newland developers pty ltd - vpa

Newland Developers Pty Ltd Land Parcel corner Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road,

Clyde Buffer Constraint Assessment

November 2013

GHD | Report for Newland Developers Pty Ltd - Land Parcel corner Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde,

31/30924/228285 | i

Table of contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

2. Site Location and Development ................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Site Development ............................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Land Use......................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Nearest Sensitive Land Uses ........................................................................................... 2 2.4 Surrounding Industries .................................................................................................... 2

3. Meteorology .............................................................................................................................. 5 3.1 Choice of Meteorological Dataset .................................................................................... 5 3.2 Wind Climate ................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Atmospheric Stability – Directions of Good and Poor Dispersion ...................................... 6

4. Relevant Buffer Guidelines ........................................................................................................ 8 4.1 Victorian Broiler Code ...................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Application to Fedwell Farm............................................................................................. 8 4.3 Reverse Amenity ............................................................................................................. 8 4.4 Recommended Buffer for Fedwell Farm ........................................................................... 9

5. Directionally-Dependent Buffer ................................................................................................ 12

6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 14

7. Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 15

Table index Table 1 Seasonal Variation in Mean Wind Speed – Pakenham 2005/2006 ................................... 5

Table 2 Directional Variation in Buffer in Response to Local Meteorology – Pakenham AQMS ........................................................................................................................... 12

Figure index Figure 1 Site Location .................................................................................................................. 3

Figure 2 Planning Map .................................................................................................................. 4

Figure 3 Annual Wind Rose – Pakenham AQMS 2005/2006 .......................................................... 6

Figure 4 Stability Wind Rose – Categories E & F – Pakenham 2005/2006 ..................................... 7

Figure 5 288 m Default Buffer...................................................................................................... 10

Figure 6 450 m De-rated Buffer ................................................................................................... 11

Figure 7 Directional Buffer ........................................................................................................... 13


31/30924/228285 | 1

1. Introduction GHD was engaged by Newland Developers Pty Ltd (Newland) to conduct a buffer constraint assessment on a 40 ha parcel of land located at 355 and 365 Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde Victoria (north west corner of Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road).

The purpose of an amenity buffer distance is to provide sufficient separation between sensitive land uses (such as residences) and industries that have the potential to generate emissions of dust and/or odour that can, on the occasion of an upset or malfunction, cause disamenity off-site.

The only identified industry in the vicinity of the land parcel that requires a separation distance (buffer) from sensitive land uses is a broiler farm located approximately 570 m to the west. Broiler farms accordingly attract the buffers specified in the Victorian Broiler Code (the Code)1.The Victorian Broiler Code defines separation distances from the perimeter of the shed array, where the buffer distance is defined as a function of the capacity of the farm expressed as thousands of birds.

The separation distances are applied as a fixed radial distance from the shed array envelope and do not take account of directions of good and poor dispersion. In the former, the default distance can be reduced, while in the latter the distance can be increased. GHD has developed a methodology to determine a directional buffer that encloses the same area as the default buffer but provides an equal protection from odour disamenity independent of the direction from the farm.

This report considers the type and scale of operations of the existing broiler farm and examines the separation distances that would apply to the farm and any potential constraints posed on the land parcel at question. The local meteorological conditions are also considered to assess whether and to what extent, the buffer distance could be made to be directionally dependant in order to give a more equal risk of exposure to disamenity in the event of a process upset at this site.

The findings, conclusions and recommendations of this buffer assessment should be read in conjunction with the Limitations presented in Section 7.

1 Victorian Code for Broiler Farms September 2009.

2 | GHD | Report for Newland Developers Pty Ltd - Land Parcel corner Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde,

31/30924/228285 | 2

2. Site Location and Development 2.1 Site Development

Newland wish to develop the 40 ha site located at 355 and 365 Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde Victoria for residential uses. The site is covered by a Precinct Structure Plan (PSP) 57 - Casey Fields.

2.2 Land Use

The land in question is located at the corner of Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde Victoria (referred to as “the site” from hereafter), and is subject to the provisions of the Planning Scheme operated by Cardinia Shire Council. An aerial photograph of the site with the land parcel identified is provided in Figure 1.

The site is located on land zoned for Urban Growth (UGZ), and this zone extends to the north, east, south and west of the site. The identified broiler farm is located at 1385 Ballarto Road, Cranbourne East and is also situated on land zoned for Urban Growth

A planning scheme map of the proposed site and the surrounding area is provided in Figure 2.

2.3 Nearest Sensitive Land Uses

The definition of a sensitive receptor or sensitive land use is defined by the Code as ‘A use that involves the presence of people, causing the use to be sensitive to amenity considerations such as odour, dust and noise. Sensitive uses (also referred in other documents as sensitive land uses) include a dwelling, a dependent persons unit, a residential building, a hospital, a school, a day care centre, a caravan park and other uses involving the presence of people for an extended period. Sensitive use does not include recreational areas such as parks and sporting facilities’. The nearest current sensitive land uses in relation to the broiler farm are the rural residences located directly south and west of the farm; all residents are located within land zoned for Urban Growth.

2.4 Surrounding Industries

A desktop review of the site and the surrounding area was conducted which identified only one industry that would pose a potential odour constraint requiring a buffer. This industry was identified as a two shed broiler farm located at 1385 Ballarto Road, Cranbourne East and trading as Fedwell.

GHD has confirmed with the Fedwell farm owner2 that the two shed farm was built in the 1980’s, has a capacity of 80,000 birds with cross flow ventilation on each shed. The sheds are 125 m long by 15 m wide, are spaced approximately 15 m apart and are orientated in an east-west direction.

GHD understands there have been no odour complaints received by Council in relation to the broiler farm 3.

2 Pers Com Ken Matthews 12/11/2013 3 Emails from Stefanie Knippenkoetter at Casey Council dated 22/11/13 and 25/11/13


31/30924/228285 | 4

Figure 2 Planning Map

Source: http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning


31/30924/228285 | 5

3. Meteorology The wind climate representative of the site is required so that: (i) the directions of prevailing winds, and (ii) the directions of good and poor dispersion, can be assessed. In the directions of poor dispersion the maximum extent of impact from an odour/dust emission during an upset/malfunction from the broiler farm can be increased. Similarly in the direction of good dispersion, the maximum extent of impact will be reduced.

3.1 Choice of Meteorological Dataset Ideally a 12 month dataset recorded at hourly intervals is required to fully characterise annual average, diurnal and seasonal variations in wind climate. The nearest meteorological dataset is from the EPA AQMS (air quality monitoring station) located in the centre of the Pakenham Racecourse, some 15 km to the northeast of the site. As there is no intervening terrain, GHD is of the opinion that the Pakenham dataset will be representative of the wind climate at the site.

GHD obtained a 12 month dataset (July 2005 – June 2006) from EPA to enable the wind climate to be characterised.

3.2 Wind Climate Figure 3 shows the annual wind rose for the Pakenham data and the following features can be seen:

The prevailing wind directions are from the northwest quadrant, with a combined incidence of 55% of total winds;

There is a smaller component from the east, west and south with incidences of 7%, 6.5% and 5% respectively;

The annual average wind speed is a modest 3.19 m/s; and

The largest proportion of light winds (<2 m/s) are from the north and northwest, while the largest proportion of high wind speeds (>6 m/s) are also from the north and northwest.

The mean wind speed shows little seasonal variation (all within 5% of the annual mean with autumn as least windy and spring as most windy), as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Seasonal Variation in Mean Wind Speed – Pakenham 2005/2006

Season Annual Summer Autumn Winter Spring

Wind Speed

m/s

3.19 3.06 3.02 3.22 3.25

% of Annual Mean

100 96 95 101 105


31/30924/228285 | 6

Figure 3 Annual Wind Rose – Pakenham AQMS 2005/2006

3.3 Atmospheric Stability – Directions of Good and Poor Dispersion The EPA 12 month dataset includes a measure of atmospheric stability (using the Pasquil/Gifford classification scheme – A (strongly unstable), through D (neutral) to F (moderately stable)). Figure 4 shows a stability rose for stable categories E and F (slightly and moderately stable respectively) as these are the most important stability classes for dispersion of ground based sources. The following features can be seen:

Higher incidences of E and F are seen from the northwest and easterly directions. These directions provide a guide on the directions of poor dispersion, and

A lower than average incidence of stable conditions is seen for all southerly component winds.

