Monday, June 2, 2008

Let's Pick "6"

The Los Angeles County Sanitation District and its 'Clearwater Program' needs to have a large shaft sunk for the purposes of placing tunnel-drilling equipment for a new outflow tunnel and for the removal of dirt and to provide access to the new tunnel.

"Let's Pick "6"" means that we all should welcome the mining-site and shaft to Identified Potential Shaft Site Number 6, at the Port of L.A., (LAXT) site, on Terminal Island.

Number "6" is NOT in a residential area.

Number "6" has railroad track adjacent to it, allowing for more equipment and dirt to be transported with less cost and have less pollutants.

Number "6" is 'freeway friendly' with not one, but two freeways with easy access over any of three bridges, allowing for no large dirt-haulers to have to clog city streets.

Number "6" allows for greater security to be established and maintained for the site.

Number "6" will NOT use up any valuable parkland, environmentally fragile areas, or cultural and other recreational areas.

Number "6" may allow the most level tunnel to be dug.

(Click on illustration to enlarge)

You can find more information about the Clearwater Program at the Sanitation District's Web site for the program at:

Folks are trying to find support from all five Neighborhood Councils in the Harbor area, every single homeowners' groups, business groups, and every individual living in the San Pedro, Harbor City, Wilmington, and eastern Rancho Palos Verdes.

Let's all join together and welcome the new tunnel which is very necessary and make sure that the site where the shaft is sunk, the equipment is utilized at ground level, and the dirt is hauled away from is Number "6", at the former LAXT site on Terminal Island.


Anonymous said...

are you sure we should even be putting more sewage into the water? how about pick none of the above?

M Richards said...

Thank you so much anonymous 4:46 PM for your insightful comment AND for being the first comment on this blog!

It may be better to treat the water as much as can be done and then use it to water "Donald Frump's Ocean Fails Irrational Golf Course", the new outside areas of Terranea, and all the other golf courses in the area, but that wouldn't account for more than a fraction of the water that needs to be moved somewhere other than into our bodies.

The two tunnels/outfall systems are aging and too small.

If Bob Bisno gets anywhere close to 1,950-condos at Ponte Vista, just think how many more flushes will be created in our area.

If there really needs to be outfall into the ocean, then the least worst spot to place the shaft and ground-level structures is away from residential areas, many, many people believe.

If we can't put the treated water into the ocean, where else can we put it?

The Gobe and Sahara deserts could sure use any water they can get and the continent that receives the least rainfall on earth seems to be losing a whole lot of ice these days.

Maybe shipping the treated water to Antartica might help the global warming issue by adding ice to the continent that is losing too much.

We need to be thinking 'out of the toilet' on these issues and Anonymous does make a point.

As for none of the above, I'm sorry but my aging bladder and colon can't help the issue.