introduction - Bishopgarth Wakefield · Web viewAir Quality Assessment for Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield Report No. 660469-01(00) 40 West Yorkshire Police Air Quality

West Yorkshire Police

Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, WakefieldAir Quality Assessment

Project No: 660469

NOVEMBER 2014 1

RSK GENERAL NOTESProject No.: 660469-01 (00)

Title: Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield – Air Quality Assessment

Client: West Yorkshire Police

Date: 25 May 2023

Office: Hemel Hempstead

Status: Draft for client comments

Author Dr Christina HigginsTechnical reviewer Dr Srinivas Srimath

Signature Signature

Date: 25 May 2023 Date: 25 May 2023

West Yorkshire PoliceAir Quality Assessment for Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, WakefieldReport No. 660469-01(00)

RSK Environment Ltd (RSK) has prepared this report for the sole use of the client, showing reasonable skill and care, for the intended purposes as stated in the agreement under which this work was completed. The report may not be relied upon by any other party without the express agreement of the client and RSK. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report.

Where any data supplied by the client or from other sources have been used, it has been assumed that the information is correct. No responsibility can be accepted by RSK for inaccuracies in the data supplied by any other party. The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that all relevant information has been supplied by those bodies from whom it was requested.

No part of this report may be copied or duplicated without the express permission of RSK and the party for whom it was prepared.

Where field investigations have been carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to achieve the stated objectives of the work.

This work has been undertaken in accordance with the quality management system of RSK Group plc.

Summary

RSK Environment Ltd (RSK) was commissioned to undertake an air quality assessment as part of the planning process for a residential development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield.

The proposed development site is located within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The estimated background air pollutant concentrations at the proposed development site are within relevant air quality standards but air quality is considered to be a concern for the future residents.

RSK consulted the Environmental Services at Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (WMDC) and agreed the scope and methodology of the air quality assessment.

No significant stationary combustion sources such as combined heat and power plants (CHP) or biomass boilers are proposed. However, it is recommended that low NOx boilers for domestic space and water heating be specified.

Construction phase impacts of the proposed development on local air quality may potentially arise due to fugitive dust emissions during the period of construction. The risk of dust impacts (without mitigation) was assessed according to a widely used method published by the Institute of Air Quality Management and found to be ‘high risk’ to ‘low risk’. Mitigation measures appropriate to the construction phase will be specified by a dust management plan (DMP) agreed with WMDC), therefore significant residual effects are not anticipated.

The Transport Assessment, undertaken by Curtins, identifies that the maximum increase in annual average daily traffic (AADT) as a result of the operation of the proposed development on Westfield Road (south of site access) is less than 6%. No significant change in vehicle speed, car parking spaces and the number of HGVs has been identified in the Transport Assessment. Furthermore, a traffic impact analysis using criteria set out by WMDC was undertaken which involved the estimation in the change of the local air quality. The anticipated annual average NO2

pollutant concentration at the proposed development location has been assessed using the road traffic data, Emissions Factor Toolkit (EFT) in conjunction with the measured NO2 concentration at a nearby roadside site. With the proposed development in place, the annual average NO2

concentration at the proposed development location was estimated to be 29μg/m3 which is below the air quality objective. Furthermore, a travel plan has been proposed which will help to reduce exposure of the residents to air pollutants. Therefore, the impact from traffic generated from the proposed development is not considered to be significant and a detailed air quality assessment involving dispersion modelling is not considered to be required.

An estimate of damage costs was also made based on emissions to air caused by the proposed development using the methodology identified by WMDC. On the basis of this assessment, the proposed development is unlikely to be adversely affected by, or have a significant impact on local air quality, and therefore air quality is considered to be a low priority concern for the proposed development.


AbbreviationsAADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

AQAP Air Quality Action Plan

AQMA Air Quality Management Area

CHP Combined Heat and Power

CO Carbon Monoxide

DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DMP Dust Management Plan

EC European Commission

EDHD East Hampshire District Council

EP-UK Environmental Protection UK

EU European Union

GLA Greater London Authority

HDV Heavy Duty Vehicle

IAQM Institute of Air Quality Management

LAQM Local Air Quality Management

NAQS National Air Quality Strategy

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

NOx Oxides of nitrogen

O3 Ozone

PM2.5 Particulate matter of size fraction approximating to <2.5mm diameter

PM10 Particulate matter of size fraction approximating to <10mm diameter

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

WMDC Wakefield Metropolitan District Council


CONTENTS1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................1

1.1 Background............................................................................................................................. 11.2 Proposed Development..........................................................................................................1

2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT..........................................................42.1 Key Legislation........................................................................................................................ 42.2 Planning Policy....................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1 National Planning Policy Framework...........................................................................52.2.2 Environmental Protection UK Guidance – Development Control: Planning for Air

Quality......................................................................................................................... 52.2.3 Local Planning Policy..................................................................................................6

3 ASSESSMENT SCOPE.................................................................................73.1 Overall Approach.................................................................................................................... 73.2 Construction Phase Assessment............................................................................................73.3 Operation Phase Assessment................................................................................................8

4 BASELINE AIR QUALITY CHARACTERISATION...............................................94.1 Emissions Sources and Key Air Pollutants.............................................................................94.2 Local Authority Review and Assessment of Air Quality...........................................................9

4.2.1 Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (WMDC)........................................................94.3 Baseline Monitoring Data........................................................................................................94.4 LAQM Background Data.......................................................................................................11

5 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................125.1 Construction Dust Assessment.............................................................................................125.2 Operational Impact Assessment...........................................................................................12

6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS.......................................................................136.1 Construction Phase...............................................................................................................13

6.1.1 Exhaust Emissions from Plant and Vehicles.............................................................136.1.2 Fugitive Dust Emissions............................................................................................136.1.3 Potential Dust Emission Magnitude...........................................................................146.1.4 Sensitivity of the Area...............................................................................................156.1.5 Risk of Impacts.........................................................................................................18

6.2 Operational Phase................................................................................................................196.2.1 Pollution Emissions Cost...........................................................................................22

7 MITIGATION MEASURES...........................................................................247.1 Construction Phase Mitigation..............................................................................................247.2 Operational Phase Mitigation................................................................................................247.3 Residual Impacts: Significance.............................................................................................25

8 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................269 REFERENCES..........................................................................................27

APPENDICESAPPENDIX A CONSTRUCTION DUST ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY..................29APPENDIX B EMISSION SOURCE APPORTIONMENT.........................................35


APPENDIX C SITE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES......................................37

TABLESTable 2.1: Air Quality Objectives Relevant to the Proposed Development............................................4Table 4.1: 2013 Annual Average Measured Pollutant Concentrations: Wakefield Metropolitan District Council................................................................................................................................................ 10Table 4.2 2014 to 2016 Estimated Background Annual Average NOx, NO2 and PM10 Concentrations at Proposed Development Site................................................................................................................11Table 6.1: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Demolition Activities (Before mitigation)..........14Table 6.2: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Earthworks Activities (Before mitigation).........14Table 6.3: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Construction Activities (Before mitigation).......15Table 6.4: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Trackout Activities (Before mitigation).............15Table 6.5: Summary of Dust Emission Magnitude of the Site (Before mitigation)...............................15Table 6.6: Sensitivity of the area.........................................................................................................18Table 6.7: Summary of the Dust Risk from Construction Activities......................................................19Table 6.8: Traffic Data and Predicted Percentage Increase between Future Development Operation Scenarios............................................................................................................................................ 20Table 6.9: Estimation of the Change to Local Air Quality....................................................................20Table 6.10: Significance of the Potential Operation Phase Impacts With Reference to the Criteria Identified by Environmental Protection UK..........................................................................................21

FIGURESFigure 1.1: Proposed Development Site Location.................................................................................2Figure 1.2: Proposed Development Layout...........................................................................................3Figure 6.1: Construction and Trackout Activities Buffer Map...............................................................17Figure 6.2: Traffic Assessment Road Links.........................................................................................19


1 INTRODUCTION1.1 Background

RSK Environment Ltd (RSK) has been commissioned to undertake an assessment of the potential air quality impacts associated with a proposed residential development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield, to accompany the planning application. The proposed development site is currently West Yorkshire Police’s Training and Development Centre.

