Agenda item

4.1

Petitions

4.1.1

Petition Requesting the Council to Reassess the Need for a Crossing Patrol Outside Loxley Primary School

The Council received an electronic petition containing 156 signatures, requesting the Council to reassess the need for a crossing patrol outside Loxley Primary School.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by James Connolly. Mr Connolly stated the school crossing patrol outside of Loxley Primary School needed to be reinstated. There was little in the way of traffic management or calming and there was poor road signage. Both he and the Deputy Headteacher had found it necessary to intervene in order to stop children from running out across the road. There had been other instances where vehicles had had to stop to allow children to cross safely and other vehicles had then gone on to attempt to overtake those cars, thereby causing a dangerous situation.

The crossing point was also used by children from Bradfield School who were dropped off by bus. Alternative crossing points were also used. An audit was carried out following the retirement of the previous School Crossing Patrol Warden and this had resulted in a score which it was believed would have been much higher if the audit had been undertaken at a different time. The petitioners rejected the principle of using audits of this type. Mr Connolly said that he could state that there were now more risk factors to take into account and that an accident was likely to occur. The costs of a School Crossing patrol were £2.5K per annum and this was considered to be worthwhile given the safety concerns. There was, he said, someone who was interested in applying for the School Crossing Patrol role The Council was asked to consider the policy relating to school crossing patrols and put children’s lives first.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Mazher Iqbal, the Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Transport. Councillor Iqbal stated that he had met with the petitioners on 23 November to discuss the issues which had been raised by the petition and technical issues had been set out in writing to the petitioners. There were national guidelines which were followed by the Council. A review was undertaken of the number of children and young people and vehicles in the location of the school between 8am and 9am and again in the afternoon. The results of the review were that the school was close to a score of 4 million, although, had a greater number of children crossed the road, the score would have been higher.

There were many primary schools in Sheffield and the cost of providing School Crossing Patrol wardens had to be considered. The Council was, with the School, examining the technical data associated with the location and Councillor Iqbal stated that he was to review the relevant policy. Some schools no longer required School Crossing Patrols and posts were not filled as people retired. Other schools were sometimes able to find the resources required to fund a crossing patrol.

Councillor Iqbal stated that he hoped that the results of the review would be known in approximately six weeks and that he would be pleased to meet again with the school and petitioners.

4.2

Public Questions

4.2.1

Public Question Concerning Devolution

Nigel Slack stated that the win in the High Court for Derbyshire County Council, against Chesterfield Borough's desire to join the core Councils of the Sheffield City Region, effectively delayed the 'geographically' appropriate City Region deal which was one of this Council's 'red lines' in agreeing this deal. He added that further consultation appeared to be required.

He said that the Government had stated that they were still ready and eager to go ahead with the deal. This suggested that the City Region could either go ahead without Chesterfield or wait until the Chesterfield question was finally settled.

Mr Slack asked firstly, how the Council was currently intending to proceed. Was it to go ahead without Chesterfield, against the original 'red line' decision; or await the final outcome for Chesterfield before further progress to the Parliamentary approval of the deal? And secondly, he asked what the impact would be on the May 2017 election for the City Region Mayor?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, stated that with regard to the outcome of the Judicial Review, it was premature to answer the question precisely. The Sheffield City Region would need to address the question collectively as to what the judgement meant and what the options were. A meeting of Sheffield City Region Leaders would take place early next week to consider the judgement, how to move forward and to consider options.

As regards the ‘red line’, she said that she believed that the geography of the Sheffield City Region for an economic deal was the right geography. The deal was an economic deal and not one based around policing or health matters and the City Region was a functional economic area.

4.2.2

Public Question Concerning Highways Trees

Nigel Slack stated that in relation to a question in full Council on 1^st July 2015 regarding the disposal of trees felled under the 'Streets Ahead' contract with Amey, the response from the previous Cabinet Member for Environment, clearly indicated that felled trees were sent for biomass use as, “The wood was often decayed...”. He quoted the extract of the minutes of that meeting, which referred to the question and the response given by the Cabinet Member.

Mr Slack said that [the response given] seemed now to be somewhat inaccurate. None of the trees removed on Rustlings Road were decayed and a brief review of the Independent Tree Panel (ITP) reports suggested that most trees removed were not decayed. He asked who was responsible for this 'inaccurate' answer to his original question; and who received the income from the felled trees sent to Biomass “cash strapped Council or profit focussed Amey”.

Councillor Bryan Lodge stated that the answer given to the previous question was accurate. Most timber sent to the biomass market was material from trees that were not of a high quality. Some timber was given to community groups and schools and there were examples of its use for local projects. Councillor Lodge stated that the answer provided by the Cabinet Member in July 2015 did not indicate that every tree which had been felled was decayed. Detail of income and costs were included in the contract pricing information.  Decisions regarding the replacement of trees were made by the Council. Income from the sale of timber would go back into the contract and result in a cheaper price for the Council.

