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

    • - had all the wrong connections at the wrong time - fraternised with some well dodgy blokes or rather one at least   - smart and  smooth talker - he has all the smoothness and ability to flatter - he is highly polished - skilled at making personal connections - never liked or trusted the chap, reminiscent of a slime ball
    • A friend has asked me to recommend Juliene for regular cleaning as she has some slots available. Her phone number is 07751426567
    • I'd put short odds on that but who would be his likely successor?
    • Hi, I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey. It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building. In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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