West Yorkshire Police Proposed Development at ......West Yorkshire Police Air Quality Assessment for Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield Report No. 660469-01(00) iii Summary

NOVEMBER 2014 1

West Yorkshire Police

Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield

Air Quality Assessment

Project No: 660469


Air Quality Assessment for Proposed Development at Bishopgarth, Wakefield

Report No. 660469-01(00)

ii

RSK GENERAL NOTES

Project No.: 660469-01 (00)

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

Client: West Yorkshire Police

Date: 24 November 2014

Office: Hemel Hempstead

Status: Final

Author Dr Christina Higgins Technical reviewer Dr Srinivas Srimath

Signature

Signature

Date: 24 November 2014 Date: 24 November 2014

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

iii

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

iv

Abbreviations

AADT 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



Report No. 660469-01(00)

v

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Proposed Development ............................................................................................................ 1

2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 4

2.1 Key Legislation ......................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Planning Policy ......................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1 National Planning Policy Framework............................................................................ 5

2.2.2 Environmental Protection UK Guidance – Development Control: Planning for Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.3 Local Planning Policy ................................................................................................... 6

3 ASSESSMENT SCOPE ................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Overall Approach ...................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Construction Phase Assessment ............................................................................................. 7

3.3 Operation Phase Assessment .................................................................................................. 8

4 BASELINE AIR QUALITY CHARACTERISATION ......................................................................... 9

4.1 Emissions Sources and Key Air Pollutants .............................................................................. 9

4.2 Local Authority Review and Assessment of Air Quality ........................................................... 9

4.2.1 Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (WMDC) ......................................................... 9

4.3 Baseline Monitoring Data ......................................................................................................... 9

4.4 LAQM Background Data ........................................................................................................ 11

5 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 12

5.1 Construction Dust Assessment .............................................................................................. 12

5.2 Operational Impact Assessment ............................................................................................ 12

6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ........................................................................................................ 13

6.1 Construction Phase ................................................................................................................ 13

6.1.1 Exhaust Emissions from Plant and Vehicles .............................................................. 13

6.1.2 Fugitive Dust Emissions ............................................................................................. 13

6.1.3 Potential Dust Emission Magnitude ............................................................................ 14

6.1.4 Sensitivity of the Area ................................................................................................. 15

6.1.5 Risk of Impacts ........................................................................................................... 18

6.2 Operational Phase .................................................................................................................. 19

6.2.1 Pollution Emissions Cost ............................................................................................ 22

7 MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................................. 24

7.1 Construction Phase Mitigation ................................................................................................ 24

7.2 Operational Phase Mitigation ................................................................................................. 24

7.3 Residual Impacts: Significance .............................................................................................. 25

8 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 26

9 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 27

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A CONSTRUCTION DUST ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ....................................... 29

APPENDIX B EMISSION SOURCE APPORTIONMENT .................................................................... 35

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



Report No. 660469-01(00)

vi

TABLES

Table 2.1: Air Quality Objectives Relevant to the Proposed Development ............................................ 4

Table 4.1: 2013 Annual Average Measured Pollutant Concentrations: Wakefield Metropolitan District Council .................................................................................................................................................. 10

Table 4.2 2014 to 2016 Estimated Background Annual Average NOx, NO2 and PM10 Concentrations at Proposed Development Site ................................................................................................................. 11

Table 6.1: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Demolition Activities (Before mitigation) .......... 14

Table 6.2: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Earthworks Activities (Before mitigation) ......... 14

Table 6.3: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Construction Activities (Before mitigation) ....... 15

Table 6.4: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Trackout Activities (Before mitigation) ............. 15

Table 6.5: Summary of Dust Emission Magnitude of the Site (Before mitigation) ................................ 15

Table 6.6: Sensitivity of the area ........................................................................................................... 18

Table 6.7: Summary of the Dust Risk from Construction Activities ...................................................... 19

Table 6.8: Traffic Data and Predicted Percentage Increase between Future Development Operation Scenarios .............................................................................................................................................. 20

Table 6.9: Estimation of the Change to Local Air Quality ..................................................................... 20

Table 6.10: Significance of the Potential Operation Phase Impacts With Reference to the Criteria Identified by Environmental Protection UK ........................................................................................... 21

FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Proposed Development Site Location .................................................................................. 2

Figure 1.2: Proposed Development Layout ............................................................................................ 3

