Are Arb Method Statements the biggest waste of time ever?

[benedmonds]

It can be so demoralising writing AMS. I have been asked to prepare a report on this lime tree by the residents of a new build close.

An AIA and two AMS' were written (not by me in this case) but completely ignored..

TPO'd lime tree. There was an AMS prepared in 2014 which was ignored, I had a look at the tree in April 2019 where it looked fair but suggested returning in the summer to check

In the winter of 2020 they had to redoo al the block paving as they were having drainage issues.. Another AMS was written (and again completely ignored) they pulled up all the block paving and replaced with cellular confinement system, air spaded, added new drains and repaved..

 

Who should get the blame. The original developer? The contractor during the initial build? The contractor replacing the block paving? Or the council for failing to insist on proper arb supervision...  Has anyone ever had a builder follow the plans written in an AMS?    Why do we bother...?

 

[Khriss]

Why bother  ? K

[daltontrees]

Short answer -  we bother because we're paid to. The Arb is not the tree police and if Council/client/contractor aren't taking is seriously that's their problem.

AMSs are mostly a waste of time. I write them as contract documents, so the client or council only has to append them to a legally enforceable build contract. If they're not precise enough to be enforceable, they really are pointless.

[Jon Heuch]

Are they a waste of time? It very much depends. If a council require one prior to granting planning permission, there is a strong chance that, without a "strong" condition, the AMS may be left to one side. An AMS produced early in the planning process is inevitably tree-centric and may be impracticable. Has the arborist thought about where the site office is going to go? How large is the office going to be? The architect won't know. The planning consultant won't know. Where are site vehicles going to park during construction? Where will site materials be offloaded & stored? How will the construction be phased - the previous points may all change during the project?

 

I encourage the AMS to be written when the contractor who is going to do the work has been chosen & I can talk to the appointed site manager (prior to the machines arriving on site). If the council is going to take 2 months to approve the AMS the delay may work in the favour of this approach, if planned well.....or it might not if the more typical general mellee of rush rush takes place. 

 

If the council condition an AMS after granting planning permission, condition arboricultural supervision and condition a sign-off condition at the end of the work from an arboricultural consultant to say that the works have proceeded in line with the AMS, there is a stronger chance that the AMS will both be respected and complied with.....but no guarantee as few plans anticipate the gas, water, electricity, drainage, internet connections in the detail required to undertake an AMS. it is only when you have the site manager in your grasp that you can pin him down and make some sense of what they think they are going to do.....even then their plans will change and once you turn your back you will be told that some service run has to go in a particular location etc etc....that is, after they have excavated and told you that they didn't see many roots, but they can't explain what that big piece of wood is on top of the earth that came out of the trench...

[daltontrees]

Well yes Jon it very much depends, but mostly on whether there is a genuine desire to protect trees or whether the AMS was a shelf-filling box-ticking requirement by the Council. Someone involved in the project has to have budget and clout.

 

If it's the Council that wants one and nobody else does, conditions have to be waterproof, the TO has to be seen on the site regularly and have the enforcement officer primed and willing to act. The most important thing becomes the monitoring reporting arrangements, so that the TO can ease off when things are underway and rely on monitor reporting.

 

If it's the site owner that wants one, the AMS has to be realistic and has to be enforceable against the contractor. If the contractor has it imposed on him, it will not go well, so it is more than useful to involve the contractor in the drafting. This is not always easy, as the contractor has to have been appointed at least provisionally. Best to involve a contractor when he has preferred bidder status, and programming is underway, otherwise there will be uncontrolled cost implications.

 

Finally, if you find it's the contractor that wants the AMS, stop taking pills or snorting or smoking whatever you're on, because you've drifted off into fantasy land.

[Gray git]

Are they a waste of time? It very much depends. If a council require one prior to granting planning permission, there is a strong chance that, without a "strong" condition, the AMS may be left to one side. An AMS produced early in the planning process is inevitably tree-centric and may be impracticable. Has the arborist thought about where the site office is going to go? How large is the office going to be? The architect won't know. The planning consultant won't know. Where are site vehicles going to park during construction? Where will site materials be offloaded & stored? How will the construction be phased - the previous points may all change during the project?
 
