stage 1/2 preliminary contamination investigation 6

Stage 1/2 Preliminary Contamination Investigation 6 Honeman Close, Huntingwood, NSW 116786

March 2017

Prepared For:

Arcidiacono Family Trust c/o 518 Rocky Point Road Sans Souci, NSW 2219.

Level 4, 66 Clarence Street Sydney, NSW 2000 P. 02 9699 3088 | F. 02 9319 7508 www.meinhardtgroup.com

Copyright © Meinhardt This document is subject to copyright. Use or copying of this document in whole or part without the written permission of Meinhardt constitutes an infringement of copyright. Disclaimer Information in this document is current at the time of writing. While all professional care has been undertaken in preparing the document, Meinhardt accepts no liability for loss or damages incurred as a result of reliance placed upon its content. The mention of any company, product or process in this report does not constitute or imply endorsement by Meinhardt.

REV DATE Written Reviewed Approved Approved Signature

A SR SR SR

Stage 1 Preliminary Contamination Investigation

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 3

1.1 Objective ................................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Scope of Work and Methodology .............................................................................................................. 3

2 Site Description and Setting .................................................................................................................. 5

2.1 Site Identification ...................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Site Location and Context ......................................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Site Description and Conditions ................................................................................................................ 5

2.4 Surrounding Land Use .............................................................................................................................. 5

2.5 Site Topography and Hydrology ............................................................................................................... 6

2.6 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................................... 6

2.7 Hydrogeology ............................................................................................................................................ 7

3 Site History .............................................................................................................................................. 8

3.1 Historical Aerial Photography .................................................................................................................... 8

3.2 Historic Title Deeds ................................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Heritage Register Search ........................................................................................................................ 10

3.4 Council Planning Certificates .................................................................................................................. 10

3.5 EPA Records, Notices, Permits and Licences ........................................................................................ 11

3.6 Dangerous Goods Licences .................................................................................................................... 12

3.7 Historical Business Directories ............................................................................................................... 12

4 Site Inspection ...................................................................................................................................... 13

5 Site Contamination Potential ............................................................................................................... 14

6 Contamination Investigation Works .................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Sampling Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 15

6.2 Laboratory Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 16

7 Assessment Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 17

7.1 Soil Assessment Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 17

7.1.1 Human Health Investigation Criteria ....................................................................................... 17

7.1.2 Ecological Investigation Criteria.............................................................................................. 17

7.2 Groundwater Assessment Criteria .......................................................................................................... 17

7.2.1 Human Health Investigation Criteria ....................................................................................... 17

7.2.2 Ecological Investigation Criteria.............................................................................................. 18

8 Field Observations................................................................................................................................ 19

8.1 Soil Observations .................................................................................................................................... 19

8.2 Groundwater Monitoring Observations ................................................................................................... 19

9 Laboratory Analytical Results ............................................................................................................. 21

9.1 Soil Analytical Results............................................................................................................................. 21

9.2 Groundwater Monitoring Results ............................................................................................................ 22

10 Quality Assurance and Quality Control .............................................................................................. 23

11 Discussion and Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 24

11.1 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................. 24

11.2 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 25

12 References ............................................................................................................................................ 26

13 Statement of Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 27


2

List of Tables Table 2-1 Surrounding Land Uses ..................................................................................................................... 5

Table 3-1 Aerial Photography – Summary ........................................................................................................ 8

Table 3-2 Activities under the POEO Act 1997 ................................................................................................ 11

Table 4-1 Summary of Potential Contaminants ............................................................................................... 13

Table 5-1 Summary of Potential Contaminants ............................................................................................... 14

Table 6-1 Soil and Groundwater Sampling Procedures .................................................................................. 15

Table 8-1 Lithology Observations .................................................................................................................... 19

Table 8-2 Groundwater Well ............................................................................................................................ 20

Table 10-1 QA/QC Procedures ..................................................................................................................... 23

Appendices Appendix A – Figures

Appendix B – Site Photographs

Appendix C – Lotsearch Report

Appendix D – Historic Land Titles Search

Appendix E – Planning Certificates and Information (Section 149)

Appendix F – Hazardous Goods Database Search


3

1 Introduction Meinhardt Infrastructure and Environment has been engaged by Cadway Projects on behalf of John

and Anna Arcidiacono to conduct a Stage 1/2 Preliminary Contamination Investigation at 6 Honeman

Close, Huntingwood, NSW (the site).

The site has an area of approximately 5.7 hectares and is located 8 km west of Parramatta in an area

zoned as IN1 (General Industrial) in the City of Blacktown Local Environmental Plan (Western Sydney

Employment Area) 2013.

Meinhardt understands it is proposed to develop part of the site for a Service Station with car and

truck refuelling, a car wash and 6000m2 truck parking area (see Figure 2 ). This Stage 1-2

Contamination Investigation has been prepared to form part of the Development Application (DA) to

Council. In addition to the proposed development described above, there are a number of areas

designated as “Site for Additional Development” on site (see Figure 2 ).

1.1 Objective The objective of the assessment is to support the DA for the site and demonstrate that the site is

suitable for commercial/industrial use in accordance with State Environmental Protection Policy

(SEPP55) and the requirements of City of Sydney Council.

1.2 Scope of Work and Methodology Meinhardt have undertaken the following scope of works to meet the criteria set out in SEPP55 Stage

1 Preliminary Contamination Investigation and Stage 2 Preliminary Contamination Investigation:

Review and interpretation of existing background information including:

• Historic title deeds, historic aerial photographs and historical and current surrounding land use;

• Council information, including Section 149 Planning Certificates and Local Environment Plan; • NSW EPA (now OEH) Contaminated Sites Register (notifications or incidents); • NSW EPA Protection of the Environment (Operations) (POEO) License register; • Dangerous Goods Licenses; • NSW Department of Water and Energy water information (groundwater bore information); • Published soil, geology, and topographic maps; • Acid sulfate soils; and • Hydrological, geological and topographical maps depicting the site.

Following on from the desktop study Meinhardt conducted a site inspection to assess areas of

concern which included:

• Current uses of the site and surrounding land; • Disturbed or stained soil; • Bare soil patches; • Disturbed or distressed vegetation; • Site topography and surface water drainage; • Presence or absence of asbestos containing materials (ACM) on the ground surface; • Evidence of on-site storage or spillage of chemicals, fuels or dangerous goods and/or off-site

migration; and • Further assess other potential sources of contamination and identify target soil and

groundwater sampling locations accordingly.


