Save the 12 Trees on Rustlings Road - Please sign Petition

[taxman 12]

Oh great, just waste a whole load of tax payers money why don't you.

 

This silly protest is pure selfishness.

 

Maybe Amey and the Council should either then a) stop cutting down the trees or b) tell us all how many trees they are planning to cut down and provide the detailed assessments from their qualified arboriculturist.

 

Until they do that it just seems like random and wholesale chopping down across Sheffield for no reason.

 

Remember when their excuse for cutting down the trees on Rustlings Road was because of access issues for disabled people, yet a FOI request found out they'd had three complaints in three years. Rubbish. When you consider the problems people have getting past cars parked on pavements it's beyond credulity that they think whole scale tree felling will make a difference.

 

Sorry, I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, the council used to have qualified and trustworthy people, however the tree destruction has just escalated to all areas of Sheffield, Ive seen some and they are perfectly fine, healthy and not posing problems, therefore I no longer trust anything Amey/Streets Ahead/The council say on this issue.

 

I think they are lying.

[megalithic 10]

Its stayed above "when they are gone they're gone for a generation". True they are, but when they die its the same state of play. Only reason people are objecting is they don't want the generation in their life times, but what about future generations?

 

Just smacks of selfishness to me. Sorry.

[Ukpetes46 10]

Trees in Crookes were cut down but replaced with saplings

[SaveMyCity 10]

Signed. This kind of vandalism is disgusting. I remember those trees well and I have seen similar vandalism ruin a beautiful street where I live now for almost exactly the same feeble reasons. "Damage to pavements" my bum!

[taxman 12]

Its stayed above "when they are gone they're gone for a generation". True they are, but when they die its the same state of play. Only reason people are objecting is they don't want the generation in their life times, but what about future generations?

 

Just smacks of selfishness to me. Sorry.

 

Future generations won't get fully mature trees with all the wildlife and biomass they provide, because the precident has been set that as soon as a tree becomes big and mature and capable of supporting vast amounts of animals, it suddenly becomes unwieldy and should be cut down.

 

Avenues of saplings do not provide the benefits that avenues of mature trees do. The fact they may need more management than saplings is, I believe, the reason they've all been cut down.

 

My suspicions could be allayed by the council and Amey being up front, honest and transparent....but that is never going to happen. They keep hiding behind "commercial sensitivity". Replacing mature trees with saplings is an incredible habitat loss. Birds can't nest in saplings.

 

---------- Post added 09-09-2015 at 20:44 ----------

 

Trees in Crookes were cut down but replaced with saplings

 

Cutting down the Amazon rain forest and replacing with saplings might seem a neat idea to the uneducated but in reality it is an absolute disaster.

 

Sheffield is a much smaller scale but the principle is exactly the same.

[Solomon1 10]

Here is some important information for anyone out there who sees a notice forewarning of tree felling in a street near them.

 

The Council are under a water tight PFI contract with Amey.

 

Amey has a Duty of Care to the council - the Council has a Duty of Care to tax payers- ergo Amey have a duty of care to the tax payers.

 

In their notices it actually asks you to contact them if you have any concerns about that specific felling. You will find this in the top left hand corner of the notice.

 

Therefore if you write to them emphasising that the tree should not be felled till your concerns have been answered - remembering they have a legal obligation to reply in full. Then they have to put the work on hold - if they don't they are in breach of that duty of care.

 

Bury them in paper - demand answers, tell them in detail why a tree isn't obstructing a path or a road so they have to answer you in detail - there are no laws that say a path has to be over a set width or flat or free from leaves.

 

They really haven't got a leg to stand on and it's time they were told.

So - if you are thinking of talking to the council about saving your tree -

- Ask to see the risk assessment.

- Check the actual degree of root damage and ask them how it has been assessed as outside tolerances

- Ask what considerations have been given to kerb reprofiling, thinner kerbs etc.

- Ask to see the technical, engineering reasons why it is necessary to fell rather than use ramping.

- Ask what consultation has been done with SCC Access officers if it is judged to be 'discriminatory'.

Ask until you get answers.

 

This information comes courtesy of Sheffield Trees Action Group. Find them on Facebook by typing in STAG or contact by email at [email protected]

 

 

Remember...once your trees are gone they are gone for a generation!

 

Don't believe the rubbish about like for like replanting because it's a load of hogwash!

 

You ROCK Swami!

 

---------- Post added 09-09-2015 at 21:08 ----------

 

Signed. This kind of vandalism is disgusting. I remember those trees well and I have seen similar vandalism ruin a beautiful street where I live now for almost exactly the same feeble reasons. "Damage to pavements" my bum!

 

Exactamondo dude

 

Amey can kiss my ass

[Lotusflower 10]

Oh great, just waste a whole load of tax payers money why don't you.

 

This silly protest is pure selfishness.

 

Hi megalithic, The city wide protests are far from silly!

Furthermore, calling them "selfish" is even further from the truth. You are, of course, entitled to hold that opinion but let me put it to you that if you were in full possession of a few pertinent facts you may come to realise exactly why labelling protesters as "silly" and "selfish" misses the mark.

 

Many of the reasons given on notices attached to trees tagged for felling are, in the opinion of highly qualified arboriculturists, based more upon the need to make profit for Amey than the need to preserve as much of Sheffield's street tree stock as possible. There are many other councils around the country who have in place a positive and fully comprehensive tree strategy which operates from the perspective of using positive engineering solutions that protect the tree by simply working around it. Sheffield, which prides itself on being among the greenest cities in Europe has no such strategy in place .

