(1) MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL by respondent City of San Diego is GRANTED. (CCP § 657)

(2) MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT by respondent City of San Diego is DENIED. (CCP§ 663)

The court has considered the late filed and served opposition. The court expects parties to know and comply with procedural rules.

The court issued a tentative ruling on November 16, 2017 denying the petition as untimely. The court heard oral argument on November 17, 2017 and took the matter under submission. The parties did not argue the merits of the case other than the timeliness issue and standing and did not request nor reserve further argument. The court issued a ruling on November 30, 2017, granting the petition and making findings as to timeliness, standing and the merits of the petition.

The City claims that it was not afforded the opportunity to orally argue the merits of the case, thus depriving it of a fair hearing. It also disagrees with the court finding petitioner has standing because the court relied on