Calabasas wins traffic lawsuit
Mulholland signal was contested
By Joann Groff joann@theacorn.com

The Calabasas City Council won a lawsuit that was filed against the city last summer regarding the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Old Topanga Road and Mulholland Highway.

Toby Keeler and Elizabeth Stephens filed the suit with the Los Angeles Superior Court on June 18, 2007, claiming the council was incorrect when it found the installation of the signal exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

The plaintiffs said the traffic light is inappropriate because it's located in a scenic corridor and that by bypassing the CEQA review, the city was going against its own General Plan.

The project has been completed and the signal installed, but Keeler and Stephens said they wanted the City Council's decision overturned and the signal removed.

"Petitioners have raised serious issues, and the court acknowledges that residents can have real aesthetic concerns for a traffic signal," a court statement said. "Nonetheless, careful review shows that the petition is not well taken."

Superior Court Judge Chalfant heard the case, which went to trial on Jan. 25.

"(Chalfant) rejected the plaintiff 's charges and found that City Manager Tony Coroalles followed, and in many ways exceeded, established (environmental) guidelines when he approved the project," the city of Calabasas said in a statement.

The court said there was no evidence that the traffic light had a negative environmental impact on the Mulholland Highway and Old Topanga Road scenic corridors or on the Headwaters Corner area.

The court also found that there was no legitimate public controversy over the installation of the signal that necessitated further environmental review.

"I am extremely pleased that the court affirmed that the city acted prudently, rationally and in the accordance with CEQA and the city's General Plan when we approved the installation of the signal," Coroalles said.

Last July, Keeler called the council's decision "hypocrisy and a betrayal of public trust." He circulated a petition opposing the signal and gathered more than 100 signatures.

"We carried on the court battle to give voice to the many citizens who opposed the signal, including the 100 plus individuals who signed the petition against the signal, the Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation, the Calabasas Highlands Homeowners Association, the Cold Creek Community Council, the Malibu Canyon Community Association and others," Keeler said in a statement. "It was a battle that had to be fought if we were to keep faith with our fundamental connection to the land, but it is now clear that neither city officials nor the courts will hear the voice of the community that favors preservation of the natural environment in rural areas of the city."

If there are no written objections, the court's ruling will become final March 19.

The city plans to seek a reimbursement of court costs from Keeler and Stephens.