RE: [CPEO-BIF] Philadelphia (PA) Site Visits

["Emery Graham" <piphoto@comcast.net>]

Developers often shoot themselves in the foot when they willingly violate
Fed. State. And local environmental laws as they try to develop an area. The
residents need to file a suit for damages to person and property caused by
the developer's activity. Neighbors need to video tape the illegal
development activity for purposes of evidence. Finally they need to file
claims with the developer's insurance company for damages.

Emery

-----Original Message-----
From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org
[mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:30 PM
To: Brownfields Internet Forum
Subject: [CPEO-BIF] Philadelphia (PA) Site Visits

Philadelphia Site Visits
March, 2006
Lenny Siegel
(For a formatted version with pictures, go to 
http://www.cpeo.org/brownfields/brown.html.)

I recently made two visits to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, learning about 
neighborhoods with both viable residential communities and checkerboards 
of abandoned properties. Redevelopment is already underway, but it is 
encumbered by a history of mistrust. Still, there are opportunities for 
cooperation between residents and development interests, but it will 
take a conscious effort by government agencies, as well as community 
members, to build the partnership necessary for success.

On January 24 Peter Strauss - who works with me on a number of projects 
- and I met with active residents of Philadelphia's Northern Liberties 
Neighborhood. The neighborhood is one of Philadelphia's oldest areas, 
north of downtown between the Delaware River and 6th Street. 
Historically it has been home to tanneries, breweries, and other 
industries. About 4,000 people live there, but with many Brownfields 
being converted to moderate-income rental housing and high-rise towers 
along the River, the population is growing. The area is historically low 
income, but some of the new developments are gentrifying the 
neighborhood. According to residents, about one fourth of the property 
is now owned by one influential developer.

Poisoning the climate, the area suffers - according to residents - from 
a recent legacy of unpermitted demolitions and the unsafe handling and 
storage of debris (containing, among other things, lead and asbestos) 
and contaminated soil. They say that a local company has carried out a 
series of demolitions in the area, with little regard for environmental 
protection. It has moved contaminated dirt from property to property.

One of the community's biggest concerns is a former tannery site they 
call the "pregnant parking lot," because asphalt was reportedly laid 
directly over a mound of dirt with little grading. EPA conducted an 
emergency response on the property in the late 1980s and early 1990s. 
Neighbors are concerned about vapor intrusion, but it's not clear that 
the concentrations of TCE are great enough to merit a significant 
response or serious health concerns. There seems to be residual 
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon contamination, but the regulatory status 
of this site is not clear.

The nearby Schmidt Brewery site is currently the subject of 
state-sponsored public meetings. The community was unable to preserve 
this historic structure, and part of the property has been redeveloped 
with housing - reportedly without cleanup. Another  portion contains PCB 
hot spots, possible the result of the dumping of contaminated dirt from 
other neighborhood sites. Neighbors want removal, not capping. Large 
mounds of dirt are a source of dust, possibly toxic, in adjacent 
residential buildings.

The contamination is compounded by what appears to be periodic flooding, 
which may spread contamination in the neighborhood and transport PCBs to 
the Delaware River.

Neighborhood activists feel that they are getting little support from 
either the city of Philadelphia or Pennsylvania's Department of 
Environmental Protection. They feel that their concerns are dismissed 
because officials perceive them as opponents of much needed 
redevelopment. They don't oppose development, but they want proper 
demolition, the control of releases from demolition and the movement of 
dirt, and full remediation of sites undergoing redevelopment.

I made a number of suggestions designed to improve their chances of 
achieving their objectives, including seeking more press coverage, using 
constructive language when dealing with regulators, and proposing a 
community advisory group for Philadelphia's Brownfields program. I also 
suggested that they focus on their most important issues. We discussed 
the possibility of CPEO leading a "Brownfields 101" workshop.

On Thursday night, January 26, I attended a North Liberties Neighborhood 
Association meeting in a local church. 40 to 50 people attended, and the 
group dealt with a series of issues including a mural, a park, trash, 
the Edgar Allan Poe House, and a Doughboy memorial.

One of the main agenda items was a discussion of the Schmidt Brewery 
site with four officials of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection. There seems to be a great deal of tension over PADEP's 
jurisdiction. The agency is perceived as unresponsive. For example, air 
issues, such as dust from construction, demolition, and soil 
transportation, are normally regulated by the city of Philadelphia. 
Furthermore, Pennsylvania's Act 2 Land Recycling program is a voluntary 
program, with state jurisdiction and public notice only after a 
developer gives notice of an intent to remediate. If citizens want to 
trigger a hazardous waste investigation, it has to be through a 
different program. Furthermore, notice is through a newspaper of public 
record and a difficult-to-use web site. There is no community mailing list.

