Legal Argument lodged on air quality grounds with Council today
Following our campaign crowdfunding legal advice, I have sent the following to the Council today.
Dear Sir/Madam
On behalf of the Stop the Tesco Toxic
Towers group, and having taken independent advice from counsel, I wish to
bring the following additional matters to your attention as regards the
proposed development’s impact on air quality.
You have a copy of the Air Quality
Review report prepared by Professor Peckham and Dr Mills (“the Peckham
Report”), which highlights a number of serious deficiencies with the
developer’s approach to air quality modelling (undertaken by Aether Ltd). While
we ask that you pay close attention to the findings of the Peckham Report in
its entirety, we highlight the following points in particular:
·
The
lack of transparency in Aether’s reports, which makes it difficult to
independently assess the conclusions therein.
·
The
failure to consider or mitigate against the likely breaches of the objective
limits for NO2; half the sites surveyed in the diffusion tube survey
had the majority of tubes within 10% of the legal NO2 threshold and
two sites had tubes exceeding the legal threshold.
·
The
failure to review the air quality assessment (October 2019) in light of the
results from the six-month site-specific survey completed in January 2020.
·
The
failure to use the new diffusion tube results to re-run and verify Aether’s
original model.
·
The
failure to properly consider the cumulative impact from individual sites, as
required by the NPPF.
·
The
issues with the modelling of receptor heights, particularly in relation to the
sunken aspect of the site, which could be under-estimating the actual pollution
levels.
·
The
failure to assess hourly NO2 exceedances.
·
The
failure to properly interpret the criterion of “where members are regularly
present”, which triggers the application of the air quality objectives.
We also wish to highlight the particular
issue of the proposed primary school, fronting onto High Road. Aether Ltd
admits that there is uncertainty in the modelling results and such uncertainty,
coupled with the diffusion tube measurements (one of which gave a value of 40mg/m3 on the High Road), indicates that it is entirely feasible that
post-development values will be at or above 40mg/m3. The siting of a primary school in this
location is therefore both contrary to the NPPF and NICE guidelines.
It should also be noted that as
regards the A receptor at the High Road "there is likely to be a slight
impact on the local annual mean NO2 concentrations as the change in concentration due to the
development is 0.8% (page 24 of the Aether October 2019 air quality
report)"
The February 2018 (the most recent at
time of writing) annual NO2 reading of Chadwell School is 62.9mg/m3 at page 56 of the Redbridge Air Quality Annual
Status Report for 2018. This is nearby receptor A. While page 11 of the Aether
report of October 2019 states hourly breaches are unlikely at annual levels
below 60mg/m3, it seems almost certain that
receptor A will have some days with an annual mean of 60mg/m3 so making a breach of the
hourly limit of 200mg/m3 a real possibility.
Accordingly, we will be writing to
Aether for their daily and hourly estimates of NO2 at receptor A for the year
ending 31.12.19 and for 2026. NO2 pollution is likely to be higher on week days than at weekends and
also during the rush hour. Aether has a duty to produce this information to
allow Councillors to properly assess if the extra pollution caused by the
development will breach not only the annual mean threshold, but also the hourly
thresholds. The need to carry out such calculations is proportionate to the
size of the proposed development.
In light of these issues and
shortcomings, we are concerned that the developer has failed to propose any
mitigation measures whatsoever. This is the case notwithstanding Aether Ltd’s
own conclusion that “it is widely acknowledged that there is no safe level
of exposure to air pollution, and as such, the developer is encouraged to
consider further mitigation measures to reduce emissions arising from the site.”
Moreover, the Health Impact Assessment
(October 2019) notes as follows: “The Air
Quality Assessment by Aether Ltd recommends
measures including ultra-low NOX gas boilers
mechanical ventilation or NOx/NO2 filters on the ground to second floor façades of the western building facing High Road.”
Worryingly, there is no mention of such recommended mitigation in Aether’s Air
Quality Assessment, nor has such mitigation been proposed by the developer.
We are further concerned that having had
sight of the Peckham Report, the developer has not sought to address and
rectify the issues raised in respect of its air quality modelling.
The Council is no doubt familiar with
the legal framework that underpins issues of air quality and pollution, and its
own duties in this regard. We therefore
ask you to carefully assess the available evidence against the legal framework.
At present, it is simply not possible to conclude that the proposals will be
‘air quality neutral’ in respect of either NO2 or particulate matter
levels. To the contrary, there is a real likelihood that the development will
worsen the air quality. In the absence of any proposed mitigation whatsoever,
the proposed development is in conflict with the relevant policies, both at the
national level (paras. 180, 181 and 183 NPPF) and local level (London and
Redbridge Local Plans) as well as the Council’s Air Quality Action Plan.
Finally, we note that the Council’s
proposed cumulative impact study with respect to air quality has not yet been
published. Its findings will no doubt be directly relevant to the robustness
(or lack thereof) of the developer’s assessments.
Yours sincerely
Andy Walker
120 Blythswood Road
IG3 8SG
Comments
Post a Comment