Attention Westsiders - RE: Sullivan Canyon (Threads Merged)

Air quality

Is the fire in Rancho Palos Verdes going to affect the air quality at all?

 

I am in Torrance right now and there is no smoke from PV. That fire will probably be completly out this morning. It was the afternoon ocean breeze or wind that really helped that fire last nite.

 

As for the air quality, yesterday the wind was out of the West so most of the smoke was headed away. This morning the wind is coming from the East so there is a lot more smoke out this way from the La Canada and Morris fires as well.
Enough that I thought our local hill was going up again. #-o

 

air quality deteriorating rapidly

The skies were clear here early this morning, but by 9 am the smoke has rolled in. These were taken at 9:30am from Mulholland Tennis (the radio tower atop Mulholland between Laurel Canyon & Coldwater Canyon). The sunlight has that eerie orange glow and the smell of fire is there.

Looking NE over Studio City towards the Verdugos & the fire:


Looking SW towards Century City & SaMo:

 

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
SMOKE ADVISORY

FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 2009

Valid Friday, August 28, 2009

Smoke from wildfires is affecting air quality in portions of the South Coast Air Basin. The fires are in the Angeles National Forest (Station Fire near La Canada and Morris Fire north of Azusa), the San Bernardino National Forest (Cottonwood Fire, near Hemet), and in Palos Verdes. Smoke has settled into the valleys of Los Angeles County overnight near the fires and in the Hemet area. Onshore ocean breezes during the afternoon are expected to move smoke into the mountains and smoke impacts in Los Angeles County, the San Bernardino valleys and the Hemet area are likely. Prior to the onshore flow clearing the western Basin, smoke will linger in much of Los Angeles County. Air quality will reach Unhealthy levels in smoke impacted areas.

Unhealthy air quality will occur in areas of direct smoke impact, especially near the fires. These areas include:

• portions of the San Gabriel Mountains (Area 15);
• the West San Bernardino Mountains (Area 36);
• portions of the San Fernando Valley (Areas 6 and 7);
• the East San Gabriel Valley (Area 9);
• the West San Gabriel Valley (Area 8;
• the Hemet/San Jacinto Area (Area 28;
• the Southwest Los Angeles County Coastal Area (Area 3);
• the South Los Angeles County Coastal Areas (Area 4).

In any area impacted by smoke: Everyone should avoid any vigorous outdoor or indoor exertion; people with respiratory or heart disease, the elderly, and children should remain indoors. Keep windows and doors closed or seek alternate shelter. Run your air conditioner if you have one. Keep the fresh air intake closed and the filter clean to prevent bringing additional smoke inside.

For mapped current air quality measurements, see http://www.aqmd.gov.

For more tips on avoiding health impacts from smoke, see
http://www.aqmd.gov/ej/CAC/wildfire_safety_tips.htm on AQMD’s website.

 

Sullivan Canyon

A quick question Would we even have had the trail to ride on for al these years if the gas company had not built a road in the first place ?? Same with the fire roads and DWP.


I love these trails . Run and ride them a few times a week. Bummed about the up coming transformation. But we were all annoyed when they graded the ridges now they have awesome single track if you want to put the effort in.

They gotta do, what they gotta do It will work out for us, we just have to wait for a good rain storm.

Just my 2 cents

Craig

 

The air quality alerts are concerning - kay and I are going to hold off riding in the smoky/potentially smoky areas this weekend.

Thanks for the info Nancy -

 

SAMPLE LETTER to try and Protect Sullivan Canyon

If anyone wants to copy and paste here is a sample letter that can be sent out to various city council and other public officials.


Hello
I live in Topanga and am a frequent user of many of the trails in the Santa Monica Mountains. One of my favorites is Sullivan Canyon where I ride several times a week. Although I recognize that the Gas Company has pipelines that go through the canyon and therefore has an easement or some other type of right to maintain that pipe and the area, my understanding of their proposed plans involve much more than just maintenance and include serious environmental and social impacts that should require the appropriate studies - like a CEQA study BEFORE they construction or demolition begins on September 1.

PLEASE help protect Sullivan Canyon and prevent irrepable harm by stopping the project until the appropriate environmental studies are performed and the project complies with environmental standards.

Sincerely,
Heidi Volpe
21135 Colina Rd
Topanga CA
90290

 

Current air quality is moderate... so it's normal. :lol:

http://www2.aqmd.gov/webappl/gisaqi2/VEMap3D.aspx

 

so did anyone ride Sully today? The air quality is sketchy at best...

 

Air Quality wasn't an issue in the canyon, traffic however was a bitch. I started at 7:00am and coming down around 8 was kind of a bummer. Overall it was nice to hit it what might be for the last time.

 

There is an update up on the CORBA site now. There is a meeting on Monday night 8/31. The meeting is on the West Side to discuss this issue. There is also a link to a letter CORBA received from the Gas Co. In that letter the project does not sound as bad as the Homeowners group led us to believe. The Canyon will only be closed for a few months. It is a bummer but those that have been around a while know this is routine and the Canyon will come back! We also have to remember that it is Gas Co property and we are lucky they do not close it off to the public.

http://www.corbamtb.com/issues/IssuesHome.shtml#SullivanCynMeeting

 

For those who will be attending tonight's meeting, I have attached a list of possible talking points prepared by the Brentwood Hills Homeowner's Ass'n.

IMPORTANT POINTS FOR THE AUGUST 31 PUBLIC MEETING​

​

​

Ø The lack of public notice is a real concern to all of us. All of the affected and interested homeowners associations, environmental organizations, recreational groups and community leaders are well-known and many have public websites. Yet, neither the Gas Company nor the various agencies considering the permits gave any public notice to these groups either of the permit applications or the alleged exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (known as CEQA). This deprived the public of the opportunity to review and comment upon the permits, the alleged CEQA exemption, or the proposed mitigation measures.

Ø Why would the Gas Company be afraid of such notice and community involvement?

Ø There should be another public meeting with more advance notice. This public meeting is a start, although it should have come long before tonight. However, given the last-minute notice of this meeting, and the fact that many people are on vacation or getting their families ready for the start of the school year, there are many important community leaders and groups that could not make it tonight. It is not sufficient for the Gas Company to hold a public meeting for the first time on such short notice, especially since the Gas Company contends the permits have already been issued, and it is only twelve hours before the Gas Company intends to start their project.

Ø How can a five-year project of this scope and admitted environmental impact be totally exempt from environmental review under CEQA? The Gas Company should not be permitted to start the project until a full analysis of the environmental impacts of the project can be completed under CEQA.

Ø The 185 large trees that the Protected Tree Report says will be impacted or removed were there well before the pipelines were constructed and the road has been repaired before without removing or impacting these trees. Why can’t the Gas Company change the project to avoid cutting or impacting any large and ancient trees?

Ø The project should be put on hold until the community can receive and understand the project documents, have meaningful input into mitigation measures, and until a proper review of the environmental impacts of the project can be had under the California Environmental Quality Act. Meaningful input means the opportunity to modify the project to lessen its environmental impacts.

Ø A mere two-week delay in the commencement of the planned project is important, but it is not enough.

Ø While the Gas Company owns much of the land in the bottom of the Canyon, it does not own the streambed, which is a public stream that is regulated by the Department of Fish and Game, among other agencies. Moreover, Sullivan Canyon—with its perennial pools of water, springs and stream—is a rare and important habitat for many birds, amphibians, reptiles and mammals. These include bobcats, deer, coyotes, lizards and other animals that rely on the water, plants and shady cover of the Canyon to survive and thrive.

Ø In addition, Sullivan Canyon is an important recreational resource. People from all over the Westside, San Fernando Valley, and other parts of Los Angeles come to Sullivan Canyon to hike, ride horses and bike. Both kids and adults flock to the Canyon every day to take advantage of its unique environment.

Ø The public documents state that the project will have unmitigated impacts. Any work in this environmentally sensitive area must be done only after consideration and mitigation of any significant environmental impacts. The purchase of off-site mitigation measures in areas many miles away will not mitigate the actual environmental impacts in Sullivan Canyon.

Ø There has been no discussion of alternatives to the current proposed project. None of the project documents we have seen analyze, or even discuss, any alternative routes or construction methods for the roadway and pipeline maintenance. This is one of the many problems arising from the fact that the project has not undergone any environmental review under CEQA.

Ø We do not oppose proper maintenance of the gas pipelines. Safety of the pipelines is very important.

Ø However, such maintenance and the reconstruction of the access road should be done to minimize and mitigate any significant environmental impacts.

Ø The project should be changed so that it will, at a minimum:

o Avoid any removal of protected trees more than 8 inches in diameter;

o Avoid any impacts on the major branches and root systems of the 185 large oaks, sycamores and other protected trees that the Protected Tree Report says will be affected by the project. Such impacts can weaken and kill these ancient trees;

o Repair the access road to the minimum possible width and with the minimum possible number of turnouts—12 feet wide with turnouts up the entire length of the canyon is too big;

o Minimize the use of concrete and rip-rap. This is a wild area and the road should have the minimum possible impact. Mere convenience and cost-saving to the Gas Company is not a legitimate justification to put in a wider, heavily engineered roadway, when alternatives are available to minimize the environmental impacts of the project without sacrificing safety; and

o Fully restore the Canyon and reverse the environmental impacts from the proposed pipeline repair excavations.

Ø All construction and subsequent mitigation efforts must be closely monitored by the environmental agencies, and all mitigation measures must be strictly enforced. What are the agencies doing to ensure this?

Ø Fire Safety is of paramount importance. The fact that the project is being commenced in the very heart of the most dangerous time of the fire season—without any prior notice to the community—is of great concern. The recent Getty fire was caused by brush clearance crews. The hills in other areas of Los Angeles are burning as we speak. What is the Gas Company doing to prevent fires from its construction, tree-cutting, brush clearance and welding work in the Canyon?

Ø Please put an immediate hold on the project and ensure that the public is meaningfully notified and consulted regarding both this first stage of work—but also regarding all subsequent stages of work over the course of this five-year project.

 

Co-workers rode it Saturday and said it was pretty crowded. So we decided to go early Sunday morning 7:30am.

Not crowded and beautiful up the canyon. Got really smoky near the top of the canyon. Bikers coming down said it was pretty bad on the ridge so we turned back just at the flat concrete at the turn. Starting to get crowded on the return. No signs of moving equipment or new signs anywhere.

Another friend rode this morning and said it was pretty busy. Lots of riders. The smoke was even worse. But still no signs of anything about to start.

 

Sullivan Canyon

Does anyone know if Sullivan Canyon is still open? Has So Cal Gas started working in Sullivan Canyon? Thank you. I don't get to ride this canyon as much as i want to. Long drive from the O.C.

 

So I went to the community meeting for the Sullivan Gas pipeline tonight and I have good news and bad news. The good news is that they will not be paving Sullivan canyon which I think some posts here indicated. The bad news is that they will indeed be grading the canyon with a new 12 foot wide road. The gas company says that they will only grade areas that cannot be driven over by a pickup truck but I think that we know that that's a lot of the canyon. Additionally, they flat out said they will be regrading all singletrack. Ok, so more good news. It looks like a majority of the work will be done between now and December. They will be first grade the road and then put down concrete mats over and around pipelines to prevent soil erosion. There may be a period between the grading and the pipeline work that the canyon will be open. In fact they said that the canyon might be open to use sporadically during the fall. Also they said that the canyon will be closed occaisionally in the spring.

It's a bummer that they're doing this (and being so sneaky about getting the permits) but at least without paving the canyon will eventually return to what we know and love. Additionally, it does not look like it will be closed for a full 5 years. Rather this number refers to the length of time their work permits are good for.

 

I wanted to go but took a nap and overslept!
Damn time change stuff!
Did they say anything about all the trees?

 

They said that they're taking out 31 trees and that they are all extremely close to the road (either leaning into it or with the potential of falling). My girlfriend who is a city planner says that they will have to plant new trees but that these will be very small seedlings and hence not much chance of surviving. Probably why they'll have to plant 300+. In short, the trees are toast. Suck.

 

good feedback...very fair

 

Every time I ride there, for 18 years, I notice the giant oak and the giant sycamore!
I'll be so sad if they cut those old trees down.
I hope not!