Too many trees in East Dulwich. (Lounged)

[david_carnell]

JRussel

I'm intrigued. Perhaps we could build one of these in East Dulwich:

http://popularchitecture.com/supertower/

It even has trees inside it (I think) - thus solving both our problems.

[Loz]

We need to be concentrating on making our cities denser

You're certainly leading by example... B)

[jrussel]

lozzyloz Wrote:

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

> I'm stumped. No where in the article does it

> advocate "It is still possible to create a decent

> living environment with very few trees". In fact

> there's not even any mention of trees.

>

> Now leaf us alone.

The article was quoted to illustrate the fact the America is slowly waking up to the idea that it needs to make its cities denser.

Copenhagen is often mentioned as one of the most desirable cities to live in in Europe, with a very good standard of living.

Go and look at central Copenhagen on the satellite view on Google Maps.

Now do the same for East Dulwich.

[Jeremy]

Bit of acorny joke there, Lozzyloz. But I agree that jrussel is barking up the wrong tree here.

[JamesG]

I would like to see the letter you send to Boris please.

[*Bob*]

A friend of mine works at City Hall, and has given me some inside information.

Word is that Boris Johnson is going to plant an acorn in the top of his head (on Christmas Day this year). With regular feeds from a genetically modified fertiliser - and by spending at least ten hours a day under sodium lamps - Boris says that this acorn will grow into a giant 'super tree', capable of providing London with at least half its oxygen. This will in turn allow a rapid program of tree-felling thoughout the capital, a doubling of the number of black cabs, and the right to smoke cigars in lifts anywhere within the bounds of the M25.

[Mark]

Assume what you want jrussel. The report you linked to says "calls on the federal government to establish policies to expand transit options, make regional freight operations more energy-efficient, encourage energy-efficient retrofitting of homes and employ other strategies to decrease urban impact on the environment."

There's no mention of getting rid of trees. And you started by saying trees cause drain problems, masonry damage, injure people and get in the way and now you're blaming them for carbon emissions. I agree that reduction of road traffic (especially personal transport) is a good thing but I don't agree that we should cut down trees to stop "suburban" types coming to East Dulwich.

[lozzyloz]

Jeremy, you call my joke corny!!?? ;-)

jrussell apples and pears and all that, but how can you compare a city centre with a suburb? I'm sure Copenhagen is a lovely place but ED it's not. What makes an environment attractive as well as having the ability to de-stress us humans is an abundance of trees and other greenery. I don't think anyone would agree with your assertion that ED has too many trees nor that it needs to be denser but I'm willing to listen to your argument if you can actually make a coherent one.

[Mark]

Copenhagen with green bits:

View Larger Map

edited to out a map in as the picture http://www.kiteshots.org/getimg/download/h/?img=content/gallery/2007/kongens_have/IMG_9432.jpg was too big

[edited once]

[giggirl]

I agree with him. I tried hugging a tree once but it was all very one-sided. Get rid of them all.

[first mate]

JRussel,

One of the maddest posts I've read in a long time.

Seem to recall you were the one who was worried about destroying the environment by using baby pooh bags to pick up dog doo.

Please tell us you are a wind up merchant?

[louisiana]

If you don't like trees, why not move to a place with few/no trees? (Brick Lane? Western Avenue? Holloway Road? North Circular!)

Most US cities have *vastly* lower density than London (2-10 times lower). Even San Fran, one of the US's denser cities, is less than twice as dense as London. We are already in one of the more densely populated cities in the world (ahead of most other European major cities too). The US experience of huge urban sprawl with very low densities is not the London experience (or the UK experience). We do not live in a country where people think nothing of driving 50 miles to buy a pack of cake mix.

And some of the densest cities in the world are also among the most polluted. Think Calcutta or Mexico Cty. Have you tried to do a regression analysis of polluation vs. density? (and not just in the US)

Having lived in an incredibly dense area of another city (often used as an example by Richard Rogers as the way forward in terms of urban population density), I can say the downsides exceeded the upsides e.g. incredible levels of noise 24/7 (a perception supported by OECD international comparisons) from so many people living on top of one another. Of course trees can absorb noise, but we didn't have any. The same city also experiences considerable flash floods, some of which led to drownings/deaths while I lived there. Flash flooding often increases when there has been a reduction in soil/tree coverage and an increase in tarmac/concrete, worsening run-off problems. Or are you proposing getting rid of rain in urban areas too?

http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/WDC/Leisure+and+culture/Parks+and+recreation/Parks/The+Benefits+of+Trees.htm

[Jeremy]

lozzyloz Wrote:

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

> Jeremy, you call my joke corny!!?? ;-)

Sorry, just looking for an excuse to get my poor "acorn" pun in there.

I'm still struggling to understand the root of jrussell's argument.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

I think he's just a sap.

[ratty]

Best Post Ever!

[mlteenie]

By the time the council have stopped chopping those inconvenient trees down, this area will have more in common with our previous location, Elephant and Castle.

P'raps you'd prefer that location, jrussell?

[MadWorld74]

Can you come round to my house JRussel at the weekend, I need a childrens entertainer.

[Jeremy]

mlteenie Wrote:

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

> P'raps you'd prefer that location, jrussell?

Not sure how he'd take to branching out... I reckon he'd soon be pining for East Dulwich. He'd soon get sycamore buildings.

Sorry.

[RoseK]

Venice is built on trees. Millions of them, upright, making pylons buried in the lagoon and surrounding swamps to support the buildings. But there are still plenty left - some 500 years old. (Here's a photograph of some huge trees in Venice - an entire avenue of them: http://www.worldofstock.com/closeups/TEI1510.php - type in trees, venice, or this ref: Image ID: TEI1510 )

A town without trees is a sad place indeed. Hot, airless, noisy, depressing. It is obvious that JRussell has a phobic fear of trees - and needs help. At the present rate of out of control population growth, people will destroy the planet - then how will all the billions of starving people exist? Trees will return, as they did in South and Central America.

[jrussel]

I am sure that some people will realise that this thread has been prompted by a certain proposed development in the ED area which was recently refused permission due to the interference of certain local residents more interested in their own selfish agendas than the benefits the development could have offered.

Unfortunately for all sorts of reasons I am unable to be more specific. But perhaps this will provide some kind of explanation for those puzzled by my comments, who are presumably unaware of the background issue.

[Mark]

Please tell us what you're talking about.

[louisiana]

jrussel, there are dozens of proposed developments in this area every month, many of them leading to the loss of many, many trees. At the end of my own garden, right now, there is a proposed development on a plot with some 50+ trees, which I have objected to (though not on the grounds of loss of trees).

But presumably it's not that development you're referring to (the first proposal has been approved, and we're now awaiting decision on a second, what one could call 'ultra-development', which exceeds even the top end of urban planning guidelines in terms of density).

Is discussion of urban development now subject to the Official Secrets Act?

And is it really tenable to generalise from the specific/personal single case to an entire district or city? While many examples run counter to your argument?

[d803cn]

i wooden't like to make wild accusations but perhaps someone put a tree preservation order on a tree in the middle of a plot of land ripe for development? A good tactic to persuade the planners to reject an application, if it involves chopping said tree down.

[Muttley]

Or maybe this is about the palm tree on the LL roundabout...not heard anything about that for a while.

[louisiana]

The presence of a fabulous old tree is no barrier to development in some cases. I've seen grand old trees form part of the centrepiece through a building, such as the one at the Hotel Moka in Cuba

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/americas/hotel-of-the-week-cubas-hotel-moka-471536.html

Of course this requires imaginative development, and imagination is in short supply among British developers.