file no: sf0598 ip

File No: SF0598 IP

24 September 2021

Macquarie House Landscape Project DA cover letter

The Macquarie House Landscape Project involves repurposing the decommissioned Denham Henty Waterscape Fountain into a small area of public greenspace. It will provide public amenity by including a section of grass and garden displays such as cascading plants over the top tier of the existing fountain, whilst retaining a section of existing fountain surface and the iconic Willow. Similar design language will be utilised so the space ties back in with the broader Civic Square landscape. Henty Fountain was constructed in 1978 on the site of a former residence and car showroom, to commemorate the contribution to Launceston by Sir Denham Henty. Sir Henty was the Mayor of Launceston from 1948 to 1949, before taking office as a Senator for Tasmania from 1950 to 1968. Contact was made with Sir Henty's son Tim in 2018 regarding redevelopment of the site, which is attached with this application. During construction works for the Macquarie House redevelopment in 2018, major cracking was located in the bed of the fountain leading to it being decommissioned. The wet well, pumps and other water circulation infrastructure were all removed. Since the 2018 development the fountain has sat idle. Construction fencing remains to barricade off the top tier of the fountain from those exiting the public toilets.

Figure 1: The Denham Henty Waterscape Fountain as it stands in 2021

PLANNING EXHIBITEDDOCUMENTS

Planning Administration

DA 0521/2021Ref. No:

Dateadvertised: 02/10/2021

This document is subject to copyright and is protected by law. In displaying thisdocument on its website the Council grants website users a non-exclusive licence toreproduce the document in their web browser for the sole purpose of viewing thecontent. The Council reserves all other rights. Documents displayed on the Council'swebsite are intended for public perusal only and should not be reproducedwithout the consent of the copyright owner.

Version: 2, Version Date: 30/09/2021Document Set ID: 4617344

of 3

The future of the fountain is as a small section of public greenspace, providing additional contrast to the predominately grey landscape of Civic Square. It will be infilled with growing medium and covered in turf, with the natural grade falling towards the road as to remove the current height difference from fountain crest to bed; the finished surface will match that of the surrounding area. A section of the existing cobblestone fountain bed will be retained in recognition of the site's former state as a fountain. This will also involve the retention of a plaque (Figure 2) that is embedded into the existing cobble stone surface. Chris Bonner of Heritage Tasmania has been consulted during the process as the site is heritage listed. However, Chris has said the heritage relates to Macquarie house rather than the fountain.

Figure 2: The existing plaque will be retained along with a section of the cobblestone fountain bed

As per the arborist report attached, the existing Salix (willow tree) overhanging the fountain will be retained. However, the Platanus × acerifolia (London Plane) to the south will be removed and replaced with a Ulmus Parvifolia Var. This species of tree will provide a similar form to the existing London Plane and is in keeping with tree species from the eastern section of Civic Square. Excavation work will be conducted sensitively as to not damage the existing Willow. Planting themes will be appropriate for the space, and match in with the Civic Square language - a detailed planting plan will be supplied prior to construction. This is as plants will be installed by CoL staff, and exact species will depend on market availability and involve input from those who will be maintaining the space. A similar formed concrete retaining wall will be installed to the north, which will include a new planter box retaining wall for the Willow. This has been designed such to move with the expansion of the Willow's root bed, not disjoint as the existing blockwork structure does. The planting theme is intended to mimic the flow of water similar to when the fountain was operational, with the turf emulating the pool and the cascading plants the sheet of water off the top tier of the fountain.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




of 3

Figure 3: Proposal for fountain redevelopment. A PDF file is included in the submission

Documentation included with the DA application includes:

Structural engineering and drainage details, along with GA plan from Pitt & Sherry

A Preliminary Site Investigation, prepared by Environmental Service and Design

A letter sent to Tim Henty - Sir Henty's son - regarding the fountain's original decommissioning in 2018

Arborists report from Stewart Malone, Coordinator Arboriculture, City of Launceston

This cover letter prepared by Isaac Probert, Graduate Engineer, City of Launceston

Landscape plan prepared by Matt Jordan, Recreation & Parks Project Officer, City of Launceston

Certificate of title documentation The repurpose of Henty Fountain will see one of the final pieces of the Civic Square puzzle completed. With no future as a fountain, the space will be redeveloped into public greenspace whilst maintaining a firm recognition of the site's history, and Sir Henty's contribution to Launceston. It will match in seamlessly with Civic Square design language, utilise planting of more appropriate species and provide a natural foreground to the recently renovated Macquarie House.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




DRAWING No.

DRAWING TITLE

STATUS

SCALEDRAWING REVISION HISTORY CLIENTA3

PROJECT

SHEET SIZE(PLOTTED FULL SIZE)

© 2021 PITT & SHERRY (OPERATIONS) PTY LTD. THE DOCUMENT MAYONLY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS COMMISSIONEDAND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT.

REFERENCE FILES ATTACHED:

DESCRIPTIONNo. DATE APPROVED

SIGNED

DATE

DATUMS: CLIENT No.

ORIGINAL COPY ON FILE"e" SIGNED BY

P&S FORM DRG-A3 REV - 8

REVISION

REVIEWED DATEDRAWN DESIGNED

Aug. 23, 21 - 13:29:05 Name: S-P.21.1000-00-GEN-DRG-001.dwg Updated By: Eric Fanning

pittsh.com.au Phone 1300 748 874 ABN 67 140 184 309

CITY OF LAUNCESTON

DENHAM HENTY WATERSCAPEFOUNTAIN REDEVELOPEMENT

GENERAL NOTES

S-P.21.1000-00-GEN-DRG-001 -PRELIMINARYAHD / MGA -

AS SHOWN (A3)

E.FANNING H.EASTHER 19-07-21

0 4020

SCALE IN MILLIMETRES - 1:1

3010 10

G1. THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SPECIFICATION, ARCHITECTURAL, CIVIL AND RELEVANT ENGINEERING SERVICES, DOCUMENTS AND WITH OTHER SUCH WRITTEN INSTRUCTIONS AS MAY BE ISSUED.

G2. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN SHALL BE VERIFIED ON SITE. ENGINEERS DRAWINGS MUST NOTBE SCALED. ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS SHALL BE THE PRIMARY SOURCE FOR DIMENSIONS, TYPICALLY.

G3. DURING CONSTRUCTION THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A STABLE CONDITIONAND NO PART SHALL BE OVERSTRESSED.

G4. ALL MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATION AND THE RELEVANT CURRENT AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS AND NCC.

G5. UNO DENOTES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

G6. ALL DIMENSIONAL UNITS ARE MILLIMETRES EXCEPT REDUCED LEVELS AND DISTANCES (CHAINAGES) WHICH ARE METRES UNO.

G7. ALL DIMENSIONS WHICH TIE INTO OR OTHERWISE RELATE TO EXISTING STRUCTURESSHALL BE VERIFIED ON SITE PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION BY THE CONTRACTOR.

G8. SITE SET-OUT DRAWING IS BASED ON THE SITE SURVEY.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SET-OUT THE WORKS USING A LICENSED SURVEYOR.

G9. ANY DISCREPANCIES WITHIN PROJECT DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE REFERRED TO THESUPERINTENDENT FOR RESOLUTION.

G10. UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO NOTIFY AND ALLOWTIME FOR THE ENGINEER TO INSPECT AT THE FOLLOWING POINTS: COMPLETEDEXCAVATION, FORMWORK, REINFORCEMENT, MEMBRANES AND EMBEDMENTS PRIOR TOPLACING CONCRETE, COMPLETED ERECTED STRUCTURAL FRAMING PRIOR TO COVERING.