4.2.3

Public Question Concerning The Council’s Major Contractors

Nigel Slack stated that he was disappointed to have to ask again for an answer to a question first posed at full Council in November 2016, with respect to Council's Major Contractors, their value and the overall profit margin for the contracts. He said that, despite repeated requests, this information was still outstanding and the relevant page on the website was no longer available.

Councillor Ben Curran, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources responded that the delay in obtaining the information was due to the fact that it was not easy to obtain the information that Mr Slack had requested.

Accounts were examined for the Council’s major contractors Veolia, Amey, Capita and Kier. The terms of some contracts had changed and some contracts had been renegotiated, so the figures were not necessary like for like. Not all companies disclosed in their accounts the figures relating solely to their contracts with Sheffield City Council. Based on what these contractors were paid in aggregate for the calendar year 2015, it was estimated from the accounts that the profits were just under two percent.

4.2.4

Public Questions Concerning Trees

Sharmaan Freeman Powell asked a question concerning the Cabinet Member’s views about best practice by other local authorities which were able to maintain trees that were larger than those in Sheffield and whether the Cabinet Member could describe the criteria upon which the Council would question its decision about felling large trees.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for the Environment stated that the Council used the ‘6 Ds’ criteria to access and decide whether a tree would be felled. This approach did fit with that used by other local authorities, for example in Hounslow. With reference to discriminatory trees, the Council had a duty to provide access on the highway under the Highways Act and guidance relating to disability discrimination and inclusive mobility.  

4.2.5

Public Questions Concerning Health and Safety and Streets Ahead

Richard Davis asked a question concerning health and safety with regards to Amey and the Streets Ahead contract. He said that he had contacted Councillor Bryan Lodge by email in relation to this matter but had not yet received a reply. He asked if Amey was found to be in breach of health and safety law, would the Council contemplate ending its contract with them. 

He said that there had been 10 reports made to the Council under RIDDOR (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations). However, the Health and Safety Executive had no records of any incidents. He referred to the health and safety section of the contract between the Council and Amey at paragraph 37.3.1. He asked that in view of this safety record, would the Council commit to terminating the contract with Amey, if they were in breach and if not, why not?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, stated that the Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Bryan Lodge, may have more detail and that he had previously given information as regards Amey’s record as regards health and safety, which she did not have to hand at this point in time and so was not able to comment in detail. However, in general terms with regards contracts made with the Council, the contractor had to be contract compliant. She said that if a contractor was in breach of health and safety regulations relating to that contract, then she believed there could be penalties. Such penalties might include termination of a contract.

In contract law, both parties, i.e. the Council and Amey, had responsibilities. If there was a breach of the contract, this would be a matter for the Council’s compliance unit and penalties would be applied as was the case in relation to other contracts. If there was a breach of the contract and it meant that the Council was able to terminate the contract without consequences, then this was an option which would be considered.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment, stated that a question relating to health and safety had been asked at the meeting of the Council in December 2016 and his response was recorded in the minutes of that meeting. For clarity, he read out the question which had been asked and repeated the answer that had been given. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) had not issued stop notices to Amey and there was no reason for Amey to cease felling work. The HSE had not considered that a stop notice was required and it would have issued such a notice if this was necessary. At present, and since November, only emergency works were being carried out and no works had been undertaken outside of the general terms of the Streets Ahead contract.

4.3

Petition Requiring Debate

4.3.1

Petition Requesting the Council to Save Western Road First World War Memorial Trees from Destruction

4.3.2

The Council received a joint paper and electronic petition containing 5,197 signatures, requesting the Council to “save Western Road First World War Memorial Trees from destruction.”

The Council’s Petitions Scheme required that any petition containing over 5,000 signatures would be the subject of debate at a Council meeting. The wording of the qualifying petition was as follows:-

“The trees on Western Road in Sheffield were planted to honour pupils of Westways School who gave their lives in the Great War.  Sheffield City Council plan to honour their memory in the Centenary of the Great War by destroying this Memorial and felling the trees.  Independent arboricultural advice from leaders in the industry has confirmed that these trees have many years of useful life left if properly maintained.  The outcry within Sheffield and beyond is growing and we need your help to raise a minimum of 5000 signatures to force a debate in full council.”

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by the lead petitioner, Dave Dillner. Mr Dillner stated that in 1914, former pupils of Westways School signed up to serve and fight in the First World War. 67 men aged between 17 and 23, lost their lives. 97 trees were planted on Western Road and Gillott Street to commemorate those who had lost their lives. This was something which was especially emotional on the centenary of the First World War. The Sheffield Trees Action Group’s (STAG) Arboriculturalist had concluded that not one of the 23 trees which were listed to be felled needed to be felled.

Mr Dillner said that in September 2015, the Council’s Head of Highways Management had told a meeting of the Tree Forum that Flexipave was a listed option in the Streets Ahead Contract and this was a reasonable alternative engineering measure which could be taken at no additional cost to the taxpayer.

The trees on Western Road and Gillott Street were registered as a war memorial and it was not too late for the Council to act regarding the trees listed to be felled. Mr Dillner commented that the membership of the STAG had doubled but that it was also attracting people to the campaign that might cause public disorder and extremists and that was not something that he wished to see. He asked the Council to do the right thing and save the trees on Western Road.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13.1(b), the Cabinet Member for the Environment responded to the petition, following which the Shadow Cabinet Member the Environment spoke on the matter.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for the Environment, thanked the petitioners for bringing this matter to Council. He said that it was important to make sure that the war memorial and trees were maintained for the future. It was proposed that a working group was established to work with the community and organisations including the War Memorials Trust.  Ward Councillors in Crookes and Crosspool Ward had started speaking with local people and obtaining their responses with regard to the memorial and trees. A multi-disciplinary team would be set up and would be led by Lisa Firth, the Head of Parks and Countryside and this would include the community, local councillors, the War Memorials Trust and other interested parties, such as the British Legion. A clear timetable was required and it was recognised that Western Road was a special case. The Council’s contractor, Amey, had been requested to look at engineering solutions and would also undertake some excavation work to enable them to look at what could be done and the associated costs.

Councillor Lodge said that Frecheville Memorial was an example of where the local community, including the local school, had been involved and an interpretation board had been installed at that site. He hoped that, similarly, people could become involved in the memorial on Western Road.  Western Road would also be referred to the Independent Tree Panel and the Panel would be requested to prioritise the matter so that a response was made by February or March. The Council would consider the Panel’s advice and options including the need to source funding. There would also be consultation on any revised proposals.

Councillor Lodge stated that if no action was taken there was a danger that more trees might be lost. Trees on Western Road which had previously died had not been replaced. The Council would do what was possible on this issue and at the same time would consider its duties and responsibilities under the Highways Act and with regard to the Disabilities Discrimination Act. In some cases, trees were categorised as discriminatory and there were guidelines in relation to access and footpath dimensions. The Council had to comply with legislation with regards to work carried out as part of the Streets Ahead programme.   

It was possible that there could be a rededication of the trees as a memorial and an appropriate target date for such an event might be Armistice Day. There would also be work done to restore the stonework on the memorial. Councillor Lodge said that he hoped that agreement could be reached on this issue.

The Shadow Cabinet Member for the Environment then spoke on the matter and Members of the City Council then debated the matters raised by the petition, as summarised below:-

It was generally welcomed that the Council was looking again at this matter. The trees formed part of the war memorial, and it was important that appropriate respect was shown to that memorial. The issue was of a sensitive nature and people wanted to remember those who had lost their lives in conflict.

It was suggested that the matter was referred to the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee so that a cross party working group might be established to consider the matter further. This would need to be done in a timely manner.

It was hoped that ward councillors for the area would also be involved in the scrutiny exercise and kept informed of developments relating to grant funding and work with the community etc. Criticism was made of some of the reasons given for the proposed felling of trees on Western Road and the validity of those reasons.

The petitioners were thanked for their work in bringing the petition to Council. It was important to remember the significance of the Western Road memorial and especially for the families of those who lost their lives in the First World War. The Council’s contractor Amey had been tasked with looking at engineering solutions and the Council would work with the local community to explore options.

The Council was right to see Western Road as special case. There were differences between the approach taken in Sheffield and in Hounslow, for example, it was felt that Sheffield City Council and Amey did not look to use engineering solutions to retain trees as a first principle.

Ward Councillors had been working with residents with regard to the memorial trees and to find out their views and the War Memorials Trust and Royal British Legion were also engaged. The Council was committed to working with community groups, including with regard to preservation and maintenance of the memorial. A bid had been submitted to the War Memorials Trust and this had been done in conjunction with residents. 

The Council was asked to consider applying engineering solutions to all highway trees in the City that might otherwise be felled.

It had been made clear at the meeting of Council in December that the Council was committed to look at streets with trees with war memorial status. The Cabinet Member had worked with officers to explore options and local councillors had engaged with local residents. Sheffield had a proud history of recognising the fallen in conflicts and this included events such as Remembrance Sunday and Armed Forces and Veterans Day and the memorial to the Women of Steel. The Council was also committed to supporting the Armed Forces community through the Community Covenant. The Freedom of the City had been granted to the Armed Forces.

The Council was requested to make sure it addressed issues of trust and respect that had arisen in relation to highways trees and consider solutions to retain trees in other areas. If it was necessary to remove trees then they should be replaced. If possible, an independent body should consider issues relating to the removal of trees and consider the views of both interested parties.

It was important not to forget why trees had been planted as a memorial to those former pupils who had died in the First World War and that children today were made aware of the significance of the memorial. The Council had a duty to consider the preservation of the memorial in the long term. It was also noteworthy that in some places, people had requested the removal of trees which were damaging walls and drains and affecting light in people’s homes and access on the pavements.