assessment of boundary near surface soils

Senversa Pty Ltd

Level 6, 15 William Street, Melbourne, VIC 3000 ABN 89 132 231 380 www.senversa.com.au

M17985_002_RPT_Rev2 2 September 2020 of 5 Commercial in Confidence

2 September 2020

AS Residential Property No.1 Pty Ltd C/- Anna Martiniello Senior Development Manager ISPT Operations Pty Ltd Level 11, 8 Exhibition Street Melbourne VIC 3000 [email protected]

Dear Anna,

Re: Assessment of Boundary Near Surface Soils 179-217 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village, Victoria

Senversa Pty Ltd is pleased to provide AS Residential Property No.1 Pty Ltd (ASRP1) with this assessment of near surface soils around boundary of the former Kingswood Golf Course located at 179-217 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village, Victoria (the Site).

1. Background and Objectives

Senversa undertook multiple environmental assessments at the former Kingswood Golf Course between 2015 and 2018 as a part of ASRP1’s proposed development of the Site. In late 2019 waste materials including asbestos containing materials (ACM) were identified as having been buried in the south east corner of the Site under and around trees. This uncontrolled waste was linked to the demolition of an adjacent off-site warehouse building and uncontrolled disposal of waste in this corner of the Site in the 1980s prior to ASRP1 purchasing the Site.

The discovery was made as a result of test pits excavations undertaken for the development of a cultural heritage management plan. Two soil and asbestos assessments of the area were undertaken by Prensa Pty Ltd in late 2019. These assessments provided recommended management measures for the waste material both in the short term and during development of the Site in the medium to longer term.

In order to progress the development of the Site, ASRP1 required an assessment of soil conditions around the boundary of the Site to assess whether other areas of the Site were likely to be impacted by uncontrolled waste.

Based on this background the objectives of this assessment were to:

• To assess near surface soils around the boundary the Site.

• Provide recommendations on the need for an environmental audit.

mailto:[email protected]

Assessment of Boundary Near Surface Soils 179-217 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village, Victoria

M17985_002_RPT_Rev2 2 September 2020 of 5

2. Scope of Works and Methodology

The scope of works consisted of the excavation and visual inspection (see photographs in Appendix A) of 32 targeted test pits near the boundary of the Site via hand tools and excavator over a two day period.

Details of these works and the methodology adopted are summarised in the table below.

Activity Item Description

Underground Service Clearance

Date 4 August 2020

Subcontractor Underground Services Detection (USD)

Method Prior to excavation of soils proposed investigation locations were cleared for the presence of underground services via the following methodology:

• Review of available service plans from the dial-before-you-dig online database.

• Inspection of the Site and immediate off-site areas for surface evidence and signage indicating utility locations and to confirm the presence and alignment of nearby and on-site sewerage infrastructure and underground services.

• Tracing of known and redundant (where possible) underground utilities by an experienced underground utility locator using radio detection equipment. Senversa supervised this activity and discussed the findings with the locator personnel.

Boundary Inspection & Test Pit Excavations

Date 4 – 5 August 2020

Subcontractor Kingston Plant Hire

Method The three Senversa field engineers traversed the entire boundary to identify places where either unusual mounding was present or trees that may allow the burying of waste material was present. Following this, Senversa excavated test pits in 32 locations which both targeted areas where potential uncontrolled waste may have been present and provided an assessment of conditions around the boundary of the Site. Senversa excavated 32 test pits by hand and backhoe; where anthropogenic material was discovered a backhoe was used to determine the extent of the area, with further hand dug test pits used to delineate the area. The locations of the test pits are shown in Figure 1. Excavated soils were visually inspected and documented, a general soil profile is shown below and photo logs are shown in Attachment A. All test pits were reinstated with excavated material flush to surface. Senversa discovered a small fragment of potential ACM on the surface of a bunker in the vicinity of TP28a. This fragment was couriered to ALS Laboratory for confirmation of the presence of asbestos.



3. Investigation Results

The soil profile was generally consistent across the Site, with the generalised soil profile provided below.

Depth (m bgl) Soil Type Description

0 to between 0.2 – 0.6

Fill (reworked natural silt and sands)

Silty Sand, dark grey, minor root matter, fine to medium grained, poorly sorted, angular, loose, moist.

