Salt Pan Creek Masterplan by cbcity

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE CONCEPT MASTERPLAN MASTERPLAN REPORT

F i n a l R e p o r t ma y 2 0 1 8

For:

By:

with:

contENTs 0.0 Introduction 0.1 Background 0.2 Project Outcome EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 1.1 The masterplan vision 1.2 Implementation 2.0 MASTERPLAN 2.1 Masterplan precincts -McLaughlin Fields -Whitmarsh Reserve -Site Entries -M5 Underpass -Salt Pan Parklands -Parkland edge to new community 2.2 Active Recreation 2.3 Informal Recreation 2.4 Connections 2.5 Sustainability Hilltop Artwork / Gateway Feature 2.6

Document Control Issue

Purpose

Date

Preliminary Draft

22 Jan 2018

Updated Preliminary Draft

21 Feb 2018

Final Draft

11 April 2018

Final Report

07 May 2018

Credits Environmental Partnership Landscape Architect and Lead Consultants GML Heritage Heritage Consultants Eco Logical Australia Environmental Consultants

3.0 REVIEW 3.1 Heritage 3.2 Ecology & Habitat 3.3 Access 3.4 Recreation 3.5 Adjoining Development 3.6 Landfill, Landform & Drainage 4.0 Vision 4.1 Project Vision 4.2 Principles 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3

Concept options Salt Pan Creek Reserve II McLaughlin Oval Salt Pan Recreation Parklands

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES Landform and drainage 6.1 6.2 Access 6.3 Vegetation management 6.4 Recreation 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3

ACTION PLAN Summary Costs Criteria for prioritisation Indicative staging plan

ATTACHMENTS A. Public Domain Indicative Order of Costs B. Heritage Report by GML C. Ecological Report by ELA

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background

1.2 Project objectives

In May 2016 Council appointed Environmental Partnership (NSW) Pty Ltd (EP) Landscape Architects to coordinate preparation of the Salt Pan Creek Open Space Masterplan.

The commissioning of the Salt Pan Creek Open Space Masterplan recognised that a coordinated vision for enhancement and management of Salt Pan Creek Reserve was required to guide long term enhancement.

As indicated on Figure 1.1 the Salt Pan Creek open space is a 45.3ha site comprising the existing McLaughlin Reserve and Whitmarsh Park sites (15.9ha) to the north of the M5 corridor and the former Salt Pan Creek landfill site (29.4ha) to the south of the M5. The masterplan seeks to provide a long term vision for the integrated open space that can guide its ongoing enhancement and rehabilitation, and ultimately its expanded community use and enjoyment by the community. The development of the masterplan has involved a multi-disciplinary team including specialist inputs in the following areas: Heritage Management

Godden Mackay Logan

Ecological Management

Eco Logical Australia

The project brief identified the following required outcomes for the project: • a concept Master Plan to coincide with the issuing of the (EPA) closure of the tip license and the subsequent capping of the site. • a concept to guide the capping process of the landfill site to ensure compatibility future uses • consideration of environmental impacts on Riverwood wetlands to the west of the site (including saltmarsh and EEC) and to the waterway of Salt Pan Creek • consideration of traffic and access considerations: access to the site, parking provision and potential impact on local traffic

In addition the study team was assisted by the specialist inputs of Coffey who has advised throughout the masterplan process providing advise on issues including site remediation, landfill capping, and environmental management.

• consideration of leachate production, treatment and disposal that will be ongoing

- sporting grounds

This report provides a summary of the study process and outcomes and details the recommendations for ongoing development and improvement of the open space.

- play spaces

- amenities including toilets

- active recreation facilities e.g. shared paths, skate ramps, off leash dog parks

• Consideration of potential uses:

437852 440204 425109

473738

- passive recreation areas

- interpretive and sensory uses

- inclusion of public art

- opportunities to include environmental education/ protection

- uses that complement the existing natural forms and environment

473285 425719

449583

425405 450679

425406 425616

Prop Key 425109 425228 425405 425406 425616 425719 425720 431521 437852 440204 449119 449583 450679 473285 473738

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Figure 1.1: Aerial Map

Address 46A Wiggs Road RIVERWOOD NSW 2210 1A M5 Expressway NARWEE NSW 2209 65 Moxon Road PUNCHBOWL NSW 2196 1000 M5 Expressway NARWEE NSW 2209 Lot 35 M5 Expressway NARWEE 48A Wiggs NSW Road 2209 RIVERWOOD NSW 2210 48B Wiggs Road RIVERWOOD NSW 2210 48 Kentucky Road 59 Moxon Road 25-51 Wiggs Road PUNCHBOWL NSW 2196 151 Belmore Road North RIVERWOOD 48 Wiggs RoadNSW 2210 RIVERWOOD NSW 2210 37 Moxon BelgiumRoad Street 63 PUNCHBOWL NSW 2196 61 Moxon Road

425228

431521

Owner City Of Canterbury Bankstown The State Of New South Wales Crown Land Roads & Maritime Services Roads & Maritime Services The State Of New South Wales The State Of New South Wales NSW Land & Housing Corporation Private Owner City Of Canterbury Bankstown City Of Canterbury Bankstown City Of Canterbury Bankstown City Of Canterbury Bankstown City Of Canterbury Bankstown Private Owner

425720

449119

Figure 1.2: Land Ownership 4

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.1 The masterplan vision The development of the Masterplan has responded to the following guiding vision and planning principles:

....a destination parkland providing for multiple recreational uses that engage a broad cross section of community, and that celebrates the Salt Pan Creek location and setting...

WI GG S RO AD

19 8 13

Work with the site’s landfill history • Recognise the landfill profile as a determining baseline for design • Implement required leachate and gas management measures • Maintain necessary access to environmental management Activate the edge • Provide a permeable, comfortable, friendly park edge • Enable a high level of use across day /evening • Encourage development of appropriate density, orientation, and use adjoining the park to assist activation • Encourage positive addresses and access to resdiential development edge Connect, loop and experience • Integrate paths with broader recreational access systems • Provide multiple pedestrian entry points to parklands • Create a diversity of loops and routes • Link experiences with the access network Water in the landscape • Integrate the element of water beyond Salt Pan Creek to enhance the environment and character of the landscape • Harvest drainage from surrounding public domain • Treat in bioremediation ponds • Use for field irrigation • Interpret the former creek line in the park landscape Multiple integrated recreational roles • Regional sports function (football) • Multi-use district sports function • Destination family play • Integrated landscape experiences - topography / water • Local promenading Dispersed vehicular access and parking • Dual vehicular entry / egress points • Enable modal management of through access • Provide dispersed parking serving recreational nodes Demonstrating sustainability • Provide a solar power generation node • Integrate water collection, treatment and harvesting • Integrate on site nursery / plant propogation during park development

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

WHITMARSH RESERVE

8 12

13 9 10

M5 WEST ER

N MOTO RW

7 27

26 7

20 18

28 16

2 14 7

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

23 5

15 7

19 20

8 7

20 6 9

Figure 2.1: Overall Masterplan Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

The site masterplan opposite is referenced to the key elements below. The masterplan proposals are illustrated and explained on the precinct plans on following pages. The illustratons on this page also illustrate the potential outcomes for several key recommendations.

Circulation & Parking

Informal Recreation

1 Upgraded entry from Wiggs Road

Amphitheatre/viewing areas

2 New entry from Kentucky Road

Open grassed gathering, event, informal game and picnic space

3 Parking areas - McLaughlin Fields 4 Parking areas - Salt Pan Parklands 5

2.5-3m Shared access / maintenance perimeter path to east edge

6 Shared access / maintenance perimeter

path to creek edge 7 Shared pedestrian cycle access loop 8 Secondary pedestrian paths 9

Regional access links across / along Salt Pan Creek

10 M5 underpass upgrade integrating potential public art programme 11

Event secondary vehicular access from Kentucky Road

Open grassed informal game and picnic space 23 Transitional open space to new residential housing 22

NPL Football Stadium and stand

Supporting Football Fields

Multi-purpose playing field areas

Sustainability 24 Stormwater harvesting and water quality

wetlands 25 Solar Power Generation or vegetation Biobanking zone 26 Revegetation of embankments

Viewing points and public art 27 Earth Mounding/Landscape visible from

Active Recreation

Hilltop Iconic Artwork and Lookout Viewing point to Salt Pan Creek 29 corridor 28

Public amenities facilities (toilets and change rooms) 16 Skate Bowl/Parkour Facility 15

BMX Track Circuit

Adventure Playground

Local Community Play Space

May 2018

Figure 2.2 Illustrative views of Masterplan proposals

environmental partnership

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary implementation costs

Criteria for staging of implementation

The costs summary below provides an indication of overall implementation costs for the concept proposals outlined in this report. Overall implementation costs are envisaged in the order of $80 million including design and contingencies

Due to the extensive scope of park improvements envisaged by the masterplan it will be necessary for works to be staged over an extended time period. The potential staging indicated on the following page responds to a series of criteria for Salt Pan Creek Parklands aimed at addressing immediate needs and achieving optimum short term benefit, all the time working towards the long term realisation of the masterplan.

Overall Costs Summary COSTS SUMMARY

Order of costs estimate

Indication of escallation per annum -average 6%

McLaughlin Fields 0.1

Preliminaries Demolition and earthworks

$4,511,285.23 $608,542.50

$270,677.11

0.2 0.3

Access and parking works

$2,225,195.00

$133,511.70

0.4

NPL Stadium

$5,402,500.00

$324,150.00

0.5

Supporting fields

$1,070,000.00

$64,200.00

0.6

Facilities and Furniture

$315,000.00

$18,900.00

0.7

Planting and revegetation

$2,286,155.00

$137,169.30

0.8

Establishment

$15,000.00

$900.00

$16,433,677.73

$986,020.66

Subtotal

$36,512.55

Whitmarsh Reserve 0.1

Solar Facility installation

Subtotal

$3,900,000.00

$234,000.00

$3,900,000.00

$234,000.00

Salt Pan Parklands

Ultimately the availability and source of funding will influence how priorities are applied to the implementation of works. However the following criteria seek to provide guidance to Council when decisions are needing to be made regarding priorities in achieving the optimum benefit for expenditure.

Address immediate needs related to safety and environment Initial priorities shall be directed towards addressing any current safety issues for the community and in meeting EPA obligations around tip closure. In particular this will focus on making good of landfill capping, drainage and leachate and gas management and addressing current access / safety concerns around the M5 underpass and existing boardwalk crossing of Salt Pan Creek.

Enable vegetation structure to be initiated and developed Building on the capping works required for tip closure, address additional filling to enable the planting structure of the parklands to be initiated and for establishment of that planting to commence

0.1

Preliminaries

0.2

Demolition and earthworks

$11,891,961.44 $21,855,350.00

$1,311,321.00

0.3

Access and parking works

$4,297,745.00

$257,864.70

0.4

Amenities

$7,684,195.00

$461,051.70

0.5

Fields

$2,250,000.00

$135,000.00

0.6

Adventure Play precinct

$1,363,000.00

$81,780.00

0.7

Wetland

$3,732,800.00

$223,968.00

0.8

Facilities and Furniture

$481,000.00

$28,860.00

0.9

Planting and revegetation

$7,332,683.00

$439,960.98

$30,000.00

$1,800.00

Subtotal

$60,918,734.44

$3,655,124.07

Plan and implement temporary events and other activations within the parklands area to build awareness and expectation of the future park. Involve community in initial planting works.

Total concept Estimate

$81,252,412.17

$4,641,144.73

Link park evolution to evolution of adjoining residential community

Filling and earthworks priorities

Stay in close liaison with State Government over the programme of development to Riverwood LUIIP to leverage the progression of the development and arrival of new residents to area. Focus new park improvements where they can be accessed by new community for maximum usage. Integrate new entry works south of M5 as appropriate with the urban renewal project.

The earthworks priorities define the areas of most importance to the Salt Pan Parklands south of the M5. These integrate the assumption that the lowest priority items may not be ultimately be able to be implemented based on budget or material availability. Rational for these priorities in provided in section 7.0 of this report:

0.10 Establishment (12 months)

$713,517.69

Action Plan Capping of the landfill and establishment of the final landform that will enable the facilities overlain to be implemented and then opened for use is the key driver of sequencing As the earthworks are progressed this will unlock the ability to develop facilities, takling into account such factors as the criteria this page. The action plan highlights critical actions to initiate the implementation process from which the detailed sequencing will emerge (refer to section 7.0 for full detail):

Build on existing community use of trail network

Within zones where finished levels have been established implement shared and supporting paths that will enable the community to more effectively access and use the site for trail based recreation and fitness. Provide experiences that build awareness of and connection to the parkland Figure 2.10 Earthworks Priorities

Develop sports facilities as funding opportunities arise

Capping generally and establish field platforms:

Liaise with organisations and government regarding funding of major sports facilities such as the NPL facility.

Western embankments to riparian corridor

Feature and spectator mounding

2 Transition filling to eastern boundary

Investigations and management 1 2 Remediation 3 Access Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD MASTERPLAN

MASTERPLAN McLaughlin Fields 1

Concept proposals for the reconfiguration of McLaughlin Oval are outlined following with the relevant masterplan items referenced on the plan this page: 1. • • 3. • • •

WI GG S RO AD

Upgraded entry from Wiggs Road Provide roundabout entry Realign roadway to enable field construction Parking areas - McLaughlin Fields Retain existing frontage parking area New parking area adjoining fields access road Stadium event drop-off zone

7. Shared pedestrian cycle access loop • Trunk shared access route linking to off site connections and to Salt Pan parklands south of M5 8. Secondary pedestrian paths • Supporting pedestrian access paths from entry points

8 12 13

9. Regional access links across / along Salt Pan Creek • New boardwalk access across Salt Pan Creek north of M5 10. M5 underpass upgrade • Widen roadway as site access route • Provide off road shared path • Solar feature lighting under road structure subject to RMS • Protective netting to motorway edging to catch debris

9 10 M5 WEST ER

N MOTO RW

12. NPL Football Stadium and stand • Synthetic football surface compliant with NPL requirements • Stand and supporting facilities compliant with NPL requirements 13. Supporting Football Fields • Grassed football fields for general community use 15. Public amenities / facilities • Public toilets and change rooms to serve field and general park use 19. Local Community Play Space • Retain and enhance community playspace in current area of park where it easily accessible from adjoining neighbourhood 22. Open grassed informal game and picnic space • Open grassed area suitable for informal games and play and supported with shade tree canopy and park furniture • Connected by supporting path linkages 25. Whitmarsh Reserve • Solar Power Generation transitioning into vegetation Biobanking / habitat zone in future • Refer Whitmarsh Reserve concepts next page Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

100m

Figure 2.3 Masterplan - McLaughlin Fields 10

Whitmarsh Reserve Whitmarsh Reserve is a Council owned land parcel adjoining the Salt Pan Creek riparian corridor. The space is isolated by the former Bowling Club Facility to the east which currently operates under license to sporting groups. This area does not currently form part of the open space area covered by the masterplan. (Refer Land Ownership diagram Figure 1.2). The site potentially forms part of the Riparian Corridor habitat zone of Salt Pan Creek but is currently in poor condition due to past clearing and weed encroachment. The former Bowling Club Facility site in turn offers potential to play a role supporting recreational facilities on the McLauglin Oval site and Salt Pan Parklands areas. Solar generation potential Council has previously investigated potential for solar power generation on this and other sites. The concept of solar generation is compatible with the broader site vision of “demonstrating sustainability” and integrates well with the shared path passive access system, habitat enhancement, and environmental management on the site. Some key observations of the past investigations include: • The predicted life expectancy of a commercial scale solar arrays is 25 years, after which the land can be converted to another purpose • annual savings realised by local energy generation, could be reinvested into any number of community or council resources or initiatives • Solar Farm to target 2MW on 2-5-3ha usable site area (see table below) The past investigations identified the following parameters for potential solar facility on the site: Size

Solar Potential

30,000m2

2 MW

Output per annum

2,900,000 KWh

% of Councils electrcity and annual savings

ROI (based on 2017 electricity prices)

Est Cost Excluding ancillary works

9.5% $800,000

Less than or equal to 4.6 years

$3,700,000

100m

M5 WEST ER

N MOTO R W AY

Figure 2.4 Short to medium term - Whitmarsh Reserve

Short to medium term - Solar Power Generation • The usable area( approximate), excluding boundary vegetated area and boardwalk is approximately 2.7 ha of a total 3.2 Ha) • This will enable indicatively a solar array with capacity up to 2MW • As a guide 1MW could possibly provide enough power for up to the equivalent of 200 - 300 homes depending on quality & wattage of panels and other variables. Design issues to be considered in ongoing assessment include: • geotechnical surveys to ensure that the ground is conducive to supporting the mounting system.

100m

M5 WEST ER

N MOTO RW

Figure 2.5 Long term - Whitmarsh Reserve

• address drainage issues associated with soil conditions around the installation areas, (compacting of capping layer) and potential pooling of water around cabling trenches • provide site security – temporary and/or permanent fencing • provide ancillary works including access roads, secure inverter storage and an office/service building • consider additional costs that may incur for Power Purchase Agreement with retailers Long term - Biobanking / habitat zone • Ecological Australia reviewed the potential for Biobanking on the Whitmarsh Reserve site which is of low ecological quality currently • it was identified that there could be up to 10ha of available area that could be subject to biobanking arrangements

The masterplan recommends that Council investigate further the provision of a solar generation facility in the short to medium term (eg 10-15 years) after which the site could be subject to rehabilitation works and revegetation as part of the Salt Pan Creek riparian corridor.

May 2018

• however it is noted that the area is subject to past landfill and possible contamination and that existing weed encroachment is significant • Ecological Australia estimated that the proposed biobank site would establish approximately 90 credits. CRCIF credits currently trade for between $12,000 - $17,000 / credit. A Biobank feasibility study would provide a more certain outcome for this opportunity.

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN a.

Site Entries Due to the scale of the overall site and the nature of facilities that LEGEND LEGEND are expected to draw usage from a broad catchment, vehicular External public open space publicfactor open space access to and through the site isExternal a key to address. The masterplan proposes that the site have two main vehicular area access points one either side ofSports thefield M5 Motorway and a supporting temporary / event access point that can supplement the other access points on peak use days.

WI GG S RO AD LEGEND External public open space

Road

Internal public open space

Parking Existing top and bottom of embankment Sports field area

Sports field area

WHITMARSH RESERVE

Sports field area

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

External public open space External public open space Internal public open space

LEGEND

Shared road

a. Wiggs Road Entry Parking Flat turfed The existing entry toareaMcLaughin Oval provides access to the Turfed parking existing parking area.areaAn access road that continues south under Embankment the M5 and loops up to the baseball facilities is closed during Flat turfed area weekdays and forfieldother than managed vehicular access. Embankment It is Sports area area proposed that this entry be upgraded as the key northern entry Externalto public open space at McLaughlin oval but also through to providing access parking Sports field area the Salt Pan Parklands. Key upgrade works proposed include: • provision of a roundabout at Wiggs Road

Top of embankment Bottom of embankment

By nature the facilities to the open spaces either side of the M5 will draw different users so will likely provide some separation of traffic loads although dependent on point of origin and route to the site, some users may enter at north or south of M5 and then travel within the park to the other side. The road system through the park givesLEGEND Council the option to manage through vehicle access in a LEGEND modal manner - for instance through vehicular access may closed Road Road during weekdays. (refer also to access strategy - section 6.2) Parking

LEGEND

M5 WEST ERN MO T O R WA

Wetland

Flat turfed area

Embankment area

External public open space Sports field area

External public open space

• retention and upgrading of existing entry and paved forecourt

• widening of existing road to cater for two way access • provision of a separated shared path from Wiggs Road b. Kentucky Road Entry A new vehicular entry is proposed off Kentucky Road integrated with the Riverwood LUIIP development. This would be integrated LEGEND with pedestrian and cycle access and provide an active linkage LEGEND into theOrganised park.Sports A roundabout would be provided within the park to Road access 1.District Sports Facilities distribute vehicles to either the Salt Pan Parklands on the former • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) Specialarm event road access landfill site or to McLaughlin Fields under the M5. This to adjoining site to west would 2.be able to be closed if desired during certainParking periods when Local Sports Facilities fields and amenities through• Multipurpose access sports is desirable to be avoided

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

LEGEND

Primary path / Shared path

Tree canopy in managed turf or native grassland

Secondary path

Full strata revegetated area

Parking

Filling to east boundary to provide gentle transition to new development

Filling over embankments to enable canopy tree plantings and establishment

Filling to establish high points, viewing embankments, and visual interest

Maintained sports surface

Informal - Non-organised Recreation

c. Kentucky Road (special event access) 3. Local Playspace Local Informal Parkland is proposed to be provided through Kentucky A new 4.5.entry driveway Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gatheringflexibility Meadow Reserve providing to manage event vehicular access. 7. Local Informal Parkland 8. Local Informal Parkland This would be concrete paved similar to the shared access Recreation Amenities network and would be used as p[art of shared access network Tolets and change rooms during non event times.

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Figure 2.6 Site entry and access 12

Creek Crossings at M5

M5 Underpass The underpass to the M5 is an important connection between the north and south, and is seen as both a vehicular and pedestrian / cycle link between Salt Pan Parklands and McLaughlin Oval and for pedestrians and cyclists to the areas beyond the site to the south west and north. It is expected that the zone around the M5 underpass will become a busy hub of movement day to day. However the current character of this area is dark and un-inviting. It is proposed that this area be subject to works including the following:

The site is flanked by the M5 and the Salt Pan Creek riparian corridor that limit pedestrian and cycle access. Examination of access at these interfaces seeks to pursue some key principles:

• selectively trim existing casuarina that have encroached on roadway • widen roadway as two way site access route • provide off road shared path • provide solar feature lighting under road structure subject to RMS • provide protective netting to motorway edging to catch debris • recognise street art to pier structures and interpret on site maintaining views corridors, potential night lighting

• Integrate with broader recreational access systems • provide multiple pedestrian entry points to parklands • create a diversity of loops and routes • link experiences within and outside the parklands An existing timber boardwalk and bridge structure in generally poor condition (see a. on Figure 2.8 below) provides access across the drainage channel from Wiggs Road and then across Salt Pan Creek linking the eastern side of the creek to the Salt Pan Creek access corridor.

With ongoing redevelopment of McLaughlin Fields the levels of activity in the area will increase and provide greater surveillance for this access through mangrove vegetation. An upgrade of the facility is required using contemporary boardwalk materials (eg FRP Mesh deck and Steel frame) . A secondary access across the drainage channel is proposed to provide more direct access for those moving under M5 from south and localised access loops (b.) A further connection to the south side of the M5 is proposed (c) to link the Salt Pan Parklands to the Creek Corridor access system and could integrate will to the proposed masterplan design elements of the hilltop viewing point.

a. Plan at underpass

Existing view south at underpass

M5 WEST ERN MO T O R W AY

0 Illustrative view of proposed improvements at underpass May 2018

100m

Figure 2.8 Salt Pan Creek corridor access connections

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN Salt Pan Parklands Concept proposals for the reconfiguration of McLaughlin Oval are outlined following with the relevant masterplan items referenced on the plan this page:

M5 WEST ER

2. New entry from Kentucky Road • New entry and roundabout within park site to distribute traffic to parking and to road access to McLaughlin Oval • 4. • • • 5.

Potential for north arm to be gated to regulate use Parking areas - Salt Pan Parklands 90 degree parking to access road 90 degree parking to northern parkland 90 degree parking to northern parkland 2.5-3m Shared access / maintenance perimeter path to east edge • Multi use path at junction with adjoining residential neighbourhood • Rip rap walling to conserve existing trees in filled zone at boundary • Fitness equipment nodes and shaded seating stimulating activity

4 26

20 18 21

16 9

11 19

4 8 2 26

7. Shared pedestrian cycle access loop • Trunk shared access route linking to off site connections and to McLaughlin Fields north of M5 8. Secondary pedestrian paths • Supporting pedestrian access paths from entry points

29 23

5 15

9. Regional access links across / along Salt Pan Creek • Boardwalk access across Salt Pan Creek south of M5 connected to hilltop lookout • Linkage to south to existing bridge crossing of creek

20 22 8

14. Multi-purpose playing field areas • grassed platforms flexible to various field configurations and sports

24 14

15. Public amenities / facilities • Centralised public toilets and change rooms to serve field and general park use supported by shaded plaza

16. Skate Bowl/Parkour Facility • Skate Bowl integrated into landform • Parkour sculpture park integrated into landform

17. Mountain Biking Circuit • Mountain Bikin g track system integrated into filled hill zone and linking up to hilltop

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

6. Shared access / maintenance perimeter path to creek edge • Multi use track in vicinity of existing maintenance access

18. Adventure Playground • Adventure integrated into landform and within tree canopy • Overlooked by grassed slopes

N MOTO RW

Figure 2.6 Masterplan - Salt Pan Parklands

Salt Pan Hill and Adventure Play Precinct

M5 WEST ER

N MOTO R W AY

17 4 7

20 18

11 8 4

40m

Figure 2.7 Masterplan - Salt Pan Parklands - adventure play zone

19. Local Community Play Space • Retain and enhance community playspace adjoining neighbourhood on Kentucky Road at Michigan Road • New playspace adjoining neighbourhood on Kentucky Road at Wyoming Avenue 20. Amphitheatre/viewing areas over activities • Gentle grassed slopes with overlook to sports or active play facilities 21. Open grassed gathering, event, informal game and picnic space • Gentle grassed slope (1:33) down to Riverwood Open space corridor • Potential as event amphitheatre for special events • Play and picnic grasslands day to day

May 2018

22. Open grassed informal game and picnic space • Open grassed area suitable for informal games and play and supported with shade tree canopy and park furniture • Connected by supporting path linkages

27. Earth Mounding/Landscape visible from M5 • Filling over capping layer to provide high point visible from M5 and as viewing point over site -7-8m above existing levels • Provide soil profile for mature tree canopy

24. Stormwater harvesting and water quality wetlands • Stormwater from adjoining public domain directed through wetland filtration and providing water body • Low flow and overflow connection to Salt Pan Creek • Potential water harvesting for irrigation

28. Hilltop Iconic Artwork and Lookout • Iconic structure to provide viewing outlook over creek corridor 29. Viewing point to Salt Pan Creek corridor • Viewing point to Salt Pan Creek corridor at edge of fields adjoining path intersection

26. Revegetation of embankments • Filling over capping layer to enable soil profile for mature tree canopy and native understorey to extend riparian corridor

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN Parkland edge to new community The interface of Salt Pan parklands to the residential community of the Riverwood LUIIP development is a key zone for integrating the parklands to the adjoining public and private domain. An active and safe interface of the two is critical to the character of the parklands and the amenity of the new housing. New residential buildings adjoining the park will generally be six storeys in height and effectively have a dual frontage to Kentucky Road and the park. It is desirable that the park frontage be active with multiple access points to buildings and landscaped frontages integrating with the park frontage.

Key influences Some key planning influences in this area that have informed the masterplan recommendations are outlined following Levels and drainage It was resolved with Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s consultant remediation engineers that it was necessary to work above the existing landfill levels and avoid any disturbance or regrading of landfill. There is an existing 1:4 gradient grassed batter slope at this edge which creates a barrier to views and access. In addition existing levels along the park boundary create a number of trapped low points in a â&#x20AC;&#x153;valleyâ&#x20AC;? between the adjoining residences which slope to the west from Kentucky Road and the landfill which are not effectively drained. It is proposed that levels along the edge of the parklands are raised to provide a consistent fall from north to south draining to the proposed wetland basin. This will also enable filling over the existing embankment to reduce the gradient to a more gentle profile that will encourage access and enable visual links up the slopes into the parklands (refer Figure 2.9 cross section opposite). Filling will ideally extend into adjoining development sites to provide an even transition and gentler gradients through those sites. This would also potentially reduce amount of excavation for basement parking.

Existing tree canopies to be retained A

Existing trees The triangular space which adjoins the eastern boundary is identified as an open space on the Riverwood LUIIP concept plan. There are a number of trees through this area believed to have been planted that would be desirable to conserve. As such it is proposed to modulate the landform around these trees with the filling programme to enable their retention (refer Figure 2.9) Activation As noted above it is important that the interface has a balance of enough activity to create character and safety but not excessive activity so as to disturb residents. As such a shared path will run along the park boundary providing an easily accessible north south link connecting to the park frontages of the residential buildings. This will be supported by fitness nodes shaded seating and general tree planting in the maintained grassed embankment. Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

100m

Figure 2.8 Masterplan - eastern edge to residential development 16

Existing view at eastern boundary

Illustrative view of proposed improvements at eastern boundary

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

1:40

1:20

EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVEL

RIP RAP RETAINING WALL

3m approx.

1:20

EXISTING GROUND LEVE

STORMWATER PIPE

NEW DEVELOPMET

PROPERTY

BOUNDARY

EXISTING TREES TO BE RETAINED

2500

SWALE

TWO WAY CARRIAGEWAY

1800

MAINTENANCE PATH

5000

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

10488

ANGLE PARKING

5000

ANGLE PARKING

PEDESTRIAN PATH

1800

PEDESTRIAN PATH

Example of rip rap walling enclosure for tree retention

Figure 2.9 Cross Section through eastern edge to residential development May 2018

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN The following pages illustrate the nature of usage that is envisaged across the park precincts upon development of the park development and improvements.

Active Recreation Children’s Local Play Area • Play equipment located for access by the local community

Skate Bowl/Parkour Facility • Skate park and bowl • Parkour/excercise equipment

Mountain Biking Track Circuit • Short circuit Mountain Biking trails • Trails and mounding at varying levels of difficulty • Ability to rotate trails to manage impacts

Adventure Playground • Challenging activities / equipment serving a variety of ages • Combination of custom and propretary elements • Equipment ranging in difficulty /size

Sports Fields/Amenities • Multipurpose fields for organised sports and training • Clubhouse/amenities to serve sporting events

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Illustration - Adventure Playground

May 2018

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN Informal Recreation

Amphitheatre/Viewing Areas • Shaped landform to create diverse opportunities for use and events and to create visual interest

Boardwalk/Bridge Outlook Decks • Boardwalk through and around mangroves and creek edge • Viewing tower and decks allowing vantage points along creek and back towards park

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Circulation & Parking

Open Recreation/ Walking Tracks • Walking tracks from open recreation areas to creek edge and adjoining residential area

Parking • Provide 90 degree parking with tree canopies @ 10m cts within Salt Pan Creek Reserve II • Provide 90 degree parking with tree canopies @ 10m cts within McLaughlin Oval • Provide parallel parking within McLaughlin Oval

May 2018

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN Sustainability

Energy Generation • Solar Farm

Stormwater Harvesting and Interactive Water Play Areas • Multipurpose fields for organised sports and training • Clubhouse/amenities to facilitate sporting events

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Illustration - Indicative character intended in the area of the Salt Pan Parklands wetlands May 2018

environmental partnership

MASTERPLAN Hilltop Artworks / Gateway Feature

Earth Mounding/Landscape Art • Earth mounding to create visual high point / landmark • Lookout point reinforcing visual landmark • Art installations that help identify park

Hilltop Iconic Artwork • Visible for wide area • Possible art competition for design • Potential integrated kinetic / light / shadow sculpture

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Existing View to site from M5 Motorway looking east

Illustration - Salt Pan Parklands viewed to east from M5 Illustration - Gateway Feature from M5 Motorway looking east May 2018

environmental partnership

page left blank for double sided printing

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD REVIEW

3.0 REVIEW 3.1 Heritage 3.1.1 Historical Background and Environmental Context The masterplan is informed by a Heritage Review undertaken by GML Heritage (Feb 2017) which identified a series of phases of heritage importance which can inform planning and design proposals and offer interpretation opportunities

40 M

100 M

100

200 M

Plan of the parish of St George in 1889, showing original grantees of the study area and Canturbury region. (Source: LPI NSW) Map of Salt Pan Creek and the surrounding areas in 1830, showing the natural topography and watercourses of the region. (Source: L Mitchell, engraved by John Carmichael, Map of the Nineteen Counties, State Library of NSW)

The only known depiction of Pemulwuy, created a year after his death. (Source: State Library of New South Wales)

The Levingston family home during its later use as a golf club house, c1930. (Source: EM Jones, Canterbury Commons)

Setllement & resistance Pre Setllement • traditional lands of the Bediagul • Pemulway most well known • network of creeks and rivers important - economic and cultural exchange

Ellen and Hugh Anderson at their home on Salt Pan Creek, in c1925. (Source: State Library of NSW)

An 1943 aerial photograph showing the 118th General Hospital and surrounding residential development, with the study area marked in red. (Source: SIX Maps with GML overlay, 2016)

Refugees and rights

• 1798 first exploration in area

• Bediagul maintained presence in the area through to 1930’s

• 1809 -areas adjoining Salt Pan Creek first subject to land grants

• Salt Pan Creek camps continued in the area drawing indigenous peoples from across Sydney

• Moxon Murphy Batty and Pashley early grant holders • name potentially comes from salt boiling industry to east • land clearing in 1809 led to conflict with Bediagul • Wakefield Outwood Farm owned by Robert Levingston - 1930’s

• Between 1926-35 Salt Pan creek became focal point for indigenous rights • By end of depression pressure mounted for camps to be cleared and many Aboriginal people were moved out of area

• Herne Bay estate company 1930’s

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

GML Heritage

3.6 Public Lands Besides the reclamation and landfill areas, other lands along the creek were reclaimed and converted to playing fields. The eastern playing field was likely created during the 1960s. The area of McLaughlin Oval was levelled and transferred by the State Planning Authority to the care, control and management of Canterbury Municipal Council in 1967.40 It is shown in use as part of the Garbage Depot in Figure 2.10, however, it is identified as McLaughlin Oval by 1984 in Figure 2.11. Regardless, the works to create the baseball fields were completed by 1991 (Figure 2.12). It was named in honour of Mr Vernon McLaughlin, in recognition of his role in establishing a baseball field at the site.

The 118th General Hospital buildings, in use by the US Army in 1944. (Source: Lois Townsend, Canterbury Council Archives)

The M5 motorway corridor which now divides the study area was reserved in the early 1980s, with planned areas of reclamation shown in Figure 2.11. Construction of a single lane for the road was completed by 1992, before being upgraded in 2001. 41 The northwestern portion of the study area was also

Aerial photograph from 1965 demolished levelled in theshowing mid-1980s,the with now no formal use for the hospital buildings, and otherwise swampy, mangrove-filled shorelineit of the land identified. Given its inaccessibility, may have creek. (Source: LPI NSW) only been informally used by the Canterbury

40 M

100 M

100

200 M

Figure 2.11 map Parish map for the study area fromarea 1984, showing the 1984, extent of reclamation and proposed location for the (Source: LPI NSW) Parish for the study from showing the extent ofM5.reclamation and proposed location for the M5. (Source: LPI NSW)

Bankstown Tennis and Bowls Club to the east. Following its closure, the Garbage Depot was remediated and converted for public use, adding to the existing public lands along the foreshore, with the current leachate treatment plant and pumping stations constructed.

40 M

100 M

100

200 M 0

40 M

100 M

100

200 M

An 1943 aerial photograph showing the 118th General Hospital and surrounding residential development, with the study area marked in red. (Source: SIX Maps with GML overlay, 2016)

WWII and Post war • Late 30’s Doctors Bush Camp -Levingston - brief use as golf course and grazing land • 1942 portion of Levingston land requisitioned for largest miliatary hospital in Aust - to east of site • 1946 hospital adapted into emergency housing

Aerial photograph from 1986, during the operation of the Salt Pan Creek Garbage Depot. Much of the study area was by then reclaimed and filled. Only the southern sports field had been completed at this stage. (Source: LPI NSW) 10

Landfill

PUBLIC LAND

Salt Pan Creek Reserve—Masterplan Advice—Draft Report, February 2017

• By 60’s most of hospital building replaced by housing

• Besides the reclamation and landfill areas, other land along the creek was claimed and converted to playing fields

• Early juxtasposition of new and old buildings

• Eastern playing field was likely created during the 1960s

• Riverwood gazetted in 1958

• McLaughlin Oval was levelled and transferred to the care, control and management of Canterbury Municipal Council in 1967. Baseball fields were completed by 1991 and named in honour of Mr Vernon McLaughlin

• Infrastructure fell behind development and polution of creek system major issue • 1964 - proposal for landfill with end use playing fields • tip operated from 1966 to 1992

• The northwestern area was also levelled in the mid - 1980s, with no formal use for land identified • The Garbage Depot was closed and remediated and coverted for public use, adding to the existing public lands along the foreshore

• 1.3million m3 of domestic waste

May 2018

Aerial photograph from 1991, showing the largely remediated northern portion Figure 3.12 Aerial photograph from 1991, showing the largely remediated northern portion of the study area, with filling still taking place in the south. of theLPIstudy area, with filling still taking place in the south. (Source: NSW) (Source: LPI NSW)

environmental partnership

3.0 REVIEW

GML Heritage

3.1 Heritage 4.0 Archaeological Potential and Heritage Significance 3.1.2 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity

GML Heritage

TheGMH potential for archaeological remainspotential relating for to the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal of the The Heritage report 2017 reviewed Archaeological remains relating to occupation the Aboriginal andsite are assessed in Appendix A (Aboriginal) Appendix C (non-Aboriginal). The location and type of remains are non-Aboriginal occupation of the area. and Aboriginal Archeological sensitivity is summarised below: summarised here to guide future management of the archaeology at Salt Pan Creek Reserve, and to inform the masterplanning process, including possible interpretive works. 4.0 Archaeological Potential and Heritage Significance

4.1 Aboriginal Archaeological Potential The potential for archaeological remains relating to the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal occupation of the site are The areas in of Aboriginal withinCthe study have beenThe defined, following the Due Diligence assessed Appendix archaeological A (Aboriginal) sensitivity and Appendix (non-Aboriginal). location and type of remains are 42 Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in NSW. summarised here to guide future management of the archaeology at Salt Pan Creek Reserve, and to inform the masterplanning process, including possible interpretive works. Level of Aboriginal Description Archaeological Sensitivity

4.1 Aboriginal Archaeological Potential Areas of Nil Sensitivity

This sensitivity category was based on the absence of landforms which the predictive model identified as foci within for Aboriginal activity,have or erosion or defined, ground disturbance completely The areas of Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity the study been following the Due Diligence 42 removing the soil horizons which have the potential to contain Aboriginal archaeology. Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in NSW. Areas Aboriginal Level of of Low Aboriginal Archaeological Buried ArchaeologicalSensitivity Sensitivity

Areas of Nil Sensitivity

Areas of High Aboriginal Areas of Low Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Archaeological Sensitivity Buried

Areas of High Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Buried Areas of High Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity

Areas of High Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Buried

This sensitivity category was based on historical aerial analysis and the site inspection Description identifying earthworks/landscaping cutting into the soil horizon thus removing or redepositing potential Aboriginal objects. The definition of buried is defined by the base of This sensitivity category was based on the absence of landforms which the predictive the landfill overlying natural soil horizons. Thus, buried deposits are characterised by the model identified as foci for Aboriginal activity, or erosion or ground disturbance completely presence of both disturbed or intact soil horizons. removing the soil horizons which have the potential to contain Aboriginal archaeology. This sensitivity category was based on the presence of alluvial Birrong soils which can be This category waszones basedcontain on historical aerial analysis and the site inspection up to sensitivity 250cm in depth. These the potential to yield stratified archaeological identifying earthworks/landscaping cutting into the soil horizon thus removing deposits. Historical aerial analysis of this location has identified that the depositsorhave redepositing potential objects. The definition of buried is defined by the base of likely been capped andAboriginal remain intact. the landfill overlying natural soil horizons. Thus, buried deposits are characterised by the This sensitivity category wasorbased thehorizons. presence of alluvial Birrong soils which can be presence of both disturbed intactonsoil up to 250cm in depth. These zones contain the potential to yield stratified archaeological This sensitivity category wasthebased on the presence of alluvial Birrong soils which can be deposits. It is also based on potential location of shell middens, associated with the up to 250cm in depth. zonesapplying contain the potential to yield stratified archaeological estuarine context of SaltThese Pan creek, Port Jackson predictive modelling of deposits. Historical aerial of this location(historical has identified the deposits have Attenbrow 1994 within 10manalysis of the 1965 shoreline aerialthat mapping accuracy may likelyand been capped and remaininintact. vary should be considered any reassessment). The definition of buried is defined by the base of the landfill overlying natural soil horizons. Thus, buried deposits are This sensitivity category was based on the presence of alluvial Birrong soils which can be characterised by the presence of both disturbed and intact soil horizons. up to 250cm in depth. These zones contain the potential to yield stratified archaeological Historical analysis thisthelocation haslocation identified that the deposits have likelywith been deposits.aerial It is also basedofon potential of shell middens, associated the impacted through clearing, dumping or landscaping, however, due to the depth of the estuarine context of Salt Pan creek, applying the Port Jackson predictive modelling of alluvial profile andwithin the potential for stratified deposits the location is classified as high may Attenbrow 1994 10m of the 1965 shoreline (historical aerial mapping accuracy archaeological sensitivity. This isinbecause any potential The stratified deposits in intact profiles vary and should be considered any reassessment). definition of buried is defined may yield scientifically significant evidence. by the base of the landfill overlying natural soil horizons. Thus, buried deposits are characterised by the presence of both disturbed and intact soil horizons.

Historical aerial analysis of this location has identified that the deposits have likely been impacted through clearing, dumping or landscaping, however, due to the depth of the alluvial profile and the potential for stratified deposits the location is classified as high archaeological sensitivity. This is because any potential stratified deposits in intact profiles may yield scientifically significant evidence. Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Figure 4.1 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Zones. (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017)

FigureZones. 3.1 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitive Zones. Figure 4.1 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017)(Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017 30

3.1.3 Historical Archaeology Heritage TheGML GMH Heritage report 2017 reviewed potential for Archaeological remains relating to the Aboriginal and

non-Aboriginal occupation of the area. Historical Archeological sensitivity is summarised below:

GML Heritage 4.2 Historical Archaeology Phase

Site Feature

Location

Types of Archaeological Evidence

4.2 Historical Archaeology

Phase 1— Doctors Bush Northern Structural remains of buildings, post holes or footings Camp playground/M5 Types Phase 1798–1939Site Feature Location of pits Archaeological Evidence Rubbish boundary Evidence of fires and cooking

Phase 1— 1798–1939

Doctors Bush Northern CampLevingston playground/M5 Carpark Estate and boundary Golf Course

Phase 2— Military 1942–1946Levingston hospital

Northern playground Carpark

Estate and Golf Course Phase 2— Military 1942–1946 hospital Phase 3— Housing 1946–1960s

estate

Northern and Northern southern playground playground

Significance

Low

State

Artefact scatters of traditional and introduced material Structural remains of buildings, post holes or footings Evidence of land clearing and cultivation Rubbish pits

Likelihood of Survival

Significance

Low

State

Low

Local

Evidence of landscaping for golf course

Evidence of fires and cooking

Artefact scatters of traditional and introduced material Structural remains including post holes for footings, and demolition Evidence of landrubble clearing and cultivation

Moderate

Isolated artefacts

Structural remains including post holes for footings, Moderate Local and demolition rubble Evidence for modifications to buildings Low Local Underfloor deposits Domestic rubbish pitsfrom wards Isolated artefacts Remains of unidentified structure

Moderate

Post holes of fencing

Moderate

Evidence of clearing or cultivation, possibly

Low

Evidence forwith modifications associated Phase 1 to buildings

Remnant farmlands

Northern Northern playground playground

Introduced for reclamation and levelling Remains of fills unidentified structure

Moderate

Post holes of fencing

Moderate

Evidence of clearing or cultivation, possibly associated with Phase 1

Low

rubbish pits Local domestic refuse Central mound Domestic

Northern mound

Playgrounds Northern and sporting playground Garbage Central mound facilities Southern depot

Northern playground playground

Local

Evidence of landscaping for golf course

Northern playground

Garbage depot

Local

Low

Underfloor deposits from wards

Housing estate

Phase 4— 1960s–1992

playground Northern playground

Remnant farmlands

Phase 3— 1946–1960s

Northern and southern playground Northern

Likelihood of Survival

Services including water, sewer, stormwater

Local domestic refuse infrastructure and structures Footings for equipment,

Local

Low

High

Local None

High, extant

Local

None

High

None

Introduced fills for reclamation and levelling Figure 4.2 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Zones. (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017)

McLaughlin Northern Oval

mound

Salt Pan Whole study Phase 5— Creek reserveNorthern area 1992– Playgrounds Present and sporting playground

facilities May 2018

Capping fills

Services including water, Landscaping, garden beds sewer, stormwater

High, extant

None

High, extant

Footings for equipment, infrastructure and structures Southern playground McLaughlin Oval

None

Figure 3.2 Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitive Zones. (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017

Aboriginal Archaeological Sensitivity Zones. (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017) partnership ep Figure 4.2 environmental

3.0 REVIEW 3.1 Heritage 3.1.4 Heritage Significance The GMH Heritage report 2017 summarised a series of zones and recommendations for the site. In general terms the report identified : • The site is significant at a local level due to:

-Continuing Aboriginal occupation

-Military Hospital

• The Doctors Bush Camp (which was a camp / shelter site to the south of the subject site was significant as place of Aboriginal occupation into 20th Century • The area’s role as an ongoing place of Aboriginal presence makes it important as a place of refuge and resilience • Ongoing consultation required with Aboriginal community to further develop the background to these themes and the narrative arising • WWII hospital is a symbol of war conditions and of international cooperation, and is worth of interpretation

Recommendations for areas requiring Heritage Management The diagram this page indicates the areas that are of Archaeological potential and require consideration in ongoing planning and design.

These are both located to the eastern edge of the site. Where masterplanning proposals are not proposing excavations into these areas potential impact is likely to be low. Built structures over these areas will require assessment but are also likely to be of minimal impact. Excavation works would require assessment through the sequence identified in the Heritage report 2017

Figure 3.3 Area of archaeological potential and heritage significance within the Salt Pan Creek Reserve study area. (Source: NSW LPI with GML additions, 2017) Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

3.1.5 Interpretation Given the local significance and the individual and distinctive combination of heritage narratives in the area of the site, there is great potential for interpretation to be embedded in ongoing park design as a key design influence. Some recommended themes are outlined below and keyed on the plan this page 1.

Interpret Original Creek shoreline

-interpretive trail

-markers in the landscape / discovery

-integration with boardwalk access

Interpret refuge and resilience (Aboriginal presence in area)

-Consultation

-Hilltop artwork

-Back to country spaces and activities

-Integrated interpretation through track network

-Playground - potential indigenous theming

-Aboriginal naming of park areas / elements

Interpret healing and compassion WWII Hospital

-Northern Playground

-Architectural character of amenities and shelters

Note: Hospital site was futher to east of Salt Pan Creek site - so physical â&#x20AC;&#x153;markersâ&#x20AC;? interpreting presence are not appropriate

3 1 3

3 1

Figure 3.4: Original Creek Shoreline (Source: EP) May 2018

environmental partnership

3.0 REVIEW 3.2 Ecology & Habitat 3.2.1 Habitat Ecological Australia undertook and Ecological assessment in 2017 to review and summarise ecological values for the site (refer Attachment C) A review of the vegetation mapping (OEH 2013) identified ten vegetation communities within the subject site, including: • • • • • • • • • •

Castlereagh Ironbark Forest Estuarine Mangrove Forest Estuarine Reedland Estuarine Saltmarsh Estuarine Swamp Oak Forest Plantations Sydney Turpentine-Ironbark Forest Urban native and exotic cover Weeds and exotics Cleared land.

Threatened ecological communities Of these the following are listed as threatened ecological communities: •

Estuarine Saltmarsh

•

Swamp Oak Forest

Fauna Habitat No threatened fauna species were recorded during the site assessment, though habitat exists for a number of highly mobile species including Anthochaera phrygia (Regent Honeyeater), Haliaeetus leucogaster (Whitebellied Sea-eagle), Limosa lapponica (Bar-tailed Godwit), Gallinago hardwickii (Latham Snipe), Haematopus longirostris (Pied Oystercatcher), Ninox strenua (Powerful Owl), Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flyingfox), Malurus Cyaneus (Superb Fairywren) and several microbats species. The subject site also has the potential to provide habitat for the Litoria aurea (Green and Golden Bell Frog) within the Estuarine Saltmarsh, however targeted surveys would be required to confirm their presence.

Figure 3.5 Vegetation mapping of the study area (Source: ELA)

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Figure 2: Vegetation mapping of the study area

3.2 Ecology & Habitat 3.2.2 Habitat values and opportunities Important environmental values The following important environmental values were identified within the subject site and are recommended for retention and enhancement: •

Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion, listed as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) under the Threatened Species Conservation (TSC) Act and a Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

•

Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest of the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner bioregions, listed as an EEC under the TSC Act.

•

Coastal saltmarsh in the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner bioregions, listed as an EEC under the TSC Act and Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act.

•

Acacia pubescens, listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act and EPBC Act

•

Potential habitat for approximately nine threatened fauna species

•

Wildlife corridors (connected habitat) to the east and west, and north and south-west

These values have been identified in the figure this page.

Environmental management and enhancement Revegetation and regeneration It is recommended that selected parts of the subject site are revegetated or regenerated to: •

enhance existing ecological communities

•

improve wildlife corridors and connectivity

•

allow for potential sea level rise

•

utilise ecological values to contribute to improved amenity e.g. more shade trees around the edge of ovals.

Recommended areas for revegetation and regeneration are provided in the figure this page. To re-establish the three Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) within the study area, timing and spacing for planting is recommended as follows: •

Castlereagh Ironbark Forest community planting should take place over one year in order to ensure proper establishment and achieve a final density of one plant per m2 for trees / shrubs and three plants per m2 for sedges/ rushes and grasses.

•

Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest community planting should take place over one year in order to ensure proper establishment and achieve a final density of one plant per m2 for trees / shrubs and three plants per m2 for sedges/ rushes and grasses.

•

Coastal Saltmarsh planting should take place over three years in order to ensure proper establishment and achieve a final density of 4 plants per m2 for rushes, herbs and grasses.

Offset Opportunities There may be options to explore establishment of a Biobanking Agreement site within the north-western of the site on Whitmarsh Reserve. This area is approximately 10 ha in size, which is a viable size for a Biobank site, however the site is largely dominated by exotic vegetation and costs to establish and manage the site may become prohibitive and therefore not economically viable for the landholder. It is estimated that the proposed biobank site would establish approximately 90 credits. CRCIF credits currently trade for between $12,000 - $17,000 / credit. A Biobank feasibility study would provide a more certain outcome for this opportunity. Figure 3.6 Important environmental values within the study area (Source: ELA) May 2018

environmental partnership Figure 3: Important

environmental values within the study area

3.0 REVIEW 3.2 Ecology & Habitat

Castlereagh Ironbark Forest recorded within the study area

Estuarine Mangrove Forest within the study area

Planted native vegetation recorded within the study area

Weeds and exotics within the study area

Estuarine Saltmarsh recorded within the study area

Estuarine Swamp Oak Forest recorded within the study area

Maintained grass / cleared land recorded within the study area

Acacia pubescens recorded within the study area (Source: ELA)

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

3.3 Access The site has potential to integrate with access networks at a number of levels

3.3.1 District Access

3.3.2 Local Access

•

strong east west link along Riverwood Parkland corridor

•

access to McLaughlin oval from adjoining streets

•

potential linkages to south in adjoining LGA and the existing bridge across Salt Pan Creek via Riverwood Park

•

limited access across / under M5 corridor

•

potential additional linkage to west linking to Salt Pan Creek walkway system

need for east west connections through new communities to east - ideally this edge would be as permeable as possible to enhance security and usability

PUNCHBOWL

Whitmarsh Mclaughlin

WHITMARSH PARK

1km

MCLAUGHLIN OVAL

M5 Motorway M5 MOTORWAY

10.00

5.00

10.00

5.00

SALT PAN CREEK SITE

5.00 5.00

10.00

5.00

5.00 10.0

Riverwood

SALT PAN CREEK

5.00

400m 300m

10.00

SALT PAN CREEK

5.00

KENTUCKY RESERVE 5.00

5.00

10.00

5.00

10.00

300m

5.00 5.00

5.00

400m

5.00

5.00 5.00

Salt Pan 1km

10.0 0

RIVERWOOD

PADSTOW

0 10.0

.00 5.00

Paths

Pedestrian Access Local Bicycle Network

Site Boundary

Walkability Radius Parking

Site Boundary

Bridges/Boardwalks

5.00

Bridges/Boardwalks

5.00

District access

Figure 3.7 Neighbourhood access map May 2018

Kentucky Reserve 0 5.0

Formal Pedestrian Entry Pedestrian/Cycle Entry Local Bicycle Network

Vehicular Access

5.00

Vehicular Entry

LEGEND:

5.00

LEGEND:

Local Access

Figure 3.8 Local access map

environmental partnership

Lanfill Drainage

3.0 REVIEW 3.4 Recreation Development of the masterplan has straddled the merger of Canterbury and Bankstown Councils. The project was originally commissioned by Canterbury Council, but with the merger into one LGA, the site is now pivotally located at the centre of Canterbury Bankstown. The review of the project at the time of the merger addressed the question of the future role of a parkland on the post landfill site and considered the potential role the site could play for the community of the expanded LGA. It was resolved for the purposes of the masterplan that the park had potential to provide a regional role for informal recreation and a district role for organised sports. Definitions of these categorisations follow: • Regional: ‘High value’ open space that has the capacity to draw from or benefit people across and beyond the City due to its size, facilities, features, innovation, location. • District: Good quality open space that has the capacity to draw from or benefit people across or beyond a district within the City (west, central, east) due to its size, facilities, features

As Council’s merger process progressed conceptualisation of the consolidated recreational resource and the related shortfalls and opportunities were able to be identified. As a result a refined perspective of the role of the park was defined. This has guided the masterplan’s development, with the covenant that where possible development of the park build in the maximum potential for future flexibility and adaptability. Key points of the refined recreational profile for the park are listed following: • The context of the Riverwood LUIIP development to the immediate east of the site is significant and is discussed in further detail in section 3.5 opposite page) • Council resolved to consider options for relocation of Sydney Olympic Football Club to a location at Salt Pan Creek. This will free 3 leased football fields at Tasker Park (Canterbury Town Centre) which form part of the critical open space for the Urban Renewal Corridor Relocating Sydney Olympic Football Club also frees Peter Moore field adjacent to Belmore Oval (Canterbury Bulldogs precinct) • A new football facility would be a regional level and be provided with NPL-1 level amenities including a synthetic field, covered seating / grandstand, ticket office and perimeter fencing, parking and other associated change rooms, office and gym facilities. Council considered 1 x synthetic and 1 x grass full field would address the Sydney Olympic role. • Baseball, AFL / Cricket / Athletics, Football/ soccer and passive recreation facilities including significant water treatment and water course are to be provided within the masterplan area • Council identified that two multi-purpose “pads” catering for different modes of use: -2 x football fields or -1 x cricket wicket or -1x AFL field be provided within the park south of the M5

Figure 3.9 Existing open space / recreational context

Morris Iemma Indoor Centre Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Stuart Street Reserve

Apex Park 38

Illustrative master plan p

Draft - not for distribution

3.5 Adjoining Development The Riverwood precinct to the immediate east of the site is the subject of a significant redevelopment project which will result in increased residential densities adjoining the site and built form up to six storeys at the park edge.

The Riverwood Land Use Infrastructure Implementation Plan (LUIIP) was declared a NSW Government Priority Precinct and development of the Salt Pan Creek Parklands masterplan has involved liaison with the Riverwood project team. The project will markedly change the character of the neighbourhood adjoining the parklands, and provide a more active and safe “edge” to the park than the existing closed residential rear yards and fenclines. The uplift in population will create a local user catchment that will help activate path and trail systems and facilities such as fitness nodes

22. 33. 44.

review road access integrated with adjoining development to optimise integration with adjoining community and spread traffic load for access to the parklands promote “green” corridors to open space / streets leading to the parklands pursue active frontages adjoining the new community and promote walk in access to the parklands through an attractive and usable park edge

7 5

5 7

6 6

Some key opportunities as indicated on Figure 3.11 include:

11.

15 8

2 6

15 6

explore potential WSUD opportunities and water in the landscape

3 3

8 8

8 6

Riverwood master plan | Site and context analysis | Architectus

0 Figure 3.10 Adjoining Riverwood development site (Source: Draft Riverwood Masterplan) May 2018

100m

Figure 3.11 Adjoining Development (Source: Draft Riverwood Masterplan)

environmental partnership

3.0 REVIEW 3.6 Landfill, Landform and Drainage 3.6.1 Landfill background

Differential Settlement & Ponding BH-12

Access Road

Seeps (LSeep, GW4 See) Pumping Station-3

GW-5 A=800mg/L

GW-5A A=25 mg/L

7 6 5

LEGEND

Salt Pan Creek

Existing Capping (variable)

Buried Waste (Inferred)

Weathered Sandstone

Tidal

Alluvial (Silty Clays)

Clay Bunding and Liner (schematic only & original surface)

Perched Water (Leachate)

Regional Groundwater

A23 Approx Ammonia Concentrations (20014, mg/L)

-2

Figure 2.12: Preliminary Conceptual Site Model Preliminary Conceptual Site Model (V2, Jan 2015) (Source: City of Canterbury Council Closure/Rehabitation of Salt Pan Figure 6 Creek Landfill The Concept Plan (EPL 10636) July 2015)

Date: 22 January 2015

SALT PAN CREEK LANDFILL- Concept Plan

Reference: E2W_204_02.cdr

Min 2% grade

management

-3

Slope 2% - minimum soil disturbance & support end use (playing fields)

Well Screen (jnferred)

-1

Grass cover (playing fields)

0.3m

Landfill Gas & Re-vegetation Area

Evapo-transpiration layer (ET-L) Combined drainage/infiltration layer ~0.3m thick placed without compaction

-Shallow Water Table & Water Collection/Drainage-

Thinner ET-L (~0.15m) possible if existing clay barrier is >0.8m thick

0.25m

Gravel trench- gas

Canterbury Councils Tip Closure Plan in 2015 identified recommendations for end use planning: • Promote positive falls. Runoff away from site with a minimum of 2% slope for playing fields • Reduce infiltration into soil • Promote evapo-transpiration (water exchange from soil and plants to atmoshpere) • Prevent leachate (water that has moves through soil and leached embedded minerals or chemicals) entering groundwater /surface water • Treat leachate to remove solids, sulfides • Preferred landfill geometry involves minimum 2% slopes to facilitate construction of sporting fields and playing areas • Prevent exposure of buried waste. • The site is preferred to be partially or fully re-vegetated and integrated with a wetland water body for water quality treatment and • Possible leachate pump installation. • Preferred landfill gas management involves the construction of passive structures such as gravel trenches and or bio-pads due to elevated landfill gas concentrations on the mound (mulch piles integrated with treatment/landscaped areas without flaring equipment). Gravel trenches are proposed near the more sensitive residential and school areas.

Rainfall Infiltration

BH-7

Inferred Elevaton (RL)

As a post landfill site the effective capping of the landfill profile, and the ongoing management of leachate and gas from the subsurface zones are key influences on park planning. Addressing these requirements must be at the forefront of an integrated site planning approach. At the same time this masterplan seeks to ensure that the landfill legacy does not unduly limit the potential of the site to provide an interesting and stimulating landscape environment.

0.5m Clay barrier (Permeability E- 08 m/sec) 2 compacted lifts ~0.25m thick

0.25m

Performance Based (soft spots removed & stabilised)

Seal bearing layer (stable/compacted & minimal waste)

Sound foundation- granular materials with minimal waste

NOTES Final layer comprising mostly soil with minor waste (<20%)

Buried Waste

Hold points for construction QA Clay capping; inspection & testing

Landfill Capping Plan Plan Figure 2.13: ProposedProposed Landfill Capping (Source: City of Canterbury Council Closure/Rehabitation of Salt Pan 5A Creek Landfill The Concept Plan (EPL 10636) July Figure 2015)

Date: 22 January 2015

SALT PAN CREEK LANDFILL- concept plan

Reference: E2W_204_07.cdr

Slope 2% - minimum soil disturbance & support end use (playing fields)

Sea/bearing surface - sound foundation (no heaving)

LEGEND Top of crown/mound - minimum 2% slopes for playing fields

LEGEND

Existing batter slopes (re-shaping as required to enhance run-off) Landfill closure design 3H IV batter slopes (maximum)

0.3m Evapotranspiration layer

Denotes survey control points and profiles

Clay cap - recycled cover material (0.5m)

Sand layer

Buried Waste

Clay

Clay liner (schematic /inferred only)

Denotes compacted waste - soil layers

Alluvial (silty clay)

Proposed Biofilter pad (mulched & landscaped) Slotted 100mm diam pipe placed in waste layer/seal bearing layer

Grass cover 10m

Denotes area of stabilised fill Buried waste Denotes area of cut

Batter slopes- no change

Proposed gravel trench & biofilter materials

Perched water

Leachate collection system 1 Layer

Capping 0.5m

Groundwater 0m Clay liner (inferred)

Landfill footprint and access track

Legend: Mound reshaping from <1% to 2% slope (adjustment in m)

In-situ sediment and bedrock (sandstone) Bund wall

Schematic Concept Plan - Reshaping of Mound & Filling Plan

Figure 3.14: Schematic Concept Plan - Reshaping of Mound & Filling Plan Figure 5C (Source: City of Canterbury Council Closure/Rehabitation of Salt Pan Creek Landfill The Concept Plan (EPL 10636) July 2015)

Source: Neil Charters Pty Ltd Date: 22 January 2015

Reference: E2W_204_06.cdr

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

SALT PAN CREEK LANDFILL

Preliminary Landfill Gas Management at Salt Pan Creek Landfill Figure 3.15 Preliminary Landfill Gas Management at Salt Pan Creek Landfill (Source: City of Canterbury Council Closure/Rehabitation of Salt Pan Creek Figure 5D Landfill The Concept Plan (EPL 10636) July 2015) Date: 22 January 2015

Reference: E2W_204_08.cdr

SALT PAN CREEK LANDFILL- Concept Plan

Date: 6 February 2015 Reference: E2W_204_13.cdr

Preliminary Concept Cut & Fill Plan (January 2015)

SALT PAN CREEK LANDFILLplan Figure 3.16: Preliminary Concept Cut &concept Fill Plan (Source: City of Canterbury Council Closure/Rehabitation of Salt Pan Creek Figure Landfill The Concept Plan (EPL 10636) July 2015) 7

3.6.2 Landfill Investigations 2017 The diagrams below reflect those investigations. Existing capping depth is varied but averages somewhere between 09-1.5 metres Figure 3.19 composites the two profiles and highlights the high points of the existing landfill profile. Any earthworks must avoid disturbance of the existing landfill profile. 6242650

Council commissioned Coffey to undertake further testing on the site and to assist with the masterplan process in addressing remediation and capping requirements. Coffey developed an updated set of contours of the landfill and existing surface landform.

