Redevelopment Agency v. Rados Bros.

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 234·95 Cal. App. 4th 309
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 15, 2002D037231California4,052 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

In this eminent domain action, plaintiff Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista (the Agency) appeals a judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant Rados Bros. (Rados). The Agency persuasively contends the trial court erred by determining the acquisition of the Rados property was not for a public use, the property was not necessary for the redevelopment project in question and the acquisition would be an unlawful de facto taking by the San Diego Unified Port District (Port District). We reverse the judgment and remand the matter to the trial court.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 1974 the Agency adopted a redevelopment plan for the Bayfront Redevelopment Project (Bayfront Project). Originally, the Bayfront Project roughly comprised all City of Chula Vista (the City) land lying west of Interstate 5, excluding land within the Port District’s jurisdiction. In 1998 the Agency amended the plan to include Port District land, although it retained sole discretion over development of the land.

The objectives of the Bayfront Project include the provision of adequate roadways, the renovation of businesses to promote their economic viability, the elimination of blight…

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.