Editor: Former Benicia Mayor Jerry Hayes sent me the following email message: “Roger – I have grown increasingly concerned that our City Council is about to approve the issuance of building permits for Seeno’s Rose Estates project. I think the Council as well as the majority of our citizens are ill-informed about the ongoing hazard presented by the closed IT Toxic Waste Dump.”
Tale of Two Failures
By Jerry Hayes, Benicia Mayor, 1996-2000

Over 30 years ago, shortly after being elected to the Benicia City Council, I met with and was given friendly advice by our former mayor, Marilyn O’Rourke. She told me of her own, eight-year experience serving on the City Council. Perhaps Mayor O’Rourke’s greatest accomplishment was managing the closure of the IT class one toxic waste facility on Benicia’s northern border.
Mayor O’Rourke cautioned me that two issues, the Rose Drive dump and the IT toxic dump, would occupy most of my time and energy during my future tenure on the City Council. Boy, was her warning prophetic.
During my first term on the City Council, I spent countless hours meeting with Rose Drive residents and Department of Toxic Substances Control officials. I would have much rather spent my time and energy promoting ferry service for our community or working on the revitalization of our waterfront for the benefit of all our residents.
Rose Drive (Braito) Dump
The Rose Drive dump, also known historically as the Braito/Solano County Sanitary Landfill, began operations in the mid-1950s and accepted a mix of household waste, scrap metal, tannery waste, sewage sludge and industrial waste. The dump operated until 1979 when it was closed with the purchase of the property by the Southampton Company. Homes were built over the landfill area soon after closure, as part of the Southampton residential community.
In 1991, ground settling and the discovery of a soft black material beneath backyards of several homes revealed that buried waste remained under residential lots. Several homes were evacuated for cleanup. Methane leaking from the buried waste was ignited by a pilot light in one residence, resulting in a fire and evacuation. Investigations revealed that roughly 24,000 cubic yards of potentially hazardous waste had not been removed and remained buried near or beyond the original landfill boundaries.
What followed next was litigation, with residents suing the developer and the City of Benicia and former Mayor O’Rourke’s warning became a reality. By the time I took office as a council member in 1992, scores of Southampton residents had filed lawsuits against our city, and by the time I was sworn in as mayor in 1996, nearly 100 lawsuits had been filed asserting that the city, as well as the developer, had been negligent. Again, I found myself spending most of my time in countless meetings with attorneys who we had hired to defend our city and its citizens. My principal job as mayor was protecting the reputation of our city and the property values of every homeowner.
Historically, Braito landfill wasn’t regulated as a hazardous waste site, but the presence of wastes like tannery refuse raised concerns about contaminants in the soil or groundwater. Some residual wastes were found outside the closed landfill leading to long-term monitoring requirements. In 1998, a jury found negligence by the developers regarding homes built on the old landfill, though damages awarded were limited.
IT Class 1 Hazardous Waste Dump
Operations at the IT Panoche facility predated IT ownership. In 1968, the facility was permitted by the State of California as a Class 1 hazardous waste disposal site and received its first conditional land use permit from Solano County. Originally owned by J&J Disposal Company, the site was purchased by IT in 1974. This hazardous waste management facility covers 242 acres, of which 190 acres are permitted for disposal of hazardous waste, within a 2,350-acre parcel of land owned by IT.
Types of waste received
From 1970 to 1985, the facility annually received between 80,000 and 220,000 tons of hazardous waste for disposal. In 1986, the facility accepted 67,867 tons of waste for landfill disposal and approximately seven million gallons of liquid waste which were disposed in surface impoundment ponds. During 1985, more than 98% of all the hazardous wastes received at the facility were from outside Solano County. The specific types of hazardous waste handled by the facility included: acid and alkaline solutions; metal sludges; solvents; pesticide rinse water; PCB’s; paint sludge; laboratory wastes; heavy metal wastes; contaminated soils; asbestos; chloroform; tetrachlorethene; dichloropropane.
Violations and closure
From 1984 through 1988, state regulators issued numerous notices of violations (NOV) and cleanup and abatement (CAB) orders until the facility ceased operations in 1988. In 2002, IT Corporation declared bankruptcy. On May 1, 2004, the IT Environmental Liquidating Trust (ITELT) was established to oversee the long -term post closure, maintenance and upkeep of the site.
All closed Class 1 toxic waste dumps located in the state of California leak. The IT Panoche Benicia site has leaked in three directions, east, west and south.
The future Rose Estates
I am writing this rather lengthy treatise because it has been revealed that our city administration is about to issue building permits for a 1,050-home residential project to the Seeno Corporation to be built just south of Lake Herman Road, in the shadow of the closed IT toxic waste dump.
I stand adamantly opposed to this project for a variety of reasons. While Benicia deserves thoughtful, sustainable solutions to our housing needs, placing a large residential development adjacent to a closed Class 1 toxic waste dump, the IT Panoche site, is neither prudent nor responsible. Class 1 toxic waste facilities are designated for the disposal of the most hazardous industrial material. Although the IT Panoche site is officially closed, closure does not mean it is risk-free. Such sites require long-term monitoring because contaminants can migrate through soil, ground water or air over time. Building more than a thousand homes – likely housing several thousand residents including children and seniors – so close to a known toxic waste site exposes future residents to unnecessary and potentially irreversible health risks. No amount of landscaping, fencing or marketing language can change the basic reality: This location was once deemed appropriate for hazardous waste, not for neighborhoods, schools or parks.
Approving Rose Estates would shift environmental risk onto future homeowners and renters who do not fully understand the site’s history. This raises serious environmental justice issues. Residents should not be placed in harm’s way because land is cheaper or easier to develop near a contaminated area.
Health impacts from long-term exposure to toxic substances, such as increased cancer risk, respiratory illnesses, and developmental issues, often take years or decades to become evident. By then, the burden falls on families and the community, not on the developer. Even if current studies suggest the site is “safe,” conditions change. Earthquakes, flooding, erosion or infrastructure failure can all compromise containment systems. Who will be responsible if contamination is discovered decades from now? Will homeowners bear the costs or will Benicia taxpayers? Approving this project creates long-term liabilities for the City of Benicia, potentially far outweighing short-term economic or housing gains.
Allowing dense residential development next to a former Class 1 toxic waste dump sets a troubling precedent. It signals that Benicia is willing to lower its safety standards and gamble with public health to meet development goals. Once established, such a precedent becomes difficult to reverse.
A call for responsible decision making
Rejecting the Rose Estates proposal is not a rejection of housing; it is a commitment to smart, ethical and responsible planning. Benicia can and should pursue housing projects that do not place residents at risk or burden future generations with preventable health and environmental problems. City leaders have a duty to protect the community. In this case, the responsible choice is clear.
The rose estates project should not move forward.
Jerry Hayes is a former City Council Member (1992-1996) and Mayor of Benicia (1996-2000).
MORE ABOUT THE ROSE ESTATES PROPOSAL
HERE ON THE BENICIA INDEPENDENT
Rose Estates on the Benicia Independent
CITY OF BENICIA

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their ROSE ESTATES page. For larger image, just click on the map at right.

Prior to 2024, the City of Benicia conducted a North Study Area community visioning process – see the old web page.
MORE ABOUT SEENO
BENICIA BACKGROUND:
- Benicia’s Housing Element Has Been Approved, Throwing Seeno’s ‘Builders Remedy’ Threat Into Question
- Seeno invokes ‘builder’s remedy’ to force Benicia’s hand on major housing project, but the city is pushing back
-
SEENO stories on the Benicia Independent (many stories, going back to 2016).
- Benicia Green Gateway (citizen study of 2008, archive)
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:
- Seeno / North Area Study – Stakeholder Seat at the Table, March 23, 2023
-
SEENO stories on the Benicia Independent (36 stories, going back to 2016).
- City of Benicia Open House on Nov 29, 2022 – What’s the Future of Benicia’s North Side?
- Benicia Green Gateway (citizen study of 2008, archive)
CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
- Concord Communities Alliance: SEENO IS AT IT AGAIN. SHOW UP SATURDAY, Jan. 7th at 9AM, Concord Senior Center, 2727 Parkside Circle.
- Save Mt. Diablo: The Seeno Way—Why the Seenos Are Bad Community Partners
You must be logged in to post a comment.