.

  • Waiting for the 'surge'...

    Submitted by rootrunner on June 6, 2013 – 2:44pm. #
    Trying to make the best sense

    “Thanks, I really hope this works out someday at LMP and Crowell Lot can remain the great nieghborhood open green space and playground it already is. If the LMP location was actually considered, I would predict a surge of donations may come BASIC’s way.”

    Any idea when this ‘surge’ might commence…?

Leave a Reply