4

Following on from the desktop study and site inspection Meinhardt conducted an intrusive

assessment of the soil and geology at the site and meet the criteria set out in SEPP55 Stage 2

Contamination Assessment which included:

• Review of the Stage 1 Preliminary Site Investigation and other available site information prior to commencing a Stage 2 Contamination Investigation in which soils and groundwater were sampled and analysed;

• Sampling locations were chosen upon review of background information and historical information available at the time. Areas identified as having the highest potential for contamination were targeted. Meinhardt selected 10 soil bore locations and 7 test pits to sample stockpiles on site;

• Collected samples of the subsurface soil layers by solid auger or standard penetration test (SPT) drilling techniques. Samples were assessed by PID, visual and olfactory evidence of contamination and selected to be sent for analysis; In total 20 soil samples were collected of which 16 samples were scheduled for laboratory analysis for contaminants of potential concern (COPCs);

• Installed four groundwater monitoring wells. One well to approximately 10.2 m below ground level (bgl) and another to approximately 5.2 m bgl. The wells were developed after installation;

• Returned to site a minimum of six days after well development to gauge, purge and sample the groundwater within the monitoring wells. Four groundwater samples were collected and scheduled for laboratory analysis for COPCs; and

Preparation of this Stage 1/2 Investigation report detailing the findings of the investigation in

general accordance with requirements of relevant EPA Guidelines.


5

2 Site Description and Setting

2.1 Site Identification The property is situated at 6 Honeman Close, Huntingwood, NSW in an mixed use commercial/rural

area on the periphery of Sydney. The site is described as comprising Lot 2 DP 229466 within the local

government area of Blacktown City Council.

2.2 Site Location and Context

The site is located on the south western corner of the intersection of Great Western Highway and

Reservoir Road, Huntingwood. The site is approximately 8 km to the west of Parramatta and 30 km

west of Sydney CBD.

The site’s location in a regional context and the site features are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 of

Appendix A respectively. Photographs of the site and the surrounding area are provided in Appendix

B.

2.3 Site Description and Conditions The site comprises an allotment described as Lot 2 DP 229466 within the local government area of

Blacktown City Council and has a total area of approximately 5.7 hectares. The site is triangular in

shape and has a frontage of approximately 320 metres on the Great Western Highway on the

northern boundary, 260m on Reservoir road on the eastern boundary and 460m on the south western

boundary with Honeman close.

The site natural ground surface falls north-west for a change in ground elevation of approximately

16m between the higher south-east and lower north-west parts of the site. The natural ground slope

has been modified by fill embankments associated with the roadway formation to the north and east

site boundaries resulting in troughing and the creation of a preferred drainage path through the n

north central part of the site with a south-east to north-west orientation. Sparse to moderate

population of gum trees cover the site.

There is a dilapidated residential building in the south east corner of the site and a shed near the

centre of the site. Small mounds of soli were noted on the western site boundary and in the central

north east area of the site. At the time of the inspection the site was vacant.

2.4 Surrounding Land Use The surrounding land uses includes bushland and commercial properties. Surrounding land uses are

summarised in Table 2-1 below:

Table 2-1 Surrounding Land Uses

Direction Land Use

North The Great Western highway is to the north with multi-level commercial buildings (e.g. Mitre10) further North.

East Reservoir road runs along the Eastern boundary of the site. Beyond Reservoir road is a Bunnings Warehouse.


6

South Immediately to the south of the site is Honeman Close and bushland further south.

West Immediately to the west of the site is Honeman Close and bushland further west.

2.5 Site Topography and Hydrology The site has an approximate elevation of 68 m AHD and the general topography of the area in the

vicinity of the site has a gentle fall to the north/north west.

2.6 Geology and Soils The Sydney Geological services 1:100,000 map indicates the site to be located in an area where

Bringelly Shale of the Wianamatta Group comprise the bedrock to the region.

Residual reactive clays generally overlie the shale. From geotechnical considerations those geological

conditions do not pose any concerns.

The soil investigation disclosed a relatively consistent subsurface profile between the boreholes which

comprised the following:

Topsoil: Silty fine sand containing a trace of clay and ranging in depth from approximately 0.2

to 0.4m. The vegetation (grass) root zone was generally confined to the top 0.1m.

Silty Clay: This stratum ranged in thickness from approximately 2.1 to 2.9m and was

assessed to be of medium to high plasticity and moderate to high reactivity with changes in

soil suction. In general, the silty clays were of very stiff consistency or strength. However a

reduction in strength could be expected where the clays have been affected by increased

moisture associated with the drainage path traversing the site.

Shale: The shale bedrock surface was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 2.4

to 3.3 metres and proven by augering to depths of 4.5 metres below ground level. The

bedrock was assessed to vary from extremely to distinctly weathered conditions and from a

very low to low strength, improving marginally with depth.

Fill: Apart from naturally occurring soils, a number of fill stockpiles were located in the north-

east part of the site. Samples recovered from the fill mound comprised ripped shale. The

origin of the fill is not known; nor can the quality of the entire stockpile be attested to.

Reference should be made to the attached Borehole Logs and Explanatory Notes for a detailed

description and sequence of the various strata encountered at the site.

Acid sulfate soil (ASS) risk map Information obtained from the department of Land and Property

Information provided in Appendix C indicates that the site is located within an area of ‘no known

occurrence of Acid Sulfate Soils’.

On-site dryland salinity data forecasts (Appendix C ) that there is High Hazard or Risk of Dryland

Salinity defined for all years 2000, 2020 and 2050 for the western half of the site.


7

Samples collected by Meinhardt show that soil salinity is 1.2 dS/m which is well below 4 dS/m for soils

to be considered saline. In addition, other signs of dryland salinity such as bare soil patches, salt

crystals and dieback of trees are not evident.

2.7 Hydrogeology Review of the Hydrogeology Map of Australia Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia)

describes the aquifers in the vicinity of the site as porous, extensive and of low to moderate

productivity.

A search of the NSW Department of Primary Industries Office of Water website.

http://allwaterdata.water.nsw.gov.au/water.stm, NSW Government (24 November 2016) indicated

there were 6 bores within an approximate 1 km radius of the site (Appendix C ). Each of the bores

were private and their purpose was for monitoring.

The closest monitoring bore is GW113285, located 132 m north east of the site was drilled to 10.5 m

below ground level (mbgl), however, no standing water level (SWL) is provided.

The next closest bores are located between 140 m (12m BGL) and 169 m (10.5m BGL) north east of

the site. Another three bore were drilled by Numac Drilling to depth of 7.5 m BGL approximately 800m

northeast of the site.

The drillers logs provided for of the bores drilled 800m to the north east of the site indicate the bores

were installed through fill, overlying residual brown clay. Drillers logs of a bore (GW111069)

approximately 806 m north east of the site indicate the bore was installed through fill (0-0.8m0, Clay

Firm Dry Brown (0.8 – 1.5m), Clay High Plasticity Firm Brown (1.50m-5.50m), Clay Brown, Damp,

Moist (5.50m-7.00m) and Clay Brown, Saturated (7.00m-7.50m).

Given the similarity in the provided borelogs it is evident the geology and groundwater level is

consistent in the area.

Based on local topography, groundwater flow is anticipated to flow toward the north west from the

site. Based on the search of licensed groundwater bores, no identified users of groundwater are

located in the near down-gradient of the site.


