tesco hawkins lane, burton-on-trent air quality assessment ... application/620000/6200… ·...

Tesco – Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent Air Quality Assessment Report

Mouchel Collaborator\Air Quality & Odour\Live Projects\Tesco - Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent\09 Control of

Documents \08 Reporting\Final Report

© Mouchel 2010

1

Tesco Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent Air Quality Assessment Report

E&E3/AQ/PR00031

Produced for:

wendy.keach

Rectangle

wendy.keach

Text Box

P/2010/01452 Received 9/12/2010




© Mouchel 2010

2

CLIENT AND CONSULTANT CONTACT DETAILS

Client Details Client Tesco Stores Ltd

Address PO Box 400, Cirrus building, Shire Park, Welwyn Garden City, AL7 1ZR

Project Manager Dave Burkey Tel +44 (0)1707 360401 Email [email protected]

Air Quality Consultant Details Address 1 Export House, Cawsey Way, Woking, Surrey, GU21 6QX Address 2 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn, London, EC1N 2ST Address 3 St. Johns House, Queen Street, Manchester, M2 5JB

Project Manager Mark Chapman

Tel +44 (0)1483 731 378 Fax +44 (0)1483 731 006 Email [email protected] Technical Manager Ana Grossinho Tel +44 (0)1483 731 510 Fax +44 (0)1483 731 006 Email [email protected] Project Team Chloe Smith, Fergus Boughton, Thomas Wright, Mark Chapman,

Ana Grossinho

Principal Author(s) Chloe Smith

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

Document Information

Project Name Tesco - Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent Project Number 1032252-001-001 File Name Tesco_Hawkins_Lane_AQA_Final_021210_Compressed




© Mouchel 2010

3

Record of Issue

Issue Status Description Prepared by:

Name/Dated

Approved and Authorised by:

Signed/Dated

1 Final v1 First report issued to client

Chloe Smith

02/12/10

Ana Grossinho

02/12/10

Mark Chapman

02/12/10

Distribution

Organisation Contact Copies

Mark Chapman Mouchel electronic

Ana Grossinho Mouchel electronic

David Burkey TESCO electronic

Mark Aylward DPP electronic

wendy.keach

Rectangle

wendy.keach

Rectangle




© Mouchel 2010

4

Disclaimer

This Report is presented to Tesco Stores Ltd (the Client) and may not be used or relied on by any other person or by the Client in relation to any other matters not covered specifically by the scope of this Report.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Report, Mouchel is obliged to exercise reasonable skill, care and diligence in the performance of the services required by the Client and shall not be liable except to the extent that it has failed to exercise reasonable skill, care and diligence, and this Report shall be read and construed accordingly.

This Report is based on and incorporates information and data from information preceding Mouchel’s involvement and Mouchel is unable to defend any inaccuracies within this information.

This Report has been prepared by Mouchel Limited. No individual is personally liable in connection with the preparation of this document. By receiving this Report and acting on it, the Client or any other person accepts that no individual is personally liable whether in contract, tort, for breach of statutory duty or otherwise.

Any questions or matters arising from this report should be addressed in the first instance to the Project Manager.




© Mouchel 2010

5

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................9

1 Introduction ......................................................................................................10

1.1 Objectives...........................................................................................................10

1.2 Description of the Proposed Development..........................................................11

1.3 Study Area..........................................................................................................11

2 Legislative Background and Guidance...........................................................13

2.1 Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and Air Quality (England) Amendment

Regulations 2002................................................................................................13

2.2 Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS23): Planning and Pollution Control .............14

2.3 The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA) ...................................................15

2.4 Best Practice Guidance: Control of Dust Emissions from Construction Activities16

3 Assessment Methodology...............................................................................17

3.1 Analysis of Traffic Data.......................................................................................17

3.2 Definition of the Study Area ................................................................................17

3.3 Identification of Relevant Receptors of Public Exposure.....................................17

3.4 Characterisation of Baseline Conditions .............................................................18

3.5 Identification of Hot-spot Locations.....................................................................19

3.6 Background Data................................................................................................19

3.7 Monitoring Data ..................................................................................................19

3.8 Construction Impacts on Local Air Quality ..........................................................25




© Mouchel 2010

6

3.9 Operation Impacts on Local Air Quality...............................................................28

4 Baseline Conditions.........................................................................................32

4.1 Selected Relevant Receptors of Public Exposure ...............................................32

4.2 Local Air Quality Management Findings .............................................................34

4.3 Background Concentrations ...............................................................................36

4.4 Local Air Quality Monitored Concentrations........................................................36

5 Results..............................................................................................................39

5.1 Construction Phase ............................................................................................39

5.2 Construction Site Proposed Mitigation Measures................................................42

5.3 Operation Phase.................................................................................................49

6 Conclusions .....................................................................................................58

6.1 Construction Phase ............................................................................................58

6.2 Operation Phase.................................................................................................58

6.3 Overall Impacts on Local Air Quality ...................................................................59

7 References........................................................................................................60

8 Appendices.......................................................................................................62

8.1 Appendix A - Summary of Health Effects of NO2 and PM10 .................................62

8.2 Appendix B - Meteorological Data ......................................................................63

8.3 Appendix C - Detailed Modelling Procedures......................................................64




© Mouchel 2010

7

Figures

Figure 1 - Location of the Proposed Development .............................................................................12 Figure 2 - Location of the Diffusion Tubes Used for Model Verification (ESBC Survey) ....................... 23 Figure 3 - Location of the Diffusion Tubes Within the Vicinity of the Site (ESBC Survey) ..................... 24 Figure 4 - Location of Public Exposure Receptors (including Sensitive Receptors).............................. 33 Figure 5 - Location of AQMAs and Proposed Development Site ......................................................... 35 Figure 6 - Construction Phase Estimated Impact Magnitude Bands (Pre Mitigation Controls) ..............41 Figure 7 - Construction Phase Estimated Impact Magnitude Bands (Post Mitigation Controls).............48 Figure 8 - Do-Minimum NO2 Concentrations...................................................................................... 50 Figure 9 - Do-Something NO2 Concentrations ................................................................................... 51 Figure 10 - Operation Phase Change in NO2 Concentrations ............................................................. 52 Figure 11 - Do-Minimum PM10 Concentrations ................................................................................... 54 Figure 12 - Do-Something PM10 Concentrations................................................................................. 55 Figure 13 - Operation Phase Change in PM10 Concentrations ............................................................ 56 Figure 14 - 2009 Wind Rose for East Midlands Airport Meteorological Station ....................................63




© Mouchel 2010

8

Tables

Table 1 - Relevant Air Quality Objectives/ EU Limit Values ................................................................ 13 Table 2 - Description of Local Authorithy Monitoring Sites Considered for Model Verification in the

Current Assessment................................................................................................................. 20 Table 3 - Best Practice Guidance Construction Dust Risk Classification .............................................26 Table 4 - Construction Impact Magnitude Categories (Source: Mouchel) ............................................28 Table 5 - Average Background Concentrations across the Study Area (µg/m3) ...................................36 Table 6 - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations (µg/m3) Measured at Continuous Monitors ...................... 36 Table 7 - Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations (µg/m3) Measured at Continuous Monitors..................... 37 Table 8 - Diffusion Tube Monitoring - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations Measured by ESBC..............37 Table 9 - Relevant Receptors Sensitive to Dust Deposition ................................................................ 40 Table 10 - Diffusion Tube Monitoring - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations Measured by ESBC............62 Table 11 - Summary of Traffic Characteristics Data ...........................................................................66 Table 12 - Summary of Model Conditions for CHP.............................................................................68 Table 13 - Summary of Car Park Accumulation Data (Friday)............................................................. 68 Table 14 - Summary of Car Park Accumulation Data (Saturday) ........................................................ 69 Table 15 – Three Stage Model Adjustment Factors............................................................................71




© Mouchel 2010

9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Mouchel Limited was commissioned by Tesco Stores Ltd to undertake an Air Quality Assessment in support of their planning application for the re-development of land at Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent.

The current report evaluates the air quality conditions registered in the baseline year (2009) and estimates the likely contributions of the proposed development to local air quality in the opening year (2013) in association with both the construction and operation phases of the development. The proposed development is located within close proximity to two Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs). Therefore the assessment has also considered the impact of the development on these AQMAs.

The main sources of local pollution associated with the construction phase of the development are those of fugitive dust emissions arising from demolition, excavation and materials storing and handling activities. The main sources of pollution arising from the operation phase of the development are those of road traffic emissions associated with changes in the local network traffic characteristics, those arising from vehicles parking at the site, and from the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) unit which is to be installed as part of the development.

The construction site was classified as a high risk site with relevant receptors identified as being exposed to major magnitude impacts at the pre mitigation stage. Therefore, a series of hard and soft control measures are recommended to reduce the magnitude of these impacts. Once such mitigation controls are implemented it is estimated that the majority of the receptors will fall under either the minor or negligible magnitude impact categories.

Advanced air dispersion modelling was used in the assessment undertaken, taking into account the effects of the car park, the CHP plant and likely changes in traffic characteristics associated with the proposed development. Available local diffusion tube monitoring data provided by East Staffordshire Borough Council (ESBC) were analysed and used for model verification purposes.

Analysis of the modelled results indicates that exceedences of the Annual Mean Air Quality Objective for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10) for both the Do-Minimum and Do-Something Scenarios in the opening year (2013) are unlikely.

