[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37866-37871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18741]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Record of Decision for the Disposal and Reuse of the Department
of Defense Housing Facility Novato, California
summary: The Department of the Navy (Navy), pursuant to Section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42
U.S.C. Sec. 4332(2)(C), and the regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality that implement NEPA procedures, 40 CFR Parts
1500-1508, hereby announces its decision to dispose of the Department
of Defense Housing Facility (DoDHF) at Novato, California.
Navy intends to dispose of the property in a manner that is
consistent with the Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan dated October
1995, as revised in November 1996 (Revised Reuse Plan). These plans
address reuse of both DoDHF and the Department of the Army's adjacent
Hamilton Army Airfield (HAA). The Hamilton Reuse Planning Authority
(HRPA), the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for the DoDHF property,
prepared both the October 1995 Reuse Plan and the November 1996 Revised
Reuse Plan. The City of Novato approved the Revised Reuse Plan in
February 1996 and published it in November 1996.
The Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, identified in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) as the Preferred Alternative,
would implement the Revised Reuse Plan. The Preferred Alternative
proposes an adaptive reuse of certain DoDHF buildings and the retention
of existing land uses, i.e., residential areas, community facilities,
commercial activities, parkland, and open space.
In deciding to dispose of DoDHF Novato in a manner consistent with
the Preferred Alternative, navy has determined that a mixed land use
will meet the local economic redevelopment goals of providing housing
and recreational resources while also limiting adverse environmental
impacts and ensuring land uses that are compatible with adjacent
property. This Record Of Decision does not mandate a specific mix of
land uses. Rather, it leaves selection of the particular means to
achieve the proposed redevelopment to the acquiring entity and the
local zoning authority.
Background
The Department of Defense Housing Facility at Novato is located in
the southeastern part of the City of Novato in Marin County,
California, about 20 miles north of the City of San Francisco. The
property covers an area of about 411 acres on two sites that are
separated by United States Highway 101.
The 304-acre Main Site is located on the east side of U.S. Highway
101 and contains military family housing, a Commissary, a Navy
Exchange, an Officers Club, community service areas, a bowling alley,
and recreational fields. The 107-acre Rafael Village military family
housing site is located on the west side of U.S. Highway 101, about one
mile northwest of the Main Site. The 142-acre Spanish Housing area lies
adjacent to the Main Site and was formerly part of the Main Site. Navy
will transfer this property to the United States Coast Guard (Coast
Guard).
The Hamilton Reuse Planning Authority developed a reuse plan for
DoDHF Novato in October 1995. This plan, designated the Hamilton Army
Airfield Reuse Plan, addressed reuse of both DoDHF and the adjacent
Army Airfield. The Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan proposed adaptive
reuse of most of the existing housing and other buildings and retention
of the existing land uses.
The Reuse Planning Authority revised the original HAA Reuse Plan to
take account of changes in the Coast Guard's request for an interagency
transfer of base closure property at DoDHF. The Revised Reuse Plan
developed by HRPA incorporated the Coast Guard's revised request. It
was approved by the City of Novato in February 1996 and published in
November 1996. The Revised Reuse Plan, described in the FEIS as the
Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, is the Preferred Alternative. The
Department of the Army issued the Record Of Decision for the disposal
and reuse of Hamilton Army Airfield on February 24, 1997.
Under the authority of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act
of 1990, Public Law 101-510, 10 U.S.C. 2687 note, the 1993 Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Commission recommended disestablishment of the
Navy Public Works Center, San Francisco Bay, which included DoDHF
Novato. The recommendation was approved by President Clinton and
accepted by the One Hundred Third Congress in 1993. Navy closed the
housing facilities at Novato on September 30, 1996.
During the Federal screening process for the Novato housing
facilities, two Federal agencies, the Department of Veterans Affairs
and the United States Coast Guard, expressed interest in property at
DoDHF. The Department of Veterans Affairs initially requested an
interagency transfer of 54 housing units at the Main Site but later
withdrew its request. The Coast Guard, in its revised request, sought
282 housing units at the Spanish Housing area of the Main Site, and
Navy will transfer the 142-acre property that contains these units to
the Coast Guard. The remaining property is surplus to the needs of the
Federal Government.
