Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority  

Go Back   Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority > General Sports > General Board

Hello Guest!
Take a minute to register, It's 100% FREE! What are you waiting for?
Register Now
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-10-17, 11:31 PM
Yappi Yappi is offline
Go Buckeyes
 
Join Date: 04-15-01
Location: Ohio
Posts: 47,009
Yappi will become famous soon enough
Court to billionaire: Open the gate to Martins Beach

Interesting that this and the private street being sold are both from the same area...

Quote:
A state appeals court ruled Thursday that a billionaire landowner had no right to block public access to a San Mateo County beach without first obtaining a permit, rejecting arguments that a forced opening would be tantamount to stealing his property.

The 50-page decision by the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco affirmed a 2014 ruling by a San Mateo judge who ordered Vinod Khosla to give the public access to picturesque Martins Beach, near Half Moon Bay, which Khosla owns.

It was the latest slap-down of Khosla in a long, increasingly heated legal dispute with the Surfrider Foundation, which sued the co-founder of Sun Microsystems after he shut the access gate leading to nearly 90 acres of his coastal property in 2010. The nonprofit group founded by surfers charged that the closure amounted to development, requiring a permit from the California Coastal Commission. A judge agreed, prompting Khosla’s appeal.
Read more:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/articl...t-11749183.php
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 08-11-17, 04:41 AM
cabezadecaballo cabezadecaballo is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-06-12
Location: over here
Posts: 28,559
cabezadecaballo will become famous soon enough
What a joke. Why doesn't this turd judge just make the State Park System buy it from him ? California is full of horrible humans in authority. Completely ruined a wonderful place.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-11-17, 05:44 AM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 16,727
eastisbest will become famous soon enough
Shoreline property laws are fairly consistent, at least along the major bodies. These have generally be declared public property with access. Im not sure where these rules don't apply, but quick google says it applies "most" places. I really can't imagine California being an exception. Shoreline is part of their iconic make-up. It was there before he was, he didnt make the beach, he should have known. I don't see a controversy. Anyone without their heads up their azz buying shoreline property knows the rules.

It's a mixed bag buying along shoreline, particularly when "tide lines" seem debatable. In this case, the concern is only where public access stops, relative to his private property. He may not even be permitted to privacy fence, depending upon local regulations. I seem to recall an issue one place with "native" peoples. I think different rules applied and it was private.

I don't know the history along the NH Shores but I was surprised and impressed the amount of public access along some of their norther beaches, these homes are close to water, no one had a privacy and the one I used, the owner actually said hello to me! Guess he's used to it. Maybe the houses are located within a park?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-11-17, 02:03 PM
arizonawildcat arizonawildcat is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-13-09
Posts: 6,684
arizonawildcat is on a distinguished road
My limited understanding is that the shoreline is open to everyone. The issue that arises is the allowable access to the shoreline. Obviously not every home owner is required to leave an open lane next to his house to allow access to the shore. But there should be some sort of access every mile or so.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-11-17, 04:18 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 16,727
eastisbest will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by arizonawildcat View Post
My limited understanding is that the shoreline is open to everyone. The issue that arises is the allowable access to the shoreline. Obviously not every home owner is required to leave an open lane next to his house to allow access to the shore. But there should be some sort of access every mile or so.
That's what I was thinking and how it looks along the eastern shores where I've seen access, between houses on the shore side of the closest road.

Wonder what his real objection is? People existing? Noise? Even without the rule, he'd have to have military level policing to keep people off that wide a space. I can understand the annoyance, most of us don't have to "share" our land.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-11-17, 04:33 PM
chs1971 chs1971 is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 07-30-16
Posts: 1,383
chs1971 is on a distinguished road
The west coast has the sunshine and the girls all get so tanned.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-11-17, 08:04 PM
Yappi Yappi is offline
Go Buckeyes
 
Join Date: 04-15-01
Location: Ohio
Posts: 47,009
Yappi will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastisbest View Post
I can understand the annoyance, most of us don't have to "share" our land.
I know that almost everyone in my community has to share our land when kids walk near the street on our properties. Some even have sidewalks that the local government forces people to put in.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-11-17, 08:36 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 16,727
eastisbest will become famous soon enough
I don't think the shoreline rule is working on that same principle. Maybe?

Read a couple different interpretations. Tideland, is land under the water, using the high water mark. That's public. Public access is permitted for some things, not others, depending upon local laws. Some places seem to have a more liberal definition of high water mark or where public access stops. It seems complicated.

That they're permitted to surf, swim whatever in the water is clearly permitted. There's no private water. How much of the beach and land access to the beach or waterline seems the thing that varies from community to community.

