assessment of air quality effects - epa

TR11A

SSESSMEN

T OF A

IR QU

ALITY

EFFECTS

ASSESSMENT OF AIR QUALITY EFFECTS

Quality Assurance

Prepared by

AECOM New Zealand Limited

AECOM House Level 2, 8 Mahuhu Crescent, Auckland 1010

PO Box 4241 Shortland Street, Auckland 1140

T +64 9 967 9200 F +64 9 967 9201

Revision History:

Revision Author Reviewer Approved for Issue

Name Signature Name Signature Date

RevA Cheng Yii

Sim Peter

Stacey Peter Stacey

Andrew Curtis

Andrew Curtis 21-10-2019

RevB Cheng Yii

Sim Andrew Curtis

Andrew Curtis Andrew Curtis

Andrew Curtis 30-10-2019

RevC Cheng Yii

Sim Andrew Curtis

Andrew Curtis

17-04-2020

RevD Francesca

Mills David

Rollings David Rollings

David Rollings

David Rollings 10-07-2020

RevE – Final Report

Francesca Mills

David Rollings

David

Rollings

22-09-2020

Rollings, David

Stamp

Rollings, David

Stamp

ASSESSMENT OF AIR QUALITY EFFECTS // 3

Sensitivity: General

Quality Information

Document Title: Assessment of Air Quality Effects for the Construction and Operation of N2P

File Name: \\nzwlg1fp001.au.aecomnet.com\projects\603X\60306339\4. Tech work area\4.16

Ngauranga to Petone Consenting Design\Air and Noise\Air Quality\8- AECOM AQ

Report\Final Report\Assessment of Air Quality Effects - Nga Uranga to Pito-

One.docx

Version: Revision E (RevE)

Date: 10 July 2020

Prepared by: Cheng Yii Sim – Air Quality Scientist

Francesca Mills – Graduate Environmental Scientist

Reviewed by: David Rollings Associate Director - Air Quality

Approved by: David Rollings Associate Director - Air Quality

Disclaimer

AECOM New Zealand Limited (AECOM) has prepared this assessment of air quality effects report

on discharges to air in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting profession

for New Zealand Transport Agency for use in a statutory process from the Greater Wellington

Regional Council under the Resource Management Act 1991 for proposed activities undertaken at

State Highway 2 Hutt Road, Wellington.

Except as specifically stated in this section, AECOM does not authorise the use of this Report by any

third party except as provided for by the Resource Management Act 1991.

Nor does AECOM accept any liability for any loss, damage, cost or expenses suffered by any third

party using this report for any purpose other than that stated above.

It is based on generally accepted practices and standards at the time it was prepared. No other

warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report.

It is prepared in accordance with the scope of work and for the purpose outlined in the contract dated

August 2018.

Where this Report indicates that information has been provided to AECOM by third parties, AECOM

has made no independent verification of this information except as expressly stated in this Report.

AECOM assumes no liability for any inaccuracies in or omissions to that information.

This Report was prepared between September 2019 and July 2020 and is based on the conditions

encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation. AECOM disclaims responsibility

for any changes that may have occurred after this time.

Ngā Ūranga to Pito-One

\\nzwlg1fp001.au.aecomnet.com\projects\603X\60306339\4. Tech work area\4.16 Ngauranga to Petone Consenting Design\Air and Noise\Air Quality\8- AECOM AQ Report\Final Report\Assessment of Air Quality Effects - Nga Uranga to Pito-One_v2.docx Revision E – 22-Sep-2020 Prepared for – Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency – Co No.: N/A

AECOM


Table of Contents

Glossary of Abbreviations for this Report i Glossary of Terminologies for this Report iv 1.0 Project Description 1

1.1 Report Content and Purpose 3 2.0 Project Construction Emissions 5

2.1 Discharges to Air 5 2.2 Particulate Matter (Dust Nuisance) 5

2.2.1 Project Construction 6 2.2.2 Earthworks 6 2.2.3 Construction Vehicle Exhaust Emissions 6 2.2.4 Fugitive Dust 6

2.3 Odour 7 2.4 Summary of Project Construction Emissions 8

3.0 Assessment Criteria 10 3.1 Assessment Criteria for the Project Construction 10 3.2 Air Quality Assessment Criteria for Emissions Associated with the Operation of

SH2 10 3.2.1 National Environmental Standards 11 3.2.2 New Zealand Air Quality Guidelines 11 3.2.3 World Health Organization 12 3.2.4 Greater Wellington Regional Quality Targets 12 3.2.5 Summary of Assessment Criteria for Air Quality 12

4.0 Assessment Methodology 13 4.1 Assessing Dust and Odour Emissions from the Project Construction 13

4.1.1 Identification of Sensitive Receptors 13 4.1.2 Site Meteorology 18 4.1.3 FIDOL Assessment 19

4.2 Assessing Air Quality Impacts from SH2 19 5.0 Assessment of Dust and Odour Emission Effects from Construction Activities 20

5.1 FIDOL Assessment 20 5.1.1 Location 20 5.1.2 Frequency 20 5.1.3 Intensity 23 5.1.4 Duration 23 5.1.5 Offensiveness 24

5.2 Summary of Assessment of the Dust and Odour Emissions Effects 24 6.0 Assessment of Air Quality during the Operation of the Project 26

6.1 Air Quality Monitoring along SH2 27 6.2 Summary of Air Quality Assessment 28

7.0 Management Controls 29 7.1 Dust Management 29

7.1.1 Good practice construction dust management 29 7.1.2 Compliance Monitoring for dust 31

7.2 Odour Management 31 7.3 Operation of the Project 31

8.0 Conclusion 32 9.0 Limitations 33

Appendix A Site Meteorology A

Appendix B Existing Air Quality Monitoring Results Along SH2 B



AECOM


List of Figures

Figure 1 Project sectors 3 Figure 2 Project location – Ngā Ūranga to Pito-One, Wellington 4 Figure 3 Locations of HAIL/ potentially contaminated sites around the Project 8 Figure 4 Identified sensitive receptors 15 Figure 5 Windrose for the period between 01 January 2015 and 31 December 2018 from

Shandon Golf Club weather station 19 Figure 6 Locations and boundaries of the Porirua, Lower Hutt and Wellington City

Airsheds relative to the Project 27 Figure 7 Annual windroses for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2018 A-2 Figure 8 Seasonal windroses for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2018 A-3 Figure 9 2016 and 2019 indicator pollutants monitoring locations along SH2 B-2

List of Tables

Table 1 HAIL sites and potentially contaminated sites identified in Technical Report 14 8 Table 2 National Environmental Standards for Ambient Air Quality 11 Table 3 New Zealand Ambient Air Quality Guidelines 11 Table 4 WHO Air Quality Guidelines Relevant to this Assessment 12 Table 5 Relevant Assessment Criteria 12 Table 6 Identified Sensitive receptors 500 m from the Project 15 Table 7 Estimated distances, directions and elevation differences of identified sensitive

receptors relative to the Project 17 Table 8 Frequency of wind speeds above 5 m/s 21 Table 9 Frequency of wind speeds below 3 m/s 22 Table 10 Existing Air Quality Indicator Pollutants Concentrations along SH2 27 Table 11 Summary of construction dust management 29 Table 12 GPG AMD recommended trigger levels for TSP 31 Table 13 Wind speed frequency distribution for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec

2018 A-1 Table 14 Summary of 2016 and 2019 indicator pollutants monitoring locations along SH2 B-1 Table 15 Summary of 2016 and 2019 PM10 Results B-3 Table 16 Summary of 2016 CO Results B-3 Table 17 Summary of monthly NO2 Concentrations (µg/m³) from passive diffusion tube in

2016 B-4 Table 18 Summary of monthly NO2 Concentrations (µg/m³) from passive diffusion tube in

2019 B-4 Table 19 Existing Air Quality Indicator Pollutants Concentrations B-5



i AECOM


Glossary of Abbreviations for this Report

Abbreviation Description

AADT Annual average of daily traffic

ADT Articulated dump truck

AECOM AECOM New Zealand Limited

AEE Assessment of Effects on the Environment

AQNES National Environmental Standards for Air Quality

BECA BECA Group Limited

CAQMP Construction Air Quality Management Plan

CBD Central Business District

CLMP Contaminated Land Management Plan

CO Carbon monoxide

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CMA Coastal Marine Area

E East

E-BAM Environmental Beta-Attenuation Mass Monitor

ESCP Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

ESR Environmental and Social Responsibility

FEM Federal Equivalent Method

FIDOL Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness and Location

GPG ADM Good Practice Guide for Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling

GPG AMD Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Dust

GPG AMO Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Odour

GPG ID Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Industry

GPG LT Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Land Transport

GWRC Greater Wellington Regional Council



ii AECOM



HAIL Hazardous and Industrial List

HCC Hutt City Council

hr Hour

km Kilometre(s)

km/hr Kilometre(s) per hour

LTMA Land Transport Management Act

m Metre(s)

m/s Metres per second

m2 Square metre(s)

m3 Cubic metre(s)

MfE Ministry for the Environment

mg/m3 Milligrams per cubic metre

N North

N2P The section of Te Ara Tupua between Ngā Uranga to Pito-One – the Project.

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

NOx Oxides of nitrogen

NZAAQG New Zealand Ambient Air Quality Guidelines

NZTM New Zealand Transverse Mercator 2000

O3 Ozone

OEHHA REL California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Reference Exposure Limits

P2M The section of Te Ara Tupua between Pito-One to Melling.

PM10 Particulate matter that is less than 10 microns in diameter

PM2.5 Particulate matter that is less than 2.5 microns in diameter

RAQMP Regional Air Quality Management Plan

RMA Resource Management Act

S South



iii AECOM



SH2 State Highway 2

SLUR Selected Land Use Register

US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

US EPA RfC United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Inhalation Reference Concentrations

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

W West

WCC Wellington City Council

WES WorkSafe New Zealand Workplace Exposure Standards

WHO World Health Organisation

WHO AQG World Health Organisation Air Quality Guidelines

% Percent

%HV Percentage of heavy vehicle

µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic metre

µm Micrometre(s)



iv AECOM


Glossary of Terminologies for this Report


(Southern and Northern) Construction Yard

Construction yards: refer to the construction lay down areas that will be located within the KiwiRail Land at Ngā Ūranga in the south of the Project, and Honiana Te Puni Reserve in the north. The construction yards will be used for storage of materials, equipment and site offices/facilities.

Existing path The narrow sealed area (of varying width) separated from SH2 by a wire rope barrier for pedestrians and (southbound) cyclists. Runs from Ngā Ūranga to approximately 300m south of Pito-One.

Fencing A transparent – tensioned chain link fence or similar is proposed at a height of 1.8 m between the rail corridor and the path.

Honiana Te Puni Reserve

The Reserve. The reserve area at the western end of Pito-One foreshore. This is owned by Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and managed as a reserve by Hutt City Council.

P2M The section of Te Ara Tupua between Pito-One to Melling.

Shared path bridge

The bridge that will be constructed adjacent to the Ngā Ūranga interchange to convey path users from the land side, to the sea-side of the Hutt Valley Railway Line.

Te Ara Tupua

Te Ara Tupua is the name that has been gifted to the Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) for use with the Wellington to Hutt Valley walking and cycling link projects. This was gifted by the Mana whenua Steering Group on behalf of Taranaki Whānui kit e Upoko o te Ika.

Te Ara Tupua is the link being developed between Wellington CBD and Melling, made up of the 3 sections – Wellington Central Business District to Ngā Ūranga, Ngā Ūranga to Pito-One (N2P) and Pito-One to Melling (P2M).

the Project Ngā Ūranga ki Pito-One Shared Path - the section of Te Ara Tupua between Ngā Ūranga and Pito-One – The 5m wide paved area providing for a 4m wide path with 0.5m shoulders.

Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency

Waka Kotahi

Transport Agency Guide

Guide to Assessing Air Quality Impacts from State Highway Projects v2.3



1 AECOM

1.0 Qualifications and Experience

David Rollings is an Associate Director in the Compliance Services team at AECOM Australia Proprietary Limited. He has over 23 years’ experience in the preparation of air quality impact assessments and holds a Bachelor of Engineering (BE Chem) from the University of Newcastle.

David is an approved air quality auditor with the New South Wales Department of Planning and has undertaken independent air quality environmental audits for a range of clients including coal mines, waste processing facilities and coal export terminals. David has prepared information for legal hearings and has appeared as an expert witness for a number of cases over the last 10 years.

Preparation of Assessment in accordance with the Code of Conduct in the Environment Court’s Practice Note 2014

I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for expert witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014. This assessment has been prepared in compliance with that Code. In particular, unless I state otherwise, this assessment is within my area of expertise and I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions I express.



2 AECOM

2.0 Project Description

The Ngā Ūranga ki Pito-One1 Shared Path Project (the Project) is part of Te Ara Tupua Programme, which aims to deliver a shared path between Pito-One and Wellington CBD. This Project involves construction of a shared path from the Ngā Ūranga Interchange to just south of Pito-One Railway Station and associated works as shown in Figure 1.

The Project will cater for active transport modes including cycling and walking and will provide an alternative to the existing State Highway 2 (SH2) cycle path located between the Hutt Valley Railway Line and the southbound SH2 carriageway. Works at Honiana Te Puni Reserve provide for the removal and replacement of the existing Wellington Rowing Association and Wellington Water Ski Club facilities at, and adjacent to, Honiana Te Puni Reserve and the introduction of new cultural facilities into the Reserve.

The primary objective of the Project is to provide safe walking and cycling infrastructure between Wellington and the Hutt Valley which will act as a catalyst for increased use of active transport modes. The Project will also provide increased transport resilience, improve connections and integration with planned and existing walking and cycling infrastructure in Wellington City and Hutt City and reconnect people with this long-inaccessible part of the harbour’s edge.

The Project will provide a 4.5km-long shared path between Ngā Ūranga and Pito-One featuring the following key elements:

a. A rail overbridge (shared path bridge) across the Hutt Valley Railway Line, connecting the shared path from Ngā Ūranga to the coastal edge;

b. A path with a 5m surface width, on existing and newly created land and coastal structures, on the seaward side of the Hutt Valley Railway Line;

c. A varied coastal edge which incorporates ūranga (landings), a rocky revetment the intermittent use of strategically placed seawalls along the path edge. The coastal edge treatment provides resilience, reflects the natural landscape, avoids sensitive habitat areas, provides for cultural expression and enhances amenity;

d. Construction of new offshore habitat for coastal avifauna; e. Connections to the Pito-One to Melling (P2M) path and the Pito-One Esplanade; f. Construction of a new integrated clubs building at the eastern end of Honiana Te Puni Reserve

and an associated car parking area; and g. A two-stage development of new cultural facilities at Honiana Te Puni Reserve, including:

i. Construction of a temporary Tāwharau Pods, consisting of three small building pods designed to accommodate a range of cultural or community uses, at the eastern end of Honiana Te Puni Reserve; and

ii. Post construction, the construction of the new Whare to the west of Korokoro Stream, and permanent relocation of the Tāwharau pods to a site adjacent to the Project at the western end of Honiana Te Puni reserve.

For description and assessment purposes in this report, the Project has been divided into three sectors (as shown in Figure 1 below). These are:

Sector 1 Ngā Ūranga Interchange and Bridge Crossing: The southern construction yard and the connection from the Ngā Ūranga Interchange via the shared path bridge across the Hutt Valley Railway Line, to the coastal edge.

Sector 2 Ngā Ūranga to Honiana Te Puni Reserve - Path and ūranga: The typical shared path, rock revetments, ūranga, seawall structures and offshore habitats between Ngā Ūranga and Honiana Te Puni reserve; and

Sector 3 Honiana Te Puni Reserve and Pito-One to Melling (P2M) Connection:

1 Consistent with the approach in the AEE, this report uses the preferred Te Reo spelling of “Ngā Ūranga” and “Pito-One” even where the official name may instead use “Ngauranga” or “Petone”.



3 AECOM

Shared path connection to P2M adjacent to Honiana Te Puni Reserve, connections to Honiana Te Puni Reserve and Pito-One Esplanade, the northern construction yard, integrated clubs building, associated car parking, the temporary and permanent Tāwharau Pods and the new whare.

Figure 1 Project sectors

A full description of the Project including design and operation is provided in Chapter 3 Description of the Project in the Assessment of Effects on the Environment.

A description of the potential construction methodology that could be used to construct the Project is provided in Chapter 4 Construction of the Project of the Assessment of Effects on the Environment.

AECOM New Zealand Limited (AECOM) has been engaged to undertake an assessment of effects on air quality associated with the Project.



4 AECOM

2.1 Report Content and Purpose

This report assesses:

• the potential air quality impacts associated with the construction of the Project at the nearest identified receptors; and

• the air quality which pedestrians and cyclists may experience once the Project becomes operational.

The location of the Project is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Project location – Ngā Ūranga to Pito-One, Wellington



5 AECOM

The assessment has been prepared in accordance with the following guidance documents:

• Ministry for the Environment (MfE) Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Dust (GPG AMD)2;

• Ministry for the Environment (MfE) Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Odour (GPG AMO)3

• Ministry for the Environment (MfE) Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Land Transport (GPG LT)4.

• Ministry for the Environment (MfE) Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Industry (GPG ID)5

• Guide to Assessing Air Quality Impacts from State Highway Projects v2.3 (Transport Agency Guide)6

The report structure is as follows:

• Section 2 Project Construction Emissions.

• Section 3 Assessment Criteria.

• Section 4 Assessment Methodology.

• Section 5 Assessment of Dust and Odour Emission Effects.

• Section 6 Assessment of Air Quality during the Operation of the Project.

• Section 7 Management Controls

• Section 8 Conclusion.

2 Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Dust, 2016 3 Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Assessing and Managing Odour, 2016 4 Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Land Transport, 2008 5 Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Assessing Discharges to Air from Industry, 2008 6 New Zealand Transport Agency Guide to Assessing Air quality Impacts from State Highway Projects v2.3, October 2019



6 AECOM

3.0 Project Construction Emissions

3.1 Discharges to Air

The principal discharge to air from construction activities associated with the Project is particulate matter (dust). However, there is also the potential for odour discharges to occur when earthworks are located within a HAIL/potentially contaminated site. Both of which could cause adverse health and amenity effects on the nearby sensitive receptors.

3.2 Particulate Matter (Dust Nuisance)

The most significant potential effect from the Project activities is nuisance associated with dust deposition during construction. There are four main factors that are important to understand when determining whether any nuisance is caused by dust emissions from the Project activities.

These are:

• Particle size;

• Particle density;

• Wind speed; and

• Wind direction.

These factors are all interrelated, and it is how they combine that determines the potential for an effect to occur. In general, however, it is possible to make the following statements:

• Heavier and larger particles require more wind (speed) to become airborne;

• Large particles will deposit faster than small particles (of a similar density);

• More dense particles will deposit more rapidly than less dense particles (of a similar size);

• Particles will travel further before depositing with a strong wind blowing than with a light wind blowing; and

• The wind direction has an obvious impact on the potential for a source to be affected, especially those downwind in a predominant wind direction.

Despite this range of variables, based on AECOM’s experience dust nuisance effects are generally only experienced within 250 m of the disturbance if construction dust management measures are not implemented in accordance with the good practice guide. Where construction dust management

measures are implemented in accordance with the good practice guide (GPG AMD), dust nuisance effects are only likely to occur within 50 m of sources that are located at ground level. Properties located at least or further than 50 m from the site are unlikely to be affected by dust during any wind speed condition.

During the construction of the Project, Construction dust management in accordance with the good practice guide, which will be further discussed in Section 7.0, and the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan7 (ESCP) will be employed to control dust and thus, dust nuisance effects are only likely to occur within 50 m of the dust sources (that are located at ground level).

The activities which have the potential to generate dust are outlined in the following sub-sections 2.2.1 to 2.2.4. Dust emissions resulting from these activities generally comprise of coarse particles with aerodynamic diameter greater than 20 µm. Respirable fine particles with aerodynamic diameter that are less than 10 µm are likely to constitute only a small fraction of dust emissions associated with the above activities.

7 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan – Ngauranga to Petone Shared Path for Resource Consent, 8 April 2020. Prepared by Beca Limited



7 AECOM

3.2.1 Project Construction

The detailed Project construction methodology is found in Chapter 4 of the AEE. A summary of the Project construction operations which could cause dust emissions are as follows:

1. Transportation of Project materials such as: - Rock armouring; - Clean gravels or filter materials from local quarries; and, - General fill from local borrow pits, riverbeds or quarry overburden;

2. Unloading of the above materials;

3. Stockpiling of the above materials at the northern and southern construction yards; and

4. Placing rip rap armouring.

Based on the proposed design there is approximately 415,198 m3 of material8 (rock and general fill) that will be moved within the construction site, throughout the entire construction period of the Project.

3.2.2 Earthworks

Where asphalt surface will be laid for the Project, existing land preparatory works such as topsoil scraping will occur. Furthermore, both the extension of culverts and the construction of the shared path bridge at the southern end of the Project will include earthworks. The operations which could cause dust emissions associated with earthworks are the following:

1. Excavation;

2. Loading of excavated materials; and,

3. Transportation of excavated materials

Based on the preliminary construction methodology the bulk of the Project construction involves working with clean gravel or rip rap rock (low content in fines), and the relative volumes of general fill and topsoil are small. In general, it is expected that there will be very limited excavation work to be carried out.

3.2.3 Construction Vehicle Exhaust Emissions

The main emissions of interest associated with combustion emissions from construction vehicles and machinery engine exhausts are fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 µm and 2.5 µm (PM10 and PM2.5), oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO). Given the comparatively small number of construction vehicles, and the temporary nature of the construction, exhaust emission effects are not expected to be significant.

3.2.4 Fugitive Dust

Wind erosion

Wind erosion may contribute fugitive dust emissions to the environment from stockpiles, roadways and exposed surfaces. However, this is more likely to occur when wind speed is greater than 5 metres per second (m/s). On roadways, vehicle-road interaction is the main contribution of fugitive dust emissions.

Mechanical Disturbance

Fugitive dust emissions caused by mechanical disturbances occur when solid particles on road surfaces adhere to the tyres of moving vehicles and get entrained in the turbulent wake caused by the vehicle after they are detached from the tyres. The increased number of vehicle movement on site can cause elevated concentrations of dust. Therefore, it is important to assess the anticipated number of vehicles on site for this project.

In the construction methodology9, it is anticipated that there are likely to be more than 50 vehicles mobilised on and off site per day, a Construction Air Quality Management Plan (CAQMP) will be required under the Waka Kotahi Guide to manage dust from the Project construction. A CAQMP is a management plan which facilitates the avoidance, remediation and mitigation of any adverse effects of

8 Volume of materials referenced from Chapter 4 of the AEE 9 Chapter 4 of the AEE



8 AECOM

dust generated from construction activities and to promote best practice construction dust management to control dust discharges from the construction site.

3.3 Odour

The presence of contaminated sites indicates that the construction of the Project has the potential to discharge not only dust, but also airborne contaminants and odour into the air if mitigation measures are not in place. In Technical Report 14 – Preliminary Site Investigation10, the investigation concluded that there are three HAIL sites and identified four other sites in the vicinity of the Project construction which could potentially be contaminated. Of the identified HAIL sites, one is located within the footprint of the Project. These sites are presented in Figure 3 and the site details presented in Table 1.

Figure 3 Locations of HAIL/ potentially contaminated sites around the Project

10 Technical Report 14: Preliminary Site Investigation



9 AECOM

Table 1 HAIL sites and potentially contaminated sites identified in Technical Report 14

Site description Location Description

SN/05/089/02 (Identified HAIL Site)

Ngauranga Gorge rail corridor historically reclaimed area

HAIL Category G3 – Landfill sites Unknown materials used in historical land reclamation. Potential for petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals and asbestos.

“Rocky Point” (Identified HAIL Site)

Electrical substation associated with the function of the rail network

HAIL Category B4 Poly chlorinated biphenols (PCB’s), heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and asbestos.

SN/03/028/02 (Identified HAIL Site)

1 N Hutt Road, Petone HAIL Category D2 and D4 Operation and demolition of former foundry. Heavy metals (including tin), oxides, fluorides and chlorides, petroleum hydrocarbons, cyanide compounds, and asbestos.

Honiana Te Puni Reserve

11 The Esplanade Unknown materials used in historical land reclamation. Potential for petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals and asbestos.

The rail corridor The corridor around the existing Hutt Valley Railway Line

Operation of rolling stock. Maintenance activities along the rail corridor. Potential for asbestos, heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, herbicide/ organo-chlorine pesticides.

Wellington Water Ski Club

1 The Esplanade Building materials. Potential for heavy metals (in particular lead) and asbestos

Korokoro Stream Potentially been impacted by upstream HAIL activities in the Petone Industrial area, however, the stream itself is not considered to be HAIL site.

During the Project construction, earthworks for the construction of the shared path bridge have the greatest potential to disturb contaminated soil which may cause odour to be discharged into air. Other identified HAIL/potentially contaminated sites are located outside of the Project construction footprint, and thus it is considered that contaminated soil disturbances will not be encountered.

Odour from some contaminated soil is considered unpleasant by the general population. As the shared path bridge location is on an identified HAIL site odour management will need to be in place to help manage and mitigate odour discharges during earthworks for the shared path bridge construction if odorous material is encountered. As there is only one identified HAIL site located within the Project construction footprint, the potential for odour discharges during earthworks is considered low and a separate odour management plan is not required. If contaminated soils are encountered, they will be managed via the Contaminated Land Management Plan (CLMP).

Based on AECOM’s experience on projects with similar odour sources, poorly dispersive conditions (wind speeds less than 3 m/s) have the greatest potential to cause odour nuisance effects to sensitive receptors located within 500 m of the odour source.

3.4 Summary of Project Construction Emissions

During the construction of the Project, activities such as construction, earthworks, material transportation and storage and dust emissions caused by mechanical disturbances from road surfaces will have the potential to generate dust. Good practice construction dust management and the ESCP



10 AECOM

will be employed to control dust and thus, it is expected that dust nuisance effects are only likely to only occur within 50 m of the dust sources (that are located at ground level).

Earthworks for the construction of the shared path bridge have the greatest potential to disturb contaminated soil which may cause odour to be discharged into air. Other identified HAIL/potentially contaminated sites are located outside of the Project construction footprint, and thus it is considered that contaminated soil disturbances will not be encountered. If contaminated soils are encountered, they will be managed via the CLMP.



11 AECOM

4.0 Assessment Criteria

The relevant legislation for consideration has been outlined in the Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE). For the relevant rules and regulations for this assessment, refer to Chapter 7 and Appendix C of the AEE.

4.1 Assessment Criteria for the Project Construction

In determining whether there is the potential for dust and odour nuisance to occur, a qualitative assessment of the potential effects associated with the construction of the Project was undertaken using the Frequency, Intensity, Duration, Offensiveness and Location (FIDOL) methodology, in accordance with the GPG AMD and GPG AMO.

This assessment involved reviewing the following:

• The nature of the activity being undertaken;

• How long the activities are likely to occur;

• The nature of the material being excavated;

• Whether mitigation measures can be implemented to control the potential for effects (e.g. use of water carts, covering stockpiles etc);

• How close receptors are to the activities;

• The nature of the receptors and their sensitivity to dust and odour; and

• The prevailing meteorological conditions.

The qualitative assessment is discussed in detail in Section 4.1.3.

4.2 Air Quality Assessment Criteria for Emissions Associated with the

Operation of SH2

As part of this assessment, AECOM considered whether, when the path becomes operational, pedestrians and cyclists are likely to experience road traffic emissions from SH2. From the large range of pollutants associated with vehicle emissions, the GPG LT has identified five pollutants that have the greatest potential to cause adverse effects and require the greatest level of attention. These pollutants are as follows:

• Carbon monoxide (CO);

• Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx, including Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2);

• Photochemical oxidants, including ozone (O3);

• Particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5); and,

• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), including benzene and 1,3-butadiene.

Concentrations of VOC and O3 are generally not measured in the environment as their ambient concentrations are difficult and expensive to measure. In many parts of New Zealand, existing concentrations of particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) are high due to discharges principally from domestic sources. Other sources of particulate matter include exhaust emissions, re-suspension of road surface dust, tyre wear, and brake and road surface wear. In considering the combustion emissions of PM, essentially all PM is less than 2.5 μm11. Based on the above, if NO2, CO and PM10 concentrations had been found to exceed the air quality assessment criteria, then a more detailed assessment of VOC, O3 and PM2.5 concentrations would have been required. This assumption is based on guidance found in the GPG LT “For most assessments it is valid to assume that CO, PM10 and NOx are good indicators of the likely effects”.

11 Referenced from GPG LT



12 AECOM

As emissions to air may cause adverse health effects on users of the Project, the air quality effects occurring from the operation of SH2 have been assessed against standards and guidelines recommended by the MfE’s GPG ID. MfE GPG ID recommends an order of priority when reviewing air quality assessment criteria. This order of priority is as follows:

• Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004 (AQNES)

• MfE, Ambient Air Quality Guidelines (2002 update) (NZAAQG) (MfE, 2002);

• GWRC Regional Air Quality Management Plan (RAQMP, 2000);

• World Health Organisation (WHO) air quality guideline (WHO AQG) Global Update 2005 (WHO, 2006) (herein referred to as WHO AQG);

4.2.1 National Environmental Standards

The AQNES are based on the potential for the health effects described in the NZAAQG. The AQNES applies standards to five air pollutants: PM10, CO, NO2, O3 and VOCs. It is noted that MfE has recently released a discussion paper that proposed the PM2.5 Standards, which are the same as the WHO values.

While these standards were not intended to become air quality assessment criteria, they have become de facto assessment criteria because regional authorities are required to ensure air quality within their jurisdiction is maintained at or below these levels. Table 2 presents the AQNES guideline values relevant to this assessment.

Table 2 National Environmental Standards for Ambient Air Quality

Pollutant Air Quality Standard

Averaging Period Number of Permissible Exceedances per year

PM10 50 µg/m³ 24-hr 1

PM2.5 25 µg/m³ 24-hr 3

10 µg/m³ Annual -

CO 10 mg/m³ 8-hr 1

NO2 200 µg/m³ 1-hr 9

4.2.2 New Zealand Air Quality Guidelines

The NZAAQG were published by the MfE in 2002 following a comprehensive review of international and national research and are widely accepted among New Zealand air quality practitioners. The NZAAQG criteria provide the minimum requirements that ambient air quality should meet in order to protect human health and the environment.

NZAAQG levels for pollutants and averaging periods not superseded by the AQNES are still relevant and should be considered as part of any assessment. The NZAAQG criteria set for the protection of human-health are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 New Zealand Ambient Air Quality Guidelines

Pollutant Threshold Concentration Averaging Period

PM10 20 µg/m³ Annual

CO 30 mg/m³ 1-hr

NO2 100 µg/m³ 24-hr



13 AECOM

4.2.3 World Health Organization

The AQNES and NZAAQG are essentially the same as those promulgated by the WHO with the WHO AQG. In addition, WHO has promulgated an annual guideline for NO2, which is relevant to this assessment. These guidelines are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 WHO Air Quality Guidelines Relevant to this Assessment

Pollutant Maximum Concentration Averaging Period

NO2 40 µg/m³ Annual

4.2.4 Greater Wellington Regional Quality Targets

The GWRC’s RAQMP12 became operative on 8 May 2000 and set out regional ambient air quality guidelines for a number of pollutants relevant to this project. These targets are the same as those found in the AQNES and NZAAQG, except for 1-hour NO2 which is less stringent.

4.2.5 Summary of Assessment Criteria for Air Quality

Based on the order of priority recommended by MfE GPG ID presented in Sections 3.2.1 to 3.2.4, the air quality assessment criteria used to assess the air quality impacts from SH2 on the path are summarised and presented in Table 5. The values are adopted from the lowest, most stringent standard presented above.

Table 5 Relevant Assessment Criteria

Pollutant Maximum Concentration Averaging Period Source

PM10

50 µg/m³ 24-hr AQNES

20 µg/m³ Annual NZAAQG

CO

30 mg/m³ 1-hr NZAAQG

10 mg/m³ 8-hr AQNES

NO2

200 µg/m³ 1-hr NZAAQG

100 µg/m³ 24-hr AQNES

40 µg/m³ Annual WHO AQG

12 Greater Wellington Regional Council, Regional Air Quality Management Plan for the Wellington Region, 8 May 2000



14 AECOM

5.0 Assessment Methodology

5.1 Assessing Dust and Odour Emissions from the Project Construction

In this report, the potential air quality impacts associated with the construction of the Project have been assessed in accordance with the GPG AMD and GPG AMO. This section presents the methodologies used in assessing the potential effects associated with dust and odour emissions from the construction of the Project.

5.1.1 Identification of Sensitive Receptors

Dust and odour effects have been identified to have the highest potential to cause air quality issues from this Project. Based on Sections 2.2 and 2.3, dust and odour nuisance effects may occur within 50 m and 500 m, respectively. With consideration of the potential nuisance effects, AECOM has undertaken a desktop study to identify discrete receptors within 500 m of the construction site which have been deemed sensitive to dust and odour as a result of discharges to air from the Project construction. The receptors were selected to be representative of the locations surrounding them and are often the closest, or most likely to be affected by air quality issues of a residential/commercial property group. Representative receptors have been selected along the length of the Project in order to best identify air quality issues. If one receptor in a group is found to experience nuisance effects, its surrounding receptors are also identified to experience similar air quality in the area.

The nearest potentially affected sensitive receptors are presented graphically in Figure 4. The receptors location details and the area which they represent are summarised in Table 6. The distances and relative directions of all identified receptors to the nearest part of the path alignment, their distances to the shared path bridge and construction yards, and their elevation difference relative to the alignment are estimated and summarised in Table 7.



15 AECOM

Figure 4 Identified sensitive receptors



16 AECOM

Table 6 Identified Sensitive receptors 500 m from the Project

Receptor Name

Coordinates (NZTM 200013) Address District and Zoning Receptor Type

Representative Area of Receptor

X (m) Y (m)

R1 1752002.7 5432301.1 2 Centennial Hwy, Ngauranga, 6035

WCC - Commercial Commercial

Commercial properties along Centennial Highway

R2 1752111.8 5432443.3 4 Fort Street, Ngauranga, 6035 WCC – Outer Residential Residential

Residential properties along Fort Street and Malvern Road

R3 1753057.7 5433329.0 52 Dungarvan Rd, Newlands, 6037

WCC – Rural Residential

Residential properties along Dungarvan Road

R4 1753362.0 5433483.8 222 Glanmire Road, Newlands, 6037

WCC – Open Space B Residential

Residential properties along Glanmire Road

R5 1753649.4 5433546.4 579 Hutt Road, Horokiwi, 5016 WCC – Open Space B Residential

Isolated House on hill above SH2

R6 1753829.3 5434035.9 27 Cromwell Point, Newlands, 6037

WCC – Outer Residential Residential

Residential properties along Cromwell Point and Bendigo Grove

R7 1753988.0 5433845.4 605 Hutt Rd On, SH 2, Horokiwi, 5016

WCC – Open Space B BP Self-service Station

Self-service petrol station adjacent to SH2

R8 1754437.8 5434218.5 673 Hutt Road, Horokiwi, 5016 WCC – Rural Treetop services Wellington

Isolated commercial property beside SH2

13 New Zealand Transverse Mercator 2000



17 AECOM

Receptor Name

Coordinates (NZTM 200013) Address District and Zoning Receptor Type

Representative Area of Receptor

X (m) Y (m)

R9 1755780.7 5434644.2 1 The Esplanade, Lower Hutt 5012

HCC – Special Recreation

Recreational Area Wellington Water Ski Club and Wellington Rowing Association

R10 1755991.3 5434746.6 1 Cornish St, Korokoro, 5012 HCC – General Business Ullrich Aluminium Company

Industrial premises along Cornish Street and Pito-One Road

R11 1756197.1 5434642.4 9 The Esplanade, Petone, Lower Hutt 5012

HCC – Petone Commercial Area1

Porter Hire Commercial properties along Hutt Road and The Esplanade

R12 1756040.5 5434572.6 Honiana Te Puni Reserve HCC The Reserve

Eastern end of the Honiana Te Puni Reserve which will be open to public access during the construction of the Project

R13 SH2 and KiwiRail along the Project alignment - Public road and railway track adjacent to the Project

R14 Hutt Road and The Esplanade Petone - Public roads adjacent to the Project

R15 Future Location of Rowing and Water Ski Clubs HCC – Special Recreation Future site of the integrated club room for the Wellington Rowing Association and Wellington Water Ski Club.



18 AECOM

Table 7 Estimated distances, directions and elevation differences of identified sensitive receptors relative to the Project

Receptor name

Distance nearest to the

Project (m)

Distance to the

overbridge (m)

Distance to the nearest

Construction Yard (m)

Direction relative to the nearest point of the Project

Elevation of Receptor above the

alignment (m)

R1 155 140 130 NW 10

R2 120 235 130 NW 46

R3 235 1,460 1,000 NW 129

R4 195 1,775 1,315 NW 106

R5 75 2,035 1,550 NW 35

R6 290 2,500 1,785 NW 154

R7 40 2,485 1,700 NW 2

R8 70 3,070 1,110 NW 13

R9 1 4,300 0 S 0

R10 50 4,630 110 N 0

R11 30 4,740 230 S 1

R12 85 4,600 100 S 0

R13 0 0 0 N and S 0

R14 0 4,400 156 S 0

R15 140 4,700 330 SE 0



19 AECOM

5.1.2 Site Meteorology

The qualitative assessment undertaken for this project requires the consideration of local meteorological data. For this project, the meteorological observation data from the nearest long-term weather station located at Shandon Golf Club, approximately 4.5 km east-northeast of the path.

The distribution of hourly average wind speed and wind directions for the period between 01 January 2015 and 31 December 2018 is shown in Figure 5. The predominant wind distribution as shown in Figure 5, is to the northeast, north-northeast, and south-southwest, respectively. Strong winds tend to come from the northeast quadrant, while the slower winds from the southwest quadrant. Further meteorological data is presented in Appendix A; it includes a table presenting the frequency distribution of windspeed and an annual and seasonal windrose from January 2015 to December 2018.

Figure 5 Windrose for the period between 01 January 2015 and 31 December 2018 from Shandon Golf Club weather station



20 AECOM

5.1.3 FIDOL Assessment

A qualitative assessment of the potential effects associated with the proposed activities is required to determine whether the construction activities may generate nuisance dust that might affect the neighbouring community. This is undertaken in accordance with GPG AMD and GPG AMO using the FIDOL assessment tool. These factors are explained in detail below:

• Frequency: relates to how often an individual is exposed to dust or odour. To determine the frequency three parameters need to be established:

1. The direction of sensitive receptors – relative to the construction activities.

2. The frequency at which the wind blows in this direction with sufficient strength that dust or odour can be carried; and,

3. The frequency of dust or odour discharges.

AECOM considers that the significance of occurrence frequency for wind conditions which may cause dust or odour nuisance to be low when the frequency is between 0 % and 5 %; moderate when the frequency is between 5 % and 10 % and high when the frequency is above 10 %.

• Intensity: is the concentration of dust or the strength of odour that is likely to be experienced at any potential receptor.

• Duration: is the amount of time that a receptor is exposed to dust or odour. Combined with frequency, this indicates the exposure to dust/odour. The duration of dust or odour emissions, like its frequency, is related to the source type and discharge characteristics, meteorology and location.

• Offensiveness: is a subjective rating of the unpleasantness of the effects of nuisance dust/odour.

• Location: is the type of land use and the nature of human activities in the vicinity of a dust/odour source. The same process in a different location may produce more or less dust/odour depending on local topography and meteorological conditions. It is also important to note that in some locations certain higher dust/odour concentrations may be more acceptable than in others.

5.2 Assessing Air Quality Impacts from SH2

As part of this assessment, AECOM considered whether, when the Project becomes operational, pedestrians and cyclists are likely to experience road traffic emissions from SH2 that may lead to health effects for the Project users.

In determining whether there is the potential for the road traffic emissions from SH2 to cause adverse health effects on the Project users, a short-term monitoring program was undertaken between March and September 2016 along the existing SH2 roadway for the indicator pollutants (PM10, CO, and NO2). A further study, which measured PM10 and NO2 was also undertaken between June and September 2019. This information was collected and assessed against standards and guidelines discussed in Section 3.2.5 to determine the existing air quality along SH2.



21 AECOM

6.0 Assessment of Dust and Odour Emission Effects from

Construction Activities

6.1 FIDOL Assessment

FIDOL assessment was undertaken for the Project site activities as described in Section 2.2 and 2.3 to assess the potential for dust and odour nuisance to occur at nearby receptors.

6.1.1 Location

Dust

AECOM considers that, with good practice construction dust management and ESCP in place, only winds above 5 m/s have the potential to cause dust nuisance effects to occur at sensitive receptors located within 50 m of the dust source.

Based on the information provided in Section 4.1.1, sensitive receptors R1 – R6 are located more than 50 m from the Project construction activities. They are also located at higher elevations than the Project and surrounded by natural barriers such as trees. Due to the sudden elevation change and natural barriers which occur between these receptors and the Project, the receptors are unlikely to be affected by nuisance dust from the Project construction activities. Similarly, R8 (an isolated commercial property adjacent to SH2), R12 and R15 (both situated on the eastern end of the Honiana Te Puni Reserve) are all located more than 50 m from the Project, and therefore are unlikely to experience dust nuisance from the Project construction activities.

The receptors which are located within 50 m of the Project and have the potential to experience dust nuisance as a result of the following construction activities:

R7 – Self-service station;

R9 – Old location of Wellington Water Ski Club and Wellington Rowing Association (Rowing association building to be demolished and Water Ski Club to be repurposed as Construction Site office);

R10 – Industrial premises along Cornish Street and Pito-One Road, at the northern end of the Project;

R11 – Commercial properties along Hutt Road and The Esplanade, at the northern end of the Project;

R13 – SH2, located along most of the Project alignment; and

R14 – Hutt Road and The Esplanade, adjacent to the northern end of the Project alignment.

Odour

Earthworks for the new overbridge construction have the greatest potential to disturb contaminated soil which may cause odour to be discharged into air. AECOM considers that only winds below 3 m/s have the potential to cause odour nuisance effects to the sensitive receptors located less than 500 m from the odour source.

Based on the information provided in Section 4.1.1, receptors located less than 500 m from the potential odour source, new overbridge construction, are the following:

R1 – Commercial properties along Centennial Highway;

R2 – Residential properties along Fort Street and Malvern Road; and

R13 – SH2, along most of the Project alignment.

6.1.2 Frequency

Dust

Dust frequency relates to how often a receptor is exposed to dust. AECOM considers that, with good practice construction dust management in place, only winds above 5 m/s have the potential to cause dust nuisance effects to occur at sensitive receptors located within 50 m of the dust source. Table 8 presents a summary of wind frequencies presented in Table 7 and Table 13 in Appendix A. Table 8 shows the distance and change in elevation between each receptor and the Project, as well as the total percentage of wind with wind speeds above 5 m/s, travelling from the Project towards each receptor.



22 AECOM

Table 8 Frequency of wind speeds above 5 m/s

Receptor

Distance nearest to the Project

(m)

Distance to the overbridge

(m)

Distance to the nearest

Construction Yard (m)

Receptor Elevation above the alignment

(m)

Total % of wind above 5 m/s

traveling from alignment towards

receptors

R1 155 140 130 10 0.0

R2 120 235 130 46 0.0

R3 235 1,460 1,000 129 0.0

R4 195 1,775 1,315 106 0.0

R5 75 2,035 1,550 35 0.0

R6 290 2,500 1,785 154 0.0

R7 40 2,485 1,700 2 0.0

R8 70 3,070 1,110 13 0.0

R9 1 4,300 0 0 5.9

R10 50 4,630 110 0 0.0

R11 30 4,740 230 1 5.9

R12 85 4,600 100 0 5.9

R13 0 0 0 0 0.0 - 5.9

R14 0 4,400 156 0 5.9

R15 140 4,700 330 0 6.0

Based on the wind speed frequency distribution presented in Table 8, the frequency of winds above 5 m/s which have the potential to carry dust from the Project construction activities to the sensitive receptors R7 and R10 is 0.0 % of the time. However, the frequency of winds above 5 m/s which have the potential to carry dust from the Project construction activities to R9, R11, R13 and R14 is at 6 %.

The frequency for wind conditions which may cause dust nuisance effects from the Project construction, including the new overbridge, to most of the sensitive receptors is considered to be low. However, the frequency for wind conditions which may cause dust nuisance effects to R9, R11, R13 and R14 is considered to be moderate.

Odour

Odour frequency relates to how often a receptor is exposed to odour. Earthworks for the new overbridge construction have the greatest potential to disturb contaminated soil which may cause odour to be discharged into air. As noted in Section 2.3, AECOM considers that only winds below 3 m/s have the potential to cause odour nuisance effects to the sensitive receptors located less than 500 m from the odour source. Table 9 presents a summary of wind frequencies obtained from Table 7 and Table 13 in Appendix A. It presents the distance between each receptor and the new overbridge, the elevation difference between each receptor and the Project and the total percentage of wind with wind speeds below 3 m/s, travelling from the new overbridge towards each receptor.



23 AECOM

Table 9 Frequency of wind speeds below 3 m/s

Receptor Distance to the overbridge (m)

Receptor Elevation above the alignment

(m)

Direction relative to the

Overbridge

Total % of wind below 3 m/s

traveling from new bridge

towards receptors

R1 140 10 NW 0.6

R2 235 46 N 0.0

R3 1,460 129 NE 8.1

R4 1,775 106 NE 8.1

R5 2,035 35 NE 8.1

R6 2,500 154 NE 8.1

R7 2,485 2 NE 8.1

R8 3,070 13 NE 8.1

R9 4,300 0 NE 8.1

R10 4,630 0 NE 8.1

R11 4,810 1 NE 8.1

R12 4,600 0 NE 8.1

R13 0 0 NE and SW 8.1 - 14.3

R14 4,400 0 NE 8.1

R15 4,700 0 NE 8.1

Based on the wind speed frequency distribution presented in Table 9, the frequency of winds below 3 m/s with the potential to carry odour from the earthworks to R1, R2 and R13 (which are located less than 500 m from the potential odour source) is between 0.6 and 14.3 % of the time.

The frequency of wind conditions which may cause odour nuisance effects to R1 and R2 is considered to be low. However, the frequency of wind conditions which may cause odour nuisance effects to R13 is considered to be high.



24 AECOM

6.1.3 Intensity

Dust

Dust intensity relates to the concentration of dust that is likely to be experienced at any potential receptor. The nearest sensitive receptors, located less than 50 m from the Project construction activities and at elevations similar to the Project, are receptors R7, R9, R10, R11, R13 and R14.

R7 is a self-service petrol station which is only used by patrons for short intervals of time. Receptor R9, which represents both the old location of the Wellington Water Ski Club and Wellington Rowing Association, both clubs will be operating from R15. The buildings represented by R9 are to be demolished and repurposed as a Construction Site Office over the Project construction period, it is unlikely that R7 and R9 will have sensitive receptors present for a prolonged period of time.

Both R10 and R11 may experience higher concentrations of dust from the Project construction due to their proximity to the Project and the northern construction yard at the Honiana Te Puni Reserve.

R13 and R14 have the potential to experience high concentrations of dust from the Project construction.

Overall, only receptors R10, R11, R13 and R14 have the potential to experience high concentrations of nuisance dust.

Odour

Odour intensity relates to the strength of odour that is likely to be experienced at any potential receptor. Receptors R1, R2 and R13 are located less than 500 m from the new shared path bridge and have the potential to experience “offensive or objectionable” odour from the earthworks’ activities associated with the construction of the overbridge.

The duration of the shared path bridge construction is expected to be approximately eight months and some of the works immediately adjacent to or over rail lines is scheduled to be carried out at night when train frequencies are lower. Excavated materials will also be tested for possible contamination prior to excavation to reduce the time of contaminated soil exposure. Furthermore, the frequency of wind conditions, which have the potential to carry odour to these receptors, with the exception of R13, is low.

Although the frequency of wind conditions, which have the potential to carry odour to R13 is considered high (14.3%), both SH2 road users and rail passengers will likely to be around the shared path bridge construction site for only short periods of time.

Therefore, the potential for all receptors to experience intense odour nuisance from the earthworks’ activities associated with the construction of the new shared path bridge is low.

6.1.4 Duration

Dust

Receptors R7, R9, R10, R11, R13 and R14 are receptors located within 50 m of the Project and have the potential to experience dust nuisance. As mentioned previously, R9 will not be used during the Project construction period and therefore there will be no sensitive receptors being exposed to dust nuisance.

R7 is a self-service petrol station and, R13 and R14 are public roads and railway track. Receptors at these locations will typically be exposed to dust for only short periods of time.

