Public land can’t look private, coastal panel rules

Alicia Robinson

One man’s private picnic area may be another man’s encroachment on

public space, at least when that public space is a state beach.

The California Coastal Commission decided on Thursday that yard

improvements at George and Sharlee McNamee’s Corona del Mar home must

be removed because, commissioners say they make the adjacent public

beach appear private, which discourages people from using it.

The McNamees have 60 days to apply to the commission for permits

to keep the picnic tables, thatched shelter, storage space, barbecue

area, shed and landscaping on their Ocean Boulevard beachfront

property.

If they don’t file permit applications, the commission’s cease and

desist order will go into effect, forcing the McNamees to remove the

amenities or rack up fines of $6,000 a day until they do.

They haven’t decided what they’re going to do, Sharlee McNamee

said. She sees the three-year fight with the Coastal Commission as an

issue of property rights issue rather than one of public access.

The 1972 Coastal Act regulates all property along the coast even

when it’s privately owned, Commissioner Toni Iseman said. While some

of the amenities on the McNamees’ property were probably there before

the McNamees bought it, it appeared they have made changes that

aren’t allowed, she said.

“I believe that there was something on the beach that they enjoyed

that resembles what’s there now,” Iseman said. “Then the question

becomes how much change have they made to it.”

The shed on the property, which contains a restroom, sink and

refrigerator, was there when the couple moved in 27 years ago,

Sharlee McNamee said.

They did improve the shed to make it less susceptible to break-ins

and they replaced a picnic table that predated their ownership of the

property, she said.

She believes whoever built the shed probably had a permit, though

the Coastal Commission and the city of Newport Beach do not have a

record of one.

The shelter over the second picnic table was added because George

McNamee’s doctor told him to stay out of direct sun, Sharlee McNamee

said. Since it’s not a permanent structure, she didn’t think a permit

would be required.

Removing all the amenities and landscaping and returning the bluff

to its natural state will cost the McNamees about $50,000, Sharlee

McNamee said.

While the McNamee family and their friends will undoubtedly miss

the improvements, it was clear to commissioners that they violate the

Coastal Act, which requires approval for any development that might

have an impact on public use or enjoyment of the coast, Iseman said.

The commission voted unanimously to uphold the cease and desist order

but allow the 60-day extension to file permits.

“There’s no doubt that they’re wonderful people who have welcomed

many over the years to enjoy the ocean from their front yard, and the

support from the community was overwhelming, but the only thing that

we could look at was a very narrow issue, and that was whether it

falls within the Coastal Act,” Iseman said.

But for Sharlee McNamee, the end of the amenities will mean the

end of her family’s enjoyment of their own beach property, where they

now spend most of their time at home. She and her husband are too old

to make frequent trips up and down the staircase between the house

and the beach, she said.

They didn’t mind letting beachgoers use their picnic tables, but

nothing obligates them as property owners to open their space to the

public, Sharlee McNamee said.

“It just doesn’t make sense what [the Coastal Commission is]

doing,” she said. “They say they’re doing it for the public good, but

that means that we aren’t part of the public. It certainly isn’t

doing us any good.”

* ALICIA ROBINSON covers business, politics and the environment.

She may be reached at (949) 764-4330 or by e-mail at

alicia.robinson@latimes.com.