AM-PM Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling Construction

Transcription

AM-PM Service Station,
65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling
Construction Environmental Management Plan
Report for Commercial and General
08 8331 2417
184 Magill Road, Norwood SA 5067
[email protected]
www.lbwep.com.au
Building strong relationships
that deliver solutions
AM-PM Service Station,
65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling
Construction Environmental Management Plan
Report for Commercial and General
Document Control
File
150659 R01 Rev1 JP
Revision
Rev 1
Date issued
9 July 2015
Author(s)
D Valiff
Principal review
JP
Approved for issue
Document Distribution
Revision
Date Issued
Client
Other
LBW|ep
DRAFT
26/05/2015
1 - PDF
-
1 x PDF - file
Rev 0
27/05/2015
1 - PDF
-
1 x PDF - file
Rev 1
9/07/2015
1 - PDF
-
1 x PDF - file
Table of Contents
1
2
3
4
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1
Proposed Development
1
1.2
Previous Investigations
1
1.2.1 General
1
1.2.2 Site Conditions and Geology
2
1.2.3 Soil Assessment Results
3
1.2.4 Groundwater Assessment Results
3
1.3
EPA CEMP Requirement
4
1.4
CEMP Objectives
4
Proposed Site Use Risk Management ................................................................................................ 6
2.1
Site Suitability for Commercial Use
6
2.2
Benefits of Proposed Use
6
Earthworks Method Statement ........................................................................................................... 7
3.1
Site Demolition and Clearance
7
3.2
General Site Excavation
7
3.3
UST Pits Excavation and Validation
8
3.4
Fill Importation
8
3.5
Classification and Off-site Disposal of Excavated Materials
8
3.6
Hold Points
9
3.7
CEMP Verification/Validation Report
9
Construction Environmental Management ................................................................................... 11
4.1
Management of Excavation Works - General
11
4.1.1 Stockpile Management and Odour and Dust Control
11
4.1.2 Erosion and Sediment Control
12
4.1.3 Noise and Vibration Management
12
4.1.4 Inspections and Monitoring
13
4.2
Management of New USTs Installation
13
4.3
Management of Building Construction Works
13
4.4
Groundwater Management
13
4.5
Dewatering Management Plan
14
4.5.1 Objectives and General Requirements
14
4.5.2 Potential Dewatering Impacts
15
4.5.3 Monitoring
15
4.5.4 Disposal of Contaminated Groundwater
15
Geotechnical Issues
16
4.6
5
Workplace Health and Safety .......................................................................................................... 17
5.1
Potential Hazards
5.2
Exposure Pathways
17
5.2.1 General
17
5.2.2 Dermal Contact
17
5.2.3 Inhalation of Toxic Vapours / Dust
17
5.2.4 Ingestion
18
Risk Control Measures
18
5.3
I:\Jobs\2015\150659 AM-PM Stirling CEMP\Report\150659 R01 Rev 1.docx
17
6
5.3.1 Flammable Atmospheres
18
5.3.2 PPE
18
5.3.3 Skin & Eye Contact
19
5.4
Monitoring Requirements
19
5.5
Training
19
Contingency Plans .............................................................................................................................. 20
6.1
General
20
6.2
Discovery of Additional Soil Contamination
20
7
Emergency Procedures...................................................................................................................... 21
8
CEMP Implementation ....................................................................................................................... 22
8.1
Roles and Responsibilities
22
8.2
Site Security
22
8.3
Management of Complaints and Non-Conformances
22
8.4
Review
22
8.5
Record Keeping
23
9
References............................................................................................................................................ 24
10
Limitations.............................................................................................................................................. 26
List of Tables
Table 1
Summary of Roles and Responsibilities
List of Appendices
A
Demolition & Site Clearance Plan and Proposed Site Redevelopment Plans
B
Works Environmental Management Plans
22
List of Acronyms
ASC NEPM
National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as
amended 2013)
EPA
Environment Protection Authority, Government of South Australia
EP Act
Environment Protection Act 1993, Government of South Australia
HIL/HSL
Health investigation/screening level
IWS
Intermediate Waste Soil
LBW|ep
LBW Environmental Projects Pty Ltd
LLCW
Low-level Contaminated Waste
mAHD
metres Australian Height Datum
mBGL
metres below ground level
mBTOC
metres below top of casing
NATA
National Association of Testing Authorities
PID
Photoionisation detector
PSI
Preliminary Site Investigation
QA/QC
Quality assurance / quality control
SA
South Australia
UST
Underground storage tank
VOC
Volatile organic compound
WDF
Waste derived fill
WF
Waste Fill
1
1
Introduction
LBW Environmental Projects (LBW|ep) was commissioned by Commercial and General to
prepare a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for management of historic site
contamination during proposed redevelopment works at the former Shell service station located
at 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling, South Australia (the site).
Previous comprehensive investigations on the subject site have identified the presence of
elevated petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in soils and groundwater (as detailed in Section
1.2).
This CEMP details the design and management measures to be implemented to:

minimise the risk of new site activities contributing to contamination of the site

prevent an increase in risks to the environment or human health from existing
contamination on the site.
The CEMP provides a basis for managing of excavation and disposal of existing impacted and
non-impacted soils on site and of managing contaminated groundwater should dewatering be
required and outlines the general methodology and scope of works associated with
redevelopment of the site. This document also provides verification that a suitably qualified and
experienced site contamination consultant will implement the CEMP and prepare the
Verification/Validation Report to confirm that works were completed in accordance with the
CEMP and SA EPA requirements.
1.1
Proposed Development
On behalf of the site owner, Commercial and General (C&G) intends to redevelop the site for
continued service station use.
The proposed redevelopment includes the construction/installation of:

a new canopy over the fuelling area in the central part

an automatic car wash and a plant room with 2.6 m screen in the north-western part of
the site

three fuel underground storage tanks (USTs) at the south western part of the site, in the
approximate locations of former UST pits

an underground LPG tank and SPEL tank for stormwater management in the central
portion

a single storey retail store building and a cafe in the eastern portion

courtyard in the centre of the southern portion and

car parking areas adjacent the retails store, retaining walls, fencing and signage.
The Demolition and Site Clearance Plan and Proposed Site Redevelopment Plans are contained
in Appendix A.
1.2
1.2.1
Previous Investigations
General
Several environmental site assessments undertaken for the site between 2010 and 2013 were
documented in the following reports and correspondence:
2

Environmental Site Investigation, Coles Express Service Station Stirling, 65 Mount Barker
Road, Stirling, South Australia. Environmental Resources Management (ERM) Australia
(February 2010);

Human and Environmental Risk Assessment, Coles Express Service Station Stirling (M404),
65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling, South Australia. ERM Australia (June 2010);

Tank Removal and Soil Validation Report, Coles Express Service Station Stirling (M404). ERM
Australia (21 February 2012);

Detailed Risk Assessment (SA EPA 05/17510), Former Coles Express Stirling, 65 Mount Barker
Road, Stirling, South Australia. ERM Australia (16 October 2012);

Letter from the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) to Shell, re – EPA Review: Detailed
Risk Assessment, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling SA. EPA ref. 60031 05/17510 (29 January
2013);

Detailed Risk Assessment Submittal and Review Process, CEXP Stirling (M404). ERM
Australia (20 February 2013);

Detailed Risk Assessment FINAL, Former Shell Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling
SA. ERM Australia (21 February 2013);

Detailed Risk Assessment FINAL, Former Shell Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling
SA. ERM Australia (22 March 2013);

Groundwater Monitoring Management Plan, Former Coles Express Stirling Service Station
(M404), 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling, South Australia. ERM Australia (22 March 2013); and

Letter from EPA to Shell, re - Detailed Risk Assessment and Groundwater Monitoring
Management Plan: Former Shell (Coles Express) Stirling Service Station, 65 Mount Barker
Road, Stirling SA. EPA ref. 60031 05/17510 (27 March 2013).
An independent review of the above documents was undertaken by LBW|ep with the purpose
of providing an opinion on whether the investigations undertaken by ERM Australia adequately
assessed the nature and extent of the soil and groundwater contamination at the site, and
whether the Detailed Risk Assessment (DRA) and Groundwater Monitoring Management Plan
(GMMP) complied with EPA guidelines ((letter dated 20 December 2013 addressed to Weeroona
Holdings Pty Ltd.).
1.2.2
Site Conditions and Geology
The site is predominantly covered with concrete and bitumen hard cover, with clean infill, grass
and weeds located in areas where infrastructure has been removed (UST areas, mechanic and
hoist pits) or hard cover damaged. The remainder of the site is covered with grass, weeds and
small trees, mostly around the site boundary.
There are no other environmentally significant features on the site.
Local geology is generally comprised of a thin (0.5 metres below ground level (mBGL)) layer of
imported fill (bedding sand) underlain by natural brown clays (0.5-1.5 mBGL.
Bedrock consisting of pale-grey, foliated and fractured sandstone was encountered at varying
depths, ranging from 0.5-4 mBGL (ERM, 2010). The fractured sandstone formation extends to 10
mBGL, the maximum depth of investigation at the site.
3
1.2.3
Soil Assessment Results
Hydrocarbon (TPH, BTEX, TRH and naphthalene) impacts were generally detected in soil at
depths between 0-2 mBGL beneath the former fuel USTs and bowsers, and in the southwest
corner of the property.
Fuel infrastructure including four USTs, three bowsers, a kerosene UST, a former waste oil tank and
480 m3 of fill and site soils were excavated and removed off site in 2011. Following validation
testing the excavated former UST pits were subsequently backfilled with virgin quarry sand
material.
Based on soil analytical results from site validation testing, residual hydrocarbon impacted soils
remained in-situ in sections of the walls and base of former UST pit excavations in the southwestern portion of the site, and reportedly in areas beneath former fuel bowsers and the canopy
supporting columns where soils could not be excavated.
Soil in the reminder of the site satisfied the adopted assessment criteria for commercial / industrial
use.
1.2.4
Groundwater Assessment Results
Groundwater assessment comprised installation and testing of a total of 21 on- and off-site
monitoring wells.
Hydrocarbon impacts were most recently identified in the shallow water table (approximately
0.001-3.5 mBGL, (ERM, 2012)) in two wells MW07 and MW22 located near the former UST area.
Elevated concentrations of benzene were identified in deeper groundwater (approximately 1.3-8
mBGL) in off-site monitoring well MW21.
Phase separated hydrocarbon (PSH) product (up to 5 mm thickness) was detected in on-site
groundwater well MW24 in October 2009. The PSH was not considered to be associated with the
shallow groundwater plume beneath the site, but was considered to be related to a minor
surface spill that entered the well casing. There was no PSH in well MW24 in the April 2012
groundwater monitoring event (GME).
Regional groundwater flow was inferred to be in a north and north-westerly direction with the
flow direction most likely being influenced by localised mounding of groundwater beneath the
site.
On 19 June 2009, the SA EPA was notified of existing groundwater petroleum hydrocarbon
impacts at the site, pursuant to Section 83A of the Environment Protection Act 1993, ‘Notification
of site contamination that affects or threatens underground water’.
A detailed risk assessment (DRA, ERM 2013), which was approved by the SA EPA in March 2013,
concluded that the residual hydrocarbon contamination in soil and groundwater did not pose
unacceptable risk to human health and environment under a continued commercial land use
scenario. It was also concluded that groundwater contamination had been decreasing via
natural attenuation since monitoring had begun.
To monitor the nature and extent of the residual hydrocarbon plume and confirm the stability
and reduction by natural attenuation of the residual hydrocarbons in the groundwater it was
recommended that further four 9-monthly GMEs be undertaken, in accordance with the
groundwater monitoring management plan (GMMP, ERM, March 2013).
To minimise/ prevent the risk posed by off-site groundwater potentially impacted by migration of
hydrocarbons it was also recommended that a Prohibition / Restriction of Groundwater Use Zone
be implemented under the Section 103S of the Environment Protection Act 1993.
4
1.3
EPA CEMP Requirement
The SA EPA has advised (letters dated 4 May 2015 and 22 June 2015) that given the proposed
development’s USTs are to be located in an area of residual soil impacts and the limitations of
previous site soil assessment and former UST area validation, contaminated soil may be
encountered during site development work. This exposure to impacted soils may increase the risk
to human health and the potential for environment nuisance or harm, if not property managed.
This CEMP has been developed, for implementation during construction, to ensure site
contamination issues are adequately addressed in accordance with EPA’s publication,
Environmental Management of On-site Remediation. The CEMP incorporates the following
aspects:

air quality, including odour and dust control

surface water, including erosion and sediment control

soils, including fill importation, stockpile management and prevention of soil
contamination

groundwater, including prevention of groundwater contamination and management of
potentially contaminated groundwater during dewatering activities (if any)

occupational health and safety

the engagement of a suitably qualified and experienced site contamination consultant
to assist in implementation and maintenance of the CEMP, with particular involvement in:
–
management of contaminated material in accordance with EPA and other relevant
guidelines
–
validation (and associated reporting) of Underground Storage Systems (USS)
excavations in accordance with the National Environment Protection (Assessment of
Site Contamination) Measure (ASC NEPM) 1999 and other EPA guidelines prior to
backfilling of pits or replacement of USTs.

