Jump to content

Memorial tree decision - Town Hall 13/12/17

Recommended Posts

Hopefully , but the problem is , the same old people will still vote Labour because their fathers and grandfathers voted Labour.

 

Well Tone, I guess when you're old enough you'll vote Tory just like your father and grandfathers did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok I assumed they were staying - wrongly.

 

The new scheme does involve planting 11 new trees though. So there will be more trees after the development than there are now?

 

:loopy:

 

Can you not see the difference between a mature tree (with another 100 years of life in it) and a sapling? Which one cleans the air more? Which provides more cover? How many bats and owls live in saplings? Do you know anything about biodiversity?

 

You'll be telling us it's OK to demolish the Amazonian Rain Forest if an equivalent number of saplings are sown. You'd be both an idiot and wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure there are a million threads regarding the tree issue as a whole, however I am trying to make this specific to the happenings at the Town Hall this evening.

 

I was just notified of a live stream via The Star on social media. It was a live stream from the consultations and supposed decisions surrounding the future of the memorial trees that are scheduled to be removed.

 

I have tried to be impartial to the whole tree thing as a whole, not because I don't care (I do have my opinions however don't for one minute think that our individual opinions matter on this subject), but as a whole it seems quite a fiery debate which has captured global imagination......and well, as a general ruling I guess I am a little too long in the tooth to get involved in such heated debates.

 

Anyway the stream was a poor one or at least the sound on the feed was minimal to the extent that I don't have the foggiest of the conclusion. Can anybody shed any light on the final outcome / verdict?

 

Apparently the meeting was quite feisty, and had to be stopped several times because of disruption from the public gallery.

 

Good. Sooner or later the council might realise their future is at stake unless they take public opinion into account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently the meeting was quite feisty, and had to be stopped several times because of disruption from the public gallery.

 

Good. Sooner or later the council might realise their future is at stake unless they take public opinion into account.

 

I wish that would be the case, but some of these jokers get in their positions of power with just a couple of thousand of votes, a 20% share of a low turnout.

 

Not their fault that most people appear apolitical and disgruntled but it means they can just carry on failing and embarrassing the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the council have made big mistakes with the way all this has been handled, which will come back and bite them next election.

 

Oh, I do hope so! And before someone starts twittering on about voting the way parents did, this would be somewhat challenging in my case as my mother and father voted for opposing parties. But vote they always did, cancelling each other out! That's democracy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wish that would be the case, but some of these jokers get in their positions of power with just a couple of thousand of votes, a 20% share of a low turnout.

 

Not their fault that most people appear apolitical and disgruntled but it means they can just carry on failing and embarrassing the city.

 

I think the tide may be turning on that front. Bad publicity in regards to the council is everywhere now, and goes beyond the attitude to trees into many different areas.

 

I really think change is coming. Here's hoping anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the national eye... I think the local council as well as local political representatives have made a right old mockery out of Sheffield as a while this year.

 

For once I would just like to see somebody take control who has the best interests of Sheffield at heart. Somebody with a refreshing approach towards looking after our own, whilst driving us forward into the current era. I am sick to death of hearing more about the public purse and misplaced ambition.

 

As I said, I have tried to remain impartial to the debate however one thing I can say is that it has been allowed to go on for way to long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone tell me how many trees were planted originally? and how many have been removed over the years ?

The fact is that nobody gave these trees a second thought when some were removed in the past and the only reason it became a (non) issue is because of the usual Amey knockers.

 

the pavements are a disgrace because of these trees and I for one wont mourn them if it can help my disabled friends walk safely down the street

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can anyone tell me how many trees were planted originally? and how many have been removed over the years ?

The fact is that nobody gave these trees a second thought when some were removed in the past and the only reason it became a (non) issue is because of the usual Amey knockers.

 

the pavements are a disgrace because of these trees and I for one wont mourn them if it can help my disabled friends walk safely down the street

 

Presume that people parking massive 4x4s and vans up on on the pavement is also a disgrace? That goes on across the entire city and makes it impossible for wheelchair uses to go down pavements.

 

Be nice to have a sterile city free of wildlife I think. Less trees the better- they only get in the way. We don't need the oxygen they produce do we?

 

Number of complaints received across the city from the disabled in regards to trees causing an obstruction? Zero. Was revealed in an FOI request. Didn't stop them claiming the number of complaints was a big reason for chopping them all down though.

 

'Amey knockers'! Haha! Yep, you got it. A load of people just knocking a good honest multi-national company trying to get on with solid work for the good of everyone, and doing their best. They're just trying to earn an honest crust and put food on the table, and all people do is 'knock' for it.

 

No more I tell you! People are just trying to run down a lovely bunch!

 

Haha- come off it! What's next? 'Leave those rainforest loggers alone, they're only trying to make a living, and all people do is criticize them for it?'

 

I'd love to be so naive as to think people are 'knocking' Amey for no reason....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed they are yes. Again, an unnecessary course of action.

 

If you are so inclined, you can sign a petition here. I don't believe there is a PFI contract pulling the strings in this case, so strength of opposition might actually have some effect this time..

 

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-the-fitzalan-square-plane-trees

 

These are the only remaining mature trees in the city centre and must be retained

 

That's pretty economical with the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:loopy:

 

Can you not see the difference between a mature tree (with another 100 years of life in it) and a sapling? Which one cleans the air more? Which provides more cover? How many bats and owls live in saplings? Do you know anything about biodiversity?

 

You'll be telling us it's OK to demolish the Amazonian Rain Forest if an equivalent number of saplings are sown. You'd be both an idiot and wrong.

 

Except I’m not talking about the rainforest I’m talking about 4 trees in Fitzalan Square. Therefore it’s completely different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be nice to have a sterile city free of wildlife I think. Less trees the better- they only get in the way. We don't need the oxygen they produce do we?

 

 

The trees planted in pavements and roadside verges are only a tiny proportion of trees in the city. Wanting the removal of some of the trees growing in pavements and roadside verges that are causing damage and obstruction isn't arguing for a sterile city free of wildlife. No "street trees" on my road and surrounding ones but no shortage of birds, foxes - even badgers - a mile from the city centre - and far more abundant then 20 years ago.

 

We manage quite comfortably without the oxygen produced by the deciduous trees in the entire northern hemisphere for the best part of half a year - must be another source for the bulk of the oxygen I reckon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.