Council tree felling...

[neeeeeeeeeek]

And all the police that seemingly watched a man take an uppercut that would have put deontay wilder down and thought - nah - leave that it’s reasonable force.

 

Or at that time they did not want to get involved. I believe they said they can only investigate if an allegation is made.

[hackey lad]

what an absolute nonsense statement. Get in the real world, far more important issues in the world. protest by all means, but unfortunately don't expect everyone to agree with your opinions.

Amey removed a tree outside my house that was causing subsidence to my property, and many others on my road and have replanted new trees as well resurfaced the paths to a very high standard making it safer for elderly and people in wheelchairs and with prams as all pavements haven't got massive bumps and tree roots sticking out everywhere causing a hazard and have resurfaced my road so im not having to dodge potholes every 5 inches

 

job well done in my opinion

 

But that's the point the protestors are trying to make , if a tree really does need felling ,for whatever reason , then do it but the council /amey are just felling trees , to save money .

 

---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 22:51 ----------

 

He doesn’t uppercut him though does he - although the angle makes it look a bit dodgy on camera I agree - the dramatic music also makes it seem like the escape from stalag.....

 

It’s a bit like running onto the pitch at a football match - grappling with the stewards and then complaining they’ve been a bit mean to you.

 

If you really don't see the uppercut , then you have got your council/amey blinkers on

[onewheeldave]

Okay - so the protestors were arrested but amey operatives weren’t.

 

There's a common theme to many of your posts here. You seem to be under the impression that if the police arrest someone, that person is the bad/wrong party, and, if they don't arrest someone, that person is the good/right party.

[neeeeeeeeeek]

id be worried if your statement was backed up with facts. but im not worried

 

Yea, it must be reassuring knowing that ground heave isn't real and that the 123000 results that come back when you google it are all wrong!

[gazza c]

But that's the point the protestors are trying to make , if a tree really does need felling ,for whatever reason , then do it but the council /amey are just felling trees , to save money .

 

---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 22:51 ----------

 

 

If you really don't see the uppercut , then you have got your council/amey blinkers on

 

then why are they only protesting in the leafy suburbs not had one protester where I live trying to save a tree in my area. Amey aren't saving money as they are having to draft in security which is a cost. im sure in these hard times the taxpayer would like our police to catch hardened criminals and not spend time sorting arguments out about trees

[onewheeldave]

what an absolute nonsense statement. Get in the real world, far more important issues in the world. protest by all means, but unfortunately don't expect everyone to agree with your opinions.

Amey removed a tree outside my house that was causing subsidence to my property, and many others on my road and have replanted new trees as well resurfaced the paths to a very high standard making it safer for elderly and people in wheelchairs and with prams as all pavements haven't got massive bumps and tree roots sticking out everywhere causing a hazard and have resurfaced my road so im not having to dodge potholes every 5 inches

 

job well done in my opinion

 

The protesters do not object to felling trees that there are good reasons to fell. There are also bigger issues here, as covered in this post about trees felled where the residents overwhelmingly wanted to keep the trees-

 

(from https://medium.com/@jennifersaul/nicola-needed-to-get-to-hospital-tree-felling-barriers-blocked-the-way-573f95e17b27

The street where this incident happened was no ordinary street, and the trees being fought for were no ordinary trees: this street is famous for the Christmas lights it puts in its trees, to raise money for charity. The residents overwhelmingly wanted to keep these trees, which are part of a beloved annual tradition, and which were originally paid for by donations from residents, many of whom still live on the street, in their 80s and 90s.

 

But that is of no consequence to the Labour-led council. Despite the fact the Labour party nationally is now strongly opposed to PFI contracts like their contract with Amey, they will apparently do anything to enforce the wishes of the private contractor. Neither they nor Amey have been able to give coherent answers for why all the expert advice is being ignored in order to fell healthy trees against residents’ wishes, but that is what they are insisting on doing — at any cost. They demonise protestors like Nicola, insisting that vast security forces and police presence are needed. Then, having built up the idea that protestors like Nicola are dangerous thugs, they seem utterly unable to see them as vulnerable citizens in need of medical attention — even when they are lying on the ground unable to move and trapped under a barrier.

 

This is not how a Labour government should behave: allowing a private company to insist on destroying the trees of the greenest city in Europe, against expert advice and residents’ wishes; turning its streets into quasi-militarised zones; demonising peaceful protestors; and continuing, day after day, to waste scarce resources to do all this. Other councils are pulling out of their contracts with Amey. Sheffield could do so without penalty. Why don’t they? The Inside Out programme has already begun asking difficult questions, as has the Yorkshire Post. These questions only get more pressing as it becomes clearer what vast lengths the council will go to. Let’s just hope more people aren’t injured in the process.

 

---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 23:02 ----------

 

then why are they only protesting in the leafy suburbs not had one protester where I live trying to save a tree in my area. Amey aren't saving money as they are having to draft in security which is a cost. im sure in these hard times the taxpayer would like our police to catch hardened criminals and not spend time sorting arguments out about trees

 

But you said you wanted the trees gone. Did your neighbours also want them gone? Why would they protest in your area when they can (and do) protest in areas where the residents don't want to lose their trees?

