The City of Nanaimo has slapped a landowner with a nearly $92,000 bill to clean up contaminated dirt.
The bill is “insane,” says Duart Rapton, who was charged $91,991, including a tipping fee that topped $72,000, to remove contaminated soil he failed to clean up himself.
He’s prepared to defend himself against the city legally, and told the News Bulletin he will put a lien on a house where he got the soil but he won’t pay the bill.
Last year, the City of Nanaimo placed a clean-up order on Rapton’s Howard Avenue property, where there was garbage, wood and shingle scraps and discarded furniture, but city staff said that between the time the order was issued and when the city went to get estimates for cleanup, soil partially covered the debris and was found contaminated with lead, zinc and tin. Rapton was asked to remove soil in October, and in January the property owner went to council for an extension, saying he was unable to remove the soil because the weather had been so bad.
Council declared the soil a nuisance and gave him 30 days to remove it. The tipping fee was estimated to be up to $40,000.
“On this particular file our city staff worked very diligently with Mr. Rapton to advise him that it would be much more cost effective if he handled the matter on his own and Mr. Rapton did not respond to that,” said Brad McRae, the city’s chief operating officer. “He has been aware for many months that it’s his responsibility to manage his property and the city stepping in is a last resort.”
The clean-up work was done by the city in March and took three days because of the amount of contaminated soils and other material, according to McRae, who said the city was not able to get a final understanding of cost until the work was completed.
“I could handle $40,000, it’d take me 10 years to pay it off, but I can never pay $91,000. Where am I going to get that money?” said Rapton, who was “blown away” by the bill.
He said the city also towed away three vehicles and ground up lumber.
Rapton previously said he got the soil from a Franklyn Street property and nobody told him anything was wrong with it. He told the News Bulletin he’s not convinced it was contaminated, claiming not to have been given a sample, and questioned why the soil from the property he got it from was allowed to be moved elsewhere.
The city has not confirmed from where the soil originated, but Davidson previously said the site Rapton mentioned did go through the development permit process and there was no indication of contaminated soil.
Several councillors raised the issue of accountability for the soil at a recent committee of the whole meeting. Coun. Jim Kipp believed the city building inspection department should be held accountable for allowing the soil to move without “one of our standards.” He said the soil should not have left the site and that he had asked “months ago” why it was moved and never got an answer.
He also expressed disbelief, after having gone to the Howard Avenue site, that there was $90,000 worth of soil there.
The city is currently investigating what happened on the Howard Avenue property and if there’s any connection with other sites, which is expected to take 30 days.
