Rebuttal to Developer-funded Health Risk Assessment

In April supporters of Yes on L published a new HRA (Health Risk Assessment) from the same company that did the original one.  An independent analysis of that HRA has uncovered major flaws with the methodology, enough to make it invalid.

Click here for the full document

According to this analysis, the methodology is inaccurate in methodology and in omissions and the health risk to children understated by a large factor, large enough to change the outcome of the report.  There were several problems including:

  • Air Quality used was average of an entire day, though children would be using the field from 3-6pm, when traffic is much heavier.
  • Children were assumed to be standing in place, when they would in fact be exercising vigorously.
  • Ultrafine Particulate Matter was completely ignored.

Correcting the errors results in a determination that the field is unsuitable for the intended activities.

3 thoughts on “Rebuttal to Developer-funded Health Risk Assessment

  1. So Where do I find NO on L signs?
    Will gladly pay for myself and others if helpful/practical.
    We unfortunately have a high volume of traffic passing our street and should get some value from that .

    Thanks for your outstanding efforts for Lafayette residents.

  2. Quote from your mailer, ” It would be irresponsible to put Children on fields with poor air quality”.
    Do you realize there is a high school across the street from this project where 1200 kids vigorously exercise
    on a daily basis. Are you suggesting that the Acalanes School District is exposing our kids to harmful air quality
    and we should consider closing the school?
    I am undecided on whether to support this project or not but you sound ridiculous when you bring up a health
    risk effecting possibly 30 kids playing on a sports field when there is a high school across the street that has
    sporting events almost every night all year.

    1. Acalanes HS is not bordered by three heavily traveled roads and is actually quite a bit further from the freeway than the proposed sports field. The particulate matter goes down considerably over 1,000 feet so that’s a mitigating factor. The location at Acalanes is not ideal but it’s probably within acceptable ranges. You might be interested in reading the opinions of Dr. Devra Davis, now available on this website. She found many similar problems with the developer-funded HRA, and some additional ones that we hadn’t thought of.

      Save Lafayette

Comments are closed.