Dear Editor,
I am a homeowner at Rincon Point. You are well aware of the fact that Heal the Ocean and Carpinteria Sanitary Distirct are currently trying to encourage our neighborhood to vote in favor of connecting to sewer to improve the environment. I, along with many of my neighbors, believe the proposed project is completely wrong and potentially very hazardous. The financial assessment is substantial, offering no guarantees for completion and location of vital pumping equipment. The $88,000 to $90,000 cost represents a starting point with possible future assessments—or even abandonment—if funds run out and neighbors cannot agree to cover increased costs.
There is no evidence that our septic systems are polluting Rincon Beach, and there is no evidence that constructing a complex sewer system will improve water quality at Rincon Point. In fact, even the Koonce memo, generously sent out by Heal the Ocean to all residents, states that “lack of bacteria may be caused by effective bacterial treatment by the septic systems, the filtering action of the subsurface material or both.” There is substantial evidence that previous beach closures occurred during a time the EPA was citing the Carpinteria Sanitary District for sewage spills. The Carpinteria Sanitary District reported 31 spills between July 1997 and June 2002. Rincon Beach has not been closed since the EPA mandated the Carpinteria Sanitary District repair its system.
The much cited “DNA evidence” is misleading. Urban runoff from the two County Park parking lots bordering our neighborhood flows through a culvert directly into the lagoon and can easily account for the presence of human DNA. The DNA evidence also points to higher levels of coliform bacteria in ocean water samples than freshwater samples from the lagoon. Carpinteria Sanitary District is allowed to dump up to 2,600,000 gallons of secondary waste-containing coliform directly into the ocean, 1,000 feet from shore into 25 feet of water where prevailing wind and current flow directly to Rincon. Why should we send our waste to the Carpinteria Sanitary District only to find it back on our beaches?
Claims that connecting to sewer may improve property values are unrealistic. The homes at Rincon Point are worth millions of dollars because of the incredibly special quality of life in our community.
However, for many of us the most important consideration is not monetary or technical. Most of us want to secure the long-term health and beauty of our beloved Rincon Point. As a community we now face a decision that will significantly impact our future. At this time, it is clear that we must come together in order to resolve our issues and ensure the best possible future for Rincon Point.
We believe the construction of the sewer will pave the way for increased development within our neighborhood and the surrounding area, the Bluffs, and eventually the Rincon Creek watershed. A resort on the Bluffs and “McMansions” on the Point will decrease green space, significantly increase urban-runoff pollution, encourage endless construction projects, and increase traffic in an area already at its threshold, the end result of which will be degradation to the quality of life here at Rincon Point. This degradation to the quality of life not only threatens property values but also promises to change the character of Rincon Point forever.
As environmentalists, our greatest concern is that the installation of a sewer system will not only facilitate development; it will also increase our chances of a serious environmental threat. All it takes is to look just south at our neighbors in Santa Monica, Los Angeles, and Manhattan Beach to name a few. Beach closures and environmental hazards from sewer spills are a regular occurrence. Carpinteria Sanitary District has asserted time and again that a sewer will not improve water quality. Why should we take such risks with nothing to gain?
We believe responsible onsite treatment is the most environmentally sustainable approach to wastewater management, whereas a sewer system will induce growth in the local community which in turn will spew more sewage out of the Carpinteria Sanitary District’s outfall at Carpinteria Creek and into the waters near Rincon Point.
We can come together as a local community and work to ensure that everything that makes Rincon Point special—its beaches, its lagoon, its green space, and its historic architecture—is protected. If we allow a sewer into our neighborhood, we will never have an opportunity to explore better environmental solutions to our waste management in the future. We have a vision for Rincon Point. We can become a national model for an environmentally sustainable beachfront community.
Sincerely,
Billy Taylor
Rincon Point, CA
Dear Editor,
I have been following Elizabeth Dietzmann’s inspection and maintenance series, and she is right on track! Massachusetts had a good program for at least inspections, and, I believe, it requires about a three-year renewal of qualifications. A really simple solution is to require the designer to build in at least a five- to 10-year inspection period. After all, she/he should know best if something is going wrong!
What really encouraged me to write was Dietzmann’s cite of MA Title 5. I think Title 5 came to be shortly after the birth of the EPA. The state did such a lousy job of putting it together that a committee was formed to “correct” it—I was on that committee, and our work was accepted and replaced the original doc—that was 1976!
Keep writing …
Sincerely,
Richard H. Smith, P.E.
Ketchikan, AK
OW - September/October 2007 |