The proposed site has an area of approximately 3.6 hectares on land located to the north of Westfield Road; the approximate grid reference for the centre of the site is 433054, 421702. Figure 1.1 shows the location including the red line boundary of the site. The site is located in Bishopgarth, Wakefield, south of the M62 motorway. It is bounded by residential properties to the west and east off Blenheim Road and College Grove Road, sports fields to the north and Westfield Road to the south. The site falls within Wakefield Metropolitan District Council’s (WMDC) jurisdiction.

1.2 Proposed DevelopmentThe proposals comprise the development of approximately 150 dwellings on land which is currently occupied by a police training school in Bishopgarth, Wakefield. The indicative masterplan is presented in Figure 1.2.

This report presents the findings of an assessment of existing/baseline air quality conditions, potential air quality impacts during the construction phase of the proposed development and predicted impacts on local air quality resulting from traffic emissions generated by the development once it is fully operational.


1

Figure 1.1: Proposed Development Site Location


2

Figure 1.2: Proposed Development Layout


3


4

2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT2.1 Key Legislation

UK air quality policy is published under the umbrella of the Environment Act 1995, Part IV and specifically Section 80, the National Air Quality Strategy (NAQS). The latest Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – Working Together for Clean Air, published in July 2007 sets air quality standards and objectives for ten key air pollutants to be achieved between 2003 and 2020.

The EU Air Quality Framework Directive (1996) established a framework under which the EU could set limit or target values for specified pollutants. The directive identified several pollutants for which limit or target values have been, or will be set in subsequent ‘daughter directives’. The framework and daughter directives were consolidated by Directive 2008/50/EC on Ambient Air Quality And Cleaner Air for Europe, which retains the existing air quality standards and introduces new objectives for fine particulates (PM2.5).

The air quality standards in the United Kingdom are derived from European Commission (EC) directives and are adopted into English law via the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and Air Quality (England) Amendment Regulations 2002. The Air Quality Limit Values Regulations 2003 and subsequent amendments implement the EU Air Quality Framework Directive into English Law. Directive 2008/50/EC was translated into UK law in 2010 via the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010. The relevant1 objectives for England and Wales are summarised below in Table 2.1.

These objectives are to be used in the review and assessment of air quality by local authorities under Section 82 of the Environment Act (1995). If exceedances are measured or predicted through the review and assessment process, the local authority must declare an air quality management area (AQMA) under Section 83 of the act, and produce an air quality action plan to outline how air quality is to be improved to meet the objectives under Section 84 of the act.

Table 2.1: Air Quality Objectives Relevant to the Proposed Development

Substance Averaging period

Exceedances allowed per year

Ground level concentration limit (g/m3)

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)1 calendar year - 401 hour 18 200

Fine particles (PM10)1 calendar year - 4024 hours 35 50

1 Relevance, in this case, is defined by the scope of the assessment, which was agreed to be limited to NO2 and PM10.


5

2.2 Planning PolicyThe land use planning system is a key means of improving air quality, particularly in the long term, through the control of the strategic location and design of new development. Any air quality concern that relates to land use and its development can, depending on the details of the proposed development, be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications.

2.2.1 National Planning Policy FrameworkThe National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012, superseding previous Planning Policy Statements. The National Planning Policy Framework was intended to simplify the planning system and includes a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Section 11 of the NPPF deals with Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment, and states that the intention is that the planning system should prevent ‘development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability ’ and goes on to state that ‘new development [should be] appropriate for its location’ and ‘the effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, the natural environment or general amenity, and the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution, should be taken into account.’

With specific regard to air quality, the NPPF states that:

‘Planning policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites in local areas. Planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan’.

2.2.2 Environmental Protection UK Guidance – Development Control: Planning for Air QualityEnvironmental Protection UK’s guidance note ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (Update 2010)’ responds to the need for closer integration between air quality and development control. It provides a framework for air quality considerations within local development control processes, promoting a consistent approach to the treatment of air quality issues within development control decisions.

The guidance includes a method for assessing the significance of impacts of development proposals in terms of air quality and how to make recommendations relevant to the development control process. The guidance note is widely accepted as an appropriate reference method for this purpose.

2.2.3 Local Planning Policy


6

Wakefield’s Core Strategy sets out development strategy and policies and was adopted in April 2009. The proposed development falls just inside the city centre catchment area and therefore the Central Wakefield Area Action Plan guidance is applicable. The Central Wakefield Area Action Plan develops the overall strategy set out in the Core Strategy Local Development Framework into more detailed policies relating to central Wakefield and was adopted in June 2009.

The Core Strategy identifies the following objectives:

‘Air quality is a concern in parts of the district, particularly in the M1 corridor and in city/town centres, mostly caused by traffic. A number of Air Quality Management Areas have been designated where pollution levels may exceed guidelines set by the government. City/town centres and urban areas are the places where the LDF spatial development strategy concentrates most new development, so that without action air quality in these areas might deteriorate. The Council’s Environmental Health Service is preparing an Action Plan to address pollution levels in Air Quality Management Areas. Nevertheless, it is important that new development throughout the district does not worsen air quality. Promoting the use of public transport, walking and cycling as alternatives to the car, will help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.’

‘Planning obligations may be used to secure improvements to the public realm and within Air Quality Management Areas.’

Furthermore, the Central Wakefield Area Action Plan states with respect to AQMAs:

‘In these and other sensitive locations, development proposals will need to include appropriate mitigation measures to offset the effects of noise, air and light pollution on surrounding amenities and direct sensitive uses away from worst affected areas. Air quality, noise and light impact assessments will be required for significant development within central Wakefield.’


7

3 ASSESSMENT SCOPE3.1 Overall Approach

An air quality assessment has been undertaken, and the approach taken for assessing the potential air quality impacts of the proposed development may be summarised as follows:

Correspondence with the local authority; Baseline characterisation of local air quality; Qualitative impact assessment of the construction phase of the development; An assessment of air quality impacts during the operational phase of the

proposed development using the guidance published by WMDC, and that on development control by Environmental Protection UK; and

Recommendation of mitigation measures, where appropriate, to ensure any adverse effects on air quality are minimised.

3.2 Construction Phase AssessmentThe Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) has published a guidance document on the assessment of construction phase impacts.

In order to assess the potential impacts, construction activities are divided into four types:

demolition;earthworks;construction; andtrackout.

The first step in the assessment is to determine whether there is a need for a detailed assessment. An assessment is said to be required where there are human and/or ecological receptors within certain distances of the site. This is further identified in Appendix A.

Construction of the proposed development may lead to the release of fugitive dust. There are human receptors within 350m of the boundary of the site and within 50m of the trackout route; therefore, construction dust may have the potential to cause annoyance in the local area. A qualitative construction impact assessment has been conducted to identify the potential risk of dust impacts and the level of mitigation required to reduce these impacts.

This assessment report considers the potential impact from demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout activities.


8

3.3 Operation Phase AssessmentEP-UK’s guidance note ‘Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (Update 2010)’ suggests that a need for detailed assessment of road traffic emissions is likely to be triggered by proposals that will give rise to a significant change in either traffic volumes, typically a change in annual average daily traffic (AADT) or peak traffic flows of ±5% or ±10%, depending on local circumstances (a change of ±5% will be appropriate for traffic flows within an AQMA), or in vehicle speed (typically of ±10 kph), or both, usually on a road with more than 10,000 AADT (5,000 if considered ‘narrow and congested’).

Also, a traffic impact analysis using criteria set out by WMDC was undertaken. This analysis involved the estimation in the change of the local air quality. It is not considered likely that the proposed development will generate traffic which would be considered significant on this basis. Therefore, a detailed assessment of increased road traffic emissions using dispersion modelling was not carried out; however, an estimate of likely NO2 concentrations was made using the road traffic data, Emissions Factors Toolkit, and the measured NO2 concentrations at a roadside site near the proposed development.


