Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Study Finch Manor, Local Authority A (Planning Ref: 14/0001/XYZ)

Transcription

1 Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Study Finch Manor, Local Authority A (Planning Ref: 14/0001/XYZ) Worked Example 1 Version 1.1 (16 Jun 2016) This worked example illustrates form and content of an Emissions and Mitigation Assessment Study, reflecting requirements of the draft Lancaster Air Quality and Emissions Planning Guidance (LAN-PG-1.1). It is based upon a real development site, albeit with adjustments and inventions for the purpose of the example (see notes below for details). The example does not include a treatment of mitigation costs. Summary - Finch Manor is a development of 128 Residential dwellings - This report presents findings of the Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Study for the site. Its aim is to assess the transport emission impacts of the development, propose corresponding mitigation and demonstrate that the latter is balanced and proportionate. - This study involved work to identify and describe key features of the development, estimate the traffic generated by the site and also the nature, scale and impact of associated emissions. It then proposes mitigation to reduce these impacts and estimates associated costs and benefits of action. - A package of on-site mitigation is proposed, which combines residents travel plans with a Low Emission Car Club, in combination with a financial contribution for further compensatory measures. The report concludes that these proposals represent a balanced and proportionate level of mitigation, not least achieving a 94% total mitigation credit, including 14% assured on-site benefits. Notes [1] The following information has been absorbed and reflected within the example: During pre-app discussions, the LA requested that a transport contribution of 168,000 be provided by the development. This level of contribution has been included in the viability assessment for the site and is considered to be of a sufficient level to allow the public transport improvements and the footway / cycleway link to the west of the site to be delivered. These are identified as essential measures in the S106 agreement for the outline permission. [2] Trip data has been invented for the purpose of the worked example. It was estimated, using LET defaults, based on actual development size and location. The emission and damage costs were then calculated based upon these estimations. [3] The on-site mitigation package was invented for the purpose of the worked example. [4] Locations and Planning References have been anonymised for the purpose of this case study

2 Introduction i This Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Study has been undertaken according to the requirements of Lancaster District Air Quality and Emissions Planning Guidance (LAN-PG-1.1) in combination with the Low Emission Partnership s associated assessment guidelines (EMA-TG-2.0). Its aim is to assess the transport emission impacts of the development, propose corresponding mitigation and demonstrate that the latter is balanced and proportionate. ii In order to achieve these aims, the following tasks were undertaken: 1 Identify and describe relevant characteristics and features of the development and its core design 2 Estimate the type and levels of traffic generated by the site through its occupation and use 3 Estimate the associated emissions and health damage caused by this traffic 4 Select and specify appropriate on-site mitigation and estimate both its cost and emission benefits 5 Consider and, if justified, propose a financial contribution for further compensatory measures 6 Present findings in a summary report, supplemented by more detailed tables and technical notes iii Study findings are presented according to the Low Emission Partnership s guidelines using their associated templates for the summary report (EMA-SR-2.0). iv The Summary Report (this document) comprises five sections. Although these are presented as a linear sequence, they actually represent the optimised outcome of an iterative process 1 Describe the main features of site design, which are relevant to traffic/emissions 2 Establish the base fleet sub-structure & estimate associated emissions and damage costs 3 Select and define on-site measures, including estimate effectiveness and implementation costs 4 Estimate on-site benefits and consider need/level of contribution towards further measures 5 Provide a single page summary, which presents main points supported by headline indices V Supplementary tables and notes provide full details of method, input data, assumptions, calculation method, outputs and along with supporting evidence and other technical information. v In undertaking this study, efforts have been made to ensure that: 1 The approach reflects relevant guidance; and report is concise, transparent and of good quality 2 Base design is well described and reflects good environmental design principles 3 Estimated fleet activity and impacts are based on reasonable and realistic assumptions 4 Appropriate effort has been made to identify, assess and propose mitigation 5 Balance of mitigation reflects the mitigation hierarchy and also local site characteristics 6 Scale of mitigation (including any financial contribution) is commensurate to the emissions harm

