RM Response to Further Information Request

Transcription

1 Kaipara District Council Unit 6 The Hub 6 Molesworth Drive Mangawhai 0505 Job No: May 2018 Attention: David Badham Dear David, RM Response to Further Information Request We have received your request for further information dated 30 April 2018 relating to the resource consent application number RM As requested, the following provides a response to the queries received by Kaipara District Council (KDC) and Northland Regional Council (NRC) and are numbered sequentially in the same order as they were listed in the Section 92 request. The specific questions are identified in bold and italics. Cultural Impact Assessment 1. Please provide a cultural impact assessment assessing the effects of the proposal on Kāpehu Marae and the associated urupā. 1.1 Tegel is currently liaising with Kāpehu marae stakeholders, and has recently engaged a cultural expert. It is anticipated that Tegel will provide KDC and NRC an assessment of potential cultural effects on Kāpehu marae and urupā prior to the hearing. We will continue to update KDC and NRC with progress and expected timeframes to receive this assessment. 1.2 Kāpehu marae and urupā are located on the adjoining northern boundary of the property where Tegel propose to construct and operate a free-range poultry farm. Part of this proposed development includes limited expansion of an existing quarry located in the northeastern corner. 1.3 Reference was made in the Section 92 request to the submission of Professor Margaret Mutu on behalf of Kāpehu marae that raised various concerns regarding the potential adverse effects of the proposed poultry farm development on Kāpehu marae and urupā, and more broadly the relationship of their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands and waahi tapu. The potential adverse physical effects raised in the submission from Professor Mutu and the subsequent recommendations are summarised below: Tonkin & Taylor Ltd 105 Carlton Gore Rd, Newmarket, Auckland 1023, New Zealand PO Box 5271, Wellesley St, Auckland 1141 P F E akl@tonkintaylor.co.nz

2 2 1.4 Quarry related effects identified in Professor Mutu s submission: Dust from the proposed extension to the limestone quarry contaminating Kāpehu marae drinking water and causing a nuisance; and Noise and vibration associated with the operation of the limestone quarry. Requested recommendation: For no quarrying to take place within 150m of Kāpehu marae and urupā; and For dust from the quarry not to be permitted to reach within 100m of the boundaries of Kāpehu marae and urupā. 1.5 Effects identified in Professor Motu s submission related to the operation of the proposed poultry farm: Odour; Dust and ash discharged from the poultry sheds and litter burner; Noise from the proposed poultry farm operation; Landscape and visual amenity; Archaeology; and Animal and bird welfare. Requested recommendation: For the discharge of odour, particulates and contaminants to air not be permitted to reach within 100 metres of the boundary of Kāpehu urupā. 1.6 The following sections assess the potential effects raised by mana whenua, specifically the matters raised in the submission listed above, including measures that Tegel proposes to avoid, remedy or mitigate potential adverse effects. The technical assessments commissioned by Tegel establish that there will not be any significant adverse effect. Quarry - dust: 1.7 In response to the concerns relating to the potential impacts of quarrying activities raised in submissions including from Professor Mutu and during discussions with Kāpehu stakeholders, Tegel has decided to substantially reduce the expansion of the limestone quarry. Attached as Appendix A is a revised plan showing the extent of the proposed quarry operation. This drawing illustrates that Tegel proposes to set back the quarry extent by 100 m from Kāpehu marae boundary and 140 m from Kāpehu urupā boundary. The proposed reduction in the extent of the quarry reduces the proposed earthworks volumes from the quarry from 117,500 m 3 to approximately 50,000m 3. The current limestone quarry is setback approximately 130 m from Kāpehu marae boundary and is used by the current landowners to source limestone to maintain the farm tracks. 1.8 As noted in the quarry dust assessment provided at Appendix B, the proposed setback of quarrying activities, along with implementation of extensive dust management and monitoring measures during the construction phase (described in Appendix B) will mean that deposition of quarry dust (and impacts on roof water collection) at Kāpehu marae during the construction phase is highly unlikely. Quarry noise and vibration: 1.9 Refer to noise and vibration assessment provided in response to question 4 below. Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

3 3 Operation of the proposed poultry farm - odour: 1.10 The Air Quality Assessment (provided as Technical Report E, Volume 2, as part of the resource consent application dated October 2017), assesses the potential odour impacts of the proposed poultry farm within the local environment. This assessment included dispersion modelling of potential odour emissions. A summary of Tonkin + Taylor (T+T) air and odour effects assessment is outlined in Section and of the Assessment of Environmental Effects Report (AEE) dated October It concludes that a high standard of management of emissions to air is proposed and that at most locations the potential for adverse air quality effects as a result of the proposed poultry farm (and ancillary activities) is low It is further noted that the review of T+T s Air Quality Assessment (provided as Technical Report E, Volume 2, as part of the resource consent application dated October 2017), conducted by Beca (Tegel Foods Review of Technical Assessment of Discharges to Air, 5 December 2017) agreed with T+T s assessment methodology and considered that it provided a reasonable prediction of the likely effects of air discharges from the proposed poultry farm in the local vicinity The Air Quality Assessment predicted that the frequency, intensity and duration of odour at Kāpehu marae considered will be appropriate for this type of environment and unlikely to be offensive or objectionable T+T provided further analysis of odour dispersion model predictions for Tegel public open days held on 19 and 20 March. This analysis looked at the predicted frequency of occurrence of odour concentrations that the UK Environment Agency has identified to equate to faint and distinct odour intensities 1. This analysis indicated that on average faint intensity odour would be experienced at the marae for 7 hours per year and that no distinct intensity odour was predicted. Similar analysis for the urupā 2 indicates that faint intensity odour would be experienced for approximately 25 hours per year (also with no distinct odour) In relation to energy centre combustion, the application proposed combustion only of material generated within the sheds on-site (used litter and bird mortalities) and that no offsite waste material would be combusted. Subsequently, in response to concerns raised in submissions and in discussions with Kāpehu stakeholders, Tegel no longer proposes to burn mortalitie and combustion fuel will be limited to used litter generated on-site. This will be offered as a condition of consent. Operation of the proposed poultry farm dust 1.15 Section of the AEE and the Air Quality Assessment (provided as Technical Report E, Volume 2, as part of the resource consent application) assesses the potential dust generated by the operational farm activities, including traffic movements on unsealed access roads and the clearing and handling of litter. Dust generating site activities are well separated from sensitive off-site locations. The Air Quality Assessment concludes that dust emissions from the operation of the proposed poultry farm are unlikely to cause any adverse effects beyond the site boundary, including on Kāpehu marae land. Operation of the proposed poultry farm noise 1.16 Marshall Day Acoustics, Acoustics assessment (refer to Technical Report I in Volume 2, lodged as part of the resource consent application), assessed the potential noise impacts associated with the poultry farms operations. The assessment found that whilst the proposed farm will 1 UK Environment Agency Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Technical Guidance Note IPPC SRG 6.02 (Farming) - Odour Management at Intensive Livestock Installations 2 Based on predictions at nearest grid receptor Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

4 increase the background noise levels, the proposed poultry farm operation will comply with the operational noise limits set out in the District Plan at all of the surrounding dwellings, including Kāpehu marae. Therefore, it is considered that operation of the proposed poultry farm will result in noise effects that are consistent with the permitted baseline and therefore there will not be any adverse effects on Kāpehu marae and urupā. Operation of the proposed poultry farm landscape and visual amenity 1.17 Boffa Miskell Ltd (Boffa) prepared a Landscape and Visual Amenity Effects Assessment (refer to Technical Report J in Volume 2, lodged as part of the resource consent application) that assessed the potential landscape and visual effects of the proposed poultry farm development on the surrounding environment. Sections 1.15 and 1.16 of the assessment specifically assesses the potential effects on Kāpehu marae and urupā and concludes that the visual effects of the proposed poultry farm operation from the marae and urupā are less than minor The Boffa Landscape and Visual Amenity Effects Assessment was peer reviewed by Landscape Architect Rebecca Skidmore for Kaipara District Council. The peer review generally agreed with the overall conclusions regarding the potential landscape and visual effects. Operation of the proposed poultry farm archaeology 1.19 An Archaeological Assessment was undertaken by CFG Heritage (refer to Technical Report H in Volume 2, lodged as part of the resource consent application), that assessed the subject site, predominately focusing on the flat area in the western portion of the site areas where the majority of the proposed poultry farm would be developed. As part of the archaeological investigation, an archaeological survey was undertaken and no archaeological evidence was identified in the flat areas of the site. CFG Heritage noted, that it is unlikely that any subsurface archaeological material would be found on the flat areas of the site due to the poor drainage CFG Heritage archaeology investigations also assessed the hills to the east of the subject site where limited physical works are proposed to enable the establishment of the energy centre, water supply infrastructure and the proposed dwellings. CFG Heritage identified two recorded pa sites (P08/28 and P08/32) located within the hilly area to the east of the subject site. No physical works are proposed to be undertaken within 50m of the recorded pa sites. Tegel proposes, in consultation with Kāpehu marae members, to have the pa sites blessed prior to commencement of works and appropriately fence the pa sites off to prevent further disturbance of these tapu sites No further pa sites or archaeological constraints were identified on the subject site. Management of environmental effects (if any) will not be achieved by undertaking wider archaeological investigations beyond the subject site boundary where no physical works are proposed to be undertaken by Tegel. Such a request is unreasonable and not for a resource management purpose. Operation of the proposed poultry farm animal and bird welfare 1.22 Animal and bird welfare is controlled under the Animal Welfare Act Specifically, the 2012 Animal Welfare (Meat Chicken) Code of Welfare was developed as a minimum standard for all poultry operators under the Animal Welfare Act 1999 (refer to Section of T+T AEE dated October 2017 for further details). Tegel proposes to briefly outline internal processes followed to achieve compliance with relevant legislation at the hearing, for the submitters benefit. This is not a resource management issue. 4 Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

5 5 Summary 1.23 Overall, it is considered that the above information in conjunction with the additional work Tegel is currently undertaking with Kāpehu stakeholders and the cultural expert will sufficiently assess the potential effects of the proposed poultry development. It is considered that the potential adverse effects associated with the construction and operation of the proposed poultry farm have been avoided, remedied or mitigated sufficiently to be considered acceptable on Kāpehu landholdings. KDC has sufficient information to prepare the s42a report and continue processing the resource consent application. Consideration of Alternatives 2. Please provide a description of any possible alternative locations or methods for undertaking the activity. 2.1 We do not consider an assessment of alternatives under Schedule 4 is required under the RMA as the proposed poultry farm will not result in significant adverse effects on the environment, including those relating to cultural effects. Nor do KDC require an assessment of alternatives to prepare the s42a report or to continue processing the resource consent application. 2.2 However, for completeness, an assessment of alternative sites and methods considered will form part of Tegel Corporate evidence and Planning evidence presented at the Council hearing, and will outline that over the past two years, Tegel and T+T have undertaken a significant amount of work to find a site suitable for the development of a 32 shed free range poultry farm. Economic Assessment 3. Please provide an assessment from a suitably qualified and experienced person detailing the economic effects (both positive and adverse) of the proposed development. 3.1 Please see Appendix C for an economic assessment prepared by Fraser Colegrave from Insight Economics. Noise and Vibration Assessment 4. Please provide an assessment by a suitably qualified and experienced acoustic engineer regarding the noise and vibration effects of the proposed quarry operations on site. 4.1 Please refer to Marshall Day Arapohue Quarry Assessment of Environmental Effects report dated 17 May 2018 attached as Appendix D and letter responding to KDC s92 request dated 17 May 2018 attached as Appendix E. 5. Please provide a response from a suitably qualified and experienced acoustic engineer to point 6.A of the submission from the Northland Public and Population Health Unit. 5.1 Please refer to Marshall Day letter responding to Kaipara District Council s92 request dated 17 May 2018 attached as Appendix E. Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

6 6 Antimicrobial Resistance Plan 6. Please provide an assessment of whether the New Zealand Antimicrobial Resistance Action Plan is a relevant consideration for the resource consent application. 6.1 This is not a relevant consideration for the resource consent application. The New Zealand Antimicrobial Resistance Action Plan (NZARAP) sets out objectives and methods to manage antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which has been identified as having a global threat to public health and human health. The plan is managed by the Ministry of Health and Ministry for Primary Industries. 6.2 This has been raised within a number of submissions and Tegel proposes to briefly outline internal processes followed and involvement in the NZARAP at the hearing, for the submitters' benefit. 6.3 Tegel accepts and supports the vision and goals of the NZARAP and has already directed efforts and practices towards meeting its objectives. Tegel uses relatively low levels of these compounds when compared internationally, and the company is committed to reducing and eliminating their use over time. Tegel employs the understanding of the guidelines published by the WHO Advisory Group on Integrated Surveillance of Antibiotic Resistance (AGISAR) and this drives Tegel s prudent use of antibiotics and antimicrobial stewardship. All use of antibiotics is in accordance with the New Zealand Veterinary Code of Practice and supports the NZ Veterinary Association s aspirational goal that by 2030 New Zealand will not need antibiotics for the maintenance of animal health and welfare. 6.4 Tegel recognises that antibiotic use is part of, and not a replacement for, an integrated animal health and wellness programme and the company has a strong focus on best practice biosecurity, hygiene and sanitation procedures, and animal health and welfare. KDC Land Drainage Bylaw 7. Please provide an assessment of the proposed flood control work against the requirements of the Kaipara District Council Land Drainage Bylaws 2008 and confirm whether appropriate approval has been obtained from for any aspects of the proposed flood control work regulated by the Bylaw. 7.1 Tonkin + Taylor has been in contact with Wayne Crump at KDC as well as experts at NRC in regards to the proposed flood control design before and during lodgement of the resource consent application. The technical assessments that were submitted with the resource consent application are required to demonstrate that the proposed drainage and flood control are appropriate and will not result in adverse flooding levels within and outside of the site. These outcomes are also those that will be sought by the Bylaw and therefore these assessments will be able to be used for consideration under the Bylaw. T+T coastal engineers will contact Wayne Crump to make sure he has access to these assessments and will work with him to address any concerns prior to the hearing. Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

7 7 Odour Assessment 8. Please provide comment from a suitably qualified and experienced odour expert regarding the character and intensity of odour anticipated (beyond those sites who have provided written approval) and how odour estimates compare with that which could be reasonably expected from typical farming activities that are anticipated and provided for in a rural environment. 8.1 Discharges of odour to air from the type of activities proposed and their effects on the environment are governed by the NRC, through the provisions of the Regional Air Quality Plan in particular. Discharges to air from factory farming of poultry and the amenity impacts of odour are specifically addressed in this plan. 8.2 KDC has a responsibility to manage the impacts of land use activities on local character and amenity, which could potentially include odour nuisance caused by the use of land for intensive poultry farming. Unlike the Regional Air Quality Plan, the KDC District Plan does not specifically mention the potential for odour to impact on character and amenity aseither a district wide or rural issue or in the rural amenity objectives and policies. 8.3 Comment from the author of the Air Quality Impact Assessment on the character and intensity of the odour is provided in Appendix F. 8.4 In summary, odour from the site is primarily generated from the degradation of organic matter. Odour of similar character is likely to already be present at times in the local rural receiving environment, generated from a range of rural activities that result in the degradation of organic matter. 8.5 The intensity of odour existing in the receiving environment will vary depending on adjacent activities and is not able to be accurately quantified for comparison with the intensity of odour that may result from the proposed activities. 8.6 Odour concentrations predicted to result from emissions from the site (refer to Appendix X of T+T AEE) comply with a criterion of 5 OU/m3 (as a 99.5th percentile) at sensitive receptors (excluding properties from which written approval has been provided). Odour is therefore considered unlikely to be offensive or objectionable or to have any unacceptable adverse effects on amenity. Outcome of Consultation with New Zealand Transport Agency 9. Please provide information relating to the outcome of any consultation with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) in respect of the effects of the proposed flood control work on State Highway Tonkin + Taylor has had ongoing consultation with NZTA throughout the consenting process, including providing NZTA with a copy of the full resource consent application and associated technical assessments In addition, NZTA has made a neutral submission on the application No issues were raised in this submission in regards to flood levels. Other Matters 10 As per our response to the further information request to KDC dated 8 December 2017 (question 23), it was noted that the proposed final colour scheme for the sheds would be provided to Council once finalised. Based on Boffa Miskell letter dated 13 December 2017 titled Free Range Broiler Farm, Arapohue S92 Response issued to Tegel recommending a Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