6242600

M5 WESTE

6242550

RN MOTOR

WAY

CBH232 CBH231

CBH007

CBH019

CBH008

CBH013

CBH009

CBH010

CBH011

CBH023

CBH030 CBH031

CBH033

CBH034

CBH035

CBH036

CBH037

CBH043

CBH044

CBH045

CBH046

CBH047

CBH049

CBH048

CBH089

CBH090

CBH097

CBH098

CBH099

CBH100

CBH125

CBH126

9.5

CBH120

CBH119

CBH127

CBH128

CBH129

CBH138

9.5 CBH148

9.5 CBH157

CBH158

CBH164

CBH175

CBH160

CBH170

CBH169

CBH176

CBH177

CBH178

CBH180

CBH179

6.5 8.5 9.5 10 10.5

12 CBH185

CBH186

CBH227

CBH188

CBH187

CBH189

CBH192

CBH195

CBH194

.5 55

.5 11CBH201

CBH206

CBH212 CBH208

CBH211

CBH210

CBH247

CBH219

5.5

CBH215

CBH220

CBH217

11.5

CBH221

CBH222

CBH224 CBH223

CBH249

CBH250

319300

+12.0

12.5 .5 11 1 11 0.5 10 .5 109.5 9.59 98.5 8 7.5 8.58 7.5 7

319250

CBH225

.5 1010 5 9. 9 5 8.8.5 77 5 6.6 5 5. CBH248

CBH216

11.5

CBH218

CBH214

319200

CBH213

CBH203

CBH209

319150

+12.0

CBH226

CBH205

CBH204 CBH202

CBH200

12.5

CBH199

CBH207

319100

11.5 .5 12

CBH196 CBH193

CBH246

319050

9 1 8.5 .95 0

CBH191

5.5

CBH197 CBH190

11.5

10.5

CBH198

CBH245

319000

6.5

11.5 CBH184

CBH183

CBH182

9 8 7.5 7 6 5.5 5

CBH181

9.5

11.5

CBH174

CBH168

7.5

5 CBH167 10.

CBH173

CBH166

CBH165

CBH159

CBH156

CBH155

CBH171

CBH150

10.5

CBH154

CBH163

CBH172

CBH149

9 8.5

4.5 5

CBH147

.5 9.5 10

9.5

CBH153

CBH162

CBH244

318950

11 .5

CBH140

CBH139

11.5 10

CBH152

CBH146

9.5

7 8 5 7.5 8. 9 8 8.5 9

CBH137

CBH136

CBH145

5.5

EK CBH151

CBH144

CBH135

CBH143

CBH142

11 .5 10

8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5

CBH134

CRE

CBH141

+11.0

10 .5

CBH130

6.5

CBH133

CBH132

CBH131

6242250

CBH118

PAN

6242200

CBH110

CBH109

10 CBH124

CBH123

CBH161

6241900

CBH108

CBH117

CBH242

CBH243

6241850

CBH116

CBH115

CBH114

9.5

CBH122

CBH121

8 8.5 7.5 7 6.5 .56 5

CBH241

CBH113

CBH112

CBH107

8.5

6242300

5.5

CBH111

CBH228

10.5

CBH106

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

5 CBH240

CBH104

CBH103

CBH102

10.5

9.5 10

CBH096

CBH105

CBH229

10.5

CBH088

CBH087

CBH080

CBH079

6242400

CBH078

CBH230

CBH070

CBH069

5 9. 9

8.5

CBH060

CBH059

10.5 11

6242350

9 5

Northing

CBH086

CBH095

CBH094

CBH093

CBH092

CBH101

SALT

6242150

CBH077

CBH058

CBH068

CBH067

CBH076

CBH085

CBH084

CBH083

CBH082

CBH081

Top of Waste Level (mAHD)

6242100

CBH075

CBH057

CBH239

318900

6242050

CBH066

CBH238

3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13

6242000

CBH056

CBH074

CBH073

CBH072

CBH071

CBH055

CBH065

119.5

CBH091

6241950

CBH054

CBH064

9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 6 6.5

CBH237

CBH063

CBH062

8.5 5 7.

8 7.5

CBH053

CBH052

CBH051

CBH061

.5 11

8.5

CBH050

CBH236

10 .5

10.5

CBH042

10.5

CBH041

9.5

10.5

CBH040

.5 10

CBH032

9.0 9.5

8.5

CBH024

10.5

6242450

CBH022

CBH028

CBH021

CBH039

CBH038

CBH235

CBH029

10.5

0 1CBH027

CBH026

CBH234 CBH025

9 9.5

CBH020

CBH018

9 8.5

CBH006

CBH012 CBH017

CBH016

CBH015

CBH014

10 1 0. 11 12 5 9. 5 98.5 910 1 0.5 11 11 12.5 .5 12

CBH005

CBH233

8.5

6242500

CBH004

CBH003

CBH002

CBH001

319350

319400

319450

7.5 7

8.5

319500

Easting

drawn approved

100 Metres

150

200 date scale original size

Figure 3.17 Existing Landform (Source: Coffey 2017 May 2018

OP BF/AP

client:

Salt Pan Creek Landfill Closure

23/11/2016 AS SHOWN A3

Canterbury-Bankstown Council

project:

title: project no:

Top of Waste Contour 754-SYDEN195724

Figure 3.18 Landfill profile beneath existing capping (Source: Coffey 2017)

environmental partnership

figure no:

rev:

Figure 3.19 Composite of landform and capping highlighting high points in landfill profile which cannot be disturbed (EP) 41

3.0 REVIEW 3.6 Landfill, Landform and Drainage 3.6.3 Landform

3.6.4 Drainage - Surface Drainage

The landform of the landfill zone is largely a flat and open platform with embankments down to adjoining areas. Some key characteristics are noted:

Drainage is dictated by the landfill profile with the landfill forming a barrier to natural drainage from adjoining areas to the east, and directing drainage along the east edge of the landfill to a trapped lowpoint mid way along the east boundary. Some other key characteristics are noted

• RL 12.5 - 13.5 high points

• limited falls to landfill top surface

• edge batters generally 1:5-6

• implications of rl 8.0 water table contour for regrading at edges need to be considered • potential integration with drainage from new development for WSUD and water harvesting

Whitmarsh

Mclaughlin

M5 Motorway

Fall

10.00

Fall

10.00

10.00 10.00

+ RL 8.0

10.00

Fall

10.00

5.00

10.00

5.00

Riverwood

SALT PAN CREEK

5.00

Fall + RL 12.5

Riverwood

SALT PAN CREEK

5.00

Fall

Fall 5.00

5.00

Fall

Fall 5.00

Fall

5.00

Salt Pan

Fall

5.00

Salt Pan

10.00

5.00

2.0m Inferred Groundwater Elevation 8.0m Inferred Groundwater Elevation (regional)

5.00

Site Boundary Surface Drainage Concrete Dish Drain Monitoring Well (EPL, Existing) Monitoring Well (E2W Dec 2014)

10.

5.00

Figure 3.20: Landform (Source: EP) Lanfill Drainage

Kentucky Reserve 0

10.

Fall

5.00

Sub-surface

5.0

Fall + RL 13.5

Creek Flood Depths

5.00

5.0

Fall

LEGEND:

5.00

Existing gradient

Kentucky + RL 6.5 Reserve

5.00

Fall

5.00

LEGEND:

10.00

10.0

Fall

Lanfill Drainage

5.00

Figure 3.21: Surface Drainage (Source: EP)

View south across Salt Pan Creek Parklands site south of M5 Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD VISION

4.0 vision 4.1 Project Vision In consideration of the project objectives as defined by Council and recognising the physical and cultural influences on the site as outlined in previous sections a guiding vision and a series of more detailed design principles has been developed that has informed planning and assisted in evaluation of options.

....a destination parkland providing for multiple recreational uses that engage a broad cross section of community, and that celebrates the Salt Pan Creek location, history and setting...

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

4.2 Principles

9.0 9.5

8.5

10.5 8.5 8

9 10

5 9.

9.5 10

10.5

10 .5

10.5

9.5

9 119.5

9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 6 6.5

10.5

+11.0

10 .5

9.5 10

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

10.5 11

10.5

9 8.5

8 7.5

11 .5

.5 11

8.5

11 .5 10

9.5

11.5 10

7 8 5 7.5 8. 9 8 8.5 9

9.5

5 9.

.5 9.5 10

5.5

8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5

6.5

10.5

9 8.5

9.5

7.5

10.5

11.5

6.5

11.5

12.5

.5 12

+12.0

10 1 0. 11 12 5 9. 5 98.5 .5 910 10 .5 1 1 11.5 12 12.5

11 .5

+12.0

11.5

12.5 11 1 .5 1 1 11 0.5 10 .5 109.5 9.59 98.5 8 7.5 8.58 7.5 7

7.5 7

8.5

LEGEND

LEGEND High point of waste level

LEGEND External public open space

Road

Internal public open space

Parking

Sports field area Sports field area

Sports field area

Work with the site’s landfill history

ii.

Activate the edge

External public open space

Internal public open space

• Recognise the landfill profile as a determining baseline for design

• Permeable, comfortable, friendly park edge

• Implement required leachate and gas management measures

• High level of use across day /evening

• Maintain necessary access to environmental management infrastructure

• Encourage development of appropriate density, orientation, use LEGEND LEGEND • Encourage positive address and access to residential development

LEGEND

Flat turfed area

Road

Wetland

Embankment area

Parking

Shared road

Flat turfed area

Parking

Embankment area

Top of embankment

Flat turfed area

Bottom of embankment Turfed parking Existing top and bottom of

May 2018

embankment

Sports field area

Embankment area

environmental partnership

Sports field area Flat turfed area

Sports field area Embankment area

External public open space

4.0 vision 4.2 Principles WI GG S RO AD

WHITMARSH RESERVE

WI GG S RO AD

WHITMARSH RESERVE

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

M5 WEST ER

N MOTO R W AY

iii.

WHITMARSH RESERVE

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

M5 WEST ER

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

WI GG S RO AD

N MOTO RW

M5 WEST ER

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

200m

Connect, loop and experience

• Integrate with broader recreational access systems

400m

iii.

N MOTO RW

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

200m

Connect, loop and experience

• Multiple pedestrian entry points to parklands

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

400m

iii.

200m

400m

Connect, loop and experience

• Create a diversity of loops and routes • Link experiences

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

4.2 Principles

M5 WEST ERN MO T O R WA

iv.

Water in the landscape

Multiple integrated recreational roleS

• Integrate the presence of water beyond Salt Pan Creek to enhance the environment and character of the landscape

• Regional sports function (football)

• Harvest drainage from surrounding public domain

• Destination family play

• Treat in bioremediation (using aquatic planting and sand filter beds to improve water quality) ponds

• Integrated landscape experiences - topography / water

• Multi-use district sports function

• Local promenading and exercise

• Use for field irrigation and other on site uses

• Temporary / pop-up uses during park evolution

• Interpret the former creek line in the park landscape May 2018

environmental partnership

4.0 vision 4.2 Principles

vi.

Dispersed vehicular access and parking

vii.

Demonstrating sustainability

• Multi entry / egress points

• Solar power generation

• Provide flexibility for modal management of through access

• Water collection, treatment and harvesting

• Dispersed parking serving recreational nodes

• On site nursery / plant propogation during construction

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD CONCEPT OPTIONS

Internal public open space Sports field area Sports field area

5.0 CONCEPT OPTIONS

LEGEND

5.1 Salt Pan Parklands

LEGEND Flat turfed area

Road

Embankment area

Parking

Shared road

Top of embankment

Development of options

LEGEND

Parking

Flat turfed area

5.1.1 Road LEGEND Access & Parking - Concept Options LEGEND Bottom of embankment

Turfed parking Embankment area

Existing top and bottom of embankment

LEGEND

Existing road access in the park McLaughlin Oval to Wiggs Flat turfed area south of the M5 connects pastRoad Sports field area Sports field area Road in the north. It is proposed to provide additional vehicular access from the Riverwood Embankment area Parking neighbourhood to increase accessibility and reduce traffic loads on a single access. Top of embankment

The salt Pan Parklands is the least developed of the two main park areas comprising the overall masterplan site. This section explores concept planning solutions for the main components of the Salt Pan Parklands. Options are included where applicable including identification of a preferred option.

External public open space

Parking

E Sports field area

Several scenarios were reviewed in terms of alignment and organisation of vehicular access Embankment area Existing top and bottom of embankment and parking. These are outlined this page with the preferred scenario described opposite Bottom of embankment

Sports field area

Embankment area

Shared road

External public open space

Flat turfed area

Road

Turfed parking

S External public open space

Flat turfed area

Sports field area Embankment area

M5 WEST ERN MO T O R WA

M 5 W ELEGEND S T E R N M External public open space O T O R WA Y

M5 WEST ERN MO T O R WA

External public open space

SportsYfield area

Asphalt

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path

External public open space

Secondary pedestrian path 9.0

9.5

9 8.5

12.5

11 .5

40 M

10 .5 1 1 11.5 12 12.5

9.5 10

10 .5 10

100 M

Wetland Existing tree canopy to be retained

100

9.5

7.5

8.5

7.5 7

8.5

200 M

Scenario 2

.5 11

9 8.5

10 .5 1 1 11.5 12 12.5 9.5 10

Parking

9.5

11 .5 11

10.5

9.5

8.5 9

Proposed tree canopy at parking / fitness area

Scenario 1

9.5 10

8.5

10.5 11

Recreation Amenities Tolets and change rooms Proposed tree canopy at parking / fitness area

7.5 7

6.5

200 M

8.5

Secondary path

100

Primary path / Shared path

7.5

9.5

7.5

100 M

LEGEND

11.5 Road access 11 3. Local Playspace 1.District Sports Facilities 4. Local Informal Parkland • Close proximity to major roads Destination Adventure Playspace and Fitness Area • Capacity for support facilities (e.g.5.clubhouse) 10.5 Facilities Special event road access 6. Event and Gathering Meadow to adjoining site to west 7. Local Informal Parkland Retaining wall 8. Local Informal Parkland Parking 2. Local Sports Facilities 11 • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities Recreation Amenities Turf 11.5 Tolets and change rooms Informal - Non-organised Recreation 11.5 12 Vegtation 12 3. Local Playspace 12.5 4. Local Informal Parkland .5 12 Wetland 5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. LocaltoInformal Parkland Existing tree canopy be 13 8. Local Informal Parkland retained

Gravel

Park

9 8.5

LEGEND

6.5

Informal - Non-organised Recreation

5.5

6.5

200 M

Figure 5.8 Road access and parking scenarios N

Vegtation

10 .5

Boardwalk / Timber platform Organised Sports

LEGEND

PAN PARKLANDS

7.5

Parking

6.5

10.5

9.5

7.5

Proposed vegetation

100

9 8.5

8.5

2. Local Sports Facilities SALT • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities

8.5

5.5

10.5

9.5

9 8.5

7.5 7

Secondary pedestrian paths

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

8.5 9

5.5

8.5

6.5

7.5

12.5

11 .5

40 M

6.5 8

100 M

9.5

Turf 20

Prim

Seco

Special event road access

9.5 10

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

Retaining wall 13

Existing vegetation

Cycle/Pedestrian shared path

LEGEND Road access

12 1.District Sports Facilities • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west

6.5

10.5 11

9.5 10

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

10 .5

Fitness Area

6.5

10.5 11

40 M

.5 12

LEGEND

6.5

8 7.5

7 12.5

11 .5

12.5

8.5

.5 11

8.5

8 7.5

Organised Sports

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge

wall SALT PAN Existing sandstone Road Boardwalk Proposed contours / PARKLANDS mounding Parking Proposed amenity building 12 Grassed/ turf area 11.5 Shared access / 11 Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge Maintained sportsfield Proposed grandstand 10.5 area Cycle/Pedestrian shared Security fence path Existing sandstone wall Secondary pedestrian Existing vegetation 11 paths Proposed contours / mounding 11.5 Boardwalk / Timber .5 1 1 platform 12 Grassed/ turf area Proposed vegetation 12 Gravel Maintained sportsfield area

Proposed grandstand

LEGEND Security fence

8.5

11.5

12 12.5

Brick pavement

.5 12

Parking

Proposed amenity building

10 .5

9.5

Secondary pedestrian path

11.5

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path

11.5

LEGEND

Asphalt

Road

9.5

10.5

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

10 .5

Boardwalk

10 10.5

10.5

LEGEND

10 .5

9.0 9.5

LEGEND

Brick pavement9.5

11 .5

12 10

9.0 9.5

9.5

Scenario 3 N

• Primary south entry at 1. off Kentucky Avenue

• Potential secondary entry at 2. providing loop circulation • Angle parking off road

• Potential secondary entry at 2. providing loop circulation, but maintaining south-western corner un-incumbered by road access

• Nodal parking area between playing field pads at 3.

• Angle parking off road

• Potential secondary entry at 2. off Union Road providing loop circulation - but creating a road based divide at all times between main park and Riverwood - which may not be desirable

• Nodal parking area between playing field pads at 3.

• Angle parking off road • Nodal parking area between playing field pads at 3.

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

LEGEND

Preferred Scenario

LEGEND

Flat turfed area

Road

Embankment area

Parking

Shared road

Top of embankment

In order to avoid the profile of the existing landfill while at the same time providing access to the centralised amenities complex in the centre of the field pads, the entry road must transition up into the site along the eastern embankment. This takes it away from the east boundary and creates a park space between the road and the boundary

M5 WEST ER

Bottom of embankment

Embankment area

Existing top and bottom of embankment

Embankment area

External public open space

Secondary pedestrian path

Sports Fields & Amenities

Brick pavement

External public open space

+9.5

Amphitheatre/Viewing Areas

Boardwalks & Viewing decks

Circulation & Parkings

Road with 90 Degree Parkings (324)

Pedestrian Vehicular Shared Zone

2.5-3m Maintenance Perimeter Shared Pathway

Parking

Organised Sports

LEGEND

+7.88

Road access

Security fence

Cycle/Pedestrian shared path Secondary pedestrian paths

2. Local Sports Facilities • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities

Boardwalk / Timber platform

Informal - Non-organised Recreation

Pri

+8.5 +8.8

+8.675 (+6.09) Special event road access

+13.0

Sec

Parking

Pa +7.76

+14.0

Grassed/ turf area

3. Local Playspace +13.0 Parkland 4. Local Informal 5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. Local Informal Parkland 8. Local Informal Parkland

Gravel Fitness Area Retaining wall Existing vegetation

Pedestrian Access

+9.0

LEGEND +8.75 (+7.16)

+13.0

Proposed grandstand

Maintained sportsfield area

+9.25

Road

1.District Sports +18.0 Facilities (+10.8) to major roads • Close proximity • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west

Proposed contours / mounding

+9.5

+9.25

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge

Existing sandstone wall

RIVERWOOD NEW DEVELOPMENT

+10.0

LEGEND

Sports field area

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

+10.5

Proposed amenity building

+13.0

Recreation Amenities Tolets and change rooms

Turf

+3.94

+3.46

(+10.5) 3+16.0

+5.44

+6.69

+9.17

RIVERWOOD PUBLIC SCHOOL

Proposed vegetation

Sustainability Provide wetland habitat for wildlife to increase biodiversity value and improve water quality

Hilltop Art / Gateway Feature

+4.2

Vegtation

+1.92

Wetland Existing tree canopy to be retained 0

+11.0

Passive Recreation

External public open space

+14.4

Boardwalk

+18.0 (+11.5)

+17.0 (+11.395)

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path

Adventure play

Turfed parking

Sports field area

As such the preferred scenario uses an existing access point to Kentucky Avenue LEGEND seeking to maximise the interface to the community that is parkland. A perimeter path will allow for shared access, maintenance access, and provide a similar activating role Asphalt to an edge road.

Active Recreation

N MOTO R W AY

Flat turfed area Sports field area

A perimeter road that hugged the site boundary and became a “double frontage” between the park and the development would be ideal as it would provide an active edge and public domain zone linking the park to the community. However this road would be at the boundary level some 4-5m below the amenities and the field above. Scenarios 1-3 implement a secondary road access to the former Landfill zone. In each case to varying degrees the second road access serves to spatially separate the adjoining community from the park.

Parking

Flat turfed area

Provide hill top art / gateway feature to create identity to the parkland from M5 Motoway

May 2018

Figure 5.9 Refined Concept

40 M

Proposed tree canopy at parking / fitness area

50 50

100m 100 M 51

environmental partnership

100

200 M

5.0 CONCEPT OPTIONS 5.2 McLaughlin Oval Council resolved to explore potential for a National Premier League Football facility integrated with retention of an informal local park role within MaLaughlin Oval

NPL Stadium Precedents

NPL Seating Requirements

Cromer Park provides a good working precedent to evaluate potential for an NPL facility at McLaughlin Oval.

This section reviews requirements and precedents for an NPL facility followed by a description of planning options and a preferred masterplan option.

Generally the sites are comparable overall albeit in slightly differing configuration. Cromer Park is highly efficient in accommodating a central parking zone. The shape of McLaughlin Oval requires alternatives for layout of parking to be explored

5.2.1 NPL Stadium & Seating Requirements and Precedents Council resolved to consider options for relocation of Sydney Olympic Football Club to a location at Salt Pan Creek. This will free 3 leased football fields at Tasker Park (Canterbury Town Centre) which form part of the critical open space for the related Urban Renewal Corridor. Relocating Sydney Olympic Football Club also frees Peter Moore field adjacent to Belmore Oval (Canterbury Bulldogs precinct) A new football facility would be a regional level and be provided with NPL-1 level amenities including a synthetic field, covered seating / grandstand, ticket office and perimeter fencing, parking and other associated change rooms, office and gym facilities. Council considers 1 x synthetic and 1 x grass full field would address the Sydney Olympic role.

NPL Stadium Precedents

Sydney University

Lambert Park

Sydney United Stadium Fairfield

CROmer park Cromer Park

Forrestfield United Perth Cromer Park

MCLAUGHLIN OVAL Shore Tennis Courts Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Modbury FC Adelaide

Figure 5.12 Precedent comparison - Cromer Park 52

Sports field area Sports field area

LEGEND

High point of waste level

LEGEND

External public open space

LEGEND

External public open space

5.2.3 Refined Options

Road

Internal public open space

Parking

Sports field area

Initial options explored a number of design parameters: • capacity of the site area to provide for the NPL level stadium with supporting grassed LEGEND fields. • the location of the NPL stadium to north or south of site Flat turfed area • configuration of parking provision including whether to maintain existing parking area Embankment area • location of community play facilities

Sports field area

LEGEND

LEGEND Road

External public ope

Road A

Parking

Top of embankment

The preferred option on this page develops the following principles:

External public open space

Internal public open

Shared road Parking

Flat turfed area

Bottom of embankment

NPL Stadium to south

Turfed parking Existing top and bottom of embankment

Embankment area

Sports field area

B Sports field area

Road External public open space

External public open space

• preliminary information indicates this area is less affected by landfill history and offers greater potential for earthworks • provides stronger green parkland frontage to Wiggs Road LEGEND

LEGEND

Flat turfed area

Playspace in current position

Flat turfed area

LEGEND

Embankment area LEGEND Wetland

Road Sports field area

areaeasy access and visibility from the • The playspace is retained in its current Embankment position with adjoining community Top of embankment

• Potential to extend playspace with relocation of parking

Flat turfed area

Shared road

Parking

Flat turfed area

Embankment area

External public open space

Bottom of embankment Turfed parking Embankment area

Existing top and bottom of embankment

Parking re-configured

Sports field area Flat turfed area

LEGEND

• parking is consolidated in closer proximity to sportsfields and to consolidate green Sports field area open space curtilage to play space (refer parking space numbers indicated) • Potential to retain existing in short term

Sports field area Embankment area

Asphalt

Shared access / Maintenance path External publicperimeter open space

External public open space

External public open space Sports field area

Informal use recreational parkland adjoining neighbourhood topath east Secondary pedestrian • Open grassland for informal use adjoining neighbouhood with path linkages

LEGEND

Brick pavement

Road

Boardwalk

LEGEND

Existing sandstone wall

Brick pavement Boardwalk

LEGEND

SECTION A-A

Existing Vegetation

Proposed contours / mounding

Existing Vegetation

Proposed Road Realignment

Grassed/ turf area Road

Proposed amenity building

Proposed grandstand

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter Existing vegetation edge path to creek

Security fence Existing sandstone wall Proposed contours / mounding

Scale: 1:300

Cycle/Pedestrian shared path

Proposed Carpark

RetainingSports wall Facilities 1.District • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) Recreation Amenities Turf Tolets and change rooms to adjoining site to west Existing Vegetation

Existing Vegetation

Proposed Road Realignment

Buffer

Salt Pan Creek

DRAWING

1:700 @ A1 1:1400 @ A3

Proposed Vegetation Buffer/Mounding

ISSUE

Parking

Open Parklands

Parking

Section A-A

LEGEND

Security Fencing

Security Fencing Beyond

Primary path / Shared path

Tree canopy in or native grass

Secondary path

Full strata reve

NPL Offical Soccer Field

Proposed Vegetation/ Mounding

Parking

Parking Path Security Fencing

Security Fencing Beyond

Realignment

3460.MP01

Primary path / Shar Secondary path

Special event road access

Proposed Mounding/ Viewing Hill

Path

Special event road access

3. Local Playspace 4. Local Informal Parkland Security Fencing LEGEND 5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow Road access 7. Local Informal Parkland 8. Local Informal Parkland

Fitness Area Organised Sports

LEGEND Road access

Prioposed Soccer Field

Informal - Non-organised Recreation

Open Parklands

SCALE

McLaughlin Oval Option A

Boardwalk / Timber platform

Open Parklands

Maintained sp

Section B-B

Wetland Informal - Non-organised Recreation Figure 5.14 Preferred Scenario - cross sections

Boardwalk / Timber platform

tree canopy to be 3.Existing Local Playspace Gravel SECTION B-B 4.retained Local Informal Parkland

Maintained sportsfield area

LEGEND

2. Local Sports Facilities • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities

Grassed/ turf area

May 2018

Proposed Vegetation Buffer/Mounding

TITLE

Organised Sports

Buffer

2.Vegtation Local Sports Facilities Proposed Security Fencing • Multipurpose sportsRoadfields and amenities

Secondary pedestrian Proposed vegetation paths

Prioposed Soccer Field

Scale: 1:300 Secondary pedestrian paths

Gravel

SECTION A-A

Buffer

1.District Sports Facilities • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west

LEGEND Maintained sportsfield Parking area

Proposed Carpark

CLIENT

February 2017

Cycle/Pedestrian shared path

Security fence

Secondary pedestrian path

DATE

Proposed Road Realignment

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge

Proposed grandstand

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path

Existing Vegetation

Figure 5.13LEGEND Preferred Scenario - NPL stadium to south

Parking

Proposed amenity building Asphalt

Security fence

External public open space Existing Vegetation

environmental partnership

Scale: 1:300

Fitness Area Existing Vegetation

5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Proposed MeadowBuffer Proposed Mounding/ Existing Vegetation

NPL Offical Soccer Field

Proposed Vegetation/

Open Parklands

5.0 CONCEPT OPTIONS

Security fence

Alternative 2a

Security Fencing

Figure 5.15 NPL Stadium to north alternative - with parking variations DATE

CLIENT

TITLE

SCALE

Salt Pan Creek

February 2017

McLaughlin Oval Option B2

DRAWING

1:700 @ A1 1:1400 @ A3

DATE

CLIENT

TITLE

Proposed Road Realignment

Road

Parallel Parking

Salt Pan Creek

McLaughlin Oval Option B1

ISSUE

Existing Vegetation

SCALE

February 2017

3460.MP03 -

Existing Vegetation

Alternative 2b

Security Fencing

Vegetation Buffer and NPL Grandstand Security Fencing

NPL Official Playing Field

DRAWING

3460.MP02

1:700 @ A1 1:1400 @ A3

ISSUE

Spectator Hill

Proposed Vegetation

Security Fencing

Open Parklands

Path

SECTION A-A

Scale: 1:300 Security fence

Existing Vegetation

Road

Existing Vegetation

Proposed Road Realignment

Parallel Parking

Vegetation Buffer and NPL Grandstand

NPL Official Playing Field

Spectator Hill

Proposed Vegetation

Open Parklands

Path

SECTION A-A

Section A-A

Club House Beyond

Scale: 1:300

Existing Vegetation

Proposed Road Realignment

Figure 5.16 Minimal Change Alternaive - NPL Stadium to north with south baseball retained DATE

CLIENT

TITLE

February 2017

McLaughlin Oval Option C

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

SCALE

Salt Pan Creek

DRAWING

1:700 @ A1 1:1400 @ A3

Road

45 Degree Parking

Buffer

NPL Offical Soccer Field

Path

Proposed Mounding/Vegetation

Open Parklands

Section B-B

Club House Beyond

Figure 5.17 Alternative Scenario - cross sections

3460.MP04 ISSUE

SECTION B-B Scale: 1:300

Existing Vegetation

Road

Buffer

NPL Offical Soccer Field

Proposed Mounding/Vegetation

Open Parklands

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD SITE WIDE STRATEGIES

Scale: 1:1500

Capped Landfill Buffer

Figure 5.2 Existing land form cross sections

Section B-B

M5 Buffer PIT

TITLE

3.42

3.92

3.82

5.00

BITUMEN

4.62

5.81

6.28

12.45

5.00 6.55

6.67

PINE

6.73

BORE HOLE 7

6.71

8.08

6.56

4.77

6.60

6.53

8.04

9.65

11.21

12.83

12.64

6.54

6.45

8.02

9.68

11.19 11.22

12.27

6.45

6.55

9.54

11.02

12.46

7.94

6.44

11.76

10.85

9.54

6.66

7.97

6.60

11.82

4.51

11.41

9.55

6.70

7.87

6.88

10.79

9.27

10.89

6.60

6.75

7.48

10.33

6.69

8.79

6.51

7.19

10.10

8.58

5.87

5.78

9.79

8.26

6.72

5.47

5.65

5.26

9.41

7.91

6.39

5.62

5.72

8.89

7.75

9.95

9.05

9.33

6.37

5.87

5.88

9.15

8.05

7.30

9.92

9.26

6.45

6.83

8.83

7.35

8.22

9.38

6.67

6.26

PIT

6.28

6.83

9.91

10.00

10.13

6.55

6.90

7.60

9.16

6.39

10.93

6.60

11.85

11.33

7.14

8.19

9.67

10.94

12.07

6.46

6.60

9.87

11.42

12.33

12.36

6.52

7.39

8.59

12.31

6.56

6.64

8.02

9.10

10.41

11.76

12.27

8.02

12.44

12.48

12.53

344

22 88

349

BOTTO

BUSH

12.83

PIT

PLAC

6.20

10.06

12.23

10.70

12.59

12.18

12.35

6.73

9.12

10.70

11.74

12.17

6.63

7.93

12.11

6.88

8.25

9.29

10.72

11.49

12.52

12.55

6.73

12.14

12.36

TOP

8.04

9.37

10.66

11.52

11.77

12.63

12.73

6.83

12.03

12.48

12.33

12.28

12.18

9.89

11.84

6.81

11.24

6.77

8.15

12.26

12.34

11.86

6.81

8.26

11.73

12.06

12.16

11.38

9.94

6.94

12.15

12.27

12.29

12.40

6.95

11.69

12.55

11.45

10.00

11.16

7.14

AND

12.27

7.30

8.60

12.01

12.17

11.82

12.21

12.42

11.76

10.91

7.68 7.72

8.78

11.99

12.28

11.77

11.22

7.61

10.06

11.62

11.98

12.06

12.15

11.41

12.14

11.86

11.85

12.37

OF 10.91

11.14

11.30

8.32

8.31

10.32

11.08

11.42

11.61

11.74

12.23

12.04

9.41

12.13

11.84

9.22

11.17

11.08

11.07

11.40

6.39

3.82

9.11

10.41

11.18

3.81

5.62

5.72

11.82

11.92

11.37

10.03

11.05

11.22

11.18

11.53

7.75

11.45

12.39

7.90

11.85

11.53

11.61

12.33

9.18

11.76

12.37

10.78

12.20

11.55

11.60

11.81

11.89

12.10

11.43

7.91

337

350 IDAH

6.53

8.81

10.88

12.13

12.69

12.34

11.98

343

5.09

13.06

9.47

10.03

12.40

12.12

342

6.67

6.76

7.44

9.85

11.25

12.90

13.18

10.33

10.30

12.38

12.14

D.P

6.70

6.88

9.09

11.23

12.70

BANK

12.99

CONTROL POINT

6.74

11.01

13.26

TEST PIT 9

6.56

8.10

11.44

12.48

13.01

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

10.11

13.13

10.10

11.14

11.95

12.32

TEST PIT 4

6.68

13.20

HAKEA

9.64

BANK

10.22

9.97

12.12

11.80

12.19

WELL

ROADWAY 6.66

12.43

11.10

10.79

11.37

11.80

12.10

MONITORING

9.36

7.83

Kentucky Reserve

11.18

10.57

10.68

11.46

11.65

11.88

SIGN

6.69

12.82

13.30

BORE HOLE 2

10.0

10.84

11.31

11.47

12.02

11.63

9.05

5.58

5.26

10.02

9.90

10.77

11.33

11.93

9.37

5.87

6.01

12.27

11.26

10.49

10.40

VEL

GRA

3.71

5.88

11.21

11.28

11.42

11.57

11.58

11.88

12.25

11.49

10.67

3.71

6.37

7.30

3.68

12.05

10.86

10.82

11.34

11.55

11.60

11.69

12.46

10.74

11.12

8.83

11.14

7.35

8.22

9.38

6.67

10.30

3.63

10.86

11.08

11.44

11.65

11.70

11.24

10.94

11.65

10.64

10.65

11.29

11.94

11.40

12.07

6.26

11.80

9.91

6.28

6.83

10.06

10.00

12.12

10.03

PLAC

6.20

10.60

12.19

11.83

6.20

11.39

11.71

11.64

11.41

10.66

9.55

11.92

11.16

11.21

12.23

11.13

7.86

6.45

6.83

9.97

11.37

10.79

6.53

8.81

IDA

12.30

11.78

12.00

9.92

9.26

10.98

6.73

11.72

TEST PIT 7

11.23

12.42

11.56

BANK

6.78

9.31

12.74

BORE HOLE 3

7.80

11.29

BOTTOM

6.62

7.71

OF 11.18

12.04

11.45

BANK

6.69

6.55

13.49

12.19

10.98

11.48

11.16

11.95

11.50

11.80

11.17

7.54

5.47

5.65

8.05

10.68

11.65

SIGN

6.51

12.87

12.41

11.35

11.38

11.87

11.54

6.72

3.86

8.26

9.72

BORE HOLE 6

12.41

12.67

11.35

11.09

11.63

11.66

10.86

3.83

9.79

9.15

11.31

11.46

3.69

11.71

12.12

11.06

10.23

10.58

11.19

5.90

11.16

10.39

10.90

10.17

12.16

9.69

10.32

6.46

12.38

7.69

9.86

12.14

9.87

11.42

12.33

12.36

6.01

11.87

11.79

10.11

11.36

11.57

6.52

7.39

8.59

11.10

11.31

3.79

12.12

12.69

12.34

9.44

9.31

3.71

12.31

12.59

11.83

11.26

11.32

11.78

11.98

8.02

9.10

10.41

6.56

6.64

11.76

12.27

8.07

12.18

8.02

12.44

11.49

11.50

11.84

11.78

11.97

8.98

8.73

9.81

10.67

10.96

10.99

3.90

12.35

3.96

6.63

8.58

8.47

9.84

8.70

11.91

11.62

11.61

11.56

12.03

11.82

11.28

10.98

11.60

10.69

11.36

10.13

9.36

6.73

9.12

10.70

11.74

11.87

11.45

11.99

11.93

12.29

11.87

12.17

11.30

8.66

7.95

12.37

12.29

11.86

11.35

11.90

12.48

12.53

11.63

10.00

11.78

11.44

5.86

3.86

11.28

10.60

11.44

9.17

9.20

11.71

11.99

11.78

9.23

12.16

12.15

12.26

11.77

11.64

10.65

10.81

11.82

12.29

11.48

12.07

11.96

10.84

12.09

11.99

11.75

11.26

6.60

12.40

11.91

11.40

9.41

12.22

11.10

10.86

11.83

12.33

11.90

3.69

11.21

11.34

11.56

11.22

11.79

12.33

3.73

12.32

11.85

7.14

8.19

9.67

11.33

12.07

10.94

11.85

11.75

12.10

11.47

11.35

11.18

11.76

ROADWAY

TOP

11.34

10.53

6.39

6.60

12.23

10.70

10.93

11.76

11.81

11.16

11.44

11.65

11.77

11.71

9.27

3.63

12.05

11.77

12.31

10.59

10.81

11.22

11.01

11.14

11.69

12.31

12.33

12.31

12.19

11.87

11.07

7.95

10.88

12.13

10.13

6.55

6.90

7.60

9.16

11.95

11.80

11.44

11.46

TOP

6.39

11.19

12.84

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

12.63

12.71

TOP

12.84

11.23

11.43

10.98

11.83

11.60

9.19

5.78

9.05

9.33

10.41

9.73

12.73

11.49

11.37

POLE (NOT IN USE)

