Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This has just been sent to me again - if you search you will see a petition, just in case the link is edited out. Southwark Council are cutting them down - they pre-date the footbridge!! - because it is easier for them to repair the bridge supports. When we are all fighting against pollution and trying to conserve our natural world for our children it is pretty ripe that the council is actually removing trees that do a great job. There is a tree removal notice on them that says from the beginning of November at some point they are being cut.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-the-cox-s-walk-footbridge-oak-trees

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why don?t they just demolish the footbridge ?


They say it is part of the footpath through and they have to protect the floor of the wood I suppose. Have a look at the petition there is more on there.

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have contacted one of the tree officers about

> this and I'm waiting to hear back from him

> Renata

They won't help if the info on the petition website is correct. They have been overruled by Ms Lury.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> so what now?

> They just continue anyway?


I think the main protestors have all written to loads of organisations as well as asking the council to re-address the issue. Keep sharing the petition - that is what I have done with everyone I know locally.

Hot off the press!!!


Helen Hayes tweeted this earlier today:


Pleased to say that following further discussion and representations from me,

@CatherineRose6

&

@AndySimmons10

Southwark Council has agreed to halt the decision to fell two oak trees in Sydenham Hill Woods so that further options can be explored & community engagement take place.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...