UPDATED: Tranmere Rovers withdraw plans for Ingleborough Memorial Fields (From Wirral Globe)
Send us news by text, start your message Globe News and your send photos and videos to 80360
UPDATED: Tranmere Rovers withdraw plans for Ingleborough Memorial Fields
2:39pm Friday 10th February 2012 in News By Stephanie Cureton
HIGHLY-CONTROVERSIAL plans by Tranmere Rovers to sell off a historic memorial field have been scrapped.
The club has withdrawn its application to build almost 100 homes on the Ingleborough Road playing fields.
Wirral Council’s planning department also confirmed that a scheme to revamp Woodchurch Leisure Centre, which went hand-in hand with the Ingleborough Road proposals, has been pulled.
The plans sparked objections from many residents and Dean Johnson, founder of the Wilfred Owen Story, launched a high profile campaign to save the memorial field.
Opponents to the project believed the sale of the former Birkenhead Institute site would mean the loss of its commemorative status.
However Rovers’ fans pledged their support for the project as it was vital to “secure the longevity of the club’s future,” according to planning documents.
Following the news that the application has been scrapped, Dean expressed his relief and paid tribute to his campaign’s supporters.
He said: “It’s a great relief but I always thought that the club would understand how important the meaning of the memorial was in the end. I am really happy at the moment for the families of the fallen heroes who are commemorated there because their memories can now live on undisturbed.
“My campaign was never about going against Tranmere Rovers, it was more about how I strongly I felt about the field. It is such an important place and I think it means a lot to commemorate soldiers especially when we have young lads fighting out in Afghanistan now.”
It is not yet known why the application was scrapped.
Club chairman Peter Johnson contacted us on Thursday to break his silence over the plans and insisted that Woodchurch residents has been given the opportunity to make their objections known.
He also said that neighbouring residents of Ingleborough Road were the “most important people” to consider and that it was a “win-win situation” for them because the housing development would take Tranmere traffic away from the area.
Now Dean is eager to register the field with English Heritage so it will be tough for any future applications to be approved.
He added: “I think it would be useful to set up a ‘friends’ group so Ingleborough can stay the focus of people’s attention.
"Our application to have the field registered with English Heritage is being pushed through so if the club do try again, the same issues will always be there.”
Following the news of the withdrawal, fans' website Total Tranmere claimed the club intended to re-submit both applications, with adjustments to the Woodchurch proposals.
However a spokesman for Tranmere Rovers refused to confirm or deny this.
Comments(68)
Jimrob
says...
6:11pm Fri 10 Feb 12
I'm so pleased that the application has been pulled. (I wonder if it has anything to do with the close scrutiny that Wirral Borough Council is now under, regarding ALL planning and procurement deals)
I would also like to say that if it were not for the bravery and courage of the fallen in WW1, Tranmere Rovers would be playing, not in the English First Division, but most likely, in the Third Division of the Bundesleague.
Time now for the current owners of the Memorial Fields to return it to it's original condition, at thier expence!!!
uncatom
says...
7:08pm Fri 10 Feb 12
24424m
says...
7:30pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Uncatom, you'll forgive me for not sharing your glee at the announcement. As ever, I note your unsubstantiated observation / intended slur, but I guess today's a good day in your house, so fair play!
Whether this is now over is not clear (to me anyway), but if it transpires that it is, can I just say that despite our many disagreements, it has been a decent debate, and I wish the regular correspondents such as yourself, bickyboy, ordinary personn & Ben B all the best, & good luck for the future.
Until we spar again unc, au revoir!
Reremnart
says...
10:47pm Fri 10 Feb 12
WirralMan
says...
11:18pm Fri 10 Feb 12
He said he'd hope the club would see the importance of the field and the plaque. Guess what Mr Johnson, they DID, hence the movement of the plaque to a respectful location, somewhere away from a field containing said plaque, which many people, "DIDN'T KNOW EXISTED", until the planning application happened.
His narrow-sightedness has jeopardised important renovation and improvement work for the Wirral, at a time when Liverpool gets a lot of regeneration and the Wirral gets virtually none, so anything that improves local revenues and benefits people from a wide range of sporting backgrounds is an absolute potential boon, whereas what exactly does a tinpot museum, to one long forgotten but still great poet achieve for local revenues. Many people died in WWI and got a field and a plaque, but one man died in WWI and got a museum, just because he wrote poetry and was born in Wirral. Presumably then when Ian Botham dies Dean or a relative will open an Ian Botham Museum, not necessarily in Heswall as I'm sure Ian's relatives wouldn't mind one anywhere on the Wirral.
People suppotring his poor judgement, seemingly don't feel strongly in improving Wirral and don't care that if Tranmere Rovers ever got into a bankruptcy situation, many people would be out of work, competing with some of these supporters for jobs and they and the club would contribute £0 in taxes to the local economy.
Most people don't even consider what the "fallen heroes" would think if they were able to speak after death and how many descendants exactly have poo-pooed the scheme? Any verifiable statistics?
Soliders deserve respect and the plans would have allowed for this, but some supporters of Dean's interferance, probably gave scant regard for such "fallen heroes", until they found out about plans to build on a memorial, they never realised was there; the short sighted hypocrits.