Overall, this Air Quality Assessment concluded that the proposed development is likely to be compliant with the national and European Air Quality Objectives and Limit Values and, as such, there are no air quality reasons to prevent the local planning authority from granting planning permission.




© Mouchel 2010

10

1 Introduction

1.1 Objectives

Mouchel Limited was commissioned by Tesco Stores Ltd to undertake an Air Quality Assessment in support of their planning application for the re-development of land at Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent.

This assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ (Defra) current Technical Guidance on Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) (Defra, 2009) and will cover air quality impacts associated with both the construction and operation phases of the proposed development.

It is considered that the proposed development may have a temporary effect on local air quality during construction, with demolition activities, earth-moving works and the storage of aggregates at the Hawkins Lane Site (hereafter referred to as the Site) posing the highest risk with respect to the occurrence of ‘nuisance dust’. These activities are likely to increase the risk of dust entrainment and possible nuisance occurrence from increased deposition to surrounding surfaces. The assessment of construction phase impacts will focus on likely impacts of airborne and deposited particulate matter in the vicinity of the Site. Potential control measures will be evaluated and recommended to mitigate any estimated risks associated with this phase of the development.

Changes in local traffic characteristics resulting from the operation of the proposed development may have an impact on air quality. Vehicle exhaust gases contain a number of air pollutants. The quantities of each pollutant emitted depend upon the type and quantity of fuel used, engine size, speed of the vehicle and the type of emissions abatement equipment fitted. Therefore changes in traffic characteristics (as a result of the proposed development) may result in changes in pollutant concentrations at properties near to roads relevant. These will be addressed in the current assessment.

The operation of a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) natural gas-fired power unit will result in emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapour (H2O), oxides of nitrogen (NO and NO2, generally referred to as NOx), oxides of sulphur (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO), unburnt hydrocarbons (UHC), and particulate matter (PM10). However, NOx is likely to be the main emission and its impact on local air quality (NO2 concentrations) will be assessed in the current exercise.

Finally, the operation of a new car park may have an impact on local air quality and its associated emissions will equally be considered.




© Mouchel 2010

11

The pollutants NOx/NO2 and PM10/PM2.5 are the main pollutants associated with this development with relevance for local air quality and will be evaluated in the current assessment.

The potential impact of the development on local air quality will be assessed on the basis of the findings of advanced dispersion modelling (ADMS-Roads) calculations, which will be undertaken in the context of relevant national and European Air Quality Objectives and Limit values (described in Section 2) and relevant guidance.

1.2 Description of the Proposed Development

The proposed Site works will be undertaken at the existing Alumasc Grundy Site, Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent. These will consist of the construction of a new Tesco store with CHP and associated car park, along with vehicle access on this former Brownfield site.

The proposed development lies within East Staffordshire Borough Council (ESBC) and will comprise a gross building area of 10,570 m2 and a net sales area of 7,669 m2 with associated car parking and a CHP unit. The re-development of the site is proposed for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industry) and B8 (Storage and Distribution) use, with trade facilities and the construction of a new vehicular access.

1.3 Study Area

The Site is situated on a vacant Brownfield site, which is located approximately 0.7 km to the north west of the centre of Burton-on-Trent and to the west of the River Trent. The site is bound by Hawkins Lane to the east and Horninglow Street to the south, with the major trunk road (A38) located approximately 1.2 km to the north of the site.

The nearest bus stop to the Site is located along Horninglow Street to the west. This bus stop is served regularly by services from across the area. There are also proposals in place for a hopper bus service associated with the development.

Figure 1 presents the location of the proposed development in Burton-on-Trent.


Mouchel Collaborator\Air Quality & Odour\Live Projects\Tesco - Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent\09 Control of Documents \08 Reporting\Final Report

© Mouchel 2010

12

LEGEND

Design CS 10/09/2010 Client:

Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Location of the Proposed

Development Drawn CS 10/09/2010

Checked MIC 01/12/2010 Figure 1 Rev:

A Description:

FINAL

Project: Tesco Hawkins Lane,

Burton-on-Trent

Google Earth © 2010 Tele Atlas

© 2010 Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky

Approved AG 01/12/2010 Scale Not to Scale

Figure 1 - Location of the Proposed Development




© Mouchel 2010

13

2 Legislative Background and Guidance

2.1 Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and Air Quality (England) Amendment Regulations 2002

The UK Government and the devolved administrations published the latest Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in July 2007 (Defra, 2007a) defining both the standards and objectives for each of a range of air pollutants.

The ‘standards’ are set as concentrations below which health effects are unlikely even in sensitive population groups, or below which risks to public health would be exceedingly small. They are based purely upon the scientific and medical evidence of the effects of a particular pollutant.

The ‘objectives’ set out the extent to which the Government expects the standards to be achieved by a certain date. They take account of the costs, benefits, feasibility and practicality of achieving the standards. The objectives are prescribed within The Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 (Stationery Office, 2000) and The Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002 (Stationery Office, 2002) (termed the ‘Regulations’). Air Quality Objectives included in the Regulations and current legislation (CAFE Directive) which are relevant to the current study (NO2 and PM10) are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1 - Relevant Air Quality Objectives/ EU Limit Values

Air Quality Objective/EU Limit Value To be achieved by: Pollutant

Concentration Measured as Regulation EU Limit

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 200 µg/m3, not to be exceeded

more than 18 times a year 1 Hour Mean 31 December 2005

All UK 40 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December

2005

2010

Particulate Matter (PM10) (gravimetric) 50 µg/m3, not to be exceeded

more than 35 times a year 24 Hour

Mean 31 December

2004 All UK

40 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2004

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (gravimetric)* 25 µg/m3 (target) Annual Mean 2020

All UK 15% cut in urban background exposure Annual Mean 2010 - 2020

Note: * Not included in Regulations at present.




© Mouchel 2010

14

Appendix A provides a brief summary of the health effects of NO2 and PM10.

The Air Quality Objectives only apply where members of the public are likely to be regularly present for the averaging time of the objective (i.e. where people will be exposed to pollutants). The annual mean objectives apply to all locations where members of the public might be regularly exposed; these include building façades of residential properties, schools, hospitals, care homes etc. The 24 hour mean objective applies to all locations where the annual mean objective would apply, together with hotels and gardens of residential properties1. The 1 hour mean objective also applies at these locations as well as at any outdoor location where a member of the public might reasonably be expected to stay for 1 hour or more, such as shopping streets, parks and sports grounds, as well as bus stations and railway stations that are not fully enclosed.

Measurements across the UK have shown that the 1 hour mean NO2 objective is unlikely to be exceeded unless the annual mean NO2 concentration is greater than 60 µg/m3 (Laxen and Marner, 2003). Thus exceedences of 60 µg/m3 as an annual mean NO2 concentration are used as an indicator of potential exceedences of the 1 hour mean NO2 objective.

Similarly, studies (Defra, 2003) have also established a relationship between the annual mean PM10 concentration and number of exceedences of the 24 hour mean objective: those areas where the annual mean concentrations is greater than 32 µg/m3 were demonstrated to be at risk of exceeding the 24 hour mean objective. Thus exceedences of 32 µg/m3 as an annual mean PM10 concentration are used as an indicator of potential exceedences of the 24 hour mean PM10 objective.

2.2 Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS23): Planning and Pollution Control

PPS23 is guidance which covers planning and pollution control and new development in England. PPS23 advises on the policies and practices that should be taken into account by those involved in the planning of any development that has the potential to cause pollution. Annex 1, Paragraph 1.48 states…

“planning conditions could be used in respect of […] impacts such as noise, vibrations, odour, air pollutants and dust from certain phases of the development such as demolition and construction”.

1 Such locations should represent parts of the garden where relevant public exposure is likely, for example where there are seating or play areas. It is unlikely that relevant public exposure would occur at the extremities of the garden boundary, or in front gardens, although local judgement should always be applied.




© Mouchel 2010

15

(ODPM, 2004)

2.3 The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA)

Dust and air pollution, can cause nuisance affecting properties and the public adjacent to a construction site and can also adversely affect other environmental receptors including watercourses and ecological receptors. In addition, there are statutory objectives in relation to NO2 and PM10 which have known health impacts.

The EPA (Section 79, Chapter 43, Part III - Statutory Nuisances and Inspections) contains a definition of what constitutes a ‘statutory nuisance’ with regard to dust, and places a duty of care on Local Authorities to detect any such nuisances within their area. Section 79 of the Act further defines “Best Practicable Means” (BPM) as…

“reasonably practical having regard, among other things, to local conditions and circumstances, to the current state of technical knowledge and to the financial implications”.

(EPA, 1990)

It also defines a number of factors relating to dust and air pollution which constitute a statutory nuisance. These include:

i. smoke emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance;

ii. fumes or gases emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance;

iii. any dust, steam, smell or other effluvia arising on industrial, trade or business premises and being prejudicial to health or a nuisance; and

iv. any accumulation or deposit which is prejudicial to health or a nuisance.

Local Authorities have the power under Section 80, Chapter 43, Part III of the EPA (Summary Proceedings for Statutory Nuisances) to serve an abatement notice requiring the abatement of a nuisance or requiring works to be executed to prevent their occurrence. Generally, if something is unreasonable to an average person, a court may decide that it is a nuisance. A typical example of statutory nuisance is dust produced by construction activities.




© Mouchel 2010

16

2.4 Best Practice Guidance: Control of Dust Emissions from Construction Activities

The Greater London Authority and London Councils published this Best Practice Guidance document in November 2006 (London Councils, 2006).