 

Sheffield has one of the highest levels of pollution in the whole of the country. A report produced by Sheffield First Partnership revealed that air pollution from industrial emissions and increasing car use in the city causes 500 premature deaths a year. The local economy suffers to the tune of £160 million a year!

Childhood respiratory disease in this city is at an unacceptably high level!

 

We should be planting more trees not felling the healthy ones as we are doing at present!

 

What do you think the environmental impact will be on say...I'll use Dore as an example...when, if Amey proceed as planned 148 trees are removed at one fell swoop? How will 148 saplings restore the ecological imbalance such action will cause?

 

I wasn't born in this city but over my 27 years of living here I have grown to love it and derive great personal enjoyment from walking its many tree lined streets and avenues and deriving the health benefits that trees produce. Is that the sort of "selfish" and "silly" you are referring to?

[spilldig 188]

Oh great, just waste a whole load of tax payers money why don't you.

 

This silly protest is pure selfishness.

Agreed. The only people who should have an opinion are the residents of properties where the trees are. And some people in S8 have threatened legal action to get trees cut down.

[SaveMyCity 10]

Agreed. The only people who should have an opinion are the residents of properties where the trees are. And some people in S8 have threatened legal action to get trees cut down.

 

No it's not silly. Tree lined streets are a great adornment to any urban environment. What the stupid people in the environment department need to do is to get a proper management plan together so that succession planting can take place over many years. In this way, trees can be replaced when they start to cause problems but mature ones will always be present to preserve the full ambience.

As for the residents, then unless the trees are damaging their property their complaints are selfish and unjustified. The claims of car parking should hold no sway. If you want to see what a decent community is prepared to put up with to preserve established trees then go to the university college suburbs of Cambridge. The pavements have tarmac hillocks around the trees. Parking, moving traffic, cyclists, pedestrians and many ancient buildings survive completely untroubled by them. It shames the weak-kneed, petty minded officials of our city, who so easily give in to a small minority of grubbily motivated, whingeing "residents" (I wonder how many have a REAL commitment to the area if they value their environment so little).

So....put in place a plan and until it gets into full swing - put up with stuff instead of giving in to civic vandalism.

[Lotusflower 10]

Agreed. The only people who should have an opinion are the residents of properties where the trees are. And some people in S8 have threatened legal action to get trees cut down.

 

Knock knock...is anybody home?

 

If the above represents the sum of your argument on this subject you have a lot of catching up to do!

 

Whoever the people in S8 threatening legal action are (if they exist at all because we have only your word for it since you offer no proof) they are batting on a very sticky wicket.

 

Let's start with this simple question:

 

On what grounds is legal action being threatened?

 

Please don't come on here asserting who is and who isn't entitled to an opinion either. We have a word for that you know!

 

---------- Post added 10-09-2015 at 13:07 ----------

 

Its stayed above "when they are gone they're gone for a generation". True they are, but when they die its the same state of play. Only reason people are objecting is they don't want the generation in their life times, but what about future generations?

 

Just smacks of selfishness to me. Sorry.

 

Re my bold above.

 

Trees in the natural world do not die 148 at a time as Amey/SCC intend to accomplish on two streets in Dore.

 

The only reason people are objecting? Who are you to talk of such things when this statement alone displays your total lack of knowledge on the matter?

 

How many of us do you know? How many of us have you spoken to?

 

At least have some substance to what you are trying to say on here so we can have a sensible debate!

[spilldig 188]

Knock knock...is anybody home?

 

If the above represents the sum of your argument on this subject you have a lot of catching up to do!

 

Whoever the people in S8 threatening legal action are (if they exist at all because we have only your word for it since you offer no proof) they are batting on a very sticky wicket.

 

Let's start with this simple question:

 

On what grounds is legal action being threatened?

 

Please don't come on here asserting who is and who isn't entitled to an opinion either. We have a word for that you know!

 

---------- Post added 10-09-2015 at 13:07 ----------

 

 

Re my bold above.

 

Trees in the natural world do not die 148 at a time as Amey/SCC intend to accomplish on two streets in Dore.

 

The only reason people are objecting? Who are you to talk of such things when this statement alone displays your total lack of knowledge on the matter?

 

How many of us do you know? How many of us have you spoken to?

 

At least have some substance to what you are trying to say on here so we can have a sensible debate!

 

Why insult me by calling me a liar.I see from your previous posts that you called somebody a troll for holding an opposite opinion to you and you are insulting me in your first line that says something to me about you.

They knocked on our door asking us to take part in legal action because of damage to pavements.

We want nothing to do with it, even though we have to fork out to have gutters cleared every year, and we have roots breaking our path up and the pavement outside, and moss on the path from lack of daylight and have to have a light on all day, in summer, and gunge all over your windows, and leaves all over.So as I say, unless you have a tree outside you have no right to campaign on them.

And before anyone says, why move to a house with a tree outside?

That was 42 years ago when the trees were managed properly.

[taxman 12]

Amey were around tonight cordoning off parts of the green on South Road Walkley, seeing as it's a community green and nothing to do with their "streets ahead" bull**** I hope they will soon do one and eff off.

 

Really how many trees are going to be cut down because of this cosy, non disclosable relationship between the council and Amey?