Silsden Cam Bookmark and Share

<< HOME PAGE  < RETURN

Donate to Yorkshire Air Ambulanceback to General Forum | back to forum index | login | sign up | help | latest topics | search


Forums Home > General Forum > Aldi Cutting down mature trees on Keighley rd site

  

This thread is now closed

Replies in this thread : 103
Page : 1 2 3
<< next page next page >>

Author

Topic : Aldi Cutting down mature trees on Keighley rd site

tetleydrinker
Website Member
Posts : 301

Website Member

04/08/2014 : 18:39:52      reply with quote


According to the Ecology building society Aldi builders are due to remove a mature lime tree from the Keighley Rd site.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=687430004676733&id=170010383085367
click for more information

Dodzi
Website Member
Posts : 461

Website Member

04/08/2014 : 19:35:03      reply with quote


Its a tree and I think that it was part of the planning application which was passed that this came down but they would plant several new trees to replace.
click for more information

dexter
Website Member
Posts : 547

Website Member

04/08/2014 : 20:32:08      reply with quote


I would much rather have a new Aldi with price competition, better service and new jobs than 1 tree...the real world moves on.
click for more information

Parsleyb
Website Member
Posts : 3

Website Member

05/08/2014 : 15:00:16      reply with quote


Don't like this 'real world' where money and building are put before everything else!
click for more information

victor
Website Member
Posts : 663

Website Member

05/08/2014 : 16:34:52      reply with quote


Parsleyb myself and several others don't like it either, that is why we all complained about our local builder damaging the Old Oak tree on Banklands Lane. When I talked to the tree inspector from the council he said that " they needed the general public to contact them about tree damage by builders because they don't have time to monitor all sites."
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

05/08/2014 : 16:59:58      reply with quote


We must be concerned about any tree that is cut down!

What has a tree ever done to you..other than provide oxygen, fuel, beauty and majesty?

In Turkey they have a saying: They can understand why a man might kill another man, but they can’t understand why a man would kill a tree....hence why if you go to the country you would find shops and other buildings constructed around a tree, no matter how big large or small!

Developers must be more considerate to our environment and we must keep a watchful eye open to protect what we have?


click for more information

dexter
Website Member
Posts : 547

Website Member

05/08/2014 : 22:26:08      reply with quote


If they are planting 3 trees to replace 1, what is the problem? Sounds like good sense to me...more oxygen etc.
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 09:52:32      reply with quote


quote
posted by dexter
If they are planting 3 trees to replace 1, what is the problem? Sounds like good sense to me...more oxygen etc.
Dexter You are wrong!!!
It would take in excess of 30yrs to even get any way close to the amount of oxygen lost to the atmosphere (depends on size of tree lost).
The reason why 3 trees are planted instead of 1 is because some are likely to die and then they will have to be thinned out to let desirable ones grow. So you can assume from this that we would loose out for a considerable number of years!
click for more information

dexter
Website Member
Posts : 547

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 10:41:54      reply with quote


quote
posted by CorkyYorky
quote
posted by dexter
If they are planting 3 trees to replace 1, what is the problem? Sounds like good sense to me...more oxygen etc.
Dexter You are wrong!!!
It would take in excess of 30yrs to even get any way close to the amount of oxygen lost to the atmosphere (depends on size of tree lost).
The reason why 3 trees are planted instead of 1 is because some are likely to die and then they will have to be thinned out to let desirable ones grow. So you can assume from this that we would loose out for a considerable number of years!
Then you had better get on to the Forestry Commission and explain to them that their policy of replacing thousands of trees is all wrong. Trees are a long term issue, not a short term fix.
click for more information

tetleydrinker
Website Member
Posts : 301

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 11:48:12      reply with quote


this post has been edited 1 time(s)

m.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11389136.Eco_workers_battle_to_save_historic_tree/#comments

According to facebook, tree surgeons are today trying to cut down the 250 year old tree, but ecology building society staff are sat under the tree in order to stop the tree from being felled.