So please feel free to visit the homes of young aspiring athletes and say sorry, for potentially helping to stop their new facility from being built and if the developments income streams don't happen, feel free to give a nice cheque for a few thousands of pounds to the council every month, to compensate.
P.S. How many so-called supporters of Dean Johnson's, have ever visited his low income museum, or knew more about it than the Ingleborough plaque, before this farcical tooing and froing actually occured?
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
11:34pm Fri 10 Feb 12
Well done old boy, quite simply you have done the right thing and you should be very proud of yourself, seriously!
On a practical note,has anyone considered that section of field immediately adjacent to Prenton Park? The one marked out as a playing field?? Surely there is your compromise?
WBC why not use this bit of land for the clubs funding requirements, it doesn't seem to be doing much and that's not me being sarcastic !!
It must have been a very hard decision to make Mr Johnson but as someone who has been very keen to see the fields preserved for all the right reasons, in my eyes I have seen you and TRFC in a different light today, united in a common cause to remember or local boys regardless of how long ago it was.
Come on all, please pause for a moment and put our differences aside !
"They shall not grow old as we grow old, at the going down of the sun and in the morning, we shall (and must) remember them"!
We all surely agree with these immortal lines?
Amen....
RoSs1303
says...
12:50am Sat 11 Feb 12
As a Wirral lad (well man) I have had direct contact with TRFC, the Woodchurch sporting facilities and some of the many war memorials on our peninsular.
My conerns are that, for the sake of a few, many could well be affected by this on going saga, whilst some will have been affected prior to this situation rearing it's ugly head.
Make no mistake the site as it is now is less of a memorial and more of a sad reflection on us as individuals. No one, myself included, has cared enough to want to bring the site up to a standard of true thanks, no one.
Yet as soon as a scheme that could directly effect a club who, believe it or not, bring entertainment to thousands of local residents comes up, people are up in arms!
Forget for a moment that this enterprise would generate a significant amount of money for one individual. There was a real chance here for us to leave a great mark of respect to our fallen, ensure future generations of Wirralians have a great sports and recreational and allow continuing enjoyment of our local football team for years to come.
This whole thing has been an utter waste of time for everyone. I could have understood the happiness of those against the scheme if they had ensured the survival of the site along with a commitment to improving the memorial and acess to it. Yet as it stands Woodchurch still has a pretty basic and ageing facility, TRFC still has land with no use AND worst of all the site will still be a disgrace to those who lost their lives for our freedom.
No one, and this goes for both sides, that mattered had the foresight to sit down and agree a way forward that was mutually acceptable and enhanced our show of appreciation to our fallen.
I find it hard to believe that homes, that could easily be turned into individually legally protected memorials, along with the long term protection of each tree planted in memory plus a relocated plaque and memorial garden is not a much more fitting tribute than an inaccessible and vandalised field
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
8:12am Sat 11 Feb 12
Like others, I believe there is no co-incidence between what is going on at Wallasey Town Hall and the decision to withdraw this application. A few weeks ago I raised the question of the relationship between local councillors and TRFC, particularly with respect to the manner in which these Memorial Playing Fields were transferred to TRFC in the first place, the implications of the likely 'unexpected' windfall and the level of hospitality extended by the club to Wirral councillors and officials. No answers were forthcoming, then out of the blue the plans to build on this war memorial are pulled. The silence said it all.
On now with the English Heritage registration and some out-of-the-box ideas as to how these fields can best be used for the benefit of the community as a whole.
Finally - thanks to 24424m for your gracious comments.
uncatom
says...
9:16am Sat 11 Feb 12
RoSs1303
says...
10:22am Sat 11 Feb 12
ordinary personn
says...
10:41am Sat 11 Feb 12
WirralMan - I guess you are disappointed by the outcome but your comment "just because he wrote poetry" is uncalled for. Have you read Wifred Owen's work and that of the other War Poets? If not, I challenge you to do so and not be moved. If so, revisit it and look again. Culture in all its forms enriches our society and that includes the arts as well as sport. BTW I have attended many a football match and understand why people are so passionate about it so would never poo-poo its importance to them. However in this instance I saw the issue as being around money being placed before respect, although I realise other people have a different point of view. Your comment about Wirral not receiving much regeneration money is incorrect - Wirral has received millions over the years from Objective 1, SRB, New Deal etc etc. Time would be better spent finding out why there are still serious issues to be tackled in spite of all that funding rather than moaning Wirral does not get enough - but that is really for another thread.
Finally, I for one would be happy to put my money where my mouth is and volunteer to work in a friends' group and bring the memorial back up to the standard it should be.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
12:38pm Sat 11 Feb 12
bickyboy
says...
4:06pm Sat 11 Feb 12
Ya boo to those individuals who, at a time when there's an almost unprecedented lack of confidence in local elected representatives, presumably had to persuade TRFC to withdraw the application lest even more dirt be unearthed on their dodgy activities.
A big thanks to 24424m for his, or her sparky and robust contributions to the pro cause.
A hail of rotten fruit against certain people who have completely missed the point with their late and clumsy interventions as seen above, and have made themselves look like complete idiots.
The meaningful ("meaningful" being the important word, because if you move a memorial, IMO there's a danger of it losing its meaning)preservation of the memory of those who fell so that we could have frank exchanges like these is more important than any brick-built rabbit hutch or yet another wretched football pitch where children can be taught to cheat.
Jimrob
says...
8:00pm Sat 11 Feb 12
I won't give any great thought to certain posts on this thread as I don't think they deserve any.
Some people just don't get it, and that's fair enough. But, please have the good grace to no longer try to "Use" the memory of the dead, to improve the fortunes of an ailing football team.
The reason that Woodchurch Community Centre is in such a sorry state is the fault of Wirral Borough Council.
The reason that TRFC (And I am a fan) is failing, is the sole responsibility of the owner, who refuses to invest any money in the Football Club.
Please do not try to blame others.
WirralMan
says...
8:02pm Sat 11 Feb 12
In the context of war, Owen was no more heroic and giving than anyone else.
Wirral may have had funding over the years for things, but nothing of major note regenaration wise. Peel seem to be going nowhere, as they did the last time they tried to redevelop Woodside and three previous attempts to develop New Brighton have gone for a burton.
Ingleborough would have provided housing and a sports facility to help local people go on to possibly be medal winning Olympians, just like our own Chris boardman was and indeed Steve Smith was a very accomplished athlete.
This area survives on small redevlopment. The Lauries Centre, another Asda within throwing distance of the first, the Rock retail park, whereas Liverpool got Liverpool one, though Rock was created first, it pales by comparison and also Liverpool has the Echo arena, which trumps Pacfic Road and doing up the Floral Pavillion won't make it superior to the Everyman, Playhouse or Empirel just to name a few.
The revenues and sporting legacy generated from Ingleborough, would far outweigh anything a small museum can provide.
If Dean Johnson made his museum a museum to "all" war heros, they would have their memorial and then some, not a plaque and a vandalised field, then Tranmere could have what they and the local economy would benefit from.
Also to the guy calling people nasty-pro TRFC supporters, to call football supporters nasty is a very ill-judged comment, because it could promote a feeling from some, of oh look at those nasty anti-regeneration supporters, who want an area of grass turned into something, that makes little to no money and benefits nobody.
Then the so-called nasty-anti's could be accused of wanting Tranmere's future to be bleak, to the point where the club died and many people were out of work and contributing no taxes, nor the club either.
So to Mr Beaconsfield, it would be prudent not to use descriptions that might stir-up the equivalent of racial hatred.
The economy needs to sustain its own regneration, because relying on people like Peel's promises and occasional Government hondouts won't suffice. Improved sporting facilites, housing, possibly more jobs and certainly taxes is worth more to this area, than a patch of grass that is not a very good homage to dead people; people who have no way to say what they might think about regeneration plans were they alive.
Tranmere never planned to butcher the memorial, but move the plaque to a tasteful location, because many people connected to Tranmere and in the local area in general will have had relatives in either WWI, WWII or both. I did, but I want to live in a more productive area and having a Grandfather who died in WWII makes me proud of what he did, but his efforts won't improve the future of my area now.
People need to start seeing the real potential of the area, instead of living off sentiment and empty promises from Peel, because unless the Wifred Owen Museum starts making as much money as an attraction like Alton Towers does, there is no way the potentially lost revenues borne out of the Ingleborough scheme will come from it.
P.S. it might have been helpful for anti-TRFC supporters to canvas a large selection of living servicemen / ex-servicemen, to get their views, before commenting, as that would be as close to the views of deceased WWI soldiers as you'll ever get.
bickyboy
says...
10:41am Sun 12 Feb 12
Look at the number of cemeteries on the Wirral with war memorials and graves which are neglected, vandalised and offered scant material protection by the authorities. Look at the buildings we've lost, the legacies gone forever, because they became out of use and the council couldn't, or wouldn't secure them adequately.
The sites are cleared, and wretched concrete rabbit hutches take the place of wonderful old structures with history. Authorities pay lip service to the war dead but often do little to help preserve the past, not only out of apathy and lack of funds, but also because of an inherent embarrassment about making a connection with what is often seen as a colonial legacy.
What appeals to me most about the culmination of the Ingleborough Fields saga is that for once, this trend has been bucked.
The names dont really matter: it could be Owen, it could be an ordinary soldier, a sailor or airman with no living relatives. Its irrelevant whether these people wrote poetry or whatever: what they did in selling their lives in return for our freedom towers over everything we do, because without the things they did we simply wouldnt exist in a world where we can have these conversations. And that makes the preservation of what they stood for, in the place where it was first commemorated, one of the most important duties of this society.
I see little value in your suggestion about canvassing war veterans over this issue. Their views are relevant, but it wouldn't be the end of the story even if, as seems unlikely, they rejected the preservation of Ingleborough out of hand.
The principle represented by the memorial is far bigger than the opinions of just one bunch of people, no matter now relevant their experience.
Once gone it would be lost forever, and in my opinion we dont have sufficient knowledge of, or authority over the likely values of future generations to make the decision to destroy it and thus deprive them of its original symbolism.
Self sacrifice for the greater good is the noblest of all human actions, and has huge ramifications for the preservation of our species.
Oh and finally, at least from my POV, this was never about an "anti TRFC" campaign. Its an "anti building houses on the site of an original war memorial" campaign. Important distinction to make.
uncatom
says...
10:43am Sun 12 Feb 12
It would benefit you to read the correspondance properly, there was no mention of nasty pro supporters,the words were "nasty pro posters above" your ramblings certainly give good cause to keeping the field as a memorial as they show you have very little understanding of the main issue,you are consistant with your critisims about the state of the field and how TRFC would provide a fitting memorial yet they have had tenure of the field for the past 16 years and allowed it to be run down vandalised and neglected, so much for a deserved memorial and respect,finally might I add that many people showed protest at the sale not just Dean Johnson amongst them the Royal British Legion and many many ex servicemen and women, just one last thing I think TRFC have more friends within the council than DJ.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
11:46am Sun 12 Feb 12
I thought saving the Ingleborough Road Memorial Fields was ambitious in itself - though eventually successful thanks to the tenacity of a few - but the idea of a World War One Theme Park - complete, presumably, with a Trenches Maze and a Big Bertha Shell Ride - is too much for my simple mind.
Readers might think I have finally cracked, using that last paragraph as Exhibit A. Truth is, I am irked. I am irked that, finding no real arguments with which to shoot down my own past postings, Wirral Man resorts to accusing me, albeit in a sly, roundabout way, of being a racist. I would say that it was unbecoming, but WirralMan is new to me so I don't know his pedigree and am not yet therefore in a position to judge. But I find his remark offensive in the extreme.
ordinary personn
says...
12:58pm Sun 12 Feb 12
Why have a Wilfred Owen museum? I could turn that around and say why have statues of footballers when all the players played the same game? I see no problem in recognising and celebrating the achievements of individuals be it Wilfred Owen or Sir Stanley Matthews.
Finally, to add my voice to the others who have been previously involved in discussion on this topic - this is NOT and NEVER has been and anti TRFC issue. Go back into the Globe archives and read previous threads and you will see that for yourself. It was and is all about respect.
WirralMan
says...
7:48pm Sun 12 Feb 12
I never called the W O museum a theme park, that is just an outlandish slant on my comment, I basically said, the museum would have to generate the same kind of revenues, as a theme park like Alton Towers, in order to generate anything close to the same kind of revenues as the Ingleborough project.
With reference to racism, I never inferred or called anyone racist; I inferred that anyone being labelled a "nasty poster" by someone who disagreed, could potentially view such an attitude as "akin to a racist attitude", because anyone having a passionate viewpoint about regeneration projects, doesn't deserve to be called nasty; possibly wrong might be a more choice piece of wording.
Yes there is a removal of the past links to this area and perhaps there should be more buildings designed for the commemoration of the past, but old buildings sometimes become unsafe or unproductive and the local economy can't operate well on expensive refurbishment of some old buildings that make little to no money.
If the building was a well reknowned artists cottage, or an old railway station, that could be turned into a rail heritage museum, that would be great, but what if the building was an old bank building, or an old victorian public toilet? Some buildings would cost too much to refurbish and preserve, make little money and garner little interest from people, after the initial curiousness or interest faded.
Sometimes the past can be commemorated and should be, but sometimes the past hinders the future and a balance needs to be sought sometimes, as to best use of old buildings and sites.
deadly_sub
says...
11:21am Mon 13 Feb 12
The latest news is that the applications have been withdrawn to allow some changes to be made to the Woodchurch half of the application. The Ingleborough plans remain pretty much unchanged. They will be re-submitted shortly and are more likely than not to be approved.
A newsletter has gone out to members of the Tranmere Hall Estate residents group confirming the above.
It would have been nice of TRFC or Peter Johnson to share this with the wider Wirral public, but PR and communication have never been his strong points.
deadly_sub
says...
11:24am Mon 13 Feb 12
chief1
says...
11:55am Mon 13 Feb 12
deadly_sub
says...
12:08pm Mon 13 Feb 12
No need to gloat. TRFC have clearly taken local feelings and the historical links of the site into consideration. This has been done in an attempt to appease the concerns of people such as the contributors to this thread. They should be commended for this and TRFC supporters should maintain the moral high ground and not resort to petty abuse. This only adds credence to the idea that all Rovers fans are idiots with no compassion for the fallen, etc.
uncatom
says...
6:58pm Mon 13 Feb 12
deadly_sub
says...
11:52am Tue 14 Feb 12
uncatom wrote:Now come on, Uncatom, the antis have been far more vitriolic that Chief1 on occasions. Both sides have contributors who are less articulate and more confrontational. That is just the way things are. Both sides have valid points, but I would say that the antis have been more entrenched in their views, unwilling to acknowledge the pro viewpoint and making this an anti-Tranmere campaign rather than anti-development. Making the campaign personal only brings out the worst in the other side.
Nice to see the true face of TRFC support, the sneering and contempt shown by chief 1, it does nothing to support your cause, you should pay attention to deadly sub,and follow the lead of the more sensible,I dont know about the moral high ground you cant claim that win or lose
As for the moral high ground,I was talking about the behaviour on this and other websites, not the actual planning decision.
uncatom
says...
9:20am Wed 15 Feb 12
ordinary personn
says...
10:52am Wed 15 Feb 12
Deadly_sub - yes, whilst both sides of the argument have been passionate in their stances and may at times have been out of order, I am afraid that Chief1 has undone a lot of the work you and the likes of 24242m have done in putting the pro side of the argument. Chief1's post was completely unnecessary and IMHO childish and petty. Chief1 has a right to their opinion but to reduce the issue to a football score is disrespectful in the extreme. Indeed, it may just have suceeded in reinforcing the negative stereotype some people hold about football and football supporters and functioned in merely strengthening people's belief about the development being disrespectful and increased their determination to prevent it going ahead.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
10:58am Wed 15 Feb 12
But he has provided a great re-quotable quote:-
" Celebrating a win is amazing as you must of thought that a multi million pound business man would walk away from a £5 million pound development is amazing!! "
woodyres
says...
1:55pm Wed 15 Feb 12
chief1 wrote:Sadly this is no laughing matter chief1, but you are "spot-on" about that business man having no intention of walking away from the opportunity to make a huge sum of money. The arguements i have read are all valid, but are actually missing the point ...
Apologies to all clebrating but i can only laugh at your expense. Celebrating a win is amazing as you must of thought that a multi million pound business man would walk away from a £5 million pound development is amazing!!!! Plan is to be re submitted within a month and will be accepted and TRFC will prevail through your ridiculous arguements!! There is a memory park to be installed at the new development which has a lot more going for it than trees planted on the outskirts of a football field!!! TRFC 1 0 Dean Johnson
I believe this business man does not "care a jot" about Ingleborough, and certainly not the development at Woodchurch, it's all about making money at the end of the day.
If Wirral Council allow planning permission for houses on the Memorial Ingleborough site, what is to stop them doing the same in years to come with the large amount of greenbelt land at Woodchurch that will be "gifted" along with the leisure centre ?
You seem to be certain about the new plans for Woodchurch being accepted ... shouldn't TRFC be offering another public consultation, maybe they want to let us know about the hockey pitches that were stranglely omitted from the first consultation !!
Also, I have watched the way the TRFC supporters club have treated Dean Johnson, that doesn't bode well for future "community engagement" on Woodchurch does it ? Is this what will happen to anyone who speaks up against their future plans ?
deadly_sub
says...
4:00pm Wed 15 Feb 12
I just have to correct a couple of things:
Firstly, the Woodchurch land would be leased from the council, not owned by TRFC, secondly, the planning application has a consultation period, and what is the issue with the hockey pitch? It is an extra facility, surely that is a good thing? Or am I missing something?
And thirdly, the TRFC supporters club is non-existant. Individual supporters have commented on Dean Johnson. The Supporters TRUST have met with Dean in an attempt to find a compromise acceptable to all parties. The Trust is all about community involvement.
uncatom
says...
10:09am Thu 16 Feb 12
bickyboy
says...
10:34am Thu 16 Feb 12
As for Johnson "walking away", there are other ways of skinning a stuffed cat than persisting with such an unpopular scheme. TRFC arent doing so well at the moment, and wouldnt be the first football club to go under and have their ground sold to pay off debts.
woodyres
says...
1:58pm Thu 16 Feb 12
deadly_sub wrote:deadly-sub - Leased at a nominal rent or owned there is already talk of pitches being fenced off from the general public. That is acceptable for the TRFC players training area, but not for the pitches which extend along the green belt area to the old St.Benedict school site. How much say will the community have about that decision?
Woodyres, I just have to correct a couple of things: Firstly, the Woodchurch land would be leased from the council, not owned by TRFC, secondly, the planning application has a consultation period, and what is the issue with the hockey pitch? It is an extra facility, surely that is a good thing? Or am I missing something? And thirdly, the TRFC supporters club is non-existant. Individual supporters have commented on Dean Johnson. The Supporters TRUST have met with Dean in an attempt to find a compromise acceptable to all parties. The Trust is all about community involvement.
The hockey pitch was not mentioned at all in the "estate wide consultation" which took place, however, if you look on the council's planning department website it shows a timetable for use of that hockey pitch & it only includes the clubs from around the Wirral, and no time allowed for the residents to enjoy this extra facility. so, yes, I feel you are missing something.
I have also been at meetings with Dean Johnson and he tells a very different story to the impression you are giving about the TRFC Supporters TRUST/CLUB so I stand by my original statement, and my huge concern regarding future community involvement.
A further comment regarding the Supporters TRUST, there have been some sweeping comments made by some of their members about how much this would benefit the Community of Woodchurch. It would be nice if they had actually made an effort to ask us - the residents.
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
8:06pm Thu 16 Feb 12
Here is a solution to the problem that I think makes excellent sense, keeps all parties happy and stops all the escallating back biting.
Get the National Trust to buy the land and preserve it / enhance it as was intended with formal gardens and educatioanal facilities to tell the story of the great war and other conflicts perhaps which would improve the look of the area and possibly increase the value of local property?
2014 sees the 100 anniversary of the commencement of hostilities in WW1, What better time to get NT involved !
Give Mr Johnson his cash, develop the Woodchurch centre and pay the debts...everybody is happy....Simple !
Please visit www.planningforpeopl
e.org.uk
deadly_sub
says...
9:07pm Thu 16 Feb 12
woodyres wrote:TRFC will be spending millions of pounds on Woodchurch. The football pitches will be high quality and will need regular upkeep. I don't see an issue with them being fenced off. They will still be available for use 7 days a week, morning til evening.
deadly_sub wrote:deadly-sub - Leased at a nominal rent or owned there is already talk of pitches being fenced off from the general public. That is acceptable for the TRFC players training area, but not for the pitches which extend along the green belt area to the old St.Benedict school site. How much say will the community have about that decision?
Woodyres, I just have to correct a couple of things: Firstly, the Woodchurch land would be leased from the council, not owned by TRFC, secondly, the planning application has a consultation period, and what is the issue with the hockey pitch? It is an extra facility, surely that is a good thing? Or am I missing something? And thirdly, the TRFC supporters club is non-existant. Individual supporters have commented on Dean Johnson. The Supporters TRUST have met with Dean in an attempt to find a compromise acceptable to all parties. The Trust is all about community involvement.
The hockey pitch was not mentioned at all in the "estate wide consultation" which took place, however, if you look on the council's planning department website it shows a timetable for use of that hockey pitch & it only includes the clubs from around the Wirral, and no time allowed for the residents to enjoy this extra facility. so, yes, I feel you are missing something.
I have also been at meetings with Dean Johnson and he tells a very different story to the impression you are giving about the TRFC Supporters TRUST/CLUB so I stand by my original statement, and my huge concern regarding future community involvement.
A further comment regarding the Supporters TRUST, there have been some sweeping comments made by some of their members about how much this would benefit the Community of Woodchurch. It would be nice if they had actually made an effort to ask us - the residents.
I still don't understand the issue with the hockey pitch. The planning document contains an EXAMPLE of how the facilities may be used. It is not set in stone!
Finally, as a recent member of the Tranmere Rovers Trust board (I stood down at the AGM in January), I can confidently say that no-one on the board made any public comments about Dean Johnson that were disparaging. The board met Dean and the meeting was amicable, with interesting suggestions from both sides and many areas of agreement and common ground.
The legacy of a development of the Woodchurch leisure centre is a matter of opinion, but I don't see how it can do anything but benefit the local community.
remember the past preserve the future
says...
10:28am Fri 17 Feb 12
a really noble and novel idea indeed.
in reality how much do you think they NT would pay for the land and would it include per se from the wilfred owen society and maybe the war trust etc?
it would suit all parties.
maybe the wilfred owen story could relocate from Argyle Street.
as for preserving the field as is that is a great idea however what would the local residents think about having an open field behind their houses?
the council or the preservation society would / could hire park wardens / rangers to keep undesierables out at night.
another winner could be to ask Shaftsbury (sic) to move into Ingelborough and give that land to TTFC and then they can develop that as they see fit.
as you say everybody wants a win out of this situation. there must be some way everybody can get what they want????
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
10:48am Fri 17 Feb 12
All in all, an all-round great solution to a big problem. Congrats.
uncatom
says...
12:52pm Fri 17 Feb 12
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
8:14pm Fri 17 Feb 12
It would be great for the National trust to get involved, let's not be put off by the fact the memorial field is in the middle of a neat, pleasant little housing area, after all they invested in Paul McCartney's house in liverpool, this area is just as important, bigger and represents more people etc.
Just imagine and try to picture the scene,in 2014, the 100 anniversary of WW1, wouldn't it be great for:
TRFC to be thriving on their new training ground
TRFC debt reduced, their financial pressures reduced, the club could get on with enjoying the game.
The Ingleborough Memorial Fields have been fully landscaped into, perhaps thriving gardens which could incorporate an educational visitors centre that could attract school visitors from around the country. Hey you could even have 88 miniture bronze figures similar to those on Formby Beech, one for each of the fallen.
This enhancement brings pleasing relaxing surroundings to the area and increases the value of surrounding house prices!
What is the bottom line for the land I wonder?
Surely the National Trust would be more than happy to take the project on giveh it's historical value even if it meant a little fund raising from The National Lottery and Internet appeals. Thank heavans for the Wilfred Owen connection (admitedly just as important as the other guys) Wilfred is massive in America, surely the funds would not take long to raise even in these financially striken times.
It would be great if Mr Johnson would be willing to look at this alternative solution.
What say ye ??
WirralMan
says...
9:01pm Fri 17 Feb 12
He might then get more patrons, because I'm sure people who go to it now just get blaze, because it's not like an art gallery with many and constantly changing pictures, themes and displays, it's a constant, so I would assume it gets many repeat visitors.
Therefore if you have a constant theme and display, make the most of the theme and including a museum to all soliders not just one, would be more befitting than a dilapidated field and less expensive to sort out, because the Council could perhaps offer Dean Johnson a few thousand to restructure his museum accordingly, rather than let him pay for the changes himself.
He then creates a lasting legacy to WWI soldiers and Ingleborough can become what many others want.
This saves a lot of faffing about, with a vast swaythe of suggestions and rhetoric about Ingleborough and Woodchurch.
WirralMan
says...
9:10pm Fri 17 Feb 12
I meant to put in my previous post, that I assume it, (the museum), doesn't get many repeat visitors, so although it said "it gets many", it wasn't meant to say that.
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
9:23pm Fri 17 Feb 12
Hey ! Is it just me or are we all starting to find a little common ground with this whole episode?
True, Dean has focused on one indivisual who has become renowned the world over, as an outsider to the exhibition, the way I see it, Wilfred, amongst many others had a rare tallent (for want of a better phrase) of putting pen to paper and speaking for the millions of men ON BOTH SIDES who spent day in day out in foul conditions concentrating on nothing but getting home safe.......The rest, as we all know is sadly history.
For this reason, in my humble opinion, Dean is flying the flag for all the fallen, why not make Wilfred the figure head? The voice of the fallen?
If he could speak for himself, Wilfred, I'm sure would not put himself above any other soldier ON EITHER SIDE but I think he is the most well known voice of the fallen.
Over to you old boy....
remember the past preserve the future
says...
9:36pm Fri 17 Feb 12
as for turning it into a theme park he would surely be aghast. however as long as tranmere reduce their debt to fund the enhancement of woodchurch/ wirral sporting facilities for future generations that's the real winner. so really over to you dean Johnson. can you raise the funds to buy the land for a fitting memorial to all the fallen.
as for uncatom. give it a rest old boy.
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
9:50pm Fri 17 Feb 12
Hey Dean ! If you watch this thread....As a local business, you have our support!! I will call by Argyle Street with a few ideas sometime soon ;-)
remember the past preserve the future
says...
10:16pm Fri 17 Feb 12
uncatom
says...
9:48am Sat 18 Feb 12
Should we not be showing our concern for all those involved in this sad saga not just TRFC, as I pointed out Woodchurch playing fields are not my primary concern, not because I dont care but mainly because i dont use the Woodchurch centre but those that do should be given cast iron assurances that it will remain a public facility and that they are not denied its use at the whim of TRFC who to be fair have admitted that they will have priority at times on some uses of the centre and fields, and as football and training are their primary function they will need to use the said facilities quite often, as to give it a rest "old boy" are you suggesting that this thread is only for the use of those that support the sale of Ingleborough Memorial Field, old boy?
remember the past preserve the future
says...
10:30am Sat 18 Feb 12
uncatom
says...
12:33pm Sat 18 Feb 12
I'am quite aware of the term community and use,and I am glad you raised the subject as you well know the council provided the Woodchurch centre for the said community use,upon that point we both agree,now if someone takes over that facility or leases it they then control its use, are you with me so far, it has to all intents and purposes been privatised no longer under the direct control of WBC, if the landlord then decides he wishes to use certain parts of that facility for his sole use or the use of his agents and I believe TRFC have already said that they will have a certain amount of priority use, then surely that negates the term community use and re-inserts the proviso of community use when we allow, would that be a fair assumption old boy.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
12:38pm Sat 18 Feb 12
remember the past preserve the future
says...
12:50pm Sat 18 Feb 12
Serena T
says...
12:52pm Sat 18 Feb 12
http://www.wilfredow
enstory.com/inglebor
oughroad.html
uncatom
says...
12:52pm Sat 18 Feb 12
uncatom
says...
2:37pm Sat 18 Feb 12
You flatter me, that my remarks could scupper anything,oh if that were so,your quite right we were all getting along quite well until someone wrote give it a rest old boy not a good response if you wished to keep things civil,you appear to have taken quite an exception to my comments maybe because they have a ring of truth in them.
Serina T excellent site,thats what its all about.
remember the past preserve the future
says...
7:19pm Sat 18 Feb 12
WirralMan
says...
9:55pm Sat 18 Feb 12
I want the regeneration for the area as a whole not just Tranmere, because waiting for New Brighton or Peel to come up trumps, is like waiting for Martians to land on Earth.
People have made good points about losing historical legacy, but I still maintain, historical legacy anywhere in this country. needs some sound relevance, I.E. preserving a dead poets house for example, not decrepit and possibly dangerous old buildings, that would be potentially used for little benefit to anyone and cost potentially millions to renovate, with little to no revenue generation to recoup expenditure.
As for Wilfred Owen speaking for soliders with his work, he only did that it must be said, because whilst hospitalised in Scotland after being injured, the writer Siegfried Sassoon, who was also there, encouraged him to do that.
Such things were represented in a film with Christopher Price and Johhny Lee Miller in it, the name escapes me offhand.
That is not meant in any way to devalue Owen's work, it's merely a factual observation.
Tranmere never intended to shun the past, because of the relocation plans for the plaque and many people, no doubt Peter Johnson included, would have had relatives who fought in wars and as the saying goes, "hate the game not the player", so anyone who thinks along the lines of Soldiers are brainwashed political fodder, with no free will, is wrong to think such things, because I respect the dead and the living who gave and give for my country and my area, but like it or not, if your area can benefit from better sporting facilities for many and more housing, tax and possibly jobs, it must be done, because sentiment, however warm and lasting, doesn't help and this area is founded on poor promises from Peel and lost revenues from Cammel Laird being closed before now and Vauxhalls losing jobs and possibly they are under threat if recent reports are founded at all.
However many people wrankled about the memorial field and supported the owner of a museum, but how many people
A: knew about and visited the field before this farago emerged in the public domain.
B: Knew of and visited the museum whose owner they went on to claim support for.
