(Epping Forest District Council) To receive reports on the impact of local air quality on Epping Forest from Dr Jeremy Dagley (Head of Conservation, Open Spaces Department - Epping Forest, Corporation of London) and EFDC Air Quality Officer, Claire Jaggard.
Minutes:
Members received two presentations on the impact of local air quality – the first an overview of the District from the Council’s Air Quality Officer, Ms C Jaggard; while Dr J Dagley, City of London Corporation (CofL) (Epping Forest Head of Conservation), focussed on Epping Forest.
C Jaggard explained how the Council had taken up the challenge to reduce air pollution, which attributed to 40,000 deaths in the UK. The Council’s environmental health duties encompassed the protection of human health by reviewing and assessing air quality in the District for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and particulate matter. The Council was required to declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and produce an actual plan to reduce air pollution levels by 2020. There were various monitoring locations throughout the District. The latest results indicated that no new management areas were required. However, Bell Common, Epping, an AQMA site set up in 2010, was being monitored as NO2 levels were still elevated. The Council’s reports were available on the EssexAir website http://www.essexair.org.uk/ Next steps for the Council included further work until any additional measures were identified to be included in the final plan. These measures might include: the introduction of enforcement for idling vehicles, especially by schools; to encourage bus operators to switch to cleaner vehicles / retrofitting existing vehicles to improve engine emissions; the installation of more charge points to increase uptake of electric cars; and, an environmental review of working methods with a focus on transportation. There would also be partnership involvement and consultation on the new Action Plan.
Dr J Dagley then addressed the meeting and outlined the impact of local air quality on Epping Forest, which was around 20 kilometres in length and comprised some 2,500 hectares of ancient wood-pasture. Two thirds of the Forest was a special area of conservation (SAC). A special feature of the Forest was the Atlantic Beech Forest that contained more ancient trees than any other UK site and flourished on acid soils. The Forest also supported various species that relied on old wood and was in the top five of important sites in the UK. Beech fungi also thrived and the Forest was notably one of the top sites in Europe for fungi. He explained the Forest contained wet and dry heaths, which reacted differently to pollution. There were 55,000 ancient trees and currently just over 24,500 had been mapped and listed in the Epping Forest Veteran Tree Register. Individual trees did matter, it was not just a wood, as the Beeches were the oldest living things in Britain and went back to Anglo Saxon times. Ecosystems were vulnerable to threat from habitat change, climate change, invasive species, over-exploitation and pollution (nitrogen / phosphorus). Regarding air pollution, nitrogen oxides were a key pollutant, were a shared health problem for humans and plants, and in an Imperial College study (2003-06) measurements recorded that up to 20 per cent of the Forest exceeded critical level. As a result, the Epping Forest beech were in poor health, all heaths were in an unfavourable condition, and grasses dominated at the expense of heather. He emphasised that any developments must not adversely affect the Forest, particularly as the SAC was of international importance, and needed to be protected by working with the Council to ensure Epping Forest retained its global status.
A question and answer session followed.
Cllr E Webster said that Essex County Council (ECC) had tried to work with the CofL to provide a filter system to help traffic flow but this did not work out and a speed reduction was introduced. Could the Council join with ECC and CofL to relook at the Bell Common traffic lights to help pollution levels there? Cllr G Mohindra commented that this had been brought up at the last Clinical Commissioning Group Board meeting and asked members and the two guest speakers to let the District’s ECC councillors know what was needed. He also asked if evidence was required that a lower speed level had helped, and was public safety more or less? C Jaggard replied that the Council would develop an action plan to bring down air pollution that would include participation with other authorities involved with air quality, as well as anyone who drove a car and worked in the District. J Dagley said that ECC Highways would need to reply on how effective traffic management had been with a 40 mph speed limit, but CofL had also been concerned by the safety aspect. However, traffic modelling was being carried out presently. Parish Councillor S Jackman asked if Bell Common was chosen to be monitored as it was near the Forest, but why not monitor Loughton High Road and Epping High Street as there was more danger to humans? C Jaggard replied that the Council would review the locations, but Bell Common was chosen because the houses were very close to the road. There were also two sites located in Epping High Street and four in Loughton High Road where there was high traffic flow close to residential properties. J Dagley commented that there was greater pollution from the M25, which was picked up 190 metres into the Forest that bordered the motorway. Councillor R Gadsby commented that she thought roundabouts seemed a better alternative to traffic lights and would this work at Bell Common? C Jaggard replied this was one of the options but all factors needed to be taken into consideration to make sure that congestion was not shifted to another location.
