Trees on Western Road are next

[Robin-H 11]

I'd like to see the clause in the contract that specifies this. Quite simply I can't believe it wouldn't incur further costs, especially on the maintenance side.

 

Ongoing maintenance costs are the problem of AMEY, who have the 25 year PFI contract. I agree that it would incur greater maintenance costs to them, but not to the council. I do not agree that healthy mature trees should be felled in order to increase the profits of a private company.

 

You can read the clause of the contract that says that 14 of the engineering solutions (and the ones that independent contractors have said should be used on Western Road) would not cost the council any more money in the Streets Ahead 5 Year Management Strategy, paragraph 3.2.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 12:13 ----------

 

Me ! Please do tell me how this can be done with out cutting down trees? The whole roads and paths would need to be raised above the pertruding tree roots that have lifted the surfaces (hoping they do not push through the new raised works), the raised roots cause trouble for the elderly, visually impaired and wheel chair uses to navigate around safely. Come winter time when the snow has fallen or icy, they can even make it difficult for the able bodied walkers.

 

 

A combination of root pruning (if needed) and gentle ramping. You don't need to raise the entire pavement, you just gradually ramp over the roots, thus creating a smooth surfaces for visually impaired or wheelchair users.

 

Shallow roots can also be shaved down without greatly harming the tree. This removes the roots on the surface.

[Bertie Magoo 10]

I don't think root pruning on large trees in a high target area is a good solution. Nor root shaving as the roots produce callous growth in response which can exasperate the issue. Flexi paving and ramping are more sympathetic to the tree, but it depends on how raised the footway is to begin with. There are also issues with water discharge from the footway, it cannot drain onto private property.

[Goooooogle 10]

Say no more. They are not chopping them down for fun, the trees are causing damage to the road and pavement.

 

Causing damage to their profit and loss account more likely...

[Eater Sundae 12]

Not at extra cost no. The engineering solutions required (flexi-pave, ramping etc) are within the contract with AMEY. They wouldn't cost the council any money.

 

As none of us know the terms of the contract, you cannot say that with any confidence.

 

You simply do not know.

[Robin-H 11]

As none of us know the terms of the contract, you cannot say that with any confidence.

 

You simply do not know.

 

It is written in the Streets Ahead 5 Year Tree Management Strategy.

[Goooooogle 10]

At extra cost, and this is the problem. Many of us don't mind losing a tree ( that will be replaced anyway) to see nice uniform paths and roads all around Sheffield. We just don't see it as a big issue.

 

Well Amey bid for and won a 25 year contract and are suddenly badly underwater (losing a million a year for the last 3 years published accounts) so presumably some bright spark high up has decided to start cutting costs.

 

Is it cheaper to maintain the tress as they are ?

 

Or cheaper to chop them all down and replace with saplings which need no further maintenance? (And fundamentally change the character of areas of Sheffield).

 

I will leave it to you to work out which conclusion they have come to.

 

They did it once (and elsewhere with less noise) and will carry on unless people stand up to them.

 

The council has no choice as I would imagine AMEY now has them held to ransom over letting them do what they want versus sending Amey Hallam Highways into administration .

 

Amey Hallam Highways is owned by Amey Hallam Highways Holdings , the shares of which are owned by Amey Ventures Asset Holdings Ltd , Equitix Highways 2 Ltd and Aberdeen Infrastructure Investments (No.5) Ltd...

 

The rabbit hole of companies within companies is pretty deep !

 

The whole thing is a fiasco of gigantic proportions .

[430spider 10]

I hear that trees on Rivelin Valley Road are also on the hit list now. Quite what justification they can find for felling this impressive avenue of trees I can't imagine, but it can't be the state of the pavements - there are scarcely any, apart from the section near the paddling pool.

 

Even if there were more, a pavement is a quick fix. Trees like this are 100 years in the making.

[Cyclone 10]

Say no more. They are not chopping them down for fun, the trees are causing damage to the road and pavement.

 

The contract in place provides multiple options as a remedy to pavement damage other than removal.

Removal only benefits the profits of Amey, not the people of Sheffield.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 13:24 ----------

 

At extra cost, and this is the problem. Many of us don't mind losing a tree ( that will be replaced anyway) to see nice uniform paths and roads all around Sheffield. We just don't see it as a big issue.

 

This is not (as far as we know) correct.

 

Although the secrecy of the contract makes it difficult to know for sure.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 13:25 ----------

 

It is written in the Streets Ahead 5 Year Tree Management Strategy.

 

It appears that we can be sure actually.

[Eater Sundae 12]

RF

The contract in place provides multiple options as a remedy to pavement damage other than removal.

Removal only benefits the profits of Amey, not the people of Sheffield.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 13:24 ----------

 

 

This is not (as far as we know) correct.

 

Although the secrecy of the contract makes it difficult to know for sure.

 

---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 13:25 ----------

 

 

It appears that we can be sure actually.

 

No we can't, actually. Options are included within the strategy, but there's nothing about how many trees it will apply to.

 

According to 1.3 of the strategy document, the expectation is to replace, on average, 200 to 400 trees per year over the 25 year, which corresponds to 5000 to 10000 trees. This is in order to initiate a sequence of long term replacement such that there is a progressive planting program and replacement of the tree stock.

 

In the absence of contract details, we could guess that Amey are expecting to be replacing this sort of quantity. It is also a stated aim of the tree strategy to reduce maintenance costs.

 

Amey are regularly portrayed on these threads as some sort of crafty machiavellian contractor, able to twist a contractually incompetent SCC round their little finger. Now I don't know the relevant contractual nous of either party, but I find it hard to believe that Amey would sign up to a contract with an open ended cost obligation. The contract must include some sort of scope of work regarding what is done to the trees, especially if the cost of implementing the different options varies by much. So any fixed price cost must be based on an expected split between replacement and retention. That doesn't mean that there will not be a change in contract value if the scope changes materially. The strategy document doesn't preclude this.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Eater Sundae
Added a clarification, near end.

[feargal 21]

I hear that trees on Rivelin Valley Road are also on the hit list now. Quite what justification they can find for felling this impressive avenue of trees I can't imagine, but it can't be the state of the pavements - there are scarcely any, apart from the section near the paddling pool.

 

Even if there were more, a pavement is a quick fix. Trees like this are 100 years in the making.

Where did you hear about the Rivelin trees Spider? I'd heard about the problems on Western Road, but not Rivelin Valley Road.

[Hogg 10]

Another shameful attack on one of Sheffield's most beautiful assets by this perfidious council and its PFI pals.

[Robin-H 11]

Where did you hear about the Rivelin trees Spider? I'd heard about the problems on Western Road, but not Rivelin Valley Road.

 

https://www.change.org/p/sheffield-city-council-amey-streetsahead-sheffield-gov-uk-save-the-trees-on-rivelin-valley-road-sheffield