Advertised Plans - 25 Quills RD

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
advertised: 05/08/2017
Planning Administration
This document is subject to copyright and is protected by law. In displaying this
document on its website the Council grants website users a non-exclusive licence to
reproduce the document in their web browser for the sole purpose of viewing the
content. The Council reserves all other rights. Documents displayed on the Council's
website are intended for public perusal only and should not be reproduced
without the consent of the copyright owner.
Planning Submission
25 Quills Road
Resource Development (Intensive Animal Husbandry)
1
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3
2. Site Description ............................................................................................................................... 3
3. Proposal .......................................................................................................................................... 3
4. Launceston Interim Planning Scheme 2015 .................................................................................... 5
5. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Apendicies:
Appendix A Certificate of Title

Appendix B Site Plan
Appendix C Environmental Impact
2
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
1. Introduction
This submission is prepared in support of an
application for a free-range egg production facility At a Glance
at 25 Quills Road, Lalla.
Site: 25 Quills Road, Lalla
Metier Planning and Development have been CT224689/1
engaged by the owners of the land to make this
application on their behalf. This development Proposal: Resource
application is made pursuant to Section 57 of the Development (Intensive
Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993. Animal Husbandry)
Zone: Rural Resource

2. Site Description
Overlay: Scenic Protection
The subject site is contained in one parcels of land,
Certificate of Title 224689/1. A copy of the title is Use: Resource Development
provided at Appendix A of this submission. No Permit Required
The site is zoned Rural Resource. The site is Zone Provisions:
mapped as having a Land Capability of Class 4.
Complies with all Acceptable
Solutions
Relevant Code:
E7.0 Scenic Management Code
E7.6.2 Scenic management

areas P1
Figure 1: Zoning Map (Rural Resource Zone with Scenic Overlay) E11.0 Attenuation Code
E11.6.1 Attenuation distances

P2.
3. Proposal
The proposal is for the use and development of a
new free -range chicken shed for egg production,
this falls into the use class of Resource
Development (intensive animal husbandry).
An approval for a similar facility was granted by

Council in 2015 at 25 Quills Road, Certificate of
Title 164145/1. The separation of the two sites is
approximately 900m. The existing layer shed is
functioning well and complying with all permit
conditions. Olsens Eggs are recognised for
producing a quality ethical product, consequently
demand is outstripping supply.
3
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Proposed Layer
Shed
Existing Layer Shed
Figure 2: Aerial image of site
It is proposed to construct a shed (63m x 16m) to house the chickens. The shed has a capacity
for 7200 chickens. There will be no roosters. The chickens will have approximately 3.5ha to
range about in and will have free access to and from the shed for laying, feeding and
watering. The chickens will be enclosed in the shed at night fall and let out again no later
than 10am.
The shed will be constructed of insulated laminated panels, which has both insulation and
noise attenuation properties. The sheds will be well ventilated and low noise fans will
circulate air on hot days. Automatic feeders and water points will be located in the shed,
these are designed to minimise spillage. The floor of the shed is a plastic grid suspended
800mm above a concrete slab. The grid will be removed and the slab cleared out once a year.
Approximately 3 trees will be required to be removed, two in the drive way area and one
where the shed is proposed to be constructed. All trees occurring in the range area will be
retained. It is proposed to plant a tree buffer on the eastern and southern side of the range
area.
The range area will be fenced with a chicken wire fence. The shed and range area will be
partitioned in half to allow the management of two different age groups. This will also allow
the range area to be periodically spelled. The farm has access to a 10 mega litre dam, which
will allow irrigation of the pasture in summer months.
The chickens will be attended to twice a day and egg collection will occur in the mornings.
Any broken eggs or deceased birds will be removed at that time. Egg cleaning and sorting
will not occur on this site.
The subject site is accessed via Quills Road. This is a Council maintained Road. In May of
2017 Council replenished the gravel and graded Quills Road. The subject site is the last
property to have access to Quills Road.
4
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
4. Launceston Interim Planning Scheme 2015

The application is made in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme set out below:
26.0 Rural Resource Zone

26.1 Zone Purpose
26.1.1 Zone Purpose Statements
26.1.1.1
To provide for the sustainable use or development of resources for agriculture, aquaculture, forestry,
mining and other primary industries, including opportunities for resource processing.
26.1.1.2
To provide for other use or development that does not constrain or conflict with resource development
uses.
26.1.1.3
To provide for uses that add value to primary industries.
26.1.1.4
To provide for uses that support or service rural communities.
26.1.2 Local Area Objectives
There are no local area objectives.
26.1.3 Desired Future Character Statements
There are no desired future character statements.
Response
The proposed use has a No Permit Required status in the Zone, it therefore is considered to
meet the purpose of the Zone.
26.2 Use Table

Resource Development No permit required, if not on prime agricultural land.
The land has a classification of 4 (Field Checked)
26.3 Use Standards

26.3.1 Location and intensity
Objective:
To:
(a) protect the long term productive capacity of prime agricultural land by minimising
conversion of the land to non-agricultural uses or uses not dependent on the soil as a
growth medium, unless an overriding benefit to the region can be demonstrated;
(b) minimise the conversion of non-prime agricultural land to a non- primary industry
uses;
(c) ensure that non-primary industry uses are located appropriate to the zone;
(d) discourage non-primary industry uses that can be reasonably located on land
zoned for that purpose;
(e) provide for uses that are co-located with a dwelling and are of similar intensity to
a home-based business;
(f) provide for tourism uses to enhance the experience and promotion of touring
routes and natural and cultural features;
5
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
(g) locate uses so that they do not unreasonably confine or restrain the operation of
primary industry uses; and
(h) provide for uses that are suitable in the locality and do not create an unreasonable
adverse impact on existing uses or local infrastructure.
Acceptable Solution Performance Criteria Assessment
A1 P1 A1
If for permitted or no permit Uses (except for a single The use of Resource
required uses. dwelling) are established at Development is a no permit
a location and at an required use.
intensity that is appropriate
in the zone, having regard
to:
(a) the nature of the use,
including:
(i) the scale and extent
of the use;
(ii) the utilisation of
existing buildings and
infrastructure;
(iii) the number of
employees;
(iv) the customer
visitation and deliveries;
(v) the hours of

operation;
(vi) the nature of any
emissions;
(vii) external storage of
goods, materials or waste;
and
(b) the area of the site
proposed to be used,
including:
(i) the existing use and
development;
(ii) the surrounding use
and development;
(iii) its capacity for
productive agricultural use;
(iv) the topography of
the site;
(v) current irrigation
practices and the potential
for irrigation;
(vi) the effect, if any, of
the loss of the site on the
6
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
continuing or potential
agricultural use of the site
and the surrounding area;
and
(c) the potential to
confine or constrain
adjoining primary industry
uses;
(d) the location being
reasonably required for
operational efficiency;
(e) the need to locate on
the site;
(f) the capacity of the
local road network to
accommodate the traffic
generated by the use; and
(g) the capability of the
site to accommodate all
aspects of the use.
A2 Not required A2
If for permitted or no permit The proposed use is no
required uses. permit required.
26.3.2 Dwellings Not applicable
26.4 Development Standards
26.4.1 Building height, setback and siting
Objective:
To ensure that:
(a) buildings minimise the impact on the visual character of the area; and
(b) buildings for sensitive uses do not constrain primary industry uses.
A1 P1 A1
Building height must be no Building height must The layer shed will have a
greater than: minimise the impact on the maximum height of 4.4m at
(a) 12m; or visual character of the area, the apex of the roof.
(b) 8m for dwellings. having regard to:
(a) the impacts on
skylines and ridgelines;
(b) the topography of
the site;
7
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
(c) the visibility of the

building when viewed from
an adjoining road;
(d) any existing
vegetation;
(e) the proposed colours
and external materials of the
building; and
(f) the character of the
surrounding area.
A2 P2 A2
Buildings, other than for Buildings, other than for The proposed shed is
sensitive uses, must be sensitive uses, must be setback more than 30m from
setback from a frontage: setback an appropriate Quills Road.
distance, having regard to:
(a) no less than 30m; (a) the topography of
the site;
or
(b) the prevailing
(b) no less than the
setbacks of existing
existing building buildings on nearby lots;
for an extension. (c) the location of
existing buildings on the
site;
(d) the visual impact of
the building when viewed
from an adjoining road;
(e) any proposed
upgrading of adjoining
roads; and
(f) retention of
vegetation within the front
setback.
A3 Not required Not applicable
Buildings for a sensitive use.
A4 Not required Not applicable
Where the site is located on
the boundary of the General
Residential, Village, Urban
Mixed Use or Low Density
Residential zones, new
buildings or alterations to
existing buildings must
have side and rear setbacks
no less than 30m from the
zone boundary.
8
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
26.4.2 Lot size and dimensions Not Applicable

26.4.3 Frontage and access Not Applicable
26.4.4 Wastewater management Not Applicable
Codes
E1.0 Bushfire-Prone Areas Code Not applicable
E2.0 Potentially Contaminated Land Code Not applicable
E3.0 Landslide Code Not applicable
E4.0 Road and Railway Assets Code
The code is relevant as the proposal will result in an increased use of the existing access
point. The subject site is the last property to have access to Quills Road. The only traffic
therefore in the area is that traveling to or from the proposed development. No rail line is
located near the subject site.
Figure 3: Exiting access at end of Quills Road
E4.5 Use Standards
E4.5.1 Existing road accesses and junctions
Objective:
To ensure that the safety and efficiency of roads is not reduced by increased use of
existing accesses and junctions.
A2 Not required. Quills Road has a speed
The annual average daily limit of more than 60km per
traffic (AADT) of vehicle hour.
movements, to and from a
site, using an existing access The proposal will meet the
or junction, in an area acceptable solution. It is
subject to a speed limit of anticipated that the use will
9
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
more than 60km/h, must result in an average of 6

not increase by more than traffic movements per day.
10% or 10 vehicle
movements per day,
whichever is the greater.
E5.0 Flood Prone Areas Code Not applicable
E6.0 Parking and Sustainable Transport Code
No requirement is set for Resource Development Intensive Animal Husbandry. The site is
of sufficient area to accommodate on site carparking. It is anticipated that only 1 to 2
vehicles will be present at the site at any one time. No formal provision has been made for
onsite carparking for the reasons outlines above.
E7.0 Scenic Management Code
Part of the site is mapped as being within the Scenic Management Area, Rural Hills Precinct.
E7.6.3.8 - 8 Rural Hills Precinct

Existing character statement - description and significance
The Rural Hills Precinct encompasses significant skyline and vegetated corridors that form part of the
rural areas around Launceston. This precinct also includes key skylines and vegetated corridors that
line the northern approaches into Launceston and rural townships in the municipality.
Mt Arthur, Mt Barrow, and Mt Direction signal station are visually significant and dominant
landforms in the landscape. These areas also contain heritage, geological and archaeological values.
Other high scenic value areas include the Fingerpost and Boomer Hills. These areas provide the key
native vegetation background for the views of the eastern side of Launceston. These areas also include
threatened flora and fauna communities.
Management Objectives
(a) Maintain and enhance existing vegetation cover, consistent with the vegetation type and
existing character of the area. Promote and enhance native forest coverage in hilltop locations, and
retention of cleared farmland on the lower slopes and plains.
(b) Discourage development along significant skylines, ridge lines or visually prominent
locations, particularly if the development would be visible from the Launceston City and Lilydale
township, the Tamar River or arterial roads or highways.
(c) Development is to be consistent with the existing settlement patterns and character.
(d) Significant infrastructure for the benefit of the community must be encouraged to co-locate in
existing areas, or be designed to minimise their visual intrusion in the landscape.
(e) Development must be unobtrusive by its siting, design, exterior finish and landscaping, or be
designed to have a minimal visual impact commensurate with the quality of the scenic and landscape
values of that site and area.
(f) Allow for the maintenance of the Mt Direction signal station, so that the semaphore remains
visible from Mt George in George Town and Windmill Hill in Launceston.
10
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Proposal
The layer shed is proposed to be located within an existing clearing. To the north, west and
south a significant area of native vegetation exists. To the east a ring of trees exists, with
some gaps. It is proposed to plant the eastern side of the shed with native species, including
a mix of eucalypts and blackwood.
Figure 4: Aerial photo of site.
The height of the shed at its peak is 4.4m, with wall heights of 2.8m and a roof pitch of 20%.
It is important to note that this site is not visible from Launceston, Lillydale, the Tamar River
or any arterial roads.
E7.6.2 Scenic management areas
Objective:
The siting and design of development is to be unobtrusive in the landscape and
complement the character of the scenic management areas.
A1 P1 P1
No acceptable solution. Development (not including The proposal has regard to
development that involves the management objectives
only the clearance or and character of the area.
removal of vegetation, or The site has been choses as
subdivision) must have it is relatively level and is
regard to: screened by existing trees.
(a) the scenic Tree removal is limited to
management precinct approximately 3 trees and
existing character statement replanting is proposed.
and management objectives
in clause E7.6.3; The overall height of the
(b) the impact on shed is low (approximately
skylines, ridgelines and 4.4m) and will therefore be
prominent locations;
11
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
(c) the nature and effectively screened from

extent of existing view by trees.
development on the site;
(d) the retention or
establishment of vegetation
to provide screening;
(e) the need to clear
existing vegetation;
(f) the requirements for
any hazard management;
(g) the need for
infrastructure services;
(h) the specific
requirements of the
development;
(i) the location of
development to facilitate the
retention of trees; and
(j) design treatment of
development, including:
(i) the bulk and form of
buildings including
materials and finishes;
(ii) any earthworks for
cut or fill;
(iii) the physical (built or
natural) characteristics of
the site or area;
(iv) the nature and
character of the existing
development; and
(v) the retention of trees.
A2 P2
No vegetation is to be Development that involves
removed. only the clearance or
removal of vegetation must
have regard to:
(a) the scenic
management precinct
existing character statement
and management objectives
in clause E7.6.3;
(b) the physical
characteristics of the site;
(c) the location of
existing buildings;
12
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
(d) the type and

condition of the existing
vegetation;
(e) any proposed
revegetation; and
(f) the options for
management of the
vegetation.
E8.0 Biodiversity Code Not applicable, the site is not mapped as containing priority
habitat.
E9.0 Water Quality Code Not applicable
E10.0 Open Space Code Not applicable
E11.0 Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code
Figure 5: Surrounding sensitive uses
This code is applicable as one existing sensitive use occurs within 500m of the boundary of
the property. The farm house located at 46 Collins Rd, Karoola, shares a boundary with the
subject site. It is noted however that the actual separation distance between uses is 650m.
An assessment has been undertaken by Pitt and Sherry. The assessment also considers the
existing facility. The report concludes that potential nuisance will not impact the dwelling at
46 Collins Road, due to the scale of the proposal, the type of equipment, management
procedures and importantly the separation distance.
13
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
E11.0 Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code
E11.1 Purpose of the Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code

E11.1.1
The purpose of this provision is to:
(a) ensure appropriate consideration of the potential for environmental harm or
environmental nuisance in the location of sensitive uses; and
(b) ensure the environmental impacts of new uses are eliminated, reduced or mitigated
to avoid environmental harm or environmental nuisance.
E11.6 Use Standards

E11.6.1 Attenuation distances
Objective:
To ensure that potentially incompatible uses are separated by a distance sufficient to
mitigate any adverse effects.
A1 P1 Not Applicable
No acceptable solution. Sensitive use or subdivision
for sensitive uses within an
attenuation area to an
existing activity listed in
Tables E11.1 and E11.2 or a
buffer area shown on the
planning scheme overlay
maps, must demonstrate
that there will be no
environmental nuisance or
environmental harm,
having regard to:
(a) a site-specific study
that considers:
(i) the degree of
encroachment;
(ii) the location of the
boundaries of the site of the
sensitive use or subdivision;
(iii) the location of the
sensitive use;
(iv) the location of the
boundaries of the site on
which the activity is located;
(v) the location of the
area on which the activity is
undertaken;
(vi) the nature of the
activity being protected by
the attenuation area or
buffer area;
14
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
(vii) the degree of hazard

or pollution that may
emanate from the activity;
and
(viii) the measures within
the use to mitigate impacts
of the activity on the
sensitive use; and
(b) any advice provided
in writing from the owner
or operator of the activity;
and
(c) any advice provided
in writing by the Director of
the Environment Protection
Authority.
A2 P2 P2
Activities listed in Tables Activities listed in Tables The proposed use is an
E11.1 and E11.2 must be set E11.1 and E11.2 must activity listed in the table to
back the minimum demonstrate that there will this clause. Intensive animal
attenuation distance listed be no environmental husbandry is required to be
in Tables E11.1 and E11.2 for nuisance or environmental separated from a sensitive
that activity from: harm, having regard to a use by 500m to meet the
(a) any existing site-specific study that has acceptable solution. The
sensitive use; or regard to: separation is measured from
(b) a boundary to the (a) the degree of the title boundary of each
General Residential, Inner encroachment; use.
Residential, Low Density (b) the nature of the
Residential, Rural Living, activity being protected by The immediately adjoining
Environmental Living, the attenuation area; title to the south west, 46
Urban Mixed Use, Village, (c) the degree of hazard Collings Road, contains a
Local Business, General or pollution that may dwelling. The actual
Business, Central Business, emanate from the activity; separation from the
Commercial and Major (d) the location of the dwelling to the fence of the
Tourism zones. boundaries of the site on range area is 650m.
which the activity is
proposed to be undertaken; The dwelling is located in
(e) the location of the the rural resource zone and
activity with the potential to is a dwelling associated
create environmental harm with actively farmed land.
or nuisance;
(f) the location of any Pitt and Sherry have
existing sensitive uses; prepared a site specific
(g) the location of a assessment to demonstrate
boundary to the General the potential impact of the
Residential, Inner free range facility. A full
Residential, Low Density copy of this report is
Residential, Rural Living,
15
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Environmental Living, provided at Appendix C of

Urban Mixed Use, Village, this submission.
Local Business, General
Business, Central Business, The report considers all
Commercial and Major likely sources of nuisance. It
Tourism zones; and was determined that noise
(h) whether any land is and odour should be
to be irrigated by effluent. investigated. The report lists
equipment and
management practices. The
report concludes that the
surrounding sensitive uses,
with particular emphasis on
46 Collins Street will not be
subjected to any nuisance.
It is also noted that egg

production facilities are
regulated and monitored by
the State Government, with
annual audits taking place.
E12.0 Airports Impact Management Code Not applicable
E13.0 Local Historic Cultural Heritage Code Not applicable
E14.0 Coastal Code Not applicable
E15.0 Telecommunications Code Not applicable
E16.0 Invermay/Inveresk Flood Inundation Area Code Not applicable
E17.0 Cataract Gorge Management Area Code Not applicable
E18.0 Signs Code Not applicable
E19.0 Development Plan Code Not applicable
5. Conclusion
The proposed development demonstrates it meets the performance criteria of the planning
scheme in relation to potential impact on amenity and by meeting the requirements of the
Scenic Management Code. Olsens Eggs have demonstrated compliance with the existing
facility and demand for their product outstrips supply.
16
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Appendix A: Certificate of Title
17
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Appendix B: Site Plan & Elevations
18
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Appendix C: Environmental Impact
19
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Olsons Eggs
25 Quill's Road, Lalla
Noise and Odour Assessment
transport | community | mining | industrial | food & beverage | carbon & energy
Prepared for: C & J Olson
Client representative: Chris Olson
Date: 13 June 2017

Rev00
Now part of the pitt&sherry group

Table of Contents PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................i Planning Administration

1. Introduction.........................................................................................................................................1
2. Locality ................................................................................................................................................1
3. Odour Assessment ...............................................................................................................................2
3.1 Odour Minimisation ..................................................................................................................2
3.2 Odour Impact Assessment Approach .........................................................................................3
3.3 Calculated Odour Separation Distance ......................................................................................5
4. Noise Assessment ................................................................................................................................7
4.1 Noise Sources ...........................................................................................................................7
4.2 Existing Ambient Noise Levels ...................................................................................................8
4.3 Calculated Noise Levels at Nearest Residences ..........................................................................8
5. Conclusions..........................................................................................................................................9
Appendices
Appendix A: The Author
Prepared by: . Date: 13 June 2016

Name
Reviewed by: . Date: 13 June 2016

Name
Authorised by: . Date: 13 June 2016

Name
Revision History
Rev
Description Prepared by Reviewed by Authorised by Date
No.
2016 pitt&sherry
This document is and shall remain the property of pitt&sherry. The document may only be used for the purposes for
which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of
this document in any form is prohibited.
pitt&sherry ref: LN16255L001 Noise&Odour rep 31p Rev00.docx/DGF/DGF

