Read Microsoft Word - App 7.doc text version

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford

Air Quality Assessment Technical Appendix CW2 2B-10 July 2011

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

This report has been prepared for the sole benefit, use and information of Hutchinson Whampoa Properties for the purposes set out in the report or instructions commissioning it. The liability of Buro Happold Limited in respect of the information contained in the report will not extend to any third party.

Revision 00

Description Air Quality Assessment ­ Energy Centres

Issued by DM

Date 21/07/11

Checked TC

author signature

Daniel Moon

date approved date

21/07/11 Trevor Curson 21/07/11

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 1

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Contents

1. 2. Executive Summary Introduction 2.1 2.2 3. Purpose of Report Scope of Report 3 4 4 4 8 8 8 9 12 12 12 14 20 23 25 25 25 25 26 27 29 30 32 33 34 34 36 43

Legislation and Policy 3.1 3.2 3.3 Introduction Legislation Planning Policy

4.

Methodology 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Baseline Air Quality Construction Dust Operational Traffic Operational Energy Centres Assessment Criteria

5.

Baseline Air Quality 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Overview Local Authority Review and Assessment Local Authority Monitoring Data Diffusion Tube Monitoring Defra Background Air Quality Maps

6.

Model Verification 6.1 6.2 6.3 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Particulate Matter (PM10) Summary

7.

Air Quality Impact Assessment 7.1 7.2 Construction Dust Operational Impact

8.

Conclusion

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 2

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

1.

Executive Summary

Buro Happold has been commissioned by Convoys Investment S.á.r.l to assess the air quality impact of the Convoys Wharf development to support an outline planning application. Emissions associated with operational traffic, and emissions from on-site energy generation have been assessed using an advanced dispersion model. In addition, a second energy strategy for the site, connection to SELCHP has also been assessed. Emissions of dust associated with construction activities onsite have been qualitatively assessed based on long-term meteorological data and the proximity of sensitive receptors to the site boundary. The assessment focuses on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10) as they are the main pollutants associated with traffic and gas fired boilers and the London Borough of Lewisham have declared locations within and around the development an Air Quality Management Area for these pollutants. The contribution of emissions from traffic and on-site energy generation to ambient pollutant concentrations have been predicted using the ADMS-Roads dispersion model. Energy centres 1, 2 and 3 have been assumed to be fitted with NOx abatement technology.The relevant NAQOs are predicted to be achieved at all onsite receptors; therefore it is deemed that the site is suitable for residential use. The energy centres and wharf boiler are predicted to increase annual average NO2 concentrations by up to 1.0g/m3 (3.3%) at the most affected onsite receptor and 0.9g/m3 (3.1%) at the most affected existing receptor. Traffic emissions are predicted to contribute up to 4.9g/m3 (14.9%) at most the affected onsite receptor and 19.8g/m3 (42.5%) at most affected existing receptor to annual average NO2 concentrations. The annual average NO2 National Air Quality Objective (NAQO) is predicted not to be achieved at three of the considered receptors in the "do minimum" (future baseline) scenario and at four receptors for the "with development" scenario. All other relevant NAQOs are predicted to be achieved at all considered receptors. Emissions from the energy centres generally have a dominant effect on air quality within 100m of the stacks at ground level. Using Institute for Air Quality Management (IAQM) significance criteria and professional judgement it was predicted that emissions of NOx from traffic associated with the development, the energy centres and the wharf boiler will have "moderate adverse" impact at five of the considered receptors. The maximum impact to annual mean and 24 hour PM10 concentrations from traffic is below <0.1g/m3 at all considered receptors which is classified as "imperceptible" by IAQM significance criteria. An assessment of construction impacts was also undertaken with the main emphasis on construction dust. Construction traffic generated by the proposed development was considered insufficient to warrant air quality modelling

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 3

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

2.

2.1

Introduction

Purpose of Report

Buro Happold has been commissioned by Convoys Investments S.á r.l. to assess the impact to air quality of the Convoys Wharf development to accompany an outline planning application. Sources of onsite emissions from onsite energy generation have been considered in this assessment. An air quality modelling exercise of the proposed operational traffic on local air quality was undertaken by Mott MacDonald (February 2010). The results of this modelling exercise have been used in this assessment.

2.2

Scope of Report

This assessment considers the follow: The impact of traffic generated by the proposed development and of onsite energy centres/boilers on local air quality at existing residential receptors close to the development site for an operational year of 2019; Assessment of construction impacts as a result of dust and construction traffic; and The suitability of the site for its intended use.

The assessment focuses on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10) for the traffic assessment and only NO2 as these are the main pollutants associated with gas fired boilers and traffic, also the London Borough of Lewisham have declared locations within and around the development an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) due to concentrations exceeding the NAQOs for these pollutant. The number of HGV movements generated during each phase of construction on the local road network is presented in Table2.1.

Table 2.1: HGV Movements Generated during Construction Phases Total HGV Movements/Day Road Phase 1 Creek Rd (from southern end of New King St) Evelyn St between New King St and Groove St Evelyn St between New King St and Prince St Evelyn St between Prince St and Grove St Grove St between Evelyn St and Leeway, including haul route into site Prince St between Evelyn St and New King St including haul route on site New King St between site include haul road and Creek Rd Watergate St between Creek Road and Prince Street including haul route 232 174 116 116 58 58 Phase 2 232 186 162 162 23 23 23 Phase 3 174 174 174 -

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 4

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Construction traffic has not been considered as the movements as the number of HDV movements generated does not warrant an air quality impact assessment according to EPUK Guidance1. It states: "The following criteria are provided to help establish when an air quality assessment is likely to be considered necessary: 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); and 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 that as for a site this size the number of construction vehicles is unlikely to exceed 200 vehicle movements a 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)" Although there are more than 200 additional HDV movements on Creek Rd during Phase 1 and 2 of the construction assessment along this road is scoped out as the limit is exceeded by a small margin and the change results in only a 1% increase of traffic per day on Creek Rd (20,029 total vehicle flow per day). Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the energy centres, locations and receptors considered in this assessment.

_________________________

1

Environmental Protection UK (2010), Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2010 Update)

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 5

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Figure 2.1: Locations of Energy Centres, Wharf Boiler and Receptors

Energy for the proposed development may be delivered from three energy centres, which contain a number of Combined Heat and Power boilers (CHP) and gas fired boilers, and one gas fired boiler on the wharf. The number of CHPs and boilers within each energy centre is presented in Table 2.1.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 6

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 2.1: Indicative number of CHPs and Boilers in each Energy Centre Energy Centre 1 2 3 Wharf Boiler Number of CHP units 5 6 4 0 Number of gas boilers 2 2 1 1

Emissions from each energy centre will be released through a single multi-core stack at a height of 3m above roof level. Energy centre 1 is located on a seven storey building (23m), energy centres 2 and 3 are located on a nine storey building (29m) and energy centre 4 will be located on a 4 storey building (16m). The locations of the stacks are shown in Figure 2.1. Due to the size of energy centres 1, 2 and 3 it has been proposed that NOx abatement technology should be installed. Abatement technology could include Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) technology which could use UREA (carbamide, (NH2)2CO) as a reagent. SCR is a process where, in this case NOx reacts selectively with another compound across a catalyst, and is reduced into nitrogen (N2) and water (H2O). Such technology will reduces emission of NOx from the energy centres by 90%. The assessment assumes such technology is installed on energy centres 1, 2 and 3 and NOx emissions are reduced by 90%. If the SELCHP it should also be noted that a standby 15MW boiler is also proposed within the development. This boiler would only become operational if needed as back up in the event of temporary closure of SELCHP. In the case this does occur it is estimated that the boiler would be operational for duration of ten days, therefore emissions from this boiler have not been included within the assessment.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 7

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

3.

3.1

Legislation and Policy

Introduction

This section summarises the relevant legislation, regulatory and policy frameworks as applicable to air quality management in the area in and around Convoys Wharf. This includes consideration of the local, regional and national frameworks.

3.2

Legislation

In the UK, the presence of local air quality pollutants in ambient air is managed through legislation (including that transposed from EU Directives) and Government policy. Air quality limit values and objectives specify the concentration of a pollutant, a time period over which that concentration is measured, and a date by which it should be achieved. Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 requires that every local authority shall periodically carry out a review of air quality within its area, including likely future air quality. As part of this review, the authority must assess whether air quality objectives are being achieved, or likely to be achieved within the relevant periods. Any parts of an authority's area where the objectives are not being achieved, or are not likely to be achieved within the relevant period must be identified and declared as an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). The area encompassing the Convoys Wharf is declared an AQMA on the basis of elevated NO2 and PM10 concentrations. The air quality objectives specifically for use by local authorities in carrying out their air quality management duties are set out in the Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and the Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002. Reference should also be made to the Air Quality Standards Regulations 2007. The Environment Act requires that the UK Government produces a national `Air Quality Strategy' (AQS) containing standards, objectives and measures for improving ambient air quality and to keep these policies under review. The current AQS2 was made in 2007 under Section 80 of the Environment Act 1995. No statutory numerical criteria exist in relation to concentrations of dust in ambient air, or that deposited to land or other surfaces, and therefore none is included within the summary of relevant air quality criteria in Table 3.1 below. However, Section 79(1)(d) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 defines a `statutory nuisance' as "any dust, steam, smell or other effluvia arising on industrial, trade or business premises and being prejudicial to health or a nuisance". Where a local authority is satisfied that a statutory nuisance exists, or is likely to occur or recur, it must serve an abatement notice. Failure to comply with an abatement notice is an offence. However, where an operator employs the best practicable means to prevent or to counteract the effects of the nuisance, this constitutes a defence. With respect to the Proposed Development the key pollutants requiring consideration within the assessment (and for which numerical standards exist) are nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particulates (PM10 and PM2.5). Section 2 provides further information on the pollutants assessed. Key air quality objectives and limit values (hereafter referred to as air quality objectives (AQO)) are summarised in Table 3.1. These criteria are relevant to human exposure. There are no internationally or nationally designated ecological sites within 5 km of the proposed development site and hence objectives for the protection of vegetation and ecosystems are omitted.

_________________________

2

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (July 2007). The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Cm 7169, Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 8

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 3.1: Key Air Quality Objectives Pollutant Averaging Period 1-hour Objective Where Applicable (a) Attainment Date

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

200 g/m3 (b)

All locations accessible to the public Locations of permanent residence Locations where the public may be expected to be present for at least 8 hours per day (eg. Residential properties, hospitals, care homes, etc) Locations of permanent residence Urban background exposure

UK: 31 December 2005 (d) EU: 1 January 2010 (e) UK: 31 December 2005 (d) EU: 1 January 2010 (e) UK: 31 December 2004 (d) EU: 1 January 2005 (e)

Annual

40 g/m3

Particles (PM10)

24-hour

50 g/m3 (c)

Annual

40 g/m3

UK: 31 December 2004 (d) EU: 1 January 2005 (e) UK: 1 January 2015 (d) EU: 2010-2020

Particles (PM2.5)

Annual

25 g/m3 15% reduction

Notes: (a) Criteria are applicable only at locations where persons may be exposed over the averaging period. For example, the 1-hour criteria are applicable at all public places, the annual mean criteria at locations of residence. (b) Expressed as the 99.79th percentile for calendar year. (c) Expressed as the 90.4th percentile for the calendar year. (d) Air Quality Objective. Source: The Air Quality Strategy 2007. (e) EU Directive 1999/30/EEC relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air.

3.3

3.3.1

Planning Policy

National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS 23) - Planning and Pollution Control [Ref 6] offers guidance to Local Authorities on the relationship between controls on development under planning laws, and under pollution control legislation. PPS23 sets out those circumstances where air quality may be considered a material issue for planning applications and provides guidance to planning authorities on making decisions, including, more recently, advice on climate change. PPS23 states that air quality is likely to be particularly important where: The development is proposed inside, or adjacent to, an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) as designated under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995; The development could in itself result in the designation of an AQMA; and/or To grant planning permission would conflict with, or render unworkable, elements of a local authority's Air Quality Action Plan.

However, PPS 23 advises that not all planning applications for developments inside or adjacent to AQMAs should be refused if developments would result in a deterioration of local air quality. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs), transport authorities and pollution control authorities are encouraged to explore the possibility of securing

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 9

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

mitigation measures that would allow the proposal to proceed. All applications should be supported by such information as is necessary to allow a full consideration of the effect of the proposal on the air quality of the area. 3.3.2 The London Plan

The London Plan3 is the cross-cutting regional planning document of the Mayor of London. Policy 4A.6 which relates to air quality states that all Boroughs should implement the Mayor's Air Quality Strategy4 which sets out policies and proposals to improve London's air quality to the point where air pollution no longer poses a significant risk to human health. This includes reducing emissions from transport, effectively using the planning system to manage land-use changes and constraints and promoting sustainability and energy efficiency. In London, the annual mean NO2 objective and the 2005 daily mean PM10 objective are being exceeded at locations close to the main road network. The AQS objectives for all other pollutants are likely to be met in all London locations. Road traffic emissions in London are the major source of the pollutants of concern, accounting for an estimated 60% of NO2 emissions and 70% of PM10 emissions. The Mayor's Air Quality Strategy focuses on improving air quality in London by reducing the volume of traffic; and emissions from individual vehicles. In October 2009 a new draft version of the air quality strategy was published and it currently is out for consultation with the London Assembly and functional bodies. The new draft builds on key proposals outlined within the current document to further improve air quality in London. A key proposal within the Mayor's Air Quality Strategy to reduce emissions from individual vehicles is the implementation of Low Emission Zones (LEZ), which prohibit the most polluting vehicles from travelling within specified areas. In June 2005, the Mayor appointed Transport for London (TfL) responsible for preparing and consulting on revisions to both its air quality and transport strategy including proposals for a London LEZ. In October 2005, TfL produced a draft set of revisions to the LEZ proposals. As part of the stakeholder consultation process, a study to assess the impact of the LEZ on air quality and the health of the population was undertaken. The results of the study, published in January 20065, concluded that the scheme would result in overall holistic health benefits. In February 2008, the first phase of the LEZ was introduced and enforced on heavy good vehicles. In July 2008, this was expanded to include lighter lorries and some other diesel engine vehicles. By the end of 2010, vans and minibuses will be included and by 2012 buses will also have to comply. In order to enter the LEZ (without paying a penalty), vehicles must comply with the relevant EURO emissions standards. These standards certify the amount of pollutants (specifically, particulates, but often also NOx emissions by proxy) that are emitted from different categories of vehicle. Over time, the standard required in order to enter the LEZ penalty-free becomes more stringent. This is the way in which the LEZ is designed to reduce concentrations of air pollutants from road sources. The London Plan identifies Convoy's Wharf as a Safeguarded Wharf which poses certain constraints on the operation and regeneration of the site (this is discussed in more detail in Section 2 of the Environmental Statement). Environmental issues are considered as one of the potential factors that could make the viability of the Wharf unfavourable. Any redevelopment of the Wharf must take due consideration of the environmental impacts and opportunities with regard to the surrounding heterogeneous use classes.

_________________________

3 4

5

Mayor of London (2004). The London Plan www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan accessed November 2009 Mayor of London. (2002). `Cleaning London's Air, The Mayor's Air Quality Strategy' Greater London Authority ERM (2006) London Low Emission Zone ­ Health Impact Assessment http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/roadusers/lez/LEZHealth-Impact-Assessment-Summary.pdf accessed November 2009

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 10

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

3.3.3

Local Planning Policy

Lewisham Local Development Framework (LDF) was adopted in June 2011. The Core Strategy covers a 15 year period from 2011 to 2026. The policies laid out in the Core Strategy will help Council to assess all future planning applications. Policy CSP9 aims to improve air quality within the borough. It states: "The Council will seek to improve local air quality and minimise any negative air quality impacts by: a) supporting a co-ordinated and partnership approach to implement national policy, London Plan policy and the actions outlined in the Council's Air Quality Management Plan b) working with Transport for London to manage and improve air quality along transport corridors and traffic congestion points c) Working with all businesses, including SELCHP, within Lewisham to manage and improve air quality."

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 11

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

4.

4.1

Methodology

Baseline Air Quality

Current air quality around the site has been assessed by drawing on the following measured and modelled data: LB Lewisham LAQM reports provided information regarding historical air quality in the borough; Two air quality continuous monitoring stations for NO2 and PM10 operated by London Air Quality Network. One is located at Catford Town Hall, and is classified as an urban background site; the other is on New Cross Road and is classified as a roadside site; LB Lewisham's NO2 diffusion tube network. Data from two NO2 diffusion tube locations on New Cross Road and at the junction of New Cross Road and Pepys Road are presented in this report; and Modelled background data concentrations used in this assessment have been taken from an assessment undertaken by Mott MacDonald (February 2010), which uses the background maps taken from Defra's Local Air Quality Management Support website6 for 2019.

