Professional Engineers in California Government v. Department of Transportation

Good Law
129 Cal. Rptr. 3d 255·198 Cal. App. 4th 17·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1031
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 2011No. A131449California1,786 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Marchiano, J.

This case involves the validity of a public-private partnership for the construction of phase II of the Presidio Parkway Project in San Francisco. Plaintiffs, Professional Engineers in California Government et al., sought a writ of mandate and a permanent injunction to prohibit defendants, California’s Department of Transportation et al. (CalTrans), from further implementation of a public-private partnership (P3) for phase II on the ground that phase II did not qualify as a P3 under Streets and Highways Code section 143 (section 143). 1 The trial court denied relief. Plaintiffs raise three challenges to phase II, all involving statutory interpretation of section 143. We disagree with plaintiffs’ arguments for the reasons set forth below, and affirm.

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY & FACTS

The essential facts are undisputed. Because we agree with its analysis, we rely substantially on the trial court’s written opinion, which is essentially a statement of decision.

*21 The Presidio Parkway Project (Project) involves the replacement of the existing southern approach to the Golden Gate Bridge, known as Doyle Drive, with a new six-lane parkway. Doyle Drive is part of a state highway,…

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.