“We think there is such great benefit to this—that’s why we’ve spent so much time on it,” says Suzanne Malec-McKenna, commissioner of the Chicago Department of Environment. “The perception is that with this we could bring polluted soil into our communities, but the reality is that this is the soil you’d find in any backyard in Chicago.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Under the city’s proposal, the dirt dug up through city road, sewer, school, library, and park construction projects could simply be taken to another construction site where it’s needed—as long as tests prove it’s no more contaminated than what’s already there. Malec-McKenna says in these instances it makes no sense to truck in “virgin” soil from rural areas that has itself been exposed to decades of vehicle emissions, pesticides, and other chemicals. “There just really isn’t a god-and-glaciers quality soil anywhere anymore,” she said.
Among them were representatives of groups like Chicago Urban Initiative and the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, which has led fights against polluted park space in their south side neighborhood.
“They didn’t tell anyone about it beforehand—we got downtown for the meeting and found out it was pulled from the agenda,” Wasserman said.
“Where is the proof?” she said. “It makes us very leery, especially when you’re talking about dirt that would be used for schools, playgrounds, and libraries.”
Last week Tribune columnist John Kass speculated that a state bill relaxing the rules for disposing of construction debris would be helpful to a connected city contractor as plans move forward for work on an Olympic Village. There’s no chance the city is pushing the soil and rubble ordinance to save money–or spend it with the right people–on Olympics-related construction, is there?
