Final court ruling puts BNSF's Wilmington railyard project on indefinite hold

A Contra Costa judge issued a final judgment Tuesday halting plans for a $500 million Wilmington railyard and set aside an environmental analysis needed for the project to move forward.

Judge Barry Goode rejected a last-minute effort by BNSF Railway to salvage the project, finding that the required environmental analysis done for BNSF Railway Co. and the city of Los Angeles was inadequate.

BNSF lawyers argued railroad operations are the jurisdiction of the federal govement but Goode rejected the claim, saying in this case the development near low-income communities was on public land and subject to state regulation.

“This ruling affirms that the proposed project caot proceed without additional measures to protect Long Beach neighborhoods, which is a win for Long Beach” especially residents on the west end of the city, said Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia. “As proposed, this project would have endangered the health of our children and damaged the neighborhoods where many people live, study and work.”

The order wraps up one chapter in a contentious battle with Long Beach officials and environmental groups on one side and the Port of Los Angeles and the railway on the other. Led by then-Mayor Bob Foster, Long Beach was one of several groups that filed a lawsuit to stop the development of Southe Califoia Inteational Gateway, a 185-acre railyard near Long Beach schools and homes. Unveiled in 2005, the massive yard was expected to attract 1.5 million container trucks a year, about 5,500 semi-trucks daily, and eight trains a day.

The company and its allies must now decide whether it’s worth building on this industrial stretch of land in Wilmington in the face of intense community opposition. It can appeal, drop plans or begin anew the environmental analysis.

BSNF and Los Angeles officials both said they were in the process evaluating the judgment.

One of the biggest criticisms of the environmental review is that it failed to consider what the project would mean for BNSF’s Hobart Facility in the City of Commerce and those that lived along the route there from the ports. BNSF had contended the new facility would take big rigs off the road that have crowded the 710 Freeway on their way to Hobart more than 20 miles from the ports. Opponents said SCIG —about four miles from the port — would increase merely allow for increased capacity and create more traffic all around.

Goode agreed the analysis fell short and, in March, issued a preliminary judgment demanding Los Angeles and the railyard go back to the drawing board. But in a late-in-the-game move, BNSF appealed to Goode, saying the state court didn’t have the jurisdiction to interfere with interstate commerce because it is a federal issue.

On Tuesday, the judge rejected that argument, saying that Califoia’s environmental laws require that the public and decision-makers have “a certain quantum of information ... prior to making a decision that may have a significant impact on the environment.”

Advertisement

Long Beach City Attoey Charles Parkin praised the ruling, saying, “We’re pleased that the project will not be moving forward unless the (Port of Los Angeles) corrects its flawed (EIR) to protect the health and safety of neighboring residents.”