SAN FRANCISCO – An appeals court has upheld a denial of a petition submitted by a group of Sonoma County residents who claim a proposed Walmart would have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
On Sept. 20, the Court of Appeal of the State of California First Appellate District, Division One affirmed the Sonoma County Superior Court's ruling, which found that the plaintiffs' petition was barred by res judicata and the statute of limitations.
Nancy Atwell, Elizabeth Craven and Matthew Weinstein had filed the petition for writ of mandate against the city of Rohnert Park arguing that a proposed 24-hour Walmart SuperCenter would result in an increase in traffic and the closures of already-established supermarkets within the area. Part of their argument weighed on the city's general plan and land use code, which reads in part that proposed projects should, "encourage new neighborhood commercial facilities and supermarkets to be located to maximize accessibility to all residential areas," the opinion states.
The court wrote that "the key question is whether the project would generally increase or decrease supermarket access for city residents. Appellants first argue the project would result in the closure of Pacific Market, a then-existing neighborhood market, because the region can only support a finite number of supermarkets. However, closure of a supermarket would only be relevant under Policy LU-7 if it impacted residents’ access to supermarkets. On this point, the city offered evidence indicating its residents’ access to supermarkets has not been and would not be impacted."
In fact, according to the opinion, one of the markets of concern, Pacific Market did in fact close during the course of this litigation. As part of the city's plan for the redevelopment project, it was written that should Pacific Market close the property would be "retenanted as a 'Walmart Neighborhood Market.'”
According to the ruling, Walmart filed an application with the city of Rohnert Park in 2009 proposing to expand its existing store by 36,000 square feet and creating a 24-hour location in the northwest corner of town.
The city received public comments during considering the argument from residents that the proposed project "was not consistent with the General Plan or Policy LU-7," the ruling states. The council approved the proposed plan in 2010.
However, the planning commission declined to approve the original environmental impact report for the project.
"The planning commission instead concluded the (environmental impact report) and project did not comply with the general plan and was, in part, inconsistent with Policy LU-7," the ruling states.
Walmart appealed the planning commission’s decision and the matter was eventually sent back to the city council and planning commission who, in 2015, approved a revised version of the project that included a new environmental impact report.
Atwell and others continued to argue that the project was not consistent with the land use code and requested that the project be vacated.