section 43(a) application amendment to the break o’day … · 2011. 7. 13. · flagstaff rd is...

LEVEL 2 QUARRY OPERATION, DIANAS BASIN, TASMAN HWY Section 43(a) Application Amendment to the Break O’Day Planning Scheme 1996

Appendices APPENDIX C Dianas Basin Quarry Reopening Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan SUPPLEMENT February 2008

John Miedecke and Partners Pty Ltd

Dianas Basin Quarry Reopening

Development Proposal andEnvironmental Management Plan

D e n n i s F i e l d w i c k P t y L t d

SUPPLEMENT

February 2008

Dennis Fieldwick Pty Ltd

Diana’s Basin Quarry Reopening

Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan

Supplement

February 2008

John Miedecke and Partners Pty Ltd 41 Tasma St North Hobart Tasmania 7000 03 62311472 Fax 0362311548 [email protected] Version 1

Dennis Fieldwick Pty Ltd Dianas Basin Quarry DPEMP Supplement _____________________________________________________________________

john miedecke and partners pty ltd

CONTENTS A. Relevant Public Submissions ................................................................................................1 B. Referral Agency Comments...................................................................................................4 Appendix A Pearu Terts Noise Assessment Report Appendix B North Barker Updated Flora and Fauna Report Appendix C Vipac Noise Modelling Report and updated report Appendix D Figure 3.1

Dennis Fieldwick Pty Ltd Dianas Basin Quarry DPEMP Supplement


1

A. Relevant Public Submissions ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Flagstaff Road sealing Requested sealing of Flagstaff Road from Tasman Hwy to State Forestry boundary. As this is not a council road, it is up to the road users to pay for maintenance to the road. The traffic survey did not recommend sealing because of low traffic levels. This will be discussed with Council as Council may take over the road. It is currently intended to seal the section to be realigned. Flagstaff Road Gate Considers that boom gate should not be placed on track between quarry and Loila Tier Rd, because this track may be required as an escape from fire for local residents This is noted and will be discussed with residents, Council and Forestry. It is only intended to gate access to the immediate quarry area. Flagstaff Road Intersection Establish signage at the Tasman Hwy intersection indicating Flagstaff Rd. There is already a sign. Signage will be done as required by DIER submission and Council requirements. SRAD and residences Residences within SRADs for crushing, screening and blasting This is acknowledged. However SRADs are guideline only and subject to onsite studies. One resident has conducted independent noise studies as required by Council and found that a house approx 400m distance is acceptable. See DTAE noise section. Flagstaff Road Realignment Requests that entrances to the excised section of road (after realignment) be secured to prevent unauthorised use. Flagstaff Rd is not a council road and access to private properties is property owners responsibilities. Fieldwicks have reconstructed and maintained Flagstaff Road and residents have unrestricted access and use. Fieldwicks cannot legally block access to a reserved road. Flagstaff Road speed limits Speed limits for trucks to be reduced This is already planned (40km/hr) Blasting notification Neighbours should be warned about impending blasts Fieldwicks have committed to this. Noise surveys Independent noise surveys, excessive noise at present.



2

Independent noise surveys were conducted by Vipac (for DPEMP) and Pearu Terts (for a planned residence). Both gave comparable results and demonstrated that an attenuation distance of approx. 400m was sufficient. Noise levels at the nearest residences were acceptable, with the quarry audible. Pearu Terts report is attached as Appendix A (with approval of Mr Barker). Quality of life Compensation for loss of quality of life and property value There are many developments and changes in a neighbourhood which affect quality of life and property values, including planning and zoning. The quarry has been in operation for almost 25 years and predates almost all residences in the area. It is in an area zoned for this use. Other quarry suppliers Suggested other quarries in area do produce material of a similar quality There is one other quarry (Griffiths) in the area that can supply a similar product (but not certified or used by DIER). This quarry is currently supplying the market and has a mining lease and level 1 permit. It has similar access to the highway and residences in proximity to the road. It would require a level 2 permit and upgrading and would offer no social or economic benefits to the Fieldwick quarry, which is operated to a higher standard. Tenure of Flagstaff Rd Tenure of Flagstaff Rd Flagstaff Road is a road reserve, but as far as known is not a Council asset nor maintained by Council. It is used as access for forestry, recreational and residential users as well as the quarry. Therefore, access to the road and maintenance is dependent on road users. Fieldwicks have maintained the road for use as quarry access and has applied for the appropriate access licence from Crown Land Services. Council will presumably address this issue. It should also be noted here that if Fieldwicks had not reconstructed the road and maintained it, it would have been up to the residents who use the road to maintain it (at their cost). Flagstaff Rd Realignment Planned realignment will cross part of Environmental Protection Zone and require vegetation removal. The planned realignment is on private land and has been surveyed by North Barker. Some vegetation will require clearing (less than 1ha) and they have no concerns (See updated report Appendix B). The “environmental protection zone” is a zone under the planning scheme and the proposed realignment complies with the schedules. Quarry access Request more details regarding modification to the access road to quarry. Figure 3.8 shows the proposed road realignment. Fieldwicks have an agreement with the landowner and have conducted a flora and fauna assessment. This is a simple exercise to reconstruct and there is already an existing track. This will in fact be a private road. Figure 3.1 shows the proposed new access road for truck access in the immediate quarry area. This was proposed after discussions with Fieldwicks and local residents to avoid perceived



3

traffic noise issues (together with reduced operating hours). The access road avoids the steep section up the hill and will used for trucks carting gravel. Access will still be required to the upper benches via the existing roads. Criticisms of past operations Criticisms of past operations

• Lack of blasting notification • Dust • Noise • Operating outside operating hours • Operating illegally as per production levels • Quarry never had planning approval from Council