I imagine the guy will appeal. He has the bucks.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-11-17, 09:19 PM
EagleGuy EagleGuy is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 06-26-16
Location: Homestead
Posts: 2,003
EagleGuy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by arizonawildcat View Post
My limited understanding is that the shoreline is open to everyone. The issue that arises is the allowable access to the shoreline. Obviously not every home owner is required to leave an open lane next to his house to allow access to the shore. But there should be some sort of access every mile or so.
The beach appears to be less than a mile long with the access road centrally located. The northern end of the beach is only ~1000 feet from the road running along the coast while the southern end is only ~500 feet from the same road. And, there are trails leading toward the beach - though I'm not sure the beach is accessible from these trails due to the terrain (cliffs, etc.). As it is now, the access road may be the only viable way to get to the beach.

https://www.bing.com/maps?&ty=18&q=M...r&trfc=&lvl=11
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-12-17, 06:16 AM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 16,727
eastisbest will become famous soon enough
They can already walk apparently. This seems only to prevent driving access. The reasons given by judges for or against to support their desired decision have been ludicrous. At least stick to law.

I haven't been able to find a picture that clearly depicts his property line and where people are living relative to this access road. No information on who owns what just to the north and south. Hard to develop an informed opinion.


The public should have some responsibility here, to pay for access, it just seems his price is ridiculous. I really don't like this 1% vs the rest of us schtick, this would be the same issue if a pauper owned the land. If Native American's owned the land, it'd be a completing off the table debate. Surfer's lawyer is an azz, so I can't build up alot of sympathy for them, besides which, I'd bet more than one of those surfers got big bucks.

Not every single piece of land is easily accesible by nature to every person nor should it be the private citizen's responsibility to make it so.

Let them walk. I'd be childish and remove the parking area, if it were on my land. They might be able to make me let them walk the road but they can't make me let them park.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-12-17, 08:01 PM
EagleGuy EagleGuy is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 06-26-16
Location: Homestead
Posts: 2,003
EagleGuy is on a distinguished road
The Aerial View on the link above shows the houses as does Google's Satellite View. Assuming the property runs from water (duh) to the north-south coastal road, it may be possible to get a rough idea where the property lines are.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-12-17, 08:17 PM
eastisbest eastisbest is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Posts: 16,727
eastisbest will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleGuy View Post
The Aerial View on the link above shows the houses as does Google's Satellite View. Assuming the property runs from water (duh) to the north-south coastal road, it may be possible to get a rough idea where the property lines are.
It's the north-south not the east-west property boundaries that are relevant to the complaint. Those are what dictate what would be the alternative access. Cliffs to the north and cliffs to the south, I'd be interested why those owners, presuming private and not him, aren't being held for ransom by the surfers? They're relying on what the previous owners did, not what the law says. Seems cheesy to me. The previous owners didn't even give access. They charged. So new guy decides he doesn't want to be in that business and the court says by not developing it, he developed it? And the original decision in his favor based upon some treaty with Mexico?

This isn't law.

Before making a solid decision where I side, I'd want to know who his north and south bound neighbors are and where those lines are. Anyone wants access to that beach is perfectly permitted to grab a boat at the Ritz Carlton, navigate south, anchor, wade the water and walk on the wet sand. Heck, California's tideline is generous, they could actually walk on dry sand.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-12-17, 10:24 PM
EagleGuy EagleGuy is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 06-26-16
Location: Homestead
Posts: 2,003
EagleGuy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastisbest View Post
It's the north-south not the east-west property boundaries that are relevant to the complaint. Those are what dictate what would be the alternative access. Cliffs to the north and cliffs to the south, I'd be interested why those owners, presuming private and not him, aren't being held for ransom by the surfers? They're relying on what the previous owners did, not what the law says. Seems cheesy to me. The previous owners didn't even give access. They charged. So new guy decides he doesn't want to be in that business and the court says by not developing it, he developed it? And the original decision in his favor based upon some treaty with Mexico?

This isn't law.

Before making a solid decision where I side, I'd want to know who his north and south bound neighbors are and where those lines are. Anyone wants access to that beach is perfectly permitted to grab a boat at the Ritz Carlton, navigate south, anchor, wade the water and walk on the wet sand. Heck, California's tideline is generous, they could actually walk on dry sand.
^^ Yes. I shortcut my answer, but had the n/s property lines in mind - again assuming the e/w lines were water (low tide? ) and n/s coastal road and the parcel being 90 acres. I don't know how easy it would be to look up CA property records, so...

And, it may not be law, but it is the land of Wine and Weed. Also, $$$ talks.

I guess that access road was the most convenient despite there being other means to get to the tubes.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Registration Booster - Powered By Dirt RIF CustUmz