Coventry Live readers are appalled at the news that the city council plans to cut down “beautiful” trees along a Coventry road to make way for the final stretch of the Binley cycle path. At the centre of the controversy are the 26 mature trees on Clifford Bridge Road which have been part of the landscape for “decades”. The council has shared their views in our comments section.

Will Delieu has started an online petition to save the trees, praising their beauty and highlighting their long-standing presence. He argues that their removal would not only rob the neighbourhood of its green charm, but also cause permanent damage to the local ecosystem. He also says that while the planned bike lane seems to be a good step towards sustainable transport, the environmental cost is simply too high.

The campaign on change.org is calling on the city council to stop the project immediately and consider alternative routes that would preserve the trees. While some argue that the cycle path is unnecessary and would remain unused, others suggest a combined footpath/cycle path or moving the path to adjacent land.

Read more: Before and after pictures show stunning refurbishment of The Burges that have people saying ‘Wow’

A council spokesman said: “If these plans are approved at the end of October, we would remove 26 trees as part of the work. However, it is important to note that they would be replaced by 32 new trees as well as a range of low-growing plants.”

The Council’s consultation period on the tree felling proposal runs until 12 September.

Chr15R said: “No matter what you say or what you request, unfortunately the decision has already been made by the city council. The cycle path will displace the existing trees, the new trees will be cut down week after week like the other trees around Coventry and then we will pay for their replacement too.”

Philskey agrees: “The petition might as well be thrown to the birds, this council is not listening. The ultimate goal is to drive private drivers off the roads and give priority to pedestrians or cyclists.”

Music Man adds: “The council doesn’t seem to care what they’re destroying. Coventry is a mess, it’s just a concrete jungle.” Pollyperfection points out: “We need trees, not cycle paths. Here we are suffering the effects of global warming, so what is this council doing? They’re cutting down much-needed trees!”

Cityofculturedontuknow says: “The council has no money. There are cycle lanes all over Coventry costing millions but nobody uses them. There is no street lighting, we have to pay for green bins, council tax has gone up, there are potholes everywhere, new 20mph zones and what does the council give us? Cycle lanes!”

Riva responds: “Let’s blame Coventry City Council and ignore the real culprit who brought these state-funded cycle lanes into being. “England is to be provided with thousands of miles of kerb-protected cycle lanes built to newly published high standards,” promises a UK government statement on 27 July 2020. Significantly, this “revolutionary” £2 billion plan is being pushed forward by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, an everyday cyclist.”

FirstTrojan writes: “The existing bike lanes in the city seem to be very little used. Is there any solid evidence that more are being built? What has been the true cost of the existing construction and how much is still being spent? What other improvements or useful projects have been put on hold to fund this? Obviously not much is being spent on underpasses to encourage people to walk or on sidewalks. I would like to see a costing that balances bike lane use with actual use.”

Destroyedcountry asks: “If there is a bike lane on this street, where are residents supposed to park their cars? Do they all have to cross the bike lane when entering or leaving their homes?”

DJ6464 replies: “Yes, exactly! On a hill where cyclists are already racing down!”

SIC says: “This will undoubtedly be a backdoor for them to create a ULEZ as air quality has declined due to the lack of trees.”

Dapsy replies, “No. They are removing 26 trees and replacing them with 32 trees.” Waitwat adds, “And what the article doesn’t say is that in addition to the additional trees, the city government will also be creating rain gardens on the street, which will prevent flooding, make the street more beautiful, and at the same time improve biodiversity.”

SIC responds: “Removing the trees and replanting others means that they are not fully grown but only seedlings. These take a long time to grow and do not absorb as much CO2 due to their low biomass and weak root system. This in turn means higher CO2 levels in the region. Studies show that trees accumulate more than 40% of their total carbon in the last quarter of their life.”

Bobbypotter agrees: “People will say, ‘Oh, it’s just a few trees. It doesn’t matter.’ But it’s important. All these little things add up to a bigger problem.”

Hackettboy grumbles: “Great, another bike path that is hardly used.”

Nick Rowley agrees: “I drive my wife to work at the hospital three or four times a week and I have lost count of the number of times I have seen cyclists on the main road not using the new path. However, I can count on two hands the number of times I have seen actually using it! A complete joke and a waste of money, and it would be the same if the trees were left alone.”

Sillybait says: “The solution is simple: make it a one-way street and ensure people use the driveways rather than blocking the roads and pavements, which seems to be a very common problem in Coventry.”

What do you think about this project? Is the bike path worth the destruction of the trees? Let us know your opinion in our comments section.

Get daily headlines and breaking news by email – FREE