by Steve Dwyer

A landfill conversion is a high-risk, high-reward proposition. Prudent end use decision-making is paramount—all the time balancing social with economic impacts. 

This prudent progression comes to mind when examining projects like the former Marble Quarry Landfill Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP) site in Tuckahoe, New York. The property illustrates the inherent challenges facing New York State’s—and all other states’—extensive program to rehabilitate contaminated brownfields sites.  And, this redevelopment effort shines a light on the task that all stakeholders face in end-use decision-making. 

First some background: Remediation of the landfill is fragmented into three parts. A hotel developer enrolled in the BCP as a volunteer is remediating its own property, but “is not responsible for investigating or remediating off-site contamination that has migrated from the BCP site, or that was disposed off-site (i.e., the remainder of the landfill).”

In the absence of finding and holding accountable a responsible party, the Department of EnvironmentalConservation (DEC) is addressing the other two parts using state Superfund money. 

Bilwin Development Affiliates purchased 3.45 acres in the middle of theelongated property, successfully applying for inclusion of those acres in New York State’s DEC Brownfields Cleanup Program. Bilwin, with support from village leaders, is building a 153-room, multi-storyMarriott Springhill Suites hotel, a restaurant, and parking lots totaling about 200 spaces.

As part of the Remedial ActionWork Plan prepared by Bilwin’s consultants, a published report stated that they excavated 10 so-called “hot spots;" capped the former landfill with buildings, concrete, and other impermeable surfaces; embarked upon vapor mitigation for the hotel and restaurant buildings; and established institutional controls and a site management plan.

At a spring 2016 public meeting, community members opposed the project, believing it would provide insufficient protection of public health, and that the remedy was incomplete since only one-half of the landfill was being addressed. According to a published report, the concern was that construction, involving dozens of pilings penetrating the landfill, would disturb and spread contamination.  Also of concern was the need for construction plan details regarding the compaction of the soil with heavy weights, which had not been worked out. Community consensus also generated concern that the plan did not address the migration of groundwater and vapors off site.

Those tasked with evaluating the project said they “are not convinced that the routes of potential exposure have been fullycharacterized. Even if the remedy for a landfill is appropriate, that doesn’t mean that it is safe in the long run to build work or living spaces on property with uncertain contaminant distribution and likely settling and off-gassing. This is why most communities redevelop old landfill sites into parks and other open spaces.”

Therein lies the tricky task of pinpointing end use decision-making in the context of the historical background. A passive-use strategy for these types of parcels has proven successful in many instances—including former landfills that have been converted into golf courses, which avoids the “trap” of building living spaces on property with uncertain contaminant distribution. A golf course is one way to stimulate economic engines as well, via the green fees and other revenue. Indeed, stimulating economic impacts is often a vital and necessary endgame, particularly for communities needing to ratchet up their coffers. 

Opting for social-oriented drivers—promoting green space and its residual quality-of-life components—might not generate the tax dollars desired at the time, but this course of action could win friends for generations.