Agenda item

To receive a report and the Air Quality Action Plan from Ned Johnson, Principal Officer, Pollution

Ned Johnson, (Principal Officer Pollution), introduced the Air Quality report, together with the Air Quality Action Plan which provided information on the issues of air pollution faced in LB Enfield and how these problems are being addressed. 

The following was highlighted:

• The introduction of air quality management transcends from European law and is a health based approach.
• First round of assessment of local air quality completed in 2001 demonstrated the objective levels for nitrogen dioxide and Particulates (PM10) would be exceeded along major routes and a number of heavily trafficked roads, therefore the borough was declared an air quality management area (AQMA). The Air Quality Action Plan for Enfield was prepared following this.
• The Air Quality Standards Regulations (2010) has set objective levels for pollutants for target dates.
• Data shows that nitrogen dioxide objective is being exceeded at roadside locations on busy roads.  The data for (PM10) shows that we have not exceeded objectives for this pollutant since 2008.
• Data is generated from four permanent monitoring sites in the borough. Information captured aims to show what is happening at the roadside and also from areas away from the road.
• The current Air Quality Action Plan is being reviewed.  Actions are updated as a result of activities/ measures undertaken such as traffic and transportation schemes.

The following issues/questions were raised

• Councillor Levy mentioned that from looking at the report it would appear that some measures while seeking to improve air quality may seem counter to other aims. He referred to the need for correct placing of traffic signals so that traffic idling does not cause higher emissions. He also spoke of the need for encouraging greater cardiovascular exercise – cycling and walking to school.

• Attention was drawn to the pie- chart shown at p15 of the Air Quality Action Plan. This gave the indicative sources for apportionment of NO2 in Enfield and showed that cars were the source of 9% for this type of pollution compared to 56% attributable to ‘local background’.  It was thought one of the contributors to the ’local background’ category was the provision of central heating from gas fires.  When asked if local or central government were able to influence this issue, it was answered that measures had been taken such as in the area of scrappage schemes for old boilers and improved home insulation schemes.
• The move to the use of new technologies as soon as practical was considered beneficial, such as the move to hybrid/ electrical cars. It was agreed that the move to electrical cars and installation of electrical charging points was the way forward.
• Councillor Rye referred to the Cycle Enfield initiative and thought heat maps of Enfield seem to show that an increase in the standing of vehicles at traffic lights appear to indicate an increase in pollutants. Reference was made to the implementation of Cycle Enfield as a measure to reduce car use by providing safe cycle routes.
• It was asked what measures had been introduced in association with recent legislation to pursue the ‘reduction of cars idling’. Ned Johnson answered that we had not issued fixed notices for ‘anti-idling’ because legislation needed to be tighter, at present it would be possible to escape prosecution easily and the fixed notice at £20 was not considered a sufficient deterrent.  It was hoped people would be most influenced through education with an awareness campaign taking place outside Enfield schools. It was suggested that it may be useful to lobby government to address this issue such as by increasing fines and making legislation more robust.
• Councillor Pearce emphasised the importance of children using their local schools with less reliance on cars taking children to schools.  Members were in agreement with this and also spoke of the need for local bus routes to better reflect transport needs including the increased future use of Chase Farm hospital.
• It was mentioned that the Mayor of London was looking to impose an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) on all vehicles travelling in the Greater London Area and it was thought this would be from within the North Circular Road boundary. Ned Johnson stated that a disadvantage of this would be that the North Circular road would be a ‘turning point’ for vehicles and this may cause problems. It would also mean that while one area of the borough would be within the zone, the remainder would not.
• Concerns were raised that road testing of vehicles regarding European standards testing showed that many cars were not meeting emission standards
• It was thought priority should be given to the health of young people, and for parking attendants to focus on vehicles parked outside schools where cars were ‘idling’.
• Ned Johnson confirmed that for NO2, there are exceedances of the annual mean objective along main roads in the Borough. For particulates - PM10 no exceedances of the daily mean objective shown for the A105 Green Lanes.
• There were concerns raised regarding road humps and other traffic diverters, the effect of which is the stop/start movement of traffic which may lead to more pollutants on roads. Ned Johnson stated that monitoring had taken place but not specific monitoring regarding road humps.
• Councillor Smith said he understood planters were to be introduced along some roads and some barking bays widened, he thought that a review may be useful of all traffic measures.  He also spoke of buses which he said were a major contributor of air pollution. He said he understood the London Mayor was keen to replace buses for hydrogen buses although they are expensive.
• It was suggested that with regard to pollution perhaps we needed to look at whether our council vehicles and buildings were as good as they could be, and whether we were able to influence our contractors.  It was confirmed that when any of our fleet vehicles are replaced, we ensure that the ‘cleanest’ vehicles are acquired, thus we are leading by example.  It may be possible for a ‘Euro standard’ to be included in contracts, as a means of influencing our contractors.
• Research may provide further information on the benefits of reducing pollution and comparisons with the importance of exercise. Also whether driver behaviour can be changed by education e.g more careful driving over road humps.  Ned Johnson said research shows that exercise is always most beneficial. He also referred to the Green Transport Plan which encourages cycling and walking and the Gold Silver and Bronze awards for schools to encourage culture change and hopefully for children to influence family members.
• Councillor Rye made the point that traffic management measures to reduce speed should also look to avoid an increase in particulates -PM10.  He also stated that the Council’s vehicle fleet should be replaced with ‘cleanest’ vehicles at the earliest possible date and our contractors should be obliged to use ‘green’ vehicles.

AGREED

Members noted the Air Quality Action Plan. They requested that if any changes result in the removal of ‘Actions’ from the Plan, following its review, then these should be reported back to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Ned Johnson was thanked for his report.