Councillor R Gadsby remarked that in Waltham Abbey bus operators stopped outside residential properties but left vehicle engines idling when they could be turned off. Councillor C C Pond commented that there was an ‘idle’ cut-off on new buses and actually it was prohibited to leave bus engines idling in parking spaces, which the Council could perhaps take up with North Essex Parking Partnership to enforce and ticket idling vehicles. He continued that at the Cabinet meeting on 7 September 2017 it was reported that two thirds of Council officers used single occupancy cars to come to work and that control of this was with the Council as an employer to encourage car sharing or use of public transport. He also said that Loughton Town Council had put forward a motion on air quality to reduce particulates and NO2 to the Essex Association of Local Councils’ Annual General Meeting on 19 September 2017. C Jaggard replied that a Buckhurst Hill resident had complained about idling vehicles outside a primary school, which officers visited and monitored, and asked parents to turn off their engines. Active enforcement was one of the issues to look at and to run a large campaign. Also the Green Working Group was looking into how staff travel. Councillor V Metcalfe praised the Council’s proactive response in monitoring parents who left their vehicle engines’ idling. C Jaggard added that as ECC was the education authority there should be a concerted effort with parents to walk children to school rather than go in cars, and this was also an option for the Council but involved parents’ support of this action.
Councillor C Whitbread commented on the key points Councillor Jackman made earlier on the two properties being monitored at Bell Common, but when the M11 went down Epping High Street suffered from gridlock and caused increased air pollution. He also referred to the 40mph speed limit and asked, why this was not introduced into the lower part of the Forest which was never looked at and could a speed limit be introduced here.
Councillor D Wixley asked about the pollution threat to animals, particularly cattle that grazed in the Forest. J Dagley said that mammals were similar to humans but amphibians would be affected by SO2. He also asked if there could be a concerted effort by ECC to get parents to walk their children to school rather that getting into cars. C Jaggard said this was one of the actions on the Council’s action plan but involved parents having the will to carry this out but would increase their activity levels.
Councillor J Lea stated that traffic was not the only pollutant, as big developments caused pollution to neighbouring properties during construction and cited examples of sanding irresponsibly and loose cement powder. She said there should be regulations to control this but when she made a complaint recently to Development Control she was told this was not a planning issue, but suggested more needed to be done. C Jaggard said the Council’s focus was on road traffic today but acknowledged there were other pollution causes / factors and she would be putting in place new procedures with development control and the Local Plan and make improvements.
Councillor G Mohindra remarked that ECC was rolling out smart traffic lights, which might include monitoring and to speak to ECC Highways, and that our Leader was the ECC Deputy Portfolio Holder for Health so you might wish to raise at the Health Wellbeing Board at Essex, and that some councils had started to charge parents who drove their vehicles close to schools.
Councillor D Stallan commented that there was no monitoring equipment in Ongar High Street but this suffered from increased traffic when the motorway went down. There was monitoring equipment at Tempest Mead in North Weald that was not on the High Road, to which C Jaggard replied this site was chosen to determine NO2 pollution levels from the Epping Ongar Railway. He also commented that roadworks caused pollution from idling traffic as vehicle engines were running, but there was no one working or the restrictions were left in place, and suggested liaising with ECC Highways as roadworks did have an impact, particularly in residential areas.