F1. THESE NOTES SHALL BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SITE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: (IF AVAILABLE)THE FOUNDATION ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITIES ARE NOMINATED AS FOLLOWS:

- GENERAL: 100 kPaTHE SITE CLASSIFICATION TO AS2870 IS: N/A

F2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN THE ENGINEER'S APPROVAL OF THE FOUNDATIONMATERIAL BEFORE PLACING CONCRETE.

F3. SUBGRADE MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% DRY DENSITY RATIO (MODIFIED). IFIT IS CONSIDERED THAT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT RISK OF WET WEATHER, NATURALGROUND SHALL BE OVER EXCAVATED BY A MAXIMUM OF 200 mm. A LAYER OF SELECTFILL OF COMPACTED HIGHLY WEATHERED ROCK SHALL THEN BE PROVIDED TO BRINGTHE EXCAVATION BACK TO REQUIRED LEVEL.

F4. ENSURE CONCRETE FOOTING MINIMUM 150 mm CLEAR OF ANY ISOLATED ROCK OR FLOATER. PROVIDE SAND PACKING TO ENSURE SEPARATION.

E1. THESE NOTES SHALL BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SITE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

E2. ALL EXCAVATION SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO PRESERVE UNDISTURBED CONDITIONS AT THE UNDERSIDE OF FOOTINGS & SLABS.

E3. APPROVED BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE PLACED UNIFORMLY AROUND ALL FOOTINGSIDES IN 200 mm MAXIMUM LOOSE LAYERS AND COMPACTED TO 95% S.D.D.R. UNO.

E4. IF FOOTING EXCAVATIONS ARE LOWER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON DESIGN DRAWINGS,THE OVER EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH LEAN MIX MASS CONCRETE.

E5. FINISHED EARTHWORK SLOPES SHALL NOT BE STEEPER THAN 1 VERTICAL IN 2HORIZONTAL UNO.

E6. ALL TRENCHING AND OTHER TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITHAS2870 IN TERMS OF RATIO OF DEPTH TO HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM FOOTING.

E7. DISTURBED MATERIAL UNDER SLABS SHOULD BE COMPACTED WITH TWO PASSES OF AVIBRATING ROLLER. ANY REQUIRED FILL SHOULD BE FINE CRUSHED ROCK COMPACTEDTO 95% S.D.D.R. UNO.

C1. ALL WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIAL SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATION AND AS3600. USE GENERAL PURPOSE CEMENT AND NORMAL WEIGHTAGGREGATES UNO. DO NOT USE ADDITIVES WITHOUT APPROVAL.

C2. CONCRETE QUALITY SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS (UNO) ;

ITEM CONCRETE GRADE

GENERAL N32PRECAST N40PAD AND STRIP FOOTINGS N25FOOTING BEAMS N25PEDESTALS N32BLINDING N15BACKFILL N15

C3. ALL REINFORCEMENT ON THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNATED AS FOLLOWS UNO:SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TYPESL MESH - SQUARE GRID D500L TO AS4671RL MESH - RECTANGULAR GRID D500L TO AS4671TM TRENCH MESH D500L TO AS4671R PLAIN BARS R250N TO AS4671S DEFORMED BARS D250N TO AS4671N DEFORMED BARS D500N TO AS4671

DESIGNATION EXAMPLESL82 REINFORCING MESH D500L 8 DIA. RIBBED BARS @ 200 CRS4-L12TM TRENCH MESH D500L 4 No 12 DIA. RIBBED BARS. (300 WIDE)4-R10-300 PLAIN BARS R250N 4 No 10 DIA. BARS @ 300 CRS4-S12-300 DEFORMED BARS D250N 4 No 12 DIA. BARS @ 300 CRS4-N16-200 T DEFORMED BARS D500N 4 No 16 DIA. BARS @ 200 CRS TOPNOTE: NUMBER OR SPACING SPECIFIED - GENERALLY NOT BOTH

C4. CLEAR COVER TO REINFORCEMENT (INCLUDING FITMENTS) SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNO

TOP COVER : 40 mmCAST AGAINST BUILDING OR FORMWORK : 40 mmCAST AGAINST GROUND PROTECTED BY DAMP PROOF MEMBRANE : 50 mmCAST AGAINST GROUND NOT PROTECTED BY DAMP PROOF MEMBRANE : 60 mmCAST AGAINST BLINDING CONCRETE : 50 mm

C5. SIZES OF CONCRETE ELEMENTS DO NOT INCLUDE THICKNESS OF ANY APPLIED FINISHES.

C6. BEAM DEPTHS ARE NOTED FIRST AND INCLUDE THE THICKNESS OF THE SLAB IF ANY.

C7. CONSTRUCTION JOINTS WHERE NOT SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE LOCATED TOTHE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. JOINTS TO BE SEALED WITH SEALANT AS NOTED ONDRAWING OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT.

C8. FORMS SHALL BE CHAMFERED FOR RE-ENTRANT ANGLES AND FILLETED FOR CORNERS.WHERE THESE WILL BE EXPOSED TO VIEW IN THE COMPLETED PROJECT THE FACE OFTHE BEVEL IN EACH CASE SHALL BE 25 mm WIDE UNO.

C9. NO HOLES, CHASES OR EMBEDMENTS OF PIPES OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON THESTRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER.

C10. NO ALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE FOR STACKED MATERIALS ON THE CONCRETE STRUCTURE UNO.

C11. CONCRETE FLOOR FINISH SHALL BE MONOLITHIC, STEEL TROWEL FINISH INTERNAL ANDBROOM FINISH EXTERNAL UNO.

C12. NO REINFORCEMENT SPLICES SHALL BE MADE IN POSITIONS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS WITHOUT THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER.

C13. MINIMUM LAP FOR MESH SHALL BE TWO TRANSVERSE WIRES PLUS 25 mm.

C14. WELDING OF REINFORCEMENT IS NOT PERMITTED UNLESS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGSOR APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.

C15. TOP AND BOTTOM REINFORCEMENT IN SLABS SHALL BE SUPPORTED ON APPROVEDPLASTIC TIPPED CHAIRS IN BOTH DIRECTIONS AT MAXIMUM CENTRES OF:600 FOR 10 mm DIA. BARS,900 FOR 12 mm AND 16 mm DIA. BARS,1200 FOR 20 mm DIA. BARS750 FOR MESH.

C16. ALL FORMWORK AND PROPS UNDER SUSPENDED CONCRETE WORK SHALL BE REMOVED BEFORE ANY BRICKWORK OR BLOCKWORK IS BUILT ABOVE.

CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT ABBREVIATIONS

TUTL

BUBL

REINFORCEMENT LAYERING

C17. THE MINIMUM CLEAR SPACING BETWEEN CONDUITS, CABLES, PIPES AND BARS SHALLBE AS REQUIRED BY AS3600 BUT NOT LESS THAN THREE DIAMETERS HORIZONTALLYFOR HORIZONTAL CONDUITS ETC. IN SLABS WALLS AND FOOTINGS AND NOT LESS THAN ONE DIAMETER FOR ALL OTHER CONDUITS ETC.

C18. SPLICED BARS SHALL BE LAPPED AS FOLLOWS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE:

THE NOTED LAP LENGTHS ARE FOR N32/N40 GRADE CONCRETE FOR ACTUAL BAR COVER NOT LESS THAN 40mm AND CLEAR SPACING BETWEEN BARS NOT LESS THAN 80mm.

