Smith v. City of Santa Barbara CA2/6

Filed 1/26/21 Smith v. City of Santa Barbara CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

GREG SMITH ET AL., 2d Civil No. B301299 (Super. Ct. No. 18CV01590) Petitioners and Appellants, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

CITY OF SANTA BARBARA, ET AL.,

Respondents;

HERBERT BARTHELS ET AL.,

Real Parties in Interest.

Real Parties in Interest Herbert Barthels and the Herbert E. Barthels Trust (Barthels) bought the last undeveloped oceanfront lot in Santa Barbara (City) in 1976. Barthels’s plans to build a house stalled in 1989 when the City determined he lacked legal access to the property. The City recently changed its position and revived Barthels’s plans. Neighbors and appellants

Greg and Judith Smith (the Smiths) opposed development and sought a traditional writ of mandate challenging the City’s access determination. The trial court denied their petition. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Mesa neighborhood overlooks the Pacific Ocean from the bluffs above Santa Barbara Harbor. Barthel’s lot sits on the waterfront near the Mesa’s centerline, just a few hundred feet from the city’s historic lighthouse. One accesses the lot by taking El Camino de la Luz to its eastern cul-de-sac terminus, entering a driveway, then following a narrow private road that bends southward toward the ocean. At the end is 1837 ½ El Camino de la Luz. The Smiths own the oceanfront house just west of Barthels’s lot at 1839 El Camino de la Luz. The late Gertrude Eaton created 1837 ½ by splitting off 1837’s southern half in 1958. Eaton’s neighbors, including the former owner of the Smith’s property, sent letters to the Planning Commission supporting her split request. Minutes from the commission hearings, however, reflect concerns among its members about the private road’s width and service capacity. The Commission recommended the City Council deny the request. Eaton appeared personally at the next council meeting and explained why she believed the existing 15-foot easement would provide adequate access. The council granted her request despite the commission’s denial recommendation, noting “that several of the neighbors wrote letters . . . urging approval of the requested division of property, and the granting of a variance in this case.” Eaton eventually sold 1837 ½. Barthels bought the undeveloped lot in 1976. Barthels first applied for a development permit in 1989. Neighbors objected on the grounds his project would further