Agenda item

The Leader welcomed the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Board, Councillor L. Mallett and Councillor S. Colella as a Member of the Board and as Ward Councillor for Hagley West.  He proposed that the Cabinet considered recommendation a) that Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) reverse the proposal to revoke the Hagley AQMA after consideration had been given to the other recommendations.

It was noted that recommendation d) that the Council increase the AQ monitoring points in Hagley from Stakenbridge Lane to the B4187 (Worcester Road junction) had already been discussed and actioned following the Overview and Scrutiny Board meeting.

Councillor Colella was invited to speak and in so doing explained the reason for the request that the revocation of the AQMA be reversed.  He raised concerns around the current monitoring process and the use of the small test tubes which were analysed on a monthly cycle with a mean average being taken over a year.  It was stated that there was equipment available which able to produce both a maximum and minimum reading, this was important as there were peak traffic times and the impact of residents would be higher particular for those travelling to school on foot or cycling.  Hagley had carried out numerous investigations and research and had heard from experts. It was clear that traffic in the area had increased due to the recent developments and therefore it was difficult to understand how the current position had been reached.  It was acknowledged that financial support would be needed to carry out such testing, but it was understood that in the not too distant future Central Government would be making available a number of grants for local authorities who needed to improve air quality in their areas.

Mark Cox responded to a number of points raised by Councillor Colella and explained that the testing that was used provided robust quality assurance and meet DEFRA guidelines.  The monitoring to which Cllr Colella had referred was used to record measures with a rapid turnover and had a set up cost of around £30k this did not include the cost of maintenance, electricity etc or for the cost of analysing the data collected and calibration.  This method was currently being used on the Worcester Road in Wychbold in order to ascertain whether an AQMA was required in that location.  This method had also been used in Hagley initially to assess the area.  The monitors needed to be in place for 6 months.  It was accepted that air quality was a wide concern generally and that DEFRA had guidelines and protocols to follow in respect of AQMAs inception and revocation.  The national objective, which took into account “peaks and troughs”, was not being exceeded in the case of the Hagley AQMA and therefore it was not appropriate or necessary for it to be retained.

Members noted the availability of such equipment and commented that they had not been aware of this.  Mark commented that this had in fact been used initially in Hagley when considering whether it was appropriate to establish an AQMA in the area.

Members had some sympathy with Councillor Colella’s concerns in respect of the use of the mean average measurements and how the levels could fluctuate dependent on the weather and the traffic movement in the area.  It was questioned whether by revoking the AQMA this would impact on the monitoring and the availability of funding for further investigations within that area and considered whether by revoking the AQMA the monitoring would be made easier as it did not have to be so strictly based on the guidelines set out by DEFRA.

Mark explained that the annual average over a 3 year period took into account fluctuations and was confident that it met the DEFRA requirements and that there was no longer levels that we needed under the AQMA regime.  He further advised Members that the grants referred to by Councillor Colella, were primarily used for larger authorities such as London and Birmingham who had particularly poor air quality and had been mandated to produce clean air.  There were a large number of clean air zones which demanded attention throughout the country and it was very likely that they would receive the bulk of this funding.

The Leader referred to recommendation b) that the Council invest in sensitive and appropriate monitoring equipment in all its AQMAs and whilst he sympathised and accepted the need in principle, he requested further detailed costings to be brought back to Cabinet in order to give further consideration as to whether it was appropriate to fit these in all areas or in particular ones.  It was noted that detailed monitoring had been carried out in all AQMAs in order to establish them initially and that the monitoring in Hagley had meet the requirements of DEFRA in order for it to be revoked.  It was also confirmed that by revoking the AQMA it did not mean that the monitoring would stop, this would continue and the areas where it would take place had been discussed with the relevant ward Members and was being put in place, as requested in recommendation d).

In respect of monitoring for Particulate Matter as detailed in recommendation c) Mark Cox explained to Members that these levels were not monitored across the County but it had not been indicated that there was a particular problem.  Any measures of nitrogen dioxide would impact on the particulate levels and whilst were some issues in Bromsgrove there were none in Hagley.

Councillor Mallett suggested that there was a need to focus on actions being taken rather than on the challenge of monitoring and that it was likely that the reduction which was influencing the revocation of the AQMA was most likely due to a number of reasons, which were undeterminable.  However, it was noted that there remained issues in respect of traffic problems in a number of areas, for example along the Worcester Road in Bromsgrove where it was clear that the traffic had got worse, with an increase in the number of vehicles and those vehicles taking longer to travel along the road.  It was therefore important, to establish the levels and for appropriate monitoring to take place, whilst understanding the need to take the financial implications of any additional monitoring into account, before making a decision.

Members went on to discuss a number of other areas in more detail, including:

·         The work of a Residents’ Air Quality Task Group which was established in Hagley.

·         The impact of diesel engines and the increase in levels of other CO² emissions.

·         The national objectives under the DEFRA guidelines.

·         Where the monitoring, using the more detailed equipment, was carried out initially.

·         The monitoring was not there to improve the  air quality but as a benchmark.

·         There was no categorical explanation as to why the levels had reduced in respect of the Hagley AQMA.

·         The revocation of the AQMA would not impact on the monitoring – if it were to be retained then any application for grant funding in the future would not be looked on favourably if the Council had an AQMA that did not meet the DEFRA guidelines.

·         Preventative work such as the synchronising of traffic lights.

·         Concerns that although the AQMA was revoked that residents would not accept that there had been improvements to the air quality.

·         The levels were not borderline but well below the recommended level.

·         The challenges facing WRS and the need for them to work closely with Worcestershire Highways in light of recent concerns raised in respect of issues which had been raised following developments where it has been proven that the information from WCC was not accurate.  This was referred to within recommendation e).

·         It was confirmed that monitoring would continue for a further 3 years and the locations had been reviewed following discussions at the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

·         Concerns around this Council and WCC encouraging residents to walk and cycle yet the monitors were not on the road sides but by residential properties.  It was confirmed that they were placed on the residential properties as part of the DEFRA guidelines. 

It was confirmed that should the AQMA be revoked monitoring would continue and this would be provided to DEFRA for background information only.  WRS would continue to work with WCC and assert pressure where possible to ensure that air quality was considered at every opportunity.

In respect of the recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Board, Cabinet

RESOLVED:

a)    that the Council increase the Air quality monitoring points in Hagley from Stakenbridge Lane to the B4187 (Worcester Road junction);

b)    that Worcestershire Regulatory Services continues to engage fully and positively with Worcestershire County Council Highways to resolve known local Highways issues that exist along AQMAs and adjoin carriageways that effect air quality and health; and

c)    that further costings be obtained and presented to a future Cabinet meeting in respect of the Overview and Scrutiny Board recommendations b) and c).

Following the review of the air quality monitoring in Hagley, which had been undertaken and in light of the levels having fallen below the national objectives that required the adoption of an air quality management area Cabinet

RECOMMEND TO COUNCILthat Kidderminster Road, Hagley AQMA be revoked.