Original source · versioned page text
2184Response_OM13_222
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (11.7 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
_ MAX WATTERSON+ASSOCIATES CONSULTING SURVEYORS & PLANNERS 29" November, 2013 Your Ref: JLO13:JL:MCU12/0184 The Chief Executive Officer Sunshine Coast Regional Council Locked Bag 72 SUNSHINE COAST MAIL CENTRE Q 4560 Attention: Jack Lewis Dear Sir, Re: Council Resolution OM13/222 Development Application for Material Change of Use (MCU12/0184) (Animal Husbandry Type 2) — Poultry Farm Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA12/0087) Lot 21 on SP226606 — 136 Top Forestry Road, Ridgewood Applicant: W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd. | refer to the above-mentioned matter and provide the following information to clarify the issues that were raised during the Ordinary Meeting held on the 14'" of November 2013. 1. Total vehicle trips including details of size of vehicles, purpose of trip, time of trip and number of trips per day. The daily distribution of vehicle trips throughout the 9 week (63 day) period is variable according to the phase of the cycle. A spreadsheet of the daily vehicle movements, the type of vehicle, the purpose of the trip and the time spent at the site is attached as Appendix A. Please note that this is the worst case scenario; with all sheds full of birds. A summary of the vehicle movements is: Number of Number of Frequency of Days vehicles per day trips per day 0 0 30 1 2 14 2 4 13 3 6 1 4 8 0 5 10 0 6 12 0 7. 14 0 8 16 0 9 18 0 10 20 1 11 22 1 12 24 al 13 26 2 PRINCIPAL 12 Maple Street (PO Box 639) Cooroy Q 4563 ABN 59 847 644 252 Max L. Watterson PH 07 5442 6121 Cadasiral Surveyor (Qld) FAX 07 5442 5125 B.Surv(UNSW). M.S.S.S.1 EMAIL [email protected]
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 39 pages
Page 2
During the 63 day cycle: On 30 days there are no trips generated. On 14 days there are 2 trips generated. On 13 days there are 4 trips generated. On 1 day there are 6 trips generated. There are only 5 days out of the 63 in which greater than 6 trips (that is, 3 vehicles) are generated each day The vehicles used will include: 19m B-double 17m or 18m Semi-trailer 8m or 9m body truck 7m Light truck Utility Passenger vehicle The purpose of the trips will be to: Deliver shavings Deliver feed Deliver chicks Collect dead birds Live bird pick up Carry forklift, foreman & crew Litter removal Shed washing Shed sanitisation The timing of the trips will vary throughout the day. The live bird pick-up will be conducted in the early morning. Other deliveries will generally be made during the hours of 8am to 4pm. 2. Feasibility of requirements to provide to seal to 50m in front of affected properties on Top Forestry Road or to enter into an infrastructure agreement with Council. A Report prepared by MWA Environmental addressing the dust emission of the vehicles along Top Forestry Road is attached as Appendix D; which concludes that the additional vehicle movements will increase the overall particulate emissions from Top Forestry Road by less than 10%; and will only “have a minor impact on dust level at residences along Top Forestry Road”. A Plan prepared by Callaghan & Toth showing the extent of Top Forestry Road to be sealed within 50m of dwellings is attached as Appendix B. The Plans include 5 sections of the road totalling 381.1m located within 50m of dwellings. Please note that the Plan is conceptual only, subject to further site surveys and subject to analysis of the individual sites. With respect to the sealing of Top Forestry Road the applicant proposes that a Condition of approval be included that states:
Page 3
Top Forestry Road to be sealed to a maximum of 50m from dwellings; the extent of the sealing to be determined following a detailed site survey, an analysis of the site conditions and the preparation of an Operational Works application. As a part of the investigation of the standard of Top Forestry Road it has been disclosed that the bend at the front of No. 111 is of insufficient width to accommodate two trucks to pass. Top Forestry Road is a school bus route and currently buses and trucks use the road. It is possible that trucks and buses may be required to pass at this bend currently. The Plans prepared by Callaghan & Toth (Appendix B) also includes works required to provide a width of the formation sufficient for 2 trucks to pass. The works include the widening of the formation and stone pitched walls on each side of the Road; the extent of the works is shown on Sheet 7 of the Plans. The current situation is inadequate for the current traffic usage of the road; therefore the applicant seeks to enter into an infrastructure agreement with Council to pay a contribution of 50% of the cost of improvement of Top Forestry Road at this bend. 3. Composting and_ stockpiling methodology including data on management of emissions during these processes. In response to requests from Council staff MWA Environmental have provided a review of the Noise, Dust & Odour assessment of the proposal; included in the review is the modelling of the emissions with updated metrological, emission and dispersion models utilizing the parameters provided by Pacific Environment Limited (PEL) who conducted the technical review on behalf of Council. It is noted that the updated modelling based upon PEL parameters “results in significantly lower odour impact from the development as compared to the modelling previously undertaken by MWA Environmental’. A copy of the updated Report prepared by MWA Environmental is attached as Appendix C. It is also noted that several properties owned by the applicant are located within the area impacted upon by odour; the applicant proposes the inclusion of the following Condition or a similar Condition: The poultry farm can only operate as long as Lots 20 & 22 on SP226606, Lot 1 on SP100788 and Lot 204 on RP892484 are owned and occupied by the operator or an employee of the poultry farm. In the event that the lands are not owned and occupied by the operator or an employee of the poultry farm, the farm can only operate when the odour limits are below 2.5 odour units. Also prepared by MWA Environmental is a response to the Councillors request for further information; which is enclosed herewith as Appendix D. The report provides the methodology of the litter stockpiling, composting and spreading. The odour modelling undertaken by MWA Environmental show that the cumulative impact of the poultry sheds, the composting and compost spreading will comply with the Queensland odour guideline at surrounding residential dwellings.
Page 4
The Report recommends that a Condition of approval be imposed that requires the imposition of a Site-Based Environmental Management Plan (SBEMP); which includes details of the measures required for the spreading of litter, the distribution pattern, boundary setbacks and time of spreading. 4. Water quality management particularly addressing potential impacts from the use of shed waste and composting material for fertilising the orchard and any associated run off. The litter is composted within 3 bunded areas; 300 lineal metres within a 120m x 22.5m bunded area: a reserve area of 76 lineal metres in a 82m x 14m bunded area and a further reserve area of 110 lineal metres in a 75m x 14m bunded area. Each batch will create approximately 1030m% of litter/compost; it is planned to spread the compost for a depth of 0.1m for a width of 5m under the trees and landscaping. Therefore the compost from each batch will provide 2,060 lineal metres (2.06kms) of compost along the orchard rows or 12km of orchard rows per year. The orchard includes in excess of 50kms of orchard rows therefore the composting operation will only cover less than 25% of the total orchard rows per year. The orchard currently includes a vegetated buffer located along the watercourses and the spreading of the compost will only be undertaken within the orchard area; in accordance with the current farming practice. 5. Feasibility on reduction of size and number of sheds The applicant originally proposed the construction of 8 poultry sheds 160m long; which is the industry standard; during the process of the application and detailed design of the sheds and site the sheds have been reduced to average lengths of 105m. The applicant has also undertaken to adopt to RSPCA stocking density 17.2 birds per m?; therefore the maximum total number of birds possible at the site is 235,554. The Queensland Farming Manger of Inghams has provided written confirmation that most new facilities have a capacity of 240,000 birds and that a capacity of less than 200,000 may not be viable (Ref: Inghams Letter, 25/11/13 — Appendix E). This proposal allows for a maximum of 235,554 birds to be on site. The scale of this proposal is already reduced from what was envisaged at the concept stage when sheds with a length of 160m were considered. | trust that this information provides the additional information required for the assessment of the Development Application. Do not hesitate to contact this office if you require any further information. Yours faithfully Mb ‘Max Watterson
Page 5
APPENDIX A Details of Maximum Movements per Batch Cycle (63 Days) for 8 sheds
Page 6
Milligan Farms - Proposed Chicken Meat Farm - Maximum Vehicle Movements Per Batch Cycle (63 Days) for 8 Sheds
Approx. time of Total actual trips
Day Number of Vehicles Purpose of Trip Type of Vehicle Total per Wk Council's Est / Wk
trip/time on site generated
1 3 Between 8am-4pm - 30 mins Deliver shavings 6
2 2 Between 8am-4pm - 30 mins Deliver shavings 4
3 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
WEEK 1 4 2 9:30am-4pm - 2-3 hrs Deliver chicks 4
5
6
7 18 30
1 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
2 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
3 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
WEEK 2 4
5
6
7 6 8
1 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
2 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
3 1 Arranged time - 20-30 mins Loss collection 2
WEEK 3 4
5
6
7 10 12
1 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
2 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
3 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
WEEK 4 4
5 1 Arranged time - 20-30 mins Loss collection 2
6
7 12 14
1 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
2 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
3 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
4 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
WEEK 5 5 8 Can start as early as 2:30am - 40 mins Live bird pick-up 16
1 Carry forklift & crew 2
1 Carry foreman & crew 2
6
7 34 22
1 8 Can start as early as 2:30am - 40 mins Live bird pick-up 16
1 Carry forklift & crew 2
1 Carry foreman & crew 2
1 Arranged time - 20-30 mins Loss collection 2
2 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
WEEK 6
3 2 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 4
4
5 1 Arranged time - 20-30 mins Loss collection 2
6
7 32 70
1 1 Time nominated - 50 mins Deliver feed 2
1 Arranged time - 20-30 minutes Loss collection 2
2
3
4 10 Can start as early as 2:30am - 40 mins Live bird pick-up 20
1 Carry forklift & crew 2
1 Foreman & crew 2
WEEK 7
5 10 Can start as early as 2:30am - 40 mins Live bird pick-up 20
1 Carry forklift & crew 2
1 Foreman & crew 2
1 Arranged time - 20-30 minutes Loss collection 2
6
7 54 68
1 11 Can start as early as 2:30am - 40 mins Live bird pick-up 22
1 Carry forklift & crew 2
1 Foreman & crew 2
2 1 Arranged time - 20-30 minutes Loss collection 2
WEEK 8
3
4
5
6
7 28 32
1 1 Shed cleaning 2
2 1 Shed cleaning 2
3 1 Shed cleaning 2
WEEK 9 4 1 Shed cleaning 2
5 1 Shed sanitisation 2
6
7 10 92
19m B-Double TOTAL VEHICLE MOVEMENTS PER BATCH: 204 204 348
17 or 18m Semi average trips per week 23 39
8 or 9m Body Truck *Truck arrival times are generally flexible, except during live bird pick-up
7m Light Truck * 30 days of the 63 day cycle generate no vehicle movements, with the exception of permanent staff
Ute with Trailer * No allowance made for trucks removing litter as it stays on-site. If taken off-site, allow for 12 semis (24 movements) in Week 9.
Passenger vehicle
Page 7
APPENDIX B Proposed Top Forestry Road Improvements to Access Lot 21 on SP226606 prepared by Callaghan & Toth
Page 8
PLAN INDEX
1209-20 A SITE PLAN
1209-21 A PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 1
1209-22 A PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 2
1209-23 A PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 3
1209-24 A PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMETNS LAYOUT PLAN 4
1209-25 A PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 5
1209-26 A BEND DETAIL AND TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
“Top Furey Ay
2
Top Forested
1209-21
1209-25
NOTE: CONCEPTUAL ONLY & SUBJECT TO DETAILED SURVEY
Callaghan & Toth )
| Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
PO BOX 2305
NOOSA HEADS 4567
8/41 Sunshine Beach Road
Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041
www.callaghanandtoth.com.au
datum AHD DERIVED
.. PSM 120517
Origin (B.M.) RL 187.09
designed [AN
drawn MM.
checked | ADT
approved
SURVEYED BY
MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES
[rao 54 426 121
_———
project
PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS
LOT 21 ON SP226606
ld
($$ <~r
Client
DAVID MILLIGAN
TS)
—————————————————
title
SITE PLAN
LOT 21 on SP226606
Parish of TUCEKOI
County of MARCH
SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL
Locality of RIDGEWOOD
En
_————
SCALE
Q 20 40 60 80 100 Meters 200
ee
scale SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE
. DO _NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING
1:4000(A3) USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED
REVISIONS
A | AMENDED SCALE
FILES
COMPUTER DIRECTORY
X\JOBS\CT\...
NOT POR CORSTROCTON
Sheet 1 of 7 sheets
drawing number
1209-20
XK dote 27th NOVEMBER 2013 J
Page 9
LEGEND: PROPOSED SERVICES es TOP OF BANK BUILDING TABLE DRAIN GRAVEL ROAD CONTOUR VEGETATION 2 COAT BITUMEN SEAL 6m WIDE 50m RADIUS SHOWING SEAL EXTENT JOINS PLAN 1209-22 NOTE: CONCEPTUAL ONLY & SUBJECT TO DETAILED SURVEY Callaghan & Toth . | Civil, Environmental & | Hydraulic Engineers PO BOX 2305 NOOSA HEADS 4567 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au datum AHD DERIVED PSM 120517 SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES PHONE 54 426 121 project PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS LOT 21 ON SP226606 Client DAVID MILLIGAN title PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD! IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 1 LOT 21 on SP226606 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD 10 15 20 25 Meters 50 scale ‘SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:1000(A3) B0_NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING : USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED REVISIONS revision details FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY X\JOBS\CT\... re Sheet 2 of 7 sheets drawing number 1209-21
Page 10
LEGEND: PROPOSED SERVICES es TOP OF BANK BUILDING TABLE DRAIN GRAVEL ROAD CONTOUR VEGETATION 2 COAT BITUMEN SEAL 6m WIDE 50m RADIUS SHOWING SEAL EXTENT NOINS PLAN _ 1209-25) Callaghan & Toth . | Civil, Environmental & | Hydraulic Engineers PO BOX 2305 NOOSA HEADS 4567 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au datum AHD DERIVED PSM 120517 SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES PHONE 54 426 121 project PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS LOT 21 ON SP226606 Client DAVID MILLIGAN title PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD! IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 2 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD 10 15 20 25 Meters 50 scale ‘SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:1000(A3) B0_NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING : USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED REVISIONS revision details FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY X\JOBS\CT\... Sheet 3 of 7 sheets drawing number 1209-22
Page 11
Callaghan & Toth TOP OF BANK . | Civil, Environmental & BUILDING | Hydraulic Engineers a 2 PO BOX 2305 TABLE DRAIN 7 a " NOOSA HEADS 4567 . y ’ 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road GRAVEL ROAD . ; Phone 54749081, Fax 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au L, , ‘ : , . datum AND DERWED CONTOUR : J PSM 120517 VEGETATION SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES PHONE 54 426 121 LEGEND: PROPOSED SERVICES 2 COAT BITUMEN SEAL yy | saae = . project 6m WIDE PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS 50m RADIUS SHOWING 7 af d LOT 21 ON SP226606 SEAL EXTENT - ae Client DAVID MILLIGAN title PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 3 LOT 21 on SP226606 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD 10 15 20 25 Meters 50 scale ‘SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:1000(A3) B0_NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED REVISIONS f revision details FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY X\JOBS\CT\... fd Sheet 4 of 7 sheets drawing number 1209-23 NOVEMBER 2013
Page 12
LEGEND: PROPOSED SERVICES TOP OF BANK BUILDING TABLE DRAIN GRAVEL ROAD CONTOUR VEGETATION 2 COAT BITUMEN SEAL 6m WIDE 50m RADIUS SHOWING SEAL EXTENT JOINS PLAN _1209=25 DETAILED SURVEY Callaghan & Toth . | Civil, Environmental & | Hydraulic Engineers PO BOX 2305 NOOSA HEADS 4567 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au datum AHD DERIVED PSM 120517 SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES PHONE 54 426 121 project PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS LOT 21 ON SP226606 Client DAVID MILLIGAN title PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD! IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 4 LOT 21 on SP226606 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD 10 15 20 25 Meters 50 scale ‘SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:1000(A3) B0_NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING : USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED REVISIONS f revision details FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY X\JOBS\CT\... re Sheet 5 of 7 sheets drawing number 1209-24
Page 13
TOP OF BANK BUILDING TABLE DRAIN GRAVEL ROAD CONTOUR VEGETATION 2 COAT BITUMEN SEAL 6m WIDE 50m RADIUS SHOWING SEAL EXTENT NOTE: CONCEPTUAL ONLY & SUBJECT TO DETAILED SURVEY Callaghan & Toth \ Civil, Environmental & Hydraulic Engineers PO BOX 2305 NOOSA HEADS 4567 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au jatum AHD DERIVED PSM 120517 SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES PHONE 54 426 121 project PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS LOT 21 ON SP226606 Client DAVID MILLIGAN title PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS LAYOUT PLAN 5 LOT 21 on SP226606 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD 0.5 10 15 20 25 Meters 50 ee scale ‘SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:1000(A3) B0_NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING : USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED REVISIONS t deti ADDED NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY KA\JOBS\ CTY. date 27th NOVEMBER 2013
Page 14
DATUM R.L.116.000 4.00 4.94 XTENT OF CONCRETE VEE_DRAIN STONE PITCHED RETAINING WALL STONE PITCHED RETAINING WALL SECTION A-A scale 1:100(A3) NOTE: CONCEPTUAL ONLY & SUBJECT TO DETAILED SURVEY Callaghan & Toth Civil, Environmental & Hydraulic Engineers PO BOX 2305 NOOSA HEADS 4567 i! 8/41 Sunshine Beach Road = Phone 54749081, Fox 54749041 www.callaghanandtoth.com.au designed | AH datum AHD DERIVED drawn MM . PSM. 120517 checked [ADT | Origin (BM) RL 187.09 approved SURVEYED BY MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES [rao 54 426 121 _——— project PROPOSED TOP FORESTRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCESS LOT 21 ON SP226606 ld ($$ <~r Client DAVID MILLIGAN TS) ————————————————— title BEND DETAIL & CROSS SECTION A-A _———— LOT 21 on SP226606 Parish of TUCEKOI County of MARCH SUNSHINE COAST COUNCIL Locality of RIDGEWOOD En _———— SCALE 0.1.25 2.5 3.7/5 5 6.25 Meters 12.5 SSS scale 5 SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE 1:250(A3) 0 'NoT SCALE. FROM THIS. DRAWING \ USE_ONLY_DIMENSIONS PROVIDED. } REVISIONS i le A | ADDED NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE |11/13) FILES COMPUTER DIRECTORY X\JOBS\CT\... NOT POR CORSTROCTON Sheet 7 of 7 sheets drawing number 1209-26 N XK dote 27th NOVEMBER 2013 J
Page 15
APPENDIX C Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Council Officers Request for Further Information — Noise, Dust & Odour Issues Prepared by MWA Environmental
Page 16
Ref: L26013/BH/12-002
29 November 2013
W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd
124 Top Forestry Road
Ridgewood QLD 4563
Attention: Mr David Milligan
Dear David
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Council Further Information
Request of 19 November 2013–
Noise, Dust & Odour Issues -
Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
Further to your request, MWA Environmental has reviewed the further information
requested by Council Officers (“the technical review matters”) by email on 19
November 2013 in relation to the proposed poultry farm at 124 Top Forestry Road,
Ridgewood.
