Allied Arts Guild dealt blow by appeals court Allied Arts Guild dealt blow by appeals court (October 05, 2005)

** Nonprofit owner must do EIR to continue increased number of events.

By Renee Batti

Almanac News Editor

Members of the nonprofit group that owns and operates the Allied Arts Guild are huddling with their attorney and should decide later this week whether to challenge last week's appellate court decision that threatens the guild's ability to host nighttime events on its grounds.

As a result of the First Appellate District Court of Appeal decision on September 27, the guild's owner, the Woodside-Atherton Auxiliary, will have to commission an environmental impact report (EIR) if it wants to continue the expanded scheduling of events at the historic Allied Arts Guild in Menlo Park.

The ruling is a major blow to the auxiliary, which raises money for the Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford through the rental of its facilities for events, the lease of space to small shops, and a restaurant staffed mostly by volunteers. If the appellate court ruling stands, the nonprofit group will have to pay for the costly environmental study and the court costs associated with the appeal.

The group that sued the auxiliary, Allied Arts Neighbors, is likely to seek attorney's fees when the matter is returned to Superior Court, according to the neighbors' attorney, Susan Brandt-Hawley.

The matter must return to Superior Court before permits and approvals are rescinded, the auxiliary's attorney, Jeffrey Kirschenbaum noted. And that won't happen until after last week's ruling becomes final -- which could be some time down the road if the auxiliary challenges the ruling. Even if there is no appeal, the Superior Court process is lengthy, so last week's ruling "won't affect the guild at all" for some time -- probably not until next year, he said.

That's good news for the guild and its supporters, because the holiday season is the busiest and most successful fundraising time for Allied Arts.
Increased events

The Woodside-Atherton Auxiliary launched a major fundraising drive several years ago to renovate and seismically retrofit the deteriorating buildings at the 3.5-acre Arbor Road site. It also sought and, in 2003, won permits from the city to increase the number of events allowed at the complex, which is in a quiet residential area bordered to the south by the creek.

Residents pushed hard for the city to require an EIR for the project and to place tight restrictions on events that might bring excessive noise, traffic and parking problems to the neighborhood. Instead of an EIR, the City Council voted unanimously to accept a small-scale environmental review, known as a "negative declaration."

The auxiliary also worked with the residents to find viable compromises on event restrictions, but although concessions were made, a number of residents didn't think they went far enough.

They formed Allied Arts Neighbors and sued the auxiliary and the city of Menlo Park, insisting that an EIR was legally required before the permits were issued; an EIR can identify measures to lessen impacts of a project.

After Superior Court Judge Quentin Kopp ruled against the Allied Arts Neighbors in May 2004, the neighbors appealed.

In a unanimous ruling, the three-panel appeals court upheld the appeal. The decision requires the Superior Court to order Menlo Park to "vacate" zoning and other approvals and withhold permits to the auxiliary until an EIR is done.
The ruling

The appeals court ruled that the neighbors made an adequate case for requiring an EIR, based on the potential noise and traffic impacts that nighttime events will have on the neighborhood. The negative declaration -- the environmental document approved by the city -- "gives too short shrift" to those impacts.

The court concluded that the California Environmental Quality Act "requires the preparation of an EIR to further analyze the environmental impacts of the Auxiliary's plan to hold evening events at the Guild."

Mr. Kirschenbaum, the auxiliary's attorney, said his client could ask for a rehearing before the same panel of judges, or it could petition for review by the state Supreme Court. He expects a decision by this Thursday.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.