M5 Junction 4a to 6 All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR) · M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes...

M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR)

Air Quality Assessment

February 2014

326073-30-3003-RE-002-D02

An executive agency of the

Department for Transport

Project Support Framework (Consultancy) 2011 – 2016 M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR) Air Quality Assessment

M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR)

Air Quality Assessment

February 2014

326073-30-3003-RE-002-D02

Revision Record

Revision

No

Date Originator Checker Approver Description

P1 12/12/13 Matthew

O’Brien

Melanie Taylor Giles

Hewson

First Draft

A01 10/01/14 Matthew

O’Brien

Christopher

Mills

Giles

Hewson

RFC

A02 13/02/14 Matthew

O’Brien

Melanie Taylor Giles

Hewson

FIN

This document has been prepared on behalf of the Highways Agency by Mott MacDonald

Grontmij JV for the Highways Agency's Project Support Framework (PSF) (Consultancy)

2011-2015. It is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes

connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other

party or used for any other purpose.

Mott MacDonald Grontmij JV accepts no responsibility for the consequences of this

document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or

containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us

by other parties.

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It

should not be shown to other parties without consent from Mott MacDonald Grontmij JV

and from the party which commissioned it.


Prepared for:

Highways Agency

Address line 1, address line 2,

Town Postcode

Prepared by:

Mott MacDonald Grontmij

Stoneham Place, Stoneham Lane

Southampton, SO50 9NW


Page 3 of 83

Contents Page

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6

1.1 Scheme Information ................................................................................................ 6

1.2 Scope and Purpose of the Assessment .................................................................. 6

2 Legislation and Policy Context ............................................................................... 7

2.1 Legislation .............................................................................................................. 7

European Union ................................................................................................................... 7

England ................................................................................................................................ 7

Statutory Nuisance ............................................................................................................ 10

2.2 Policy .................................................................................................................... 10

UK Air Quality Strategy ...................................................................................................... 10

National Planning Policy Framework ................................................................................. 10

Local Planning Policy ......................................................................................................... 10

3 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Construction Dust ................................................................................................. 12

3.3 Local Air Quality .................................................................................................... 12

Overview ............................................................................................................................ 12

Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 12

Traffic Data ........................................................................................................................ 15

Assessment Scenarios ...................................................................................................... 15

Dispersion Model ............................................................................................................... 16

Emission Factors ............................................................................................................... 16

Meteorological Data ........................................................................................................... 16

Background Pollutant Concentrations ................................................................................ 17

NOx to NO2 Relationship .................................................................................................... 18

Receptors .......................................................................................................................... 18

Model Verification .............................................................................................................. 18

Assessment of 1 Hour NO2 and 24 Hour PM10 Concentrations ......................................... 18

Assessment of Future NOx and NO2 Projections ............................................................... 19


Page 4 of 83

Compliance with the EU Directive on Ambient Air Quality ................................................. 19

Evaluating Significance ...................................................................................................... 19

3.4 Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Air Quality Impact Appraisal ........................ 21

3.5 Regional Impacts .................................................................................................. 21

4 Baseline Conditions............................................................................................... 22

4.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 22

4.2 Local Authority Review and Assessment Information ........................................... 22

4.3 Scheme Diffusion Tube Monitoring Survey ........................................................... 22

5 Assessment of Impacts ......................................................................................... 24

5.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 24


5.3 Local Air Quality .................................................................................................... 28

NO2 Results ....................................................................................................................... 28

Junction 4a to Junction 5 ................................................................................................... 28

Droitwich ............................................................................................................................ 29

South of Droitwich to Junction 6 ........................................................................................ 30

PM10 Results ...................................................................................................................... 32

Assessment of Significance ............................................................................................... 32

5.4 Regional Impacts .................................................................................................. 33

5.5 Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Air Quality Impact Appraisal ........................ 34

6 Mitigation Measures............................................................................................... 36

6.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 36


7 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................... 37

8 References .............................................................................................................. 38

Appendix A – Model Verification .................................................................................... 39

Appendix B – Local Authority Monitoring Data ............................................................ 46

Appendix C – Scheme Diffusion Tube Monitoring ........................................................ 50

Appendix D – Local Air Quality Results ......................................................................... 55


Page 5 of 83

Appendix E – Sensitive Receptor Locations ................................................................. 63

Appendix F – SATURN Traffic Data ................................................................................ 78

Appendix G – WebTAG Results ...................................................................................... 81

Tables

Table 1: Air Quality Objectives and Limit Values ................................................................. 8

Table 2: Locations where the air quality objectives should and should not apply ................ 9

Table 4: Comparison of Monitored Background NO2 Concentrations and Defra

Background Pollutant Map Data ........................................................................................ 17

Table 5: Magnitude of Change Criteria .............................................................................. 20

Table 6: Guideline to Number of Properties Constituting a Significant Effect .................... 20

Table 8: Maximum Impacts at Droitwich ............................................................................ 30

Table 8: Maximum Impacts at Droitwich to Junction 6 ....................................................... 30

Table 10: Regional Impacts – 2012 Base Year Emissions ............................................... 34

Table 11: Regional Impacts – 2015 (Opening Year) Emissions ........................................ 34

Table 12: Regional Impacts – 2030 (Opening Year Plus 15 Years) Emissions ................ 34

Table 13: Regional Impacts – Changes from Base Year Emissions ................................. 34

Figures

Figure 3: Construction Dust Receptors (northern study area) ............................................ 25

Figure 4: Construction Dust Receptors (central study area) .............................................. 26

Figure 5: Construction Dust Receptors (southern study area) ........................................... 27


Page 6 of 83

1 Introduction

1.1 Scheme Information

The proposed Scheme is to install an All Lanes Running Smart Motorways (ALR) between

Junction 4a and Junction 6 on the M5 motorway. The proposed works would be

approximately 17km in length, with the following two links:

Junction 4a to Junction 5 - approximately 8km long.

Junction 5 to Junction 6 - approximately 9km long.

1.2 Scope and Purpose of the Assessment

This report provides an assessment of the potential air quality impacts of the proposed

Scheme in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11

Section 3, Part 1 – Air Quality (HA207/07) [Ref 1] and current Interim Advice Notes (IAN

170/12, 174/13 and 175/13).


Page 7 of 83

2 Legislation and Policy Context

2.1 Legislation

European Union

European Union (EU) Framework Directive 96/62/EEC on ambient air quality assessment

and management came into force in November 1996 and had to be implemented by

Member States by May 1998. This Directive aimed to protect human health and the

environment by avoiding, reducing or preventing harmful concentrations of air pollutants.

As a Framework Directive, it required the European Commission to propose ‘Daughter’

Directives which set air quality limit and target values, alert thresholds and guidance on

monitoring and measurement for individual pollutants. The four Daughter Directives are as

follows:

Council Directive 1999/30/EC (the first Daughter Directive) relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), particulate matter (PM10) and lead in ambient air;

Directive 2000/69/EC (the second Daughter Directive) relating to limit values for benzene and carbon monoxide (CO) in ambient air;

Directive 2002/3/EC (the third Daughter Directive) relating to ozone (O3) in ambient air; and

Directive 2004/107/EC (the fourth Daughter Directive) relating to arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air.

Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe was adopted in

May 2008. This Directive merges the first three existing Daughter Directives and one

Council Decision into a single Directive on air quality.

England

The Air Quality Standards Regulations 2010 came into force in June 2010; they implement

the EU’s Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality.

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). Once

such a declaration has been made, Authorities are under a duty to prepare an Action Plan

which sets out measures to pursue the achievement of the air quality objectives within the

AQMA.


Page 8 of 83

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.

The air quality objectives and limit values relevant to the assessment are summarised in

Table 1.

Table 1: Air Quality Objectives and Limit Values

Pollutant Averaging Period

Concentration Allowance Attainment Date

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

Annual 40 μg/m3 - 31 December 2005(a)(b)

1 January 2010(c)

1 Hour 200 μg/m3 18 31 December 2005(a)(b)

1 January 2010(c)

Particulates (PM10)

Annual 40 μg/m3 - 31 December 2004(a)(b)

1 January 2005(c)

24 Hour 50 μg/m3 35 31 December 2004(a)(b)

1 January 2005(c)

Notes: (a)

Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 as amended (b)

Air Quality Strategy 2007 (c)

EU Directive 2008/50/EEC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe and The Air Quality

Standards Regulations 2010. Derogations (time extensions) have been agreed by the EU for

meeting the NO2 limit values in some zones/agglomerations;

The air quality objectives only apply in locations of relevant exposure. Table 2 provides

details of where the respective objectives should and should not apply and therefore the

types of receptors that are relevant to the assessment.


Page 9 of 83

Table 2: Locations where the air quality objectives should and should not apply

Averaging Period Objectives should apply at: Objectives should not apply at:

Annual

All locations where members of the public might be regularly exposed.

Building façades of residential properties, schools, hospitals, care homes etc.

Building façades of offices or other places of work where members of the public do not have regular access. Hotels, unless people live there as their permanent residence.

Gardens of residential properties.

Kerbside sites (as opposed to locations at the building façade), or any other location where public exposure is expected to be short-term.

24 Hour

All locations where the annual mean objective would apply, together with hotels. Gardens of residential properties.

Kerbside sites (as opposed to locations at the building façade), or any other location where public exposure is expected to be short-term.

1 Hour

All locations where the annual mean and 24 and 8-hour mean objectives apply.

Kerbside sites (for example, pavements of busy shopping streets).

Those parts of car parks, bus stations and railway stations etc. which are not fully enclosed, where members of the public might reasonably be expected to spend one hour or more.

Any outdoor locations where members of the public might reasonably expected to spend one hour or longer.

Kerbside sites where the public would not be expected to have regular access.

Notes: [Ref 2]


Page 10 of 83

Statutory Nuisance

Section 79(1)(d) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 defines one type of ‘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, it is

a defence if an operator employs the best practicable means to prevent or to counteract

the effects of the nuisance.

2.2 Policy

UK Air Quality Strategy

The Environment Act 1995 requires the UK Government to produce a national AQS. The

AQS establishes the UK framework for air quality improvements. Measures agreed at the

national and international level are the foundations on which the strategy is based. The

first Air Quality Strategy was adopted in 1997 and replaced by the Air Quality Strategy for

England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland published in January 2000. The 2000

Strategy has subsequently been replaced by the Air Quality Strategy for England,

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 2007.

National Planning Policy Framework

The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the government’s planning policies for

England. With regard to air quality the Policy states at paragraph 109 that:

“The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:… preventing both new and existing 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 at paragraph 124 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.”

Local Planning Policy

Three South Worcestershire councils, including Worcester City Council (WCC) and

Wychavon District Council (WDC), collaborated on the preparation of the Local

Development Scheme (LDS) although each has specific content relating to the city or


Page 11 of 83

districts’ commitments. There are no specific policies listed in the LDS that refer to air

quality.

Bromsgrove District Council (BDC) published its Proposed Submission of the Bromsgrove

District Plan for a six week formal representation from the 30th September to 11th

November 2013 prior to its submission to the Government. The District Plan sets out the

strategic planning policy framework for development and planning strategy until 2030.

Within BDP1 there is one policy that relates to air quality:

“BDP1.4 - In considering all proposals for development in Bromsgrove District regard will

be had to the following:

b) Any implications for air quality in the District and proposed mitigation measures;”


Page 12 of 83

3 Methodology

3.1 Overview

Potential air quality impacts have been assessed in accordance with the DMRB Volume 11 Section 3, Part 1 – Air Quality (HA207/07) and the following IANs:

IAN 174/13 ‘Updated advice for evaluating significant local air quality effects for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality (HA207/07) [Ref 3]’; and

IAN 170/12 (v3) 1 ‘Updated air quality advice on the assessment of future NOx and NO2 projections for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality’ [Ref 4].

IAN 175/13 ‘Updated air quality advice on risk assessment related to compliance with the EU Directive on ambient air quality and on the production of Scheme Air Quality Action Plans for user of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality’’

The following sub-sections describe the methodology in more detail.

3.2 Construction Dust

Construction activities can result in temporary effects from dust. The word ‘dust’ usually

refers to particulate matter in the size range 1-75 microns in diameter [Ref 5].

A qualitative assessment of potential dust effects has been undertaken, based on a review

of likely dust raising activities and identification of sensitive receptors within 200m. Best

practice mitigation measures have been proposed commensurate with the risk of dust

effects identified.

3.3 Local Air Quality

Overview

The sub sections below describe the approach of the local air quality assessment.

Because of the potential impacts of the Scheme, and indication of existing exceedences of

air quality objectives in the area (see Section 4 for further details), a ‘Detailed Level’ local

air quality assessment has been undertaken.

Study Area

As noted above, the proposed Scheme is to install an ALR between Junction 4a and

Junction 6 on the M5 motorway. The SATURN traffic model for the Scheme encompasses

a wider area of the road network, up to 10km from the M5. In accordance with HA207/07,

the following criteria have been applied to the Do-Minimum and Do-Something scenario

traffic flows in order to identify which roads are likely to be affected by the Scheme

(referred to as ‘affected roads’) to the degree that potential air quality impacts require

consideration within the local air quality dispersion modelling:

Road alignment will change by 5m or more; or


Page 13 of 83

Daily traffic flows will change by 1,000 AADT or more; or

Heavy Duty Vehicle (HDV) flows will change by 10 km/hr or more; or

Peak hour speed will change by 20 km/hr or more.

A map of the affected roads, designated sites and AQMAs within the study area is

presented in Figure 1. SATURN traffic model data for affected roads has been presented

in Appendix F.

Additional road links have been included within the dispersion modelling where their emissions contribute to total concentrations at identified receptors.


Page 14 of 83

Figure 1: Study Area and Key Features


Page 15 of 83

Traffic Data

Outputs from the Scheme SATURN traffic model have been used for the assessment.

Data on vehicle flows, speed and % Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV) are available for the

following periods in the Do-Minimum and Do-Something scenarios:

AM peak period (07:00 to 10:00);

Interpeak period (10:00 to 16:00);

PM peak period (16:00 to 19:00); and

Off peak period (19:00 to 07:00).

The diurnal traffic flow characteristics, and therefore emissions, are represented in the

dispersion model using time varying emission factors. The same profile used for

weekdays has been applied to the weekend.

Assessment Scenarios

This assessment has considered the following scenarios:

Base Year 2012;

Do-Minimum (DM) Scenario 2015 (opening year); and

Do-Something (DS) Scenario 2015.

An analysis of the traffic data for a further future year of 2030 shows that, although an

increase in traffic is predicted, it is relatively small and likely to be outweighed by the

improvement in vehicle emissions and background concentrations expected. The

opening year of the proposed Scheme is therefore considered to represent the worst case

within the first 15 years of opening and so no further future year has been considered.

The construction period of the Scheme is estimated to be one year in total. At this stage,

limited information is available on what traffic management measures would be required

during this period. However, they may include:

Lane closures for the duration of the works, with narrow lanes and speed restrictions in place (50mph); and

Diversion if full closures are used, for example during works on slip roads.

Due to the limited duration of any traffic management measures, and the likely reduced

emissions associated with a 50mph speed restriction compared to normal speeds,

potential impacts from any traffic management associated with the construction phase of

the Scheme are considered to be negligible and have not been assessed further.

On the basis of the construction works to be undertaken, construction traffic movements

are considered to be insignificant compared to existing flows and therefore potential

impacts from the Scheme are considered to be negligible and have not been assessed

further.


Page 16 of 83

Dispersion Model

The assessment uses a dispersion model called ‘ADMS-Roads’ (version 3.1); a PC-based

model of dispersion in the atmosphere of pollutants released from road traffic sources,

produced and validated by Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants (CERC).

Emission Factors

Defra’s current guidance to Local Authorities recommends the use of the ‘Emission Factor

Toolkit’ (EFT) to calculate road traffic emissions for dispersion modelling. The latest

version of the toolkit (Version 5.2c) is available from Defra [Ref 6].

Meteorological Data

The most important meteorological parameters governing the atmospheric dispersion of

emissions are wind direction, wind speed and atmospheric stability.

For meteorological data to be suitable for dispersion modelling purposes, a number of

meteorological parameters need to be measured on an hourly basis. There are only a

limited number of sites where the required meteorological measurements are made.

Data from Pershore for 2012 were used within the assessment as it is the nearest and

most representative of the study area. Where cloud data were missing this was

supplemented by data from Birmingham and Coventry. A windrose is presented in Figure

2 which shows a dominance of wind from the south west

Figure 2: Windrose 2012


Page 17 of 83

Background Pollutant Concentrations

Only road traffic emission sources have been explicitly included within the dispersion

model. Non-road traffic related emission sources have been accounted for within the

assessment by assigning appropriate ‘background’ concentrations to modelled receptor

locations. These have been taken from Defra background pollutant concentration maps

[Ref 7]. A summary of the range of concentrations used within the study area is presented

in Table 3.

Table 3: Summary Defra Background Pollutant Map Data

2012 2015

NOx NO2 PM10 NOx NO2 PM10

Minimum (μg/m3) 19.4 14.0 15.0 16.6 12.2 14.5

Maximum (μg/m3) 32.3 21.6 17.7 27.3 18.8 17.2

A comparison of monitoring data taken from the Leominster Automatic Urban and Rural

Network (AURN) monitoring site and the Defra background pollutant concentrations has

been undertaken for the years 2010 to 2013. As presented in Table 4 the comparison

shows generally good agreement between the two data sources. Defra background

pollutant concentrations were consistently slightly higher than monitored background

concentrations at Leominster, with the exception of 2010. It is generally recognised that

meteorological conditions in the UK during 2010 caused unusually elevated pollutant

concentrations and therefore this appears to be under-represented by the Defra data at

this location.

As the Defra Background concentrations are consistent, and in most cases higher, than

the monitored values it is considered appropriate to use the Defra background pollutant

concentrations for this assessment.

Table 4: Comparison of Monitored Background NO2 Concentrations and Defra Background Pollutant Map Data

2010 2011 2012 2013

Conc. DC Conc. DC Conc. DC Conc. DC

Leominster(a) 15.0 83% 9.6 98% 9.0 97% 9.2 82%

Defra Background(b) 11.1 - 10.7 - 10.3 - 9.9 - Notes:

(a) – Located at 349774,258426.

(b) – Grid square 349500,258500

Conc. – Concentrations of NO2 in µg/m3

DC – Annual Data Capture (%)

“-“ = Modelled concentrations so DC not relevant


Page 18 of 83

NOx to NO2 Relationship

Research undertaken on behalf of Defra has provided a method to determine NO2

concentrations [Ref 8]. This method (version 3.2) has been used within this assessment

and its suitability assessed within the model verification process (see below).

Receptors

The assessment has included all sensitive receptors that have a reasonable risk of

exceeding the air quality objectives, and those that are likely to experience the highest

total concentrations and/or greatest change. As noted in Section 2, the air quality objectives only apply in locations of relevant exposure and therefore receptors have been chosen in accordance with Table 2.

As shown in Figure 1, there are no nature conservation sites (Designated Sites) within

200m of affected roads. Therefore potential impacts on Designated Sites from the

Scheme are considered to be negligible and have not been assessed further.

Appendix E presents a list of sensitive receptors included in the assessment and their

distance from the M5 carriageway, as well as Figures of their locations.

Model Verification

Dispersion modelling has associated with it an inherent level of uncertainty, primarily as a

result of:

Uncertainties with traffic flow and emissions data;

Uncertainties with recorded meteorological data; and

Simplifications made in the model algorithms or post processing of the data that describe atmospheric dispersion or chemical reactions.

This uncertainty has been addressed within the assessment by carrying out model

verification. Details of the model verification and use of an adjustment factor are

presented in Appendix A.

The model verification is based on the relevant monitoring data currently available, some

of which can be considered preliminary.

Assessment of 1 Hour NO2 and 24 Hour PM10 Concentrations

Government guidance [Ref 2] advises that exceedences of the 1 hour mean objective for

NO2 are only likely to occur where annual mean concentrations are 60µg/m3 or above.

Therefore exceedences of 60 μg/m3 as an annual mean are used as an indicator of

potential exceedences of the 1 hour mean NO2 objective.

The prediction of daily mean concentrations of PM10 is available as an output option within

the ADMS roads dispersion model for comparison against the short term air quality

objective. However, as the model output for annual mean concentrations is considered


Page 19 of 83

more accurate than the modelling of the daily mean, an empirical relationship has been

used to determine daily mean PM10 concentrations. In accordance with Government guidance [Ref 2], the following formula has been used:

‘No. of 24-hour mean exceedences = -18.5 + 0.00145 x annual mean3 + (206 / annual mean)’

Assessment of Future NOx and NO2 Projections

IAN 170/12 (v3) provides advice on taking account of the impact of future alternative NO2

projections. The IAN is in response to Defra’s advice on long term trends that there is a

gap between current projected vehicle emission reductions and projections on the annual

rate of improvements in ambient air quality as previously published in Defra’s technical

guidance.

The assessment of local air quality NO2 impacts has been undertaken in accordance with

IAN 170/13. The IAN allows for three potential approaches for determining the

significance of impacts based on professional judgement:

Defra’s technical guidance; or

Long term trend projections; or

Interim alternative long term trend projections.

The HA’s interim alternative long term projections have been used within the assessment

as they are considered to represent an appropriate balance of the likely future trends. This

is justified on the basis that the background concentrations presented in Table 4 indicate a

decline over recent years, whilst monitored concentrations from the nearest roadside

AURN site (Birmingham Tyburn) indicate very little change; concentrations for 2011, 2012

and 2013 are 45 µg/m3, 46 µg/m3 and 45 µg/m3 respectively.

Compliance with the EU Directive on Ambient Air Quality

IAN 175/13 provides advice on a risk assessment approach related to compliance with the

EU Directive on ambient air quality. The first step of the approach is to identify whether

any of the Scheme affected roads coincide with Defra’s Pollution Climate Mapping (PCM)

model. This has been carried out and it has been confirmed that none of the affected road

network coincides with the PCM model. Therefore it can be concluded that the Scheme

does not represent a risk to compliance with the EU Directive on ambient air quality and no

further assessment is required.

Evaluating Significance

IAN 174/13 provides advice for evaluating significant local air quality effects for public exposure and designated ecosystems. Evaluation of the significance of local air quality impacts has been undertaken in accordance with IAN 174/13, a summary of which is provided here.


Page 20 of 83

As noted above, sensitive receptors that have a reasonable risk of exceeding an air quality threshold have been assessed in both a Do-Minimum and Do-Something scenario. The difference in pollutant concentration between the two scenarios is used to describe the ‘magnitude’ of change in accordance with Table 5.

Table 5: Magnitude of Change Criteria

Magnitude of Change in Concentration

Value of Change in Annual Average NO2 and PM10

Large (>4) Greater than full MoU value of 10% of the air quality objective (4μg/m3)

Medium (>2 to 4) Greater than half of the MoU (2 μg/m3), but less than the full MoU (4 μg/m3) of 10% of the air quality objective

Small (>0.4 to 2) More than 1% of objective (0.4 μg/m3) and less than half of the MoU i.e. 5% (2 μg/m3). The full MoU is 10% of the air quality objective (4 μg/m3)

Imperceptible (</= 0.4) Less than or equal to 1% of objective (0.4 μg/m3) Notes: MoU = Measure of Uncertainty (10% of the objective)

The number of receptors where changes are greater than imperceptible, and where concentrations exceed the air quality objectives in the Do-Minimum or Do-Something scenario have been compared to the guideline bands presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Guideline to Number of Properties Constituting a Significant Effect

Magnitude of Change in Concentration

Number of Receptors With:

Worsening of air quality objective already above

objective or creation of a new exceedence

Improvement of an air quality objective already above

objective or the removal of an existing exceedence

Large (>4) 1 to 10 1 to 10

Medium (>2 to 4) 10 to 30 10 to 30

Small (>0.4 to 2) 30 to 60 30 to 60

The information compiled to complete Table 6 has then been used along with the following key criteria (amongst others) to determine the overall evaluation of local air quality significance:

Is there a risk that environmental standards will be breached?