Both R10 and R11 may experience extended periods of dust nuisance from the Project construction due to their proximity to the northern part of the Project and the northern construction yard at the Honiana Te Puni Reserve. The length of exposure could correspond with the trading hours of the industrial and commercial properties. However, with the implementation of dust monitoring as part of the CAQMP (which will be discussed in Section 7.1), AECOM considers that at worst the duration would be limited to a period of less than 2 hours at any one time, being the time to recognise nuisance dust has occurred beyond the Project site and the implementation of mitigation and other management for the dust emitted.

Odour



25 AECOM

The duration of the new shared path bridge construction is expected to be approximately eight months and some of the works immediately adjacent to or over rail lines is scheduled to be carried out at night when train frequencies are lower.

Excavated materials will be tested for possible contamination prior to excavation to reduce the time of contaminated soil exposure. If contaminated soils are encountered, they will be managed via the CLMP. AECOM considers that at worst the duration would be limited to a period of less than 2 hours at any one time, being the time to recognise that an accidental discovery of contaminated soil has occurred and the management of the contaminated soil is implemented.

Based on the duration of the overbridge construction, the frequency of wind conditions, and with the CLMP in place, the length of receptors’ exposure to odour is considered to be short and infrequent.

6.1.5 Offensiveness

Dust

Offensiveness dust is one’s consideration in whether there is an ‘objectionable or offensive’ effect occurring as a result of exposure to dust.

Based on the assessment on the location, frequency, intensity and duration factors outlined in Section 5.1.1 – 5.1.4, sensitive receptors R10 and R11 have the potential to experience ‘objectionable or offensive’ dust due to their proximity to the Project construction and the duration at which they will experience nuisance dust.

Although receptors at R13 and R14 (public roads and railway track) would only be exposed to dust for short periods of time, under extreme conditions, dust plumes can cause reduced visibility for road traffic which is a safety concern.

Odour

Odour from contaminated soil is considered unpleasant by the general population. Based on the assessment on the location, frequency, intensity and duration factors outlined in Section 5.1.1 – 5.1.4, in the event of an accidental discovery of contaminated soil during the construction of the shared path bridge, sensitive receptors R1, R2 and R13 are unlikely to experience ‘objectionable or offensive’ odour as the length of receptors’ exposure to such odour is considered to be short and infrequent.

6.2 Summary of Assessment of the Dust and Odour Emissions Effects

Dust

Commercial properties along Centennial Highway (represented by R1) and residential properties represented by R2 – R6 are unlikely to experience dust nuisance from the Project construction activities as they are surrounded by natural barriers such as trees, located at higher elevation than, and more than 50 m from the Project construction activities

The commercial property adjacent to SH2 (R8) and the eastern end of the Honiana Te Puni Reserve (R12 and R15) are located more than 50 m from the Project and therefore, they are not likely to experience dust nuisance from the Project construction activities.

Receptor R7 is a self-service petrol station. Therefore, it is unlikely that R7 will have sensitive receptors experiencing dust nuisance for a prolonged period of time. Receptor R9, which represents the existing locations of both Wellington Water Ski Club and Wellington Rowing Association, will not be used for this purpose during the Project construction period. The new location of these clubs is represented by R15 which should not experience nuisance dust due to the distance of the new site from the Project construction activities.

Industrial premises along Cornish Street and Pito One Road (R10) and commercial properties along Hutt Road and The Esplanade (R11) are at the greatest risk of experiencing nuisance dust from the northern construction yard and during the construction of the northern part of the Project.

Under extreme conditions and if dust from the Project construction is not properly managed, receptors at R13 and R14 (public roads and railway track) may experience a reduction in road visibility due to construction dust plumes, which presents a potential safety concern. Good practice construction dust management, including visual observations by all site personnel during all site works, will be



26 AECOM

implemented for the Project at all times. Consequently, dust emissions from the construction site are expected to remain at acceptable levels, which do not pose as a risk to the road or rail users.

To ensure adverse effects from the Project construction activities are managed, and that the good practice construction dust management are implemented, a CAQMP is required. General information and good practice construction dust management which will be incorporated into the CAQMP are further discussed in Section 7.1.

Odour

Receptors R3 – R12 and R14 – R15 are all located more than 500 m from the new shared path bridge construction site, which is located in an identified HAIL site, and therefore are unlikely to experience nuisance odour.

Receptors R1, R2 and R13 are located less than 500 m from the new shared path bridge area. Windspeeds capable of transporting odour will occur less than 0.6% of the time for receptor R1 and R2. Although the frequency of wind conditions, which have the potential to carry odour to R13 is considered high (14.3%), both SH2 road users and rail passengers will likely be in the proximity of the shared path bridge construction site for only short periods of time.

The duration of the shared path bridge construction is expected to be approximately eight months and some of the works immediately adjacent to or over rail lines is scheduled to be carried out at night when train frequencies are lower. Furthermore, odour discharge is not expected to occur often at the Project site with the implementation of good practice management of potentially contaminated materials.

Based on the duration of the overbridge construction, the frequency of wind conditions, and with good practice management of potentially contaminated materials in place, it is unlikely for receptors located within 500 m from the shared path bridge construction yard, which has the potential to discharge odour if contaminated soil is exposed, to experience odour nuisance.



27 AECOM

7.0 Assessment of Air Quality during the Operation of the

Project

There are eight airsheds within the Wellington Region. The southern end of the Project is not located in any of these airsheds, however, the northern end is located within the Lower Hutt Airshed. The ‘2012 Air Quality in Wellington Region’ report prepared by the GWRC14 states that for the three indicator air pollutants (PM10, CO and NO2), the air quality in the Wellington City and Lower Hutt Airsheds met all national standards and guidelines. Despite full compliance with the air quality guidelines, a national screening programme carried out by Waka Kotahi has shown that NO2 concentrations may be elevated on some heavily trafficked roads in the region.

Figure 6 presents the boundaries of the Porirua, Lower Hutt and Wellington City Airsheds relative to the Project.

Figure 6 Locations and boundaries of the Porirua, Lower Hutt and Wellington City Airsheds relative to the Project

14 Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2012. Air Quality in the Wellington Region report.



28 AECOM

As the Project is intended to be used for active transport such as walking and cycling, no vehicle emissions will be associated with the continued operation of the Project. Consequently, all emissions experienced at the Project will be from SH2 and other nearby emitters. Due to the Project being located less than 150 m15 from SH2, vehicle emissions from traffic on SH2 may lead to health effects for pedestrians and cyclists using the path.

During the scoping phase of the Project, it was identified that there was generally a lack of air quality monitoring along SH2, adjacent to the Project, to demonstrate that the air quality complies with the air quality guidelines. A short-term monitoring of the indicator pollutants - PM10, CO, and NO2 was undertaken between March and September 2016 (autumn and winter months) and a further study, which measured PM10 and NO2, was undertaken between June and September 2019 (winter months). This information was collected to determine the existing air quality along SH2.

7.1 Air Quality Monitoring along SH2

Continuous PM10 and CO monitors were sited in accordance with the specifications outlined in Australia/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3580.1.1:200716. To measure PM10 concentrations, AECOM installed a continuous particulate monitor (Environmental Beta-Attenuation Mass Monitor, E-BAM). While the E-BAM used during the two monitoring periods was not a US EPA Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) instrument, it uses the same measurement technique (beta attenuation) as the FEM methods and was considered appropriate for a screening level monitoring program of this type. Measurement of CO was made using an electrochemical cell capable of measuring CO concentrations between 0 ppm and 300 ppm.

NO2 passive diffusion tubes were deployed for a one-month exposure period at each of the monitoring locations as a screening method to indicate the existing level of NO2 along SH2. After deployment, the tubes were replaced with new tubes and were sent back to a laboratory where the tubes were analysed. It should be noted that the NO2 concentrations recorded from the use of passive samplers are conservative values and they provide only an indication of the amount of NO2 in the air during the one-month period.

As the monthly NO2 concentrations measured cannot be directly comparable to the NO2 guidelines, the NO2 concentrations for 1-hour, 24-hour and annual averages are calculated using methodology contained in the MfE GPG for Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling17 (ADM). In a 2008 review of regional council monitoring results suggests that any site which exceeds the annual average of WHO guideline for NO2 is also likely to exceed the NES 1-hour standard for NO2

18. This means that when comparing the derived NO2 concentrations with the guideline values, it provides only an indication of whether the existing NO2 concentrations along SH2 is likely to exceed the guidelines.

The calculated 1-hour, 24-hour and annual averages of NO2 concentrations, as well as the measured PM10 and CO monitoring results are summarised in Table 10. The concentrations measured for PM10, CO, and NO2 are also assessed against the applicable assessment criteria.

Table 10 Existing Air Quality Indicator Pollutants Concentrations along SH2

Pollutant Averaging

Period

Air Quality Assessment Criteria

(µg/m³)

Average Concentration (µg/m³)

2016 2019

NO2

1-hr 200 149 151

24-hr 100 79 80

Annual 40 24 25

CO 1-hr 30 mg/m³ 0.7 Not Assessed

8-hr 10 mg/m³ 0.7 Not Assessed

PM10 24-hr 50 10 11

15 Based on Longley, 2018 – “Nitrogen Dioxide Concentration Data”, nitrogen dioxide concentrations generally become substantially elevated within 150 m of a road. 16 Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3580.1.1:2007 Methods for sampling and analysis of ambient air 17 Page 72 of Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, June 2004 18 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, 2008 – “



29 AECOM

Pollutant Averaging

Period


(µg/m³)


2016 2019

Annual 20 1019 -

Further details of this monitoring are presented and discussed in Appendix B.

7.2 Summary of Air Quality Assessment

Short-term monitoring of the indicator pollutants - PM10, CO, and NO2 was undertaken between March and September 2016, and a further study, which measured PM10 and NO2, was undertaken between June and September 2019. The monitoring was repeated in 2019 between June and September to ensure there was no significant changes in air quality along SH2, adjacent to the Project area. Both monitoring events were undertaken during the autumn and winter months which typically experience poorer air quality due to an increase in home-heating emissions and a decrease in windier weather that leads to a less dispersive environment.

