The city of Ridgefield is looking to clean up a small section of a downtown parking lot that used to be a dry cleaning business, which led to the contamination of 22 acres of land.
During its Nov. 3 meeting, the Ridgefield City Council voted unanimously to support a “consent decree” between the city and the Washington State Department of Ecology. The decree would allow for work at the former Park Laundry site at 122 N. Main Ave. to excavate and purify the nearby water table.
Though the property in question is only about 2,600 square feet, the contamination from the business’ operation covers a 22-acre area, according to a staff report presented to the council. The area is contaminated with tetrachloroethylene, a chemical usually used in the dry cleaning process.
“The site as we see it is relatively small,” but the chemicals from the dry cleaning operation seeped through over time, Ridgefield City Manager Steve Stuart said.
Park Laundry operated between the 1960s and 1970s, the staff report stated. Afterwards, the property had various owners. The owner of the site is currently listed in the Clark County Geographic Information Systems as Union Ridge Investment Company. The property currently serves as the south end of a parking lot in downtown.
In 2014, the city and the Ridgefield School District partnered with the Department of Ecology for a grant to identify areas of the city which would benefit from remediation and redevelopment, the staff report stated. A 2016 study found three properties downtown with ground contamination, one of which was the site of the former Park Laundry.
“For those sites in the downtown to actually redevelop, we need public investment. They need our help,” Stuart said.
The cleanup is estimated to cost between $1.5 million and $2 million, Stuart said. A private party would not be able to finance the work in order to do the full remediation.
Holly Stafford, an environmental law attorney who is helping the city with the project, explained the consent decree is a documented agreement, in this case between Ecology and the city.
“It commits the need to do something, but it also provides some benefits to the city,” Stafford said.
By agreeing to the decree, the city receives “contribution protection,” which means as long as it completes the work detailed in the decree, it’s protected against claims from Ecology and third parties. The city must agree to a Cleanup Action Plan (CAP), which will be drafted by the environmental consultants in the project.
“If (the city) had performed all the work under the CAP, no one can bring a lawsuit (forward),” Stafford said.
In return, Ecology receives a commitment from the city to complete work based on the CAP.
Meredith D’Andrea, a geologic and environmental consultant for the project, said the project will include a 15-foot excavation of the project area and the addition of three groundwater monitoring wells. This was an expansion of the initial six-foot excavation required by Ecology, which led to an increase in cost from up to $1 million to the current range estimate of $1.5 to $2 million.
D’Andrea said the project was initially approved for a grant around $900,000. The city will need to seek additional funding to make up the difference.
A number of steps must be completed before the city breaks ground on the project. Simultaneous to the public comment period for the consent decree, project backers will have to apply for a State Environmental Protection Act permit and seek approval of the CAP. Then, an engineering design report is needed.
D’Andrea said the extensive soil removal during the project will have an immediate effect on the contaminant plume, and the chemical injection would take care of the downstream effects.
Stafford explained the injection “helps start the chemical breakdown” of the contaminants in the water table.
Stafford said the consent decree differed from Ecology’s usual approach in that it has a different effective date. For the city, it only becomes effective once the city acquires the title of the property. A decree usually goes into effect immediately after it is signed by a judge.
In Ecology’s usual case, the city would be obligated to do the work before it owns the property, which is something the city doesn’t want, Stafford said.
She said the city has worked with property owners in order to secure a quit claim deed. She noted the cost of needed remediation “far exceeds” the property value.
The city could also pursue condemnation of the property, though that could go to trial.
