OCTOBER 2008: AROUND THE STATE
FUNDS FOR TOXIC CLEANUP UNCERTAIN
The former McCormick
and Baxter Creosoting site in North Portland
(foreground) cost state and federal agencies $45.6
million to remediate.
|
|
PORTLAND This
summer a national group proclaimed a victory of sorts in
Portland’s perpetual struggle to clean up contaminated
industrial land along the Willamette River. The Chicago-based
National Brownfield Association spent a year working with the
Portland Development Commission and multiple government
agencies on a roadmap that could turn idle, polluted land into
profitable industry. The plan, however, is just that: a
framework for some of the biggest issues — like how to
actually fund the cleanup.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency’s delicate
definition of a brownfield — land where
“redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived
environmental contamination” — is indicative of
their sometimes-controversial nature: There are 18 such sites
covering 338 acres along the Portland harbor. If only half of
those sites were cleaned up and developed, says Kevin Johnson,
a PDC program manager, it would create $320 million worth of
investment and 1,450 new jobs.
That land, however, isn’t worth that much today.
And that’s a key problem. It was comparatively easy to
find development money to help clean other non-industrial-zoned
brownfields, such as in South Waterfront or the Pearl District,
since the value of the land offset the price of cleanup. But
cleanup cost vs. industrial land value is, as Chuck Harman with
the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality puts it,
“pretty flat.” That doesn’t give landowners
much incentive to clean up. A tax structure that decreases
property taxes for polluted land, along with fears of what
rehabilitation might cost, further diminishes landowner
motivation.
One way to address that problem would be to change the zoning
and allow non-industrial development. But pushing the
industrial sector out to agricultural land would take jobs from
the city and eliminate industry’s riverfront
transportation trifecta: rail, water and highway.
Further complicating things are the land’s other values:
as habitat, as green space, as part of Portland’s role as
a green mecca. Willamette Riverkeeper executive director
Travis Williams says some environmental groups have been more
focused on pollution issues in the river itself. But
rehabilitation of the land and development will undoubtedly
come under the public’s land-use and environmental
magnifying glass.
So how does the PDC proceed with its new plan? Slowly.
The first step, Johnson says, is to identify sites where
cleanup is financially feasible. Then the agency wants to find
a large-scale developer who could purchase and develop multiple
properties. Funding and grants from both state and federal
agencies are available for cleanup. Bonds, city money and
private/public partnerships would also have to be considered.
There’ll also be a brownfield consultant.
“We’re looking for someone who can give us a broad
perspective. What’s worked in other parts of the country,
what it will take for us to utilize this land,” Johnson
says.
ABRAHAM HYATT
Have an opinion?
E-mail feedback@oregonbusiness.com
