Hidrisc

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/the-yorkshire-post-says-the-sheffield-tree-scandal-and-echoes-of-dark-orgreave-days-1-9582775 And now this... Seems SYP are easily mislead and don't seem to mind that they are.

Council just annouced they are not going to fell the healthy trees on Western Rd because of Armistice...thats something they have done...though one would like to know they wont change their minds in a few years.

This rain is the wettest from the standpoint of water for quite a while.

There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about and that is not being talked about about...Oscar Wilde. Not much talk ever about previous mayors.

Both funnily enough. First decision..to fell tree or not? Felling healthy tree is environmental damage so shouldn't be done. Engineering solutions are environmentally friendly. Second decision. The actual tree felling operation? Involves security/police/massing of persons..."dangerous" ..so according to CDM best avoided.

It's not really the civil contract that matters here since there is Statute Legislation, the CDM Regulations 2015 which overides all construction activity and requires Client and Contractor to put public health and safety, which the tree felling is detrimental to, first and foremost in all decisions.

The Streets Ahead contract works come under the Construction Design and Management Regulations 2015. This is Statute Legislation breach of which can be a criminal offence. SCC is the Client and Amey is the Principal Designer and Contractor under the Regulations The Client's duties are stated in Clause 4; (1) A client must make suitable arrangements for managing a project, including the allocation of sufficient time and other resources. (2) Arrangements are suitable if they ensure that- (a) The construction works can be carried out, so far as is reasonable practical, without risk to the health and safety of any person affected by the project: (3) A client must ensure that these arrangements are maintained and reviewed throughout the project. The duties of the Principal Designer and Principal Contractor regarding risk to health and safety of any person affected by the Construction works are the same as the Client’s. The felling of an healthy tree unnecessarily is damaging to the environment and hence the health ( mental and physical) of persons is detrimentally affected. There are reasonable and practical alternatives to resolving Highway/Tree interface issues without cutting the tree down and these are the Engineering Solutions within the contract. This would seem to be a breach of Clause 4.2 (a) and specific to the actual loss of the tree. That the reason for the felling is because of cost ( it’s cheaper and more profitable to cut the tree down ) is not a valid reason since the Client must have the resources ( money) to make suitable arrangements for the works ( Engineering Solutions) since these arrangements do not risk the health and safety of persons affected whereas the tree felling does. This would seem to be a breach of Clause 4.1. Felling of healthy highways trees is opposed for environmental reasons by the persons affected by it so the present tree felling arrangements involve up to 20 security and 30 police to enable the tree to be felled. There have been injuries due to this massing of persons and arrests. SCC has used the word “dangerous” when describing this situation. These arrangements put at risk those persons involved and affected by it. As these arrangement are not reasonable nor practical whereas Engineering Solutions are, there would seem to be a clear breach of Clause 4. 2(a) here. Clause 3 requires arrangements to be maintained and reviewed. Freedom of Information requests to SCC on Risk Assessments and the application of the Engineering Solutions have not divulged any information that demonstrates that after events at Rustlings Road and Meersbrook Park Road ( to name just two “hotspots” ) the arrangements have been reviewed. That this information is not readily available suggests a breach of Clause 4. 3. The costly involvement of the Police as a control method within the Risk Assessments for the environmentally damaging tree felling operation instead of the use of the reasonable and practical Engineering Solutions because tree felling is cheaper, raises serious issues in the light of the above probable breaches. The principle of CDM Regulations is to avoid risk and when one can't they are a bit like insurance. One had better filled in the forms honestly and correctly to demonstrate competence and compliance because in the event of an investigation should a serious incident occur the forms are the evidence that will be prove a case. Has a serious incident occurred to date? The environmental damage to date seems serious enough. Add to it the events at Rustlings Road and Meersbrook Park Road and stir in Teagate and it looks very serious. What is needed is an authoritative body to investigate this situation.