DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report City of Los Angeles Integrated Resources Plan Summary Report December 2006 Prepared for City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Sanitation and Department of Water and Power Prepared By: CH:CDM, A Joint Venture Final Report Acknowledgements Project Director Adel Hagekhalil, Bureau of Sanitation Tom Erb, Department of Water and Power (DWP) Kellene Burn-Roy, CDM Project Managers Debbie Pham, Bureau of Sanitation William Van Wagoner, DWP Heather Boyle VanMeter, CDM Kathleen Bullard, CH2M Hill Facilities Plan Task Managers Reina Pereira, Bureau of Sanitation Judi Miller, CH2M Hill Financial Plan Task Managers Lisa Mowery, Bureau of Sanitation Dan Rodrigo, CDM Mike Matichich, CH2M Hill Public Outreach Task Managers Hyginus Mmeje, Bureau of Sanitation Chris Harris, Harris & Company Environmental Task Managers Ara Kasparian, Bureau of Engineering Jawahar Shah, Bureau of Sanitation Louis Utsumi, Envicraft, LLC Christine Roberts, CH2M Hill Stakeholder Facilitator Paul Brown, CDM Management Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee Varouj Abkian/BOE Yolanda Fuentes/Board of Mike Mullin/BOS Public Works Sam Alavi/BOS Joe Mundine/BOS Jose Gardea/CD1 Ralph Avila/Planning Greg Nelson/DONE Maria Gomez/BOS Ron Bagel/LAUSD Hiddo Netto/BOS Dan Griset/SCAG Vik Bapna/LACDPW Reina Pereira/BOS Aaron Gross/CD11 Bob Birk/BOS Mark Pestrella/LACDPW Gerald Gubatan/CD1 Melinda Bartlett/DEA Susan Pfann/CAO Keith Hanks/BOE Allison Becker/CD13 Debbie Pham/BOS Daniel Hackney/BOS Angelo Bellomo/LAUSD Randy Price/BOS Adel Hagekhalil/BOS Barry Berggren/BOS Rafael Prieto/CLA Chris Harris/Harris & Dale Burgoyne/BOS Ken Redd/BOE Company Bee Campbell/CAO Phil Richardson/BOE Bill Hartnett/EED Jeff Catalano/CD9 Rita Robinson/BOS Tim Haug/BOE Jeanne Chang/CD4 Dan Rosales/CD7 Patricia Huber/CAO Emeverto Cheng/BOS Bill Rosendahl/CD11 David Jensen/LAUSD Donna Chen/BOS Cynthia Ruiz/ BPW Robert Jensen/RAP Dan Comorre/BOE Brian Sasaki/LACDPW Josh Kamensky/CD13 Froy Cornejo/BOS Shahrouzeh Saneie/BOS Ara Kasparian/BOE Johne Crosse/CD11 Jawahar Shah/BOS Shahram Kharaghani/BOS Joseph Cruz/BSS Susan Shu/BOE Rod Kubomoto/LACDPW Patricia Cruz/BOS Michael Shull/RAP Wayne Lawson/BOE Paula Daniels/Board of Public Cathy Shuman/USACE Julie Lee/CD8 Works Siegmund Shyu/CAO Andy Lipkis/TreePeople Steve Davis/RAP Jill Sourial/CD1 Brent Lorscheider/BOS Gus Dembegiotes/BOS Mike Spiker/LAG Carmelo Martinez/BOS Ed Demesa/USACE Mark Starr/BOS Mark Mackowski/ULARA John De Witt/Rec & Parks Watermaster William Steele/US Bureau of Mark Dierkin/CD7 Reclamation Jim Marchese/BOS John Dierking/Office of Nancy Sutley/Mayor’s Office Laura McLennan/CD7 Finance Raja Takidin/City of Glendale Jon Mukri/RAP Rebecca Drayse/Tree People Wing Tam/BOS Carl Mills/BOE Jim Doty/BOE Robert Tanowitz/BOS Traci Minamide/BOS Tom Erb/DWP Paul Thakur/Caltrans Hyginus Mmeje/BOS Kurt Erikson/City of Glendale Chuck Turhollow/BOS Omar Moghaddam/BOS Doug Failing/Caltrans Herman Van Buren/CLA – Lisa Mowery/BOS Darryl Ford/RAP Planning Lupe Vela/CD1 Chris Westhoff/CAO Don Wolfe/LACDPW Bill Van Wagoner/DWP Judy Wilson/JW & Robert Wu/Caltrans Associates Camille Walls/RAP Clayton Yoshida/BOS Robb Whitaker/Water Doug Walters/BOS Steve Zurn/City of Replenishment District of Glendale Deborah Weintraub/BOE Southern California Contributing Staff and Consultants Wastewater Management Treatment Chuck Turhollow, Bureau of Sanitation Curt Roth, CH2M Hill Tim Haug, Bureau of Engineering Hector Ruiz, CH2M Hill Varouj Abkian, Bureau of Sanitation Heather Boyle VanMeter, CDM Ken Redd, Bureau of Engineering Glen Daigger, CH2M Hill Steve Fan, Bureau of Sanitation Ilknur Ahmad, CH2M Hill Bob Birk, Bureau of Sanitation Gary Guyll, CH2M Hill Collection System Farsheed Farhang, Bureau of John Wang, Bureau of Sanitation Sanitation Devang Parikh, MapVision Betty Dong, Bureau of Sanitation Judi Miller, CH2M Hill Biosolids Diane Gilbert Jones, Bureau of Ruth Roxburgh, CH2M Hill Sanitation Sava Nedic, CDM Omar Mogahaddam, Bureau of Fred Soroushian, CH2M Hill Sanitation Water Management William Van Wagoner, DWP Dan Rodrigo, CDM Tom Gackstetter, DWP Scott Lynch, CH2M Hill Alvin Bautista, DWP Megan Laetsch, CH2M Hill Victoria Cross, DWP Bob Kemmerle, E2 Jennifer Barrack, DWP Kathleen Higgins, CH2M Hill Mike Mullin, Bureau of Sanitation Mike Savage, CDM Runoff Management Shahram Kharaghani, Bureau of Sanitation Jennifer Gronberg, CDM Morad Sedrak, Bureau of Sanitation Don Schroeder, CDM Robert Vega, Bureau of Sanitation Judi Miller, CH2M Hill Mike Mullin, Bureau of Sanitation Curt Roth, CH2M Hill Wing Tam, Bureau of Sanitation Andy Lipkis, TreePeople Hampik Dekermenjian, CDM Bob Kemmerle, E2 Decision Science Dan Rodrigo, CDM Enrique Lopez-Calva, CDM Regulatory Forecast Traci Minamide, Bureau of Sanitation William Van Wagoner, DWP Shahram Kharaghani, Bureau of Sanitation Carrie Takayama, DWP Adel Hagekhalil, Bureau of Sanitation Chris Westhoff, City Attorney’s Donna Toy Chen, Bureau of Sanitation Office Diane Gilbert Jones, Bureau of Sanitation Judy Wilson, JW & Associates Lisa Mowery, Bureau of Sanitation Ruth Roxburgh, CH2M Hill Reina Pereira, Bureau of Sanitation Heather Boyle VanMeter, CDM Contents Section 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Background ...............................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Stakeholder Driven Facilities Planning Process...................................................1-3 1.3 Overview of Document ...........................................................................................1-3 Section 2 Wastewater Management ........................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Planning Parameters................................................................................................2-1 2.2.1 Wastewater Service Area..........................................................................2-2 2.2.2 Population and Employment Projections ..............................................2-2 2.2.3 Regulatory Requirements.........................................................................2-5 2.3 Guiding Principles Affecting Wastewater Management ....................................2-7 2.4 Wastewater Flow Projections..................................................................................2-8 2.5 Existing Collection System......................................................................................2-9 2.6 Collection System Options ....................................................................................2-10 2.7 Existing Treatment Facilities.................................................................................2-14 2.7.1 Hyperion Treatment Plant .....................................................................2-15 2.7.2 Donald C. Tillman Water Reclamation Plant (TWRP).......................2-17 2.7.3 Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant................................2-19 2.7.4 Terminal Island Treatment Plant ..........................................................2-21 2.8 Treatment Options..................................................................................................2-23 2.8.1 HTP Treatment Option...........................................................................2-24 2.8.2 WRP Treatment Options ........................................................................2-25 2.8.3 LAG Treatment Options.........................................................................2-27 2.8.4 TITP Options............................................................................................2-29 2.8.5 New Water Reclamation Plant Options ...............................................2-29 2.9 Biosolids Management...........................................................................................2-32 2.10 Alternatives Analysis.............................................................................................2-37 Section 3 Water Management...................