Council upholds appeal of Carmonita Road warehouse project, sends decision back to staff

The Norwalk City Council voted to uphold an appeal of a proposed industrial warehouse at 14830 Carmonita Road, directing staff to prepare a resolution with findings and return the matter to the council for final action. The vote followed a multilayered public hearing in which opponents, developers and technical consultants disputed whether the project required a full environmental impact report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Appellants represented by Aden Marshall of CREED LA argued the project's recirculated mitigated negative declaration (MND) was insufficient. Marshall told the council the study “lacked a VMT study. It lacked measurements of nighttime noise. It lacked a fire flow study,” and raised cumulative public–health concerns for a disadvantaged community with elevated pollution indices. Several local residents and community groups echoed those concerns, citing truck traffic, neighborhood air quality and potential health risks.

The developer’s team — represented by attorney Andrew Fogg and environmental consultants from EPD Solutions — defended the MND and the project description as proposed. Fogg said the appeal relies on speculative assumptions about future uses that “are not part of the project,” and that the applicable air-district cancer-risk threshold in effect for the analysis is higher than the draft standard cited by opponents. EPD Solutions presented trip-generation and emissions modeling and maintained the project falls below adopted thresholds used in the environmental review.

Union representatives and some construction-trade speakers urged the council to approve the project, saying it would bring jobs and economic activity. Danny Osborne of Iron Workers Local 433 told the council the project would “ensure that the most competent and qualified contractors and workers would be building that project,” and asked for local-hiring and skilled-workforce commitments.

Council discussion focused on whether the MND adequately addressed potential impacts, how thresholds of significance were applied, and what controls the city can impose on future tenant uses. Staff noted a condition restricting uses to general warehousing (ITE code 150) and said certain types of more intensive uses would require further review. City staff and the developer also said technical experts were available to answer detailed questions about traffic, air quality and noise.

After deliberation the council voted to sustain the appeal and refer the matter back to staff for a resolution upholding the appeal with findings. The clerk announced the final tally as four votes in favor of the motion and one opposed; the council directed staff to prepare the formal resolution and return to the council with any supplemental analysis or conditions the body requests. The hearing record will include written letters submitted by CREED LA and the developer’s technical responses.