Time and again, we have seen the lengths previous administrations and council members went to satisfy the demands of the oil and gas industry; even pushing people out of their homes in the name of "greenspace", only to gift multiple zoning changes that allowed industrial plant incursion into the neighborhood in exchange for the promise of a ball park or other community investment.

Before deciding on a ballpark location adjacent to an oil refinery hazardous waste unit and within close proximity to its tank farm and refining units, comprehensive soil, ground water, and air sampling results should be made publicly available and studied; to ignore the public health implications in its alternative site selection process only makes the parish further liable. Recent ground water test results indicate higher chemical levels in the area of the solid waste earthen conveyance ditch, impoundments, and settlement ponds. This hazardous solid waste processing area is adjacent to the vacant "greenspace" lots that some believe should be utilized for recreational use, including youth sports. [1] Public access to the real time benzene fence line monitoring data should be obtained, and the plant should install additional fence line monitoring for its other chemical emissions, also with public access to the data, similar to the fence line monitoring provided at its facilities in other states. [2]

____________________________________________________

Saturday, September 21, 2013

where not to put a park

68530.

where not to put a park

by sbcitizens, 09/17/13 6:46 PM

don't put a park in the oil spill area; its too close to the tank farm and contaminated air; that's why the air monitor is in that area, its bad air.

don't put a park next to the solid waste ditch and ponds; there is a required exclusion zone for solid waste areas up to 250 feet to 500 feet and that part of the oil spill property is where nothing is supposed to be.

don't put a park where special interests groups are forcing the park on others.

don't put a park where the streets are going to be removed or where the street lights are not maintained.

put a new park where kids and older people and family and neighbors will be safe and protected, where people live close enough to just walk to the park and not have to drive. put a new park where the people who live in that area want one.

can we even afford another park? don't think we would even be talking about another park until all the previous neighborhood and recreational parks are renovated and sustainably operational. so, why are parish employees advocating for a park in the oil spill green belt? are they advocating for the oil company? if you receive a survey for where the next park ought to go, think about what that park is supposed to be and why certain parties would push to spend limited resources on something we don't need, don't want, and would be liable for anyway.