[Source: Press-Telegram] City Council Chambers will soon be center stage for a David-and-Goliath battle – between a loose coalition of small businesses and Long Beach’s economic powerhouse.
A study on how a proposed rail yard expansion by the Port of Long Beach will affect the environment will go before the City Council on Tuesday – with port officials arguing the more than half-billion-dollar project is crucial to improving air quality and opponents saying it will hurt nearby companies.
The Board of Harbor Commissioners approved the Environmental Impact Report in January, but two businesses just outside the project’s proposed path filed separate appeals to the council, challenging the report’s breadth and accuracy.
The council appeal is the last major hurdle before the port can begin buying up properties that sit in the way of the rail yard expansion.
“We think the council will find the EIR (Environmental Impact Report) was done properly,” said port spokesman Lee Peterson. “It will hold up to the appeal.”
But, opponents said, the consequences of the project could be greater than the report suggested.
“With all those diesel trains going through,” said Stan Janocha, chief operating officer of appellant Superior Electrical Advertising, “how could it not cause major pollution?”
The expansion, on 171 acres of land in the harbor area, is slated to begin in 2020, will create 1,100 construction jobs, and will increase the number of tracks at the Pier B rail facility from 12 to 48 tracks.
But in doing so, it would require the port to acquire 39 parcels of land, forcing the closure or relocation of long-time businesses located in the project zone. And Ninth Street east of the Los Angeles River would close permanently.
Port officials say the expansion is a crucial part of its continuing effort to reduce emissions and traffic congestion around the port.
Once finished, the rail yard – the only one that connects to the docks – will provide extra storage for empty rail cars, be able to accommodate trains up to 10,000 feet long and “allow for more efficient rail operations,” according to a city staff report.
The expanded rail yard would also reduce the number of trucks needed to transport the steel shipping containers from the docks: one train can carry about 250 containers, as opposed to the one-to-one ratio for trucks, Peterson said.
The port is trying to increase the percentage of containers carried via on-dock rail to 30 to 35 percent by 2030, Peterson said. Currently, according to city documents, 24 percent of cargo is shipped by rail and the rest by truck.
“Pier B is a really importance piece,” Peterson said. “It’s absolutely necessary for achieving that goal.”
But first, the port must prove this project – estimated to cost $540 to $820 million – will not significantly damage the environment. Any major project must undergo an environmental study and, under state law, be approved during a public hearing by whatever board oversees it.
The report analyzed how the project, during and after construction, would affect seismic conditions, water quality, ground transportation and noise.
The Environmental Impact Report, which underwent a 90-day public review before its approval by the Harbor Commission, found two areas that would be significantly impacted: air quality and global climate change.
The air emissions created by the project would, at times, create more pollution than allowed by regional regulations.
“It’d be rare,” Peterson said.
But not everyone agrees.
Phillips Steel Company and Superior Electrical Advertising, both on Anaheim Street, have filed appeals against the Environmental Impact Report. The owners of both companies are expected to speak at Tuesday’s meeting. Representatives of WestPac, a coalition of businesses in the harbor area, will also speak.
Phillips and Superior are not in the path of the project, but both argue in their respective appeals that expanding the rail yard would hurt their businesses.
They argue that the air pollution would affect the health of their employees. They also say dust and noise from the trains would hamper production and meetings with customers, and the closure of Ninth Street would make it exceedingly difficult for customers, employees and emergency personnel to get to their businesses.
“We want to stay here,” said Janocha, the COO of Superior, which makes signs for companies such as Starbucks and Disney. “But we’ll have to move out of Long Beach or shut down.”
Superior has been in business for more than 50 years and employs 125 people. Besides a 50,000 square-foot warehouse, where it constructs its signs, the company has a 50,000 square-foot yard used for storing signs that are ready to be shipped out, trucks, and large recycling containers.
The back of the yard is about half a football field from where the expanded tracks would begin.
Superior often shows clients the signs before they are finished. But with the rail yard so close, it would be difficult to bring in customers, or pitch prospective clients because of the noise, Janocha said last week.
The dust would make the new signs look dirty before they were even shipped to customers, Janocha added during a tour of his facility, as strong winds whipped around the yard.
“Tracks also cause blight,” Janocha said.
Janocha said he has looked around Long Beach for other properties that could accommodate Superior’s work, but there weren’t any large enough.
They’d have to move to elsewhere, perhaps the Inland Empire – an unreasonable burden to the 43 employees who live in Long Beach.
“Many of them take public transportation,” Janocha said. “How would they get to work?”
Peterson said Port officials have been in talks with Janocha and other business owners to mitigate any effects, which he said shouldn’t be many.
“We wouldn’t want closures to happen,” he said. “We don’t see the rail yard being anything less than a good neighbor.”
Janocha said he understands persuading the council to uphold Superior’s and Phillips’ appeals is an uphill battle. Janocha reached out to every councilmember, but only heard from Lena Gonzalez, who represents the area where the project is being built.
Gonzalez did not return requests for comment.
Janocha has discussed options with his lawyer, should the appeals get denied. But he declined to discuss those options.
“It’s David versus Goliath,” Janocha said.
Source: Press-Telegram
March 19, 2018