3 1 Base Design Describe the main features of site design, which are relevant to traffic/emissions Site 1.1 Name Location Finch Manor Stonewall Road, Local Authority A, LAA 123 Land Use Site Type Planning Reference Application Date Dwelling Houses 2X 14/00001/XYZ 01/01/ Description Outline 128 Residential dwellings Detail Full application for erection of 128 residential dwellings with associated access and landscaping following the demolition of existing buildings. Relevant Features 1.3 Location General: Stonewall Road is located to the south of the site and provides a connection between the City Centre in the west, via Ember Road and North Street, and the A123 Road in the northeast. In the vicinity of the site, Stonewall Road has a carriageway width of approximately 7.7m and benefits from footways on both sides of the road and street lighting. Walking: The City Centre is located within a 2km walk distance. Generally, the area is conducive to walking, with well surfaced and street-lit footways on both sides of all the roads, which benefit from natural surveillance by virtue of the residential properties overlooking local roads within the vicinity of the site. Cycling: There are a variety of cycle routes within this distance of the site to encourage cycle trips. The whole of the City and surrounding areas are within 5km of the development. Public Transport: The nearest bus stop is located approximately 50m away on Stonewall Road. There is 1 bus per hour available throughout the daytime Monday to Saturday, which runs from the city centre to Southwick Prison. Other bus stops are available within 400m.

4 Access Walking & Cycling: Separate pedestrian and cycle links will be provided to the west of the site to Donald Road, via the allotments, providing a direct link to Christ Church Primary School (Cost 20,000) Bus Services: Whilst the site is well located in relation to bus stops, services are relatively infrequent and the development will provide a transport contribution which will be used to improve public transport frequency for 5 years:- (i) Provision of a bus service operating every 20 minutes during the peak hours (07:00 to 09:00 and 16:45 to 18:15) Monday to Saturday inclusive; (ii) An increase in the daytime bus service from every 60 minutes to every 20 minutes from Monday to Saturday inclusive. (Cost 150,000) Facilities Parking: has been designed in accordance with the standards presented in the Joint Regional Structure Plan (March 2006) which requires family houses to provide two parking spaces per dwelling. For dwellings without a garage, a garden shed will be provided for the safe storage of cycles Conclusions 1.4 Site location is appropriate for the development and good environmental design principles have been applied. Of note, the proposal includes improved pedestrian and cycle links (costing 20,000). There is also a proposal for a contribution towards an extended bus service ( 150,000). In recognition, an associated AQ design credit of 17,000 is proposed. This value represents 10% of total site harm (100% of which, it is noted, will be generated even taking these provisions into account).

5 2 Base Fleet Establish the base fleet sub-structure & estimate associated emissions and damage costs Description 2.1 Site traffic arises from residents and service vehicles. The chosen sub-fleet structure comprises: SF1 - cars (residents), SF2 - LGV (service) and SF3 - HGV (service). Motorcycles are omitted, since they are considered to be a small proportion of the total fleet. Calculation 2.2 A standard calculation was undertaken based on the protocols defined within LEP guidance (EMA-TG 2.0), utilising: (i) EFT (v6.0.2), assuming 'urban' roads and 48kph; and (ii) Defra Damage Costs (Sep-15), assuming 'Urban Large (>100k popn), and using the central value. No adjustments were made. The reported figures reflect absolute journeys for the site and make no deductions for linked trips. Annual trip data for cars was estimated using the defaults within the LET (v1.1), which are based on TRICS outputs. (Using actual development size and assuming location as 'edge of centre'). Annual trip data for LGV and HGV service vehicles was estimated using LET (v1.1) service defaults (these are less certain than the TRICS based data). Base Fleet Impacts 2.3 Sub-Fleet impacts are laid out below: Base Fleet Table Standard Sub-Fleets km/5y DC/5y SF1 Dwelling houses Cars Origin 10,475, ,645 SF2 Delivery Vans Destination 42,486 1,130 SF3 Delivery Trucks Destination 8, Site Total 10,527, ,435 Conclusions 2.4 The base fleet calculation estimates total traffic at 2,100,000 km/y, with associated emissions of 2.9t NOx and 0.3t PM10 over the 5 year impact/benefit period. This represents a combined damage of 119,000. The largest contributors are residents' car journeys, accounting for over 98% of emissions and damage costs.

6 3 Measures Select and define on-site mitigation, including estimate effectiveness and associated costs 3.1 Approach A range of on-site interventions were considered, with particular reference to those listed in the LPA guidance. Options were defined and described as per LEP guidance. Implementation costs and impact factors were estimated using best available evidence and reasonable assumptions, which are documented in supporting materials. Selection 3.2 An initial package of measures was selected based upon professional knowledge and experience from similar sites. This was then refined and optimised through cost/benefit iteration. The final proposed package is summarised below alongside the corresponding cost and benefit assumptions. Measures 3.3 The following measures are proposed: (M1) Residents' travel plan (travel plan incl. sustainable transport, applies to all residents car trips) (M2) EV Car Club (establishment of a Low Emission Car Club with membership offered to all residents) 3.4 The following cost and benefit assumptions were employed: Cost & Benefit Assumptions Cost Distance Performance (% imp.) M-ID Measure SF-ID % redn NO x PM10 x PM10 n M1 Residents' travel plan SF1 10% 0% 0% 0% M2 EV Car Club SF1 0% 5% 5% 0% Total Cost=> Conclusions 3.5 A package of on-site mitigation is proposed, which combines residents travel plans with a Low Emission Car Club