4.2

Construction Dust

Construction activities can result in temporary effects from dust. `Dust' is a generic term which usually refers to particulate matter in the size range 1-75 microns in diameter7. Emissions of construction dust are associated with the movement and handling of minerals and are therefore predominantly composed of the larger fraction of this range which does not penetrate far into the respiratory system. Particles such as PM10 and PM2.5 which have a greater potential for health effects normally represent a smaller fraction of emissions. Therefore the primary air quality issue associated with construction phase dust emissions is loss of amenity and/or nuisance caused by, for example, soiling of buildings, vegetation and washing and reduced visibility. There is no formally recognised methodology for determining these effects and no statutory environmental quality standards for which to compare levels of deposited dust or concentrations in air. Dust deposition is expressed in terms of mass per unit area per unit time, e.g. mg/m2/day1. UK guidance states that most non-toxic dusts will begin to be perceived as a nuisance when deposition reaches 200mg/m2/day1 8. This figure is based on an annual deposition rate and represents the threshold for significant nuisance. A range of criteria from 133 to 350 mg/m2/day1 is found outside of the UK. The usefulness of numerical criteria to determine effects from construction dust is limited as the perception of loss of amenity and/or nuisance is affected by a wide range of factors such as character of the locality and sensitivity of receptors. Because of this, assessment methodologies that are based on a qualitative approach are advocated in a range of guidance, including that produced by the Mayor of London, Buildings Research Establishment (BRE)9 and Defra10. Therefore, a qualitative approach has been adopted for this assessment based on key issues identified in the guidance described above.

_________________________

6 7

http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/ British Standards Association. (1987), `Glossary of Terms', BS 6069 (Part 2). 8 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (March 2005). `Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and Mitigating the Environmental Effects of Minerals Extraction in England, Annex 1: Dust', TSO (The Stationary Office). 9 Kukadia, V. Upton, S. Hall, D. (2003). `Control of dust from construction and demolition activities', Building Research Establishment. 10 Air Quality Expert Group. (2005). `Particulate Matter in the United Kingdom', Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 12

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

The first stage of the assessment has involved the identification of specific construction activities which have the potential to cause dust emissions, and the degree of that potential, in accordance with the generic activities presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Generic Dust Emitting Activities Activity Description Potential Dust Raising Activities Excavation works Excavation works, Transport of materials, Resuspension of dust on un-surfaced roads Dust Raising Potential

Setup and enabling works Roads and Infrastructure

Rerouting of utilities Decommissioning, Reenergising of existing mains. Diversion of public sewers. Installation of new roads as required. Installation of infrastructure below road level. Roads to be constructed as phasing dictates. Stripping of the walls and floors. Demolished material will be considered for re-use on-site; this material therefore has the potential to be crushed on-site.

Medium-High Medium - High

Site clearance and ground works

Earthmoving, Demolition, Excavation, Crushing, Transport of materials, Wind, Resuspension of dust on un-surfaced roads Transport of materials, Storage of materials, Preparation of materials(cutting etc.), Resuspension of dust on roads, Wind Earthworks, Storage of materials, Wind

High

Construction of new buildings

Construction of buildings on floor-by-floor basis using building cranes

Low-Medium

Landscaping

Landscaping of the Development may be employed at a future date.

Low-Medium

In the second stage of the assessment, all sensitive receptors with the potential to be significantly affected by construction dust emissions have been identified. The distances from source that construction dust effects are felt are dependent on the extent and nature of mitigation measures, prevailing wind conditions and the presence of natural screening by, for example, vegetation or existing physical screening such as boundary walls on a site. However, research indicates that that effects from construction activities that generate dust are generally limited to within 150-200 metres of the source8. Therefore, all sensitive receptors within 200 metres of the construction site boundary have been identified, and their sensitivity to effects determined in accordance with Table 4.2.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 13

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 4.2: Receptor Sensitivity, Dust Emissions Receptor Sensitivity High Hospitals and clinics Retirement Homes High-Technology industries Painting and furnishing Food processing Medium Schools Residential areas Food retailers Glasshouse and nurseries Horticultural land Offices Low Farms Light and heavy industry Outdoor storage

The final stage of the assessment has been to identify other local factors which may affect dust emissions such as meteorological conditions and natural screening. On the basis of the above, the construction phase has been afforded a risk descriptor of high, medium or low in relation to its potential for causing significant dust effects. The results of the construction dust assessment are compared with the overarching criteria within the Mayor of London's best practice guidance (BPG) (as presented in Table 4.3) and mitigations measures that are consistent with the Mayor of London's BPG have been identified.

Table 4.3: Construction Phase Impact Assessment and Risk Criteria Risk Size of Development No. of new properties Potential effect on sensitive receptors Infrequent Intermittent or likely Significant

Low Medium High

< 1000 m2 1000 ­ 15,000 m2 > 15,000 m2

< 10 10 ­ 150 > 150

4.3

Operational Traffic

The modelling of the impact to air quality by traffic associated with the proposed development was undertaken by Mott MacDonald (February 2010). The methodology of the assessment is presented within this section of the report. 4.3.1 Temporal Extent of the Assessment

Three assessment scenarios for air quality effects arising from operational transport impacts have been included within this assessment as follows: A baseline assessment undertaken for 2008; Without Development (Do-Minimum) 2019 ­ without the proposed development but with other committed and planned development in the study area; and

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 14

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

With Development (Do-Something) 2019 ­ with the full proposed development and with other committed and planned development in the study area.

The baseline scenario is considered in order that the dispersion model can be a verified. The report relies on a previous modelling exercise undertaken by Mott McDonald in 2010. This assessment contained a baseline assessment for 2008 and considered at date of completion as 2019. While the date of opening has now moved to 2022, it is considered that an opening year of 2019 will still yield a robust assessment as traffic emissions are predicted to improve by 2022 as automotive technology delivers cleaner and more efficient vehicles and the national fleet composes of newer vehicles. Hence this is considered a worst case assessment. 4.3.2 Spatial Extent of the Assessment and Identification of Sensitive receptors

For the operational traffic assessment, pollutant concentrations were modelled at receptor locations within the study area representing the existing residential sensitive receptors where concentrations were likely to be highest and changes in air quality, as a result of the proposed development, were likely to be greatest. In addition, discrete sensitive receptors were modelled at locations representative of proposed residential uses within the proposed development. Details of the sensitive receptors are presented in Table 4.4 and Figure 2.1. In addition to discrete locations, concentrations were modelled over a receptor grid covering the study area. The `intelligent gridding' function within ADMS Roads was used to generate receptor points at a high resolution to estimate pollutant concentrations near to the modelled links. The traffic related pollutants NO2 and PM10 only have been modelled as these represent the pollutants which the LB Lewisham's review and assessment work has determined as being of concern in the Borough.

Table 4.4: Modelled Discrete Sensitive Receptors No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Name New King Street 1 New King Street 2 (2nd floor) New King Street 3 Prince Street 1 Prince Street 2 Grove St 1 (2nd floor) Grove St 3 Evelyn St 1 Prince St 3 Evelyn St 2 (2nd floor) Evelyn St 3 Evelyn St 4 Grove St 4 Evelyn St 5 Type Existing Existing Existing Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) Existing (residential) X (m) 537112 537133 537089 537040 537018 536765 536674 536830 536862 536850 536827 536730 536742 537220 Y (m) 177836 177700 177858 177893 177906 177940 178265 177897 177897 177877 177866 177943 177972 177679 Height (m) 1.5 4.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 4.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 15

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

No. 15 16 17 18 19 20

Name Watergate St Onsite 1 Onsite 2 Onsite 3 Onsite 4 Creek Rd 1

Type Existing (residential) Proposed (residential) Proposed (residential) Proposed (residential) Proposed (residential) Existing (residential)

X (m) 537159 537087 537033 536737 536950 537231

Y (m) 177718 177901 178101 178238 178237 177649

Height (m) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

4.3.3

Dispersion Model Selection

The proposed development is located within an AQMA which has been designated on the basis of elevated NO2 and PM10 concentrations. Any new developments should not prejudice this designation or the associated action plan. Effects of new developments on local air quality must be carefully managed and assessed in detail. Moreover, discussions with the relevant local authorities highlighted the need to identify locations where air quality objectives may be breached. To address these issues, a detailed dispersion modelling study was undertaken in accordance with UK best practice. The advanced dispersion model ADMS-Roads 2.3 (full description at www.cerc.co.uk) was used to predict concentrations of ground level contributions from road traffic to NO2, NOX and PM10 concentrations. ADMS Roads is a new-generation dispersion modelling system produced by Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants which can be used to assess the effects of road vehicles on local air quality. Unlike simpler spreadsheet screening tools, it can include parameters such as variable meteorological conditions, complex road networks (including the combined contribution of multiple road links on single sensitive receptors) and the capability of including the effects of complex terrain, atmospheric chemistry and street-canyon effects. The model is widely used by Local Authorities in the UK as part of their review and assessment obligations. 4.3.4 Traffic Data

Traffic data used for this assessment is presented in Table 4.7. Changes to the proposed development have occurred since the traffic modelling assessment in February 2010. As a consequence, the traffic flows for the Scheme have also changed. In order to understand the effect this would have on the dispersion modelling that had been undertaken, traffic data for the site and the local area has been re-examined in detail. In particular a comparison has been made between the traffic data associated with the February 2010 Scheme and the current Scheme. These have been evaluated as part of the environmental assessment process to understand if the noise and air quality assessments which rely on these data remain valid. In the context of local air quality, traffic flows of less than 10,000 vehicles per day are not considered significant. Additionally, traffic changes of less than 10 percent are not expected to have an effect on local air quality (LAQM.TG(09)). The tabulated summary figures are included in Appendix CW2 2A-7.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 16

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

When the data is compared, two points are very clear: The future baseline and with development figures are in general lower than the traffic modelling assessment in February 2010. This applies to almost all road sections. Where there is a projected increase the traffic flows are extremely small and are not considered to be significant; and The projected percentage change in traffic on local roads as a result of the development is, in almost all cases, lower than previously projected. Where increases over what was predicted in the February 2010 Scheme are anticipated, these are on roads with low traffic flows (less than 10,000 AADT).

Even with lower baseline data, the traffic impact from the current Scheme is now lower than the February 2010 Scheme. This can also be demonstrated by comparing the overall number of vehicles and HGVs assessed for the February 2010 and current Scheme.

Table 4.5: Summary comparison of number of vehicles and HGV's February 2010 Scheme Total AADT 230,940 Total HGV 10,466 Current Scheme Total AADT 202,053 Total HGV 8,399

Note: Total AADT is the sum of AADT flows for all roads included in assessment while total HVG is the sum off all HGV flows

Table 4.6: Full comparison of 24hr AADT flows for old and new development proposals Old scheme Street Name Future baseline flows Future baseline with development flows New scheme Future baseline flows Future baseline with development flows

% change

% change

Creek Road (north of Deptford Church) Evelyn St (Deptford Church St to Deptford High St) Evelyn St (Deptford High St to Prince St) Evelyn St (Prince St to Grove St) Evelyn St (Grove St to Blackhorse Rd) Evelyn St (Blackhorse Rd to Oxestalls Rd) Watergate St (North of Evelyn St) New King St (North of Evelyn St) Prince St (East of Evelyn St) Grove St (North of Evelyn St) Oxestalls Rd (North of Evelyn St) New King St Site Access Grove St Site Access

21747 29932 28052 27751 22356 20318 342 652 1774 5625 2670 -

24742 35446 33169 32274 23656 21617 342 2472 3544 8848 4767 3608 5321

13.8% 18.4% 18.2% 16.3% 5.8% 6.4% 0% 279.3% 99.8% 57.3% 78.6% -

20029 27774 27363 25608 19738 18244 333 624 1796 5746 2628 -

21944 31445 29067 26095 19738 18521 333 3655 2631 6234 5222 3921 3082

9.6% 13.2% 6.2% 1.9% 0.0% 1.5% 0% 485.7% 46.5% 8.5% 98.7% -

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 17

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Old scheme Street Name Future baseline flows Future baseline with development flows

New scheme Future baseline flows Future baseline with development flows

% change

% change

Deptford Church St (South of Creek Rd) Creek Road (north of Deptford Church) Evelyn St (Deptford Church St to Deptford High St) Evelyn St (Deptford High St to Prince St)

15999 21747 29932 28052

18517 24742 35446 33169

15.7% 13.8% 18.4% 18.2%

15459 20029 27774 27363

17215 21944 31445 29067

11.4% 9.6% 13.2% 6.2%

The traffic modelling assessment for the earlier development proposals are therefore considered to remain valid and robust as they assess a `worse than worst-case' traffic situation. Traffic speeds near to main junctions were assumed to be 20kph in accordance with government guidance11.

Table 4.7: Traffic Data used within this Assessment Link Baseline AADT Creek Road (north of Deptford Church) Evelyn St (Deptford Church St to Deptford High St) Evelyn St (Deptford High St to Prince St) Evelyn St (Prince St to Grove St) Evelyn St (Grove St to Blackhorse Rd) Evelyn St (Blackhorse Rd to Oxestalls Rd) 16923 %HDV 3.6% Without Scheme AADT 21747 %HDV 3.6% With Scheme AADT 24742 %HDV 3.6% 32.0 Speed kph

26580

4.8%

29932

4.8%

35446

4.8%

32.0

24985

4.9%

28052

4.9%

33169

4.9%

32.0

24879

4.8%

27751

4.8%

32274

4.8%

32.0

19851

5.2%

22356

5.2%

23656

5.2%

32.0

17888

3.8%

20318

3.8%

21617

3.8%

35.4

_________________________

11

Defra (2009), LAQM.TG(09)

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 18

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 4.7 cont: Traffic Data used within this Assessment Link Baseline AADT Watergate St (North of Evelyn St) New King St (North of Evelyn St) Prince St (East of Evelyn St) Grove St (North of Evelyn St) Oxestalls Rd (North of Evelyn St) New King St Site Access Grove St Site Access Deptford Church St (South of Creek Rd) Deptford High St (South of Evelyn St) Abinger Grove (South of Evelyn St) Blackhorse Road (South of Evelyn St) 324 %HDV 1.9% Without Scheme AADT 342 %HDV 1.9% With Scheme AADT 342 %HDV 1.9% 32.0 Speed kph

611

0.0%

652

0.0%

2472

0.0%

32.0

1720 5228

4.7% 2.3%

1774 5625

4.7% 2.3%

3544 8848

8.1% 2.3%

32.0 28.3

2480

3.5%

2670

3.5%

4767

3.5%

32.0

13396

6.6%

15999

6.6%

3608 5321 18517

5.4% 2.0% 6.6%

32.0 32.0 32.0

4953

4.5%

5308

4.5%

5308

4.5%

32.0

5651

1.8%

6033

1.8%

6033

1.8%

32.0

1203

7.3%

1275

7.3%

1275

7.3%

32.0

Source: Colin Buchanan 2010 Notes: Annual average daily flows. Speed near to junctions assumed to be 20km/hr AADT = Annual Average Daily Traffic; HDV = heavy duty vehicles.

4.3.5

Meteorological Data

Three years of hourly sequential meteorological data have been used, sourced from the meteorological station at Heathrow Airport which is the closest representative site to Lewisham. Windroses for the three years used within the assessment are presented Figure 4.1. In order to ensure a conservative assessment, the results presented for discrete sensitive receptors represent the maximum modelled concentrations from the three years of meteorological data used.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 19

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Figure 4.1: Windroses for Heathrow Airport (2006 ­ 2008)

0° 800

0° 800

340° 330° 320° 310° 300° 290°

350°

0° 800

10°

20° 30° 40°

320° 310° 300° 290°

340° 330°

350°

10°

20° 30° 40°

320° 330°

340°

350°

10°

20° 30° 40°

600

600

50° 60° 70°

50° 60° 70°

310° 300° 290°

600

50° 60° 70°

400

400

400

200 280° 270° 260° 250° 240° 230° 220° 210° 200° 190° 180° 170° 160° 150° 140° 80° 90° 100° 110° 120° 130°

200 280° 270° 260° 250° 240° 230° 220° 210° 200° 190° 180° 170° 160° 150° 140° 80° 90° 100° 110° 120° 130°

280° 270° 260° 250° 240° 230° 220° 210° 200° 190°

200 80° 90° 100° 110° 120° 130° 140° 150° 180° 170° 160°

2006

0 3

2007

6 10 16 (knots) W speed ind 0 1.5 3.1 5.1 8.2 (m/s)

2008

4.3.6

NOx to NO2 Relationship

A number of methods for determining NO2 concentrations from NOx concentrations are available and supported by Defra. Recent research undertaken on behalf of Defra has provided a new method for deriving NO2 concentrations from NOx concentrations specifically for use within road assessments. It is currently available as a spreadsheet based tool on the Air Quality archive website (www.airquality.co.uk). This method has been applied to the road traffic assessment and its suitability assessed within the model verification. 4.3.7 Model Verification

Model verification is the process by which uncertainties associated with dispersion modelling are investigated. Modelled results are compared with monitored results to determine the performance of the model. Section 6 presents details of the model verification process which has been carried out for NO2 and PM10.

