DT Ralge Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Down St Mary's Gate? I never did understand why they did that. A lot of the trees though are supposedly reaching the end of their lifespan and need replacing, and are also of an inappropriate type really, so will be replaced with something different. "Inappropriate" meant (as far back as the tender document, I understand) that our city's forefathers saw fit to plant trees (often too close) by the side of the road that were more suited to parkland. They are just too big, heavy and close to the road to accommodate drivers who can't manage to stay on the road. With an overarching objective of the Streets Ahead project centring on road/pavement quality and safety it was decided to fell the offending trees and replant. Crying shame but ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Doesn't explain why they mulched all the vegetation, hedges and established borders down the centre of st Mary's Gate of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeDaMouse Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 I would hate to work for Amey, They work long hours and sometimes under dangerous situations and all they do is get slated all the time. We have over 2million trees in Sheff and people are getting in a huff and a puff about a few trees been felled. im sure its hardly going to affect our alleged ''greenness'' is it? Plus do you recon that Amey are just felling trees for fun or do you think that there might be a reason for it? Disrupting drains, foundations, public safety e,c,t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Of course, just as I think about how dangerous cars are Doesn't mean I look at every car with suspicion I've noticed that trees are regularly blamed for all kinds of things, with no proof. Just lazy blame. Do you know anyone who's had problems with trees that have blown over or blocked drains? Because in 15 years I have heard of zero cases Makes a nice story for corporates like Amey though - to fell mature trees for absolutely no feckin reason at all ---------- Post added 04-01-2015 at 22:18 ---------- It is Amey They will then have to put in a Section 211 notice, if it's in a conservation area Which is literally just 6 weeks notice that felling will take place Appeals to SCC for Tree Preservation Orders need to be made before this time ---------- Post added 04-01-2015 at 22:20 ---------- For what reason Spilldig? If you say daylight, I'm literally gonna come round tomorrow morning and drag you out yer house and sit you outside! Daylight my feckin ass Lack of daylight is one. Why should we have to have a light on all day? Windows covered in so much gunge you nearly have to clean them with a chisel. Broken and dangerous pavements. Path buckleing and splitting. Having to pay to have the gutters cleared every year and sweeping a very large amount of leaves up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen. Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 SPECIAL BRANCH!!! love it. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 I would hate to work for Amey, They work long hours and sometimes under dangerous situations and all they do is get slated all the time. We have over 2million trees in Sheff and people are getting in a huff and a puff about a few trees been felled. im sure its hardly going to affect our alleged ''greenness'' is it? Plus do you recon that Amey are just felling trees for fun or do you think that there might be a reason for it? Disrupting drains, foundations, public safety e,c,t. Re my bold. The primary reason appears to be to save future maintenance. It is not "a few" trees...it is an ever increasing number and it is being done in a non consultative way! Amey got the contract for council services by tendering the lowest bid. Chopping down healthy trees that enhance the environment to preserve low budgets is wrong...plain and simple! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) On our road, it's the people who have no trees outside their houses that want to keep them. Oh, and a couple who have had theirs removed from outside their houses and now love it because they now are not living in the darkness that the rest of us have to put up with, but insist that everyone else should have to put up with it, as they like the trees really - just not outside their own houses! - hypocrites! Let's face it, many trees across Sheffield have been badly managed for years and have got to the point that they have 'outgrown' their surroundings. I find many who claim 'environmental' reasons, a tad hypocritical, as new younger trees would be far better for the environment. Edited January 5, 2015 by Mr Bloom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olive Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) Hi everyone Have enjoyed many years of sympathetic tree management, so... Or many years of no management at all! ---------- Post added 05-01-2015 at 18:37 ---------- Do you know anyone who's had problems with trees that have blown over or blocked drains? The one outside our house (grows out of the pavement, so belongs to the council) hasn't been pruned in donkeys' years. It's completely outgrown its environment. The roots damaged our garden wall, which is a retaining wall, to the extent it had be completely rebuilt, which was no small job. If only Amey would do some work on this particular tree..... By the way, it's a beautiful tree, it looks lovely. I just wish it had been looked after. Edited January 5, 2015 by Olive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 5, 2015 Share Posted January 5, 2015 Lack of daylight is one. Why should we have to have a light on all day? Windows covered in so much gunge you nearly have to clean them with a chisel. Broken and dangerous pavements. Path buckleing and splitting. Having to pay to have the gutters cleared every year and sweeping a very large amount of leaves up. I guess the trees were there before you and your neighbours. So if there's a problem it's you that should be removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Share Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) I agree very annoying to see trees felled for daft reasons such as the pavement is slightly uneven or its blocking light into someones house or sap is falling on their car. ... (what awful things we have to deal with!).. maybe its an idea to shoot all the birds to stop their noisy chirping and droppings as well, or build a massive dome to stop rain and snow falling??... . Imo id rather put up with the annoyances and have an abundance of trees than a barren city. trees keep areas cool in the summer, make un-maintained and dirty areas look nicer, clean the air and provide homes for wildlife. (and give Sheffield its green reputation) Obviously trees have to be felled if they are causing genuine issues, like damage to foundations/roofs/drains or are diseased. These trees should be replaced and the residents better informed that this is going to happen and maybe where the new tree will be located. (wouldn't take much to do this.. a recyclable leaflet through the door or a big notice stuck on the tree a decent amount of time before it is due to be felled.???). This is what Amey need to do better! Also I think we need to remember us humans are animals and rely on nature to survive. we need to stop trying to fight it because its sometimes slightly annoying and dirty and gets in the way of our ''civilized'' and ''organised'' society. Ok rant over... i sound a right tree hugging hippy!! I feel exactly the same way as you drummer! And it seems we're not alone on here.....wouldn't it be good if all of us tree warriors got together and protected Sheffield's Trees in the way that they should be! We'd be unstoppable..... ---------- Post added 05-01-2015 at 23:13 ---------- This would be us...saving the trees.... ---------- Post added 05-01-2015 at 23:25 ---------- I guess the trees were there before you and your neighbours. So if there's a problem it's you that should be removed. I wholeheartedly agree with this Some of the utter tripe people come out with to justify the destruction of trees that have been there longer than their grandfathers...is frankly astounding! Pavements and light? Are you effin kidding me?? Trees that have grown for 140 years, been there longer than you and your stupid house - are worth far more to me Passing greedy corporates like Amey where it's all about money....they come and go. Those ancient trees can never be replaced... And if one more person talks about sapling replacement as some sort of friggin equivalent, I will hunt them down, sit them in front of one of the old trees of Sheffield....and ask them to explain to me how a 2 year old tree is any 'replacement' for something that has been growing there for over 100 years? They are NOT a replacement - in any shape or form I am so friggin mad about this, my head is going to explode.... These ancient trees, with their natural, unadulterated shapes have been such a privilege to live with... Seriously such a blessing....and they belong to ALL OF US in the decades of their growth.... They are ALL of our heritage LEAVE OUR TREES ALONE AMEY!! Edited January 5, 2015 by Solomon1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts