Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change ... 217954.pdf · Ontario Ministry of the...
Transcript of Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change ... 217954.pdf · Ontario Ministry of the...
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change - Record of Site Condition # 217954
Record of Site Condition
Under Part XV.1 of the Environment Protection Act
Summary
Notice to Readers Concerning Due Diligence
This record of site condition has been filed in the Environmental Site Registry to which the public has
access and which contains a notice advising users of the Environmental Site Registry who have dealings
with any property to consider conducting their own due diligence with respect to the environmental
condition of the property, in addition to reviewing information in the Environmental Site Registry.
Contents of this Record of Site Condition
This record of site condition consists (RSC) of this document which is available to be printed directly from
the Environmental Site Registry as well as all supporting documentation indicated in this RSC to have been
submitted in electronic format to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change.
Record of Site Condition Number 217954Date Filed to Environmental Site Registry 2015/05/07Certification Date 2014/04/21Current Property Use IndustrialIntended Property Use CommercialCertificate of Property Use Number 0742-9P7G94Applicable Site Condition Standards** Full Depth Generic Site Conditions Standard,
with Non-potable Ground Water, CoarseTextured Soil, for Commercial property use, withRA
Property Municipal Address 209 WICKSTEED AVENUE, TORONTO, ON,M4G 2C1
1 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
PART 1: PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, PROPERTY INFORMATION AND OWNER'S CERTIFICATIONS
Information about the owner who is submitting or authorizing the submission of the RSC
Owner Name WICKSTEED BUSINESS PARK INC.
Authorized Person JACK WINBERG
Mailing Address 170 THE DON WAY, SUITE 307, TORONTOONTARIO, CANADA
Postal Code M3C 2G3
Phone (416) 446-4064
Fax (416) 445-4849
Email Address [email protected]
2 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
RSC Property Location Information
Municipal Address(es) 209 WICKSTEED AVENUE, TORONTO, ON M4G 2C1
Municipality Toronto
Legal Description See Attached Lawyer’s Letter
Assessment Roll Number(s)
19-06-04-30120-00301-000-03
Property Identifier Number(s)
10369-0178 (LT)
RSC Property Geographical References
Coordinate System UTM
Datum NAD 83
Zone 17
Easting 632,924.00
Northing 4,841,261.00
RSC Property Use Information
The following types of property uses are defined by the Regulation: Agricultural or other use, Commercial use, Community use, Industrial use, Institutional use, Parkland use, and Residential use.
Current Property Use Industrial
Intended Property Use Commercial
Certificate of Property Use has been issued under section 168.6 of the EPA
Yes
Certificate of Property Use Number
0742-9P7G94
3 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Please See the Signed Statements of Property Owner, or Agent, or Receiver at the End of this RSC
The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank
4 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
PART 2: LIST OF REPORTS, SUMMARY OF SITE CONDITIONS AND QUALIFIED PERSON’S STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONSQualified Person's Information
Name ROBERT W TOSSELL
Type of Membership Under the Professional Geoscientists Act
Limited Member
Membership Number 2222
QP Employer Name PINCHIN LTD.
Mailing Address 2470 MILLTOWER COURT, MISSISSAUGAONTARIO, L5N 7W5 CANADA
Phone (905) 363-1407
Fax (905) 363-0681
Email Address [email protected]
Municipal Information
Local or Single-Tier Municipality
Toronto
Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change District Office
District Office Toronto District Office
District Office Address 5775 Yonge St., 8th floor, North York ON M2M 4J1
5 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Phase One Environmental Site Assessment ReportDocument used as the phase one environmental site assessment report and updates in submitting the RSC for filing
The date the last work on all of the records review, interviews and site reconnaissance components of the phase one environmental site assessment was done (refer to clause 28(1)(a) of O. Reg. 153/04)
(YYYY/MM/DD)
2014-09-12
Type of Report
Report Title Date of Report (YYYY/MM/DD)
Author of Report
Name of ConsultingCompany
P1 ESA Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2012-07-20 Rachael Colgan & Vico Paloschi
PINCHIN ENVIRONMENTAL LTD.
P1 ESA Update
Phase One Environmental Site Assessment Update, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2015-02-06 Heather McLennan & Robert Tossell
PINCHIN LTD.
Reports and Other Documents Related to the Phase One Environmental Site AssessmentReports and other documents relied upon in certifying the information set out in section 10 of Schedule A or otherwise used in conducting the phase one environmental site assessment
Report Title Date of Report (YYYY/MM/DD)
Author of Report
Name of ConsultingCompany
Environmental Investigations, Commercial Property, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2003-01-31 Bernard Chen & Rene de Vries
CPG-Franz Environmental Inc.
Site Remediation, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2006-09-19 Eleni Girma Toronto Inspection Ltd.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2010-02-10 Jenise Lee & Derek J. Maat
Maat Environmental Engineering Corp.
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2010-03-17 Jenise Lee & Derek J. Maat
Maat Environmental Engineering Corp.
Impact Delineation, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2010-03-17 Derek Maat Maat Environmental Engineering Corp.
Soil Sampling Program, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2010-07-20 Sarah Ferguson, Mark Cormack & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Remedial Excavation and Verification Soil Sampling, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2010-11-02 Lindsay Bell, Stephen Spooner & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2011-02-08 Christine Kirchner & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2013-05-01 Corinne Poisson & Robert MacKenzie
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2013-06-06 Corinne Poisson, Stephen Spooner, Robert Tossell & Vico Paloschi
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
6 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment ReportDocument used as the phase two environmental site assessment report and updates in submitting the RSC for filing
The date the last work on all of the planning of the site investigation and conducting the site investigation components of the phase two environmental site assessment was done (refer to clause 33.5(1)(a) of O. Reg. 153/04)
(YYYY/MM/DD)
2014-04-21
Type of Report
Report Title Date of Report (YYYY/MM/DD)
Author of Report
Name of ConsultingCompany
P2 ESA Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2012-07-20 Rachael Colgan, Stephen Spooner & Robert MacKenzie
PINCHIN ENVIRONMENTAL LTD.
P2 ESA Update
Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment Update, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2015-02-06 Heather McLennan & Robert Tossell
PINCHIN LTD.
Reports and Other Documents Related to the Phase Two Environmental Site AssessmentReports and other documents relied upon in making any certifications in the RSC for the purposes of Part IV of Schedule A or otherwise used in conducting the phase two environmental site assessment
Report Title Date of Report (YYYY/MM/DD).
Author of Report
Name of ConsultingCompany
Site Remediation, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2006-09-19 Eleni Girma Toronto Inspection Ltd.
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2010-03-09 Jenise Lee & Derek J. Maat
Maat Environmental Engineering Corp.
Impact Delineation, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2010-03-17 Derek J. Maat Maat Environmental Engineering Corp.
Soil Sampling Program, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario 2010-07-20 Sarah Ferguson, Mark Cormack & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Remedial Excavation and Verification Soil Sampling, 209 Wicksteed Avenue,Toronto, Ontario
2010-11-02 Lindsay Bell, Stephen Spooner & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2011-02-08 Christine Kirchner & Robert Tossell
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 2013-05-01 Corinne Poisson & Robert Mackenzie
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario
2013-06-06 Corinne Poisson, Stephen Spooner, Robert Tossell & Vico Paloschi
Pinchin Environmental Ltd.
7 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Environmental ConditionSection 41 applies? No
Section 43.1 applies? No
Site Condition InformationCertification date (YYYY/MM/DD) 2014/04/21
Total area of RSC property (in hectares) 0.10000
Number of any previously filed RSC that applies to any part of the RSC property
Number of any previously filed Transition Notice that applies to any part of the RSC property
Soil Texture Coarse
Assessment/Restoration Approach Full Depth Generic
Site investigation includes the investigation, sampling and analysis of ground water? Yes
Is there soil present that is sufficient to investigate, sample and analyze soil on, in or under the property in accordance with s. 6, Schedule E of O.Reg. 153/04?
Yes
Site investigation includes the investigation, sampling and analysis of soil on, in or under the property which is used in the RSC?
Yes
Name of the laboratory used to analyze any samples collected of soil, ground water or sediment
MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC.
Ground water condition (potable, non-potable) Non-potable
Applicable Site Condition Standard TABLE 3
Local or single-tier municipality non-potable written notification date 2015/02/03
Risk Assessment InformationA risk assessment has been prepared and accepted by the Director in support of this RSC?
Yes
Risk assessment identification number 4822-998LE2
Risk assessment was a site specific risk assessment completed and approved in accordance with the Cleanup Guideline 1996?
Yes
8 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in Soil
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
1 Boron (Hot Water Soluble)* 1.1 2 µg/g
2 Chromium VI < 0.2 8 µg/g
3 Cyanide (CN-) 0.02 0.051 µg/g
4 Electrical Conductivity 0.83 1.4 mS/cm
5 Mercury < 0.05 3.9 µg/g
6 Sodium Adsorption Ratio 8.2 12
7 Acetone < 0.5 16 µg/g
8 Bromomethane < 0.05 0.05 µg/g
9 Carbon Tetrachloride < 0.05 0.21 µg/g
10 Chlorobenzene < 0.05 2.4 µg/g
11 Chloroform < 0.05 0.47 µg/g
12 Dichlorobenzene, 1,2- < 0.05 6.8 µg/g
13 Dichlorobenzene, 1,3- < 0.05 9.6 µg/g
14 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- < 0.05 0.2 µg/g
15 Dichlorodifluoromethane < 0.05 16 µg/g
16 Dichloroethane, 1,1- < 0.05 17 µg/g
17 Dichloroethane, 1,2- < 0.05 0.05 µg/g
18 Dichloroethylene, 1,1- < 0.05 0.064 µg/g
19 Dichloroethylene, 1,2-cis- < 0.05 55 µg/g
20 Dichloroethylene, 1,2-trans- < 0.05 1.3 µg/g
21 Dichloropropane, 1,2- < 0.05 0.16 µg/g
22 Dichloropropene,1,3- < 0.05 0.18 µg/g
23 Ethylene dibromide < 0.05 0.05 µg/g
24 Hexane (n) < 0.05 46 µg/g
25 Methyl Ethyl Ketone < 0.5 70 µg/g
26 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone < 0.5 31 µg/g
27 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) < 0.05 11 µg/g
28 Methylene Chloride 0.054 1.6 µg/g
29 Styrene < 0.05 34 µg/g
30 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2- < 0.05 0.087 µg/g
31 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- < 0.05 0.05 µg/g
32 Tetrachloroethylene 0.079 4.5 µg/g
33 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- < 0.05 6.1 µg/g
34 Trichloroethane, 1,1,2- < 0.05 0.05 µg/g
35 Trichloroethylene 0.38 0.91 µg/g
...Continued on next page
9 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in Soil
Continued from previous page....
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
36 Trichlorofluoromethane < 0.05 4 µg/g
37 Vinyl Chloride < 0.02 0.032 µg/g
38 Bromodichloromethane < 0.05 18 µg/g
39 Bromoform < 0.05 0.61 µg/g
40 Dibromochloromethane < 0.05 13 µg/g
41 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F1**** < 0.02 55 µg/g
42 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 < 0.02 230 µg/g
43 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F3 < 0.02 1700 µg/g
44 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F4 < 0.04 3300 µg/g
45 Acenaphthene < 0.01 96 µg/g
46 Acenaphthylene < 0.005 0.15 µg/g
47 Anthracene 0.009 0.67 µg/g
48 Benz[a]anthracene < 0.02 0.96 µg/g
49 Benzo[a]pyrene 0.017 0.3 µg/g
50 Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.014 0.96 µg/g
51 Benzo[ghi]perylene < 0.02 9.6 µg/g
52 Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.01 0.96 µg/g
53 Chrysene 0.02 9.6 µg/g
54 Dibenz[a h]anthracene < 0.02 0.1 µg/g
55 Fluoranthene 0.031 9.6 µg/g
56 Fluorene < 0.005 62 µg/g
57 Indeno[1 2 3-cd]pyrene < 0.02 0.76 µg/g
58 Methlynaphthalene, 2-(1-) *** 0.015 76 µg/g
59 Naphthalene 0.009 9.6 µg/g
60 Phenanthrene 0.043 12 µg/g
61 Pyrene 0.045 96 µg/g
62 Arsenic 3 18 µg/g
63 Selenium < 0.5 5.5 µg/g
64 Barium 190 670 µg/g
65 Beryllium 0.66 8 µg/g
66 Boron (total) 6.8 120 µg/g
67 Chromium Total 36 160 µg/g
68 Cobalt 8.1 80 µg/g
69 Molybdenum < 0.5 40 µg/g
70 Nickel 54 270 µg/g
...Continued on next page
10 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in Soil
Continued from previous page....
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
71 Silver 4.1 40 µg/g
72 Thallium 0.12 3.3 µg/g
73 Uranium 0.56 33 µg/g
74 Vanadium 26 86 µg/g
75 Benzene < 0.02 0.32 µg/g
76 Ethylbenzene < 0.02 9.5 µg/g
77 Toluene < 0.02 68 µg/g
78 Xylene Mixture < 0.04 26 µg/g
11 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards (Continued)
Ground Water
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
1 Chloride 120,000 2300000 µg/L
2 Chromium VI < 5 140 µg/L
3 Cyanide (CN-) < 2 66 µg/L
4 Mercury < 0.1 0.29 µg/L
5 Acetone 44 130000 µg/L
6 Bromomethane < 0.5 5.6 µg/L
7 Carbon Tetrachloride < 0.2 0.79 µg/L
8 Chlorobenzene < 0.2 630 µg/L
9 Chloroform < 0.2 2.4 µg/L
10 Dichlorobenzene, 1,2- < 0.5 4600 µg/L
11 Dichlorobenzene, 1,3- < 0.5 9600 µg/L
12 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- < 0.5 8 µg/L
13 Dichlorodifluoromethane < 1 4400 µg/L
14 Dichloroethane, 1,1- < 0.2 320 µg/L
15 Dichloroethane, 1,2- < 0.5 1.6 µg/L
16 Dichloroethylene, 1,1- < 0.2 1.6 µg/L
17 Dichloroethylene, 1,2-cis- < 0.5 1.6 µg/L
18 Dichloroethylene, 1,2-trans- < 0.5 1.6 µg/L
19 Dichloropropane, 1,2- < 0.2 16 µg/L
20 Dichloropropene,1,3- < 0.5 5.2 µg/L
21 Ethylene dibromide < 0.2 0.25 µg/L
22 Hexane (n) < 1 51 µg/L
23 Methyl Ethyl Ketone < 5 470000 µg/L
24 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone < 5 140000 µg/L
25 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) < 0.5 190 µg/L
26 Methylene Chloride < 2 610 µg/L
27 Styrene < 0.5 1300 µg/L
28 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2- < 0.5 3.3 µg/L
29 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- < 0.5 3.2 µg/L
30 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- < 0.2 640 µg/L
31 Trichloroethane, 1,1,2- < 0.5 4.7 µg/L
32 Trichlorofluoromethane 0.6 2500 µg/L
33 Vinyl Chloride < 0.2 0.5 µg/L
34 Bromodichloromethane < 1 85000 µg/L
35 Bromoform < 1 380 µg/L
...Continued on next page
12 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards (Continued)
Ground Water
Continued from previous page....
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
36 Dibromochloromethane < 0.5 82000 µg/L
37 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F1**** < 100 750 µg/L
38 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 < 100 150 µg/L
39 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F3 < 100 500 µg/L
40 Petroleum Hydrocarbons F4 < 100 500 µg/L
41 Acenaphthene < 0.05 600 µg/L
42 Acenaphthylene < 0.05 1.8 µg/L
43 Anthracene < 0.05 2.4 µg/L
44 Benz[a]anthracene < 0.05 4.7 µg/L
45 Benzo[a]pyrene 0.01 0.81 µg/L
46 Benzo[b]fluoranthene < 0.05 0.75 µg/L
47 Benzo[ghi]perylene < 0.1 0.2 µg/L
48 Benzo[k]fluoranthene < 0.05 0.4 µg/L
49 Chrysene < 0.05 1 µg/L
50 Dibenz[a h]anthracene < 0.1 0.52 µg/L
51 Fluoranthene < 0.05 130 µg/L
52 Fluorene < 0.05 400 µg/L
53 Indeno[1 2 3-cd]pyrene < 0.1 0.2 µg/L
54 Methlynaphthalene, 2-(1-) *** < 0.05 1800 µg/L
55 Naphthalene 0.14 1400 µg/L
56 Phenanthrene 0.08 580 µg/L
57 Pyrene < 0.05 68 µg/L
58 Sodium 60,000 2300000 µg/L
59 Antimony 2.4 20000 µg/L
60 Arsenic 1 1900 µg/L
61 Selenium 17 63 µg/L
62 Barium 120 29000 µg/L
63 Beryllium < 0.5 67 µg/L
64 Boron (total) 2,100 45000 µg/L
65 Cadmium < 0.1 2.7 µg/L
66 Chromium Total < 5 810 µg/L
67 Cobalt 1.2 66 µg/L
68 Copper 1.6 87 µg/L
69 Lead < 0.5 25 µg/L
70 Molybdenum 14 9200 µg/L
...Continued on next page
13 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards (Continued)
Ground Water
Continued from previous page....
ContaminantName
Maximum Concentration
Applicable Site Condition Standard
Unit of Measure
71 Nickel 2 490 µg/L
72 Silver < 0.1 1.5 µg/L
73 Thallium 0.13 510 µg/L
74 Uranium 0.55 420 µg/L
75 Vanadium 2 250 µg/L
76 Zinc 26 1100 µg/L
77 Benzene 0.5 44 µg/L
78 Ethylbenzene < 0.2 2300 µg/L
79 Toluene 0.43 18000 µg/L
80 Xylene Mixture 0.26 4200 µg/L
14 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
See the attached “Table 2, Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Standards Specified in a Risk Assessment” for standards specified in a risk assessment and comparison to maximum
concentrations measured on, in or under the RSC property.
The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank
15 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Remedial Action and Mitigation
Remediated Soils
Estimated quantities of the soil, if any, originating at and remaining on the RSC property that have been remediated, at a location either on or off the property, to reduce the concentration of contaminants in the soil. Indicate the remediation process or processes used and the estimated amount of soil remediated by each identified process.
Soil Remediation Process Estimated Quantity of Soil (in-ground volume in m³)
Description of Remediation
Description of any action taken to reduce the concentration of contaminants (including soil removals) on, in or under the RSC property.
Soil or Sediment Removed and Not Returned
Estimated quantities of soil or sediment, if any, removed from and not returned to the RSC property.
Estimated Quantity of Soil (in-ground volume in m³) 0.0
Estimated Quantity of Sediment (in-ground volume in m³) 0.0
Soil Brought to the Property
Estimated quantity of the soil, if any, being brought from another property to and deposited at the RSC property, not including any soil that may have originated at but been remediated off the RSC property and that is identified in section 28 of Schedule A.
Estimated Quantity of Soil Brought to the Property(in-ground volume in m³)
0.0
16 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Ground Water Control or Treatment Measures
Ground water control or treatment measures that were required for the RSC property prior to the certification date for the purpose of submitting the RSC for filing.
Ground water control or treatment measures that are required for the RSC property after the certification date.
Estimated volume of ground water, if any, removed from and not returned to the RSC property.
Estimated Volume of Ground Water (in litres)
17 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Other Activities Including Risk Management Measures
Constructed works that prior to the certification date for the purpose of submitting the RSC for filing, were required to control or otherwise mitigate the release or movement of known existing contaminants at the RSC property.
None
Constructed works that after the certification date, are required to control or otherwise mitigate the release or movement of known existing contaminants at the RSC property.
Installation of a hard cap or fill/soil cap barrier
Monitoring or Maintenance
Soil Management Measures
Soil monitoring requirements or any requirements for care, maintenance or replacement or any monitoring or control works for known existing contaminants, if any, on the RSC property, after the certification date.
Monitor and maintain hard cap barrier as per CPU
Ground Water Management Measures
Ground water monitoring requirements or requirements for care, maintenance or replacement of any monitoring or control works or known existing contaminants, if any, on the RSC property, after the certification date.
Not applicable
Remediated or Removed Soil, Sediment or Ground Water From Near Property Boundary
Has any soil, sediment or ground water at the RSC property that is or was located within 3 metres of the RSC property boundary been remediated or removed for the purpose of remediation?
No
18 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Qualified Person’s Statements and CertificationsAs the qualified person, I certify that:
A phase one environmental site assessment of the RSC property, which includes the evaluation of the information gathered from a records review, site reconnaissance, interviews, a report and any updates required, has been conducted in accordance with the regulation by or under the supervision of a qualified person as required by the regulation.
A phase two environmental site assessment of the RSC property, which includes the evaluation of the information gathered from planning and conducting a site investigation, a report, and any updates required, has been conducted in accordance with the regulation by or under the supervision of a qualified person as required by the regulation.
The information represents the site conditions at the sampling points at the time of sampling only and the conditions between and beyond the sampling points may vary.
As of 2014/04/21, in my opinion, based on the phase one environmental site assessment and the phase two environmental site assessment, and any confirmatory sampling, there is no evidence of any contaminants in the soil, ground water or sediment on, in or under the RSC property that would interfere with the type of property use to which the RSC property will be put, as specified in the RSC.
Ground water sampling has been conducted in accordance with the regulation by or under the supervision of a qualified person as required by the regulation.
I have, within the six months immediately before the submission of this record of site condition, given written notice of intention to apply non-potable ground water site condition standards to the clerk of the local municipality in which the property is located and the clerk of any upper-tier municipality in which the property is located.
As of 2014/04/21, in my opinion, based on the phase one and phase two environmental site assessments and any confirmatory sampling, the RSC property meets the applicable full depth generic site condition standards prescribed by section 37 of the regulation for all contaminants prescribed by the regulation in relation to the type of property use for which this RSC is filed, except for those contaminants (if any) specified in this RSC at Table 2, Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Standards Specified in a Risk Assessment.
As of 2014/04/21, the maximum known concentration of each contaminant in soil, sediment and ground water at the RSC property for which sampling and analysis has been performed is specified in this RSC at Table 1, Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards.
In relation to any contaminant excepted from the certification mentioned above as specified in the RSC at Table 2, Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Standards Specified in a Risk Assessment, or in relation to any other contaminant that in my opinion is likely to cause an adverse effect:
A risk assessment was prepared for the contaminant with respect to the property for which the phase two environmental site assessment was conducted.
The Director has accepted the risk assessment under clause 168.5 (1) (a) of the Act.
As of 2014/04/21, the property for which the phase two environmental site assessment was conducted meets the standards specified in the risk assessment for the contaminant.
I am a qualified person and have the qualifications required by section 5 of the regulation.
I have in place an insurance policy that satisfies the requirements of section 7 of the regulation.
I acknowledge that the RSC will be submitted for filing in the Environmental Site Registry, that records of site condition that are filed in the Registry are available for examination by the public and that the Registry contains a notice advising users of the Registry who have dealings with any property to consider conducting their own due diligence with respect to the environmental condition of the property, in addition to reviewing information in the Registry.
The opinions expressed in this RSC are engineering or scientific opinions made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices as recognized by members of the environmental engineering or science profession or discipline practising at the same time and in the same or similar location.
I do not hold and have not held and my employer PINCHIN LTD.does not hold and has not held a direct or indirect interest in the RSC property or any property which includes the RSC property and was the subject of a phase one or two environmental site assessmentor risk assessment upon which this record of site condition is based
To the best of my knowledge, the certifications and statements in this part of the RSCare true as of 2014/04/21.
By signing this RSC, I make no express or implied warranties or guarantees.
By checking the boxes above, and entering my membership/licence number in this submission, I, ROBERT W TOSSELL, a qualified person as defined in section 5 of O. Reg. 153/04 am, on 2015/04/30:
19 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
By checking the boxes above, and entering my membership/licence number in this submission, I, ROBERT W TOSSELL, a qualified person as defined in section 5 of O. Reg. 153/04 am, on 2015/04/30:
a) signing this record of site condition submission as a qualified person; and b) making all certifications required as a qualified person for this record of site condition.
I Agree
20 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Additional Documentation Provided by Property Owner or AgentThe following documents have been submitted to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Changeas part of the record of site condition
Certificate of Status or equivalent for the owner
Lawyer’s letter consisting of a legal description of the property
Copy of any deed(s), transfer(s) or other document(s) by which the RSC property was acquired
A Current plan of Survey
Property Specific Standards
Area(s) of Potential Environmental Concern
Table of Current and Past Uses of the Phase One Property
Phase 2 Conceptual Site Model
Owner or agent certification statements
6.1.2
21 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
22 of 22Filed Record of Site Condition # 217954 on 2015/05/07
Request ID: 017579120 Province of Ontario Date Report Produced: 2015/04/30Demande n° : Province de l'Ontario Document produit le :Transaction ID: 57472368 Ministry of Government Services Time Report Produced: 11:17:37Transaction n° : Ministère des Services gouvernementaux Imprimé à :Category ID: CTCatégorie :
CERTIFICATE OF STATUSATTESTATION DU STATUT JURIDIQUE
This is to certify that according to the D'après les dossiers du Ministère desrecords of the Ministry of Government Services gouvernementaux, nous attestonsServices que la société
W I C K S T E E D B U S I N E S S P A R K I N C .
Ontario Corporation Number Numéro matricule de la société (Ontario)
0 0 2 3 2 7 3 4 5
is a corporation incorporated, est une société constituée, prorogée ou néeamalgamated or continued under d'une fusion aux termes des lois de lathe laws of the Province of Ontario. Province de l'Ontario.
The corporation came into existence on La société a été fondée le
M A Y 0 8 M A I , 2 0 1 2
and has not been dissolved. et n'est pas dissoute.
Dated Fait le
A P R I L 3 0 A V R I L , 2 0 1 5
DirectorDirecteur
The issuance of this certifcate in electronic form is authorized by the Ministry of Government Services.
La délivrance du présent certificat sous forme électronique est autorisée par le Ministère des Services gouvernementaux.
April 28, 2015 Michael J. Baum
Direct Line: (416) 250-2892
E-mail: [email protected]
Law Clerk: Atiya Bourke
Direct Line: (416) 250-2866
E-mail: [email protected] Ministry of the Environment
and Climate Change
Operations Division – Central Region
5775 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2M 4J1
File No.: 120075
Dear Sirs:
Re: Wicksteed Business Park Inc. - Record of Site Condition
We are the solicitors for Wicksteed Business Park Inc. in the above-referenced matter.
We further wish to confirm as follows:
1. Wicksteed Business Park Inc. is the registered owner, in fee simple and the developer of
the lands which are the subject of the Record of Site Condition.
2. The legal description of the lands which are the subject of the Record of Site Condition is
as follows:
Part of West Half of Lot 9, Concession 3, From the Bay, Twp. Of York, and Part
of Lot 10, Concession 3, From the Bay, Twp. Of York, designated as Part 1 on
Plan 66R-26854, City of Toronto, being Part of PIN 10369-0178 (LT).
3. The municipal address of the lands is as follows:
209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M4G 2C1.
Table 2: Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Standards Specified in a Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment Number: RA1322-13
1 of 1
Table 2: Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Standards Specified in a Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment Number RA1322-13Applicable Site Condition Standard Table 3
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in SoilContaminant Measurement type Measured Concentration Standard Specified in Risk Assessment Unit of Measurement Antimony Measured 49 58.8 ug/g Cadmium Measured 92 110.4 ug/g Copper Measured 1700 2040 ug/g Lead Measured 430 516 ug/g Zinc Measured 700 840 ug/g
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in Ground WaterContaminant Measurement type Measured Concentration Standard Specified in Risk Assessment Unit of Measurement Tetrachloroethylene Measured 9.8 11.76 ug/L Trichloroethylene Measured 1.7 2.04 ug/L Vinyl Chloride < MDL Value of 0.2 1.8 ug/L
Measured Concentration for Contaminants in SedimentContaminant Measurement type Measured Concentration Standard Specified in Risk Assessment Unit of Measurement <none>
TABLE OF AREAS OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN – PART 1
Area of Potential Environmental Concern
Location of Area of Potential Environmental Concern on
Phase One Property
Potentially Contaminating
Activity
Location of PCA (on-site or off-site)
Contaminants of Potential Concern
Media Potentially Impacted (Ground water, soil and/or
sediment)
APEC #1 (Rail Line) Western Portion of Phase One Property
Item 46 – Rail Yards, Tracks and Spurs On-Site
Metals and Inorganics PHCs PAHs
Soil and Groundwater
APEC #2 (Poor-quality Fill Material)
Entire Phase One Property Item 30 – Importation of Fill Material of Unknown
Quality On-Site
Metals and Inorganics PHCs PAHs
Soil and Groundwater
APEC #3 (Historical Fire)
Majority of Phase One Property Fire at Former Site Building On-Site PAHs Soil and Groundwater
APEC #4 (VOC-impacted Groundwater in
Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed)
West-central Portion of Phase One Property Adjacent to Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed Avenue
Not Applicable (spill identified by previous
consultant) On-Site VOCs Groundwater
TABLE OF CURRENT AND PAST USES OF THE PHASE ONE PROPERTY
Year Name of Owner Description of Property Use Property Use Other Observations from Aerial Photographs, Fire Insurance Plans, etc.
Lot 9
1836 William W. Baldwin Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use
1836 – 1849 James Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1849 – 1887 Thomas B. Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use
1887 – 1888 Henrietta V. Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1888 – 1913 Robert Davies Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use
1913 – 1949 Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Company No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
1939 aerial photograph indicates vacant undeveloped land that
(Part of Lot 9) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use appears to be traversed by a roadway.
1913 - 1942 Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Company No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or (Part of Lot 9) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
1942 Thorndale Securities Company Limited (Part of No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
Lot 9) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
1942 – 1948 Trustees of John Curry (Part of Lot 9) No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or 1947 aerial photograph indicates vacant undeveloped land with an to be vacant undeveloped land. other use apparent roadway located on western portion of the Phase One
property.
1948 – 1949 Joseph Tanenbaum, Max Tanenbaum & No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or Runnymede Iron and Steel Company (Part of Lot 9)
to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
Lot 10
Prior to 1843 Crown Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1843 – 1844 John Peter Carey Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1844 Thomas Elliott Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1844 – 1846 William Hill Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1846 – 1862 Jacob Snider Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1862 – 1864 Charles Snider Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use 1864 – 1881 John Taylor, Thomas Taylor and George Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use
1881 – 1907 John H. Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1907 – 1912 Matilda M. E. Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1912 – 1917 Frederick Grundy Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1917 – 1920 Sterling Trust Corporation Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1920 Matilda M. E. Taylor Assumed agricultural Agricultural or other use
1920 – 1946 George D. Forbes (Part of Lot 10) Assumed agricultural Agricultural or
other use
1939 aerial photograph indicates vacant undeveloped land that appears to be traversed by a roadway.
1946 – 1949 Treuhaft Manufacturing Limited (Part of Lot
No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or 10) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
1920 – 1942 George D. Forbes (Part of Lot 10) Assumed agricultural Agricultural or 1942 – 1947 Dominion of Canada Expropriation Plan 3080 – No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
Department of Munitions & Supply (Part of Lot to be vacant undeveloped land. 10)
other use
1947 James R. Thompson (Part of Lot 10) No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
1947 aerial photograph indicates vacant undeveloped land with an to be vacant undeveloped land. other use apparent roadway located on western portion of the Phase One
property.
1947 James W. Carrick and Thomas M. Weatherhead No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or (Part of Lot 10) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
1947 – 1948 Malvern Construction Company Limited (Part
No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
of Lot 10) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use 1948 – 1949 Pilkey-Noble Construction Company Limited No documented land use / Assumed Agricultural or
(Part of Lot 10) to be vacant undeveloped land. other use
TABLE OF CURRENT AND PAST USES OF THE PHASE ONE PROPERTY
Year
Name of Owner
Description of Property Use
Property Use
Other Observations from Aerial Photographs, Fire Insurance Plans, etc.
Lots 9 and 10
1949 Pilkey Noble Construction Company Limited
No documented land use / Assumed to be vacant undeveloped land.
Agricultural or other use
1949 – 1962 Lake Simcoe Ice & Fuel Limited
Frozen food storage and warehousing
Industrial The roadway observed in the 1947 aerial photograph is not apparent in an aerial photograph dated 1950. A rail line located on the western portion of the Phase One property (APEC #1) is visible in aerial photographs dated 1957 and 1960.
