integrated contaminated sites...

15.08.2011

INTEGRATION-WorkshopBogotá

28/02 – 02/03/2011VIII International Seminar on Remediation and Redevelopment of Contaminated Sites

Integrated contaminated sites management

Hermann Josef Kirchholtes

Departament for Environmental Protection, Stuttgart

Integrated inner urban development


INTEGRATION Approach


Why to register contaminated sites?

• First problems emerged 1986 with dwellings on contaminated soilsin Germany

• German legislation 1987: Municipalities preparing a land-use plan are responsible to take into account healthy living conditions

• German jurisdiction 1989: Municipalities preparing a land-use plan have to take into account contaminated sites aspects

• Legislation in Baden-Württemberg 2004: Responsibility of localadministrative bodies to establish and maintain contaminated sitesregisters

Responsibility of a property owner forcontaminated sites management in Germany

According to Soil Act (1998)

• The property owner … of a real property shall be obliged to takemeasures to prevent harmful soil changes originating from theirproperty. (§ 4 (2) Soil Act)

• The party who caused a contaminated site … shall be obliged to remediate the contaminated site …. (§ 4 (3) Soil Act)

If contamination was unknown, owners‘ responsibility should be limitedup to the current market value of the decontaminated plot (DecisionFederal Constitutional Court 2000)

Contaminated sites registration in Stuttgart

• 1993-1996: Historical survey of (potentially) contaminated sites in the entire city (3.600 areas determined).

• 1995/96: Establishment of a digital contaminated sites register in Stuttgart based on the digital map.

• Since 1997: Continuous update of the register.

• 2004/2005, 2010/11 and annualy starting from 2012: Update of thehistorical survey of potentially contaminated sites.

• Since 2003: Register of (about 300) Brownfield sites in Stuttgart as a potential for urban development. Intersection with contaminatedsites.

Costs for survey and maintenance of contaminated sites data

• About 500 Euros per site => 1.8 Mio. Euro for 3600 sites(1280 BRL per site => 4.6 Mio. BRL for 3600 sites)

3.090

Contaminated sites

in Stuttgart

45 REMEDY 46 CONTROL

1.175 Sites to deal with,

thereof 192 municipal

1.915 POT

1.084 INVEST

Focus: Contaminated sites management

Contaminated sites in Stuttgart-Feuerbach

Different types of data access to the contamiatedsites register

1. Complete access (read and write) for all responsibles in thedepartment for environmental protection

2. Limited access (read) according to the needs in the department forbuilding control, urban planning department and land surveydepartment, states agencies and ministry

3. Complete data set in a printed version for a single site at therequest of the owner or in case of legitimate interest of the applicant

4. Basic information for everybody on www.stuttgart.de (underpreparation)

5. Statistical and background information on www.stuttgart.de

Complete data set

Content

Name of the siteDescription of the locationType of the site, branch, operating timeStatus of knowledgeHarmful substancesEnvironmental riskNeed for actionInvestigation reportsDigital map

Basic information on www.stuttgart.de: http://gis3.stuttgart.de/geolineflex/geolineflex_n.html

1. Information requests(annualy about 1000)

2. Which kind of information?Plots registered?Status of the knowledge?Need for action?In case of need for action: estimated costs.

3. Time for handling: 1-2 days

4. Who asks? Private owners or investors, technical experts, real estateappraisers, banks, district court (in case of saile by court order), offices.

5. Which fees? Plots registered: free of charge.Stand der Altlastenbearbeitung/Übersendung von Daten 20 Euro. Beratung zum weiteren Vorgehen nach Aufwand, je Stunde 76 Euro.

Data requests

Municipal reserves for contaminated sitesThe municipality of Stuttgart operates as land owner.

2010 double-entry accounting was adopted.

Therefore Stuttgart saves reserves for contaminated site management.

• 192 contaminated municipal sites

• 10 Million Euro (26.5 Mio. BRL) reserves for investigation

• 40 Million Euro (106.2 Mio. BRL) reserves for remediation

How to calculate management costs on the status of historical data?

Cost–benefit of contaminated sites registration

Cost Benefit

Data Survey

Maintenance

Data Base Management

Security forinvestor and municipality

Avoid regress

Aerial picture of the Schoch area 2011 Feuerbach

Schoch area in the contaminated sites register Stuttgart

Historical data: Metal coating company since1925, dealing withchromium and CHC

Remediation costestimation 2005based on hisoricalinvestigation(PROSIDE-tool):

6 Mio. Euro

15.9 Mio. BRL

Area: 14,200 m²

Value decontaminated:

380 €/m² => 5.4 Mio. €

1000 BRL/m² => 14.3 Mio. BRL

Schoch area in Stuttgart Feuerbach

2007:Groundwatercontaminationwith CHC in Feuerbach as a result of an aereal gw-investigationyellow: 100-1000 µg/lred:> 1000 µg/l

Area: 14,200 m²


380 €/m² => 5.4 Mio. €

1000 BRL/m² => 14.3 Mio. BRL

Remediation costestimation 2007based on preliminaryinvestigation:

7.2 Mio. Euro

19.1 Mio. BRL


Area: 14,200 m²


380 €/m² => 5.4 Mio. €

1000 BRL/m² => 14.3 Mio. BRL

Remediation costestimation 2012based on detailed linvestigationand remedial planning(0.5 Mio. €):

16 Mio. Euro

42.4 Mio. BRL


Site specific solution

The remediation of such sites is funded by 75 % of the remediationcosts. The municipality purchased the Schoch plots to be able to recieve state funding.

The risk is that there is no guarantee for state‘s funding of theremediation. An application is only possible if the municipality is siteowner, declares its responsibility, if a budget is available and otherpreconditions are kept.

Urban development of the Brownfield however is only possible if theremediation costs can be balanced by funding.


Different departments – different interests

Urban planning department:Central location, new entrance for Feuerbach. New dwellingsurgently needed.

Social department: Need for social infrastructure (Daycare facility for children).

Department for environmental protection:Remediation costs higher than value, no investor for remediation.

Economical promotion:Neighbour interested in enlagement, innovative technology, workingplaces, saveguarding of the place of location, but remediation coststoo high.

Concerted action: Installation of a Brownfield manager.

Cooperation of municipaldepartments in case of Schoch area

Findings

The municipalities have to deal transparently with the contaminatedsites information.

For some extreme sites remediation costs cannot be balanced. In theses cases special solutions have to be developed.

Stuttgart developed a strategy to make state‘s funding availavle for thecontaminated sites development.

National approaches are not transferable due to different legislation. Butinternational exchange of approaches facilitates the development of local instruments.

The „Operaϧão urbana“ developed for the INTEGRATION pilot area of Mooca-Vila Carioca seems to be an adequate approach for São Paulo.

17.10.2012

http://www.urbal-integration.eu

17.10.2012

integrated contaminated sites...

Documents