8 suitable colour range for the proposed sheds, Tegel has confirmed the proposed colour finish of the buildings (both walls and roofs) will be Mist Green. Please refer to Appendix G for a proposed colour scheme provided by Boffa Miskell. 8 Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

9 9 Applicability This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client Tegel Foods Limited, with respect to the particular brief given to us (in accordance with our letter of engagement dated 1 December 2017) and it may not be relied upon in other contexts or for any other purpose, or by any person other than our client, without our prior written agreement. Tonkin & Taylor Ltd Environmental and Engineering Consultants Report prepared by: Authorised for Tonkin & Taylor Ltd by: Andrea Brabant Principal Planner Jenny Simpson Project Director 18-May-18 p:\ \ \workingmaterial\s92 response may 2018\s92 response for al review (al comments) ju _clean copy.docx Tonkin & Taylor Ltd RM Response to Further Information Request Kaipara District Council 18 May 2018 Job No:

10 Appendix A : Quarry Plan

11 ORIGINAL IN COLOUR Tonkin & Taylor DRAWING STATUS: FOR INFORMATION ONLY Level 4, 2 Hunter St, Wellington Tel. (04) Fax. (09)

12 Appendix B : Dust impact assessment

13 Quarry dust assessment and consideration of dust management and monitoring measures Summary of recommended dust management and monitoring measures In the context of the proposed expansion of the existing quarry and environmental setting, we recommend the following dust management and monitoring measures be implemented during the construction phase: Provide a minimum separation of 100 m between the quarry extent and the curtilage of the marae. Introduce wind break or screen fencing along downslope (northwest) and upslope (southeast) perimeter of quarry area. Vegetative screen planting should be investigated along site boundary with marae Minimisation of quarry working area to the extent practicable Rapid stabilisation of completed quarry areas Avoid or minimise stockpiling of material at quarry site where practicable Minimise handling of material in quarry area where practicable (e.g. straight to truck for transfer for use) Minimise drop heights to trucks and stockpiles Vehicle speeds within the quarry area should be limited to 15 km/h Install a continuous instrumental weather station at or close to the quarry site Specify trigger levels for wind speed/directions and response actions in management plan Prepare draft dust management plan for quarrying activities. Installation and operation of a dust monitor between quarry and marae (as close to marae as practicable), with specified response actions to dust trigger levels could provide further protection in the event that quarry dust impacts at the marae are identified. Dust generating activities at the quarry, the sensitivity of activities in the receding environment and potential dust mitigation measures are considered below. With the implementation of the proposed quarry setback, screening and operational dust management measures, the risk of dust deposition at the marae (the nearest sensitive receptor location) will be minimised. The proposed monitoring, and associated trigger levels and operational response measures will further reduce the risk of dust effects. Overall the rigorous implementation of the proposed management and monitoring regime should ensure that dust deposition is minimal and consequently, adverse dust effects at the marae are highly unlikely. Other sensitive receptors (the urupā, dwellings etc.) are located at a greater distance from the quarry and are therefore also highly unlikely to be impacted by dust deposition with the implementation of the recommended measures.

14 Emissions to air Quarry dust, comprised of limestone in particular Sources Quarry dust generating activities: Excavation (no blasting assumed) Handling of excavated material Wind erosion of stockpiles and exposed areas Vehicle movements over exposed surfaces. Sensitivity of activities in the receiving environment Activity type Nature of receptor activity Overall sensitivity comments Marae Urupā Pasture/forest Dwellings Human occupation usually intermittent (hui and tangi) with high expectations of amenity Roof water collection highly sensitive to contamination via dust deposition Buildings and other property sensitive to dust soiling Human occupation usually intermittent (tangi) Potential tapu/cultural impacts of dust deposition at a burial site Human occupation is occasional/infrequent Pasture and rural buildings and structures generally insensitive to dust soiling Extreme dust deposition could potentially impact on agricultural/horticultural output Human occupation potentially constant with high expectations of amenity High sensitivity due to roof water collection and also while the marae is in use. Located adjacent to site boundary and potential quarry area. Generally lower sensitivity (moderate to high) than residential activities due to infrequent and intermittent occupation but could have additional cultural sensitivity. Located at least 170 m from potential quarry extent. Generally low High sensitivity but generally well separated from the potential quarry area (nearest dwelling is several hundreds of metres from potential quarry area)

15 Consideration of management and monitoring measures Potential measures Comments on relevance to project Recommendation General management measures Separation of dust sources activities and sensitive 100 m minimum separation from sensitive activities would be typical for moderately sized quarrying activities. In this instance the quarry is elevated above the marae, which could require increase the potential radius of impact. However that radius could also be reduced with additional monitoring and mitigation. Minimum separation of 100 m between quarry extent and the curtilage of the marae (within implementation of measures recommended below) Wetting/agglomeration of material Watering unlikely to be practicable for limestone material Unlikely to be available in this instance. Wind speed reduction Documentation of dust management measures Measures specific to excavation, material handling and storage Minimisation of material exposure Minimisation of material movement Wind break or screen fencing could provide immediately available reduction in wind speeds across the quarry area Vegetative screening could also provide visual screening benefit if vegetation large enough. Sloping terrain could reduce effectiveness of screening towards downslope direction (e.g. towards marae) Specific details of quarry dust management are likely to be required as part of a Construction Environmental or Air Quality Management Plan as part of consent conditions. Illustration of these measures at the hearing stage could provide confidence to the commissioners in the dust management regime proposed Minimisation of the working quarry face and exposed soil/quarry areas will reduce dust generation potential. Completed or unused quarry areas should be rapidly stabilised and rehabilitated Minimisation of movement of material will reduce potential dust generation Introduce wind break or screen fencing along downslope (northwest) and upslope (southeast) perimeter of quarry area. Vegetative screen planting should be investigated along site boundary with marae Prepare and implement dust management plan Minimisation of quarry working area to the extent practicable. Rapid stabilisation of completed quarry areas. Avoid or minimise stockpiling of material at quarry site where practicable Minimise handling in quarry area (e.g. straight to truck for transfer to construction site) where practicable Minimise drop heights to trucks and stockpiles

16 Potential measures Comments on relevance to project Recommendation Measures specific to vehicle movements Vehicle speed reduction Monitoring measures Weather monitoring Dust monitoring Remedial measures Provision of alternative water supply Continuous instrumental monitoring of weather parameters (wind speed and direction at a minimum) would allow dust control measures to be tailored to manage impacts at the marae (this could potentially include cessation of excavation and handling activities at the quarry when strong winds are blowing towards the marae) Continuous on-line instrumental dust/particulate monitoring with an ability to cease quarry activities in the event of dust concentrations exceeding trigger levels provide more confidence in management of dust impacts at marae Provision of alternative water supply (e.g. via water tanker) to the marae could avoid the potential for a contaminated water supply. This type of measure would require the cooperation of the marae (e.g. via side agreement). Vehicle speeds within the quarry area should be limited to 15 km/h Install an continuous weather station at or close to quarry site (or alternatively at dust monitor) Specify trigger levels for wind speed/directions and response actions in management plan Although unlikely with rigorous implementation of dust management recommended above, if dust impacts at the marae are identified during quarry operation dust monitoring could provide additional protection. In that instance a continuous dust monitor could be installed and operated between the quarry and marae (as close to the marae as practicable) for the construction quarrying period. Particulate concentration trigger levels and response actions should be specified in a management plan Would require cooperation of the marae in order to be implemented.