Navy published a Notice Of Intent in the Federal Register on
October 31, 1995, announcing that Navy would prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the impacts of disposal and reuse of
the land, buildings, and infrastructure at DoDHF Novato. A public
scoping meeting was held at San Marin High School in Novato on November
16, 1995, and the scoping process ended on December 1, 1995.
On January 31, 1997, Navy distributed a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) to Federal, State, and local agencies, interested
parties, and the general public. Navy held a public hearing concerning
the DEIS on February 27, 1997, at San Marin High School. During the
forty-five day review period after publication of the DEIS, Federal,
State, and local agencies, community groups and associations, and the
general public submitted oral and written comments concerning the DEIS.
These comments and Navy's responses were incorporated in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement and was distributed to the public on
November 21, 1997, for a thirty-day review period that concluded on
December 22, 1997. navy received five letters concerning the FEIS.
Alternatives
NEPA requires Navy to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives
for the disposal and reuse of this Federal property. In the NEPA
process, Navy analyzed the environmental impacts of
[[Page 37867]]
two ``action'' alternatives that could result from disposal of the
DoDHF Novato property. Navy also evaluated a ``No action'' alternative
that would leave the property in a caretaker status with navy
maintaining the physical condition of the property, providing a
security force, and making repairs essential to safety. For its
analysis, Navy relied upon the Revised Reuse Plan developed by HRPA and
approved by the City of Novato.
In March 1994, the City of Novato and the County of Marin entered
into the Hamilton Reuse Planning Agreement to establish the HRPA and
procedures for ensuring public participation in the reuse planning
process. The HRPA is composed of representatives from the City of
Novato, the County of Marin, and several advisory groups. The HRPA
prepared the Reuse Plan after extensive public involvement and comment.
This process also resulted in the establishment of the Hamilton
Advisory Commission (HAC), a citizens committee composed of 25
representatives from various stakeholder groups; the Technical Advisory
Committee, a technical guidance committee composed of 33 members from
local service districts (i.e., water districts and fire districts) and
Federal and state agencies; and the Multi-Agency Board (MAB), composed
of two members from the Novato City Council, one member selected by the
City Council, two members from the County Board of Supervisors, and one
member selected by the Board. The MAB reviewed HAC's recommendations
and made recommendations to the Novato City Council regarding adoption
of the reuse plan. The goal of this planning process was to develop a
reuse plan for HAA, DoDHF and the adjacent private lands and reflected
a consensus gained through public participation by the community.
After the City adopted the Reuse Plan, the Department of Veterans
Affairs withdrew its request for property at DoDHF and the Coast Guard
revised its request for DoDHF property. As a result, the HRPA changed
the Reuse Plan. The City of Novato approved the Revised Reuse Plan in
February 1996 and published it as the Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse
Plan, ``Revised November 1996''.
The Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, designated in the FEIS as the
Preferred Alternative, would implement the Revised Reuse Plan. It
proposed a mix of residential, open space, parkland, community, and
commercial uses.
The Revised Reuse Plan identifies 10 planning areas and a runway
area. Planning Area 1 is the Rafael Village site, a 107-acre suburban
residential development located on the west side of U.S. Highway 101.
Under the Revised Reuse Plan, the 503 existing Rafael Village
structures would be demolished and 500 dwelling units would be built on
86 of the 107 acres. The remaining property would be used for parkland
(seven acres), open space (seven acres), and roadway (seven acres). The
other planning areas are located at the Main Site, on the east side of
U.S. Highway 101 and southeast of Rafael Village.
Planning Area 2 is located in the southwest section of the Main
Site. Known as Capehart Housing, it is a 216-acre suburban residential
development. Under the Revised Reuse Plan, the existing 100 acres of
housing, nine acres of parkland, and 107 acres of open space would be
used for the same purposes as their current uses.
Planning Area 3, the Spanish Housing area, is located east of the
Capehart Housing and will be transferred to the Coast Guard. It is not
available for reuse by the community.
Planning Area 4, the Commissary Triangle, is a 13-acre site located
at the northwest corner of the Main Site. Under the Revised Reuse Plan,
this property would be used for community and civic purposes and would
provide an 80-bed shelter for the homeless.