These features determine that the directions of poor and good dispersion are from the north and northwest and from the south respectively.


31/30924/228285 | 7

Figure 4 Stability Wind Rose – Categories E & F – Pakenham 2005/2006


31/30924/228285 | 8

4. Relevant Buffer Guidelines 4.1 Victorian Broiler Code

The Victorian Broiler Code was first introduced in 2001 and applies only to a planning permit application to use and develop land for a broiler farm that includes any of the following:

The establishment of a new broiler farm; and

An increase in the farm capacity of an existing broiler farm (farm expansion).

The Code does not apply to an existing broiler farm where there is no increase in the farm capacity.

The Code revision in 2009 changed the threshold farm size defining ‘special class’ farms to increase to 400,000 birds (viz eight, 50,000 bird sheds), and defined the separation distance for farms of lower capacity by a formula. In addition, the separation distance was applied to the perimeter (rather than the centroid) of the shed array. The separation distance is calculated by the formula as given below.

D = 27 N 0.54

Where D is the separation distance in metres and N is the farm capacity in thousands of birds.

The advantage of the equation (as opposed to the table in the 2001 Code) is that the separation distance can be directly calculated for any farm capacity.

4.2 Application to Fedwell Farm

The identified farm has a capacity of 80,000 birds and the formula then gives a value for D of 288 m. From the ‘Classification of broiler farms’ section of the Code it indicates that the identified farm would be classified as a Class B farm in which the following apply:

The farm capacity is less than or equal to 400,000 birds; and

The development can meet the minimum separation distance requirement (as defined by the formula) but this distance is not fully contained within the broiler farm boundary.

Figure 5 shows that this buffer is well clear of the site in question (separation of western boundary of the site to the buffer envelope is approximately 280 m).

Note that the Code (Chapter ‘Element 1 Location, siting and size’) specifies objectives that a proposed broiler farm development must meet to minimise potential amenity or environmental impacts, including odour, dust and noise emissions, and pollution of ground and surface waters. These objectives are primarily addressed by providing sufficient separation of emission sources from sensitive uses. These requirements apply in addition to the separation requirements used to determine farm classification found in the ‘Classification of broiler farms’ section of the Code as detailed above.

4.3 Reverse Amenity

Approved Measure E1 M1.1 of the Code requires a separation distance of 1000 m for any proposed broiler farm development from: (i) a residential zone, urban growth zone or other urban zone where housing is a primary purpose of the zone, or (ii) a future residential area shown on a plan or strategy incorporated in the planning scheme. However the purpose of the 1000 m buffer is in the application to the siting of a new broiler farm or upgrades to an existing broiler farm; it does not appear to apply to the reverse amenity situation of establishing sensitive uses near a broiler farm (which is the case here). Reverse amenity issues are addressed in


31/30924/228285 | 9

Section 11 of the Code. This Section states that the separation distances as found in the ‘classification of broiler farms’ section (as calculated by the formula above) should be used as a guide when planning for urban use and development near a broiler farm; thus the 288 m buffer would apply. Section 11 also states that for farms approved and built under the Code (after 2001), planning authorities should maintain the setbacks as described in Element 1 (E1 M1.1) for urban and rural living zones. However, as this farm was built prior to the Code, (in the 1980’s) the setback (separation distance) recommended in E1 M1.1 does not apply.

For older farms built prior to 2001, the application can be problematic and unreasonable as these farms were established at a time when there was no expectation that the approval of the farm would limit the use of adjoining land. In these cases the historical performance of these farms in regards to odour impact can be used as well as the current separation to the nearest residences. The Code calls for a buffer distance that is as large as reasonably possible.

As discussed in Section 2.4, GHD understands there have been no odour complaints received by Council in relation to this broiler farm. This indicates that the current operations of the farm are being well managed to best practice standards.

The current separation distance to the nearest residences excluding the resident on the farm site (most likely the owner’s residence) is 120 m to the southeast, 230 m to the southwest and 320 m to the south. Thus given there has been no history of odour complaints from these residences, it indicates that a separation distance of 120 m or greater would be sufficient to reduce the risk of odour exposure to sensitive land uses. However, to the extent that existing residents are within the zone of potential odour impact, it may be the case that they have acclimatised to the occasional exposure – for these residents, in effect it has become part of the background palette of ambient odour. This situation may not be replicated with the development of new residential areas – new residents may find odour from the broiler farm unusual and objectionable and this may result in an increased number of complaints.

4.4 Recommended Buffer for Fedwell Farm

GHD recommends that the separation distance of 288 m as calculated in the ‘Classification of broiler farms’ section of the Code should apply to the farm. This distance does not pose any constraints to the site.

It can also be argued that as this is a small example of a broiler farm (and not likely to expand) the 1000 m buffer recommended by the Code should be de-rated in any case if it were to be required. A standard farm is considered to be 400,000 birds thus using the EPA de-rating method by the square root of the capacity ratio, the 80,000 bird farm would attract a much smaller buffer.

,,

.

= .

So, for an 80,000 bird farm, the appropriate application of the 1000 m buffer would be to reduce it to:

0.45 x 1000 = 450 m

The 450 m buffer is plotted in Figure 6 and shows that this buffer is also well clear of the site in question (separation of western boundary of the site to the buffer envelope is approximately 120 m).


31/30924/228285 | 12

5. Directionally-Dependent Buffer Approved Measure E1, M1.3 of the Code refers to meteorological and topographic conditions that might require an increase to the default value in specific directions. To examine the potential for this measure to constrain the site, GHD has determined a directional buffer using a methodology developed in 20044 and used in numerous buffer assessments conducted by GHD since. In effect the directional buffer takes account of site-representative meteorology to determine a buffer distance that varies with direction from the farm and provides equal protection from potential disamenity.

Where site-representative meteorological data is available the directions of good and poor dispersion can be identified as shown in Section 3. Further, if the 12 month dataset is configured to Ausplume format (deriving atmospheric stability category and mixing height), then dispersion modelling can be conducted using a nominal source emission rate (odour) to determine the directional change in extent from the default nominal 288 m buffer.

This was performed for the Fedwell farm using the EPA Pakenham meteorological dataset, and adopting a nominal 10 m x 10 m area source with a nominal emission rate. The 99.5% contour that gave the same enclosed area as a 288 m radius circle (i.e. 260,576 m2) was selected and is presented in Figure 7. From this figure it is seen that the extent of the contour is greater than the all-direction mean of 288 m in the southerly sector – out to 409 m. Similarly, the extent of the contour to the north is significantly less than 288 m, down to 199 m. The contour effectively gives the departure from the fixed 288 m radius that would be required if an equal exposure to disamenity was to be given in the event of an upset/malfunction at the broiler farm.

The angular change in buffer distance is given as a function of direction in Table 2. This information has also been used to demonstrate the effect on the 288 m buffer when applied to the envelope of the broiler farm sheds. As seen in Figure 7 the directional buffer extends further west and south when compared to the default 288 m buffer and retracts in the north and easterly directions (direction of the site at question) – leaving a separation of ~300 m from the directional buffer to the western margin of the site.

Table 2 Directional Variation in Buffer in Response to Local Meteorology – Pakenham AQMS

Direction Sector deg.

Range m

% of mean range

Direction Sector deg.

Range m

% of mean range

N 0 199 69 S 180 409 142

NNE 22.5 210 73 SSW 202.5 357 124

NE 45 196 68 SW 225 314 109

ENE 67.5 219 76 WSW 247.5 349 121

E 90 256 89 W 270 331 115

ESE 112.5 279 97 WNW 292.5 279 97

SE 135 314 109 NW 315 279 97

SSE 157.5 389 135 NNW 337.5 219 76

4 Clarey P, Pollock T “Integrating Separation Distances with Dispersion Modelling”, Enviro 04, 28 March – 1 April 2004, Darling

Harbour, Sydney.