4.4

Operational Energy Centres

The contribution of emissions from the energy centre to NO2 concentrations has been predicted using the ADMSRoads Extra dispersion model. This model has been widely used in the UK for this type of assessment. The input parameters for the model, given by the project's building services adviser Hoare Lea, are presented in Table 4.8. All stacks were modelled at 3m above roof level and all energy centres are running at 75% capacity throughout the year. Emission rates have been temperature corrected and an effective exit diameter was calculated for the energy centres. The volumetric flows for the energy centres are summed and temperature averaged. Highlighted figures show that a calculation has been made to derive the required input parameter.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 20

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 4.8: Dispersion Model Input Parameters Input Parameter NOx Emission Rate (mg/Nm3) Volumetric Flow (m3/s) Exit Diameter (m) Exit Temperature (oC) Efflux Velocity (m/s) Stack Height above Ground Level (m) NOx Emission Rate (g/s) CHP unit 50 0.8 0.25 120 16.2 n/a Boiler unit 10 0.8 0.40 50 6.5 n/a

0.21

0.06

NOx abatement will reduce emissions of NOx by 90% therefore the emission rates associated with energy centres 1, 2 and 3 have been assessed at 10% of that presented in the previous report. The buildings where the stacks are located and any adjacent buildings that are taller than the stacks have been included in the assessment as building downwash will have a significant effect on the dispersion of the resulting plumes. Table 4.9 presents the building input parameters used within the dispersion model. The dispersion model requires a building to be designated as the "main building" to affect the dispersion of the plume for each stack. In each case the building upon which the stack is located has been designated as the corresponding "main building".

Table 4.9: Building Input Parameters Building Shape X(m)* Y(m)* Height (m) Length (m) Width (m) Angle from N (o) 0 0 9.3 350.7 9.3 9.3 9.3

11 2 32 43 5 64 7

Note:

1

Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular Rectangular

537136 537124 536806 537057 537029 536795 536789

177949 177984 178230 178009 178029 178263 178233

29 29 29 23 23 16 23

20 15 17 50 15 16.5 17

80 65 60 18 35 80.5 95

* Corresponds to centre point of building "Main Building" for energy centre 1 2 "Main Building" for energy centre 2 3 "Main Building" for energy centre 3 4 "Main Building" for the wharf boiler

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 21

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Figure 4.2 shows the model visualisation of the building input parameters.

Figure 4.2: Visualisation of ADMS-Roads Extra Buildings Input Parameters

To reflect the area surrounding the site a surface roughness of 1m, which is consistent with cities, was used in the assessment. It has been assumed that all NOx emitted for the boilers is as NO2. This is a conservative assumption which is likely to over-estimate the annual NO2 concentrations close to the energy centres. Hourly sequential meteorological data for 2005 from Heathrow airport has been used for this assessment. This is the most representative meteorological station where the necessary parameters are recorded. Concentrations of NO2 have been predicted at the same receptors modelled in the previous assessment at a height of 1.5m to represent relevant exposure. Along with this, concentrations of NO2 have been predicted over a 600m x 700m grid across the footprint of the site at a resolution of 10m. This will allow for a pollution contour to be created so that the impact of emissions from the energy centres to NO2 concentrations across the site can be easily understood. Contributions to NO2 concentrations from road traffic at considered receptors have been taken from the previous report and presented in Section 5 of this report. It should be noted that since the earlier assessment traffic on the local road network is predicted to be lower than previously assessed therefore predicted NO2 concentrations represent a "worse than worst" case assumption and are likely to be lower than previously predicted. The traffic contributions to NO2 concentrations have been added to predicted contributions from the energy centres and the predicted background concentrations (taken from previous report and presented in Section 5 of this report) to allow assessment against the relevant NAQO.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 22

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

4.5

Assessment Criteria

The predicted concentrations of NO2 have been assessed against the annual mean NAQO (40µg/m3). The predicted annual average concentrations for NO2 were used to screen whether the short-term NO2 NAQO is likely to be breached. Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(09) (Defra, 2009) states: "authorities may assume that exceedences of the 1-hour mean objective for NO2 are only likely to occur where annual mean concentrations are 60µg/m3 or above" The predicted number of days when the PM10 concentration exceeds 50g/m3 has been calculated from the annual average concentration using the methodology in LAQM.TG(09). The magnitude and significance of impacts on local air quality of a proposed development have been defined in the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) guidance issued in 200912. These definitions have been applied to the results of this assessment. Table 4.10 presents the IAQM's definition of impact magnitude as a percentage of the relevant NAQO.

Table 4.10: IAQM's Definition of Impact Magnitude for Changes in Pollutant Concentration as a Percentage of the NAQO Magnitude of Change Large Medium Small Imperceptible Annual Mean Increase/Decrease >10% Increase/Decrease 5-10% Increase/Decrease 1-5% Increase/Decrease <1%

Table 4.11 presents the IAQM's impact descriptors to describe the significance of changes in annual average NO2 concentrations due to a scheme at specific receptors. It should be noted that the guidance states that this magnitude and significance criteria should not be used to evaluate the overall air quality impact of a scheme but should be used to inform it.

_________________________

12

IAQM, 2009, http://www.iaqm.co.uk/text/News/IAQM_PS_Significance_16_11_2009.pdf, www.iaqm.co.uk

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 23

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 4.11: IAQM's Air Quality Impact Descriptors for Changes to Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations at a Receptor Change in Concentration Absolute Concentration in Relation to Objective/Limit Value Magnitude of Change Small Slight Adverse Medium Moderate Adverse Large Substantial Adverse

Above Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (>40g/m3) Just Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (36-40g/m3) Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (30-36g/m3) Well Below Objective/Limit Value With Scheme (<30g/m3)

Slight Adverse

Moderate Adverse

Moderate Adverse

Negligible

Slight Adverse

Slight Adverse

Negligible

Negligible

Slight Adverse

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 24

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

5.

5.1

Baseline Air Quality

Overview

All Local Authorities are obliged to periodically report on the air quality conditions in their area. In this section, a summary of this process is presented along with the monitored air pollutant concentrations at a range of locations near to the study area. This includes data from within LB Lewisham and LB Greenwich, as the site is within Lewisham but near to the boundary with LB Greenwich.

5.2

Local Authority Review and Assessment

In 2001, the LB of Lewisham declared four large areas and a series of ribbon roads as AQMAs based on exceedances of NO2 and PM10 objectives. In addition, in the same year the LB of Greenwich declared its entire Borough an AQMA due to predicted exceedences of the annual mean objectives for NO2 and PM10. The most recent Review and Assessment reports in both Boroughs produced in 2008 noted that the annual mean NO2 objective continued to be exceeded in 2007. In particular roadside locations exhibit elevated concentrations of NO2. This is a similar situation to other Boroughs throughout London. Both Boroughs have developed air quality action plans to try and improve ambient air quality conditions for local residents

5.3

5.3.1

Local Authority Monitoring Data

Continuous Monitoring Stations

The LB of Lewisham operates two continuous monitoring stations, known as Lewisham 1 and Lewisham 2. Lewisham 1 is classified as an urban background site meaning it is generally representative of the area's background air pollutant concentrations and is away from major or significant sources of pollutants. This station monitors NO2, sulphur dioxide and ozone, of which the former is relevant to this assessment. The station is located on Catford Road near to the rail station, which is approximately 4.5km south of Convoy's Wharf. Lewisham 2 is classified as a roadside site and as such is representative of the exposure near to the roadside. This monitoring site measures NO2, PM10 and sulphur dioxide, of which the first two are of value to this assessment. The site is located on New Cross Road near to the rail station approximately 5m from the roadside with a sampling height of 3m. This is approximately 1.4km south-west of Convoy's Wharf. A summary of the monitoring station data is presented in Table 5.2. The data shows that annual mean concentrations for NO2 have been consistently higher than the annual mean NAQO (40g/m3) in the recent past and that pollutant concentrations near busy roads are elevated. PM10 data at the roadside location does show a steady decline since 2004 and does not exceed the annual mean NAQO (40g/m3) at this location.

Table 5.1: Summary of Continuous Monitoring Locations in LB Lewisham Name Location Classification Distance to Kerb (m) n/a Sampling height (m) X (m) Y(m)

Lewisham 1

Catford Town Hall

Urban background Roadside

537675

173689

Lewisham 2

Source:

New Cross Road, New Cross

6

3

536241

176932

London Air Quality Network

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 25

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 5.2: Summary of Continuous Monitoring Data for Lewisham Year Lewisham 1 NO2 Annual Mean (g/m³) 49 51 55 53 52 57 52 Lewisham 2 NO2 Annual Mean (g/m³) 68 57 65 60 63 64 51 Lewisham 2 PM10 Annual Mean (g/m³) 28 28 26 26 25 25 25

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Source: Notes:

London Air Quality Network Data for PM10 represent the recently corrected data from Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM) measurements, as reported on the London Air Quality Network (LAQN) website. Data capture at all sites was in excess of 75%, although at Lewisham 2 capture rates for NO2 were below 90% in 2005 and 2006 and for PM10 in 2007.

