Aaron Montenegro, Residents and Families for El Monte v. City of El Monte, City Council of El Monte, and Does 1 through 4
Published: Feb. 25, 2017 | Result Date: Jan. 6, 2017 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BS158641 Bench Decision – Writ Granted
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Gideon Kracov
(ADR Services, Inc.)
Defendant
Lloyd Pilchen
(Olivarez Madruga LLP)
David F. Gondek
(Olivarez Madruga LLP)
Facts
On Nov. 6, 2015, petitioner City of El Monte residents filed suit against the City of El Monte and Walmart, in relation to plans for a new Walmart Supercenter. In October 2015, defendant City of El Monte approved the environmental impact report and land use approvals to construct a new 182,429 square foot Walmart supercenter.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that the project environmental impact report lacked substantial evidence, violated the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore that the EIR and the land use approvals must be voided. Specifically, petitioners alleged the EIR and land use approvals for the Walmart failed to adequately assess the significance of, and mitigate, the greenhouse gas emissions from the project's almost 9,500 peak daily car trips causing 7,575 metric tons per year in greenhouse gas emissions and other smog-related air pollution.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The city and Walmart argued that the EIR had in fact properly assessed the significance of the project's greenhouse gas emissions, and that petitioners had not adequately exhausted administrative remedies before filing suit.
Result
The court rejected the city and Walmart's arguments, granted the writ of mandate and issued judgment against the city requiring it to set aside the EIR and land use approvals for the Walmart as to the greenhouse gas issue. The court found the city's analysis in the EIR violated CEQA's rules for greenhouse gas analysis set forth in the California Supreme Court's opinion in Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (Newhall Ranch), (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204. Like Newhall Ranch, the court determined that the Walmart EIR contained an analytical gap since the city prejudicially failed to provide a reasoned explanation as to whether the greenhouse gas emissions were significant. The court enjoined any construction of the Walmart project until a new EIR is prepared to address the project's greenhouse gas impacts.
Other Information
FILING DATE: Nov. 6, 2015.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390