17 Appendix C : District Economic Assessment

18 Final Report: 16 May 2018 District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville PREPARED FOR Tegel Foods Limited INSIGHT ECONOMICS CLEAR, CONCISE AND COMPELLING ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

19 Authorship This document was written by Fraser Colegrave. For further information, please contact him at the details below: Mobile: (021) Web: Insight Economics Ltd, All rights reserved. Cover photo credit:

20 Contents 1 Executive Summary Introduction Context Scope and Purpose of this Report About Tegel About the Proposed Farm Report Structure Methodology Approach to the Assessment Introduction to Multiplier Analysis Multiplier Tables Used in the Assessment One-Off Construction Impacts Ongoing Operating Impacts One-Off Construction Impacts Construction Costs & District Shares One-off Impacts of Locally-Sourced Materials One-off Impacts of Local Employment & Local Spending Total One-Off Impacts Ongoing Annual Impacts Ongoing Costs & District Shares Ongoing Impacts of Locally-Sourced Supplies Ongoing Impacts of Local Employment & Local Spending Total Ongoing Impacts Summary and Conclusion... 14

21 1 Executive Summary Context and Purpose of Report Tegel Foods Limited has lodged a resource consent application with the Kaipara District Council to develop and operate a new broiler farm in Arapohue, Dargaville. To assist, this short report briefly estimates the likely impacts of constructing and operating the proposed farm on the district economy. About Tegel and the Proposed Farm Tegel has been operating since 1961 and is New Zealand s largest poultry producer. It processes 58 million birds per year and employs 2,300 people across its fully-integrated production process, which spans breeding through to processing/distribution. The proposed farm will comprise 32 free range poultry sheds and be able to raise eight million birds per year. These will generate annual revenues of $72 million. Scope and Approach of the Assessment This report quantifies both the one-off impacts of constructing/developing the farm, plus the ongoing, annual impacts of its operations. Both are estimated via a technique called multiplier analysis, which identifies the direct and flow-on effects to yield overall economic impacts. Multiplier analyses incorporate highly-detailed matrices called input-output tables, which describe the various supply chains that comprise the local economy. As a result, they enable the wider economic impacts of a change in one sector or industry to be traced through to estimate the overall impacts. These are measured in terms of district GDP, household incomes, and employment. Estimated One-off Construction Impacts Design and construction of the farm are estimated to cost $80 million. A proportion of this represents the purchase of supplies and services from district businesses, which stimulate the district economy. In addition, construction will create full-time employment for 20 people for three years. Given the district s relative remoteness, these workers are all expected to be existing or future residents of the district. Accordingly, the wages paid to them represent direct contributions to local GDP. Further, a significant proportion of those wages will be spent locally, which gives rise to so-called induced impacts. The overall one-off impacts of construction are the sum of these various parts, and are presented in the table below. Table 1: Total One-Off District Impacts of Farm Construction Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $7.2m $2.8m $10.0m Employment (FTE-years) Household Incomes $5.7m $1.5m $7.2m In summary: farm construction will generate one-time boosts equal to: $10 million in district GDP Employment for 147 people-years (i.e. 49 people for 3 years), and $7.2 million in household incomes District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 4

22 Estimated Ongoing Operational Impacts The scope of our ongoing impact estimates mirrors those of one-off impacts. Hence, they capture the impacts of ongoing purchases from district businesses, wages paid to district residents, and local spending by farm workers. The following table summarises the resulting estimates of ongoing, annual impacts. Table 2: Ongoing Annual District Impacts of Farm Operations Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $2.3m $0.5m $2.8m Employment (FTEs) Household Incomes $2.1m $0.3m $2.4m In summary: Including flow-on effects, operation of the farm will generate annual economic impacts equal to: $2.8 million in GDP Employment for 47 people, and $2.4 million in household incomes. Summary This report has quantified the likely one-off and ongoing impacts of the proposed broiler farm on the Kaipara district economy. It has indicated that farm construction and operation will likely make significant and sustained contributions to district GDP, incomes, and employment. Accordingly, we support the resource consent on economic grounds. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 5

23 2 Introduction 2.1 Context Tegel Foods Limited (Tegel) has lodged a resource consent application with the Kaipara District Council (KDC) to develop and operate a large, new broiler farm in Arapohue, Dargaville. The proposed farm if consented will form part of Tegel s fully-integrated production process, and significantly boost its production capacity. 2.2 Scope and Purpose of this Report The consent application was accompanied by a detailed assessment of environmental effects and supporting technical reports. However, the estimates of economic impacts attached to the application were reasonably high-level and were produced in-house. To provide a more robust and independent assessment, this report briefly estimates the likely impacts of constructing and operating the proposed farm on the district economy. 2.3 About Tegel Tegel has been operating since 1961 and is New Zealand s largest poultry producer. It processes 58 million birds per year and employs 2,300 people across its fully-integrated production process, which is illustrated below. Figure 1: Tegel's Fully-Integrated Production Process District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 6

24 2.4 About the Proposed Farm The proposed farm will comprise 32 free range poultry sheds and various supporting structures, including an energy centre, utility sheds, and workers accommodation. Birds will be grown from day-old chicks until roughly 42 days old, when they will be transported to Auckland for processing and distribution. This is followed by a 14-day downtime, where the sheds are cleaned and prepared for the next cycle. A full cycle therefore lasts about 56-days which, with 1.3 million chickens onsite at a time, enables the farm to produce about eight million birds per year. These will generate annual revenues of about $72 million. 2.5 Report Structure The remainder of this report is structured as follows. Section 3 describes the methodology that we used to estimate the likely district economic impacts of developing and operating the proposed farm. Section 4 presents our estimates of one-off district economic impacts from farm construction. Section 5 presents our estimates of annual district economic impacts from ongoing farm operations, and Section 6 provides a brief summary and conclusion. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 7

25 3 Methodology 3.1 Approach to the Assessment The assessment quantifies both the one-off impacts of constructing/developing the farm, plus the ongoing, annual impacts of its operations. Each uses a technique called multiplier analysis to identify the direct and flow-on effects, which are combined to yield the overall economic impact. 3.2 Introduction to Multiplier Analysis Multiplier analyses incorporate highly-detailed matrices called input-output tables, which describe the various supply chains that comprise the local or regional economy. Specifically, they show the set of inputs that each sector requires to produce one unit of its output, plus the industries and end-users to whom each sector sells its output. As a result, they enable the wider economic impacts of a change in one sector or industry to be traced through to estimate the overall impacts. Consider the following example. Suppose a local construction company wins a large, new building contract. In addition to extra labour requirements, the company will also need to source a range of additional building products from its suppliers to complete the job. Those suppliers, in turn, will need to source various inputs from their suppliers, and so on. The input-output table traces all these interdependencies so that the wider economic impact of the new building work can be estimated. Specifically, the economic impacts estimated by multiplier analysis comprise two parts: 1. Direct Effects these are the direct economic effects of the entity (or entities) in question plus the economic effects of their immediate suppliers. 2. Flow-On Effects these are the overall economic impacts of the wider supply chain that support the entity s own suppliers. In addition, they capture the effects of increased local spending by people employed due to the project. The overall economic impact is the sum of the direct effects and flow-on effects, which are measured in terms of: Value added (GDP), Employment, and Household incomes 3.3 Multiplier Tables Used in the Assessment Insight Economics develops and sells customised local/regional input output tables to a range of organisations across New Zealand. These are based on the most recent national input output table produced by Statistics New Zealand in Using our proprietary regionalisation process, we created a set of Kaipara district tables for use in this analysis. These contain lower multipliers than the corresponding regional tables because, all other things being equal, the smaller the geographic area the greater the leakage out and the smaller the resulting flow-on effects. Accordingly, the use of District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 8

26 district-specific multipliers here causes our impact estimates to be significantly smaller than if regional multipliers were used, which is often the case in these types of studies. Hence, overall, our estimates of district impacts are relatively conservative. 3.4 One-Off Construction Impacts Design and construction of the farm are estimated to cost $80 million. While most building materials and other supplies will be sourced from outside the district, a proportion will be sourced locally. This local spending will stimulate the district economy and generate both direct and flow-on economic effects. In addition, construction will create full-time employment for 20 people for three years. Given this long construction period and the district s relative remoteness, these workers are expected to reside in the district during the build. Accordingly, the wages paid to them also represent a direct contribution to district GDP. Further, a significant proportion of wages paid to construction workers will be spent locally, which will give rise to so-called induced economic impacts. The overall economic impacts of construction therefore equal the sum of impacts from: Purchases of construction materials/supplies from district businesses. Construction wages paid to district residents, and Local spending by construction workers. 3.5 Ongoing Operating Impacts Estimating the farm s ongoing contribution to the local economy was complicated, because it will comprise only one part of Tegel s overall production process. Accordingly, the farm s outputs (mature chickens) will not be sold, and instead will be inputs to Tegel s processing and distribution activities. As a result, there are no farm revenues per se, which precludes estimation of the farm s overall contribution to district GDP via traditional techniques. 1 To overcome this and ensure that our analysis remained conservative, we estimated ongoing impacts in the same manner as one-off impacts. Specifically, our estimates of ongoing impacts include those arising from: Purchases of farm supplies from district businesses, Farm wages paid to district residents, and Local spending by farm workers Again, because the district is relatively remote, we expect that farm workers will live locally (including some who will live on the farm itself). This means that the wages paid to them represent direct additions to district GDP. Further, just like construction workers, a significant proportion of wages will be spent locally, and hence give rise to induced economic impacts. These are also captured in our estimates of ongoing district economic impacts. 1 When estimates of costs and revenues are available, GDP can be estimated as earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA), plus wages. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 9

27 4 One-Off Construction Impacts 4.1 Construction Costs & District Shares Design and construction of the farm are estimated to cost $80 million. This comprises $77 million of building materials/supplies, and about $3 million of construction wages. Tegel estimated that about 17% of building materials and supplies will be sourced locally, with 100% of wages accruing to current or future district residents. This information was used to estimate the one-off impacts outlined below. 4.2 One-off Impacts of Locally-Sourced Materials The following table shows the estimated one-off impacts of locally-sourced construction supplies and other building materials. Table 3: One-Off Impacts of Local Construction Purchases Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $3.4m $2.7m $6.1m Employment (FTE-years) Household Incomes $2.2m $1.4m $3.6m Table 1 shows that the purchase of construction supplies and materials from local businesses will boost district GDP by $6.1 million over three years, including flow-on effects, and boost household incomes by $3.6 million over the same period. In addition, it will create employment for 73 FTE-years, which is about the same as 24 people being employed full-time during the three-year construction period. 4.3 One-off Impacts of Local Employment & Local Spending Construction wages will accrue to existing or future district residents, and hence represent a direct contribution to district GDP. A significant proportion of those wages will also be spent locally and hence create flow-on economic impacts. The following table shows the corresponding one-off district economic impacts. Table 4: One-Off Impacts of Local Construction Wages & Induced Local Spending Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $3.9m $0.1m $4.0m Employment (FTE-years) Household Incomes $3.5m $0.1m $3.6m Table 2 shows that construction employment and local spending by construction workers will boost district GDP by $4 million over three years, including flow-on effects, and boost household incomes by $3.6 million over the same period. In addition, it will create employment for 74 FTE-years, which is the same as 24 or 25 people being employed full-time during the three-year construction period. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 10

28 4.4 Total One-Off Impacts Table 3 combines the two sets of impact estimates above to yield the total one-off economic impacts of farm construction. Table 5: Total One-Off District Impacts of Farm Construction Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $7.2m $2.8m $10.0m Employment (FTE-years) Household Incomes $5.7m $1.5m $7.2m In summary: Including flow-on effects, construction of the farm will generate one-time economic boosts to the district economy equal to: $10 million in GDP Employment for 147 people-years (i.e. 49 people for 3 years), and $7.2 million in household incomes. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 11

29 5 Ongoing Annual Impacts 5.1 Ongoing Costs & District Shares The farm will incur a range of ongoing operating costs, such as fuel, transport, rates, insurance, power, water, and general operating expenses. Tegel estimate that about half of these costs will be incurred locally. In addition, the farm will employ 32 full-time workers, who are all expected to live in the district. This information was used to estimate the ongoing impacts below. 5.2 Ongoing Impacts of Locally-Sourced Supplies The following table shows the estimated ongoing impacts of locally-sourced farm supplies. Table 6: Annual District Impacts of Local Farm Purchases Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $0.5m $0.1m $0.6m Employment (FTEs) Household Incomes $0.3m $0.1m $0.4m Table 6 shows that the purchase of farm supplies from local businesses will boost district GDP by $0.6 million per annum, including flow-on effects, and boost household incomes by $0.4 million. In addition, it will create employment for 8 people. 5.3 Ongoing Impacts of Local Employment & Local Spending Farm wages will accrue to existing or future district residents, and hence represent a direct contribution to district GDP. A significant proportion of those wages will also be spent locally and hence create flow-on economic impacts. The following table shows the corresponding ongoing district economic impacts. Table 7: Annual Impacts of Local Farm Wages & Induced Local Spending Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $1.8m $0.4m $2.2m Employment (FTEs) Household Incomes $1.8m $0.2m $2.0m Table 7 shows that farm employment and local spending by farm workers will boost district GDP by $2.2 million per annum, including flow-on effects, and boost household incomes by $2 million. In addition, it will create ongoing employment for 39 people. 5.4 Total Ongoing Impacts Table 8 combines the two sets of impact estimates above to yield the total ongoing economic impacts of farm operations. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 12

30 Table 8: Total Annual/Ongoing Impacts of Farm Operations Impact Measures Direct Flow-on Total District GDP $2.3m $0.5m $2.8m Employment (FTEs) Household Incomes $2.1m $0.3m $2.4m In summary: Including flow-on effects, operation of the farm will generate annual economic impacts equal to: $2.8 million in GDP Employment for 47 people, and $2.4 million in household incomes. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 13

31 6 Summary and Conclusion This short report has quantified the likely one-off and ongoing impacts of the proposed broiler farm on the Kaipara district economy. It has indicated that construction and operation of the farm will likely make significant and sustained contributions to district GDP, incomes, and employment. Accordingly, we support the resource consent on economic grounds. District Economic Impacts of Proposed Broiler Farm in Arapohue, Dargaville 14

32 Appendix D : Arapohue Quarry Assessment of Environmental Effects

33 ARAPOHUE QUARRY ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Rp May 2018

34 84 Symonds Street PO Box 5811 Wellesley Street Auckland 1141 New Zealand T: F: Project: ARAPOHUE QUARRY Prepared for: Tegel 100 Carlton Gore Road Private Bag Newmarket Auckland Attention: John Russell Report No.: Rp Disclaimer Reports produced by Marshall Day Acoustics Limited are based on a specific scope, conditions and limitations, as agreed between Marshall Day Acoustics and the Client. Information and/or report(s) prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics may not be suitable for uses other than the specific project. No parties other than the Client should use any information and/or report(s) without first conferring with Marshall Day Acoustics. The advice given herein is for acoustic purposes only. Relevant authorities and experts should be consulted with regard to compliance with regulations or requirements governing areas other than acoustics. Copyright The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Marshall Day Acoustics constitutes an infringement of copyright. Information shall not be assigned to a third party without prior consent. Document Control Status: Rev: Comments Date: Author: Reviewer: Draft - For team review 14 May 2018 Peter Ibbotson - Approved May 2018 Peter Ibbotson Craig Fitzgerald

35 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION QUARRY DESCRIPTION POTENTIAL OPERATIONS NOISE CRITERIA Vibration AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS CALCULATED SOUND LEVELS Methodology Calculated Sound Levels Summary of Noise Emissions CALCULATED VIBRATION LEVELS CONCLUSION EXCAVATOR VIBRATION REGRESSION CURVE APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY APPENDIX B NEW ZEALAND STANDARD NZS 6803: 1999 ACOUSTICS - CONSTRUCTION NOISE APPENDIX C VENTILATION DIFFERENCE OVER THE PROPOSED SITE This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 3

36 1.0 INTRODUCTION Tegel Foods proposes to construct a free-range poultry farm at Arapohue, New Zealand. The assessment of noise effects from the operation is set out in Marshall Day Acoustics report Rp 001 R PAI Free Range Broiler Farm, Arapohue Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE. The original report did not consider the operation of a quarry at the north-west part of the property. This supplementary report therefore details noise from the potential quarry operation and compares the operation against the noise limits in the District Plan. Acoustic terminology used throughout the report is provided in Appendix A. 2.0 QUARRY DESCRIPTION An existing quarry pit is located at the north-west corner of the site. It is proposed to utilise quarry limestone from the pit during construction of the free-range broiler farm. The quarry would cease to operate once the farm construction is completed. Marshall Day Acoustics understands from discussions with Tegel and the Assessment of Environmental Effects that limestone sourced from the quarry is intended to be used as fill for the construction of the bunds. Approximately 50,000m 3 of limestone will be quarried from the site during construction. Based on conversations with Tonkin and Taylor Geotechnical Engineers and from on-site observations, the quarry contains friable limestone rock. It is Marshall Day Acoustics observation that the rock is loose, friable and well fractured and that little mechanical power is required to extract the rock: in most areas the surface limestone can be easily dug away by hand. It is understood that the proposed quarry operation is more akin to excavation rather than hard-rock quarrying. The Kāpehu Marae is located on Sills Road. Land slopes downward from the quarry towards the marae. Currently the potential occupants of the Marae would have direct line-of-sight to parts of the existing limestone quarry and will continue to have direct line-of-sight to machinery operating within the quarry when the extraction is occurring to the north and northwest of the existing pit. Other faces of the quarry are screened from the marae by topography and stockpiles of limestone. There are other buildings in proximity, but these are further removed from the site than the Kāpehu Marae. The Kāpehu Urupā is located to the west of the marae and quarry. Figure 1 shows the quarry, site and surrounds. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 4

37 Figure 1: Site, Surrounds, Measurement and Receiver Reference Locations This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 5

38 3.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONS The quarrying is understood to operate at the following times: 0600 to 0630 Quarry workers arrive at the quarry to 0730 Loaders and excavators start and idle to warm hydraulic fluids, etc to 2000 General quarrying operations summarised below. As the limestone is friable, crushing and screening is not required. The limestone can simply be excavated and loaded out to trucks in a ready-to-use form. The following sets out the anticipated quarrying methodology: Existing limestone stockpiles will be loaded out onto trucks. The haul road will be extended to allow trucks to access the lowest point of the quarry. Topsoil will be removed from the areas that are required to be quarried. These are the areas currently in pasture between the northern edge of the quarry pit and the 100m setback line (refer Figure 1). This will be loaded out on road or quarry trucks and taken elsewhere on the site. A hydraulic excavator will use a face shovel to extract limestone. This is likely to occur from north to south. A loader and further hydraulic excavator will be used to move product around the site and to load out limestone to road or quarry trucks. Based on Marshall Day Acoustics experience, the following equipment is likely to be used: Excavators (two operating) are used to extract material and overburden from the pit face and to load out haulage trucks. Examples include 20 to 30 tonne excavators: e.g. Leibherr R934C/R936C, Komatsu PC200 Loaders (one operating) are used to load out product to trucks and to distribute material around the site as required. Examples of plant include Leibherr L576, Komastu WA450, etc Road trucks or quarry type trucks visit the quarry and return to the construction area. Modern road trucks can generate little engine noise at low speed; however empty trucks can generate chassis noise as they travel on rough surfaces. Quarry-type trucks tend to generate higher levels of engine noise and overall noise. The type of truck used will depend on road conditions; for this assessment an off-road truck has been allowed for (an example includes a Moxy MT31). Ten movements per hour have been allowed for as a typical situation. There will be NO drilling and blasting, crushing and screening or impact rock breaking as the limestone is friable. These sources of noise are typically the most significant sources of high noise in a quarry pit and avoiding them will result in lower overall noise emissions. Sound power levels for the above plant are set out in Appendix B. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 6

39 4.0 NOISE CRITERIA The site is located in the Rural Zone of the Kaipara District Council. The extraction of limestone in the quarry is considered to be a construction activity. This is because it will be a temporary and will only occur during the construction of the site. The quarry will not be used during the operation of the broiler farm and is not subject to the operational noise rules in the District Plan. The Kaipara District Plan states that construction is permitted (Refer rule ) with respect to noise, provided it does not exceed the noise limits in NZS6803:1999. The construction of the site is expected to be a long term duration activity in accordance with the standard. The relevant noise limits are given below in Table 2: Table 2 Recommended upper limits for construction noise received in residential zones and dwellings in rural areas Time of week Time period Duration of work (dba) Leq Long-term Weekdays Lmax Saturdays Sundays and public holidays Vibration The following rule is contained in the of the District Plan with regard to vibration: Any activity is permitted if vibration from the activity does not exceed the following average levels: a) Within a dwelling on any adjacent site zoned Residential, Maori Purpose or Rural Zone; Time Maximum Weighted Vibration Level (Wb or Wd) Maximum Instantaneous Weighted Vibration Level (Wb or Wd) Monday to Saturday 7:00am - 6:00pm 0.045m/s m/s 2 All other times 0.015m/s m/s 2 Note 1: Vibration levels shall be measured and assessed according to British Standard BS6841:1987. The average vibration shall be measured over a time period not less than 60 seconds and not longer than 30 This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 7

40 minutes. The vibration shall be measured at any point where it is likely to affect the comfort or amenity of persons occupying a building on an adjacent site. The above rules are intended to protect human comfort within dwellings. This is appropriate for ongoing vibration from commercial or industrial activities that may be received in dwellings. It is noted that for construction vibration, criteria are often given in terms of Peak Particle Velocity or PPV. This methodology has the advantage that PPV values can be used as a limit to ensure that cosmetic building damage does not occur (e.g. cracking in plaster) and to provide an indication as to whether human annoyance may result from the construction activities. The following PPV vibration limits are typically applied to ongoing construction activities where transient vibration events can occur. It is recommended that these be adopted for the construction in the quarry: Cosmetic Building Damage Figure 2: Short-term (transient) 1 vibration at building foundations (DIN : Figure 1) Table 1: Short-term (transient) vibration (DIN : Tables 1) Type of structure PPV at the foundation at a frequency of (mm/s) 1-10Hz 1-50 Hz Hz PPV at horizontal plane of highest floor (mm/s) Commercial/Industrial Dwellings Historic or sensitive Human Annoyance While the primary vibration concern is cosmetic building damage, people may be disturbed at lower vibration levels. British Standard BS :2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites Part 2: Vibration provides the following guidance on the amenity effects of vibration: This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 8

41 0.14mm/s PPV Just perceptible in the particularly sensitive environments 0.3 mm/s PPV Just perceptible in normal residential environments 1 mm/s PPV Typically acceptable with prior notification 10 mm/s PPV Likely to be intolerable for any more than a very brief period For comparison, the vibration amenity limit for marae given in the Auckland Unitary Plan is 2 mm/s between when measured in the corner of the floor of the storey of interest for a multistorey building or at the foundation. There is an allowance for up to three days of higher vibration levels received (5mm/s) only if prior notification was given, at least three days in advance, to all occupied buildings within 50m of the works. 5.0 AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS Marshall Day Acoustics carried out a site survey to the quarry on the 10 th of May The purpose of our site visit was to understand the proposed quarry operation in relation to the Kāpehu Marae and to measure ambient noise levels in this area (note that a full attended ambient noise survey was conducted on the 23 rd August 2017 and is set out in our previous report for this site). Measurements were undertaken generally in accordance with the relevant standards identified in the Kaipara District Plan. The morning included heavy fog, however, this cleared during our survey. Wind conditions were 0.3 and 1.5 m/s from the north-west. The measured sound levels during this site visit are summarised in Table 3 overleaf. Dominant noise sources are highlighted in bold. Table 2: Summary of Sound Level Measurements Measurement Position Date Start Time Duration Measured Sound Levels (db) Sound Sources and Comments hh:mm mm:ss LAFmax LAeq LA10 LA90 MP1 10/05/ :05am MP2 10/05/ :35am 15: Distant Low Frequency Surf Noise (4m+ swell and offshore winds) Fog present during measurement Birds, distant traffic on SH12 and Mititai Road 5: Distant Low Frequency Surf Noise (4m+ swell and offshore winds) Fog lifted Birds, distant traffic on SH12 The measurements performed at this location showed higher background noise levels occurred than previously measured at Whakapara Road during the daytime. This is due to the elevated low frequency noise levels from surf breaking on the beaches west of Dargaville as well as noise from distant traffic. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 9

42 6.0 CALCULATED SOUND LEVELS 6.1 Methodology The sound levels of quarry machinery are presented in Appendix B. These have been used for calculations of sound levels at the notional boundary of nearby receiver locations. Special audible characteristic corrections have not been applied to the quarrying activity as NZS6803 specifically excludes the application of any penalty. It is expected that broadband self-levelling reversing beepers can be used to avoid any tonal noise emissions from the site. No impulsive sources are proposed in the pit. 6.2 Calculated Sound Levels Sound levels have been predicted for separate scenarios. These are summarised as follows: Scenario 1: Scenario 2: Scenario 3: Scenario 4: 0630 to 0730 hours warm up of hydraulic fluids and engines in northwest of quarry Topsoil clearing and establishment of the haul road adjacent to the 100m setback contour. Load out of topsoil to trucks. Quarrying at northwest of quarry (for operation details refer Section 3). Truck movements to and from quarry. Quarrying at southeast quarry face (for operation details refer Section 3). Truck movements to and from quarry. Calculated noise levels are summarised in Table 3. Noise contour plots of the relevant scenarios are provided in Appendix C. Table 3: Calculated Sound Levels Receiver Calculated Sound Rating Level (db LAeq) Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Kāpehu Marae Kāpehu Urupā Noise Rule Compliance Yes Yes Yes Yes 6.3 Summary of Noise Emissions Idling of machinery between 0630 and 0730 hours would readily comply with the Kaipara District Plan construction noise limit of 55 db L Aeq. During the majority of the quarrying (Scenario 2, 3 and 4), noise levels would be between 41 and 51 db L Aeq. Such a level of noise would readily comply with the Kaipara District Plan construction noise limit of 70 db L Aeq between 0730 and 2000 hours. The quarry can therefore operate at the following times without breaching the Kaipara District Plan construction noise rules: o o 0630 to 2000 hours Monday to Friday 0730 to 1800 Saturday and Sunday Notwithstanding this compliance, it is understood that Tegel will volunteer not to operate the quarry during hui (assembly) or other important Marae events. No other specific additional noise mitigation measures are recommended. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 10

43 7.0 CALCULATED VIBRATION LEVELS Construction vibration is highly variable for a range of reasons, including equipment type, size, operator and ground conditions. Excavation in quarries typically does not generate levels of vibration that would risk cosmetic building damage at distances of 100 metres or greater. In order to evaluate vibration levels from construction activities, reference is typically made to vibration measurements performed of similar activities. From this data, the peak particle vibration level at a range of distances can be calculated using a regression analysis. Typically, a 100% safety margin is applied to such data to ensure that a range of ground and operational conditions are allowed for. For excavation, this example data is provided in Appendix D. The data shows that vibration from excavation would be below 2mm/s PPV at a distance of 23 metres from the quarry machinery. At 80 metres from the operation, vibration can be reasonably expected to be below 1mm/s PPV. These distances are likely conservative, and vibration may be much lower. As the quarry operations will be at least 100 metres from the Kāpehu Marae at all times, it is considered that there is negligible risk that the activity would generate levels of vibration that risk breaching the DIN vibration limits for transient events. It is considered that the activity does not represent a risk of cosmetic building damage. As vibration levels are expected to be below 1mm/s PPV at the Kāpehu Marae, it is considered that vibration will be typically acceptable and will not result in significant amenity effects on visitors or occupants within the marae. It is understood that Tegel proposes that the quarry will not operate during hui (assembly) or other important Marae events. 8.0 CONCLUSION Marshall Day Acoustics has carried out an acoustic assessment of noise and vibration from the proposed use of a quarry located on the proposed free-range broiler farm at Arapohue. The extraction of limestone in the quarry is considered to be a construction activity. This is because it will be a temporary activity and will only occur during the construction of the site. The quarry will not be used during the operation of the broiler farm. The Kaipara District Plan states that construction is permitted with respect to noise, provided it does not exceed the noise limits in NZS6803:1999. The relevant noise rules are given in the report. Noise modelling has been carried out to assess noise from these activities. The assessment has considered several scenarios. The modelling results show that the Kaipara District Council noise rules will be readily complied with at the Kāpehu Marae where operation occurs within the following time periods: 0630 to 2000 hours Monday to Friday 0730 to 1800 Saturday and Sunday Vibration from the quarry operation is expected to be below 1mm/s at the Kāpehu Marae. It is considered that vibration from the proposed quarrying activity represents negligible risk of cosmetic building damage and should not result in significant amenity effects on visitors or occupants within the marae. Overall it is considered that the quarry can comply with the relevant noise and vibration limits and will not impact unreasonably on the amenity of the adjacent Kāpehu Marae or nearby areas. It is considered that the effects on the amenity of the surrounding area will be no more than minor. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 11

