Chiquita Canyon in Perspective: Building America's Largest Landfills

For over a decade, Apex Landfill in Las Vegas and Puente Hills Landfill in Southern California were back-and-forth contenders for the title of ‘Nation’s Largest Landfill.’ At some point, Puente Hills was recognized as the largest. Operated by Los Angeles County, Puente Hills became a reliable repository for much of Los Angeles’ refuse, accepting a motley category of unwanted items such as outdated couches, empty hair-coloring bottles, construction debris, shredded automobiles and expired cheese. Puente Hills’ management asserted that they adhered to their “Good Neighbor Policy” and that they were “helping neighbors, and the environment in tons of ways.” Outside of the hackneyed, groan-worthy pun, their motto seems trite, if only for the scope of the project. Residents near the Nation’s largest landfill regularly complained of odors, traffic, noise and negative environmental, health and economic effects while it was open. They were mostly ignored.

On October 31, 2013, the Puente Hills Landfill closed for good. A couple of years before its agreed-upon closing date, the San Gabriel Valley of Governments petitioned to keep it open for another 10 years. Communities nearby fought hard and eventually won. Despite their victory, residents near Puente Hills will continue to deal with issues such as fugitive gases and other health and environmental issues for decades and generations to follow. In fact, closed landfills still carry significant risks of spontaneous explosion and unhealthful, carcinogenic gasses.

With the landfill’s closing, it is likely that the County is looking for another Puente Hills within its boundaries and is eyeing Chiquita Canyon Landfill for that purpose. It is not widely known that many projects such as the LAX Specific Plan Amendment Study, the Boyle Heights Mixed-Use Community Project, and the 100 West Walnut Project in Pasadena (City of Pasadena, “100 West Walnut Planned Development: Environmental Impact Analysis,” SCH No. 2013071018, Page IV.L.3-8, June 2014) cite that their waste needs could be accommodated by Chiquita Canyon Landfill’s pending expansion in their planning documents. Newhall Ranch’s Landmark Village relies on Chiquita’s remaining capacity and refers to the planned Chiquita Canyon Master Plan Revision in a footnote in 2011. Since many County projects have moved forward based on the assumption that Chiquita Canyon Landfill will succeed in obtaining an expansion permit, in effect, it seems that a decision has already been made – and without the bother of the CEQA/EIR process, or a hearing with the Board of Supervisors.

Another conflict in this permitting practice is that homes in the Newhall Ranch project will be built right up against the landfill, closer than any home in Val Verde. The expansion could provide a way for those homes to be built – and paradoxically endanger the people who will reside there.

So what happens statistically if you live near a landfill? Well, the results from multiple peer-reviewed studies are worrisome, indicating increased risks of decreased immune system function, asthma, leukemia, liver cancer, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, bladder cancer and birth defects. Despite health complaints by Val Verdeans and not a single air quality monitor in the town of Val Verde, residents are dismissed and lectured frequently. We are aggressively invited to tour Chiquita so that we can witness first-hand the Disneyland-of-All-Landfills over the hill.

In practice, people have little to no recourse to mitigate health concerns after a landfill is permitted and approved per County, State and Federal law. It is even harder to impose regulations on Chiquita, since it is owned by a publically-traded corporate entity and not by the County. The company does not provide an air monitoring program to the town of Val Verde, nor is it required to per County regulations. Many people ask why Val Verde does not use the mitigation money to pay for an off-site air quality monitoring program; the fact is that the mitigation contract with Chiquita Canyon bars the town from using the money for any purpose that is potentially damaging to the landfill.

According to the current Conditional Use Permit at Chiquita, the small community of Val Verde could potentially host 1.56 million tons of trash per year. With increased waste comes increased risk. Ideally, there should be stringent and fair policies to alleviate the effects of living near landfills, especially when we impose massive financial, safety and health risks on nearby residents. Is it possible for a municipality to effectively deal with its waste while aggressively protecting the well-being of all of its citizens?

Some countries such as Sweden and Austria send a miniscule percentage of their refuse to landfills: 1% and < 1%, respectively. Compare that to the United States where we send 69% of our total waste to landfills, well above the EU average of 38%. I will spare readers a speech about what we all can do to help. We all know how we can reduce waste and our impact on the environment – but we don’t. At least not enough.

When you ask communities to support and host landfills, you are not only asking them to bear the consequential risks of accepting waste that they did not generate, you are also asking them to accept the burden of bad policy. When residents complain loudly and municipalities run out of places to bury trash, it is time to reevaluate how we change our legacy of irresponsibility and our lack of problem solving.

Just South of the Newhall Pass is Sunshine Canyon Landfill, one of the largest in the State of California. Sunshine Canyon recites the good-neighbor rhetoric and even distributes a quarterly publication called Neighbor-to-Neighbor. Many years ago when the City of Santa Clarita was fighting a potential landfill in Elsmere Canyon, the City agreed that they had too many good neighbors. Many were concerned that Santa Clarita Valley would be known as “The Valley of the Dumps.” Today, the Santa Clarita Valley could be called, “The Valley Between the Dumps,” as it fills in the 10-mile space between the two of the State’s largest landfills.

Today, Apex Landfill in Las Vegas holds the title of the largest operating landfill in America. They accept waste at the rate of approximately 10,500 tons per day, a staggering amount. So, what is the scope of the expansion proposal for Chiquita Canyon? Chiquita Canyon Landfill proposes to expand their footprint by 40%, and most significantly, double daily tonnage to 12,000 tons per day – 1,500 tons more per-day than Apex Landfill accepts, the largest landfill in the nation.

Newhall Ranch is the largest-ever proposed development in the history of Los Angeles and it will sit on the lap of possibly the largest landfill in the country. By contrast, Apex Landfill is located in a remote, uninhabited area. In 1997, when Chiquita was granted their last expansion, the area was relatively rural. Today there are more neighborhoods, commercial and mixed-use buildings, including the popular K-12 charter school SCVi – which will be approximately one mile from the landfill if the expansion is approved. The landfill in Val Verde is rural no more.

We should question the wisdom of governmental policies and practices that readily mix heavy industry such as landfills with residential zoning. Home is supposed to be a place where we are safe and protected. Instead of discrediting the dissenting residents who live near landfills, value their insight and use it to improve industry and to reexamine governmental policies. Spare them the good-neighbor rhetoric and speak to them with concern and respect. Most importantly, make sure that the well-being of citizens is a priority above the financial interests of big business as we build the largest landfills in America.