12.40

12.73

11.56

11.16

11.59

12.32

7.78

TOP

12.98

11.38

11.50

11.09

11.91

CONTROL POINT

11.25

12.85

11.51

11.48

11.88

11.44

CONTROL POINT

11.95

7.93

12.11

11.54

6.88

8.25

9.29

10.72

11.49

12.52

12.55

11.59

6.73

12.14

12.36

10.39

12.25

10.62

7.96

5.83

8.99

8.08

9.65

8.96

9.21

11.09

5.56

10.74

9.60

8.01

8.62

4.14

12.31

12.16

12.02

12.00

12.04

11.68

8.99

11.42

7.85

6.77

8.15

7.78

12.16

12.19

11.38

9.01

9.61

9.27

8.94

4.26

8.26

11.73

12.06

6.81

9.87

7.70

9.75

10.49

10.54

10.59

10.06

8.76

8.53

8.40

9.28

9.69

5.64

11.54

9.94

6.94

12.15

12.27

12.29

12.40

12.10

11.86

4.23

12.26

12.34

11.88

7.01

9.11

8.48

8.91

9.89

11.84

6.81

11.24

7.52

10.88

10.95

4.20

6.83

12.03

12.19

11.81

8.50

11.57

8.96

9.37

11.61

12.36

12.26

11.23

12.04

11.39

8.24

8.53

10.51

11.23

11.62

11.91

11.93

12.30

11.94

11.78

7.59

8.45

11.23

10.67

11.66

11.32

11.26

9.40

9.69

4.07

3.97

12.29

12.41

8.58

8.04

12.28

12.18

12.33

11.66

12.48

12.02

11.60

TOP

9.37

10.66

11.52

11.77

12.63

12.73

11.50

6.32

TEST PIT 11 9.64

13.17

BUSH

12.14

13.10

11.46

11.62

11.38

11.57

11.59

11.50

5.87

5.71

8.58

7.79

7.19

10.10

9.95

11.45

11.47

11.88

11.59

6.95

11.69

12.55

11.80

8.51

9.98

9.04

7.61

7.64

7.72

7.84

8.02

7.42

7.62

7.49

7.54 7.39

7.58

6.43

6.41

6.86

5.82

7.19

7.02

7.50

6.76

6.87

5.32

11.08

4.45

11.17

4.31

4.30

4.35

4.28

4.31

4.03

4.08

4.194.18

4.41

4.28

3.88

3.87

3.91

4.22

4.40

3.85

4.27

4.38

4.00

10.77

11.33

11.93

10.02

9.90

4.35

4.23

4.47

4.18

4.06

4.04

4.16

11.37

10.03

11.05

11.22

11.18

11.53

4.15

4.08

4.56

4.07

4.31

4.42

12.39

11.82

11.92

11.85

11.53

11.61

12.33

9.18

4.57

4.55

4.27

4.40

4.25

4.37

4.88

4.35

4.64

4.45

4.37

4.27

4.41

4.67 4.53

4.37

4.51

4.10

4.43

4.50

4.32

4.27

10.41

11.18

9.11

4.64

11.08

11.07

11.40

11.76

12.37

4.35

12.20

11.55

11.60

9.22

4.35

5.15

4.82

11.89

12.10

11.81

4.22

4.29

4.59

5.35

5.18

12.13

11.84

4.14

8.32

8.31

10.32

4.91

5.11

5.63

5.69

6.08

5.67

5.45

OF 10.91

11.14

11.30

11.42

11.61

12.37

12.04

11.74

12.23

6.36

6.68

6.61

5.94

5.76

7.04

6.34

5.83

5.77

5.95

4.19

5.75

5.77

4.16

5.93

7.39

7.04

7.92

7.51

7.72

5.64

7.47

7.69

7.30

7.17

7.68

8.78

11.99

12.28

11.85

11.77

11.22

7.61

10.06

5.64

6.86

7.69

7.24

7.66

7.75

7.26

10.91

11.62

11.98

12.06

12.15

11.41

12.14

11.86

6.91

7.98

7.55

7.90

7.56

7.80

7.97

7.87

8.38

7.30

8.60

4.18

8.00

7.95

7.65

4.19

8.34

5.52

7.46

8.75

8.78

7.79

9.51

6.71

11.45

10.00

11.16

7.14

12.27

12.01

12.17

11.82

12.21

12.42

11.76

AND

BITUME

5.00

VEL

7.59

13.31

11.41

11.68

11.35

11.52

11.55

11.54

CONTROL POINT

GRA

9.69

13.12

12.00

11.57

11.54

11.31

11.39

REF: 200155 SCALE: 1:250

6.38

BORE HOLE 4 13.23

11.80

11.97

11.52

10.97

11.56

11.49

CONTOUR INTERVAL 0.5M

7.59

13.28

12.38

11.72

TOP

10.05

13.41

12.04

11.61

10.88

11.46

3.92

7.40

13.24

12.58

11.87

11.65

10.61

11.60

3.86

6.51

11.08

8.79

6.69

8.89

BANK

5.71

5.86

7.15

13.37

12.72

11.92

BANK

13.48

13.41

12.92

12.19

12.00

10.58

11.29

12.68

12.89

12.65

11.78

11.68

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

13.34

12.99

12.67

11.74

11.92

11.89

10.64

BANK

12.80

PINE

13.29

13.38

12.79

12.73

12.87

12.34

12.46

10.69

10.81

BORE HOLE 5

5.06

12.75

12.85

12.64

12.77

10.93

11.55

10.33

9.47

10.98

11.48

12.11

BANK

12.74

12.77

12.76

11.54

11.20

11.15

11.20

7.44

5.57

8.65

7.48

10.33

11.35

11.38

TEST PIT 1

4.89

12.87

12.91

12.93

12.83

12.67

11.57

11.59

11.27

11.35

11.19

11.09

6.75

6.60

BAN

5.47

12.28

12.86

12.71

12.83

BOTTOM

11.62

11.46

10.20

3.99

9.27

11.23

11.35

11.09

11.57

11.60

4.58

12.47

13.19

12.94

12.92

11.60

11.84

11.79

12.50

13.13

12.91

12.92

12.15

11.61

9.88

13.25

12.96

13.03

11.88

11.35

8.85

10.79

10.89

10.10

11.43

11.52

11.29

CONTROL POINT

SEWER

3.78

9.87

13.12

13.17

13.05

12.86

11.20

12.30

11.27

BANK

9.98

13.30

13.01

12.85

12.81

12.07

10.57

11.26

7.58

5.51

3.88

6.88

10.22

11.49

11.37

11.31

11.55

7.98

4.43

7.37

13.22

12.73

11.75

10.84

11.11

4.00

3.94

6.70

7.87

11.10

11.56

11.16

11.15

11.19

10.00

3.78

7.45

13.35

13.06

12.70

12.61

11.76

11.33

12.18

12.56

12.36

10.11

11.25

TOP

5.31

12.63

12.70

12.93

12.02

12.74

12.47

9.12

10.25

9.55

10.57

11.38

11.50

10.97

11.55

11.84

5.38

5.52

12.39

13.09

12.81

12.68

12.66

12.82

10.85

9.03

4.51

11.41

10.84

11.51

11.48

10.88

11.46

BANK

3.45

12.21

10.69

12.78

9.94

10.75

8.76

7.86

5.72

6.60

11.82

11.56

11.62

11.38

10.98

11.35

11.43

12.27

11.26

10.49

11.21

11.28

11.42

11.57

10.40

GRAV

3.89

3.94

4.17

4.19

4.21

3.94

3.82

4.00

4.04

4.02

11.88

12.25

11.49

11.58

4.27

3.49

11.94

13.08

12.83

12.76

12.63

12.64

12.65

7.92

6.66

7.97

11.46

11.68

10.58

11.27

11.63

GAS

3.39

10.05

13.06

10.65

12.68

10.35

9.54

11.29

11.41

11.54

11.09

10.69

10.84

10.00

3.59

10.47

Path 10.11

12.65

8.86

13.15

12.56

12.61

12.28

TEST PIT 10

8.49

9.95

7.34

BUSH

8.24

12.48

8.73

12.79

12.09

10.36

9.73

4.04

11.07

6.44

10.85

12.53

7.67

12.42

11.99

8.16

12.68

8.72

HIGH PRESSURE

3.39

6.09

11.75

7.45

9.86

BORE HOLE 8

6.12

11.57

5.56

12.08

7.82

BANK

3.65

9.95

6.67

6.52

9.91

10.67

3.84

STATION 8.22

6.70

5.67

5.59

5.87

12.27

7.99

12.81

10.69

10.11

9.05

7.87

10.37

7.94

11.76

12.04

11.57

11.52

11.35

10.93

3.84

5.25

5.20

11.35

11.13

10.69

6.52

9.40

5.77

5.00

5.44

5.40

5.33

12.94

9.84

8.39

9.10

7.98

4.00

6.45

6.55

9.54

12.00

11.97

11.54

CONTROL POINT

ROADWAY

3.28

3.39

BORE HOLE 12

5.50

5.31

7.62

11.70

11.20

6.23

6.45

12.46

11.02

11.80

11.72

11.27

11.56

10.11

11.25

11.50

GAS

3.63

WELL

4.51

5.08

4.27

11.17

BORE HOLE 9

4.55

MONITORING 5.15

4.71

9.52

11.03

6.42

4.22

4.77

4.46

5.54

5.16

10.82

7.37

9.62

8.48

10.50

4.10

6.54

12.27

11.87

11.65

11.57

11.59

10.85

4.49

4.59

9.30

CONTROL POINT

4.69

4.45

5.33

6.29

9.47

4.10

6.53

8.02

9.68

11.19 11.22

12.19

12.00

11.92

BOTTOM

9.94

10.75

8.76

10.61

11.26

11.20

HIGH PRESSURE

4.14

4.74

7.46

4.76

3.57

TEST PIT 6

4.97

3.64

4.67

4.56

ADW 9.07

5.43

11.24

TOP

4.72

7.63

3.55

9.81

6.54

8.43

6.29

11.33

8.30

6.58

6.60

12.64

12.41

12.19

11.68

11.61

10.35

10.64

11.39

TOP

4.79

4.68

3.59

12.25

5.71

3.51

5.38

7.70

10.53

4.11

6.56

12.83

8.04

9.65

11.21

12.38

11.74

11.84

11.60

TEST PIT 3

HIGH PRESSURE GAS

4.40

4.67

3.81

RO 3.64

8.70

SEWER

3.98

3.89

Path

BANK SEAT

4.62

4.14

Scale: 1:4000 3.51

KEY PLAN 9.79

6.96

TEST PIT 5

3.66

Capped Landfill 10.02

B 10.90

BRICK SURROUND TO PIT COVER RL. 4.36

8.15

SEWER

6.56

AND

4.31

BITUMEN

3.62

9.64

BORE HOLE 10

5.00

Kentucky Reserve

TOP

3.76

3.94

WELL

.00 10

3.73

7.97

MONITORING

6.25

Section A-A

CONTROL POINT

BANK

3.91

PIT

9.48

CONTROL POINT

7.86

PUMPING

9.75

STATION

4.11

PUMPING

BORE HOLE 1

STATION

AND

4.05

9.48

SEWER

6.26

MONITORING WELL

8.21

BORE HOLE 11

PUMPING

4.05

SURROUND TO PIT COVER RL. 4.87

6.48

3.98

6.71

13.06

REF: 200155 SCALE: 1:250

8.06

BRICK

4.09

4.77

8.08

9.85

11.25

12.90

CONTOUR INTERVAL 0.5M

5.00

TOP

4.13

10.67

5.09

6.67

6.76

7.44

11.23

12.70

BANK

12.99

9.09

13.26

BANK

6.23

9.76

3.97

11.01

12.67

11.89

11.61

PIT

VEL

Section B-B A

8.58

6.59

6.70

8.10

11.44

12.48

13.01

10.11

13.13

12.84

12.04

12.34

11.78

12.15

B TEST PIT 2

4.03

SHEOAK

4.10

6.73

6.88

13.20

12.71

12.58

TEST PIT 8

GRAVEL

10.0

4.14

6.74

9.64

BANK

12.84

12.65

11.92

10.36

9.73

354

9.66

3.95

12.43

11.18

12.73

12.72

12.67

12.46

PIT

8.48

6.43

6.68

6.56

7.83

12.82

13.30

9.36

10.00

11.72

PIT

353

5.00

BANK

6.00

11.23

12.42

ROADWAY 6.66

9.31

12.74

12.73

12.92

12.77

12.30

8.72

POWER

4.02

7.80

13.18

12.87

12.76

7.82

PIT

3.90

3.83

6.69

6.78

OF 11.18

12.98

12.64

12.61

PIT

WELL

5.88

6.67

13.49

12.85

12.67

12.56

BANK

MONITORING

4.07

12.87

9.72

12.41

13.17

12.74

10.81

10.67

351

8.25

6.30

7.71

6.73

11.19

13.10

12.89

12.83

10.69

10.11

9.05

7.87

352 357

3.79

6.62

6.55

13.31

BORE HOLE 7

3.74

12.63

TOP

9.73

13.12

12.99

12.82

11.20

BUSH

355

3.91

12.40

6.69

7.78

TOP

13.23

12.77

12.78

11.13

10.69

350

356 10.85

3.90

11.25

13.28

12.83

12.65

9.40

349

CONTROL POINT

GRA 3.76

6.51

13.19

12.79

12.73

12.92

12.68

8.39

348 TEST PIT 12

3.73

6.13

6.11

6.55

9.64

13.41

12.71

12.92

11.70

BOTTOM

Scale: 1:1500

6.27

3.83

12.14

13.24

12.85

12.94

12.79

11.62

11.03

PIT

4.72

3.79

7.59

13.37

12.74

12.91

13.03

12.68

12.83

Section A-A

4.40

9.69

6.38

6.39

13.48

13.41

12.93

12.08

9.62

8.48

347

5.30

6.32

12.68

13.34

PINE

5.0

Capped Landfill 15

346

4.03

7.59

12.80

13.29

13.38

12.86

13.05

12.86

6.29

11.79

11.07

RO 11

5.00

Scale: 1:1500 AND

Capped Landfill GRAV

12.75

BANK

13.13

12.85

12.96

12.27

12.81

HAKEA

345

TOP

3.97

6.28

12.87

12.91

13.25

13.01

12.81

11.35

CONTROL POINT

3.84

5.81

12.28

13.12

13.17

12.73

12.94

11.24

3.90

7.40

12.45 5.71

12.47

10.05

13.08

13.09

12.81

12.68

12.66

11.17

TEST PIT 9

3.93

5.86

12.50

13.06

13.30

12.83

12.76

12.63

12.64

12.70

9.52

9.81

6.54

8.43

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

3.94

5.06

12.39

9.88

13.15

13.22

12.65

12.93

BORE HOLE 2

4.08

4.89

9.87

13.35

13.06

12.56

12.61

12.28

7.37

10.82

BORE HOLE 3

3.95

4.58

7.15

12.48

9.95

9.30

7.70

11.88

344

4.20

4.62

9.98

10.05

12.70

12.63

12.42

11.99

8.16

TEST PIT 11

4.43

7.37

11.75

7.46

8.70

11.20

BANK

3.78 3.78

5.47

7.45

4.17

3.82

7.67

12.21

11.57

11.94

6.52

10.69

9.79

6.96

TEST PIT 7

4.29

3.92

5.31

5.67

5.87

5.38

5.52

10.47

10.11

5.20

9.07

5.43

BORE HOLE 6

D.P

4.14

5.00 3.45

5.40

5.33

9.95

5.50

5.31

5.15

7.63

10.65

3.59

BORE HOLE 4

NTU

4.00

3.42

8.24

8.49

8.22

3.51

8.86

5.38

BUSH

3.49

6.09

5.16

6.70

3.64

PINE

3.39

6.12

5.77

5.25

7.34

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

341

CLIENT OF

340

TOP

C BITUM

Path BITUMEN 3.59

5.00

3.39

4.22

4.69

8.73

10.02

BANK 6.84

HIGH PRESSURE GAS

5.00

Path 3.65

3.84

4.74

4.76

3.51

3.66

5.71

12.07

POWER POLE (NOT IN USE)

3.28

3.39

4.14

5.44

4.97

STATION

3.84

4.67

4.56

4.72

7.45

TEST PIT 10

3.63

4.79

4.68

3.62

11.75

10.90

8.15

TEST PIT 4

4.70 CONTROL POINT

TOP

4.67

3.76

BUSH POLE (NOT IN USE)

343

AND

PIT 4.51

5.56

6.56

BORE HOLE 8

CONTROL POINT

5.00

GRAVE

5.00

4.55

6.67

11.76

342

SIGN

TOP

BORE HOLE 12 4.62

3.73

9.64

11.33

12.18

12.36

BOTTOM 10.86

3.45

11.41

10.74

10.66

UNDER M5 MOTORWAY

12.07

10.86

10.64

10.65

11.29

11.44

11.65

11.70

11.24

10.94

11.65

11.08

2.67

11.12

11.94

11.40

12.19

11.83

11.39

11.71

11.64

12.46

11.92

TO TUNNEL

10.82

11.34

11.55

11.21

12.23

11.60

11.69

12.00

12.05

12.30

11.78

WELL

4.49

3.81

7.97

12.02

BANK

ROADWA

MONITORING

4.40

5.59

13 TOP

WELL

CKY

3.98

6.25

12.47

9.48

BORE HOLE 9 BANK

MONITORING

NTU

ROADW

3.89

9.75

7.86

4.11

BANK

5.08

6.26

12.09

BANK

337

TOP

4.27

9.86

4.05

8.06

4.13

6.23

11.33

338

TOP

4.71

9.91

CONTROL POINT

4.77

4.03

11.35

12.32

339

5.00

4.14

7.99

10.67

11.20

CONTROL POINT

4.46

6.00

10.57

10.50

REF: 200155 SCALE: 1:250

10.98

GRAVE

5.00 4.59

9.84

9.66

10.53

CONTOUR INTERVAL 0.5M

5.00

TOP

4.45

4.02

5.88

4.07

9.12

BORE HOLE 5 4

BITUMEN

7.62

8.25

TOP

10.41

TOP

3.91

7.92

CONTROL POINT

3.90

OF CONTROL POINT

CONTROL POINT

BANK

5.54

6.27

9.48

BANK

AND

3.76

6.52

12.11

SIGN

3.73

6.42

BANK

11.71

12.12

10.23

10.58

11.19

11.16

TOP

10.39

10.90

10.17

ROADWAY

12.16

11.85

9.69

10.32

11.87

11.79

12.07

11.10

11.31

11.96

10.11

11.36

11.57

11.75

9.86

12.09

11.99

12.22

11.26

10.86

11.83

12.33

11.90

11.21

11.34

11.56

12.33

11.22

11.79

11.75

12.10

11.47

11.35

11.18

11.76

11.81

11.16

11.44

11.65

11.77

11.71

12.05

11.77

12.31

10.59

10.81

11.22

11.01

11.14

11.69

12.31

12.33

12.31

12.19

11.87

11.34

9.44

9.31

11.26

11.32

11.78

9.20

11.71

11.99

11.78

12.16

12.15

12.26

11.64

10.65

10.81

11.82

12.29

11.77

8.98

8.73

9.81

10.67

10.96

11.44

11.50

11.84

11.78

11.97

11.60

10.69

11.36

8.70

9.36

8.58

8.47

9.84

10.13

11.91

11.62

11.61

11.56

12.03

11.82

11.28

11.87

11.45

11.99

11.93

12.29

12.37

12.29

11.86

11.35

11.90

11.78

10.99

5.00

5.33

5.30

9.76

11.17

11.30

10.98

3.96

TOP

BITUM

10.

3.57

6.29

BITUMEN

VEL

GRA 3.64

BANK

5.0

3.55

4.03

8.58

11.09

11.84

7.96

5.83

8.99

8.08

9.65

8.96

9.21

11.09

5.56

10.74

9.60

8.62

4.14

8.01

11.42

12.16

12.02

12.00

12.04

11.68

12.31

8.99

7.52

10.88

10.95

4.20

7.85

12.19

11.81

8.50

11.57

8.96

9.37

11.61

12.36

12.26

11.23

12.04

11.39

8.24

8.53

10.51

11.23

11.62

11.91

11.93

12.30

11.94

11.78

7.59

8.45

11.23

10.67

11.66

11.32

11.26

9.40

9.69

4.07

3.97

12.29

12.41

8.58

10.39

12.25

10.62

7.78 7.01

9.11

8.48

8.91

8.40

8.53

9.28

7.70

9.75

9.61

9.27

8.94

4.26

9.01

9.87

10.49

10.54

10.59

10.06

8.76

4.23

9.69

5.64

8.51

9.98

7.61

7.64

7.72

7.84

8.02

7.42

7.62

7.49

7.54

7.39

7.58

6.43

5.64

6.41

6.86

7.47

7.02

7.19

6.76

6.87

4.45

4.64

4.28

4.67 4.53

4.06

4.03

4.07

4.04

4.08

4.31

4.16

3.91

4.22

3.88

3.87

3.85

4.27

4.00

4.18

4.28

4.38

4.40

4.35

4.23

4.47

4.15

4.08

4.56

4.194.18

4.41

4.27

4.35

4.28

4.31

4.42

4.43

4.28

4.57

4.55

4.27

4.41

4.30

4.25

4.45

4.37

4.64

4.40

4.37

4.88

4.51

4.35

5.15

4.82

4.59

5.35

5.18

4.37

4.35

4.10

4.35

4.50

4.32

4.27

4.31

4.22

4.29

4.14

4.91

5.11

5.63

5.32

5.69

6.08

5.67

5.45

6.36

6.68

6.61

5.94

5.76

7.04

6.34

7.50

7.04

7.92

7.51

7.17

5.82

5.64

5.83

5.77

5.95

4.19

5.75

5.77

4.16

5.93

7.39

7.69

7.30

7.69

7.24

7.66

7.75

7.26

6.91

7.98

7.55

7.90

7.56

7.80

7.97

7.87

4.18

8.00

7.95

7.65

4.19

8.34

8.38

7.46

8.75

9.04

8.78

7.79

9.51

6.71

5.52

BITUMEN

5.00

LEACHATE

3.93

8.48

11.11

TEST PIT 1 SIGN 7.86 CONTROL POINT 2

5.00

3.94

6.30

10.25

10.00

8.66

7.95

TOP

3.94

6.11

10.37

11.48

11.44

3.90

7.98

BANK

3.91

6.13

9.10

12.53

AND

5.00

DWA

10.00

5.00

TEST PIT 6

BANK

4.05

4.08

TOP

CONTROL POINT

TOP

AND

ROA 6

BITUME

5.00

12.25 CONTROL POINT

GAS

4.20

9.47

11.16

11.40

11.28

10.60

5.86

3.86

HIGH PRESSURE

4.29

8.30

11.45

11.06

9.17

8.07

TOP

ROADWAY

10.0

4.72

TEST PIT 5

4.02

3.89

3.94

4.17

4.21

4.19

3.94

3.82

4.00

4.04

4.27

5.00

BORE HOLE 10

HIGH PRESSURE GAS

10.0

4.40

8.21

TEST PIT 3

GAS

GRAVEL

4.14

6.59

11.08

11.13

9.23

3.71

BANK

HIGH PRESSURE

TOP

4.00

6.43

10.20

10.78

10.84

3.79

TOP

SEAT

TOP

3.97

3.79

8.85

BORE HOLE 1

4.31

BANK

3.83

9.03

10.86

9.41

6.01

10.00

BANK

3.79

7.86

9.19

TEST PIT 2

PUMPING STATION

3.84

7.98

8.65

11.10

7.69

TEST PIT 12

BANK

TOP

Capped Landfill 3.90

6.58

7.58

11.07

3.69

CONTROL POINT

TOP

MONITORING WELL

ROADWAY

B 5.00

3.95

6.48

5.72

10.60

10.53

3.73

TOP

GRAVEL

4.17

4.10

6.23

10.67

9.27

5.90

3.45

TO TUNNEL

UNDER M5 MOTORWAY

2.67

6.1 Landform and drainage

3.90

4.11

9.05

9.55

7.95

3.63

CONTROL POINT

5.00

10.00

3.83

3.98

7.79

9.37

3.69

GRAVEL

ROADWA

5.00

3.74

4.09

7.44

7.90

3.63

5.00

AND

Scale: 1:1500 OF

Section A-A HIGH PRESSURE GAS

5.00

3.97

5.51

7.54

7.86

6.20

BITUMEN

PUMPING STATION

BITUME

3.95

4.04

5.71

3.68

4.70 CONTROL POINT

TOP

4.10

5.57

6.01

3.71

AND

4.10

3.99

Capped Landfill

BANK

October 2016 5.00

DATE 4.00

5.58

3.71

10.85

TOP

A 3.94

5.00

4.00

3.92

3.86

3.81

PIT

10.00

3.88

3.82

The plan and sections below illustrate the existing landform created by the landfill and capping A layers over. Broadly there are two main zones to north and south separate by a lower lying gully approximately 2-3m lower. 5.00

BANK

5.00

3.86

SIGN

MONITORING WELL BANK

Section C-C Buffer M5 Buffer Scale: Salt Pan1:1500 Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan 10.00

5.00

Section A-A 5.00

3.83

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES This site wide strategies illustrate the key site wide strategies that underpin the masterplan and should inform ongoing planning and design development. C C

The foundation of concept planning for the masterplan is the development of a landform strategy.