This criticism is accepted and acknowledged and the Company recognises these criticisms and has committed to practices and procedures which will avoid similar incidents in the future. The quarry had a level 1 permit and under the planning scheme existing use rights. Bridge Capacity Capacity of bridge crossing Basin Creek to carry B double trucks It is presumed that this query is the internal quarry access road. B double trucks are not used and the bridge is in good condition and Fieldwicks and Forestry responsibility. Queried stated distance to nearest residence Fig 2.2 shows a house at 500 metre radius, while same house is at 380 metres in fig 4.2 This was a drafting scale error using a google image. Fig 4.2 is correct. It should be noted that this is irrelevant as noise measurements were taken at the house. Greenhouse gases Were greenhouse gases accounted for when material was transported to Fingal region Yes Forest Practices Plan Suggested a Forest Practices Plan is required for vegetation clearance because of presence of threatened species. As noted in the DPEMP, any vegetation clearance is not expected to exceed 1ha and will not require a Forest Management Plan. The proposal has been referred to the Forest Practices Board and includes the road diversion.



4

B Referral Agency Comments Environment Division (DTAE) Noise modelling Noise modelling needs to be conducted using actual noise levels from the machinery proposed for the activity. This has been conducted by Vipac and is provided as a separate report (Appendix C). Independent noise monitoring has been conducted for a proposed residence by Pearu Terts, Consulting Engineer. This report documents noise measurements taken around the quarry in August 2007. They are comparable to Vipac’s measurements and are independent. Attached as Appendix A As a result of the modelling results, Fieldwicks commits to maintaining a noise bund between quarry operations and the nearest residence as recommended in the Vipac report. Airblast A residence is on the modelled 115 dBA contour line (Fig 4.3). Detail regarding the level of confidence in the airblast modelling is required.

Mitigation measures if airblast pressure exceeds the guideline levels

The airblast was modelled by Terrock who have used the model innumerable times and this has proved accurate in estimating airblast and vibration. Similar results were obtained by Peari Terts. It is proposed to measure every blast (at least initially) at the residence likely to be most affected. If the measurements indicate tha the standard is being exceeded, blast pattern design will be modified (e.g reduce loadings, increase stemming etc). Table 4.1

Clarify apparent discrepancy in data for Location 3. Provide data for Locations 7-9

See Appendix C (Vipac). RMC Comments

RMC Response

It is recommended that the location of Helichrysum aff. leucopsideum be mapped and that any potential impacts on this species be avoided.

This has been done

Actively excluding the area where Hibbertia virgata is found and constructing an exclusion fence is fully supported.

Noted These areas will be fenced



5

It is recommended that appropriate measures eg fencing be undertaken to prevent incidental damage to Desmodium gunnii and Plantago debilis (and similar habitat in the vicinity of the recorded occurrences - given the likelihood of more plants occurring than those recorded as mentioned in the North Barker report).

Noted. These areas will be fenced

The proposed prescriptions for the management of the quarry including the development and implementation of a Phytophthora and weed management plan are fully supported. Care with this is needed given the proximity of a significant rare vegetation community in Basin creek.

Noted

The presence and legal status of Erica lusitanica is noted. However, what is not conveyed is the fact that removal of material contaminated with seed of this plant constitutes a breach of the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999. Eradication of this weed is therefore required prior to the expansion of operations into infested areas.

Noted. Eradication will occur within 1 month of recommencement

The flora species list includes “Genista sp”. It is highly likely that this is Genista monspessulana, a declared weed under the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999, for which there are similar legal obligations to those for Erica lusitanica. The DPEMP, based on the information contained – but not thoroughly explained – in the Flora Survey, does not adequately address the weed management obligations of the quarry operators.


It is recommended that a fire mitigation and management plan be developed to manage the risk of fires starting in, and spreading from, the quarry into adjoining state forest and other land, particularly given the proximity of threatened communities to the quarry site

A fire management plan will be developed. This was an oversight and should have been included as a commitment.

It is not clear where or how salvaged overburden and topsoil is to be stockpiled on site for later use in rehabilitation works. This material should be stored separately to avoid mixing, compaction, potential loss through erosion and contamination by weeds.

Noted. Soil and overburden will be stockpiled separately. Topsoil will be stored at the quarry extremities so it can be replaced on benches. The overburden will be stored on the northern edge of the quarry (ie facing Basin Creek) to provide a noise bund.



6

The management action to “Develop and implement a weed and Phytophthora cinnamomi management plan” is noted. When preparing this plan the legal obligations imposed on the operators by the Weed Management Act 1999 will need to be addressed. Due to the presence of one and probably two declared weeds, weed control must be undertaken as soon as possible to prevent weed spread.


Roads & Public Transport (DIER) The DIER submission is a response mainly to the traffic report and these recommendations are accepted. It is expected that these will be a Council Permit condition and Fieldwicks will discuss with them their implementation. Mineral Resources Tasmania Figure 3.1 has been revised and this is attached (Appendix D). This has been discussed with MRT and the procedures for the new lease and surrender of the old. A bench width has been discussed with MRT and 2.5m is regarded as adequate for a small excavator to work. If it is required to widen the benches to 3 or 4m this will be done in practice.

5 lERi5 FFI eei - . ! : :2

PEARU TE"RTSSl. C*t O,n.

""t. S*u- lHon!). iII! Anst ' CPE\G' N1AAS

Corakirs EnSinE

33 Falcon R IClarerEoot ? EltrTs:i, Arlstla lia

'tel 03 6749 7l6str&\ 03 6249 129it

I

2 .

l .

