To concerned Regulators,

We believe the “purpose & need” of this fast moving project could be violating the spirit of “avoid, minimize, mitigate” in general. Therefore, we humbly request a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment are completed before approving the Nationwide 27 Permit.

Several reasons why below:

1. Myth #1: The City doesn’t need to do this Pleasure House Point project at all; there is another wetlands project available instead called the New Mill Creek Tidal Mitigation Bank.
   Fact: Yes, another possible opportunity to buy tidal wetland mitigation credits came online last week called the New Mill Creek Tidal Mitigation Bank.
   Source: https://virginiabeach.gov/connect/blog/the-real-deal-debunking-13-myths-about-the-pleasure-house-point-wetlands-restoration-project 2.
2. “Please provide the list of projects that have required the city to buy wetland mitigation credits since the bond referendum passed November 2, 2021 and how many wetland mitigation credits are required now for future projects.” From 11/21/2021 to To 12/23/2024.
   Your request was forwarded to Public Works. I have been advised that they do not have a list in response to your request.
   Source: FOIA Request response January 13 2025
3. Petition asking to purchase credits & refine plan. Over 2,700 people have signed petition since only December 20, 2024.
   Source: https://www.change.org/p/please-purchase-the-newly-available-tidal-wetlands-credits-refine-phpwmb-plans
4. Three(3) samples of material was presented at City Council public hearing which was acknowledged by the Public Works Director – a piece of pavement, concrete with gravel & an unknown petrochemical material all presumably dumped on the spoils site – Pleasure House Point in the area Wetlands Mitigation Bank is proposed – in the 1970s. Was material being tested before dumped? After it was dumped?
   Video of City Council public hearing January 7th 2025 is provided here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D_T1v0rI3A

As you know, the Brock Environmental Center and Macon & Joan Brock Classroom campus is literally feet away from this project. Pre-schoolers thru senior citizens routinely spend time there. Meetings with visitors from national & international governments & NGOs also are held routinely. However, this project rolls out. It’ll certainly garner national news. Over 140,000 people have visited the campus since it opened.

In property acquisitions, it is customary for due diligence investigation(s) to be completed before a fee simple property transfer is finalized. It seems reasonable that such an investigation would have reported the obvious; materials of generally unknown origin were dumped on the PHP property as far back as the 1970’s.

These findings would have been followed up with Phase II soil and/or groundwater sampling and testing to screen for regulated substances (hazardous and petroleum constituents). If the investigations were completed, they should be made available to evaluate the potential effects on the proposed PHPWMB project.

Of principal concern is the transport of these dredge materials to the City’s Oceana disposal site, especially if they remain untested. Once removed from PHP, the material becomes a waste, and is subject to VDEQ regulations for transport and disposal. Secondly, possible exposures to regulated substances may result when construction workers are exposed to any contaminated soil, dust, and groundwater. Especially with workers involved in the planting process where hand work is proposed, and the incidence of physical contact with regulated materials may result.

Additionally, considerations for the sampling, testing and handling of regulated materials should be included in the project plans and specifications for the PHPWMB project. This information should be made available for public review and comment.

Therefore, we humbly request a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and a Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment are completed before approving the Nationwide 27 Permit.

What will be the “reasonably foreseeable effect” if the environmental site assessments haven’t successfully been completed for a spoils site used in the 1970s?

Sincerely yours,
Tim Solanic