|
A judge’s ruling in favor of Long Beach and co-litigants in a lawsuit challenging a $500 million rail-yard project at the Port of Los Angeles puts the project on pause and may give Long Beach officials considerable leverage in negotiating greater environmental protections for any future project design.
"It certainly strengthens our hand, definitely," Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia said after Wednesday’s ruling was announced. "The city is now in a position where we have a court standing on our side."
The case centered on BNSF Railways’ plan to build a 185-acre rail yard, the Southern California International Gateway, in the Wilmington area of Los Angeles. The project site is located near neighborhoods, schools and the Century Villages at Cabrillo veterans housing complex in West Long Beach. Los Angeles’ City Council approved the project, which is also known as SCIG, in May 2013 and several parties filed lawsuits against the project shortly thereafter.
Long Beach officials said in their lawsuit that Los Angeles and BNSF failed to provide a complete analysis of the SCIG’s potential environmental impacts, which would have been disproportionately borne by people living in West Long Beach.
The multiple lawsuits were consolidated into a single case and proceedings moved to Contra Costa County Superior Court in January 2014. Judge Barry P. Goode ruled in favor of Long
|
Beach and the other litigants on Wednesday after concluding the project’s environmental impact report failed to deliver a complete analysis the environmental impacts of the project.
His decision voids Los Angeles officials’ approval of the project and orders a suspension of any activities related to the construction of SCIG.
"We are disappointed with the court ruling that delays or deprives the region of many environmental benefits and both ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach of important rail infrastructure," said a statement from the Los Angeles port. "We will study the decision and discuss next steps with BNSF and the Board of Harbor Commissioners."
Goode’s ruling requires the petitioners to propose the terms of a judgment that could end the case, or at least set the stage for Los Angeles officials to decide if they want to appeal the judge’s ruling.
For more of the Press-Telegram story: www.presstelegram.com
|