CONSULT THE ENGINEER FOR LAPS FOR OTHER CONCRETE GRADES, COVER OR SPACING.

C19. FOR WIDE ELEMENTS, INCLUDING BAND BEAMS, LAPS SHALL BE STAGGERED SO THATNO MORE THAN 50% OF THE BARS ARE LAPPED AT ANY ONE CROSS SECTION AND THATTWO ADJACENT BARS ARE LAPPED AT ANY ONE LOCATION. WHERE STAGGERED BARSARE NOT POSSIBLE THE MINIMUM LAP LENGTH SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 1.25 TIMESTHE STANDARD LAP LENGTH OR AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.

C20. THE LAP LENGTH OF BUNDLED BARS SHALL BE INCREASED FROM THE VALUES SHOWNIN THE TABLE AS FOLLOW:3 BAR BUNDLE - 20%4 BAR BUNDLE - 33%.

C21. INDIVIDUAL BARS WITHIN A BUNDLE SHALL BE TERMINATED AT DIFFERENT POINTS STAGGERED BY AT LEAST 40 TIMES THE DIAMETER OF THE LARGER BAR.

C22. ALL SLAB RE-ENTRANT CORNERS SHALL HAVE 3-N16 BARS 1500 mm LONG AT 100 mmCENTRES TIED TO THE UNDERSIDE OF THE TOP LAYER OF REINFORCEMENT UNO.

C23. CONCRETE IS TO BE CURED BY KEEPING MOST OR BY THE USE OF APPROVED CURINGCOMPOUNDS FOR A MINIMUM OF 3 DAYS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS3600. FOR NEAR COASTAL (<50 km) OR FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONES, CURE FOR A MINIMUM OF 7 DAYS.

LAP LENGTHS < 300 CONCRETE DEPTH(UNDER BAR LAP) [mm]

> 300 CONCRETE DEPTH (UNDERLAP) [mm]

CONCRETE GRADE CONCRETE GRADEBAR N32 N40 N32 N40N10 320 290 420 380N12 390 350 510 460N16 600 530 770 690N20 840 750 1100 980N24 1110 990 1440 1290N28 1400 1250 1810 1620N32 1710 1530 2220 1980

CP CENTRALLY PLACEDEW EACH WAYEF EACH FACENF NEAR FACEFF FAR FACELV LENGTH VARIESB BOTTOM REINFORCEMENTBU BOTTOM REINFORCEMENT UPPER LEVELBL BOTTOM REINFORCEMENT LOWER LEVELT TOP REINFORCEMENTTL TOP REINFORCEMENT LOWER LEVELTU TOP REINFORCEMENT UPPER LEVELEJ EXPANSION JOINTCJ CONTROL JOINTDJ DOWELLED JOINTSJ SAWCUT JOINTTOC TOP OF CONCRETEFCR FINE CRUSHED ROCKSOP SET OUT POINT

200 SLAB THICKNESS (200mm)

FOUNDATIONS & FOOTINGS

GENERAL CONCRETE (CONTINUED)CONCRETEEXCAVATION AND BACKFILL



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




EXISTING LANDSCAPEDAREA TO REMAIN


EXISTING GARDEN BED

EXISTING GARDEN BED

EXISTINGGARDEN

BED

EXISTING CAR PARKING

EXISTING STAIRS

EXISTING WILLOWTREE TO BE RETAINED& PROTECTED DURINGWORKS

NEW CONCRETERETAINING WALL

NEW PLANTERBOX

NEW CONCRETEKERB

EXISTING COBBLE STONE PAVING TOREMAIN. CRACK SEAL & REPLACE STONESAS REQUIRED. APPLY EXTERNAL CLEAROUTDOOR SEALING COMPOUND WITHANTI-SLIP GRANULES MIXED THROUGH.

EXISTING COBBLESTONE PAVING TOREMAIN

NEW GRASSED AREA

GENERAL ARRANGEMENTSCALE 1:100

EXISTING RETAININGWALL BELOW

CHARLES STREET

EXISTING ROCKSTO REMAIN

NEW 400 x 400 (NOM)SURFACE COLLECTIONPIT WITH AN ANTI-SLIPHEELGUARD GRATE

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

LANDCADD 1987

NEW PLANTSSPECIFICATIONBY PRINCIPAL

EXISTING COBBLESTONES TO REMAIN

FALL

FALL

FALLFALL

MAKE GOOD ATINTERFACE OFRETAINING WALL& ROCKS

MAKE GOOD STONES ATINTERFACE. EXISTINGCOBBLE STONE IS TOBLEND WITH NEW KERB

KERB TO FINISH FLUSH WITHCOBBLE STONE TO ALLOWSURFACE WATER TO DRAININTO COLLECTION PIT.

NEW PLANTSSPECIFICATIONBY PRINCIPAL

NOTE:SURFACE OF GRASSED AREAIS TO FALL TO THE DIRECTIONOF THE COLLECTION PIT.

LOCALISEDREARRANGEMENT OFROCKS TBC WITHPRINCIPAL ON SITE

RETAIN EXISTINGPLAQUE

RL 10.500

RL 10.560

RL 10.560RL 10.600

RL 11.250T.O. SOIL

RL 11.050T.O. SOIL

RL 11.050T.O. SOIL

BOUNDARY

BOUN

DARY

BOUNDARY

BOUN

DARY

BOUN

DARY

DRAWING No.

DRAWING TITLE

STATUS


PROJECT





SIGNED

DATE

DATUMS: CLIENT No.



REVISION


Sep. 28, 21 - 14:52:57 Name: S-P.21.1000-00-STR-DRG-001.dwg Updated By: Eric Fanning


CITY OF LAUNCESTON


GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

S-P.21.1000-00-STR-DRG-001 BPRELIMINARYAHD / MGA -

AS SHOWN (A3)

E.FANNING H.EASTHER 19-07-21A NOTES ADDED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 22-09-21B BOUNDARY LINE ADDED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 28-09-21

0 4020


3010 10

NORTH



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:






EXISTING GARDEN BED

EXISTING GARDEN BED

EXISTINGGARDEN

BED

EXISTING CAR PARKING

EXISTING STAIRS

NEW CONCRETERETAINING WALL

NEW PLANTERBOX NEW CONCRETE

KERB

PLANSCALE 1:100

EXISTING RETAININGWALL BELOW

A003

B003

D004

C003

CHARLES STREET

NEW SURFACECOLLECTION PIT

FALL

FALL

EXISTING GRATEDDRAIN BELOW TOREMAIN

FALLFALL

NOTE:ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINAL &ARE TO BE CONFIRMED ON SITE.

9400

=

=

=

5140

2570

300

300

200

10970

3800

14920

BOUNDARY

BOUN

DARY

BOUNDARY

BOUN

DARY

BOUN

DARY

3810

642

2731

5BO

UNDA

RY

11708

152

DRAWING No.

DRAWING TITLE

STATUS


PROJECT





SIGNED

DATE

DATUMS: CLIENT No.