m.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11390689.CAMAPIGNERS_trying_to_save_a_200_year_old_tree_from_being_cut_
down_are_this_morning_standing_firm_despite_contractors_arriving_with_chainsawsStaff_at_
the_Ecology_Building_Society__Silsden__have_vowed_to_keep_constant_vigil_beneath_a_massive_lime_tree_whic/
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 12:04:05      reply with quote


quote
posted by dexter
quote
posted by CorkyYorky
quote
posted by dexter
If they are planting 3 trees to replace 1, what is the problem? Sounds like good sense to me...more oxygen etc.
Dexter You are wrong!!!
It would take in excess of 30yrs to even get any way close to the amount of oxygen lost to the atmosphere (depends on size of tree lost).
The reason why 3 trees are planted instead of 1 is because some are likely to die and then they will have to be thinned out to let desirable ones grow. So you can assume from this that we would loose out for a considerable number of years!
Then you had better get on to the Forestry Commission and explain to them that their policy of replacing thousands of trees is all wrong. Trees are a long term issue, not a short term fix.
Dexter you are so naive!
The Forestry Commision are a business..They grow trees for profit NOT for the sake of the environment!
Please don’t give advice to our Environmental group if you have no understanding of what you are saying!
click for more information

gazzer
Website Member
Posts : 3078

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 13:13:33      reply with quote


quote
posted by CorkyYorky

What has a tree ever done to you..other than provide oxygen, fuel, beauty and majesty?





If the worst happens and it comes down can I have it for the fuel?
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4558

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 14:16:41      reply with quote


6.2 Trees to be Removed

6.2.1 T46 will require removal as it is situated within the footprint of the proposed development.

6.2.2 T46 is a retention category ‘B’ tree which offers high amenity. In this instance the removal of this tree is unavoidable due to the presence of a flood plain which dictates

where construction can occur on site. The planting of new tree stock should go towards mitigating its removal.

6.2.3 The trees on site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders 0068, 0544 and 0422.

news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/13_04193_MAF-ARBORICULTURAL_REPORT___IMPACT_ASSESSMENT-3890010.pdf

click for more information

old_miner
Website Member
Posts : 730

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 16:51:01      reply with quote


I am still not sure about the economic viability of the Aldi. However, when the new school is built in lieu of Tescos there will be plenty of customers.
click for more information

victor
Website Member
Posts : 663

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 17:11:51      reply with quote


Can you imagine the abuse if it was Tesco cutting down the tree. Just like the Oak tree on Banklands lane, if it's aldi or a local builder it's not so bad.
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 17:50:15      reply with quote


quote
posted by Peter
6.2 Trees to be Removed

6.2.1 T46 will require removal as it is situated within the footprint of the proposed development.

6.2.2 T46 is a retention category ‘B’ tree which offers high amenity. In this instance the removal of this tree is unavoidable due to the presence of a flood plain which dictates

where construction can occur on site. The planting of new tree stock should go towards mitigating its removal.

6.2.3 The trees on site are protected by Tree Preservation Orders 0068, 0544 and 0422.

news.silsden.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/13_04193_MAF-ARBORICULTURAL_REPORT___IMPACT_ASSESSMENT-3890010.pdf


I think its an atrocious loss to our landscape and to the screening of the ecology Building Society.

Bradford council themselves state: "The lime tree that will need to be removed would be an unfortunate loss as it is the largest tree on the site at present. As such, it provides a visual focal point and a green backdrop to the Ecology Building Society building in views from Belton Road”.

They they go on to say: “In terms of the proposed planting, the scheme should provide visual interest where it is needed and it relates well to the edge of town site”.

The tree is a big loss and one should expect Aldi’s to mitigate against this loss by planting a few larger, longer lived trees. The trees proposed are no more than token plants and many will likely cop it because the design of planting is to encourage the short lived Birches. Yes they have included large growing trees including Lime, but the size of these are very small (60-80cm) (23-31”) the same size of the native hedging plants, in comparison and will likely be out competed by the faster growing Birches.


A worrying conclusion to the tree planting is that I have not seen any landscape maintenace Schedule for a minimum of 5yrs as outlined in the section 106 agreement that implies that this must be done prior to any external landscaping or Public Realm Works!
Has anyone seen it?
click for more information

dexter
Website Member
Posts : 547

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 19:23:44      reply with quote


We have now gone national on this

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2717866/Environmental-protesters-demand-discount-supermarket-Aldi-halt-felling-200-year-old-tree-sit-new-store.html

Ecology BS had all the time to object to this in the planning stage...must have been asleep. Not a good advert for them to object at this stage, publicity stunt springs to mind.
click for more information

Ecology
Website Member
Posts : 10

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 20:04:17      reply with quote


Hi

I'm Anna, from Ecology Building Society.