44 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY SPL or L P SWL or L W db dba L Aeq (t) L A90 (t) L Amax NZS 6801:2008 NZS 6802:2008 Prescribed time frame Rating Level Residual Sound Specific Sound Total Sound Or Ambient Sound Sound Pressure Level. A logarithmic ratio of a sound pressure measured at distance, relative to the threshold of hearing (20 µpa RMS) and expressed in decibels. Sound Power Level. A logarithmic ratio of the acoustic power output of a source relative to watts and expressed in decibels. Sound power level is calculated from measured sound pressure levels and represents the level of total sound power radiated by a sound source. Decibel - The unit of sound level. Expressed as a logarithmic ratio of sound pressure P relative to a reference pressure of Pr=20 Pa, i.e. db = 20 x log(p/pr) The unit of sound level which has its frequency characteristics modified by a filter (Aweighted) so as to more closely approximate the frequency bias of the human ear. The equivalent continuous (time-averaged) A-weighted sound level. This is commonly referred to as the average sound level. The suffix "t" represents the time period to which the sound level relates, e.g. (8 h) would represent a period of 8 hours, (15 min) would represent a period of 15 minutes and ( ) would represent a measurement time between 10 pm and 7 am. The A-weighted sound level equalled or exceeded for 90% of the measurement period. This is commonly referred to as the background sound level. The A-weighted maximum sound level. The highest sound level which occurs during the measurement period. New Zealand Standard NZS 6801:2008 Acoustics Measurement of environmental sound New Zealand Standard NZS 6802:2008 Acoustics Environmental Noise Daytime, night-time, evening, or any other relevant period specified in any rule or national environmental standard A derived level used for comparison with a noise limit. Takes into account any and all corrections described in NZS 6801 and NZS 6802, e.g. duration, special audible character, residual sound etc. The total sound remaining at a given position in a given situation when the specific sounds under consideration are suppressed or are an insignificant part of the total sound A component of total sound that can be identified as associated with a specific source. Specific sound is the sound of interest in an assessment The totally encompassing sound in a given situation at a given time, from all sources near and far, including the Specific Sound. See also Residual Sound. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 12

45 APPENDIX B SOURCE SOUND POWER LEVELS Machinery Quarry Truck Moxy MT Sound Power Level (dba) 109 db 30 t Hydraulic excavator loading quarry truck (significant banging) 107 db 30 t Hydraulic excavator face shovel 101 db Front end loader loading truck or moving stone Topsoil stripping Idle of Large Plant 101 db 103 db 96 to 106 db This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 13

46 APPENDIX C NOISE CONTOUR MAPS SCENARIO 3: NORTHWEST OPERATION SCENARIO 4: SOUTHEAST OPERATION This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 14

47

48

49 Peak Particle Velocity Vibration Level (mm/s) 9.0 EXCAVATOR VIBRATION REGRESSION CURVE Setback (m) Excavator This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 17

50 APPENDIX D DISTRICT PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES The following relate to mineral processing activities: Rural Issue : Farming, forestry, mineral extraction and processing, and renewable energy generation support the social and economic wellbeing of the District and have the potential to be adversely affected by incompatible neighbouring activities (e.g. residential). It is recognised that these activities are constrained by locational, operational and technical factors. For the social and economic wellbeing of the District, there is a need to provide for a range of activities including farming, forestry, mineral extraction and processing, renewable energy generation within the Rural Zone and recognise that some of these activities generate adverse effects e.g. odour, health, light spill, noise, dust, grit or spray drift which may not be compatible with other more sensitive activities, such as residential. Rural Objective To recognise farming, forestry, mineral extraction and processing, renewable energy generation, industrial and commercial activities and network utilities that enable people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing. Rural Policy By requiring activities locating in the Rural Zone to be sited and designed to avoid, remedy or mitigate reverse sensitivity effects on existing adjoining land uses. The location of some land uses, such as rural-residential living and commercial operations, can result in actual or perceived nuisances to such land uses from the effects of lawfully existing rural activities. This can lead to pressure being placed on existing rural activities to reduce or eliminate such effects, which in many instances is impossible or impracticable and could potentially constrain both present and future operations. 'Noise Sensitive activities as defined in Chapter 24: Definitions such as residential activities that seek to locate in the Rural Zone must recognise the potential effects of existing rural activities, such as noise and odour, and should be sited and designed to reduce such effects. Where activities such as mineral extraction and processing or, industrial or intensive rural activity seek to establish in the Rural Zone, consideration must also be given to adverse effects on existing adjoining activities... This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp PAI Arapohue Tegel Quarry Acoustic Assessment of Environmental Effects ISSUE.docx 18

51 Appendix E : Marshall Day KDC s92 response

52 17 May Symonds Street PO Box 5811 Wellesley Street Auckland 1141 New Zealand T: F: Tegel c/- Tonkin and Taylor 105 Carlton Gore Rd, Newmarket Auckland 1023 Attention: Jessica Urquhart Dear Jessica KAIPARA DISTRICT COUNCIL S92 REQUEST I refer to the Kaipara District Council Section 92 request dated 30 April This letter provides the further information requested. The following matters have been considered: Noise and Vibration Assessment 4. Request: Please provide an assessment by a suitably qualified and experienced acoustic engineer regarding the noise and vibration effects of the proposed quarry operations on site. Reason: Section of the AEE details that approximately 428,000m 3 of earthworks are required for the proposal. This includes earthworks for the construction of the bund which will require approximately 60,000m 3 of fill to be excavated from the quarry on site. The proposed earthworks require restricted discretionary resource consent under Rule a of the Kaipara District Plan and discretionary activity consent under Rule of the Regional Water and Soil Plan for Northland and C of the Proposed Regional Plan for Northland. The submission from Margaret Mutu on behalf of Kāpehu Marae has identified concerns regarding the operation of the quarry in close proximity to Kāpehu Marae, and in particular the noise effects of the quarry operation. The Noise Report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics dated 18 September 2017 does not provide any assessment of the quarry operations. This assessment is required to determine whether the proposed quarry operations will comply with the noise limits in the Kaipara District Plan and to determine the extent of potential noise and vibration effects of the quarry operations on the nearest sensitive receivers. I have carried out a further site visit specifically to address this matter. The details of my assessment are set out in the attached report (Rp ). The conclusions are summarised as follows: The quarry operation would only occur during the construction of the farm. The quarry will be set back from the boundary of the adjacent marae by 100 metres. Other mitigation measures will also be implemented, such as extracting during non-sensitive times. No crushing or screening is required. The limestone is friable and can be used as extracted. The long-term NZS6803:1999 construction noise guidelines are the appropriate rules that apply to the site (refer of the Kaipara District Plan) The construction noise rules will be complied with by a significant margin. I expect noise levels to generally be 20 decibels below the noise rules between 0730 and 1800 hours. Vibration will not affect the amenity of the marae or present any risk of cosmetic building damage. This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Lt PAI Tegel Arapohue Kaipara District Council S92 Request ISSUE.docx 1

53 5. Request: Please provide a response from a suitably qualified and experienced acoustic engineer to point 6.A of the submission from the Northland Public and Population Health Unit. Reason: This submission has questioned the lack of consideration of likely special audible characteristics from ventilation fans and highlighted that these have not been adequately included in the calculations by Marshall Day. Clarification is sought from an acoustic engineer with regard to this submission point. NDHB Submission (6A): The applicant is specifically put on notice about the following matters: Lack of consideration of likely special audible characteristics from ventilation fans which the applicant's acoustical advisers have not included in their calculations. Their assumption that the fans will not exhibit any tonality is not supported by any information as such characteristics may not be evident in octave band data. lt also fails to consider possible frequency modulation characteristics, a related special audible characteristic, in sound emitted off-site caused by multiple sources of similar character. Such consideration should consider the change in the character of the background sound level and possible intrusiveness of special characteristics at less than background sound level which may be an amenity issue for neighbours (excluding those exempt from consideration of effects pursuant to s. 104 (3) (a) (ii) of the Act.) The main special audible characteristics that are commonly encountered in practice are tonality and impulsiveness. The operation, including the ventilation fans which the NDHB submission has specifically referred to, will not generate impulsive noise levels and this does not need to be considered further. NZS6802:2008 sets out how special audible characteristics should be considered. NZS6802:2008 is referenced by of the Kaipara District Plan. NZS6802:2008 standard states the following: Tonality While blade passage tones can be generated by ventilation fans, it is not typical to assume that ventilation fans will generate tones. For the proposed axial fans I did not consider tones a significant risk if the blade tip speed is not excessive and there are no significant obstructions to airflow (such as support structures or impediment to the intake of air). This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Lt PAI Tegel Arapohue Kaipara District Council S92 Request ISSUE.docx 2