Is there a high probability of the effect occurring?

Will there be a large change in environmental conditions?

Will the effect continue for a long time?

Will many people be affected?

Is there a risk that protected sites, areas, or features will be affected?

Will it be difficult to avoid, or reduce, or repair, or compensate for the effect?


Page 21 of 83

3.4 Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Air Quality Impact Appraisal

The DMRB notes that the results and a summary of the worksheets from the local air

quality appraisal prepared using the Transport Appraisal Guidance (TAG) [Ref 9] should

be presented with this report.

The TAG assessment involves the following key steps:

Step 1 – Identifying the Affected Network – This is the same as the Study area shown in Figure 1.

Step 2 – Quantifying the Number of Properties – The number of properties within 50m, 50 to 100m, 100 to 150m and 150m to

200m of affected roads are counted.

Step 3 – Calculating NO2 and PM10 Concentrations – Concentrations are predicted using the DMRB Screening Model. Although

this model is different to the ADMS-Roads model described in the preceding Sections, the key issue for the TAG assessment is the change in concentrations caused by the Scheme. Therefore use of the Screening Model is appropriate.

Step 4 – Calculating Property Weighted NO2 and PM10 Concentrations – A ‘score’ is assigned for each scenario which is calculated from the pollutant

concentrations and the number of properties

Step 5 – Calculating the Number of Properties that Improve, Worsen or Stay the Same

– The number of properties predicted to experience an increase, decrease, or no change in concentrations is calculated,

3.5 Regional Impacts

Quantification of changes in emissions of NOx, PM10 and carbon dioxide (CO2) has been

carried out for the following scenarios:

Base Year 2012;

DM 2015;

DS 2015;

DM 2030 (opening year plus 15 years); and

DS 2030.

Due the availability of traffic data and the relatively small size of the study area,

calculations have been based on diurnal traffic flows (rather than daily average flows) for

the entire SATURN traffic model area. In order to be consistent with the local air quality

assessment described above, the EFT has been used.


Page 22 of 83

4 Baseline Conditions

4.1 Overview

This Section provides a review of information available on baseline pollutant

concentrations relevant to the study area. This includes information available from

relevant Local Authorities and an NO2 diffusion tube monitoring survey currently underway

for the Scheme. Predicted concentrations at identified receptors from the 2012 Baseline

modelling are presented in the Results Section.

4.2 Local Authority Review and Assessment Information

The Scheme is located within the administrative areas of Bromsgrove District Council

(BDC), Wychavon District Council (WDC) and Worcester City Council (WCC) and the parts

of the affected road network pass through these administrative areas.

BDC and WCC have declared a number of AQMAs due to identified exceedences of the

annual mean NO2 objective, primarily as a result of road traffic emissions. As shown in

Figure 1, all of these AQMAs are more than 200m from affected roads and therefore there

are no potential impacts from the Scheme..

BDC, WDC and WCC carry out monitoring using NO2 diffusion tubes at a number of

locations, as shown in Appendix B. Monitored annual mean NO2 concentration data are

available for 2011 to 2013. As described in detail in Appendix A, the 2012 data are

considered likely to under-represent NO2 concentrations, primarily due to the limited basis

of the bias adjustment factor available. The bias factor has a limited basis because it uses

a national factor which has been determined from only two collocation studies (which is the

maximum available for that laboratory and preparation method).

Although the Local Authority monitoring covers a wide area, only three sites are within the

Scheme study area. Monitoring at Wychbold (near Junction 5 of the M5) indicates

potential exceedences of the annual mean NO2 objective, with concentrations of between

40 and 50 μg/m3 from 2011 to 2013. The two remaining sites are in Droitwich, both

broadly representative of concentrations at residential receptors near the M5. The

northern of the two sites reported concentrations of between 30 and 40 μg/m3 from 2011 to

2013. The southern site reported concentrations of between 23 and 35 μg/m3 from 2011 to

2013. Appendix B provides full details.

4.3 Scheme Diffusion Tube Monitoring Survey

A Scheme NO2 diffusion tube monitoring survey commenced in May 2013 and is currently

ongoing. Monitoring has been carried out and reported for 42 locations, the majority of

which are representative of relevant exposure, including properties near the M5.


Page 23 of 83

Details of the monitoring locations and latest results are presented in Appendix C. Results

have been bias adjusted (using a Scheme specific factor) and annualised in accordance

with Defra guidance.

The Scheme monitoring data shows that concentrations are generally below the annual

mean NO2 objective within the study area.

South of Droitwich, between Junction 5 and 6, monitored annual mean NO2 concentrations

at sites ‘M5J4AJ6_024’ and ‘M5J4AJ6_026’ are low, at 16 and 19 μg/m3 respectively.

Monitoring within Droitwich indicates that concentrations in this area are elevated,

particularly in the northern area where sites are closer to the M5, but no exceedences of

the annual mean NO2 objective at relevant exposure have been identified.

North of Junction 5, monitored concentrations vary (primarily as a result of the site

distances to the M5) and one site (‘M5J4AJ6_018’) which is considered representative of

relevant exposure indicates an exceedence of the annual mean NO2 objective.

In the area south of Catshill (near Junction 4a) concentrations are below the objective, at

around 20 μg/m3.


Page 24 of 83

5 Assessment of Impacts

5.1 Overview

This Section provides the results of the assessment of potential impacts from construction

dust, local air quality and regional impacts.


The following information is currently available on the work to be undertaken during the

construction phase of the Scheme:

Vegetation clearance would be required throughout the length of the Scheme to facilitate new infrastructure, ducting and drainage;

Drainage would be increased to ensure sufficient attenuation prior to existing outfalls, involving drainage works in the verges;

Cross carriageway ducts would be required;

New ducting would be required throughout the length of the verge for new communications and power supply infrastructure;

A total of 14 Emergency Refuge Areas (ERA’s) would be constructed within the verge. Each ERA would be 250m in length and up to 8m in width comprising an area of hardstanding adjacent to the existing hard shoulder lane.

Three existing portal gantries would be removed and replaced with super-span gantries spanning the full width of the motorway.

Three new superspan gantries will be constructed spanning the full width of the motorway;

Four new super-cantilever gantries would be constructed spanning one side of the motorway, two on the northbound carriageway and two on the southbound carriageway.

Three new MS3 signs would be installed, with four removed and one retained within the Highways verge;

Seventeen existing MS3 signs would be upgraded, to be replaced with MS4 signs in thirteen locations and CCTV in two locations. An additional eleven MS4 signs would be installed.

Three cantilever Advanced Direction Sign (ADS) gantries would be installed, with four verge mounted ADS.

Compound areas would be established within the verge. The final location of these is unknown at this stage.

Re-surfacing of all existing running lanes including the hard shoulder would be undertaken. This would be to Category 3 level.

Due to the uncertainties over the location of construction activities, all potentially sensitive receptors within 200m of the M5 have been identified and are presented in Figure 3 to

Figure 5. 762 residential properties, 22 commercial properties and 1 school are within 200m. 15 residential properties and one commercial property are within 50m. The majority of residential properties are in Droitwich. Based on the likely construction activities and their dust raising potential, the duration of the construction phase and location of sensitive receptors, potential dust impacts can be suitably controlled to avoid


Page 25 of 83

loss of amenity or nuisance using appropriate mitigation measures presented in Section 5.5.

Figure 3: Construction Dust Receptors (northern study area)


Page 26 of 83

Figure 4: Construction Dust Receptors (central study area)


Page 27 of 83

Figure 5: Construction Dust Receptors (southern study area)


Page 28 of 83

5.3 Local Air Quality

NO2 Results

Predicted NO2 concentrations at all modelled receptors are presented in Appendix D.

Appendix C provides detailed Figures of the receptor locations. The following paragraphs

provide a summary of impacts along key areas affected by the Scheme, moving south

from Junction 4a.

The Scheme is not predicted to cause reductions in NO2 concentrations at any modelled

receptors.

All predicted annual mean concentrations are well below 60 μg/m3 and therefore no

exceedences of the 1 hour NO2 objective are predicted.

Junction 4a to Junction 5

Table 7presents the maximum Scheme impacts between Junction 4a to Junction 5.

To the south of Junction 4a, west of Bromsgrove (see Figure E2), relatively few residential

properties are close to the M5. The maximum change in annual mean concentrations in

this area is 0.2 μg/m3 (at Receptor 2).

Farther south, to the west of Stoke Heath (see Figure E3) relatively few properties are

close to the M5. The maximum change in annual mean concentrations in this area is 0.3

μg/m3 (at Receptor 4).

Near Upton Warren (see Figure E4), there are a small number of residential properties

close to the M5. The maximum change in annual mean concentrations in this area is 0.6

μg/m3 (at Receptor 6.

Near Junction 5 at Wychbold (see Figure E5) there are a number of residential properties

close to the M5 and the junction itself. The maximum change in annual mean

concentrations in this area is 0.8 μg/m3 (at Receptor 15). Concentrations in this area are

close to the objective, but are not predicted to exceed it.

All of the above changes in concentrations are as a result of the Scheme causing a

change in AADT of 1345 and increase in average daily speed of 6kph along adjacent

sections of the M5.


Page 29 of 83

Table 7: Maximum Impacts at Junction 4a to Junction 5

Receptor

NO2 Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m3)

Shown in Figure 2015 DM 2015 DS Change

2 25.8 26.0 0.2 E2

4 26.6 26.9 0.3 E3

6 30.5 31.1 0.6 E4

15 37.5 38.3 0.8 E5

Droitwich

Table 8 presents the maximum Scheme impacts at Droitwich.

Droitwich has the highest density of housing close to the M5 within the study area. The

largest change in annual mean NO2 concentrations caused by the Scheme is 1.2μg/m3

and occurs at receptor 63 in the northern part of Droitwich (see Figure E6). The only

predicted exceedences of the annual mean objective also occur in this area due to a

combination of their proximity to the M5 and slightly higher background concentrations.

As Figure 6 and Table 8 show, Receptors 63 and 64 on Mayflower Road are predicted to

experience changes in annual mean concentrations above 0.8 μg/m3 and total

concentrations are very close to or above the air quality objective in the Do-Minimum and

Do-Something Scenario. Receptors south of these along Mayflower Road are not

predicted to experience total concentrations above the air quality objective in the Do-

Minimum and Do-Something Scenario. This is due to the increasing distance of these

receptors from the M5 and the lower background concentrations attributed to them.

All receptors presented in Table 8 are located within 25 metres of the M5. These

receptors will experience an increase in the annual mean NO2 between 0.8 and 1.2 μg/m3.

In the southern part of Droitwich (see Figure E7) the maximum change in annual mean

concentrations is 1.0 μg/m3 (at Receptor 217, which is closest to the M5) as a result of a

change in AADT of 1047 and increase in daily average speed of 5kph.


change in AADT of 1047 and an increase in average daily speed of 5kph along adjacent

sections of the M5.


Page 30 of 83

Table 8: Maximum Impacts at Droitwich

Receptor



47 41.0 41.8 0.8 E6

48 43.5 44.6 1.0 E6

63 43.4 44.6 1.2 E6

64 39.4 40.2 0.8 E6

South of Droitwich to Junction 6

Table 9 presents the maximum Scheme impacts south of Droitwich to Junction 6.

South of Droitwich, near Oddingley (see Figure E8) few residential properties are close to

the M5. The maximum change in annual mean concentrations in this area is 0.2 μg/m3 (at

Receptor 223).

Just north of Junction 6, near Tibberton (see Figure E9), relatively few properties are close

to the M5. The maximum change in annual mean concentrations in this area is 0.3 μg/m3

(at Receptor 225) as a result of a change in AADT of 1047 and increase in average daily

speed of 5kph.


change in AADT of 1047 and increase in daily average speed of 5kph along adjacent

sections of the M5.

Table 9: Maximum Impacts at Droitwich to Junction 6

Receptor



217 37.2 38.2 1.0 E7

223 23.2 23.4 0.2 E8

225 25.4 25.7 0.2 E9


Page 31 of 83

Figure 6: Local Air Quality Receptors with Predicted Concentrations Above 40(µg/m3)


Page 32 of 83

PM10 Results

Predicted PM10 concentrations at all modelled receptors are presented in Appendix D. As

the results show, annual mean PM10 concentrations are predicted to be well below the

objective in the Do-Minimum and Do-Something scenarios. All changes are predicted to

be less than 0.4 μg/m3, and therefore are considered ‘imperceptible’

Daily mean PM10 concentrations are predicted to be well below the objective in all

scenarios and the number of days when concentrations are above 50 µg/m3 is unchanged

by the Scheme.

Assessment of Significance

As Table 10 shows, the maximum increase in NO2 concentrations at a receptor

experiencing concentrations above the objective is ‘small’ and this is predicted to occur at

4 receptors (the locations of which are shown in Figure 6 above).

There are no predicted ‘small’, ‘medium’ or ‘large’ changes in PM10 concentrations. All

changes are predicted to be less than 0.4 μg/m3, and therefore are considered

‘imperceptible’.

Table 11 presents the overall evaluation of local air quality significance, and the basis of

the conclusion that the Scheme’s local air quality effects are not significant.

Table 10: Local Air Quality Receptors Informing Scheme Significance – NO2

Magnitude of Change in Annual Mean (μg/m3)

Number of receptors with:

Worsening of an air quality objective already above

objective or creation of a new exceedence

Improvement of an air quality objective already above objective or the removal of an existing

exceedence

Large (>4) 0 0

Medium (>2 to 4) 0 0

Small (>0.4 to 2) 4 0


Page 33 of 83

Table 11: Overall Evaluation of Local Air Quality Significance

Key Criteria Questions Yes / No

Is there a risk that environmental standards will be breached?

Yes

Will there be a large change in environmental conditions?

No

Will the effect continue for a long time? No

Will many people be affected? No

Is there a risk that designated sites, areas, or features will be affected?

No

Will it be difficult to avoid, or reduce or repair or compensate for the effect?

No

On balance is the Overall Effect significant? No

Evidence in support of professional judgement:

- The Scheme is predicted to cause an exceedence of the annual mean NO2 objective at 4 receptors in 2015.

- Changes in annual mean NO2 concentrations are ‘small’ at worst.

- Predicted concentrations of NO2 in the Do-Something scenario are likely to reduce to Do-Minimum levels within approximately 2 years.

- Changes in NO2 concentrations are predicted at a small number of receptors.

- There are no Designated Sites within 200m of affected roads.

- As local air quality effects are not significant, no mitigation measures are proposed.

- The affected road network (identified in Section 3.3) does not include any parts of the Compliance Risk Road Network. Therefore there is no risk of the Scheme causing non-compliance with the EU Directive on ambient air quality.

5.4 Regional Impacts

Results of the regional impact assessment are presented in Table 12 to Table 15. The

Scheme is predicted to cause an increase in emissions of NOx, PM10 and CO2 compared

to the Do-Minimum scenario in 2015 and 2030. This is due to an increase in overall

vehicle flows and speeds in the Do-Something scenario. The increase in speeds is the

dominant factor causing the increase in emissions.

Compared to the Base Year, emissions are predicted to increase in 2015 for all pollutants,

and for PM10 and CO2 in 2030. A reduction in NOx emissions is predicted in 2030

compared to the Base Year, primarily due to the expected introduction of more stringent


Page 34 of 83

Euro emission standards. The respective increase and reductions occur in the Do-

Minimum and Do-Something scenarios.

Table 12: Regional Impacts – 2012 Base Year Emissions

Pollutant 2012 Base Year

NOx (t/yr) 2,232

PM10 (t/yr) 144

CO2 (t/yr) 722,069

Table 13: Regional Impacts – 2015 (Opening Year) Emissions

Pollutant 2015 DM 2015 DS % Change

NOx (t/yr) 2,531 2,569 1.5

PM10 (t/yr) 182 184 0.7

CO2 (t/yr) 1,134,922 1,145,735 1.0

Table 14: Regional Impacts – 2030 (Opening Year Plus 15 Years) Emissions

Pollutant 2030 DM 2030 DS % Change

NOx (t/yr) 871 893 2.5

PM10 (t/yr) 156 157 0.6

CO2 (t/yr) 1,181,578 1,196,471 1.3

Table 15: Regional Impacts – Changes from Base Year Emissions

Pollutant 2015 2030

DM DS DM DS

NOx (%) 13.4 15.1 -61.0 -60.0

PM10 (%) 26.7 27.6 8.1 8.7

CO2 (%) 57.2 58.7 63.6 65.7

5.5 Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Air Quality Impact Appraisal

Appendix G presents the results of the TAG air quality impact appraisal. The results show

that for NO2 and PM10 there is an overall deterioration in concentrations with scores of

40.91 and 35.54 respectively. For both pollutants, all 758 properties are predicted to

experience an increase in concentrations, and therefore deterioration in air quality.


Page 35 of 83


Page 36 of 83

6 Mitigation Measures

6.1 Overview

This Section presents the mitigation measures which will be used to control potential

impacts from construction dust.

No mitigation measures are required for local air quality impacts.


The Contractor shall ensure works shall be carried out in accordance with the Best

Practicable Means, as described in Section 79 (9) of the Environmental Protection Act

(EPA) 1990, to reduce fumes or emissions which may impact upon air quality. This could

include but not be limited to the following, which will be included within the Construction

Environmental Management Plan (CEMP):

Avoid double handling of materials;

Minimise height of stockpiles and profile to minimise wind-blown dust emissions and risk of pile collapse;

Locate stockpiles out of the wind (or cover, seed or fence) to minimise the potential for dust generation;

Ensure that all vehicles with open loads of potential dusty materials are securely sheeted or enclosed;

Provide a means of removing mud and other debris from wheels and chassis of vehicles leaving the site. This may involve a simple coarse gravel running surface or jet wash, or in the case of a heavily used exit point, wheel washers;

Maintain a low speed limit on site to prevent the generation of dust by fast moving vehicles;

Damp down surfaces in dry conditions;

Water should be sprayed during cutting / grinding operations (i.e. cutting curb slabs); and,

All vehicle engines and plant motors shall be switched off when not in use.

Particular care shall be taken when activities are carried out in close proximity to identified

receptors and in the Droitwich area where the highest density of receptors are present.


Page 37 of 83

7 Summary and Conclusions

The proposed Scheme is to install an All Lanes Running Smart Motorways (ALR) between

Junction 4a to Junction 6 on the M5 motorway.

This report provides an assessment of the potential air quality impacts of the proposed

Scheme in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11

Section 3, Part 1 – Air Quality (HA207/07) [Ref 1] and relevant Interim Advice Notes

(IANs).

A qualitative assessment of potential dust effects has been undertaken, based on a review

of likely dust raising activities and identification of sensitive receptors within 200m.

Potential dust impacts would be suitably controlled using the best practice mitigation

measures proposed. Potential construction dust effects would not cause statutory

nuisance or loss of amenity and are therefore concluded to be not significant.

Because of the potential impacts of the Scheme and indication of existing exceedences of

air quality objectives in the area, a ‘Detailed Level’ local air quality assessment has been

undertaken.

The maximum increase in long term NO2 concentrations at receptors experiencing

concentrations above the objective is ‘small’. This is predicted to occur at four receptors ,

all located to the north of Droitwich, close to the M5. Changes in concentrations of NO2

are primarily due to the Scheme causing an increase in vehicle speeds, though small

increases in flows and bringing vehicles closer to receptors also contributes (though to a

lesser degree). All changes in PM10 concentrations are ‘imperceptible’.

The affected road network does not include any parts of the Compliance Risk Road

Network. Therefore there is no risk of the Scheme causing non-compliance with the EU

Directive on ambient air quality.

The Scheme’s effect on local air quality is concluded to be not significant and no

mitigation measures are proposed.


Page 38 of 83

8 References

1. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1, HA 207/07, Air Quality. Highways Agency 2007.

2. Local Air Quality Management – Technical Guidance (09). Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2009.

3. Interim Advice Note IAN 174/13. Update advice for evaluating significant local air quality effects for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality’ (HA207/07). Highways Agency, 2013

4. Interim Advice Note IAN 174/12 v3. Update air quality advice on the for users of

DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality’ (HA207/07). Highways Agency, 2013

5. BS 6069 (Part Two) 1987. British Standards Institution, Glossary of Terms.

6. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Emission Factor Toolkit. Available at: http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/emissions.html#eft. Accessed December 2013

7. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK-AIR: Air Information Resource. Available at: http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/ AIR. Accessed December 2013

8. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, NOx to NO2 calculator. Available at: http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/tools-monitoring-data/no-calculator.html Accessed December 2013

9. WebTAG: TAG unit A3 environmental impact appraisal. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/webtag-tag-unit-a3-environmental-impact-appraisal

http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/emissions.html#eft

http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/emissions.html#eft

http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/tools-monitoring-data/no-calculator.html%20Accessed%20December%202013

http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/tools-monitoring-data/no-calculator.html%20Accessed%20December%202013

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/webtag-tag-unit-a3-environmental-impact-appraisal

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/webtag-tag-unit-a3-environmental-impact-appraisal


Page 39 of 83

Appendix A – Model Verification

Methodology

Verification of modelled 2012 annual mean NO2 concentrations has been carried out using

monitoring results from a number of relevant diffusion tube sites within the study area.

Data from Local Authority monitoring and the Scheme monitoring were reviewed and only

sites that are in areas representative of receptors included within the dispersion modelling

have been included in the verification process.

Four of the Local Authority monitoring sites meet this criterion; two sites at Wildmoor Lane

(tubes WL and TS) in Bromsgrove, a triplicate exposure site at Mayflower Way (tubes EPS

19, 20,21) and triplicate exposure site at Tagwell Close (EPS 22,23,24), both in Droitwich.

2012 annual mean concentrations at these sites have been calculated from period mean

results from April to December. This is because there was a change in the diffusion tube

supplier used from April, meaning that results from January to March have been

discarded. Overall, diffusion tubes results for 2012 are around 10 μg/m3 lower than in

2011 at the two sites in Droitwich. 2012 results are subject to a bias adjustment factor of

0.69 which is based on only 2 non-local colocation studies. Due to the missing data from

2012, the limited basis of the bias factor, and inconsistency with Local Authority 2011 and

2013 data, and the Scheme diffusion tube study results, the 2012 data is considered likely

to under-represent NO2 concentrations at these locations and has not been used in the

verification.

2013 annual mean concentrations at the four Local Authority sites have therefore been

used within the model verification. Although modelled 2012 concentrations have been

verified against monitored 2013 concentrations, the difference in 2012 and 2013

concentrations is considered inconsequential. As noted above, due to limitations in Local

Authority monitoring, it is not possible to use this data to infer what changes in roadside

concentrations have occurred between 2012 and 2013. However, a comparison of

background monitoring data and Defra background pollutant concentrations are presented

in Section 3.3 Table 4, showing relatively small reductions in concentrations between

these two years. In addition, concentrations from the nearest roadside AURN site

(Birmingham Tyburn) for 2012 and 2013 are 46 and 45 µg/m3 respectively, indicating little

change.

Consideration was given to using Local Authority data from 2011 for sites WL, TS, EPS 19

to 21 and EPS 22 to 24. However, because monitored concentrations are slightly higher

at these sites in 2013 than in 2011, the 2013 data were used in order to provide a slightly

more conservative adjustment factor.

A number of Scheme monitoring sites have been included within the model verification.

The data used are annualised mean NO2 concentrations, calculated from period mean,

bias adjusted monitored concentrations from May to December 2013 (7 months of data).


Page 40 of 83

Table A4 presents the reasons for inclusion or exclusion of diffusion tubes from the

verification process.

