Desktop Environmental, Hydrological and Geotechnical Study

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Categories and 1994 Wetland Categories. No wetland sites of National Environmental Significance or sites of state significance were identified within PSP Area 25. 6.5 Heritage sites A search of the Hume Planning Scheme Heritage Overlay (sites of National, State, regional and local significance), Victoria Heritage Register/Database, Australian Heritage Database, Protected Matters Search Tool (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) was performed to located sites of historic significance on the site. Although no heritage sites were identified on PSP Area 25, five specific heritage sites were identified immediately adjacent to PSP Area 25. Project 230243-001-01 | File 20120912 PSP25 Desktop 230243.docx | 13 September 2012 | Revision 2 p 40
7. Recommendations 7.1 Contamination Based upon our environmental desktop evaluation and a review of the publicly available information, we note that potential for site contamination may exist and as such further site investigations should be conducted for the subject site known as the PSP 25 Area near Craigieburn in the City of Hume, Victoria. In accordance with the Victoria DSE Potentially Contaminated Land, General Practice Note, 2005 (DSE, 2005) recommendations for future assessment of individual site properties, based on use and potential for contamination are summarized in Table 16 and indicated on Figure 4 presented in Appendix A. Where land has been identified as potentially contaminated, a further investigation is necessary as part of the next stage of the planning process such as planning permit application or planning scheme amendment on a property by property basis (DSE, 2005). Of the fifty-four (54) site properties, further assessment is recommended for twenty-two (22) properties, with recommendations for environmental audits on four additional properties. In general, recommendations for assessment were made based on sensitive land use, such as large-scale intensive agriculture. The presence of significant (more than 0.5 ha) small-scale agriculture, abandoned vehicles, farm equipment or unidentified debris was considered secondary indicators of the need for assessment in the case of sensitive land use. Environmental audits were recommended for the former market garden at 810 Summerhill Road and properties used for large-scale intensive agriculture at 30 Amaroo Road, 185 Brookville Drive and 295 Brookville Drive, each of which was considered at high potential for contamination based on past and present land use. Due to the limited nature of the site inspection, additional site properties may be recommended for assessment in the future based on receipt of additional information not available at the time of this assessment. Intrusive sampling and analysis should be undertaken in accordance with National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (1999 NEPM) and draft 2011 NEPM, Australian Standard (2005) Guide to the investigation and sampling of sites with potentially contaminated soil Part 1: Non-volatile and semi-volatile compounds (AS 4482.1-2005), Australian Standard (1999) Guide to the sampling and investigation of potentially contaminated soil Part 2: Volatile substances (AS 4482.2-1999) and Victoria Environment Protection Authority, Industrial Waste Resource Guidelines (IWRG) Soil Sampling, 2009. The results of the sampling and analysis would be compared with guideline values for protection of human health and the environment as well as waste disposal criteria (as applicable). In addition, hazardous materials surveys should be carried out for structures identified for demolition or relocation. The surveys should address asbestos, lead-based paint, polychlorinated biphenyls in electrical fixtures, and hazardous materials storage. Should asbestos containing material be encountered during future investigations or construction, the testing, inspection and removal of asbestos materials are required by law to be undertaken by a suitably qualified and licensed asbestos specialist/removalist. Project 230243-001-01 | File 20120912 PSP25 Desktop 230243.docx | 13 September 2012 | Revision 2 p 41
Page 1: Precinct Structure Plan Area 25 Gro
Page 4 and 5: 3.1.1 Certificates of title 14 3.1.
Page 6 and 7: Glossary of terms AEC Area of Envir
Page 8 and 9: Recommendations for assessment of i
Page 10 and 11: There is an Urban Floodway Zone (UF
Page 12 and 13: • Compilation of known groundwate
Page 14 and 15: 2. Site identification 2.1 Location
Page 16 and 17: Table 1 Site property details No. A
Page 18 and 19: Sodosols are a soil order of the Au
Page 20 and 21: Table 2 Summary of key geotechnical
Page 22 and 23: 2.13.4 Groundwater resources and us
Page 24 and 25: 3. Records review 3.1 Search of pub
Page 26 and 27: Table 7 Aerial photograph review su
Page 28 and 29: Table 7 Aerial photograph review su
Page 30 and 31: The potential for off-site sources
Page 32 and 33: Table 9 Summary of site AECs Areas
Page 34 and 35: • Organochlorine and organophosph
Page 36 and 37: Table 12 Derivation of risk classes
Page 38 and 39: Table 15 Qualitative risk assessmen
Page 48 and 49: 6. Summary 6.1 Site contamination R
Page 52 and 53: 7.2 Geotechnical It is recommended
Page 54 and 55: Table 16 Assessment recommendations
Page 56 and 57: Table 16 Assessment recommendations
Page 58 and 59: 8. References Australian and New Ze

Desktop Environmental, Hydrological and Geotechnical Study

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?