Surfrider Foundation v. Cal. Coastal Commission
Filed 6/5/06 Surfrider Foundation v. Cal. Coastal Commission CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
SURFRIDER FOUNDATION,
Plaintiff and Appellant, A110033
v. (San Francisco County
Super. Ct. No. 503643)
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION,
Defendant and Respondent.
______________________________________/
Surfrider Foundation[1] filed a petition for a writ of mandate challenging a decision of the California Coastal Commission (the Commission) to approve the construction of a seawall that would protect two private homes and a public street that are located on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean in Pismo Beach. The trial court denied the writ ruling the Commission had interpreted and applied the applicable statutes correctly. Surfrider now appeals. We will affirm.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Gary Grossman owns the home located at 121 Indio Drive in Pismo Beach. The home was constructed prior to January 1, 1977, the effective date of the California Coastal Act. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 30000 et seq.)[2] Walter Cavanaugh owns the home located next to Grossman's home at 125 Indio Drive. Cavanaugh's home, in turn, is located adjacent to the Florin Street cul-de-sac, an important public viewpoint.
The lot on which Cavanaugh's home is located was originally owned by Grossman who in 1997, obtained permission from Pismo Beach to build a new home there. Before granting permission, Pismo Beach considered a report from a geotechnical expert who estimated that the bluff on which the home would be located was retreating at a rate of two to three inches per year. Therefore, the city required that the structure be set back 25 feet from the bluff face; an amount that should have been adequate to withstand 100 years of erosion.
Then nature intervened. The El Nino winter storms of 1997-1998 produced the wettest February in recorded history. Nearly 22 inches of rain fell on the Central Coast from late January through February 1998. The storms caused a five-foot section of bluff at the rear of Cavanaugh's property to break off and fall into the sea.
After the rains subsided, Grossman and Cavanaugh obtained new geotechnical studies. Those studies concluded that both homes were at serious risk of falling into the sea.
Grossman and Cavanaugh filed an application with Pismo Beach to construct a seawall to protect the bluff from further erosion. The city has adopted a local coastal program (LCP) as authorized by the Coastal Act. (See § 30108.6.) An LCP must be certified by the Commission. (§ 30519.) By application of section 30519, subdivision (a), development review authority previously exercised by the Commission is delegated to the local government that has adopted a certified LCP. Accordingly, Pismo Beach had the authority under the Coastal Act to authorize such a structure. (See § 30519, subd. (a).) Pismo Beach approved the application finding it was consistent with section S-6 of its LCP which allows seawalls â€