8

3 Site History The desktop investigation discovered the following historical information for the site.

3.1 Historical Aerial Photography Historical aerial photographs were obtained for the site from 1943 to 2016 and are provided in

Appendix C . Brief descriptions of the photographs and changes to the site are provided in Table 3-1

below.

Table 3-1 Aerial Photography – Summary

Date Site and Surrounding Land Description

1943

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – The photo is of poor quality however the lot appears to comprise of buildings in the south east corner with some evidence of horticulture being carried out north of the buildings. The remainder of the site comprises open woodland.

• Surrounding area – The site is surrounded by bushland on the eastern, southern and western side. On the northern side there is bushland then agricultural land. Reservoir road runs along the eastern boundary and Honeman close runs along the south and western boundaries.

1956

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – The photo shows the lot appears to comprise of buildings in the south east corner with some evidence of horticulture being carried out north of the buildings. The remainder of the site comprises open woodland.

• Surrounding area – The site is surrounded by bushland on the eastern, southern and western side. On the northern and north eastern side there is bushland then further development of agricultural land. An industrial factory is visible 150m south east of the site. Reservoir road runs along the eastern boundary and Honeman close runs along the south and western boundaries, both roads appear to have been upgraded..

1961

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – The photo shows the lot appears to comprise of buildings in the south east corner with less evidence of horticulture being carried out north of the buildings. The remainder of the site comprises open woodland.

• Surrounding area – The site is surrounded by bushland on the eastern, southern and western side. On the northern and north eastern side there is bushland there is further development of agricultural land. An industrial factory is visible 150m south east of the site and has been extended. Reservoir road runs along the eastern boundary and Honeman close runs along the south and western boundaries, both roads appear to have been upgraded..

1965 • Lot 2 DP 229466 – The photo is of poor quality. There doesn’t seem

to be any changes since 1961.

1970

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – The photo shows the lot appears to comprise of buildings in the south east corner with less evidence of horticulture being carried out north of the buildings. The remainder of the site comprises open woodland. The Great Western highway is now apparent along the northern boundary of the site.


9

Date Site and Surrounding Land Description

• Surrounding area – The site is surrounded by bushland on the eastern, southern and western side. On the northern and north eastern side there is bushland and further development of agricultural land. An industrial factory is visible 150m south east of the site and has been extended. Reservoir road runs along the eastern boundary and Honeman close runs along the south.

1982

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – The main change from 1970 is that Honeman close no longer connected to the great western highway and is now a no through road.

• Surrounding area – The area surrounding the site appears to remain mostly unchanged since 1970.

1991

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – No significant changes on-site.

• Surrounding area – The area to the northeast of the site appears to increasingly developed into residential. A significant amount of clearing has occurred to the south east of the site.

2004

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – No significant changes on-site except for minor clearing in the south east corner.

• Surrounding area – The area to the northeast of the site appears to increasingly developed into residential. In addition, the area to the north and north east of the site has had major development into industrial premises. The M4 and on/off ramps are now visible to the south of the of the site.

2009

• Lot 2 DP 229466 – No significant changes on-site except for minor clearing in the south east corner.

• Surrounding area – The area to the west of the site has industrial development evident. Industrial development to the south east of the site is no longer visible

2014


• Surrounding area – No significant changes except to the east southeast of the site a large area has been cleared.

2016


• Surrounding area – No significant changes except to the east southeast of the site a large cleared area has been developed into a warehouse/industrial complex.

Review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the site has potentially had a history of residential and agricultural use.

3.2 Historic Title Deeds A historical title search for each of the lots comprising the site was undertaken as part of this

assessment. Review of the historical title records indicate that the site has likely had a history of

residential, agricultural and commercial use with owners described as carpenter, farmer and

gentleman. It does not appear to have been used for the use or storage of hazardous chemicals or for

heavy industrial purposes or for other site uses which are considered potentially contaminating

activities. A summary of historical ownership is given in Appendix C .


10

3.3 Heritage Register Search A review of the Australian Heritage Trust database

(http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/heritage/publications-and-resources/australian-heritage-

database), the NSW Heritage Inventory

(http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/heritagesearch.aspx) and the Aboriginal Heritage

Information Management System (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/AboriginalPlaces/index.htm)

was undertaken by Lotsearch as part of this investigation. Search results are provided in Appendix C .

A search of the Australian Heritage Trust indicated that that the site did not contain any heritage listed

items.

A search of the NSW Heritage Inventory indicated that the site did not contain any state heritage listed

items. The search did return three registered state heritage items located within 1000 m of the site,

the nearest being the Former Great Western Road Prospect (Honeman Close) forming the south and

western site boundary, next is the Prospect Reservoir and surrounding area (334m south), and Royal

Cricketers Arms Inn 385 Reservoir Road Prospect (911m south east). Further details with a map are

provided in Appendix C .

A search of the Local Heritage Inventory indicated that the site did not contain any local heritage listed

items. The search did return 9 registered local heritage items located within 1000 m of the site. The

nearest local heritage item is the Former Great Western Road Prospect which is located immediately

to the south and west of the site. Further details and a map are provided in Appendix C .

Results of an Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System search indicated there are no

registered Aboriginal relics or sites or places of cultural significance in or within 300m of the site.

3.4 Council Planning Certificates Planning certificates were obtained from Blacktown City Council for Lot 2 DP 229466, comprising the

site. Planning certificates provided in Appendix E documented the following information regarding the

site:

• The land is zoned: IN1 General Industrial (Blacktown Local Environmental Plan – Western Sydney Employment Area - 2013).

• An item of environmental heritage is not situated on the land and the land is not located in a heritage conservation area.

• The land is not affected by road widening or road realignment under Roads Act 1993, Any Environmental Planning Instrument and any Resolution of Council.

• No environmental planning instrument, or proposed environmental planning instrument applying to the land, provides for the acquisition of the land by a public authority, as referred to in section 27 of the Act.

• The land is not affected by any of the matters contained in Clause 59(2) as amended in the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 or subject to a management order within the meaning of the Act. The land is not the subject of an approved voluntary management proposal or ongoing maintenance order, or a site audit statement within the meaning of the CLM Act 1997 which has been provided at any time to Council.

• The land is not affected by Section 38 or 39 of the Coastal Protection Act 1979.

• The land is not affected by Section 15 of the Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 1961 proclaiming land to be a Mine Subsidence District.


11

• The land is not within an environmentally sensitive area and does not include or comprise Critical Habitat.

• The land is not within an area identified as being Class 1 or Class 2 Acid Sulphate Soils.

3.5 EPA Records, Notices, Permits and Licences A search of the EPA’s public register maintained under the Protection of the Environment Operations

Act 1997 was also undertaken. Results are included in Appendix C . The search identified that, for

the site there were:

• No prevention, clean-up or prohibition notices; and • No transfer, variation, suspension, surrender or revocation of an environment protection

licence (EPL).