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Planning Parameters................................................................................................3-2 3.3 Potable Water ............................................................................................................3-2 3.3.1 Demands.....................................................................................................3-2 3.3.2 Supply .........................................................................................................3-4 3.4 Water Conservation..................................................................................................3-5 3.4.1 Existing and Planned Conservation Measures......................................3-6 3.4.2 Potential Additional Conservation Measures .......................................3-7 3.5 Recycled System .......................................................................................................3-8 3.5.1 Existing Recycled Water System and Demands ...................................3-8 i Summary Report Table of Contents Contents Summary Report 3.5.2 Potential Demands for Recycled Water ...............................................3-10 3.5.2.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Los Angeles River Jurisdictional Determination Special Case Cover
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 JUL 6 2010 OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR Colonel Mark Toy District Engineer, Los Angeles District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 532711 Los Ange les, California 90053-2325 Dear Colonel Toy: This letter transmits the Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdictional determination for the Los Angeles River. On August 17, 2008, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water designated the Los Angeles River as a "Special Case" as defined by the EPA-Corps 1989 Memorandum ofAgreement (MOA) regarding coordination on matters ofgeographic jurisdiction. Pursuant to the MOA, designation ofthe "Special Case" made EPA responsib le for determining the extent to which the Los Angeles River was protected as a "water ofthe United States." Specifically, EPA analyzed the river's status as a "Traditional Navigable Water," one ofseveral categories ofjurisdictional waters under the Act. We conclude that the mainstem ofthe Los Angeles River is a "Traditional Navigable Water" from its origins at the confluence of Arroyo Calabasas and Bell Creek to San Pedro Bay at the Pacific Ocean, a distance of approximately 51 miles . In reaching this conclusion, Region 9 and Headquarters staffconsidered a number offactors, including the ability ofthe Los Angeles River under current conditions offlow and depth to support navigation by watercraft; the history ofnavigation by watercraft on the river; the current commercial and recreational uses of the river; and plans for future
    [Show full text]
  • The Pacoima Wash Greenway
    THE PACOIMA WASH GREENWAY Linking & Greening Communities Pacoima Demographics Located in Northeast San Fernando Valley 100,000 Residents 85% Latino, 8% African American 21% Live in garages or rented rooms 19% Receive Food Stamps 17% Below Poverty Level Cumulative Impacts The cumulative impacts of these pollution sources creates a toxic environment. Health Impacts 48% Child Obesity (3 X county average) 20% Asthma 6% Diabetes 75 Acres of Parks Less than 1-acre of parks per 1,000 Residents (recommended ratio is 10-acres to 1,000 residents) Pacoima Wash Project Funding Project funded through a Policies for Livable, Active Communities and Environments (PLACE) grant from the Los Angeles County Department of Health. Goal of the PLACE grant is “to foster policy change that supports the development of healthy, active environments for all Los Angeles County residents.” Pacoima Wash San Fernando: 1.6 Miles Sylmar: 2 Miles Pacoima: 1 Mile Arleta: 2.5 Miles _____________________ Total Greenway Length: 7.1 Miles Community Organizing Over 32 Focus groups 5 large community workshops, including an on- site mapping activity with over 100 residents 3 Working Events 200 Person Supporter Database Community Organizing Physical Project Before After Physical Project Before After Community Engagement Project Partners Community Engagement Accomplishments Completion of the Pacoima Wash Vision Plan Inclusion of the Vison Plan in the Sylmar Community Plan Two (2) New Pocket Parks Preliminary Engineering for 3.5 mile bikeway Anticipated Construction of 1.5 Mile Bike Path In San Fernando Next Steps / Challenges Construct Greenway Connect to Angeles National Forest and LA River Develop Funding Strategy Construct Additional Parks Strengthen Connections to Surrounding Community Thank you! Pacoima Beautiful 13520 Van Nuys Blvd.
    [Show full text]
  • Aesthetics and Visual Resources
    1 Section 3.1 2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 3 SECTION SUMMARY 4 This section characterizes the existing aesthetic conditions in the proposed Project area and assesses how 5 the construction and operation of the proposed Project or an alternative would alter them. The aesthetics 6 and visual resources impact analysis evaluates and identifies potential impacts associated with 7 implementation of the proposed Project or an alternative on locally-designated scenic highways, scenic 8 resources, light and glare, and visual character of the proposed Project area. 9 The primary features of the proposed Project and alternatives that could affect aesthetic resources include 10 the addition of up to 12 new cranes, additional berthed ships, and additional terminal lighting. Additional 11 features and activities such as redeveloped buildings and stored containers are also considered in this 12 analysis. 13 Section 3.1, Aesthetics and Visual Resources, provides the following: 14 A description of existing visual characteristics in the Port area (including photographs); 15 A description of key areas from which the proposed Project or alternatives would be visible; 16 A description of existing night lighting conditions; 17 A description of applicable local, state, and federal regulations and policies regarding visual 18 resources and scenic highway designations in the proposed Project area; 19 A discussion of the methodology used to determine whether the proposed Project or alternatives 20 would result in an impact to aesthetic and visual resources; 21 An impact analysis of the proposed Project and six alternatives, which includes simulated photos 22 of the proposed future build-out conditions; and, 23 A description of proposed mitigation measures intended to reduce potential impacts, as applicable.
    [Show full text]
  • OUFS for North Hollywood Well Field Area of North Hollywood/Burbank NPL Site, SFV Groundwater Basin, W/Executive Summary
    POOR LEGIBILITY ONE OR MORE PAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT ARE DIFFICULT TO READ DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL V SFUND RECORDS CTR 2166-04905 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power SFUND RECORDS CTR 88134326 OPERABLE UNIT FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE NORTH HOLLYWOOD WELL FIELD AREA OF THE NORTH HOLLYWOOD-BURBANK NPL SITE, SAN FERNANDO VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN NOVEMBER 1986 n LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OPERABLE UNIT FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE NORTH HOLLYWOOD WELL FIELD AREA n / OF THE NORTH HOLLYWOOD-BURBANK NPL SITE, SAN FERNANDO VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN a November 17, 1986 p*« fi •i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 1 FORWARD• 7 I. INTRODUCTION 10 Background 10 Importance of Los Angeles Groundwater 14 Regional Setting and Site Location 17 Hydrogeologic Setting1 18 Nature and Extent of Problem ' 19 n Characterization of Contaminant Incidence 22 II. IDENTIFICATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND SCREENING OF REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGIES . 25 Overview of Screening 25 Screening Criteria . 26 Response Actions - 27 Summary of Preliminary Remedial Action Screening 58 III. DEVELOPMENT OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES . 60 Description of Groundwater Extraction/Conveyance System . 61 Alternative A - Aeration 62 Alternative B - Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption 66 Alternative C - Combined Aeration/GAC 70 Alternative D - Ultraviolet Irradiation/Ozonation 70 IV. SCREENING OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES 73 Environmental and Public Health Screening .74 Cost Screening 78 Recommendation and Summary of Candidate Treatment Methods . 83 V. TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF SCREENED ALTERNATIVES 86 Aeration ••'• ' ~ 87 Granular Activated Carbon Adsorption 90 Aeration/GAC 92 Summary of Technical Evaluation Process 95 Cost Comparison 98 . VI. INSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS . 103 Federal Agencies 105 State Agencies 106 Regional Agencies .