0.2 – 0.6 to 0.7 – 1.5

Fill (reworked natural sands)

Sand, fine to coarse, poorly sorted, angular, medium dense, moist, varying in colour between pale greys and browns to dark greys and browns. Base of unit varying across Site.

0.7 and below (variable across Site)

Natural soil - Sands

Sand, fine to coarse, poorly sorted, angular, dense, pale yellow brown, moist. Becoming Clayey below 1.50m with an organic odour in some areas across Site.

1.5 to 1.7 (max) Natural soil – Clayey Sand

Clayey Sand, fine to coarse, poorly sorted, sub-angular sand with low plasticity clay. Dense, moist, dark grey to yellow brown.

The depth of the reworked material largely varied across the Site with respect to the topographic nature of the golf course. A denser, lighter coloured sand was encountered and easily distinguishable from the overlying fill material. The reworked material consists of aeolian sand deposits ranging in colours and grain sizes.

All locations where waste was encountered (TP01, TP26 and TP30), the waste was encountered in the upper 600mm of the excavation. Further hand-dug test pits excavations (denoted as A, B, C on Figure 1) delineated the extent of the encountered waste at each of these locations.

A fragment of suspected asbestos containing cement sheeting was also observed to be present on the surface of the bunker in the vicinity of TP28a (see Figure 1). The sample was sent away for laboratory analysis (see Attachment B) and was found to contain asbestos.

4. Discussion

Senversa excavated 32 test pits around the boundary of the Site with the locations shown on Figure 1. Of the 32 test pits 29 were found to contain no uncontrolled waste material. However, waste material was found in in the following areas:

• TP01 - Minor waste was encountered at the rear around the former clubhouse. The waste consisted of a hessian sack and was considered to be limited in extent due to delineation works undertaken. No ACM were identified.

• TP30 – Minor waste consisting of bricks and some glass bottles was encountered around a densely treed area in the middle of the Site. The waste was considered to be limited in extent due to delineation works undertaken. No ACM were identified.

• SE Corner of the site (Prensa Investigation Area, TP26 & TP28) - No further buried waste with or without ACM present was found to be present outside of the Prensa Investigation Area (shown in yellow on Figure 1). However, one fragment of cement sheeting confirmed to contain asbestos (see Photo 29 in Attachment A) was found at the surface approximately 100 m SW of the buried waste area at TP28 (still within the SE corner of the Site).



It is considered unlikely that further areas containing significant amounts of uncontrolled buried waste that could not be effectively managed as a part of a construction environmental management plan are present around the remainder of the Site. This is due to exploratory test pit investigations undertaken by Senversa (see Attachment A), the visual site inspection and previous investigations undertaken largely focused on the north and eastern boundaries of the Site (see Figure 1).

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on review of historical aerial photographs, presence of vegetation and evidence of historical ground disturbance, Senversa targeted and assessed soils to a depth of approximately 1.5 m below ground at 32 locations around the boundary of the Site. Based on this assessment the following conclusions were drawn:

• No further buried waste with ACM present was found to be present outside of the PrensaInvestigation Area (shown in yellow on Figure 1). However, one fragment of cement sheetingconfirmed to contain asbestos (see Photo 29 in Attachment A) was found at the surfaceapproximately 100 m SW of the buried waste area at TP28 (still within the SE corner of the Site).

• Fill soils with a minor amount of non-hazardous waste present (bricks / hession bag) wereidentified at TP01 (behind former clubhouse) and at TP30 (middle of the site).

• 29 of the 32 targeted test pits did not encounter waste materials and no ACM was encounteredaway from the southern boundary in the SE corner of the site.

Based on this assessment the following recommendations are made:

• To ensure that risks associated with buried uncontrolled waste and ACM are suitably managed,ASPR1 could consider undertaking a statutory Section 53X Environmental Audit across areaswhere buried uncontrolled waste and ACM has been identified. An approximate 50 m bufferaround areas where ACM have been identified could also be considered. This would allow theaudit to further assess the extent of ACM that may have migrated from the buried waste area, viamowing or foot traffic. Figure 1 provides the potential extent of an environmental audit overlaywhich includes an approximate 50 m buffer.

• It is also recommended that quarterly inspections for surficial asbestos containing material beundertaken across the potential environmental audit overlay area in the SW corner of Site.