Responses to each of the technical review matters raised by Council Officers by
email on 19 November 2013 are provided in the following sections.
It is noted that, to ensure that SCRC is satisfied with the modelling, an updated
meteorological, emission and dispersion models have been prepared in accordance
with the preferences of Pacific Environment Limited (“PEL”) who conducted the
technical review. MWA Environmental has consulted with PEL in relation to the
responses and updated model to ensure that the technical review matters are
adequately addressed.
A summary of the model updates is provided in Attachment 1.
The results of the updated model are provided in Attachment 2.
The results of the updated model indicate that the cumulative impact of the poultry
growing sheds and litter stockpiling can comply with the Queensland odour guideline
at surrounding residences. The updated modelling based upon PEL emissions and
modelling preferences results in significantly lower odour impact from the
development as compared to the modelling previously undertaken by MWA
Environmental.
Max Winders & Associates Pty Ltd tas MWA Environmental
Level 15, 241 Adelaide St, Brisbane GPO BOX 3137, Brisbane Qld 4001
P 07 3002 5500 F 07 3002 5588 E [email protected]
W www.mwaenviro.com.au
ABN 94 010 833 084
Page 17
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
1. Please provide a response and or revise the modelling you performed with regard to the
following points:
a. How the year 2008 was determined to be representative of long term weather patterns;
A brief analysis of the Year 2008 compared to long-term average conditions at the
nearest Bureau of Meteorology station (Tewantin) is provided in Attachment 3.
The analysis indicates that the Year 2008 is sufficiently representative of long-term
trends to be applied for the purpose of this assessment. There are variations in the
frequency of winds from various directions and speeds as compared to long-term
averages but these are evident for any year when compared to long-term averages.
The odour objective being assessed relates to the 44th ‘worst’ 1 hour periods of each
year for each receptor location. The ‘worst’ conditions for odour dispersion are
typically associated with lower (less than 3 metre per second) wind speed conditions.
The analysis indicates that wind speeds during 2008 were lower than long-term
averages and thus may be considered a conservative year in this regard.
b. The effect of the radius of influence on Station 1 in TAPM being set at 15 km;
The radius of influence for the Nambour station is the TAPM observation nudging
dataset has been updated to 5km as per the request from PEL (per email 25
November 2013).
c. Whether the vegetation resolution in the inner domains affects the model output.
MWA Environmental provided information regarding the land use dataset to PEL by
email on 21 November 2013. Subsequent advice from PEL (per email 25 November
2013) is that the land use data supplied appeared appropriate.
d. Why the Teixeira algorithm was used in CALMET
The CALMET model has been updated to apply the ‘MM5toGrads algorithm’
(ICLOUD=4) as per request from PEL (per email 25 November 2013).
e. Whether the THRESHL setting of 0 in CALMET has produced spurious mixing heights at
dawn and dusk
The THRESHL value of 0 was applied by MWA Environmental in accordance with
the recommended setting from Generic Guidance and Optimum Model Settings for
the CALPUFF Modeling System for Inclusion into the ‘Approved Methods for the
Modeling and Assessments of Air Pollutants in NSW, Australia’ (TRC for NSW OEH,
2011). Box and whisker plots of the mixing heights by hour of day are presented in
Attachment 4 for review. The results appear reasonable to MWA Environmental.
2
Page 18
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
f. Why WSCALM was set at 0.2 m/s
WSCALM was set to a value of 0.2m/s to account for plume transport during the
approximate 100 hours of wind speeds predicted by the meteorological model to be
above 0 m/s but below 0.5m/s. This notwithstanding, the updated modelling has
been conducted with a WSCALM value of 0.5m/s as per request from PEL (per email
25 November 2013).
g. What the influence of thermal buoyancy on emissions would have on predicted impacts
at nearby receptors above the height of the sheds (i.e. the site should be modelled to
evaluate this).
In accordance with PEL request, representation of emissions has been updated to be
as buoyant point sources in accordance with the method presented in the Best
Practice Guidance for the Poultry Industry – Plume Dispersion Modelling and
Meteorological Processing (PAE Holmes for DEEDI, May 2011).
This amended source representation considers thermal buoyancy by way of
representing emissions at the predicted release temperature of air from the sheds for
each hour of the batch cycles. Vertical mechanical momentum has been excluded
using a momentum flux factor of 0 (rain hat function). The point source
characteristics have been set with varying emission velocity by hour as a function of
the ventilation rate divided by the cross sectional area of the effective 16.5m
diameter point source.
It is our understanding that this representation is in accordance with the
recommendations of PEL.
h. What the impact would be of setting the initial vertical dispersion at 6 m for a building
with a total height of 5 m (both odour and dust).
As above, the emissions representation has been updated to point sources in
accordance with the recommendations of PEL. This issue is therefore no longer
relevant.
i. What the impact would be of setting the initial vertical dispersion as modelled for the
litter sources rather than a more representative value for stockpile heights
MWA Environmental had previously modelled SIGZI 0.35 (1.5m stockpile height
divided by 4.3) as a conservative representation. This has been updated to SIGZI
0.70 (1.5m stockpile height divided by 2.15) for a ground level source as per
modelling guidance.
3
Page 19
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
2. In regard to estimating the emissions from the sheds, Pacific Environment note that the
K factor used for the modelling of 2 should have been 2.2 to follow the
recommendations in the Queensland Meat Chicken Guideline. This would increase
predicted impacts by 10% assuming that the impacts of potential changes with the
clarifications required above do not change the model results further. Please amened
your modelling to include the appropriate K factor.
