Exactly who has been skating round this issue?

Your report states the noise levels are too high what a load of tosh. Do the residents that back onto Monkton Park complain when the folk festival, the party in the park or the fireworks display is the event of the week?

The noise levels are horrendous when these events take place but a private view in the warmth of their houses, the residents don't complain then.

Why are we pandering to a few when the youth of the town (the adults of the future) are deprived of a skatepark which is safe, central and keeps the kids away from the public roads/footpaths.

I prefer them away from the public areas, where they are a nuisance and a danger to themselves and others. If the skateboard park stays closed, I hope the skateboarders and stunt cyclists have a play around the Monkton Park Estate, then the moaning old sods will have something to complain about.

John Harris,

Long Barrow Road,

Calne.

It is difficult to separate truth from fiction in the episode of the forced closure of the skateboard park.

I reside in Monkton Park, but not too close to the park (in Esmead), and I suggest that as the complainants have won their battle through the offices of the Ombudsman (to whom they should not have had to appeal) they may like to donate their awards for expenses and damages to a fund to help build the very necessary skateboard park in a suitable way in a suitable and central place in Chippenham.

Full marks to Darren Harley who attended the council meeting on June 4 to press his case in a democratic way. Zero marks to Cllr Lesley Bennett who blamed "middle class residents" for the closing of the skateboard park, not the council.

If Darren, or someone in the council, would like to open a properly accountable fund for a new skateboard park, I for one will now happily pledge £50 as a donation toward it. Any other pledges?

JIM BELK.

Esmead,

Monkton Park,

Chippenham.

The outburst from a particular councillor at a recent public meeting is typical of this council. She blamed the ombudsman, she blamed the residents, she obviously can't take accountability for her own actions. It was councillors who made the wrong decisions.

The ombudsman's report contains 55 paragraphs, is very comprehensive, balanced and, importantly, takes into account noise legislation. I understand it is very unusual indeed for the ombudsman to refer to a council as being "perverse and utterly unreasonable". Legislation evolves over a period of years and usually reflects what ordinary folk believe to be right in society. To the more vociferous correspondents I would ask how they would feel being subjected to constant crashing and banging by their next door neighbour. I think they would rightly expect the law to offer some solution.

The council expert measured the mechanical noise and it peaked at 90dB.

A small band of councillors have doggedly refused to acknowledge the extent of the problem.

During September their own professional noise consultant advised that the skatepark was not sustainable in its current location without causing unacceptable noise levels and the recommendation was to close it. Did the councillors listen? No. They promised to relocate during the winter, did they do so? No. The ombudsman was engaged at an early stage and we agreed to two extensions of time to give councillors the opportunity to deal with the problem. Did they do so? No. Two other locations were identified which were acceptable to all parties. Did the councillors relocate the skatepark? No.

When the matter exploded in their face they carefully created a smokescreen to generate adverse reaction against ordinary residents. What they should have done is say sorry, we'll relocate the skatepark as quickly as we possibly can.

In his report, the ombudsman referred to the existence of a statutory nuisance. Councillors, no matter how important they think they are, are not yet empowered to ignore statute. Our protest has been with the council, not the skateboarders.

NAME AND ADDRESS

SUPPLIED.