The 24-hour average PM10 measured in both the 2016 and 2019 monitoring periods were well below the assessment criteria.

The indicative annual average NO2 concentrations derived from both the 2016 and 2019 passive samples were well below the WHO guideline value of 40 µg/m3. The 1-hour and 24-hour average concentrations of NO2 were also below the relevant assessment criteria for NO2. The NO2 concentrations collected along SH2 in 2016 and 2019 do not exceed the relevant NES guidelines.

The increase in PM10 and NO2 concentrations along SH2, between 2016 and 2019, is likely due to the increased traffic and heavy vehicles along SH2. However, the increase in the concentrations of these pollutants is negligible.

CO measured in 2016 along SH2 was well below the assessment criteria. Based on the low levels of CO measured in 2016, and that the changes in both PM10 and NO2 concentrations between 2016 and 2019 are negligible, it is assumed that the increase in CO concentrations would be minor and therefore CO monitoring was not repeated in 2019.

As there will not be operational air quality effects from the Project, all vehicle emissions experienced on the Project are from SH2 and other nearby emitters. The monitoring results show that the air quality along SH2 is below the relevant assessment criteria which the ambient air quality should meet in order to protect human health and the environment. Therefore, users of the Ngā Ūranga ki Pito-One Shared Path are highly unlikely to experience adverse air quality effects.

19 Average of all data based on 189 days of data. Included for indicative purposes only.



30 AECOM

8.0 Management Controls

8.1 Dust Management

Based on the information reviewed, construction dust from the Project has the potential to cause dust nuisance to industrial premises along Cornish Street and Pito One Road, and commercial properties along Hutt Road and The Esplanade. Under extreme meteorological conditions (very high winds) with a lack of applied mitigation, public roads and rail users may experience reduced visibility for traffic due to short duration dust plume generation. A CAQMP is required to manage the adverse effects caused by the Project construction and eliminate the potential for dust events occurring. All land disturbance activities and works within the CMA which have the potential to cause dust nuisance will be managed via the ESCP.

The CAQMP may require updating as the Project progresses as further information becomes available and will include but not necessarily be limited to:

• Project description;

• Construction activities and durations;

• Good practice construction dust management methods. Further details discussed in Section 7.1.1;

• Compliance monitoring methods for dust. Further details discussed in Section 7.1.2;

• Roles and responsibilities and contact details for the parties involved in the Project;

• Complaints management procedures.

8.1.1 Good practice construction dust management

Table 11 outlines the typical construction dust management recommended in the ESCP and/or the GPG AMD which can be implemented to reduce nuisance dust effects. The Project should have contingency measures equal to or more stringent than the management controls discussed in Table 11.

Table 11 Summary of construction dust management

Source of Dust Controls

Stockpiles • All material deposited in temporary stockpiles will be in areas specified by the contractor with temporary bunds in place.

• Limit the height of uncovered stockpiles to reduce wind entrainment. Stockpiles exceeding 3 m in height have a higher risk of discharging dust;

• Orientate stockpiles where possible in order to maximise wind sheltering as much as possible;

• Maximise shelter from winds as far as practicable;

• Keep active stockpiles damp at all times or bunker or cover stockpiles of fine materials;

• Dampen or bunker or cover inactive stockpiles if they are producing visible dust emissions;

•

Access track • All running surfaces will be clean gravel to reduce the amount of fugitive dust generated;

• Cover trafficked surfaces with coarse materials where practicable;

• Compact all unconsolidated surfaces where practicable;

• Regularly maintain roads by grading and the laying of fresh gravel;

• Limit exposed surfaces as much as possible;

• Keep unpaved roads and exposed surfaces damp in dry, windy weather conditions. Typical water requirements for most parts of New Zealand are up to 1 litre per square metre per hour;



31 AECOM

Source of Dust Controls

• Stabilise cleared areas not required for construction, access or for parking if liable to cause excessive dust during windy conditions. Methods may include placing metalling, grassing or the establishment of vegetative cover.

Vehicles • Limit vehicle speeds to 10 km/hr through the works areas;

• Limit load sizes to avoid spillages;

• Cover loads of fine materials;

• Minimise travel distances through appropriate site layout and design;

• Minimise mud and dust track-out onto surrounding road network by using wheel cleaning facilities at site exits to sealed roads;

• Where necessary sweep public roads to remove any tracked dust.

Importation and Placement of Fill (general fill and topsoil)

• Use water sprays as required during the placement and compaction of fill material to prevent dust generation;

Loading, unloading and transport of dusty materials

• Limit loading or unloading during windy conditions that cause dust to be emitted beyond the site boundary;

• Use water sprays to dampen material prior to and during unloading to minimise dust generation if unloading needs to occur;

Earthmoving and Construction

• Controlling vehicle speeds on unconsolidated surfaces (10 km/hr);

• During periods of extreme dust risk, dampen areas that are to be earth-worked prior to any earthwork commencing. Allow time for penetration of the soil;

• Limit drop heights;

• Employ additional measures as practicable where dropping material from height, such as the use of water sprays;

• Minimising open / un-stabilised areas reduces sources of erosion. It also reduces the source of dust nuisance;

• Stabilise exposed areas not required for construction, access or parking, along with completed fill and spoil areas as soon as practicable;

• Adequate irrigation systems must be available on each site to dampen areas that are to be earthworked prior to any earthwork commencing and shall be used permanently on sites until the final site shape has been established and further earthworks are not required;

• Prior to a cut and fill activity in sand, pre-water the area with sprinklers to allow time for penetration of the soil.

Sealed Surfaces • Regular removal of surface dust through washing or vacuum sweeping.

Miscellaneous • The Contractor shall endeavour to complete earthworks as per guidelines laid out in the Erosion and Sediment Control plan and any other relevant documentation.

• Ensure sufficient water is available on site;

• Take account of daily forecast wind speed, wind direction and soil conditions before commencing an operation that has a high dust potential;

• Install windbreak fences where practicable and appropriate. Effectiveness is greatest where fencing is perpendicular to the prevailing wind direction with a porosity of about 50%;

• Minimise the area of surfaces covered with fine materials.



32 AECOM

8.1.2 Compliance Monitoring for dust

Due to the proximity of some receptors to the Project construction activities, continuous visual monitoring for total suspended particulate (TSP)20 and meteorological monitoring (at a minimum, wind speed and wind direction) should be undertaken at the northern part of the Project. This is to prompt actions to control dust if significant adverse effects occur beyond the Project.

Table 12 presents the trigger levels recommended in the GPG AMD to control nuisance dust where the receiving environment is considered moderately sensitive. A moderately sensitive environment is considered to be one where people with a range of sensitivities may use, such as open recreational spaces and commercial, retail and other business areas. This is considered the most representative sensitivity rating for the Project due to its proximity to SH2. It is expected that these triggers will be reviewed following the commencement of the Project to ensure their practicality.

Table 12 GPG AMD recommended trigger levels for TSP

Trigger Averaging Period Moderately sensitive receiving environment

Short term 1-hour 250 µg/m3

Daily Rolling 24-hour 80 µg/m3

Wind warning 1-minute 10 m/s (during two consecutive 10 minute periods)

Rain warning 12-hour There has been no rain in the previous 12 hours

Visible dust Instantaneous Visible dust crossing the Project construction boundary

The CAQMP will also need to include the following:

1. Dust management contingency measures that may be implemented when the TSP and meteorological trigger levels in Table 12 are exceeded. A list of recommended mitigation measures have been listed in Table 11 above. These measures should be sufficient to control dust from the construction. However, if extreme conditions result in dust impacts, further measures will need to be implemented to further control dust emissions. Contingency measures (such as short-term site works reductions or in an extreme situation, shutdown of the dust generating activities) will need to be defined as part of the CAQMP; and

2. Contingency plan for dust monitor downtime.

8.2 Odour Management

Overall, it is expected that there will be very limited excavation work to be carried out throughout the Project construction. As there is only one identified HAIL site located within the Project construction footprint, the potential for contaminated soil to be exposed during earthworks, which will result in odour discharges, is considered to be low. Therefore, a separate odour management plan is not required. If contaminated soils are encountered, they will be managed via the CLMP.

8.3 Operation of the Project

No specific operational mitigation measures are recommended based on the results of this assessment as the contribution of air pollutants from the Project is not expected to cause any effects.

20 Particulate matter smaller than 100 micrometres in diameter.



33 AECOM

9.0 Conclusion

AECOM was engaged to undertake an assessment of the potential for air quality effects during the construction and operation of the Project.

The FIDOL assessment concludes that, with the implementation construction dust management in accordance with the good practice guide during the Project construction, the potential to cause dust nuisance effects at nearby receptors is low. However, there is the potential for industrial premises along Cornish Street and Pito One Road (R10), commercial properties along Hutt Road and The Esplanade (R11), and public road and rail users (R13 and R14) to experience nuisance dust due to their proximity to the northern construction yard and the Project. Therefore, to ensure nuisance dust does not occur visual compliance monitoring for dust should be undertaken and prompt actions taken to control dust if significant adverse effects occur beyond the Project. With strict adherence to the CAQMP the receptors located further than 50 m from the Project are unlikely to experience ‘offensive and objectionable’ dust, and therefore the potential for effects from dust on sensitive receptors are acceptable.

Based on the FIDOL assessment for odour, all receptors including receptors R1, R2 and R13 located within 500 m from the new shared path bridge construction yard, which has the potential to discharge odour if contaminated soil is exposed, are not likely to experience ‘offensive and objectionable’ odour. If contaminated soils are encountered as anticipated in Technical Report 14 – Preliminary Site Investigation 21, the potential effects to human health and the environment can be controlled through the implementation of the CLMP. The proposed conditions accompanying the notice of requirements and resource consent applications has been reviewed. It is considered that the conditions will appropriately manage effects as assessed in this report.

