Pistoresi

Pistoresi v. City of Madera

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 3d 284·188 Cal. Rptr. 136·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2234
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 26, 1982Civ. 6487California1,853 words

Opinion

Opinion

Andreen, J.

This appeal follows the issuance of a writ of administrative mandate requiring the Madera County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to set aside its adoption of a negative declaration relative to a proposed annexation. We affirm.

Facts

Real party in interest, Trend Homes, Inc., purchased from a Madera city councilman a 32-acre parcel of land situated on the southern edge of the City of Madera. It sought and obtained approval of annexation from LAFCO. A “negative declaration” on the annexation was recommended by the LAFCO staff.

LAFCO had before it a staff report which identified an adequate supply of undeveloped property already existent in the City of Madera. At the hearing on the proposal, it was pointed out that within the city there already were 400 to 600 acres zoned for development that were lying idle and could “provide upwards of 2,000 homes” if subdivided.

Respondent Sam Pistoresi appeared at the LAFCO hearing. He owns 20 acres immediately west of the proposed annexation. He questioned its impact upon his horticultural practices, since prevailing winds would blow from his vineyard over the subdivision, carrying dust and chemical sprays over the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.