pages: CityCouncil/2012-11-07.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2012-11-07 | 4 | The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded there is a process; the Navy has to comply with the Section 106 historic process before the property can be conveyed, which requires the historic district be submitted for the national register; the Navy has submitted the district; the City had the opportunity to review documents and provided many comments but was not able to change said aspect [regarding Building 5]; the district will have to be designated a local monument as part of the conveyance agreement; the Historical Advisory Board would consider the new map, which includes Building 5 and some of the Seaplane Lagoon, in December; then, the matter would come to Council; just because the Building is a contributing structure to a historic district does not mean there is not flexibility to demolish the Building at some point; there is just an extra process to demonstrate that removal of the building does not undermine the integrity of historic district as a whole. Councilmember deHaan inquired if the Navy would still be obligated to do remediation if the Building is removed, to which the Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point responded the proposed plan is to leave the slab in place. Consultant Peter Russell, Russell Ressources, stated if the alternatives recommended in the proposed plan are carried forward into the Record of Decision, the slab will be an engineering control that isolates the radiological material under it; the slab will have to be maintained in perpetuity unless it is removed and something equivalent is placed on top or radiological contamination is removed; the Navy's responsibility is simply to ensure that the engineering control is in place and adequate; the City would have to pay to remove the slab and dig up the contamination. In response to Councilmember deHaan's further inquiry, Mr. Russell stated the specifics will be developed as part of a later document; the requirement to maintain the slab will probably only apply to the footprint of the affected storm drains and not necessarily the southern half of the building. Councilmember Johnson stated apparently the Navy is going back to the cleanup method of natural attenuation: leave contamination long enough and eventually it will disappear; the City is objecting and providing comments that it does not support the plan; however, if the Navy sticks to the proposed plan, the building could be demolished but the cap sealing off contaminants could not be removed; everybody agrees that the plan is not good, which is why comments are being submitted. Councilmember deHaan stated the City is asking the uranium portion be cleaned up; a lot of activities which occurred have had remediation action; the area is probably the dirtiest at Alameda Point; the concern is paying for remediation if the building is torn down; the Navy is putting the building on the historical list, so they do not have any obligation to tear it down. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated remediating the radiological material under the building would require portions of the building be torn down; the Navy does not want to do so because it would be exorbitantly expensive. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 November 7, 2012 | CityCouncil/2012-11-07.pdf |