31/30924/228285 | 14

6. Conclusions The analyses provided in this report lead to the following conclusions. They should be read in conjunction with the Limitations of Section 7.

Based on our knowledge of the broiler farm, it is concluded that:

The identified farm has a capacity for 80,000 birds;

The Victorian Broiler Code applies only to a planning permit application to use and develop land for a broiler farm that includes the establishment of a new broiler farm and an increase in the farm capacity of an existing broiler farm;

From the ‘Classification of broiler farms’ section of the Code the Fedwell farm requires a separation distance of 288 m which is well clear of the site in question (separation of western boundary of the site to the buffer envelope is approximately 280 m);

Approved Measure E1 M1.1 of the Code requires a separation distance of 1000 m for any proposed broiler farm development from: (i) a residential zone, urban growth zone or other urban zone, or (ii) a future residential area. However this 1000 m buffer only applies to the siting of a new broiler farm or upgrades to an existing broiler farm not the reverse amenity scenario of establishing sensitive uses near a broiler farm (which is the case here);

Should the 1000 m buffer be argued to be required, it should be de-rated in any case. Application to the 80,000 bird farm would attract a smaller buffer of 450 m. This buffer is also well clear of the site in question (separation of western boundary of the site to the buffer envelope is approximately 120 m;

Section 11 of the Code addresses the issue of establishing sensitive uses near broiler farms. This Section states that the separation distances as found in the ‘classification of broiler farms’ section should be used as a guide when planning for urban use and development near a broiler farm, thus the 288 m buffer would apply;

GHD understands there have been no odour complaints received by Council in relation to the broiler farm. This indicates that the current operations of the farm are being well managed to best practice standards to avoid off-site impact;

The current separation distance to the nearest residences excluding the resident on the farm site (most likely the owner’s residence) is 120 m to the southeast, 230 m to the southwest and 320 m to the south. Thus given there has been no history of odour complaints, it indicates that a separation distance of 120 m or greater would be sufficient to reduce the risk of odour exposure to sensitive land uses;

The Directional Buffer which accounts for local meteorology extends further west and south when compared to the default 288 m buffer and retracts in the north and easterly directions – leaving a separation of ~300 m from the directional buffer to the western margin of the site; and

GHD recommends that the separation distance of 288 m as calculated in the ‘Classification of broiler farms’ section of the Code should apply to the farm. This distance does not pose any constraints to the land at 355 and 365 Clyde Fiveways Road, Clyde Victoria (corner of Ballarto Road and Clyde Fiveways Road) as shown in Figure 5.


31/30924/228285 | 15

7. Limitations This Report has been prepared by GHD for Newland Developers and may only be used and relied on by Newland Developers for the purpose agreed between GHD and Newland Developers.

GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than Newland Developers arising in connection with this Report. GHD also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent legally permissible.

The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing this Report were limited to those specifically detailed in the Report and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the Report.

The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on conditions encountered and information reviewed at the date of preparation of the Report. GHD has no responsibility or obligation to update this Report to account for events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that the Report was prepared.

The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this Report are based on assumptions made by GHD described in this Report. GHD disclaims liability arising from any of the assumptions being incorrect

GHD has prepared this Report on the basis of information provided by Newland Developers and Fedwell Farm, which GHD has not independently verified or checked beyond the agreed scope of work. GHD does not accept liability in connection with such unverified information, including errors and omissions in the Report which were caused by errors or omissions in that information.

GHD

180 Lonsdale Street Melbourne, Victoria 3000 T: (03) 8687 8000 F: (03) 8687 8111 E: [email protected]

© GHD 2013

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited. G:\31\30924\WP\228285.docx

Document Status

Rev No.

Author Reviewer Approved for Issue Name Signature Name Signature Date

Draft 18/11/13

0 M. Asimakis

T. Pollock

M. Koller

27/11/2013

www.ghd.com

newland developers pty ltd - vpa

Documents