Campaign Update on why I seek a retraction from Cllr Athwal & other stuff

Got  emails earlier today from Redbridge Council. Aether has not yet responded to Prof Peckham's report which was critical of their air report. This is a surprise to as Aether has responded to Prof Peckham's work elsewhere involving planning applications.

Prof Peckham's report is HERE 

The absence of a Aether rebuttal is interesting as Cllr Athwal implies one exists per the statement below taken from a press article HERE

They also stated that comments made by Cllr Jas Athwal in a cabinet meeting on May 19 about the issue were “inconsistent with objective evidence”.

In the meeting, Cllr Athwal stated that modelling showed levels of polluting gas nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter “will be well below the annual mean level”.

However, having analysed the developer’s models, the report concludes that “the levels are not only not ‘well below the annual mean level’ but in one case exceed it”.

It adds: “Whilst Jas Athwal is not currently on the planning committee, it is discouraging to see him make statements about current and modeled air quality at the site that are demonstrably false and may predispose others.”

Regarding the development as a whole, the authors found the development “will worsen air pollution”, noting that Redbridge’s air quality is already “so poor on average that the entire borough has been designated an Air Quality Management Area”.

[edited to add Jas Athwal’s comment]

An independent review of the controversial Goodmayes Tesco development claims Redbridge Council’s leader Jas Athwal made “demonstrably false” claims.

Campaigners opposed to the “toxic Tesco towers” commissioned the Centre for Health Services Studies at the University of Kent to review how the controversial development could affect air quality.

The report found the developer’s own prediction for one harmful gas “far exceeds the level at which strong correlations with mortality occur according to contemporary research”.

They also stated that comments made by Cllr Jas Athwal in a cabinet meeting on May 19 about the issue were “inconsistent with objective evidence”.

In the meeting, Cllr Athwal stated that modelling showed levels of polluting gas nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter “will be well below the annual mean level”.

However, having analysed the developer’s models, the report concludes that “the levels are not only not ‘well below the annual mean level’ but in one case exceed it”.

It adds: “Whilst Jas Athwal is not currently on the planning committee, it is discouraging to see him make statements about current and modeled air quality at the site that are demonstrably false and may predispose others.”

Regarding the development as a whole, the authors found the development “will worsen air pollution”, noting that Redbridge’s air quality is already “so poor on average that the entire borough has been designated an Air Quality Management Area”.

Cllr Jas Athwal said he stands by his statement, which “directly reflected council officers’ expert views”.

He said: “My comments were judged to be accurate by air pollution professionals, both those working within our council and independent adjudicators of air pollution levels. (my emphasis) 

Unless Cllr Athwal can produce some evidence as soon as possible it appears his claims of support by "independent adjudicators of air pollution levels" do not exist and I invite him to retract his comment. This is important because Jas is Leader of Redbridge Council with influence over Cllrs who will have taken his comments seriously who will be making a decision at planning committee in due course.

It is good to know that Redbridge has uploaded Prof Peckham's work onto Redbridge site. My questions on cumulative report remain unanswered. At today, application not going to September meeting, the town hall email is less forthcoming than earlier emails and leaves open the prospect of this changing.

Two emails follow below, I have deleted the officers name.

Dear Mr. Walker,

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

1 Aether

To confirm, the LPA does not have written comments from Aether.

 

2 Prof Peckham

I can confirm that Prof Peckham's work been uploaded to the council website.

 

3) Preparing briefing for campaign lawyer

The Tesco planning application live application and  is still under consideration.  All relevant planning matters are being considered as part of the planning process for this application,  as per the Council’s Local Plan policies, and London Plan policies, and will form part of the consideration and recommendation to Members at Planning Committee.

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

 

Regeneration, Property and Planning

Regeneration and Culture Directorate

London Borough of Redbridge

11th Floor (Front), Lynton House 255-259 High Road, Ilford IG1 1NY

Web: www.redbridge.gov.uk

Twitter: @RedbridgeLive

Facebook: www.facebook.com/redbridgelive

Save time, go online: www.redbridge.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

From: andy.walker@talk21.com [mailto:andy.walker@talk21.com]

Cc: Cllr Jas Athwal
Subject: 1) Has Aether written? 2) Prof Peckham 3) Preparing briefing for campaign lawyer

 

Dear Anna

 

1 Aether

 

Has Aether written a reply to Prof Peckham's work on air quality and if so can I be sent a copy please?

 

2 Prof Peckham

 

And has Prof Peckham's work been uploaded to the council website?

 

3) Preparing briefing for campaign lawyer

 

Jas said at the June cabinet, and confirmed last night his cumulative report described so at the June cabinet;

 

"I have asked that all the the cumulative impact of several developments needs to be assessed and that impact, including the air quality, goes forward and is reported to the planning committee when the applications goes forward."

 

Can you advise:

 

Which developments?

Which types of pollution are to be monitored?

What other types of cumulative impact apart from pollution are to be monitored? For example, could schools and the NHS cope with so many developments going up in such a short period?

 

I request answers to the above so as seek the advice of the campaign lawyer as to whether Redbridge is breaching its duty of care regarding reasonable scrutiny of applications. 

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

Dear Mr. Walker,

 

At the momement, the application is not scheduled for the September Planning Committee meeting.

 

Please note that  confirmation of whether a particular application will go to a particular Planning Committee will only be made public the day on which the planning agenda for the particular planning committee is published, that is, a week before the committee meeting date.

 

Kind regards