This article is a rebuttal letter to the editor on the Santa Cruz Sentinel Article published 5/29/22 by Santa Cruz County Environmental Health (see below).
The Watsonville residents deserve evidence that the new housing project will be
safe for the community. So far we can’t find it.
In 2018, Santa Cruz County Environmental Health approved a toxic mitigation
plan for the developer to transfer the top 2 (two) feet of contaminated soil to
Kettleman toxic waste dump prior to construction. The levels of lead found in
the soil, according to Webber, Hayes & Associates, L.LC ( hired by the
developer) were concentrations up to 5,400 parts per million which is 160 times
higher than a San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board soil
screening level for human safety!
Yet in 2021, the developer submitted a revised mitigation plan: to take only the
top six inches of toxic soil to Kettleman and the remaining 18 inches would be
either taken to Hollister land fill OR be buried next to Seaview Ranch residential
housing, near Landmark Elementary and along the Watsonville slough
Despite repeated public outcry, the city approved the plan- to bury and cap
( 18,000 cubic feet) in a 25 foot deep pit and haul away to Kettleman only the
top 6 inches. The construction just started this month and is scheduled to
continue in several phases over the next few years.
The city and county environmental health tried to assure the public in a 5/29/22
Sentinel article that “some soil will be left behind will exceed strict screening
levels- levels so low they would not need to be taken to a hazardous disposal
site” . However, we have looked closely at the Webber, Hayes and Associates
report. Bob Culbertson, one of our members, has carefully analyzed it, noting
that nowhere in the report does it suggest that the toxins are concentrated only
in the top 6 inches of soil. Rather, the report states repeatedly that the high level
of toxins were found in the top two feet throughout the acreage. This means not
just lead- a known human carcinogen- but other metals, as per the Webber and
Hayes report, that also exceed state board levels which, in 2018, were
considered too high for residential are now suddenly and somehow “magically”
determined to be “safe” levels. We have submitted our concerns to the
Department of Toxic Substance Control ( D.T.S.C) and await the answer to our
question : How can the county possibly allow the 18,000 cubic feet of the toxic
soil , which by law had been mandated to go to a regulated toxic dump, ( where
they have specialized liners, temperature regulators and leak detections) to
now be buried next to a housing project with no special equipment to regulate
any leakage so as to assure public safety? The only report(s) available to us
shows the public remains at risk.
Another major concern is the instability of the hillside, where they will bury the
toxins, cap it and depend on a retaining wall to hold back the toxic soil. The
Seaview Ranch HOA hired a locally respected geologist consultant firm ( Cotton,
Shires & Associates, Inc.) Their 2021 Peer Review report , written by principal
engineering geologist J. Wallace, indicates that the Miller-Pacific report ( paid for
by the developer) itself shows that the (toxic) fill will alter the stability of the
equilibrium of the hillside, and is expected to fail in an earthquake that can result
in just 12 inches of movement. That is enough, as per Wallace, to crack and
expose the toxic landfill to air and water, enough for the roads to fail and the
toxic landfill to slide into the slough. The county however, asserted ( in the
5/29/22 article) that the cap “ would be located on a lower tier of the sloped
property and requires a much smaller retaining wall”. Yet in a meeting we
recently had with D.T.S.C., Wallace, shared that the clay soil make-up of that
slope is similar to some adjacent properties which have been problematic for
years, citing homes inching toward the slough. He referred to another
neighboring site with geological soil problems where the developer had dug only
half as deep as the Hillcrest plan will dig. Wallace says that the Hillcrest plan did
not have correct geological parameters for their model to be accurately
characterized which creates a high likelihood of containment failure.
We agree with Jimmy Dutra, Watsonville city council member, who opposed
the project citing the risk of “extremely carcinogenic” toxins stating “ How can I
approve a project that may cause physical harm and death? These findings are
a dealbreaker for me ” There are numerous other issues not yet addressed. If
you are interested in learning more about our efforts to address this problem,
stay tuned. We are considering starting a citizen group website to monitor this
on-going public safety concern.
Watsonville Committee Against Toxics- Noriko Ragsac, Bob Culbertson, Lisa
DuPont