Rustling Road trees are being felled right now

[Guest makapaka]

The city was always going to 'benefit' from this but to call it a scheme is disingenuous. It is costing 2.5 BILLION QUID, you make it sound like Amey are doing us a favour resurfacing our roads.

 

2.5 BILLION QUID and they are still chopping down healthy trees that DON'T NEED TO BE CUT DOWN just so they can cream off a bit more cash.

 

I don't know how old you are but if you have kids they could easily be dead before these twigs Amey are planting give us anything like the canopy cover we had before Lodge and Amey came along. If your kids have kids they won't be growing up surrounded by wonderful mature trees, they will never see the city as we have been lucky enough to see it. And I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for the on going efforts of people highlighting the unnecessary destruction Amey would have quietly cut down a few thousand more by now.

 

Well it is 25 years work and it's not going to be free is it?

 

It's not the lorax- we've only had 15% of trees removed and replaced.

 

If the efforts of the campaigners have been successful all the better.

[Longcol]

If your kids have kids they won't be growing up surrounded by wonderful mature trees, they will never see the city as we have been lucky enough to see it.

 

Seriously?

 

There are about 4 million trees in Sheffield - only 36,000 are planted in pavements and road side verges.

 

Going back to Rustlings Road - if you look at Street View on Google there is a near continuous line of trees in Endcliffe Park from the Hangingwater end for a couple of hundred yards which are within a few yards of the road.

 

Near where I live Crookes Valley Road has trees at both sides in Crookes Valley Park and the top of the Ponderosa - all a few yards from the road.

 

I can give loads more examples

[Bargepole23]

The city was always going to 'benefit' from this but to call it a scheme is disingenuous. It is costing 2.5 BILLION QUID, you make it sound like Amey are doing us a favour resurfacing our roads.

 

2.5 BILLION QUID and they are still chopping down healthy trees that DON'T NEED TO BE CUT DOWN just so they can cream off a bit more cash.

 

I don't know how old you are but if you have kids they could easily be dead before these twigs Amey are planting give us anything like the canopy cover we had before Lodge and Amey came along. If your kids have kids they won't be growing up surrounded by wonderful mature trees, they will never see the city as we have been lucky enough to see it. And I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for the on going efforts of people highlighting the unnecessary destruction Amey would have quietly cut down a few thousand more by now.

 

Where does 2.5 BILLION QUID come from? The contract value is £2 billion as I understand it.

[neeeeeeeeeek]

Where does 2.5 BILLION QUID come from? The contract value is £2 billion as I understand it.

 

My mistake, it's only 2 billion!

[atticus]

Im sure when the contract was being discussed the cost of the work (cost to AMEY) was something like £750 million.

Obviously in the crazy world of the PFI's the final cost to the taxpayer will be more.

[Robin-H]

Where does 2.5 BILLION QUID come from? The contract value is £2 billion as I understand it.

 

The total contract sum is I believe £2.2billion, but what's an extra £200 million amongst friends..

 

(A lot of articles do say £2 billion, but others say £2.2billion, so I'm not actually sure which is correct..)

[annbaker]

It's £2.2billion 50% of which has been funded by Central Govt (Dept for Transport)

 

In terms of ribbons. I ribbon trees regularly. I do not ribbon any tree that is reported as dead, dying ,diseased or dangerous and nor does anyone else from any of the local groups. Why would we? STAG hasn't any issue with any dead or ailing tree being felled as has been said ad nauseum

 

The ribbons are put around healthy trees described by Amey as Damaging and Discriminatory. They are perfectly healthy. STAG is against the felling of healthy trees only. If you see a ribbon on a tree that is dead etc then please report this on the STAG fb page. If the wrong tree has been ribboned then the ribbon will be removed.

 

Our source of info btw for which D the tree comes under is SCC and Amey's own records. Not something we made up

 

You will see Save Me notices on healthy trees only.

 

Also to note had this Streets Ahead contract not been in place things like leaves, lack of light, sap (which does not damage cars just to dispel that myth), bird poo (which happens anywhere and not just under trees), interference with your Skybox are not deemed as legitimate reasons to fell trees (check the council website cos it's on there). I should point out I live on a tree lined road and have done for 25 years. Sweeping up leaves isn't an issue, some soapy water deals with the bird poo and the sap. It's not a problem and I knew the trees were there when I bought the house so I did have a choice to go elsewhere

 

Now to turn to the ITP. The ITP's recommendations are not binding (check their terms of reference on SCC's webpage). Their recommedations are also published. For the most part in relation to healthy trees they recommend engineering solutions such as narrower kerbs, flexible paving . There are 14 of these in all that do not cost you or me an additional penny as they are already costed into the contract yet SCC and Amey just ignore them. The ITP is, however, costing us money and would appear to be a bit pointless if they're not going to be listened to.

 

STAG are not just a bunch of bobbly hatted tree huggers and you would be very wrong to make that assumption, Many are qualified in such fields as engineering , arboculture, the law , envionmental e.g. your air quality, highway management and PFI contracts (that'd be me) so we do know what we're about. (The hats (bobbles optional) tho are required in cold wet weather when you're outside trying to save healthy trees.). STAG members come from all walks of life across Sheffield with one common aim - saving healthy trees. Not to stop you having your road or pavement re-done - we all want those done!. Just to save HEALTHY trees. Not ALL trees as one Bryan Lodge would have you believe

Edited March 19, 2017 by annbaker

[Guest makapaka]

It's £2.2billion 50% of which has been funded by Central Govt (Dept for Transport)

 

In terms of ribbons. I ribbon trees regularly. I do not ribbon any tree that is reported as dead, dying ,diseased or dangerous and nor does anyone else from any of the local groups. Why would we? STAG hasn't any issue with any dead or ailing tree being felled as has been said ad nauseum

 

The ribbons are put around healthy trees described by Amey as Damaging and Discriminatory. They are perfectly healthy. STAG is against the felling of healthy trees only. If you see a ribbon on a tree that is dead etc then please report this on the STAG fb page. If the wrong tree has been ribboned then the ribbon will be removed.

 

Our source of info btw for which D the tree comes under is SCC and Amey's own records. Not something we made up

 

You will see Save Me notices on healthy trees only.

 

Also to note had this Streets Ahead contract not been in place things like leaves, lack of light, sap (which does not damage cars just to dispel that myth), bird poo (which happens anywhere and not just under trees), interference with your Skybox are not deemed as legitimate reasons to fell trees (check the council website cos it's on there). I should point out I live on a tree lined road and have done for 25 years. Sweeping up leaves isn't an issue, some soapy water deals with the bird poo and the sap. It's not a problem and I knew the trees were there when I bought the house so I did have a choice to go elsewhere

 

Now to turn to the ITP. The ITP's recommendations are not binding (check their terms of reference on SCC's webpage). Their recommedations are also published. For the most part in relation to healthy trees they recommend engineering solutions such as narrower kerbs, flexible paving . There are 14 of these in all that do not cost you or me an additional penny as they are already costed into the contract yet SCC and Amey just ignore them. The ITP is, however, costing us money and would appear to be a bit pointless if they're not going to be listened to.

 

STAG are not just a bunch of bobbly hatted tree huggers and you would be very wrong to make that assumption, Many are qualified in such fields as engineering , arboculture, the law , envionmental e.g. your air quality, highway management and PFI contracts (that'd be me) so we do know what we're about. (The hats (bobbles optional) tho are required in cold wet weather when you're outside trying to save healthy trees.). STAG members come from all walks of life across Sheffield with one common aim - saving healthy trees. Not to stop you having your road or pavement re-done - we all want those done!. Just to save HEALTHY trees. Not ALL trees as one Bryan Lodge would have you believe

 

It's admirable and I certainly am not one for unnecessary destruction.

 

I think given that these are suburban street trees it's a bit different though and in the main the council should be able to get on with their job.

[Cyclone]

Seriously?

 

There are about 4 million trees in Sheffield - only 36,000 are planted in pavements and road side verges.

 

Going back to Rustlings Road - if you look at Street View on Google there is a near continuous line of trees in Endcliffe Park from the Hangingwater end for a couple of hundred yards which are within a few yards of the road.

 

Near where I live Crookes Valley Road has trees at both sides in Crookes Valley Park and the top of the Ponderosa - all a few yards from the road.

 

I can give loads more examples

 

Does any of this somehow justify removing trees for no good reason?

 

Or is it just one more attempt to avoid the issue.

 

---------- Post added 19-03-2017 at 20:19 ----------

 

Well it is 25 years work and it's not going to be free is it?

 

It's not the lorax- we've only had 15% of trees removed and replaced.

 

If the efforts of the campaigners have been successful all the better.

 

So you're attempting to justify the unnecessary removal of trees, cause we have plenty more.

 

---------- Post added 19-03-2017 at 20:20 ----------

 

The point I'm trying to make is the figures don't suggest a wanton destruction of the city's trees and whilst some removals have stirred a lot of emotion, perhaps rightly, it's not the end of the world by any stretch and the city overall has benefited greatly by the scheme.

 

How has the city benefitted from trees being removed for no good reason?

 

The only "argument" you have here is to try to minimise, distract or ignore the point.

[annbaker]

It's admirable and I certainly am not one for unnecessary destruction.

 

I think given that these are suburban street trees it's a bit different though and in the main the council should be able to get on with their job.

 

These street trees are helping clean up the toxic air we're breathing in. The twiglet replacements will take years to reach the same canopy size. You do realise we're the 3rd worst air-polluted city in the UK? Why would anyone want to make that worse all because SCC and Amey won't use the engineering solutions that are in their contract at no extra charge?