    [Show full text]
  • 1987-88 Water Year Annual Report May 1989
    UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER AREA WATER MASTER CITY OF LOS ANGELES VS. CITY OF SAN FERNANDO. ET AL CASE NO. 650079 - COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES WATERMAST'ER SERVICE IN THE UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER AREA LOS ANGELE·S COUNTY OCTOBER 1, 1987 - SEPTEMBER 30, 1988 MAY 1989 UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER AREA WATERMASTER CITY OF LOS ANGELES VS. CITY OF SAN FERNANDO. ET AL CASE NO. 650079 - COUNTY OF LOS ANGElES MELVI:-.i L BLEVINS WATERMASTER. MAILING ADDRESS: Office I.ocatiun Room 1455 ULARA Water master III 'liorth Hope Street P.O. Box III. Rm. 1455 I. .. , Angeles, CA Los Angeles. CA 90051 Telephone 1~1.l14KI 6177 I 1 WATER MASTER SERVICE IN THE [ UPPER LOS ANGELES RIVER AREA LOS ANGELES CO.UNTY I OCTOBER 1, 1987 - SEPTEMBER 30, 1988 1 ) ) 1 1 \ MAY.1989 - - -- CO~VERSION FACTORS Enqlish to Metric System of ~easurement Quantity Enqlish unit ~ultiply by To get metric equivalent Length feet (ft) II, .3048 metres (m)· 'rl miles (mi) I; 1. 6093 kilometres (km) " 2 Area square feet (ft2) .092903 square metres (m ) 2 acres 4046.9 square metres (m ) .40469 hectares (hal .40469 square hectometres (hm~) .0040469 square kilometres (km2 ) square miles (mi2) 2.590 square kilometres (km2 ) Volwae gallons (qal) 3.7854 litres (1) 3 .0017854 cubic metres (m I 6 .illion gallons (10 gal) 3785.4 cubic metres (m 1) 3 cubic feet (ft3) .028317 cubic metres (m ) cubic yards (yd1) .76455 cubic metres (m) ) acre-feet (ac-ft) 1233.5 cubic metres (m) ) .0012335 cubic hectometres (hm 1) " 3 1.233 x 10-6 cubic kilometres (km ) V01U11le/Tiae 3 (Flow) cubic feet per second (ft /5) 28.317 litres per second (l/s) 3 .028117 cubic metres ~er second (~ /s) gallons per minute (qal/min) .06309 litres per second (l/s) 6.309 x 10-5 cubic metres per second (m]/s) million gallons per day (mqd) .043813 cubic metres per second (.]/5) miners inch* .70792 (.56634) litres per second (l/s) tF - 32 Temperature Degrees Fahrenheit (OF) -r:a- tC Deqre~s Celsius (OC) ...
    [Show full text]
  • W Is D Determined Eligible for the National Register D See Continuation Sheet
    JPS Form 10-9CO CM3 No. 10024-OOiB (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior RECEIVED 2280 National Park Service JAM '• 8 ^:H National Register of Historic Places MAR 1 1 1996 Registration Form NAT. REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for indtvidu ns in How to Complete tfie National Register of Historic Places Registration Perm {National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not appry to tne property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architecture classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from (he instructions. Place additional entnes and narrative items on.continuation sheets (NFS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete aJI items. 1. Name of Property____________________________________________________ historic name San Pedro Municipal Ferry Building_________________________ other names/site number LOS Angeles Maritime Museum__________________ 2. Location street & number Berth 84. Foot of 6th Street not for publication city or town San- Pedrn t) vicinity state California code county LOS Angeles code Q37 zip code SQ731 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that tnisO nomination D request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the proceduraJ and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property Q- meets D does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • WATSON 135,727 SF INDUSTRIAL CENTER Available for Lease
    WATSON 135,727 SF INDUSTRIAL CENTER Available For Lease Watson Building 139 720 WatsonCenter Road, Carson, CA 90745 VALUE ADVANTAGE SPECIFICATIONS Additional 2.48 Acres for BUILDING SIZE: 135,727 SF MINIMUM CLEARANCE: 27’ - 29’ Trailer Storage OFFICE SIZE: 8,462 SF DOCK HIGH TRUCK POSITIONS: 23 - 8’ x 8’ Potential merchandise processing fee savings with GROUND LEVEL RAMPS: 1 - 12’ x 15’ Foreign Trade Zone 202 LAND SIZE: 427,146 SF activation TRUCK TURNING RADIUS: 323’ POWER: 1,200 amps, 277/480 volts, Master Planned Center 3 phase, 4 wire Close to Ports of Los Angeles, WAREHOUSE LIGHTING: T5 Long Beach and Los Angeles International Airport SPRINKLER SYSTEM: .40 GPM/3,000 SF Convenient access to the San Diego (405), Harbor (110), PARKING SPACES: 113 Long Beach (710), Artesia (91) and Terminal Island (103) YEAR BUILT: 1991 Freeways. Near Intermodal Container Transfer Facility WATSON LAND COMPANY 310.952.6401 www.watsonlandcompany.comwatsonlandcompany.com WATSON 135,727 SF INDUSTRIAL CENTER Available For Lease WATSON BUILDING 139 SITE PLAN 139 OFFICE PLAN 8,462 SF WATSON CENTER ROAD Gate OPEN OFFICE AREA LOBBY Entry Main Break Oce Room Area W W M M OPEN OFFICE AREA 139’ OPEN OFFICE AREA 135,727 SF Storage Container Approx. 2.48 Acres for 2.48 Acres Approx. AVALON BLVD. 99’ 8” 23 DH POSITIONS WCC 139 OFFICE PLAN revised | StudioCanvas | 01.04.11 Chain Link Fence N 250’ 323’ The information on this brochure has been compiled for the internal administra- tive convenience of Watson Land Company. Watson Land Company makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy of this brochure.
    [Show full text]
  • Barry Lawrence Ruderman Antique Maps Inc
    Barry Lawrence Ruderman Antique Maps Inc. 7407 La Jolla Boulevard www.raremaps.com (858) 551-8500 La Jolla, CA 92037 [email protected] Map of Terminal Island Showing portion of East San Pedro as recorded in Book 52, Page 13, Miscl Records. Stock#: 48538 Map Maker: Southern Pacific Railroad Company Date: 1910 circa Place: n.p. Color: Condition: VG- Size: 31 x 65 inches Price: SOLD Description: Fine early map of Terminal Island, in San Pedro California, drawn for the Southern Pacific Railroad. The map illustrates Terminal Island at the beginning of its modern history, before the island was substantially reshaped and modified by dredging and reclamation projects that created the modern harbors at San Pedro and Long Beach. The map show the City of San Pedro at the right, with the lines of the Southern Pacific. Below, a line identified as Los Angeles Terminal Railway traverses Terminal Island, with a railway station, Hotel Site, Mill, Lumber Yard and Coal Yard shown, along with several wharfs. The location of the Catalina Yacht club is also noted (constructed in 1898). The map shows Morman (Mormon) Island and Smith Island, both of which have also been dramatically reshaped by modern port projects. Mormon Island was the site of an short-lived settlement attempt by San Bernardino-based Mormon pioneers in the 1850s. Terminal Island The island was originally called Isla Raza de Buena Gente and later Rattlesnake Island. It was renamed Terminal Island in 1891. In 1891, the Terminal Land Company purchased the island and a railway was built on to its east side by the Los Angeles Terminal Railroad Company.
