HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC RES 4161RESOLUTION NO. 4161
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
MODIFYING THE NOTICE AND ORDER FOR BUILDING CODE
VIOLATIONS AT THE PROPERTY AT 520 PACIFIC STREET
(ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN 401-371-07)
The Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
The Board of Appeals hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. That, on July 27, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of 520
Pacific Street, sent a letter requesting that City staff provide written
verification that the two guest homes located at the rear of the single family
residence at 520 Pacific Street could be rebuilt in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster;
B. That, on August 4, 2010, City staff provided a written zoning confirmation
letter informing Mr. Fairbanks that the property is zoned as Single Family
Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural Resources Overlay (CR)
District and that accessory buildings used as guest rooms are only allowed
as conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 district, provided that no
cooking facilities are installed or maintained and that no compensation in
any form is received. The letter further informed the property owner that no
permits or entitlement exist for the guest houses at the subject property;
C. That, on September 10, 2010, City staff conducted an on-site assessment of
the property at 520 Pacific Street. The assessment revealed that several
unpermitted modifications and additions had been made to the structures
that were not in compliance with Tustin City Code and minimum Building
Code requirements;
D. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the
City of Tustin sent notice of recordation of a Notice and Order for the property
at 520 Pacific Street to Mr. Fairbanks. Said Notice and Order provided written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance on the property as determined by
the Enforcement Officer and required the correction of code violations related
to unpermitted structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code;
E. That, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the Enforcement Officer is
defined as the Director of Community Development or any other person or
City officer or employee to enforce property maintenance, zoning, and other
nuisance abatement regulations and standards of the City;
F. That, on September 22, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of
520 Pacific Street, filed an appeal of the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at his property;
Resolution No. 4161
Page 2
G. That on October 14, 2010, the City gave public notice by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation, by posting the project site, and by mailing
to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site of the holding of a
public hearing at which the appeal would be considered;
H. That on October 26, 2010, a duly called, and noticed public hearing at which
interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or in
opposition to, the appeal and at which the Planning Commission, acting in
its capacity as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice
and Order filed at 520 Pacific Street. The Planning Commission continued
the item to November 9, 2010 meeting and directed staff to do additional
research on the property and to meet with Mr. Fairbanks to discuss possible
alternatives to resolve the appeal. However, the correction measures
discussed were not acceptable to the appellant;
I. That on November 9, 2010, the Planning Commission, acting in its capacity
as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice and Order
filed at 520 Pacific Street and continued the meeting to December 14, 2010,
and directed staff to return with findings to modify the Notice and Order to
allow uses established prior to November 6, 1961, of which only the Zoning
Code matters were affected;
J. That on December 14, 2010, the Planning Commission, acting in its
capacity as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice and
Order filed at 520 Pacific Street and heard testimony from the appellant;
K. That, pursuant to Section 112 Board of Appeals of the Building Code as
adopted by the City of Tustin, the hearing was held to consider evidence
that is relevant to whether the true intent of the City of Tustin's adopted
California Building Code or the rules legally adopted thereunder have been
incorrectly interpreted; the provision of such code does not fully apply; or,
an equally good or better form of construction is proposed;
L. That, pursuant to Section 112 of the City of Tustin's adopted California
Building Code, the Planning Commission, acting as Board of Appeals, shall
not have authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions
of the Tustin Building Code or to waive requirements of such code. Further,
the hearing shall be de novo and the Board of Appeals may approve,
approve with conditions, or disapprove the matter in accordance with the
Tustin City Code or remand the matter to the Community Development
Director or the Zoning Administrator for further proceedings in accordance
with directions of the Board of Appeals;
M. That, on October 26, 2010, November 9, 2010, and December 14, 2010,
the Board of Appeals considered evidence supporting the Enforcement
Officer's determination that a public nuisance condition exists at the subject
property due to the present violations of the following Building Code
section:
Resolution No. 4161
Page 3
California Building Code A105.1 (adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) -
Permits Required. Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct,
enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a
building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove,
convert or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any such work to
be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain the
required permit.
(Prior staff reports and attachments are attached hereto in Exhibit A)
N. That the City of Tustin was incorporated on September 19, 1927, and the
subject property is located within the original City boundaries. The house
and detached two story garage were constructed July 3, 1929, and the first
published building code, the 1927 Edition of the Uniform Building Code,
was adopted by the City of Tustin on June 3, 1929. This was the Building
Code in effect at the time of original construction;
O. That there is substantial evidence that the violations identified in the Notice
and Order exist as evidenced by the Building Code violations observed on a
cursory and visual observation during a site visit on September 10, 2010,
and provided hereto in Exhibit A;
P. That the violations identified herein and in the Notice and Order
demonstrate that substandard housing and property maintenance
conditions exist which create a dangerous condition at the subject property
due to the present violations of the California Building Code as adopted per
Tustin City Code 8100; and
Q. That the Board of Appeals has the right to employ qualified individuals to
assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed
Architect John C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The architect
provided a report that concluded that there were several nonconforming
additions and Building Code violations. (Shown in Exhibit A).
II. The Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the Board of Appeals pursuant
to Section 112 of the Building Code as adopted by the City of Tustin, hereby
modifies the Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pacific Street which provides
written notice of the existence of a public nuisance:
A. The property owners are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of
the Notice and Order identified in the staff report dated October 26, 2010, and
attached hereto in Exhibit B, to the extent such corrections are reasonably
determined by the Building Official to be necessary or appropriate to ensure
that the health and safety of the occupants of the nonconforming buildings are
adequately protected and preserved.
Resolution No. 4161
Page 4
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting on the 14th day of December, 2010.
/Steve'6o _ak
Chairperson
Y. Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Board of Appeals Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF TUSTIN
I, Y. Henry Huang, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Board of Appeals Secretary
of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4161 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Board of Appeals, held on the 14th
day of December, 2010.
Y. Henry Huang,
Building Official
EXHIBIT A
OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Prior staff reports and attachments from
October 26, 2010 and November 9, 2010
ITEM #2
MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2010
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
BOARD OF APPEALS
FROM: ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Y. HENRY HUANG, BUILDING OFFICIAL
PREPARED BY: AMY THOMAS, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF NOTICE AND ORDER AT 520 PACIFIC STREET
(CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 26, 2010)
SUMMARY:
On September 16, 2010, the City of Tustin recorded a Notice and Order for the property at
520 Pacific Street (Tustin City Code Section 5503). The Notice and Order provided written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance on the property and required the correction of
code violations related to structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code. The current property owner
of 520 Pacific Street (APN 401-371-07), Bret Fairbanks, has filed an appeal of the
Notice and Order.
In accordance with Tustin City Code Sections 8101 and 9294, the Planning Commission
will consider the appeal of the Notice and Order for public nuisance as determined by the
Enforcement Officer for the property at 520 Pacific Street. The Planning Commission will
act in its capacity as the Board of Appeals in considering Building Code violations and as
the appeal hearing body for consideration of the Zoning Code violations that were
applied in the Notice and Order.
On October 26, 2010, the Planning Commission/Board of Appeals considered the appeal
of the Notice and Order at 520 Pacific Street. At the conclusion of the meeting, the
Commission/Board continued the item and directed staff to meet with the appellant to
discuss possible alternatives. Following the meeting, staff met with the appellant to
identify how the structures could be constructed and occupied in a safe and conforming
manner. These correction measures however were not acceptable to the appellant.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
City staff is recommending that the Planning Commission (acting in its capacity as the
Board of Appeals per TCC Section 8101 and acting as the appeal hearing body Per TCC
Section 9242) affirm the Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pacific Street.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On September 16, 2010, staff issued a Notice and Order at 520 Pacific Street based
upon significant substandard building conditions which violate the City's Building Codes.
On September 23, 2010, the current property owner, Mr. Bret Fairbanks, filed an appeal
of the Notice and Order. On October 26, 2010, the Planning Commission considered
an appeal of the Notice and Order in their role as Board of Appeals and the appeal
hearing body. A memo was provided to the Planning Commission to clarify the
Commission's roles as the Board of Appeals and the appeal hearing body in
considering the appeal of the Building and Zoning Code respectively. The memo
outlined the limited scope of what may be considered with this appeal.
At the October 26, 2010, meeting Mr. Fairbanks submitted a letter related to the appeal
and included the following general questions/comments/concerns:
• When does the City recognize the units were built?
• How the City determines if a structure can remain if it has no permits
• If the City would consider a structure legal if it is deemed historical on the
survey and has no permits.
• Both units on the property existed at the time of the adoption of the Zoning
Code and should be considered non -conforming structures
After testimony by Mr. Fairbanks and the public, the Planning Commission/Board of
Appeals continued the matter to provide staff an opportunity to meet with the appellant
and provide additional information.
This report discusses the following topical items. The prior Planning Commission report
is also included as Attachment D for detailed and comprehensive analysis of the appeal.