9

4 BASELINE AIR QUALITY CHARACTERISATIONExisting or baseline air quality refers to the concentrations of relevant substances that are already present in ambient air. These substances are emitted by various sources, including road traffic, industrial, domestic, agricultural and natural sources. Baseline air quality data employed in this study have been obtained from continuous and diffusion tube monitoring stations maintained by WMDC and from the LAQM Support website operated by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

4.1 Emissions Sources and Key Air PollutantsTransport-related emissions are one of the main sources of air pollution in urban areas. The principal pollutants relevant to this assessment are considered to be NO2 and PM10, generally regarded as the two most significant air pollutants released by vehicular combustion processes, or subsequently generated by vehicle emissions in the atmosphere through chemical reactions. These pollutants are generally considered to have the greatest potential to result in human health impacts, and are the substances of most concern in terms of existing levels in the area, as discussed below.

4.2 Local Authority Review and Assessment of Air QualityAs directed by the Environment Act 1995, local authorities are required to review and assess air quality with respect to the standards and objectives for the pollutants specified in the Government’s National Air Quality Strategy (NAQS, 2007). Local authorities are required to undertake an Updating and Screening Assessment (USA) of their area every three years. If the USA identifies areas where air quality objectives are likely to be exceeded, then a detailed assessment of those areas is required.

Where objectives are not predicted to be met, local authorities must declare an AQMA and prepare an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP), which outlines measures aimed at improving air quality within the designated AQMA.

4.2.1 Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (WMDC)WMDC has a number of Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) in the borough. It is understood that the proposed Bishopgarth development site is within the Wakefield City AQMA, which was declared in 2006 for exceedances of the annual mean nitrogen dioxide (NO2) air quality objective for human health. An air quality assessment is being prepared to support the planning application for the proposed development.


10

4.3 Baseline Monitoring DataAccording to WMDC’s Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) report, Air Quality Progress Report 2014, there are six automatic monitoring sites in the district, three combined NO2 and particulate matter (PM10), two NO2 and one ozone monitoring stations. The monitoring stations within 3 km of the proposed development site are presented in Table 4.2.

NO2 was additionally monitored using 52 diffusion tubes by WMDC during 2013 at a mixture of kerbside, roadside and urban background sites. There are 17 diffusion tubes within 3 km from the proposed development. The diffusion tube located at Gissing House, Wentworth Terrace provides a good reference of the NO2 background level for the proposed development. This diffusion tube is located 0.4km from the proposed development and is 2m from the nearest kerb.

Annual average NO2 and PM10 concentrations as measured in 2013 at all automatic and NO2 at all nearby diffusion tube sites are presented in Table 4.2.

Measured NO2 concentrations were above the relevant air quality objective at five of the monitoring sites within 3 km from the proposed site; all of these sites are within an AQMA. PM10 concentrations were below the annual average at the automatic monitoring site.

Table 4.2: 2013 Annual Average Measured Pollutant Concentrations: Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Site Name Site TypeApprox. distance from proposed

development (km)

2013Annual

Average NO2

(µg/m3)

Annual Average PM10

(µg/m3)

Newton Bar Automatic Roadside 0.3 31 -

Park StreetAutomatic

Urban Background

1.5 31 21

Diffusion tubes1 Arlington Street Background 0.3 34 -

61 Leeds Rd Roadside 0.4 46 -Gissing House Roadside 0.4 32 -99 Northgate Background 0.4 63 -139 Leeds Rd Background 0.5 32 -11 Pinderfields Rd Background 0.6 32 -

St. Christopher’s Walk

Background 0.7 33 -


11

Site Name Site TypeApprox. distance from proposed

development (km)

2013Annual

Average NO2

(µg/m3)

Annual Average PM10

(µg/m3)King Street Kerbside 0.8 53 -Bull Ring Background 0.9 34 -182 Stanley Rd Background 0.9 39 -11 Turton Street Roadside 1.2 34 -5 Thornhill Street Background 1.4 35 -

44 Denby Dale Rd Background 1.7 35 -

185 Dewsbury Rd Background 2.1 38 -

128 Doncaster Rd Roadside 2.4 40 -

190 Agbrigg Rd Background 3.0 36 -259A Doncaster Rd Background 3.0 47 -

Air Quality Objective 40Note: NO2 concentrations incorporate a local bias adjustment factor rather than regional factor because it represents local conditions more closely. Exceedances of the NO2 objective are shown in bold.

4.4 LAQM Background DataIn addition to the local monitoring data, estimated background air quality data available from the LAQM website operated by Defra, may also be used to establish likely background air quality conditions at the proposed development site.

The LAQM website provides estimated annual average background concentrations of NOx, NO2 and PM10 on a 1km2 grid basis. Table 4.3 identifies estimated annual average background NOx, NO2 and PM10 concentrations at the proposed development site for years from 2014 to 2016. No exceedance of NO2 and PM10 air quality objectives is predicted.

Table 4.3: 2014 to 2016 Estimated Background Annual Average NOx, NO2 and PM10 Concentrations at Proposed Development Site

Assessment Year

Estimated Annual Average Pollutant Concentrations Derived from the Defra LAQM Support Website

Annual Average NOX

(µg/m3)Annual Average NO2

(µg/m3)Annual Average

PM10 (µg/m3)

2013 30.6 21.1 16.6

2014 29.7 20.7 16.7

2015 28.7 20.1 16.0

2016 29.2 19.5 15.9


12

Air Quality Objective

30^ 40 40

Note: Presented concentrations for 1 km2 grid centred on 432500, 421500; approximate centre of development site is 433054, 421702; ^air quality objective designated for the protection of vegetation and ecosystems only.


13

5 METHODOLOGY5.1 Construction Dust Assessment

The Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) has published a guidance document on the assessment of construction phase impacts.

In order to assess the potential impacts, construction activities are divided into four types:

demolition;earthworks;construction; andtrackout.

For each activity, the risk of dust arising to cause annoyance and/or health or ecological impacts is determined using three risk categories: low, medium and high risk. The risk category is different for each of the four activities and depends on the sensitivity of the area. Three separate dust impacts are considered:

annoyance to dust soiling;the risk of health effects due to an increase in exposure to PM10; andharm to ecological receptors.

The assessment is used to define the appropriate level of mitigation required and the measures to reduce the identified potential impact and determine the significance of the predicted level of impact to air quality. Appendix A sets out the construction dust assessment methodology. This contains information on potential dust emission magnitude for the four construction activities; this takes account of the scale and nature of the works, which determines the potential dust emission magnitude, and the sensitivity of the area. The risks of impact are defined based on this information and site specific mitigation measures that should be adopted to alleviate this risk.

The Magic Map application available online was used to identify statutory ecological receptors near the proposed development site area.

5.2 Operational Impact AssessmentThe updated 2010 Environmental Protection UK (EP-UK) guidance provides an approach for assessing the significance of air quality impacts associated with a development. This approach has been used to qualitatively asses the operational impacts associated with the development.


14

6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS6.1 Construction Phase

Atmospheric emissions from construction activities will depend on a combination of the potential for emissions (the type of activity and prevailing conditions) and the effectiveness of control measures. In general terms, there are two sources of emissions that will need to be controlled to minimise the potential for adverse environmental effects:

exhaust emissions from site plant, equipment and vehicles; andfugitive dust emissions from site activities.

6.1.1 Exhaust Emissions from Plant and VehiclesThe operation of vehicles and equipment powered by internal combustion engines results in the emission of exhaust gases containing the pollutants NOx, PM10, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO). The quantities emitted depend on factors such as engine type, service history, pattern of usage and fuel composition. The operation of site equipment, vehicles and machinery will result in emissions to atmosphere of exhaust gases, but such emissions are unlikely to be significant, particularly in comparison to levels of similar emission components from vehicle movements on the local road network surrounding the development site.

Construction traffic will comprise haulage/construction vehicles and vehicles used for workers’ trips to and from the site.

6.1.2 Fugitive Dust EmissionsFugitive dust emissions arising from construction activities are likely to be variable in nature and will depend upon the type and extent of the activity, soil type and moisture, road surface conditions and weather conditions. Periods of dry weather combined with higher than average wind speeds have the potential to generate more dust.