The project officer explained that the developer hadn't even submitted a 
final use scenario, so any comments he was developing were not final. If 
the property is developed as single-family residences or row houses, 
capping will probably not be accepted as a remedy. Furthermore, he said, 
if groundwater is impacted then more cleanup would be required. After 
the meeting he agreed the surface water run-off was also a pathway of 
concern.

Also, after the meeting I clarified that once soil is deemed hazardous 
waste PADEP has the authority to require controls to reduce fugitive dust.

The North Liberty residents seem to be making a difference. PADEP isn't 
used to intense public involvement, so when it happens, it has an 
impact. Though community members believed that opportunities for public 
involvement had ended, PADEP said that they would continue. I predict 
that the community will get much of what it wants at this site and 
better, earlier cooperation from officials at other sites.

The people at the meeting who cared about environmental issues are doing 
a good job, but they could be more effective and feel more empowered if 
they better understood the cleanup and redevelopment processes. They 
would clearly benefit from a Brownfields 101 Workshop.

I returned to Philadelphia on March 23 to lay the groundwork for a 
city-wide Brownfields workshop. I met with EPA officials with 
responsibility for Brownfields in Philadelphia, I took a walking tour of 
the South Kensington and Northern Liberties Neighborhood, and I met with 
a group of community activists as well as a community relations 
specialist from PADEP. I took all of the photos that accompany this 
report on that day. I plan to meet with city officials on a future visit.

I learned that EPA is taking community complaints seriously. It is 
reviewing documents associated with the "pregnant parking lot," 
considering, among other things, the possibility of vapor intrusion into 
adjacent new residences. I also was told that Philadelphia is now more 
carefully monitoring the movement and storage of excavated soil and 
debris. Similarly, DEP is listening to community requests for more 
involvement.

On this trip, I received positive, but general feedback on CPEO's 
proposed workshop, as well as the concept of a community advisory group.

But the tour of the two neighborhoods was the most valuable part of this 
visit. I learned that Northern Liberties is being repopulated by young 
families. The South Kensington neighborhood, just to the north, appears 
poorer, with sections inhabited by African-Americans, Puerto Ricans, and 
Middle Eastern Moslems.

I saw the Reading Viaduct - as in "take a ride on the Reading Railroad" 
- which some community members would like to turn into a linear park and 
trail. Reportedly, the current plan is to demolish it. Though there are 
a number of fenced-off pocket gardens, the area seems to suffer from a 
shortage of public greenspace. Plans to build high-rise residential 
buildings along the Delaware River, just to the East, may accentuate the 
problem.

I saw the Absco site, a former junkyard that has largely been cleared, 
but apparently not cleaned.

And I saw the Gretz Brewery, like the Schmidt Brewery, a historic 
building with no official designation. Many in the community would like 
to see this structure preserved and restored.

But more important than the individual properties was the appearance of 
the neighborhoods as a whole. Both areas are a mix of housing, operating 
small industries (paint shops, etc.), abandoned structures, and vacant 
lots strewn with garbage. Schools and homes sit next door to and across 
the street from blighted, possibly polluted properties. Though it would 
cost more to properly clean these properties to support unrestricted use 
(housing, schools, etc.), future industrial operations appear 
inappropriate, because they would generate emissions, discharges, and 
traffic unsuitable for neighborhood improvement.

While Northern Liberties, closer to the city center, has more immediate 
redevelopment potential, both neighborhoods are candidates for 
revitalization. Community activists support redevelopment, but they feel 
left out of the process. Only allowed to express themselves at specific 
sites, after major decisions have been made, residents are viewed simply 
as nay-sayers and troublemakers.

An area-wide (or even city-wide) advisory group would help the community 
understand what projects are in the works in time to influence them. It 
could figure out which properties are worth neighborhood attention. And 
developers could adjust their plans to win more community support. From 
what I could tell, most of the contamination in the area is near the 
surface, so developers could be more protective simply by using 
standard, inexpensive "dig-and-haul" removal techniques.

Northern Liberties (and to a lesser degree, South Kensington) is clearly 
on the front lines of the Brownfields issue. It's an area that 
desperately needs cleanup and development, and its location in itself is 
an economic incentive for commercially viable projects. Community 
members have taken the first step toward constructive involvement, and 
with proper support they can create better neighborhoods in partnership 
with government agencies and private developers.



-- 
Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
http://www.cpeo.org

_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields


_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields