Malick v. Department of Transportation
Before: Anderson
Opinion
ANDERSON, P. J.
Plaintiff Laura Malick (appellant) appeals from a judgment that dismissed her petition for a writ of mandate to command the Department of Transportation; James W. van Loben Seis, Director; and Preston Kelley, Director, District #4 (respondents), to cease building sound walls on Scenic Highway Interstate 680 and to remove those already installed. A demurrer to the petition had been sustained without leave to amend.
Appellant contends: (1) “The decision that no law prohibits sound walls on scenic highways is refuted by the mandate for
scenic conservation
in the Scenic Highway Act” (italics added); (2) “Sound walls permitted on freeways are impermissible visual barriers on the scenic highway portions of freeways.” These contentions lack merit.
“The complex legislative scheme for construction of freeway and expressway systems in California is set out in exhaustive detail in the Streets and Highways Code. [All references in this quotation and in this opinion are to
[1831]
this code.] In general, it is the intent of the Legislature that highways be created only after a planned and coordinated effort by all state and local agencies with full exchange of information by all concerned. (See § 210.) Hearings to present a forum for exchange of ideas are mandated. (See §§ 210.4, 210.5.)”
(Smith
v.
State of California
(1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 529, 536, fn. 3 [123 Cal.Rptr. 745].)
As part of the legislative scheme sections 260-263.9 provide that certain portions of the state highway system shall be designated as “state scenic highways” and given “special scenic conservation treatment” by respondents. Sections 215.5-216.1 provide that respondents shall construct “noise attenuation barriers along freeways in the California freeway and expressway system.”
Interstate Highway 680 “from the Santa Clara-Alameda county line to Route 24 in Walnut Creek” was designated a scenic highway by section 263.8. It is also one of the California freeways along which respondents have authority to construct a noise attenuation barrier or sound wall. (§§ 253, 253.1, 620.) Respondents have been erecting 10 miles of concrete sound walls along Interstate Highway 680 from Dublin to Walnut Creek. The sound walls are approximately eleven and one-half feet high. Scenic views of mountains, hills or woodlands are blocked by the sound walls.
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)