Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, April 24, 1994 TAG: 9404240031
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: D-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: CATHRYN MCCUE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The long-awaited Roanoke River flood control project is moving along, albeit at glacial speed.
The multimillion-dollar project stalled indefinitely a couple years ago when heavy metals and other contaminants were found in substantial quantities along the river's banks, which need to be widened to reduce the force of flood waters.
City engineers have been waiting for information from the state Department of Environmental Quality, and vice versa. Now, both are waiting on the federal Environmental Protection Agency to determine just how polluted the waterfront land is.
Eventually, City Council must decide whether to take the plunge and start digging, perhaps increasing the cost if the project results in more environmental damage than if the river were just left alone.
The seven candidates vying for four seats on council all support the flood control project. Whether they'd be willing to assume potential cleanup costs is another matter.
"I don't think the city can take blanket responsibility for cleanup. That's like a black hole, as far as finances go," Democrat William White said.
Democrat Linda Wyatt agreed, saying she wouldn't "write a blank check" to clean up the banks. She advocated weighing the benefits of cleanup vs. the cost, as did Democrat John Edwards.
"It's a balancing of risk. Not going forward, we know the results, we know the risk. It happened in 1985," he said, referring to the city's last major flood.
He added that the project, which has been delayed by several years, has to be speeded up.
As for the polluted spots along the river, Edwards said, "At some point in time, they need to be cleaned up by somebody." He suggested that the federal and state governments might be able to kick in some money for that.
The Army Corps of Engineers agreed to pay about $23 million toward the $38 million flood control project, but won't pay for any environmental cleanup.
Democrat Nelson Harris and Republican Barbara Duerk said the worst sites should be left out of the project as long as the contaminants are sealed in the dirt and not leaking into the river or ground water.
That may be the city's solution. John Peters, the city engineer in charge of the flood project, said he gave the "worst-case scenario" to meet the corps' strict criteria that every dollar spent on the project yields a dollar of benefit.
"I think we still have a project even if we take out the trouble spots," Peters said.
Roanoke's hired consultant, Dewberry and Davis, is reviewing one site in the city and one in Roanoke County, both privately owned, to deposit the massive amount of dredged soil, which Peters said likely would be classified as industrial waste.
He declined to say where those sites are because of ongoing negotiations with property owners, he said.
Because the soil will be somewhat contaminated, the state won't allow it to be spread on pristine, previously undeveloped land. Nor can it be put in the flood plain, and escalating tipping fees make dumping it in a modern landfill out of the question, Peters said.
Meanwhile, Peters and state Department of Environmental Quality staff members are waiting for the results of EPA samples taken in January.
The federal agency could determine that pollution along the riverbanks is worse than the city or state thought, and that could slow the project down even more.
The EPA official recently assigned to the case was unavailable for comment.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB