Old Golden Oaks v. County of Amador
Filed 5/30/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Amador) ----
OLD GOLDEN OAKS LLC, C099948
Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 23CV13256)
v.
COUNTY OF AMADOR,
Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Amador County, Steve Hermanson, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Everview LTD., Bradley B. Johnson and James I. Anderson for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Gregory G. Gillott, County Counsel and Glenn Spitzer, Deputy County Counsel for Defendant and Respondent.
Old Golden Oaks LLC applied for an encroachment permit and a grading permit from Amador County in connection with a housing development project. The county determined the applications were incomplete and requested Old Golden Oaks to provide
1
supplemental information. Old Golden Oaks filed a petition for writ of mandate contending the county violated the Permit Streamlining Act (Gov. Code, § 65920 et seq.) by requesting information not included in the submittal checklists for both permits. The trial court sustained the county’s demurrer without leave to amend. On appeal, Old Golden Oaks contends the catch-all provision in the county’s encroachment permit submittal checklist violates the Permit Streamlining Act because it does not “specify in detail” the information required for a development project application. We agree. But the county may still condition the completeness of the grading permit application on the additional environmental information because the submittal checklist for the grading permit informed Old Golden Oaks that its project must comply with California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq; CEQA). Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part. Undesignated statutory references are to the Government Code. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Old Golden Oaks owns a residential subdivision created by a map the county approved in 1973. Old Golden Oaks’s predecessor-in-interest had agreements with the county to construct streets and water service facilities for the subdivision. But construction of the project was halted after 1973. In 2023, Old Golden Oaks applied for a grading permit and an encroachment permit from the county. For the grading permit, the county’s submittal checklist required, among other things, a completed application, an erosion control plan, and a copy of right-of-way agreements. Old Golden Oaks stated in its grading permit application that it planned to grade 58,740 cubic yards and acknowledged it must also submit a notice of intent, a storm water pollution prevention plan, and engineered plans. The application also asked whether CEQA compliance was required, but Old Golden Oaks did not answer the question. The county’s municipal code section 15.40.090, entitled “Procedure for issuance of grading permits where required,” states that grading over 5,000 cubic yards
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)