McCammon v. City of Redwood City
| Decision Date | 26 March 1957 |
| Citation | 308 P.2d 831,149 Cal.App.2d 421 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Charles E. McCAMMON and Theodore WUNDERLICH, doing business under the firm name and style of McCammon-Wunderlich Company, a copartnership, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. The CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, a municipal corporation, S. D. Herkner, as Mayor of the City of Redwood City, a municipal corporation, E. A. Rolison, as City Manager of the City of Redwood City, a municipal corporation, William H. Royer, S. D. Herkner, Robert V. Shillers, Paul Jones, Floyd Granger, Hiram S. Stout and Carl A. Britschgi, as members of the City Council of the City of Redwood City, a municipal corporation, and S. D. Wood, as Chief of Police of the City of Redwood City, a municipal corporation, Defendants and Respondents, Hamilton Morton, Whipple Road Quarry Company, a corporation, Palpar, Inc., a corporation, and Palomar Holding Company, a corporation, Defendants and Appellants. Civ. 17101. |
G. H. Eckhardt, Jr., San Francisco, for appellants Charles E. McCammon and Theodore Wunderlich.
A. J. Harwood, San Francisco, for appellants Hamilton Morton, Whipple Road Quarry Co., Palpar, Inc., and Palomar Holding Co.
Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro, San Francisco, of Counsel, for all appellants.
Currie, Lebsack & Hannig, Redwood City, for respondents.
This is an appeal from a judgment denying an injunction against the enforcement of an ordinance of the City of Redwood City which prohibits the operation on certain streets of any truck having a gross weight of over three tons.
Appellants collectively own, lease and operate the Whipple Road Quarry. Respondents are the city, its councilmen and other city officials. The ordinance was enacted by the city council, to become effective December 15, 1954. It established certain designated streets within the corporate limits as routes over which could be operated trucks exceeding a maximum gross weight of three tons and prohibited such operation over any other streets. Certain exceptions were made as to trucks entering from the outside and having a destination point inside the city but these trucks were likewise required to enter the city only on an established truck route. (Another exception was made as to trucks on a trip originating inside the city.)
The quarry is located to the west of the city on Edgewood Road, in the unincorporated area of San Mateo County, and has been in operation for many years. Its products are transported by trucks, all of which exceed three tons in gross weight whether loaded or empty. Edgewood Road is a county highway and runs generally east and west. It intersects at its eastern terminus with El Camino Real (U. S. Highway No. 101) which runs through the city in a general northerly and southerly direction. From the quarry entrance, running easterly along Edgewood Road, to the city limits is a distance of 1.6 miles and from there to El Camino Real is a distance of 1.1 miles. The elevation of the quarry is 239 feet above sea level and that of the intersection of Edgewood Road and El Camino Real is 17 feet above sea level. Thus the route from the quarry to El Camino Real easterly on Edgewood Road is a distance of 2.7 miles on a downgrade. The only reason for selecting this particular intersection on El Camino Real is that it is the nearest to the quarry and at this point trucks coming from the quarry can either turn north or south on El Camino Real to delivery points up or down the peninsula. A substantial part of the trucking from the quarry had followed this route.
El Camino Real is a state highway and is designated in the ordinance as a truck route. Edgewood Road is not so designated nor is any other connecting street which would provide access to El Camino Real from that portion of Edgewood Road which is immediately outside of the city limits.
The other route from the quarry to El Camino Real proceeds westerly on Edgewood Road to its intersection with Canada Road, a distance of 1.35 miles, from there southerly on Canada Road to its intersection with Woodside Road, a distance of 3.6 miles, and from there easterly to its intersection with El Camino Real, a distance of 4 miles. (Woodside Road is a state highway and also is designated in the ordinance as a truck route.) The intersection of Woodside Road and El Camino Real is 1.35 miles south of the intersection of Edgewood Road and El Camino Real. However, there is nothing in the record to indicate which intersection is nearer to most of the destination points of the quarry trucks. The important factor to appellants seems to be the difference in hauling distances from the quarry to El Camino Real. This is 2.7 miles on Edgewood Road as against 8.95 miles on the other route, a difference of 6.25 miles. In addition, the summit on Edgewood Road between the quarry and Canada Road is 549 feet above sea level and the resulting grade is a cost factor in trucking operations.
The points raised by appellants will be discussed in the order made. The first is whether the enforcement of the ordinance causes irreparable injury to appellants. The trial court found that it does not. This finding is inconsistent with the following findings: '[T]hat at all times prior to enforcement of Ordinance No. 781 a substantial number of trucks carrying rock and earth from said quarry proceeded from the quarry easterly on Edgewood Road and entered the city limits of Redwood City, and that a considerable portion of said trucks so entering Redwood City went through Redwood City to El Camino Real, a state highway; that some of said trucks so entering Redwood City made local deliveries in said city; * * *' Under these facts it is clear that the closing of the usual route to trucks from the quarry made necessary a longer and more expensive haul to reach El Camino Real. Such curtailment of appellants' business operations is manifestly an irreparable injury justifying the equitable remedy of injunction if all of the other necessary elements are present. Greenfield v. Board of City Planning Com'rs, 6 Cal.App.2d 515, 518, 45 P.2d 219.
The ordinance in question was enacted pursuant to section 713 of the Vehicle Code. This section authorizes incorporated cities to prohibit by ordinance the use of its streets which are designated therein by vehicles exceeding a specified maximum gross weight limit. If such an ordinance attempts to so restrict the use of a state highway, the section requires the city to designate an alternate route which is not so restricted and submit the ordinance and the designated alternate route to the Department of Public Works for its approval. The ordinance under consideration herein was submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works although the City did not designate any alternate route therein. Inasmuch as the ordinance did not contain any restriction upon the use of any state highway it was not necessary to do so. However, appellants contend, and we think correctly, that there must in fact be such an alternate route or otherwise the ordinance is unreasonable. The extra hauling distance over such alternate route...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cnty. of Ventura v. City of Moorpark
...1550, 1559, fn. 5, 69 Cal.Rptr.3d 612.)The determination of hauling routes is a police power.3 ( McCammon v. City of Redwood City (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 421, 427, 308 P.2d 831.) Therefore, if the haul route provisions in the settlement agreement "amount[ ] to [BBGHAD’s] ‘surrender,’ ‘abnegat......
-
Ratkovich v. City of San Bruno
...in the ordinance, * * *' The grant to cities of authority to legislate in this field is therefore clear. (McCammon v. City of Redwood City (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 421, 424, 308 P.2d 831; Neary v. Town of Los Altos Hills (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 721, 726, 343 P.2d 155; Skyline Materials, Inc. v. ......
-
State v. Davison, 82-223
...route. See, Carpentersville Ready Mix v. Carpentersville, 39 Ill.App.3d 840, 350 N.E.2d 508 (1976); McCammon v. City of Redwood City, 149 Cal.App.2d 421, 308 P.2d 831 (1957). Finally, the defendant argues that the ordinance is discriminatory because it allows trucks over 5 tons to use the s......
-
Skyline Materials, Inc. v. City of Belmont
...or out of the city. It is apparent that the Neary statement was inadvertent. The sole authority cited for it (McCammon v. City of Redwood City, 149 Cal.App.2d 421, 308 P.2d 831) holds precisely to the contrary. In McCammon, the court pointed out that designation of an alternate route is req......
-
Legal Tools for Achieving Low Traffic Zones
...found “inconsistent with the statutes governing the review of subdivision applications”); but see McCammon v. City of Redwood City, 149 Cal. App. 2d 421 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1957) (upholding weight restriction on trucks over three tons that efectively required large trucks to use a diferent......