The court of appeal affirmed the trial court judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s CEQA action on grounds that the plaintiff failed to join an indispensable real party in interest within thirty days after the city filed a revised notice of determination to correct an earlier notice of determination which misidentified the project applicant — even though
Michelle Chan
Court of Appeal Holds CEQA Review Is Not Required for Project That Is Only Subject to Design Review
The court of appeal held that the City of St. Helena did not violate CEQA by approving a demolition permit and design review for a multi-family residential project without preparing an environmental impact report. McCorkle Eastside Neighborhood Group v. City of St. Helena (2018) 31 Cal.App.5th 80. The court held that because the city’s discretion…
Court Upholds Class 1 Exemption for Improvements to Amusement Park in City of San Diego
The court of appeal found that an amended and restated lease requiring upgrades and improvements to an existing amusement park was exempt from the requirements of CEQA under the Class 1 exemption. San Diegans for Open Government v. City of San Diego, 31 Cal.App.5th 349 (2018).
In 1987, the City of San Diego entered into…
Court of Appeal Holds that Petition Challenging Wal-Mart Project is Barred by Earlier Lawsuit Raising the Same Issues
The court of appeal held that the plaintiff’s challenge to the City of Rohnert Park’s reapproval of a Wal-Mart grocery store was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because a prior proceeding had raised the same issues. Atwell v. City of Rohnert Park (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.), 27 Cal. App. 5th 692 (2018).
In 2010, the City approved the Wal-Mart project. Following the City’s approval, the Sierra Club and Sonoma County Conservation Action (SCCA) filed a petition challenging the project on grounds that it violated CEQA and conflicted with the City’s General Plan Policy LU-7. Policy LU-7 sought to “encourage new neighborhood commercial facilities and supermarkets to be located to maximize accessibility to all residential areas. … to ensure that convenient shopping facilities such as supermarkets and drugstores are located close to where people live and facilitate access to these on foot or on bicycles … this policy will encourage dispersion of supermarkets rather than their clustering in a few locations.”
While the plaintiffs in the 2010 proceeding alleged that the project conflicted with Policy LU-7 in their petition, the plaintiffs did not pursue the claim during the proceeding. The trial court ultimately granted the petition on the CEQA claims and ordered that the resolutions approving the Project be vacated, and that the Project be remanded for additional environmental review with respect to traffic and noise impacts.
The City prepared a revised EIR; however, the EIR did not alter the original EIR’s analysis of the project’s consistency with the General Plan. Following the City’s reapproval of the project in 2015, the plaintiffs filed this current proceeding challenging the project’s consistency with Policy LU-7. The trial court denied the petition finding that the petition was barred by the 2010 proceeding under the doctrine of res judicata.
The doctrine of res judicata applies where a claim or issue raised in the present action is identical to a claim or issue litigated in a prior proceeding, the prior proceeding resulted in a final judgment on the merits, and the party against whom the doctrine is being asserted was a party or in privity with a party to the prior proceedings.
Continue Reading Court of Appeal Holds that Petition Challenging Wal-Mart Project is Barred by Earlier Lawsuit Raising the Same Issues
Voter-Approved Initiative to Limit Large Developments and Chain Stores Exceeded Initiative Power
In a case that illustrates the limits of use of voter-approved initiatives to limit development, the court of appeal invalidated an initiative passed by voters in the City of Malibu that sought to limit large developments and chain stores. The Park at Cross Creek v. City of Malibu, 12 Cal.App.5th 1196 (2017).
The initiative…
Appellate court upholds approval of master-planned community against multiple CEQA challenges
The court of appeal upheld the County of Riverside’s decision to approve development of a master-planned community, rejecting claims that the County violated CEQA by (1) filing an inadequate notice of determination; (2) failing to recirculate the final EIR after the project was modified; and (3) failing to consider and adopt feasible air quality mitigation…
CEQA YEAR IN REVIEW 2016
A Summary Of Published Appellate Opinions Under The California Environmental Quality Act
In 2016, the California appellate courts issued published opinions in 21 CEQA cases. In several of those opinions, including a ground-breaking decision by the California Supreme Court, the courts grappled with limits on the scope of required environmental review for a subsequent project…
California Supreme Court Reforms Precondemnation Entry and Testing Statutes to Allow for Jury Determination of Damages
In Property Reserve v. Superior Court, S217738 (Cal. Supreme Court, July 21, 2016) the Supreme Court of California held that the precondemnation entry and testing statutes are constitutional when reformed to permit affected property owners the right to have a jury determine damages.
The California Department of Water Resources sought a court order allowing…
Failure to Discover An Agency’s Approval Of An Exempt Project Does Not Extend The Time To File CEQA Lawsuit
The First District Court of Appeal has ruled that the accrual of a claim that a public agency exemption determination violated CEQA is not postponed by the plaintiff’s failure to discover the violation. Communities for a Better Environment et al. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, No. A143634 (1st Dist., July 19, 2016;…