As no suitable monitoring data are available to verify modelled PM10, the verification has

been carried out for NO2 only. Given the low PM10 concentrations within the study area,

and relatively low potential for impact associated with the Scheme in comparison with NO2,

verification of PM10 is not considered necessary.

Table A1 presents the monitoring data used within the model verification.

Table A1: Monitoring Data used within the Model Verification

Site ID Type Annual Mean (µg/m

3)

NOx(a)

NO2

MM002 Diffusion Tube 84.0 42.9









EPS19, 20, 21 Diffusion Tube 87.4 44.5

EPS22, 23, 24 Diffusion Tube 61.0 33.9

WL Diffusion Tube 49.7 29.7

TS Diffusion Tube 55.8 32.2

Notes: (a) Derived from NO2 to NOx calculator

Results

Table A2 and Figure A1 present the results of the model verification. It can be seen that

the model under-predicts annual mean NO2 concentrations at all the monitoring sites, with

the exception of MM14, MM015, MM017 and WL.

Tube MM017 is located near to a minor road, approximately 40m from the M5. The M5

passes over a bridge on the minor road approximately 5m above the monitoring location

height. Tube WL is in a similar position to MM017 as the M5 is above the monitoring

location height; however the height difference is less than the difference between the M5

and MM017. The dispersion model assumes that all receptors and road sources are at the

same ground level (though the diffusion tube height above ground is accounted for).


Page 41 of 83

The location of the M5 above the diffusion tubes means emissions are subject to greater

dispersion, due to the greater distance, than the model assumes. The model over-predicts

concentrations at the MM017 and WL diffusion tubes by 15.7% and 10.9% respectively.

For this reason, no adjustment factor has been applied for receptors near to areas where

the M5 is approximately 5m above the receptor ground level height. Following a check of

all other sites, and model input parameters, no other systematic under or over-prediction

has been identified.

This gives an adjustment factor of 1.3 for all other receptor locations.

Table A.3 and Figure A.2 present the adjusted modelled NO2 with monitored NO2 at the

verification sites (excluding Tube MM017). The adjustment factor is applied to the

modelled road NOx contributions and added to the background NOx concentrations to give

total corrected NOx at the verification site. The NOx to NO2 conversion has been applied to

these values to provide total adjusted modelled NO2.

Table A2: Unadjusted Model Verification Results

Site ID Monitored Road NOx

(µg/m3)

Modelled Road NOx

(µg/m3)

Monitored Total NO2

(µg/m3)

Modelled Total NO2 (µg/m

3)

Total NO2 % Difference

MM002 59.4 35.1 42.9 33.5 -22.0

MM004 32.4 21.6 33.5 28.8 -14.0

MM012 101.4 72.6 55.6 46.2 -16.8

MM014 53.1 57.0 39.2 40.6 3.8

MM016 36.5 24.6 31.5 26.3 -16.6

MM017 21.3 30.2 25.4 29.4 15.7

MM021 42.3 39.0 40.4 39.1 -3.3

MM022 16.6 13.0 26.2 24.5 -6.5

MM015 17.5 23.0 26.2 28.8 9.6

EPS19, 20, 21 61.4 30.9 44.5 32.6 -26.9

EPS22, 23, 24 37.7 30.3 33.9 30.8 -9.2

WL 19.8 27.2 29.7 33.0 10.9

TS 28.5 18.5 32.2 27.8 -13.7


Page 42 of 83

Figure A1: Unadjusted Model Verification Results

Table A3: Adjusted Model Verification Results

Site ID Monitored Total NO2 (µg/m3) Modelled Total NO2 (µg/m

3) % Difference

MM002 42.9 37.8 -11.9

MM004 33.5 31.7 -5.4

MM012 55.6 53.5 -3.7

MM014 39.2 46.9 19.7

MM016 31.5 29.6 -6.1

MM021 40.4 43.7 8.1

MM022 26.2 26.3 0.7

MM015 26.2 31.9 21.3

EPS19, 20, 21 33.9 36.5 -18.0

EPS22, 23, 24 29.7 34.7 2.2

TS 42.9 30.3 -5.8


Page 43 of 83

Figure A2: Adjusted Model Verification Results


Page 44 of 83

Table A4: Diffusion Tubes Notes

Tube ID

Local Authority

X Y Included? Reason(a)

1 BDC 396999 272979 No Unrepresentative of receptors



9a BDC 391210 280668 No Unrepresentative of receptors

9b BDC 391210 280668 No Unrepresentative of receptors







19a BDC 395188 268564 No Unrepresentative of receptors

19b BDC 395188 268564 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BC BDC 395685 270424 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BCX BDC 395807 270549 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BG1 BDC 396238 271118 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BG3 BDC 396755 270400 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BR BDC 396292 271210 No Unrepresentative of receptors

F1 BDC 397010 273112 No Unrepresentative of receptors



LC BDC 395399 270005 No Unrepresentative of receptors

SR BDC 396780 269450 No Unrepresentative of receptors

TS BDC 396613 275085 Yes -

WL BDC 396095 274592 Yes -

WR BDC 395702 270423 No Unrepresentative of receptors

WR2 BDC 395511 270180 No Unrepresentative of receptors

WR3 BDC 395501 270190 No Unrepresentative of receptors

WRa BDC 395702 270423 No Unrepresentative of receptors

WRb BDC 395702 270423 No Unrepresentative of receptors

BaR WCC 384609 256144 No Unrepresentative of receptors and low data

capture

BrS WCC 384666 254818 No Unrepresentative of receptors

Lwm2 WCC 385164 255134 No Outside of study area

McI WCC 383454 254606 No Unrepresentative of receptors

EPS6 WDC 394703 246308 No Unrepresentative of receptors

EPS7 WDC 394850 246065 No Outside of SATURN model area



Page 45 of 83

Tube ID

Local Authority

X Y Included? Reason(a)



EPS19 WDC 390715 262846 Yes -

EPS20 WDC 390715 262846 Yes -

EPS21 WDC 390715 262846 Yes -

EPS22 WDC 390853 261909 Yes -

EPS23 WDC 390853 261909 Yes -

EPS24 WDC 390853 261909 Yes -

EPS27 WDC 392031 265624 No

Triplicate. Unrepresentative of receptors EPS28 WDC 392031 265624 No

EPS29 WDC 392031 265624 No





EPS52 WDC 387598 252511 No Low data capture



MM001 BDC 396113 274573 No Low data capture

MM002 BDC 395598 274230 Yes -

MM003 BDC 395435 274415 No Unrepresentative of receptors

MM004 BDC 395448 273500 Yes -

MM005 BDC 395428 273294 No Low data capture

MM006 BDC 395123 273021 No Unrepresentative of receptors

MM012 WDC 393158 268145 Yes -

MM014 WDC 393112 268168 Yes -

MM015 WDC 393101 267910 Yes -

MM016 WDC 392854 267500 Yes -

MM017 WDC 391947 266419 Yes -

MM018 WDC 392213 265990 No Unrepresentative of receptors

MM021 WDC 390781 263010 Yes -

MM022 WDC 390670 262308 Yes -

MM027 WCC 388532 255439 No Unrepresentative of receptors

MM028 WCC 388298 254968 No Low data capture

MM030 WCC 388304 254048 No Low data capture

MM031 WDC 388065 253185 No Low data capture




Page 46 of 83

Appendix B – Local Authority Monitoring Data

Table B1: Local Authority Monitoring Data

Tube ID Local

Authority X Y

Annual Mean Concentration µg/m3

2011 2012(a)

2013(b)

1 BDC 396999 272979 32.3 21.3 30.6

8 BDC 391452 280947 15.3 16.2 25.6

9 BDC 391210 280668 37.2* 30.6 38.0

9a BDC 391210 280668 37.2* 26.6 38.1

9b BDC 391210 280668 37.2* 26.7 37.0

10 BDC 391137 280638 37.6 29.6 36.7

11 BDC 390295 280043 31.5 24.7 32.0

13 BDC 396889 274133 29.6 22.4 32.1

16 BDC 394701 268444 37.7 32.1 35.3

18 BDC 395180 268549 36.1 32.6 40.5

19 BDC 395188 268564 38.4* 31.5 42.3

19a BDC 395188 268564 38.4* 31.6 42.6

19b BDC 395188 268564 38.4* 31.6 39.9

BC BDC 395685 270424 49.0 43.2 56.0

BCX BDC 395807 270549 47.6 40.3 58.0

BG1 BDC 396238 271118 35.1 30.5 35.6

BG3 BDC 396755 270400 21.9 17.0 26.2

BR BDC 396292 271210 32.3 24.8 33.1

F1 BDC 397010 273112 53.1* 44.6 44.2

F2 BDC 397010 273112 53.1* 39.5 52.9

F3 BDC 397010 273112 53.1* 47.0 44.5

LC BDC 395399 270005 30.1 25.2 33.2

SR BDC 396780 269450 28.3 20.6 30.8

TS BDC 396613 275085 29.5 22.1 32.2

WL BDC 396095 274592 30.1 23.7 29.7

WR BDC 395702 270423 42.9 32.2 46.4

WR2 BDC 395511 270180 39.3 32.4 41.7

WR3 BDC 395501 270190 34.4 26.7 38.4

WRa BDC 395702 270423 42.9 32.0 42.4

WRb BDC 395702 270423 42.9 33.6 45.1

BaR WCC 384609 256144 36.3 34.0 41.4

BrS WCC 384666 254818 38.4 35.5 47.8

Lwm2 WCC 385164 255134 37.4 29.1 21.4

McI WCC 383454 254606 16.4 12.1 18.6

EPS6 WDC 394703 246308 18.2 13.4 27.5

EPS7 WDC 394850 246065 25.6 25.1 34.3


Page 47 of 83

Tube ID Local Authority

X Y Annual Mean Concentration µg/m3

EPS8 WDC 395048 245527 27.3 24.6 17.7

EPS9 WDC 394571 245377 16.5 11.5 31.0

EPS10 WDC 394981 245735 26.3 20.3 45.2

EPS19 WDC 390715 262846 39.2* 29.0 43.5

EPS20 WDC 390715 262846 39.2* 29.7 44.8

EPS21 WDC 390715 262846 39.2* 29.3 33.3

EPS22 WDC 390853 261909 32.6* 22.7 33.4

EPS23 WDC 390853 261909 32.6* 24.9 35.1

EPS24 WDC 390853 261909 32.6* 23.2 54.5

EPS27 WDC 392031 265624 52.2* 38.0 56.9

EPS28 WDC 392031 265624 52.2* 47.0 54.7

EPS29 WDC 392031 265624 52.2* 45.2 33.7

EPS33 WDC 403753 244068 29.8 25.5 39.2

EPS34 WDC 403751 244020 33.6 26.1 38.6

EPS43 WDC 404222 243598 32.9 30.1 40.2

EPS44 WDC 404183 243611 31.6 31.6 38.5

EPS52 WDC 387598 252511 37.4 32.4 33.9

EPS53 WDC 387595 252533 32.6 28.5 37.5

EPS54 WDC 387591 252541 36.0 32.1 30.6

Notes: (a)

Maximum of 9 months of data from April-December 2012 bias adjusted (factor of 0.69) and annualised

(b) Bias adjusted annual mean

* indicates average of triplicate

Bromsgrove District Council (BDC)

Wychavon District Council (WDC)

Worcester City Council (WCC)


Page 48 of 83

Figure B1: Local Authority Monitoring Locations (northern study area)


Page 49 of 83

Figure B2: Local Authority Monitoring Locations (southern study area)


Page 50 of 83

Appendix C – Scheme Diffusion Tube Monitoring Overview

This Appendix provides key information about the Scheme NO2 diffusion tube monitoring

survey which began in May 2013 and is currently ongoing.

Full details of the survey and first six months of results are presented in a separate report

(‘Air Quality Monitoring Interim Report, Scheme: M5 J4a-J6326073-30-3003-RE-003’).

Monitoring Locations

Figure C1 and Figure C2 show the location of the monitoring sites.