As there will not be operational air quality effects from the Project, all vehicle emissions experienced on the Project are from SH2 and other nearby emitters. The monitoring results show that the air quality along SH2 is below the relevant assessment criteria which the ambient air quality should meet in order to protect human health and the environment. Therefore, users of the Ngā Ūranga ki Pito-One Shared Path will not experience adverse air quality effects.

21 Technical Report 14: Preliminary Site Investigation



34 AECOM

10.0 Limitations

AECOM New Zealand Limited (AECOM) has prepared this assessment of air quality effects report on discharges to air in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting profession for Waka Kotahi for use in a statutory process from the Greater Wellington Regional Council under the Resource Management Act 1991 and in support of the notices of requirement and applications for resource consent for the Project made by Waka Kotahi under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 (COVID-19 Recovery Act) for proposed activities undertaken at State Highway 2 Hutt Road, Wellington. In particular, this Report supports the assessment of the Project's effects on the environment as required by the COVID-19 Recovery Act. The requirements of the COVID-19 Recovery Act and an overall assessment of the effects of the Project on the environment are set out in the Assessment of Effects on the Environment.

Except as specifically stated in this section, AECOM does not authorise the use of this Report by any third party except as provided for by the Resource Management Act 1991.

Nor does AECOM accept any liability for any loss, damage, cost or expenses suffered by any third party using this report for any purpose other than that stated above.

It is based on generally accepted practices and standards at the time it was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report.

It is prepared in accordance with the scope of work and for the purpose outlined in the contract dated August 2018.

Where this Report indicates that information has been provided to AECOM by third parties, AECOM has made no independent verification of this information except as expressly stated in this Report. AECOM assumes no liability for any inaccuracies in or omissions to that information.

This Report was prepared between September 2019 and September 2020 and is based on the conditions encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation. AECOM disclaims responsibility for any changes that may have occurred after this time.



AECOM

Appendix A

Site Meteorology



A-1 AECOM

Appendix A Site Meteorology Table 13 Wind speed frequency distribution for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2018

Direction

Wind Speed (m/s) frequency distribution Total wind below 3 m/s (%)

Total wind

above 5 m/s (%)

Total wind (%) 0 - 0.5

0.5 - 1.5

1.5 - 3.0

3.0 - 5.0

5.0 - 10.0

> = 10.0

North 0.1 0.3 2.0 2.0 5.3 0.6 2.4 5.9 10.3

North northeast

0.1 0.8 3.8 6.1 7.3 0.4 4.7 7.7 18.6

Northeast 0.2 4.2 9.9 6.6 4.4 0.0 14.3 4.4 25.3

East northeast

0.2 3.2 5.3 1.8 0.4 0.0 8.7 0.4 10.9

East 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.0

East southeast

0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7

Southeast 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.7

South southeast

0.1 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9

South 0.1 0.8 1.6 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 3.5

South southwest

0.1 1.7 5.4 4.2 0.5 0.0 7.2 0.5 11.9

Southwest 0.2 2.6 5.3 1.2 0.1 0.0 8.1 0.1 9.4

West southwest

0.1 1.3 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.7

West 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9

West northwest

0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.5

Northwest 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4

North northwest

0.1 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 1.3

Calms (<0.5 m/s):

2.1



A-2 AECOM

Figure 7 Annual windroses for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2018



A-3 AECOM

Figure 8 Seasonal windroses for period between 01 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2018



AECOM

Appendix B

Existing Air Quality Monitoring Results

Along SH2



B-1 AECOM

Appendix B Existing Air Quality

During the scoping phase of the Project, it was identified that there was generally a lack of air quality monitoring at locations within the Project area to demonstrate that the air quality complies with the air quality assessment criteria. A short-term monitoring study was undertaken between March and September 2016 to assist with determining the ambient background concentrations of the indicator pollutants - PM10, CO and NO2.

On 24 March 2016, AECOM began monitoring NO2 using passive diffusion tubes, at six locations, and continuous PM10 at one location. CO monitoring commenced at the same location as the PM10 monitor on 7 May 2016. Given the results of the monitoring, in particular NO2 and PM10, and the amount of time since the initial monitoring was undertaken, the monitoring was repeated in 2019 between June and September to ensure there was no significant changes in air quality within the assessment area. It is worth noting that the monitoring undertaken in 2019 was during the winter months which typically experience poorer air quality due to an increase in home-heating emissions and a decrease in windier weather which leads to a less dispersive environment. CO monitoring was not undertaken in 2019 as the concentrations measured in 2016 were well below the applicable assessment criteria.

The monitoring locations are summarised in Table 14 and graphically shown in Figure 9.

Table 14 Summary of 2016 and 2019 indicator pollutants monitoring locations along SH2

Site

Pollutants Monitored Co-ordinates (NZTM 2000)

Mar - Sep

2016

Jun - Sep

2019 X (m) Y (m)

Monitor 1 (M1)

NO2 NO2 1752498.1 5432589.7

Monitor 2 (M2)

NO2 NO2 1753102.5 5433036.9

Monitor 3 (M3)

NO2 NO2 1753496.6 5433367.0

Monitor 4 (M4)

NO2, CO, and PM10

NO2 and PM10 1753496.9 5433367.0

Monitor 5 (M5)

NO2 NO2 1754677.3 5434259.7

Monitor 6 (M6)

NO2 NO2 1755727.4 5434656.0



B-2 AECOM

Figure 9 2016 and 2019 indicator pollutants monitoring locations along SH2



B-3 AECOM

2016 and 2019 Monitoring Results

Particulate Matter - PM10

The results of PM10 monitoring along SH2 are summarised in Table 15 as 24-hour average concentrations. The maximum 24-hour average PM10 concentration measured was 28 micrograms per cubic metres (µg/m³) which is well below the AQNES guideline value.

Table 15 Summary of 2016 and 2019 PM10 Results

24-hour Average Concentration (µg/m³)

Year 2016 2019

AQNES Guideline 50 (µg/m³)

Maximum 28 24

Median 9 10

Minimum 3 1

Average 10 11

Carbon Monoxide - CO

The results of CO monitoring along the SH2 are summarised in Table 16 as 1-hour average and 8-hour rolling average concentrations. Based on the monitoring results the existing CO concentrations are below the air quality assessment criteria.

Table 16 Summary of 2016 CO Results

1-hr Average Concentration

(mg/m³) 8-hr Rolling Average Concentration

(mg/m³)

Year 2016 2019 2016 2019

Guidelines 30 mg/m³ (NZAAQG) 10 mg/m³ (AQNES)

Maximum 2.2 Not Assessed 1.6 Not Assessed

Median 0.7 Not Assessed 0.7 Not Assessed

Minimum 0.0 Not Assessed 0.1 Not Assessed

Average 0.7 Not Assessed 0.7 Not Assessed



B-4 AECOM

Nitrogen Dioxide - NO2

The 2016 and 2019 monthly results of NO2 monitoring along SH2 are summarised in Table 17 and Table 18, respectively. The average NO2 concentrations in 2016 ranged from 16 to 40 µg/m³, with an overall average NO2 concentration of 28 µg/m³. The NO2 concentrations in 2019 ranged from 17 to 40 µg/m³, with an overall average NO2 concentration of 32 µg/m³.

Generally, higher concentrations of NO2 were found at sites closest to SH2. Monitor 4 which is approximately 2 m from the north bound lanes recorded the highest NO2 concentrations.

Table 17 Summary of monthly NO2 Concentrations (µg/m³) from passive diffusion tube in 2016

Monthly Concentration (µg/m³)

Monitor Mar-Apr Apr-May May-Jun Jun-Jul Jul-Aug Aug-Sep

Average

M1 21 20 NR22 26 27 22 23

M2 26 29 35 37 NR23 34 32

M3 25 30 34 33 34 29 31

M4 40 38 31 39 42 52 40

M5 22 25 28 28 32 28 27

M6 13 13 18 19 17 13 16

NR = No Result

Table 18 Summary of monthly NO2 Concentrations (µg/m³) from passive diffusion tube in 2019

Monthly Concentration (µg/m³)

Monitor Jun-Jul Jul-Aug Aug-Sep

Average

M1 34 23 21 26

M2 39 31 24 31

M3 40 31 25 32

M4 37 41 41 40

M5 36 36 36 36

M6 19 18 14 17

22 Sampler was missing 23 Sampler was left of out for 2 months



B-5 AECOM

Summary of Monitoring Results

In the absence of 1-hour, 24-hour averages and annual averages of NO2 concentrations, the maximum monthly average concentration for each monitoring site was used to derive the NO2 concentrations for these averaging times, using methodology contained in the MfE GPG for Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling24 (ADM). It should be noted that the 1-hour, 24-hour and annual averages of NO2 concentrations derived using the methodology provided in the GPG ADM are only indicative values. When compared to the NO2 standards and guidelines, these values provide only an indication of whether the existing NO2 concentration along SH2 is likely to exceed the guideline.

The calculated 1-hour, 24-hour and Annual averages of NO2 concentrations, as well as the measured PM10 and CO monitoring results are summarised and presented in Table 19.

Table 19 Existing Air Quality Indicator Pollutants Concentrations

Pollutant Averaging

Period


(µg/m³)


2016 2019

NO2

1-hr 200 149 151

24-hr 100 79 80

Annual 40 24 25

CO 1-hr 30 mg/m³ 0.7 Not Assessed

8-hr 10 mg/m³ 0.7 Not Assessed

PM10 24-hr 50 10 11

Annual 20 1025 -

CO measured in 2016 along SH2 were well below the assessment criteria. CO monitoring was not repeated in 2019 due to the low levels of CO measured in 2016.

The 24-hour average PM10 measured in both the 2016 and 2019 monitoring periods were well below the assessment criteria.

The 1-hour and 24-hour average concentrations of NO2 are below the relevant assessment criteria for NO2. The annual average NO2 concentration is well below the WHO guideline value of 40 µg/m3.

24 Page 72 of Ministry for the Environment Good Practice Guide for Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling, June 2004 25 Average of all data based on 189 days of data. Included for indicative purposes only.

assessment of air quality effects - epa

Documents