|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Jun 16, 2023 14:16:13 GMT
It doesn't actually say, but what nut case would want to cut down 131 trees, and even worse for no reason whatsoever. the news item seems almost deliberately ambiguous. It begins by identifying a park, and a group of agitators snd nimbys. But it then refers to a field ADJACENT to where this occurred as being privately owned, and to the area being ‘Metropolitan Open Land’ whatever that means There are many, many examples around here, where you cannot sink a shovel more than three foot without striking a piece of the quay of Augustus’ Caesar’s Silurian dockyard, where councillors keen to develop areas they purchased engineer bulldozer accidents. So i’m quite amenable to the theory this is a developer keen to get a head start on a high end residential property or similar. I have little love for town planners but thats because the ones round here are proven to have one set of rules for council tax band E and below and a quite different set for multimillionaires with brown envelopes. Some of the riverbank changed hands quite suspiciously before a huge housing development went ahead too… |
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Jun 16, 2023 14:24:24 GMT
It doesn't actually say, but what nut case would want to cut down 131 trees, and even worse for no reason whatsoever. the news item seems almost deliberately ambiguous. It begins by identifying a park, and a group of agitators snd nimbys. But it then refers to a field ADJACENT to where this occurred as being privately owned, and to the area being ‘Metropolitan Open Land’ whatever that means There are many, many examples around here, where you cannot sink a shovel more than three foot without striking a piece of the quay of Augustus’ Caesar’s Silurian dockyard, where councillors keen to develop areas they purchased engineer bulldozer accidents. So i’m quite amenable to the theory this is a developer keen to get a head start on a high end residential property or similar. I have little love for town planners but thats because the ones round here are proven to have one set of rules for council tax band E and below and a quite different set for multimillionaires with brown envelopes. Some of the riverbank changed hands quite suspiciously before a huge housing development went ahead too… I'm pretty sure kick-backs by big developers are paid to some councillors to by-pass normal regulations. Don't think it will ever be stopped. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jun 16, 2023 14:26:24 GMT
Can't they just declare the blight an illegal immigrant and threaten to deport it to Rwanda? That'll stop it crossing the channel for sure. At least trees have a legitimate legal right to be here, they've been here long before humans...
good link
We've got an oak on the farm that could be 500 years old. Rotten down the middle and kept together with a ratchet strap. It's in full leaf though. Could go another 100 years yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jun 16, 2023 14:32:59 GMT
It doesn't actually say, but what nut case would want to cut down 131 trees, and even worse for no reason whatsoever. the news item seems almost deliberately ambiguous. It begins by identifying a park, and a group of agitators snd nimbys. But it then refers to a field ADJACENT to where this occurred as being privately owned, and to the area being ‘Metropolitan Open Land’ whatever that means There are many, many examples around here, where you cannot sink a shovel more than three foot without striking a piece of the quay of Augustus’ Caesar’s Silurian dockyard, where councillors keen to develop areas they purchased engineer bulldozer accidents. So i’m quite amenable to the theory this is a developer keen to get a head start on a high end residential property or similar. I have little love for town planners but thats because the ones round here are proven to have one set of rules for council tax band E and below and a quite different set for multimillionaires with brown envelopes. Some of the riverbank changed hands quite suspiciously before a huge housing development went ,ahead too… I agree, it's either poor journalism or deliberately being ambiguous, I live in Wilmslow Cheshire described as a 'leafy area' property developers can't wait to get their grubby little hands on any snippet of land, so they can build their greenbelt expensive properties.
We're having none of it, the ones who have managed backhand the council describe their properties as 'leafy luxury developments', but in reality they purchase big properties on big plots of land, give the seller over inflated prices, knock the houses down, and build luxury apartments or houses, none of which would be in the price range of any first time buyers.
The first thing they do is cut the trees down, it's sheer greed and profit, and me and other homeowners are going to put pay to it.
|
|
