Sunnyvale West Citizens Shut Down the Mary Ave Bridge Extension Project

Congratulations Sunnyvale West citizens! Gopal Patangay just relayed the word . . . “GOOD NEWS! Today in the council meeting the motion 1.H – RTC 12-055 to ‘Reject Proposal to Prepare Revised Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Associated Analysis of Mary Avenue Extension Project’ (F1006-118) is passed with 7-0 vote by the Sunnyvale City Council. At last The Mary Ave. Extension Project is a history.”

In Sunnyvale West v City of Sunnyvale Council, a state superior court ruled that the city’s environmental review of a road extension violated state law because it based it’s review on traffic projections for 2020 instead of current conditions.

This news is very motivating and encouraging to communities that unite and oppose City Projects and illegal environmental impact reports. The Sunnyvale West Decision, as a result of a California Environmental Quality Act CEQA lawsuit, has made an impact throughout the state courtrooms, most recently influencing the win of Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera.

Community Advocates ~ take note: you can win!

Per Court Order, Sunnyvale City Council Decertifies Mary Avenue Extension Project

By Alia Wilson, Sunnyvale Sun Posted 06/29/2011

awilson@community-newspapers.com

As ordered by the Superior Court, the Sunnyvale City Council decertified the Mary Avenue Extension Project environmental impact report and project approval Tuesday night, three years after it was originally approved.

The action followed a lawsuit filed by the Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association in 2008 that contested the approval and adequacy of the EIR. The project was for a proposed bridge at the north end of Mary Avenue at Almanor Avenue. The bridge to the Moffett Business Park was designed to allegedly mitigate part of the traffic effects of the Moffett Towers.

Supreme Court Denies VTA’s Request for Sunnyvale West v. City of Sunnyvale City Council Depublication

The SUNNYVALE WEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION v. CITY OF SUNNYVALE CITY COUNCIL Certified for Publication Decision is significant and historic. A big win not only for the Mary Avenue Extension Project (MAEP) residents living nearby, but for all communities in California affected by projects requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)  in compliance with the California Quality Environmental Act (CEQA) law and policy.

The Published Decision is so significant, in fact, seeming to rattle the systems of massive agencies, such as The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) as they led, with an additional 15+ other public agencies and private industry groups, in filing a multitude of Briefs to the Supreme Court with Requests for Depublication this past February.

The VTA’s et al Request to Depublish the SUNNYVALE WEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION v. CITY OF SUNNYVALE CITY COUNCIL was denied by The Supreme Court yesterday, April 27, 2011. The case is now closed. 

Failed City of Sunnyvale Mary Avenue Extension Project Fees Almost $1.3M and Rising

The City of Sunnyvale has been charged close to a whopping $1.3M to date for the failed Mary Avenue Extension Project (MAEP) with additional expenses to De-Publish Precedent Opinion climbing and still yet unknown.

Filed and Published December 16, 2010, the 6th Appellate Court ruled against the City of Sunnyvale Council’s approval of the proposed Mary Avenue Extension Project and its Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR).

The Appellate Court found the City of Sunnyvale’s usage of year 2020 hypothetical traffic “baseline” to be legally deficient. The FEIR did not consider the project’s traffic and related impacts on the existing environment and “constituted a failure to proceed in the manner required by law.”  

Sunnyvale West CEQA Win Rippling Effect Throughout California Courtrooms

The Sunnyvale West v City of Sunnyvale Council Appellate CEQA win is causing an immediate impact and rippling effect throughout the state of California courtrooms. In Southern California, for example, attorneys for both sides are using the Sunnyvale decision as arguments for the Expo Line Phase 2 lawsuit.

Published Dec 22, 2010 “The Sunnyvale Decision” and Phase II of Expo: Game Changer or Footnote?  Damien Newton writes “After NFSR lawyer John Bowman introduced case-law that was decided five days ago, Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association v. City of Sunnyvale City Council, things changed.  In Sunnyvale, a state superior court ruled that the city’s environmental review of a road extension violated state law because it based it’s review on traffic projections for 2020 instead of current conditions.  The mitigation plan for Expo are based on traffic projections for 2030.”  

City of Sunnyvale Found GUILTY of Violating CEQA Law Rules Appellate Court

Congratulations and Joyous Holiday Wishes to Plaintiffs Dr. Bill Mathews, Eleanor Hansen, Tammy Salans, Gopal Patangay, as head of the Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association and Attorney Zan Henson who sued the City of Sunnyvale Council to decertify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a proposed bridge at the north end of Mary Avenue (at Almanor) called the Mary Avenue Extension Project EIR and WON!

For the ruling, click here.

The City of Sunnyvale Council must set aside its approval of the Mary Avenue Extension Project until a legally adequate EIR has been prepared and considered.

Certified for Publication and filed 12/16/10, the California Court of Appeals rules “The City of Sunnyvale’s use of hypothetical traffic conditions of Year 2020 violates CEQA Law. The failure to comply with the law subverts the purposes of CEQA if it omits material necessary to informed decisionmaking and informed public participation.”