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Executive Summary
Olsons Eggs operates a free range chicken farm at 25 Quills Road, Lalla. They are planning to expand the
capacity of the farm by building an additional chicken shed and fenced free range area about 900m north of
the existing shed. The nearest residences are two farm houses, about 700m to the north and 650 m to the
southwest of the proposed site.
The new site will house 7,200 chickens in a new purpose designed and built shed. The operation will be
managed using best practice approaches to ventilation, bird handling, drinking water supply, feed supply and
manure handling which will minimise the generation of noise and odour.
The impact of odour on the residences was assessed using a methodology for calculating the required site
specific separation distance between poultry farms and residences developed by the NSW EPA. The
methodology takes into account the number of birds and site specific terrain, vegetation and wind effects.
The distance to the nearest houses is significantly larger than the minimum separation distances calculated.
This indicates that odour is unlikely to cause an adverse impact to these residences.
The noise was assessed by calculating the expected combined noise levels at the nearest residences from the
equipment and vehicles that will operate on the site, and comparing these with the estimated ambient noise
levels. The levels calculated are not intrusive and are low enough that the noise from the farm will not be
perceptible at all, at the neighbouring residences, most of the time.
pitt&sherry ref: LN16255L001 Noise&Odour rep 31p Rev00.docx/AUTHOR/word processor i

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
1. Introduction
Olsons Eggs operate a free range chicken farm at 25 Quills Road, Lalla. They are planning to expand the
capacity of the farm by building an additional chicken shed and fenced free range area about 900m north of
the existing shed. The nearest residences are two farm houses, about 700m to the north and 650 m to the
southwest of the proposed site.
This odour and noise assessment has been prepared to support the development application for the
proposed new activity.
2. Locality
The location of the existing and proposed chicken sheds and the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 2 shows the site plan for the new 63m x 16m shed and the fenced free range area.
The surrounding land is zoned rural and used mostly for pasture with some small areas of bush. The nearest
settlements are the small townships of Karoola, about 1km to the southwest, and Lalla, a similar distance to
the southeast. The nearest house to the north is at 74 Windsors Road, Karoola and the house to the south
west is at 46 Collins Road, Karoola. More houses occur in small numbers at greater distances, predominantly
to the south.
Figure 1: Locality Map (Base Image from TheList)
pitt&sherry ref: LN16255L001 Noise&Odour rep 31p Rev00.docx/AUTHOR/word processor 1

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Figure 2 Extract from Site Plan
3. Odour Assessment
3.1 Odour Minimisation
Odour nuisance is the most common reason for complaints concerning poultry developments. Odour can be
effectively controlled by good management practices. Excessive odour is normally caused by wet manure,
inappropriate disposal of dead birds, poor environmental conditions inside the shed or poor feed and waste
storage.
Olsons employ best practice design and management techniques at the existing chicken farm, and will
continue to do so in the new facility. This will ensure that the generation of odour is minimised. These
measures include:
The chicken shed will be a well designed and constructed new building, with good rain protection,
insulation and ventilation.
The shed normally relies on natural ventilation incorporating a series of small fixed vents and large wall
vents that are opened and closed by mechanically actuated roller curtains. Two wall mounted ventilation
fans are also provided, but these will only operate in particularly hot weather. The fans and curtains are
controlled automatically by temperature sensors in the shed, to ensure that excessive internal
temperatures or humidity do not occur.
In the shed, the chickens are kept on a plastic gridded floor, 800mm above a concrete slab with a concrete
block perimeter wall. The manure falls through the grid and collects on the slab, where it dries out and
remains dry. The collection area is cleaned out using a "Bobcat" loader every 12 to 14 months.

The chicken manure is disposed of by spreading on pasture, where it is rapidly absorbed by the grass.
Olsons own over 700acres of pasture to facilitate this. Manure is spread immediately after removal from PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
the chicken shed and is not stockpiled onsite. Ref. No:
Date
DA 0322/2017
05/08/2017
advertised:
The chickens are provided with drinking water in the shed using a nipple and cup system that prevents
water spillage onto the manure collection area.

Dead birds are removed from the site immediately and disposed of offsite using arrangements at Olsons
existing poultry operation at Brown Mountain.
The proposed operation is a free range poultry farm. Because the chickens spend much of the day
roaming across open pasture, the generation of odour within the shed is less than if they were confined
there all of the time. The odour generated on the free range area is negligible.
The new shed will be located within an area of existing trees and additional tree planting is planned
around the shed. Planting vegetative barriers or retaining existing bush around chicken sheds has been
shown to reduce the intensity of odour emissions by absorbing odour from the ventilation air discharged
from the sheds.
3.2 Odour Impact Assessment Approach

Odour nuisance from intensive poultry farms is generally managed by setting appropriate separation
distances and buffer zones between poultry farms and neighbouring residences to ensure that any odours
emitted can disperse before affecting residents. Various methods have been used by different regulatory
authorities to determine the applicable separation distances for individual farms. These include the use of
tables of fixed separation distances (that vary depending on the number of birds), separation distance
formulae (that take into account the number of birds and other relevant site specific factors) and odour
dispersion modelling.
The use of separation distance formulas has a number of advantages. It allows site specific separation
distances to be easily and rapidly calculated, while still taking into account a number of local parameters
including the sensitivity of the receptors, the type of shed ventilation, the surface roughness and topography
of the land and the prevailing wind conditions. Odour modelling using air dispersion modelling software is
much more complex, time consuming and expensive. The separation formulae have been established
following careful research and are set up to give conservative results. This has been demonstrated in a
number of independent assessments, such as in the report: Separation Distances for Broiler Farms: Verifying
methods including the effects of thermal boyancy, June 2010, prepared by the Rural Industries Research and
Development Corporation, which concluded that the separation distances calculated by the formula were
consistently larger than those predicted by modelling (and therefore conservative).
As a result the environmental protection agencies in South Australia and New South routinely use separation
distance formulae for regulatory assessments and Victoria and Queensland are seriously considering
adopting the approach. Similar methodologies are also used for piggeries and cattle feedlots.
We have assessed the impact of odour emissions from the proposed new shed on the nearby residences by
evaluating the NSW EPA's separation distance formula for this site and comparing it to the actual distances
from the chicken shed to the houses. The methodology is documented in: Technical Notes - Assessment and
management of odour from stationary sources in NSW, November 2006, Department of Environment and
Conservation NSW, and is referred to as the Broiler chicken farms: Level 1 odour impact assessment. In NSW
this methodology is used for Level 1 assessments of chicken farms with up to 250,000 birds. (This proposal is
for 7,200 additional birds, as well as the 7,200 birds at the existing shed). Air dispersion modelling of odour
is only required for Level 2 and Level 3 assessments of much larger farms or to cope with complex and unusual
meteorological conditions or to justify separation distances lower those calculated using the formula.
The NSW EPA distance formula is published by the NSW EPA as an approved method that may be used to
ensure that poultry farms meet the requirements of NSW legislation for protection of the environment.

(There is no equivalent Tasmanian methodology available to use). The objective of the impact assessment, PLANNING EXHIBITED
as described in its "Technical Notes", is to "ensure that offensive odours do not cause unreasonable
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
interference to the community". The odour assessment provisions are concerned with controlling odours to
Date
ensure that offensive odour impacts will be effectively managed, but do not purport to achieve a complete
absence of odour at all times.
Note that for this current assessment, using this formula will be conservative in that egg production farms
usually generate slightly less odour than broiler (meat) farms and free range chicken shed generate less odour
than caged or barn operations. Odour emissions from the free range paddocks are considered to be
negligible.
The separation distance methodology also includes specific provisions for assessing the combined effect of
two chicken farms that are located in close proximity.
Wind Data
Recorded wind data specific to the site is not available, as the Bureau of Meteorology's nearest weather
station is at Ti Tree Bend, on the Tamar River, where the wind patterns can be expected to be significantly
different. Weather data for a location where there is no weather station can be generated by using the
CSIROs TAPM software. The software is able to estimate the hour by hour weather conditions at a specific
site, using information about the local topography, vegetation cover etc, combined with broad scale records
of air pressures, air temperatures, sea surface temperatures etc. Figure 3 is a Wind Rose showing the
distribution of wind direction and wind speed at the proposed chicken shed site over the course of one year,
as predicted by TAPM using data for the year 2013. The wind rose shows that the wind direction is relatively
evenly spread around the compass. Winds are generally relatively light, mostly between 1 and 3 m/s and only
rarely exceeding 5 m/s.
Figure 3 - Wind Rose generated by TAPM for the Proposed Site

3.3 Calculated Odour Separation Distance PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
The distance formula has the following form:

Date
D = N0.71 x S1 x S2 x S3 x S4 x S5
where
D is the separation distance in metres,

N is the number of "standard" sized sheds of 22,000 birds each (for "non standard" sheds N = number
of birds/22,000),
S1 is the ventilation type factor,
S2 is the receptor factor,
S3 is the terrain factor,
S4 is the vegetation factor and
S5 is the wind direction frequency factor.
Calculation Factor Values

The factors have been set to reflect on-site conditions, using values obtained from tables in the
methodologys technical notes.
Ventilation: Both sheds utilise fans for ventilation giving a value of 980 for the ventilation factor S1. This is
quite conservative as the fans are only used in hot weather. For the majority of the year, natural ventilation
is used, which would allow a lower value.
Receptors: The receptor factor varies depending on the population in the likely impact area. The NSW
odour assessment criteria has been designed to take into account the range of sensitivity to odour in the
community and to provide additional protection for individuals with a particularly sensitive response to
odour. To achieve this the formula provides larger separation distances for larger populations, where it is
expected there is a higher likelihood of more sensitive individuals residing, with smaller values applied to
single scattered residences such as are found in the Karoola, Lalla area. For scattered, single rural
residences the value of S2 = 0.3.
Terrain: The terrain factor is set depending on the nature of the surrounding topography. The new chicken
shed is located on the top of a small hill, with the land falling away in all directions with a slope of
approximately 13% (as assessed from Tasmap 10m contour elevation data). This is described as low relief
in the methodology and gives a value for the terrain factor S3 of 1.2. The land surrounding the existing
chicken shed slopes upwards to the north at about 7% and downwards to the south east at 1% to 2%. This
is regarded as flat which gives S3 a value of 1.0. Note that the calculation methodology also includes a
designation (with a higher value of S3) referred to as valley drainage. A valley drainage zone is defined
(for the purposes of the separation distance formula) as topography at low relief (where the receptor is
located lower than a 2% falling slope from the source) and where the terrain has "significant confining
sidewalls). The topography in the general area is gently undulating and lacks the "significant confining
sides" required to meet the valley drainage flow definition for the purposes of the separation distance
formula. This is not to say that valley drainage flows do not occur in the wider area but the distance
formula's definition of valley drainage terrain does not apply in the area of interest.
Vegetation: The vegetation surrounding both sites is pasture, with occasional clumps of trees. This gives the
vegetation factor S4 the highest possible value of 1.0.
Wind Frequency: The wind frequency factor S5 has been conservatively set to the highest possible value of
1.5 which relates to a high frequency wind direction towards a receptor. The site wind rose shows that wind
direction is actual fairly evenly distributed, so the normal wind conditions value of 1.0 could have
reasonably been used.
The factors selected and the results are shown in the Table 1 below for the proposed new shed and the
existing shed.

Separation Distance Calculation Proposed New Shed Exisiitng Shed PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Number of Chickens N 7,200 7,200 Planning Administration

Ventilation Factor S1 980 980

Receptor Factor S2 0.3 0.3

Terrain Factor S3 1.2 1.0
Vegetation Factor S4 1.0 1.0
Wind Frequency Factor S5 1.5 1.5
Separation Distance (m) D 239 200
Table 1 - Separation Distance Calculation
Combined Effect of the Two Chicken Farms

The separation distance methodology includes two provisions for assessing the combined effect of two
chicken farms that are located in close proximity.
Two Farms Considered as One: If the distance between the two farms is less than half the shortest
separation distance calculated for each farm, then the two farms should be combined and considered as one
farm. The distance between the new and existing chicken sheds is about 900m, which is much larger than
the separation distances calculated above, so this is not required.
Two Farms Considered Separately: The second check in the methodology is that for each chicken farm, 20%
is added to the calculated separation distance and this distance is used as the radius of a circular separation
zone centred on each farm. If the two zones overlap then the 20% adjustment is retained to specify the final
separation distances for both farms. If the two zones do not overlap then the original calculated separation
distances remain unchanged. The separation zones are plotted in Figure 4 below. It can be clearly seen that
they do not overlap, so the final result of the separation distance calculation for the proposed new shed
remains at 239m.
Figure 4 - Locality Map (Base Image from TheList) showing Calculated Separation Zones

Conclusion
PLANNING EXHIBITED
The nearest neighbours are at a distance of about 650 metres (46 Collins Road) and 700 metres (74 Windsors
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Road) from the chicken shed. These distances are substantially greater the required separation distance, so
Date
it is extremely unlikely that these residences would be adversely impacted by offensive odours from the
proposed chicken farm.
4. Noise Assessment
4.1 Noise Sources
Noise will be generated by a number of items of fixed plant and vehicles operating at the proposed farm.
Some of the equipment is located inside the chicken shed which provides significant noise shielding. The
following noise sources will operate on the site at various times:
Roof Exhaust Fans: The shed will have two EURO Model DM100, wall mounted ventilation fans, which will
operate for only a few days a year, in hot weather.
Feed Distribution System: A grain silo with two cross augers and a chain conveyor will be installed inside the
shed. It will be powered by several small, low speed electric motors.
Egg Collection Conveyor System: The "Automatic Nest" egg collection system is also located inside the shed,
powered by low speed electric motors.
Utes: Staff will visit the farm daily in a ute. The shed is located close to the road entry so most onsite driving
will be brief and at low speed.
Feed Deliveries/ Egg Deliveries: The feed silo will be filled about once a month, requiring 3 or 4 trips by a
medium sized, rigid truck each time. Eggs will be dispatched daily in a small refrigerated truck. All deliveries
will be made during daylight hours. On site vehicle movements will be brief and at low speed.
Shed Cleanout: Every 12 to 14 months the shed will be cleaned out and the flock renewed. This will involve
some additional truck movements and a bobcat operating within the shed for a day or two.
Chickens: The noise level generated by the birds is much lower than the noise level of the equipment and
vehicles. Management practices will be employed that avoid stressing the birds, which will further minimise
bird noise. The small amount of noise that they do make is greatly shielded by the chicken shed structure,
with its well insulated walls and roof.
The sound power levels used to characterise the noise sources in the calculations are listed in Table 2, below.
This data is based on manufacturer's equipment specifications, or where specific data was not available,
noise power levels were estimated with reference to specifications or measurements for similar equipment.

PLANNING EXHIBITED
Noise Source Sound Power DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Level dB(A) Date

advertised:
05/08/2017

Exhaust Fan 81.0
Egg Collection System 66.0
Feed Distribution System 66.0
Utility Truck (driving at low speed on gravel) 80.3
Light Delivery Truck (driving at low speed on gravel) 83.0

Table 2: Noise Sources
4.2 Existing Ambient Noise Levels

The location of the farm on Quills Road, off Lalla Road, is in a rural area with very light local traffic. Pasture
and grazing is the predominant agricultural activity and the residences are relatively widely scattered. In this
environment the existing ambient noise levels can be expected to be low. Specific measurements of the
ambient noise levels were not undertaken for this assessment. We have conservatively estimated (based on
our experience carrying out noise measurements in similar areas in Tasmania) that the daytime ambient
noise level at the two neighbouring houses would be generally about 30 to 35 dB(A) dropping at night to
about 25 dB(A).
These levels are both 5dB(A) lower than the reference background noise levels provided in AS1055.3, for
noise area category R1 (areas with negligible transportation) which are commonly used as an estimate of
ambient noise when measured data is not available.
4.3 Calculated Noise Levels at Nearest Residences

The combined noise level of all the noise sources at both the new and the existing sites has been calculated
at the two nearest houses, taking into account the attenuation due to the distance between the noise sources
and the houses.
The calculations have been carried out in accordance with the Tasmanian EPA's Noise Measurement
Procedures Manual, Section 11.3, which specifies that the ISO9613 calculation procedures for predicting
sound pressure levels, or any subset of these procedures which produces an equivalent or higher result,
should be used.
In line with these requirements, the calculations have been made without including the effects of
atmospheric absorption and attenuation due to the ground effect. This makes the results slightly
conservative. It should be noted that the effect of the wind on sound propagation operates by modifying the
magnitude of the ground effect. This effect is very small for sound propagation over the soft ground (grass)
and the relatively short distances between the chicken farms and the nearby houses.
The shed walls have an STC rating of about 41dB, which means noise emissions passing through the walls
would be reduced by 41 dB. Some of the noise from the internal equipment will escape through open doors
or ventilation openings etc., so the actual noise reduction will vary at different times and in different
directions. The calculations do not include the any effect of the shielding of the internal noise sources due to
the walls, so the actual noise levels will be lower than predicted. The internal noise sources have significantly
lower sound power levels than the external exhaust fans and vehicles on site, so their contribution to the
total combined noise emissions will be very small.

The noise levels have been calculated for a worst case daytime scenario when the fans, egg collection, and
feed systems are all running and a ute and a delivery truck arrive at the same time, as well as a night time
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
DA 0322/2017
scenario with no vehicle movements. These scenarios will not occur frequently, more usually only one or two
Ref. No:
Date
noise sources will be active at the same time, so for most of the time the noise level will be significantly lower
than predicted. The results are shown in Table 3, below.

Residence Distance Calculated Noise Leve

m Day Night
46 Collins Road 650 27.5 22.4
74 Windsors Road 900 25.8 20.6
Table 3: Calculated Noise Levels dB(A)
The intrusiveness of the noise emissions is examined in Table 4 below. Noise emissions from a new activity
that are greater than 5 dB(A) above the existing ambient noise levels would be considered intrusive.
Residence Day Night

Calculated Ambient Calc. - Amb. Calculated Ambient Calc. - Amb.
46 Collins Road 27.5 30 - 2.5 22.4 25 - 2.6
74 Windsors Road 25.8 30 - 4.2 20.6 25 - 4.4
Table 4: Calculated Noise Levels compared with Ambient Noise Levels dB(A)
The predicted noise levels from the farm are much less than 5 dB above the ambient noise level, so are not
intrusive. At most times noise from the farm will not be perceptible at all.
5. Conclusions
The assessments of odour and noise impact indicate that the proposed chicken farm will not cause an adverse
impact on the amenity of the nearest residences.

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Appendix A
The Author
pitt&sherry ref: LN16255L001 Noise&Odour rep 31p Rev00.docx/AUTHOR/word processor

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Douglas Ford (Senior Mechanical Engineer, Noise & Air Emissions Specialist) Planning Administration
Doug has over 26 years' mechanical engineering experience working in design, technical support, research,
maintenance, energy efficiency auditing and project management roles.
He has a broad experience across a range of industries. His recent experience includes significant noise and
air emissions assessment work. This includes experience in environmental noise and vibration measurement,
noise modelling and design of noise attenuation measures for industrial and commercial building
applications. Recent projects include noise assessment reports for new and/or expanded industrial
plants including dairies, sawmills, breweries, mines and quarries. These reports have been submitted to the
Tasmanian EPA and various councils in Tasmania to support environmental and planning applications. His air
emissions work includes modelling of the emissions of solid particles and combustion gasses from a number
of gas and wood fired boilers and a milk power processing plant, as part of environmental approval
submissions. He has also conducted odour assessments and modelling for fish and poultry processing and
farming operations in Tasmania and Queensland.
Doug has also provided advice to commercial and residential building owners on a variety of noise
attenuation issues including the reduction of noise emissions from equipment such as exhaust fans, heat
pumps and spray booth fans and on reducing the noise exposure of residences to rail and traffic noise.
pitt&sherry ref: LN16255L001 Noise&Odour rep 31p Rev00.docx/AUTHOR/word processor

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Contact
Douglas Ford
03 6323 1930
dougford@pittsh.com.au
transport | community | mining | industrial | food & beverage | carbon & energy
Brisbane Hobart Newcastle E: info@pittsh.com.au

Level 2 199 Macquarie Street Level 1
W: www.pittsh.com.au
276 Edward Street GPO Box 94 81 Hunter Street
Brisbane QLD 4000 Hobart TAS 7001 Newcastle NSW 2300 incorporated as
T: (07) 3221 0080 T: (03) 6210 1400 T: (02) 4910 3600 Pitt & Sherry (Operations) Pty Ltd
F: (07) 3221 0083 F: (03) 6223 1299 ABN 67 140 184 309
Sydney
Canberra Launceston Suite 902, Level 9,
PO Box 3124 Level 4 1-5 Railway Street
Manuka ACT 2603 113 Cimitiere Street Chatswood NSW 2067
T: 1300 748 874 PO Box 1409 PO Box 5487
Launceston TAS 7250 West Chatswood NSW 1515
Devonport T: (03) 6323 1900 T: (02) 9468 9300
Level 1 F: (03) 6334 4651
35 Oldaker Street
PO Box 836
Devonport TAS 7310 Melbourne
T: (03) 6424 1641 Level 1, HWT Tower
F: (03) 6424 9215 40 City Road
Southbank VIC 3006
PO Box 259
South Melbourne VIC 3205
T: (03) 9682 5290
F: (03) 9682 5292
Now part of the pitt&sherry group

PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
1 x Layer House (60+3) x 16 x 2.8
Proposal No.: 50416-1

April 20, 2017
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
AGROTOP Ltd. is a private company established in 1989 as a subsidiary of HAPACH Metal Industries
Ltd., A well-established 60 year-old company working for the Israeli poultry sector.
AGROTOP specializes in planning design and implementation of complete turnkey projects

worldwide, for the agriculture and industrial sectors.
AGROTOP Is Israels leading company for poultry complex turnkey projects, having a market share
of 80% in Israel.
AGROTOP highly-qualified engineers and technicians work in close cooperation with leading
scientific and agricultural institutes to produce products ideally suited to meet today's demands.
AGROTOP construction techniques and service methods enable the company to offer several specific
and important advantages, namely:
Turn-Key Service
We are able to take responsibility for entire, integrated projects, from the planning and
manufacturing stage till the on-site installation of completely equipped structures, ready for use
within a set budget and time table.
Versatility and Flexibility

