LIVERMORE — Residents who sued to dam an reasonably priced housing venture are interesting a court docket ruling that quashed their lawsuit.
The residents’ group, Save Livermore Downtown, mentioned in a press release that it'll enchantment the February ruling from Alameda County Superior Court docket Choose Frank Roesch, which favored the town of Livermore and the nonprofit developer of the downtown reasonably priced housing venture, Eden Housing of Hayward.
Save Livermore Downtown’s lawsuit asserts that the 130-unit reasonably priced house complicated Eden Housing is planning to construct at Railroad Avenue and South L Road is “inconsistent” with elements of Livermore’s downtown plan, and shouldn't have been authorized by the Metropolis Council in Could 2021.
The lawsuit additionally mentioned the town wanted to do additional environmental evaluation concerning contamination on the positioning.
Roesch, nonetheless, dominated the town complied with all environmental high quality checks, and that the venture suits in with the town’s imaginative and prescient for downtown.
Roesch mentioned throughout a Feb. 4 listening to the arguments from Save Livermore Downtown had been “nearly completely with out advantage.”
After reviewing court docket filings and listening to from attorneys for either side, his ruling was “not a detailed name,” in keeping with an earlier assertion from the town and Eden Housing.
Save Livermore Downtown’s members embrace influential resident Joan Seppala, founder and writer of The Unbiased, a neighborhood weekly newspaper.
Seppala can also be the chief of the Livermore Valley Performing Arts Middle’s board, which oversees the Bankhead Theater, a number of hundred ft from the reasonably priced housing venture web site.
Jean King, additionally a member of the group, serves on the board of the performing arts heart as properly.
“Save Livermore Downtown firmly believes that the town unlawfully authorized the venture
with out conducting further needed evaluate below the California Environmental High quality Act (CEQA) and since the venture design is inconsistent with the downtown particular plan,” King mentioned in a press release in regards to the enchantment.
“We additionally imagine that Choose Frank Roesch of the Alameda Superior Court docket dominated incorrectly,” King mentioned.
“We sit up for the California Court docket of Attraction deciding the deserves of our lawsuit,
which we firmly imagine is vital to making sure downtown Livermore might be developed in a approach
that's inviting to all of its residents and guests,” King mentioned.
Mayor Bob Woerner, who has persistently critiqued the group’s lawsuits and challenges to the venture as thinly veiled stalling ways, mentioned the enchantment isn't a surprise.
“Interesting on the final potential second is according to SLD’s previous efforts to delay the much-needed workforce housing,” he mentioned in an emailed assertion.
“Town could be very assured that the Superior Court docket’s ruling can be upheld on enchantment and is constant to work with Eden Housing as they develop the venture,” Woerner added.
The group beforehand denied it filed the lawsuit to delay the reasonably priced housing venture, as an alternative claiming it was introduced due to “the very actual and legit concern that the town has failed” to correctly environmentally consider the venture, together with not totally contemplating “considerations raised by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water High quality Management Board concerning the historic contamination” on the web site.
Town has rebutted the assertion, saying the contamination on the web site was common and the cleanup can be routine and can be carried out with enter from the water board.
Linda Mandolini, the president of Eden Housing, mentioned in an emailed assertion the delays from Save Livermore Downtown’s authorized challenges have value the nonprofit state financing it had beforehand obtained to start development in April.
“Sadly, as an alternative of welcoming 130 households to properties they desperately want subsequent 12 months, we can be losing time and sources preventing this baseless authorized motion,” Mandolini mentioned.