If you have any comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact either of the undersigned on (03) 9606 0070.

Yours sincerely,

Carly Powell Christopher Sandiford Project Environmental Scientist Principal Environmental Scientist

CEnvP - Site Contamination Specialist (SC40061) CP/CS



Enclosures:

Figure 1: Investigation Location Plan Attachment A: Photo Log Attachment B: Laboratory Report

Technical Limitations and Uncertainty – This document was prepared to meet the objectives outlined in the Senversa proposal for the works. Additional investigations and information may improve the confidence or yield different results, due to a range of factors such as the variable or heterogeneous nature of environmental contaminants in the subsurface. Extreme care should be taken, and no warranty is provided, in the application of any costs or contingent liabilities derived using the data or conclusions within this report. The assessment is based on the condition of the site at the time of assessment. Reasonable care to avoid reliance upon data and information that may be inaccurate. Senversa’s conclusions presented in this report are therefore based on the information available during the assessment. Disclaimer - This document is confidential and has been prepared by Senversa for use only by its client and for the specific purpose described in our proposal which is subject to limitations. No party other than Senversa’s client may rely on this document without the prior written consent of Senversa, and no responsibility is accepted for any damages suffered by any third party arising from decisions or actions based on this document. Matters of possible interest to third parties may not have been specifically addressed for the purposes of preparing this document and the use of professional judgement for the purposes of Senversa’s work means that matters may have existed that would have been assessed differently on behalf of third parties. Senversa prepared this document in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of Senversa’s profession practicing in the same locality under similar circumstances at the time the services were performed. Senversa requires that this document be considered only in its entirety, and reserves the right to amend this report if further information becomes available.


M17985_002_RPT_Rev2 2 September 2020

Figure 1: Test Pit Locations and Potential Extent of Environmental Audit Overlay

Ad d re ss: P hone : We b site :

Le ve l 6, 15 William Stre e tMe lb ourne VIC 3000(03) 9606 0070 www.se nve rsa.com .au

De signe d :Drawn:Che cke d :File :

Date : Re vision: Scale : (A3)

P roje ct:

Figure No:

Location:

Clie nt:

Title:

SenvrSae

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

EDED

ED

ED

ED

ED

@A?@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

&<º

&<º

&<º

&<º

&<º

&<º

&<º

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

@A?

