Re: [betterbayview] Re: Meeting about Sewer Plant Upgrades - save the waterfront
- as someone who's been watchdogging the sewer planning process and trying turn this ship around for over the past decade i get amused when hysterics are used to try and trump the basic facts of the situation. but as we all know while everyone's entitled to their opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts.
and the facts are:
- all of the proposed alternative locations are 'landfill' and construction at all of those locations would be supported by piles that go down to bedrock. the difference between the alternatives is how far down the piles would have to go to reach the bedrock. it would be more accurate to descibe the new facilities as being surrounded by landfill rather than built on it.
- the plant's capacity is determined by how much liquid it can handle - about 80 million gallons/day - as well as its solids handling facilities. the proposed 10MGD shift of sanitary sewage and stormwater from the east to west side will actually decrease the bayview's treatment burden. there are no plans - nor will there be plans - to expand that capacity, meaning of course that moving the digesters out of the heart of the neighborhood will free up land for other commercial development and open space to buffer people's homes from the rest of the plant. there is no reason to somehow use the digester rebuild as some stealth plant expansion effort.
- the sewage treatment plant is a vital part of our urban life support system and our city can't function without it. yes, the north point plant should be utilized more, but it makes no sense (economically or environmentally) to build solids handling facilities there. while it may feel good to spout on about how the digesters should be rebuilt somewhere out of the neighborhood, that's just an unreal proposition.
- our system accepts waste from brisbane and part of daly city. that was part of 'the deal' to get gobs of federal money that covered about 75% of the cost of the last master plan (it was VERY expensive)
- the solids would be pumped, not trucked to the digesters.
- the jobs piece is an important consequence and byproduct of the sewer
system rebuild and clearly an important issue for our neighbors. they're not being used as some sort of 'buy off' or distraction (that was done 35 years ago).
- the bayview is in a mixed industrial neighborhood. 'blight' is a word used to describe the junkyards and metal recyclers along evans, not brand new industrial development built to exacting design specifications. there will continue to be industrial development in this neighborhood - as there should be IMO.
- development in the backlands is governed by the public trust and the port's backlands planning process will maximize the opportunities available there. the port believes - and i agree with them - that the digesters can function as a key piece of an eco-industrial park out in that area. the port does not have the money to build some sort of open space utopia out there.
- Hi all, I wanted to chime in to agree 100% with Matt's arguments
against moving the digesters to the backlands. The amount of money at
stake is enormous - and would be an enormous waste if it turned out
that the new digesters could indeed cure the smell problem. I don't
see why we can't try that relatively-low-cost solution first.