I encourage the AMS to be written when the contractor who is going to do the work has been chosen & I can talk to the appointed site manager (prior to the machines arriving on site). If the council is going to take 2 months to approve the AMS the delay may work in the favour of this approach, if planned well.....or it might not if the more typical general mellee of rush rush takes place. 
 
If the council condition an AMS after granting planning permission, condition arboricultural supervision and condition a sign-off condition at the end of the work from an arboricultural consultant to say that the works have proceeded in line with the AMS, there is a stronger chance that the AMS will both be respected and complied with.....but no guarantee as few plans anticipate the gas, water, electricity, drainage, internet connections in the detail required to undertake an AMS. it is only when you have the site manager in your grasp that you can pin him down and make some sense of what they think they are going to do.....even then their plans will change and once you turn your back you will be told that some service run has to go in a particular location etc etc....that is, after they have excavated and told you that they didn't see many roots, but they can't explain what that big piece of wood is on top of the earth that came out of the trench...

"Has the arborist thought about where the site office is going to go? How large is the office going to be? The architect won't know. The planning consultant won't know. Where are site vehicles going to park during construction? Where will site materials be offloaded & stored? How will the construction be phased - the previous points may all change during the project?"

Don't be nieve, if course we all know where these will go, in the normally only clear space on site that someone has kindly already fenced off under that handy shady tree to help keep the office or fuel store cool!
The amount of times I arrive on site and think wtf can't you guys read the same paperwork I've been given, it's just another tick box paper shuffling exercise until someone is actually willing to stand up within the planning authority and say no to this.

[benedmonds]

9 hours ago, Gray git said:

"Has the arborist thought about where the site office is going to go? 

Don't be naive, if course we all know where these will go, in the normally only clear space on site that someone has kindly already fenced off under that handy shady tree ......

 I often put the site office on the RPA. It's the best way to ensure it won't get used as a dumping ground for all the other crap.. My thoughts are it is much more difficult to move than a bit of heras fencing, although to be honest I doubt any of my AMS's ever get more than a cursory read. 

[daltontrees]

Isn't there a danger that offices over the RPA will deprive the tree roots of water?

 

[Gary Prentice]

On 06/07/2020 at 18:47, benedmonds said:

It can be so demoralising writing AMS. I have been asked to prepare a report on this lime tree by the residents of a new build close.

An AIA and two AMS' were written (not by me in this case) but completely ignored..

TPO'd lime tree. There was an AMS prepared in 2014 which was ignored, I had a look at the tree in April 2019 where it looked fair but suggested returning in the summer to check

In the winter of 2020 they had to redoo al the block paving as they were having drainage issues.. Another AMS was written (and again completely ignored) they pulled up all the block paving and replaced with cellular confinement system, air spaded, added new drains and repaved..

 

Who should get the blame. The original developer? The contractor during the initial build? The contractor replacing the block paving? Or the council for failing to insist on proper arb supervision...  Has anyone ever had a builder follow the plans written in an AMS?    Why do we bother...?

 

I learnt long ago to just be pragmatic about all this. In all of the planning process the Arb Method Statement is provided (objectively) to demonstrate that the build can be completed without detriment to retained trees. If it can, the box is ticked and the process moves on.

 

I generally outline the build stages and propose a signing off of each stage, in that the MS has been adhered to. Planning includes a condition that the MS is followed, so technically if it isn't there's a contravention of conditions, exactly the same as changing the brick colour or whatever.

 

I've never had a client object to getting the building stages signed off, but then again I've never been asked to sign off either, so the fault has surely got to lie with planning itself. Maybe it's just that the system has become a box ticking exercise and as long as new housing quotas are being filled that has become the main target.

 

It's frustrating to see AMS's trashed but you just have to get over it, - or start stacking shelves in Tescos, while hoping that somewhere there's a proactive TO, planner and Legal department that'll do their jobs as legislation permits.

 

 

[Derek Eames]

Interesting. There should have been a construction exclusion zone (CEZ) around this tree. The Arb report should have highlighted that diggers and dumpers etc were excluded... but hey, since when did a Contractor follow the rules...?