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

EDED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

ED

EDED

TP 10

TP 11

TP 13

TP 14

TP 15

TP 16

TP 17

TP 18

TP 19

TP 20

TP 21

TP 22

TP 23

TP 24

TP 25

TP 27

TP 28

TP 29

TP 30

TP 31

TP 32

TP 02

TP 03

TP 04

TP 05

TP 06

TP 07

TP 08

TP 09

TP 01b

TP 26a

TP 25b

TP 12a

TP 30e

TP 25a

TP 28a

TP 29a

TP 30d TP 30c

TP 12

TP 26TP 26b

TP 01TP 01a

TP 30a

TP 30b

CARUANADRIVE

WOLBERS ROAD

PICKW

ORTH

DRI

VE

FERNHILL

DRIVE

KUBIS

CRES

CENT

CENTRE DANDENONG ROAD

WYNDARRA CRESCENT

SHEL

FORD

GROV

E

MCCLURE ROAD

CAMPBELL GROVE

GOLFWOOD CLO

SE

CARDINALCOURT

SEATON DRIVE

KINGSMEADCOURT

TOORAK DRIVE

VERDANT PLACE

RYAN MEWS

HAMLET PLACE

CHIPP COURT

DOWNLAND

PLACE

ROOS

EVEL

TCO

URT

WAKEMANCOURT

TIMMS CRESCE

NT

UNNAMED

CHRIS

TINAT

ERRACE

ELY COURT

LEE-ANDY LANE

MARTENSPLACE

SADLER COURT

LAKELANDCOURT

BOGART CLOSE

MCGR

EGOR

COU

RT

MINJAH COURT

RUBY PLACE

GREENWOODS CLOSE

REX PLACE

DONNA CLOSE

AISHA CRESCENT

MARJORIE

AVENUE

RUDOLF COURT

SNEAD COURT

TARNOOK COURT

TOOT

AL RO

AD

LEE-ANDY COURT

DEBBIE COURT

LACKENHEA THCOUR T

WHEAT

LAND

CRES

CENT

NAMBROK CLOSELU

MEAH COURT

MANUELA COURT

SHARROCK DRIVE

VON NIDA COURT

CHALD

RON PL

ACE

CANNERY PLACE

MUNGARI STREET

JULIU

S AVE

NUE

KIMBER COURT

WILLY COURT

NEWBRIDGE C

LOSE

GREENVIE

W

CLOSE

SPRING ROAD

KATHRIN AVENUE

NICKSON CLOSE

HIGGINS

CLOSE

ProposedAudit Area

±

0 50 100 150 20025Me tre s

1:3,750

LegendED

Te st P it – No Uncontrolle d WasteP re se nt

ED Te st P it – Minor Waste P re se nt

EDTe st P it – Uncontrolle d WasteP re se nt

@A? P re vious Land fill Gas Bore Location

@A?P re vious Ground wate r MonitoringWe ll Location

&<º P re vious Soil Bore Location

ED P re vious Te st P it LocationSite Bound aryP re nsa Asb e stos Asse ssm e nt Are aP rop ose d Environm e ntal Aud itOve rlay Exte nt

Path: S:\01_Jobs\3.VIC_Jobs\M17985_ISPT_KINGSWOOD_EAO REVIEW\MXDs\1. Working MXDS\M17985_000_F001_Locations of Waste.mxd

Datum GDA 1994, P roje ction MGA Z one 55

P . Calcott 28/08/20200

Ae rial im age ry source d from Ne arm ap P ty Ltd

This

Draw

ing is

Sub

ject to

COP

YRIG

HT. N

o port

ion of

this

drawi

ng m

ay be

remo

ved,

extra

cted,

copie

d, ele

ctron

ically

stored

or di

ssem

inated

in an

y form

with

out th

e prio

r writt

en pe

rmiss

ion of

Sen

versa

.

Waste De line ation Asse ssm e nt

1

Ce ntre Dand e nong Road , Dingle y Village , VictoriaClie nt

Investigation Location Plan

M17985_000_F001_Locations of Waste

M. Byrne

.



Attachment A: Photo Logs of Test Pit Excavations

Attachment A: Site Photographs

Att A - Site Photographs 1

Photo 1. Minor waste consisting of a hessian bag identified at TP01 near surface.

Photo 2. Soil profile above and beneath the root zone at TP01



Photo 3. Soil profile at TP01a. No evidence of waste material.

Photo 4. Soil profile at TP01b. No evidence of waste material.



Photo 5. Soil profile at TP02.

Photo 6. Brick fragments found at TP02.



Photo 7. Soil profile at TP03 including likely irrigation system.

Photo 8. Soil profile at TP03 including fill horizon.



Photo 9. Soil profile at TP05. No evidence of waste material.





Photo 12. Fill soils present at based of TP10.




Photo 14. Fill soils encountered at TP12, but no evidence of uncontrolled waste.



Photo 19. Soil profile at TP 20. No evidence of waste material.

Photo 20. Soil profile at TP21. No evidence of waste.



Photo 23. Soil profile at TP25b. No evidence of waste material.

Photo 24. Evidence of uncontrolled waste material in TP26b.




Photo 28. Evidence of fill soils at TP28



Photo 29. Potential asbestos containing cement sheeting identified at TP28a at surface.





Photo 32. Evidence of minor waste in fill soils at TP30.



Photo 33. Evidence minor waste in fill soils at TP30a.

Photo 34. Evidence minor waste in fill soils at TP30b



Photo 35. Soil profile at TP30c. No evidence of waste material.




Photo 37. Soil profile at TP32. No evidence of waste.



Attachment B: Analytical Laboratory Report

0 0.00 True

Environmental

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSISWork Order : Page : 1 of 3EM2013840

:: LaboratoryClient SENVERSA PTY LTD Environmental Division Melbourne

: :ContactContact MR CHRISTOPHER SANDIFORD Peter Ravlic

:: AddressAddress Level 6, 15 William St

Melbourne VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA 3000

4 Westall Rd Springvale VIC Australia 3171

:Telephone +61 03 9606 0070 :Telephone +6138549 9645

:Project M17985 Date Samples Received : 10-Aug-2020 13:30

:Order number ---- Date Analysis Commenced : 11-Aug-2020

:C-O-C number ---- Issue Date : 11-Aug-2020 21:48

Sampler : PC

Site : ----

Quote number : EN/103/18 (primary work only)

5:No. of samples received

1:No. of samples analysed

This report supersedes any previous report(s) with this reference. Results apply to the sample(s) as submitted. This document shall not be reproduced, except in full.

