The Interbay Neighborhood Association has asked the City to withdraw its permit for the transitional homeless encampment in Interbay, stating that the site is contaminated and that the city has not done its due diligence in making sure it’s safe for campers.
The encampment at 3234 17th Ave. W. is one of three city-sanctioned encampments (Ballard and SODO) that Mayor Ed Murray announced last summer in response to a growing homeless population. Since then there has been public opposition to the selection of the sites with heavy contention being from the fact that Ballard and Interbay sites were contaminated with harmful compounds.
INA bases their charge on a review conducted by SoundEarth Strategies who contend the city’s testing and sampling for contaminants at the site were not adequate. SES issued a letter last week that sates the city used the wrong methodology in testing and that the findings are not applicable for residential use.
Seattle City Light acquired the property back in 2000. Scott Thomsen with Seattle City Light said that they acquired the property thinking that they might one day have a substation there, but since then the site has been used for storing poles. Before then, the previous owner, Pacific Testing Laboratories, stored heavy industrial solvents at the site. Before the property was purchased, there was an environmental review of the site that determined it was contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE). TCE is a solvent linked to cancers and Parkinson’s disease.
Since then the property had been “capped” with asphalt, which the city believes will protect the campers from contaminants. In addition, because of the known contaminants and campers sleeping so close to the ground, the city hired Argus Pacific Inc. to conduct tests to determine if there are fumes of the contaminant emitting in the air. Samples were taken and the findings were compared to the Washington State Division of Occupational Safety and Health 8-hour permissible exposure limit.
“That sampling found no trace of any contaminants in the air. It was undetectable,” said Thomsen.
However, SES believes the methodology in the testing was inaccurate. They reported that Argus used a lower detection limit of 0.2 parts per million, which is 540 times greater than the Model Toxics Control Act Method B Clean Up Level for TCE (.00037 ppm) and is also the threshold for measurement established by the Department of Ecology for clean up needed for residential use. Furthermore, the sample measurement was compared to occupational standards, which the Department of Planning and Development stated was the “only ones available” for comparison.
“Considering the fact that the Property has been proposed to be used as a residential homeless encampment, it is unclear why Argus compared their analytical results to occupational standards, or why the City asserted, in their 2015 DPD letter, that occupational standards are ‘the only ones available,’” stated SES in their review.
SES advised that there are devices and measuring methodology capable of detecting the smaller measurements required by the MTCA and that they should be used to gather an accurate assessment for the risks of exposure to TCE vapor.
Jeff Thompson, of Interbay Neighborhood Association, has been a leading opponent against the selection of Interbay encampment site.
“The city’s environmental review of contaminates on the site of the Interbay Homeless Encampment was woefully inadequate. The city performed the wrong tests, applied the wrong standards and issued a permit for residential use in clear violation of state environmental law,” said Thompson in a statement.
Despite questions about the level of contamination at the site, campers say they are just glad to be off the street. There are about 20 campers at the site, which the city estimates could house up to 80. Campers have been there since before last weekend.
“It’s not an ideal location, but the alternative is living on the streets. This way people could get back on their feet,” said Stou Tanquist. Tanquist is a resident at Tent City 3 and is acting as the “Move-in Master” for SHARE, which is the organization managing the site.
When told about the SES review and the City’s apparent negligence, Tanquist was skeptical.
“For somebody that doesn’t want us here, they’ve got to find reasons to not have us here, and say well that’s not safe for you. It sounds to me they really don’t care about us, but at the same time they are saying they care about us.”
One camper joked that the reason the encampment was placed on a contaminated site was so “we would just die off.” He also reported that when it rains there is a “river of creamer,” that flows through the encampment from a small pool to the northern slope of the site where SCL poles are stored. He suspects the “river of cream” is linked to the contamination.
“A neighborhood association that doesn’t like us, well I don’t trust them. I have reasonable trust in the city because they are liable, but it would be good to know more.”
Thompson contends that the issue has nothing to do with not wanting the campers in Interbay and everything to do with the city doing right by them with proper assurance that the site is clean and residents are safe.
“The city’s actions could harm the health of homeless campers and subject the City and City Light to liability claims, a clear violation of the city’s property use rules,” Thompson said.