S u ; t m a r )7l FlngsisffRoad. St Helens

Llompantiv. Doisb rncasuaemenu cooduc',l{l on 2318/0/al prcfcrred house location (loe I) and minimumdistanae housc locoti{tn, (loc 2):

dB(A)r-1 LlO L90 Lcq

Quarry operadng 49 3 43.3 36.i 4{} 6 toc I

Quarrl' opcrutints '16.:i 44 0 38 0 11 5 loc 2

!6 .8 4: .0 30 0 38 d lod IQ!att], inocl^ :

]-bc iois€ ar Lcc 2 is matginally greaier than abe oois{ar rhe lEEftned iocation I, duc lo Proximily to $etrlrmc dohinai'rd t qsnr.n HighlvAy.

Based on t.he i.,easurcd nois€ levels &rd AuitalnnSlanduds AS :.107 and A53671. sL{rilcrd lruustconsrruclir. i. scceptsble.

Celcutsled groufil Yib|alo! lut av€ra8e ru!r' is.

l , rcr i tun l . I {mm/sLocalion 2, l 0 m.dvs

CalcularEd air bl4st ovc! pfcssur€:

Lo(;]ron 1, I13.7 dBtl-rn)I-ocariorl 2. I 1 l..1 dB(Linl

CLIENTi

BR]EF:

Mr. & Mrs Drvid BrkctPO Box l:R

I rlrifiumta / .,i I l

CDuncii reqJires tle owdcr: tr1 CelionsGal€ thal $e!e is "no cct0ict rf

lu,d L$c" ifthc oNrcr3 buil.i I icaidcnce 600 m riam ihe quer-w' that

is. widin de attesuation disklrcc ofliO m

ARCHITEC I U-RAL ACOUSTICSNOISE CONTROL

Fel ea2-44:24

INTRODUCTION:

Noise a.rnoyarce depends on tie fo$o\ring lsclols:

l. fir leve! of th€ aDlblenl no,sc2. the level of'Jle indudinE n,)se3. \,.,hether the iiltruding noisc nas 6nal compodents4. }\herber &c intruding noisc has impulsiv,c cofiponriis5. thc time of the dd!'Gc inlrJijng noise occlus6. stiether the iatluding !cj5c easigs uwercd intcliig.a:c7, q-hether the inhrding nojse is ES.etF.rIty cxus€d or ldinjtessll

;niict€d.

Pcople €encrElly toierate sn in!.ease in nois€ oi3 dqA) !o 5 dEA)and the greaEr dn diffcrerE€ bcrweeL', dl. amb jEnt itld lhc , lcn nois,ihc morc likcly is the co8rrlunity lo comFlsin.

Tb€ Tasmsnia Quar./ Ccde of PFcricc (Jurl' 1999), psge lC slatca:'With the €xcEption of t lesring rihere pem;rEd, nois€ 6D'] nrtivitie!in a qlg'ry s5€cting ftsid6ti.l p'emi!e8. droit not exced !O dB(A)eb!\,o rito notrt ubi.br noii. l.w.l. drin8 &)aio. oF....tiod.."

ln el8tion to blGting the Cql: rldrcs or Fge r: 'Ahtting hat b.

carried out such that. whcr measured Bt the cunilage oftbe EaardtItsidcnce (or scBsilive u,se) in other occupdioD or oulsnbip, air blad6nd ground vibral;o'l coarply kitb ibc followiEg:

s) fgr 95 7. ofblasls. air bl5.sl ovff prcssule must Dol cxcrcdI l5 dB(Lin. ?€,3k);

b) air ltlast ole! pressure rl'|tr5l nol excsed I ?0 .lB0-in Pesk) I Ialli and

c) grounC vitrratiotr must nc1 exced 5 nury's Fak psrtic,e!elocity".

Noisa mealurenle$ts wcrt co.Eductrd *ilh th€ miclDphona iocaled atloclliun 1, trc prcftrtEd l.tGaLiu,r uf dE PloPJ!€d UUN od *r ltMriol

2, t\hich i5 750 rn ftofi lhe quarry. Thc wcsthcr csnditions wet€ goodtor such measurcmeD1s, rhst is no €in and nir st'ong *'inds.

}}e Dcarby quarD. oPerale<i b:t lur lricidnick, involls bl3!ti!g abuu

3 to 4 times 6 year. Tbc quart) operutlons iuvolve ollrmber ofrne.bine! and thcsc csn tle s4?n on lbe pbotognlix (lo prige I Th.6$'D.r end rt!. <Fn< Are locs'€d rD thc dt of the q 3riy aadrL.rr:orc ihicrdod lrd out of oisht f.om rhe prcp.s:d houe site.

INSTRLUE]'TS:The main instrumenl. useJ were:

Bru.i & Kjser.{cous{i: Caliblatot ttpe 4230, &h i655615B et & Kjscr Stelisrical !iojs(, Aialyzer t'?e 4226, s/n 7419 9

The ebov€ iostru.'nenls $eG laboEtory calitreled iil Decefib€ |:006.

P&ges 5 ro t sho1t maP3- acrjal photograpL and pholoStaphs ofthequsrry and loc3rions I 8nd 2.

Pag.s A 1 !o A 5 show the resolis oiDois4 m€5suna!cn!! al locaiioa

dld lccalion 2.

Pa{e A I sho** the statisricd an6l)'sis of noile at locdlion I In th€

tob]es, Ln is the noise level .:.cesded for n 7; ofthe sasrpliag time

L90 b a good des.ripto! ofthe bar€ or bs.kground t$ise lelel Fo' -€xslnDle, I-90:37.3 dB{./\} mcan5 that fot 90 % oflhc sa.mple lime oi

l5 minures, tbat is. t3.5 minules, .he nois€ levcl *!s 37.3 dB(A) o.

Ll0 i3 irrc mi€c lcvcl cxce€ded 'or ! 0 "/, of&e saJhplln8 rl.he' th-ar ld

l.s rni'luttt. lt is r good de6c'iPlo! ol lne ave1'sgc of the hilhd lcisc

lcvels errcout&red. aljd it is a metric used in talfio noise sl',rdres'

I-€q is the equivaient 'A' treighted noise lev€l A fluctuEtila Doit€

hs;nc.n I e4 = a0 1 dB(Aj has thc ssme scotlstic cnerg.v 8s t sletilvnois of40.1 dD(Al

Page A : shows time tecordings ofnoise obtain€d at tb3 siE fhE

chirts show fcsturcs dDc to t$.ks travelling ro tnd ftoro thE qusrty'l-he doise rnad€ by the trdcks :an bc hcad but al€ aot loud

Psge A I shows thc aFttrd distribuliotr ofnoisa rDsdc by rJe

op€fllrn8 quarrrl

Psge A 4 sbows lhe noisc le!<:s obleidcd at a loc€Fon ?50 m ti^om th:

o,ti..". ar d,"t t,".:rrjuo .r ds(' uutsirrql dlc trjlbicDt DoisF l€rsl5 wb i'

rie q.rary ccascd operatioDt for thc daj .

Pacc A 5 sbows the time rEcordings oblained at location 2 Thc chatl

shJxs noise wrth t-lre quarl alleming ffd llois4 wi& ltre quat4 shut

Peqe\ B I atd B 2 $o\^ the crlcLrlarior( made Io egimaE the goun'

riirarions and ,hc air bl€Lsl ot jt prcssur!. bssed on nr'o hoi's pet deL )

.ach hole fillcd wirti 42 kg oi explosi'ie.

F ; ; : ' :

CzuTER]Al

2

L Thc loog Ou,arty Codc or Drutict r*oomm& tlut noise lcalls d

it* "".r-o

-,i t'...' a* r' qudry ogcloionq shoulJ rot cxeod

I0 dB(A) abov. ttle Ernhicnt nors: le!el'Thc DraR En\iruftacn''l Pmtecriof, Policy O'lo;3e) 8nd l-Brpa'r

Slltem€nl, De€cmb€r 2006. Schedule I, gives world Hcalt!

Or@-riztioD (WHO) Guidclind for Comn1urity Noiso outdoor

living orcar whrre I-eq : 55 dB(A) s-'e judged to caus€ serious

, rERrs Fra! eB: . : : :5

annoyance end wbrIe lxq = J0 dB(A) isjudged to cause moaloila,ia''syafu'e Inside beJrco,r. Leq = l0 dE(A) is scceFisbl€.

3. lraffc ooise crireia is for L l 0, averaged ovsr I t hours ftom 060i1h ro 2400 h, kn${r as Ll0 118 h), tuI r. dc.e.d 63 dB{A)

DISCUSSION:The measured resulG iDdi,=i. *rat thc I 0 dB(A) rrquircmefll of rhcQuarry Code ofPmoice is .asily md at bcib locations The resuhsalso show it6t rhe noise lercls al rhc prefeted location I 4'pesi to b€mrrgiDdlly lowrr d}ID drc ,oi!e ls!€ls ublritr-d Er ttrr cdw ur&cbuffer zone, 750 m fiorn rhe qll.rrry

Thc Lcq nc,isc lcvcis lrlcd the rcquiFm.ots of Schedul. I <,f dr. wHl )Cuiderines for Coltll!.lnitv Ndi+ 1s9c

The L t0 noise levels arc elso ttelo\r'tllc lilely Ll0 (l E h) crllent of 6lcB(A)

Consequerrly, according to AS -'1671 , Catcgory I soflsructl ot that issta$da.rd co$trucdon, is accL"plable foi lhc aite ar borh locsliotrs ItlrEferftdl snd 2 -,>

^ *-/Cl,t-")L-Ji,-.- J -ttu127

Pesrs Tens

8i10t2007

DOCUMENT USRD:

Dcpannrent of Environment and l.arxl rfittgamEn 'Ql]!rrj Codc ofPrdarice JuDc 1999'.

Austelian Standard, As 2187 2 - i993

I]arldh)ck or QurrlinS. Dcprulc,rl crf MirEs and Eneg) ' Sculh4u5rlllie

Dn O Ell!ilvt|lr,eti Protccrion Polic) CNoie) and Impact Sratcmctrt'

De.emb€.2006

43,/IIZS 2lO7:2OOo tilolsIics D.,:omnmdel dFieh rotnd l.v.ls

and rererteration rimes for buildin-! inrerioF'.

AS3671-t989 Amusiics Roid ram( rluis< iAtrutioi - lluilding

eiiing drd constsuction'.

ST.A.TISTICAL \O]SE A.\AIYSIS

L o l a j o n : s + z c l : r - : l : c o L , l ^ c a ! - o : ' - - r " 1 - : r e : L ^ - € e r - -

SurveJ Dare: z,/iJ/?co1 Eng,'fcch. FTI:,

1

?

*.

a:i{}ER

Teup . C r r . tPless. hPa 1916Rel.Hrm % 12\1'r:l speec ro/€ : ,5^v ' l -5isA'rnd- Dir. NxUlouC F /at

L\STIIIMT,NTI :

N.i ! . l |da l ! .3 . Trr , . i .42 l i

!&:c cal . ib ! ! :A. . fyF . !?13. ln ' , ra7r6

; o i r r a b , c a l ! b ! a : p d ' : / 0 6

PE af-,r lerts ,C cna,r l t lng i ; : .c1:- . e.

d]j,.-{.

CoqDents li-3e a " 1 a , ' t"^ ]>o l : sc

15 njnute 9

5 m:nute r

151.-1tzt

1 t? t : -1 t ! J

155C-1r)i 1 ? . O

; t . . l : 7 . ,l 8 . r i r e . r

t7 .E ) J t , '

, 1

J,

I

! -c ise 16Ye:

PFEE U 1

3 e l i E / : 4 0 7 e e : l q + 6 1 : ; : 2 5 4

Fe/, 2A2-491296

Act 1a1

and a .

pbotoSraph rhowlng locatLoequerry (Q) rnd loo.t loai 1

DQurb B*LKE-Q_ .F I Aa (TAs 2.J\ cr rJolcrr

ST.A.TISTICAI NOISE A}{ALYSF

L o ; a i c D i S r l l c l . r : l - c o k , I - . : r : o : . - ! r ! ' E a e : l - ^ . € e ! - , . .

Survey Dale: 2t/tr/2c.\7 Etr&"tedr: FT/l;

C oEEe: i tF

t t . )

, l 7 . -

1 ? . O

: h , :

P;G: : :

'5 n: iute v

5 n:nuie r

t l

J,

I

1

1ad1-I$R

T.E!. c r.aPress hPe 1c16Rel.Hw:l % 12\',ad opeec tars .:1 , 5ar ' 1 . :i uIr bd- Dir. Nd=CtouC e/s

L\STIITMENTI :

. ! ! re - * f :aer e La r r r t1 .a :N. i . . a . - !1 : - .1 r 1 : ,? ' . Ld26

d Lar .13 ! r_ . r y tE d 2 . - i Jd / ! 1 ? 0 " 1 6

'J ! i r lab , Ca: ib tanod I2 , /06

I-ccns

rl i I-oj- i,.ci:reer

dlj,,-{

1 i 1 O - 1 i 2 . )

1i t3-1t1J

15JC-1t) i

d : ( A )I-ci-ae l"oYe:

3

^ 2

.g

!i

; . d$ F

4 a

3

3

a

I

?. s

s7a:TRr.l NiISE DlSilliiuTtoli

t , o . . r ' . i 1 t I , " . r a r ^ d i 6 , r ; ' r i i e )

cl l !a€s l :q: l9. t d-E(,1)

a n - r : ! -

, s E a Dc. i r i r f r tnur tc [ !

PEI\FU TER fS

loc lcotr:s'd' .] Datc:

i 4

STAfiSllC,\l NOISE

St i l ! i6n. b lockr ; , . i ia i i . ! : 2

2 i / e , t 2 : a 7d 4 i - \ I

-4,N_A,lYSN

- r l e d a ] t h r u e e 3 1 t e

Con'

1 5 n r n

\lE-{llux--

TiE! cPr*rs. bPs

*_rnd sreed is\i-ind. DL.C'rcuii

7 ?

tiEe/ .

NS,RLMSIT.IS:

: r 'ud l , & IJeex 3nL. i$1 i .4 : .l lo laa - r - ra l rJAe: ty le 4 l :4t s e r r r 1 : . r . z t l r )

: x !s : - ! XJ i€ i i Ju |d ! ' v r iCa la i t re ror t * !e 4 : j lser ia l nc . '2 i?1 . .

- " ' . ! - - + l irn i ^ i ! : :1 t iCd ) . . - :a l5

? e a l u ? e f t i ,L ione11lr la6 5!g1nee!

Il|l]e r r l r : l i : I r o T, " ^ ; , t ^

11 ta -1 i45 4 ? .C l

41 .1

4 ? . 8 4 0 . r

l ; , .

a r . 8

4 1 , ?

: n : : : 1 : +--.ar-.-qa ir)

z f : - 4 9 : -

1 l] ;

l

i

t

k :

;

!

ir

B

."

I

a

!

!z!

5

x

z

PEARU TERTS

", ts! ̂ 1rr.q.qF.e , eYq. tY . :

4

\r

: l

t'al e32-4=' a?a

, \ 'Vrirk Sireets h € A 1 . . . r l .

" r ; ! " -p7 a,E .+I ,et - '

C(. .r

- l . LI t o o \\ Gi"/

' - l ' '/ i t " - \

L ' i t q /

J.r- *..2

? 9br

AII

?.f .r

IIt

\t\ '4

|kl

i P F ' 2E. L tLt

$ ri?r

= 1 i > 5 - ' L = V I X S

r j - o l e s L r ' a 5 '

ur4 8q t\ / o6lnl .

!A/ = 8{

t<

w ' q

? 7 ! = l l { D60o.

p P v : 1 t . { o

$ 5 a l 9 " a - r < i t

Po- '- -7' t

&"4 '? te q

, . , 1 t * 6

o.11 ; * .17

- i . al p . \

ppv = r r r - r 12 tF i

ppv = .1*t / tb o Q d

a-

#** , t>"'c"'a<

f,.,.e t?1 i,-, -" I s"

jl-e

Ltr . { r r . : CoJr "l

" , \ 'a 'T'*"t 2->

f , o.cLt rtQ"o{Y

6t oe <.at,

lPa--F.

PEARU TERTS

" " a .Ff1 l : !P i :..ec, 9T *a&".r

A r R 6 L A s t

a.*i's*r a Y)rf.sh-'et;,l,T;,^h.r, .,," 1hCq7C l { d . h v . . . . . O t }

t 2

o lB t 6 \ - - , * l q , o (R

I (-1{ w

I Ll r.-3

6 oo ,-,r, "---A

?fo '1

/ Je9- \r{2s - ' r 15 ," l r t ; ' It 6 9 - 2 . q l o J , " l 7 - l

t t 7 . - 7 + > ( r i - )

(-

a

" tDtoo

5'Lt loAl

3tntp

L t 1 4 r ' l - :

t a f

t l l ' 4

Q,,a^,.7 C<t,4t "l ?rqc,fr,< , :i,; ra l?ti

T c-4" t7. Eo- 1t7. "l blerr.{. t

t4; Ete,T b r l5 o{B Li" st- , ; , - n J

4i b l*.T .*' 'l * -l

I ao d B t ir, p-<'l df a.ll

| 6e-

'aro

ffi5 7

4

t

6 ( t ; . ' ) .

VIPAC ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS

Vipac Engineers & Scientists Limited A.C.N. 005 453 627 A.B.N. 33 005 453 627 PO Box 476, Rosny Park, Tasmania 7018 AUSTRALIA Telephone (+61 3) 6244 5556, Facsimile (+61 3) 6245 9200, www.vipac.com.au

Melbourne • Sydney • Adelaide • Perth • Brisbane • Hunter Valley • Tasmania • Singapore • Kuala Lumpur • Hong Kong • Bangkok

NA

T A

Fieldwicks Quarries 12 March, 2008 c/o John Miedecke 41 Tasma St Nth Hobart Tasmania 7000 3062 Attention: John Miedecke ST HELENS QUARRY NOISE – ACOUSTIC MODELLING A previous report1 described on site noise measurements conducted at the Fieldwick St Helens Quarry. In support of that work an acoustic model of the site has been compiled and this letter details the results of that acoustic modelling.

INTRODUCTION

The site measurements previously reported showed noise levels around the quarry were between 35 to 50 dBA. Based on those measurements a quarry buffer zone of 380m was proposed, outside of which noise levels were deemed acceptable for residential dwellings.

Following from that work, an acoustic model of the site has been compiled and run with various operating scenarios with the intent of demonstrating:

• The detailed noise levels around the quarry via a noise contour map (measurements were only for ½ dozen locations).

• The applicability of the measured data by using generic data in the model instead of data for the actual equipment and comparing results to those measured.

• The principal factors that control noise levels at the critical residential locations.

• What future noise levels may be for the quarry assuming development of it.

ACOUSTIC SITE MODEL

The software package SoundPlan, using the Concawe algorithms, was used for determining the environmental noise levels around the site. The model incorporated:

• Terrain contours at 10m intervals, provided by DTAE.

• Five residential receivers for detailed results, the Pike residence, the Stonehouse residence, the Barker residence, a proposed residence and a residence to the east of Stonehouse.

• Three noise sources at the quarry viz. the crusher system, the excavator for loading the crusher, and a loader for moving product around the quarry. The source sound power levels are shown in Table 1, and are based on measurements for similar equipment.

• Barriers to simulate the placement of earth bunds or material stockpiles.

• Meteorological conditions equivalent to clear weather with a light wind from source to receiver.

• Ground absorption of 100% (ie. No ground reflection) to simulate the heavy undergrowth and bush.

Transportation noise to and from the quarry was not considered in the model. 1 “St Helens Quarry Noise Survey”, Vipac Report No. 2913, Oct 2007

Fieldwicks Quarries St Helens Quarry Noise – Acoustic Modelling

Reference: 3062 13-Mar-08 Page 2 of 6 Commercial-In-Confidence

The model was used to simulate the following operating conditions:

• Baseline. The present arrangement with the quarry floor at ground level and stockpiles on the north eastern side with a larger one on the eastern side.

• Scenario 1. The quarry floor 5m below ground level, and with a 3m earthen bund along the north eastern side of the quarry.

• Scenario 2. The quarry floor 15m below ground level, and with no earth bunds around the quarry. For each condition, the noise level at the five receiver locations was determined, and a noise contour map for the surrounding area generated.

SOURCE SOUND POWER LEVEL, dBA

Excavator 111

Loader 111 Mobile Crusher System 113

Table 1: Source Sound Power Levels

ACOUSTIC MODELLING RESULTS

The results of the modelling are summarised by the three noise contour maps of Figure 1 to Figure 3, and Table 2.

Sound Pressure Level, dBA Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Pike 32 24 22 Approved 43 31 26

Proposed 41 32 28 Stonehouse 40 37 35

House 34 30 28

Table 2: Receiver Noise Levels

From conducting the modelling and observing the results, the following is noted: • Typically around a 2 to 5m contour interval would be used for acoustic modelling, but was not

available in this case. The 10m interval is large and causes some odd or dramatic effects to show in the contour map where terrain screening comes into effect.

• The screening afforded by the stockpiles / overburden and the pit itself have a dramatic effect on noise levels. High terrain points on the contour map are noisier than closer points at lower elevation due to the higher elevation affording clear view of the quarry equipment.

• If the stockpile present during the measurements on the eastern side, and modelled in the baseline as a barrier, is removed, noise levels at the Stonehouse residence increase by 10 dB. This may explain the variation in noise levels experienced by Stonehouse – as the stockpile changed so did the received noise levels.

• Worst case weather causes a further increase of 1 to 2 dB in the received noise levels. • The baseline noise levels are similar to those measured, Table 3, giving credence to the measured

data as being that of a typical quarry operation.



Sound Pressure Level dBA

Measured Modelled Hill Side North 51 54 Approved 42 2 43 Proposed 35 41 Stonehouse 41 40 Southern Ridge 34 36

Table 3: Measured vs Modelled Data

SUMMARY The modelling has confirmed the validity of the previously measured data and shown the importance of the acoustic screening afforded by existing stock piles around the quarry’s northern and eastern perimeter. Further credence is given to the measured data by a set of measurements conducted by a third party2, that agrees with the Vipac’s measurements and modelling. With a permanent earthen bund of 3m height along the northern and eastern sides of the quarry, it may therefore be said with some confidence that quarry noise levels will be below 45 dBA for the nearest residences surrounding the quarry (both existing and proposed). As the quarry develops and the quarry floor drops, the noise levels at the residences also drops and the relevance of the earthen bund reduces. From the modelling it is then recommended that to maintain acceptable quarry noise levels at surrounding residents, an earthen bund be installed of nominally 3m height along the north eastern perimeter. Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to call this office directly. Yours faithfully

VIPAC ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS LTD Bill Butler [email protected] ____________________________________ 2 Data from report by P.Tertz for Mr and Mrs Barker, October 2007



Figure 1: Noise Contour Map - Baseline



Figure 2: Noise Contour Map – Scenario 1, 5m Lower Pitt Floor



Figure 3: Noise Contour Map – Scenario 1, 15m Lower Pitt Floor

VIPAC ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS

Vipac Engineers & Scientists Limited A.C.N. 005 453 627 A.B.N. 33 005 453 627 PO Box 476, Rosny Park, Tasmania 7018 AUSTRALIA Telephone (+61 3) 6244 5556, Facsimile (+61 3) 6245 9200, www.vipac.com.au

Melbourne • Sydney • Adelaide • Perth • Brisbane • Hunter Valley • Tasmania • Singapore • Kuala Lumpur • Hong Kong • Bangkok

NA

T A

Fieldwicks Quarries 13 March, 2008 c/o John Miedecke 41 Tasma St Nth Hobart Tasmania 7000 2913_01 Attention: John Miedecke ST HELENS QUARRY NOISE SURVEY Fieldwicks operate a limestone gravel quarry at Brooks Hill St Helens. The quarry is formalising its environmental permit and as part of that process a noise survey of the surrounding area is required. This letter presents the results of that noise survey conducted in September 2007.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The quarry is located in relatively open bushland off Flagstaff Road approximately 650 metres from the Tasman highway. The quarry is positioned on the northern side of a ridge that runs east west, and is working back into the ridge. The ridge then provides good acoustic shielding to the southern side. To the north the quarry is quite open and faces another ridge that shields the nearest resident in that direction from the quarry. To the east the quarry is again quite open and the nearest resident in that direction shielded from the quarry operations only by the stockpiles of gravel. Figure 3 shows the site in relation to the residents. Having blasted the quarry face, the rock is passed through a mobile crushing plant, with the crushed product stored in stockpiles for future use. The mobile crushing plant is shown in Figure 4. Product is transported from site via Flagstaff Road, a gravel road that passes directly in front of the resident at location 1. At this point the road is uphill and curving so a potentially noisey section where trucks will be accelerating / decelerating. The noise sources from the quarry are then the crushing plant, the excavator / loader, and the cartidge trucks. In particular: Primary Crusher BL Pegson 1100x650 Premtrak Secondary crusher BL Pegson MaxTrak 1000 Cone Sizing Screen PowerScreen Turbo Chieftan 1400 Twister Pilot Crushtec Twister trak Excavator Caterpilar 325C Loader Caterpilar 950G As per the quarry code of practice, the operating hours are 0700 to 1900 hrs Monday to Friday, 0800 to 1600 hrs Saturday, and no operation Sundays or public holidays.

MEASUREMENTS Noise measurements were made at the quarry on the morning of the 8th of September, 2007, in clear and still conditions. During the measurements the crushing plant was operating, but no trucks were carting gravel off site. Measurements were made at nine locations, each over a period of between 10 to 15 minutes. Two of the locations were at the nearest residential sites (1 and 5), 3 of the locations at potential residential sites (2, 4, 6), and the remainder at locations close to the quarry. The locations are shown in Figure 3.

Fieldwicks Quarries St Helens Quarry Noise Survey

Reference: 2913_01 13-Mar-08 Page 2 of 7 Commercial-In-Confidence

The following observations were made during the measurements:

Location 1 • The quarry crushing operations were inaudible. • Bird noise and Tasman highway traffic dominate the noise levels. • The ridge between this site and the quarry very effectively block the quarry noise • No traffic passed on Flagstaff Road, but its close proximity to the house (30 m) and quite steep rise

on a corner, would make traffic noise loud here.

Location 5 • Quarry noise is dominant, traffic noise from Tasman highway similarly noisey, but intermittent. • Noise from quarry is engine noise most consistently, with crushing noise more inconsistent. • When off the Tasman Highway traffic noise is dominant with birds and other bush animals

comprising the background.

Locations 2, 3, 4 • Locations 2 was ontop of the ridge and as you crested the ridge from the north, the quarry became

clearly audible. It was perceived as engine noise and crushing noise in equal contributions. • Moving toward the quarry from 2, the engine noise became increasingly dominant such that at 3

the engine noise was considerably louder than the crushing noise. • Moving East down the ridge from location 2 to 4, the quarry became less audible and at location 4

whilst it was audible (predominantly as engine noise), it was perceived as quiet and could be easily ignored. Birds were the loudest noise.

Locations 6 • This location was on the top of the ridge south of the quarry. • Quarry audible as engine noise rather than crushing noise. • Moving down from the ridge into the gully toward the quarry the quarry quickly becomes

inaudible.

SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL, dBA LOCATION L10 L90 Leq

COMMENTS

1 36 27 38 Quarry Inaudible 2 42 37 40 Quarry Noise audible

2 OFF 39 34 37 Bush and traffic Noise 3 53 47 51 Quarry totally dominant 4 38 33 35 Quarry audible but minor 5 42 38 41 Quarry clearly audible

5 OFF 44 37 41 Bush and traffic Noise 6 36 32 34 Quarry audible but minor 7 58 53 56 Equipment not visible. 8 68 64 66 All quarry Noise 9 45 42 43 Quarry clearly audible

Table 1: Daytime Noise Levels

The measurements are summarised in Table 1, and Figure 1 to Figure 2. The data shows:

• Crushing plant noise comprises two components, rock crushing noise and engine noise. Rock crushing noise is strongest in the 80Hz and 100 Hz 1/3 octave bands, while engine noise is higher frequency in the 300 – 1000 Hz 1/3 octave bands.



• At location 5, the nearest residence, while the quarry noise is clearly audible, it does not have a

dramatic effect on the overall noise level. The quarry is audible more by its nature (low frequency) than by its loudness (see Figure 2). If there was no traffic on the Tasman highway, the quarry off noise levels would have been lower.

• With the quarry off, ambient noise levels are 33 to 35 dBA.

Figure 1: Noise Spectra

4140

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

10 100 1000 10000

1/3 Octave Band Frequency Hz

Sou

nd P

ress

ure

leve

l, d

BA

Site 5 ON

OFF

@SHEL024 @SHEL013

Figure 2: Location 5 Spectra



DISCUSSION The quarry is audible as engine noise and rock crushing noise, the crushing noise occurring predominantly in the 80Hz 1/3 octave band, and the engine noise more the mid to high frequency range. When the quarry is off the Tasman Highway is the main noise source. At the residential location 5, when the quarry is off, the traffic noise is similar to the engine noise, and hence the difference is perceived as being the low frequency crushing noise; Figure 2 shows this difference. The quarry has no stipulated noise level that it must not exceed, and to help in determining what such a level may be, the information of Table 2 is used. In the Table only the quarry code of practice gives an actual not to exceed level, the remaining sources being guidelines. From the Table it may then be inferred that the quarry must not exceed 47 to 50 dBA but it would be desirable for it not to exceed 42 to 45 dBA. To ensure that the quarry does not become a noise problem for the surrounding residents, a buffer zone should be placed around quarry, within which residential dwellings and their immediate surrounds should not be located. Choosing the conservative range of 42 to 45 dBA, a buffer zone comprising a circle of nominally 380m radius is proposed as shown in Figure 3. It should be noted that for locations outside this buffer zone while quarry noise emissions will be acceptable, they will still be audible.

Source Criteria dBA Quarry Code of Practice, 1999 Ambient + 10dB 47 to 50 World Health Organisation Moderate annoyance outside 50

DPIWE 2003 DRAFT Noise Policy Minimum Noise limit 45 AS1055 R1 or R2 Bkgnd of 40 to 45 dBA

Background + 5dB L90 + 5dB 39 to 42 AS1055 + 5dB 45 to 50

Table 2: Noise Criteria

The discussion so far has focussed on the continuous noise of the quarry mobile crushing operations. The intermittent noise caused by delivery trucks travelling to and from the site is another noise source. For the resident at location 1, while the quarry noise is inaudible, the trucks travel within 30m of the house and are negotiating a corner on an uphill section of road. Given the truck movements are infrequent, the noise annoyance will not be due to sustained noise but rather intermittent high levels causing disturbance. Disturbance is most relevant at night when it effects sleep, but may also be an issue during the day. While not necessary, it is recommended to mitigate the truck noise by straightening the road out at this point which would then move it further from the house and take to cornering aspect out, both of which having a significant effect on noise levels at the house. Again this is shown in Figure 3.



SUMMARY

An environmental noise survey of the Fieldwick quarry at St Helens was conducted on the 8th of September 2007, in clear and still conditions during normal operation of the quarry. Measurements were made at the nearest residential dwellings, and at other potential sites nearby with the aim of determining an area outside of which quarry noise levels were acceptable. The measurements showed:

� Site noise emissions were dominated by the mobile crushing plant engine noise and by the primary crusher crushing noise.

� Ambient noise was dominated by Tasman highway traffic noise and then typical rural noises (birds, wind in bush etc.)

� Due to the site layout and local topography, the quarry noise is most audible in the quadrant to the north east of the quarry.

� Site noise emissions were 41dBA at the nearest residential dwelling. From which it is recommended that:

� A buffer zone of nominal radius 380m is proposed for the quarry.

� Flagstaff Road be re aligned to remove the corner adjacent to the house there. Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to call this office directly. Yours faithfully

VIPAC ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS LTD Bill Butler [email protected]



Figure 3: Site Map



Figure 4: Crushing Plant within the Quarry Looking South West

90

Point Easting Northing

Coordinates of MLA 17/2007 (approx)

A 604907.358 5420342.511

C 605215.358 5420377.511D 605215.358 5420155.585E 604907.358 5420155.585

B 605044.358 5420377.511

Stockpiles

Stockpiles

StockpileMaterial

Floor Level

R.L. 82.8

20 10 0 20 40m

70

75

80

85

85

85 8585

85

85

85

85

85

85

85

85

90

85

85

95

100

105

85

95

85

85 8590

Stockpile

90

65

M L A 1 7 / 2 0 0 7 B O U N D A R Y

J O H N M I E D E C K E & P A R T N E R S P L

F I E L D W I C K S P T Y L T D

November 2007Fig 3.1

Dianas Basin Quarry

Existing Quarry & Leases

Access

Road

Approx.

E

A

C

D

B

New Access Road

E X I S T I N G L E A S E B O U N D A R Y M L 1 6 M / 9 4

section 43(a) application amendment to the break o’day … · 2011. 7. 13. · flagstaff rd is...

Documents