Banking on Tainted Ground 

The Navy balks at cleaning up its old Alameda base, but if it accepts the city's latest plan, houses may bloom there yet.

Last month when the Pentagon recommended closing the Concord Naval Weapons Station, Mayor Laura Hoffmeister was pictured in the San Francisco Chronicle sucking cake frosting off her index finger. There was good cause for her to celebrate. If Congress approves the closure, Concord hopes to oversee the development of 13,500 new homes on the site, plus schools, business parks, and open space.

But if the experience of other Bay Area cities is any indication, Concord officials should temper their excitement. Before ground is broken, they are in for a tedious process of compromise, toxic assessments, and cleanup negotiations.

At least that has been the case in Alameda, which has been itching to build on the former Alameda Naval Air Station since 1993. The base boasts 1,600 acres of developable waterfront property right in the center of the Bay Area. When the area now known as Alameda Point was chosen for closure, the community was terrified by the proposed loss of four hundred jobs that had helped sustain the island's economy since World War II. The city immediately mobilized and began working on a redevelopment plan. It was approved in 1996, but the project is still on hold.

The Navy has surrendered only about eighty acres since it officially ceased operations at the base. The remaining 1,520 acres have been ensnared in toxic cleanup negotiations. "It has been a long process because of the environmental issues," Alameda Mayor Beverly Johnson said of the former base, which was put on the Superfund hazardous-waste cleanup list in 1999. "We can't do anything with the property until it's cleaned up."

Bound by the federal Environmental Protection Act, the Navy cannot transfer the land until it is reasonably cleaned of toxic hazards. And the sticking point in transferring the base has been agreement on what a "reasonable" cleanup would cost.

The Navy rejected the city's 2003 transfer proposal because the city wanted $370 million more for cleanup then the Navy was willing to give. It took the city two years to regroup and submit another proposal that would only transfer about four hundred acres. The land in question was used for Navy housing, and requires little cleanup compared to the rest of the property.

The Navy has agreed to respond by June 30, and Alameda Point planners are on pins and needles as they await its decision. City officials and the project's master developer, the Alameda Point Community Partners -- a partnership of the Centex Corporation and Shea Homes -- said they believe they can reach agreement with the Navy over the cost of cleaning up the four hundred acres.

If the Navy says yes, the city hopes to break ground sometime next year on 1,200 new residential units, 695,000 square feet of commercial space, a $10 million sports complex, and 134 acres of open space. If the answer is no, plans to create new housing on the base could be set back by two years, and possibly much longer.

"We are cautiously optimistic," said Alameda's base reuse and redevelopment manager, Debbie Potter. A Navy spokesman also was positive about the proposal. "We are looking forward to conveying the land and having development begin," Navy base closure manager Ron Plaseied said. "I know there is a level of frustration, but wait and see the redevelopment plan they have in mind. It's beautiful, and I think they will forget the past. Just wait."

Alameda Point Advisory Committee chairman Lee Perez, who has worked on the reuse plan for thirteen years, is ready to see some progress. "The process has been considerably frustrating," he said. "At first they told us our group would be around for four years, five at the most. But the toxicity problems on the base persist and the negotiations have gone on and on and on."

Plaseied said his agency also has been frustrated by the seemingly endless details. Out of the 23 major military bases closed in California in the last fifteen years, Alameda Point has some of the most extensive contamination. Finding agreement on cleaning it has been unexpectedly difficult because of the multitude of agencies involved. Besides the Navy, stakeholders include the city of Alameda, its master developer, the US EPA, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the state Department of Toxic Substance Control, and the nonprofit environmental organization Arc Ecology.

"When I first became manager in 1999, I had no idea of the extent of necessary cleanup and no idea of the time it would take to reach agreement," Plaseied said. "But the more people you have in a room, the longer it takes to reach agreement."


The level of contamination at the base is commensurate with its importance during World War II. When war broke out in the Pacific, the Navy rushed to build hangars, housing, and airfields, and often took short cuts with construction of storm drains and other infrastructure. Once completed, the base became one of the navy's busiest air stations, facilitating critical air support to Pacific convoys and West Coast patrol operations.

Tags: ,

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Anonymous and pseudonymous comments will be removed.

Readers also liked…

Latest in News

  • Oakland Organic Gardener Wins Battle Against Roundup

    Diane Williams fought for two years to stop Oakland Unified from spraying the likely carcinogenic herbicide. And, finally, she was vindicated.
    • Oct 10, 2018
  • Two PACs Take Aim at Desley Brooks

    Building trades unions and some supporters of Mayor Libby Schaaf and ex-Mayor Jean Quan are hoping to oust Brooks, but the councilmember’s backers say the PACs are misrepresenting her record.
    • Oct 9, 2018
  • Targeting Muslims?

    Critics say the Alameda County Sheriff's Office is using a Trump administration anti-terrorism grant to focus on Black, Muslim inmates returning to society.
    • Oct 3, 2018
  • More »

Author Archives

  • Richmond at a Crossroads

    The city is on the verge of an economic boom: Will Mayor Tom Butt, a longtime city official, lead it to prosperity, or will the Richmond Progressive Alliance take full control of City Hall?
    • Oct 17, 2018
  • The Firing of Captain Mark Gagan

    The surprising dismissal of the well-liked Richmond police captain and a series of other scandals threaten to tarnish the reputation of a police department once held as a national model of reform.
    • Jun 27, 2018
  • More»

Most Popular Stories

  • The Express' November 2018 Endorsement Guide

    We endorse Schaaf, Ezzy Ashcraft, and Butt; along with Fortunato Bas, Thao, Middleton, and Whitaker for Oakland council and Knox White and Oddie for Alameda council.
  • Richmond at a Crossroads

    The city is on the verge of an economic boom: Will Mayor Tom Butt, a longtime city official, lead it to prosperity, or will the Richmond Progressive Alliance take full control of City Hall?
  • Role Reversals in the Oakland Mayor's Race

    In the Oakland mayor's race, the normally staid Libby Schaaf has come out swinging, while one of her top challengers, the usually brash Cat Brooks, is acting more like a Fortune 500 CEO.
  • Oakland Council District 4 Is a Wide-Open Contest

    With the incumbent quitting, the race features seven candidates, including three who are running as a slate.
  • The Fight Over Rent Control

    Tenants are pushing to repeal the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act, which strictly limits local rent control. But landlords are spending big to beat Prop. 10.

Special Reports

Fall Arts 2018

Our Picks for the Best Events of the Fall Arts Season

The Queer & Trans Issue 2018

Stories about creating safe spaces in the Queer and Trans community.

© 2018 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation