Rustling Road trees are being felled right now

[Eater Sundae]

By the way, on our street, some of the residents are trying to do something positive to build a better, more sustainable streetscape for our future. We're pushing for more trees to be planted. We dont just want the three, grown-too-big-for-where-they-are-trees to be replaced. We'd love for the street to be resored to its original Edwardian design, with trees all along. As long as they're of a suitable variety. I'm trying to do something positive to improve quality of life for me and my neighbours.

 

That's a positive approach, and I hope you are successful.

 

I think that tree size (relative to the site where it is grown) is often the problem. In many cases it has been necessary to heavily prune roadside trees over the years. More careful choice of trees would have allowed sustainable avenues of trees which are in harmony with the scale of the roads and houses where they are set.

 

About 300 yds from my house (but on the same road, so I received the consultation notification) they are proposing to replace a sycamore by planting a type of birch. According to Wikipedia, sycamores grow to 35m. The birch being proposed can grow to 20m. Although I don't know the particular variety of birch, my experience is that birches grow more slowly than the common sycamore, which is fast growing and pretty invasive.

 

If we go for avenues of similar trees, we will always be likely to have several stages of development - an initial stage with small trees needing support, established trees, and finally, possibly, trees that are too big for the site. The rate of growth of the trees is an issue. We want fast growing trees so that they soon reach an attractive size. The downside is that they carry on growing and can overpower the site. The ideal would probably be to plant a well established slow growing variety of tree, but of course that would greatly increase costs. So we compromise by planting younger trees, and wait for them to grow.

 

(Edit inserted. Where streets are already tree lined, but badly maintained, historically, as we now have, it becomes difficult to maintain an avenue style of similar trees. So we either do a series of patches, or we pull out the lot and start again).

 

As an aside, I have a copy of a book of old photographs of Sheffield 10. (Although oddly a lot of the photographs are actually S11). It is one of the modern paperbacks, as often seen in local newsagents, so nothing special. On page 30, there is a photograph of Rustlings Road which shows recently planted trees, each still with their triple supporting stakes, and looking close together. The road looks very different from how it looks now. The houses have a much more open aspect (little vegetation in the front gardens), tram tracks, and not a vehicle in sight. I wonder if the people living on the road at that time appreciated how much the road would change over the years, and how different the treescape would be.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Eater Sundae
Added a bit, plus correcting a few typos

[Bargepole23]

Really, so if councillors make all the important decisions why is Mothersole paid so much?

 

He is in charge, the elected councillors are just willing pawns. Mothersole gets £219,000 per year. He's not likely to let elected councillors have any say in the real day to day running of City Hall. They might think they do, but come on be realistic. He wouldn't get that massive wodge if he wasn't in total and utter control. Dore might pretend to be a "strong leader" but just remember who gets paid over £200k and who doesn't

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 22:48 ----------

 

 

Why the hell should locals pay for retaining the trees, Amey are already contracted to do it. Just because they've decided they can't be bothered is no reason for the public purse to bail them out. Make them do it, or cancel their contract.

 

Do you think that's how organisations and businesses work? Somebody at the top, paid a massive wodge, in total and utter control? Not at all the case in my experience.

[Cyclone]

Really, so if councillors make all the important decisions why is Mothersole paid so much?

 

He is in charge, the elected councillors are just willing pawns. Mothersole gets £219,000 per year. He's not likely to let elected councillors have any say in the real day to day running of City Hall. They might think they do, but come on be realistic. He wouldn't get that massive wodge if he wasn't in total and utter control. Dore might pretend to be a "strong leader" but just remember who gets paid over £200k and who doesn't

 

If the council decide tomorrow that from now on the ITP advice is to be followed, then no unelected employee can overrule that.

[Bargepole23]

By the way, on our street, some of the residents are trying to do something positive to build a better, more sustainable streetscape for our future. We're pushing for more trees to be planted. We dont just want the three, grown-too-big-for-where-they-are-trees to be replaced. We'd love for the street to be resored to its original Edwardian design, with trees all along. As long as they're of a suitable variety. I'm trying to do something positive to improve quality of life for me and my neighbours.

 

Nicely stated and a very reasonable approach.

[Cyclone]

I was naive. I had no clue how year on year the gloom would have such an effect on my wellbeing. I imagine it's a bit like having noisy neighbours, you don't mind it so much at first, but after a while the cumulative effect really gets you down.

 

Even more naively, we actually thought the council would do the decent thing, and cut it back to something like a reasonable size, but no not even the branches that overhung our property, or grew so low that the footpath was obstructed, or when the roots caused so much damage our retaining garden wall had to be rebuilt, or when the pavement became so raised it's impossible to pull the car onto the drive without it damaging the car.

 

This tree has been neglected. But I guess that's all my fault?

 

No, it's obviously the fault of the council that the trees have been basically unmanaged for about 20 years.

[Olive]

That's a positive approach, and I hope you are successful.

 

I think that tree size (relative to the site where it is grown) is often the problem. In many cases it has been necessary to heavily prune roadside trees over the years. More careful choice of trees would have allowed sustainable avenues of trees which are in harmony with the scale of the roads and houses where they are set.

 

About 300 yds from my house (but on the same road, so I received the consultation notification) they are proposing to replace a sycamore by planting a type of birch. According to Wikipedia, sycamores grow to 35m. The birch being proposed can grow to 20m. Although I don't know the particular variety of birch, my experience is that birches grow more slowly than the common sycamore, which is fast growing and pretty invasive.

 

If we go for avenues of similar trees, we will always be likely to have several stages of development - an initial stage with small trees needing support, established trees, and finally, possibly, trees that are too big for the site. The rate of growth of the trees is an issue. We want fast growing trees so that they soon reach an attractive size. The downside is that they carry on growing and can overpower the site. The ideal would probably be to plant a well established slow growing variety of tree, but of course that would greatly increase costs. So we compromise by planting younger trees, and wait for them to grow.

 

(Edit inserted. Where streets are already tree lined, but badly maintained, historically, as we now have, it becomes difficult to maintain an avenue style of similar trees. So we either do a series of patches, or we pull out the lot and start again).

 

As an aside, I have a copy of a book of old photographs of Sheffield 10. (Although oddly a lot of the photographs are actually S11). It is one of the modern paperbacks, as often seen in local newsagents, so nothing special. On page 30, there is a photograph of Rustlings Road which shows recently planted trees, each still with their triple supporting stakes, and looking close together. The road looks very different from how it looks now. The houses have a much more open aspect (little vegetation in the front gardens), tram tracks, and not a vehicle in sight. I wonder if the people living on the road at that time appreciated how much the road would change over the years, and how different the treescape would be.

 

Interesting points. It is all about context isn't it? I doubt if the planners of our street thought the trees would be neglected so much and get this big. Our house was built with a driveway to access what was once the coach house, so the driveway and the tree were put in at the same time. Now the tree's so huge the drive's becoming inaccessible. The roots continue to raise the pavement and Amey just keep laying layer upon layer of tarmac over the top of the damage! It's about a foot higher than the rest now!

 

Part of the problem is there's only the pavement, no grass verge or anything, then the front gardens are only a few feet deep, so these huge trees are wedged into a really narrow space. Really what should have happened through the decades would have been to replace them with young, slow growing trees one-by-one. It wouldn't have been detrimental to the streetscape to have one or two youger trees dotted about amongst the more mature ones, whereas now they're trying to do it all at once.

 

We can't wave a magic wand now, but I'd much rather we plan ahead and put up with small sapplings for a few years than cling on to a situation that's detrimental to the people living close by.

[Planner1]

Really, so if councillors make all the important decisions why is Mothersole paid so much?

 

He is in charge, the elected councillors are just willing pawns. Mothersole gets £219,000 per year. He's not likely to let elected councillors have any say in the real day to day running of City Hall. They might think they do, but come on be realistic. He wouldn't get that massive wodge if he wasn't in total and utter control. Dore might pretend to be a "strong leader" but just remember who gets paid over £200k and who doesn't.

 

Mr Mothersole gets paid that much because he heads up an extremely large and complex organisation, which employs thousands and has a budget of billions. his equivalents in the private sector (ie CEO's of FTSE100 companies) get paid a huge amount more than he does.

 

Mr Mothersole works for the Councillors, not the other way round. The Councillors do take the big decisions and dictate the policy of the organisation. That's what you elect them for.

[taxman]

Here is a map of all the trees that are due to be felled on streets that are currently having their surveys (phase 10). It shows just how widespread the planned felling is. It's not just a few as the council keep telling people.

[Robin-H]

Here is a map of all the trees that are due to be felled on streets that are currently having their surveys (phase 10). It shows just how widespread the planned felling is. It's not just a few as the council keep telling people.

 

That's brilliant. Yes it really shows how widespread this is, and this is just one phase of many. Think how many markers there would be if the previous 9 phases were included too.

 

Western Road and Spring Hill Road seem particularly hard hit.

[Olive]

Here is a map of all the trees that are due to be felled on streets that are currently having their surveys (phase 10). It shows just how widespread the planned felling is. It's not just a few as the council keep telling people.

 

Is there a Planting map as well as the Felling one? Would be good to compare.