 

If you decide you want to keep your trees, then I'd suggest contacting STAG (Sheffield Tree Action Group) and they would probably help you and the other residents in a protest.

[hackey lad]

then why are they only protesting in the leafy suburbs not had one protester where I live trying to save a tree in my area. Amey aren't saving money as they are having to draft in security which is a cost. im sure in these hard times the taxpayer would like our police to catch hardened criminals and not spend time sorting arguments out about trees

 

You usually find trees in leafy suburbs . Amey are saving millions by cutting down healthy trees so they don't have to look after them for 25 years . Why have engineering solutions not been used ?

 

---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 23:11 ----------

 

And all the police that seemingly watched a man take an uppercut that would have put deontay wilder down and thought - nah - leave that it’s reasonable force.

Thought not . Will be skipped over the next time she logs on

 

Any chance of an answer to post 678 ?

Edited March 6, 2018 by hackey lad

[gazza c]

You usually find trees in leafy suburbs . Amey are saving millions by cutting down healthy trees so they don't have to look after them for 25 years . Why have engineering solutions not been used ?

 

---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 23:11 ----------

 

Thought not . Will be skipped over the next time she logs on

 

Any chance of an answer to post 678 ?

 

you usually find trees everywhere in Sheffield, bit of a generalisation saying you usually find trees in leafy suburbs. what engineering solutions are you talking about. I hear this argument every time but have not found an example of this.

[dave_the_m]

making it safer for elderly and people in wheelchairs and with prams as all pavements haven't got massive bumps and tree roots sticking out everywhere causing a hazard

 

Many people seen to be under the misapprehension that if a tree isn't cut down, then the only alternative is for bumpy pavements to be left as-is. In fact the reality is that there are about 15 engineering solutions, *pre-paid for* in the contract, that Amey are supposed to apply where possible in situations like this, including root shaving and trimming, using growth retardant, flexi-pave etc.

 

But Amey doesn't seem to applying any of these solutions. For example, after a two year battle over a freedom of information request, where the Information Commissioners's Office eventually threatened to take out an injunction against SCC, they finally admitted (in an obfuscated manner) that flexi-pave had been used exactly zero times by Amey to save trees.

 

Also, when people see a large bulge in the tarmac, they reasonably assume that it's due to a huge root which reaches above the level of the pavement. In fact the root is usually a lot lower (and can sometimes be re-buried even lower with "root bending"). The reason the tarmac has a large hump is that, being non-flexible, the slightest growth of a root just beneath the surface causes it to crack. Over the decades, pavement repairs have just consisted of putting a new patch of tarmac over the crack, which itself then cracks, resulting in another layer. Eventually you have a large hump of thick tarmac. Hence the need for flexi-pave.

 

A recent excavation of the pavement around a tree on Western Road for a root inspection resulted in the new tarmac being about 6 inches lower than the previous level (you could tell from the "tide mark" where the old tarmac was much higher against the tree trunk).

 

In 87% of the cases where the Independent Tree Panel (set up by SCC as a sop to campaigners) recommended keeping a tree and applying an engineering solution, Amey decided to cut the tree down anyway.

 

---------- Post added 07-03-2018 at 00:13 ----------

 

what engineering solutions are you talking about. I hear this argument every time but have not found an example of this.

 

The STAG website has a whole page here devoted to it

[gazza c]

Many people seen to be under the misapprehension that if a tree isn't cut down, then the only alternative is for bumpy pavements to be left as-is. In fact the reality is that there are about 15 engineering solutions, *pre-paid for* in the contract, that Amey are supposed to apply where possible in situations like this, including root shaving and trimming, using growth retardant, flexi-pave etc.

 

But Amey doesn't seem to applying any of these solutions. For example, after a two year battle over a freedom of information request, where the Information Commissioners's Office eventually threatened to take out an injunction against SCC, they finally admitted (in an obfuscated manner) that flexi-pave had been used exactly zero times by Amey to save trees.

 

Also, when people see a large bulge in the tarmac, they reasonably assume that it's due to a huge root which reaches above the level of the pavement. In fact the root is usually a lot lower (and can sometimes be re-buried even lower with "root bending"). The reason the tarmac has a large hump is that, being non-flexible, the slightest growth of a root just beneath the surface causes it to crack. Over the decades, pavement repairs have just consisted of putting a new patch of tarmac over the crack, which itself then cracks, resulting in another layer. Eventually you have a large hump of thick tarmac. Hence the need for flexi-pave.

 

A recent excavation of the pavement around a tree on Western Road for a root inspection resulted in the new tarmac being about 6 inches lower than the previous level (you could tell from the "tide mark" where the old tarmac was much higher against the tree trunk).

 

In 87% of the cases where the Independent Tree Panel (set up by SCC as a sop to campaigners) recommended keeping a tree and applying an engineering solution, Amey decided to cut the tree down anyway.

 

---------- Post added 07-03-2018 at 00:13 ----------

 

 

The STAG website has a whole page here devoted to it

 

thanks for the info, I will have a look