management of records and documentation associated with the CEMP

confirmation that residual contamination does not pose unacceptable risk to human
health or the environment and that the site is suitable for the proposed land use

demolition, soil excavation, classification / validation of the spoil for disposal purposes
from the central and northern portion of the site

dewatering management plan including the control measures for removal of the
perched water and the excavated contaminated saturated soils and disposal offsite

verification at completion that a suitably qualified and experienced site contamination
consultant has implemented the CEMP.
This CEMP addresses SA EPA requirements and provides management and control measures for
implementation which are directed at confirming site suitability for the proposed use (service
station) and reducing the risk of new activities contributing to further site contamination.
On completion of the construction/ redevelopment works, qualified and experienced site
contamination consultant (LBW|ep) will prepare a CEMP Verification/Validation Report to
confirm that works were implemented in accordance with this CEMP and SA EPA requirements.
1.4
CEMP Objectives
The objectives of this CEMP are to provide:
5

design and management measures that are required to ensure continued suitability for
service station use while minimising risks to site workers, the general public and the
environment

construction management measures for the proposed works and for any contaminated
soil discovered during works, including validation sampling

contingency measures to be implemented in the event of the discovery of additional soil
or groundwater contamination during construction of new facilities and infrastructure

methodologies for monitoring of the effectiveness of management measures.
6
2
Proposed Site Use Risk Management
2.1
Site Suitability for Commercial Use
The site is being redeveloped for continued service station use. The results of soil and
groundwater sampling confirm that contamination is present. Refer to Section 1.2.
The redevelopment of the site (and hence disturbance of soils through excavation activities and
groundwater during any dewatering activities) is likely to expose site workers to contaminated
soil/groundwater and hydrocarbon vapours during the construction period. These potential risks
can be controlled and managed during site redevelopment.
In the longer term, it is unlikely that the proposed site activities will increase either existing
contamination levels on the site or exposure of vapours to site workers and visitors, given the site’s
continued use as a service station and the proposed layout (see Appendix A).
Proposed capping of the site with concrete will minimise vapour transmission to the surface and
infiltration of fuel spills or stormwater during the service station’s operation, hence minimising the
migration of contamination present in groundwater.
Where practicable, contaminated soil exposed during excavation of the pits for installation of
new USTs and contaminated water drawn to the surface during any dewatering activity will be
disposed off-site, decreasing ongoing groundwater petroleum hydrocarbon contamination
sources.
2.2
Benefits of Proposed Use
The design and management measures adopted for the proposed site use (i.e. installation and
operation of petroleum hydrocarbon storage and dispensing infrastructure) will minimise risk of
further site contamination.
Appropriate management of any residual soil contamination during construction will reduce
migration of contamination from existing sources.
Ongoing use of the site as a service station will limit potential exposure that might otherwise
occur if the site was developed for more sensitive land use, and provides continued access to
site groundwater for ongoing monitoring.
Fuel storage and dispensing infrastructure will be installed at the south-western end of the service
station site in the location of the former (removed) Shell fuel USTs. Proposed fuel storage and
supply infrastructure is designed to prevent leakage of fuels which could result in additional
contamination of soil and groundwater.
7
3
Earthworks Method Statement
The Site Manager will be appointed by C&G, Construction Director and Principal Contractor. The
Site Manager will be responsible for managing the demolition / earthworks and the requirements
of this CEMP.
3.1
Site Demolition and Clearance
Site demolition and clearance of the existing structures will require the removal of buildings and
infrastructure, including footings and underground services. It is understood that the UST
infrastructure has been removed and validated to the practicable extent (as summarised in
Section 1.2). The removal of any remaining infrastructure must be undertaken in a manner that
minimises the mixing or spread of potentially contaminated soils with underlying or adjacent soils,
and collects any contaminated groundwater for off-site disposal/treatment.
Existing site structures will be demolished in accordance with the Demolition and Site Clearance
Plan (Attachment A) and demolition specification documentation available and includes:

existing old service station building / workshop located in the central part of the site

existing above ground LPG gas tank and electric motor

existing canopy and concrete ramp in the south-western part of the site

other built structures, concrete slabs, driveways, bitumen surfaces, concrete kerbs, drains,
walls, concrete grated pit, concrete paths, slabs, footings, services and fences.
The demolition wastes, including concrete, bricks and other demolition rubble, are to be
recycled or disposed off-site as non-contaminated waste.
3.2
General Site Excavation
Following the demolition program the sub-base fill layer, typically ranging in thickness from 100
mm to 400 mm, will be excavated from the entire site as part of civil works, to achieve design
finished levels. The maximum excavation depth of 1.2 mBGL is proposed in the south –central
portion of the site near the proposed courtyard area.
A small volume of soils (approximately 100-150 m3) excavated from the remainder of the site and
confirmed to be clean may be reused on site for filling the north-eastern portion (proposed car
parking area) to achieve the required finished levels. It is considered that soil validation sampling
of the excavated surfaces across the general site (with the exception of the former fuel USTs and
bowsers in the south-west part of the property) is not required based on the results of the previous
soil assessments.
Following the completion of the soil excavation to the required levels the site may be partially
backfilled (if required) with appropriate clean imported fill / quarry material. Service trenches
across the site will also be backfilled with imported quarry material.
Excavations for footings and services to the new retail building and trenching work are not
expected to intersect contaminated soils. However should any potentially contaminated
materials be observed during the excavation works contingent actions described in Section 7
must be implemented.
Excavations for footings and services to the new retail building and trenching work are not
expected to intersect shallow groundwater. However, should any perched groundwater be
observed during the excavation works, actions described in Section 4.5, Dewatering
Management Plan, must be implemented.
8
3.3
UST Pits Excavation and Validation
A total of five fuel USTs are to be installed as part of the site redevelopment. Three large USTs
(marked as T70 on the attached development plan) will be installed in the location of former
(removed) USTs with trim to the excavation as required to fit the new USTs (to a maximum depth
of 5 m BGL).
Following the excavation of new UST pits, an environmental consultant (LBW|ep representative)
will undertake soil validation sampling of the walls and the base of the new UST pit excavations in
order to assess residual contamination potential risk to groundwater, and to determine whether
additional excavation (to the extent allowable by site infrastructure) is warranted to minimise this
risk.
Remote fill points will be installed in close proximity to the new USTs and dispensing bowsers will be
installed under the new canopy to the north-east. Installation of USTs and infrastructure may
unearth soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbon, which will be managed as detailed in
Section 4.2.
If dewatering is required during tank pit excavation, dewatering management plan is to be
enacted (refer to Section 7.2).
A Photoionisation Detector (PID) will be used to monitor volatile organic compound (VOC)
concentrations in excavations and removed soils during works. Works will cease where the PID
indicates VOC concentrations greater than 100 ppmv in the airspace within excavations.
Soil demonstrating high levels of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination, and hence potential risk
to groundwater on the basis of field VOC monitoring and visual and olfactory field observations,
will be excavated to a practicable extent.
Following completion of excavation works equipment used for excavation of potentially
contaminated soil must be cleaned of loose soil prior to use in another area.
Following successful validation the UST pits may be partially backfilled (if required) with
appropriate clean imported fill / quarry material, if necessary, and then used to accommodate
the new USTs.
3.4
Fill Importation
Any fill to be imported to site is to be verified as suitable for use on site. The importation of fill must
comply with EPA’s Standard for the Production of Waste Derived Fill (2010) and be from a
documented source.
Suitability of fill material must be confirmed by the environmental consultant prior to any
imported fill material being brought onto site. Documentation and laboratory certificates must
accompany imported quarry materials before importing and placing them on site, and records
retained for completing the CEMP Verification/Site Validation report. Alternatively suitability of
imported fill material can be confirmed by LBW|ep via sampling and laboratory testing prior to
transporting to the site.
Review of documentation for any imported fill to site is to be undertaken by the Construction
Manager.
3.5
Classification and Off-site Disposal of Excavated Materials
All excavated soils will either be stored on site (subject to available space) or transported to an
appropriately licensed waste facility (e.g. Southern Waste ResourceCo, Main South Road,
McLaren Vale) for temporary storage and further sampling and testing for disposal classification.
Potentially contaminated soils excavated from the UST pits must be stored separately from the
potentially non-contaminated soils (based on the previous soil assessments results) excavated
from remaining areas of the site.
9
Soils from the UST pits will not be reused on site and will be appropriately disposed of to a licensed
waste facility based on soil classification results. A small volume of soils from the remainder of the
site may be reused as fill for the north-eastern portion.
Waste soil classifications for on-site reuse or off-site disposal at a licensed waste depot will be
made in accordance with EPA Information Sheet (March 2010) Current criteria for the
classification of waste including Industrial and Commercial Waste (Listed) and Waste Soil.
To achieve the timeframe required for construction schedule needs, the soil classification
laboratory analysis will be requested on a fast turnaround time (24-48 hours).
Based on the laboratory results LBW|ep will assign the waste disposal classification and advise
the client and the licensed facility. Excavated soils can be classified and disposed of as Waste Fill
(WF), Intermediate Waste Soil (IWS), Low Level Contaminated Waste (LLCW) or High Level
Contaminated Waste (HLCW), depending on the concentrations of contaminants present in the
soil.
Waste soils will be transported off-site under the following protocols:
3.6

each load is to be accompanied by either a completed Waste Tracking Form (WTF) or
Waste Transport Certificate (WTC) in accordance with EPA Guideline 415/10 Waste
Transport Certificate (2007)

each load must be covered and transported by an EPA licensed waste transport
contractor

soil or mud from vehicle tyres is not to be tracked off-site causing fouling of roads

copies of waste soil disposal records are to be provided to LBW|ep’s site supervisor and
to C&G within one day of waste disposal occurring.
Hold Points
The new USTs will not be installed until the tank pit has been appropriately validated by the
environmental consultant and confirmation of acceptability of residual contamination risk
provided in writing to the Site Manager. This requirement is in accordance with the SA EPA (May
2015) letter which states:
“The CEMP is required to incorporate a definitive statement to the planning authority on the
suitability of the validation program from a suitably qualified consultant. That is, the consultant
must state that the soils present will not pose unacceptable risks to human health and the
environment taking into accounts the proposed use(s) within three months of the site
remediation.”
No on-site reuse or off-site disposal of excavated soils will occur until classification advice has
been provided in writing by the environmental consultant (following sampling and testing) or a
storage agreement has been entered into with an appropriately licensed waste management
facility for potentially contaminated soils (if soil classification is to occur off-site).
3.7
CEMP Verification/Validation Report
The implementation of the CEMP will be undertaken by a suitably qualified and experienced site
contamination consultant – LBW|ep. On completion of the construction/redevelopment works,
LBW|ep will prepare a CEMP Verification/Validation Report to:

document the remediation (if any) and validation works and indicate the final extents of
excavation

confirm that the works were implemented in accordance with this CEMP and SA EPA
requirements and discuss where works deviated from the plan (if any)
10

conclude on the suitability of the site for the proposed use as a service station and that
residual contamination does not pose unacceptable risk to human health and the
environment.
11
4
Construction Environmental Management
This section is intended to provide information on site specific environmental management issues
and outline any management measures required to minimise risks to human health and the
environment during the demolition, excavation and construction works.
General management of excavation works is outlined in the sections below. Detailed and more
specific guidance is provided in environmental management plans for each identified
construction activity, attached in Appendix B.
4.1
Management of Excavation Works - General
Proposed general construction management measures are directed at management of:

air quality (odour and dust control)

surface water, including erosion and sediment control

soils, including fill importation, stockpile management and prevention of soil
contamination

groundwater, including prevention of groundwater contamination and management of
potentially contaminated groundwater during dewatering activities (if any)

noise and vibration control.
4.1.1
Stockpile Management and Odour and Dust Control
The following requirements and control mechanisms should be implemented during the site
earthworks:

Earthworks contractor will have access to a water cart to use for dust suppression
purposes. Application of water (via water cart / or hand held hose) to excavations,
exposed surfaces and stockpiled soils should be undertaken as required.

Excavated soil will not be stockpiled on site unless the appointed consultant confirms that
the soil is unlikely to be contaminated, in which case it can remain on site up to one week
(as long as dust and sedimentation issues are managed).

Earthworks will temporary be ceased during high wind and dust periods.

Hard stand, operational and loading areas will be cleaned regularly to minimise dust.

Stockpiled soils will be covered to prevent dust generation and kept to a height of less
than 2 metres. Potentially contaminated soil can be stockpiled temporarily (2 days or less)
or directly loaded onto trucks and transported off-site to a licensed facility.

Any odorous or stained soils encountered during excavation will be covered during
temporary storage (in readiness for transport off-site) to prevent odour causing nuisance
issues or impacting surrounding property users/owners.

Where excessively odorous material is being stockpiled, consideration will be given to the
application of odour suppressants in addition to the use of covers (where practical).

On completion of stockpiling activities each day, the stockpile will be covered to prevent
dust generation, erosion, water infiltration and escape of odours. Suitable covers may
include tarpaulins and plastic sheeting, appropriately weighed down to prevent being
blown off by wind. Section 7 summarises contingency actions in case of such an event.
12
The dust monitoring program will include two aspects initially, these being:

visual observation of dust leaving the site perimeter

implementation of a complaints management system and maintenance of a Complaints
Register which will also document the response and actions to complaints.
Continuous visual observation of dust levels will enable rapid identification of potential dust issues
and implementation of appropriate dust control measures as required.
4.1.2
Erosion and Sediment Control
To reduce erosion and sediment runoff the following stormwater management measures will be
implemented at the site:

Stockpiled soils shall be placed in a bunded area to contain runoff from stockpiles and
prevent erosion and sedimentation from upstream stormwater runoff.

Stormwater controls will be installed to redirect runoff around excavation areas. Sediment
control devices (such as hay bales, silt fences or Geofabric socks) will be used by the
contractor to protect stormwater drains and prevent sediment laden runoff.

Temporary drainage channels and detention pondage will be installed, as required, to
appropriately manage stormwater; diversion drains will be constructed to minimise runoff
from rainfall flowing into the works area.

Sediment fencing will be installed in drainage lines which discharge off-site (though offsite discharge will not be allowed as a norm).

Regular inspections of the site drainage system will be undertaken by an experienced
and respected excavation contractor and the Site Manager (or representative).

The site will be kept clean and tidy to reduce the potential for litter impacting surrounding
properties.
4.1.3
Noise and Vibration Management
To mitigate excessive noise which may arise as a result of works at the site, and to minimise the
associated impact on surrounding properties, all works will be undertaken in accordance with all
applicable State and local noise regulations.
Noise management measures will be employed at the site during the pre-development work,
including:

staging of earthworks to minimise the extent of cumulative noise and vibration impacts

fitting all on-site and visiting heavy vehicles (excavators, jackhammers, plant and
equipment associated with the dewatering process and other equipment utilised as part
of the redevelopment work) with appropriate silencing devices

selection of all motorised equipment used on site on the basis of its noise performance
and compliance with regulatory standards for noise generation

minimising nuisance noise impact to residents in surrounding properties by scheduling
activities which generate high noise levels for short term duration, wherever possible, and
to times of the day which are least intrusive.
The level of vibrations will be monitored by the earthmoving contractor responsible for activities
that are likely to cause vibration and advising the Site Manager of such activities.
13
Earthworks will be undertaken during EPA approved construction hours.
4.1.4
Inspections and Monitoring
C&G will be responsible for management of the site and potential impacts from planned
activities during redevelopment. C&G’s Site Manager will undertake daily inspection during all
works to ensure that controls are appropriately implemented.
4.2
Management of New USTs Installation
The main exposure aspects to be managed during the tank pit excavation and installation of
new USTs include:

interaction with neighbours who need to be consulted in relation to the works

risk to human health from exposure to vapour during the works

stockpiling and classification of soils for possible disposal off-site and appropriate removal
of discovered hydrocarbon contaminated soils from the UST area to the extent
practicable (source removal)

general site aesthetics

backfill of excavation

possible dewatering.
4.3
Management of Building Construction Works
This section relates to construction of the proposed development structures including retail
building, canopy and sign posts.
The development will require relatively shallow excavation, typically within the upper 1.5 m of fill
and soil for the construction of footings and underground services.
The main exposure aspects to be managed during this work include:

risk to human health from exposure to vapour from deeper contamination during works in
this area

disposal or reuse of potentially contaminated soil

site aesthetics.
Trenching work is not expected to extend beyond a depth of 2 metres and is unlikely to intersect
contaminated soils, which are reportedly present at greater depth.
Appropriate OH&S controls and monitoring will be implemented during construction work – refer
to Section 6.
4.4
Groundwater Management
Groundwater beneath the site has been impacted by historical site activities. The removal of
residual contaminated soil during site works will minimise the potential ongoing source of
groundwater contamination and result in reduction of groundwater contamination plume
migration over time.
Proposed commercial development (using state of the art storage systems) and capping the site
with concrete will minimise infiltration of fuel spills into groundwater.
14
LBW|ep understands that groundwater monitoring is to remain the responsibility of the Viva
Energy Australia (former Shell Company of Australia), and is separate to the implementation of
this CEMP, though data, where relevant, from monitoring events may be used as information, as
required.
Groundwater monitoring will be undertaken in accordance with the ERM (2013) GMMP
developed for the site and approved by the SA EPA. In accordance with this GMMP four GMEs
are to be undertaken (commencing in 2013) on a 9 monthly basis by a suitably qualified
environmental consultant to monitor the hydrocarbon plume and confirm the stability and
declining trend of pre-existing groundwater hydrocarbon contamination. It is understood that
following the completion of four sampling events (in 2016), the monitoring program will be reevaluated.
The following management measures will be undertaken to reduce the risk of groundwater
impact by construction activities:

Appropriate stormwater management measures (including stormwater diversion up
gradient of the excavation) as summarised in Section 4.1 will be undertaken by the
contractor to prevent contamination of stormwater and to minimise runoff entering open
excavations onsite and potentially infiltrating to groundwater.

Appropriate stockpile management / control measures such as bunding and covering of
stockpiles during storage on site, will be part of the overall groundwater management /
contamination prevention strategy.

Residual contaminated soil will be excavated from the tank pits to the extent practicable
prior to installation of new USTs, decreasing ongoing groundwater petroleum
hydrocarbon contamination sources.

Following the installation of the new USTs excavations will be backfilled with clean
imported fill / quarry material. Excavations will be backfilled as soon as practicable to
minimise groundwater infiltration.

Tank pit excavations will be dewatered if required in accordance with the procedures
outlined in Section 4.5.

The UST fuelling area pump stands will be capped with concrete pavement.
It is important that existing monitoring wells are protected during demolition and construction
work. Any damaged / decommissioned wells should be reported to the Site Manager and may
be reinstalled for the purposes of implementation of the GMMP.
As advised previously in LBW|ep’s letter to Weeroona Holdings (dated 20 December 2013) this
important issue should be agreed with Shell prior to commencing any site works. It may also be
important to understand EPA’s position on a revised monitoring well network following demolition
and construction. The EPA may be prepared to accept a reduced network of wells, which would
reduce the cost of well reinstallation work and ongoing monitoring.
4.5
4.5.1
Dewatering Management Plan
Objectives and General Requirements
Perched shallow groundwater may be present beneath the site at depths ranging from 0.001 m
to 3.5 m BGL (ERM, 2012) and the proposed USTs excavation to a maximum depth of 5 m BGL
may potentially intercept perched groundwater.
Dewatering may therefore be required in order to remove perched groundwater infiltrating into
the UST pits and / or other service trenches / excavations across the site during excavation.
Management of dewatering activities will be undertaken by the Site Manager and the
Dewatering Operator for the duration of the site construction activities.
15
Based on the reported low recovery from the site groundwater monitoring wells and the low
groundwater recharge rate exhibited during GMEs conducted at the site, the shallow
groundwater is considered to be low yielding. Therefore, potential volume of groundwater
generated during redevelopment works requiring dewatering is expected to be low.
Should dewatering be required, works are to be halted and a suitably qualified and experienced
site contamination consultant (LBW|ep) must be appointed to determine an appropriate
management/response strategy.
4.5.2
Potential Dewatering Impacts
General environmental control measures outlined in Section 4.1 will be undertaken by the Site
Manager to ensure the dewatering process does not cause any of the following adverse
impacts:

threat to aquatic fauna or flora

soil erosion or local flooding, erosion of structures or services

sediment build-up in drains and waterways

changes to the water table, water quality or hydrology that may cause adverse effects
on neighbouring properties or water resources

significant change of pH in soil, surface waters or groundwater

leaching of contaminant concentrations

hydrocarbon odour that may potentially emanate from dewatering activities negatively
impacting on properties surrounding the site

noise nuisance to nearby properties from site plant such as pumps and generators used in
the dewatering process

harm to property.
Any incidental detrimental effects on people, property or water bodies must cause the
dewatering system operator to stop work and immediately report the incident to the Site
Manager. Measures must be taken to effectively remedy any damage.
4.5.3
Monitoring
To manage the potential for impacts in relation to the dewatering volume and quality of the
groundwater, the dewatering system operator should carry out monitoring as follows:

Dewatering discharge rate during the works (using a water meter)

Static water levels in the surrounding water table (if required), e.g. via existing adjacent
wells to assess draw-down effects (and any impacts on structures).
4.5.4
Disposal of Contaminated Groundwater
Based on the depth to perched shallow water at the site, it is anticipated that dewatering may
be required during portions of the excavation works. Groundwater beneath the site is
contaminated hence testing of groundwater resulting from any dewatering activities will be
required to determine appropriate disposal methods. Hydrocarbon impacted groundwater
would not be suitable for discharge to the environment / waterways, the stormwater system and
/ or sewer, so it would require containment and disposal offsite.
16
If required, groundwater is to be sampled in the excavation or from a trial dewatering point and
classified for appropriate management or disposal prior to works occurring.
Two available dewatering and disposal options, depending on the volume and speed of
perched water recharge / seepage, are described below.
Option 1 - Saturated Soils Blending
Given the identified perched water recharge is slow, it is expected that most of the perched
water will be removed together with excavation of the contaminated soil media.
The blending of saturated soils with non-saturated soils during the excavation works is anticipated
to produce a spadable material that can be readily loaded into trucks and transported offsite.
The classification testing and off-site disposal of excavated materials will be undertaken in
accordance with the process described in Section 3.5.
This option is only possible where water does not collect in the excavation to the extent that it
affects works.
Option 2 – Vacuum Truck
If groundwater recharge is found to be too high for Option 1, provision will be made for the
containment and disposal of potentially contaminated perched groundwater if and when it is
encountered. A vacuum truck will be on standby during the UST pits excavation that may
potentially intercept perched groundwater. Prior to the USTs excavation / installation works the
Site Manager shall ensure the availability on site of a balance tank with capacity to contain a
minimum of two hours of dewatering flow.
Groundwater collected during dewatering will be disposed of off-site by licensed liquid waste
disposal contractors, e.g. Veolia Environmental Services located at Churchill Road, Kilburn, SA.
Given the small scale of proposed on-site dewatering activities, low groundwater recharge rate
and immediate removal of water / seepage off site by licensed waste disposal contractors for
off-site disposal (as required), the potential for these activities to increase the risk or to pose
unacceptable risks to human health and the environment taking into account the proposed use
and to facilitate off-site migration of hydrocarbons is considered to be low.
4.6
Geotechnical Issues
LBW|ep makes no judgment on the suitability of soils with respect to geotechnical performance.
Assessment of geotechnical suitability of fill materials should be made regularly by the engineer
during the works.
17
5
Workplace Health and Safety
This section includes suggested Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) management measures for
contractors to use as a guide to manage workers and visitors’ safety via their relevant Job Safety
Analysis (JSA) and safety plans to comply with their WHS management/Worksafe requirements.
All site workers involved with construction and earthworks should be required to read and confirm
their understanding of WHS requirements prior to commencing any works on the site, which
should form part of the site induction process.
5.1
Potential Hazards
A hazard of potential exposure to contaminants in soils exists for:

contractors undertaking site excavation works at the source site

the community in the surrounding area

contractors undertaking soil transportation to any potential disposal site.
Such work activities are of relatively low concern regarding long term or chronic human health
risks, as they are expected to be infrequent and of short-term duration only. However, some
activities pose a risk to the health and safety of site workers and the public, and must be
managed appropriately to minimise the risk.
The hazards and exposure pathways that can be encountered when working in the vicinity of
contaminated soils are discussed below.
5.2
Exposure Pathways
5.2.1
General
Typical exposure pathways to contaminated soils include:

Dermal contact with contaminants present in soil

Inhalation of contaminants, volatile components and contaminated dust

Oral ingestion.
5.2.2
Dermal Contact
Contaminants may be absorbed through the skin by the following mechanisms:

Direct contact with contaminated soil

Splashing of contaminated water and mud, especially through the eyes

Contaminated dust falling into hair or face.
5.2.3
Inhalation of Toxic Vapours / Dust
Movement of soils has the potential to generate nuisance dust. Inhalation of contaminated dust
has the potential to cause a risk to the health of site workers and the surrounding community.
Site workers are required to monitor visible dust levels, wet down the working area if visible dust is
detected. Contractors must cease work and immediately contact the Construction Manager
18
responsible for the works if the visible dust cannot be prevented by the aid of wetting down the
area whilst working.
A Photo-ionisation Detector (PID) will be used to monitor VOC concentrations in the tank pits and
excavated soils during works. While vapour (as evidenced by odour) generated by the site soils is
not expected to pose an unacceptable health risk, should odour levels become uncomfortable
to workers during any trench work in the retention area or should the PID indicate VOC
concentrations greater than 100 ppmv in the airspace within excavations, work will be
rescheduled to allow time for odour levels to reduce with natural ventilation.
Ventilation may be increased via mechanical blowers also as required.
No special vapour mitigation system is anticipated to be needed for the underfloor of the retail
building. However, this could change if the site layout changes significantly from the current
disposition. Vapour mitigation would be required in the event there was a genuine potential of
unacceptable risk to the health of workers in the retail outlet from exposure to petroleum
vapours.
5.2.4
Ingestion
Workers may be exposed to contamination via accidental ingestion of contaminated soils (e.g.
eating or wiping face / mouth without washing hands or while wearing contaminated gloves).
5.3
Risk Control Measures
Each contractor undertaking works at the site must develop a site safety plan specific to their
own activities, but consistent with the overarching health and safety management principles to
be implemented by the principal contractor. The site safety plan must describe measures and
actions to be implemented by site staff to ensure a safe work area is maintained. The site safety
plan must identify the risks and hazards associated with the required scopes of work and outline
measures to be implemented to mitigate those risks.
The following provides guidance for risk control measures in relation to residual site
contaminated.
5.3.1
Flammable Atmospheres
Residual hydrocarbons vapours emanating from soils may produce flammable atmospheres
where ventilation is poor, such as in deep and narrow excavations. In the vent that such
excavations are required, care should be taken to ensure all ignition sources are isolated from
the work area, to the extent practicable.
Ventilation may be increased where necessary via wider excavation or the use of mechanical
blowers.
Contractors with the potential to encounter flammable vapours within their works shall include
appropriate controls within their work method statements, including the provision of a fire
extinguisher(s) ready at the work area.
5.3.2
PPE
All field staff (including contractors) must wear the following personal protective equipment (PPE)
at all times when undertaking activities associated with the earthworks including excavation of
contaminated soils:

Protective gloves (to be worn whenever there is potential for dermal contact with soil);

Safety glasses;

Steel toed boots;
19

Hard hat (where overhead structures/machinery are present);

Coveralls / long pants & long sleeved shirt; and

A fluorescent traffic vest and/or approved long sleeved hi-visibility work shirt with
reflective strips in good condition.
Other PPE (including but not limited to ear plugs and respirators) must be available to all staff
while on-site. The PPE must satisfy the above and the minimum requirements of the principal
contractor, whichever is the most protective.
5.3.3
Skin & Eye Contact
Wearing of appropriate PPE such as boots, long sleeves / coveralls and pants reduces the
opportunity for skin contact. Nitrile (or waterproof) gloves act as a barrier between the skin and
the contaminated soil, helping avoid contact with hands.
Wearing safety glasses protects the eyes against splashed product. Head protection can prevent
contaminated product from falling in hair or on the face.
Good hygiene needs to be observed at all times, including washing of hands and face prior to
eating, drinking and smoking.
5.4
Monitoring Requirements
Workers are required to monitor visible dust levels. The work area shall be wet down immediately
if visible dust is detected.
Workers must cease work and immediately advise the construction contractor if the visible dust
cannot be prevented by the aid of wetting down the area whilst working. The contractor shall
promptly advise the client manager should this situation occur.
Toxic vapours are invisible and often have little or no odour. Monitoring vapours in workers’
breathing zones during all excavation works should be undertaken using a PID. If levels of toxicity
increase the worker must leave the affected area and investigate the use of breathing
apparatus.
5.5
Training
All site workers should be inducted in the requirements of the WHS measures for contaminated
materials at the site, prior to commencing work.
The principal contractor should maintain a register of site-specific inductions regarding the WHS
measures provided to site workers and visitors.
20
6
Contingency Plans
6.1
General
The following events would be considered anomalous / unexpected to the site redevelopment
works and would require contingent action:

discovery of unexpected or unknown soil contamination.
If this issue arises, activation of the appropriate Contingency Plan/s (outlined below) and
immediate reporting and inspection by the suitably qualified and experienced site
contamination consultant LBW|ep would be required.
6.2
Discovery of Additional Soil Contamination
The location of new USTs is expected to encounter contaminated soils and soil sampling (and
analysis) of excavated material shall be undertaken following removal. Contaminated soil (and
potentially groundwater) may however be encountered during excavation works elsewhere on
the site. Contaminated soil could be potentially distinguishable by hydrocarbon or other odour,
staining relative to natural condition.
Site workers should be vigilant in monitoring site conditions to manage risk for undocumented site
contamination, per the protocols described below:

Excavation is to cease where potentially contaminated soil is observed (suspect colour,
odour, texture of soils, or inclusion of anthropogenic materials) and the suitably qualified
and experienced site contamination consultant shall inspect the soils and advise on
appropriate management action.

Any soil already excavated shall be temporarily stockpiled on an impermeable surface,
covered and clearly identified, for sampling and classification by the environmental
consultant. The soil validation and classification laboratory analysis will be requested on a
fastest turnaround time (24-48 hours). If the analysis results are not likely to be available
within the timeframe required for construction needs onsite (i.e. construction activity will
prevent stockpiling onsite), the soil should be transported to a licensed facility under a
temporary storage agreement for off-site sampling and classification by the
environmental consultant prior to appropriate disposal.

In-situ soil which is to be excavated from the suspect area must be sampled and tested,
risks assessed and advice provided by the environmental consultant, prior to any further
excavation occurring.

Where soil is proven to be contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons or other
contaminants, the excavation must be validated by the environmental consultant to
provide baseline data relative to future use of the subject area.

The Site Manager will undertake daily inspection during excavation works to ensure that
any potentially contaminated soil discovered is appropriately managed, and is ultimately
responsible for appropriate disposal of any soil.
21
7
Emergency Procedures
Emergency procedures will be detailed in a site specific Health, Environment and Safety Plan
and include, but not be limited to:

oil or other contamination spillage

collapse or potential collapse of a structure

fire and explosion

failure of any control structures

industrial accident.
The first priority is the safety of any persons either workers or others. Whatever reasonable actions
are necessary to protect safety will be taken. The site WHS Plan will outline actions to be taken in
relation to safety of persons, if these circumstances eventuate.
The second priority is to quickly minimise the environmental damage. All emergency action
should take place as soon as possible after the event. Actions to be taken may include:

containment of any pollution by booms, silt fences or other means. Supplies of silt fences
are to be kept on site.

temporary re-establishment of the environmental control structure in place.

collection of appropriate environmental samples to assess the extent of the problem.
In the event of an emergency situation arising, the Site Manager shall be contacted immediately
after all persons are accounted for and appropriate immediate actions to control environmental
pollution have been taken.
22
8
CEMP Implementation
8.1
Roles and Responsibilities
The Site Manager will be appointed by C&G, Construction Director / Principal Contractor. The
Site Manager will be responsible for managing the requirements of and changes to this CEMP.
Table 1
Summary of Roles and Responsibilities
Organisation
Role
Representative and Contact Details
65 Mt Barker Road Pty/Ltd
Site owner
c/- Commercial and General
Commercial and General
Site Manager / Construction
Director / Principal Contractor
Michael Georgiou
0408 857 717
[email protected]
LBW Environmental
Projects
Environmental Consultant
Jarrod Bishop, Dilara Valiff
8331 2417
[email protected]
8.2
Site Security
There is the potential for members of the public to access the site during the demolition and
construction works. Access to the site development works must be controlled at all times to
prevent personal injury or exposure to contaminated soil as follows.

To prevent any member of the public in coming into contact with exposed contaminated
soil the work area(s) shall be secured by appropriate barricades / temporary fencing
during any demolition / excavation works. This area will be clearly signed to provide
advice on the hazard with appropriate signage stating “No unauthorised access”.

Deep excavation areas will also be clearly signed to advise of the hazard and the
excavation. Excavations will be backfilled as soon as practicable.

Access to the site during work hours should be controlled via on-site permitting or
inductions and a sign in/out system.

Where required, appropriate traffic management controls will be provided by
experienced contractors during truck movements from site onto public roads.

Regular inspections of the site security must be conducted by the Construction Manager.
8.3
Management of Complaints and Non-Conformances
The Site Manager must retain records of any complaints received, how they were dealt with and
any follow up action that occurred.
8.4
Review
The CEMP will be reviewed and updated, as required, in response to:

actions from complaints or non-conformances

changes to EPA requirements, guidelines and regulations
23

a directive from SA EPA or the environmental consultant

changes to the planned activity for which this CEMP has been developed.
8.5
Record Keeping
Records will be kept of the following:

changes to the CEMP

minutes of meetings

correspondence from or to EPA/Council related to the CEMP

waste disposal documentation related to the CEMP

inspection/survey/test reports

non-conformances and complaints.
24
9
References
Detailed Risk Assessment (SA EPA 05/17510), Former Coles Express Stirling, 65 Mount Barker Road,
Stirling, South Australia. Environmental Resources Management Australia (16 October 2012)
Detailed Risk Assessment Submittal and Review Process, CEXP Stirling (M404). Environmental
Resources Management Australia (20 February 2013)
Detailed Risk Assessment FINAL, Former Shell Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling SA.
Environmental Resources Management Australia (21 February 2013)
Detailed Risk Assessment FINAL, Former Shell Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling SA.
Environmental Resources Management Australia (22 March 2013)
Development Application Information Request, SA EPA, 4 May 2015
Demolition and Site Clearance Plan, Always Service Station Stirling, Cheesman Architects, 13
January 2014
Environmental Site Investigation, Coles Express Service Station Stirling, 65 Mount Barker Road,
Stirling, South Australia. Environmental Resources Management Australia (Feb 2010)
Environment Protection Authority South Australia (SA EPA) Guidelines for the Assessment and
Remediation of Groundwater Contamination, February 2009
Environment Protection Act (SA) 1993
Environment Protection Authority South Australia (SA EPA) Guidelines for Environmental
Management of on-site remediation, March 2006
Environment Protection Authority South Australia (SA EPA) Standard for the production and use of
Waste Derived Fill, January 2010
Environment Protection Authority South Australia (SA EPA) Guidelines for Bunding and Spill
Management (EPA 080/04)
Environment Protection Authority South Australia (SA EPA) Guidelines for Assessment of
Underground Storage Systems (EPA 580/05), February 2005
Groundwater Monitoring Management Plan, Former Coles Express Stirling Service Station (M404),
65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling, South Australia. Environmental Resources Management Australia
(22 March 2013)
Human and Environmental Risk Assessment, Coles Express Service Station Stirling (M404), 65 Mount
Barker Road, Stirling, South Australia. Environmental Resources Management Australia (June 2010)
Letter from EPA to Shell re – EPA Review: Detailed Risk Assessment, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling
SA. EPA ref. 60031 05/17510 (29 January 2013)
Letter from EPA to Shell re - Detailed Risk Assessment and Groundwater Monitoring Management
Plan: Former Shell (Coles Express) Stirling Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling SA. EPA ref.
60031 05/17510 (27 March 2013)
National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as amended
2013)
Proposed Site Development Plans, AM/PM Integrated Petrol Filling Complex, Cheesman
Architects, 15 April 2015
25
Tank Removal and Soil Validation Report, Coles Express Service Station Stirling (M404).
Environmental Resources Management Australia (21 February 2012)
26
10
Limitations
Scope of Services
This construction environmental management plan (“the CEMP”) has been prepared in
accordance with the scope of services set out in the contract, or as otherwise agreed, between
Commercial and General and LBW|ep (“scope of services”). In some circumstances the scope
of services may have been limited by a range of factors such as time, budget, access and/or site
disturbance constraints.
Reliance on Data
In preparing the CEMP, LBW|ep has relied upon data, surveys, analyses, designs, plans and other
information provided by Commercial and General and other individuals and organisations, most
of which are referred to in the report (“the data”). Except as otherwise stated in the report,
LBW|ep has not verified the accuracy or completeness of the data. To the extent that the
statements, opinions, facts, information, conclusions and/or recommendations in the report
(“conclusions”) are based in whole or part on the data, those conclusions are contingent upon
the accuracy and completeness of the data. LBW|ep will not be liable in relation to incorrect
conclusions should any data, information or condition be incorrect or have been concealed,
withheld, misrepresented or otherwise not fully disclosed to LBW|ep.
Environmental Conclusions
On all sites, varying degrees of non-uniformity of the vertical and horizontal soil or groundwater
conditions are encountered. Hence no monitoring, common testing or sampling technique can
eliminate the possibility that monitoring or testing results/samples are not totally representative of
soil and/or groundwater conditions encountered. The management advice provided in the
CEMP is based upon the data which is merely indicative of the environmental condition of the
site at the time of preparing the data, including the presence or otherwise of contaminants or
emissions.
Also, it should be recognised that site conditions, including the extent and concentration of
contaminants, can change with time.
Within the limitations imposed by the scope of services, the advice in the CEMP has been
prepared in a professional manner, in accordance with generally accepted practices and using
a degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised by reputable environmental consultants under
similar circumstances. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
Report for Benefit of Specified Parties
The report has been prepared for the benefit of 65 Mt Barker Road Pty Ltd Trust and Commercial
and General and no other party. LBW|ep assumes no responsibility and will not be liable to any
other person or organisation for or in relation to any matter dealt with or advice expressed in the
CEMP, or for any loss or damage suffered by any other person or organisation arising from
matters dealt with or advice expressed in the CEMP (including without limitation matters arising
from any negligent act or omission of LBW|ep or for any loss or damage suffered by any other
party relying upon the matters dealt with or conclusions expressed in the CEMP). Other parties
should not rely upon the CEMP or the accuracy or completeness of any advice and should make
their own enquiries and obtain independent advice in relation to such matters.
Other Limitations
LBW|ep will not be liable to update or revise the CEMP to take into account any events or
emergent circumstances or facts occurring or becoming apparent after the date of the CEMP.
Appendix A
Demolition & Site Clearance Plan and
Proposed Site Redevelopment Plans
RETAIN EXISTING
FENCE
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
REMOVE EXISTING
BARRIER RAIL
RETAIN EXISTING
FENCE
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
ON GROUND CONCRETE
SLAB TO BE REMOVED
REMOVE EXISTING
BARRIER RAIL
EXTENT OF SITE
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
RETAIN EXISTING FENCE
ON GROUND CONCRETE
SLAB TO BE REMOVED
REMOVE EXISTING WALL STRUCTURE
INCLUDING CONCRETE SLAB AND FOOTINGS
REMOVE EXISTING ABOVE GROUND
LPG GAS TANK
REMOVE EXISTING
CANOPY ROOF STRUCTURE
REMOVE EXISTING
CONCRETE GRATED PIT
REMOVE EXISTING
GRATED DRAIN
REMOVE EXISTING
BITUMEN AND KERBS
ELECTRIC MOTOR
PUMP TO BE REMOVED
PROTECT EXISTING BUILDING
DURING DECONSTRUCTION
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
EXTENT OF SITE
RETAIN EXISTING FENCE
DM:02
REMOVE AND DISPOSE EXISTING
BUILT STRUCTURE & SERVICES
INCLUDING FOOTINGS AND SERVICES
REMOVE EXISTING BITUMEN
AND KERBS
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
REMOVE METAL WIRE FENCE
EXISTING OLD SERVICE
STATION BUILDING / WORKSHOP
REMOVE AND RETAIN EXISTING
STORAGE CONTAINER
PROTECT EXISTING TREE
REMOVE EXISTING
CONCRETE RAMP
(SHOWN SHADED)
EXI
STI
N
GC
OW
N S ANO
P
HA
DE Y
D)
(SH
REMOVE METAL WIRE FENCE
AND KERBS
REMOVE EXISTING
CONCRETE PATH
DM:02
REMOVE AND DISPOSE EXISTING
BUILT STRUCTURE & SERVICES
INCLUDING FOOTINGS AND SERVICES
REMOVE EXISTING
REMOVE EXISTING
GRATED DRAIN
MAINTAIN PUBLIC ACCESS TO
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATH
REMOVE EXISTING
CONCRETE PATH
ROAD
SITE
EXTENT OF
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
BARKER
AND KERBS
REMOVE EXISTING
FIRE HOSE REEL BOX
MOUNT
REMOVE EXISTING
PIT
DM:01 DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
REMOVE EXISTING
CONCRETE DRIVEWAY
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
REMOVE EXISTING FOOTING
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
AND KERBS
EXTENT OF SITE
AND KERBS
REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE
SLAB BELOW CANOPY
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
REMOVE EXISTING
DM:01
DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
(SHOWN HATCHED)
MERRION
TERRACE
ALL SERVICES INSIDE DEMOLITION ZONE
TO BE TERMINATED PRIOR TO
COMMENCEMENT OF WORK
DECONSTRUCTION PLAN
1:200
Legend:
Schedule:
ELEVATION TYPE REFERENCE
TITLE TYPE REFERENCE
DRAWING NUMBER
SHEET NUMBER
#
Drawing Name
#
SCALE 1:###
ELEVATION NUMBER
##
A####
SHEET NUMBER
GRID TYPE REFERENCE
GRID NUMBER
#
DETAIL TYPE REFERENCE
DETAIL NUMBER
##
A####
SECTION TYPE REFERENCE
SECTION NUMBER
##
A####
SHEET NUMBER
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
SE:
CIVIL ENGINEERING
CE:
ELECTRICAL SERVICES
ES:
MECHANICAL SERVICES
MS:
HYDRAULIC SERVICES
HS:
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
FS:
VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
VT:
Legend:
Notes:
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
BUILDER'S BOUNDARY
DM:01 EXTENT OF DECONSTRUCTION ZONE
DM:02 EXTENT OF EXISTING BUILT STRUCTURE TO BE DEMOLISHED
DISCONNECT & REMOVE ALL LIGHTING, EXISTING TREES, GARDEN BEDS,
SOFT LANDSCAPING ITEMS. DISCONNECT GARDEN BED IRRIGATION. CUT
AND REMOVE BITUMEN, FOOTINGS,CAR PARKING, GENERAL LANDSCAPE AREAS,
RAMPS, WATER RETENTION & COLLECTION INCLUDING UNDERGROUND SERVICES
AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE WORKS GENERALLY.
REMOVE AND DISPOSE EXISTING BUILT STRUCTURES & SERVICES
INCLUDING BELOW GROUND STRUCTURES LIKE FOOTINGS AND BELOW
GROUND SERVICES.
Legend notes are summaries only and are not intended to be comprehensive.
Refer to Specification for full construction details of scheduled wall types.
Refer to Engineering Services Documentation for all information relating to Hydraulic, Mechanical,
Electrical and Fire Protection Services. Refer services drawings for all a/p's. Wall nibs behind doors to
be typically 100mm unless noted otherwise.
Refer to Structural Documentation for all information on footings and structural framing, details of
structural stud sizes and gauge.
EXISTING FENCE
(REMOVE ALL ITEMS WITHIN THIS AREA UNLESS SPECIFICALLY
INDICATED TO BE RETAINED. REFER SPECIFICATION &
SURVEY DRAWING FOR FURTHER DETAILS)
All dimensions are to structural faces. Wall lining thicknesses must be added to dimensions generally.
Refer to room elevations for further details of fixtures & fittings. Some fittings not shown for clarity.
NOTE: REFER SERVICES AND CIVIL ENGINEER'S DOCUMENTS FOR EXISTING
SITE SERVICES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TERMINATED PRIOR TO
THE COMMENCEMENT OF DECONSTRUCTION.
Provide control joints to all walls, ceilings and floor finishes that pass over expansion joints - (typical)
Refer elevations for locations of control joints in cladding.
SHEET NUMBER
ALWAYS SERVICE STATION
STIRLING
65 MOUNT BARKER ROAD, STIRLING SA 5152
Cheesman
Architects
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
DD
13-01-14
-
checked
date
rev.
Cheesman Architects Pty Ltd A.C.N. 008 154 407
304 The Parade, Kensington S.A. 5068
telephone: +61 8 8431 1144
facsimile: +61 8 8331 9442
email: [email protected]
DEMOLITION AND
SITE CLEARANCE PLAN
Plotted:13 January 2014 15:58
File:C:\Users\dj\appdata\local\temp\AcPublish_2820\11141_A_WD1201.dwg
Not for construction purposes unless stamped FOR CONSTRUCTION.
Verify dimensions and levels on site before setting out. Do not scale. Refer to figured
dimensions - in mm unless otherwise stated.
scales
drawn
checked
signed off
1:200
DD
DD
JS
orig. size
B1
drawing no.
11141_A_WD1201
date
13/01/2014
revision
-
MOUNT
BARKER
ROAD
A
SITE BOUNDARY
2.4M COLORBOND FENCE TO COURTYARD
RETAIL BACK OF HOUSE
F. &
ACC.
WC
M. WC
COURTYARD
DARY
SITE BOUN
G WALL
E RETAININ
CONCRET
10
B
9
SITE BOUNDARY
EX
IT
RETAIL STORE
7
T70 UST
NDARY
DARY
SITE BOUN
T70 UST
SITE BOU
B
5477
EN
TR
Y/
8
180
0
6
540
0
PUMP 02
PUMP 03
PUMP 04
UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS
4
700
PROPOSED
CANOPY
0
DE
LP RGR
G
TA OUN
NK D
260
0
11
2
EN
TR
PUMP 06
PUMP 07
PUMP 08
600
6070
EX
IT
AUTOMATIC
CAR WASH
1
4000
Y/
PUMP 05
13
UN
3
12
VACUUM BAY
T70 UST
VACUUM BAY
5
OFFICE
PUMP 01
PLANT ROOM
850
CAFE SEATING &
BICYCLE PARKING
UNDERGROUND
SPEL TANK
SITE BOUNDARY
CANTILEVERED CONCRETE DECK
GLAZED BALUSTRADE
EXISTING GARDEN BED
LANDSCAPED VERGE
& GARDEN BEDS
EXISTING FOOTPATH
2.6M SCREEN
STONE FACED RETAINING WALL
STEEL BALUSTRADE
NEW PLANTING TO VERGE
WITH EXISTING TREES & SHRUBS
RETAINING KERB
MATURE PLANTING OF
LARGER SHRUBS & SMALL
TREES WHERE SITE LINES
ARE NOT IMPEDED
MERRIO
N
TERRAC
NEW FOOTPATH
E
A
NEW GARDEN BEDS TO SITE & ADJACENT LANDSCAPE BEDS
ALONG EXISTING COUNCIL PEDESTRIAN PATH SYSTEM.
MATURE PLANTING OF SMALL & MEDIUM SHRUBS WITH
SMALL TREES WHERE SITE LINES ARE NOT IMPEDED.
PLANTING AS PER COUNCIL LANDSCAPING SCHEDULE &
EXISTING ADJACENT LANDSCAPE BEDS.
NEW GARDEN BED TO VERGE. MATURE PLANTING OF
SMALL TO MEDIUM TREES SUCH AS CREPE MYRTLES WITH
GROUND COVER ROSES. EXISTING ESTABLISHED TREES &
SHRUBS TO BE RETAINED.
PROJECT NORTH
N
N
0
2
10
At A1
20m
Petrol Filling Complex
Merrion Terrace - Stirling
Cheesman
Architects
Cheesman Architects Pty Ltd
tel: 61 8 8431 1144
fax: 61 8 8331 9442
Drawing
Proposed Site Plan
File: I:\Projects\11141 Always Service Station - Stirling\B-Drawings & Images\01 Drawings\SD\11141_SD30
Scale
Date
1:200 @ A1 15/04/2015
Drawing No.
11141_SD30
Plotted: Wednesday, 15 April 2015 2:17:40 PM
Revision
B
PRE FINISHED COMPOSITE
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
7000 MAX ROOF LEVEL
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
COMMERCIAL ALUMINIUM FRAMED
HIGH PERFORMANCE GLAZING
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
CANOPY
2.4M COLORBOND FENCE TO
COURTYARD
RL:500.1
RL:499.2
4000 RETAIL CEILING
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
COLOUR TO MATCH SCREEN
MATURE PLANTING OF LARGER
SHRUBS & SMALL TREES WHERE
SITE LINES ARE NOT IMPEDED
3000
RL:497.5
MOUNT BARKER ROAD
NATURAL FINISH PRECAST CONCRETE
GLAZED BALUSTRADE
FLOOR LEVEL RL:494.6
RL:493.5
CONCRETE RETAINING WALL
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL AT BOUNDARY
ON NEIGHBOURING PROPERTY
1
AUTOMATIC CARWASH
2.6M LASER CUT PATTERN SCREEN TO
RENDERED PRECAST CONCRETE WALL,
PATTERN TO BE CONFIRMED.
NEW PLANTING OF MATURE
SHRUBS TO LANDSCAPED
GARDEN BEDS & VERGE.
NORTH ELEVATION - MERRION TERRACE
1:100
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
7000 MAX ROOF LEVEL
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
4000 RETAIL CEILING
COLORBOND SHEET METAL CLADDING
3000
GLAZED ACOUSTIC/ PRIVACY SCREEN
WITH OBSCURED VISION PATTERN
MERRION TERRACE
2
EAST ELEVATION
1:100
CANOPY
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL AT BOUNDARY ON
DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL AT BOUNDARY ON
NEIGHBOURING PROPERTY
7000 MAX ROOF LEVEL
RL:500.1
ADJACENT PROPERTY IN FOREGROUND
SHOWN DASHED FOR CLARITY
RL:499.2
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
4000 RETAIL CEILING
RL:497.5
COURTYARD SHOWN DASHED FOR
CLARITY
MERRION TERRACE
NATURAL FINISH PRE CAST
CONCRETE
RL:493.5
GROUND LEVEL AT BOUNDARY TO
MOUNT BARKER ROAD
3
0
1
2.6M LASER CUT PATTERN
SCREEN ON RENDERED WALL.
PATTERN TO BE CONFIRMED.
AUTOMATIC
CARWASH
PAINTED PRECAST CONCRETE
WEST ELEVATION - MT BARKER ROAD
1:100
5
At A1
10m
Cheesman
Architects
tel: 61 8 8431 1144
fax: 61 8 8331 9442
Drawing
Proposed Elevations - Sheet 1
Scale
Date
1:100 @ A1 21/01/2015
Drawing No.
11141_SD31
Plotted: Wednesday, 21 January 2015 3:14:14 PM
Revision
A
CANOPY
COURTYARD
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
7000 MAX ROOF LEVEL
RL:500.1
RL:499.2
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
COLOUR TO MATCH SCREEN
RL:497.5
MOUNT BARKER ROAD
3
AUTOMATIC CARWASH
GROUND LEVEL AT BOUNDARY ON
SOUTH ELEVATION
1:100
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
7000 MAX ROOF LEVEL
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
CANOPY
4000 RETAIL CEILING
3000
ALUMINIUM CLADDING
COURTYARD
GLAZED BALUSTRADE
MERRION TERRACE
2
3
0
1
GROUND LEVEL ACROSS SITE IN LINE
WITH WESTERN END OF CANOPY
PAINTED PRECAST CONCRETE
NORTH WEST ELEVATION - SHOPFRONT
1:100
ADJOINING PROPERTY
AM / PM PETROL FILLING STATION
TRAFFIC ROUNDABOUT
ADJOINING PROPERTY
MERRION TERRACE
MERRION TERRACE
MT BARKER ROAD
JOHNSTON STREET
MERRION TERRACE STREETSCAPE
1:500
5
At A1
10m
Cheesman
Architects
tel: 61 8 8431 1144
fax: 61 8 8331 9442
Drawing
Proposed Elevations - Sheet 2
Scale
Date
1:100 @ A1 21/01/2015
Drawing No.
11141_SD32
Plotted: Tuesday, 17 March 2015 4:26:25 PM
Revision
A
COURTYARD
SITE BOUNDARY
SITE BOUNDARY
CANOPY
RL:501.6 MAX ROOF LEVEL
ADJACENT BUILDING
GLAZED ACOUSTIC/ PRIVACY SCREEN
WITH OBSCURED VISION PATTERN TO
REAR BOUNDARY
RL:497.6 LOWER ROOF LEVEL
BOUNDARY FENCE
ADJOINING CARPARK
RETAINING WALL
ADJACENT DRIVEWAY
RL:494.6 FLOOR LEVEL
MERRION TERRACE
ROADWAY
STONE FACED
RETAINING WALL
RL:493.0
FOOTPATH
SECTION AA
RL:501.6 MAX ROOF LEVEL
SITE BOUNDARY
1:100
SITE BOUNDARY
1
NEW FOOTPATH
CANOPY
RL:497.6 LOWER ROOF LEVEL
ADJOINING CARPARK
RETAIL STORE
BACK OF HOUSE
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL ON
NEIGHBOURING PROPERTY.
RL:492.9
2
0
1
SECTION BB
1:100
5
At A1
10m
Cheesman
Architects
tel: 61 8 8431 1144
fax: 61 8 8331 9442
Drawing
Proposed Sections
Scale
Date
1:100 @ A1 21/01/2015
Drawing No.
11141_SD33
Plotted: Wednesday, 21 January 2015 3:11:19 PM
Revision
A
AM PM PETROL FILLING COMPLEX
MERRION TERRACE
MERRION TERRACE
Cheesman
Architects
tel: 61 8 8431 1144
fax: 61 8 8331 9442
EXISTING 2 STOREY
ADJOINING PROPERTY
PROPOSED
AUTOMATIC CARWASH
PROPOSED CANOPY
EXISTING SINGLE STOREY
ADJOINING PROPERTY
PROPOSED RETAIL STORE
ADJOINING PROPERTY
MT BARKER ROAD
Drawing
Scale
Date
Drawing No.
Merrion Terrace Streetscape
NTS
10/03/2015
11141_SD34
Plotted: Tuesday, 10 March 2015 2:57:58 PM
Revision
A
Appendix B
Works Environmental Management Plans
Construction EMP
Environmental Aspect
Control/ Management Measures
Responsibility
Verification
Exposure to contaminated
soil and groundwater
Previous soil sampling identified petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in
the vicinity of the existing USTs, where new USTs are to be installed.
Site Manager (SM)
The Developer must document exposure of
contaminated material.
Consultation with neighbours prior to works commencing to inform them of
activities and engage them in the benefit of the development and any
activities that might cause nuisance issues.
Provide evidence of neighbour consultation
prior to the works commencing.
Provide records of any complaints or queries
received in relation to environmental and/or
contamination matters and of response to
complaints.
Neighbours will be provided with a point of contact for comments,
questions or complaints.
Generation of odour during
excavation causing nuisance
issue to neighbours and
contractors
If odour is detected during works, advise all neighbours who may potentially
be affected.
SM
Retain a copy of written advice to neighbours
and record any concerns/complaints, and any
actions in response to concerns/complaints.
SM
Where disposal is necessary, contractors will
provide the appointed environmental
consultant with an estimate of the spoil quantity
and confirmation of appropriate truck licenses
for waste transport prior to disposal occurring.
If necessary stop excavation works temporarily to allow odour to dissipate.
Backfill excavations as soon as possible.
Disposal of excavated fill
surplus to need
Any spoil generated by excavation must be sampled by a suitably qualified
environmental consultant and analysed by a NATA certified laboratory for
classification and disposal.
Residence time for stockpiles onsite shall be minimised.
Sampling for the purpose of classification is to be undertaken by the
appointed, suitably qualified environmental consultant, in accordance with
the requirements of EPA guidelines and standards.
Validation sampling must be undertaken to record residual contamination
levels.
At the completion of excavation, the contractor
will provide the appointed environmental
consultant with copies of the Waste Transport
Certificates (WTC) and waste management
facility weighbridge receipts to confirm the
quantity of material transported. The
environmental consultant will confirm that the
quantity of spoil received by the facility is
consistent with the quantity removed from the
site.
Evidence of surplus soil management in
accordance with this CEMP must be provided,
including the above documentation.
Environmental Aspect
Control/ Management Measures
Responsibility
Verification
Dust generation during
earthworks
Dust will be managed in accordance with standard industry practices for
construction sites (with the main reference being ‘Environmental
management of on-site remediation’ (EPA, November 2008))
SM
Inspection checklists.
Stormwater runoff onto
adjoining properties or
council roads
Stormwater runoff will be managed in accordance with standard industry
practices for construction sites (with the main reference being ‘Stormwater
Pollution Prevention – code of practice for the building and construction
industry’ (EPA, March 1999))
SM
Contingency Events
Contingency measures implemented as per Section 6 of the CEMP.
SM
Discovery of contamination
Appropriate disposal of surplus soils.
Dewatering of excavations
Appropriate dewatering management and disposal of water (Section 4.5).
Provide Incident Reports or record of complaints
and response and actions taken in response.
Inspection checklists.
Provide Incident Reports or record of complaints
and response.
Records of contingent events must be provided,
including documentation of management of
these events in accordance with the CEMP
(and any supporting information such as
photographs of works) and disposal certificates
(and other supporting records) as per
management of surplus soils above.
Records of management of discovered
contamination must be provided.
Importation of fill
Excavated material is not to be used as backfill unless approved by
agreement between the Site Manager and the environmental consultant
and with approval of its engineering properties from a qualified
geotechnical engineer.
Virgin imported quarry material must be suitable for commercial land use
and meet the engineering specification of a qualified geotechnical
engineer.
SM
Provided that certified virgin quarry product
only is imported to site, no chemical testing is
warranted.
Copies of fill purchase receipts/account
summary shall be provided to the SM to
evidence that only virgin quarry product was
imported to site.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Service Station Stirling
Prepared by: SR
PT Design ABN 35 008 116 916
141-149 Ifould Street, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Tel: (08) 8412 4300 Fax: (08) 8232 4311
Project No:
Revision:
Date of Issue:
16710
-0027/10/2014
INTRODUCTION
PT Design were engaged to prepare a stormwater management plan for a proposed petrol station in
Stirling. The stormwater management plan has been prepared taking into account the use of the
site, the surrounding environment and best management practices for stormwater drainage.
The overall stormwater management plan incorporates the following features:

Collection and management of stormwater flows

Treatment of stormwater

Capture of oil spills beneath the forecourt canopy and pumper delivery areas.

Connection to council's existing stormwater system
The site itself is approximately 1955m2. This site comprises of a cashier and retail building, forecourt
canopy covering dispensers for petroleum and LPG products, underground fuel storage tanks and
concrete pavements.
This report is prepared solely for council submission for planning approval purposes only. Further
design and detail will be required to gain building rules approval and development approvals.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Stormwater runoff from the roof will connect directly to the underground drainage system. The
external paved areas (under cover and open areas) drain to a series of sumps and grates. Runoff
from all paved areas will not leave the site without first passing through the stormwater treatment
device. Refer to Appendix A for stormwater management plan.
Site levels will be set so that external stormwater will not enter the site and stormwater runoff from
this site will not adversely affect any other tenancies on neighbouring lease boundaries.
The stormwater pipes have been designed for a 1 in 10 year, 5 minute ARI event in accordance with
code requirements. 2 x 150 diameter PVC pipes at 1.0% grade (or steeper) have been specified to
discharge to Council's roadway. Refer to Appendix B for calculations. Council have been contacted
and there no detention requirements for the site.
SITE ACCESS
Access to and from the proposed development should be safe during a 100 year ARI flood. Site
levels are falling overland from the building line towards Merrion Terrace and Mount Barker Road,
allowing safe access for pedestrians during critical rain events.
The building access point matches finished floor level and paths around the site meet disability
access requirements, which allows for a smooth transition for pedestrian access.
STORMWATER TREATMENT
Due to the nature of the proposed development and the petrol and oil that will be present on site,
the development has been classified as HIGH risk. As such, a class 1 separation and treatment device
such as a SPEL Puraceptor (or equivalent) has been specified. Refer to Appendix C for product
details.
Due to the potential for both minor and major spills, sufficient storage volume is to be provided to
cater for such an event within the treatment device (SPEL Puraceptor).
Advice from the SPEL Puraceptor supplier should be sought to determine the recommended
treatment performance, storage volume and spill containment details specific to this site and its
needs.
APPENDIX A
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
LEGEND
STORMWATER NOTE:
CONTRACTORS NOTES:
NOTE:
0
5000
SCALE 1:200
10000
@A3
15000
APPENDIX B
STORMWATER CALCULATIONS
Project: Stirling Petrol Station
Design By: SR
Project #
Date
Page
16710
27.10.2014
1 of 2
STORMWATER CALCULATIONS
ARI = 1 IN 10 YEAR STORM AT A DURATION OF 5 MINUTES. FOR THE ADELAIDE AREA
THE ARI = 94.2mm (SEE BELOW)
Project: Stirling Petrol Station
Project #
Date
Page
Design By: SR
16710
27.10.2014
2 of 2
CALCULATE PIPE SIZES
SITE TO STREET WATER TABLE
Average Recurance Interval:
Time of Concentration:
Rainfall Intensity:
CATCHMENT AREA
Roof
Paved
Pervious
C
1.0
0.9
0.2
FLOW
Q=
1 in
A (m2)
760
1215
123
49.14 L/sec
PIPE SELECTION
Type:
Grade:
PVC
1.0 %
PIPE SIZE
Adopt:
150 diameter
CHECK VELOCITY
10 years
5 mins
94.2 mm/h
1.42 m/s
(Maximum 25.0L/s per outlet)
(Minimum 2 outlets)
APPENDIX C
CLASS 1 SEPARATOR – SPEL PURACEPTOR
PURACEPTOR
Petrol Stations
Fuel Depots
Transformer Bunds
Switchyards
Power Stations
Wash Bays
Airports
STORMWATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT DEVICES
STORMWATER TREATMENT
SPEL PURACEPTOR Class 1 stormwater treatment separators
cater for potential hazards to the environment including sites where
there is a risk of oil and fuel spills.
Oils and all petroleum hydrocarbons are treated to the highest discharge
quality exceeding EPA standards ensuring it safe for stormwater discharge.
Major Oil spills from a petrol tanker or a transformer rupture are captured
and contained preventing any stormwater discharge.
•
Independently tested (laboratory)
and certified to discharge
< 1.86PPM or less petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH),from
5,000PPM ingress
ST
TA TE
A
N
N
ATIO
tion.
CE ST
s opera l,
I
V
R
e
month
E
S
after 3
aded fu
le
court
t of un
on fore
atmen
e stati
and tre gine oil.
re
Servic
tu
p
n
es ca
and e
Includ
diesel
oleum
al Petr
Tot
• Independently field tested to
discharge ‘no detection’ from
>33,000.0PPM
The results obtained at HR Wallingford, U.K. are certified to European
Standard EN BS858.1 (2006) and are in line with the designed performance
criteria for high performance and long service life between maintenance periods,
achieving results averaging between 0.1 - 1.86mg/
mg/l
ssed in
1
t
s
e
T
s expre
Result
Inflow
EQL*
C6-C9
14
C10-C
28
C15-C
36
C29-C
arbons
Hydroc
2.4
0.05
0.05
0.4
0.1
302
1820
8.3
ted
*Sensit
stima
ivity: E
tion
Reduc
Outflow
<0.05
<0.05
<0.4
<0.1
tation
Quanti
No
on
Detecti
Limit
MAINTENANCE
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Designed for high performance and low maintenance over a long life span
Visible oils (TPH) are skimmed from the surface of the water level
Easy and safe to access and clean, with access shafts positioned on
all chambers.
No entering of the unit is required
Not mandatory for the unit to be cleaned every 3 months.
Only oils, sediment and gross pollutants need to be removed.
All stormwater does not require removal.
The cylindrical design ensures sediment collects easily on the floor
of the chambers effecting easy, quick removal. There are no square
corners or unreachable cavities and recesses.
Waste is removed by a vacuum loading truck. (Suction truck)
SPEL® PURACEPTOR tanks contain an immersed inlet
dip pipe to extinguish flames and prevent inflammable
vapours form passing through to the drainage system.
Complies with Section 6.3.4 of BS EN 858.1.2006.
SPEL PURACEPTOR can withstand temperatures of up
to 140ºC.
Oil Retention Chamber
SPEL ® PURACEPTOR units are glass reinforced plastic
vessels made by the technical advanced chop hoop filament
winding process (patented) producing circumferential and
longitudinal strength complying with AS 2634-1983 for tank
design.
Stormwater discharge quality is < 1.86 mg/l hydrocarbon
content exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency
(E.P.A.) requirements of 10mg/l hydrocarbon content.
Test sampling access: Field test discharged samples are
taken from sampling point and analysed by NATA
accredited laboratories.
The probe is freely suspended in the probe protection tube
in the separator at the correct level. When the oil-layer or
depth of hydrocarbons reaches the predetermined level, the
top of the probe will be immersed in the oil, breaking the
circuit and activating the alarm. It is intrinsically `fail-safe`
system providing complete assurance that is operative. If a
fault occurs it will be signaled immediately.
The AUTOMATIC CLOSURE DEVICE (A.C.D.) is a precisely
engineered device comprising a water-buoyant ball
that is sensitive to any change in the water density as a
consequence of light liquids build up, thereby automatically
activating a process of depressing the A.C.D. to SHUT OFF
the separator, preventing pollutants from discharging to
drains and waterways.
Secondary
Separation
Chamber
SPEL PURACEPTOR Class 1 separators
incorporate coalescer units. They
consist of a quality stainless steel
mesh container with an adjustable
handle and high volume reticulated
foam insert.
The coalescer unit is mounted in
the second chamber, providing
a coalescence process for the
separation of smaller globules of light
liquid pollutants before final discharge
to stormwater.
Oil Capture and Containment
High Risk
Ararat Wind Farm
Cranbourne Switchyard
SITE
Ararat Wind Farm, VIC.
APPLICATION
Transformers
RISK
High
POLLUTANTS
Transformer oil
DISCHARGE
Stormwater
UNIT SUPPLIED
P006 - PuraceptorTM Class 1 with 20,000 litre retention tank
T.F.R.
6 LPS
OPERATIONDue to the remote position of this transformer and the impact on the
environment in the event of a failure, it was essential to the power
provider to have a proven and reliable system. SPEL PURACEPTORTM
was selected due to its proven “track record” in supplying the power
industry, overall reliability and the necessity to have optimum quality
discharge. Whilst the design of 6 LPS from the bund area caters for
the nominal flow, a 20,000L spill retention was built into the system
to hold the capacity of a transformer rupture.
SITE
APPLICATION
RISK
POLLUTANTS
DISCHARGE
UNIT SUPPLIED
T.F.R.
Cranbourne Switchyard, VIC.
Transformer Switchyard
High
Transformer oil (70,000 litres)
Stormwater to river
P040 - PuraceptorTM Class 1 - oil capacity 70,000 litre
40 LPS
OPERATIONThis unit was installed to treat stormwater and firewater from
the deluge system simultaneously. The unit caters for a 40 LPS
flow rate, and has the capacity to capture a 70,000L transformer
spillage and remain operational. SPEL units are designed and
built to BS EN 858.1. 2006 it was able to be used as a
designated flame trap, further enhancing its selection for this site.
Fuel Station
SITE
Fuel Service Station, NSW.
APPLICATIONStormwater runoff from forecourt and immediate
adjacent surfaces.
RISK
High
POLLUTANTS
Petrol, diesel, oils, suspended solids
DISCHARGE
Stormwater drain to Georges River.
UNIT SUPPLIED
P006 Puraceptor™ Class 1
T.F.R.
6 LPS
OPERATIONFunctions by gravity, will continue to be treated
in the event of a power failure. Equipped with an
oil/fuel alert probe for maintenance monitoring
and to alert in the event of an emergency spill.
Head Office
83 – 87 Fennell Street, Parramatta NSW 2150
02 9683 5555
www.spelproducts.com.au
Petrol Filling Complex, Stirling
Environmental Noise Emissions
Desktop Study
Report Date: Wednesday, 4 March 2015
Reference: A15056RP1, Revision B
Desktop Study
A15056RP1 Revision B
www.resonateacoustics.com
Document Information
Project
Petrol Filling Complex, Stirling—Environmental Noise Emissions
Client
Commercial & General
Report title
Desktop Study
Project
Number
A15056
Author
Vahid Alamshah
Acoustic Engineer
[email protected]
Reviewed by
Deb James
Revision Table
Report revision
Date
Comments
0
16 February 2015
Issue
A
25 February 2015
Assumptions updated
B
4 March 2015
Operating hours corrected
Adelaide 
Melbourne 
Sydney 
Brisbane 
Perth Petrol Filling Complex, Stirling
Desktop Study
Glossary
A-weighting
A spectrum adaption that is applied to measured noise levels to
represent human hearing. A-weighted levels are used as human
hearing does not respond equally at all frequencies.
Characteristic
Associated with a noise source, means a tonal, impulsive, low
frequency or modulating characteristic of the noise that is
determined in accordance with the Guidelines for the use of the
Environment Protection (Noise) Policy (Noise EPP) to be
fundamental to the nature and impact of the noise.
Continuous noise level
A-weighted noise level of a continuous steady sound that, for the
period over which the measurement is taken using fast time
weighting, has the same mean square sound pressure as the
noise level which varies over time when measured in relation to a
noise source and noise-affected premises in accordance with the
Noise EPP
Day
Between 7 am and 10 pm as defined in the Noise EPP
dB
Decibel—a unit of measurement used to express sound level. It
is based on a logarithmic scale which means a sound that is
3 dB higher has twice as much energy. We typically perceive a
10 dB increase in sound as a doubling of that sound level.
dB(A)
Units of the A-weighted sound level.
Frequency (Hz)
The number of times a vibrating object oscillates (moves back
and forth) in one second. Fast movements produce high
frequency sound (high pitch/tone), but slow movements mean the
frequency (pitch/tone) is low. 1 Hz is equal to 1 cycle per
second.
Indicative noise level
Indicative noise level determined under clause 5 of the Noise
EPP.
Leq
Equivalent Noise Level—Energy averaged noise level over the
measurement time.
Lmax
The maximum instantaneous noise level.
Night
Between 10.00 p.m. on one day and 7.00 a.m. on the following
day as defined in the Noise EPP
Noise source
Premises or a place at which an activity is undertaken, or a
machine or device is operated, resulting in the emission of noise
Desktop Study
Quiet locality
A locality is a quiet locality if the Development Plan provisions
that make land use rules for the locality principally promote land
uses that all fall within either or both of the following land use
categories: (a) Residential; (b) Rural Living;
Desktop Study