The reason for both points of note is, that supporting either or both of those things, without prior knowledge or patronage of them, reduces the strength of the persons stance somewhat, but some people arguing here and through other media outlets, who never knew about or went to either the field of the museum, have never declared this, so we'll never know, but if they didn't, their ability to be against Ingleborough and for Dean Johnson, loses some credibility if one or either of those things was unknown to the arguer in the first place.
Though it should be said, I am not saying such an individual is not entitled to a viewpoint, merely that lack of prior knowledge about the two things in question, would reduce the strength of their argument.
Tranmere made from the start, a case for relocation of the plaque. Dean Johnson made no argument from the outset, for how the war dead should be remembered, or if he would get involved in some way, that I'm aware of, but I am willing to be corrected on that, so whereas Tranmere had a proposed solution, Dean Johnson seemingly offered nothing but a fair amount of criticism, which reduces the strength of an individuals argument in any situation, if critique is followed by no ideas on the matter being discussed, debated or argued, such ideas needing a how, not just a what, to make them more substantial.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
9:03am Sun 19 Feb 12
The area is not in need of regeneration. What the Tranmere Rovers proposal was -and apparently still could be - is redevelopment, and with redevelopment comes an element of profit, because by their very nature redevelopers are not known for their altruism.
remember the past preserve the future
says...
1:01pm Sun 19 Feb 12
uncatom
says...
2:31pm Sun 19 Feb 12
If ever a case could be made for not selling Ingleborough Memorial field it could be judged by the crassness of you and Wirralman's remarks,the Wilfred Owen one is a classic he only did it after being urged to whilst in hospital and as regards your remark about wiping off a debt the only debt thats being wiped off here is what we owe to the fallen, for what ? to pay off debts incurred by a greedy businessman, shame.
The Ingleborough 88 appreciation society
says...
6:44pm Sun 19 Feb 12
Thats it in a nut shell !!
I'm with you :-)
WirralMan
says...
9:59pm Sun 19 Feb 12
So please feel free to explain why such comments are crass, because quoting something and deriding it, without valid or indeed any explanation, is what looks crass.
Assuming that is the film maker did not make a holy show of themselves on the research, then I remembered the well acted points of research correctly.
remember the past preserve the future
says...
10:21pm Sun 19 Feb 12
WirralMan
says...
11:43pm Sun 19 Feb 12
Yes the area needs regeneration, because if the East Float was so wonderfully picturesque it had National Trust or English Heritage status, then the no need for regeneration angle would be more potent.
The area where the tram fetches up near the Cheshire lines building isn't exactly a thing of beauty; the area near to the tunnel entrance full of weeds behind some corregated iron isn't exactly a well kept beauty spot and some of the housing around the Birkenhead area, had boarded up windows and diplaidation when last I saw and no doubt some houses in the Wallasey and New Brighton area might be like that too.
If the Wirral CBD's looked like the London Docklands and all the housing outside of the CBD's was Caldy, Port Sunlight and Heswall quality, the need for regeneration would be invalid, however striving to improve the area, should always be a key point of interest for the council on a yearly basis, to make the area the best it reasonably can be and keep it that way and it's not about mimicing the London Docklands or making every new or improved house, good enough for a £3,000,000 price tag, but why shouldn't the wirral be devloped to the point where even Liverpool looks second best in some respects?
Why shouldn't the Wirral with it's important dock, shipbuilding, soap and car manufacturing history, be something even more than it is now?
Yes it should be done in the right ways, but nevertheless, the fact it should be done is reason enough to want change.
Regeneration is always necessary in any area like the Wirral, or disrepair becomes an enevitable accepted norm, when lack of pride and care in the local area, forces disrepair and a more downtrodden feel to creep in.
It is a financial burden to be faced on a year by year basis, but effort must be taken each and every year to maintain and improve what is here and should not always be seen as a way to line one or more companies or individuals pockets.
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
10:22am Mon 20 Feb 12
I'm ducking out now (no doubt I will be accused of running away) but will be back should this application be re-submitted.
remember the past preserve the future
says...
12:51pm Mon 20 Feb 12
uncatom
says...
3:58pm Mon 20 Feb 12
you really dont understand the context of my post do you? I'am not disputing when or were he wrote his poetry, you then follow it with quote this is not in any way to devalue Owens work, then why mention it? you 've answered your own question, I will also bid you adieu
Ben Beaconsfield
says...
9:59am Thu 8 Mar 12
22/10/2011 - Attendance at Tranmere Rovers v Walsall match - Match day pass for the Directors Box & Dixie Dean Suite at Prenton Park, car park pass, hot buffet, programme, coffee offered by WBC; Accepted
25/04/2011 - 1 ticket for the Match Sponsors' Lounge at the Tranmere Rovers v Exeter City match. Car park pass, programme, hot buffet and drinks; Accepted
19/04/2011 - 2 tickets for the Directors Box and Dixie Dean Suite at the Tranmere Rovers v Notts County match, car park pass, programme; Accepted
19/03/2011 - Invitation to a performance of Bullets and Daffodils at Wilfred Owen Story and Gallery; Declined
18/03/2011 - Invitation to grand opening - cheese and wine reception at Wilfred Owen Story and Gallery; Declined
Fungy says...
5:08pm Fri 10 Feb 12
nimby-ism at its highest