I think that part of the article might be confused. The Coastal Act requires that you provide access. It encourages cheap parking and other amenities and the o

I think that part of the article might be confused. The Coastal Act requires that you provide access. It encourages cheap parking and other amenities and the owner can charge for these—as the previous one did. Improvements to these can also be requested/required if you want to further develop the property. However, I don’t think they force you to offer parking. This email from the city, which was part of the trial, mentions both the parking and the access, but only notes, repeatedly, that the access needs to be preserved: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw9SrI2nMR-WVVhiMVZtS3Rxd0U/edit https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw9SrI2nMR-WVVhiMVZtS3Rxd0U...