A detailed assessment of the former Empire Bay Marina site commissioned by the NSW Government has identified unacceptably high levels of contamination.
Parliamentary Secretary for the Central Coast, Adam Crouch, said Crown Lands NSW would now take action to ensure the site was safely remediated.
“A detailed site investigation was conducted by Douglas Partners who tested the soil, sediment and groundwater at the former marina,” Crouch said.
“The testing has confirmed elevated levels of heavy metals, antifouling agents and hydrocarbons, as well as asbestos and acid sulfate soils.
“The likely sources of these include fuel, oil and lead-based paint.
“Crown Lands is now liaising with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) on the findings and further actions will be undertaken to ensure the site is made safe.”
Minister for Water, Property and Housing, Melinda Pavey, said the report recommended remediation of the former marina site including the decommissioning and removal of the fuel tanks.
“It also recommends further testing and analysis be undertaken to assess any potential impacts on the environment,” Pavey said.
“Crown Lands will complete the additional assessments prior to making a final decision on the future of the site.
“A future decision on the marina site will need to consider the significance of contamination, remediation requirements, the scale and cost of structural repairs, building and environmental safety, and other factors like access, parking, planning and heritage requirements.”
In September 2020, the NSW Government revoked the Empire Bay Marina private operator’s licence due to ongoing safety and environmental concerns, and a continued failure to rectify issues.
The move sparked a community protest and the Save our Heritage Listed Empire Bay Boatshed Facebook group agitated for the retention of the historic building.
Group spokesperson, Errol Baker, said the site investigation doesn’t add much information that was not already known.
“It doesn’t really state where findings were for different contaminants – a lot of it is probably from old dump sites along the foreshore,” Baker said.
“The report actually says contamination from the fuel tanks was minimal – some of those contaminants might not actually be from the boatshed.”
Baker said the report didn’t preclude the possibility of restoring of the 100-year-old boatshed.
“Experts have been under the boatshed and reported that some of the support timbers need replacing but it otherwise seems fine,” he said.
“The problem is that we can’t get permission from Crown Lands to have an engineer actually go into the boatshed and do a report as it is deemed unsafe.”
The investigation conclusions confirm that options being considered by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) include the return of the site to public open space consistent with the surrounding foreshore areas.
“Remediation to a public open space standard may also allow other uses including industrial or commercial and some community purposes; however, these uses would require specific consideration prior to the commencement of the rehabilitation works,” the report said.
It said records and anecdotal information suggested that the deterioration of marina facilities and poor work practices had the potential to result in contamination of the site, other nearby maritime-related activities (such as storage and maintenance of boats and foreshore stabilisation works) also had the potential to have resulted in contamination of the site and nearby areas.
The conclusion said the report involved the assessment of soils at 14 locations, sediments at seven locations and groundwater at three locations.
It said the site could be made suitable for uses including public open space, subject to more detailed investigations into the potential of contamination to impact nearby surface water ecosystems and groundwater and subsequent remediation/management actions.
Significant leakage from Underground Petroleum Storage Systems (UPSS) infrastructure was “unlikely to have occurred” but appropriate decommissioning and removal of the existing/former UPSS infrastructure was required together with any required soil and groundwater remediation, it said.
A site and development-specific acid sulfate soil management plan (ASSMP) was also needed and that the advice of a structural engineer should be sought at the “preliminary planning stage of rehabilitation works”.
“It is considered that the site can be made suitable (from a site contamination perspective) for the potential public open space use subject to implementation of the recommendations above.
“If a use other than public open space is proposed (industrial/commercial or community purposes), then a review of the DSI and specifically the recommendations provided above is advised.”
Terry Collins