1962 – 1983 Lake Simcoe Ice & Enterprises Limited
Frozen food storage and warehousing
Industrial Phase One property occupied by Lake Simcoe Ice & Enterprises Ltd. and Singer’s Foods Ltd. ca. 1965-1980 based on street directories.
1983 – 1996 Lake Simcoe Enterprises Limited
Frozen food storage and warehousing
Industrial Phase One property occupied by Lake Simcoe Ice & Enterprises Ltd. and Agincourt Foods Inc. ca. 1985-1990 based on street directories.
1996 – 2006 1198177 Ontario Inc.
Frozen food storage and warehousing
Industrial Phase One property occupied by Lake Simcoe Enterprises Ltd., Agincourt Foods Inc., Excel Cleaning & Sup Serv. Ltd. and Laurada Industries Inc. ca. 1990-2002 based on street directories. A 2002 aerial photograph indicates the rail line (APEC #1) had been removed.
2006 – 2010 2112264 Ontario Inc.
Frozen food storage and warehousing to 2007 / Vacant land from 2007 to 2010
Industrial Site Building demolished following fire in 2007 (APEC #3).
2010 - 2013 R. E. Real Estate Ltd.
Vacant land Industrial
2013 – 2014
Wicksteed Business Park II Inc.
Vacant land Industrial
2014 – Present
Wicksteed Business Park Inc.
Vacant land Industrial
2470 MILLTOWER COURT, MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO L5N 7W5 PHONE: (905) 363-0678 FAX: (905) 363-0681 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY MANAGEMENT SERVICES FROM OFFICES ACROSS CANADA
www.pinchin.com 1-888-767-3330
Phase Two Conceptual Site Model
The updated Phase One Conceptual Site Model (CSM) included in this letter provided a detailed
visualization of the APECs which could occur on, in, under, or affecting the Phase Two property. The
Phase One CSM also presented the potential contaminants of concern (PCOCs), descriptions of
underground utilities, and available site-specific hydrogeological information. Furthermore, the Phase
One CSM illustrated the potential exposure pathways and receptors that Pinchin had identified to
potentially exist on the Phase One property. The Phase One CSM is summarized in Figures 3 through 6.
The following sections expand on the Phase One CSM with information collected during the completion of
the 2013 Phase Two ESA and 2013 Phase II ESA.
The Phase Two property is currently undeveloped, vacant land zoned for commercial land use and is
located within the City of Toronto on the south side of Wicksteed Avenue, east of Leslie Street (see
Figure 1). The Phase Two CSM is described in the following sections and illustrated in the attached
Figures 1 to 16.
Potentially Contaminating Activities
Two potentially contaminating activities (PCAs) as defined by Ontario Regulation (O.Reg.) 153/04 have
been documented to have occurred on the Phase Two property as follows:
Item 30 – Importation of Fill Material of Unknown Origin:
Sand, with occasional topsoil inclusions and brick and woodchip debris, is
present to a maximum depth of approximately 1.5 mbgs. The origin of this fill
material is unknown.
Item 46 – Rail Yards, Tracks and Spurs:
An historical railway spur (based on historical information) oriented generally
north-south was located on the western portion of the Phase Two property from
between 1950 and 1959 to between 1992 and 2002. No evidence of the railway
spur was noted at the time of the Phase One ESA.
In addition, a fire that resulted in the demolition of the former Site Building was considered a PCA for the
Phase Two property.
The presence of volatile organic compound (VOC) impacted groundwater was considered to represent an
on-Site PCA.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 2
Areas of Potential Environmental Concern
The following table summarizes the areas of potential environmental concern (APECs), and
corresponding PCAs and PCOCs, which were identified at the Phase Two property.
APEC
Location of APEC on Phase Two Property
PCA
Location of PCA (On-Site or Off-Site)
PCOCs Media Potentially Impacted (Groundwater, Soil and/or Sediment)
APEC #1 (Rail Line)
Western Portion of Phase Two Property
Item 46 – Rail Yards, Tracks and Spurs
On-Site
Metals and Inorganics
PHCs
PAHs
Soil
APEC #2
(Fill Material)
Entire Phase Two Property
Item 30 – Importation of Fill Material of Unknown Quality
On-Site
Metals and Inorganics
PHCs
PAHs
Soil
APEC #3
(Historical Fire)
Majority of Phase Two Property
Fire at Former Site Building
On-Site PAHs Soil
APEC #4
(VOC-Impacted Groundwater)
Entire Phase Two Property
VOC-Impacted Groundwater
OnSite VOCs Groundwater
Notes: PHCs – Petroleum Hydrocarbons Fractions F1-F4 PAHs – Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons VOCs – Volatile Organic Compounds
Figure 4 shows the locations of APECs and PCAs located on the Phase Two property and within the
Phase One study area.
Subsurface Structures and Utilities
There are no active subsurface utilities located at the Phase Two property as they have been capped at
Wicksteed Avenue according to the Phase Two property owner. Information on the depths and locations
of these utilities is not available. Temporal fluctuations in groundwater levels are unlikely to have any
effect on the distribution and migration of the metal and VOC impacts in the subsurface of the Phase Two
property. The north elevation of the former Site Building was located approximately 7 to 15 m south of
Wicksteed Avenue. Given the likelihood that any subsurface utilities entered the Site from Wicksteed
Avenue and entered the former Site Building on the north elevation, the former subsurface utilities were
likely located a minimum of 60 m north of the Phase Two property. Preferential pathways were not
identified during the Phase Two activities.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 3
Physical Setting
The following provides a summary of the physical setting of the Phase Two property:
The Phase Two property is currently undeveloped, vacant land located within the City of
Toronto that is zoned for commercial land use;
The observed stratigraphy (at the drilling locations) generally consisted of sand fill of
unknown origin, with occasional topsoil inclusions and cinder-like inclusions, to a
maximum depth of approximately 2.29 mbgs, followed by sand unit that extended to a
maximum depth of approximately 4.27 mbgs. A silty clay till was present below the sand
and gravel unit that extended to the maximum investigation depth of approximately 9.14
mbgs. Cross-sections summarizing the subsurface geological conditions have been
provided as Figures 8A and 8B;
The sand/sand and gravel unit within the upper 1.52 to 2.29 metres at the Phase Two
property may be fill material. The origin of this possible fill material is unknown. To
Pinchin’s knowledge soil has not been brought from another property and placed on, in or
under the Phase Two property;
Based on the grain size analysis of representative soil samples collected during the 2012
Pinchin Phase Two ESA and the observed stratigraphy at the borehole locations, Pinchin
concluded that over one-third of the overburden at the Phase Two property is coarse-
textured as defined by O. Reg. 153/04 and Site Condition Standards for fine-medium
textured soil were not applied;
The upper water table at the Phase Two property is located within the sand/sand and
gravel unit at depths ranging from approximately 2.72 to 3.19 mbgs. As indicated on
Figure 9, groundwater flow is interpreted to be to the northeast;
There are no open water bodies located at the Phase Two property and the nearest
water body is a tributary of the Don River West Branch located approximately 240 metres
south of the Phase Two property;
The hydraulic conductivity measured in the sand/sand and gravel aquifer was 3.33 x 10-6
metres/second, and based on the groundwater gradient, groundwater flow velocity is
estimated to be approximately 0.82 metres/year. The hydraulic conductivity
measurements were conducted during the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA;
Based on measurements completed as part of the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA the
horizontal hydraulic gradient of the water table is approximately 0.002;
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 4
Based on measurements completed as part of the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA the
vertical hydraulic gradient of the water table is approximately 1.09 in a downward
direction;
The silty clay unit below the sand/sand and gravel unit is considered to represent an
aquitard. No additional aquitards or aquifers were encountered during the borehole
drilling program for the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA, 2013 Pinchin Phase II ESA or
supplemental drilling conducted in 2014;
Bedrock was not encountered at any of the borehole locations up to the maximum depth
drilled of approximately 9.14 mbgs and the Phase Two property is not a shallow soil
property, as defined by Section 43.1 of O. Reg. 153/04. Pinchin notes that based on a
review of the water well record for Well ID Number 7192323, located approximately 400
m north of the Phase Two property, bedrock is located approximately 25 mbgs;
The pH values measured in the submitted soil samples were within the limits for non-
sensitive sites. The Phase Two property is also not an area of natural significance and it
is not adjacent to, nor does it contain land within 30 metres of, an area of natural
significance. As such, the Phase Two property is not an environmentally sensitive area
as defined by Section 41 of O. Reg. 153/04; and
The surrounding area is supplied by municipal services, with Lake Ontario serving as the
water source. The Phase Two property is not located within an area that utilizes
groundwater wells for potable water use.