Thanks to those of you who have expressed support for our efforts. This isn't a publicity stunt, but a last-ditch effort to save an important historical and environmental resource for Silsden.

We're campaigning for the conservation of the 250-year-old Common Lime tree which stands near our boundary wall. This is due to be felled first thing tomorrow morning (7 August) to make way for the new Aldi store.

I want to stress that we're not campaigning against Aldi in principle – just asking them to preserve this tree and the local wildlife it supports. Common Lime trees are excellent habitats for hoverflies, ladybirds, many species of bird and pollinators including bees. The council's own assessment of the trees on site states "This tree is estimated to be around 250 years old and of historical value. Removal of this tree is totally unacceptable" (see www.planning4bradford.com/online-applications/files/76B9C747A150064E923A1C6AA41F3467/13_04193_MAF-TREES-3870500.doc).

We have been in dialogue with Aldi for many months regarding the development, but were not told that the removal of the tree was imminent, nor were we asked in advance for permission for Aldi's contractors to gain access to our land for the removal process.

We are receiving visits from local residents who are unaware that this tree is due to be felled and feel that they haven’t been fully informed about the plans.

If you share our objections to the removal of this tree and would like to support our campaign, you can email Aldi at customer.service@aldi.co.uk, post to their Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/AldiUK or tweet them at https://twitter.com/aldiuk. You can also call them on 0800 042 0800. We will continue to post updates on the campaign at https://www.facebook.com/ecologybs.

Thanks.
click for more information

dexter
Website Member
Posts : 547

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 20:23:49      reply with quote


Hands up....thanks to Ecology for letting people know what has been going on in the past... would have been useful to know. Let's see what happens.
click for more information

grandad
Website Member
Posts : 1756

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 20:31:20      reply with quote


Now here is a thought for all you tree huggers.
This land we are all benefiting from via agriculture, used to be one great big forest, if nobody had cut down any of the trees; we would all be starving now.
As the Dutch say, "you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs".
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

06/08/2014 : 20:40:19      reply with quote


quote
posted by Ecology
Hi

I'm Anna, from Ecology Building Society.

Thanks to those of you who have expressed support for our efforts. This isn't a publicity stunt, but a last-ditch effort to save an important historical and environmental resource for Silsden.

We're campaigning for the conservation of the 250-year-old Common Lime tree which stands near our boundary wall. This is due to be felled first thing tomorrow morning (7 August) to make way for the new Aldi store.

I want to stress that we're not campaigning against Aldi in principle – just asking them to preserve this tree and the local wildlife it supports. Common Lime trees are excellent habitats for hoverflies, ladybirds, many species of bird and pollinators including bees. The council's own assessment of the trees on site states "This tree is estimated to be around 250 years old and of historical value. Removal of this tree is totally unacceptable" (see www.planning4bradford.com/online-applications/files/76B9C747A150064E923A1C6AA41F3467/13_04193_MAF-TREES-3870500.doc).

We have been in dialogue with Aldi for many months regarding the development, but were not told that the removal of the tree was imminent, nor were we asked in advance for permission for Aldi's contractors to gain access to our land for the removal process.

We are receiving visits from local residents who are unaware that this tree is due to be felled and feel that they haven’t been fully informed about the plans.

If you share our objections to the removal of this tree and would like to support our campaign, you can email Aldi at customer.service@aldi.co.uk, post to their Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/AldiUK or tweet them at https://twitter.com/aldiuk. You can also call them on 0800 042 0800. We will continue to post updates on the campaign at https://www.facebook.com/ecologybs.

Thanks.
Anna

I have just looked at the Newspaper Article you posted in which it statesthe following:
'The Tree Preservation Order still stands on a number of other trees on the site. One of the conditions of planning application being granted was that the new landscaping of the site would include the planting of a semi-mature lime tree close to the position of this tree.'

I have viewed the section 106 agreement and find no mention of this within it!
Further to this statement I cannot find on any landscape Plan any mention of a semi-mature Lime tree.

