Seawall in Del Mar to Come Tumbling Down, Judge Rules

By JENIFER WARREN

July 31, 1986 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writer

A Superior Court judge Wednesday broke a lingering stalemate between the state Coastal Commission and a group of oceanfront homeowners in Del Mar, rejecting pleas by the residents that they be allowed to retain a protective seawall that encroaches on the public beach.

The ruling by Judge Douglas R. Woodworth means the homeowners must comply with a commission order to remove or relocate the timber wall, which stretches north from 24th Street almost to 27th Street. An attorney for the property owners, however, said he would consult with his clients and may appeal the decision.

“Obviously, we’re very disappointed,” said attorney John S. Murray of Los Angeles. “We were asking for a limited form of relief, that the walls be allowed to stand until the Coastal Commission and the city agree on an overall shoreline protection plan. I’m sorry that the judge chose not to see it our way.”

Woodworth’s ruling marks the latest chapter in an unusual saga that dates to mid-1983 when nine homeowners spent $300,000 to construct a 480-foot-long seawall 15 feet onto the public beach. At the time, the commission granted an emergency permit for the timber wall on condition that it was a temporary structure designed to protect the homes from heavy winter surf.

But soon after the protective device was completed, the property owners began building patios and decorative sidewalks between their homes and the seawall--basically staking claim to the 15-foot strip of land formerly used by beachgoers. Some built additional walls dividing the sandy area into individual yards.

That move infuriated inland Del Mar residents and local advocates of public beach access, who argued that the beachfront dwellers should be permitted to protect their expensive homes only with walls built on private land.

Coastal commissioners, whose mission includes preserving public access to the shoreline, were also concerned, and in December, 1984, they ordered the homeowners to remove the wall and rebuild it no more than 5 feet onto public property.

Since then, the state panel has twice extended the deadline for removal of the wall, in part out of courtesy to the City of Del Mar, which is drafting an ordinance governing beach encroachments. On April 1, the third deadline passed and the commission, exasperated with the city’s sluggish progress on the ordinance and convinced that the wall has stood in the public domain long enough, prepared to sue to force removal of the structure.

“Basically, the commission felt there wasn’t any real movement on this issue and that public access should be restored,” said Deborah Lee, a coastal commission planner in San Diego.

But the day before the commission’s attorneys intended to file the legal action, the homeowners’ attorney petitioned the court, requesting that the judge set aside the state’s order to remove the wall, at least until the city’s ordinance is in place.

Arguing for the homeowners, Murray contended that the residents were not aware that the emergency seawall might later be ordered removed. The attorney said his clients believed that only minor “modification” of the structure might be necessary.

In addition, Murray said the city has refused to issue permits for construction of new seawalls. Therefore, if the homeowners were to dismantle the existing wall, they could not build a new one and their homes would be left unprotected.

Moreover, the homeowners contend that they should not be forced to take any action before the pending ordinance governing Del Mar’s beachfront is in place, because that ordinance might alter existing rules on seawalls.

Judge Woodworth, however, sided with the Coastal Commission, which was represented Wednesday by state Deputy Atty. Gen. Jamee Jordan Patterson. Patterson said that if the homeowners do not appeal, they now have two options: to comply with the commission’s order or to refuse to remove the wall.

“If they do not comply, they will be in violation of the Coastal Act and we will be back in court to compel them to do it,” Patterson said. “The Coastal Commission has been patient on this and wants to see the wall removed as soon as possible.”

One concern, Patterson said, relates to scientific evidence revealing that seawalls can cause beach erosion problems. Del Mar’s shoreline, like that of much of North County, has been plagued by loss of sand for the past several years.

“If you’re going to have a seawall, you want it as far back on the beach as possible,” Patterson said. “That’s why the commission said it can be relocated to no more than 5 feet out.”

On a related front, Councilman Scott Barnett, who has worked on Del Mar’s so-called beach overlay zone ordinance for nearly two years, said the long-awaited law should be approved and in place within the next several months. It is expected to resolve for good Del Mar’s age-old dispute over encroachment onto public territory at the beach.

Just how the ordinance will balance the opposing interests of property protection and public access, however, is still a mystery.

“The city has been trying to strike a compromise on the beachfront issue for 25 years, and it’s fallen apart many times before,” Barnett said. “But I am optimistic that this time we’ll have a program that the city, property owners and beach activists can be happy with.”

The councilman declined to comment on what sort of restrictions the ordinance is likely to place on the infamous seawalls. But he did say that “some protection of public property, a wall or some other structure” will be permitted under the law.

“The question,” Barnett said, “is where will that wall be.”

The ordinance must be approved by the Coastal Commission.