    [Show full text]
  • Synopsis in Pdf Format
    FURUSATO - The Lost Village of Terminal Island Those who came of age during World War II have been called “The Greatest Generation”. On Terminal Island, California this generation is known as the ‘Nisei’ – or second generation Japanese, the American-born sons and daughters of immigrant parents. On the southern edge of the Port of Los Angeles, this isolated village offered a unique childhood experience. More than 3000 residents lived in a very small area known as Fish Harbor in San Pedro, 99% of whom were Japanese or Japanese American. While their parents worked as fishermen or cannery workers, the Nisei’s memory of Terminal Island is as an idyllic place, where they were often allowed to roam free, share dinner at a friend’s house, or dive for abalone near the beach. The culture of Japan was everywhere, from the Shinto Shrine to the Japanese Fisherman’s Hall where Kendo and Judo were taught. Physically and culturally isolated, the residents developed a unique dialect which combined Japanese and English – often in ways that were confusing to outsiders who spoke one or the other. The Terminal Island ‘lingo’ was symbolic of their status in California, accepted by neither the majority culture nor by other Japanese, the Terminal Islanders came to refer to themselves as ‘Yogores’ – dark and dirty on the outside, but pure and clean of heart within. As the Nisei grew older, they attended San Pedro High School and began to share American traditions with their Issei parents. Baseball games became a weekly event, sponsored by village businesses and fishermen.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Survey Report
    F.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR THE SAN PEDRO WATERFRONT PROJECT LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Los Angeles Harbor Department Environmental Management Division 425 South Palos Verdes Street San Pedro, California 90733 Prepared by: ICF Jones & Stokes 811 West 7th Street, Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90017 213/627-5376 August 2008 Table of Contents SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 2 II. REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................ 3 FEDERAL REGULATIONS ................................................................................ 3 STATE REGULATIONS ...................................................................................... 4 LOCAL REGULATIONS ..................................................................................... 6 III. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 7 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................. 7 PREHISTORIC CULTURAL SETTING .............................................................. 7 ETHNOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 9 HISTORIC BACKGROUND .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of CARSON FINAL Initial Study/Negative Declaration for The
    CITY OF CARSON FINAL Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Shippers Transport Express Container Storage Project City of Carson 701 E. Carson Street Carson, CA 90745 Contact: Max Castillo (310)-952-1761 ext. 1317 Prepared by: ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT, INC. 1000-A Ortega Way, Suite A Placentia, CA 92870 (714) 632-8521 November 2019 CHAPTER 1 –PROJECT DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS FINAL INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE SHIPPERS TRANSPORT EXPRESS RELOCATION PROJECT Page No. CHAPTER 1.0: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Agency Authority.................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Location ...................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Historic Site Uses .................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4.1 2149 East Sepulveda Boulevard ................................................................ 1-2 1.4.2 1150 East Sepulveda Boulevard ................................................................. 1-2 1.5 Project Description.................................................................................................. 1-4 CHAPTER 2.0: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 General Information
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles County Law Enforcement Phone Numbers
    LOS ANGELES COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT PHONE NUMBERS LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S - STATIONS Altadena (07) ................................................ 780 E. Altadena Dr., Altadena 91001 .................................. 626-798-1131 Avalon (18) .................................................... 215 Summer Ave., P.O. Box 1551, Avalon 90704 .......... 310-510-0174 Carson (16) ..................................................... 21356 S. Avalon Blvd., Carson 90745 .................................. 310-830-1123 Century (21) .................................................. 11703 Alameda, Lynwood 90262 ........................................... 323-567-8121 Compton ........................................................... 301 S. Willowbrook Avenue, Compton 90220 ............................................................ Crescenta Valley (07) ................................. 4554 N. Briggs Ave., La Crescenta 91214 ............................. 818-248-3464 East Los Angeles (02) ................................. 5019 E. Third St., Los Angeles 90022 .................................... 323-264-4151 Industry (14) .................................................. 150 N. Hudson Ave., City of Industry ............................................ 626-330-3322 Lakewood (13)............................................... 5130 N. Clark Ave., Lakewood 90712 ................................... 562-866-9061 Lancaster (11) ............................................... 501W. Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster 93534.............................. 661-948-8466
    [Show full text]