If their statement is true and have been told to plant another tree close to its original position it is clear that they are happy to let another tree grow to maturity...then the question is why propose to cut down the existing tree in the first place?
It seems to me that our Planning Dept are sending everyone round in unnecessary circles for no reason at all and causing grief to our commmunity due to their poor judgement.


solid wood flooring

Ecology
Website Member
Posts : 10

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 09:45:39      reply with quote


Thanks very much for your suggestions - we've just been looking through the documentation again to check the points you raise. I'm not a planning expert myself, so please forgive me if anything below has been lost in translation...

You're right that the landscaping isn't fully covered in the section 106 agreement, although section 6 (page 3) defines 'development' as including landscaping. The actual landscaping conditions are contained within the planning permission document itself (para 13).

We believe that the landscaping plan has been submitted, but not approved, and we're waiting for written confirmation from the Council that the felling can go ahead despite the approval being pending. This has allowed us a little more time to raise awareness and ask more people to contact Aldi, which may be our best hope at the moment.

We really do appreciate you raising this - please do let me know if you find any other potential issues as we'll do everything we can to give this tree a chance.
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 09:58:58      reply with quote


Ecology/Anna

Have you thought about my earlier posting?

A worrying conclusion to the tree planting is that I have not seen any landscape maintenance Schedule for a minimum of 5yrs as outlined in the section 106 agreement that implies that this must be done prior to any external landscaping or Public Realm Works!
Has anyone seen it?

If this is not done then it suggests to me that the tree cannot be chopped down...yet!!
click for more information

ginjo
Website Member
Posts : 1388

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 10:30:46      reply with quote


interesting to see that the planning reference referred to in an earlier post is unavailable to view online at this time! this seems to happen a lot.Also did I read somewhere that the tree preservation order was being removed because of something to do with the flood plain? If this is the case, why was planning permission ever granted in the first place
click for more information

Ecology
Website Member
Posts : 10

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 11:01:27      reply with quote


Hi all

We're currently challenging adherence to the conditions of the planning process with Aldi and seeking to delay work until they can demonstrate every single condition can be met. Please do keep sharing information with us on this - I'm passing it all on to our Chief Operating Officer. I will try to keep this feed updated and am also posting to our Facebook and Twitter feeds to keep the wider public informed...

Thanks

Anna
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4558

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 11:09:10      reply with quote


quote
posted by ginjo
interesting to see that the planning reference referred to in an earlier post is unavailable to view online at this time! this seems to happen a lot.Also did I read somewhere that the tree preservation order was being removed because of something to do with the flood plain? If this is the case, why was planning permission ever granted in the first place
You cannot reference a link externally from Bradford Planning Portal which is why the link you refer to doesn't work.

To see the document:
www.planning4bradford.com/online-applications/

Search for 13/04193/MAF

and click on documents (there should be 66 for Aldi)

The document you are looking for is titled TREES

While you are on the site you should look at some of the other documents, this is not so black and white as you may be led to believe.

While I have every sympathy for the wish to preserve an old tree, I can't help wondering what would have happened to the trees if a waste recycling plant had got planning permission on this site.
click for more information

muriel
Website Member
Posts : 64

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 11:33:51      reply with quote


Am I the only one questioning why now all the opposition?The plans were on line and everyone had a chance to support or oppose the plans,so I have to ask why people have waited until the diggers moved in until there was a protest?
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 13:21:12      reply with quote


quote
posted by muriel
Am I the only one questioning why now all the opposition?The plans were on line and everyone had a chance to support or oppose the plans,so I have to ask why people have waited until the diggers moved in until there was a protest?

Interesting comment Muriel. Yes we must be a tighter and stronger community and be more active in oppposing proposals from the start.
However, we must also ensure that planning regulations are met by the developers, because we can’t rely on our planners to do it!
Agreements have been made between the council and the planners which must be adhered to. These agreements are often abused by developers and by which can cause further damage to our environment, the example being the damage to a tree on Banklands Lane, posted earlier this week.
It is right that we should protest at any time in which we feel unjust to situations or circumstances.
There is also the matter of being able to view planning documents...often it is noticeable that documents are not visible to the public eye when they should be!
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4558

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 13:38:37      reply with quote


quote
There is also the matter of being able to view planning documents...often it is noticeable that documents are not visible to the public eye when they should be!
But these plans are available BUT access is controlled by a short-time session cookie, which means if you copy the address of a document on the site it will not be of any use as a direct reference later (the session will have timed out). To see the document you must go into the planning portal website and search using the planning application number, or via the map on the site.