Figure 6.1: Construction and Trackout Activities Buffer Map ................................................................ 17

Figure 6.2: Traffic Assessment Road Links .......................................................................................... 19



Report No. 660469-01(00)

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 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 Development

The 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

2

Figure 1.1: Proposed Development Site Location



Report No. 660469-01(00)

3

Figure 1.2: Proposed Development Layout



Report No. 660469-01(00)

4

2 LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT

2.1 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 (µµµµg/m3)

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1 calendar year - 40

1 hour 18 200

Fine particles (PM10) 1 calendar year - 40

24 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

5

2.2 Planning Policy

The 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 Framework

The 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 Quality

Environmental 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

6

2.2.3 Local Planning Policy

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.’



Report No. 660469-01(00)

7

3 ASSESSMENT SCOPE

3.1 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 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; and

• trackout.

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

8

3.3 Operation Phase Assessment

EP-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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

9

4 BASELINE AIR QUALITY CHARACTERISATION

Existing 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 Pollutants

Transport-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 Quality

As 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.

4.3 Baseline Monitoring Data

According 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



Report No. 660469-01(00)

10

stations. The monitoring stations within 3 km of the proposed development site are

presented in Table 4.1.

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 4.1.

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 4.1: 2013 Annual Average Measured Pollutant Concentrations: Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Site Name Site Type Approx. distance from proposed

development (km)

2013

Annual Average NO2

(µg/m3)

Annual Average PM10

(µg/m3)

Newton Bar Automatic Roadside

0.3 31 -

Park Street Automatic

Urban Background

1.5 31 21

Diffusion tubes

1 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 -

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 Background 1.4 35 -



Report No. 660469-01(00)

11

Site Name Site Type Approx. distance from proposed

development (km)

2013

Annual Average NO2

(µg/m3)

Annual Average PM10

(µg/m3)

Street

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 40

Note: 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 Data

In 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 4.2 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 4.2: 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/m

3)

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

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

12

5 METHODOLOGY

5.1 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; and

• trackout.

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; and

• harm 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 Assessment

The 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

13

6 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

6.1 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; and

• fugitive dust emissions from site activities.

6.1.1 Exhaust Emissions from Plant and Vehicles

The 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 Emissions

Fugitive 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; and

• movement 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



Report No. 660469-01(00)

14

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 Magnitude

With 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 6.1: 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 6.2: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Earthworks Activities (Before mitigation)

Earthworks Criteria Dust Emissions Class


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/A

Total material moved Large Unknown

Work times Large Unknown




Report No. 660469-01(00)

15

Table 6.3: Summary of Dust Emissions Magnitude of Construction Activities (Before mitigation)

Construction Criteria Dust Emissions Class


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


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

Trackout Criteria Dust Emissions Class


Number of HDV>3.5t per day Large Conservative rating

Surface type of the site Large Conservative rating

Length of unpaved road Large Conservative rating


Table 6.5: Summary of Dust Emission Magnitude of the Site (Before mitigation)

Construction Activities Dust Emissions Class

Demolition Large

Earthworks Large

Construction Large

Trackout 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 6.1 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

site boundary; there is one Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Alverthorpe and



Report No. 660469-01(00)

16

Wrenthorpe Meadows, located around 1km from the proposed development site

boundary.

Table 6.6 presents the determined sensitivity of the area with the factors itemised which

have helped to define this.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

17

Figure 6.1: Construction and Trackout Activities Buffer Map

Construction Activities Trackout Activities



Report No. 660469-01(00)

18

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 6.6: Sensitivity of the area

Potential Impact

Sensitivity of the surrounding area

Demolition 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


High High High High

Annual mean PM10

concentration <24µg/m

3 <24µg/m

3 <24µg/m

3 <24µg/m

3

Number of receptors

10-100 10-100 10-100 >100


<20m <20m <20m <20m


Low Low Low Medium

Ecological


Medium Medium Medium Medium


SSSI approx 1km away

SSSI approx 1 km away




Low Low Low Low

6.1.5 Risk of Impacts

The 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

Table 6.7. Site specific mitigation measures to reduce construction phase impacts are

defined based on this assessment in Section 7.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

19

Table 6.7: Summary of the Dust Risk from Construction Activities

Potential Impact Dust Risk Impact

Demolition Earthworks Construction Trackout

Dust soiling High risk High risk High risk High risk

Human health Medium risk Low risk Low risk Medium risk

Ecological 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 6.2 displays the road links used in the traffic assessment.

Table 6.8 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 6.2: Traffic Assessment Road Links



Report No. 660469-01(00)

20

Table 6.8: 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 +1.05

1.B 3474 3778 3998 +5.82

1.C 19714 21480 21463 -0.08

1.D 855 933 933 0.00

2.A 6132 6684 6529 -2.32

2.B 173 188 188 0.00

2.C 3972 4321 4289 -0.74

2.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 6.9. 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 4.2) is 21.1µg/m3 and

therefore, local source NO2 contribution is estimated to be 6.8µg/m3.

Table 6.9: Estimation of the Change to Local Air Quality

Road Link 2014 Base Year

NOx (µg/m3)

2019 'Without Development' NOx (µg/m

3)

2019 'With Development' NOx (µg/m

3)

Anticipated 2019 NO2 (µg/m

3)



Report No. 660469-01(00)

21

1.A 6.8 7.28 7.31 28.4

1.B 6.8 7.34 7.77 28.9

1.C 6.8 7.20 7.24 28.3

1.D 6.8 7.37 7.37 28.5

2.A 6.8 7.41 7.24 28.3

2.B 6.8 7.21 7.21 28.3

2.C 6.8 7.34 7.29 28.4

2.D 6.8 7.36 7.42 28.5

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 6.10 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 6.10: 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 Necessary

Evaluation 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

Table 6.8).

No



Report No. 660469-01(00)

22

Environmental Protection UK Criteria for Identifying Whether an Air Quality

Assessment is Necessary

Evaluation 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 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

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

23

6.2.1 Pollution Emissions Cost

The 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:

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



Report No. 660469-01(00)

24

7 MITIGATION MEASURES

7.1 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 Mitigation

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.

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

25

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: Significance

With 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

26

8 CONCLUSIONS

An 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

27

9 REFERENCES

City 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 24 November 2014].

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. MAGIC Map [online] Available at:

http://magic.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed 24 November 2014].

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 24

November 2014].

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014. UK-AIR Air Information Resource.

[online] Available at: http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk [Accessed 24 November 2014].

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:



Report No. 660469-01(00)

28

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/planningpolicystatement23.p

df [Accessed 24 November 2014].

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 24

November 2014].

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 24 November 2014].

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 24 November 2014].

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 24 November 2014].

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 24 November 2014].



Report No. 660469-01(00)

29

APPENDIX A: CONSTRUCTION DUST ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

This 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).



Report No. 660469-01(00)

30

Step 1: Screen the requirement for assessment

The 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; or

o 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 Magnitude

Demolition

The 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 – 50,000m

3, 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.

Earthworks

The 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


• 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.

Construction

The 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


• 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).



Report No. 660469-01(00)

31

Trackout

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 Area

The 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

32

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

33

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 Low

10-100 High Medium Low Low

1-10 Medium Low Low Low

Medium >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

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

1-10 High Medium Low Low Low

28-32

µg/m3

>100 High High Medium Low Low



24-28

µg/m3

>100 High Medium Low Low Low


1-10 Medium Low Low Low Low

<24 µg/m3 >100 Medium Low Low Low Low

10-100 Low Low Low Low Low

1-10 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 Sensitivity Distances from the Source (m)

<20 <50

High High Medium

Medium Medium Low

Low Low Low

Step 2C: Defining the Risk of Impacts

The 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

34

Table A5: Risk of Dust Impacts from Demolition

Sensitivity of Area Dust Emission Magnitude

Large Medium Small

High High Risk Medium Risk Medium Risk

Medium High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk

Low Medium Risk Low Risk Negligible

Table A6: Risk of Dust Impacts from Earthworks/Construction


Large Medium Small


Medium Medium Risk Medium Risk Low Risk

Low Low Risk Low Risk Negligible

Table A7: Risk of Dust Impacts from Trackout


Large Medium Small


Medium Medium Risk Low Risk Negligible

Low Low Risk Low Risk Negligible



Report No. 660469-01(00)

35

APPENDIX B: EMISSION SOURCE APPORTIONMENT

Table 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 0.2

1.A PM2.5 15.9 19.9 45.7 12.6 5.6 0.4

1.A PM10 17.7 18.7 46.1 12.0 5.1 0.4

1.A CO2 21.8 15.6 45.6 11.8 4.8 0.4

1.B NOx 6.8 30.9 53.8 5.6 2.7 0.3

1.B PM2.5 18.6 23.3 53.5 2.9 1.3 0.5

1.B PM10 20.6 21.7 53.5 2.7 1.2 0.4

1.B CO2 25.2 18.0 52.6 2.7 1.1 0.4

1.C NOx 4.9 22.3 38.9 22.8 10.9 0.2

1.C PM2.5 15.6 19.5 44.9 13.6 6.0 0.4

1.C PM10 17.4 18.4 45.3 13.0 5.6 0.4

1.C CO2 21.5 15.3 44.9 12.8 5.2 0.4

1.D NOx 6.0 27.1 47.2 13.2 6.3 0.2

1.D PM2.5 17.4 21.8 50.0 7.2 3.2 0.5

1.D PM10 19.3 20.4 50.2 6.8 2.9 0.4

1.D CO2 23.7 16.9 49.5 6.7 2.7 0.4

2.A NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.3

2.A PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.5

2.A PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.4

2.A CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.5

2.B NOx 4.3 19.5 34.0 28.4 13.6 0.2

2.B PM2.5 14.4 18.0 41.4 17.9 7.9 0.4

2.B PM10 16.2 17.0 42.0 17.1 7.3 0.3

2.B CO2 19.9 14.3 41.7 16.9 6.9 0.4

2.C NOx 6.7 30.4 52.9 6.5 3.1 0.2

2.C PM2.5 18.5 23.1 53.1 3.4 1.5 0.5

2.C PM10 20.4 21.5 53.1 3.2 1.4 0.4

2.C CO2 25.0 17.9 52.3 3.1 1.3 0.4

2.D NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.3

2.D PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.5

2.D PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.4

2.D CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.5



Report No. 660469-01(00)

36

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 0.2

1.A PM2.5 16.1 20.2 46.3 11.8 5.2 0.4

1.A PM10 18.0 18.9 46.7 11.2 4.8 0.4

1.A CO2 22.1 15.8 46.2 11.0 4.5 0.4

1.B NOx 6.9 31.1 54.2 5.1 2.5 0.3

1.B PM2.5 18.7 23.4 53.7 2.6 1.2 0.5

1.B PM10 20.6 21.8 53.6 2.5 1.1 0.4

1.B CO2 25.3 18.1 52.8 2.4 1.0 0.4

1.C NOx 5.0 22.9 39.8 21.7 10.4 0.2

1.C PM2.5 15.8 19.8 45.5 12.8 5.7 0.4

1.C PM10 17.7 18.6 45.9 12.2 5.2 0.4

1.C CO2 21.7 15.5 45.5 12.0 4.9 0.4

1.D NOx 6.0 27.3 47.5 12.8 6.1 0.2

1.D PM2.5 17.4 21.8 50.2 7.0 3.1 0.5

1.D PM10 19.4 20.4 50.4 6.6 2.8 0.4

1.D CO2 23.8 17.0 49.7 6.5 2.6 0.4

2.A NOx 7.2 32.6 56.8 2.1 1.0 0.3

2.A PM2.5 19.1 23.9 55.0 1.1 0.5 0.5

2.A PM10 21.1 22.2 54.8 1.0 0.4 0.4

2.A CO2 25.8 18.4 53.9 1.0 0.4 0.5

2.B NOx 4.4 20.1 35.0 27.3 13.1 0.2

2.B PM2.5 14.6 18.3 42.2 17.0 7.5 0.4

2.B PM10 16.4 17.3 42.7 16.2 7.0 0.3

2.B CO2 20.3 14.5 42.4 16.0 6.5 0.4

2.C NOx 6.8 30.7 53.4 6.1 2.9 0.2

2.C PM2.5 18.5 23.2 53.3 3.1 1.4 0.5

2.C PM10 20.5 21.6 53.3 2.9 1.3 0.4

2.C CO2 25.1 17.9 52.5 2.9 1.2 0.4

2.D NOx 7.2 32.9 57.2 1.6 0.8 0.3

2.D PM2.5 19.2 24.0 55.2 0.8 0.4 0.5

2.D PM10 21.2 22.3 55.0 0.8 0.3 0.4

2.D CO2 25.9 18.5 54.1 0.7 0.3 0.5



Report No. 660469-01(00)

37

APPENDIX C: SITE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES

Site-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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

38

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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

39

• 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.



Report No. 660469-01(00)

40

• 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.