In accordance with PEL request, the broiler emission rate model has been updated in
accordance with the method presented in the Best Practice Guidance for the Poultry
Industry – Plume Dispersion Modelling and Meteorological Processing (PAE Holmes
for DEEDI, May 2011). Specific updates were to consider a ‘K Factor’ of 2.2 (i.e. with
10% factor of safety) and a maximum ventilation rate of 10m3/hour/bird.
The odour emission rates are lower when calculated in accordance with the PEL
recommendations (i.e. Best Practice Guidance document method) due to the
conservatively high maximum ventilation rates that were previously adopted by MWA
Environmental.
3. The sensitive receptors used in the report, do not take into consideration the impacts on
146 (which includes a house), 124, 172 or 224 Top Forestry Road. These lots could be
sold off by the applicant and a house constructed on each of them. Please either indicate
whether the applicant is willing to accept a condition about amalgamating the lots in to
the larger lot (136 Top Forestry Road), otherwise include appropriate modelling
indicating that these separate lots ‘sensitive receptors’ will not be affected by the
cumulative odour impacts.
The results of the updated odour modelling (refer to Attachment 2 and response to
issue 4. below) indicate that odour impacts may exceed the Queensland odour
guideline on several adjacent properties owned by the applicant.
Advice from Gantt Legal is that a lawful condition can be imposed to address odour
impacts at the abovementioned adjoining lands, specifically that:
“A condition could be imposed to the effect that the poultry farm can only operate as
long as the adjoining lands are owned and occupied by the operator or an employee of
the poultry farm. In the event that the adjoining lands are not owned and occupied by
the operator or an employee of the poultry farm, then a condition of approval could
require odour limits not to be exceeded at those adjoining lands. “
4
Page 20
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
4. Provide a response to the assertion from Pacific Environment that with regard to the flux
chamber method, recent research including Parker et. al (2009) and Hudson & Ayoko
(2008) have both concluded that for gas phase controlled odorants, the use of the flux
chamber can under predict emissions. The emission rate reported in the Golder report
was 350 ou/m2/min (5.8 ou/m2/sec). The aged stockpile OER was reported as on
average 3,200 ou/m2/min (53 ou/m2/sec) which is ten times higher than that used for
the modelling for the stockpiles.
The poultry litter stockpiles measured at Queensland Organics for the purpose of the
Narangba Industrial Estate Health Risk Assessment were for both ‘fresh litter
stockpiles’ and ‘aged litter stockpiles’. The ‘aged litter stockpile’ odour emissions are
not expected to be relevant to the mechanically turned windrow system proposed to
be operated at the subject site. The aged litter stockpiles would have been stagnant
bulk stockpiles stored for an extended period without turning, resulting in anaerobic
conditions which significantly increase odour emission rates.
The proposed operation involves mechanical turning using a compost turning
machine on an approximate weekly basis. This mechanical turning procedure allows
sufficiently aerobic conditions to be maintained which reduces odour emission rates.
For this reason, the ‘fresh litter stockpiles’ odour emission rate of 350 OU/m2/minute
measured for the Queensland Health Study was considered to be most applicable.
MWA Environmental also notes that for the two ‘aged litter stockpile’ samples taken
for the Queensland Health study, odour emission rates measured at 3200
OU/m2/minute and 580 OU/m2/minute. Thus, average odour emission rates from the
‘aged litter stockpiles’ were not actually ten times higher than the ‘fresh litter’ sample
emission rate considered appropriate and modelled by MWA Environmental.
MWA Environmental has compared the adopted litter composting odour emission
rate of 350 OU/m2/minute (5.8 OU/m2/second) to published odour emission rates
from other composting facilities, as follows:
MWA Environmental Adopted: 5.8 OU/m2/second
Effective Peak SOER from Litter in Shed1: 11 OU/m2/second under forced
ventilation conditions and
including bird odour - no flux
hood sampling issues
Woy Woy Report (URS)2: 1.25 OU/m2/second for composting
windrows
Woy Woy Report (URS): 4.5 OU/m2/second for mature compost
as measured by wind tunnel
1
23800 / 2080 = 11 based upon peak 23800 OU/s from largest shed with litter surface area of
2
2080m , also includes bird odour
2
Woy Woy Waste Management Facility Air Quality Impact Assessment (URS, August 2007)
referencing measurements of covered windrows published in “Kühner M, Fischer IK, (1999)
Composting with Covers as an alternative to conventional (traditional) decomposting of organic
matter in 75th Colloquium of Waste – Practical Report 25.03.1999”
5
Page 21
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
GHD Covered Windrow3: Average 0.4 OU/m2/second for
covered windrow
Peak 1.2 OU/m2/second for top
section of covered windrow
ERM Gerogery4: Varying odour emission from Week 1
to Week 5 including flux hood
correction, as follows:
Table 1: Surface Odour Emission Rate Derived from ERM Gerogery
Actual SOER for Full Surface of Stockpiles
With Flux Hood Correction Factor5
Surface Odour Emission Rate - OU/m2/sec
PARAMETER
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5
SOER Measured by Flux Hood 7.7 1.1 0.36 0.85 0.07
Correction for Flux Hood Diversion 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 4.6
Modelled SOER 107.0 15.3 5.0 11.8 0.3
Whilst the above comparative data does not definitively quantify odour emissions
from the proposed stockpiling activities, the data does indicate that the MWA
Environmental modelled odour emission rates are comparable to published data for
composting windrows, including measurement by wind tunnel instead of flux hood
sampling.
The updated modelling has considered the overall odour impacts from the proposed
development including the following litter stockpile odour emission rate scenarios:
A. Poultry Sheds Only i.e. no litter stockpiling
B. Previously applied stockpile odour emission rate of 5.8 OU/m2/second;
C. Stockpile odour emission rate of 53.3 OU/m2/second based upon the ’10
times higher’ aged stockpile sample referenced in the SCRC information
request; and
D. Stockpile odour emission rates as per Table 1 above (derived from ERM,
2013) varying from 107 OU/m2/second for Week 1 to 0.3 OU/m2/second for
Week 5.
The results of the modelling are presented in Attachment 2.
3
Pollock, T. (2009) Odour Emission rate Measurements on Green-waste Windrows, 19th Int. Clean Air
& Environment Conference.