While it is specifically aimed at developments in London, it is the most comprehensive guidance document available, and the Environment Agency (EA) and others are encouraging its use across the country. The basic principles to be applied in the selected approach are the targeted prevention, suppression and containment of emissions. This document is used in line with Annex 1 of the Minerals Policy Statement (OPDM, 2005) which gives examples of reducing and controlling dust, and outlines good practice in dust assessment.

These documents together with Mouchel’s professional judgement were used to localise and evaluate the potential construction impacts associated with the proposed development.




© Mouchel 2010

17

3 Assessment Methodology

3.1 Analysis of Traffic Data

Data were provided by Transport Planning Associates (TPA) and included daily flows, speed information and composition. These data were analysed and processed for the baseline (2009) and opening year (2013) for the Do-Minimum (DM) and Do-Something (DS) scenarios. The data included:

i. annual average daily traffic flows (AADT, combined - vehicle/day) for

relevant links;

ii. the percentage of Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDVs) (vehicles > 3.5t Gross Vehicle Weight) on each of the roads for each year modelled;

iii. the daily average speed (kph) on the relevant roads for each year modelled; and

iv. road type.

3.2 Definition of the Study Area To ensure consistency with the Local Authority LAQM modelling approach and to make sure the AQMAs were addressed suitably in the current exercise, the full extent of the study area was determined by the roads considered in ESBCs Further Assessment report (ESBC, 2008). These roads were considered to be relevant for the current Air Quality Assessment and all relevant receptors within 200m of these links were selected and included in the model.

This procedure defined the study area for local air quality purposes.

3.3 Identification of Relevant Receptors of Public Exposure

The Regulations require that likely exceedences of Air Quality Objectives are assessed in relation to:

“…the quality of the air at locations which are situated outside of buildings or other natural or man-made structures, above or below ground, and where members of the public are regularly present…”.

(Stationery Office, 2000 and 2002)

Existing and planned properties where people might experience a change in local air quality within 200m of the relevant roads were identified. This included a clear identification of properties hosting susceptible groups of the public (establishment of




© Mouchel 2010

18

locations of any receptors that may be sensitive to changes in air quality during the construction and operation phases of the development - e.g. schools, hospitals, homes for the elderly, residential properties, etc.). Representative receptors of such locations were subsequently selected and used in the model.

Overall 7,302 relevant receptors (including sensitive locations such as nurseries and schools) were identified using MasterMap Address Layer 2 data and mapped onto the Ordnance Survey base map using a Geographic Information System (GIS) and then modelled to ascertain annual mean concentrations of NO2 and PM10.

These relevant receptor locations were considered site representative of locations where members of the public are exposed for a period of time appropriate to the averaging period of the objective.

3.4 Characterisation of Baseline Conditions

The identification of baseline air quality conditions in and around the proposed development included:

i. review of LAQM information:

evaluation of the most readily available LAQM Assessment Reports to ascertain the existence, location and extent of any AQMAs and ascertain air quality trends in the study area;

ii. analysis of local air quality monitoring data:

this entailed obtaining and reviewing local pollutant monitoring data held by the Local Authority. Local Authority and National AURN (Automatic Urban and Rural Network) monitoring data for NO2 and PM10 were analysed for location and type of station, pollutant measured, data capture, validity and values recorded; and

iii. background concentrations:

this comprised a review of estimated Annual Mean background pollutant concentrations (available online at the UK National Air Quality Information Archive (NAQIA)2). Estimated background pollution concentrations were derived from the national maps (1 km x 1 km spatial resolution) and used in the assessment for the baseline year 2009 and opening year 2013.

2 http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php - Accessed 19/08/10




© Mouchel 2010

19

3.5 Identification of Hot-spot Locations

Areas likely to experience higher-than-average pollution concentrations, such as roundabouts and junctions, were identified and assessed accordingly.

3.6 Background Data

Background concentrations of NO2 and PM10 within the study area for the baseline and opening years have been derived from national maps (1 km x 1 km spatial resolution) of Annual Mean background concentrations available from the NAQIA (Defra, 2007b).

Total background concentrations from Defra were disaggregated to provide relative contributions from different sources. The contributions of emissions from trunk ‘A’ roads and primary ‘A’ roads have been excluded from total background concentrations used in the assessment as these have been explicitly modelled in the current exercise. Where industrial sources have also been explicitly modelled as part of the DS scenario, these have also been removed from the total. Contributions from the ‘Out grid’ component were left within the total backgrounds.

Due to the large model study area and the need for receptor specific concentrations, ArcGIS 9.3 was used to select the nearest background to the relevant receptor. This ensured that the background concentrations were selected for the actual grid square where the receptors were located.

3.7 Monitoring Data

3.7.1 Continuous Monitoring Data

ESBC has two automatic monitoring stations located at St. Peters Bridge and Derby Turn monitoring NOx/NO2 and PM10. The Derby Turn monitoring station is located approximately 195m of the north west to the site and the St. Peters Bridge monitoring station is located approximately 1.4 km to the south-east of the Site. Monitored concentrations were analysed and evaluated for suitability for both model verification and indication of local conditions in this assessment.




© Mouchel 2010

20

3.7.2 Passive Monitoring Data

ESBC currently manages a network of diffusion tubes measuring NO2 concentrations across their area of jurisdiction.

Thirty eight (38) of these locations were evaluated and considered suitable for model verification purposes in the current assessment in terms of location, data quality and capture. These were within close proximity to the Site and the modelled road network. Table 2 provides a description of these sites.

Table 2 - Description of Local Authorithy Monitoring Sites Considered for Model Verification in the Current Assessment

Site Number Site Description

Site Type

X (m)

Y (m)

1 and 2 Trent Bridge Duplicates Roadside 425362 323339

3 and 4 St Peters Bridge Duplicates Roadside 425575 322028

7 Horninglow Croft Roadside 424367 324781

11, 12 Wellington Street Kerbside 423953 323280

13 Horninglow Street Roadside 424796 323624

14 Derby Turn Roadside 424632 324043

15 Derby Turn Kerbside 424636 324037

21 Horninglow Road - approaching A38 flyover Kerbside 424404 324481

22 Horninglow Road / Parker St Junction Roadside 424537 324228

23 Derby Street - nr to Derby Turn Kerbside 424581 323963

25 Derby Street / Byrkley St junction Roadside 424212 323473

26 A444 - Stapenhill - Approaching junction with Violet Way Kerbside 425706 321902

27 Princess Way Roundabout Roadside 425235 324854

28 Derby Road - Approaching Princess Way Roundabout

Roadside 425161 324737

29 Derby Road/ Eton Road junction Roadside 425107 324668

30 Sydney Street - nr. Junction with Derby Rd Roadside 424970 324505

31 Derby Road - Approaching Derby Turn Roadside 424709 324140




© Mouchel 2010

21

Site Number Site Description

Site Type

X (m)

Y (m)

32 Derby Street - Approaching Derby Turn Roadside 424547 323940

34 Derby Street - Maltings Court Roadside 424351 323660

35 Albert St - nr. Junction with Derby St Roadside 424322 323674

36 Derby Street - Appr Little Burton West Roadside 424453 323794

37 Byrkley St - nr Princess St Roadside 424194 323508

38 Waterloo Street - Approaching junction with Byrkley Street Kerbside 424116 323483

39 Derby Street - opposite Midland Grain Warehouse

Roadside 424149 323344

40 Wellington Street - Crossing Roadside 423993 323308

41 Curzon Street - nr. Junction with Wellington Street

Roadside 423951 323216

42 Wellington Street - roundabout Roadside 423812 323077

43 Wellington Street - Approaching roundabout Roadside 423807 323115

44 Wellington Street - roundabout Roadside 423784 323099

46 Rolleston Road - nr junction with Horninglow Road

Roadside 424113 325209

49 Shakespeare Road - nr junction with Horninglow Road

Roadside 424417 324579

50 Goodman Street - nr Junction Horninglow Road

Roadside 424621 324142

52 Horninglow Street - Bridge Roadside 424752 323748

53 Horninglow Street - nr junction with Wetmore Road

Roadside 425270 323346

54 Horninglow Street - nr junction with High Street Roadside 425275 323327

55 Bridge Street - nr Old Bridge Roadside 425345 323321

58 Belvedere Rd - A38 flyover Roadside 423834 324316

59 Shobnall Rd - A38 flyover Roadside 422908 323540




© Mouchel 2010

22

Figures 2 and 3 show the location of these monitoring sites across the study area and in the vicinity of the site respectively.



© Mouchel 2010

23

LEGEND

Design CS 28/09/2010

Client: Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Location of the Diffusion Tubes

Used for Model Verification (ESBC Survey) Drawn CS 28/09/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of

Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery

Office.

© Crown Copyright. Licence number 100020449

Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.


Figure 2 - Location of the Diffusion Tubes Used for Model Verification (ESBC Survey)



© Mouchel 2010

24

LEGEND


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Location of the Diffusion Tubes Within the Vicinity of the Site

(ESBC Survey) Drawn CS 28/09/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on

behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery

Office.




Figure 3 - Location of the Diffusion Tubes Within the Vicinity of the Site (ESBC Survey)




© Mouchel 2010

25

3.8 Construction Impacts on Local Air Quality

During the construction phase, there will be a number of activities undertaken that have the potential to generate and/or re-suspend dust and PM10/PM2.5. At the time of assessment the exact activities to be undertaken during construction are unknown. In order to evaluate the magnitude and extent of potential adverse impacts likely to result from the proposed development, the following construction activities have therefore been assumed:

i. site clearance and preparation;

ii. storage of materials;

iii. laying of hard surfaces; and

iv. landscaping.