5.4

Diffusion Tube Monitoring

The LB of Lewisham established a network of diffusion tubes which started operating in February 2008. Although eleven tubes were deployed, the majority of these tubes are located a considerable distance from Convoy's Wharf and therefore are not considered in this assessment. Nonetheless, the monitoring data from all sites across Lewisham shows that concentrations are elevated across the Borough with more than half the tubes showing annual mean NO2 concentrations in excess of the annual mean NAQO (40 g/m3). The sites close to Convoy's Wharf are presented in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4 below.

Table 5.3: Summary of Diffusion Tube Monitoring Locations in LB Lewisham Name Location Classification Distance to Kerb 4 Sampling Height 2.5 X (m) Y (m)

LWS005/7

Triplicates located with Lewisham 2 continuous analyser Junction of New Cross Road and Pepys Road

Roadside

536241

176932

LWS008

Roadside

7

2.5

535830

176830

Source: LB Lewisham EHO

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 26

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 5.4: Summary of Diffusion Tube Monitoring Results in LB Lewisham (g/m³) Tube LWS005 LWS006 LWS007 LWS008 2008 NO2 Annual Mean Concentration 70 70 68 52

5.5

5.5.1

Defra Background Air Quality Maps

Overview

The Defa provides estimates of pollution concentrations for NOx, NO2 and PM10 across the UK for each 1 kilometre grid square for every year from 2006 to 2020. The 1km2 maps include a breakdown of background concentrations by emission types to include roads and industrial emission sources. 5.5.2 Defra Background Air Quality Data

The background concentrations presented in Table 5.5 which are representative of each of the sensitive receptors are values from the grid square that the receptor is located in, adjusted to remove contributions from nearby road sources. This method follows recently published government guidance and is designed to avoid the double counting of road source emissions within the assessment [Ref 17].

Table 5.5: Defra Background Annual Mean Concentrations Receptor Name 2008 Annual Mean Background Pollutant Concentration (g/m3) NOx New King St 1 New King St 2 (2nd floor) New King St 3 Prince St 1 Prince St 2 Grove St 1 (2nd floor) Grove St 3 Evelyn St 1 Prince St 3 Evelyn St 2 (2nd floor) 48.4 48.4 48.4 48.4 48.4 50.0 50.1 50.0 50.0 50.0 NO2 34.4 34.4 34.4 34.4 34.4 35.3 35.3 35.3 35.3 35.3 PM10 23.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 23.4 23.3 23.4 23.4 23.4 2019 Annual Mean Background Pollutant Concentration (g/m3) NOx 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 35.1 36.2 36.3 36.2 36.2 36.2 NO2 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 27.1 27.2 27.1 27.1 27.1 PM10 21.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.6 21.4 21.6 21.6 21.6

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 27

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Receptor Name

2008 Annual Mean Background Pollutant Concentration (g/m3) NOx NO2 35.3 35.3 35.3 34.4 34.4 35.3 37.8 37.8 35.3 34.4 PM10 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.1 23.1 23.4 23.9 23.9 23.3 23.1

2019 Annual Mean Background Pollutant Concentration (g/m3) NOx 36.2 36.2 36.2 35.1 35.1 36.2 38.2 38.2 36.3 35.1 NO2 27.1 27.1 27.1 26.4 26.4 27.1 28.4 28.4 27.2 26.4 PM10 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.3 21.3 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.3

Evelyn St 3 Evelyn St 4 Grove St 4 Evelyn St 5 Watergate St Onsite 1 Onsite 2 Onsite 3 Onsite 4 Creek Rd 1

50.0 50.0 50.0 48.4 48.4 50.0 54.8 54.8 50.1 48.4

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 28

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

6.

Model Verification

Model verification is the process by which checks are carried out to determine the performance of a dispersion model at a local level, primarily by comparison of modelled results with monitoring data. Differences between modelled and monitored data may occur as a result of uncertainties associated with a number of model inputs including: Traffic flows, speeds and vehicle splits; Emissions estimates; Background concentrations; Meteorological data; and Surface roughness length and terrain.

The verification process benefits an assessment by investigating uncertainties and minimising them either through informed refinement of model input parameters or adjustment of the model output if it is deemed necessary. Guidance produced by Defra (LAQM.TG(09), 2009) provides a methodology for model verification including calculation methods and directions on the suitability of monitoring data. As described in Section 4 monitoring is carried out at a number of locations by the surrounding local authorities. For the purpose of this verification only roadside monitoring sites have been used as verification against kerbside sites tends to result in over prediction at non-kerbside locations which are the primary focus of this assessment. Surface roughness was set as 1.0 metres, representing the urban area in which the monitoring sites are located. Traffic data used in the verification is presented Table 6.1. Background concentrations used for the monitoring sites are presented in Table 6.2. In accordance with guidance the model verification runs have been based on 2008 meteorological data.

Table 6.1: Traffic Data used within Verification Modelling Link AADT Light Duty Vehicles 32735 25207 2950 21298 35397 29733 23911 AADT Heavy Duty Vehicles 4424 1937t 111 1343 2259 2357 1405 Speed (kph)

A2 New Cross Road A206 Trafalgar Road Maize Hill Creek Road East Creek Road West A2 Blackheath Hill Deptford Church

30 35 35 30 25 30 25

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 29

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 6.2: Background Concentrations used in Model Verification Location 2008 Background Annual Mean Concentration (g/m3) NOx New Cross Gate Trafalgar Road Blackheath 51.6 55.5 48.5 NO2 36.2 34.3 34.6 PM10 23.3 23.3 23.3

Notes: PM10 background data obtained from millennium village background station PM10 concentrations calculated using the volatile correction method

6.1

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Verification of NO2 concentrations has been carried out using 2008 results from three roadside continuous analysers in LBL and LBG. These locations have been selected as they are all relatively close to the site and would experience similar concentrations to those within the study area. No diffusion tube locations have been used within the verification process. Diffusion tubes are not as accurate as continuous analysers and can be up to approximately 20 percent above or below the actual pollutant concentration, it is therefore considered more robust to verify the model against the continuous analysers only. The traffic model for the proposed development did not cover a large enough area to incorporate local monitoring locations. Therefore traffic data used within the verification was obtained from the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (LAEI). The LAEI provides traffic data for all main roads within London for 2004 and 2010 showing a detailed breakdown of vehicle categories. A comparison was made the assessment years; this indicated that there was predicted to be negligible growth in traffic between 2004 and 2010. LAEI guidance assumes 2008 flows are the same as the 2010 and were used within the verification. A comparison between flows from the LAEI and the traffic data produced for the proposed development was undertaken by comparing flows along the A200 Evelyn Street. The comparison showed that the total vehicle numbers presented within the LAEI and were broadly similar with the LAEI flows being slightly higher. Table 6.3 presented below shows the monitoring data used within the verification, their location and the monitored pollutant concentrations. All monitoring data is taken from continuous monitoring stations.

Table 6.3: Monitoring Data Used in Model Verification Location 2008 Measured Annual Mean Concentration (g/m3) NOx New Cross Gate Trafalgar Road Blackheath 148.0 100.8 110.9 NO2 63.2 53.0 45.4 PM10 24.8 21.5 n/a

Notes: PM10 concentrations calculated using the volatile correction method

Table 6.4 and Figure 6.1 present the results of the model verification. It can be seen that the modelled NO2 concentrations at all locations are well below the monitored values. On this basis it has been concluded that the

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 30

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

model is under predicting annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area. Therefore, an adjustment factor has been calculated.

Table 6.4: Model Verification Results Site Name New Cross Gate Trafalgar Road Blackheath Classification Roadside Roadside Roadside Monitored Total NO2 63.2 53.0 45.4 Modelled Total NO2 46.1 40.1 39.7 % Difference -27.1 -24.3 -12.5

Figure 6.1: Model Verification Results

To derive the adjustment factor for this assessment the modelled road NOx contribution has been compared to monitored road NOx contribution. The verification results for the three continuous monitors indicate that the model is significantly under-predicting. Applying the LAQM.TG(09) method gives a modelled road NOx contribution adjustment factor of 3.56 across the verification sites. This adjustment factor is applied to the modelled road NOx contributions and added to background NOx concentrations to give total corrected NOx at each of three verification sites. The final stage of the verification process involves applying the latest NOx to NO2 relationship. Table 6.5 presents the total adjusted modelled NO2 and the monitored NO2 after the adjustment factor has been applied. Figure 6.2 presents the correlation between the total corrected NO2 and the monitored NO2. Once the adjustment factor has been applied and the NOx to NO2 adjustment performed the modelled results match the monitored values very well. After the adjustment is carried out the model is over predicting by 3.5% it is therefore considered that the model is performing well.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 31

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 6.5: Adjusted Model Results Site Name Monitored Total NO2 Total Corrected Modelled NO2 63.8 53.0 45.4 Adjusted %Difference

New Cross Gate Trafalgar Road Blackheath

63.2 53.0 45.4

1.0 -1.9 11.6

Figure 6.2: Adjusted Modelled Results

6.2

Particulate Matter (PM10)

Table 6.6 present the results of the model verification for PM10. Verification was not carried out at Blackheath continuous monitor as the data capture rate was less that 75%. It can be seen that the modelled PM10 concentrations at New Cross Gate and Trafalgar Road are approximately the same as the monitored values. On this basis it has been concluded that the model is working sufficiently well within the study area, therefore no adjustment factor has been calculated.