The search indicated that there were one existing Environmental Protection Licences issued to a site,

no delicensed activities still regulated by the EPA and five former licences now revoked or

surrendered within 1 kilometre of the site. Results are summarised in Table 3-2 below and further

details and a map are provided in Appendix C .

Table 3-2 Activities under the POEO Act 1997

Activity Organisation Address Approximate Distance/Direction

Existing

Slaughtering or processing animals (EPL 5069)

Red Lea Chickens Pty Ltd

421-427 Flushcombe Road Blacktown

424 m South East

Delicensed Activities still regulated

None No records in Buffer - -

Former Licensed Activities now revoked or surrendered

Other Activities / Non Scheduled Activity - Application of Herbicides Lic. No. 4653

Luhrmann Environment Management Pty Ltd

Waterways Throughout Nsw 85 m


Robert Orchard

Various Waterways Throughout New South Wales -Sydney NSW 2000

85 m


Sydney Weed & Pest Management Pty Ltd

Waterways Throughout NSW - Prospect, NSW, 2148

85 m

Hazardous, Industrial or Group A Waste Generation or Storage Lic. No. 11284

Glaxosmithkline Australia Pty Ltd

1 Decker Place, Huntingwood, NSW 2148

612 West

General animal products production Lic. No. 10674

Orlc 92 Pty Ltd 14 Augusta Street, Blacktown, NSW 2148

754 south east


12

A search of the NSW EPA Contaminated Land Record of Notices indicated that there are no notices

pertaining to environmental issues for the site under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997

(CLM Act). The search of the register also indicated that there are no records of notices within 1

kilometre of the site.

3.6 Dangerous Goods Licences

A search of the Storage of Hazardous Chemicals Database and the microfiche records held by

WorkSafe NSW was undertaken and did not locate any records pertaining to the site.

Search results of the search are provided in Appendix F

3.7 Historical Business Directories

A search of 1950, 1970 and 1991 UBD Historical Business Directory identified a variety of potentially

contaminating historical businesses within 1km of the site. Search results are provided in Appendix C

and summarized in Table 3-4 below.

Table 3-3 Summary of Historical Business Directory Records

Activity Organisation Address Approximate Distance/Direction

1991

Motor Garages & Service Stations

Bellevue Service Station

Flushcombe Rd, Blacktown 2148 655 m North East

Motor Garages & Service Stations

Esso Blacktown Service Station

Flushcombe Rd, Blacktown 2148 655 m North East

1970

Motor Service Stations petrol, Oil, Etc. (M716)

Honeys Road House & Service Station

Great Western Highway. Blacktown 619m East

Motor garages and engineers

Bellevue Service Station

Flushcombe Rd. Blacktown 655 m north east


Esso Service Center Flushcombe Rd. Blacktown 655 m north east


Williams Garage Flushcombe Rd. Blacktown 655 m north east

1950

Motor Accessories-Dealer Harper, G. W., Reservoir Rd.,

Blacktown 0 m North

Motor Spare Parts Dealers Retail Harper, G. W., Reservoir Rd.,

Blacktown 0 m North


13

4 Site Inspection Photographs of the site, site features and the surrounding area are provided in Appendix B. As indicated by the historical titles the site has been owned and occupied by farmer, carpenter and gentleman at certain times through its history. The following observations were made during a site walkover on 14 December 2016. • The site is currently vacant; • The site is fenced with a number of breaches of fence line; • Honeman close is closed using a locked gate to prevent rubbish being dumped; • The site is grassed and has a number of large trees and shrubs, the surface soils were observed

to be dark silty clays; • The site is fairly flat with a north westerly slope towards the front of the property (Great Western

Highway). Storm water drains across the front of the property (northeast toward the northwest); • A small storage shed is located near the centre of the site. Roofing material is suspected

Asbestos; • A former residence (dilapidated) and former shed (now destroyed) are located in the south east

corner of the site. Roofing material is suspected to be Asbestos; • The former residence seems that it was once used as service station (i.e. canopy and signs

referring to oil company); • Small stockpiles are found along the south and western site boundaries on Honeman Close; and • Small and large soil stockpiles are located in the north northeast corner of site. A number of photos were taken and are presented in Appendix B .

4.1 Potential Risks and Liabilities Table 5-1 below details a summary of the key issues and potential contaminants that may be present on-site.

Table 4-1 Summary of Potential Contaminants

Issues Potential Contaminants

Potential for Impact on Soil

Potential Risk Pathway

Shed/residence at centre at SE corner of property

TPH, PAH, BTEX, phenols, Herbicides, Pesticides, heavy metals, Asbestos

Low/Medium Contamination to surrounding soil and groundwater due to mixing of chemicals and chemical spills.

Former shed/Pile of building material at SE corner of property

Asbestos High Asbestos within building materials of destroyed shed contaminating surface soils.

Soil stockpiles along south and western site boundaries and in north east corner of site

TPH, PAH, BTEX, phenols, Herbicides, Pesticides, heavy metals, Asbestos

Low

Contamination to surrounding soil and groundwater due to leaching from stockpiles and mixing of stockpiles with natural soils.


14

5 Site Contamination Potential Based on the site setting, review of historical information on the site and surrounding area and an

inspection, a number of potentially contaminating activities in the vicinity of the site have been

identified.

Table 5-1 below details a summary of the key issues and potential contaminants that may be present

on-site.

Table 5-1 Summary of Potential Contaminants

Issues Potential Contaminants

Potential use of fill material to create existing/former site levels.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Heavy metals, Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)/Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl benzenes, Xylenes (BTEX), Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs), Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB’s), Asbestos.

Former and existing site structures Asbestos, Lead paint.

Historical and existing site activities on-site and in surrounding areas (commercial, industrial, car parking, chemical storage)

TPH, BTEX, PAHs, Heavy metals, OCPs/PCBs, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Asbestos.


15

6 Contamination Investigation Works Based upon the findings of the desktop investigation and site inspection Meinhardt identified and

drilled ten soil bore sampling locations situated across the site and conducted test pitting within a

number of on-site stockpiles. In total 29 soil samples were collected of which 19 samples were

scheduled for laboratory analysis.

Four groundwater monitoring wells were installed and subsequently developed, gauged and purged

before groundwater samples were collected and scheduled for laboratory analysis.

The adopted sampling and analytical regime does not meet the minimum sampling density specified

in the NSW EPA (1995) Sampling Design Guidelines, for the characterisation of a 1.2 ha site but is

justified on the basis that the site was not historically used for potentially contaminating activities.

The locations of the soil bores and wells are provided on Figure 1 in Appendix A . Bore logs of all soil

bores are provided in Appendix G and samples scheduled for laboratory analysis are shown in the

laboratory reports provided in Appendix E .

6.1 Sampling Methodology Sampling and analysis of soils and groundwater was undertaken with regard to the following

guidelines and standards:

• A Guide to the Sampling and Analysis of Waters, Wastewaters, Soils and Wastes (Publication 441.7 – EPA 2000a);

• Australian Standard: Guide to the Investigation and Sampling of Sites with Potentially Contaminated Soil – Part 1: Non-volatile and Semi-volatile Compounds (AS 4482.1-2005 – Standards Australia 2005);

• Australian Standard: Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil – Part 2: Volatile Substances (AS 4482.2-1999 – Standards Australia 1999); and

• National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM 1999).

Soil sampling procedures were undertaken as outlined in, Table 6-1 below.

Table 6-1 Soil and Groundwater Sampling Procedures

Item Procedure

Soil sample collection

Samples were collected from a standard penetration test (SPT) tubes and from the solid auger. Samples were collected using disposable nitrile gloves with a new pair used for each sample collection. Stockpile sampling was undertaken using a backhoe and samples taken directly from bucket using disposable nitrile gloves.

Groundwater sample collection

Samples were collected using a dedicated disposable bailer and poured directly into appropriate sample bottles. Samples were collected using disposable nitrile gloves with a new pair used for each sample collection.

Decontamination

All Sampling equipment used in manual sampling procedures (i.e. a hand trowel) decontaminated in between each sample by:

• Removal of soil adhering to the sampling equipment; • Washing thoroughly in a bucket with phosphate-free

detergent; • Rinsing thoroughly in a second bucket using potable

water.


16

Field observations All samples were assessed in the field for any visual signs of contamination (glass, ash, slag, coke), staining and odour.

Volatile Screening All samples are screened for the presence of volatile organic compounds using a PID.

Calibration of field instruments All field instruments used were calibrated daily.

Sample Storage Sample jars were supplied by the laboratory containing appropriate preservatives where required.

Sample preservation Samples were stored on ice while on-site and in transit under a chain-of-custody protocols to the National Association of Testing Authority (NATA) registered laboratory.

The adopted sampling and analytical regime does not meet the minimum sampling density specified

in the NSW EPA (1995) Sampling Design Guidelines, for the characterisation of a 1.2 ha site but is

justified on the basis that the site was not historically used for potentially contaminating activities.

6.2 Laboratory Analysis Representative samples of fill material, underlying natural soils and groundwater samples were

analysed for a broad range of potential chemical contaminants which were identified during the

Stage 1 investigation. Selected soil and groundwater samples were sent to MGT-Eurofins a

National Association of Testing Authority (NATA) accredited laboratory.

15 soil and 4 groundwater samples were scheduled for the Australian and New Zealand

Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) Screen which includes Total Recoverable

Hydrocarbons (TRH), Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl-benzene and Xylene (BTEX), Polycyclic Aromatic

Hydrocarbons (PAH), Phenols, Organochlorine Pesticides (OCP), Polychlorinated Byhenyls

(PCB) and metals – As, Ag, Be, B, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb, Mn, Hg, Mo, Ni, Sb, Se, Sn, Zn and

Cyanide.

2 soil samples were scheduled for the amended National Environment Protection (Assessment

of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM 2013) Screen which includes PAHs (as BaP TEQ), Total

PAHs, Phenol, Pentachlorophenol, 2-Methylphenol(o-cresol), 3&4-Methylphenol(m+p-cresol),

OCP (DDT,DDE,DDD), Aldrin, Dieldrin, Chlordane, Endosulfan, Endrin, Heptachlor, HCB,

Methoxychlor, Mirex, Toxaphene), Acid Herbicides(2.4.5-T,2.4-D,MCPA,MCPB,

Mecoprop,Picloram), Atrazine, Chlorpyrifos, Bifenthrin, PCBs, Metals (As, Be, B, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu,

Pb, Hg, Mn, Ni, Se, Zn), Cr6+, CN Free, Fe, Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC), pH(CaCl2), Total

Organic Carbon (TOC) and Clay Content;

2 soil samples were scheduled for soil salinity parameters and

12 soil samples were scheduled for analysis of asbestos containing materials in soils.


17

7 Assessment Criteria Given the objective of this assessment is to support the DA for the site and demonstrate that the site

is suitable commercial/industrial development, concentrations of contaminants in the soil and

groundwater were compared against appropriate soil and groundwater Investigation Levels as

outlined in the following sections.

Where there were no NSW EPA endorsed thresholds (i.e. asbestos, individual VOC compounds), the

laboratory LOR was adopted as an initial screening value for the purposes of this assessment.

7.1 Soil Assessment Criteria Soil sample results were compared to the National Environment Protection Council investigation

levels as specified in the “National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination)

Amendment Measure” (NEPM 2013).

7.1.1 Human Health Investigation Criteria Meinhardt understands that the land is proposed for commercial/industrial development, therefore,

soil sample results were compared to (NEPM 2013) Health Investigation Levels (HILs) for commercial

industrial (HIL D) premises such as shops, offices, factories and industrial sites.

Although the soil profile at the site is predominantly clay and silty clay, the most conservative (i.e.

sandy soil) Health Screening Levels (HSLs) for vapour intrusion were adopted.

7.1.2 Ecological Investigation Criteria Soil sample results were compared to (NEPM 2013) EILs for commercial and industrial land uses.

Site specific EILs are calculated by adding the Ambient Background Concentration (ABC) and Added

Contamniation Limits (ACL). Site ACLs are based on the soil characteristics of pH, CEC and clay

content.

There are three methods for determining the ABC, however, the prefered method is to measure the

ABC at an appropriate refence site. The most conservative ACL was used and an ABC of 0mg/kg was

used to assess exceedence of EILs.

7.2 Groundwater Assessment Criteria

7.2.1 Human Health Investigation Criteria Results were assessed against Health Screening Levels (HSLs) for vapour intrusion in groundwater

HSL D Commercial/Industrial Clay as specified in Table 1A(4) of the NEPM (2013). The HSL

guidelines were adopted based on the lithology found under beneath the site as per drilling

investigation, predominately clay material, as well as the depth of groundwater beneath the site which

was between 2 and 4 mbgl.

Given the proposed use of the site as mixed commercial/industrial and the site’s location with access

to reticulated water and other services groundwater at and in the vicinity of the site will not be used for

drinking purposes. Further, based on the search of licensed groundwater bores, no identified users of

groundwater (for drinking or recreational purposes) are located in the vicinity or down-gradient of the

site.


18

Therefore, given there are no existing uses of groundwater in the vicinity of the site and there is

unlikey to be any future extractive uses of groundwater, analytical results were not assessed in

relation to the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (NHMRC 2011) or any other beneficial use

guideline criteria.

7.2.2 Ecological Investigation Criteria For the purpose of assessing groundwater contamination to the relevant beneficial uses, the

Groundwater Investigation Levels (GILs) specified in Table 1C of the NEPM (2013) have been

adopted. Given that groundwater beneath the site is likely to discharge into nearby surface water

points approx. 1km north northwest of the site, threshold values of the ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000)

guidelines for slightly-moderately disturbed Freshwater Ecosystem for freshwater environments have

been adopted for this assessment.