Construction activities that are considered to be the most significant potential sources of fugitive dust emissions are:

demolition of existing buildings and the size reduction and handling of materials;earth moving, due to the handling, storage and disposal of soil and subsoil

materials;construction aggregate usage, due to the transport, unloading, storage and use of

dry and dusty materials (such as cement and sand);movement of heavy site vehicles on dry or untreated haul routes; andmovement of vehicles over surfaces where muddy materials have been transferred

off-site (for example, on to public highways).

Fugitive dust arising from construction and demolition activities is mainly of a particle size greater than the PM10 fraction (that which can potentially impact upon human


15

health), however it is noted that demolition and construction activities may contribute to local PM10 concentrations. Appropriate dust control measures can be highly effective for controlling emissions from potentially dust generating activities identified above, and adverse effects can be greatly reduced or eliminated.

See Appendix A for further explanation of the tendency of dust to remain airborne.

6.1.3 Potential Dust Emission MagnitudeWith reference to the IAQM guidance criteria outlined in Appendix A, the dust emissions magnitude for demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout activities are summarised in Tables 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4. Risk categories for the four construction activities are summarised in Table 6.5.

Worst-case assumptions have been made, where information is not currently available, for a conservative assessment.

Table 6.4: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Demolition Activities (Before mitigation)

Demolition Criteria Dust Emissions Class Evaluation of the Effects

Total volume of buildings to be demolished Medium 20,000-50,000m3

On-site crushing and screening Large On-site crushing and screening

Height of demolition activities above ground Medium 10-20m above ground

Dust potential of demolition materials Large Potentially dusty construction

materials (concrete and brick)Overall Rating Large Conservative rating

Table 6.5: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Earthworks Activities (Before mitigation)

Earthworks Criteria Dust Emissions Class Evaluation of the Effects

Total site area Large >10,000m2

Soil type Large Sandy/gravelly clay – potentially dusty

Earth moving vehicles at any one time Large Unknown

Height of bunds Small N/ATotal material moved Large UnknownWork times Large UnknownOverall Rating Large Conservative rating


16

Table 6.6: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Construction Activities (Before mitigation)

Construction Criteria Dust Emissions Class Evaluation of the Effects

Total building volume Small <25,000m3

On-site concrete batching or sandblasting proposed Large Unknown

Dust potential of construction materials Medium Potentially dusty construction

materials Overall Rating Large Conservative rating

Table 6.7: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Trackout Activities (Before mitigation)

Trackout Criteria Dust Emissions Class Evaluation of the Effects

Number of HDV>3.5t per day Large Conservative rating

Surface type of the site Large Conservative rating

Length of unpaved road Large Conservative ratingOverall Rating Large Conservative rating

Table 6.8: Summary of Dust Emission Magnitude of the Site (Before mitigation)

Construction Activities Dust Emissions ClassDemolition LargeEarthworks LargeConstruction LargeTrackout Large

6.1.4 Sensitivity of the Area

As per the IAQM Guidance, the sensitivity of the area takes into account a number of factors, including:

The specific sensitivities of receptors in the area;

The proximity and number of those receptors;

In the case of PM10, the local background concentration; and

Site specific factors, such as whether there are natural shelters, such as trees, to reduce the risk of wind-blown dust.

Consideration is given to human and ecological receptors from the impact of the construction site boundary and the trackout route proposed. Where necessary, for example, the trackout route is not yet known, a conservative view on the likely route has been taken.

Figure 6.3 shows a map indicating the construction and trackout buffers for identifying the sensitivity of the area. There are no ecological sites within 350m of the proposed


17

site boundary; there is one Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Alverthorpe and Wrenthorpe Meadows, located around 1km from the proposed development site boundary.

Table 6.9 presents the determined sensitivity of the area with the factors itemised which have helped to define this.


18

Figure 6.3: Construction and Trackout Activities Buffer Map


Construction ActivitiesTrackout Activities

19

Construction activities are relevant up to 350m from the proposed development site boundary whereas trackout activities are only considered relevant up to 50m from the edge of the road, as per the guidance. Only 20m and 50m buffers have been included for trackout for this reason.

Table 6.9: Sensitivity of the area

Potential Impact

Sensitivity of the surrounding areaDemolition Earthworks Construction Trackout

Dust soiling

Receptor sensitivity High High High High

Number of receptors 10-100 10-100 10-100 >100

Distance from the source <20m <20m <20m <20m

Sensitivity of the area High High High High

Human health

Receptor sensitivity High High High High

Annual mean PM10

concentration<24g/m3 <24g/m3 <24g/m3 <24g/m3

Number of receptors 10-100 10-100 10-100 >100

Distance from the source <20m <20m <20m <20m

Sensitivity of the area Low Low Low Medium

Ecological

Receptor sensitivity Medium Medium Medium Medium

Distance from the source

SSSI approx 1km away

SSSI approx 1 km away



Sensitivity of the area Low Low Low Low

6.1.5 Risk of ImpactsThe dust emission magnitude is combines with the sensitivity of the area to determine the risk of impacts of construction activities before mitigation; these are evaluated based on risk categories of each activity in Appendix A.

The risk of dust impacts from construction activities is identified in . Site specific mitigation measures to reduce construction phase impacts are defined based on this assessment in Section 7.


20

Table 6.10: Summary of the Dust Risk from Construction Activities

Potential ImpactDust Risk Impact

Demolition Earthworks Construction TrackoutDust soiling High risk High risk High risk High risk

Human health Medium risk Low risk Low risk Medium riskEcological Medium risk Low risk Low risk Low risk

6.2 Operational Phase Some emissions to air due to domestic combustion (such as space heating and cooking) are likely, however modern heating systems are efficient and low polluting and these emissions are not considered likely to have a significant impact on local air quality.

Figure 6.4 displays the road links used in the traffic assessment. presents the predicted traffic for the base year and future years with and without the development in place, on roads predicted to experience the most impact from the development. The maximum increase in AADT as a result of the operation of the proposed development on Westfield Road (south of the site) is less than 6%.

Figure 6.4: Traffic Assessment Road Links


21

Table 6.11: Traffic Data and Predicted Percentage Increase between Future Development Operation Scenarios

Road Link 2014 Base Year Traffic Flows

2019 'Without Development' Traffic Flows

2019 'With Development' Traffic Flows

% increase

1.A 20742 22600 22838 +1.051.B 3474 3778 3998 +5.821.C 19714 21480 21463 -0.081.D 855 933 933 0.002.A 6132 6684 6529 -2.322.B 173 188 188 0.002.C 3972 4321 4289 -0.742.D 3649 3982 4016 +0.85

The background pollutant concentrations, based on the baseline review undertaken in Section 4, are predicted to be below the relevant air quality objectives with NO2 having an estimated annual average background concentration of 20.7µg/m3, taken from the Defra LAQM estimated background maps. Therefore, air quality is considered to be at an acceptable level for residential use.

Calculations to estimate the likely change in pollutant concentration at the proposed development site were performed and are presented in Table 6.12. Using the diffusion tube measured concentration at 61 Leeds Road roadsite site (350m from the proposed development site) of 46µg/m3, the estimated NO2 concentration at the proposed development site is 27.9µg/m3 or less using Defra’s ‘Drop-off of NO2 concentration with distance’ tool. The estimated concentration of 27.9µg/m3 is based on a drop-off distance of 50m (maximum distance input to the tool). However, the actual drop-off distance is 350m. Therefore, it is considered to be a conservation estimate. The UK-Air NO2 estimated background concentration (shown in Table 4.3) is 21.1µg/m3 and therefore, local source NO2 contribution is estimated to be 6.8µg/m3.

