Expert witness statement
Expert Witness Report
The name and address of the expert: Peter Matthew O’Brien, Senior Environmental
Health Officer, Mornington Peninsula Shire
Council, 2 Queen St Mornington VIC 3931
The expert's qualifications and
experience:
Bachelor of Applied Science (Environmental
Health) Swinburne University 1995
Member Environmental Health Professionals
Australia and previously Australian Institute of
Environmental Health
A statement setting out the expert's
area of expertise to make the report:
Local government Environmental Health Officer
from 1996 to present with extensive experience
in food safety, public health nuisance
investigation, noise and acoustics, wastewater
management and prescribed accommodation
Developed the Shire’s Domestic Wastewater
Plan in 2007 and updated draft version 2015
Provides expert advice to Shire statutory
planners on wastewater, food safety and public
health nuisance
Attended VCAT on 7 occasions to provide
evidence on wastewater disposal
A statement identifying any other
significant contributors to the report
and where necessary outlining their
expertise.
All instructions that define the scope
of the report (original and
supplementary and whether in writing
or oral)
Not Applicable
Mornington Peninsula Shire’s Strategic Planning
Unit has requested that I provide expert
evidence as follows To assess the –




Potential public health impacts of the
proposed development (including dust,
odour and noise)
Suitability of steps proposed by the
proponent to minimise these impacts
Compliance with the Food Act, Public
Health and Wellbeing Act and other
environmental health legislation by the
proposed restaurant and accommodation
components of the development
Compliance with relevant EPA noise
legislation, guidelines and policies
1

Suitability of the proposed private
sewerage system for the development
and steps proposed by the proponent to
ensure that neighbouring land owners
have fair and reasonable access to the
private sewerage system
To recommend –

Any further works for the proponent to
complete to prevent public health
impacts from the development
 Any steps to be taken by the proponent
to ensure that neighbouring land owners
will have reasonable access to the
proposed sewerage system
To complete this report I was asked to review
the information provided by the proponent and
made available on the Shire’s web site, and to
review relevant submissions provided by
agencies including South East Water, DELWP
and the Environment Protection Authority
A statement identifying facts and
matters on which the report is based
This report is based on the site visits,
documents and correspondence listed below –
1. E-mails from South East Water to the
Shire’s Environmental Health Team
February – April 2015
2. Site inspection of the on-site wastewater
system at Western Port Harbour
Caravan Park by Shire and EPA officers
on September 5 2011
3. Data accessed from the Shire’s GIS web
site March-April 2015
A statement identifying documents
and any other material on which this
report is based
Plans 01-79 submitted by the proponent and
exhibited on the Mornington Peninsula Shire
web site
Yaringa Boat Harbour Planning Application
November 2014 submitted by the proponent and
exhibited on the Mornington Peninsula Shire
web site
Draft Planning Permit provided by the proponent
November 2014 and exhibited on the
2
Mornington Peninsula Shire web site
Sholto Consulting Drainage Management Plan
for Yaringa Harbour November 2012
Environment Protection Authority Submission on
Amendment C161 February 2015
State Environment Protection Policy N-1
State Environment Protection Policy N-2
Environment Protection Authority Publication
1254 – Noise Control Guidelines
Water Act (amended 2014)
South East Water Sewer Servicing Guide
January 2015 downloaded from South East
Water’s web site
http://southeastwater.com.au/Pages/Home.aspx
May 22 2015
State Environment Protection Policy Waters of
Victoria
EPA Publication 891.3
Mornington Peninsula Shire Wastewater
Management Policy October 2013
Food Act 1984
FSANZ National Food Safety Standards
Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 and
Regulations 2009
The identity of any person who
carried out any tests or experiments
upon which the expert relied in
making the report and the
qualifications of that person:
A statement identifying the role that
the expert had in preparing or
overseeing the exhibited report(s),
A statement to the effect that the
expert adopts any exhibited report
and identifying:
(a) any departure of the expert from
the finding or opinions expressed
in the exhibited report,
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
D) The significant daily wastewater flow
generated by the development would require
that the sewer pump system include a
comprehensive monitoring and emergency
storage system to prevent the discharge of
effluent into the environment. I am not aware
3
(b) any questions falling outside the
expert’s expertise,
(c) any key assumptions made in
preparing the report, and
(d) whether the exhibited report is
incomplete or inaccurate in any
respect.
that the proponent or South East Water have
provided details of this system.