This Certificate of Analysis contains the following information:

l General Comments

l Analytical Results

l Descriptive Results

Additional information pertinent to this report will be found in the following separate attachments: Quality Control Report, QA/QC Compliance Assessment to assist with

Quality Review and Sample Receipt Notification.

SignatoriesThis document has been electronically signed by the authorized signatories below. Electronic signing is carried out in compliance with procedures specified in 21 CFR Part 11.

Signatories Accreditation CategoryPosition

Uyen Dalkin Approved Asbestos Identifier Melbourne Asbestos, Springvale, VIC

R I G H T S O L U T I O N S | R I G H T P A R T N E R

2 of 3:Page

Work Order :

:Client

EM2013840

M17985:Project

SENVERSA PTY LTD

General Comments

The analytical procedures used by ALS have been developed from established internationally recognised procedures such as those published by the USEPA, APHA, AS and NEPM. In house developed procedures

are fully validated and are often at the client request.

Where moisture determination has been performed, results are reported on a dry weight basis.

Where a reported less than (<) result is higher than the LOR, this may be due to primary sample extract/digestate dilution and/or insufficient sample for analysis.

Where the LOR of a reported result differs from standard LOR, this may be due to high moisture content, insufficient sample (reduced weight employed) or matrix interference.

When sampling time information is not provided by the client, sampling dates are shown without a time component. In these instances, the time component has been assumed by the laboratory for processing

purposes.

Where a result is required to meet compliance limits the associated uncertainty must be considered. Refer to the ALS Contact for details.

CAS Number = CAS registry number from database maintained by Chemical Abstracts Services. The Chemical Abstracts Service is a division of the American Chemical Society.

LOR = Limit of reporting

^ = This result is computed from individual analyte detections at or above the level of reporting

ø = ALS is not NATA accredited for these tests.

~ = Indicates an estimated value.

Key :

EA200: Asbestos Identification Samples were analysed by Polarised Light Microscopy including dispersion staining.l

EA200 Legendl

EA200 'Am' Amosite (brown asbestos)l

EA200 'Cr' Crocidolite (blue asbestos)l

EA200 'Ch' Chrysotile (white asbestos)l

EA200: 'UMF' Unknown Mineral Fibres. "-" indicates fibres detected may or may not be asbestos fibres. Confirmation by alternative techniques is recommended.l

EA200: N/A - Not Applicablel

Analytical Results

----------------TP28a_surfaceClient sample IDSub-Matrix: SOLID

(Matrix: SOLID)

----------------10-Aug-2020 00:00Client sampling date / time

--------------------------------EM2013840-001UnitLORCAS NumberCompound

Result ---- ---- ---- ----

EA200: AS 4964 - 2004 Identification of Asbestos in bulk samples

YesAsbestos Detected ---- ---- ---- ----g/kg0.11332-21-4

ChAsbestos Type ---- ---- ---- -------1332-21-4

N/AAsbestos (Trace) ---- ---- ---- ----Fibres51332-21-4

20.6 ---- ---- ---- ----g0.01----Sample weight (dry)

No ---- ---- ---- ----g/kg0.1----Synthetic Mineral Fibre

No ---- ---- ---- ----g/kg0.1----Organic Fibre

U.DALKIN ---- ---- ---- -----------APPROVED IDENTIFIER:

3 of 3:Page

Work Order :

:Client

EM2013840

M17985:Project

SENVERSA PTY LTD

Analytical ResultsDescriptive Results

Sub-Matrix: SOLID

Analytical ResultsMethod: Compound Client sample ID - Client sampling date / time

EA200: AS 4964 - 2004 Identification of Asbestos in bulk samples

EA200: Description Asbestos sheeting fragments approx 45 x 36 x 5mm.TP28a_surface - 10-Aug-2020 00:00

assessment of boundary near surface soils

Documents