Burke

Burke v. California Coastal Commission

Good Law
168 Cal. App. 4th 1098·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 2369·85 Cal. Rptr. 3d 909
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 1, 2008B207188California4,151 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boren, J.

This case arises from the denial of a permit by respondent California Coastal Commission (the Coastal Commission) to replace an existing but deteriorating chain link fence, approximately 1,000 feet long, located on private property at the bottom of the bluffs at a Torrance beach. A 1988 boundary agreement with the State Lands Commission, other entities of the State of California (the State), the City of Torrance (the City), and affected homeowners specifically described the fence as an essential component of an agreed-upon boundary separating a sandy beach easement for public use from adjacent privately owned land. We find that because this type of boundary settlement with the State Lands Commission is statutorily exempt from the purview of the Coastal Commission (Pub. Resources Code, § 30416), the Coastal Commission had no jurisdiction to require a permit for the fence.

Thus, the trial court erred in denying appellant Martin L. Burke’s petition for writ of administrative mandamus to vacate the permit denial and for declaratory relief to establish the Coastal Commission’s lack of jurisdiction.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

The history of the fence and the nature of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.