Planning Area 5, the Navy Exchange Triangle, is located on the west
side of the Main Site and covers 28 acres. About 26 acres would be
dedicated to community and civic uses, i.e., a public transit center
consisting of a park and ride lot and bus stop, a library, a charter
school, a homeless shelter, a child care facility, and senior housing.
The remaining two acres would be used for private commercial activities
that would serve the local residents.
Planning Area 6, the Town Center, is located at the northeast
corner of the Main Site and covers eight acres. The Revised Reuse Plan
proposes to use four of these acres as a neighborhood commercial area
that could accommodate a theater, offices, cafes, specialty shops,
personal service shops, and artists workplaces. Two acres would be used
for community facilities, e.g., the former chapel, and two acres would
serve as a central plaza.
Planning Area 7, known as Hospital Hill, is located southeast of
the Town Center area and is part of the Hamilton Army Airfield
property. Navy is not responsible for this Army property and did not
consider alternative reuses for it.
Planning Area 8, known as the Bowling Alley, is located on the east
side of the Main Site and covers 3 acres. The Preferred Alternative
would use the existing bowling alley an gymnasium for recreational
purposes.
Planning Area 9, the Officers Club, is located on a five-acre
landscaped hill south of the Bowling Alley and contains two buildings.
The Revised Reuse Plan would use three acres for community and civic
purposes with a cultural center, community center and library. Two
acres would be used commercially to provide lodging for visitors.
Planning Area 10, the Ballfields, is situated in the southeast
corner of the Main Site and covers 31 acres. It contains open space,
baseball fields, a swimming pool and poolhouse, and parking lots. The
Preferred Alternative would use this entire area as a park and retain
the swimming pool complex for recreational activity.
The runway area east of the Main Site is part of the Hamilton Army
Airfield property. Navy is not responsible for this Army property and
did not consider alternative reuses for it.
In the NEPA process, Navy considered a second ``action''
alternative, described in the FEIS as the Open Space Alternative. This
alternative also proposed a mix of residential, open space, parkland,
community and commercial facilities.
Under the Open Space Alternative, all 503 existing structures at
Rafael Village would be demolished. This property would then be used
for open space and parkland, and no new houses would be built on the
site. Reuse of the Main Site would be similar to the Preferred
Alternative but would also allow the development of certain facilities
that were designated in the Open Space Alternative as corporation
yards. These corporation yards would provide areas for the maintenance
and storage of up to 50 buses and 40 pieces of heavy equipment. The
yards would also contain warehouses, office space and parking lots.
The Capehart Housing area at the Main Site would be used in the
Open Space Alternative to provide housing, open space, and parkland.
The Commissary Triangle area would provide community and civic
facilities. The Navy Exchange Triangle area would be used for community
and civic purposes as well as neighborhood commercial activities and
would also provide a homeless shelter. A corporation yard would be
located in either the Commissary or Exchange Triangles. The Town Center
area would be used for community activities. The Bowling Alley area
would be used for recreational activities. The Officers Club would be
used for commercial and community activities. The Ballfields
[[Page 37868]]
area would be used for parkland and open space.
Environmental Impacts
Navy analyzed the potential impacts of the Preferred Alternative,
the Open Space Alternative, and the ``No action'' Alternative for each
alternative's effects on land use, aesthetics and scenic resources,
socioeconomics (including employment, income, population, housing,
schools, recreation, and environmental justice), public services,
utilities, cultural resources, biological resources, geology and soils,
water resources, traffic and circulation, air quality, noise, and
hazardous materials and waste. This Record of Decision focuses on the
impacts that would likely result from implementing the Preferred
Alternative.
The Preferred Alternative would not cause any significant impacts
on land use, because the proposed uses of each planning area are
similar or identical to Navy's historical uses. Although demolition of
existing structures and construction of new facilities would cause
short term disruption, these temporary activities would not have a
significant impact on land use.
The Preferred Alternative would not have significant impacts on
aesthetic and scenic resources. The visual impacts arising out of
demolition and construction would be minimal and insignificant as a
result of their short duration.
The Preferred Alternative would not result in any significant
adverse socioeconomic impacts. Indeed, it would enhance affordable
housing opportunities, generate additional jobs, and provide more
recreational facilities for the City.
The Preferred Alternative would result in a 2.9 percent increase in
enrollment in the Novato Unified School District compared with 1995
levels. However, since most schools in this District are operating
below their enrollment capacities, implementation of the Preferred
Alternative would not exceed school capacity.
The Preferred Alternative would not result in significant impacts
on police and fire protection or on emergency medical services in the
Novato area. However, the number of requests for these public services
will likely increase as the population increases.
The Preferred Alternative would not result in significant impacts
on utility systems, i.e., electricity, natural gas, telephone, water
supply, storm drainage and sanitary sewer systems. The acquiring entity
will upgrade the existing utility systems to meet current utility
standards.
While demolition of the Rafael Village houses would not
significantly affect the County's landfill capacity, the additional
demolition waste would contribute to Marin County's solid waste stream.
Thus, a significant impact could result if demolition of the Rafael
Village structures prevented Marin County from meeting the State's
requirement, set forth in Cal. Pub. Res. Code, Sec. 41780, et seq., to
reduce solid waste by 50 percent by the year 2000.
The Preferred Alternative would not have a significant impact on
cultural resources. There are four historic properties within an area
designated as the Hamilton Army Airfield Discontiguous Historic
District. These are the War Department Theater (Building 507) and the
Amphitheater in the Town Center planning area; the Bachelor Officers
Quarters in the Officers Club planning area (Building 201); and the
Swimming Pool (Building 205) in the Ballfields planning area. The
Preferred Alternative would use these buildings and structures for
purposes similar to Navy's uses.
Navy may convey the War Department Theater and the Bachelor
Officers Quarters to the City of Novato through the National Park
Service's Historic Monuments Program. 40 U.S.C. Sec. 484(k)(3). Navy
may convey the Amphitheater and Swimming Pool to the City of Novato
through the National Park Service's Surplus Federal Lands to Public
Parks Program. 40 U.S.C. Sec. 484(k)(2). The National Park Service
would review and approve plans for the adaptive reuse of these four
properties to ensure their preservation after disposal by the Federal
Government.
Navy has completed consultation pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 470 (f), and its
implementing regulations, Protection of Historic Properties, 36 CFR
Part 800, with the California State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). The
SHPO and the ACHP concurred on October 16, 1997 and October 30, 1997,
respectively, with Navy's conclusion that there would be no adverse
effect on these four properties or on the HAA Discontiguous Historic
District if they were conveyed to the City under the National Park
Service programs.
Although Navy did not discover any surface archeological resources
at DoDHF Novato, archeological resources could be present in
undisturbed areas under the surface. If there are any such discoveries,
work will cease in the vicinity of the discovery until professional
archeologists have had an opportunity to evaluate the discovery and
implement an appropriate treatment plan in accordance with the Novato
General Plan and Cal. Pub. Res. Code Sec. 5097, et seq.
Increased erosion resulting from demolition and new construction
could have a significant impact on biological resources such as
sensitive wetland and riparian habitats and on the species that inhabit
these areas. The acquiring entity will reduce these impacts to an
insignificant level by introducing standard erosion control measures
such as silt fences, sedimentation basins, and other structural methods
that minimize sedimentation runoff into creeks and wetlands during new
construction. Additionally, in accordance with Executive Order 11990,
Protection of Wetlands, dated May 24, 1977, Navy will place a Notice in
the conveyance document that describes those uses that are restricted
under Federal, State, and local wetland regulations.
Navy has completed consultation with the National Marine Fisheries
Service and the United States Fish And Wildlife Service pursuant to
Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act, 16, U.S.C. Sec. 1531,
et seq. The National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish And
Wildlife Service concurred on March 24, 1997 and March 27, 1997,
respectively, with Navy's conclusion that disposal and reuse of the
DoDHF Novato property is not likely to adversely affect any species on
the Federal list of endangered or threatened species.
The Preferred Alternative would allow redevelopment in areas at
DoDHF Novato that contain potential geologic hazards. Thus, potentially
significant impacts could result from demolition and construction in
the Rafael Village area if these actions undermine or weaken unstable
slopes. The City of Novato's General Plan requires developers to
conduct geotechnical investigations in areas that have landslide
potential. The acquiring entity will reduce the potential for
landslides to an insignificant level by implementing protective
measures during construction.
Parts of the Main Site were built on fill over the San Francisco
Basin's Bay Mud formation and are particularly susceptible to damage
during earthquakes. The acquiring entity can reduce this potential for
earthquake damage to existing structures and new construction to an
insignificant level by upgrading the existing structures to comply with
current seismic safety standards and by designing new structures that
meet current building codes governing seismic safety.
[[Page 37869]]
The Preferred Alternative could degrade surface water quality,
because the demolition and construction of buildings may disturb the
soil and increase erosion and sedimentation into San Jose Creek at the
Rafael Village site and Pacheco Creek at the Main Site. The acquiring
entity will reduce this impact on surface water quality to an
insignificant level by implementing storm water pollution prevention
plans and standard erosion control measures before clearing and grading
particular sites.
Parts of the property at DoDHF Novato could be subject to flooding.
Certain parts of the Rafael Village, Capehart Housing, Commissary
Triangle, Navy Exchange Triangle, Town Center, Bowling Alley, and
Ballfields areas are located in the 100-year floodplain. In accordance
with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, dated May 24, 1977,
Navy will place a Notice in the conveyance document that describes
those uses that are restricted under Federal, State, and local
floodplain regulations.
Navy's evaluation of the impacts on traffic and circulation
considered freeway operations, local roadway and intersection
operations, public transit facilities and service, and pedestrian and
bicycle circulation. The Preferred Alternative would not have
significant impacts on freeway and intersection operations. It would
generate about 12,095 average daily trips, slightly more than the
11,340 average daily trips that were associated with Navy's use of the
DoDHF Novato property, and it would result in a significant increase in
the demand for public transit services. There would not be any
significant impacts on pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
The Preferred Alternative would have a significant but mitigable
impact on air quality. Local dust would be generated during building
demolition, renovation, and new construction activities. The acquiring
entity will reduce these potential impacts to an insignificant level by
implementing standard dust control measures during demolition,
renovation and construction.
Section 176 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7506, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to review their activities to ensure that
they do not hamper local efforts to control air pollution. This statute
prevents Federal agencies from conducting activities that do not
conform to an approved implementation plan but recognizes certain
categorically exempt activities. The conveyance of real property,
regardless of the method, is a categorically exempt activity.
Accordingly, disposal of the DoDHF Novato property does not require
Navy to conduct a conformity analysis.
The Preferred Alternative would have significant but mitigable
temporary noise impacts on adjacent land arising out of demolition,
renovation, and construction activities at the Rafael Village, Navy
Exchange Triangle and Commissary Triangle areas. The acquiring entity
will reduce these potential noise impacts to an insignificant level by
limiting demolition and construction activities to normal daytime
hours.
The Preferred Alternative would have a significant noise impact on
some residents of the Rafael Village and Capehart Housing areas arising
out of the high noise levels generated by existing traffic adjacent to
these areas on U.S. Highway 101 and Ignacio Boulevard. Under the
Preferred Alternative, residents of these areas would be exposed to 24-
hour average noise levels that would exceed the 60 decibel average for
residential areas prescribed in the Novato General Plan as the upper
limit of acceptability. This is a significant impact that cannot be
mitigated to an insignificant level.
Although DoDHF Novato generated a small amount of hazardous waste,
Navy's survey identified several areas of contamination. In response,
Navy's remediation actions include removal and remediation of
underground storage tank areas; abatement of damaged, friable and
accessible asbestos; and inspection for and notification of lead-based
paint (LBP) for housing units in accordance with the Residential Lead-
Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, 42 U.S.C. 4822.
Residential surveys for LBP showed that LBP is present in the
Rafael Village and Capehart Housing units. Since all of the Rafael
Village structures will be demolished, no LBP abatement will be
performed there. The Capehart Housing units were completed after 1960
and are therefore subject only to the inspection and disclosure
requirements of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act.
No significant adverse impacts would be caused by the hazardous
materials and hazardous waste that may be used and generated by the
Preferred Alternative. The quantity of hazardous materials used,
stored, and disposed of, and the quantity of hazardous waste generated
on the property would decrease under the Preferred Alternative.
Additionally, hazardous materials used and hazardous waste generated
under the Preferred Alternative would be controlled by existing
regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976,
42 U.S.C. Sec. 6901, et seq., codified at 40 CFR parts 260-266.
Navy also analyzed the impacts on low-income and minority
populations pursuant to Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, reprinted in 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321 note. There would be no
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority and low-income populations. Indeed, the Preferred
Alternative would increase the amount of housing in the City and County
and provide emergency shelter and transitional housing that would
benefit the homeless and low-income residents in the area.
Mitigation
Implementation of the decision to dispose of DoDHF Novato does not
require Navy to perform any mitigation measures. However, the National
Park Service must review and approve all plans for adaptive reuse of
the four historic properties if they are conveyed under the Historic
Monuments and Surplus Federal Lands to Public Parks programs. As
required by Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, and
Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, Navy will incorporate
Notices in the conveyance document describing wetland and floodplain
uses that are restricted under Federal, State, and local regulations.
Navy's FEIS identified and discussed those actions that would be
necessary to mitigate the impacts associated with the disposal and
reuse of DoDHF Novato. The acquiring entity, under the direction of
Federal, State, and local agencies with regulatory authority over
protected resources, will be responsible for implementing all necessary
mitigation measures.
Comments Received on the FEIS
Navy received comments on the FEIS from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway,
and Transportation District, the Novato Fire Protection District, the
Lanham Village Homeowners' Association, Inc., and Marvelous Marin, Inc.
The EPA commented that navy should compare the projected
environmental impacts of the two ``action'' alternatives against two
standards: historical environmental conditions (the standard that Navy
applied) and those conditions that would exist under the ``No action''
alternative, i.e., with the facility in a
[[Page 37870]]
caretaker status. Navy believes that its use of historical or
previously established environmental conditions is appropriate, because
it evaluates the impacts of the proposed reuse in light of the
conditions that existed when the facility was open and actively
operating.
The Golden Gate Bride, Highway, and Transportation District asked
Navy to include additional information in the FEIS concerning existing
public transit routes, park and ride lots, bus stops, previous land
acquisition by the Transportation District, projected hourly transit
trips, and the mission of the Transportation District. The District did
not provide comments during the public scoping period or during the
DEIS public review period.
As discussed in the FEIS, the anticipated increase in the demand
for public transit services under the Preferred Alternative can be
reduced to an insignificant level by providing internal collector
roadways within the project area that would accommodate public transit
vehicles and by providing shuttle services to existing public transit
routes. The inclusion of the additional information requested by the
Transportation District would not change the results of Navy's
environmental analysis in the FEIS.
The Novato Fire Protection District (NFPD) commented that ti is
currently providing emergency services to DoDHF Novato through a
contract with Navy and the DoDHF Novato is presently located outside
the boundaries of the NFPD. The NFPD stated that it would not be able
to provide emergency services to the DoDHF site if Navy terminated the
contract before other arrangements were made with the NFPD or unless
the DoDHF property was annexed into the district.
The Coast Guard challenged NFPD's claim that it requires a contract
to provide emergency services to DoDHF Novato. On January 7, 1998, the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
decided that NFPD's exclusion of Federal property from the fire
district was invalid. This decision has the effect of including DoDHF
Novato in the fire district. Novato Fire Protection District v. United
States, No. C 96-3893 FMS (N.D. Cal., Jan. 7, 1998), reh. den. (N.D.
Cal., Jan. 27, 1998).
Navy also received comments from the Lanham Village Homeowners'
Association, Inc. (LVHA) that reflect the views of a neighborhood
adjacent to the Main Site on the DoDHF Novato property. The Homeowners'
Association requested additional analysis of the Preferred Alternative
with respect to the Novato Unified School District's (NUSD) request for
a public benefit conveyance of the former Navy Vehicle Maintenance
Building. The School District proposes to use the building as a vehicle
repair training facility.
The Association also requested additional analysis of a corporation
yard that was proposed under the Open Space Alternative. The
Association disagrees with Navy's conclusions regarding the
environmental impacts of these components of the Preferred Alternative
and the Open Space Alternative.
Navy analyzed the proposed reuse of the former Navy Vehicle
Maintenance Building under the Preferred Alternative and concluded that
it was similar to Navy's historical use of this facility. The proposed
NUSD vehicle repair training facility would be required to meet all
health and safety regulations concerning noise and air emissions, and
reuse of the Vehicle Maintenance Facility would not have significant
impacts on land use, noise, and air quality. Navy considers this
analysis adequate. Additionally, the land use policies in the Revised
Reuse Plan require the acquiring entity to establish landscaping and
buffer zones and to consider the compatibility of new uses with
existing residential uses such as Lanham Village before approving new
uses.
The LVHA commented that the proposed NUSD facility could eventually
become a regional bus repair facility. However, the School District is
not proposing such an action in its public benefit conveyance request,
and HRPA did not propose such a facility in the Revised Reuse Plan.
In response to LVHA's comments on the DEIS concerning the Open
Space Alternative, Navy considered the possible uses of the corporation
yard in the FEIS. Navy concluded that the establishment of a
corporation yard under the Open Space Alternative would not have
significant impacts on land use and noise. Additionally, the Preferred
Alternative, i.e., the Revised Reuse Plan, does not propose to
establish an corporation yards.
The LVHA also stated that the siting of the bus repair training
facility or the corporation yard may raise environmental justice
concerns. As stated in the FEIS, however, there are no significant and
adverse environmental impacts that would disproportionately affect
minority and low-income populations.
Marvelous Marin, Inc. did not comment directly on the FEIS, but
provided copies of correspondence to the Secretary of the Navy dated
November 20, 1997. Marvelous Marin also filed suit in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California on September 30,
1997, alleging that private entities and/or Marin County may have
reversionary rights to DoDHF Novato property. Marvelous Marin, Inc. v.
United States, No. C 97-3584 CW (N.D. Cal., filed Sept. 30, 1997). Navy
considered these claims and concluded that no such reversionary rights
exist. On May 6, 1998, the District Court dismissed the lawsuit with
prejudice on the merits. Marvelous Marin, Inc. v. United States, id.
(Order and Judgment filed May 6, 1998).
In any entity were to establish reversionary property rights in the
future, the City of Novato's zoning and other ordinances would still
govern redevelopment of this property. Thus, the FEIS adequately
addressed the potential environmental impacts of disposal and reuse of
this property under the Preferred Alternative.
Regulations Governing the Disposal Decision
Since the proposed action contemplates disposal under the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (DBCRA), Public Law 101-510,
10 U.S.C. Sec. 2687 note, Navy's decision was based upon the
environmental analysis in the FEIS and application of the standards set
forth in DBCRA, the Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR), 41
CFR Part 101-47, and the Department of Defense Rule on Revitalizing
Base Closure Communities and Community Assistance (DoD Rule), 32 CFR
Parts 174 and 175.
Section 101-47.303-1 of the FPMR requires that the disposal of
Federal property benefit the Federal government and constitute the
``highest and best use'' of the property. Section 101-47.4909 of the
FPMR defines the ``highest and best use'' as that use to which a
property can be put that produces the highest monetary return from the
property, promotes its maximum value, or serves a public or
institutional purpose. The ``highest and best use'' determination must
be based upon the property's economic potential, qualitative values
inherent in the property, and utilization factors affecting land use
such as zoning, physical characteristics, other private and public uses
in the vicinity, neighboring improvements, utility services, access,
roads, location, and environmental and historical considerations.
After Federal property has been conveyed to non-Federal entities,
the property is subject to local land use regulations, including zoning
and
[[Page 37871]]
subdivision regulations, and building codes.
Unless expressly authorized by statute, the disposing Federal
agency cannot restrict the future use of surplus Government property.
As a result, the local community exercises substantial control over
future use of the property. For this reason, local land use plans and
zoning affect determination of the highest and best use of surplus
Government property.
The DBCRA directed the Administrator of the General Services
Administration (GSA) to delegate to the Secretary of Defense authority
to transfer and dispose of base closure property. Section 2905(b) of
DBCRA directs the Secretary of Defense to exercise this authority in
accordance with GSA's property disposal regulations, set forth at
Sections 101-47.1 through 101-47.8 of the FPMR. By letter dated
December 20, 1991, the Secretary of Defense delegated the authority to
transfer and dispose of base closure property closed under DBCRA to the
Secretaries of the Military Departments. Under this delegation of
authority, the Secretary of the Navy must follow FPMR procedures for
screening and disposing of real property when implementing base
closures. Only where Congress has expressly provided additional
authority for disposing of base closure property, e.g., the economic
development conveyance authority established in 1993 by Section
2905(b)(4) of DBCRA, may Navy apply disposal procedures other than the
FPMR's prescriptions.