In the proponent’s document “Yaringa Boat
Harbour Combined Permit and Planning
Scheme Amendment Application” dated
November 2014 it is stated on page 19 that “all
facilities at Yaringa Harbour will be connected to
reticulated sewer in accordance with an
agreement with South East Water” and that “this
situation will also provide an opportunity for the
existing residential properties proximate to the
site to be connected to the reticulated system”
Neither the proponent nor South East Water
have indicated how this will be achieved in a fair
and equitable manner. I am also not aware that
the proponent or South East Water have
consulted with adjoining land owners or the
caravan park regarding opportunities to connect
to the sewer system
I am of the opinion that the potential daily
wastewater flow from the adjoining residential
properties and caravan park is 26000 litres per
day. The proponent has not indicated whether
additional capacity will be provided in the sewer
main to cope with this wastewater flow
I am of the opinion that insufficient information
has been provided by the proponent on the
details of the sewer agreement and location of
sewerage infrastructure, both on the subject site
and on Shire owned or managed land. I believe
that this needs to be further addressed, and that
the proponent and South East Water must
consult with adjoining land owners, before the
amendment can be approved
The draft Planning Permit requires the Drainage
Management Plan to detail how wash-down
water from industrial premises will be connected
to sewer. The Drainage Management Plan from
Sholto Consulting does not indicate how this will
be achieved. Page 5 of the report states that “Water falling onto the roofs and paved Marine
Trades workshop complex area, where there is
the possibility of it being contaminated by trades
activities, will be directed through an Interceptor
Trap with capacity to remove hydrocarbons. This
pit is to be located in the position of the current
4
pit in the centre of the marine trades area ( Grid
B3) before being discharged via a 300mm dia
pipe to the GPT / Junction pit at the primary
collection point ( Grid F5)”
I believe the Sholto Consulting report must be
amended to indicate how wash-down water will
be connected to sewerage and to indicate the
location of proposed sewerage infrastructure on
the site
I believe that the stockpiling of soil on-site
proposed by the applicant is not suitable without
covering or wetting of the soil as there would be
unacceptable risk of dust causing health impacts
on the site and on adjoining residential
properties. Proposed methods of dust
suppression are not provided by the proponent.
The development will have capacity for several
marine industry premises. I believe these
premises must have suitable infrastructure in
place to prevent public health and environmental
impacts if processes such as spray painting are
undertaken. I believe that the Marine Service
Activity Plan outlined by the proponent as
Condition 1(s) of the draft Planning Permit for
this development must include suitable
conditions to address these potential health and
environmental impacts. A suitable condition
could be to require spray painting and the use of
hazardous or harmful chemicals to be only
conducted inside a fully ventilated spray booth
Section 6.4.of the Yaringa Harbour Environment
Report April 2013 submitted by the proponent
acknowledges that “activities associated with the
proposed action present an inherent risk of
emitting noise and light pollution if not managed
appropriately.“
While the report then assesses potential impacts
on fauna native to the site, it does not assess
any potential impacts on human health from
noise generate by the proposed development.
I am of the opinion that to fully assess
compliance with noise regulations, an acoustic
report and noise modelling must be completed
by a suitably qualified acoustic engineer
(registered with the Association of Australian
5
Acoustic Consultants) before works on the
development commence.
In my experience, acoustic reports often
recommend structural works (such as acoustic
lining within buildings or external noise barriers)
to be included within a development plan.
The applicant in their draft Planning Permit
proposes to engage an acoustic engineer before
the occupation of the development commences.
This may not allow for the completion of any
structural works recommended in an acoustic
report
The proponent has not provided information on
how Building 11 will be constructed in
accordance with National Food Safety
Standards
Summary of the opinion or opinions
of the expert.
1. Sewerage and Wastewater Disposal
Council is required under Clause 19 of the State
Planning Policy Framework to consider the
integrated provision of sewerage and other
infrastructure for any proposed development
The preamble of Clause 19 states that Growth and redevelopment of settlements
should be planned in a manner that allows for
the logical and efficient provision and
maintenance of infrastructure, including the
setting aside of land for the construction of
future transport routes.
Strategic planning should facilitate efficient use
of existing infrastructure and human services.
Providers of infrastructure, whether public or
private bodies, are to be guided by planning
policies and should assist strategic land use
planning.
Under the Shire’s Wastewater Management
Policy, reticulated sewerage is the preferred
method of wastewater disposal for all residential,
commercial and industrial areas of the Shire.
Council are the Responsible Authority for
determining whether the proponent will provide
suitable sewerage infrastructure as required
under Clause 10.04 and 19.03-2 of the State
Planning Scheme. South East Water is the
sewerage authority under the Water Act. Under
6
the Water Act, South East Water must
determine whether any sewerage infrastructure
provided to the site will be installed and
maintained in accordance with their
requirements and relevant plumbing regulations
The provision of sewerage to the development
would be a significant improvement to the onsite septic tank systems currently in use at the
subject site
It is my understanding that the type of sewerage
system installed to service this development is
likely to be a pressurised low-diameter sewer
system. This system has been installed by
South East Water to service the townships of
Flinders, Shoreham, Merricks Beach and Rye,
and is also being installed by South East Water
to service over 16,000 properties between Rye
to Portsea.