Our prefabrication techniques enable us to supply both standard type and custom designed
structures as it were 'off the shelf', without the need for retooling.
International Experience
Our teams of assembly supervisors are fully familiar with conditions around the world, having built
projects in the Middle-East, Asia, Far East, Africa, Western Europe, South-America, USA, Russia and
Eastern Europe.
Monitoring, Consulting & transfer of know-how

As it is committed to the success of the project, Agrotop offers to accompany and advice the
customer with regard to the various aspects associated with the production process.
Agrotop specialists will monitor the client's work teams during the initial running-in stages and over
a subsequent period agreed upon with the client.
The Benefits of Agrotop's Turnkey system
Better design to achieve maximum growing results

Saving time and money by using multidisciplinary agro company.
Up-to-date agro-technology
Perfect on-site coordination
-2-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
2.1 Loads list:
Parameter Value (*)

95 [kg\m2]
Wind load
0 [kg\m2]
Snow load
20 [kg\m2]
Live load
(*) To be confirmed by customer
2.2 Project Scope:
Parameter Value
a. No of Layer houses 1
No of Birds/House 7,500
Ventilation Type Tunnel Ventilation System
a. Layer House dimensions:
Parameter Value
Length x Width (60+3) x 16(m)

Height at eave 2.8 m
Height at peak 4.4 m
Intervals between frames 4m
Cross section 54.40 m (semi-straight ceiling)
Front Service Room 3 x 16 = 48 m2
Total growing area per house 960 m
Total building area per house 1,040 m
-3-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
3.1 Concrete:
All infrastructure and concrete (type B-200) works to be
done and supplied by client, planning by Agrotop.
All anchoring system to be done and supplied by client,
planning by Agrotop.
Dwarf wall will be with 80 cm height (by others).
3.2 Broiler House

Prefabricated steel construction building (60+3) x 16 (m)
net including front service room.
The construction offered by us is made of high tensile steel frames.
Columns, beams, trusses, purlins, wind braces, gable sections and all connection parts are
integrated parts of the construction.
The trusses are clear span design, 16 m wide; the slope of roof is 20% and 4 m intervals
between frames.
The height of the side columns from ground to eaves is 2.8 m.
The purlins are galvanized profiles. All steel parts of main construction are hot dip
galvanized after welding.
The packing of the parts has been especially designed to ensure easy identification and
assembly.
-4-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
4.1 Frames:
Steel profiles frames hot dip galvanized after welding, spaced
on axes each 4 m. Minimum clearance height of structural
frames 2.8 m.
4.2 Wind Bracing:

Two sets of "x" bracing at the roof and walls, among the 2 first and 2 last frames, and one set
of "x" bracing at the roof and walls at the middle of the building.
4.3 Purlins:
Galvanized Purlins mounted between the structural frames full length of the structure, for
attaching roof sheets.
4.4 Roof:
The roof is made of the corrugated galvanized and painted steel
coated with super polyester (white color) and will be securely fixed
with galvanized drive screws to the construction.
4.5 Shading:
A 60 cm canopy shall extend beyond the wall of the building. This canopy shall be in addition
to the previously stated building dimensions.
4.6 Roof Pitch:

Roof pitch is 20%.
4.7 Ceiling:
The semi-straight ceiling is made of the corrugated galvanized and painted steel coated with
super polyester color RAL 9010 (white) and will be securely fixed with galvanized drive screws
to the construction.
4.8 Insulation:
Between the roof and the ceiling 100 mm hollow fiber insulation.
-5-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
4.9 Walls:
Insulated Curtain (+panel above)
Walls will be closed with wire mash and insulated curtain with gear motor for each side.
The curtain is made of three layers:
PVC fabric (180 g/sqm) with UV protection.
Hollow Fiber flexible insulation material.
PVC fabric (180 g/sqm) with UV protection.
For additional air tightness an overlapped curtain (25cm) will be installed above the insulated
curtain.
Above the curtain will be installed insulated 40 mm poly galvanized and painted steel coated
with super polyester color RAL 9002 sandwich panels to support the air inlets.
4.10 Gables
The Gables will be closed with insulated wall sandwich panels and
securely fixed with galvanized drive screws to the construction:
Steel sheet, galvanized and polyester painted on the one side.
40 mm. rigid polyurethane foam insulation.
Steel sheet galvanized and polyester painted, on the other side.
4.11 Front Service Room:

3 m x 16m front service room at the front of the house to accommodate electric control
panels, made of insulated 40 mm sandwich panels with all the
accessories.
4.12 Doors:
3 insulated gate 2.8 m x 2.4 m at the gable, including walk in door.
2 insulated walk in doors 0.9 m x 2.0 m.
1 window at the service room.
All doors are with master key.
4.13 Pop Holes

30 insulated pop hole shutters (2m long x 0.5 m high), made of 40
mm polyurethane sandwich panels and galvanized frame shutters,
including operating system with gear motor.
-6-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
Proposal No. 50416-1 April 20, 2017
Attention: Chris Olson
Re: Free Range Layers , Australia
Dear Sir,
AgroTop is pleased to submit herewith proposal No.50416-1 for the supply of the following:
5.1 The following scope of supply is included in the proposal:

Supply of 1 (one) Layer House (60+3)x16x2.8
Delivery terms: CIF Devonport, Australia (Incoterms 2010)
Optional: Erection Supervision by Agrotop's engineer.
5.2 Not included in our proposal and will be under client scope are the following
items: (Non-exclusive list):
Client will supply: crane, workers, tools, electric and water for installation.
Infrastructure, foundation and concrete works.
All local taxes and duties, custom clearing, local certification, port dues, inland
transportation and VAT.
All Supervisors expenses as flight ticket, per-diem, accommodation, transportation,
internet connection and etc.
-7-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
5.3 Price:
The total price for the items mentioned in section 5.1 CIF Devonport, Australia [Incoterms
2010]) as of April 2017:
Object Qty Unit price, CIF, US$ Total price, CIF, US$
Layer House 1,040 m2 1 98,000 98,000
Total project price, US$ 98,000
Optional:
Erection Supervision for each week (per supervisor) US$ 2,600
5.4 Terms of Payment:

Irrevocable and confirmed Letter of Credit (L/C) to be opened and confirmed by an
internationally reputable bank acceptable to Agrotop within 14 days from contract signing.
5.5 Delivery:
Indicative delivery time as of April 2017 is starting 120 days EXW after receipt by Agrotop
of the down payment.
5.6 Warranty:
Agrotop's standard warranty for workmanship and materials shall apply, for the period of
twelve (12) months from initial operation of the Equipment but not more than 18 months
from shipment.
5.7 Validity:
The price and other terms indicated in this proposal are valid for 30 days since its receipt.
Sincerely,
Stanley Kaye
Sales Manager
Agrotop, Ltd.
-8-
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
19 July 2017
Mr. Duncan Payton

Launceston City Council
duncan.payton@launceston.tas.gov.au
Dear Duncan,
RE: DA 322/2017, 25 Quills Road, Lalla
Thank you for your request for further information, please see our response to each of the points
raised:
1) The Noise and Odour report prepared by Pitt & Sherry discusses removal of faecal waste from the
facility after 12-14 months, will this waste be re-used/spread on site and if so provide details of how
and where this will occur?
The waste will not be spread on the range area of the subject site. It will be spread over the farm as
required by the pasture. As per current farm management practice the waste is not spread close to
waterways. The waste from the proposed shed will be much drier in nature than the existing sheds
(with the exception of the new shed at 25 Quills Rd) and therefore less likely to cause odour issues. It
is noted however that the spreading of manure on farms is a typical farm practice.
2) Nearby water courses (includes naturally occurring drainage channels) may be affected by
nutrients from faecal matter being exported via surface run-off. Provide details of distance to nearest
water course and details of how this risk can be mitigated?
There are no nearby water courses. The closest water course is approximately 225m to the west. The
surface run off during high intensity rainfall events or when pasture is saturated in the location of
the proposed works will flow to the east. The closest water course to the east is approximately,
320m. The distance therefore mitigates any risk of run off from the range area reaching surface
waters.
Figure 1: Rivers Streams and Creeks Layer courtesy of THELIST
1
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
3) How will dead birds and broken/cracked eggs be disposed of?
Dead birds and broken/cracked eggs will be collected twice daily and removed to the Brown
Mountain site. This material is disposed of in the farm burial pit.
4) Will there be any washing out of the shed?
No, the minimisation of water on the flooring system results in a very dry environment, hence no
requirement to wash out.
5) Will there be any washing of eggs on site?
No, washing of eggs will take place on site.
We trust that the answers provided satisfy the RFI. If you require any further information or would
like to inspect the other layer shed, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind Regards,
Claire Gregg
Planning Consultant
2
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
27 July 2017
Mr. Duncan Payton

Launceston City Council
duncan.payton@launceston.tas.gov.au
Dear Duncan,
RE: DA 322/2017, 25 Quills Road, Lalla

Thank you for your request for further information dated 25 July, please see our response to each of
the points raised:
1. It was advised that the spreading of manure from the new facility would be spread as per
current farm management practice. I would like further clarification regarding this practice, and
confirmation that it will comply with the Environmental Guidelines for the Australian Egg
Industry. In the past there have been concerns from nearby residents regarding alleged pollution
of waterways and therefore detailed clarification of this practice is required.
It is estimated that the new layer shed will result in 180m3 of dry by-product per annum. Once a
year this material is spread in two roughly equal batches (to reflect the two halves of each shed
under different management).
The material is spread at a rate of 6m3 per ha, therefore each year 30ha of pasture is spread with
manure. The guidelines recommend no more than 15m3 per ha. As the by product is considered to
be dry composted, the minimal setbacks of 25m to waterways containing surface waters is
appropriate. The farm management practices can comply with the Environmental Guidelines for the
Australian Egg Industry, 2008.
The by-product from the old layer sheds was wet and broke down under anaerobic conditions,
resulting in occasional complaints from surrounding residences (in the last 30 years).
2. You advised that dead birds and broken/cracked eggs will be collected twice daily and removed
to the Brown Mountain site to a burial pit. I would like further information regarding this pit
including depth in relation to groundwater table and the impact of the expected increase in
waste materials. Does the burial pit comply with requirements of the Environmental Guidelines
for the Australian Egg Industry?
The current practice is for dead birds and broken/cracked eggs to be collected twice daily and
removed to the Brown Mountain site. The current practice is to dispose of this material in the farm
burial pit. This pit is shallow. Due to changes in management practices waste has substantially
reduced over the last 2 year period, despite the farm increasing in size.
It is the practice of larger poultry and egg producers to remove dead birds and eggs off site via a
waste contractor. The Environmental Guidelines for the Australian Egg Industry recommend
compositing as the most environmentally appropriate way of disposing of waste. Olsons Eggs are
trialling the composting system as per the recommendations of the Environmental Guidelines for the
Australian Egg Industry.
Olsons Eggs are now of a sufficient size to warrant investigation into alternative disposal of waste
material, such as composting or offsite removal. It is therefore proposed that dead birds and cracked
eggs will be collected twice daily and removed to the Brown Mountain Site. There, they will be
1
PLANNING EXHIBITED
DOCUMENTS
Ref. No: DA 0322/2017
Date
stored in lidded containers inside the existing store building and disposed of at least once per week
to an offsite waste facility or composted.
Kind Regards,
Claire Gregg
Planning Consultant

Advertised Plans - 25 Quills RD

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Advertised Plans - 25 Quills RD

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

PLANNING EXHIBITED

Appendix A Certificate of Title

Zone: Rural Resource

E7.0 Scenic Management Code

E7.6.2 Scenic management

E11.6.1 Attenuation distances

An approval for a similar facility was granted by

Existing Layer Shed

Figure 2: Aerial image of site

4. Launceston Interim Planning Scheme 2015

26.0 Rural Resource Zone

26.2 Use Table

26.3 Use Standards

(v) the hours of

26.3.2 Dwellings Not applicable

26.4 Development Standards

26.4.1 Building height, setback and siting

(c) the visibility of the

26.4.2 Lot size and dimensions Not Applicable

E1.0 Bushfire-Prone Areas Code Not applicable

E2.0 Potentially Contaminated Land Code Not applicable

E3.0 Landslide Code Not applicable

E4.0 Road and Railway Assets Code

Figure 3: Exiting access at end of Quills Road

E4.5 Use Standards

E4.5.1 Existing road accesses and junctions

more than 60km/h, must result in an average of 6

E5.0 Flood Prone Areas Code Not applicable

E6.0 Parking and Sustainable Transport Code

E7.0 Scenic Management Code

E7.6.3.8 - 8 Rural Hills Precinct

Figure 4: Aerial photo of site.

E7.6.2 Scenic management areas

(c) the nature and effectively screened from

(d) the type and

E9.0 Water Quality Code Not applicable

E10.0 Open Space Code Not applicable

E11.0 Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code

Figure 5: Surrounding sensitive uses

E11.0 Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code

E11.1 Purpose of the Environmental Impacts and Attenuation Code

E11.6 Use Standards

(vii) the degree of hazard

Environmental Living, provided at Appendix C of

It is also noted that egg

E12.0 Airports Impact Management Code Not applicable

E13.0 Local Historic Cultural Heritage Code Not applicable

E14.0 Coastal Code Not applicable

E15.0 Telecommunications Code Not applicable

E16.0 Invermay/Inveresk Flood Inundation Area Code Not applicable

E17.0 Cataract Gorge Management Area Code Not applicable

E18.0 Signs Code Not applicable

E19.0 Development Plan Code Not applicable

Appendix A: Certificate of Title

Appendix B: Site Plan & Elevations

Appendix C: Environmental Impact

Noise and Odour Assessment

Prepared for: C & J Olson

Client representative: Chris Olson

Date: 13 June 2017

Now part of the pitt&sherry group

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................i Planning Administration

Prepared by: . Date: 13 June 2016