Table 6.12: Estimation of the Change to Local Air Quality

Road Link 2014 Base Year NOx (µg/m3)

2019 'Without Development' NOx (µg/m3)

2019 'With Development' NOx (µg/m3)

Anticipated 2019 NO2

(µg/m3)1.A 6.8 7.28 7.31 28.41.B 6.8 7.34 7.77 28.91.C 6.8 7.20 7.24 28.31.D 6.8 7.37 7.37 28.52.A 6.8 7.41 7.24 28.32.B 6.8 7.21 7.21 28.32.C 6.8 7.34 7.29 28.42.D 6.8 7.36 7.42 28.5


22

The maximum anticipated 2019 total NO2 pollutant concentration at the proposed development site is 28.9µg/m3. This is below the air quality objective of 40µg/m3.

A breakdown of the baseline emission sources is provided in Appendix B for the pollutants NOx, PM2.5, PM10 and CO2. For both the 2014 base year and 2019 ‘with development’ scenario, the highest proportion of each pollutant was attributed to light duty vehicles (LDV).

Table 6.13 reproduces the guidance published by Environmental Protection UK (EP-UK) used to determine when a quantitative air quality assessment is likely to be required, and evaluates the proposed development in relation to each criterion.

Table 6.13: Significance of the Potential Operation Phase Impacts With Reference to the Criteria Identified by Environmental Protection UK

Environmental Protection UK Criteria for Identifying Whether an Air Quality

Assessment is NecessaryEvaluation of the Potential Operational

Impacts of Proposed Re-development Site

Is a Detailed Air Quality

Assessment Required as per

the EP UK Criteria?

Proposals that will give rise to a significant change in either traffic volumes, typically a

change in annual average daily traffic (AADT) or peak traffic flows of greater than ±5% or ±10%, depending on local circumstances (a change of ±5% will be appropriate for traffic flows within

an AQMA), or in vehicle speed (typically of more than ±10 kph), or both, usually on a road with more than 10,000 AADT (5,000 if ‘narrow and

congested’);

The highest increase of AADT is 5.8% from Westfield Road (south of the site access, low

AADT) after the development being proposed. There will be no change in speed of the roads under assessment (Traffic flows

related to the proposed development are presented in ).

No

Proposals that would significantly alter the traffic composition on local roads, for instance, increase the number of HDVs by say 200 movements or more per day, due to the

development of a bus station or an HGV park (professional judgement will be required, taking account of the total vehicle flow as well as the

change);

No significant increase in HDVs according to the transport assessment. No

Proposals that include significant new car parking, which may be taken to be more than 100 spaces outside an AQMA or 50 spaces

inside an AQMA. Account should also be taken of car park turnover, i.e. the difference between

short-term and long-term parking, which will affect the traffic flows into and out of the car

park. This should also include proposals for new coach or lorry parks. These criteria are

designed to trigger the requirement for the assessment of traffic on the local roads. It may

also be appropriate to assess the emissions from within the car park itself;

No significant increase in car parking. No

Developments which may significantly affect nitrogen deposition to sensitive habitats;

No significant nitrogen deposition to sensitive habitats is anticipated. No

Introduction of new exposure close to existing sources of air pollutants, including road traffic,

industrial operations, agricultural operations etc;

The proposed development is within an AQMA. However, the background air quality at the proposed development site is below

the air quality objective and therefore existing air quality is not considered to be a concern.

No


23

Environmental Protection UK Criteria for Identifying Whether an Air Quality

Assessment is NecessaryEvaluation of the Potential Operational

Impacts of Proposed Re-development Site

Is a Detailed Air Quality

Assessment Required as per

the EP UK Criteria?

Consideration should be given to the impacts of centralised boilers or CHP plant burning other

fuels (e.g. gas or oil) within or close to an AQMA. Proposals that include biomass boilers

or biomass-fuelled CHP plant (there is no established criterion for the size of plant that

might require assessment. Reference should be made to Environmental Protection UK’s

guidance on biomass);

No significant stationary combustion sources are proposed. No

Proposals that could give rise to potentially significant impacts during construction for nearby sensitive locations, e.g. residential

areas, areas with parked cars and commercial operations that may be sensitive to dust;

Due to small-scale nature of the proposed development, significant residual effects from

construction/demolition operations are anticipated when recommended mitigation measures are implemented through a Dust

Management Plan (DMP).

No

Large, long-term construction sites that would generate large HGV flows (>200 movements

per day) over a period of a year or more.

Limited earthworks and construction, therefore unlikely to generate in significant

increase HDV traffic.No

Proposals that will generate or increase traffic congestion, where ‘congestion’ manifests itself as an increase in periods with stop start driving;

No increase in congestion is anticipated. No

On the basis of the anticipated 2019 NO2 pollutant concentration and the EP-UK criteria, it is considered that the operational phase of the proposed development is unlikely to result in a significant impact on current air quality; therefore further assessment should not be required.

6.2.1 Pollution Emissions CostThe pollution emissions cost calculation is used to identify the environmental damage costs associated with the proposed development and as a guide to determine the amount (value) of mitigation that is to be spent on measures to mitigate the environmental impacts. The calculation utilises the current Emissions Factor Toolkit (EFT v6.0.1) to determine the transport related emissions from the proposed development and follows guidance set out in the West Yorkshire Air Quality and Emissions Technical Planning Guidance document.

EFT Input:

Year 2019

Urban (not London)

238 Traffic Flow (maximum change in traffic flows with proposed development)

5% HGV

Speed 48kph

24 hours

Link length 10km

EFT output:


24

273.28kg/annum (NOx) and 31.98kg/annum (PM10)

= 0.273 tonnes/annum (NOx) and 0.032 tonnes/annum (PM10)

X £955/tonnes (NOx) + £48,517/tonnes (PM10)

= £260.72 + £1,552.54

= £1,813.26 x 5 years

Total = £9,066


25

7 MITIGATION MEASURES7.1 Construction Phase Mitigation

The dust emitting activities outlined in section 6.1 can be effectively controlled by appropriate dust control measures and any adverse affects can be greatly reduced or eliminated.

Prior to commencement of demolition/construction activities, it is anticipated that an agreement on the scope of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the construction phase will be reached with the local authority to ensure that the potential for adverse environmental effects on local receptors is minimised. The AQMP should include inter alia, measures for controlling dust and general pollution from site construction operations, and include details of any monitoring scheme, if appropriate. Controls should be applied throughout the construction period to ensure that emissions are mitigated.

The dust risk categories identified have been used to define appropriate, site-specific mitigation methods. More detailed, site-specific mitigation measures are contained in Appendix C. There are no ‘negligible’ risks assigned to any activities, however a selection of mitigation measures are usually recommended as good practice.

The traffic effects of the proposed development during the construction phase will be limited to a relatively short period and will be along traffic routes employed by haulage/construction vehicles and workers. Any effects on air quality will be temporary i.e. during the construction and demolition period only and can be suitably controlled by the employment of mitigation measures appropriate to the development project

7.2 Operational Phase MitigationNo significant stationary combustion sources such as combined heat and power plants (CHP) or biomass boilers are proposed. However, it is recommended that low-NO x

boilers for domestic space and water heating be specified.

Various mitigation measures relating to transport are suggested:

Reducing the need to travel;

Reducing polluting motorised vehicle use, such as car sharing;

Supporting improved public transport;

Promoting walking and cycling;

Promoting sustainable travel plans; and

Encouragement of home working.


26

Furthermore, the transport assessment provided by Curtins includes features that can assist in deterring the pick-up/drop-off associated with Queen Elizabeth Grammar School. Further details are provided in the Interim Travel Plan, prepared by Curtins, which will be submitted with the planning application.

7.3 Residual Impacts: SignificanceWith the proposed construction activity mitigation measures as described in Section 7.1 in place, the significance of the residual impacts is considered to be ‘not significant’.

During the occupational phase, mitigation to minimise further exposure of the future residents to air pollution is proposed, therefore significant residual effects are not anticipated.


27

8 CONCLUSIONSAn air quality assessment for the proposed development of Bishopgarth Police Training Centre, Wakefield has been undertaken with reference to existing air quality in the area and relevant air quality legislation, policy and guidance.

The proposed development is within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The estimated background air pollutant concentrations at the proposed development site are within relevant air quality standards but air quality is a concern for the future residents.

Construction phase impacts of the proposed development on local air quality are likely to be from dust emissions during the construction activities. An AQMP incorporating best practice measures outlined in the best practice guidance developed by the GLA and London Councils will be adopted as appropriate during the construction works at the site.

The Transport Assessment, undertaken by Curtins, identifies that the maximum increase in annual average daily traffic (AADT) as a result of the operation of the proposed development on Westfield Road (south of site access) is less than 6%. No significant change in vehicle speed, car parking spaces and the number of HGVs has been identified in the Transport Assessment. Furthermore, a traffic impact analysis using criteria set out by WMDC was undertaken which involved the estimation in the change of the local air quality. The anticipated annual average NO2 pollutant concentration at the proposed development location has been assessed using the road traffic data, Emissions Factor Toolkit (EFT) in conjunction with the measured NO2

concentration at a nearby roadside site. With the proposed development in place, the annual average NO2 concentration at the proposed development location was estimated to be 29μg/m3 which is below the air quality objective. The proposed Interim Travel Plan will be helpful to limit the exposure to air pollutants. Therefore, the impact from traffic generated from the proposed development is not considered to be significant and a detailed air quality involving dispersion modelling is not considered to be required.

An estimate of damage costs was also made based on emissions to air caused by the proposed development using the methodology identified by WMDC.

On the basis of this assessment, the proposed development is unlikely to be adversely affected by, or have a significant impact on local air quality, and therefore air quality is considered to be a low priority concern for the proposed development.


28

9 REFERENCESCity of Wakefield District Council, 2014. Air Quality Progress Report 2014.

Communities and Local Government, 2012. National Planning Policy Framework, London: Crown.

Curtins, 2014. Bishopgarth, Wakefield Interim Travel Plan Draft.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2003. Part IV of the Environment Act 1995: Local Air Quality Management: Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(03), London: Crown.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2007. The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Volume 1), London: The Stationary Office.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2007. The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Volume 2), London: The Stationary Office.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2009. Part IV of the Environment Act 1995: Local Air Quality Management: Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(09), London: Crown.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. LAQM Support [online] Available at: http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. MAGIC Map [online] Available at: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. Nitrogen Dioxide fall off with distance [online] Available at: http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/tools-monitoring-data/no2-falloff.html [Accessed 25May 2023].

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. UK-AIR Air Information Resource. [online] Available at: http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Environmental Protection UK, 2010. Development Control: Planning For Air Quality (2010 Update), Brighton: Environmental Protection UK.

Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 2004. Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control, [online[ Available at:


29

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/planningpolicystatement23.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 2005. Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and Mitigating the Environmental Effects of Minerals Extraction in England, London: Crown.

Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 2010. Environmental Protection: The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010, [online] Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/1001/pdfs/uksi_20101001_en.pdf. [Accessed 25 May2023].

Institute of Air Quality Management, 2014. Guidance of the Assessment of dust from demolition and construction [pdf] Available at: http://iaqm.co.uk/text/guidance/construction-dust-2014.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2023].

London Councils and the Greater London Authority, 2006. The Control of Dust And Emissions From Construction And Demolition – Best Practice Guidance, London: Greater London Authority.

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council, 2009. Local Development Framework Central Wakefield Area Action Plan [pdf] Available at: http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/Documents/planning/planning-policy/local-plan/central-wakefield-area-action-plan/central-wakefield-area-action-plan.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council, 2009. Local Development Framework Central Wakefield Core Strategy [pdf] Available at: http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/Documents/planning/planning-policy/local-plan/core-strategy/core-strategy.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2023].

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council. West Yorkshire Air Quality and Emissions Technical Planning Guidance [pdf] Available at: http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/Documents/bins-environment/environmental-health/pollution/air-quality-and-planning-technical-guidance-plan.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2023].


30

APPENDIX A:CONSTRUCTION DUST ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGYThis appendix contains the construction dust assessment methodology used in the assessment. To assess the potential impacts, construction activities are divided into demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout. The descriptors included in this section are based upon the IAQM guidance. The assessment follows the steps recommended in the guidance.

Step 1 and Step 2 methods from the IAQM guidance are described in this Appendix to assign dust risk categories for each of the construction activities.

The tendency of dust to remain airborne is determined by the particle size and weather conditions. Eventually, particles will drop from suspension as a deposit. The previous Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance document (LAQM.TG(03))2 identifies that PM10

concentrations fall-off rapidly with distance from source. Figure A1 shows the fall-off in PM10

concentration from source for a typical wind speed of 6m/s. At 100m from source, the PM10

concentration is predicted to be less than 20% of that at the point of generation.

Figure A1: Typical Fall-off in PM10 Concentration with Distance from Source

2 LAQM TG (03). The Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance Note published by the Department for Food and Rural Affairs in 2003. This guidance note is revised in 2009 and is available as LAQM TG(09).


31

Step 1: Screen the requirement for assessmentThe first step is to screen out the requirement for a construction dust assessment, this is usually a somewhat conservative level of screening. An assessment is usually required where there is:

a ‘human receptor’ within:o 350m of the boundary of the site; oro 50m of the route used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to

500m from the site entrance(s).an ‘ecological receptor’:

o 50m of the boundary of the site; or o 50m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up

to 500m from the site entrance(s).

Step 2A: Defining the Potential Dust Emission MagnitudeDemolitionThe dust emission magnitude category for demolition is varied for each site in terms of timing, building type, duration and scale. Examples of the potential dust emission classes are provided in the guidance as follows:

Large: Total building volume >50,000m3, potentially dusty construction material, on-site crushing and screening, demolition activities >20m above ground level;

Medium: Total building volume 20,000m3 – 50,000m3, potentially dusty construction material, demolition activities 10m – 20m above ground level; and,

Small: Total building volume <20,000m3, construction material with low potential for dust release, demolition activities <10m above ground, demolition during wetter months.

EarthworksThe dust emission magnitude category for earthworks is varied for each site in terms of timing, geology, topography and duration. Examples of the potential dust emission classes are provided in the guidance as follows:

Large: Total site area >10,000m2, potentially dusty soil type (e.g. clay), >10 heavy earth moving vehicles active at any one time, formation of bunds >8m in height, total material moved >100,000 tonnes;

Medium: Total site area 2,500 – 10,000m2, moderately dusty soil type (e.g. silt), 5 – 10 heavy earth moving vehicles active at any one time, formation of bunds 4 – 8m in height, total material moved 20,000 – 100,000 tonnes; and,

Small: Total site area < 2,500m2, soil type with large grain size (e.g. sand), <5 heavy earth moving vehicles active at any one time, formation of bunds <4m in height, total material moved <10,000 tonnes, earthworks during wetter months.

ConstructionThe dust emission magnitude category for construction is varied for each site in terms of timing, building type, duration, and scale. Examples of the potential dust emissions classes are provided in the guidance as follows:

Large: Total building volume >100,000m3, piling, on site concrete batching;Medium: Total building volume 25,000 – 100,000m3, potentially dusty construction

material (e.g. concrete), piling, on site concrete batching; and,Small: Total building volume <25,000m3, construction material with low potential for

dust release (e.g. metal cladding or timber).

Trackout


32

Factors which determine the dust emission magnitude class of trackout activities are vehicle size, vehicle speed, vehicle number, geology and duration. Examples of the potential dust emissions classes are provided in the guidance as follows:

Large: >100 HDV (3.5t) trips in any one day, potentially dusty surface material (e.g. high clay content), unpaved road length >100m;

Medium: 25 – 100 HDV (>3.5t) trips in any one day, moderately dusty surface material (e.g. high clay content), unpaved road length 50 – 100m; and,

Small: <25 HDV (<3.5t) trips in any one day, surface material with low potential for dust release, unpaved road length <50m.

Step 2B: Defining the Sensitivity of the AreaThe sensitivity of the area is defined for dust soiling, human health and ecosystems. The sensitivity of the area takes into account the following factors:

The specific sensitivities of receptors in the area;

The proximity and number of those receptors;

In the case of PM10, the local background concentration; and,

Site-specific factors, such as whether here are natural shelters such as trees, to reduce the risk of wind-blown dust.

