Sheffield chainsaw massacre

[Steve Bullman]

Anyone been involved with this? Taken from The Daily Mail

 

The chainsaw massacre! Council fells 3,000 trees in England's greenest city in a bid to save money... but residents fear thousands more are at risk

 

 

• Sheffield residents are locked in a bitter battle with the council over trees
  
• More than 3,000 roadside trees were felled in an attempt to save money
  
• Campaigners fear some 75% of the city's 36,000 roadside trees are at risk
  
• Council denied claims, saying many trees were replaced with saplings
  

By Chris Brooke and Josh White For The Daily Mail

Published: 23:23, 9 February 2016 | Updated: 07:06, 10 February 2016

With more trees per person than any other city in Europe, residents of Sheffield are rightly proud of its green heritage.

But they are now locked in a bitter battle with the council over plans to chop down thousands of the trees – all to save money on road maintenance.

More than 3,000 of the 36,000 roadside trees have already been felled.

Campaigners fear that a staggering 75 per cent could be at risk.

 

Green and pleasant: Tree-lined Humphrey Road in Sheffield was typical of the many leafy streets in the city

 

 

Chopped: The council replaced the 3,000 felled trees with saplings, causing fury among local residents

 

They are so concerned that the authorities are disregarding public opinion, they have gone to court to stop them.

The trees were felled after the council agreed a 25-year, £2.2 billion private finance initiative deal with construction firm Amey to carry out road improvements.

 

Dead, dying and diseased trees have been cut down, along with trees said to be damaging roads or causing an obstruction to pavements. The council has dismissed criticism of mass felling, saying many of the trees have been replaced with saplings. A spokesman said an independent study a decade ago found that 75 per cent of roadside trees were approaching the end of their natural life.

But residents say healthy trees are being cut down and claim large trees have been axed and replaced by saplings to make road resurfacing and maintenance cheaper.

Petitions objecting to the felling have accumulated more than 22,000 signatures, and when a decision was made to take legal action almost £10,000 was raised to cover costs on a ‘crowdfunding’ website.

Now a High Court judge has issued an interim injunction banning Sheffield City Council from felling trees unless they pose an ‘immediate danger to the public’.

 

Angry: Determined residents who are staging a week-long vigil to stop Sheffield council from felling more trees

 

 

Outrage: Dead, dying and diseased trees have been cut down, along with trees said to be damaging roads or causing an obstruction to pavements

 

Campaigners persuaded Mr Justice Dove to halt the chainsaws on the grounds there had not been a ‘proper and fair consultation’ about the felling policy. His ruling was made ‘pending further investigation’ and could remain in force for three months.

The court action was instigated by David Dillner on behalf of the Sheffield Tree Action Groups. Mr Dillner, 69, says it will be an ‘ecological and environmental disaster’ if the council doesn’t have a rethink. The retired actor added: ‘No one is arguing to keep all trees – that would be total nonsense. If a tree is dangerous it needs to be felled.

‘What they are doing, and what we are saying they cannot do, is remove so many trees with large canopies – healthy trees – in such a short space of time.’

 

Money saving: Residents say healthy trees are being cut down and claim large trees have been axed and replaced by saplings to make road resurfacing and maintenance cheaper

 

He said they were being replaced by trees of a different species that won’t produce the same canopies. ‘That is a disaster waiting to happen in a city that was recently placed on the danger list for air quality. Removing the trees will damage the air quality.’

The council says it is saving taxpayers £26 million by felling rather than saving the 2,000 trees earmarked for removal.

Councillor Terry Fox said: ‘We were not notified of the proposed application to court before it was submitted and the court order was passed without our position being heard. Our lawyers are now considering the appropriate action.’

 

 

[sean]

I've been involved in this but on a campaigning level. What is going on in Sheffield at the moment is a disgrace. It's absolutely right that a temporary halt in the felling should be implemented.

To have a contractor on a 25 year contract, in charge of not only tree maintenance but also the roads and paths can lead to a serious conflict of interests. Completely healthy mature trees are being removed in order to carry our resurfacing works etc. of course it is not in the contractors financial interest to look at more expensive alternative engineering solutions to retain these very important trees. It's far easier and cheaper to remove the tree completely. This is setting a very dangerous precedent for our town and cities trees. Show me a road in this country where the trees aren't lifting the pavement. Are we to remove all the street trees in London?

This contract and the felling policy seriously needs looking at.

 

Jeremy Barrell a leading consultant from Heritage Tree Management after visiting Sheffield has publicly called into question this zero tolerance approach to infrastructure damage and was visibly appalled at the situation.

 

As for the replacement plantings, the photographic evidence of the incompetent planting is astonishing. Root balls exposed, pits far too small, completely loose stakes, the list goes on.

 

It's a sad sad situation.