Applicable Site Condition Standards
Based on the information summarized in the preceding section, the appropriate Site Condition Standards
for the Phase Two property are:
“Table 3: Full Depth Generic Site Condition Standards for Use in a Non-Potable Ground
Water Condition”, provided in the MOE document entitled, “Soil, Ground Water and
Sediment Standards for Use Under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act” dated
April 15, 2011 (“Table 3 Standards”) for:
Coarse-textured soils; and
Industrial/commercial/community property use.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 5
Buildings and Structures
The Phase Two property is currently vacant, undeveloped land. The future use of the Phase Two property
is understood by Pinchin to be the operation of a self-storage facility, which will include the construction of
storage buildings across the majority of the Phase Two property.
Previous Remedial Activities
In 2006, Toronto Inspection Limited monitored the removal and disposal of impacted soils that had been
identified by an investigation completed by CPG-Franz Environmental Inc. in 2002. Remedial activities
included the removal of metals-impacted soils from “Area A”, located along the west property boundary of
the Phase Two property. Verification soil samples were collected from within the excavated areas and
tested for copper only. Based on Pinchin’s review of the analytical data for these soil samples, the
reported concentrations of copper were below the Table 3 Standards.
The location of Area A and the reported concentrations in the remediated soil are summarized on Figure
10.
Contaminants Exceeding Applicable Site Condition Standards in Soil
The 2013 Phase Two ESA and previous investigations identified the presence of soil within the upper 2.3
metres of the Phase Two property with concentrations of metals parameters greater than the Table 3
Standards (see Figure 10). The specific origin of the metals parameters in the soil at the Phase Two
property is unknown, but may be related to historical uses of the Phase Two property and/or from the
historical importation of fill material.
Based on the delineation activities completed for the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA and the results of
previous investigations of the Phase Two property, the approximate horizontal extent of metals-impacted
soil has been outlined on Figure 11. Figure 12 and the cross-sections provided as Figures 15A and 15B
demonstrate the vertical extent of the metals -impacted soil.
Given the resistance of metals to leaching from soil to groundwater in neutral pH environments, as well as
the depth to groundwater versus the identified depth of the metal impacts, the metal impacts are likely to
persist in soil rather than leaching to groundwater. Additionally, metal impacts were not identified
groundwater samples collected from groundwater monitoring wells located at the Phase Two property,
indicating that metal impacts are not leaching from soil to groundwater.
No preferential pathways were identified on the Phase Two property. Climatic or meteorological
conditions are unlikely to influence the distribution and migration of metal concentrations within the soil.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 6
Contaminants Exceeding Applicable Site Condition Standards in Groundwater
Based on the results of the 2013 Pinchin Phase II ESA and the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA,
groundwater with concentrations of tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) exceeding the
Table 3 Standards was identified on the Phase Two property. The specific origin of the VOC parameters
in groundwater at the Phase Two property is unknown, but may be related to historical uses of the Phase
Two property.
Based on the delineation activities completed as part of the 2013 Phase II ESA, as well as previous
investigations, the approximate horizontal extent of VOC-impacted groundwater has been outlined on
Figure 13. As indicated in Figure 13, concentrations of PCE at MW302 and MW303 (located on Part 2 of
209 Wicksteed Avenue), were observed to be below the corresponding Table 3 Standards. Figure 14
and the cross-sections provided as Figures 15A and 15B show the vertical extent of the VOC-impacted
groundwater. As indicated in Figures 13, 14 and the cross-sections, concentrations of PCE at monitoring
wells MW501, MW601 and MW602 were observed to be below the laboratory RDL and corresponding
Table 3 Standards. Therefore, these impacts appear to be limited to the upper unconfined aquifer.
A number of factors can govern the transport and fate of PCE and TCE in groundwater, including dilution,
adsorption, advection and dispersion, volatilization, geochemical dynamics, and chemical or biological
attenuation (microbial attenuation). The concentrations of PCE and TCE are expected to decrease over
time.
The maximum lateral migration of these contaminants in groundwater, based on the estimated
groundwater flow velocity, is approximately 0.82 m/yr. However, it should be noted that retardation
factors, such as soil adsorption, would likely significantly limit the rate of linear migration. In considering
natural attenuation factors, retardation factors and the relatively low concentrations of PCE and TCE, the
lateral migration of these compounds in groundwater is expected to be limited.
Excessive infiltration of precipitation may potentially dilute concentrations of VOCs; however, climatic or
meteorological conditions are not expected to significantly affect concentrations of VOCs in groundwater.
Contaminant Exposure Assessment
Pinchin evaluated the potential exposure pathways and receptors which could potentially affect the Phase
Two property based on the identified APECs and related PCOCs. The exposure pathways and potential
receptors identified for the Phase Two property were illustrated in the Phase One CSM summarized in
Figures 5 and 6. The exposure pathways and receptors which Pinchin had considered were as follows:
Exposure Pathways
GW1 – The protection of drinking water component;
GW2 – The protection of indoor air from vapours originating from groundwater
component;
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 7
GW3 – The protection of the aquatic environment component;
S1 – High-frequency, high-intensity, human health exposure scenario equivalent to that
of a surface soil at a residential/parkland/institutional or agricultural/other site (children
and pregnant women are present);
S2 – Lower-frequency and lower-intensity, human health exposure scenario without
children present and is used at commercial/industrial/community sites or at depth at
residential/parkland/institutional or agricultural/other sites;
S3 – Low-frequency, high-intensity, human health exposure scenario without children
present that is protective of a worker digging in the soil. It is used for subsurface soils at
commercial/industrial/community sites;
S-IA – Soil to indoor air, for vapour intrusion into a building;
S-OA – Soil to outdoor air, a volatilization model combined with atmospheric mixing
which is protective of outdoor air quality;
S-Odour – Soil concentrations that will not result in unacceptable odours from direct
sniffing of the soil;
S-GW1 – Soil to potable groundwater, soil values protective of GW1 values; and
S-GW3 – Soil to groundwater to surface water, soil values protective of aquatic life and
GW3 values.
Human Health Receptors
H1 – Indoor workers;
H2 – Outdoor workers; and
H3 – Construction workers.
Ecological Receptors
E1 – Mammals and birds; and
E2 – Plants and soil invertebrates.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 8
Based on the above and in considering the future development activities (i.e., digging, construction, etc.)
and intended use (i.e., commercial), the GW2, S2, S3, S-IA, S-OA and S-Odour pathways were
considered potentially applicable to the Phase Two property as per the Phase One CSM. The S1
pathway was not considered a concern given that the future land use will be commercial. The GW1 and
S-GW1 pathways were not considered a concern as the groundwater in Toronto is not used as a drinking
water source. The GW3 and S-GW3 pathways were considered applicable due to contaminant migration
potential; however, it is noted that the nearest surface water body is approximately 240 metres from the
Phase Two property and the generic standards are considered overly conservative in the protection of
these pathways.
Based on the results of the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA and 2013 Pinchin Phase II ESA, the following
is an update with respect to the exposure pathways noted in the Phase One ESA Update:
The analytical results for the soil samples submitted as part of the 2013 Phase Two ESA
and for other investigations of the Phase Two property indicated that no concentrations of
volatile parameters in soil exceeding the corresponding Table 3 Standards are present at
the Phase Two property. As such, the S-IA, S-OA and S-Odour pathways are no longer
considered applicable to the Phase Two property;
The analytical results for soil samples submitted from the surficial fill materials at the
Phase Two property identified fill with metals parameter concentrations exceeding the
Table 3 Standards in the Phase Two property. Therefore, the S2, S3 and S-GW3
pathways are considered to remain applicable to the Phase Two property;
The groundwater analytical results indicated that the metals impacts identified at the
Phase Two property are not adversely impacting the groundwater quality at the Phase
Two property given that the metals concentrations in the groundwater at the Phase Two
property meet the Table 3 Standards; and
The analytical results for groundwater identified volatile parameter concentrations
exceeding the Table 3 Standards in the unconfined aquifer at the Phase Two Property.
Therefore, the GW2 and GW3 pathways remain applicable to the Site.
In summary, the exposure pathways that are considered to remain valid with respect to the Phase Two
property given the results of the 2013 Pinchin Phase Two ESA and 2013 Pinchin Phase II ESA include
S2, S3, GW2, GW3 and S-GW3.
Update Conceptual Site Model 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario March 24, 2015 Wicksteed Business Park Inc. Pinchin File: 57045.009
© 2015 Pinchin Ltd. Page 9
The release mechanisms and contaminant transport pathways for metal contaminants in the soil at the
Phase Two property are considered to be direct contact, ingestion or the inhalation of particles from soil
at the surface of the Phase Two property, or soil brought to the surface of the Phase Two property
through excavation. Given the proposed future land use of the Phase Two property as a self-storage
facility, the receptors that are considered to remain valid with respect to the Phase Two property based
on the results of the Phase Two ESA include E1, E2, H1, H2 and H3.
Figure 16 summarizes the applicable exposure pathways and receptors.
Risk Assessment
Subsequent to the completion of the Phase Two ESA, Pinchin completed a risk assessment (Streamlined
Tier III Risk Assessment) to develop Property Specific Standards (PSS) for the Phase Two Property for
VOCs, PHCs, and metals parameters that did not meet the Table 3 Standards. Based on the soil and
groundwater samples collected as part of the Phase Two ESA and other investigations, and the findings
of the risk assessment, the concentrations of the PCOCs in soil and groundwater at the Phase Two
Property meet the Table 3 Standards and/or the PSS.
57045.009_CSM_209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, ON_Part 1_Mar. 24, 2015.docx
FIGURES
PROJECT NAME
PHASE TWO ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT CLIENT NAME
WICKSTEED BUSINESS PARK INC. PROJECT LOCATION
PART 1 OF 209 WICKSTEED AVENUE, TORONTO, ONTARIO FIGURE NAME FIGURE NO.
1
KEY MAP SCALE PROJECT NO. DATE:
AS SHOWN 57045.008 MARCH 2015
© SGA LTD.
11/03/2010
0.5‐1.5
Cadmium 1.9 4.8
TP02Table 3
Std
01/02/2012
1.5‐2.3
Cadmium 1.9 2.9
BH203‐S3Table 3
Std
14/01/2011
0.8‐1.2
Antimony 40 49
Cadmium 1.9 2.9
Copper 230 1700
Lead 120 430
Zinc 340 700
MW102‐S2Table 3
Std
10/10/2002
0‐0.3
Copper 230 1100
HA6ATable 3
Std
10/10/2002
0‐0.3
Copper 230 1300
HA9ATable 3
Std
10/10/2002
0‐0.3
Copper 230 780
HA8ATable 3
Std
22/02/2010
0.2
Antimony 40 0.8
Cadmium 1.9 1.6
Copper 230 67
Lead 120 26
Zinc 340 55
S‐4Table 3
Std
01/02/2012
3.8‐4.6
Antimony 40 <0.20
Cadmium 1.9 <0.10
Copper 230 21
Lead 120 7.8
Zinc 340 41
BH203‐S6Table 3
Std
2/2/2012
0.8‐1.5
Antimony 40 0.34
Cadmium 1.9 0.55
Copper 230 14
Lead 120 7.7
Zinc 340 22
BH207‐S2Table 3
Std