Blog Part 1: DWP's New Pipeline

Set in Los Angeles in the 1930’s, the classic film Chinatown explores corruption and greed against the backdrop of the Department of Water & Power (DWP). Although this was a dramatized version of those in power in the early days of the DWP, it was based on some real events, including actions by William Mulholland and his people to remove farmers off land they wanted. The character of Noah Cross in the film—hell-bent on his vision of a metropolis in the desert and incorporating the San Fernando Valley into Los Angeles—is said to be based on William Mulholland.

One of the powerful themes in Chinatown, articulated by private eye Jake Gittes is, “You can’t always tell what’s going on,” as people are not always what they seem to be. Any first time viewer can easily get lost in the story, because everyone has an agenda and almost no one speaks the truth. Ever.

Fast forward 80+ years: The DWP is spending over half a billion dollars on a new water pipeline—and damned if anything gets in the way. Known officially as the “River Supply Conduit Project,” this new pipeline will extend from the Silver Lake & Ivanhoe Reservoirs through Griffith Park and up to North Hollywood, thereby replacing the current pipeline.

The project began over two years ago, and since its start, has faced serious issues, including the discovery of deadly Chromium 6 at the site of what will be the underground “Headworks Reservoir” on the north side of Griffith Park. This ostensibly halted DWP’s excavation temporarily, although everyone involved has been quiet about this publicly. In a law suit slated for trial this year, the Disney Studio in Burbank is alleged to be responsible for this pollution. If true, Disney will likely settle out of court to avoid bad publicity.

Other issues plaguing the pipeline: On West Silver Lake Drive, the contractor who won the bid for parts of the Silver Lake construction, Steve P. Rados, Inc., hit the telephone system while excavating, causing an outage for 10 days. Eddie Ebell, owner of Edendale Restaurant on Rowena, suffered losses estimated at $35,000. Without phone service, he couldn’t take reservations; when people called and couldn’t get through, they thought the restaurant was out of business. And he couldn’t process credit cards for those who did come.

This same contractor also hit a gas line last year during excavations on Riverside Drive near Los Feliz Boulevard. Fortunately, no explosion occurred and no one was killed. And now, the construction currently on Glendale Boulevard and Rokeby Street has caused health issues for at least 30 residents, ranging from asthmatic conditions, to bronchial infections, sinus infections and noticeable decreases in lung capacity.

Mitigation? What Mitigation?

As the community began to coalesce, it learned that mitigation measures filled many pages of DWP’s own 454 page Environmental Impact Report. In other words, there were procedures mandated by the DWP to keep hazardous levels of air pollution and noise from severely impacting residents—some whose homes are literally 11 feet from construction sites. In fact, these procedures were a condition of DWP’s own Board of Commissioners granting approval for this entire Pipeline Project.

Unfortunately, most of these mitigation procedures were not being done, and within 3 months, residents had become ill with persistent or chronic respiratory issues. Martha Mathieu, who lives just half a block from the site, developed respiratory problems so severe after month two that her doctor ordered her onto nightly oxygen treatment.

At the residents’ first community meeting with the DWP and Rados (the contractor) on January 12, 2012, everyone learned that DWP had not tested the soil for contaminants. Excavations on Glendale Boulevard and Rokeby, as deep as 47 feet, are on a site adjacent to the old Monte Sano Hospital, which operated for over 50 years from the 1920’s to the late 1960’s or early 1970’s. No one knows what could be in the ground as the EPA was non-existent until 1970. Additionally, this area is such an old part of Los Angeles, who knows what other businesses could have dumped toxic substances into the ground?

But even if there is nothing toxic in the ground, DWP’s Environmental Impact Report states that without Air Quality mitigation, EPA standards will likely be violated. Construction sites are a hazard, not only from visible dust & dirt becoming airborne, but also from “Particulate Matter.” Particulate Matter is pollution so small it cannot be seen by the naked eye. It is such a serious health hazard that the EPA has levels for how much can legally be in the air. How serious a hazard? Particulate Matter can bypass the human body’s natural filtering of particles in the air we breath and lodge deep into our lungs, causing diseases as serious as asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, and heart attacks. 

In addition to the 28 residents with health issues, 3 pets have died since construction began. Martha Mathieu’s cat, who already had health issues, spent his last days in the midst of noise and pollution and died on Christmas Day. Michael Newsom, also a half block from the site, had two dogs in good health, yet both died within a few months of the start of construction. Prior to their deaths, he said there were sneezing constantly and seemed to be having breathing issues.

At the community meeting on January 12, anger poured from the residents over the air pollution, the extreme noise, and a slew of other issues including damage to buildings along the construction site. Residents were also livid that their calls and complaints to DWP were ignored. Even calls to City Councilmember Tom LaBonge’s office were ignored—or residents were told to call the DWP instead. In fact, this meeting with the DWP only happened once Renee Nahum, Co-Chair of the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council, compelled the DWP to attend.

DWP executives present at this meeting seemed totally unaware of any mitigation procedures in their Environmental Impact Report. And despite daily photographic evidence amassed by Silver Lake resident Jerome Courshon, Rados had the audacity to claim that their crew was employing mitigation procedures. Although, they too, appeared to be totally unaware of the mitigation procedures mandated in DWP’s Report.

It was even asked if the bid Rados gave, and the acceptance of that bid by DWP, would have taken into account the funding necessary for full mitigation to protect residents along construction sites. Both Glenn Singley (the top DWP executive present) and Derek Rados (the top representative of the contractor present) responded “Yes.”

Well then, why was so little being done? If the money allocated for mitigation in the bid and subsequent contract is not being spent on mitigation for residents, where is it going?

Click through to read Part 2 of this series.