Agenda item

Resolved: that the report be noted.

5.1    Christopher Howard (Senior Environmental Protection Officer) introduced the report – the following key points were noted:

·         There was a legal requirement to provide a status report to the Greater London Authority (GLA on the implementation of the air quality action plan.

·         The GLA had approved the report (which covered activities in 2018) and was happy with it overall. In particular, the integration of different groups and various strands of work had been welcomed.

·         The main focus of the report was on transport – and a number of actions related to the management of vehicle emissions.

·         The main purpose of the air quality action plan was to draw together the different pieces of work that were taking place across the Council.

·         The air quality working group met regularly to support this work – as did the strategic air quality board.

·         The number of monitoring locations in the borough had been increased to more than 50 – with a number being located near to schools. The ‘super site’ in Honor Oak Park was also monitoring air quality in the borough. It was one of only three locations in the country that had been chosen for this investment.

·         There were future proposal to create a monitoring site in Deptford to measure levels of PM2.5 and NO2.

·         A number of the actions in plan required funding to carry out – and the Council had been successful in accessing external funding for new projects.

·         A successful bid had been made to Kings College London to take forward some work on the accuracy of air quality sensors.

·         Future work would be carried out to review the air quality action plan to ensure it stayed in line with the approach from the GLA.

·         The intention would be to prioritise the actions in the plan to make it more accessible. There would also be an increased focus the actions that residents could take to improve air quality.

·         One of the most significant future developments would be the expansion of the ultra-low emission zone. Consideration would be given to the mitigating factors required for the areas around the south circular that were not due to be included in the zone.

·         One of the key messages from Transport for London was that people would need to use their cars far less – and that there would need to be a greater shift to other forms of transport.

5.2    Christopher Howard and Geeta Subramaniam-Mooney (Director for Public Protection and Safety) responded to questions from the Committee – the following key points were noted:

·         The issue with personal air quality sensors was that they were only indicative of air quality. However – one of the benefits of personal air quality sensors was that they could be used for comparisons before and after interventions.

·         The air quality monitor project would help people to better understand the appropriate uses and reliability of residents monitoring air quality.

·         There was a variety of different air quality monitoring equipment being used by residents – some people were also building and using their own.

·         Lewisham had 50 sites with diffusion tubes – that were adjusted against national and reference sites.

·         There were close connections between the work to improve air quality and the climate emergency action plan.

·         Research into the 20mph speed limit found that in areas that were likely to be congested – the speed limit helped to keep traffic moving and would be likely to reduce pollution. In areas of low congestion – the speed limit might increase vehicle emissions because engines did not operate as efficiently at low speeds. Nonetheless – it was believed that lower speed limits made the roads feel safer for pedestrians and cyclists (consequentially reducing emissions overall).

5.3    In Committee discussions – the following key points were also noted:

·         The quality of the Council’s equipment for monitoring air quality was very high. The issues that had been identified were with residents monitoring air quality.

·         The Council should publicise more information about air quality and air quality monitoring.

·         It was noted that the 20mph speed limit had mixed effects on air quality – but it was recognised that the limit was safer for pedestrians (who were more likely to survive being hit a vehicle travelling at 20mph than at higher speeds).

·         Members welcomed the planned future rollout of healthy neighbourhoods programme.

5.4    Councillor Sophie McGeevor addressed the Committee – the following key points were noted:

·         Lewisham’s air quality was monitored by Kings College London – which was one of the world leaders in air quality monitoring.

·         Lewisham’s 50 air quality monitoring stations (combined with three permanent sites and the new super site) allowed modelling to be carried out to a high degree of accuracy across the entire borough.

·         Monitoring did not have to be carried out on every street in the borough in order for the Council to develop a picture of air quality across the borough.

·         The quality of Lewisham’s monitoring had been recognised by the GLA in response to the air quality management plan. The super site had also been placed in the borough in recognition of the quality of local monitoring.

·         There were issues with people doing their own monitoring – on one hand it was helpful because it drew attention to the poor quality of London’s air. However – there were instances in which home monitoring was different to the Council’s monitoring. This could be for a number of reasons (including the possibility that the monitoring was being carried out over varying time periods, for different durations or of different pollutants). It was important that people had confidence in the quality and accuracy of Lewisham’s monitoring.

·         The Council’s monitoring indicated that air quality across the borough was poor – as was the case with all inner London boroughs.

5.5       Resolved: that the report be noted.