4
Resource Recovery Facility – Gerogery - Odour Impact Assessment (Environmental Resources
Management Australia, August 2013) including references to Environmental Impact Statement
(Report Number 31/29006/180436 - Organic Compost Facility Environmental Impact Statement, (GHD,
October 2012)
5
Correction factors were noted by the author to be likely overestimates due to the method applied
6
Page 22
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
The results of the updated odour modelling demonstrate that, for each of the above
stockpile odour emission rate scenarios, cumulative odour impacts will comply
with the Queensland odour guideline at surrounding residential dwellings.
The Scenario C at 53.3 OU/m2/second odour emission rate based upon the ‘10 times
higher’ sample referenced in the SCRC information request is not considered to be
valid for reasons stated above.
The results of the modelling for Scenario B and Scenario D have been considered in
the context of the other properties owned by the applicant at 146, 124, 172 and 224
Top Forestry Road, as follows:
• Using the Scenario B odour emission rate (as per MWA report) a house could
be constructed outside of the odour guideline contour at 124 & 224 Top
Forestry Road. The existing house at 146 Top Forestry Road and all
potential house sites at 172 Top Forestry Road would not comply with the
Queensland odour guideline.
• Using the Scenario D odour emission rate (as per MWA report) a house could
be constructed at the southeastern parcel of 124 Top Forestry Road at a
location compliant with the odour guideline. The only location available at
224 Top Forestry Road for a dwelling is within the electrical easement. The
existing house at 146 Top Forestry Road and all potential house sites at 172
Top Forestry Road would not comply with the Queensland odour guideline.
Discussion of potential options to address Council officer concerns in relation to
houses on the affected properties that are owned by the applicant is contained in the
response to 3. above.
5. There is no information about the potential cumulative impacts be of the odour from the
sheds, composting/stockpiling and the spreading on the sensitive receptors. Please
provide additional information about the cumulative odour impacts of spreading the
stockpiled manure on the farm.
The odour model has considered the cumulative impacts associated with the poultry
growing sheds and the litter stockpiling/composting. As discussed with Council
officers at a meeting held on 20 November 2013, it is not considered feasible to
model cumulative odour impacts from the spreading of litter because the locations
and times of spreading will vary under differing meteorological conditions at various
times. Rather the spreading of the litter should be done in accordance with
management practices that minimise potential off-site impacts.
7
Page 23
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November 2013 – Noise,
Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L26013/BH/12-002
Development approvals for poultry farms typically include a condition requiring the
implementation of a Site-Based Environmental Management Plan (SBEMP) prior to
the commencement of use. This Site-Based Environmental Management Plan
should specify management measures to minimise the risk of odour nuisance from
the spreading of litter, such as:
• Spreading of litter within 4 to 5 weeks of clean-out from the poultry sheds to
ensure that odour emissions from the spreading of litter do not coincide with peak
odour emission periods from the next batch of birds in the poultry sheds.
• Litter from each batch to be spread in a distributed manner across the
orchard so as to not concentrate odours to a particular boundary of the site. The
applicant has advised that the available litter from the poultry sheds will not be
sufficient to spread over all areas of the site in a year i.e. not all areas of the site
will be covered in a year.
• Maintaining spreading areas at a minimum setback of 50 metres from the
southern, eastern and northern property boundaries to minimise potential
near-field odour influences on adjacent properties. This will provide a minimum
buffer distance of 300 metres from spreading areas to a residential dwelling.
• Spreading of litter only when prevailing winds are from the northeasterly to
southeasterly sector as required to minimise odour transport from the spreading
process.
• Use of appropriate low velocity spreading equipment to minimise release of
dust (and associated odours) into the atmosphere.
• Dampening of applied litter during high wind speed periods to minimise
potential fugitive dust (and odour) emissions.
• Corrective actions in the event of odour nuisance, including:
• Review of spreading locations, methods and practices to identify measure
to reduce impacts; and
• If necessary, export of litter from site if noted to generate excessive odour
emissions.
With the available 300 metre separation distance from spreading areas to
surrounding residences it is considered that implementation of the above
management measures in accordance with a SBEMP will ensure that the activity
does not cause unreasonable odour nuisance.
Yours sincerely
Ben Hyde
Environmental Engineer
8
Page 24
ATTACHMENT 1
Max Winders & Associates Pty Ltd tas MWA Environmental
Level 15, 241 Adelaide St, Brisbane GPO BOX 3137, Brisbane Qld 4001
P 07 3002 5500 F 07 3002 5588 E [email protected]
W www.mwaenviro.com.au
ABN 94 010 833 084
Page 25
SUMMARY OF MODEL UPDATES TO ADDRESS SCRC TECHNICAL REVIEW
MATTERS RAISED BY PACIFIC ENVIRONMENT LTD (PEL)
TAPM
• Radius of influence of Nambour observation station set to 5km (as per PEL request)
CALMET
• updated to apply the MM5toGrads algorithm (ICOULD=4) as per request from PEL
(per email 25 November 2013)
• updated the Radius of Influence of Terrain Features (TERRAD) from 2km to 5km to
match the range of suitable values in accordance with the NSW CALPUFF Modelling
Guidance Document
CALPUFF
• WSCALM was set to a value of 0.5m/s (as per PEL request)
• Model representation of poultry shed emissions amended to buoyant point sources
(as per PEL request), specifically:
o 16-16.5m source diameter offset 30m from the ventilation end of each shed
o Note momentum flux factor set to 0 (rain hat function)
o Effective emission velocity calculated for each hour based upon the
ventilation rate
o Emission temperature set in accordance with the Best Practice Guidance for
the Poultry Industry document
• Set the minimum turbulence velocities (SVMIN) set to 0.2 over land for each stability
class in accordance with the NSW CALPUFF Modelling Guidance Document
• Set the Probability Density Function (PDF) used for dispersion under convective
conditions to 1 in accordance with the NSW CALPUFF Modelling Guidance
Document
A sensitivity test was undertaken to evaluate the impact of changing SIGZI for 1.5m
high litter stockpiles from 0.35 to 0.7 for ground level sources (as per review
requested by PEL). No change in the overall concentrations was identified for the
discrete receptor model at the sensitive receptors, therefore this was not adopted in
running the gridded receptors.
