Dirt file on new RAH site

UNDER WAY: Workmen at the site of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital yesterday. Picture: BROOKE WHATNAL Source: AdelaideNow

Concept image of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital proposal. Source: AdelaideNow

< Prev

 of 2

Next >

A previously unreleased soil and groundwater experts' report says enough to fill 129 Olympic-sized swimming pools would have to be removed.

The report, prepared for TransAdelaide in 2008, estimates that, of the 320,000 cubic metres of soil to be excavated, 80,000 to 100,000 cu m are likely to be contaminated.

While the cost of decontaminating the site - $40 million - has been revealed by the Government, the total amount of soil to be removed has not.

A Government spokeswoman said yesterday the TransAdelaide report was outdated and much of the soil was likely to be remediated on site and re-used for landscaping and landfill.

The spokeswoman said a 100-hole drilling program and changes to hospital plans meant the 2008 report had been superseded. Details of the exact amount of soil remediation had been given to the preferred bidders and this could not be disclosed.

Acting Health Minister Patrick Conlon said the cost of remediation of the site had always been included within the total figure for the new RAH project.

Mr Conlon said the Liberals were engaging in scaremongering tactics to undermine the building of the new hospital.

Contracting sources told The Advertiser  yesterday it could cost about $12 million to shift that much soil. At a rate of 3000 tonnes a day, it would take about 192 days to shift.

Details of the report were given in a reply to a Freedom of Information request from Upper House Opposition Leader David Ridgway.

Soil and Groundwater Consulting were hired to determine the contamination status under the railcar depot site on North Tce and found concentrations of metals, predominantly arsenic as well as copper, lead and zinc, to be generally widespread.

The concentrations of metals are not considered likely to present a risk to users of the site but will present a "cost impost" if there are surplus soils that must be disposed of off-site.

The $40 million and a 2016 completion date for the new hospital were reaffirmed last week by Health Department chief executive Dr Tony Sherbon, in evidence to a parliamentary committee.

"The site is manageable and we have every reason to believe that this hospital can be readily built on a remediated site," he said.

Dr Sherbon said the actual decontamination process was part of the public-private partnership bid. Each bid included decontamination provisions and there was no evidence to suggest the $40 million would not be enough.

Mr Ridgway said the reports appeared to show the Government was unlikely to keep the costs of the new hospital below $2 billion.

"The developers will have to carry the cost of site remediation and they will pass it on to taxpayers," he said.