Best Best & Krieger News Feed

CEQA, Brown Act and Planning and Zoning Law Challenges Overcome in Development Project

02 Jun 2016 00:00:00 -0800

A team of Best Best & Krieger LLP attorneys successfully defeated environmental and other legal challenges to a master planned infill residential and habitat preservation project in the City of Montebello. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge John A. Torribio denied a petition for a writ of mandate that claimed the project plan was inconsistent with the City’s General Plan and that the City violated open meeting laws during the approval process. In a decision issued May 23, Torribio found both those claims and others lacked merit.

The project is planned on a nearly 500-acre plot of undeveloped land in Montebello. The land is being used for oil production, and has been for a century. About 10 years ago, the plan to develop about 150 acres of the site into a residential community was proposed. The rest of the site will be dedicated to open space uses, with approximately 260 acres reserved for the California gnatcatcher, a species designated as threatened by the federal government. The development also includes trails and parks, allowing the public access to the space for the first time in recent history.

Following numerous public hearings before both the City Council and the Planning Commission, as well as several revisions to the environmental impact report based on feedback from the public and other public agencies, the plan was approved in June 2015. A month later, the lawsuit was filed.

The petitioner claimed the project should be halted because the City’s administrative process was flawed in that the wrong address for a public hearing was on the City’s website. However, noting that the correct address was on the properly noticed meeting agenda, Torribio, rejected the claim. He also rejected a claim that the plan was inconsistent with the City’s General Plan for not addressing low-income and special needs housing issues. Torribio noted that the proposed project need only be “compatible” with the General Plan and that they are, indeed, compatible in that they do not preclude affordable housing and programs to assist the elderly and the disabled elsewhere in the City. He also found that the petitioner did not properly follow procedure on other claims, and rejected those.

The case is Citizens for Open and Public Participation v. City of Montebello, BS156922.

BB&K Secures CEQA Appellate Victory in Water Project

13 May 2016 00:00:00 -0800

A team of Best Best & Krieger LLP attorneys, led by Partner Michelle Ouellette and including Sarah Owsowitz and Jennifer Lynch, helped to secure a sweeping appellate victory against six lawsuits challenging a proposed water transfer public-private partnership project. The Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld the project on May 10, 2016, finding that challenges brought under CEQA and other laws lacked merit.

The attorneys represent the Santa Margarita Water District, which is partnering with private landowner, Cadiz, Inc., to pump fresh groundwater from an aquifer in the Mojave Desert. The water would otherwise become unusable after mixing with highly salinated brine water and evaporating. The project will prevent the waste of water and transport it to water customers in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties.

Lawsuits alleged the project was improperly approved under CEQA, and claimed the District was wrongly designated as the project’s lead agency. San Bernardino County’s approval of the project was also unsuccessfully contested. In a detailed analysis, the appellate court rejected the challenges — thus bringing the project closer to fruition at a time when the region is desperate for innovative projects like these to boost water supplies.

Read More

BB&K Successfully Defends CEQA Challenge to City of Riverside Power Project

13 Nov 2015 00:00:00 -0800

Best Best & Krieger LLP attorneys Michelle Ouellette, Charity Schiller and Alisha Winterswyk successfully defended the City of Riverside against claims its environmental review of a power transmission project were inadequate. Power to the City of Riverside, the largest city in the Inland Empire with a population of 313,670, is currently delivered by a single transmission line.

To address potential power shortages, the City designed the Riverside Transmission and Reliability Project. The RTRP would provide a second connection to the transmission grid and protect Riverside against the blackouts that occur whenever service through the existing line is interrupted. The Project includes two new substations, several 69 kV subtransmission lines to deliver power to areas throughout Riverside, and a 230 kV transmission line — a portion of which would be within the city limits of the City of Jurupa Valley. The City of Jurupa Valley filed a California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit challenging the Project approvals and Riverside’s Environmental Impact Report under CEQA.

All of Jurupa Valley's claims were rejected via a judgment entered on May 1, 2014 in the Los Angeles Superior Court. On Nov. 6, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in full and ruled that Riverside’s EIR fully complied with CEQA.

Attorney Fees Awarded Following Successful CEQA Lawsuit

15 Sep 2015 00:00:00 -0800

In the wake of a successful California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit on behalf of the City of Shafter, a team of Best Best & Krieger LLP attorneys secured a $185,000 post-judgment attorneys’ fees award. Attorneys Jason Ackerman, Fernando Avila and Jennifer Lynch represented Shafter in its CEQA lawsuit that challenged Kern Delta Water District’s proposal to shift a diversion of water historically diverted north of the Kern River to south of the river.

The BB&K attorneys began representing Shafter in 2012 when the Kern Delta Water District was attempting to adopt an environmental impact report for the Kern River Allocation Plan. The Plan called for the diversion of approximately 33,000 acre-feet of water.

On behalf of Shafter, the BB&K team argued that the EIR failed to analyze the groundwater impacts, the short- and mid-term impacts related to land subsidence and the impacts outside the project area – particularly how the groundwater basins that serve Shafter would be depleted.

In a ruling last year, a Ventura County Superior Court judge sided with Shafter on virtually all the arguments. The attorneys’ fees award followed.

Ontario Prevails in Suit Against Wal-Mart Project

09 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0800

Attorney John Brown Leads Case to Favorable Court Ruling

The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
July 9, 2009

    ONTARIO - A San Bernardino County Superior Court judge has ruled in favor of the city, stating the environmental report for the planned Wal-Mart supercenter is sufficient and adequately outlines any health threats posed to residents.

    Superior Court Judge Donald Alvarez, however, has ordered the city to conduct a new supplemental environment report on one issue raised: the project's impact to traffic safety at the intersection of Mountain Avenue and Fifth Street.

    The City Council approved the project in 2007. After an 18-month legal battle, the city now could proceed on the project, starting first with the supplemental environmental report, said John Brown, the city's attorney.

    The site - which was once was home to a Target, Food 4 Less and Toys "R" Us - has been under contention by residents in the Ontario Mountain Village Association who are opposed to the city's decision to allow the 24-hour discount store there.

    In 2007 residents filed a lawsuit, claiming the approval of the project did not meet standards set by the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA.

    "We have, by and large, prevailed across the board in the Wal-Mart case," Brown said.

To read the entire story, click here.

Legal Victory

20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 -0800

Attorney Michelle Ouellette wins tentative appeals court ruling involving British owner of Fresh & Easy markets

The Press-Enterprise
Feb. 20, 2009

An appeals court has overturned a judge's ruling that the Tesco grocery distribution center near Riverside must undergo environmental reviews separate from those already conducted for the surrounding business park off Interstate 215.
...
Under the ruling, Tesco will not have to shut down its distribution center, which opened in 2007, or receive new environmentnal reviews by the March Joint Powers Authority, which approved the project.
...
"Obviously, we're pleased with the ruling," joint powers authority attorney Michelle Ouellette said Friday. "We've always asserted that the JPA complied with CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) in its actions."

To view the entire story, visit The Press-Enterprise Web site.

BB&K Attorneys Defeat Anti-Growth Measures Adopted in Violation Of CEQA

01 Jan 1900 00:00:00 -0800

Superior Court Judge Robert Atack sided with BB&K client University of California at Santa Cruz, tossing out two anti-growth measures approved in last November's election. The judge agreed that the City of Santa Cruz did not adequately notify the public before placing Measures I and J on the ballot. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), cities must evaluate and disclose the environmental impacts of their proposed ballot measures. The City of Santa Cruz failed to comply with CEQA's requirements because it did not provide the public at least 20 days to review the negative declaration before the city council voted to place the measures on the ballot.

According to BB&K Partner, Jennifer Buckman, the measures also conflict with contracts dating back to the 1960s for the city to provide UCSC with water to all parts of the campus, including areas outside the city limits.

Congratulations to BB&K attorneys Jennifer Buckman, Daniel Neal and Christopher Conant.