REVISION




CITY OF LAUNCESTON


LAYOUT PLAN

S-P.21.1000-00-STR-DRG-002 APRELIMINARYAHD / MGA -

AS SHOWN (A3)

E.FANNING H.EASTHER 19-07-21A BOUNDARY LINE ADDED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 28-09-21

0 4020


3010 10

NORTH



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




SECTION1:50

A002

SECTION1:50

B002

FALLFALL

SURFACE LEVEL TO

REMAIN NOMINALLY

THE SAME

300 NOMCOBBLESTONE

300 NOMCOBBLESTONE

300

MIN

150

MIN

350

Ø 100 SLOTTED AGPIPE IN FILTER SOCK

VARI

ES

FALL

CONNECT AG PIPE TOEXISTING DRAIN

EXISTING DRAIN

EXISTING DN150 PVCPIPE TO STORMWATERSYSTEM

EXISTING COBBLESTONE FINISH

TOP SOIL / GROWINGMEDIUM BY PRINCIPALDEPTH TO REMAINCONSISTENT ACROSS AREA

SECTION1:50

C002

EXISTING DRAIN

EXISTING COBBLESTONE FINISH

CUT & REMOVE COBBLESTONES& CONCRETE BASE ENTIRELY UPTO THE EXISTING BASE.

EXISTING SURFACELEVEL

COBBLE STONES TO REMAIN

0.2mm DAMP PROOF MEMBRANE.TYP. TAPE ALL JOINTS AND DRAPEINTO EXISTING DRAIN

NO FINES CONCRETEWRAP IN GEOTEXTILE

0.2mm POLYETHYLENEDAMP PROOF MEMBRANE.TAPE ALL JOINTS.REFER NOTES

Ø 100 SLOTTED AGPIPE IN FILTER SOCK

150 THICK (MIN) DRAINAGELAYER WRAPPED INGEOFABRIC. REFER NOTES.

NEW RETAININGWALL.

FACADE & BRIDGING BYOTHERS

PLANTER SUPPORT POSTS(GALV) AT 1000cts

CONCRETE STRIP FOOTING

1004

2004

3004

I.L. 9.764

NO FINES CONCRETEWRAP IN GEOTEXTILE.



NEW 400 x 400 (NOM)SURFACE COLLECTIONPIT WITH AN ANTI-SLIPHEELGUARD GRATE

R.L. 10.500 NOM

REMOVE EXISTING LID & FILLWITH NO FINES CONCRETE.ENSURE TO NOT BLINDOUTLET PIPE.

0.2mm POLYETHYLENEDAMP PROOF MEMBRANE.TAPE ALL JOINTS.REFER NOTES

EXISTING FIBRE GLASS LIP

DRAWING No.

DRAWING TITLE

STATUS


PROJECT





SIGNED

DATE

DATUMS: CLIENT No.



REVISION




CITY OF LAUNCESTON


SECTIONS


AS SHOWN (A3)

E.FANNING H.EASTHER 19-07-21A DRAWING REVISED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 22-09-21B DRAWING REVISED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 28-09-21

0 4020


3010 10

NOTES:1. DAMP-PROOF MEMBRANE MUST HAVE 'HIGH' IMPACT RESISTANCE TO AS 2870.2. INSTALL DAMP-PROOF MEMBRANE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS 2870.3. DRAINAGE LAYER TO COMPLY WITH DSG SPECIFICATION R33.4. FILTER MATERIAL TO BE 19mm AGGREGATE TO R33.5.1.2.5. GEOFABRIC TO BE BIDUM A34 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




600

300

N12-300COG BOTTOM

300 WIDE (MIN) DRAINAGELAYER WRAPPED INGEOTEXTILE

BITUMEN SEALER

Ø 100 SLOTTED AG PIPE INFILTER SOCK, CONNECT TOSW DRAINAGE. FALL AT 1%.

SUBGRADE TO BE MIN 100 kPaBEARING CAPACITY. REMOVEWET & SOFT PATCHES & REPLACEWITH COMPACTED BASE A ORCONCRETE BLINDING

N12-200 T&B300

100

MIN

DETAIL1:20

2003

25 N

OMAS

PHAL

T CO

VER

500 M

AX

TYPICAL RETAINING WALL FOOTING

N12-300U-BARS

N12-200 EF

N12-300

SECTION1:20

D002

300

100

MIN

25 N

OMAS

PHAL

T CO

VER

600 M

AX

CHAMFER EDGES(MATCH CONCRETE INSURROUNDING EDGES)

5-N20 EF

N12-400 U-BARS EF40 COVERALTERNATE - N12-400LIGS

100 COMPACTEDROAD BASE

TYPICAL PLANTER BOX SECTION

PLANTER BOX REINFORCEMENT PLANSCALE 1:20

600 LAPTYP

N20 CORNERBARS

600 LAPTYP

R500

T.B.C.

R200

T.B.C.

RADIUS TOSUIT

MIN OF 40 COVER TO SIDES TO BE MAINTAINED

DETAIL1:20

3003

TYPICAL CONCRETE KERB SECTION

7560

0

200

4-N12 EF

N12-600U-BARS EF

SALVAGE STONESAND MAKE GOODPAVING OVER KERB

T.B.

C.W

HEN

DEPT

HOF

STO

NES

ISDE

TERM

INED

20 MIN CEMENTITIOUSGROUT UNDER

DETAIL1:10

1003

TYPICAL PLANTER SUPPORT DETAIL

EXISTING CANTILEVERCONCRETE PLANTER

75 x 6 EA GALV SUPPORTPOST AT 1000cts8 END PLATE2-M16 GALV CHEMSETS

STRIP FOOTING

5-L11TM CENTRE

NO FINES CONCRETE

150

500

75 x 6 EA GALV TOSUPPORT FACING

FACADE & BRIDGINGBY OTHERS

100

NOTE: STEELWORK DETAILS TBC WHEN FACING IS CHOSEN

EXISTING FIBERGLASS LIP

DRAWING No.

DRAWING TITLE

STATUS


PROJECT





SIGNED

DATE

DATUMS: CLIENT No.



REVISION




CITY OF LAUNCESTON


DETAILS


AS SHOWN (A3)

E.FANNING H.EASTHER 19-07-21A DETAIL 1 REVISED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 22-09-21B DETAIL 1 REVISED E.FANNING H.EASTHER 28-09-21

0 4020


3010 10



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




ABN: 97 107 517 144 ACN: 107 517 144 74 Minna Road PO Box 651 Heybridge TAS 7316 Burnie TAS 7320 Ph: (03) 6431 2999 Fax: (03) 6431 2933

Preliminary Site Investigation

Civic Square, Launceston 7250

Project No: 7958



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




2

PSI Civic Square, Launceston 2021

Document Control

Prepared & Published by: ES&D

Version: Final V2

File: 7958

Contact: Rod Cooper

Phone No: (03) 6431 2999

Prepared For: Isaac Probert

Version: Date:

DRAFT Nicholas Plats ES&D 5/08/2021

FINAL V1 Rod Cooper ES&D 7/8/2021

Update Nicholas Plats ES&D 20/8/2021

Final V2 Rod Cooper ES&D 22/8/2021

This report has been prepared, based on information generated by Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd from

a wide range of sources. If you believe that Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd has misrepresented or

overlooked any relevant information, it is your responsibility to bring this to the attention of Environmental Service

and Design Pty Ltd before implementing any of the report’s recommendations. In preparing this report, we have

relied on information supplied to Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd, which, where reasonable,

Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd has assumed to be correct. Whilst all reasonable efforts have been made

to substantiate such information, no responsibility will be accepted if the information is incorrect or inaccurate.

