toxins – Care4Suffolk https://care4suffolk.org Tue, 17 Feb 2026 02:47:35 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1 https://care4suffolk.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/cropped-Care4Suffolk-32x32.png toxins – Care4Suffolk https://care4suffolk.org 32 32 Environmental Concerns at Riversbend https://care4suffolk.org/2026/02/17/environmental-concerns-at-riversbend/ https://care4suffolk.org/2026/02/17/environmental-concerns-at-riversbend/#respond Tue, 17 Feb 2026 02:26:10 +0000 https://care4suffolk.org/?p=8838 Read More »Environmental Concerns at Riversbend]]>

According to the environmental studies (attached below) conducted on the old VDOT site at 1700 N Main Street, there were numerous soil and water samples that contained high amounts of Diesel Range Organics (DROs) as well as other toxic chemicals like arsenic, toluene, ethylbenzene and naphthalene that were found in the samples from the site.

Slide 1 created by Care4Suffolk with sources: Environmental Studies Phase 1 and 2, Duke University, and DC Department of Energy and Environment.

On Slide 1, the sample S-19 shows a large amount of DROs (Diesel Range Organics) present in the soil. This sample was taken from soil near the old VDOT administration building (the building is labeled 03 on the map and is circled in yellow). 

 

According to Duke University and the DC Department of Energy and Environment, any DRO amount greater than 100 mg/Kg (or ppm) needs remediation, a form of environmental clean up. Soil sample S-19 measured DROs at 16,000 mg/Kg– 160 times higher than that level. 

 

Known health impacts of DROs include: lung inflammation, difficulty breathing, decreased liver and kidney function, neurological system effects, eye damage, skin irritation, and some DROs are suspected of causing cancer. 

 

If the Riversbend rezoning is approved as things currently stand, the City will be receiving this particular building and roughly 2 acres surrounding it to use for the new Suffolk Public Schools administration building. Then it will fall to the City to clean up this hazardous DRO waste. 

Slide 2, created by Care4Suffolk with sources: Environmental Studies Phase 1 and 2

On Slide 2, additional areas were found to have DROs above the 100 mg/kg remediation level. This area is on the southeast portion of the parcel adjacent to the Nansemond River. The rezoning application shows this portion of the site remaining B-2 (commercial) and as the possible location for a marina (which has since been downgraded to a kayak launch.) 

 

Other toxic chemicals like arsenic, toluene, ethylbenzene and naphthalene were found in samples from around the VDOT site:

From PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT, page 21

From PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT, page 24

None of this is terribly surprising considering the Virginia Department of Transportation owned and used the land for roughly 80 years. I don’t think anyone is surprised that this type of site, used the way it was for so long, contains numerous hazardous materials that have leaked, leeched, or spilled into the ground and water. 

 

These chemicals CAN be cleaned up to allow the site to be reused for other purposes However, that process takes time and money. 

 

The City is about to assume the cost to clean up the hazardous waste located on the portion of the site containing the old VDOT administration building. Why has none of this been part of any of the presentations to the Planning Commission or City Council? The Interim City Manager has been very involved in this project, so surely he is aware of these studies. Did he notify the EDA (Economic Development Authority) Board, which is a party to this application? 

 

The high levels of DROs, the associated health risks, and the remediation were not included in Mr. Hughe’s presentations (there were two!) to Suffolk’s School Board about the VDOT administration building. Is the School Board even aware of this? They already would have to contend with the mold, asbestos, and lead paint in the building itself. Do they want to add this remediation cost and time to their limited window to complete a new school administration building?

Environmental Studies:

 

Other sources:

]]> https://care4suffolk.org/2026/02/17/environmental-concerns-at-riversbend/feed/ 0