Agendas and Minutes

City Council (View All)

Study Session

Monday, April 05, 2010


Monday, April 5, 2010

Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way



Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room.


Councilor Silbiger, Jackson, Voisin, Navickas and Chapman were present.  Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 5:34 p.m.


1.     Look Ahead Review

City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the items on the Council Look Ahead. 


2.   Does Council have questions about the Lithia Springs Draft Level II (Screening Level) Ecological Risk Assessment Report and the Management Plan for Historic    Resources and have directions related to the property?

George Kramer from Kramer & Company provided a summary of the Management Plan for Historic Resources.  He participated in a property review with the Historic Commission during 2005 to determine National Register eligibility.  The conclusion was damage had occurred to historic resources due to inappropriate use by the Gun Club.  During another review in the summer of 2009, he discovered the Gun Club had not fully executed previous discussions on how to treat historical resources and shared examples of further damage.  Mr. Kramer recommended a “Keep Them Dry, Keep Them Clean and Don’t Shoot at Them” management plan with clear expectations the Gun Club can use to educate members on taking better care of these historical resources.


Being on the National Register would enable the City easier access to grants.  The property was also identified as containing State archaeological sites and any excavation would require an archaeologist. 


Kenn Conner the Environment Services Group Leader for Brown and Caldwell provided a summary of the Level II Ecological Risk Assessment report that included:


Evaluation Activities

·         Vegetation Inventory

·         Wetland determination

·         Wildlife inventory

·         Sensitive species and habitats

·         Soil and water sampling

·         Define chemicals of concern

·         Identify complete exposure pathways

Mr. Conner provided examples of completed pathways that could consist of a sensitive bird species ingesting lead through plants or water or lead leeching through groundwater to other properties and affecting plant growth.


Brown and Caldwell tested groundwater by excavating 2 feet to collect samples.  Due to the excavation process, the chemical levels were elevated.  Water samples produced arsenic, chromium, cobalt, cooper, iron, lead, nickel and zinc, all below background concentrations except for cobalt, iron and lead.  Iron levels most likely came from a natural resource and cobalt was probably a background metal.  Lead came from shooting activities.


Lead levels in the ground water were 21.9milligrams per liter and 5.2.  The hazard level is 15milligrams for drinking water.  Since the water tested was 2-3 feet below the ground, there was little chance humans or animals would drink from it.  Soil samples were sieved and sifted prior to testing and did not include recoverable lead.


Evaluation Activities cont’d.

·         Calculate hazard quotients

·         Determine whether the chemical concentrations for nay complete exposure pathways exceed ODEQ Screening Levels


·         Emigrant Creek – No chemicals were detected above the ODEQ SLVs or above the upstream sample

·         Creek Sediment – No chemicals were detected above ODEQ SLVs or above upstream sample except for cobalt

·         Groundwater – No complete exposure pathway was identified

Mr. Conner explained if the pathway were not completed metals would not pose a problem to the receptors that concern the City.  This was an ecological assessment not a human assessment and no plants or animals were using the groundwater.  Installing a monitoring well would provide a more detailed test.  They tested sediment in the steam instead of rainwater.  If lead traveled through groundwater to the creek, it would settle if it were leachable and a certain particle size.  A PH test of the rainwater as it flows through the area to determine how is interacts with the lead was suggested.  The ground acts as a sieve; if the lead became soluble, it could migrate.  The acidity in rain could also make lead soluble.


Results cont’d.

·         Skeet Range Soil – Iron exceeded the ODEQ SLVS for invertebrates and plants.

Skeet ranges typically reveal pulverized skeet material and the assessment found larger pieces but very little pulverized skeet.  Bill Longiotti, the Vice President of the Ashland Gun Club explained that 80%-90% of skeet material used is biodegradable.


·         Range Berms Soils – Lead, arsenic, antimony, copper, iron, nickel, tin and zinc were above default background levels exceeded ODEQ SLVS.

Berms are made of street sweeper debris and other City fill.  The lead and copper came from shooting activities.  Zinc was most likely from downspouts and gutters.  A device that shoots the equivalent of an x-ray to screen soil was used to determine the type and concentration of metals present around the berms.  Clean up would consist of removing metal only from the first 6 inches of berm soil.  



·         Lead concentrations will drive decisions about cleaning up the site

·         Iron and cobalt may be within site-specific background concentrations and should be evaluated to establish a site background level

·         Lead concentrations in soil exceed the RCRA hazardous waste criteria

ODEQ requires a licensed individual with hazardous operations training to perform lead removal.  A typical removal would consist of four piles, recoverable lead, contaminated soil needing treatment prior to going to a landfill, contaminated soil not requiring pre-treatment prior to a landfill and a final pile of street sweepings that could be re-used for berms unless the land was slated for recreational or residential purposes in the future.


Placing rubber mats around berms to capture bullets in the rubber was a Best Management Practices and allowed bullet harvesting.  Similar materials could apply to targets as well. 

Conclusions cont’d.

·         Some cleanup and disposal of contaminated soil is likely to be required

Going Forward

·         Submit Level II Screening Level Report to ODEQ

·         Request a meeting at the end of their review before they formalize their opinion

·         Prepare a City-preferred approach prior to that meeting (Clean up berms, Surface removal at trap/skeet ranges, Installation of BMPs, Regular cleanup)

·         Be aware that ODEQ may require additional actions

·         Do not self perform cleanup.  Stringent requirements apply to cleanup of RCRA hazardous waste


Mr. Conner recommended the following Best Management Practices:

·         Address rain and surface water

·         Determine groundwater PH

·         Continue current Best Management Practices with skeet debris

·         Berm areas: install rubberized mats and sort the upper 6 inches of soil to remove stones, pebbles, cobbles to prevent bullets pulverizing 

·         Maintain records on the number of people using the Gun Club on a yearly basis and what they are shooting


The review timeframe for DEQ could take up to 3 months or longer if Level III or IV testing is required.  In the interim staff is requesting a 12-month lease extension for the Gun Club.


Setting residential standards for clean up with institutional or engineering controls was feasible because it was metal and not a chemical or solvent.  Mr. Conner will work with staff to determine the appropriate language for Residential with Institutional Controls clean up.


Meeting adjourned at 7:09 p.m.



Respectfully submitted,                                   

Dana Smith

Assistant to the City Recorder


Online City Services

Pay your bill & more 
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Building Permit
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2024 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top