Alternative to Park on Naval Base Offered

Faced with a widespread public outcry over plans to demolish recreational facilities at the Long Beach Naval Station to make room for a cargo container yard, city officials agreed Wednesday to pay $2 million to start building a 13-acre park nearby.

“Because we are taking potentially usable recreational facilities away from our community, we are willing to mitigate their loss by replacing them with similar facilities elsewhere in the city,” said Harbor Commission President George Murchison. Port officials said they did not hire a consultant to examine the facilities, but decided that $2 million was a “reasonable” amount to pay.

The announcement did little to appease many opponents of the demolition, who say the 170-acre base, which includes a 25-meter pool and four lighted softball diamonds, would serve the city’s children better than its bustling port.

“They’re going to spend $2 million to rebuild a fraction of what’s already there,” said Huell Howser, the host of KCET-TV’s “Visiting” program, who has become an advocate for saving the facilities. “I don’t get it.”

More than 1,500 people streamed into the city’s Convention Center theater Wednesday night to voice their disapproval of the demolition at a hearing before Navy, state and city officials.

“We should hang our heads in shame as Long Beach turns its back on the proud past that is connected with the Navy station,” said Joanne O’Byrne, president of a local civic organization and a retired schoolteacher.

City officials had planned to use the land as a salve on their economic wounds after losing tens of thousands of military and civilian jobs to defense industry layoffs since 1991.

“We were in the depths of the worst recession in history,” said Long Beach City Manager James C. Hankla in describing how the city decided to use the land. “Jobs were king then. I’m not sure they’re not king now.”

Last year, the City Council approved a plan to transfer its new waterfront real estate to the Port of Long Beach, which intends to lease it to China Ocean Shipping Co., a steamship line run by the Chinese government, and build a $200-million cargo terminal on 130 acres of the property. A relatively small piece of the base has been given to a satellite-launching firm.

In recent weeks, however, a coalition of preservationists and park users has proffered a cornucopia of alternate uses for the recreational facilities, the historic structures that were designed in part by renowned black architect Paul R. Williams, and other buildings built in the last eight years. They said the base could serve as a camp for at-risk children, a high school or college campus, a museum or a marine training center.

Others have cited everything from nostalgia for the 54-year-old base to resentment of China as reasons for preserving the site.

But city officials insist that the base, which is three miles from downtown Long Beach across the Gerald Desmond Bridge, is too isolated to be of any use as a public park or tourist destination. They also note that opponents of demolition have not said how they would pay to keep up the facilities or provide new programs there. If the city wanted to keep the base as is, city officials estimated Wednesday, asbestos removal and other cleanup work would cost $15 million, and maintenance of the buildings would cost $1.9 million a year.

According to city projections, construction of the cargo terminal would create 600 jobs on the site, mostly for union longshoremen, 60,000 indirect jobs in shipping and other fields, and more than $150 million in federal, state and local tax revenue.

Opponents, including an organization called Save the Park by Sharing the Facts, have cast doubt on the city’s figures, saying its economic models are too optimistic.

If the city does not pave the land, it risks losing the business of China Ocean Shipping Co., a tenant at the port for 15 years and one of the world’s largest steamship lines, port officials said. The company, owned by the government of the People’s Republic of China, has threatened to build its new terminal at one of the Long Beach port’s competitors--the adjacent Los Angeles harbor, Oakland or Seattle--if the deal collapses, said S.R. Dillenbeck, executive director of the Long Beach port.

Mayor Beverly O’Neill said that if the city agreed to reconsider its land reuse plan, which has been approved by the City Council and forwarded to the Navy, it would have to “start over” and compete with state and federal agencies to regain possession of the property. O’Neill said that would raise the possibility that a homeless services organization or the federal Department of Corrections would build on the site.

The $2 million pledged by the city Wednesday would come from port revenue, not tax dollars, and would help pay for irrigation of a park site purchased by the city two years ago, Murchison said. Sandwiched between the concrete banks of the Los Angeles River and Golden Avenue, the park would offer two soccer fields, a multipurpose diamond and other facilities. Its total cost is estimated at $8.5 million, said Councilwoman Jenny Oropeza, who represents the area.

“Obviously, $2 million will not foot the bill,” Oropeza said. But “this will put us on a fast track.”