Uhler

Uhler v. City of Encinitas

Caution
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 125·227 Cal. App. 3d 795·278 Cal. Rptr. 157·91 Daily Journal DAR 2009·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1224
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 1991D011126California3,848 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiener, J.

In response to complaints about excess traffic from residents and business owners (the Crest group) , the Encinitas City Council approved a plan to make a portion of Crest Drive one way by constructing a barrier across the north-bound lane at the intersection of Crest and Santa Fe. Residents of nearby Lake Drive (the Lake group) vigorously opposed the plan. On August 10, 1988, the city council certified an amended negative declaration with mitigation measures, allowing the project to proceed without the preparation of an environmental impact report.

Plaintiffs Ted Uhler, Edmund Cardosa, and L. James Lockwood appeal from the judgment denying their petition for writ of mandate to set aside the city council’s “decision to close Crest Drive to through traffic.” They present three principal contentions based on violations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the safety element of the general plan, and Vehicle Code limitations of local government action. We explain why the first two contentions lack merit. We then conclude the city council’s actions lacked authorization under the Vehicle Code and reverse the matter for further proceedings. However, we do not…

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.