In this system, each property is provided with an
individual sewer pump unit to replace the
existing septic tank. Wastewater is pumped from
this unit at pressure into the underground sewer
main which is normally located on the road
reserve. Small diameter (20-50mm) sewer pipes
are installed using boring technology to avoid
vegetation removal. Each sewer unit has 24
hours emergency storage in case of breakdown
or power failure. Remote telemetry is used by
South East Water to monitor any failure of the
pump unit, and an emergency repair service is
provided within 24 hours. Further information on
this type of sewer system is included as
Attachment 1 South East Water Sewer Servicing
Guide January 2015
I am of the opinion that this type of system
would provide the opportunity for neighbouring
land owners to connect to sewerage using
individual sewer pump units
Council does not have the legislative power to
compel these property owners to connect to
sewer should the sewerage system be installed.
If an existing septic system were found to be
posing a public health risk under the Public
Health and Wellbeing Act, Council may issue a
Notice under the Act requiring that either the
property connect to sewer or that the septic tank
system be repaired.
The proponent has not indicated any proposal
for an on-site wastewater system (septic tank
7
system) for the development. I am of the opinion
that on-site wastewater disposal is not feasible
for this development and would not comply with
the Environment Protection Act, State
Environment Protection Policy (Waters of
Victoria)
I have previously visited the on-site wastewater
system at the adjoining Western Port Harbour
Caravan Park and am of the opinion that this
system is failing and should be connected to
reticulated sewerage to prevent public health
and environmental risks
I am of the opinion that any sewer agreement
between South East Water and the proponent
must have suitable conditions that allow the
caravan park fair and reasonable access to the
sewer system
I am of the opinion that insufficient information
has been provided by the proponent on the
details of the sewer agreement and location of
sewerage infrastructure, both on the subject site
and on Shire owned or managed land. I believe
that this needs to be further addressed, and that
the proponent and South East Water must
consult with adjoining land owners, before the
amendment can be approved
2) Dust/Spraydrift
I am of the opinion that the Marine Service
Activity Plan must be submitted to the
Responsible Authority and the Environment
Protection Authority for approval before the
occupation of the development commences
3) Noise
Council must consider noise impacts of any
proposed dev elopement under State Planning
Policy 13.04-1 Noise abatement:
Objective
To assist the control of noise effects on sensitive
land uses.
Strategy
Ensure that development is not prejudiced and
community amenity is not reduced by noise
emissions, using a range of building design,
8
urban design and land use separation
techniques as appropriate to the land use
functions and character of the area.
Section 6.4.of the Yaringa Harbour Environment
Report April 2013 submitted by the proponent
acknowledges that “activities associated with the
proposed action present an inherent risk of
emitting noise and light pollution if not managed
appropriately.“
While the report then assesses potential impacts
on fauna native to the site, it does not assess
any potential impacts on human health from
noise generate by the proposed development.
I am of the opinion that fixed mechanical plant
(such as air conditioning) will be required in
each of the 12 proposed buildings and that noise
from this fixed plant will have potential health
impacts on guests, employees and the adjoining
caravan park.
Any noise generated by the development must
comply with State Environment Protection
Policies N-1 (Noise from Industry, Commerce
and Trade), N-2 (Noise from Entertainment
Venues) and Environment Protection Authority
Publication 1254 (Noise Control Guidelines)
I am of the opinion that a Noise Management
Plan (including on-going noise monitoring)
outlined by the proponent in their draft Planning
Permit must be submitted to the Responsible
Authority for approval before the occupation of
the development commences
4.Prescribed Accommodation
In the proponent’s document “Yaringa Boat
Harbour Combined Permit and Planning
Scheme Amendment Application” dated
November 2014 it is stated on page 16 it is
stated that the proposal includes “development
of 180 tourist resort-style accommodation units”
I am of the opinion that these accommodation
units would require registration with Council
under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008
and must therefore be constructed and
9
maintained in accordance with the Public Health
and Wellbeing Regulations 2009.
I am of the opinion that the bedrooms within the
proposed accommodation units will meet the
minimum floor areas outlined in the Public
Health and Wellbeing Regulations, and that
suitable bathroom, laundry and sanitary facilities
will be provided
The communal swimming pool proposed near
Building 11 must be maintained in accordance
with the Public Health and Wellbeing
Regulations. Backwash water from the pool
must be either treated and recirculated or
discharged to sewerage to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority
4. Food Act
The kitchen and dry store proposed in Building
11 in my opinion will require registration with
Council under the Food Act. It must therefore be
constructed in accordance with National Food
Safety Standards and AS4674:2004, and
suitable exhaust ventilation must be installed in
accordance with AS1668:1998
I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no
matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld
from the Panel.
Signature:
Name:
Date:
10