6.1.1 Existing Landform

MOTORWAY

SIGN

TREATMENT

PLANT

Capped Landfill

CONTROL POINT

BANK

PIT

MOTORWAY

SIGN

SIGN 7.86 CONTROL POINT

TREATMENT

LEACHATE

PLANT

CONTROL POINT

BANK

CONTROL POINT 8

PIT

338 KE NT KY

UC RO AD

340

341

339

CONTROL POINT 6.84

KE UC

345

KY RO

346

347 348

351 352

355

356

BANK

PIT

Path

SCALE

As Noted

357

POWER

PIT

353 354

SIGN

PIT

TEST PIT 8

BANK

BORE HOLE 11 SEWER

BRICK

SURROUND TO PIT COVER RL. 4.87

CONTOUR INTERVAL 0.5M

REF: 200155 SCALE: 1:250

SHEOAK

MONITORING WELL

CONTROL POINT

PUMPING

AND

PIT

BRICK SURROUND TO PIT COVER RL. 4.36

SEWER

Scale: 1:1500

Figure 5.1 Key Plan

Section B-B

KEY PLAN

Scale: 1:4000

Kentucky Reserve

Path

Section B-B Mclauglin Oval

Scale: 1:1500

Section C-C

Mclauglin Oval

DRAWING

6.1.2 Landfill Strategy

9.0 9.5

8.5

9 10 11 12 13 14

1:2

0 12 15

+13.6

+14.4 +12.8

6.5

9 8.5 .5 10

11.5 10

13 12

11 12

+14.4

11.5

+12.8

6.5

9.5

7.5

11.5

+9.0

12.5

.5 12

12.5

11 12

6.5

11.5

+13.0

.5 12

+13.0

10.5

7.5

10.5

16 17 +18.0 18 17 16 15 14

5 9.

9 8.5

11.5

+13.7

5.5

9 8.5

5 8. 9

10.5

5 9.

0.5 9.5 1

5.5

9.5

10.5

7 8 5 7.5 8. 9 8 8.5 9

8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5

6.5

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6

9.5 10

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

9.5 10

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5

10.5 11

+11.0 6

10.5 11

+17.0

11 .5 10

9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 6 6.5

11 10 9 8 7

8 7.5

13 12

16 15 14

+11.0

10 .5

:33

.5 11

8.5

119.5

8 7.5

10.5

10 .5

.5 11

8.5

9.5

9.0 9.5

9.5

10.5

11 +11.0 12

+18.0

9.5

9 8.5

9.5

11 .5

10 .5

10.5

5 6

10.5

5 9.

• avoid excavation through the eastern edge through the Archaeological potential management zone

10.5 8.5 8

9 9.5

• raise the level at the eastern boundary to provide an even positive fall from south to north

• Provide a highest landform in the north west of the site where it is visible from the M5 and provides a setting for a variety of park facilities including a destination play space

• establish two multipurpose platforms, the southern with a central crown the northern falling cross field to the east

• extend the toe of the eastern embankment to the east to provide gentle grades at the interface with adjoining development

• steepen the northern, western and southern embankments to facilitate higher berms along these edges to provide for seating, views, and to enable tree establishment

The landfill profile (see Figure 5.3 below) that lies under the existing capping layer (variable depth) extends to RL 11.0 - 12.0. The new landform must be built above this control profile. The proposed landform strategy develops the following principles (see Figure 5.4 right):

+12.0

1 11 0.5 10 .5 109.5 9.59 98.5 8 7.5 8.58 7.5 7

Sports field area Sports field area

LEGEND

7.5 7

8.5

12.5

11 .5

Parking

10 .5

Existing top and bottom of embankment

Sports field area

LEGEND

13 +13.0 14

Sports field area

10 .5 1 1 11.5 12 12.5

Bottom of embankment

LEGEND

9.5

7.5

15 16 16 14 15 8.5 13 12 11 10 9

8 7 6 4 5

10 1 0. 11 5 9. 5 98.5 910 1

11 1 Internal public open space .5 1

12.5

Top of embankment

Road

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

12 11 10 9

9.5

External public open space

+13.0

LEGEND

11.5

External public open space

LEGEND

+12.0

11 .5

0.5 11 11 1 .5 12 2.5

LEGEND

+18.0 7.5 7 87 6

8.5

LEGEND

External public open space

High point of waste level

External public open space

Road

Internal public open space

Parking

Internal public open space

Figure 5.3 Landfill contours (landfil contours = organge / existing landform contours = blue) May 2018

Figure Sports field area

5.4 proposed landform contours and key levels environmental partnership

Sports field area

57 External public open space

LEGEND

16 14

+8.75

+13.0

17 15 +18.0 1816 17

+7.88 +8.8 +8.5

+8.75

+13.0

17 16 15 +18.0 18 14 17 16 15 13

+8.5 +8.8

+8.675 9

+13.0

14 13

+13.012

+8.675

9 10

+7.76

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES 12

+14.0

WL +7.8

+14.0

12 11 10 9 12 8 11 76 10 9 8 7 6 WL +5.8

+13.0

12+13.0 11 10 912 8 11 7 10 6 9 8 7 6

+9.0

WL +7.8

+9.0

WL +7.8

+3.94 +3.94

+7.76

+8.6

WL +7.8

+5.44 +5.44

+8.6 +6.69

+9.17

+6.69

+9.17

6.1 Landform and drainage 13 14 15 16 13 16 +13.0 14 15 14 15 12 13 16 11 10 16 915 14 8 7 12 13 6 11 10 9 8 7 6

6.1.2 Landfill Strategy

9 10 11 12 13 14

+3.46

11 12

11 15

10 14 13

13 12

16 15 14

11 12

11 10 9

+11.0 15

8 7

WL +3.5

2 +17.0 17 (+11.395)

+16.0

5 6

1 +18.0 (+11.5) 17

+3.46

+16.0

WL +5.8

+13.0

+14.4

+1.92 WL +3.5

+10.5

+1.92 14

KEY PLAN KEY PLAN Landform Beyond Landform Beyond

9 10 11 12 13 14

5 6

13 17 16 15 14

2 +17.0 (+11.395)

13 12

+9.5

Landform Beyond Landform Beyond

Proposed Gound Level Proposed Gound Level 3 Proposed Fill Proposed Fill Gound Level Existing Existing Gound Level Existing Capping Level Existing Capping Level

+9.5

+9.25

9 10 11 12 13 14

+9.0

+8.75 (+7.16)

14 15 16 17 18 17

3 +18.0 (+10.8) 15

+13.0

+8.675 (+6.09)

+8.5 +8.8

13 12

16 15 14

11 12

12 11 10 9

+3.94 8 7 6 4 5

+5.44

+6.69

+ 11.395

11 10 9

+11.0 15

16 16

11 10 9

8 7 6

+9.5

KEY PLAN

+ 14.7

1:7 appro

KEY

+ 11.5

prox.

1:10 ap

Existing landform profile

SECTION 1-1 1:250 @ A1

Propsed landform profile (preliminary)

+10.0

+ xx.xx

Proposed level

+ xx.xx

Existing level

+13.0 13

Road and Parkings Road and Parkings +5

+4.2

13 14 12

16 16

11 10

(+10.5) +16.0 8 7 6

14 13

+3.46

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

17 18 17

SECTION 2-2 SECTION 2-2 1: 500 @ A1 1: 500 @+8.675 A1

prox. +13.0 4.5 ap

3 +18.0 (+10.8) 15

pro 1:7.6 ap

Figure 5.5 Proposed landform - long sections

+9.25

+8.75 (+7.16)

14 15 16

+ 18.0

+9.5

+9.25

Landfill Landfill +1.92

+13.0

+9.0 +7.88

+ 17.0

+ 13.14

+ 15.314

+ 10.8 pro 1:6.4 ap

Section 2-2

(+6.09)

+ 11.395

+8.5 +8.8

1:9 approx.

SECTION 3-3 1: +7.76 250 @ A1

KEY PLAN

SECTION 2-2 1: 250 @ A1

+14.0

12 11 10 9

+13.0

KEY

+ 10.5

1:3

1:6 appro

+3.94 8 7 6 4 5

appr

+5 +4.2

ox.

13 14 12

16 16

11 10

Existing landform profile

8 7 6

Existing level

+ 18.0

+1.92

+ xx.xx

+9.17

+ 13.14 4

Example profile (if existing ground continued) Proposed level

+6.69

+3.46

(+10.5) +16.0

Propsed landform profile (preliminary)

+ xx.xx

+5.44

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

+ 16.0

Example profile (if existing ground continued)

13 12

+9.17

+3.46

(+10.5) +16.0

+10.5

+6.69

+1.92

SECTION 2-2 1: 250 @ A1

+14.4

+9.17

+5.44

+ 18.0

+13.0

+4.2

+ 15.314 10

1:9 approx.

+3.94 8 7 6 4 5

+ 17.0

2 +17.0 17 (+11.395)

8 7

+14.0

Section 1-1

SECTION 1-1 SECTION 1-1 1: 500 @ A1 1: 500 @ A1

prox. 1:6.4 ap 13

+7.76

1 17

1 +18.0 (+11.5) 17

+7.88

+13.0

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

Landfill Landfill

13 14 12

Kentucky Reserve Kentucky Reserve

+10.0

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

+7.76

12 11 10 9

+13.0 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 13

11 14 13

+8.675 (+6.09)

+13.0

Buffer Buffer

+14.0

SECTION 1-1 1:250 @ A1 +10.5

+13.0

+8.5 +8.8

Sports Field Sports Field

prox.

+14.4

+7.88

+13.0

1:10 ap

+11.0 15

8 7

Buffer Buffer

11 10 9

3 +18.0 16 (+10.8) 15

+9.0

15 16 17 18 17

+ 11.5

10 14

+9.25

+8.75 (+7.16)

+ 14.7

1:7 appro

11 15

+9.5

+9.25

+ 18.0

11 12

+18.0 (+11.5)

+10.0

12 11 10 9 8 7 6

refer to previous page for cross section references for long sections

13 12

+9.5 11

14 13

Proposed Gound Level Proposed Gound Level Proposed Fill Proposed Fill Gound Level Existing Existing Gound Level Existing Capping Level Existing Capping Level 1 56

1:4.5

+ 1.92

+ 10.8

. approx

pro 1:7.6 ap

SECTION 3-3 1: 250 @ A1

SECTION 4-4 1: 250KEY @ A1 PLAN

Figure 5.6 Proposed landform - edge condition sections + 16.0

KEY

+ 10.5

1:3

1:6 appro

appr

ox.

Existing landform profile Propsed landform profile (preliminary)

+ 1.92

Example profile (if existing ground continued)

View 2 Figure 5.7 Proposed landform - 3D model illustrations Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

+ xx.xx

Proposed level

+ xx.xx

Existing level

SECTION 4-4 1: 250 @ A1

Eastern boundary interface To the eastern edge of the site the long term strategy is for levels at the site boundary to be raised as indicated on the refined concept plan. The achieves the following objectives: Drainage - overland flow Provides an even grade of around 1:200 from north to south along the eastern boundary draining to the proposed WSUD Pond . Existing levels are more varied and create trapped ponding points along the boundary. Existing boundary conditions viewed south

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

EXISTING GROUND LEVEL EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVE

1:20

1:40

1:20

BOUNDARY PROPERTY

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

SWALE

2500

MAINTENANCE PATH

1800

2.4m approx.

The cross sections following describe this strategy. Two scenarios are shown for each section recognising that the timing of the park and adjoining development may not integrate and that filling at the boundary may need to be deferred. Generally this indicates for the short term an interim batter at the boundary transition which can remain until levels at the boundary are raised.

5000

PEDESTRIAN PATH

Adjoining development May reduce excavation depths for basement carparking

5000

ANGLE PARKING

PEDESTRIAN PATH

Potential Archaeology Filling over the eastern edge zone will minimise potential issues with Archaeology below.

5000

TWO WAY CARRIAGEWAY

1800

ANGLE PARKING

Community interface Provides a smoother transition from park to community with less “up and down” and gentler grades

Section A-A Option 1 Long term outcome

+18.0 +11.5)

+17.0 (+11.395)

+9.5

+9.25

1:40

1:20

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES BOUNDARY

MAINTENANCE PATH

+7.88 +8.5 +8.8

+13.0

+8.675 (+6.09)

+7.76 +14.0

1:20 L

+9.0

+8.75 (+7.16)

+13.0

May 2018

EXISTING GROUND LEVEL EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVE

+9.25

2.4m approx.

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

+9.5

PROPERTY

+18.0 (+10.8)

2500

+10.0

1800

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

5000

PEDESTRIAN PATH

+10.5

ANGLE PARKING

+14.4

5000

ANGLE PARKING

5000

TWO WAY CARRIAGEWAY

1800

+11.0

Section A-A Option 2 Short term outcome

Figure 5.11 Earthworks at boundary - potential staging

environmental partnership

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES 6.1 Landform and drainage 6.1.2 Landfill Strategy

Existing boundary conditions viewed south

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

1:40

RIP RAP RETAINING WALL

3m approx.

1:20

EXISTING GROUND LEVE

1:20

EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVEL

STORMWATER PIPE

NEW DEVELOPMET

BOUNDARY PROPERTY

SWALE

EXISTING TREES TO BE RETAINED

2500

MAINTENANCE PATH

TWO WAY CARRIAGEWAY

1800

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

5000

PEDESTRIAN PATH

10488

ANGLE PARKING

5000

ANGLE PARKING

PEDESTRIAN PATH

1800

Section B-B Option 1 Long term outcome

0 395) +11.0

14.4

EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVEL

1:40

1:20

RIP RAP RETAINING WALL

+9.0

+8.75 (+7.16)

+7.88 0

+13.0

+8.5 +8.8

+18.0 (+10.8) +13.0

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

PROPERTY

1:20

EXISTING GROU ND LEVE +9.25

NEW DEVELOPMET

EXISTING TREES TO BE RETAINED

MAINTENANCE PATH

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

PEDESTRIAN PATH

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

3m approx.

+9.5

+9.25

+14.0

2500

+10.0

1800

BOUNDARY

+9.5

5000

ANGLE PARKING

10488

TWO WAY CARRIAGEWAY

PEDESTRIAN PATH

5000

ANGLE PARKING

1800

+10.5

+8.675 (+6.09)

Section B-B Option 2 Short term outcome

Figure 5.12 Earthworks at boundary - potential staging

+7.76

Existing boundary conditions viewed north

2.2m approx.

PROPERTY

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

EXISTING GROUND LEVEL

NEW DEVELOPMET

BOUNDARY

TURF WITH TREE CANOPIES

SWALE

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

MAINTENANCE PATH

2500

EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVEL

+18.0 +11.5)

Section C-C Option 1 Long term outcome

+17.0 (+11.395) +11.0

2500

PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL

EXISTING GROUND LEVEL

EXISTING TOP OF WASTE LEVEL

+9.25

+8.75 (+7.16)

Short term outcome

+7.88 +8.5 +8.8

+13.0

+8.675 (+6.09)

+7.76 +14.0

Section C-C Option 2

+9.0

+13.0

+18.0 (+10.8)

May 2018

NEW DEVELOPMET

+9.5

+9.25

PROPERTY

+10.0

2.2m approx.

+9.5

BOUNDARY

TURFED EMBANKMENT WITH TREE CANOPIES

+10.5

MAINTENANCE PATH

+14.4

Figure 5.13 Earthworks at boundary - potential staging

environmental partnership

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES 6.2 Access Vehicular access

area

WI GG S RO AD

Due to the scale of the overall site and the nature of facilities that will draw usage from a broad catchment, the masterplan proposes that the site have two main vehicular access points, one WHITMARSH either side of the M5 Motorway and a supporting RESERVE MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS temporary / event access point that can LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND supplement the other access points on peak use LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND External public open space External public open space External public open space LEGEND Road days. By nature, the facilities to the open spaces High point of waste level External public open space External public open space External public open space Parking either side of the M5 will draw different users Internal public open space so will likely provide some separation of accessSports field area Internal public open space Sports field area Sports field area although dependent on point of origin and route Sports field area to the site, some users may enter at north or Sports field area M5 WEST External public open space ERN MO T O R W AY south of M5 and then travel within the park to the Internal public open space other side. The road system through the park gives Council the option to manage through vehicle access in a modal manner - for instance through vehicular access may closed during weekdays. This arm would be able to be closed LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND if desired during certain periods when through access is preferable to be avoided LEGEND LEGEND LEGEND Wetland Road Road

Flat turfed area Parking is provided adjacent Parking to facilities with the existing northern parking areaFlattoturfed McLaughlin Oval bankment Embankment area area embankment retained. Top of embankment

ent area

Pedestrian and cycle access

Sports field area

LEGEND Top of embankment LEGEND

LEGEND

Bottom of embankment Top of embankment

Road Existing top and bottom of embankment Parking

Bottom of embankment Existing top and bottom embankment

Sports field area Sports field area

M5 WEST ERN

Sports field area

MOTO

R W AY External public open space External public open space

External public open spa Internal public open space

Wetland

LEGEND

Road

Flat turfed area

Road

Flat turfed area

Wetland

Parking

Embankment area

Shared road

Embankment area

Flat turfed area

External public open space

Embankment area

Turfed parking

Parking

Flat turfed area Sports field area

Bottom of embankment Existing top and bottom of embankment

A loop system of shared access links to entry points at strategic locations on the local road Sports field area ublic open space External public open space system and connections to crossing points of Salt External public open space Pan Creek.

d area

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

Shared road

Embankment area

p and bottom of ent

WHITMARSH RESERVE

Flat turfed area

Turfed parking Sports field area Flat turfed area External public open space

Embankment area Sports field area

Embankment area

External public open space

Sports field area External public open space Sports field area

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

External public open space

A network of secondary pedestrian focussed access links between facilities and provides east west connections at regular intervals.

External public open space

Embankment area

SALT PAN PARKLANDS External public open space

LEGEND Asphalt Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path Secondary pedestrian path Road

Brick pavement

LEGEND

LEGEND Parking Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge Cycle/Pedestrian shared path Secondary pedestrian paths Boardwalk / Timber platform Gravel Fitness Area Salt Retaining wall

Pan Creek Reserve

Boardwalk Organised Sports

Road

1.District Sports Facilities Proposed amenity building • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west Proposed grandstand

Parking

LEGEND

LEGEND LEGEND

Road access

2. Local Sports Facilities Security fence • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities Existing sandstone wall Informal - Non-organised Recreation Proposed contours / mounding 3. Local Playspace 4. Local Informal Parkland Grassed/Adventure turf area 5. Destination Concept MasterplanPlayspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. Local Informal sportsfield Parkland Maintained 8. Local Informal Parkland area

LEGEND Primary path / Shared path

Organised Sports

Secondary path

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter Special event road access1.District Sports Facilities • Close proximity to major roads path to creek edge Parking • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) Cycle/Pedestrian sharedParking to adjoining site to west path Secondary pedestrian paths

Figure/ Timber 5.14 Boardwalk platform Gravel Fitness Area

Vehicular access

2. Local Sports Facilities • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities Informal - Non-organised Recreation 3. Local Playspace 4. Local Informal Parkland 5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. Local Informal Parkland

LEGEND

LEGEND Tree canopy in managed turf or native grassland

RoadFull access strata revegetated area

LEGEND

1 2

Maintained sports surface Special event road access

3 Parking

Filling to east boundary to provide gentle transition to new development Primary path / Shared path Filling over embankments to enable canopy tree plantings and establishment Secondary path

LEGEND

Filling to establish high points, Parking viewing embankments, and visual interest

Figure 5.15 Pedestrian and cycle access

LEGEND Tree canopy in managed turf or native grassland Full strata revegetated area

Filling to east boundary to provide gentle transition to new development

Filling over embankments to enable canopy tree plantings and establishment

Filling to establish high points, viewing embankments, and visual interest

Maintained sports surface

6.3 Vegetation management The site is currently predominantly maintained grassland over the capped landfill and through the sports field facilities to McLaughlin Fields. A series of vegetation management zones is proposed across the site to suit site conditions and support site masterplanning of uses. These are described following: LEGEND

Full strata revegation

External public open space

LEGEND External public open space

WHITMARSH RESERVE

LEGEND External public open space

LEGEND

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS Top of embankment

Road

Bottom of embankment

The masterplan proposes that a consolidation of the riparian Internal public open space corridor to Salt Pan Creek be provided along the western edge Sports field area of the parklands. Filling over the existing berm landforms will Sports field area enable establishment of tree root systems above the capping layer. Full strata revegetation (revegation including trees shrubs and groundcovers) will stabilise the banks - generally of 1:4 gradient but up to 1:3 gradient on the southern embankment.

Parking Existing top and bottom of embankment Sports field area

Sports field area

External public open space External public open space Internal public open space

Plant species should reflect the species of the Castlereagh Ironbark Forest.