EMISSION RATES
• ‘K Factor’ of 2.2 applied in accordance with the Best Practice Guidance for the
Poultry Industry document
• Maximum ventilation rate set at 10m3/hour/bird in accordance with the Best Practice
Guidance for the Poultry Industry document
Page 26
ATTACHMENT 2
Max Winders & Associates Pty Ltd tas MWA Environmental
Level 15, 241 Adelaide St, Brisbane GPO BOX 3137, Brisbane Qld 4001
P 07 3002 5500 F 07 3002 5588 E [email protected]
W www.mwaenviro.com.au
ABN 94 010 833 084
Page 27
Poultry Sheds Only
Updated Odour Model
Standard Stocking Scenario
Figure A
1-hour average 99.5th percentile predicted odour concentrations
Ridgewood 12-002 Guideline: 2.5 Odour Units 29 November 2013
Page 28
Poultry Sheds + Litter Stockpiles
Updated Odour Model
Standard Stocking Scenario
Figure B 5 Week Litter Stockpiles as per MWA report (5.8 ou/m2/s)
1-hour average 99.5th percentile predicted odour concentrations
Ridgewood 12-002 Guideline: 2.5 Odour Units 29 November 2013
Page 29
Poultry Sheds + Litter Stockpiles “10 x Emission”
Updated Odour Model
Standard Stocking Scenario
5 Week Litter Stockpiles (53.3 ou/m2/s) as per Golder
Figure C ‘aged stockpiles’ – Not considered by MWA
Environmental to be appropriate
1-hour average 99.5th percentile predicted odour concentrations
Ridgewood 12-002 Guideline: 2.5 Odour Units 29 November 2013
Page 30
Poultry Sheds + Litter Stockpiles “ERM Varying Emission”
Updated Odour Model
Standard Stocking Scenario
Figure D 5 Week Litter Stockpiles with Varying Emissions for as
per Gerogery ERM report with Flux Hood Correction
1-hour average 99.5th percentile predicted odour concentrations
Ridgewood 12-002 Guideline: 2.5 Odour Units 29 November 2013
Page 31
ATTACHMENT 3
Max Winders & Associates Pty Ltd tas MWA Environmental
Level 15, 241 Adelaide St, Brisbane GPO BOX 3137, Brisbane Qld 4001
P 07 3002 5500 F 07 3002 5588 E [email protected]
W www.mwaenviro.com.au
ABN 94 010 833 084
Page 32
3002 TTOZ- 0007 (4y/w)) paads pum ee Te Of 82 of wt Ww iW st “4 St 8 Tt 6 8 aus Og UNUeMAL Je 8007 PUE TTOZ-000Z 40} spaads pul jo WesZoIsIH or a v1 or st oz (5%) aequasied ol -GoO 02 -OL oe -07 Or -O08€ oS -OF 09 -0¢ 08 -0'9 OOL-08 O01 =< OHOnEE i %OL'TT stujed = isv4 LS4M HLYON isva MeL HSL %8T'6T SUED HLNOS, HLYON LsamM 8007 unuemal Wog TLOZ - 0007 unuemal Wog
Page 33
Percentage (%) 30 25 20 15 10 BoM Tewantin 2000 - 2011 Histogram of Wind Speeds for 2000-2011 at Tewantin BoM site 0 2 4 5 8 9 1 143 15 417 18 21 22 24 26 28 30 31 33 35 37 39 Wind Speed (km/hr) 2003 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 <= =m All Years Percentage (%) 30 25 20 1s 10 Histogram of Wind Directions for 2000-2011 at Tewantin BoM site 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 Wind Direction (°) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 <= = All Years
Page 34
APPENDIX D Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Council Request for Further Information from the Ordinary Meeting 14 November, 2013 Prepared by MWA Environmental
Page 35
Ref: L25913/BH/12-002
26 November 2013
W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd
124 Top Forestry Road
Ridgewood QLD 4563
Attention: Mr David Milligan
Dear David
Re: Response to Resolution of Sunshine Coast Regional Council Ordinary
Meeting 14 November 2013–
Noise, Dust & Odour Issues -
Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
Further to your request, MWA Environmental has reviewed the Sunshine Coast
Regional Council (“SCRC”) Minutes from the Ordinary Meeting of 14 November 2013
(“the Minutes”) in relation to the proposed poultry farm at 124 Top Forestry Road,
Ridgewood.
Council Resolution
The Minutes contain a Council Resolution as follows (relevant extract only):
That Council defer consideration of application No. MCU12/0184 for a
Development Permit for Material Change of Use for Animal Husbandry Type 2 –
Intensive (Poultry Farm) and Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA 4 - Poultry
Farming), situated at 136 Top Forestry Rd, Ridgewood to the next Council meeting
and request the applicant to provide the following additional information:
…..
3. composting and stockpiling methodology including data on management of
emissions during these processes
MWA Response
Information regarding the operational management of the litter stockpiling,
composting and spreading activities to minimise potential nuisance was provided in
the Preliminary Operational Management Plan – Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds –
124 Top Forestry Road, Ridgewood (MWA Environmental, 11 September 2013).
Further clarification on the management measures is provided in the following
sections.
Max Winders & Associates Pty Ltd tas MWA Environmental
Level 15, 241 Adelaide St, Brisbane GPO BOX 3137, Brisbane Qld 4001
P 07 3002 5500 F 07 3002 5588 E [email protected]
W www.mwaenviro.com.au
ABN 94 010 833 084
Page 36
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Resolution of Sunshine Coast Regional Council Ordinary Meeting 14 November
2013– Noise, Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L25913/BH/12-002
STOCKPILING / COMPOSTING MANAGEMENT
Litter is to be stored within two bunded areas as shown on Callaghan & Toth Plan 01
Rev D Page 9 (September 2013) and are generally described as follows:
Northern Stockpile Area (adjacent Shed 5)
Available 300 lineal metres of stockpile within a 120m x 22.5m bunded area
Available 76 lineal metres of reserve stockpile within a 82m x 14m bunded area
Southern Stockpile Area (adjacent Shed 3)
Available 110 lineal metres of stockpile within a 75m x 19m bunded area
Management of the litter stockpiling / composting process is summarised as follows:
• Litter will be transferred to the stockpile areas by truck and the initial
stockpiles formed by tractor, bobcat or backhoe.
• The stockpiles will be covered using polyethylene sheet or similar to
minimise fugitive dust and odour emissions during the storage period.
• A compost turning machine (tow-behind tractor)1 will be used to manage
the composting process and maintain aerobic conditions to minimise odour
emissions during the stockpiling period. The compost turning machines
produce linear stockpiles approximately 1.5 metres high by 3 metres wide.
Available compost turning machines include the ability to pick up and relay
the covers over the stockpiles.