In Section 2901 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1994, Public Law 103-160, Congress recognized the economic
hardship occasioned by base closures, the Federal interest in
facilitating economic recovery of base closure communities, and the
need to identify and implement reuse and redevelopment of property at
closing installations. In Section 2903(c) of Public Law 103-160,
Congress directed the Military Departments to consider each base
closure community's economic needs and priorities in the property
disposal process. Under Section 2905(b)(2)(E) of DBCRA, Navy must
consult with local communities before it disposes of base closure
property and must consider local plans developed for reuse and
redevelopment of the surplus Federal property.
The Department of Defense's goal, as set forth in Section 174.4 of
the DoD Rule, is to help base closure communities achieve rapid
economic recovery through expeditious reuse and redevelopment of the
assets at closing bases, taking into consideration local market
conditions and locally developed reuse plans. Thus, the Department has
adopted a consultative approach with each community to ensure that
property disposal decisions consider the Local Redevelopment
Authority's reuse plan and encourage job creation. As a part of this
cooperative approach, the base closure community's interests, e.g.,
reflected in its zoning for the area, play a significant role in
determining the range of alternatives considered in the environmental
analysis for property disposal. Furthermore, Section 175.7(d)(3) of the
DoD Rule provides that the Local Redevelopment Authority's plan
generally will be used as the basis for the proposed disposal action.
The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, 40
U.S.C. Sec. 484, as implemented by the FPMR, identifies several
mechanisms for disposing of surplus base closure property: by public
benefit conveyance (FPMR Sec. 101-47.303-2); by negotiated sale (FPMR
Sec. 101-47.304-9); and by competitive sale (FPMR 101-47.304-7).
Additionally, in Section 2905(b)(4), the DBCRA established economic
development conveyances as a means of disposing of surplus base closure
property.
The selection of any particular method of conveyance merely
implements the Federal agency's decision to dispose of the property.
Decisions concerning whether to undertake a public benefit conveyance
or an economic development conveyance, or to sell property by
negotiation or by competitive bid are committed by law to agency
discretion. Selecting a method of disposal implicates a broad range of
factors and rests solely within the Secretary of the Navy's discretion.
Conclusion
The HRPA's proposed reuse of the DoDHF Novato property, reflected
in the 1996 Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan and embodied in the
Preferred Alternative, is consistent with the prescriptions of the FPMR
and Section 174.4 of the DoD Rule. The LRA has determined in its
Revised Reuse Plan that the property should be used for several
purposes including residential, community, civic, commercial, parkland
and open space. The property's location, physical characteristics and
existing infrastructure as well as the current uses of adjacent
property make it appropriate for the proposed uses.
The Revised Reuse Plan responds to local economic conditions,
promotes rapid economic recovery from the impact of the facility's
closure, and is consistent with President Clinton's Five-Part Plan for
Revitalizing Base Closure Communities, which emphasizes local economic
redevelopment of the closing military facility and creation of new jobs
as the means to revitalize these communities. 32 CFR Parts 174 and 175,
59 Fed. Reg. 16123 (1994). The acquiring entity, under the direction of
Federal, State, and local agencies with regulatory authority over
protected resources, will be responsible for adopting practicable means
to avoid or minimize environmental harm that may result from
implementation of the reuse plan.
Although the ``No action'' Alternative has less potential for
causing adverse environmental impacts, this alternative would not take
advantage of the property's location, physical characteristics and
infrastructure or the current uses of adjacent property. Additionally,
it would not foster local economic redevelopment of the DoDHF NOvato
property.
Accordingly, Navy will dispose of the Department of Defense Housing
Facility at Novato in a manner that is consistent with the Hamilton
Reuse Planning Authority's Revised Reuse Plan for the property.
Dated: July 1, 1998.
William J. Cassidy, Jr.,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Conversion And Redevelopment).
[FR Doc. 98-18741 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-M