Missing Tree

[greynolds]

Anyone slighly annoyed GBK (or someone but I presume it is those working on the flats above) have chopped down the large established tree in front? Its great all those others have been planted but it'll be years before they reach the size of the now deceased one. I was quite shocked when I saw it the other day.

[QZ]

Yes!! Outraged. Such a lovely tree and so outrageously hacked at. :(

[Sue]

Somebody has also been removing trees in Ulverscroft Road over the last few years .... WHY ?!

[simog]

I presume that is because the roots were affecting the houses and causing subsidence

[Sue]

Surely street trees are chosen which have roots which do not affect houses.

If there is subsidence, removing trees can often in fact make it worse.

[Guest]

No we have been replanting them in the Dog Kennel Hill Estates.....thanks

[batdog]

It is amazing how in a dying world some people are more concerned about some old ugly houses "subsidence" rather than beautiful trees producing oxygen for a world that we keep polluting and slowly killing...

Get a life and plant more trees

[Joe likes dinner]

Whilst i am as equally in favour of seeing the GBK subside as I am of trees, a note of warning to all ED tree-lovers.

Back in the day when the fine streets of ED, were nothing but patterns on a developers map, the trees chosen were done so on their fine ability to suck up the muck and pollution of the industrial age. Bravo. However, they also came with a caveat stating they required regular pollarding to maintain leaf span, but reduce branch and root length. Thus avoiding the risk of subsidence. I can't remember if that particular tree was pollarded or not, if it was, it may not have got to the point where it needed to be removed and having the earth re-filled.

For anyone with trees in their gardens or at the front of their houses, I suggest taking the advice of the Royal Horticultural Society.

Pollarded trees may not look as magnificent, but it is often the best way of preserving nature and making sure your house doesn't topple over. Without being a kill-joy, big trees are the sort of things that give town planners and landlords hernias so they are best managed properly!

Myself, I'm all for window boxes and roof gardens and against improper tree management. On an environmental note, if anybody has any knowledge of the most eco-efficient plants around, I am keen to hear - there must have been a pull-out guide in the Guardian to 'eco-max' your life or something like that, but alas, I only ever read the free glossy posters - woohoo! Woodland Mammals! Birds of Antarctica!

[nutty]

A tree that old is unlikely to have been planted with any thought to subsidence. They've had to remove a few on Nutfield Road and replace them with more "subsidence" friendly ones. As for making it worse, I think this is why they leave the base in for a while (sometimes in the case of sycamores they have to cut down the tree over a number of years, but in the case of the ones on Nutfield Road I assume their size means they can be removed fairly quickly).

It's a real shame but if your house was being slowly destroyed by a tree you wouldn't feel to sorry to see it go :)