Table A1 has been used to define the sensitivity of different types of receptors to dust soiling, health effects and ecological effects.

Table A1: Sensitivity of the Area Surrounding the Site

Sensitivity of Area Dust Soiling Human Receptors Ecological Receptors

High

Users can reasonably expect an enjoyment of a high level of amenity.

The appearance, aesthetics or value of their property would be diminished by soiling.

The people or property would reasonably be expected to be present continuously, or at least regularly for extended periods, as part of the normal pattern of use of the land.

Examples include dwellings, museums and other culturally important collections, medium and long term car parks and car showrooms.

Locations where members of the public are exposed over a time period relevant to the air quality objective for PM10 (in the case of the 24-hour objectives, a relevant location would be one where individuals may be exposed for eight hours or more in a day)

Examples include residential properties, hospitals, schools and residential care homes should also be considered as having equal sensitivity to residential areas for the purposes of this assessment.

Locations with an international or national designation and the designated features may be affected by dust soiling.

Locations where there is a community of a particularly dust sensitive species such as vascular species included in the Red Data List For Great Britain.

Examples include a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) designated for acid heathlands or a local site designated for lichens adjacent to the demolition of a large site containing concrete (alkali) buildings.


33

Sensitivity of Area Dust Soiling Human Receptors Ecological Receptors

Medium

Users would expect to enjoy a reasonable level of amenity, but would not reasonably expect to enjoy the same level of amenity as in their home.

The appearance, aesthetics or value of their property could be diminished by soiling.

The people or property wouldn’t reasonably be expected to be present here continuously or regularly for extended periods as part of the normal pattern of use of the land.

Examples include parks and places of work.

Locations where the people exposed are workers and exposure is over a time period relevant to the air quality objective for PM10 (in the case of the 24-hour objectives, a relevant location would be one where individuals may be exposed for eight hours or more in a day).

Examples include office and shop workers, but will generally not include workers occupationally exposed to PM10, as protection is covered by Health and Safety at Work legislation.

Locations where there is a particularly important plant species, where its dust sensitivity is uncertain or unknown.

Locations with a national designation where the features may be affected by dust deposition.

Example is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) with dust sensitive features.

Low

The enjoyment of amenity would not reasonably be expected.

Property would not reasonably be expected to be diminished in appearance, aesthetics or value by soiling.

There is transient exposure, where the people or property would reasonably be expected to be present only for limited periods of time as part of the normal pattern of use of the land.

Examples include playing fields, farmland (unless commercially-sensitive horticultural), footpaths, short term car parks and roads.

Locations where human exposure is transient.

Indicative examples include public footpaths, playing fields, parks and shopping streets.

Locations with a local designation where the features may be affected by dust deposition.

Example is a local Nature Reserve with dust sensitive features.

Based on the sensitivities assigned of the different types of receptors surrounding the site and numbers of receptors within certain distances of the site, a sensitivity classification for the area can be defined for each. Tables A2 to A4 indicate the method used to determine the sensitivity of the area for dust soiling, human health and ecological impacts, respectively.

For trackout, as per the guidance, it is only considered necessary to consider trackout impacts up to 50m from the edge of the road.


34

Table A2: Sensitivity of the area to dust soiling effects on people and property

Receptor Sensitivity

Number of Receptors

Distances from the Source (m)

<20 <50 <100 <350

High >100 High High Medium Low10-100 High Medium Low Low

1-10 Medium Low Low LowMedium >1 Medium Low Low Low

Low >1 Low Low Low Low

Table A3: Sensitivity of the area to Human Health Impacts

Receptor Sensitivity

Annual Mean PM10

Conc.Number of Receptors

Distances from the Source (m)

<20 <50 <100 <200 <350

High >100 High High High Medium Low>32g/m3 10-100 High High Medium Low Low

1-10 High Medium Low Low Low28-32 g/m3

>100 High High Medium Low Low10-100 High Medium Low Low Low

1-10 High Medium Low Low Low24-28 g/m3

>100 High Medium Low Low Low10-100 High Medium Low Low Low

1-10 Medium Low Low Low Low<24 g/m3 >100 Medium Low Low Low Low

10-100 Low Low Low Low Low1-10 Low Low Low Low Low

Medium- >10 High Medium Low Low Low- 1-10 Medium Low Low Low Low

Low - >1 Low Low Low Low Low

Table A4: Sensitivity of the area to Ecological Impacts

Receptor SensitivityDistances from the Source (m)<20 <50

High High MediumMedium Medium Low

Low Low Low

Step 2C: Defining the Risk of ImpactsThe final step is to use both the dust emission magnitude classification with the sensitivity of the area, to determine a potential risk of impacts for each construction activity, before the application of mitigation. Tables A5 to A7 indicate the method used to assign the level of risk for each construction activity.


35

Table A5: Risk of Dust Impacts from Demolition

Sensitivity of AreaDust Emission Magnitude

Large Medium SmallHigh High Risk Medium Risk Medium Risk

Medium High Risk Medium Risk Low RiskLow Medium Risk Low Risk Negligible

Table A6: Risk of Dust Impacts from Earthworks/Construction



Medium Medium Risk Medium Risk Low RiskLow Low Risk Low Risk Negligible

Table A7: Risk of Dust Impacts from Trackout



Medium Medium Risk Low Risk NegligibleLow Low Risk Low Risk Negligible


36

APPENDIX B:EMISSION SOURCE APPORTIONMENTTable B1: Base year 2014 pollutant apportionment

Location Pollutant Petrol Cars %

Diesel Cars/Taxis

%LDV % HGV %

Bus & Coaches

%Motorcycles

%

1.A NOx 5.1 23.0 40.1 21.4 10.3 0.21.A PM2.5 15.9 19.9 45.7 12.6 5.6 0.41.A PM10 17.7 18.7 46.1 12.0 5.1 0.41.A CO2 21.8 15.6 45.6 11.8 4.8 0.41.B NOx 6.8 30.9 53.8 5.6 2.7 0.31.B PM2.5 18.6 23.3 53.5 2.9 1.3 0.51.B PM10 20.6 21.7 53.5 2.7 1.2 0.41.B CO2 25.2 18.0 52.6 2.7 1.1 0.41.C NOx 4.9 22.3 38.9 22.8 10.9 0.21.C PM2.5 15.6 19.5 44.9 13.6 6.0 0.41.C PM10 17.4 18.4 45.3 13.0 5.6 0.41.C CO2 21.5 15.3 44.9 12.8 5.2 0.41.D NOx 6.0 27.1 47.2 13.2 6.3 0.21.D PM2.5 17.4 21.8 50.0 7.2 3.2 0.51.D PM10 19.3 20.4 50.2 6.8 2.9 0.41.D CO2 23.7 16.9 49.5 6.7 2.7 0.42.A NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.32.A PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.52.A PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.42.A CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.52.B NOx 4.3 19.5 34.0 28.4 13.6 0.22.B PM2.5 14.4 18.0 41.4 17.9 7.9 0.42.B PM10 16.2 17.0 42.0 17.1 7.3 0.32.B CO2 19.9 14.3 41.7 16.9 6.9 0.42.C NOx 6.7 30.4 52.9 6.5 3.1 0.22.C PM2.5 18.5 23.1 53.1 3.4 1.5 0.52.C PM10 20.4 21.5 53.1 3.2 1.4 0.42.C CO2 25.0 17.9 52.3 3.1 1.3 0.42.D NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.32.D PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.52.D PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.42.D CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.5