TreeLEGEND canopy in grass

LEGEND

The full strata Road zones will be complemented by tree canopy in Road maintained grassland or native grass. The tree canopy will provide Shared road Parking aerial habitat linkages for bird-life and climbing fauna in addition to Parking turfed area users. shade amenityFlatfor park

LEGEND Wetland

Wetland

Flat turfed area

Embankment area

Turfed parking

Embankment area Tree canopy will be tailored to the avialable depths of capping plus turfed area extra soil cover. This will include to mounded profiles whichFlatafford Sports field area Embankment area deeper profiles for deeper rooted tree species. public open space grass MaintainedExternal recreational

External public open space Sports field area

External public open space

Sports field area

Recreational areas will be provided with maintained grass cover. External public open space Subject to the intended standard of use, drainage and irrigation systems will be provided. The NPL facility will be provided with a synthetic playing field to FIFA standards.

LEGEND

SALT PAN PARKLANDS

LEGEND

Organised Sports Road access 1.District Sports Facilities • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west

Primary path / Shared path Secondary path

Full strata revegetated area

Special event road access Parking

2. Local Sports Facilities • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities Informal - Non-organised Recreation 3. Local Playspace 4. Local Informal Parkland 5. Destination May 2018 Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. Local Informal Parkland 8. Local Informal Parkland

LEGEND Tree canopy in managed turf or native grassland

Parking

Filling to east boundary to provide gentle transition to new development

Filling over embankments to enable canopy tree plantings and establishment

Filling to establish high points, viewing embankments, and visual interest

Maintained sports surface

Figure 5.17 Vegetation management

environmental partnership

6.0 SITE WIDE STRATEGIES 6.4 Recreation LEGEND

LEGEND

The scale of the Salt Pan Parklands will enable a range of recreational High point of waste level External public open space amenity to be provided. The hilltop platforms to Salt Pan Parklands and McLaughlin Fields provide for sports uses.

To the eastern edge of the open spaces either sides of the M5 passive recreational uses are catered for. This creates a buffer zone between adjoining neighbourhoods and sports uses and promotes a zone of day to day activity.

LEGEND External public open space

Road

Internal public open space

Parking

Top of embankment Bottom of embankment Existing top and bottom of embankment

Sports field area Sports field area

Sports field area

External public open space External public open space

WHITMARSH RESERVE

This interface parkland will be provided with facilities such as fitness nodes and local play spaces that provide for general community promenading and fitness uses.

Internal public open space

MCLAUGHLIN FIELDS

To the northern edge of Salt Pan Parklands where the deepest fill LEGEND LEGEND mounding is proposed it is recommended that destination play facilities turfed area Road are provided Flat that will be a regional draw in addition to complementing sports and passive recreational users of the parklands. Parking Embankment area Top of embankment

LEGEND

Flat turfed area

LEGEND

Road

Wetland

Shared road

Flat turfed area

Parking

Embankment area

Bottom of embankment Turfed parking Existing top and bottom of embankment

Embankment area

Sports field area

External public open space Sports field area

Flat turfed area Embankment area

External public open space

External public open space Sports field area

External public open space

Asphalt

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path

Secondary pedestrian path

Brick pavement

LEGEND Road

Boardwalk

LEGEND

Proposed amenity building

Parking

LEGEND Road access

Proposed grandstand

Shared access / Maintenance perimeter path to creek edge

Security fence

Cycle/Pedestrian shared path

1.District Sports Facilities • Close proximity to major roads • Capacity for support facilities (e.g. clubhouse) to adjoining site to west

Secondary pedestrian paths

2. Local Sports Facilities • Multipurpose sports fields and amenities

Boardwalk / Timber platform

Informal - Non-organised Recreation

Existing sandstone wall

Proposed contours / mounding

LEGEND

Organised Sports Primary path / Shared path Secondary path Special event road access Parking Parking

LEGEND Tree canopy in managed turf or native grassland

SALT PAN PARKLANDS Full strata revegetated area

Filling to east boundary to provide gentle transition to new development

Filling over embankments to enable canopy tree plantings and establishment

Filling to establish high points, viewing embankments, and visual interest

Maintained sports surface

Grassed/ turf area Gravel

Maintained sportsfield area

Fitness Area Retaining wall

Existing vegetation Turf

Proposed vegetation

3. Local Playspace 4. Local Informal Parkland 5. Destination Adventure Playspace and Facilities 6. Event and Gathering Meadow 7. Local Informal Parkland 8. Local Informal Parkland Recreation Amenities Tolets and change rooms

Vegtation

Wetland Existing tree canopy to be Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan retained

Proposed tree canopy at

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD ACTION PLAN

7.0 Action Plan 7.1 Summary implementation costs

7.2 Criteria for staging of implementation

7.3 Action Plan

The costs summary below provides an indication of overall implementation costs for the concept proposals outlined in this report for the masterplan areas. This includes design and contingencies.

Due to the extensive scope of park improvements envisaged by the masterplan it will be necessary to stage the program over an extended time period. Staging should consider the criteria provided herein aimed at addressing immediate needs and achieving optimum short term benefit, all the time working towards the long term realisation of the masterplan.

Address immediate needs related to safety and environment

The key factor underpinning how the parklands will evolve is the capping of the landfill and establishment of the final landform that will enable the facilities overlain to be implemented and then opened for use. As such the first consideration is the sequencing of earthworks. Figure 7.1 opposite describes notional priorities for earthworks and and their rationale to the Salt Pan Parklands area. As the earthworks are progressed this will unlock the ability to develop facilities, takling into account such factors as the criteria this page. Planning of initial earthworks must take into account the longer term directions in terms of leachate management and put in place engineering measures that need to be done prior to filling.

Initial priorities shall be directed towards addressing any current safety issues for the community and in meeting EPA obligations around tip closure. In particular this will focus on making good of landfill capping, drainage and leachate and gas management and addressing current access / safety concerns around the M5 underpass and existing boardwalk crossing of Salt Pan Creek.

To McLaughlin Fields the key driver of staging is likely the potential NPL facility and its funding. The ability for that project to commence will be the trigger for other park improvements to be implemented. However it would be desirable to implement the shared path access from Wiggs Road to integrate with the evolution of the shared path network in Salt Pan Parklands as that occurs

Overall Costs Summary as at December 2017 COSTS SUMMARY

Order of costs estimate

Indication of escallation per annum -average 6%

McLaughlin Fields 0.1

Preliminaries Demolition and earthworks

$4,511,285.23 $608,542.50

$270,677.11

0.2 0.3

Access and parking works

$2,225,195.00

$133,511.70

0.4

NPL Stadium

$5,402,500.00

$324,150.00

0.5

Supporting fields

$1,070,000.00

$64,200.00

0.6

Facilities and Furniture

0.7

Planting and revegetation

0.8

Establishment

Subtotal

$36,512.55

$315,000.00

$18,900.00

$2,286,155.00

$137,169.30

$15,000.00

$900.00

$16,433,677.73

$986,020.66

Ultimately the availability and source of funding will influence how priorities are applied to the implementation of works, however the following criteria seek to provide guidance to Council when decisions are needing to be made regarding priorities in achieving the optimum benefit for expenditure.

Enable vegetation structure to be initiated and developed Whitmarsh Reserve 0.1

Solar Facility installation

Subtotal

$3,900,000.00

$234,000.00

$3,900,000.00

$234,000.00

Building on the capping works required for tip closure, earthworks will enable the planting structure of the parklands to be initiated and for establishment of that planting to proceed Build on existing community use of trail network

Salt Pan Parklands 0.1

Preliminaries

0.2

$713,517.69

Demolition and earthworks

$11,891,961.44 $21,855,350.00

$1,311,321.00

0.3

Access and parking works

$4,297,745.00

$257,864.70

0.4

Amenities

$7,684,195.00

$461,051.70

0.5

Fields

$2,250,000.00

$135,000.00

0.6

Adventure Play precinct

$1,363,000.00

$81,780.00

0.7

Wetland

$3,732,800.00

$223,968.00

0.8

Facilities and Furniture

$481,000.00

$28,860.00

0.9

Planting and revegetation

$7,332,683.00

$439,960.98

0.10 Establishment (12 months)

$30,000.00

$1,800.00

Subtotal

$60,918,734.44

$3,655,124.07

Total concept Estimate

$81,252,412.17

$4,641,144.73

Within the zones where finished levels have been established implement shared and supporting paths that will enable the community to more effectively access and use the site for trail based recreation and fitness. Provide experiences that build awareness of and connection to the parkland Plan and implement temporary events and other activations within the parklands area to build awareness and expectation of the future park. Involve community in initial planting works. Link park evolution to evolution of adjoining residential community Stay in close liaison with State Government over the programme of development to Riverwood LUIIP to leverage the progression of the development and arrival of new residents to area. Focus new park improvements where they can be accessed by new community for maximum usage. Integrate new entry works south of M5 as appropriate with the urban renewal project. Develop sports facilities as funding opportunities arise Liaise with organisations and government regarding funding of major sports facilities such as the NPL facility.

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

The Action Plan following is not intended to provide a staging of all required works as outlined in the masterplan. There are too many variables related to the sequencing required on the past landfill site for overall staging to be practical. Rather the plan highlights critical actions to initiate the implementation process from which the detailed sequencing will emerge 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

1.4

1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

Investigations and management Review funding and clean fill availability and establish likely funding cashflow and programme On ground survey including underground services review to be updated Review leachate and gas management requirements - determine programme of required works to address short term (tip closure) and long term (possible leachate dam wall etc) Determine approach to final landform based on fill availability and budget limitations - develop civil and drainage design for implementation of staged earthworks Liaison with Riverwood LUIIP to determine approach to integration and sequencing Liaison with sports groups regarding NPL facility and potential funding Investigate potential temporary activations for site (both sides of M5- plan and implement as ongoing programme - seek potential Riverwood LUIIP involvement Develop specific Plan of Management for Parklands

7.4 Filling and earthworks priorities 2 Remediation 2.1 Assess in detail design approach for capping and determine fill depths over capping depths required for mature tree development 2.2

Interim capping works for Tip Closure completion

2.3

Address any required short to medium environmental management works required for tip closure or that need to be completed to enable final landform

2.4

Where final landform is available implement planting works to area

2. Access 2.1 2.2

2.3

2.4 2.5

carry out interim works in liaison with RMS to ensure pedestrian safety under M5 underpass Liaise with Riverwood LUIIP for provision of south entry to site from Kentucky Road - design and implement in integration with adjoining development works

The earthworks priorities on Figure 7.1 define the areas of most importance to the Salt Pan Parklands south of the M5 in realising usable recreational space. This on the assumption that the lowest priority items may not be ultimately be able to be implemented based on budget or material availability. Rational for these priorities follows: 1

Capping generally and establish field platforms:

•

Capping make good is required for Tip Closure requirements

•

Filling as part of / over capping to establish field platforms to commence process of consolidation and enable a form of use once consolidation complete

2 Transition filling to eastern boundary •

The provision of a transition zone of modified (gentler) gradient to the Riverwood LUIIP will: - encourage access to and use of the parklands and enable appropriate sightlines into the site - allow for positive drainage along the boundary from north to south - enable an active zone of informal park use along the park edge closest to the adjoining community

Design and implement separated shared path access from Wiggs Road in short to medium term to enhance safe access to Salt Pan Parklands while maintaining maintenance and construction use of existing road

Integrate new path connections to Kentucky Road in liaison with Riverwood LUIIP

Western embankments to riparian corridor

•

Provision of Filling over capping to establish soils depths for bushland revegetatiion adjoining to riparian corridor

Feature and spectator mounding

•

Provision of extra over filling works to create landform within the parklands that:

- enables additional recreational opportunities integrated with landform - creates visual interest - enables visual focii / features to be created - provides for spectator viewing of park activities

Implement shared and supporting paths on completed landform that will enable the community to more effectively access

Figure 7.1 Earthworks Priorities

May 2018

environmental partnership

SALT PAN CREEK RESERVE, RIVERWOOD APPENDIX

2.8 New boardwalk link 2.9 Lighting to paths (shared and supporting at 30m centres)

aTTACHMENTS A

Order of Costs

0.1 McLaughlin Fields

Salt Pan Upgrade Riverwood Cost Estimate - December 2017

McLaughlin Fields No. Item 0.0 PRELIMINARY 0.1 Survey and geotech / contamination investigations 0.1 Design allowance (10%) 0.1 Site establishment (12%) 0.2 Contingency (15%)

1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

DEMOLITION & EARTHWORKS Remove existing pavement Miscellaneous demolition Earthworks -cut to fill Earthworks -cut and remove Earthworks -imported fill

2.0 ACCESS AND PARKING WORKS 2.1 Asphalt pavement to roadways and parking 2.2 line marking for parking space 2.3 Shared paths 3.0m 2.4 Shared paths 3.0m adjoining roadway 2.5 Supporting paths 1.8m 2.6 Drainage works at paths 2.7 North boardwalk upgrade 2.8 New boardwalk link 2.9 Lighting to paths (shared and supporting at 30m centres)

3.0 NPL STADIUM 3.1 NPL standard synthetic field including preparation, base and drainage 3.2 Integrated Stand and Amenities building Lighting 3.3 Palisade perimeter fence 3.4 Paths and internal furnture

4.0 SUPPORTING FIELDS 3.1 Two football fields grassing drainage and establishment 3.2 Field lighting (2 fields)

Quantity

10466.5 1 0 0 6688.6

Unit

Rate

Cost

Allowance

$100,000.00

Allowance Allowance Allowance

$1,192,239.25 $1,430,687.10 $1,788,358.88 $4,511,285.23

m2 Item m3 m3 m3

Sub total

$35.00 $30.00 $60.00 $25.00 Sub total

$366,327.50 $75,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $167,215.00 $608,542.50

3997

$200.00

317

$35.00

460

Lin m Lin m

$400.00 $650.00

$0.00 $299,000.00

Lin m Allowance Lin m m2 Item

$200.00 $0.00 $750.00 $2,250.00 $4,000.00

$203,200.00 $300,000.00 $75,000.00 $337,500.00 $200,000.00

Sub total

$2,225,195.00

1016 100 150 50

610

Allowance No Allowance

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

5.0 PARKLAND FACILITIES & FURNITURE

$1,750,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$250.00 Sub total

$799,400.00 $11,095.00

4.0 SUPPORTING FIELDS 3.1 Two football fields grassing drainage and establishment 3.2 Field lighting (2 fields)

610

Allowance No Allowance

7.0 ESTABLISHMENT 7.1 Plant establishment 6 months

$2,250.00 $4,000.00

$337,500.00 $200,000.00

Sub total

$2,225,195.00

$1,750,000.00

$2,500,000.00

$250.00 Sub total

Allowance Allowance

5.0 PARKLAND FACILITIES & FURNITURE 5.1 Park furniture 1 5.2 Local children playground 1 upgrade 5.3 Wayfinding signage 1

6.0 PLANTING WORKS 6.1 Maintained grass cover with shade tree planting (35L) 6.2 Nodal and feature trees 6.3 Bushland regeneration 6.4 75 L Tree planting and installation to parking

m2 Item

Sub total

No No

$40,000.00 $200,000.00

$75,000.00

$750,000.00 $152,500.00 $250,000.00 $5,402,500.00

$370,000.00 $1,070,000.00

$40,000.00 $200,000.00 $75,000.00

Sub total

$315,000.00

$1,600,000.00

$32.00

18113 11.0

Allowance m2 No

$35.00 $200.00 Sub total

Months

$2,500,000.00

$700,000.00

50000

$1,750,000.00

2500 Sub total

TOTAL - WORKS (Items 2 to 7) TOTAL - INCL PRELIMS

$50,000.00 $633,955.00 $2,200.00 $2,286,155.00

$15,000.00 $15,000.00 $11,922,392.50 $16,433,677.73

$1,750,000.00

$2,500,000.00 $750,000.00 $152,500.00 $250,000.00 $5,402,500.00

Allowance

$700,000.00

Allowance

$370,000.00 $1,070,000.00

Sub total

150 50

Sub total 3.0 AMENITIES 3.1 Central Amenities Block Plaza landscape 3.3 Toilets Block to play space / adventure precinct

0.2 Salt Pan Parklands

Salt Pan Upgrade Riverwood Cost Estimate - December 2017

Salt Pan Parklands No. Item 0.0 PRELIMINARY 0.1 Survey and geotech / contamination investigations 0.2 Design allowance (10%) 0.3 Civil earthworks design 0.4 Site establishment (8%) 0.5 Contingency (10%)

1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

DEMOLITION & EARTHWORKS Remove existing pavement Miscellaneous demolition Earthworks -cut to fill Earthworks -cut and remove Earthworks -imported fill

2.0 ACCESS AND PARKING WORKS 2.1 New Asphalt pavement to roadways and parking 2.2 New concrete pavement 2.3 line marking for parking space 2.4 Shared paths 3.0m 2.5 Supporting paths 1.8m 2.6 Lighting to paths (shared and supporting at 30m centres 2.7 New boardwalk 2.8 Concrete Stairs 1.8m wide 2.9 Drainage allowance

3.0 AMENITIES 3.1 Central Amenities Block Plaza landscape 3.3 Toilets Block to play space / adventure precinct

4.0 FIELDS 4.1 Two multi purpose platforms grassing drainage and establishment 4.2 Field lighting (4 fields)

5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Quantity

Unit

Allowance

6665 8320 0 851899

Allowance Allowance Allowance Allowance

m2 Item m3 m3 m3

Rate

Cost

$250,000.00

$100,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Sub total

$2,717,142.30 $100,000.00 $3,922,141.84 $4,902,677.30 $11,891,961.44

$35.00 $30.00 $60.00 $25.00 Sub total

$233,275.00 $75,000.00 $249,600.00 $0.00 $21,297,475.00 $21,855,350.00

11105

$200.00

$2,221,000.00

317

m2 lm

$200.00 $35.00

$0.00 $11,095.00

3830 2605 215

Lin m Lin m Item

$400.00 $240.00 $4,000.00

348 24.3 1

1 1 1

m2 Lin m Allowance

Item Item Item

$2,250.00 $1,500.00 $450,000.00 Sub total

$2,000,000.00 $100,000.00 $900,000.00 Sub total

Allowance

$1,532,000.00 $625,200.00 $860,000.00 $783,000.00 $36,450.00 $450,000.00 $4,297,745.00

$2,000,000.00 $100,000.00 $800,000.00

Item Item Item

$2,000,000.00 $100,000.00 $900,000.00 Sub total

4.0 FIELDS 4.1 Two multi purpose platforms grassing drainage and establishment 4.2 Field lighting (4 fields)

Allowance

$2,000,000.00 $100,000.00 $800,000.00 $7,684,195.00

$1,500,000.00

Sub total

$750,000.00 $2,250,000.00

$250,000.00 $200.00 $400,000.00 $180,000.00 $200,000.00 $250,000.00 Sub total

$250,000.00 $83,000.00 $400,000.00 $180,000.00 $200,000.00 $250,000.00 $1,363,000.00

5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

ADVENTURE PLAY PRECINCT Skate bowl/Parkour facility BMX track circuit Adventure playgound viewing tower Hilltop artworks Lighting

1 415 1 1 1 1

Allowance lin/m Allowance Allowance Allowance Allowance

5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

WETLAND Earthworks Wetland profile Civil works / drainage Bridg and weir Viewing platform to wetlands

8320 5772 1 1 1

m3 m2 Item Item Item

6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 3.2

FACILITIES & FURNITURE Park furniture Vehicular boom gate Wayfinding signage Local childrens playground upgrade

1 2 1 1

Allowance No Allowance Allowance

86404

$32.00

$2,764,928.00

127213 51

Allowance m2 No

$35.00 $300.00

$100,000.00 $4,452,455.00 $15,300.00

7.0 PLANTING WORKS 7.1 Maintained grass cover with shade tree planting (35L) 7.2 Nodal and feature trees 7.3 Bushland regeneration 7.4 100 L Tree planting and installation to parking

8.0 ESTABLISHMENT 8.1 Plant establishment 6 months

$75.00 $400.00 $500,000.00 $300,000.00 $100,000.00 Sub total

$100,000.00 $3,000.00 $125,000.00 $250,000.00 Sub total

Sub total

Months

5000 Sub total

$7,684,195.00

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

$1,500,000.00

Sub total

1 1 1

$4,297,745.00

- DEMOLITION & EARTHWORKS - WORKS (Items 2 to 8) - ALL WORKS ALL ITEMS - INCL PRELIMS

$624,000.00 $2,308,800.00 $400,000.00 $300,000.00 $100,000.00 $3,732,800.00

$100,000.00 $6,000.00 $125,000.00 $250,000.00 $481,000.00

$7,332,683.00

$30,000.00 $30,000.00 $21,855,350.00 $27,171,423.00 $49,026,773.00 $60,918,734.44

$750,000.00 $2,250,000.00

ADVENTURE PLAY PRECINCT Skate bowl/Parkour facility 1 Allowance $250,000.00 $250,000.00 BMX track circuit 415 lin/m $200.00 $83,000.00 Adventure playgound 1 Allowance $400,000.00 $400,000.00 viewing tower 1 Allowance $180,000.00 $180,000.00 May 2018 Hilltop artworks 1 Allowance $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Lighting 1 Allowance $250,000.00 $250,000.00

environmental partnership

aTTACHMENTS B

Heritage Assessment (GML Heritage 2017)

Salt Pan Creek Reserve Concept Masterplan

Ecological Assessment (Ecological Australia 2017)

May 2018

environmental partnership