Judge Rules Martins Beach Owner Must Obtain Permit to Close It

By Bay City News Service:

A San Mateo County Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday that a Silicon Valley entrepreneur can’t close off a popular beach near Half Moon Bay without obtaining a permit and must reopen the beach for the time being.

Judge Barbara Mallach said property owner Vinod Khosla’s effort to limit public access to Martins Beach was a form of coastal development, or change, as defined by the California Coastal Act of 1976 and later court decisions.

Therefore, Mallach said, two companies created by Khosla to manage his coastal property must obtain a development permit from the California Coastal Commission before changing public access to the beach.

“Development includes any activity which changes the intensity of use of land or water or the public’s access to the coast,” Mallach wrote in a 16-page proposed decision.

She ordered Khosla’s companies “to cease preventing the public from accessing and using the water, beach and coast at Martins Beach” until their permit application is resolved.

Mallach issued the ruling in a lawsuit filed by the San Clemente-based Surfrider Foundation, a nonprofit group dedicated to preserving beaches, oceans and public access to beaches.

The decision is a tentative ruling. Both sides have 15 days to submit comments and request changes before the decision becomes final.

Eric Buescher, a lawyer for the foundation, said he expects the decision will remain the same in substance but might be modified in minor details.

“Coastal access is a right of all the people of this state. Today’s decision affirms that right is more than a hollow promise,” Buescher said. Jeffrey Essner, a lawyer for Khosla, was not immediately available for comment.

The foundation’s attorneys said surfers, including former foundation president Rob Caughlan, plan to head to the beach to resume surfing beginning at 9 a.m. on Thursday.

Khosla, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems who is now a venture capitalist, bought the 53-acre property in 2008 for $37.5 million from the Deeeney family, who had previously allowed public access to the beach in the daytime for much of the year in exchange for a parking fee.

The beach, about 5 miles south of Half Moon Bay, was popular with both surfers and other members of the public. Khosla continued to permit public access for about two years, but in 2010 permanently closed a gate on the only road that leads to the beach from state Highway 1 and hired security guards to keep people off the property.

He argued he had a right to exclude the public from private property and that a change in public access did not meet the definition of development.

But Mallach wrote that development “does not require any physical change or alteration to land” and that it can consist of either an increase or a decrease in the use of coastal land.

She declined, however, to order a penalty or fine, saying that Khosla had acted in good faith.

Mallach noted that the Coastal Act emphasizes both public access and protection of property rights and wrote that she could not predict whether the Coastal Commission will grant a permit to restrict access.

“The court trusts that the commission will adhere to its responsibility to fairly balance the competing interests,” she wrote.

(Main Image via Shutterstock)