California’s housing crisis continues to intensify, prompting a landmark appellate ruling that clarifies when coastal jurisdictions can legally reject affordable housing projects.
The Second District Court of Appeals, Division Four, issued its opinion on July 30, 2026, in the case New Commune DTLA v. City of Redondo Beach, addressing a direct conflict between housing law and coastal protection.
The case centred on a proposed 30-unit mixed-use condominium project, including six affordable units, filed under the Builder’s Remedy provision of the Housing Accountability Act.
The project was proposed on land designated in the certified local coastal program only for public access, coastal recreational facilities, and services supporting boating and fishing.
The court upheld the City of Redondo Beach’s denial but made clear that coastal jurisdictions cannot simply hide behind the Coastal Act to block housing without meeting a strict legal burden.
To lawfully deny a Builder’s Remedy project in the coastal zone, local agencies must find that denial is required under the Coastal Act as a matter of state law and that no feasible method exists to make the project compliant.
The court drew a significant distinction between land not designated for residential use and properties already zoned for residential purposes, even where projects may be in technical nonconformity with specific development standards.
Where residential use is already permitted, the ruling suggests coastal cities will face considerable difficulty justifying denial of housing projects under the Housing Accountability Act.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office has previously stated that the most important driver of California’s high housing costs is “the significant shortage of housing, particularly within urban coastal communities.”
California’s State Legislature has adopted numerous reform measures in recent years, including SB 35, SB 330, AB 1893, and SB 79, all aimed at increasing housing supply and affordability across the state.
The state has also placed an $11.25 billion Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act on the November ballot in an effort to boost housing production and improve affordability statewide.
The Coastal Commission itself has come under mounting pressure, with SB 963 compelling it to comply with permit application shot clocks, and the California Supreme Court refusing to grant it judicial deference in interpreting coastal rules.
The Commission’s own 2026-2030 Strategic Plan calls for coordination with local agencies to deliver denser housing in the coastal zone and expand affordable housing for the coastal workforce.
Governor Newsom made the state’s position clear, stating: “California can’t solve the housing crisis while some cities sit on their hands and dare us to do something about it. Housing law applies statewide, and no city gets a pass.”
The ruling is widely seen as a significant step toward ensuring coastal communities share the burden of addressing California’s housing shortage alongside non-coastal jurisdictions.