This report is prepared solely for the use of the client to whom it is addressed and Environmental Service and Design

Pty Ltd will not accept any responsibility for third parties. In the event that any advice or other services rendered by

Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd constitute a supply of services to a consumer under the Competition and

Consumer Act 2010 (as amended), then Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd’s liability for any breach of any

conditions or warranties implied under the Act shall not be excluded but will be limited to the cost of having the

advice or services supplied again. Nothing in this Disclaimer affects any rights or remedies to which you may be

entitled under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (as amended). Each paragraph of this disclaimer shall be

deemed to be separate and severable from each other. If any paragraph is found to be illegal, prohibited or

unenforceable, then this shall not invalidate any other paragraphs.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




3


Contents

Preliminary Site Investigation ....................................................................................................1

Document Control ......................................................................................................................2

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................5

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................6

2 Scope of Works....................................................................................................................6

3 Basis for Assessment ...........................................................................................................6

4 Site Details ..........................................................................................................................7

4.1 Ownership and Location ...............................................................................................7

4.2 Site Layout ....................................................................................................................8

5 Zoning and Land Use .........................................................................................................10

6 Contaminants of Potential Concern ..................................................................................10

7 Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology .............................................................................11

8 Site Drainage and Discharge Points ...................................................................................11

8.1 Soil and Surface Water ................................................................................................11

8.2 Groundwater ..............................................................................................................11

8.3 Waste .........................................................................................................................11

10 Analytical and Sampling Plan .........................................................................................17

13 Conclusions and Recommendations ..............................................................................22

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Site Location. The blue highlighted area of Civic Square.,: The List 2016. ................................ 7

Figure 2. Site of the previous water feature, which is due for re-development. ........................................ 8

Figure 3: Proposed water feature as part of the new development. ......................................................... 9

Figure 4. Zoning – Zoning boundaries as per the Launceston Interim Planning Scheme 2015. ................ 10

Figure 5. Preliminary Conceptual Site Model ......................................................................................... 16

Figure 6 -2016 Bores MWN (North) and MWS (South) Installed. ........................................................... 17

Figure 7 - Revised CSM .......................................................................................................................... 24



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




4


List of Tables

Table 1 - Soil Assessment Criteria, Health Screening Levels / Health Investigation Levels ....................... 14

Table 2 - Soil Assessment Criteria, Ecological Investigation Levels / Ecological Screening Levels ............. 14

Table 3 - Groundwater Assessment Criteria ........................................................................................... 15

Table 4 – Sample Information ................................................................................................................ 17

Table 5 – Soil samples with depths 1-2m ............................................................................................... 18

Table 6 – Soil samples with depths 4-8m ............................................................................................... 19

Table 7 – Groundwater .......................................................................................................................... 20



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




5


Executive Summary

A Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) was conducted on Civic Square, Launceston 7250, by

Environmental Service and Design (ES&D), to determine if the risk is acceptable from

contamination to the DA proposed by Launceston City Council (LCC). The PSI was required by

the Launceston Council under the Potentially Contaminated Land Code which identified the

property as a potential source of contamination to the proposed development of the civic

square. E2.5 & E2.6.2.

After a review of the site history from WorkSafe Tasmania (WST), it was found that there were

no registered sources of dangerous goods stored at 91-97 Charles Street, Launceston. However,

there may be soil and groundwater contamination due to other historical operations.

A wider investigation was focusing on risk to the proposed development (Launceston City Heart

Project) was conducted in 2016 and the extensive tests conducted at that time was reviewed

as part of this development. Launceston City Heart Project found no contamination during the

development and this information informs this PSI.

ES&D found records of two nearby underground fuel tank facilities, one nearby and up gradient

at 68 to 72 Cameron Street and a second at “Macquarie House” at 92 Cameron Street. Other

potentially contaminated sites were up gradient. Risk to workers on the development exists

from contaminated groundwater if it is shallow in the area and there is potential contamination

from the UPSS systems up gradient.

Based on the potential contamination and area where the development will occur, two

groundwater bores were installed (2016), and soil samples were taken in 2016. The bores were

constructed to a standard suitable as permanent monitoring bores should council wish to

perform future groundwater monitoring.

Although it was noted that groundwater TRH F2 level for C10 – C16 Fraction was 2,850 ug/l

indicating a general low level of groundwater contamination in the area, results confirmed that

there is no risk to potential receptors in the vicinity of the development as the contamination

levels in both groundwater and soil were below the NEPM Health Screening Levels and the

Groundwater Investigation Levels.

Thus, the investigation meets the LCC Planning requirement:



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




6


E2.5.1 P1(b) – Land is suitable for the intended use, having regard to an environmental site

assessment that demonstrates that the level of contamination does not present a risk to human

health or the environment.

and

E2.6.2 P1(b) – Excavation does not adversely impact on health and the environment, having regard

to an environmental site assessment that demonstrates that the level of contamination does not

present a risk to human health or the environment.

1 Introduction

Environmental Service and Design (ES&D) were engaged by their client Launceston City Council

to undertake a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) on the Civic Square, Launceston. This PSI

requires a review of historical uses to risk assess the property and to determine the level of risk

it may pose to the proposed development.

Under the Launceston City Council Interim Planning Scheme 2015 the proposed development

will need to satisfy the Contaminated Land Code E2.5 and E2.6;

E2.5.1 P1(b) – Land is suitable for the intended use, having regard to an environmental site

assessment that demonstrates that the level of contamination does not present a risk to human

health or the environment.

and

E2.6.2 P1(b) – Excavation does not adversely impact on health and the environment, having regard

to an environmental site assessment that demonstrates that the level of contamination does not

present a risk to human health or the environment.

2 Scope of Works

The scope of works included interpretation of the site history from WorkSafe Tasmania (WST),

consideration of the site environmental setting, identification of potential human and

ecological receptors and consideration of risks to identified receptors and development of a

Conceptual Site Model (CSM).

3 Basis for Assessment

As a State Policy for the purposes of State Policies and Procedures Act 1993, the National

Environmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (NEPM) was the

guideline used for the assessment.

The assessment included elements of a Preliminary Environmental Site Assessment as defined

in NEPM Schedule B2.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




7


4 Site Details

4.1 Ownership and Location

The Civic Square (Figure 1) is owned by the Launceston City Council and has no PID or Title

Reference. The square was formerly Cameron Street. Figure 1 shows location of underground

fuel tanks, indicated with a X.

Figure 1 – Site Location. The blue highlighted area of Civic Square., with historic underground fuel tanks indicated

with an “X” - Source: The List 2016.

X

X



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




8


4.2 Site Layout

Civic square is a large open square that is almost completely paved. The area allows free access

to various government buildings and has benches and small grasses areas.

The proposed development will involve the re-development of an existing water feature as part

of the project. The PSI is informed by the 2016 work and the encountering of no contamination.

Figure 2. Site of the previous water feature, which is due for re-development.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




9


Figure 3: Proposed water feature as part of the new development.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




10


5 Zoning and Land Use The site spread across two zones - Urban Mixed-Use zone and the Open Space zone. The Launceston

City Council Interim Planning Scheme 2015 (Figure 3), with the surrounding zones consisting of Central

Business (Blue to the south), Inner Residential (Red to the East), Open Space (Dark Green to the north

and east), Recreation (Light green to the west and east), Utilities (Light Yellow to the west) and

Particular Purpose (Dark Yellow to the west).

Figure 4. Zoning – Zoning boundaries as per the Launceston Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

Highlighting - Central Business (Blue), Inner Residential (Red), Open Space (Dark Green), Recreation

(Light Green), Utilities (Light Yellow) and Particular Purpose (Dark Yellow).

