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]


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


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


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


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


Author of Report


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



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


Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario

2011-02-08 Christine Kirchner & Robert Tossell


Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario

2013-05-01 Corinne Poisson & Robert MacKenzie


Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario

2013-06-06 Corinne Poisson, Stephen Spooner, Robert Tossell & Vico Paloschi



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


Author of Report


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


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



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


Remedial Excavation and Verification Soil Sampling, 209 Wicksteed Avenue,Toronto, Ontario

2010-11-02 Lindsay Bell, Stephen Spooner & Robert Tossell


Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario

2011-02-08 Christine Kirchner & Robert Tossell


Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 2013-05-01 Corinne Poisson & Robert Mackenzie


Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, Part 1 of 209 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto, Ontario

2013-06-06 Corinne Poisson, Stephen Spooner, Robert Tossell & Vico Paloschi



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


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



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




Continued from previous page....

ContaminantName



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



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






ContaminantName



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


Table 1 – Maximum Contaminant Concentrations Compared to Applicable Site Condition Standards (Continued)

Ground Water

ContaminantName



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



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




Ground Water


ContaminantName



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



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




Ground Water


ContaminantName



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


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


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


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)


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


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:


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


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


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


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


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.


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.


2014 – Present

Wicksteed Business Park Inc.


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.

http://www.pinchin.com/

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.



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;



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.



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.



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;



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.



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.



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