It should be noted that the ANZECC & ARMCANZ (2000), Marine Ecosystem criteria is applied to

groundwater at the point of discharge to surface water. To provide a conservative indication of the

potential risks requiring further investigation the Marine Ecosystem criteria has been applied at the

sampling point (i.e. groundwater well).


19

8 Field Observations The location of soil sampling locations and groundwater wells are shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A ,

and the borehole logs are included in Appendix G .

8.1 Soil Observations Field activities were undertaken between December 2016 and February 2017. Several different

material types were encountered. Observations made during the field works are summarised below:

• No fill material was observed in bores;

• Silty Clay and Clay were observed in all bores;

• There were no strong odours or visual indications of contamination such as staining of the soil noted by the field staff during the collection of the samples; and

• Photo-ionisation detector (PID) readings were taken at every sample location and none of the soil sample readings indicated the presence of elevated volatile organic compounds with the highest reading of 1.0 ppm.

The general lithology of the site is provided in Table 8-1 below.

Table 8-1 Lithology Observations

Depth (mbgs approximate) Lithology Description

0 – 1.5 Silty Clay Red with Yellow mottle

1.5 – 3.0 Clay Yellow with grey mottle

3.0 - 12 Silty Clay Yellow Grey with some Shale pieces

8.2 Groundwater Monitoring Observations Groundwater well gauging and monitoring was conducted by Meinhardt field staff on 9th February

2017. Samples were collected using a disposable bailer after three well volumes were purged from

the wells.

Groundwater was encountered at a shallow depth at the site. An aquifer was encountered in the

natural clayey , silty clay material with a standing water level at a depth of between 1.65m bgl in

monitoring well MW01 and 3.8m bgl in monitoring well MW04.


20

Table 8-2 Groundwater Well

Well ID Total Depth (mbgl)

Screen Length Intervals (mbgl)

Standing water Level 18/01/2017 (mbtoc)

Standing water Level 09/02/2017 (mbtoc)

Recharge

MW01 5.7 2.7 – 5.7 3.0 1.65 Fast recharge

MW02 10.0 7.0 – 10.0 7.5 2.9 Moderate recharge

MW03 12.6 3.6 – 12.6 4.5 2.9 Slow recharge

MW04 7.5 4.5 – 7.5 Approx. 6m 3.8 Moderate recharge

Groundwater flow direction cannot be confirmed, however, based on the topography of the area it is

anticipated that groundwater flows to the west to north-west.


21

9 Laboratory Analytical Results The following soil analytical results were received from the NATA accredited laboratory engaged to

undertake the analysis of the soil and groundwater samples. Results are discussed in relation to the

adopted assessment criteria outlined in Section 7.

Summary analytical results tables with comparison to adopted guidelines is provided in Appendix H

and laboratory reports are provided in Appendix H .

9.1 Soil Analytical Results In order to calculate some Health Screening levels (HSLs) and Environmental Investigation Levels

(EILs) soil type, texture, pH, clay content and/or cation exchange capacity (CEC) is required. HSLs

and EILs for the site where calculated based on the most conservative values of these parameters

obtained from the analytical results of soil samples.

All soil samples analysed were below the Commercial/Industrial HIL and HSL criteria, however, there

was one exceedance of the adopted EILs. Soil results are sumarrised in Appendix G and discussed

in detail below.

9.1.1 TPH and BTEX With the exception of soil samples from SP04 all samples analysed had concentrations of TPH, BTEX

below laboratory limits of reporting. TPH C16-C34 were detected in a stockpile (SP04) on the western

site boundary with Honeman Close, concentrations were below HSL and EILs for all TPH and BTEX.

9.1.2 Metals All soil samples had metal concentrations below the NEPM 2013 HILS Commercial/Industrial and

NEPM 2013 ESLs for Commercial/Industrial fine soil (0 - 2m).

9.1.3 PAHs and Phenols With the exception of soil sample SP04 all samples analysed had concentrations of PAHs and

phenols either below laboratory limits of reporting or below relevant HILs and EILs.

The laboratory reported a Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) concentration of 4.8 mg/kg in soil sample SP04

which exceeded the adopted ESL of 1.4 mg/kg provided in the NEPM.

9.1.4 Herbicides and Pesticides All analysed samples had concentrations of sVOCs, OCPs and PCBs below laboratory limits of

reporting.

9.1.5 Asbestos No fragments of potential asbestos containing material (ACM) were observed in the soil material

during drilling investigations at the site.

No fragments of ACM or respirable asbestos fibres were detected in the samples submitted for

analysis.

However, it should be noted that ACM sampling and analysis was not conducted in accordance with

the NEPM (2013) (i.e. collecting 10 L samples for sieving). Sampling and analysis was primarily


22

undertaken to confirm the presence/absence of ACM in collected samples with a view to further

investigation if asbestos was identified.

9.2 Groundwater Monitoring Results All groundwater samples analysed were below the ANZECC Fresh Water (95% protection)

Guidelines, however, there were some exceedances of the adopted frshwater waters GILs.

Groundwater results are sumarrised Appendix G and discussed in detail below.

9.2.1 TPH and BTEX Groundwater samples from the four moniotoring wells had concentrations of TPH and BTEX below

laboratory limits of reporting and thus below the adopted HSL and GILs.

9.2.2 Metals Several metals concentrations exceeded the GILs in various groundwater wells. Copper, manganese

nickel and zinc exceeded their respective GILs while all other metals analysed were below the GILs

and/or laboratory limits of reporting.

Exceedances of metal GILs where as follows:

• Copper in each of the wells BH07 (MW01 - 0.006 mg/L), BH08 (MW02 - 0.002 mg/L), BH09 (MW03 - 0.009 mg/L) and BH10 (MW04 - 0.004 mg/L) exceeded the ANZECC Freshwater guidelines (0.0014 mg/L);

• Manganese in wells BH07 (MW01 - 3.4 mg/L) and BH08 (MW02 - 2.1mg/L) exceeded the ANZECC Freshwater guidelines (1.9 mg/L);

• Nickel in BH07 (MW01 - 0.019 mg/L) exceeded the ANZECC Freshwater guidelines (0.011 mg/L); and

• Zinc in each of the wells BH07 (MW01 - 0.075 mg/L), BH08 (MW02 - 0.071 mg/L), BH09 (MW03 - 0.05 mg/L) and BH10 (MW04 - 0.16 mg/L) exceeded the ANZECC Freshwater guidelines (0.008 mg/L).

9.2.3 PAHs and Phenols Groundwater samples from both wells had concentrations of PAHs and Phenols below laboratory

limits of reporting and thus below the adopted HSL and GILs.

9.2.4 Herbicides and Pesticides Groundwater samples from the wells had concentrations of sVOCs, OCPs and PCBs below laboratory

limits of reporting and thus below the adopted HSL and GILs.


