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.

On Behalf of Coachella, BB&K Attorneys Win Appeal

14 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0800

Best Best & Krieger LLP attorneys Kira Klatchko and Irene Zurko obtained a full reversal on appeal on behalf of the City of Coachella. The City sued a subdivider and its surety, after the subdivider refused to complete public improvements that it promised to construct on a subdivision site and the surety refused to make good on the bond securing completion of the work.

Although the City granted the subdivider more time to complete the improvements, the surety asserted that, because the City did not properly extend the subdivider's deadline, the City’s action was untimely and the surety had no obligation on the bond. The trial court ruled in favor of the surety, dismissing the City’s case at the demurrer stage. The Court of Appeal reversed in full, however, concluding in an unpublished opinion that the City’s action was not on its face barred by the statute of limitations. The Court concluded that the City was not required, at the pleadings stage, to allege (or provide proof of) how the City Council granted the subdivider the extension.

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.