SOME BASIC QUESTIONS
A basic question devoid of any safety
issues is quite simply: "Does the community wish to see a golf course built
on the landfill?" According to the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) that was
formed in 1983 as part of the study that resulted in the South Coast General Development
Plan of 1985 the answer is..............."yes." The CAC recommended
a golf course be built. We find that recommendation curious. In the appendix to the
1985 Development Plan the results of a survey of the community concerning future
use of the Site are included. The CAC actually received a 70% higher response rate
to the survey than was expected. A key question in the survey was question #4: "What
facilities do you feel should be developed at the South Coast Project?" The
survey results to this question were broken down into 3 categories: Highly Desirable,
Moderately Desirable, and Least Desirable. Under Highly Desirable there were 7 suggestions,
among them a Nature Center and Hiking Trails; Golf was NOT among the suggestions.
Under Moderately Desirable there were another 7 suggestions, among them a Multi-Purpose
ballfield and Community Garden; Golf was NOT among the suggestions. It is not until
we get to the Least Desirable category that Golf is mentioned. So, quite naturally,
the CAC suggested a Golf Course. You tell us why.
A second basic question
is: "Is it safe to build a golf course on the Palos Verdes Landfill site?"
Golf courses on landfills are not uncommon. There are over 70 such arrangements in
the U.S., and we are sure that number will grow. We are not opposed to golf courses,
or necessarily to golf courses on landfills. However, neither the Los Angeles County
Sanitation Districts (LACSD) nor Meritage Golf has answered the following questions...............:
1. Have any of the other golf courses built on landfills been built on Class I landfills
that contain TCE (trichloroethylene), acid waste, pesticides, solvents, tetra-ethyl
lead sludge, chemical toilet waste, and alkaline waste, as does the Palos Verdes
Landfill? 2. And if so, do those landfills lack a liner and formal cap, as does the
Palos Verdes Landfill. 3. Are any of the other landfill golf courses uphill from
residential neighborhoods and have schools and churches on the edge of the landfill?
4. Are any of the other landfill golf courses in close proximity to an active earthquake
fault line and identified mudslide area? From our perspective, the bottom line is
that the amount of water it takes to irrigate a golf course presents an ever-present
danger. In a seismically active area the cover will invariably and on an ongoing
basis crack. Water, flowing down through the cracks, mixes with the contents of the
landfill and produces toxic leachate. The fact that there is no liner in the Palos
Verdes Landfill complicates the issue because the danger of off-site contamination
of soil and groundwater from the toxic leachate is greatly exacerbated. There have
been two well-known off-site plumes of contamination documented by the LACSD.
A third basic question is: "When the interests of the golf course conflict with
the interests and safety of the community, who will win out?" The LACSD has...............
assured the community that they will continue to monitor operations at the site,
and the safe maintenance of the Site will have priority over the golf course. If
this is so then the plan to bury the methane collection pipes as is called for in
the County's Request For Proposal for a golf course is interesting. Now the methane
collection pipes are above ground making detection of leaks and repair a simple matter.
Buried, detection and repair become problematic. A second decision reflected in the
County's Request For Proposal further calls into question the Sanitation Districts'
plan to maintain the Site in the safest possible way. According to the Request For
Proposal, the maintenance of the landfill cover that is below the golf course (appx.
110 acres) will be the responsibility of Meritage Golf, not the Sanitation Districts.
To the best of our knowldge, Meritage Golf has no expierence maintaining any landfill
cover, much less a Class 1 landfill cover.
A fourth basic question is:
"How will the grading for the golf course affect the environment during the
construction phase?" Both the soil currently on site as well as soil brought
in for the construction of the golf course will become airborne. Sampling of the
soil at the Site has shown it............... to contain heavy metals. [Note:
South Bay CARES does not at this time know the extent or the types of heavy metals
in the soil.] This soil will be airborne during construction, jeopardizing the health
of the community. The Site is in the middle of Rolling Hills Estates and Torrance
neighborhoods. Rancho Vista Elementary and Rolling Hills Country Day School are in
close proximity to the Site. There are also two churches nearby, Rolling Hills Methodist
Church and First Baptist Church of Palos Verdes. In addition, Hawthorne Blvd. and
Crenshaw Blvd. are the two main arteries for traffic entering and exiting the Peninsula;
thousands of motorists will be exposed to whatever is in the air during the grading
of the landfill.
In conclusion, we believe that building a golf course
on the Palos Verdes Landfill site is simply a BAD idea. There are too many strikes
against it. First, the people do not seem to want another golf course (in less than
2 weeks SouthBayCARES has amassed almost 1000 signatures against the golf course
proposal), not to mention the results of the 1985 survey that placed a golf course
in the Least Desirable category. Second, the hazardous wastes lie buried in an old
style unlined landfill. Neither is there a formal cap to mitigate the intrusion of
water into the landfill. Third, even if there were a cap, the seismic activity of
the region calls into question the efficacy of any barrier system. Fourth, off-site
incidents of contamination have already been documented, and the added burden derived
from the physical weight placed on top of the landfill and watering of the course
will almost certainly cause further off-site incidents. Fifth, the Torrance homes
at the base of the Landfill are already threatened by the possibility of mudslides.
Adding water to this area in excess of Mother Nature's contribution will only exacerbate
the problem. The only thing worse than a mudslide is a toxic mudslide. And finally,
if in spite of all the aforementioned reasons not to build this golf course, construction
commences anyway, the people of the community who live, play, attend nearby schools
and churches as well as those who travel along the Hawthorne and Crenshaw corridors
will be exposed for an extended period of time to whatever contaminants present in
the on-site soil become airborne during the grading phase of the project. This proposal
is a BAD idea.