23

10 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Meinhardt used Eurofins as the primary laboratory. Eurofins is National Association of Testing

Authorities (NATA) accredited. The quality assurance / quality control procedures followed by

Meinhardt are outlined in Table 10-1 below.

Table 10-1 QA/QC Procedures

Item Procedure

Sample identification All samples collected were given a unique sample identifier. Sample labels indicate the project, date of sampling, location and depth– eg. 116786, 16/01/2017 and BH01_1.25 -1.5

Chain of custody forms

Each sample designated for analysis was recorded on a chain of custody form which detailed:

• The name of the person transferring the samples; • The name of the person receiving the samples, e.g. courier or

laboratory staff; • The time and date the samples were taken; • The time and date the samples are received, e.g. at the

laboratory; • The name and contact details of the Meinhardt client; • The analytes to be determined; • Other specific instructions in the handling of the samples during

the analysis; and • Where high concentrations of contamination are expected.

Blind duplicate samples

As per AS 4482.1-2005 (Standards Australia 2005), at least 1 blind duplicate sample was submitted for every 20 samples taken. Blind duplicates were labelled so that the laboratory couldn’t determine the corresponding sample.

Split duplicate samples A split duplicate was not collected or submitted to a secondary laboratory.

Rinsate blanks A rinsate sample was collected and submitted for analysis. A new nitrile glove was worn to collect each sample from the SPT and auger so the potential for cross contamination was minimised.

Acceptance criteria for quality control samples

As per Table 4, Section 8, AS 4482.1-2005 (Standards Australia 2005).

Sample holding times Samples were received by the laboratory within the relevant holding times.

Laboratory QA/QC

Laboratory QA/QC procedures are as described in the NEPM (NEPC 1999) and in their respective NATA registrations. Each laboratory is to perform at least 1 analysis blank, 1 laboratory internal duplicate analysis, 1 laboratory control sample and 1 matrix spike.

One blind duplicate was provided to the laboratory as an internal duplicate. As part of Meinhardt’s QA

processes, duplicate analytical results were compared using relative percent difference (RPDs) as per

the Australian Standard 4482.1-2005. All field duplicate results were within the acceptable RPD

ranges with the exception of the RPDs for Cu, Cr, Pb, Mn and Zn which ranged from 36% to 170%.

Although the RPDs for various heavy metals exceeded the acceptable range it is not expected to

affect the results of the investigation as both results were below the appropriate investigation levels.

Meinhardt undertook a review of Eurofins internal QA/QC procedures. QA/QC results for duplicates,

matrix spikes and method blanks were found to be within set acceptable criteria.


24

11 Discussion and Conclusions

11.1 Summary of Findings The results of the Stage 1/2 Preliminary Contamination Site Investigation at 6 Honeman Close

Blacktown NSW revealed the following:

• The property is situated in a mixed use commercial/industrial area with a northern frontage of approximately 320 metres on the Great Western Highway;

• 6 Honeman Close (Lot 2 DP 229466) lies within the local government area of Blacktown City Council and comprises a 5.7 ha lot gently sloping to the north west;

• The Sydney 1:100,000 Geological Sheet (9130) (NSW Dept. Mineral Resources 1983) indicates that the site is underlain by Bringelly Shale of the Wianamatta Group which forms the bedrock in the region with residual reactive clays overlying the shale;

• Review of topographic map and site inspection indicate that the site slopes to the north north-west with storm water run-off which flows to the north west across the north of the site. The site has an approximate elevation of 68m AHD;

• Review of historical aerial photography indicates relatively little change of the site. Changes were most evident in areas surrounding the site. A major changes was the realignment of The Great Western highway to the north of the site;

• Review of title deeds indicates that the site has potentially had a history of farming and commercial use with previous owners described as carpenters and farmers;

• A search of the NSW EPA contaminated sites register indicated that there are no notices pertaining to environmental issues under the Contaminated Land Management Act (1997) for the site. A search of the EPA’s list of NSW Contaminated Sites Notified to EPA identified that there are four sites within 1 kilometre of the site, however, the closest is over 600 m from the site;

• A search of the hazardous chemicals storage records held by SafeWork NSW was undertaken and did not locate any records pertaining to the site; and

• Historical onsite activities suggest potentially contaminating activities were undertaken at the site including farming and carpentry.

• The stockpiles at the site are underlain by natural silty clays grading to clay between approximately 1.5 and 3.0 m bgl. Weathered shale bedrock was encountered between approximately 5 and 12 m bgl;

• However, there were no strong odours or visual indications of contamination such as staining of the stockpile soil noted by the field staff and there were no elevated PID readings from soil samples collected;

• Representative samples of surface stockpiles, subsurface material and groundwater were analysed for a broad range of identified potential chemical contaminants based on historical site use and the presence of fill material at the site;

• All soil sample results were below the (NEPM 2013) Health Investigation Levels (HILs) for commercial industrial (commercial/industrial D), however, stockpiled material located at SP04 exceeded the Ecological Screening Level (ESL D) for BaP;

• Groundwater standing water levels ranged between depths of 1.6 m bgl and 3.8 m bgl;

• The analytical results indicate groundwater samples analysed had concentrations of TPH, BTEX, PAHs and phenols, sVOCs, OCPs and PCBs below laboratory limits of reporting and were therefore below the commercial/industrial HSL criteria and fresh waters GILs. However, some metal concentrations in the groundwater wells exceeded the adopted Fresh water GILs; and

• Concentrations of copper, manganese, nickel and zinc in groundwater wells exceeded the adopted Fresh water GILs.


25

11.2 Conclusions Although there are no EPA notices pertaining to the site, no records of dangerous goods storage and

no evidence of potentially contaminating activities occurring at the site, the investigation identified

historical activities on the site that are considered associated with potentially contaminating activities.

Further, based on the discussion of potential site contamination sources included in Section 5, the

potential risk of groundwater contamination from sources originating at the site is considered low.

All soil sample results were below the (NEPM 2013) Health Investigation Levels (HILs) for commercial

industrial (HILS D), therefore, the site does not pose an unacceptable risk under the proposed

commercial/industrial use scenario.

The B(a)P impact exceeding ESLs is limited to one stockpile (SP04) on the western site boundary

with Honeman close.

While concentrations of copper, manganese, nickel and zinc were reported in groundwater exceeding

the adopted GILs, these concentrations are considered representative of groundwater in urban areas,

subject to minor impacts by urban runoff and drainage and do not appear to be attributable to on-site

sources.

As no beneficial uses of groundwater were identified at the site or downgradient of the site and given

the site is located in an urban environment is it is considered that there is a low risk to future site

users or downgradient sensitive receptors from the elevated metal concentrations identified. Based on

these results and the inferred groundwater flow direction, there is a low risk to future site users or

downgradient sensitive receptors from groundwater.

