Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Cleanup And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forest Park URA hears update on Fort Gordon land transfers, contamination, wells and a dam inspection proposal
Summary
Michael, an Oasis representative, told the Forest Park Urban Redevelopment Authority that all post-transfer work on the former Fort Gordon property is underway and asked the board to consider a contract renewal and a short inspection proposal for a leaking emergency spillway at Stevens Lake.
Get email alerts on the Environmental Cleanup And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Michael, an Oasis representative, told the Forest Park Urban Redevelopment Authority that all post-transfer work on the former Fort Gordon property is underway and asked the board to consider a contract renewal and a short inspection proposal for a leaking emergency spillway at Stevens Lake.
"All the land has been transferred at this point," Michael said, calling that a "tremendous milestone." He said Oasis is asking the URA to consider a $45,000 budget for one year of on-call services through December 2025 and that a separate proposal from engineering firm Walden Ashworth would provide a visual inspection, report and cost estimate for the Stevens Lake dam for about $4,500.
The update focused on the north and south parcels of the former base, ongoing environmental work, and utility and stormwater issues that affect future development. Michael said the property transfer dates include the north parcel transfer on March 24, 2023, and that the URA has been coordinating with the Army, Georgia EPD (the state environmental agency) and developers such as Robinson Weeks and others already occupying building pads on the site.
Why it matters: the parcels are now home to major logistics tenants and will be subject to reuse restrictions and ongoing monitoring. Decisions about dam repairs, well abandonment or replacement, and remediation affect public safety, future development costs and potential reimbursements from the Army.
Key facts and developments
- Land transfers and use restrictions: Michael said the land transfers from Fort Gordon are complete and reminded the board that residential development is not permitted in the north parcel and that groundwater extraction for any purpose is prohibited across the site except for Army remediation or monitoring. He noted municipal water is provided by the city and Clayton County.
- Environmental findings and insurance: The presentation said two contamination issues have surfaced since transfer: lead-impacted soil in the south parcel and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) detected in groundwater in limited amounts. Michael said those contaminants are often excluded from private environmental insurance policies but that the deed includes a covenant that preserves the authority to seek recovery from the Army. "We're going to go after them under this covenant because of the lead that was found in soil," he said, describing a process in which URA and developers conducted cleanup work and then filed cost-recovery claims with the Army.
- Soil reuse and Georgia EPD oversight: Michael described coordinated work with Robinson Weeks and Georgia EPD to remove debris, recharacterize and resample soils. He said the soils ultimately met Georgia EPD requirements and were reused under building pads, including for a large pad supporting building 60650. He said reimbursement claims for the cleanup work have been filed with the Army and are in process.
- Wells and monitoring: Michael said the site contains numerous monitoring wells and that some wells were disturbed or damaged during development activity. He estimated roughly 30 Army-owned wells in the south parcel were affected and cited an Army-derived developer cost estimate of about $450,000 to install new wells in the south parcel to meet the Army's requirements. He said the Army continues to operate groundwater monitoring and will undertake well abandonment or replacement as needed.
- Dams and Stevens Lake: Michael reported active leakage at the emergency spillway of Stevens Lake. He described a proposed Walden Ashworth scope for $4,500 that would include a visual inspection, a report of findings, conclusions and recommendations and a general cost estimate; he noted that detailed mapping, subsurface investigations, and computational analyses would not be included in that price. He said the URA is responsible for dam maintenance under Georgia's dam-safety framework and recommended the URA consider retaining Walden Ashworth for the inspection.
- Contracts and funding: Michael said Oasis's contract had been renewed in June 2023 through June 2024 and that he had stretched the work to December 2024, leaving about $2,300 in the original contract balance. He requested consideration of a roughly $45,000 budget for Oasis services through December 2025, to be used as needed for tasks such as the dam evaluation and stakeholder coordination.
Questions and next steps
Board members asked about the map location of Stevens Lake, whether the lake functions as a stormwater detention pond and the potential consequences of draining it. Michael said the lake historically served as Army stormwater detention and that any decision to alter it would require a hydraulic and permitting review to ensure detention is replaced. He recommended further study and said Walden Ashworth could scope additional hydrologic analysis at added cost beyond the $4,500 inspection proposal.
Michael said Oasis will prepare a formal contract renewal submittal for the URA, and that Walden Ashworth will prepare the inspection proposal; the board agreed to consider the materials at a future meeting.
"This covenant still protects this authority in that regard," Michael said of the deed language that allows for recovery of remediation costs from the Army.
The update included references to other site features โ the north landfill, Marchman Lake dam rehabilitation completed earlier, and ongoing Army plume remediation work โ that URA members said warrant continued oversight and documentation.
Ending
The board did not take formal action during the presentation; members requested the formal proposal documents be provided for review and for the item to be scheduled for a future meeting (possible January or February discussion). Oasis and Walden Ashworth were expected to deliver written proposals to the URA for consideration and possible contracting.

