Are SCC/Amey out of control?

[Guest makapaka]

Amey are ruling Sheffield like a Despots ,trees ,street lighting ,road repairs,, all questions and requests regarding any of these matters,, are all totally ignored, regardless of how many "roads " you go down to get at them .There must be a higher authority ,NOT Sheffield council.. who have made this mega rod for the people of Sheffield,,,who can stop this take over of our city .Maybe it's time for a NEW council,,, and it's members be selected by the people who pay their wages,, US.! Rather like the situation when 10 million pounds were "lost " Money collected from rate payers ,should be spent on the city, not salted away in some foreign country.

 

Ha ha!! “Take over of our city”

 

A highway firm doing the roads up and replacing 0.0025% of the city’s trees......

[dave_the_m]

Ha ha!! “Take over of our city”

 

A highway firm doing the roads up and replacing 0.0025% of the city’s trees......

 

They're cutting down nearly 20% of street trees and replacing some of them with saplings.

[Cyclone]

Roadside trees specifically you mean, not 20% of all the trees in Sheffield.

[lilaclover]

We should "live so long" as to see them grow,that is ,if they get the chance .Saplings are a prime target for vandals.

[Bargepole23]

Well that should be easy to solve, quote those people, or just ask them straight out.

 

The writer of post 130, for example. Not stated explicitly, but that's the impression I get.

 

There was another thread about a particular tree in Netheredge with a very narrow footpath caused by the size of the tree trunk. Posters on that thread were keen to keep the tree despite the fact it would make wheelchair access very difficult.

[Eccy Beach]

They're cutting down nearly 20% of street trees and replacing some of them with saplings.

 

The use of 'saplings' as a criticism is getting a bit boring now. What do you expect them to replace them with, fully grown trees?

 

It's good that they're replacing them with saplings, they'll last longer.

 

Elton John explains it well in Lion King

[dave_the_m]

The use of 'saplings' as a criticism is getting a bit boring now. What do you expect them to replace them with, fully grown trees?

 

No, we are merely pointing out that

 

1) if mature trees are cut down, it will be many years (beyond the lifetime of many people) before that street recovers its full glory.

 

2) Many mature trees are being unnecessarily being cut down.

 

3) It is certainly possible (although at greater expense) for new trees to be more mature than a spindly sapling, although obviously not fully mature.

 

4) Many saplings will not make it to maturity.

 

5) SCC's PR glibly refers to "tree replacement" etc, as if streets will thus experience no detriment. Referring to saplings is just a way of balancing out that propaganda.

[Vaati]

The modifying of other people's quotes is not allowed. The original post doing this and any in the quote train after have now been removed.

[tonk]

Its a complex problem and the two sides are arguing about different things but trees have become the common ground.

 

Amey is out to make a profit... No doubt about that. They are not doing what they do for the benefit of Sheffielders.. They are here to serve their masters and shareholders not us.

 

Getting rid of 20% of trees (they suggested 50%originally and may come back for that) lowers maintenance costs for them.

 

All this agreed in a secret Pfi deal so that it can't be scrutinised and the con revealed.

 

The tree supporters rightly recognise the value of trees but in the face of not being able to scrutinise the Pfi contract they have to forward their own case in their own terms. There is no openness about what is being done with our... All of our money... That's just not right.

 

The real issue is the Pfi deal being secret and a private Corp making a stack of cash for shareholders, tax evaders etc etc

 

If it was open it could be criticised on fair terms and the trees dealt with in a sensible manner.... Most cities prize their trees and work around them. The contract, as far is known, offers many ways to do this but it is expensive for Amey to do so... So ooo they would rather not..... I suspect the contract signed by the council said something along the lines of.. Rationalisation of existing street tree stock (reduce to manageable budget level of xxx) which is a free license to fell as much as you wish... Truth is we just don't know..

 

On another note , when planted at the same density as trees in local woods the 6000 felled street trees would cover an area equivalent of the entirety of woolley woods and roe woods combined or one third of all of Ecclesall woods... I don't think many would accept felling on that scale let alone for mindless profiteering

[Longcol]

 

On another note , when planted at the same density as trees in local woods the 6000 felled street trees would cover an area equivalent of the entirety of woolley woods and roe woods combined or one third of all of Ecclesall woods... I don't think many would accept felling on that scale let alone for mindless profiteering

 

Ecclesall Wood covers 350 acres

 

https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/visiting-woods/wood/?woodId=25254&woodName=ecclesall-wood

 

so a third of that is 117 acres, so that would be 51 trees to an acre.

 

One acre is 4840 square yards, so each tree would have about 95 square yards.

 

Doesn't sound anything like the density of trees in woodlands.