Residents worry about toxics at Brisbane project site

Oakland Tribune, Oct 24, 2004 by Emily Fancher, STAFF WRITER

BRISBANE -- Some residents of Brisbane see potential when looking out at the 500 acres of vacant land known as the Baylands.

They imagine shopping malls, office buildings, restaurants and parks that will rise out of the dirt over the next decades.

Others survey the vast stretch of land fronting Highway 101 and see the toxic legacy left behind from railyards, a factory and the city dump. And they wonder, can the Baylands be safely cleaned up for development?

That's becoming an urgent question. In the next few weeks, the land's owner, Universal Paragon Corp., will submit a development plan for the site after more than a decade of waiting. That will trigger an environmental impact report, clean-up plans that regulators must approve and, in a few years, the City Council will vote on the project.

As vacant land in the Bay Area disappears, developers are cleaning up polluted sites -- such as the Mission Bay complex in San Francisco and the Home Depot in Colma on a former landfill -- to build on.

Though the final cleanup methods haven't been decided on, it's clear the costs will be staggering. Universal Paragon has already spent roughly $20 million on the site and will likely shell out at least another $20 million.

Experts mostly agree that the Baylands can be safely developed with engineering safeguards, but they also call for vigilant monitoring, though no housing is allowed on the site.

"This is something that should not be taken lightly by the public," said Dean Peterson, director of San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division. "If it isn't done right these things can be a serious health concern."

Resident Karen Evans Cunningham said many of her questions about the site, such as what happens when these toxins interact, remain unanswered.

"There are still a lot of unknowns that need to be looked at quite carefully out there," she said.

To ensure the project is safe, the city plans to hire a firm to review all the environmental documents from the regulatory agencies and the developer once they are completed.

"Developers are there to make money, and you have to watch them," said Fred G. Lee, an environmental consultant who has been a public advisor on two Superfund sites. He said it's imperative that the firm is truly independent and does not primarily work for developers.

Brisbane's senior planner, Tim Tune, said that the city staff will study all the firms who apply to review the environmental issues.

"We can see who has been paying their bills and try to avoid a conflict," he said.

Many residents are most worried about toxics on the northwest corner, once home to the Schlage Lock factory and parts of the railyards. Left behind are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the soil and groundwater that can increase the risk of cancer if swallowed or breathed.

"We're starting to learn that VOCs may be more dangerous than we originally thought," particularly as vapors, said Lenny Siegel, director of the Center for Public Environmental Oversight in Mountain View. He said it's up to the city, perhaps even more than the regulatory agency, to make sure that engineering solutions are comprehensive.

Bill Shefchik, senior geologist at Burns & McDonnell, the firm hired to oversee the environmental issues for the developer, said that possible engineering options include flexible liners over the dirt, ventilation systems and placing parking garages on the first floor as a buffer.

He said Universal Paragon will continue to pump the contaminated groundwater out and treat it, as it has since 1995, and is considering other options.

"It's definitely a property that can be developed safely, provided there's proper engineering," said Karen Toth, who supervises the clean-up of the area for the Department of Toxic Substances Control.

The southwestern portion of the site is tainted from lead, other heavy metals and the Bunker C oil left from the former railyards.

These contaminants don't move easily, said Stephen Hill, toxics cleanup division chief for the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board, which is overseeing the cleanup. He said about three feet of clean soil and pavement for a parking lot would be enough protection. Shefchik said where contamination is shallower, the dirt will be removed.

The eastern portion of the site, roughly 300 acres, served as the city dump from 1932 to 1967, when the smell haunted residents' homes.

Today, the main concern is preventing human contact with the waste and controlling methane gas from decomposing waste. Under some conditions, methane is flammable and can displace oxygen, suffocating people, said Peterson of the environmental health division.

Shefchik said monitoring shows very little methane gas is being generated, though the levels will continue to be monitored, and a soil and clay cap that won't be breached during an earthquake will cover the landfill.

Some residents worry about medical and military waste, but Peterson said there's "no reason to believe it was used as a hazardous-waste dump" though records on the landfill are "not great."