Excerpt:
A legal battle playing out between the California Coastal Commission and homeowners who want to build a large seawall near Half Moon Bay could have repercussions along the entire coast.
On Thursday, the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco ruled in favor of a key argument the Coastal Commission used when it previously denied a permit for a 257-foot seawall to the homeowners, who said it was necessary to protect their houses from erosion and pounding surf. The appellate court agreed with the state agency that because some of the homes were built after the Coastal Act, which specifies how land is to be developed or protected from development, went into effect in 1977, they were not guaranteed the right to build a seawall.
“We’re very pleased that the court upheld a commonsense reading of the Coastal Act,” Kate Huckelbridge, executive director of the commission, said in an emailed statement. “Numerous studies have shown that continued shoreline armoring will result in massive losses to California’s iconic beaches as sea levels rise, cutting off public access to the coast. This ruling will help ensure that coastal landowners and governments prioritize less harmful approaches for adapting to sea level rise.”
But Jeremy Talcott, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, a national property rights group headquartered in Sacramento, disagreed on the commission’s interpretation of the law. “It’s certainly a very consequential change for, I would imagine, hundreds or perhaps thousands of homeowners along the coast who built after Jan. 1, 1977,” he said, and added that he would not be surprised if the case goes to the California Supreme Court. Thomas Roth, the homeowners’ attorney, did not immediately respond to a request to comment.
Huckelbridge added that the ruling doesn’t mean the Coastal Commission will deny all future permit applications for seawalls.
“There are locations where shoreline armoring may make sense and can be approved, even to protect structures built after the Coastal Act took effect,” she said. “The agency will continue to consider those situations when working with local governments, property owners and others on broader efforts to adapt to sea level rise…”