37

Table B2: 2019 ‘with development’ pollutant apportionment

Location Pollutant Petrol Cars %

Diesel Cars/Taxis

%LDV % HGV %

Bus & Coaches

%Motorcycles

%

1.A NOx 5.2 23.6 41.1 20.2 9.7 0.21.A PM2.5 16.1 20.2 46.3 11.8 5.2 0.41.A PM10 18.0 18.9 46.7 11.2 4.8 0.41.A CO2 22.1 15.8 46.2 11.0 4.5 0.41.B NOx 6.9 31.1 54.2 5.1 2.5 0.31.B PM2.5 18.7 23.4 53.7 2.6 1.2 0.51.B PM10 20.6 21.8 53.6 2.5 1.1 0.41.B CO2 25.3 18.1 52.8 2.4 1.0 0.41.C NOx 5.0 22.9 39.8 21.7 10.4 0.21.C PM2.5 15.8 19.8 45.5 12.8 5.7 0.41.C PM10 17.7 18.6 45.9 12.2 5.2 0.41.C CO2 21.7 15.5 45.5 12.0 4.9 0.41.D NOx 6.0 27.3 47.5 12.8 6.1 0.21.D PM2.5 17.4 21.8 50.2 7.0 3.1 0.51.D PM10 19.4 20.4 50.4 6.6 2.8 0.41.D CO2 23.8 17.0 49.7 6.5 2.6 0.42.A NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.32.A PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.52.A PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.42.A CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.52.B NOx 4.4 20.1 35.0 27.3 13.1 0.22.B PM2.5 14.6 18.3 42.2 17.0 7.5 0.42.B PM10 16.4 17.3 42.7 16.2 7.0 0.32.B CO2 20.3 14.5 42.4 16.0 6.5 0.42.C NOx 6.8 30.7 53.4 6.1 2.9 0.22.C PM2.5 18.5 23.2 53.3 3.1 1.4 0.52.C PM10 20.5 21.6 53.3 2.9 1.3 0.42.C CO2 25.1 17.9 52.5 2.9 1.2 0.42.D NOx 7.2 32.9 57.2 1.6 0.8 0.32.D PM2.5 19.2 24.0 55.2 0.8 0.4 0.52.D PM10 21.2 22.3 55.0 0.8 0.3 0.42.D CO2 25.9 18.5 54.1 0.7 0.3 0.5


38

APPENDIX C: SITE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURESSite-specific mitigation measures are divided into general measures, applicable to all sites and measures specific to demolition, earthworks, construction and trackout. Depending on the level of risk assigned to each site, different mitigation is assigned. The method of assigning mitigation measures as detailed in the IAQM guidance has been used.

For those mitigation measures that are general, the highest risk has been applied. In this case, the ‘high risk’ site mitigation measures have been applied, as determined by the dust risk assessment in Section 6. There are two categories of mitigation measure – ‘highly recommended’ and ‘desirable’, which are indicated according to the dust risk level identified in Table 6.7. Desirable measures are presented in italics.

Communications Develop and implement a stakeholder communications plan that includes community

engagement before work commences on site.

Display the name and contact details of people accountable for air quality and dust issues on the site boundary. This may be the environment manager/engineer or the site manager.

Display the head or regional office contact information.

Dust Management Develop and implement a Dust Management Plan (DMP), which may include measures

to control other emissions, approved by the Local Authority. The level of detail will depend on the risk, and should include as a minimum the highly recommended measures. The desirable measures should be included as appropriate for the site. In London additional measures may be required to ensure compliance with the Mayor of London’s guidance. The DMP may include monitoring of dust deposition, dust flux, real-time PM10 continuous monitoring and/ or visual inspections.

Site Management Record all dust and air quality complaints, identify cause(s), take appropriate measures

to reduce emissions in a timely manner, and record the measures taken.

Make the complaints log available to the local authority when asked.

Record any exceptional incidents that cause dust and/or air emissions, either on- or off-site and the action taken to resolve the situation in the log book.

Hold regular liaison meetings with other high risk construction sites within 500m of the site boundary, to ensure plans are co-ordinated and dust and particulate matter emissions are minimised. It is important to understand the interactions of the off-site transport/deliveries which might be using the same strategic road network routes.


39

Monitoring Undertake daily on-site and off-site inspection, where receptors (including roads) are

nearby, to monitor dust, record inspection results, and make the log available to the local authority when asked. This should include regular dust soiling checks of surfaces such as street furniture, cars and window sills within 100m of site boundary, with cleaning to be provided if necessary

Carry out regular site inspections to monitor compliance with the dust management plan, record inspection results, and make an inspection log available to the local authority when asked.

Increase the frequency of site inspections by the person accountable for air quality and dust issues on site when activities with a high potential to produce dust are being carried out and during prolonged dry or windy conditions.

Agree dust deposition, dust flux, or real-time PM10 continuous monitoring locations with the local authority. Where possible commence baseline monitoring at least three months before work commences on site or, if it a large site, before work on a phase commences.

Preparing and maintaining the site Plan site layout so that machinery and dust causing activities are located away from

receptors, as far as is possible.

Erect solid screens or barriers around dusty activities or the site boundary that are at least as high as any stockpiles on site.

Fully enclose site or specific operations where there is a high potential for dust production and the site is active for an extensive period.

Avoid site runoff of water or mud.

Keep site fencing, barriers and scaffolding clean using wet methods.

Remove materials that have a potential to produce dust from site as soon as possible, unless being re-used on site. If they are being re-used on-site cover as described below.

Cover, seed or fence stockpiles to prevent wind whipping.

Operating Vehicles/Machinery and Sustainable Travel Ensure all on-road vehicles comply with the requirements of the London Low Emission

Zone and the London NRMM standards, where applicable.

Ensure all vehicles switch off engines when stationary - no idling vehicles.

Avoid the use of diesel or petrol powered generators and use mains electricity or battery powered equipment where practicable.

Impose and signpost a maximum-speed-limit of 15 mph on surfaced and 10 mph on unsurfaced haul roads and work areas.

Produce a construction logistics plan to manage the sustainable delivery of goods and materials.

Operations Only use cutting, grinding or sawing equipment fitted or in conjunction with suitable dust

suppression techniques such as water sprays or local extraction, e.g. suitable local exhaust ventilation systems.

Ensure an adequate water supply on the site for effective dust/particulate matter suppression/mitigation, using non-potable water where possible and appropriate.


40

Use enclosed chutes and conveyors and covered skips.

Minimise drop heights from conveyors, loading shovels, hoppers and other loading or handling equipment and use fine water sprays on such equipment wherever appropriate.

Ensure equipment is readily available on site to clean any dry spillages, and clean up spillages as soon as reasonably practicable after the event using wet cleaning methods.

Waste Management No bonfires or burning of waste material.

Specific to Demolition

Soft-strip inside buildings before demolition

Ensure effective water suppression is used during demolition operations

Avoid explosive blasting, using appropriate manual or mechanical alternatives

Bag and removed any biological debris or damp down such material before demolition.

Specific to Earthworks Re-vegetate earthworks and exposed areas/soil stockpiles to stabilise surfaces as soon

as practicable.

Use Hessian, mulches or trackifiers where it is not possible to re-vegetate to cover with topsoil, as soon as practicable.

Only remove the cover in small areas during work and not all at once.

Specific to Construction Avoid scabbling (roughening of concrete surfaces) if possible.

Ensure sand and other aggregates are stored in bunded areas and are not allowed to dry out, unless this is required for a particular process, in which case ensure that appropriate additional control measures are in place.

Ensure bulk cement and other fine powder materials are delivered in enclosed tankers and stored in silos with suitable emission control systems to prevent escape of material and overfilling during delivery.

For smaller supplies of fine power materials ensure bags are sealed after use and stored appropriately to prevent dust.

Specific to Trackout Use water-assisted dust sweeper(s) on the access and local roads, to remove, as

necessary, any material tracked out of the site. This may require the sweeper being continuously in use.

Avoid any dry sweeping of large areas.

Ensure vehicles entering and leaving sites are covered to prevent escape of materials during transport.

Inspect on-site haul routes for integrity and instigate necessary repairs to the surface as soon as reasonably practicable.


41

Record all inspections of haul routes and any subsequent action in a site log book.

Install hard surfaced haul route, which are regularly damped down with fixed or mobile sprinkler systems, or mobile water bowsers and regularly cleaned.

Implement a wheel washing system (with rumble grids to dislodge accumulated dust and mud prior to leaving the site where reasonably practicable).

Ensure there is an adequate area of hard surfaced road between the wheel wash facility and the site exit, wherever site size and layout permits.

Access gates to be located at least 10m from receptors where possible.


42