London Street Trees
apps.london.gov.uk
London Street Trees
1–10 of 74 posts
Re: London Street Trees
#2one thing most people don't realise is how much park and woodland london has.
Re: London Street Trees
#3London has a surprising history and love for its trees, more so than I've seen in other cities I've lived in. This means you can find a lot of fun listicles that provide history and fun facts for trees located around the city.
For example, [Great Trees of London](https://londonist.com/london/maps/great-trees-of-london-map) has a collection I'd actually enjoy walking around, and coupling with other sites in the area.
Especially in the heat the difference trees make is incredible. Moving from a tree-lined street to an open one is horrible when walking around the place.
Re: London Street Trees
#4one thing most people don't realise is how much park and woodland london has.
Yes, although on this map I think the trees in parks are not shown
Re: London Street Trees
#5This is an unusually nice website, but if you like this, check your own city, they might have one too! For example, here's:
DC: https://trees.dc.gov/apps/3677bceead544db79a412e3ab0a68588/e...
Boston: https://boston.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?...
Re: London Street Trees
#6New York City Trees https://tree-map.nycgovparks.org/
Re: London Street Trees
#7I bet this this website cost London £100k or more. They probably contracted it out to some supplier to build and maintain, and they are charging through the nose for hosting it, because the people on the London horticultural team don't do HTML.
While I applaud the effort, I do wonder if it is tax money well spent. Perhaps a spreadsheet on a shared drive would have been better value for money?
Re: London Street Trees
#8I bet this this website cost London £100k or more. They probably contracted it out to some supplier to build and maintain, and they are charging through the nose for hosting it, because the people on the London horticultural team don't do HTML. While I applaud the effort, I do wonder if it is tax money well spent. Perhaps a spreadsheet on a shared drive would have been better value for money?
Tbh I feel like that's probably an underestimate, but otoh that's probably a fraction of the cost of maintaining the trees themselves, so I'm not sure it's worth fretting over.
Re: London Street Trees
#9I bet this this website cost London £100k or more. They probably contracted it out to some supplier to build and maintain, and they are charging through the nose for hosting it, because the people on the London horticultural team don't do HTML. While I applaud the effort, I do wonder if it is tax money well spent. Perhaps a spreadsheet on a shared drive would have been better value for money?
> I bet this this website cost London £100k or more.
Perhaps spend less time worrying about a made up estimate of tax money spent and more time lobbying internally for Google to pay their fair share of tax?
Re: London Street Trees
#10I bet this this website cost London £100k or more. They probably contracted it out to some supplier to build and maintain, and they are charging through the nose for hosting it, because the people on the London horticultural team don't do HTML. While I applaud the effort, I do wonder if it is tax money well spent. Perhaps a spreadsheet on a shared drive would have been better value for money?
> I bet this this website cost London £100k or more. Perhaps spend less time worrying about a made up estimate of tax money spent and more time lobbying internally for Google to pay their fair share of tax?
Shouldn't we define "fair share" as that defined by the laws that have been implemented by the politicians sufficiently bribed by the lobbyists?