Introduction:
Mid Suffolk recognises that street-lighting is a significant aspect of our climate change and biodiversity action plans, and that lighting can be adapted and controlled to reduce energy use and impacts on human health and wildlife – particularly bats and nocturnal insect populations which are declining[1], [2]. Council also notes that many communities and campaign groups are calling on local councils to protect dark skies.
Motion:
The Council recognises that light pollution is increasing and that it causes harm to wildlife and insects and can increase health risks in people. The Council therefore will seek to reduce the intensity and extent of outdoor lighting within its own public realm and housing assets and other lighting schemes where it has influence, to the extent practical. The Council will also include guidance in its Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document to protect and enhance dark skies for the benefit of wildlife and human health and wellbeing.
Proposer: Cllr Pratt
Seconder: Cllr Fleming
Objectives:
To achieve these objectives the Council will include lighting control within the Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which it has committed to preparing, and work with the planning team and partner organisations such as Suffolk County Council and its suppliers to reduce light pollution to the extent practical. The Council recognises the sometimes conflicting roles that artificial lighting plays both positively in making people feel safer and signage, but also negatively in terms of harm to biodiversity, health and wellbeing, and visual resources. In line with current standards and evidence the Council will ensure that new or replacement artificial lighting whether in the form of street lighting, commercial and residential lighting or advertising signage is installed to meet the lowest possible level of intensity and visual intrusion.
Notes:
[1] BBC News: Light pollution from streetlamps linked to insect loss https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58333233?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANGA
[1] CPRE Dark Skies: https://www.cpre.org.uk/what-we-care-about/nature-and-landscapes/dark-skies/
[1] BBC News: Light pollution from streetlamps linked to insect loss https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58333233?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=KARANGA
Minutes:
Councillor Pratt introduced his Motion and informed Council that starry skies inspired awe and wonder, they were a magical sight that brought stargazers and astronomers into the dark locations in our countryside to seek their connection with the cosmos.
Light pollution prevented us from observing the night sky. It is the result of artificial lighting at night, particularly the lighting that shines or scatters upwards into the sky producing what is known as ‘skyglow’ over our towns. Skyglow reduces our ability to view celestial objects that would otherwise easily be seen in the contrasting backdrop of darkness.
In some places, artificial lighting essentially turns night into day. Streetlighting is no longer only a feature of urban landscapes. With new development and changes in the way we use the countryside, our villages and open country are becoming more brightly lit.
Climate change, alongside other environmental and economic concerns, have led to the replacement of conventional lighting such as high-pressure sodium lamps with LEDs that are more energy efficient. In addition to producing an intensely bright light, nearly all LEDs emit higher levels of light within the blue region of light spectrum than their traditional counterparts. Increased light intensity and the shift in spectral composition towards blue light has impacted wildlife, particularly bats and nocturnal insect populations, and can cause harm to human health and wellbeing.
Councillor Pratt added that lighting can improve the feeling of safety for drivers and pedestrians, but there were also negative human impacts to consider. Studies suggest that direct exposure to light at night can have serious health implications. It can particularly affect our body’s hormones that are responsible for maintaining sleep patterns. There is also evidence which presents a direct link to the development of known cancers, including thyroid cancer. Light entering private households can also be seen as public nuisance.
Councillor Pratt said we understand that biodiversity is in peril. Some estimates predict that 1 million species, or 40% of all insects, will become extinct over the next few decades. Peer reviewed studies demonstrate how artificial lighting at night has contributed significantly to this insect apocalypse. This is because illumination not only causes disorientation in insects but affects their natural biological rhythms that control foraging, migration and reproduction that are normally synchronised with daily, monthly or yearly light cycles. This has catastrophic implications for insect populations. Studies have also shown that artificial lighting at night is extremely disturbing to bats, because bats avoid light, change their foraging paths and delay their emergence from their roosts and miss the time of peak insect abundances. Taken together, we must acknowledge the impact that lighting is having on human health and the environment.
Councillor Pratt went on to say that at the July 2019 Council meeting, Mid Suffolk District Council acknowledged the accelerating rate of species extinction by declaring a biodiversity emergency. We had pledged to bring forward proposals and take actions to protect and enhance wildlife in the District. To achieve this goal, we cannot ignore the need to mitigate insect declines in relation to artificial lighting.
Conveniently, LEDs can be engineered to emit lower levels of blue light using colour filters. In particular, we could investigate using true-amber or phosphor converted amber (PCA) LEDs. Brightness can be reduced remotely and progressively dimmed. Lamps can also be timer and sensor-controlled to come on for shorter periods or only when needed. Shields and baffles can be fitted to reduce skyglow and prevent light from entering households.
Other Councils are already taking action to reduce the impacts of lighting in wildlife sensitive areas. Worcestershire County Council installed bat-friendly lighting along an A-road nearby a Local Nature Reserve. The streetlights are designed using colour filters specially to emit light that does not affect the natural senses and rhythms of bats, yet which provides enough illumination for residents, helping make the roads and pavements safer, while being highly energy efficient. Their lighting does not affect visibility for drivers and pedestrians and is said to be fully compliant with the required standards. Similar lighting schemes have been tested in the Netherlands and proven successful in reducing light pollution impacts on bats and other wildlife.
