The group proposes wetlands at the Chili Cook-Off site, and putting a wastewater treatment elsewhere on MBC Civic Center Area property.
By Jonathan Friedman/Special to Malibu Times
Fireworks were on display at last Tuesday’s Malibu Creek Watershed Advisory Council meeting. Steve Uhring of the Malibu Coastal Land Conservancy and Malibu CAN, the leading Measure M opponent group, made a presentation on an alternative to the Malibu Bay Company (MBC) Development Agreement. The Watershed Council is, according to its Web site, “made up of a long list of representatives working to protect and preserve the health of the Malibu Creek Watershed and its adjoining watersheds,” and is led by Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains.
During his presentation, Uhring said the city’s proposal for a wastewater treatment facility on the Chili Cook-Off site might not be feasible, because the amount of wastewater coming from the current and future development in the Civic Center area would be too much for the facility to handle. Uhring proceeded to list the amount of wastewater discharged on a daily basis from various properties in the area. However, MBC spokesperson David Reznick said Uhring’s numbers were way off, leading to a heated exchange.
Uhring said after all the properties in the Civic Center area are developed, there would be 468,000 gallons of wastewater discharged on a daily basis. He said he got this total based on the current 50,000 gallons of wastewater coming from the restaurants at the Malibu Colony Plaza. He took the square footage of those restaurants and compared them with the other ones in the area. Then he added his estimates for how much wastewater would come from the various other developments that would be created through the MBC Agreement and the other Civic Center area agreements that are on the table, such as La Paz and Schultz. When asked by Susan Nissman, senior field deputy for County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, how he got the 50,000 figure, Uhring said it came from the MBC development agreement environmental impact report (EIR). That is when Reznick chimed in.
“I would suggest that you read the EIR with a little bit more accuracy,” he said. Reznick said the total wastewater discharge from the Malibu Colony Plaza is actually 37,500 gallons per day
However, the EIR actually states that the total amount of wastewater coming from all MBC development in the Civic Center area (including Malibu Colony Plaza, the health care facility, the post office and the three buildings on the Chili Cook-Off site) totals 30,000 gallons per day.
Malibu Coastal Land Conservancy and CAN member Ozzie Silna, who participated in the presentation with Uhring, clarified in an interview later in the week that the 50,000 figure was not actually from the EIR, but rather based on a statement that Mayor Ken Kearsley made at a CAN meeting in June.
In Uhring’s presentation, he showed a video from a City Council meeting in September 2001 in which Suzanne Good from the Malibu Lagoon Task Force, a sub-committee of the watershed advisory council, said the solution to restoring the lagoon and creek is to create a wetlands in the Civic Center Area that would treat urban runoff and excess creek flows. She said the wetlands should include the Chili Cook-Off site and other sites in the area that have various owners. Uhring said this concept combined with the placement of a wastewater treatment facility on another MBC Civic Center area property, is the best solution to cleaning Malibu’s polluted waters.
When asked if any of the other property owners were known to be willing sellers, Silna said no. However, he added that does not mean they will never be, pointing out that before June, few thought the MBC would offer to sell the Chili Cook-Off site.
Nissman then asked if there were proof that a wetlands would do a better job cleaning all the wastewater than the city’s proposed facility. Silna said there is no proof, leading Nissman to ask what the point is of the wetlands. Silna responded he is not against a wastewater treatment facility, but rather, he is against placing it on the Chili Cook-Off site, and if one were built, the city cannot allow too much development, but rather must acquire some land to prevent that, and put in a wetlands area instead.
Later in the meeting, the tension grew when CAN member Bob Purvey, who stood behind a camera while recording the meeting, suggested Nissman had been sent there by the county to “blow holes into the presentation.”
Nissman said she resented the accusation and demanded Purvey not do anything with the video he made until it had been reviewed. Purvey said he refused, and planned to show the video unedited on the city’s television channel. Purvey said he also stood by his comment because Nissman was making faces during Uhring’s presentation, and her questions implied an agenda.