Table 6.6: PM10 Model Verification Results Site Name Classification Monitoring Method Continuous Continuous Monitored Total PM10 24.8 21.5 Modelled Total PM10 24.2 24.3 % Difference

New Cross Gate Trafalgar Road

Roadside Roadside

-2.5 13.0

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 32

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

6.3

Summary

Application of the LAQM.TG(09) method verification method gives a modelled road NOx contribution adjustment factor of 3.56 across the verification sites. Once this is applied in accordance with the latest NOx to NO2 correlation adjusted modelled results are slightly higher than monitored results. Comparison of modelled versus monitored data for PM10 shows that no adjustment is required and that in some cases we are over predicting the annual mean and 24hr concentrations.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 33

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

7.

7.1

7.1.1

Air Quality Impact Assessment

Construction Dust

Overview

Construction dust is predominantly composed of large particles which do not penetrate far into the respiratory system. Health effects are therefore minimal although very high concentrations of dust can lead to short-term health impacts. Construction phase dust has a greater potential to lead to loss of amenity and/or nuisance in the local area. There are three key factors that must be considered when determining the overall risk of dust effects: Location of locally sensitive receptors; Duration of the works; and Nature of the works and relative dust raising potential of the activities. Location of Sensitive Receptors

7.1.2

Dust impacts from construction activities if unmanaged typically affect sensitive receptors up to 200m from the source activity, although the risk of impact deteriorates with increasing distance and the complexity of the surrounding environment. Therefore, the sensitive receptors within 200m of the site are considered within the assessment. As the development will occur in phases, the most sensitive receptors to construction dust effects are likely to be those onsite. The anticipated development phases are set out below and presented in Figure 7.1. As the phasing indicates there is the potential for overlap between the operation and construction of the development. Phase 1 Site preparations: 3rd Q 2012 ­ 2nd Q 2014 Construction: 1st Q 2013 ­ 1st Q 2017 Site preparations: 3rd Q 2013 ­ 2nd Q 2017 Construction: 2nd Q 2015 ­ 4th Q 2019 Site preparations: 2nd Q 2017 ­ 2nd Q 2019 Construction: 3rd Q 2018 ­ 2nd Q 2022

Phase 2

Phase 3

Convoy's Wharf is situated on the south bank of the River Thames and is surrounded on its north-west, south-west and south-east sides by development; predominantly residential. This includes properties on the adjacent streets of Leeway, Grove Street, Barnes Terrace, Dacca Street, Prince Street and Watergate Street as well as the streets that lead from these. Some of the surrounding properties are blocks of flats with balconies particularly in the area around Pepys Park and Grove Street, Dacca Street and Waterloo Street. Typically residents might use these for hanging washing which could be susceptible to soiling. A number of communal areas also exist, such as Pepys Park itself, Sayes Court, Twinkle Park etc and within individual flat developments. Several schools are located in the surrounding areas including Charlotte Turner Primary School, Clyde Nursery School and Deptford Park Primary School. None are directly adjacent to Convoy's Wharf but are within the 200m boundary.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 34

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

As the development phasing progresses, more sensitive receptors will be introduced to the area within the site. This will bring sensitive receptors much closer to the construction activities although as the scheme progresses, the intensity of the construction activities will lessen. On this basis, and with reference to the criteria presented in Table 4.3, receptor sensitivity in the area is classified as `medium'. 7.1.3 Nature and Duration of Dust Raising Activities

The construction phase will be divided into a number of phases, however, for assessment purposes the construction phase has been divided into six main activities: demolition, excavation, building sub-structure, building super-structure and clean out and landscaping. These activities align with those presented in Table 4.1 in the methodology section, therefore, the list of potential associated dust raising works is not repeated here. Given the nature of the works the site is classified as having `high risk' of causing dust effects during the construction phase. Activities with the highest dust raising potential are those that are associated with the movement of materials, including demolished buildings and excavation of materials, and the storage of spoil on site. As materials are moved and break up, small particles are liberated by the wind, or transported by vehicle wheels, and escape the site where they are later deposited. Demolition works are likely to be the most significant dust-raising activity of all the construction works, the periods of these works represents the most significant risk of dust effects. Given that a large portion of the site has been demolished this will be less of a concern. Seven buildings still remain and will be demolished as required by the overall development phasing. This means that some of the existing buildings will remain standing while other areas of the site are being constructed. This will help to reduce the magnitude of potential effects of demolishing the remaining buildings by reducing the scale of works at any one time, and will allow more tightly controlled areas and time periods for dust management strategies to be effected. In addition, this strategy reduces the amount of open space across the site reducing the potential for wind to suspend dust. While management will strive to reduce the amount of dust generated in the first place, this will help to reduce the potential for effects where dust is emitted (for example, by accident). Some of the existing buildings on site are intended to be used as storage areas for materials delivered to site. It is proposed to store construction materials in Building 15 in the northeast area of the site. Exposed stockpiles of materials can lead to particle liberation and therefore enclosing stockpiled materials indoors will reduce the likelihood of dust effects particularly for overnight storage of materials. A crushing plant may be located on site in order to process the materials already on the ground to use as suitable fill for the earthworks and sub-structures. Generally this plant will be situated immediately adjacent to a stockpile of arisings to be crushed and the machine fed directly by 360 excavators. To try and conduct this work within an existing building would result in material having to be double or triple handled and also it is likely that buildings will not have a safe operating clearance for the machines. At present it is not confirmed where the plant may be located. Crushing materials onsite means that excavated/demolished materials could be reused on site, reducing the requirements for delivery of virgin materials to site. Crushing does pose a risk of dust effects if not properly managed; therefore the use of the plant will be subject to tight controls aimed at suppressing potential dust generation. 7.1.4 Overall Risk of Dust Effects

The assessment has identified that the site is classified as having `high risk' of causing dust effects during the construction phase. The surrounding area is predominantly residential, and it is possible that if unmitigated, dust emissions could lead to loss of amenity and/or nuisance at properties surrounding the site, and in particular for newly introduced sensitive receptors once the earlier phases of the development begin to be occupied.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 35

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

7.2

Operational Impact

The contribution of emissions from traffic to pollutant concentrations and background pollutant concentrations were produced and assessed by Mott MacDonald (February 2010). 7.2.1 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Table 7.1 presents the predict contribution from traffic (previous assessment) and the energy centres to the annual mean NO2 concentrations and total annual mean NO2 concentrations for both with and without (future baseline) the development in 2019.

Table 7.1: Predicted Annual Mean NO2 Concentrations at Considered Receptors, 2019 Receptor Contribution to Annual Mean NO2 Concentration with Development (µg/m ) Background Traffic Energy Centres

3

Predicted Future Baseline Annual Mean NO2 Concentration (g/m3) 28.5 34.6 28.4 29.3 29.0 35.3 30.7 40.2 34.0 36.7 40.4 39.4 34.9 35.6 31.9 n/a n/a n/a n/a 43.7

Predicted Annual Mean NO2 Concentration with the Development (g/m3) 30.9 36.7 30.5 32.6 31.6 37.1 32.3 42.7 36.6 39.1 42.7 41.0 36.7 37.5 33.5 32.9 30.6 32.6 30.0 46.6

New King St. 1 New King St. 2 New King St. 3 Prince St. 1 Prince St. 2 Grove St. 1 Grove St. 3 Evelyn St. 1 Prince St. 3 Evelyn St. 2 Evelyn St. 3 Evelyn St. 4 Grove St. 4 Evelyn St. 5 Watergate St. Onsite 1 Onsite 2 Onsite 3 Onsite 4 Creek Rd. 1

26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 27.1 27.2 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 27.1 26.4 26.4 27.1 28.4 28.4 27.2 26.4

3.6 9.8 3.3 5.5 4.5 9.5 4.5 15.1 9.0 11.5 15.1 13.4 9.0 10.7 6.6 4.9 1.5 3.7 1.8 19.8