6 Contaminants of Potential Concern

Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC) include hydrocarbons, BTEX, and lead. Potential for

hydrocarbon and lead contamination arises from the previous land use as service stations in

the area, however there are no dangerous goods currently recorded on the site. WST have no

record of underground fuel tanks at 91-97 Charles Street. Additionally, hydrocarbons, BTEX,

Lead and PAH are expected from the nearby underground fuel tanks at 68 to 72 Cameron Street

and a second at “Macquarie House” at 92 Cameron Street.

Site

Particular Purpose

Utilities

Open Space

Recreation



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




11


7 Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology

Review of the Tasmanian Land Information System (The List) indicated that the geology of the

immediate and surrounding area is Undifferentiated Cenozoic sequences which is described as

poorly consolidated, dominantly siliceous clasts in some areas, of probable Pleistocene age. The

local topography slopes in a North / North Westerly direction. The groundwater flow is most

likely in a north-westerly direction. The local topography and the sites proximity to the river

suggests the water table underlying the site is likely to be shallow, the investigation found that

this is not the case. This may mean that there is an increased risk of exposure to vapours moving

to the surface from hydrocarbon contaminated groundwater. Note that recreational types of

use do not trigger vapour intrusion issues.

8 Site Drainage and Discharge Points

8.1 Soil and Surface Water

The proximity to historic service stations and other underground storage tanks (X figure 1)

would most likely not impact on the site soils. There is potential for the groundwater to be

contaminated and if so then the risk if vapour intrusion occurs in the Civic Square. With

excavation, there is potential for worker exposure to the vapours.

8.2 Groundwater

Groundwater contamination from underground fuel tanks up gradient from the Civic Square is

a real possibility (X figure 1). The inferred groundwater direction is to the north-west. A wider

investigation indicates that underground fuel tanks have been present at 68-72 Cameron Street

in the 1930’s. These tanks are situated up gradient of the proposed development. Additional

underground fuel tanks have been located at 92 Cameron Street, which is situated southeast of

the development. Any leakage from when these tanks were operational could potentially

impact groundwater directly below the development. A preliminary Conceptual Site Model

(CSM) is presented in Figure 5.

8.3 Waste

No waste issues have been identified in this desktop study. But management measures will be

required if soil is removed from the site during the water feature construction.

9 Potential Receptors

A preliminary Conceptual Site Model (CSM) (Figure 5) was developed after consideration of risks

to potential human and ecological receptors as outlined below.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




12


9.1 Human Receptors

The site use will not change from a Civic Square. The surrounding buildings contain commercial

employees and customers. The square is an open space containing users passing through.

Workers and subsurface workers will work on the development. Risks to human health from

hydrocarbon contamination can arise via the inhalation route from vapour intrusion into

building spaces, or when people are in close proximity to vapours for extended periods (e.g.,

subsurface workers), and/or by direct contact with contaminated soil, surface water or

groundwater (e.g., ingestion, dermal contact). The development being redevelopment of the

water feature.

Subterranean services in the street could provide preferential pathways for movement of

contaminants towards the development and present an exposure risk to sub-surface workers,

although organisations likely to be involved in such works generally have mature safety

management systems whereby uncontrolled excavations are not likely to occur.

9.2 Ecological Receptors

The suspected groundwater flow direction indicates the Tamar River, ~500 meters west, will be

the main receiving surface water body for groundwater discharging from the site. High levels of

contaminants in the groundwater are unlikely to present a risk to ecological receptors in the

river.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




13


Basis for Assessment

Health Screening Levels (HSLs), Health Investigation Levels (HILs), and Groundwater

Investigation Levels (GILs) provided in the National Environmental protection (Assessment of

Site Contamination) Measure 1999, as amended April 11, 2013 (NEPM) were the designated

criteria for assessing potential ecological and human health risks posed by hydrocarbon

contamination of soil and groundwater as applicable. Cooperative Research Centre for

Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE) documents used

in the assessment comprised CRC CARE Technical Report No. 10 “Health Screening Levels for

Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil and Groundwater Part 2: Application Document” (TR10).

Soil and groundwater screening / investigation levels considered are given in Tables 1, 2 and 3.

Section 4.6 of CRC CARE TR10 suggests that when the soil type does not match any of the three

soil categories used in the derivation of HSLs the appropriate option when deciding on soil types

for assessment of key scenarios / receptors is to assume the soil is sand as the most conservative

of the HSLs and this was the strategy adopted for the assessment.

Site soils were predominantly silt and silty clay, but silty sand and sandy gravel were also

encountered during drilling on the site.

NEPM advises that a pragmatic risk-based approach should be taken in applying ESLs & EILs in

commercial/industrial land use settings, and that these generally only apply to the top 2.0

meters of soil. ESLs relating to coarse grained soil were considered to be appropriate because

in reality there was clay and we took a conservative approach.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




14


Table 1 - Soil Assessment Criteria, Health Screening Levels / Health Investigation Levels

Land Use Units – mg/kg Commercial / Industrial

HSLs - Derived from NEPM Schedule B1, Table 1A(3)

HSL-D

1-2m, sand

HSL-D 2-4 m, sand

Chemical

Naphthalene NL NL

C6-C10 (F1) 370 630

>C10-C16 (F2) NL NL

Benzene 3 3.0

Toluene NL NL

Ethylbenzene NL NL

Xylenes NL NL

HILs – Derived from NEPM Schedule B1, Table 1A(1)

Lead 1500

NL = Not Limiting: indicates that vapour reaches saturation point and cannot increase to a point which would result in an unacceptable health risk.

Table 2 - Soil Assessment Criteria, Ecological Investigation Levels / Ecological Screening Levels

Land Use Commercial / Industrial

Chemical Soil (mg/kg)

Soil (mg/kg)

Lead

ABC Not known

ACL 1800

EIL 1800+

ESLs – Derived from NEPM Schedule B1, Table 1B(6)

C6-C10 (F1)

Coarse substrate

215

>C10-C16 (F2) 170

>C16-C34 (F3) 1700

>C34-C40 (F4) 3300

Benzene 75

Toluene 135

Ethylbenzene 165

Xylenes 180



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




15


Table 3 - Groundwater Assessment Criteria

Health Screening Levels / Groundwater Investigation Levels

Chemical Groundwater (µg/L)

HSLs - Derived from NEPM Schedule B1, Table 1A(4)

HSL-D

4m to <8 sand

Naphthalene NL

C6-C10 (F1) 6000

>C10-C16 (F2) NL

Benzene 5000

Toluene NL

Ethylbenzene NL

Xylenes NL

GILs – Derived from NEPM Schedule B1, Table 1C

Fresh Water

Lead 3.4

Benzene 950

o-xylene 350

p-xylene 200

Naphthalene 16

NL = Not Limiting: indicates that vapour reaches saturation point and cannot increase to a point which would result in an unacceptable health risk.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




16


Figure 5. Preliminary Conceptual Site Model

Primary Source Release Mechanism Secondary Source Release Mechanism Pathway Exposure Route

Receptors

Offsite Contaminants Leaks & Spills

Soil

Vapour Migration

Infiltration, percolation

Air

Ground-water

Surface Water,

Sediments

Discharge

Sub

surf

ace

w

ork

ers

Site

bu

ildin

g u

sers

DA

wo

rker

s

Current Future / Potential

Unknown ?

Riv

er E

colo

gy



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




17


10 Analytical and Sampling Plan

All contaminants that could be reasonably expected to disperse to the environment from an

Underground Petroleum Storage System (UPSS) used for storing and dispensing petrol and diesel

were included in the analytical plan. These comprised Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon / Total

Recoverable Hydrocarbon (TPH/TRH) fractions, Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene (BTEX)

and Lead (Pb).

Planned QC/QA samples included duplicate samples as necessary. A soil duplicate was to be

collected with a frequency of 1 per 20 samples, but notwithstanding this, for both soil and

groundwater, one duplicate was to be collected for each. The sampling and analytical plan is

summarised in Table 4.

Table 4 – Sample Information

Soil Number

of samples

Number of

duplicates

Total Pb TRH

Fractions

PAH (selected samples)

BTEX / BTEXN

Samples taken during groundwater bore installation (1 taken from soil/water

interface and SAMPLES AT REGULAR POINTS

8 1 9 X X X X

Groundwater 2 1 3 X X X X

Figure 6 -2016 Bores MWN (North) and MWS (South) Installed.

MWS

MWN



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




18


11 Results of the 2016 Assessment

The comprehensive data is presented in Tables 5-7 together with assessment criteria. Values above

LORs are highlighted in bold black text; those above assessment criteria are highlighted in bold red

text.

• Human health assessment criteria and ecological screening levels were not exceeded in any samples.

• Freshwater Investigation levels were exceeded for lead in the groundwater.

Table 5 – Soil samples with depths 1-2m

Laboratory Report No. EM1612862 Sample ID MWS - 1.0m

MWN - 1.0m

Date Sampled 27/10/2016 27/10/2016

Analyte Units LOR HIL HSL-D

1-2m

EIL /

ESL-D SOIL SOIL

Moisture Content (dried @

103°C) % 1 22.1 21.9

Lead mg/kg 5 1500 1800+ 9 11

TRH

C6 – C10 Fraction mg/kg 50 <10 <10

C6 – C10 Fraction minus BTEX

(F1) mg/kg 50 370 215 <10 <10

>C10 – C16 Fraction mg/kg 50 <50 <50

>C16 – C34 Fraction (F3) mg/kg 100 1700 <100 <100

>C34 – C40 Fraction (F4) mg/kg 100 3300 <100 <100

>C10 – C40 Fraction (sum) mg/kg 10 <50 <50

>C10 – C16 Fraction minus

Naphthalene (F2) mg/kg 10 170 <50 <50

BTEXN

Benzene mg/kg 0.2 3.0 75 <0.2 <0.2

Toluene mg/kg 0.5 NL 135 <0.5 <0.5

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.5 NL 165 <0.5 <0.5

meta- & para-Xylene mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5

ortho-Xylene mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Sum of BTEX mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Total Xylenes mg/kg 0.5 180 <0.5 <0.5

Naphthalene mg/kg 1 NL <1 <1

PAH

Sum of PAH mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




19


Table 6 – Soil samples with depths 4-8m

Laboratory Report No. EM1612862 Sample ID MWS- 4m MWS-6m MWS-8m MWN-4m MWN-6m MWN-8m Duplicate

Date Sampled 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016

Analyte Units LOR HIL HSL-D

4-8m

EIL /

ESL-D SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL SOIL

Moisture Content (dried @ 103°C) % 1 12.7 12.7 20 25 17 26 26.6

Lead mg/kg 5 1500 1800+ 7 5 6 7 6 7 9

TRH

C6 – C10 Fraction mg/kg 50 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

C6 – C10 Fraction minus BTEX (F1) mg/kg 50 215 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

>C10 – C16 Fraction mg/kg 50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50

>C16 – C34 Fraction (F3) mg/kg 100 1700 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100

>C34 – C40 Fraction (F4) mg/kg 100 3300 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100

>C10 – C40 Fraction (sum) mg/kg 10 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50

>C10 – C16 Fraction minus

Naphthalene (F2)

mg/kg 10 NL 170 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50

BTEXN

Benzene mg/kg 0.2 3.0 75 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Toluene mg/kg 0.5 NL 135 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Ethylbenzene mg/kg 0.5 NL 165 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

meta- & para-Xylene mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

ortho-Xylene mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Sum of BTEX mg/kg 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2

Total Xylenes mg/kg 0.5 NL 180 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5

Naphthalene mg/kg 1 NL <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

PAH

Sum of PAH mg/kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




20


Table 7 – Groundwater

Laboratory Report No. EM1612862 Sample ID MWN MWS Duplicate

Date Sampled 27/10/2016 27/10/2016 27/10/2016

Analyte Units LOR GIL

Fresh

HSL-D

4 – 8 m

Lead µg/L 0.001 3.4 21 7 7

PAH µg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 1.4

TRH

C6 - C10 Fraction µg/L 20 <20 <20 <20

C6 - C10 Fraction minus BTEX (F1) µg/L 20 6000 <20 <20 <20

>C10 - C16 Fraction µg/L 100 <100 120 110

>C16 - C34 Fraction (F3) µg/L 100 760 2850 2550

>C34 - C40 Fraction (F4) µg/L 100 <100 <100 <100

>C10 - C40 Fraction (sum) µg/L 100 760 3000 2690

>C10 - C16 Fraction minus Naphthalene (F2) µg/L 100 NL <100 120 110

BTEXN

Benzene µg/L 1 950 5000 <1 <1 <1

Toluene µg/L 2 NL <2 <2 <2

Ethylbenzene µg/L 2 NL <2 <2 <2

meta- & para-Xylene µg/L 2 200 <2 <2 <2

ortho-Xylene µg/L 2 350 <2 <2 <2

Total Xylenes µg/L 2 NL <2 <2 <2

Sum of BTEX µg/L 1 <1 <1 <1

Naphthalene µg/L 5 16 NL <5 <5 <5



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




21


12 Discussion

12.1 Soil

Results show that there is no risk to human health from residual contamination in soil that was

sampled from both bores in 2016. Note that the actual development did not uncover

contamination.

Ecological screening levels were not exceeded in the soil.

Assessment was conducted to the most stringent levels, using sand and commercial / industrial

levels rather than open space and clay soils.

12.2 Groundwater

Hydrocarbons were detected in groundwater, but not above human health criteria at either bore.

The groundwater flows to the north / northwest and so the two bores cover any potential flows

of groundwater under the proposed development. According to NEPM, a distance of 8.0m can

be applied to screen out risk to human receptors from vapour intrusion. Therefore, there is

minimal risk to workers / subsurface workers due to the depth of the groundwater.

It should be noted that lead levels in the groundwater are above the groundwater investigation

levels in both bores. This does not pose any risk to the development as there is no pathway from

the groundwater to the workers. Council may wish to investigate the lead levels, but not in

relation to this investigation.

A revised CSM is given in Figure 7.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




22


13 Conclusions and Recommendations

This PSI relies on the 2016 development Launceston City Heart development that occurred with

no feedback to suggest contamination was detected during excavation.

The PSI (2021) for the Civic Square Launceston determined that there is acceptable risk from

contamination as there is very low levels of contamination in the groundwater and soil. This is

based on a NEPM based risk assessment using the CSM presented in this report. There is

acceptable risk for the proposed DA, being a re-development of a water feature that will require

minimal excavation. The development can proceed with two management measure.

1. Any soil removed from the site must meet the EPA Tas controlled waste tracking

procedure. This will require sampling and EPA approval if required.

2. During excavation workers standard PPE must be worn - gloves, glasses, masks, hardhat,

steel toed boots must be worn.

Rod Cooper.

Certified CEnvP Site Contamination Specialist



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




23


14 Limitations

ES&D has prepared this report in accordance with the care and thoroughness of the

consulting profession for Launceston City Council. It was based on accepted practices and

standards at the time it was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as

to the professional advice included in this report. It is prepared in accordance with the scope

of work and for the purpose outlined.

