Running Out of Room : Dump Hunters Look to Northern County Valleys to Relieve Pileup at Landfills

Northern Los Angeles County, with its many large, undeveloped canyons, holds what sanitation officials believe is the key to solving the region’s mounting trash crisis.

But finding sites for the always unpopular dumps and getting neighbors of existing landfills to agree to suffer more truck traffic, litter and fumes is a complex and politically volatile process.

“The intensity of this discussion is just beginning,” said Edward Avila, president of the Los Angeles Board of Public Works. “There’s nothing as personal as trash. You put it in front of your house, and you expect it to be taken away.”

“In the next six to eight months, a lot is going to come down that will set the pace for what the long-term solutions are going to be,” said Kenneth B. Kazarian, president of BKK Corp., a landfill operator.

Things promise to heat up in the coming months as a variety of government agencies, politicians, homeowner groups and municipalities try to block or support opening and expanding landfills in the San Fernando and Santa Clarita valleys.

1988 Report

While the competing groups haggle, deadlines loom. A report, published in 1988 by the city, the county and the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, lays out the following facts:

* By 1991, three dumps will reach their permitted capacities and close. During the next five years, two more landfills are scheduled to shut down.

* Unless new dumps are opened or existing landfills are expanded, the county will not have enough space for the 45,000 tons of garbage thrown away daily. Garbage would exceed daily capacity by 6,400 tons--enough to fill 640 dump trucks--by 1992.

* Extending the life spans of seven of the existing landfills around the county--either by granting new permits or by expanding their geographical boundaries--would add only four more years of sufficient dump space, to 1995.

* Encouraging maximum residential and construction recycling and composting of yard waste--which could cut the waste stream in half--still would only add five years, to 2000.

The sanitation report concludes that new landfills are essential. And since the report was published, Elsmere Canyon, southeast of Santa Clarita, has emerged as the most likely first target of five potential sites. It would have a potential life span of 50 years.

2 Dumps Threatened

Public awareness of the impending trash disposal shortfall has been raised only recently by threats to the futures of two San Fernando Valley garbage dumps--at Lopez Canyon above Lake View Terrace and at Sunshine Canyon near Granada Hills.

But Los Angeles is not the first major city to face a garbage crunch. In fact, the large expanses of virgin land surrounding the metropolitan area have given sanitation officials more options than their counterparts in congested Eastern cities.

It was in 1987 that a barge laden with 3,100 tons of New York garbage traveled the East Coast and the Caribbean in search of a resting place.

“The picture of the barge floating around the Eastern seaboard is something everyone can relate to,” said Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar). “I guess the equivalent would be full garbage trucks driving around the L.A. freeways with nowhere to go.”

The same year that the barge roamed the East, city and county public works officials predicted doom for Los Angeles after a proposed waste-to-energy plant called LANCER fell to environmental and neighborhood opposition.

“We’ve been in an emergency situation for some time, just nobody realized it,” Avila said.

How did Los Angeles County reach this critical point?

State officials, waste haulers and homeowner groups largely blame the city of Los Angeles, which produces 40% of the county’s garbage, for not planning and for dragging its heels on curbside recycling, which still is in the planning stages.

“The city just sits and waits. I don’t know why,” said Ann Messina, president of the North Valley Coalition, which opposes expansion of the Sunshine Canyon dump.

The California Waste Management Board also blames Los Angeles for poor landfill planning. Of three dumps owned and operated by the city about 15 years ago, only Lopez Canyon remains open--and its operations are under attack by the state. Its potential closure shows the danger of shortsighted planning, officials say.

“We feel very strongly about the importance of long-term planning, which really doesn’t mean getting down to one site, where you have all your apples in one basket,” said Chris Peck, state waste board spokesman. “That’s just not too smart.”

Ernani Bernardi, Hal Bernson and Joel Wachs--the Los Angeles councilmen who represent north Valley areas where landfills are located--blame their council colleagues for an unwillingness to open or expand dumps in more affluent areas.

“What sums it up, basically, is that . . . the City Council went along and let Mission Canyon and Toyon Canyon be closed,” Bernardi said. Mission Canyon is in Sepulveda Pass, while Toyon Canyon is in the Griffith Park area.

“Now suddenly Lopez Canyon, because of the tremendous political muscle in these more affluent areas, has become the fall guy for the whole city,” Bernardi added.

Officials at the city’s Bureau of Sanitation and the Department of Public Works blame the council for bowing to public pressure against the $235-million LANCER--Los Angeles City Energy Recovery--incinerator near the Coliseum.

Project Abandoned

City sanitation officials had counted on LANCER and two other incinerators planned for the Valley and the Westside to handle virtually all of the city’s garbage by the end of the century. But after people who live near the South-Central site raised fears about air pollutants, Mayor Tom Bradley and the City Council scuttled the project.

“They had everything figured out until the year 2050,” said Hy Weitzman, who lobbies for waste hauling and disposal interests as executive vice president for the California Refuse Removal Council. “Suddenly they were caught with plans that are no longer feasible.”

Similar political pressure against landfills will undoubtedly affect the future of trash disposal in the county because either the City Council or the County Board of Supervisors must approve landfills or landfill expansions--depending on whether they are in the city or in unincorporated areas.

Expansions are proposed at seven dumps: Azusa Western and Puente Hills in the San Gabriel Valley; Bradley West, Sunshine Canyon and Lopez Canyon in the Valley; Chiquita Canyon in the Santa Clarita Valley, and Scholl Canyon near Glendale.

If recent hearings on the Sunshine and Lopez dumps are any indication, the expansions will face bitter community opposition.

4,000 Tons Daily

Sunshine Canyon Landfill, a private dump owned by Browning-Ferris Industries, accepts 4,000 tons of trash each day from city, county and private haulers. After Bernson investigated neighborhood complaints about litter and dust, the city ordered Browning-Ferris to shut down the landfill area closest to homes.

The permit for Sunshine Canyon extends through only 1991, although its operators hope to expand onto unincorporated land and stay open up to 50 more years.

Lopez Canyon Landfill--which is owned by the city of Los Angeles and accepts about 4,000 tons of city trash a day--has drawn neighbors’ ire for years for allegedly sloppy management.

In the spring, two city landfill workers fainted after unearthing toxic gases, and dump opposition reached a fever pitch. An investigation by state waste officials found that the dump was larger than its 11-year-old permit allowed.

A state order paring back operations at Lopez Canyon to 1978 levels is being challenged by the city in Los Angeles Superior Court. The city maintains that abiding by outdated conditions will force the dump to close by 1991, a year before its permit expires.

Costly Alternative

Diverting that trash to private dumps could cost up to $80,000 a day, said Delwin A. Biagi, director of the Bureau of Sanitation. Biagi also said he fears that the state’s stringent stance will foil city plans to expand the landfill and keep it open to 2005.

Five future landfill sites in the county are under consideration, and environmental impact reports on all five are expected early next year: Elsmere and Towsley canyons in Santa Clarita Valley; Blind and Browns canyons above Chatsworth, and the three-canyon site of Mission, Rustic and Sullivan in the Santa Monica Mountains.

A sixth site, Toyon II near Glendale, has already been eliminated because of geologic problems.

Elsmere is under the most intense discussion, partly because it is included in a complex land-swap agreement proposed in federal legislation introduced in February by Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City).

The swap, still under negotiation, includes protecting Mission, Rustic and Sullivan canyons for parkland in return for turning U. S. Forest Service land at Elsmere into a city and county dump. Berman also wants closure of Lopez Canyon to be included in the agreement.

But while politicians want to swap one landfill site for another, professionals in solid waste management say the growing mountains of garbage preclude bargaining over dump sites.

‘Need All of Them’

“If we’re trying to get additional capacity, why in the world would we give one up? No one of the six sites solves our problems. We need all of them,” said Steve Maguin, head of solid waste management for the 24 communities that form the county Sanitation Districts.

Meanwhile, BKK of Torrance is vying with the city and county to open a dump in Elsmere. An environmental impact report is in progress, and company president Kazarian said he hopes to obtain county approval for the project by early next year and open the landfill in 1991.

The county Sanitation Districts, fearing that they could lose other potential dump sites in the Santa Clarita Valley to development, have begun obtaining options to buy land in Towsley Canyon. The county is also preparing to negotiate soon for land in Blind Canyon, said Gary Yoshida, head of the property management section of the Sanitation Districts.

Yet around the state, landfills are becoming more and more difficult to build or expand because of neighborhood opposition.

“There’s too much at stake not to win,” said Dotti Main, vice president of the North Valley Coalition. “We can’t afford to grease palms, but we can reason with our legislators.”

Unsanitary News

In Los Angeles, residents have tried various approaches. Neighbors of Sunshine Canyon distributed a newsletter, the Unsanitary News, to counteract California Sanitation News, produced by Browning-Ferris. Neighbors of Lopez Canyon have blocked the dump entrance with human barricades three times in the past year.

Santa Clarita residents have already formed the Committee to Preserve Elsmere Canyon. Although the Santa Clarita City Council has not formally opposed Elsmere as a dump site, it has agreed to pay a lobbyist $5,000 a month to help the city hold its own in the political jockeying over the site.

“There’s a question here of fairness,” Santa Clarita Mayor Jan Heidt said. “We have two out this way already--Sunshine and Chiquita--that are going for expansion. . . . But save the Westside at all costs, right?”

Even before it comes under serious review, environmentalists have made it known that they fear Towsley Canyon--along with the proposed growth of Sunshine Canyon--could intrude upon 6,000 acres of woodlands that they want folded into a new state park.

They fear that placing a dump in one canyon will create a domino effect.

“It’s Sunshine today; it’s Towsley tomorrow. Maybe it’s Sullivan Canyon 10 years hence,” said Don Mullally, an environmentalist and the senior gardener at O’Melveny Park in Granada Hills.

Exporting garbage out of the metropolitan area is another option under study. New Jersey, for example, already sends more than half of its garbage to other states.

Shipping by Rail

Los Angeles is considering hauling garbage by rail to Eagle Mountain, a proposed dump in Riverside County, but Avila said the site will not be ready to accept trash until 1992 at the earliest.

Hauling trash by rail would cost $40 to $90 a ton, sanitation officials estimate. Conversely, dumping trash in a new landfill would cost $15 to $20 a ton, they say, although that does not account for closure costs and the expense of cleaning up any lingering environmental problems. Cheaper still is expanding an existing dump--from $10 to $20 for each ton of garbage, officials say.

The intensifying concern over diminishing landfill space has renewed recycling discussions. In the midst of a Los Angeles City Council debate on the state’s July 18 crackdown on Lopez Canyon, Westside Councilwoman Ruth Galanter introduced a motion--later passed unanimously--for city staff to look at ways to speed up the curbside recycling program.

Plans to siphon off up to half of the city’s garbage through recycling have been discussed and studied for the past five years, said Gyl Eliot, spokeswoman for the Public Works Department. About 57,500 households are involved in pilot recycling projects, and 32,500 more are expected to be on-line by the end of the summer. The program is to be expanded citywide within three years, with yard waste to be added two years later.

Of the 87 cities in the county, 15 have municipal recycling programs. And of those, nine started within the past two years, according to the Sanitation Districts.

Curbside recycling began in Los Angeles in the 1950s. Then in 1961, Mayor Sam Yorty ran on a platform that included a promise to end recycling. He called the mandatory separation of garbage “coercion against the housewives of this city.”

L.A. COUNTY’S TRASH PREDICAMENT

STATE OF THE SYSTEM

Existing sites proposed for expansion: CHIQUITA CANYON SUNSHINE CANYON LOPEZ CANYON BRADLEY WEST SCHOLL CANYON AZUSA WESTERN PUENTE HILLS

Existing sites. No expansion planned: CALABASAS BKK WEST COVINA SPADRA

Potential new sites. TOWSLEY CANYON BLIND CANYON BROWNS CANYON ELSMERE CANYON MISSION-RUSTIC-SULLIVAN CANYONS

Existing Dump Sites

Azusa Western Current tons per day: 1,500 Possible closure: 1990 Future: Permitted landfill site reaches capacity. Expansion would add 40 million tons, extend landfill life about 20 years.

BKK West Covina Current tons per day: 9,000 Possible closure: 1995 Future: Landfill reaches capacity. No expansion plans.

Bradley West Current tons per day: 2,500 Possible closure: 1992 Future: Permits expire 1992. Expansion would add 11 million tons, extend landfill life 10 to 12 years.

Calabasas Current tons per day: 3,000 Possible closure: 2005 to 2009 Future: Landfill reaches capacity. No room for expansion.

Chiquita Canyon Current tons per day: 3,000 Possible closure: 1991 Future: Permits expire 1991. Expansion would add 30 million tons, extend landfill life 10 to 15 years.

Lopez Canyon Current tons per day: 4,000 Possible closure: 1992 Future: Permits expire 1992. Expansion would extend landfill life up to nine years. But permit violations could hasten its closure.

Puente Hills Current tons per day: 12,000 Possible closure: 1993 Future: Permits expire 1993. Expansion would add 70 million tons, extend landfill life up to 20 years.

Scholl Canyon Current tons per day: 2,600 Possible closure: 2004 Future: Permits expire 2004. Expansion would add 6 million tons.

Spadra Current tons per day: 2,800 Possible closure: 1998 to 2000 Future: Landfill reaches capacity. No expansion plans.

Sunshine Canyon Current tons per day: 4,000 Possible closure: 1991 Future: Permits expire 1991. Expansion would add 215 million tons, extend landfill life 30 to 50 years.

Note: Small landfills in Burbank, Whittier, Palmdale and Lancaster each receive less than 300 tons of garbage a day.

Proposed Dump Sites

Blind Canyon Potential capacity: 140 million tons Status: To avoid losing a potential dump site, the county soon may begin negotiating withlandowners to obtain purchase options on 2,200 acres in the canyon.

Browns Canyon Potential capacity: 100 million tons Status: County has not yet sought purchase options.

Elsmere Canyon Potential capacity: 225 million tons Status: BKK Corp. hopes to open landfill by 1991. Dump could operate up to 50 years.

Mission-Rustic-Sullivan canyons Potential capacity: 25 to 250 million tons Status: A bill by Rep. Howard L. Berman would eliminate these canyons as dump sites. County Supervisors Deane Dana and Ed Edelman have said they would support a dump here only as a last resort. Supervisor Mike Antonovich opposes a dump here.

Towsley Canyon Potential capacity: 235 million tons Status: County obtained purchase options on 760 acres last year. The options, which expire in January, 1991, give county first right to buy the property.

Note: An environmental impact report on the five proposed dump sites could be completed by early next year. Depending on daily tonnage of garbage, the expected life of these landfills ranges from 20 to 90 years.

Sources: Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts and private landfill firms. Tonnage rates reflect current estimates and can vary from month to month. A change in daily tonnage rates could delay or hasten some dump closures. DIMINISHING CAPACITY

Los Angeles County’s ability to dispose of garbage will be greatly reduced if no new landfills open and existing dumps do not expand. Estimates are based on present daily disposal rates.

1990- Azusa closes. Capacity: 46,500 tons per day Tons Per Day: 48,000

1991- Chiquita and Sunshine canyons close. Capacity: 39,500 Tons Per Day: 49,000

1992- Bradley West and Lopez Canyon close. Capacity: 33,000 Tons Per Day: 50,500

1993- Puente Hills closes. Capacity: 21,000 Tons Per Day: 51,500

1995- BKK West Covina closes. Capacity: 12,000 Tons Per Day: 54,000

1998-2000- Spadra closes. Capacity: 9,200 Tons Per Day: 58,000-61,000

2004- Scholl Canyon closes. Capacity: 6,600 Tons Per Day: 67,000

2005-2009- Calabasas closes. Capacity: 3,600 Tons Per Day: 68,500-?