0.9 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.5 1.0 0.4

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 36

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 7.1 shows that the relevant NAQO is not achieved at four receptors. However, it should be noted that emissions from the development are predicted to be responsible for the exceedence of the relevant NAQO at one receptor and at all existing receptors where the relevant NAQO is predicted to be exceeded that largest contribution to annual average NO2 concentrations by some margin is from traffic. Emissions from the energy centres are predicted to contribute 0.8% - 3.1% to annual average NO2 concentrations experienced at considered receptors. The highest annual average NO2 concentration at considered receptors (46.6g/m3) is predicted to be experienced at the Creek Road 1 receptor. The largest contribution to NO2 concentrations by the energy centres at considered receptors (0.9g/m3) is predicted to be experienced on New King Street. However, the relevant NAQO is achieved at this location. The relevant NAQO is achieved at all onsite receptors it can therefore be deemed that the site is suitable for residential use. The annual average NO2 concentrations at all receptors are predicted to be below 60g/m3 therefore the 1-hour NO2 NAQO is likely to be achieved. Figure 7.1 shows the pollution contour of the predicted contribution to ground level annual average NO2 concentrations as a result of emissions from the energy centres

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 37

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Figure 7.1: Contribution to Annual Average NO2 Concentrations from Energy Centres

Figure 7.1 shows that the energy centres have a medium impact to air quality (>5% increase of baseline concentrations) within approximately 100m of the stacks at ground level. It also shows that the NAQO is achieved across the site therefore making the site suitable for residential use. Table 7.2 presents the predicted magnitude and significance of impacts to annual average NO2 concentrations from emissions from both traffic associated with the development and the energy centres at considered receptors for the first year of using the criteria presented in Section 4 of this report.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 38

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Table 7.2: Significance of Combined Impact of Emissions Associated with the Development, 2019 Receptor % Cumulative Impact to Annual Mean NO2 Concentration 8.6% 6.2% 7.5% 11.3% 8.8% 5.2% 5.3% 6.2% 7.6% 6.5% 5.6% 4.1% 5.0% 5.4% 5.2% 6.6% Magnitude of Impact Significance of Impact

New King St. 1 New King St. 2 New King St. 3 Prince St. 1 Prince St. 2 Grove St. 1 Grove St. 3 Evelyn St. 1 Prince St. 3 Evelyn St. 2 Evelyn St. 3 Evelyn St. 4 Grove St. 4 Evelyn St. 5 Watergate St. Creek Rd. 1

Medium Medium Medium Large Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Small Medium Medium Medium Medium

Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse Moderate Adverse Slight Adverse Moderate Adverse

Table 7.2 shows that emissions associated with the development cause no "substantial adverse" impacts and nine "moderate adverse" impacts at considered receptors. Some of these impacts maybe considered to be lower where the criterion for the magnitude of the impact is met by a marginal amount given that: the IAQM significance criteria is not used to evaluate but to inform on the significance of air quality impacts; worst case assumptions have been made; and the inherent uncertainties within the model

For instance at Grove Street 1, Grove Street 3, Evelyn Street 3, Grove Street 4, Evelyn Street 5 and Watergate Street receptors the "medium" criterion for the magnitude of impact is met by a small margin. The magnitude of impact should therefore be lowered to the "small" criterion. This will have the effect of reducing the significance of the impacts to "slight adverse" at Grove Street 1, Evelyn Street 3, Grove Street 4 and Evelyn Street 5 receptors and to "negligible" at Grove Street 3 and Watergate Street receptors. This would result in there being five "moderate

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 39

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

adverse" impacts. Out of the five receptors predicted to experience a "moderate adverse" impact to air quality three are predicted to be exposed to annual average NO2 concentrations above the NAQO. 7.2.2 Particulate Matter (PM10)

Table 7.3 presents the predicted contribution from traffic (previous assessment) and to the annual mean PM10 concentrations and total annual mean PM10 concentrations for both with and without (future baseline) the development in 2019.

Table 7.3: Predicted Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations at Considered Receptors, 2019 Receptor Contribution to Annual Mean PM10 Concentration with Development (µg/m3) Background New King St. 1 New King St. 2 New King St. 3 Prince St. 1 Prince St. 2 Grove St. 1 Grove St. 3 21.2 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.3 21.6 21.4 Traffic <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 21.2 21.3 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.3 21.2 21.2 21.4 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.3 21.2 Predicted Future Baseline Annual Mean PM10 Concentration (g/m3) Predicted Annual Mean PM10 Concentration with the Development (g/m3)

Table 7.3 cont: Predicted Annual Mean PM10 Concentrations at Considered Receptors, 2019 Receptor Predicted Future Baseline Annual Mean PM10 Concentration (g/m3) Predicted Annual Mean PM10 Concentration with the Development (g/m3)

Evelyn St. 1 Prince St. 3 Evelyn St. 2 Evelyn St. 3 Evelyn St. 4 Grove St. 4 Evelyn St. 5 Watergate St. Onsite 1

21.5 21.3 21.3 21.4 21.4 21.3 21.3 21.2 -

21.5 21.4 21.3 21.4 21.4 21.3 21.4 21.3 21.2

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 40

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Receptor

Predicted Future Baseline Annual Mean PM10 Concentration (g/m3) 21.5

Onsite 2 Onsite 3 Onsite 4 Creek Rd. 1

Predicted Annual Mean PM10 Concentration with the Development ( / ) 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.6

Table 7.3 shows that the relevant NAQO is predicted to be achieved at all consider receptors with the development. The impact of emissions of PM10 associated with development traffic at the most affected receptor is 0.1g/m3 (<1%) which is considered "imperceptible". Table 7.4 presents the predicted impact from traffic (previous assessment) to the 24 hour PM10 concentrations and to total number of days 24-hour PM10 concentrations are predicted to exceed 50g/m3 for both with and without (future baseline) the development in 2019.

Table 7.4: Predicted 24 hour PM10 Concentrations at Considered Receptors, 2019 Receptor Predicted Number of Days PM10 Concentrations >50g/m3 for Future Baseline Predicted Number of Days PM10 Concentrations >50g/m3 for with Development

New King St. 1 New King St. 2 New King St. 3 Prince St. 1 Prince St. 2 Grove St. 1 Grove St. 3 Evelyn St. 1 Prince St. 3 Evelyn St. 2 Evelyn St. 3 Evelyn St. 4 Grove St. 4 Evelyn St. 5

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 41

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

Receptor

Watergate St. Onsite 1 Onsite 2 Onsite 3 Onsite 4 Creek Rd. 1

Predicted Number of Days PM10 Concentrations >50g/m3 for Future B li 5 5 5 5 5 6

Predicted Number of Days PM10 Concentrations >50g/m3 for with D l 5 5 5 5 5 6

Table 7.4 shows that the relevant NAQO is predicted to be achieved at all consider receptors with the development. The impact of emissions of PM10 associated with development traffic at the most affected receptor is <1 day which is considered "imperceptible".

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 42

Redevelopment of Convoys Wharf, Deptford CW2 Volume 1 ­ Environmental Statement

8.

Conclusion

The site is located within an AQMA due to existing high concentrations of NO2 and PM10 within this area. The impact of construction dust, construction traffic and operational traffic on local air quality have been assessed by Mott MacDonald (February 2010) and their methodology and findings are presented in this report. Energy centres 1, 2 and 3 have been assumed to be fitted NOx abatement technology. The relevant NAQOs are predicted to be achieved at all onsite receptors; therefore it is deemed that the site is suitable for residential use. The energy centres and wharf boiler are predicted to increase annual average NO2 concentrations by up to 1.0g/m3 (3.3%) at the most affected onsite receptor and 0.9g/m3 (3.1%) at the most affected existing receptor. Traffic emissions are predicted to contribute up to 4.9g/m3 (14.9%) at most the affected onsite receptor and 19.8g/m3 (42.5%) at most affected existing receptor to annual average NO2 concentrations. The annual average NO2 National Air Quality Objective (NAQO) is predicted not to be achieved at three of the considered receptors in the "do minimum" (future baseline) scenario and at four receptors for the "with development" scenario. All other relevant NAQOs are predicted to be achieved at all considered considered receptors. Emissions from the energy centres generally have a dominant effect on air quality within 100m of the stacks at ground level. Using Institute for Air Quality Management (IAQM) significance criteria and professional judgement it was predicted that emissions of NOx from traffic associated with the development, the energy centres and the wharf boiler will have "moderate adverse" impact at five of the considered receptors. The maximum impact to annual mean and 24 hour PM10 concentrations from traffic is below <0.1g/m3 at all considered receptors which is classified as "imperceptible" by IAQM significance criteria.

© Buro Happold Ltd July 2011

Page 43

Information

Microsoft Word - App 7.doc

44 pages

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

1239155


You might also be interested in

BETA
Microsoft Word - App 7.doc