Councillor Pratt then MOVED his Motion.
Councillor Fleming SECONDED the Motion and informed Council that the Motion was to draw attention to the largely unintentional effects of artificial lighting, particularly given that the Council has given such firm commitments to protect and enhance biodiversity. It is also to suggest some ways of putting in reasonable measures to control light pollution.
Recent news reports had highlighted the harmful effects of artificial light not just on bats but insects, birds, mammals, amphibians, plants and or course us. Some Councillors may have heard Lord Deben’s radio interview where he advocated reducing artificial light in villages with a greater reliance on torches. He had conceded that towns needed lighting for security and went on to say the pressures to urbanise the countryside were largely antagonistic to dealing with climate change.
Councillor Fleming went on to emphasise that this Motion was mostly about rural areas. It was not about moving streetlighting or circumventing existing safety measures. There were currently two schools being suggested. The first was the Biodiversity Planning Document SPD to increase protection for wildlife . A design code was also being prepared to reflect the new NPPF mandate to value beauty and tranquillity in the natural world.
The process of developing these documents will give ample opportunity to consult further with others such as Suffolk County Council, wildlife organisations and community safety groups to unravel some of the technical aspects so that the resulting documents have clear and practical application. Councillor Fleming said she was aware that Suffolk County Council were currently implementing a programme to replace lighting with LED’s but by using filters and shrouds or dimmable lighting could reduce the effects of blue white lighting range, in particular on living creatures. These types of measures, costs and other approaches could be considered and added into the SPD and design code process.
Councillor Fleming also said that she would like to see a much more critical assessment process for illuminated advertising which arguably could be attributed to further unnecessary light pollution.
Community safety would naturally be taken into account with any measures taken to reduce light pollution, although some studies had already indicated that in a rural setting a reduction in street lighting did not lead to an increase in crime. A balance is achievable between the benefits of dark skies and the human desire to be safe.
In summary, Councillor Fleming felt that greater weight should be placed on local sensitivities both human and otherwise and that it was timely to review the entire subject and to add reasonable protection against light pollution within the means available.
Councillor Guthrie said she supported Lord Deben in avoiding the urbanisation of our rural communities and supported what the Motion was trying to achieve.
Councillor Passmore supported the Motion but said it was essential that there was an agreed framework to decide what lighting should be targeted and a definition of what was rural. He felt that the logic behind this should be explained to the public and that there weren’t huge variations on how this was applied.
Councillor Mansel supported the Motion and agreed with Councillor Passmore about getting the public on board as there was a popular misconception that lighting reduced crime. Several studies both nationally and internationally have proved that crime is actually reduced when lighting was switched off. Councillor Mansel also stated that a lot of rural areas had industrial areas that were substantially lit up and felt that any reduction in lighting in these areas would be beneficial to biodiversity.
Councillor Brewster stated that the Council had a statutory duty under the Crime and Disorder Act Section 17 to consider safety implications in any decision it takes and was concerned about the safety of women, girls and some men in some areas if the decision to turn of street lighting was made.
Councillor Matthissen raised the issue of the lighting in private new developments and asked that Planning ensured that the right lighting was put in these types of developments. He also made reference to his ward of Onehouse and how in the past they had voted twice not to have streetlighting on an estate and emphasised that it was important that people were actually asked to see what lighting they wanted.
Councillor Welham supported the Motion and informed Council that research had shown that high standards of lighting produced deep shadows which in itself could encourage criminal activity and added that instead of adding lighting to planning applications biodiversity improvements should be added instead.
Councillor Geake informed Council that research carried out in 2015 proved that while lighting may make you feel safer, only actual crime hotspots were made worse where lighting was switched off or reduced. Ultimately, she said we won’t be safer if lighting was not reduced or switched off - we can live without lighting, but we can’t live without pollinators.
Councillor Scarff wanted to see a reduction in illuminated advertising signage and requested that if the Council wanted to be taken seriously it should lead the way with the Gateway 14 development.
Councillor Field felt it was not about switching lighting off but reducing the lighting intensity to shift the colour temperature down.
In his summary, Councillor Pratt thanked Councillors for their comments and agreed with Councillors that a framework needed to be developed to agree where the lights could be switched off. Councillor Pratt added that the Council should follow the evidence as it emerges as to whether streetlighting was needed.
By 29 votes for 1 vote against
It was RESOLVED: -
That the Council recognises that light pollution is increasing and that it causes harm to wildlife and insects and can increase health risks in people. The Council therefore will seek to reduce the intensity and extent of outdoor lighting within its own public realm and housing assets and other lighting schemes where it has influence, to the extent practical. The Council will also include guidance in its Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document to protect and enhance dark skies for the benefit of wildlife and human health and wellbeing.