[Goaty]

You do wonder what actual strategy goes in to this sort of thing. The people in power are only thinking of their term often. Is it liability?

 

Everywhere and everyone seems to plant the Himalayan birch Betula utilis jacqmontii.

 

It does get a tad bit boring. On the other hand are mature trees really suited to live alongside the concrete& tarmac jungle.

[Gary Prentice]

I've been involved in this but on a campaigning level. What is going on in Sheffield at the moment is a disgrace. It's absolutely right that a temporary halt in the felling should be implemented.

To have a contractor on a 25 year contract, in charge of not only tree maintenance but also the roads and paths can lead to a serious conflict of interests. Completely healthy mature trees are being removed in order to carry our resurfacing works etc. of course it is not in the contractors financial interest to look at more expensive alternative engineering solutions to retain these very important trees. It's far easier and cheaper to remove the tree completely. This is setting a very dangerous precedent for our town and cities trees. Show me a road in this country where the trees aren't lifting the pavement. Are we to remove all the street trees in London?

This contract and the felling policy seriously needs looking at.

 

Jeremy Barrell a leading consultant from Heritage Tree Management after visiting Sheffield has publicly called into question this zero tolerance approach to infrastructure damage and was visibly appalled at the situation.

 

As for the replacement plantings, the photographic evidence of the incompetent planting is astonishing. Root balls exposed, pits far too small, completely loose stakes, the list goes on.

 

It's a sad sad situation.

 

I don't know how many authorities are tied into PFI's, but suspect Sheffield may only be the tip of the iceberg with more situations like this occurring in the future.

 

I hadn't realised that this had only just broke in the national press, as it's been around for a few months on uktc.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

I hadn't realised that this had only just broke in the national press, as it's been around for a few months on uktc.

 

Possibly coz it was on the Jeremy Vine Show on R2 last Friday I think.

 

Amey, who are the PFI main contractor / 'partner' (?), have contracted a couple of the AA Approved Contractors to undertake the works, including one who have worked for Sheffield for many years, and they paint a very different story to that reported in the press.

 

Cheer..

Paul

 

PS Before anyone asks the AA position statement is here Arboricultural Association - Jeremy Barrell comments on the Sheffield Street Trees issue

[Richard 1234]

Bad planting aside are new trees not better for the environment than old trees reaching the end of their lives?

[sean]

Possibly coz it was on the Jeremy Vine Show on R2 last Friday I think.

 

Amey, who are the PFI main contractor / 'partner' (?), have contracted a couple of the AA Approved Contractors to undertake the works, including one who have worked for Sheffield for many years, and they paint a very different story to that reported in the press.

 

Cheer..

Paul

 

PS Before anyone asks the AA position statement is here Arboricultural Association - Jeremy Barrell comments on the Sheffield Street Trees issue

 

'They paint a very different story to that reported in the press'?

 

I think Jeremy has been pretty damning in various media on the evidence that he has seen and I respect his views.

Edited February 10, 2016 by sean
Spelling

[Mark Bolam]

You do wonder what actual strategy goes in to this sort of thing. The people in power are only thinking of their term often. Is it liability?

 

Everywhere and everyone seems to plant the Himalayan birch Betula utilis jacqmontii.

 

It does get a tad bit boring. On the other hand are mature trees really suited to live alongside the concrete& tarmac jungle.

 

 

It's a tough one.

I was up round Greenwich/Woolwich/Eltham the other week and the amount of work on street trees was mind-blowing.

Mainly semi-mature Planes, just tonked again and again.

The cost of keeping 100'+ (at maturity) trees down to 40' must be staggering. The TM alone must be a nightmare.

I appreciate it keeps plenty of lads in work, but it's all got to be paid for.

Dwarf cherries all round would be pretty bad though.

I went to Uni in Sheffield, and the leafy streets really made the place.

I hope a suitable compromise can be reached.

Tree removal is normally a dirt cheap option compared to groundworks and engineering solutions, though, so it is pretty worrying.

[Gary Prentice]

Possibly coz it was on the Jeremy Vine Show on R2 last Friday I think.

 

 

 

Cheer..

Paul

 

PS Before anyone asks the AA position statement is here Arboricultural Association - Jeremy Barrell comments on the Sheffield Street Trees issue

 

I really need to keep up

[GMan84]

I use to work for a company that contracted to amey on the street trees. I even did around half the trees on Humphrey road and most of the trees in the green hill area of Sheffield. At first it seemed a good job removing trees that were obviously diseased or sructuraly unsound. But I quit after six months as was expected to fell an unachievable amount of trees a day and all to strict health and safety guidelines with regular site audits. I also ended up agreeing more and more with the campaigners and it wasn't what I went into Arb job for so suit good experience but wouldn't do it again. I am now a freelance climber.