The magnitude of potential impacts of a construction site on air quality is mainly determined by its size, the range of activities undertaken across the site, proximity to sensitive receptors, prevailing wind direction, complexity of terrain and any barriers between sources and receptors. These are addressed in turn in the following sub-sections.

3.8.1 Risk of the Site

Best Practice guidance issued by the London Councils (2006) provides guidelines that allow the evaluation of potential risk of air quality impacts occurring during the demolition or construction of a site. A summary of these details is presented in Table 3.




© Mouchel 2010

26

Table 3 - Best Practice Guidance Construction Dust Risk Classification

Risk Category Criteria

Development of up to 1,000 square metres of land; or

Development of one property and up to a maximum of ten; or

Low Risk Site

(Small Developments)

Potential for emissions and dust to have an infrequent impact on sensitive receptors.

Development of between 1,000 and 15,000 square metres of land; or

Development of between ten and 150 properties; or

Medium Risk Site

(Medium Sized Developments)

Potential for emissions and dust to have an intermittent or likely impact on sensitive receptors.

Development of greater than 15,000 square metres of land; or

Development of greater than 150 properties; or

Major development referred to Central Government; or

Major development as defined by the Local Planning Authority; or

High Risk Site

(Large Developments or Developments of

Strategic Importance)

Potential for emissions and dust to have a significant impact on sensitive receptors.

These guidelines were designed to be applied in London, which is very densely built and often has multiple construction sites in close proximity. As such, professional judgment was applied to these criteria in order to ensure that the risk evaluation reflected site specific characteristics.

3.8.2 Analysis of Distance from Source to Near-by Receptors

Distance bands were created from the boundaries of the site to account for likelihood of levels of dust and PM10/PM2.5 originated by construction related activities. The distance classes considered were 0-50m, 50-100m, 100-200 and greater than 200m.




© Mouchel 2010

27

These distance bands were then combined with the magnitude of construction risks and the prevailing wind conditions of the site to ascertain the order of impact of the estimated impacts associated with the construction activities of the proposed development.

3.8.3 Prevailing Wind Conditions

Meteorological data for 2009 from East Midlands Airport meteorological station were assumed representative of the study area and analysed for wind speed and direction. A wind rose was produced to ascertain the likelihood of receptors to be affected by dust resulting from construction activities and is shown in Appendix B. These data were also used in the dispersion modelling exercise.

3.8.4 Barriers between Emission Sources and Receptors

The existence and location of any barriers between emission sources and receptors was ascertained and evaluated. This enabled the evaluation of risk of nuisance associated with downwind emissions and the selection of suitable mitigation measures wherever such need was identified.

3.8.5 Estimation of Magnitude of Impacts

Based on the London Councils’ guidance and the spatial extent of effects, the Impact Criteria detailed in Table 4 have been developed by Mouchel for assessment of construction phase impacts.




© Mouchel 2010

28

Table 4 - Construction Impact Magnitude Categories (Source: Mouchel)

Risk from Development

Low Medium High

>200m Outside zone of

influence Outside zone of

influence Outside zone of

influence

100 - 200m Negligible Minor Moderate

50 - 100m Minor Moderate Major

Dis

tanc

e to

Rec

epto

rs

0 - 50m Moderate Major Major

The 200 m distance criteria is based on the distance beyond which no significant impacts are expected from road traffic and construction dust (HA, 1993). The 100 m distance criteria is based on guidance which identifies that the majority of dust is deposited within 100 m of the emission source (ODPM, 2005). The 50 m criteria are based on a study showing that half of people living beside construction works were bothered by nuisance (HA, 1993).

Further than 200m is generally considered to be outside of the zone of influence; however there is still the possibility that nuisance may occur during atypical meteorological conditions.

The impact criteria were used to identify possible mitigation measures appropriate for dust management purposes during the construction phase of the proposed development. Allowance was made for the number of receptors per distance band and the prevailing wind direction when control or mitigation measures were being considered based on these impact criteria.

For receptors upwind of the site, and where physical barriers were identified between emission sources and potential receptors, the impact category was reduced by one level.

3.9 Operation Impacts on Local Air Quality

The store proposals include the installation of a CHP plant to power the Store, new car parking facilities and a Petrol Filling Station (PFS). This assessment therefore considered the combined effect of the CHP plant and road traffic impacts (including the car park contributions and PFS access) on local air quality at relevant receptor locations representative of public exposure within 200m of the modelled road network.




© Mouchel 2010

29

Following the 2009 Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance (LAQM.TG(09)) guidance, there is no requirement to assess the impact of the PFS on concentrations of Benzene (C6H6) emissions, because from 1st January 2010 all new PFS with a petrol throughput of >500m3/yr are to be fitted with Stage 2 recovery systems. The increase in traffic as part of the PFS will be assessed as part of the road traffic assessment.

3.9.1 Traffic Data

2009 and 2013 traffic flow data were used as input to the ADMS-Roads model for the baseline year and for the opening year DM and DS scenarios. Further information regarding the traffic data used in the current assessment is provided in Appendix C.

3.9.2 CHP

The proposals include the installation of a CHP plant to power the Store. The plant is expected to provide an electricity output of 228 kW. The CHP plant will be fuelled by natural gas, and the main emissions modelled were NOx to estimate local air quality impacts on NO2 concentrations. The assessment therefore modelled the CHP plant emissions at relevant public exposure locations in close proximity to the store.

A technical data sheet for the proposed CHP plant was received providing input data for the modelling exercise. As the details of the CHP operation were not available, it was assumed that the plant will run at full load, continuously throughout the year. In reality, this is an unlikely scenario which provides an over-estimate of operational conditions and therefore a worst case scenario. Furthermore, a source diameter of 0.2m has been assumed, as estimated from the design drawing provided by the Client for a similar store design. Further information on CHP input data used in the current assessment are provided in Appendix B. 3.9.3 Car Park

The proposed development site will provide a total of 631 car parking spaces (this amount was updated after the car park assessment was carried out). The emissions associated with the proposed new store car park were modelled assuming the car park surface as an area source in the ADMS-Roads. Further information on car park input data used in the current assessment are provided in Appendix B.




© Mouchel 2010

30

3.9.4 Modelling

Annual Mean concentrations of NO2 and PM10 during 2009 and 2013 have been modelled using the ADMS-Roads. ADMS-Roads is one of the dispersion models accepted for modelling within the Government’s Technical Guidance (Defra, 2009). The model has been run using a full year of meteorological data for 2009 from the East Midlands Airport meteorological station which is approximately 19 km east of Burton-on-Trent. Appendix C presents the wind rose for the meteorological conditions modelled in the current assessment.

Concentrations were modelled for relevant locations of public exposure (including sensitive receptors). The modelling methodology, and the input data (traffic data, CHP and car park emissions) utilised are described in further detail in Appendix B. The model was verified against local diffusion tube measurements and its performance evaluated to ascertain whether an adjustment of the results obtained was required.

3.9.5 Data Uncertainty

There is an element of uncertainty in all measured and modelled data. All values presented in this report are the best possible estimates given the data and tools available, but uncertainties in the results might cause over-predictions or under-predictions in the data. All of the measurements presented in this report have an intrinsic margin of error. Defra (2009) suggest that this is of the order of plus or minus 20% for diffusion tube data and plus or minus 10% for automatic measurements. The model results rely on traffic count data, and predictions of future traffic flows, and thus any uncertainties inherent in these data sets will carry into this assessment.

There will be additional uncertainties introduced because the modelling has simplified real-world processes into a series of algorithms. For example, it has been assumed that:

i. during each year, the vehicle fleet within the study area will conform to the national (UK) average composition;

ii. the emissions per vehicle conform to the factors published in the Emissions Factor Toolkit Version 4.2.2;

iii. wind conditions measured at the meteorological station during 2009 will occur throughout the study area during 2013; and

iv. the subsequent dispersion of emitted pollutants will conform to a Gaussian distribution over flat terrain.




© Mouchel 2010

31

An important step in the assessment is verifying the dispersion model against the measured data. By comparing the model results with actual measurements, data will be adjusted for any under or over-prediction.

The UK Government’s Air Quality Expert Group (AQEG) has published a report on trends in primary NO2 in the UK (AQEG, 2007). This examines evidence that shows that while NOx emissions have fallen in line with predictions made a decade previously, the composition of NOx has, in some urban environments, changed. This may have caused NO2 concentrations at some locations to fall less rapidly than was expected.

The latest guidance from Defra has been followed regarding NOx to NO2 relationships, but there is still uncertainty as to whether these relationships will continue to apply in 2013. Any effect is likely to be greatest close to major roads, where future concentrations may have been underestimated.

These limitations to the assessment are considered when reviewing the results set out in the following Sections. While the model should give an overall accurate picture, i.e. one without bias, there will be uncertainties for individual receptors. Clearly in future years the uncertainties are likely to be greater than they are at present. The results are ‘best estimates’ and have therefore been treated as such in the discussion.




© Mouchel 2010

32

4 Baseline Conditions

4.1 Selected Relevant Receptors of Public Exposure

Figure 4 presents the locations of the selected receptors representative of public exposure.



© Mouchel 2010

33

LEGEND


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Location of Public Exposure

Receptors (including Sensitive Receptors) Drawn CS 18/11/2012


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent



Office.




Figure 4 - Location of Public Exposure Receptors (including Sensitive Receptors)


Mouchel Collaborator\Air Quality & Odour\Live Projects\Tesco - Hawkins Lane, Burton-on-Trent\09 Control of Documents

\08 Reporting\Final Report

© Mouchel 2010

34

4.2 Local Air Quality Management Findings The review and analysis of ESBC’s latest LAQM Review and Assessment Report (ESBC, 2008) indicated the following:

i. the two areas currently declared as Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) are predicted to exceed the annual average NO2 Objective;

ii. areas have been highlighted where further monitoring is required to determine whether there are likely to be further exceedences notably where the A38 crosses Dallow Street and Shobnall Road; and

iii. there are also predicted exceedences of the Annual Mean NO2 Objective EU Limit Value at receptors located on Wellington Street, Derby Street and Waterloo Street;

The development Site is located within close proximity to the main Annual Mean NO2 AQMA declared by ESBC in 2002. Figure 5 shows the location of the AQMA in relation to the proposed development Site.



© Mouchel 2010

35

LEGEND


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Location of AQMA and Proposed

Development Site Drawn CS 18/11/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent



Office.




Figure 5 - Location of AQMAs and Proposed Development Site




© Mouchel 2010

36

4.3 Background Concentrations

Average background concentrations across the model area are presented in Table 5.

Table 5 - Average Background Concentrations across the Study Area (µg/m3)

2009 (Baseline Year) µg/m3

2013 (Opening Year) µg/m3

1 x 1 km Grid Square Background

Concentrations NOx NO2 PM10 NOx NO2 PM10

Minimum 17.0 12.0 14.9 13.6 9.9 14.2

Maximum 48.3 28.2 18.6 26.2 17.4 16.7

Mean 24.9 16.6 16.4 19.2 13.3 15.5

Table 5 shows that Annual Mean background concentrations of NO2 and PM10 within the study area are well below the Annual Mean Objective for both NO2 and PM10 of 40 µg/m3 during either of the assessment years.

4.4 Local Air Quality Monitored Concentrations 4.4.1 Continuous Monitoring

Table 6 and 7 show the continuous monitoring data analysed for the current assessment.

Table 6 - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations (µg/m3) Measured at Continuous Monitors

NO2 Concentrations (hourly exceedences of 200 µg/m3)

Ref Location Within AQMA

Data Capture

(%) 2007

2008 2009

A1 St. Peters Bridge N 98.5 32.5 (0) 31.3 (0) 25.0 (0)

A2 Derby Turn Y 50 - - 37.6 (0)




© Mouchel 2010

37

Table 6 shows that Annual Mean concentrations of NO2 at St. Peters Bridge and Derby Turn do not exceed the Annual Mean Objective for NO2 of 40 µg/m3 in 2007, 2008 or 2009 and are below the objective limit in all years.

Table 7 - Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations (µg/m3) Measured at Continuous Monitors

PM10 Concentrations (daily exceedences of 50 µg/m3)

Ref Location Within AQMA

Data Capture

2007

2008 2009

A1 St Peters Bridge N 94.5 22.3 (10) 17.8 (10) 22.7 (13)

A2 Derby Turn Y 50 - - 20.4 (0)

Table 7 shows that Annual Mean concentrations of PM10 at both monitoring locations were well below the Annual Mean Objective for PM10 of 40 µg/m3 in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Both of these continuous monitors were considered unsuitable for model verification; St. Peters Bridge as it was outside the modelled study area and Derby Turn due to inadequate data capture.

4.4.2 Local Diffusion Tubes Monitoring Table 8 shows the Annual Mean NO2 concentrations measured by ESBC at the 38 locations that were considered as suitable locations for model verification. These are located within the model study area and present data capture greater than 75%.

Table 8 - Diffusion Tube Monitoring - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations Measured by ESBC

Site Reference Data Capture (%) Within AQMA 2007 2008 2009

1and2 83 Y 40.0 36.6 34.7 3and4 83 Y 46.1 44.4 39.0

7 100 Y 35.2 38.1 33.8 11and12 92 Y 48.5 42.8 42.2

13 100 Y 42.5 42.7 37.9 14 100 Y 48.3 48.0 41.9 15 92 Y 50.2 55.3 49.4 21 100 Y 42.2 38.3 33.8 22 100 Y 40.1 32.8 31.8 23 92 Y 53.7 47.6 45.6 25 92 Y 48.9 46.0 45.6 26 92 Y 53.2 51.0 44.5 27 100 Y 35.2 37.1 33.5 28 100 Y 41.4 34.6 33.7




© Mouchel 2010

38

Site Reference Data Capture (%) Within AQMA 2007 2008 2009

29 100 Y 41.3 40.2 37.4 30 83 Y 32.5 34.8 30.1 31 100 Y 40.5 40.7 38.6 32 100 Y 46.2 42.9 41.0 34 83 Y 43.6 37.7 39.8 35 100 Y 29.3 30.7 27.6 36 100 Y 37.5 36.6 34.6 37 75 Y 39.2 38.7 37.5 38 75 Y 43.8 45.7 39.6 39 100 Y 53.2 49.5 46.7 40 83 Y 59.4 54.6 50.2 41 92 Y 35.2 35.4 32.3 42 100 Y 36.5 46.3 38.9 43 92 Y 39.4 42.2 39.2 44 100 Y 43.6 43.8 44.8 46 100 Y 30.8 37.6 33.3 49 83 Y 36.9 33.7 30.4 50 83 Y 30.2 31.0 27.2 52 100 Y 40.0 38.8 36.6 53 100 Y 48.3 42.7 38.7 54 100 Y 48.3 48.3 42.7 55 100 Y 41.8 38.7 35.9 58 100 N 0.0 41.8 36.5 59 92 N 0.0 38.8 37.9

Table 8 shows that Annual Mean concentrations of NO2 ranged between 27.2 µg/m3

to 50.2 µg/m3 across the diffusion tube network used for model verification, with eleven (11) locations showing exceedences of the Annual Mean Objective for NO2 of 40 µg/m3. The majority of locations show a decrease in Annual Mean NO2 concentrations between 2007 and 2009, except for sites 42, 44 and 46 which show increases in concentrations. The tubes showing an increase over this period are located within the Wellington Street AQMA.




© Mouchel 2010

39

5 Results

5.1 Construction Phase

5.1.1 Estimated Magnitude of Impacts of Dust and Particulate Matter Emitted from Site Construction Activities

It is considered that the main sources of emissions of dust and PM10/PM2.5 during the construction phase of the proposed development include:

i. pollution caused by construction vehicles;

ii. use of haul routes;

iii. exhaust emissions from Site off-road machinery, especially when used at the extremes of their capacity and during mechanical breakdown;

iv. transportation and storage of materials;

v. materials handling, storage, stockpiling, spillage and disposal;

vi. excavations and earthworks construction;

vii. drilling and grouting works; and

viii. processing, cutting, crushing and grinding activities.

The majority of releases are likely to occur during the ‘working-week’ (anticipated to be 09:00 to 17:30 Monday to Friday). However, for some potential release sources (for example exposed soil produced from significant earthwork activities) in the absence of dust control mitigation measures, dust and PM10/PM2.5 generation has the potential to occur 24 hours per day over the period during which such activities are to take place.

Depending on wind direction, speed and turbulence, the greatest potential for nuisance problems associated with dust deposition/soiling is likely to be within 100m of the maximum extent of the Site perimeter. There may also be limited incidences of increased dust deposited on properties beyond this distance.

According to the matrix presented in Table 3, the site is classified as a high risk site. This is due to the size of the proposed development in terms of the area within the red line boundary (41,328m2) and the fact that the Site presents a potential for emissions and dust to have a significant impact on sensitive receptors.




© Mouchel 2010

40

Readily available meteorological data for 2009 from East Midlands Airport indicates that the prevailing wind direction is from the south west. A wind rose showing wind speed and direction trend is presented in Appendix C.

Receptors were identified at locations within 200m of the site boundary. Figure 6 shows the bands of estimated magnitude of impacts based on the criteria set out in Table 4. This shows that there are a number of properties within the Major magnitude impact zone pre mitigation.

Table 9 details the numbers of relevant receptors (sensitive to dust deposition) located within the distance bands up to 200m from the site red line boundary.

Table 9 - Relevant Receptors Sensitive to Dust Deposition

Number of Receptors Distance (m)

Upwind Downwind

0-50 17 35

50-100 26 4

100-200 31 17

As no dust deposition monitoring data are available in the vicinity of the site an assessment of the sensitivity of properties within 200m of the site boundary has not been evaluated.



© Mouchel 2010

41

Estimated Magnitude of

Impact

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Construction Phase Estimated

Impact Magnitude Bands (Pre Mitigation Controls) Drawn CS 23/11/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent



Office. © Crown Copyright. Licence number

100020449 Unauthorised reproduction infringes

Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.


Figure 6 - Construction Phase Estimated Impact Magnitude Bands (Pre Mitigation Controls)




© Mouchel 2010

42

5.2 Construction Site Proposed Mitigation Measures

This Section lists the mitigation measures identified as required to reduce the potential impacts associated with the activities anticipated to take place during the construction phase of the development. These resulted from the analysis of information available to date and can be tailored further when more specific description of construction activities becomes available.

Construction activities with the potential to generate potential impacts from emissions to atmosphere require two levels of mitigation measures to be adopted. These are termed ‘Hard’ and ‘Soft’ measures. Hard measures include physical actions taken to prevent, suppress, or contain emissions; while Soft measures include management and communication actions. Each level is presented separately and prioritised in the scope of the current development.

The most effective way to manage and prevent dust and PM10/PM2.5 generation and re-suspension during construction is through effective control of the potential source. In order to minimise likely construction phase impacts, a number of ‘Best Practice’ methods are usually implemented.

A set of mitigation measures considered appropriate for a High risk Site are recommended by Mouchel and listed in detail in the following Sub-Sections.

5.2.1.1 Hard Measures

Where appropriate, reasonable, and practicable, it is recommended that the Contractor would:

a) Site Management

i. plan the Site layout to locate machinery and dust-causing activities away from sensitive receptors;

ii. use appropriate methods, such as the erection of hoardings or other barriers along the Site boundary, to mitigate the spread of dust to any sensitive buildings or other environmental receptors;

iii. provide hard standing areas for vehicles and regularly inspect and clean these areas; and

iv. consider weather conditions prior to conducting potentially dusty works. If there are strong winds blowing towards residential properties, works may need to be postponed until more favourable conditions return.




© Mouchel 2010

43

b) Construction Plant and Vehicles

i. operate construction plant in accordance with the manufacturer’s written recommendations;

ii. switch off vehicles and plant when not in use;

iii. direct vehicle and plant exhausts away from the ground and at a height greater than the relative surroundings to facilitate improved dispersion of exhaust emissions;

iv. enclose, shield or provide filters for plant likely to generate excessive quantities of dust beyond the Site boundaries. It is recommended the use of items such as dust extractors, filters and collectors on rigs and silos;

v. keep movements of construction traffic around the Site to the minimum reasonable for the effective and efficient operation of the Site and construction of the development;

vi. locate construction plant away from site boundaries which are close to sensitive receptors;

vii. design site access points to avoid queuing traffic adjacent to access points. Parking of vehicles to be controlled;

viii. avoid the use of diesel or petrol powered generators and use mains electricity or battery powered equipment;

ix. where available use ultra low sulphur tax-exempt diesel for all non-road mobile machinery; Machinery with power outputs of over 37 kW would need to be fitted with appropriate exhaust after-treatment from approved Energy Saving Trust list (achieving filtration efficiency of over 85%); and

x. keep roads and accesses clean.

c) Transportation, Storage and Handling of Materials

i. employ appropriate measures, such as covering materials deliveries or loads entering and leaving the construction site by a fixed cover or sheeting




© Mouchel 2010

44

appropriately fixed and suitable for the purposes of preventing materials and dust spillage;

ii. not overload vehicles transporting materials within or outside the construction site;

iii. keep stockpiles and mounds away from the Site boundary and sensitive receptors, and site them to take into account the predominant wind direction;

iv. ensure stockpiles and mounds are set at a suitable angle of repose and avoid sharp changes in shape to prevent material slippage;

v. enclose, securely sheet or kept watered materials stockpiles and keep them for the shortest possible time;

vi. cover or stabilise long-term stockpiles, which give rise to a risk of dust or air pollution;

vii. Store fine dry material (under 3 mm particle size) inside buildings or enclosures;

viii. undertake mixing of large quantities of concrete or bentonite slurries in enclosed or shielded areas;

ix. keep the number of handling operations for materials to the minimum;

x. maintain materials handling areas to constrain dust emissions;

xi. use appropriate measures such as watering facilities to reduce or prevent escape of dust from the Site boundaries; and

xii. mix grout or cement-based materials using a process suitable for the prevention of dust emissions.

d) Haul Routes

i. agree haul routes prior to their construction and use and advise of the intended level of trafficking for haul routes. The surfacing of haul routes will be appropriate to avoid dust emissions as far as practicable, taking into account the intended level of trafficking;

ii. maintain the surface of haul routes in a condition appropriate to the surface material and for the purposes of suppressing dust emissions; and




© Mouchel 2010

45

iii. inspect haul routes regularly and promptly repair haul routes if required;

iv. provide areas of hard-standing at site access and egress points to be used by any waiting vehicles;

v. use appropriate methods to clean and suppress dust on haul routes and in designated vehicle waiting areas. The frequency of cleaning will be suitable for the purposes of suppressing dust emissions from the Site boundaries; and

vi. impose and enforce appropriate speed limits on haul roads for safety reasons and for the purposes of suppressing dust emissions.

e) Excavation and Earthworks Activities

i. strip topsoil as close as reasonably practicable to the period of excavation or other earthworks activities to avoid risks associated with run-off or dust generation;

ii. keep drop heights from excavators to vehicles involved in the transport of excavated material to the minimum practicable to control dust generation associated with the fall of materials;

iii. use appropriate methods to suppress dust emissions, such as shielding or damping sprays;

iv. compact deposited materials, with the exception of topsoil, as soon as possible after deposition; and

v. undertake soiling, seeding, planting or sealing of completed earthworks as soon as reasonably practicable following completion of the earthworks.

f) Drilling and Grouting Activities

i. employ measures such as enclosing, shielding or provision of filters on plant likely to generate excessive quantities of dust beyond the Site boundaries. Items such as dust extractors, filters and collectors on rigs and silos will need to be used;

ii. extract dust at source to prevent exposure of workers to excessive dust inhalation;




© Mouchel 2010

46

iii. water exposed surfaces to limit dust emissions where drilling is used for the purposes of excavating within rock; and

iv. mix grout or cement-based materials using a process suitable for the prevention of dust emissions.

g) Processing, Crushing, Cutting and Grinding Activities

i. keep drop heights from excavators to crushing plant, and from crushing plant to stockpiles to the minimum practicable to control dust generation associated with the fall of materials; and

ii. use measures for any processing, crushing, cutting and grinding activities as required to limit dust pollution, such as shielding and damping sprays.

5.2.1.2 Soft Measures

In addition to the ‘Hard’ mitigation measures set out above, there are a number of ‘Soft’ mitigation measures that are recommended in order to further reduce the risk of nuisance. The effect of these measures is difficult to quantify; however engagement of the local community is known to have a beneficial effect on the way that construction is viewed by local residents.

Mouchel recommends that the Contractor would keep vehicle, plant and equipment maintenance records on site and these would be made available to ESBC Environmental Health Department whenever requested.

The Contractor would establish a clear protocol of communication with the local residents. A complaints line number will be set up, and a member of staff on site should be available at all times during site operation to take calls. Complaints must be logged and investigated. The Contractor may wish to set up a website to keep residents informed of activities on the Site and allow them to log issues on the Site.

If any very dusty works are unavoidable, local residents should be given prior warning so that they can avoid undertaking activities that would be significantly affected by dust (e.g. hanging washing out).

Liaison with ESBC should be maintained throughout the construction process, and any incidents that may have led to an excessive increase in dust deposition/soiling and/or PM concentrations at nearby residential properties must be reported to the Environmental Health Department of ESBC. If complaints are received from local




© Mouchel 2010

47

residents, these are to be documented in a diary or log held on-site by the Site Manager, along with the information used in establishing improved construction nuisance management protocols where necessary.

With the implementation of good communication and building of trust with the local community, it is anticipated that the impact of the development could be further reduced from the categories shown in Figure 6.

5.2.2 Residual Effects

With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures set out in Section 5.3, the formation of dust and harmful emissions from the construction site are estimated to be minimised as much as practicable. Once the recommended mitigation measures have been implemented it is anticipated that the impact bands are reclassified according to Table 4. The residual effects are shown in Figure 7.

Mouchel recognises that the final design solutions for the construction phase will be developed with input from the Contractor and is happy to provide further advice at a later stage, providing input guidance on the design and implementation of an effective Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to achieve the above predicted results.

Figure 7 shows the bands of estimated magnitude of impacts based on the criteria set out in Table 4. This shows that there magnitude impacts zones have reduced to minor and negligible with the implementation of the mitigation measures proposed.



© Mouchel 2010

48

Estimated Magnitude of

Impact

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Construction Phase Estimated Impact Magnitude Bands (Post

Mitigation Controls) Drawn CS 23/11/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent







Figure 7 - Construction Phase Estimated Impact Magnitude Bands (Post Mitigation Controls)




© Mouchel 2010

49

5.3 Operation Phase

Annual Mean NO2 and PM10 concentrations have been predicted at all relevant receptor locations within 200m of the roads within the model study area. The results for each pollutant are presented in the following sub-sections.

5.3.1 NO2

The results indicate that the maximum Annual Mean NO2 concentrations in both the DM and DS scenarios (35.1 µg/m3 and 35.4 µg/m3 respectively) at relevant receptors in the study area are below the Objective Limit Value (40 µg/m3) for this pollutant (as shown in Figures 8 and 9). It is therefore anticipated that exceedences of the Annual Mean NO2 objectives are unlikely in the opening year (2013). The analysis of the range of changes in Annual Mean NO2 concentrations between the DM and DS scenarios has shown that the largest worsening change is 2.1 µg/m3. Figure 10 shows the change in NO2 concentrations between the DM and DS scenarios.

No exceedences of 60 µg/m3 as an Annual Mean NO2 concentration have been identified at locations relevant to the 1 Hour Mean objective and thus exceedences of the 1 Hour Mean objective are unlikely with the implementation of the proposed development.



© Mouchel 2010

50

Do-Minimum NO2 Concentrations

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd Description:

Do-Minimum NO2 Concentrations Drawn CS 02/12/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent





Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Approved AG 02/12/2010 Scale Not to Scale

Figure 8 - Do-Minimum NO2 Concentrations



© Mouchel 2010

51

Do-Something NO2

Concentrations

Wind Rose



Do-Something NO2 Concentrations Drawn CS 02/12/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent






Figure 9 - Do-Something NO2 Concentrations



© Mouchel 2010

52

Change in NO2

Concentrations

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Operation Phase Change in NO2

Concentrations Drawn CS 02/12/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent







Figure 10 - Operation Phase Change in NO2 Concentrations




© Mouchel 2010

53

5.3.2 PM10

The results show that the maximum Annual Mean PM10 concentrations in both the DM and DS scenarios (19.9 µg/m3 and 20.0 µg/m3 respectively) at relevant receptors in the study area are well below the Annual Mean Objective Limit (40 µg/m3) for this pollutant (as shown in Figures 11 and 12). It is therefore anticipated that exceedences of the Annual Mean PM10 objectives are unlikely in the opening year (2013). The analysis of the range of change in Annual Mean PM10 concentrations between the DS and DM scenarios has shown that the largest worsening change is 0.6 µg/m3. Figure 13 shows the change in PM10 concentrations between the DM and DS scenarios.

No exceedences of 32 µg/m3 as an Annual Mean PM10 concentration have been identified at locations relevant to the 24 Hour Mean objective and thus exceedences of the 24 hour mean objective are unlikely with the implementation of the proposed development.



© Mouchel 2010

54

Do-Minimum PM10

Concentrations

Wind Rose



Do-Minimum PM10 Concentrations Drawn CS 02/12/2010


A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent






Figure 11 - Do-Minimum PM10 Concentrations



© Mouchel 2010

55

Do-Something PM10

Concentrations

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Do-Something PM10



A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent







Figure 12 - Do-Something PM10 Concentrations



© Mouchel 2010

56

Change in PM10 Concentrations

Wind Rose


Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: Operation Phase Change in PM10



A Description:

FINAL


Burton-on-Trent







Figure 13 - Operation Phase Change in PM10 Concentrations




© Mouchel 2010

57

5.3.3 Operation Phase Mitigation Measures

The traffic associated with the proposed development will generate a small increase in pollutant concentrations at certain receptors across the study area. However, there are no predicted exceedences of the objectives for NO2 and PM10 in the anticipated opening year.

Mouchel recommends that the following amelioration measures should be considered to reduce the potential impacts of the operation of the proposed development and improve local air quality in the vicinity of the site:

i. contractors and goods suppliers should use vehicles compliant to at least EURO IV emission standards, goods suppliers to the site should also show a commitment to environmental sustainability through the adoption of an environmental policy which seeks to minimise their own impacts on local air quality;

ii. delivery times could be altered, as necessary, to avoid periods of congested traffic and thus minimise the proposed development contribution to pollutant emissions resulting from local congestion;

iii. retail staff and customers should be encouraged to travel to the premises via local public transport. Incentives, such as flexible working hours, and the provision of shuttle buses could be provided;

iv. disincentives for the use of cars to travel to work, such as the provision of minimal car parking facilities and operating a workplace car parking charge for staff who travel to work by car could also be considered;

v. retail staff could be encouraged to participate in environmentally sustainable practices, such as the use of a car-share scheme which would be managed by the Store;

vi. electricity provided to the Store could be obtained through a ‘Green Energy’ supplier; and

vii. where practicable, any improvements to road junctions close to the site which may reduce congestion and modify traffic behaviour so that vehicles are operating in free flow conditions would also help to reduce emissions.




© Mouchel 2010

58

6 Conclusions

6.1 Construction Phase

The magnitude of impacts associated with the construction phase was estimated in the current exercise using a method adapted by Mouchel using current guidance.

The construction site was classified as a High risk site and a series of hard and soft control measures are recommended to reduce the magnitude of the estimated impacts.

The implementation of the measures set out in Section 5.3 is likely to reduce the level of estimated magnitude of impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development.

The PM10 concentrations estimated in the opening year (2013) are considered to be relatively low when compared to the Air Quality Objectives and are therefore the proposed construction phase is unlikely to lead to impacts of major magnitude.

The estimated magnitude of impacts associated with the construction phase of the proposed development, assuming the mitigation measures recommended are put in place, range from minor to negligible.

6.2 Operation Phase

The most readily available Review and Assessment report (ESBC, 2088) indicated that there are two AQMAs in close proximity to the proposed development site, with local NO2

monitoring also showing exceedences in concentrations across the study area in 2009. The study area was therefore designed to take into account those areas by modelling roads assessed as part of ESBC’s Further Assessment process.

An assessment of the likely impacts of the proposed development on local air quality has been carried out for all relevant receptors within 200m of the defined roads within the study area. Annual Mean concentrations of NO2 and PM10 have been modelled for 2013 (opening year) for the DM and DS scenarios using the dispersion model ADMS-Roads.

With the implementation of the proposed development, results of the assessment undertaken indicate that it is unlikely that predicted exceedences of the Annual Mean objective will occur for NO2 and PM10 anywhere within the study area in the opening year (2013).




© Mouchel 2010

59

6.3 Overall Impacts on Local Air Quality

Overall, this Air Quality Assessment indicates that the proposed development is likely to be compliant with the national and European Air Quality Objectives and Limit Values and as such, there are no air quality reasons to prevent the local planning authority from granting planning permission.




© Mouchel 2010

60

7 References

Air Quality Expert Group, 2005. Particulate Matter in the United Kingdom.

Air Quality Expert Group, 2007. Trends in Primary Nitrogen Dioxide in the UK. Draft report for comment. August 2006.

Defra, 2007a. The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland: July 2007.

Defra, 2007b. National Air Quality Archive via the internet www.airquality.co.uk.

Defra, 2007c. Air Quality Review and Assessment Helpdesk website. Available at: www.uwe.ac.uk/aqm/review/

Defra, 2007d. National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. www.naei.org.uk.

Defra, 2007e. FAQ - Is there a new NOx to NO2 calculator available to allow for the recent increase in primary NO2 from traffic? Available at www.uwe.ac.uk/aqm/review

Defra, 2009. Local Air Quality Management: Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(09).

ESBC, 2008. Air Quality Further Assessment, June, 2008.

HA, 2007, DMRB HA 207/07 Air Quality Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1.

Highways Agency, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume, 11 Section, 3 Part 3: Disruption Due to Construction, June 1993. Laxen and Marner, 2003. Analysis of the Relationship Between 1-Hour and Annual Mean Nitrogen Dioxide at UK Roadside and Kerbside Monitoring Sites. Available from Defra, 2007b.

London Councils, 2006. The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition: Best Practice Guidance, London Councils, November 2006.

Minerals Policy Statement 2, 2005. Controlling and Mitigating the Effects of Mineral Extraction in England - Annex 1: Dust.

ODPM, 2004. Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control. 3 November 2004.

ODPM, 2005, Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and mitigating the environmental effects of mineral extraction in England. Annex 1: Dust. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.




© Mouchel 2010

61

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and Mitigating the Effects of Mineral Extraction in England - Annex 1: Dust, 2005. Stationery Office, 2000. Air Quality Regulations, 2000, Statutory Instrument 928.

Stationery Office, 2002. The Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002. Statutory Instrument 3043.



© Mouchel 2010

62

8 Appendices

8.1 Appendix A - Summary of Health Effects of NO2 and PM10

Table 10 - Diffusion Tube Monitoring - Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations Measured by ESBC

Pollutant Main Health Effects

Nitrogen Dioxide Short-term exposure to high concentrations may cause inflammation of respiratory airways. Long-term exposure may affect lung function and enhance responses to allergens in sensitised individuals. Asthmatics will be particularly at risk (Defra, 2007a).

Particulate Matter

Particulate matter can affect our health. The available evidence suggests that it is the fine components of PM10, which have an aerodynamic diameter of 10 µm or less and are formed by combustion, that are the main cause of the harmful effects of particulate matter. Particles cause the most serious health problems among those susceptible groups with pre-existing lung or heart disease and/or the elderly and children. There is evidence that short- and long-term exposure to particulate matter cause respiratory and cardiovascular illness and even death. It is likely that the most severe effects on health are caused by exposure to particles over long periods of time. However, UK estimates indicate that short-term exposure to the levels of PM10 that we experienced in 2002 led to 6,500 deaths and 6,400 hospital admissions being brought forward that year, although it is not possible to know by what length of time those deaths were brought forward.




© Mouchel 2010

63

8.2 Appendix B - Meteorological Data

Design CS 18/11/2010

Client: Tesco Stores Ltd

Description: 2009 Wind Rose for

East Midlands Airport Meteorological

Station Drawn CS 18/11/2010

Checked MIC 02/12/10 Figure 14

Rev: A

Description: FINAL


Burton-on-Trent

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey

material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the

Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery

Office.

© Crown Copyright. Licence number

100020449 Unauthorised

reproduction infringes Crown copyright and

may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.


Figure 14 - 2009 Wind Rose for East Midlands Airport Meteorological Station




© Mouchel 2010

64

8.3 Appendix C - Detailed Modelling Procedures

8.3.1 Horizontal Road Alignment

Road alignment was based around Ordnance Survey data. Those roads not explicitly included in the modelling have been accounted for via the background component of the modelled results.

8.3.2 Traffic Data

Traffic data for the study area have been produced by the Transport Planning Associates.

The Department for Transport (DfT) has recently made available new emission factors. The Transport Research laboratory (TRL - on behalf of DfT and Defra) prepared mathematical formulae that relate the rate of emission of a pollutant and fuel consumption to average vehicle speed. The new emission factors incorporate the latest test data on vehicles meeting the new vehicle Euro emission standards; the formulae also address published future standards. These new data were used in the current assessment3.

The traffic links, associated composition, flows and speeds in each assessment year are presented in Table 11.

8.3.3 CHP

The proposal includes a CHP plant that would release emissions through a stack located at the roof of CHP unit. The plant would be powered by natural gas.

The general model conditions used in the assessment of CHP plant emissions are summarised in Table 12.

3 http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/environment/emissions/




© Mouchel 2010

65

8.3.4 Car Park

The proposal includes a car park that would release emissions as an area source. The general model data input used in the assessment of car park are summarised in Table 13 and Table 14 for the new car park (Friday and Saturday accumulation data respectively).



© Mouchel 2010

66

Table 11 - Summary of Traffic Characteristics Data

2009 Data 2013 DM 2013 DS All

Scenarios Link

Number Road Name AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

Speed (kph)

1 Princess Way 11144 1.5% 11273 1.5% 12170 1.6% 64 2 Derby Road west of Hawkins Lane 16384 5.3% 16574 5.3% 17297 5.1% 48 3 Derby Road east of Hawkins Lane 22248 9.3% 22506 9.3% 25107 8.3% 48 4 Hawkins Lane 11324 10.2% 11455 10.2% 21134 5.7% 48 5 Horninglow Street north of Hawkins Lane 17867 5.8% 18075 5.8% 18855 5.6% 48 6 Horninglow Street south of Hawkins Lane 22508 4.2% 22770 4.2% 26928 3.6% 48 7 High Street 12904 0.6% 13054 0.6% 13054 0.6% 48 8 Bridge Street Gyratory north 21107 3.0% 21352 3.0% 22392 2.9% 48 9 Bridge Street Gyratory south 19539 2.6% 19766 2.6% 19766 2.6% 48

10 Derby Street 15584 6.8% 15765 6.8% 15852 6.8% 48 11 Waterloo Street 9439 3.0% 9548 3.0% 9635 3.0% 48 12 Wellington Street north of Shobnall Road 15354 6.6% 15532 6.6% 15575 6.6% 48 13 Wellington Road north of Parkway 14072 9.5% 14235 9.5% 14235 9.5% 48 14 Wellington Road south of Parkway 23377 8.5% 23648 8.5% 23648 8.5% 48 15 Shobnall Road west of Parkway 11465 3.0% 11598 3.0% 11598 3.0% 48 16 St Peters Bridge 37505 3.1% 37941 3.1% 37941 3.1% 48 17 Stapenhill Road 18572 4.1% 18788 4.1% 19474 4.0% 48 18 Curzon Street 263 4.9% 266 4.9% 266 4.9% 48 19 Borough Road 11556 1.6% 11691 1.6% 11691 1.6% 48 20 Station Street 10789 1.6% 10914 1.6% 10914 1.6% 48 21 Guild Street 14785 2.0% 14957 2.0% 9181 3.3% 48 22 Horninglow Road north of A38 19998 6.2% 20230 6.2% 21386 5.9% 48

23 (a) A38 18182 14.0% 18393 14.0% 18481 14.1% 112 23 (b) A38 18182 14.0% 18393 14.0% 18481 14.1% 112

24 Main Street 10279 3.0% 10398 3.0% 10741 2.9% 48 26 Waterloo Street Gyratory 16610 6.2% 16803 6.2% 16846 6.2% 24 27 Derby Street Gyratory 15373 6.2% 15551 6.2% 15594 6.2% 24



© Mouchel 2010

67

2009 Data 2013 DM 2013 DS All

Scenarios Link

Number Road Name AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

AADT24 (veh/day)

HDV (%)

Speed (kph)

28 Borough Road Gyratory 10498 2.3% 10619 2.3% 10662 2.3% 24 29 Byrkley Street Gyratory 10498 2.3% 10619 2.3% 10706 2.3% 24 30 Shobnall Road east of Parkway 11465 3.0% 11598 3.0% 11598 3.0% 48 31 Bridge Street 20191 5.8% 20425 5.8% 21465 5.5% 48 32 Hawkins Lane Roundabout 30549 7.0% 30904 7.0% 37854 5.8% 104 33 Derby Turn 33851 5.9% 34244 5.9% 35429 5.7% 96 34 St Peters Roundabout 42519 3.8% 43013 3.8% 43699 3.8% 96




© Mouchel 2010

68

Table 12 - Summary of Model Conditions for CHP

Table 13 - Summary of Car Park Accumulation Data (Friday)

Friday Totals

Arrival Trip Rate Vehicles

Departure Trip Rate Vehicles

Trip Rate Vehicles

Parking Acc

% Acc

0000-0100 0.03 3 0 31 0.32 34 41 6 0100-0200 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0200-0300 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0300-0400 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0400-0500 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0500-0600 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0600-0700 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 41 6 0700-0800 1.43 152 1 104 2.42 256 88 14 0800-0900 3.55 375 2 214 5.57 589 250 40 0900-1000 4.53 478 3 304 7.41 783 423 67 1000-1100 4.86 514 4 451 9.13 965 487 77 1100-1200 4.85 512 5 544 10.00 1057 454 72 1200-1300 5.01 530 5 532 10.05 1062 452 72 1300-1400 5.29 559 5 540 10.40 1099 472 75 1400-1500 5.08 536 5 566 10.43 1103 442 70 1500-1600 5.24 554 5 561 10.56 1116 435 69 1600-1700 5.69 601 5 540 10.80 1141 496 79 1700-1800 6.05 639 6 645 12.15 1285 490 78 1800-1900 5.70 603 6 665 11.99 1267 428 68 1900-2000 4.57 483 6 602 10.27 1085 309 49 2000-2100 3.13 330 4 427 7.16 757 213 34 2100-2200 2.15 228 3 295 4.94 522 146 23 2200-2300 0.66 70 1 133 1.92 203 82 13 2300-0000 0.33 35 1 68 0.97 102 49 8

Parameter Input Data

Site Location 424971, 323928

Source Height 4.83 m (estimated from design plan)

Source Diameter 0.21 m (estimated from design plan)

Emissions Profile 24 hours operation (worst-case assumption)

Emission Rate (with Catalyst) 0.0476 g/s

Volumetric Flow Rate 0.191 m3/s

Temperature 120 oC

Emission NOX




© Mouchel 2010

69

Table 14 - Summary of Car Park Accumulation Data (Saturday)

Saturday Totals

Arrival Trip Rate Vehicles

Departure Trip Rate Vehicles

Trip Rate Vehicles

Parking Acc

% Acc

0000-0100 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0100-0200 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0200-0300 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0300-0400 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0400-0500 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0500-0600 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0600-0700 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 85 13 0700-0800 2.10 222 1 147 3.49 369 159 25 0800-0900 4.30 454 3 299 7.12 753 314 50 0900-1000 5.64 596 5 486 10.24 1083 424 67 1000-1100 6.38 675 6 605 12.10 1279 494 78 1100-1200 6.68 707 6 648 12.82 1355 553 88 1200-1300 6.55 692 6 616 12.38 1308 629 100 1300-1400 5.92 626 6 663 12.19 1288 592 94 1400-1500 5.77 610 6 585 11.31 1195 617 98 1500-1600 5.73 606 6 625 11.64 1230 598 95 1600-1700 5.32 562 7 715 12.08 1277 445 71 1700-1800 4.76 504 6 589 10.33 1092 360 57 1800-1900 4.38 463 5 521 9.32 985 302 48 1900-2000 2.69 284 4 446 6.59 697 140 22 2000-2100 1.34 142 2 218 3.40 360 64 10 2100-2200 0.99 104 1 105 1.98 209 63 10 2200-2300 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 63 10 2300-0000 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 63 10




© Mouchel 2010

70

8.3.5 Model Verification and Adjustment

Most NO2 is produced in the atmosphere by the reaction of NOx with ozone (O3). It is therefore most appropriate to verify the model in terms of primary pollutant emissions. The model was run to predict Annual Mean road-NOx concentrations for the baseline year (2009) at 38 diffusion tube locations within the study area.

The model outputs of road-NOx (i.e. the component of total NOx coming from road traffic) were compared with the measured road-NOx at the diffusion tube locations. Mouchel have then applied a Three Stage Model Verification process in order to suitably correct any under or over estimations in the model, developing the method set out by Defra (2009) and taking into account the most recent guidance.

Firstly, total measured NOx was calculated from the measured NO2 concentrations at the monitoring locations using the recently updated NOx from NO2 calculator available on the NAQIA website (Defra, 2007b). The measured road-NOx contribution was then calculated as the difference between the total and the background value (determined as described in Section 4). The NOx roads adjustment factor was determined as the multiplier between the calculated (measured) road contribution and the model derived road contribution.

Secondly, the modelled road NOx concentrations were converted to modelled road NO2

concentrations using the updated NOx from NO2 calculator as described above. The NO2 roads adjustment factor was then determined as the multiplier between the calculated (measured) road contribution and the model derived road contribution.

Thirdly, the modelled NO2 roads concentrations were added to the background NO2 concentrations to give total NO2 modelled concentrations. These were then compared to the measured concentrations, and a NO2 total adjustment factor was then determined as the multiplier between the measured total contribution and the total modelled contribution.

The adjustment factors were then applied to all modelled data presented in this report as a three stage adjustment.




© Mouchel 2010

71

Table 15 – Three Stage Model Adjustment Factors

Stage Adjustment Factor (Three Stage)

NOx Roads 2.9041

NO2 Roads 1.0102

NO2 Total 0.9973