Abandoned buildings in the South east corner of the site most probably contain asbestos roofing

materials. Meinhardt understands that the southeast corner will not be part of this development.

Based on the findings of this Stage 1/2 Contamination Investigation and subject to the limitations

outlined in Section 12 the site is considered suitable for commercial/industrial use in accordance with

the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997, State Environmental Protection Policy (SEPP55) and

the requirements of Blacktown City Council. Therefore, remediation of the site and thus a

Remediation Action Plan (RAP) is not required, however, soils excavated during construction should

be addressed in a waste management plan.


26

12 References Contaminated Sites: Sampling Design Guidelines, NSW EPA, 1995.

Contaminated Sites: Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites, NSW EPA, 1997.

Contaminated Sites: Guidelines for the NSW Site Auditor Scheme, 2nd Edition, NSW EPA, 2006.

Managing Land Contamination, Planning Guidelines, State Environment Protection Policy 55 Remediation of Land (1998).

National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPC 1999).

Sydney 1:100,000 Geological Sheet (9130) (NSW Dept. Mineral Resources 1983)


27

13 Statement of Limitations The assessment in this report was restricted to the agreed scope of works and is subject to the

limitations set out below or elsewhere within this report.

The assessment has been undertaken and performed in a professional manner consistent with the

skill and care ordinarily exercised by reputable consultants under similar circumstances. No other

warranty, expressed or implied, is given.

Where Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd (Meinhardt) has relied on verbal information

and/or documentation provided by the client and/or third parties, Meinhardt did not attempt to

independently verify the accuracy or completeness of that information. To the extent that the

conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in whole or in part on such information,

they are contingent on its validity. Meinhardt assume no responsibility for any consequences arising

from any information or condition that was inaccurate, concealed, withheld, misrepresented, or

otherwise not fully disclosed or made available to Meinhardt.

This report has been prepared on behalf of the client for the benefit of the client only (the authorised

recipient). The report and the information contained within it are solely for the use of the authorised

recipients and it may not be used, copied or reproduced in whole or in part for any purpose other than

that for which it was supplied by Meinhardt. Meinhardt makes no representation, undertakes no duty

and accepts no responsibility to any third party who may use or rely upon this report or the information

contained within it.


28

APPENDIX A FIGURES

BH01

TP01

SP01

BORE HOLE LOCATION

TEST PIT LOCATION

STOCKPILE LOCATION

LEGEND

BH09

BH07

BH06

BH05

BH04

BH03BH02

BH01

TP07

TP06

TP05

TP04

TP01TP02 TP03

BH08

BH10

SP01

SP02

SP03

SP04

SP05

\\SYDFS01\PROJECTS\PROJDIR\116786 - HUNTINGWOOD SERVICE STATION\6BIM\6_3 MHT MIE\6_3_1 MHT ENV\FIGURES\116786-MP-A-F01.DWG

Level 11, 501 Swanston StreetMelbourne VIC 3000 AustraliaT: +61 3 8676 [email protected]© Copyright

Project

Client Project Number Reference Number Revision

Title

FIGURE 1SITE PLAN

BP HUNTINGWOOD SERVICE STATION

JOHN & ANNA ARCIDIACONO 116786 MP-A-F01 A

HONEMAN RD

GREAT WESTERN HWY

RESERVOIR ROAD

MIDSIGN

MIDSIGN

DELIVERIES

CAR REFUEL

SERVICESTATION

TRUC

K RE

FUEL

CAR WASH

SITEENTRY / EXIT

SITE ENTRY / EXIT

BINS

DRIVE THRU

+ 1 FOODTENANCY ANDDRIVE THRU

(200m²)

AIR / WATER BAY

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

PROPOSED SITE BOUNDARY


3550m²PROPOSED SITE BOUNDARY



PROPOSED SITE BOUNDARYPROPOSED SITE BOUNDARY

WAITING BAY

ENTRY

ENTRY

3658m²

1222m² CAR PARKING (47)

TRUCKPARKING

6010m²16 B-DOUBLE TRUCK PARKS

(300m²)

2900

0

11900

8450

28510

36970

18620

14465

15475

38690

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

2250m²

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

2800m²

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

1600m²

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

1750m²

SITE FORADDITIONAL

DEVELOPMENT


01:750

50m 75m25m

SITE AREA SCHEDULE:OVERALL SITE (ESTIMATE):SERVICE STATION (GFA):TENANCY (GFA)LANDSCAPING (APPROX):PAVEMENT/CONCRETE:AREA UNDER CAR CANOPY:AREA UNDER TRUCK CANOPY:

55 358m²300m²200m²

22 413m²22 475m²

690m²350m²

PARKING SCHEDULE:CAR PARKING:B- DOUBLE:

4716

SITE BOUNDARY HAS BEEN ESTIMATED FROMNEARMAPS AND IMAGES PROVIDED. DETAILEDSURVEY TO TAKE PLACE BEFORE CONSTRUCTIONTO FIND OUT APPROVED SITE BOUNDARIES ANDUNDERGROUND SERVICES. ECOLOGY REPORT TOBE UNDERTAKEN TO DETERMINE LOCATION OFPROTECTED FLORA AND FAUNA BEFORE DETAILEDDESIGN IS UNDERTAKEN

NOTES:

LEGEND:BALANCE OF AREA FOROTHER POSSIBLEDEVELOPMENT

ISSUE

D FOR

scale

date

drawn

checked

job no.

dwg no.

issue

project description

drawing title

client

acn: 106 382 227abn: 72 106 382 227

project address

DO NOT SCALE

Membership No. 563QBCC Lic. No. 710921

COPYRIGHT © 2015

building designers'association of

queensland inc.

FULL SIZE @ A1

PREL

IMINA

RY

24/115 Wickham Street, PO Box 724Fortitude Valley, QLD 4006

T 1800 616 [email protected]

As indicated @ A1

20/06/2016 10:55:39 AM

P:\ArchiOffice Documents\Storage\Project Docs\P11034\01 CurrentActive\01a Revit\11034-m01.rvt

A

BP HUNTINGWOODSERVICE STATION

GREAT WESTERN HIGHWAY,HUNTINGWOOD,NSW

JOHN AND ANNAARCIDIACONO

CONCEPT MASTER PLAN 2

06/17/16

Author

Checker

11034

11034 SK009

ISS

DATE

AMEN

DMEN

TCK

DA

20.06

.16PR

ELIM

NARY

ISSU

EPS

1 : 750 @ A11 CONCEPT MASTER PLAN


APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Dilapidated Building in SE corner of site. Canopy suggests it could have been a service station.

Roofing material in roof canopy.

Services located near dilapidated building.

Demolished building in South East Corner of site.

Shop Front suggesting site may have been used as service station.

Small building near center of the site

View from eastern boundary looking north towards Great Western Highway.

View looking north of surface water drainage

View from north east of site looking west

Large stockpiles in Northeast of site

View from north of site looking south

Small stockpiles found along