Monitoring Results

A scheme specific bias adjustment factor of 1.06 was calculated using seven months of

monitoring data from the automatic analyser at Stourport-on-Severn. The bias adjustment

was compared to the Gradko national bias adjustment factor for 2012, which is 0.97. As

the 2013 Gradko national bias adjustment factor for 2013 is not yet available and there is

only monitoring data for seven months the scheme specific factor of 1.06 has been applied

to the diffusion tube monitoring results presented in Table C2.

The 7 months of monitoring data were converted to an equivalent annual mean following

the procedure outlined in Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance

(LAQM.TG(09)). Continuous monitoring data used to generate the annualisation factor has

been presented in Table C1.

Bias adjusted and annualised results are presented in Table C2.

Table C1: Calculation of Annualisation Factor

Long Term Continuous Monitoring Site

Annual Mean (Am) 2013

Period Mean (Pm) 2013

Ratio (Am/Pm)

Birmingham Acocks Green 32.8 32.1 1.022

Birmingham Tyburn 29.8 29.1 1.024

Coventry Memorial 20.3 19.6 1.036

Leamington Spa 20.4 19.0 1.072

Average (Ra) 1.039

Note: Continuous monitors are all background sites and are part of the AURN


Page 51 of 83

Figure C1: Location of Scheme Monitoring Sites

Note: Sites 10, 19 and 29 not used


Page 52 of 83

Figure C2: Location of Scheme Monitoring Sites (detail)


Page 53 of 83

Table C2: Scheme Monitoring Results

Figure ID

Site Name Distance from Location of Relevant

Exposure

7 Month Average (µg/m³) (Bias

Adjusted)

Equivalent Annual Mean (µg/m³)

1 M5J4AJ6_001 10m 31.6 32.8

2 M5J4AJ6_002 20m 41.4 42.9

3 M5J4AJ6_003 9m 26.9 27.9

4 M5J4AJ6_004 15m 32.3 33.5

5 M5J4AJ6_005 10m 27.2 28.2

6 M5J4AJ6_006 15m 20.2 21.0

7 M5J4AJ6_007 N/A 42.5 44.1

8 M5J4AJ6_008 N/A 45.2 46.9

9 M5J4AJ6_009 N/A 48.7 50.5

11 M5J4AJ6_011 Compliance link 55.1 57.2




15 M5J4AJ6_015 23m (but representative of M5 exposure) 25.3 26.2

16 M5J4AJ6_016 12m 30.3 31.5

17 M5J4AJ6_017 25m 24.5 25.4

18 M5J4AJ6_018

16m to nearest building. 4m from representative location of relevant

exposure to A38 emissions. 43.5 45.2

20 M5J4AJ6_020

18m (but representative of nearby residential) 21.7 22.5

21 M5J4AJ6_021

12m (but representative of nearby residential exposure to M5) 38.9 40.4

22 M5J4AJ6_022 6m 25.2 26.2

23 M5J4AJ6_023

7m (1m from representative residential exposure )

18.8 19.5

24 M5J4AJ6_024 19.6 20.3

25 M5J4AJ6_025 19.3 20.1

26 M5J4AJ6_026 286m 22.8 23.7

27 M5J4AJ6_027

20m (but representative of residential exposure) 20.5 21.3

28 M5J4AJ6_028 10m 21.6 22.4

30 M5J4AJ6_030 25m 22.0 22.8

31 M5J4AJ6_031 9m 28.9 30.1

32 M5J4AJ6_032

23m (but representative of residential exposure) 34.8 36.1

33 M5J4AJ6_033 59m 32.6 33.8


Page 54 of 83

In November 2013, 18 additional diffusion tube sites were established in order to provide

additional data in areas where concentrations were elevated. Results from two exposure

periods are available; the first of two weeks and the second of four weeks. Raw period

means from these sites are presented in Table C3. The locations of these sites are

presented in Figure C2, above.

Due to the short monitoring period of these sites, these data must be treated with caution.

The results indicate that concentrations around Droitwich are generally below the

objectives. Potential exceedences are identified in Catshill near Junction 4a (site 034 and

035), along the A36 near Wychbold (site 036) and near Junction 5 in Wychbold (site 037). Table C3: Additional Scheme Monitoring Results

Figure ID Site Id. Distance from Location of Relevant

Exposure

Period Mean (µg/m3)

(b)

34 M5J4AJ6_034 15m 52.6

35 M5J4AJ6_035 23m 47.3

36 M5J4AJ6_036 6m 53.8

37 M5J4AJ6_037 10m 70.7

38 M5J4AJ6_038 5m 35.3

39 M5J4AJ6_039 2m 43.1

40 M5J4AJ6_040 6m 34.8

41 M5J4AJ6_041 6m 38.0

42 M5J4AJ6_042 7m 37.6

43 M5J4AJ6_043 8m 37.6

44 M5J4AJ6_044 15m 25.1

45 M5J4AJ6_045 7m 31.1

46 M5J4AJ6_046 8m 31.6

47 M5J4AJ6_047 3m 30.5

48 M5J4AJ6_048 3m (a)

49 M5J4AJ6_049 10m 30.7

50 M5J4AJ6_050

20m from residential building.

Representative of relevant exposure to

M5 emissions

28.1

51 M5J4AJ6_051 8m 36.2

Notes: “(a)

“ = Tube missing or found on the ground when retrieved

“(b)

” = Average concentration based on 6 weeks of monitoring from 05/11/2013 to 17/12/2013


Page 55 of 83

Appendix D – Local Air Quality Results

Receptor

NO2 Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m3) PM10 Annual Mean Concentration

(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

1 28.8 27.5 27.7 0.2 17.0 16.3 16.3 0.0

2 27.1 25.8 26.0 0.2 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

3 22.0 20.9 21.1 0.2 17.0 16.4 16.4 0.0

4 27.9 26.6 26.9 0.3 17.9 17.1 17.1 0.0

5 34.0 32.4 32.9 0.5 17.1 16.2 16.2 0.0

6 32.1 30.5 31.1 0.6 18.7 17.9 18.0 0.0

7 30.1 28.7 29.1 0.4 18.6 17.8 17.8 0.0

8 29.2 27.8 28.2 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

9 31.3 29.8 30.3 0.5 18.7 17.9 17.9 0.0

10 31.4 29.9 30.4 0.5 18.7 17.9 17.9 0.0

11 28.5 27.2 27.4 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

12(a)

27.3 26.0 26.4 0.4 18.8 18.0 18.0 0.0

13(a)

26.9 25.6 26.0 0.4 18.7 17.9 18.0 0.0

14 27.3 26.0 26.2 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

15(a)

39.8 37.5 38.3 0.8 20.6 19.5 19.5 0.0

16(a)

40.6 38.2 39.0 0.8 20.7 19.6 19.6 0.0

17 39.6 37.4 38.0 0.6 19.9 18.9 18.9 0.0

18 34.9 33.1 33.5 0.4 19.4 18.5 18.5 0.0

19 37.7 36.0 36.6 0.6 18.9 18.0 18.0 0.0

20 32.4 30.9 31.3 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.6 0.0

21 31.0 29.5 29.8 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

22 37.1 35.3 35.9 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

23 37.7 35.9 36.6 0.6 18.9 18.0 18.0 0.0

24 36.7 35.0 35.6 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

25 37.0 35.2 35.8 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

26 36.6 34.9 35.4 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

27 30.9 29.5 29.8 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

28 31.0 29.6 29.9 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

29 30.9 29.4 29.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

30 30.6 29.2 29.5 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

31 30.1 28.7 29.0 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0


Page 56 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

32 35.7 34.0 34.5 0.5 18.7 17.8 17.8 0.0

33 35.8 34.1 34.6 0.5 18.7 17.8 17.8 0.0

34 35.8 34.1 34.6 0.5 18.7 17.8 17.8 0.0

35 36.7 35.0 35.6 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

36 37.3 35.5 36.2 0.6 18.9 18.0 18.0 0.0

37 37.0 35.2 35.8 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

38 30.6 29.1 29.4 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

39 29.3 28.0 28.2 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

40 31.1 29.6 29.9 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

41 29.1 27.7 28.0 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

42 30.9 29.5 29.8 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

43 36.6 34.9 35.5 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

44 38.6 36.8 37.5 0.7 19.0 18.1 18.1 0.0

45 37.8 36.0 36.7 0.7 18.9 18.0 18.0 0.0

46 39.4 37.5 38.3 0.8 19.1 18.1 18.2 0.0

47 43.1 41.0 41.8 0.8 19.0 17.9 18.0 0.0

48 45.7 43.5 44.6 1.0 19.3 18.2 18.2 0.0

49 32.4 30.9 31.2 0.2 17.9 17.1 17.0 0.0

50 33.9 32.3 32.6 0.3 18.0 17.2 17.2 0.0

51 33.2 31.7 31.9 0.3 17.9 17.1 17.1 0.0

52 32.3 30.8 31.0 0.2 17.8 17.0 17.0 0.0

53 32.2 30.7 31.0 0.2 17.8 17.0 17.0 0.0

54(a)

38.7 36.8 37.5 0.7 19.1 18.0 18.0 0.0

55(a)

40.0 38.1 38.9 0.8 19.3 18.2 18.2 0.0

56(a)

32.2 30.7 31.0 0.3 18.2 17.3 17.3 0.0

57 37.5 35.7 36.2 0.5 18.4 17.5 17.5 0.0

58 34.7 33.1 33.4 0.4 18.1 17.2 17.2 0.0

59 32.6 31.1 31.3 0.3 17.9 17.1 17.0 0.0

60 31.5 30.1 30.3 0.2 17.8 17.0 17.0 0.0

61 31.8 30.4 30.6 0.2 17.8 17.0 17.0 0.0

62 32.1 30.6 30.8 0.2 17.8 17.0 17.0 0.0

63 45.6 43.4 44.6 1.2 19.2 18.2 18.2 0.0

64 41.4 39.4 40.2 0.8 18.8 17.8 17.8 0.0


Page 57 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

65 37.6 35.8 36.4 0.5 18.3 17.4 17.4 0.0

66 35.2 33.6 34.0 0.4 18.1 17.2 17.2 0.0

67 32.8 31.3 31.6 0.3 17.9 17.1 17.1 0.0

68 31.4 29.9 30.1 0.2 17.7 17.0 16.9 0.0

69 30.4 29.0 29.2 0.2 17.6 16.9 16.9 0.0

70 30.3 28.9 29.1 0.2 17.6 16.9 16.9 0.0

71 30.2 28.8 29.0 0.2 17.6 16.9 16.9 0.0

72 30.0 28.7 28.8 0.2 17.6 16.9 16.9 0.0

73 40.0 38.1 38.6 0.6 18.5 17.6 17.6 0.0

74 38.0 36.2 36.7 0.5 18.3 17.4 17.4 0.0

75 35.5 33.9 34.2 0.3 18.1 17.2 17.2 0.0

76 33.8 32.3 32.5 0.3 17.9 17.1 17.1 0.0

77 36.0 34.3 34.9 0.5 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

78 35.4 33.7 34.2 0.5 18.7 17.8 17.9 0.0

79 34.5 32.9 33.4 0.5 18.6 17.8 17.8 0.0

80 34.1 32.5 32.9 0.5 18.6 17.7 17.7 0.0

81 33.5 31.9 32.3 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

82 33.2 31.6 32.1 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

83 32.9 31.3 31.7 0.4 18.5 17.6 17.6 0.0

84 32.7 31.2 31.6 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

85 32.9 31.4 31.8 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

86 33.1 31.5 32.0 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

87 33.4 31.8 32.3 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

88 33.7 32.1 32.5 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

89 33.4 31.8 32.2 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

90 33.5 31.9 32.4 0.4 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

91 30.9 29.5 29.8 0.3 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

92 29.8 28.4 28.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

93 28.9 27.6 27.8 0.2 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

94 28.1 26.8 27.1 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

95 27.2 25.9 26.1 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

96 29.2 27.8 28.1 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

97 29.8 28.4 28.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0


Page 58 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

98 29.8 28.5 28.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

99 29.8 28.4 28.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

100 30.2 28.8 29.1 0.3 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

101 30.5 29.1 29.4 0.3 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

102 31.2 29.7 30.1 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

103 31.9 30.4 30.8 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

104 32.3 30.8 31.2 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

105 33.8 32.2 32.7 0.5 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

106 36.0 34.3 35.0 0.6 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

107 27.9 26.6 26.8 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

108 27.3 26.0 26.3 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.2 0.0

109 26.7 25.5 25.7 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

110 27.2 25.9 26.1 0.2 18.0 17.2 17.2 0.0

111 32.4 30.9 31.3 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

112 31.5 30.0 30.4 0.4 18.3 17.6 17.6 0.0

113 31.3 29.9 30.2 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

114 31.7 30.2 30.7 0.5 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

115 31.4 29.9 30.3 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

116 30.9 29.5 29.9 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

117 31.2 29.7 30.1 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

118 30.5 29.0 29.4 0.3 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

119 31.0 29.5 29.9 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

120 31.6 30.1 30.5 0.4 18.3 17.6 17.6 0.0

121 31.4 30.0 30.4 0.4 18.3 17.6 17.6 0.0

122 31.4 29.9 30.3 0.4 18.3 17.6 17.5 0.0

123 31.1 29.6 30.0 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

124 26.5 25.3 25.5 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

125 26.7 25.5 25.7 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

126 31.0 29.5 29.9 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

127 30.8 29.4 29.7 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

128 30.8 29.3 29.7 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

129 32.6 31.1 31.5 0.5 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

130 32.0 30.5 30.9 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0


Page 59 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

131 32.5 31.0 31.4 0.5 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

132 32.6 31.1 31.6 0.5 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

133 33.1 31.5 32.0 0.5 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

134 32.2 30.7 31.1 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

135 31.8 30.3 30.7 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

136 31.9 30.4 30.8 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

137 25.9 24.7 24.9 0.2 17.8 17.2 17.2 0.0

138 26.9 25.6 25.8 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

139 26.0 24.8 25.0 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

140 27.1 25.9 26.1 0.2 18.0 17.2 17.2 0.0

141 26.9 25.7 25.9 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

142 27.1 25.9 26.1 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.2 0.0

143 26.9 25.6 25.8 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

144 26.5 25.3 25.5 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

145 26.2 25.0 25.1 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

146 32.3 30.8 31.2 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

147 32.3 30.8 31.2 0.4 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

148 30.5 29.1 29.4 0.3 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

149 29.2 27.9 28.1 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

150 29.2 27.9 28.2 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

151 28.7 27.4 27.6 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

152 28.9 27.5 27.8 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

153 28.7 27.3 27.6 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

154 28.6 27.2 27.5 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

155 28.6 27.2 27.5 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

156 28.3 27.0 27.3 0.2 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

157 27.7 26.4 26.6 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

158 27.8 26.6 26.8 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

159 27.5 26.2 26.5 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

160 26.6 25.3 25.5 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

161 27.9 26.6 26.8 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

162 30.2 28.8 29.2 0.3 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

163 28.3 27.0 27.3 0.2 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0


Page 60 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

164 27.2 26.0 26.2 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.2 0.0

165 26.3 25.1 25.3 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

166 29.4 28.0 28.3 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

167 28.9 27.6 27.8 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

168 26.4 25.2 25.4 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

169 29.8 28.5 28.8 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

170 28.2 26.9 27.1 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

171 27.2 25.9 26.1 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

172 26.3 25.1 25.3 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

173 29.8 28.4 28.7 0.3 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

174 28.6 27.2 27.5 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

175 27.4 26.1 26.3 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

176 26.5 25.3 25.5 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

177 28.0 26.7 26.9 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

178 27.7 26.5 26.7 0.2 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

179 25.7 24.5 24.7 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

180 25.2 24.1 24.3 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

181 25.2 24.1 24.2 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

182 25.0 23.8 24.0 0.2 17.7 17.1 17.1 0.0

183 32.2 30.7 31.2 0.5 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0

184 30.9 29.5 29.9 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

185 31.6 30.1 30.6 0.5 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

186 31.7 30.2 30.7 0.5 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

187 31.8 30.3 30.8 0.5 18.3 17.6 17.6 0.0

188 30.7 29.3 29.7 0.4 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

189 30.7 29.2 29.7 0.4 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

190 30.7 29.2 29.7 0.4 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

191 29.7 28.3 28.6 0.4 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

192 29.7 28.3 28.6 0.4 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

193 29.7 28.3 28.6 0.4 18.1 17.4 17.4 0.0

194 28.7 27.4 27.7 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

195 28.7 27.4 27.7 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

196 32.9 31.4 31.9 0.6 18.4 17.6 17.6 0.0


Page 61 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

197 31.7 30.2 30.6 0.5 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

198 30.6 29.1 29.5 0.4 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

199 28.7 27.3 27.6 0.3 18.1 17.3 17.3 0.0

200 28.0 26.7 27.0 0.3 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

201 27.4 26.2 26.4 0.3 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

202 37.4 35.7 36.5 0.9 18.9 18.0 18.0 0.0

203 35.2 33.5 34.2 0.7 18.7 17.8 17.8 0.0

204 33.5 31.9 32.5 0.6 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

205 31.2 29.7 30.2 0.4 18.3 17.5 17.5 0.0

206 29.1 27.8 28.1 0.3 18.1 17.4 17.3 0.0

207 27.1 25.9 26.1 0.3 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

208 25.8 24.6 24.8 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

209 25.3 24.2 24.4 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

210 25.5 24.3 24.5 0.2 17.8 17.1 17.1 0.0

211 25.1 23.9 24.1 0.2 17.7 17.1 17.1 0.0

212 24.8 23.7 23.9 0.2 17.7 17.1 17.0 0.0

213 26.6 25.3 25.6 0.2 17.9 17.2 17.2 0.0

214 30.2 28.8 29.2 0.4 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

215 30.0 28.6 28.9 0.4 18.2 17.4 17.4 0.0

216 27.9 26.6 26.9 0.3 18.0 17.3 17.3 0.0

217 39.0 37.2 38.2 1.0 19.1 18.1 18.2 0.0

218 36.4 34.7 35.5 0.8 18.8 17.9 17.9 0.0

219 33.7 32.1 32.7 0.6 18.5 17.7 17.7 0.0

220 25.6 24.4 24.6 0.2 16.0 15.3 15.3 0.0

221 25.4 24.2 24.4 0.2 15.8 15.2 15.1 0.0

222 26.5 25.3 25.6 0.3 18.6 17.9 17.9 0.0

223 24.3 23.2 23.4 0.2 15.7 15.1 15.1 0.0

224 20.5 19.5 19.7 0.1 17.9 17.3 17.3 0.0

225 26.7 25.4 25.7 0.2 18.1 17.5 17.4 0.0

226 24.3 23.1 23.3 0.2 17.9 17.3 17.3 0.0

227 23.8 22.8 22.8 0.1 17.1 16.4 16.4 0.0

235 24.3 23.2 23.4 0.2 18.4 17.8 17.8 0.0

236 21.3 20.3 20.5 0.1 18.0 17.4 17.4 0.0


Page 62 of 83

Receptor


(µg/m3)

2012 2015 DM

2015 DS Change 2012 2015 DM

2015 DS

Change

237 23.3 22.3 22.4 0.2 18.2 17.5 17.5 0.0

238 21.0 20.1 20.2 0.1 18.0 17.4 17.3 0.0

239 20.6 19.7 19.8 0.1 17.9 17.3 17.3 0.0

240 23.0 21.9 22.0 0.1 17.0 16.4 16.3 0.0

Notes: (a)

No adjustment factor applied to NO2 results as M5 approximately 5m above receptor ground level


Page 63 of 83

Appendix E – Sensitive Receptor Locations

Table E1: Sensitive Receptor Locations

ID X Y Z Distance from M5 (m)

1 394966 272327 1.5 68

2 394181 271127 1.5 148

3 394182 270723 1.5 132

4 394294 269840 1.5 103

5 393123 267976 1.5 56

6 392807 267454 1.5 49

7 392815 267449 1.5 59

8 392821 267445 1.5 65

9 392820 267467 1.5 52

10 392828 267480 1.5 52

11 392118 266767 1.5 86

12 391948 266446 1.5 52

13 391944 266444 1.5 55

14 392154 266393 1.5 116

15 391888 265886 1.5 32

16 391890 265825 1.5 28

17 391915 265807 1.5 50

18 391945 265786 1.5 75

19 391147 263414 1.5 37

20 391150 263443 1.5 60

21 391123 263438 1.5 70

22 391134 263408 1.5 39

23 391133 263405 1.5 37

24 391116 263398 1.5 40

25 391108 263392 1.5 39

26 391098 263387 1.5 40

27 391111 263431 1.5 70

28 391102 263423 1.5 69

29 391093 263419 1.5 69

30 391084 263415 1.5 71

31 391074 263412 1.5 74

32 391076 263376 1.5 43

33 391067 263369 1.5 42

34 391059 263363 1.5 42

35 391053 263355 1.5 38


Page 64 of 83

36 391047 263347 1.5 36

37 391038 263341 1.5 35

38 391058 263397 1.5 70

39 391053 263406 1.5 80

40 391029 263371 1.5 65

41 391014 263379 1.5 79

42 391002 263348 1.5 60

43 391026 263334 1.5 34

44 391019 263320 1.5 28

45 391006 263312 1.5 30

46 391001 263302 1.5 26

47 390995 263294 1.5 24

48 390987 263280 1.5 18

49 390975 263338 1.5 70

50 390950 263301 1.5 58

51 390946 263304 1.5 63

52 390938 263306 1.5 70

53 390992 263356 1.5 72

54 390938 263239 1.5 22

55 390925 263221 1.5 20

56 390901 263243 1.5 52

57 390869 263183 1.5 38

58 390832 263150 1.5 47

59 390825 263163 1.5 60

60 390827 263180 1.5 69

61 390843 263201 1.5 69

62 390837 263188 1.5 65

63 390799 263034 1.5 18

64 390793 263039 1.5 25

65 390786 263049 1.5 35

66 390778 263052 1.5 44

67 390768 263059 1.5 56

68 390761 263066 1.5 66

69 390759 263082 1.5 75

70 390762 263087 1.5 76

71 390763 263094 1.5 77

72 390768 263106 1.5 80

73 390768 263006 1.5 32

74 390763 263010 1.5 38

75 390756 263019 1.5 49

76 390749 263028 1.5 59


Page 65 of 83

77 390760 262994 1.5 34

78 390755 262987 1.5 36

79 390748 262977 1.5 38

80 390743 262969 1.5 39

81 390736 262959 1.5 41

82 390732 262950 1.5 42

83 390727 262939 1.5 43

84 390720 262922 1.5 43

85 390717 262910 1.5 42

86 390715 262901 1.5 41

87 390713 262889 1.5 39

88 390711 262880 1.5 38

89 390706 262867 1.5 39

90 390705 262861 1.5 38

91 390693 262859 1.5 50

92 390686 262860 1.5 57

93 390679 262860 1.5 63

94 390673 262861 1.5 69

95 390662 262858 1.5 79

96 390664 262771 1.5 58

97 390668 262769 1.5 54

98 390666 262755 1.5 53

99 390665 262747 1.5 54

100 390666 262739 1.5 51

101 390667 262731 1.5 49

102 390670 262724 1.5 45

103 390672 262716 1.5 42

104 390673 262708 1.5 40

105 390678 262700 1.5 34

106 390685 262698 1.5 27

107 390643 262679 1.5 67

108 390638 262678 1.5 72

109 390634 262714 1.5 80

110 390639 262715 1.5 74

111 390670 262643 1.5 39

112 390666 262635 1.5 42

113 390665 262627 1.5 43

114 390667 262619 1.5 41

115 390665 262616 1.5 43

116 390663 262608 1.5 45

117 390665 262600 1.5 43


Page 66 of 83

118 390661 262586 1.5 47

119 390664 262583 1.5 44

120 390667 262577 1.5 41

121 390667 262563 1.5 41

122 390667 262558 1.5 41

123 390666 262550 1.5 43

124 390627 262622 1.5 80

125 390630 262588 1.5 78

126 390666 262544 1.5 43

127 390666 262530 1.5 44

128 390667 262524 1.5 44

129 390676 262515 1.5 36

130 390675 262506 1.5 38

131 390678 262499 1.5 36

132 390680 262489 1.5 36

133 390683 262479 1.5 34

134 390681 262467 1.5 37

135 390681 262457 1.5 39

136 390682 262450 1.5 39

137 390623 262521 1.5 88

138 390636 262522 1.5 75

139 390628 262491 1.5 86

140 390642 262494 1.5 72

141 390644 262462 1.5 74

142 390649 262450 1.5 72

143 390647 262437 1.5 75

144 390646 262424 1.5 79

145 390643 262411 1.5 84

146 390686 262441 1.5 37

147 390688 262428 1.5 37

148 390682 262414 1.5 45

149 390679 262389 1.5 54

150 390681 262381 1.5 51

151 390679 262372 1.5 54

152 390681 262367 1.5 52

153 390683 262353 1.5 54

154 390685 262343 1.5 55

155 390687 262334 1.5 54

156 390688 262325 1.5 55

157 390685 262310 1.5 62

158 390688 262306 1.5 62


Page 67 of 83

159 390714 262206 1.5 67

160 390710 262178 1.5 79

161 390730 262165 1.5 64

162 390756 262145 1.5 46

163 390740 262147 1.5 59

164 390729 262147 1.5 70

165 390718 262143 1.5 82

166 390759 262115 1.5 55

167 390760 262101 1.5 59

168 390728 262115 1.5 85

169 390775 262073 1.5 53

170 390761 262076 1.5 66

171 390750 262076 1.5 76

172 390738 262076 1.5 87

173 390786 262035 1.5 53

174 390774 262042 1.5 63

175 390763 262040 1.5 74

176 390752 262039 1.5 85

177 390778 262008 1.5 68

178 390778 262000 1.5 71

179 390776 261987 1.5 76

180 390773 261976 1.5 82

181 390776 261964 1.5 82

182 390776 261952 1.5 85

183 390833 261935 1.5 34

184 390827 261941 1.5 39

185 390835 261918 1.5 37

186 390836 261914 1.5 36

187 390838 261910 1.5 36

188 390837 261895 1.5 40

189 390838 261890 1.5 41

190 390839 261886 1.5 41

191 390836 261876 1.5 46

192 390837 261871 1.5 46

193 390838 261867 1.5 46

194 390835 261858 1.5 51

195 390836 261854 1.5 51

196 390860 261835 1.5 32

197 390855 261834 1.5 37

198 390851 261830 1.5 41

*199 390840 261831 1.5 52


Page 68 of 83

200 390836 261834 1.5 56

201 390831 261833 1.5 60

202 390900 261690 1.5 17

203 390895 261690 1.5 22

204 390888 261703 1.5 26

205 390877 261716 1.5 34

206 390866 261720 1.5 45

207 390847 261744 1.5 58

208 390839 261719 1.5 72

209 390834 261711 1.5 77

210 390839 261698 1.5 75

211 390836 261684 1.5 81

212 390834 261672 1.5 85

213 390856 261669 1.5 65

214 390878 261687 1.5 39

215 390879 261677 1.5 41

216 390868 261661 1.5 54

217 390909 261658 1.5 16

218 390904 261658 1.5 20

219 390897 261658 1.5 26

220 391130 261116 1.5 127

221 391122 260964 1.5 116

222 390913 260935 1.5 56

223 391010 260142 1.5 129

224 390566 259826 1.5 166

225 390294 258893 1.5 74

226 390280 258931 1.5 102

227 389686 258092 1.5 133

235 393698 268973 1.5 140

236 390629 259924 1.5 142

237 390790 259515 1.5 127

238 390787 259351 1.5 183

239 390806 259359 1.5 198

240 389860 258337 1.5 156


Page 69 of 83

Figure E1: Sensitive Receptor Locations


Page 70 of 83

Figure E2: Sensitive Receptor Locations within Box 1


Page 71 of 83



Page 72 of 83



Page 73 of 83



Page 74 of 83



Page 75 of 83

Figure E7: Sensitive Receptor Locations within Box


Page 76 of 83



Page 77 of 83

Figure E9: Sensitive Receptor Locations within Box

8


Page 78 of 83

Appendix F – SATURN Traffic Data

Tables F1 and F2 present Do-Minimum and Do-Something SATURN traffic data for affected links as discussed in Section 3.3. Table F3 presents the difference in traffic data. Figure F4 presents the

location of the links presented in Tables F1 to F3.

Table F1: Do-MinimumTraffic Data

ID Saturn Node A

Saturn Node B

AADT24 AM Peak Period (07:00-10:00) Inter-Peak Period (10:00-16:00) PM Peak Period (16:00-19:00) Off-Peak Period (19:00-07:00)

Flow (veh/day)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

A 5007 5522 55147 97 16.2 12136 94 15.0 21946 98 16.6 13639 93 7.5 7426 113 33.1

A 5006 1136 56536 96 16.3 12722 94 10.9 23185 95 17.1 13005 93 10.5 7625 113 33.3

B 1133 5007 55147 103 16.2 12136 102 15.0 21946 103 16.6 13639 100 7.5 7426 113 33.1

B 1136 5050 27780 108 15.6 6100 108 8.9 11643 107 16.9 6324 107 10.1 3714 113 32.1

C 5524 5500 47379 100 17.5 9868 100 12.1 20086 98 17.7 10947 97 11.3 6478 113 35.1

C 5522 5523 45391 101 16.6 10120 98 16.0 18279 101 16.2 10853 98 8.1 6139 113 33.7

D 5004 5524 51699 99 16.5 10943 99 11.4 21626 98 16.9 12142 96 10.6 6987 113 33.6

D 5005 5615 51094 100 15.4 11741 96 14.5 20455 100 15.1 12087 97 7.6 6810 113 31.7

D* 5614 5004 51699 104 16.5 10943 104 11.4 21626 104 16.9 12142 103 10.6 6987 113 33.6

D* 5523 5005 51094 105 15.4 11741 102 14.5 20455 105 15.1 12087 103 7.6 6810 113 31.7

Note: Links represent one way flows (i.e. north bound or south bound flows). Letters shown in the ID column show parallel links that are added to create a two way flow. * - Link has the same flow as its connecting north bound or south bound link but has a different speed.

Table F2: Do-SomethingTraffic Data

ID Saturn Node A

Saturn Node B

AADT24 AM Peak Period (07:00-10:00) Inter-Peak Period (10:00-16:00) PM Peak Period (16:00-19:00) Off-Peak Period (19:00-07:00)

Flow (veh/day)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

Flow (veh/period)

Speed (kph)

% HDV

A 5007 5522 56012 103 16.0 12300 101 14.8 22336 103 16.4 13852 100 7.4 7524 113 32.8

A 5006 1136 57016 102 16.3 12810 101 10.8 23376 102 17.0 13148 101 10.4 7681 113 33.1

B 1133 5007 56012 107 16.0 12300 106 14.8 22336 107 16.4 13852 105 7.4 7524 113 32.8

B 1136 5050 28009 108 15.6 6144 108 8.8 11738 107 16.8 6387 107 10.1 3741 113 32.0

C 5524 5500 47860 104 17.3 9996 104 12.0 20269 103 17.6 11061 103 11.2 6534 113 34.9

C 5522 5523 45932 105 16.4 10215 103 15.9 18539 105 16.0 10977 103 8.0 6201 113 33.4

D 5004 5524 52192 104 16.4 11074 104 11.3 21813 103 16.8 12259 102 10.5 7045 113 33.4

D 5005 5615 51648 104 15.3 11841 102 14.4 20721 105 14.9 12212 103 7.5 6874 113 31.5

D* 5614 5004 52192 108 16.4 11074 108 11.3 21813 107 16.8 12259 106 10.5 7045 113 33.4

D* 5523 5005 51648 108 15.3 11841 106 14.4 20721 108 14.9 12212 107 7.5 6874 113 31.5 Note: Links represent one way flows (i.e. north bound or south bound flows). Letters shown in the ID column show parallel links that are added to create a two way flow. * - Link has the same flow as its connecting north bound or south bound link but has a different speed.


Page 79 of 83

Table F3: Traffic Data Difference

ID Saturn Node A

Saturn Node B

AADT24 Do Minimum AADT24 Do Something One Way Flow Difference Two Way Flow Difference

Flow (veh/day)

Speed (kph)

HDV Flow

(veh/day)

Flow (veh/day)

Speed (kph)

HDV Flow

(veh/day

24hr AADT

Daily Speed

AM Peak

Speed

PM Peak

Speed HDV 24hr AADT HDV

A 5007 5522 55147 97 16.2 56012 103 16.0 866 6 7 7 26 1345 56

A 5006 1136 56536 96 16.3 57016 102 16.3 480 6 7 7 30

B 1133 5007 55147 103 16.2 56012 107 16.0 865 4 4 4 26 1094 41

B 1136 5050 27780 108 15.6 28009 108 15.6 229 0 0 0 15

C 5524 5500 47379 100 17.5 47860 104 17.3 480 5 4 6 26 1022 49

C 5522 5523 45391 101 16.6 45932 105 16.4 542 4 5 5 22

D 5004 5524 51699 99 16.5 52192 104 16.4 493 5 5 6 28

1047 51 D 5005 5615 51094 100 15.4 51648 104 15.3 554 5 6 5 23

D* 5614 5004 51699 104 16.5 52192 108 16.4 493 3 3 4 28

Note: Links represent one way flows (i.e. north bound or south bound flows). Letters shown in the ID column show parallel links that are added to create a two way flow. * - Link has the same flow as its connecting north bound or south bound link but has a different speed.


Page 80 of 83

Figure F1: Traffic Data Difference

Note: Labels on the left of the carriageway are northbound flows, labels on the right of the carriageway of

southbound flows.


Page 81 of 83

Appendix G – WebTAG Results A WebTAG appraisal has been carried out to assess the impacts of NO2 and PM10 exposure. This assessment has been carried out using TAG Unit A3: Environmental Impact Appraisal, Section 3 Air Quality Impacts and DMRB guidance. Table G1 presents the results for NO2 and shows that all receptors experience deterioration with a positive score of 40.91. Table G2 presents the results for the PM10 and shows that all receptors experience deterioration with a positive score of 35.54

Table G1: NO2 WebTAG Results

NO2, SUMMARY OF ROUTES: 0-50m 50-100m 100-150m 150-200m 0-200m

THE AGGREGATED TABLE (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v=i+ii+iii+iv)

Total properties across all routes (min) 15 208 212 323 758

Total properties across all routes (some) 15 208 212 323 758

Do-minimum NO2 assessment Total assessment NO2 (I):

across all routes 770.85 8305.09 7727.65 11424.52 28228.11

Do-something NO2 assessment Total assessment NO2 (II):


Net total assessment for NO2, all routes (II-I) 40.91

Number of properties with an improvement 0

Number of properties with no change 0

Number of properties with a deterioration 758


Page 82 of 83

Table G2: PM10 WebTAG Results

PM10, SUMMARY OF ROUTES: 0-50m 50-100m 100-150m 150-200m 0-200m

THE AGGREGATED TABLE (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v=i+ii+iii+iv)

Total properties across all routes (min) 15 208 212 323 758

Total properties across all routes (some) 15 208 212 323 758

Do-minimum PM10 assessment Total assessment PM10 (I):


Do-something PM10 assessment Total assessment PM10 (II):


Net total assessment for PM10, all routes (II-I) 35.54

Number of properties with an improvement 0

Number of properties with no change 0

Number of properties with a deterioration 758

M5 Junction 4a to 6 All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR) · M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes...

Documents

Transcript of M5 Junction 4a to 6 All Lanes Running Smart Motorway (ALR) · M5 Junction 4a to 6 – All Lanes...