Featured Case

Coastal Commission Can't Arbitrarily Dictate Aesthetics to a Private Landowner

McNamee v. California Coastal Commission

Contact:  Paul J. Beard II

Status:  Oral argument scheduled before the California Court of Appeals, Fourth Appellate District, Div. Three, on February 18, 2010.

Summary: The McNamees own a beachfront home along Corona Del Mar Beach in Newport Beach, California.  The McNamees have lived there for about three decades.  The McNamees, like their neighbors, own a portion of the beach at the foot of the beach cliff (the homes are located at the top of the cliff).  On the privately owned portion of the beach, the McNamees have over the years installed a few small amenities, such as a shower and bathroom, storage lockers, built-in barbecue, palapa, and floral arrangements, all at or near the base of the cliff. 

The McNamees never have objected to the public using these private facilities.  Local Boy Scout and junior high groups routinely use the facilities for their own celebrations.  Because of his heart problems and skin cancer, the bathroom facilities and the palapa have helped Mr. McNamee enjoy his portion of the beach over the years.

McNamee property with amenities - Corona Del Mar, CA

The Coastal Commission issued a cease-and-desist order against the McNamees in May, 2004, contending that all of the above-described amenities are unpermitted development.  In addition to contesting the cease-and-desist order’s conclusion that the amenities require a permit, the McNamees also sought an after-the-fact permit.  The Commission, at its July, 2005, meeting, denied the after-the-fact permit.

The Commission based its permit denial on two primary grounds:  (1) the McNamees’ amenities are inconsistent with development along that particular section of Corona Del Mar Beach; and (2) the amenities negatively affect recreational use of the public portion of the beach, because beachgoers are led to believe, by the amenities’ presence, that the beach is entirely private.  The McNamees sought relief from the commission’s permit denial in the trial court and lost.  Now, PLF will represent them on appeal.