Brownfields Update for the Pacific Northwest

Brownfields are more than an opportunity to reclaim land once thought lost to pollution and blight; they’re also an opportunity to approach environmental cleanup in a new way. The differences from traditional “Superfund”-style projects are dramatic: Brownfield projects typically:

• Focus on smaller sites in the context of existing communities
• Eschew an “all or nothing” cleanup approach in favor of a “managed risk” approach tailored to the site’s expected use
• Seek to direct economic momentum—not fight it—by working cooperatively with owners, developers and communities in the interest of reclaiming these once-lost lands

This new approach, once the domain of limited pilot projects from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is now gaining momentum across the country. And within EPA’s Region 10, Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Alaska are making significant progress in successful brownfields redevelopment.

In Washington state, interest in redeveloping brownfields “has really taken off in the last two years,” according to Sharon Kophs, program manager for the state’s brownfields revolving loan and redevelopment program. Where once interest in such programs was low, now “people are coming to us,” she says. The result is ambitious projects such as Seattle’s Rainier Court, a 7-acre brownfield that, once fully redeveloped, will provide the community with jobs and low-income housing. Such projects prove that “brownfields are doable,” says Kophs, who manages four to five such projects a year.

In Oregon, the state’s environmental cleanup program coordinator, Ann Levine, works with a team of regional coordinators to connect brownfield sites with over $400,000 in funds annually for assessment and cleanup. Oregon’s program benefits from a close working relationship with the governor’s office, has won numerous Phoenix Awards for exceptional reclamation projects, and hosts an annual brownfields conference. The state’s proactive approach leads to results. “When you see the buildings go up,” says Levine, “it’s pretty rewarding.”

Idaho’s brownfields program is newer. As a result, Keith Donahue, the state’s brownfields response program manager, has found his first job to be “building a trust” with businesses and communities. Though Idaho’s program is only in its second year, projects are moving smartly through the pipeline: 75 sites have been identified as potential brownfields, 25 are in the assessment phase, and four have received EPA grants. “It’s starting to flow now,” says Donahue.

Of the four states, Alaska has the newest program. Initially, John Carnahan, brownfields coordinator for the state, has been working to counter the perception that “there aren’t any brownfields in Alaska.” Though the state doesn’t have a significant chemical industry, the definition of brownfields was broadened in 2002 to include petroleum sites, and fast-growing cities such as Anchorage and Fairbanks are looking at reclaiming in-city brownfields as an alternative to sprawl. “People are realizing that it’s in the interest of the state to reclaim these lands,” says Carnahan. “It’s started to click here.”

Binding the states of Region 10 together is both a set of common drivers and common resources, according to Susan Morales, brownfields project manager with EPA. She’s quick to highlight that the states have played a crucial role in connecting worthy projects with such EPA resources as the Brownfield Assessment, Cleanup and Revolving Loan Fund, and the State and Tribal Response Programs. “Add them all together,” says Morales, “and it’s a huge impact.”