7 4 Benefits Estimate on-site benefits and consider need/level of contribution towards further measures Design Credit 4.1 Site location is appropriate for the development and good environmental design principles have been applied. Of note, the proposal includes improved pedestrian and cycle links (costing 20,000). There is also a proposal for a contribution towards an extended bus service ( 150,000). In recognition, an associated AQ design credit of 17,000 is proposed. This value represents 10% of total site harm (100% of which will be generated, even taking these provisions into account). On-Site Benefits 4.2 Emission reductions following implementation of measures (M1 and M2) are estimated as 0.4t NOX, 0.04t PM10 over 5 years. This reflects damage costs avoided of 16,000 over the period. Site Level Emission Reductions Emission Reductions (t/5y) Damage Costs Avoided ( /5y) M-ID Measure NOx PM10x PM10n NOx PM10x PM10n Total M1 Residents' travel plan , ,527 11,764 M2 EV Car Club , ,619 Site Total , ,527 16,383 Residuals 4.3 The residual impacts (i.e. the difference between base impacts and projected benefits) is estimated at 103k, over 5 years, which corresponds to 86% of base impacts. Contribution 4.4 Taking residual impacts into account, the developer proposes to make a contribution of 75,000 for further off-site compensatory emission reductions Total Mitigation Credit 4.5 Combining design credit, mitigation credit and contribution provides a total mitigation credit of 108,000, which corresponds to 91% of the estimated base harm. Conclusions 4.6 Estimated benefits from these measures correspond to a 15% reduction in NOx, 11% reduction in PM and 14% ( 16,000) reduction in overall damage across the benefit period (5 years). An additional financial contribution of 75,000 is proposed towards supplementary emission reduction measures. Combining the latter with the design credit ( 17,000) and on-site mitigation benefits ( 16,000) indicates a total mitigation credit of 108,000. This corresponds to 91% of base fleet impacts.

8 5 Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Statement Provide a single page summary, which presents main points supported by headline indices Methodology 5.1 This Emissions Assessment and Mitigation Study has been undertaken according to the requirements of the LPA guidance in combination with the Low Emission Partnership s assessment guidelines (EMA-TG- 2.0). The aim is to assess the transport emission impacts of the development, propose corresponding mitigation and demonstrate that the latter is both balanced and proportionate. Base Design 5.2 Site location is appropriate for the development and good environmental design principles have been applied. Of note, the proposal includes improved pedestrian and cycle links (costing 20,000). There is also a proposal for a contribution towards an extended bus service ( 150,000). In recognition, an associated AQ design credit of 17,000 is proposed. This value represents 10% of total site harm (100% of which will be generated, even taking these provisions into account). Base Fleet 5.3 The base fleet calculation estimates total traffic at 2,100,000 km/y, with associated emissions of 2.9t NOx and 0.3t PM10 over the 5 year impact/benefit period. This represents a combined damage of 119,000. The largest contributors are residents' car journeys, accounting for over 98% of emissions and damage costs. Measures 5.4 A package of on-site mitigation is proposed, which combines residents travel plans with a Low Emission Car Club Benefits 5.5 Estimated benefits from these measures correspond to a 15% reduction in NOx, 11% reduction in PM and 14% ( 16,000) reduction in overall damage across the benefit period (5 years). An additional financial contribution of 75,000 is proposed towards supplementary emission reduction measures. Combining the latter with the design credit ( 17,000) and on-site mitigation benefits ( 16,000) indicates a total mitigation credit of 108,000. This corresponds to 91% of base fleet impacts. Assurance 5.6 A transport emissions mitigation implementation plan will be prepared to the approval of the LPA prior to commencing work on-site. Associated measures will be put in place prior to first occupation/use. Progress will be monitored against the plan throughout the benefit period (5 years) with annual progress reports made to the LPA. Conclusion 5.7 Proposals represent a balanced and proportionate level of mitigation compared to the harm that would otherwise be caused by site emissions, not least achieving a 94% total mitigation credit, including 14% assured on-site benefits.