The report on the projected impact of the City Centre West East Link Cycle track (CCWEL) on Roseburn Terrace’s air pollution has left campaigners dismayed because it’s not what they asked for. And the report’s greatest weakness is an anomaly so great that it renders it worthless.
George Rendall of Art et Facts in Roseburn Terrace, who lodged the Council petition calling for the impact study, presently faces nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pollution at the legal maximum, with an average annual reading of 40 ug/m3. The report came about because he and the other 31 traders and 300 residents who signed the petition feared the CCWEL could lead to a rise of as much as 20%, putting their health at risk. How so? The CCWEL requires the removal of parking that presently buffer them from the pollution from the A8’s 15,000 vehicles passing their doors every day.
The Council accepts Roseburn Terrace is a classic example of a street canyon, and one which traps pollution on the south side of the street, due to the prevailing wind. Residents and traders say that bringing the traffic 3 metres closer to their homes and shops will lead to pollution rocketing to way above what they suffer just now. Their projection is based on the findings of Dundee Council, which moved traffic one lane away from residential properties to protect residents from the harmful effects of NO2, and saw levels drop by 19% as a result. Air pollution can lead to asthma, heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, COPD and diabetes in adults.
The CCWEL: Roseburn Terrace Air Quality Monitoring Report was prepared by transport consultants AECOM and presented on Tues 15th October at Council HQ to George Rendall, John Lamb (retired SEPA employee and air quality expert); Pete Gregson (of Roseburn Vision, also a Murrayfield Community Councillor), and Ward City Councillor Scott Douglas. It left John, Pete and George unimpressed; they consider it not only not what they’d asked for but also completely worthless.
For the AECOM study is based on a computer model- and the outputs CONTRADICT the Council’s own measurements that show that the concentrations of NO2 are consistently 30% higher on the south side, because of the canyoning effect- as the AECOM Technical Director pointed out at the October meeting. He went onto claim the CCWEL would lead to an 8% drop in pollution.
However, after the meeting, the campaigners plotted the figures they’d been given on the map in the report- of the Baseline 2016 scenario model- and discovered it presented an OPPOSITE view. Whilst the Council’s diffusion tubes show pollution on the south side of the Terrace is the problem, the AECOM computer data models the pollution on the north side as being much higher- by an average of around 66%.
Retired SEPA employee John Lamb, noticed that the model had not been validated, therefore CEC was unable to show that this model is representative of the conditions that currently or may exist in the future. Official guidance LAQMTG16 Government Guidance clearly states “The model used should have some form of published validation assessment available and/or should be recognised as being fit for purpose by the regulatory authorities”.
John notes: “The consultant who wrote the report cannot validate the model because there are no hourly monitoring data. We have been presented with computer projections that are plots on a graph that has no scale; the figures have no reference, as they need to be adjusted with respect to real life measures.”
Furthermore, campaigners observe the Council and the Government measure pollution on an annual mean- yet note this study is based on hourly pollution data. They say this is meaningless, because no area in Scotland is currently exceeding the hourly maximum legal levels. Indeed, the Government website shows that pollution on St Johns Road is not exceeding the hourly limit, yet confirms it’s a pollution black spot.
They point out the annual mean reflects the long-term exposure to NO2, so is the significant factor in terms of human health; a 1-hour exposure is not relevant for those that live or work in Roseburn all the year round. They say on that basis, the report hasn’t assessed the potential health impact.
They are asking why this modelling was used, when any air expert would know that this would not give the answer to the question about the likely impact of removing the parking. George says “I reckon they picked the hourly measure because they knew that it would say the track was safe. But they still haven’t proven that.”
“The Scottish Government Reporter will make a judgement next week as to whether the CCWEL goes ahead. We’ll be presenting our concerns at the hearing on the 4th and 5th at the City Chambers and we hope he pays heed and scraps this scheme. There is already a perfectly good route to Haymarket from Roseburn- NCR1, by the tram line. Cyclists access it just now by Roseburn Place; Roseburn Terrace doesn’t need to host the CCWEL. Improving access to NCR1 would stop rising NO2 in Roseburn and would save us a million pounds too- that’s money that could be spent improving cycling in the parts of the city that really need it.”
John Lamb’s analysis of the Council report can be found here