This report was prepared in August 2021 and was based off a report from November 2016.

The results are based on the conditions encountered from the initial report. ES&D disclaims

the responsibility for any changes that may have occurred after this time.

This report should be read in full. No responsibility is accepted for any use of any part of this

report in any other context or for any other purpose or by third parties. This report does not

purport to give legal advice.

Subsurface conditions can vary across a particular site and cannot be explicitly defined by

these investigations. It is unlikely therefore that the results and estimations expressed in this

report will represent the extreme conditions within the site.

The information in this report is considered to be accurate at the date of issue and is in

accordance with conditions at the site at the dates sampled.

This document and the information contained herein should only be regarded as validly

representing the site conditions at the time of the investigation unless otherwise explicitly

stated in a preceding section of the report.

No warranty or guarantee of property conditions is given or intended.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




24


Primary Source Release Mechanism Secondary Source Release Mechanism Pathway Exposure Route

Receptors

Fuel lines Refueling Activities Workshops

Underground Storage Tanks

Leaks & Spills

Soil

Infiltration, Percolation

Vapour Migration

Infiltration, percolation

Air

Ground-water

Surface Water,

Sediments

Discharge

Site

b

uild

ing

Wo

rker

s Su

bsu

rfac

e

wo

rker

s

DA

Wo

rker

s

Riv

er E

colo

gy

Current Future / Potential

Unknown ?

Food Chain

Figure 7 - Revised CSM

No Contamination

Acceptable Contamination Levels



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




15 References

CRC CARE TR10 - CRC Care Technical Report No. 10 “Health Screening Levels for Petroleum

Hydrocarbons in Soil and Groundwater” (September, 2011)

EPA Tasmania Technical Guideline - UPSS1 - Decommissioning Report Requirements - v2 - June

2014

EPA Technical Guideline - Technical Guideline - UPSS2 - UPSS Decommissioning Assessment -

Sampling and Risk Assessment Requirements - June 2014

National Environmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure, “Guideline on

the Investigation Levels for Soil and Groundwater”, Schedule B (1), 1999 (as amended 2013)

National Environmental Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure, “Guideline on

Data Collection, Sample Design and Reporting”, Schedule B (2), 1999 (as amended 2013)

AS 4482.1 (2005) Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil - Part

1: Non-Volatile and Semi Volatile Compounds

AS 4482.2 (1999) Guide to the Sampling and Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Soil – Part

2: Volatile Substances

AS 5667.1:1998, Guidance on the design of sampling programs, sampling techniques and the

preservation and handling of samples

Tasmanian Government Land Information System - http:// www.thelist.tas.gov.au



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




http://www.thelist.tas.gov.au/




DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




Arboricultural Report

Civic Square

Platanus x acerifolia (London Plane)

Asset no.407733

Salix babylonica Asset no.40692

8/09/2021

Stewart Malone

Advanced Diploma of Management

Cert IV Horticulture / Arboriculture

40+ experience in Arborist

Revision No.

Date of Revision

Revision Description

Nature of Amendment Document Author

Document Approved By

Draft 13/4/2021 Stewart Malone

2nd Draft 3/9/2021 Add new tree



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




2

CONTENTS

SALIX BABYLONICA ASSET NO.40692 ................................................................. 1

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3

2. SITE CONTEXT................................................................................................... 3

3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 3

4. OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................................ 4

5. HEALTH .............................................................................................................. 4

6. STRUCTURE....................................................................................................... 4

7. USEFUL LIFE EXPECTANTLY ........................................................................... 4

8. FORM .................................................................................................................. 4

9. DECLARATION ................................................................................................... 4

TREE 2 SALIX BABYLONICA .................................................................................... 5

10. SITE CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 5

11. OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................. 5

12. HEALTH ........................................................................................................... 5

13. STRUCTURE ................................................................................................... 5

14. USEFUL LIFE EXPECTANCY ......................................................................... 5

15. FORM ............................................................................................................... 5

16. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................... 5



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




3

1. Introduction

This report was prepared for the City of Launceston by a qualified arborist and details the condition assessment of one semi mature Platanus x acerifolia (London plane) (Asset ID: 407733) located next to Macquarie House in its own space shaped as a circle. The site, the tree location and the capacity for this tree, or parts of this tree, to injure people or damage property are important factors that are considered within this report. This report describes the site, the tree and its surroundings, level of risk and makes management recommendations.

2. Site Context

Civic Square is one of our frequent pedestrian mall areas used daily in the heart of the City. This area is a significant place with, flora (Japanese garden), built heritage, Town hall, Business and recreation and tourism activities. Civic Square is not in the scenic management area but is covered under the parks area. The London Plane is growing in a raised bed with a concrete wall that has been poured recently when the mall was upgraded, the tree was left exposed to the elements for weeks.

Figure 1 Location of tree

3. Methodology

Visual ground based inspection was undertaken on the 8/9/2021 by Stewart Malone, City Arborist.

Deck

Tree

Restaurant



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




4

4. Observations

The tree has anthracnose and constantly has die back, this makes the tree very fragile and small limbs fall on a regular bases, the tree can be retained but will have a high ongoing cost of maintenance therefore removing is the better option. I

5. Health

Tree is not in the best condition with die back and bark lesions.

6. Structure

Trunk is fair condition, limbs have bark lesions.

7. Useful life expectantly

Tree may last 5-10 years but will never look at its best.

8. Form

Tree is not as a London plain should look like (weak and poor growth rate)

9. Declaration

I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the client.



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




5

Tree 2 Salix babylonica

10. Site context

The Salix is growing in a raised bed with brick walls that are in need of repair.

Visual ground based inspection was undertaken on the 23/08/2021 by Stewart Malone, Coordinator Arboriculture

11. Observations The tree is approximately 30+ years old (semi-mature) its height is 9.5m.and the DBH

(diameter at breast height) is 99cm.

12. Health At the time of inspection minor deadwood was scattered throughout the head of the tree but in

good condition.

13. Structure The tree is in good to very good but needs minor work, as it is a willow it will need a haircut on

an annual bases to prevent overhang over path and road.

14. Useful Life Expectancy The tree is in good condition and is expected to last 10 to 15 years +.

15. Form The form of the tree is considered to be very good for a willow.

16. Conclusion and recommendations The tree is to be retained for the foreseeable future, the tree is very low risk.

The London Plane should be removed and the site planted with possibly a Chines Elm, as this would balance the Civic Square as there are Chines Elms at the other end of the squa



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:




PROJECT

Civic Square Landscape Charles Street

City of Launceston

Project Officer Matthew Jordan

DATE : Sep 2021

Notes

· Medium for top of existing fountain tier is to be CoLpotting mix or a suitable designed soil.

· Mulch is to be eucy bark, installed 50mm below finnishedretaining height.

· Plant Species and spacing to be installed as per plantingdesign.

· irrigation shall be installed and operational prior toplanting.

· existing fountain cobble stone surface will remain

Turf

Existing cobblestone paving to beretained

Cottage themeplanting consisting ofLavender, Dietes,Penstemon,Osteospermum

Ornamentalgrass var.

Ground cover plantsp. to cascade overplanter edge

Existing Plaque tobe retained

Existing fountainwall renderedfinnish retained

Existing platnus treeto be replaced withUlmus parvifolia var.

Existing Salix (willow tree)to be retained.

Reffer to engeneeringdrawing for wall detail



DA 0521/2021Ref. No:


