Greenfield

Greenfield v. Mandalay Shores Cmty. Ass'n

Good Law
21 Cal. App. 5th 896·230 Cal. Rptr. 3d 827
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 20182d Civil No. B281089California1,922 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Yegan, J.

*898 One of the basic goals of the California Coastal Act of 1976 is to "maximize public access" to the beach. An appellate court is to liberally construe the Coastal Act to achieve this goal. Respondent Mandalay Shores Community Association has not erected a physical barrier to the beach but has erected a monetary barrier to the beach. (See infra at p. 829.) It has no right to do so.

Robert S. Greenfield and Demetra Greenfield appeal the denial of their motion for a preliminary injunction to stay the enforcement of a homeowner's association resolution banning short term rentals (STR ban) in Oxnard Shores. Appellants contend that the STR ban violates the California Coastal Act ( Pub. Resources Code, § 30000 et seq. ) 1 which requires a coastal development permit for any "development" that results in a change in the intensity of use of or access to land in a coastal zone. (§§ 30600, subd. (a); 30106.) Respondent failed to get a coastal development permit before adopting the STR ban.

Denying the motion for preliminary injunction, the trial court remarked that "[t]he Superior Court is not the proper venue to assess whether or not Mandalay Bay HOA rules conflict with the…

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.