Now they want to chop down the trees in Galway.

by Gallop Tue Mar 16, 2004 16:42

SUPPORT THE EYRE SQUARE PLAN

Go out tonight and chop-chop-chop down a tree. It'll speed up the plan which will create jobs and may Galway more beautiful.

More trees is better be they old new symboloc whatever.

by Michael Tue Mar 16, 2004 16:32

Hy lads,
I have to write something about the Eyre Square Enhancement and I wonder why everybody's complaining about the chopping of the trees? When the square is finished there will be more trees than now.

by D Skrytek - Derby Friends of the Earth Sun Jan 26, 2003 10:44 dot at theadora dot screaming dot net 95 Crewe St Derby DE23 8QQ

We wish you luck in your camapign. We are also campigning to get trees saved in the Derby Arboretum - over 109 are proposed to be felled for re-planting as it is claimed that they are sick, or overcrowding others. The area where most of them are is to be turned into a 'tourist honeypot' and the historic part of the park surrounded in high railings and shut at night. The other half of the Park is to have a large 'tin shed' built on it which will cause over 20 healthy trees to be destroyed. There is an alternative site which has not been examined on the City Council's own depot!
Enclose some details and we're soon to set up a website. PLease send us info on how you progress and if we can send letters, emails etc in support we're happy to do so.
regards
Dorothy Skrytek

There is an alternative site that the Council has not considered for the
Heart building - the depot on Reginald St. Once the other buildings are
refurbished, this
will make the Heart bldg smaller and it will then fit. Cricket nets can then
just be placed to the side of the synthetic pitches, saving money and energy
and the toilet block can have a small rangers room/police room added on, for
security. This will save a lot of open space in the area and is a better use
of the land. In its present proposed site the Heart of the Park building
will be vandalised within days. Bear in mind that
there were THREE
reports missing from the application meeting.These were Design and Community Safety,
English Heritage and a report which the City Council should have done
regarding open space. .The latter is in Government Guidance 17 , in order to
show that the facilities are needed on open space and to show bio-diversity
effect.

PPG 17

The Rosehill, Peartree and Normanton areas all suffer from a lack of public
open space and this is acknowledged in the City of Derby Local Plan.

Govt planning guidance (PPG17) states that the developer has to show that
the Council has carried out
an open space strategy, with robust assessments of needs and
qualities.Existing open space and land associated with sports facilities
should 'not be built on unless an assessment has been undertaken that has
shown these to be) surplus to requirements. This surplus must consider all
functions that open space performs, which by implication includes nature
conservation''
yet there is no assessment with the application and no consultation with the
Wildlife Trust or other statutory consultees, such as English Heritage.

Yet all this was glossed over at the meeting. Cllr Bolton weakly
asked where the community safety report and the report from the Crime
Prevention Officer was, but it was obviously a done
thing. Plus of course, Economic Implications seemed to be missing too

If moved the Heart building will be made more secure as it will be
overlooked by people in the Reginald St Flats. The Planning Director has
acknowledged that the development of the yard would not detract from the
Conservation Area. (Plann Agenda Cttee meeting 23 jan) It will also be safer
for the people using the park, as there is a ready-made brick wall in place.
Otherwise there will be a building site on the Arboretum for three years
with lorries driving in and out of the park all day. Many people access the park ALL day and their safety has not been considered by the implications of a building site in the middle.

We are not against the facilities
which are a great idea and are needed, especially things like cricket nets
and a cafe - Strutt even said what sort of cutlery should be used in his
legacy for the park. However,
his tea-room was in the orangery, NOT a giant shed. During the 2 days I've been in
the Arboretum not one person who used the park was against the moving of the
shed (Heart of Park building) to Reginald St.It was also surprising that
they did not know the
details, such as the sizes of the buildings proposed. Not one person knew
details of the plans, as most of them had been to an exhibition in which
tree-felling was not even mentioned! Some said it was a pity the Shaftesbury
Rec lottery plans fell through tho' as part of the proposals for the
Arboretum would be much better suited for there, as it already has sports
facilities. Many did not want the building at all!!! These are the very
people whose comments were 'mislaid' at the exhibitions in the Orangery a
few years ago

A member of Friends of the
Arboretum on the Panel says she was not informed of many of the
proposals.
A petition is to go to the Lottery people, as well as a letter asking
whether they know what destruction, waste of open space and opposition to
community wishes is being carried out in their name and the sort of bad
image such a proposal makes.

by Interested Wed Jan 22, 2003 17:12

Do Galway City Council give any GOOD reason for wanting to cut down these trees?

If so, I would be interested to know what it is - or what they say it is.