• The litter stockpiles will be turned at least weekly but potentially twice
per week to maintain aerobic conditions.
• Litter turning should only be undertaken when prevailing winds are:
o below 10 km/h to minimise fugitive dust and odour emissions; and
o from the northeasterly to southeasterly sector to ensure that odour
emissions are directed away from sensitive receptors.
• In order to minimise the potential cumulative odour impact from the
stockpiling and spreading of the spent litter, the proponent intends to spread
all litter within 4 to 5 weeks of the shed clean-out. Under this operational
regime, odour emissions from the stockpiling and spreading of the spent litter
occur during the period when only minor emissions are generated from the
broiler sheds.
The odour modelling undertaken by MWA Environmental, including addressing
matters raised by the technical reviewer engaged by SCRC, indicate that the
cumulative impact of the poultry growing sheds and the litter stockpiling will comply
with the Queensland odour guideline at surrounding residential dwellings.
1
Examples include ‘JPH Equipment’ (http://ozturners.com.au/icwp/products/compost-turners/) and
‘Seymour Rural Equipment Pty Ltd’ (http://www.seymourrural.com.au/compost-turner-4000.html)
2
Page 37
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Resolution of Sunshine Coast Regional Council Ordinary Meeting 14 November
2013– Noise, Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L25913/BH/12-002
SPREADING MANAGEMENT
Development approvals for poultry farms typically include a condition requiring the
implementation of a Site-Based Environmental Management Plan (SBEMP) prior to
the commencement of use. This Site-Based Environmental Management Plan will
specify management measures to minimise the risk of odour nuisance from the
spreading of litter, such as:
• Spreading of litter within 4 to 5 weeks of clean-out from the poultry sheds to
ensure that odour emissions from the spreading of litter do not coincide with peak
odour emission periods from the next batch of birds in the poultry sheds.
• Litter from each batch to be spread in a distributed manner across the
orchard so as to not concentrate odours to a particular boundary of the site. The
applicant has advised that the available litter from the poultry sheds will not be
sufficient to spread over all areas of the site in a year i.e. approximately half of
the trees in the orchard will be covered in a year.
• Maintaining spreading areas at a minimum setback of 50 metres from the
southern, eastern and northern property boundaries to minimise potential
near-field odour influences on adjacent properties. This will provide a minimum
buffer distance of 300 metres from spreading areas to a residential dwelling.
• Litter should be spread during the 6am to 6pm period only.
• Spreading of litter only when prevailing winds are from the northeasterly to
southeasterly sector as required to minimise odour transport from the spreading
process.
• Use of appropriate low velocity spreading equipment2 to minimise release of
dust (and associated odours) into the atmosphere.
• Dampening of applied litter during high wind speed periods to minimise
potential fugitive dust (and odour) emissions.
• Corrective actions in the event of odour nuisance, including:
• Review of spreading locations, methods and practices to identify measure
to reduce impacts; and
• If necessary, export of litter from site if noted to generate excessive odour
emissions.
With the available 300 metre separation distance from spreading areas to
surrounding residences it is considered that implementation of the above
management measures in accordance with a SBEMP will ensure that the activity
does not cause unreasonable odour nuisance.
2
Examples include ‘Marshall 800 Series Multispread - Trailed - 2.5T’
(http://www.marshallspreadersales.com.au/800-series-multispread.html) and a Vicon SuperFlow 604’
(http://ien.vicon.eu/Spreading-Equipment/Fertiliser-Spreaders/Rear-Mounted-Pendulum-
Spreaders/Vicon-SuperFlow-604-1654)
3
Page 38
Mr David Milligan, W Donald Milligan Pty Ltd 29 November 2013
Re: Response to Resolution of Sunshine Coast Regional Council Ordinary Meeting 14 November
2013– Noise, Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
L25913/BH/12-002
Updated Odour Modelling
In response to further information requested by SCRC Officers by email on 19
November 2013, MWA Environmental has updated the odour emission rate,
meteorological and odour dispersion models to address the modelling preferences of
Council’s technical reviewer. A detailed response is provided in correspondence
Response to Sunshine Coast Regional Further Information Request of 19 November
2013 – Noise, Dust & Odour Issues - Proposed Poultry Growing Sheds, Ridgewood
(L26013/BH/12-002, 29 November 2013).
The results of the updated odour modelling demonstrate that cumulative odour
impacts will comply with the Queensland odour guideline at surrounding residential
dwellings.
The results of the updated odour modelling indicate significantly lesser impacts from
the proposed poultry growing sheds and litter stockpiling as compared the modelling
originally undertaken by MWA Environmental and provided to Council.
Top Forestry Road Dust Modelling
MWA Environmental has reviewed the potential impact of the proposed development
on overall dust emissions from Top Forestry Road considering the average 3.2 truck
trips generated per day at an existing Ingham’s farm at Redland Bay. It is noted that
the Redland Bay farm holds more birds than proposed at the subject site and, as
such, the truck trips are likely to be conservatively high.
For the purposes of this assessment it has been assumed that Top Forestry Road
current carries 200 vehicles per day.
Based upon calculations in accordance with USEPA AP-42 and Environment
Australia techniques, overall particulate emissions from Top Forestry Road are
estimated to increase by less than 10% as a result of the proposed development.
The overall dust emissions resulting from current usage of the public road is
significantly higher than the projected contribution from the proposed development.
On this basis the proposed development would only be expected to have a minor
impact on current on dust levels at residences along Top Forestry Road.
Yours sincerely
Ben Hyde
Environmental Engineer
4
Page 39
APPENDIX E A Letter Supplied by Qld Farm Manager of Inghams Enterprises P/L Regarding Poultry Farm Sizes
Page 40
Inghams Enterprises Pty. Limited 20 GO RETO Monday, November 25, 2013 Dear David and Genevieve As per our conversation, | would like to confirm the following: 1. Most new Contract Chicken Growing facilities have a 240 000 bird capacity. 2. The viability of farms with less than 200 000 bird capacity Is questionable. 3. Nine Inghams Contract Farms in South East Qid are accessed via unsealed roads. 4. Farms with capacity of greater than 240 000 birds in the vicinity of the Sunshine Coast are established in the following areas: Elimbah, Donnybrook, Ningi, Wamuran and Caboolture. Yours faithfully wn fe Brett Richter Qld Farming Manager