I live on a residential street, houses both sides and no off street parking/front gardens so cars parallel parked both sides of the road. There is a single strip of pavement that runs between the parked cars and the houses, just wide enough to push a buggy/wheelchair down. Pretty standard. I am 500 yards from a busy commuter station, and the commuters walk up and down the road as well as all of the school children that catch the train in from the city to attend the local schools. So a busy road as far as car traffic/foot traffic is concerned.
There were trees planted in the pavement every 100 yards or so which had been there for many years. The pavement had cracked and lifted from the roots to the point where the roots were actually coming through the pavement causing not only a trip hazard but must have been a nightmare for wheelchair/buggy users who would not only struggle to get past the trees, but also have all the roots/cracks to contend with.
The council wrote a letter back in the Spring to say they would be suspending the parking up and down the road in order to remove some rotten trees and repairing the pavement. All of us residents thought hallelulah, about time! Trees removed, pavement repaired, all good. A few weeks later, they replanted saplings in their place.
I noticed this morning that the pavement is lifting once again. I appreciate that it is important to replace trees that have been cut down, however why does the council feel that the pavement is a good location for them? I could completely understand if there was a strip of grass between the pavement and the road but there's not...
AIBU?? I just can't understand why the council would spend all those resources repairing the damage that the previous trees created only to recreate the issue for the future...