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 2 Proposed development .......................................................................................................... 2 2.1 3 Development Plan .................................................................................................................. 3 3.1 3.2 4 Location ........................................................................................................................ 2 Zoning .......................................................................................................................... 3 Relevant noise provisions ............................................................................................ 4 Noise criteria .......................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Environmental noise policy........................................................................................... 5 5 Noise emission assessment................................................................................................... 7 6 Noise mitigation measures ................................................................................................... 10 7 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 11 Petrol Filling Complex, Stirling
Desktop Study
1
Introduction
This report outlines a desktop study of environmental noise emissions for the proposed Petrol
filling complex at corner of Merrion Terrace and Mount Barker Road, Stirling. The complex
consists of retail store, petrol pumps, automatic car wash facility and vacuum bays.
The closest noise affected receptors are the commercial premises to the south east of the
development. The other noise affected receptor of interest is the Stirling Hotel to the south west
of the development.
The potential noise emissions from the development have been assessed against the
requirements of the South Australian environmental noise policy and the Adelaide Hills Council
Development Plan.
1
Desktop Study
2
Proposed development
2.1
Location
The proposed petrol filling complex is to be located at the corner of Merrion Terrace and Mount
Barker Road. Figure 1 shows the development boundary and the closest noise affected
receptors. The most affected receptors are the commercial premises to the south east (south
with respect to project north). Other noise affected receptors are the Stirling Hotel to the south
west on the other side of Mount barker road and the premises to the north east.
Figure 1 Proposed Petrol Filling Complex (Excerpt from drawing No. 11141_SD30 by Cheesman
Architects)
The proposed petrol filling complex is to operate from 6 a.m. to midnight, seven days a week
with all facilities operating including the carwash.
2
Desktop Study
3
Development Plan
Proposed development is located within the Adelaide Hills Council area and should have
regards to the Adelaide Hills Council Development Plan.
3.1
Zoning
The proposed petrol-filling complex is located within Stirling Core District Centre Zone within
Adelaide Hills Council area.
The objectives of the District Centre Zone state:
Objective 1:
A centre that accommodates a range of business and retail facilities, offices, consulting rooms, and
cultural, community, public administration, recreation, entertainment, health and religious venues
servicing residents and visitors within the surrounding district.
Objective 2:
Development of a visually and functionally cohesive and integrated district centre that maintains its
village character, and is in accord with the District Centre Stirling Concept Plan Figure DCe/1.
Objective 3:
A centre accommodating medium density residential development in association with nonresidential development.
Objective 4:
Development that contributes positively to the desired character of the zone.
Desired character of District Centre Zone primarily states:
The District Centre is the primary service centre and community hub for the Council area. The
District Centre is intended to continue to offer a wide range of retail, community, leisure,
administrative, cultural, and religious facilities. Residential development is considered appropriate in
this Centre only where it is at medium density in the form of townhouses, apartments and shop-top
housing, is ancillary to, and is located above or at the rear of, a non-residential use.
The primary land use promoted within the District Centre zone, including the Stirling Core
District Centre Zone, is commercial. Both the proposed complex and the most affected
receptors are located within this same zone.
3
Desktop Study
3.2
Relevant noise provisions
No particular noise provisions have been noted within the Principle of Development Control
(PDCs) for the Stirling Core District Centre zone. However, Council wide provisions for
Commercial developments state:
PDC 151, Commercial development should be of a high architectural standard, be set-back from the
road frontage to allow for landscaping, and should not degrade the amenity of the area by noise and
traffic.
Environmental noise emissions at the planning stage are assessed in accordance with the
Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (Noise EPP) which sets out guidelines for
compliance with the General care duty under Section 25 of Environment Protection Act 1993.
4
Desktop Study
4
Noise criteria
4.1
Environmental noise policy
Environmental noise emissions from the proposed development will have to comply with the
Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (Noise EPP) and this is the most relevant guideline
to address the requirements of the Development Plan.
The noise goals in the Noise EPP are based on the zoning of the development and the closest
noise affected premises in the relevant development plan. The land uses primarily promoted by
the zones are used to determine the environmental noise criteria with the indicative noise
factors shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Excerpt from Noise EPP—Table 2(subclause(1)(b))
Land use category
Indicative noise factor dB(A)
Day (7 am to 10 pm)
Night (10 pm to 7 am)
Rural living
47
40
Residential
52
45
Rural industry
57
50
Light industry
57
50
Commercial
62
55
General industry
65
55
Special industry
70
60
As noted in Section 3, the development and the most affected noise sensitive premises are
located in the Stirling Core District Centre zone for which Commercial land use is primarily
promoted.
In accordance with Part 5 of the Noise EPP, the relevant criteria for this development will be the
relevant indicative noise factors less 5 dB(A). The application of Part 5 results in the following
environmental noise criteria:
•
•
57 dB(A) during the day, 7 am to 10 pm
50 dB(A) at night, 10 pm to 7 am.
Penalties can also be applied to a noise source for a variety of characteristics, such as
impulsive, low frequency, modulating or tonal characters. For a characteristic penalty to be
applied to a noise source is must be fundamental to the impact of the noise and dominate the
5
Desktop Study
overall noise impact. Application of the characteristic penalty is discussed in the noise emission
assessment.
We note that under Part 5, Clause 20(6) of the Noise EPP, exceedance of the recommended
criterion does not necessarily mean that the development will be non-complaint. Some of the
following matters should be considered when considering compliance:
•
•
•
•
•
the amount by which the criterion is exceeded (in dB(A))
the frequency and duration for which the criterion is exceeded
the ambient noise that has a noise level similar to the predicted noise level
the times of occurrence of the noise source
the number of persons likely to be adversely affected by the noise source and whether
there is any special need for quiet.
6
Desktop Study
5
Noise emission assessment
Environmental noise emissions from the proposed petrol-filling complex will be mainly controlled
by the noise emissions from the car washing facility and vacuum bays. The environment noise
emissions from the development have been assessed based on the provided noise data by the
manufacturer of the equipment.
Figure 2 shows the manufacturer’s provided noise data for the Soft gloss 3 carwash facility.
Vacuum noise is assessed based on the provided noise level of 60 dB(A) at 10 m for the
UltraVac Standard vacuum. We note that provided data does not specify the noise descriptor.
As such, following assessment is therefore based on the assumption that the provided noise
level is continuous noise level (Leq) dB(A).
Figure 2 Soft Gloss 3 Noise data
7
Desktop Study
This assessment has been based on the following assumptions regarding the typical operation
of the carwash facility:
•
•
one carwash cycle (i.e. High pressure, Wash and Dry cycles) in a 15 minute period, and
two vacuum cycles (each 5 min) in every 15 minutes.
Table 2 summarises the predicted noise levels due to operation of the vacuum alone, and of
both the carwash facility and vacuum at the same time as the worse case scenario, at noise
affected receptors.
Table 2 Predicted noise levels
Predicted noise level, dB(A)
(1)
Noise receptor
Vacuum alone
Carwash and
(2)
Vacuum
Relevant criterion
Commercial premises to
the south of
development
≤53
(3)
≤67
Day 57 dB(A)
Stirling Hotel Outdoor
area
≤49
(3)
≤59
Day 57 dB(A)
Night 50 dB(A)
(4)
(1)
Noise from vacuum alone includes a 5 dB(A) penalty for tonality. See below for discussion.
(2)
Noise from carwash and vacuum together includes a 5 dB(A) penalty for modulation. See below for
discussion.
(3)
Predicted levels are for two cycles in 15 minute period. For one cycle in 15 minutes period the
predicted levels will be 3 dB lower.
(4)
Note that the commercial premises to the south of the development are likely to operate between
7 am to 9 pm and therefore we believe that it is appropriate to apply the daytime criterion only.
Based on our experience, we believe that noise from the vacuum alone would have tonal
characteristics for which 5 dB(A) penalty is applied.
We note that based on the manufacturers noise report, no tonal characteristic have been found
for carwash facility Soft Gloss Max and the noise character is assumed to be similar for the Soft
Glass 3. Noise emissions from the carwash may have modulating characteristic due to
operation of different components, for which a penalty has to be applied to the noise source
levels.
For the worse case with both carwash and vacuum operating, the resulting noise levels at the
receptors are controlled by the carwash noise emissions. As such, the tonal character of the
vacuum is most likely masked by the carwash noise. Therefore, only 5 dB(A) penalty has been
8
Desktop Study
considered as the worse case for potential modulating character of carwash to dominate the
resulting noise levels.
The predicted noise levels with the vacuum alone comply with the relevant criteria for both noise
sensitive receptors during day and night.
The predicted noise levels at the most sensitive commercial noise receptor is 10 dB(A) above
the day time criteria. The predicted noise level at the Stirling Hotel outdoor area is 9 dB(A)
above the night time criteria. As such, noise mitigation should be considered to ensure
compliance with the relevant environmental noise criteria.
9
Desktop Study
6
Noise mitigation measures
Potential noise mitigation measures include:
•
•
•
•
•
relocation of the car wash facility,
reselection of carwash,
noise barriers,
treatments to the carwash facility including doors, and
combination of above options.
Achieving the required noise reduction with the relocation and reselection of the facilities and
noise barrier alone would be difficult and impractical. Treatment of carwash facility, such as
addition of acoustically rated doors, is likely to achieve the required attenuation.
On the basis of our review of noise data provided by the manufacturer for the carwash facility
Soft Gloss Max, a 10 dB noise reduction can be achieved by installing a roller door at the
entrance and exit. As such, we recommend that a Soft Gloss Max door (or acoustically
equivalent) be installed at the carwash exit and entrance. The door should be selected to
ensure a minimum 10 dB attenuation/difference between the resulting noise levels with the door
open and closed.
10
Desktop Study
7
Conclusion
A desktop study of environmental noise impact of the proposed petrol-filling complex at Merrion
Terrace, Stirling has been undertaken and outlined in this report.
This assessment has demonstrated that the noise emissions from the complex are mainly
controlled by the carwash facility. The predicted noise levels at the noise-affected receptors due
to operation of the carwash facility exceed the relevant noise criteria by 10 dB.
On the basis of our assessment, incorporation of a door for the carwash entrance and exit, such
as the roller door recommended by the manufacturer for Soft Gloss Max or acoustically
equivalent, with the door closed would result in compliance with the requirement of the Noise
Policy and the Development Plan.
On this basis, with the noise treatment recommended in this report, the development can
operate within the Development Plan and Noise EPP noise requirements.
11

AM-PM Service Station, 65 Mount Barker Road, Stirling Construction

Transcription

Similar documents

theBoom "O"

March: Stock Car Racing Noise – Conflicts and Feasible Controls

2016 Events - Farmtown Park

Pantallas Acusticas Pared Verde (EN)

August 10, 2016 Danny Page Valecraft Homes Ltd. / Jean

Groove Tubes Specifications

Angiosperm Latin Name: Cyperus involucratus Common Name

Voice-Level Poster Example 2

get these forms and fill them out