BTW The document I posted a link to above was copied from the planning portal and put onto some of my webspace, the link is directed at the document I copied which is why it available directly.
click for more information

Corky Yorky
Website Member
Posts : 119

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 14:25:14      reply with quote


quote
posted by Peter
quote
There is also the matter of being able to view planning documents...often it is noticeable that documents are not visible to the public eye when they should be!
But these plans are available BUT access is controlled by a short-time session cookie, which means if you copy the address of a document on the site it will not be of any use as a direct reference later (the session will have timed out). To see the document you must go into the planning portal website and search using the planning application number, or via the map on the site.

BTW The document I posted a link to above was copied from the planning portal and put onto some of my webspace, the link is directed at the document I copied which is why it available directly.

Peter what is this you are saying?

Most of us regular users of the planning Portal are aware of this anomaly in the system..I’m talking about documents that should be there but have not been put on-line for viewing. For example if changes to proposals have been agreed then the public should be able to view what these agreements are. You should be able to read a plan correctly not decipher it using clues in various documents which have been superseded unpteenth times. Documents are there to support a plan not to actually override their primary visual intention. Also developers have a habit of handing in documents late, or not at all, which should be on-line for viewing but the authority fail to put them on....likely in their best interests!

Talking of your particular issue...which is in fact off-Subject!
I have noticed that if someone has posted a direct link on-line to the planning portal you can simply refresh the page by clicking backwards then forwards within the document to view it if it doesnt immedietley show.

Lets get back to the main important subject now...that of the Tree.
click for more information

Peter
Website Member
Posts : 4558

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 14:56:25      reply with quote


Hmm you are right, you should take the matter up with Bradford. Now back to the subject, have they chopped the tree down yet?

PS Please stop quoting everyones comments when replying, it's not necessary.

Thank you.
click for more information

rosco
Website Member
Posts : 63

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 15:26:13      reply with quote


Congratulations to Anna and The Ecology for making a stand, no disrespect to Aldi but I have always thought a supermarket at that side of the road was the wrong decision to make, the opposite side is a absolute disgrace and does nothing for the image of our town when coming in form the roundabout.
Nothing to spoil there.
I will always remeber the 200 yr oak tree at the top of Elliot street getting killed and the impact it had on the community.
Anna everyone should be on your side and save the tree,s, I wish you well with your campaign some things are well worth fighting for and this is one of them.
click for more information

grandad
Website Member
Posts : 1756

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 17:19:17      reply with quote


I and I am sure others will remember all the fuss that was made when Bradford Council said the old willow trees had to be removed from the side of the beck in Kirkgate! Look how big and attractive they are now.
Nature will always win in the end, 80 plus jobs are far more important than just one tree.
If we never cut down a tree, where would we get timber from?
click for more information

Ecology
Website Member
Posts : 10

Website Member

07/08/2014 : 17:29:54      reply with quote


I'm pleased to say the tree is still standing this evening. We expected Aldi to contact us this morning to confirm that they were going ahead with the felling, but we haven't heard from them all day. The groundworks have continued, but the team contracted to work on the tree don't appear to have been on site.

We've posted a full update at https://www.facebook.com/ecologybs. If there are any further developments, we'll keep you posted.

Thank you to all those of you who have offered support and encouragement!

Anna
click for more information

blob
Website Member
Posts : 195

Website Member

08/08/2014 : 21:39:58      reply with quote


Trees have to be cut down for development or because they are diseased. It's a fact of life. Aldi have said they are planting replacements which should cover any carbon loss or oxygen loss.
click for more information

muriel
Website Member
Posts : 64

Website Member

09/08/2014 : 06:27:53      reply with quote


one has to wonder if anything was lost in the building of the ecology building society,trees,plants habitats of wildlife.
And still no-one has answered the question why now all the fuss? why didn't they put their concerns in the public domain from the outset of their talks with Aldi?
It seems ok to berate BFD but the plans were available to view and yet the Ecology kept their concerns quiet until now.
click for more information

Replies in this thread : 103
Page : 1 2 3
<< next page next page >>

Thread Closed

login

refresh page   

latest topics

events
sale / wanted
general
have your say
looking for..
skippy greengrass

DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>>   Forums Home > General Forum > Aldi Cutting down mature trees on Keighley rd site  


<< HOME PAGE  RETURN  PAGE TOP ^  

  , © silsden.net 2016

webenquiries to