DeCicco

DeCicco v. California Coastal Commission

Good Law
131 Cal. Rptr. 3d 908·199 Cal. App. 4th 947·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1257·2011 D.A.R. 14·41 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20309
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2011No. B228009California938 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

A county’s approval of a “principal permitted use” development within a coastal zone is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission. But when the development project also requires approval of a subdivision, the California Coastal Commission has appellate jurisdiction.

This case arises under the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Pub. Resources Code, § 30000 et seq.). 1 Appellants filed a writ of mandate challenging the California Coastal Commission’s (Commission) appellate jurisdiction over their coastal development project. The Commission demurred on the ground appellants failed to allege exhaustion of administrative remedies. The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend. We need not decide whether appellants must exhaust administrative remedies prior to challenging the Commission’s jurisdiction. The Commission has jurisdiction. We affirm.

FACTS

Franco and Sonia DeCicco own four contiguous lots in Cayucos in San Luis Obispo County (County). Their land is in the coastal zone. They applied to the County for a permit that would allow them to subdivide their parcels into five parcels and construct four townhouses and a motel.

Under the local coastal…

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.