A. A brief description of the composition and purpose of the Board of Appeals
and of the Planning Commission as the appeal hearing body;
B. Building Code and Zoning Code Violations
C. How the City determines if a structure can remain if it has no permits
D. Densification of Old Town
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 3
Composition and Purpose of the Board of Appeals and the Planning
Commission as the Appeal Hearing Body
Board of Appeals
The Board of Appeals may consider evidence that is relevant to whether the true intent
of the City of Tustin's adopted California Building Code or the rules adopted there under
have been:
• Incorrectly interpreted or
• If the provision of such code does not fully apply.
However, the Board of Appeals shall not have authority to:
• Interpret the administrative provisions of the Tustin Building Code; nor to
• Waive requirements of the Tustin Building Code.
After consideration of the appeal and the evidence provided, the Board of Appeals shall
make a determination and issue an order either:
A. Affirming,
B. Reversing, or
C. Modifying the Notice and Order.
The Building Codes are legal instruments governing the construction, use, and
maintenance of buildings and structures. These codes contain certain provisions which
allow some discretion but other requirements of the code must be followed to the letter.
Granting relief from code requirements would constitute an exception, which is not
within the scope of authority of the Board of Appeals.
For this appeal, the Board should consider, based on evidence, whether a violation of
Building Code section Al 05.1 exists at the subject property or whether the code section
was either incorrectly interpreted or that the provision of the code does not fully apply:
California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) -
Permits Required. Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct,
enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a building or
structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace any
electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is
regulated by this code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make
application to the Building Official and obtain the required permit.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 4
Appeal Hearing Body
The Planning Commission, as the appeal hearing body, may consider evidence
provided by staff, then, issue an order either:
A. Affirming or
B. Reversing, or
C. Modifying the Notice and Order
There is some flexibility in interpretation of the Zoning Code, however, many provisions
must be followed precisely and do not allow flexibility unless specific findings can be
made for a variance.
For this appeal, the Planning Commission is considering, based on evidence that a
violation of the following Zoning Code sections exist at the subject property:
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1) —
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards — Accessory buildings
used as guest rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are
subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses.
Corner lot line 10 feet; interior lot line: 5 feet.
In its deliberations, the Planning Commission/Board of Appeals should make "findings,"
which are based on the evidence presented and the sworn testimony given, that support
affirmation, reversal, or modification of the appeal.
Building Code and Zoning Code Violations
At the previous meeting, staff was directed to do additional research on the property
and to meet with Mr. Fairbanks to discuss possible alternatives to resolve the current
substandard conditions at the subject property. The following section describes building
and zoning code violations existing on the property.
Building Code Violations
During the deliberations at the public hearing, there were questions as to whether the
code compliance issues noted in Exhibit A, Table 1 of the staff report provided on
October 26, 2010, were applicable when the structures were constructed. Staff has
provided an updated version of Table 1 (Attachment A) evidencing code violations that
were present at 520 Pacific Street at the time of the on-site assessment by City staff on
September 10, 2010 (as a result of Mr. Fairbanks preliminary submittal) with applicable
UBC codes. In addition, the following provides timeline and code compliance issues
using historical and current building codes where applicable.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 5
Timeline
Pursuant to the City Historical Survey Report, the main house was built in 1929 and that
a Completion Notice was issued in that same year. At the October 26, 2010, meeting
Mr. Fairbanks included a letter dated October 25, 2010 from Mr. Robert S. Gaylord,
previous owner of the property, which indicated that his father built the house, garage,
and the apartment above the garage and provided timeline of when the structures were
built. In summary, the following are timelines based upon the historical survey report
and letter from Mr. Gaylord:
• The main house (original construction) was built in 1929
• The unit above the garage was built roughly between 1938 and 1942.
• The unit behind the garage was built roughly between 1945 and 1950
Mr. Fairbanks indicated in his testimony and his letter to the Planning Commission that
the two units existed on the property for over 60 years and that the California Historical
Building Code should be applicable to these structures.
In response, use of the 2007 California Historic Building Code (CNBC) provides some
leniency for existing qualified historical buildings. The intent of the code is to protect the
public health and safety and also retain enough flexibility to allow restoration of a
historic feature while still retaining its historic integrity. Through the permitting and
entitlement process, of which the Notice and Order directs the owner to complete, the
CHBC may be utilized to ensure that any historical structures on the subject site are in
compliance with the code requirements of the time it was built. However, in order to use
the CHBC, the structure under consideration must be qualified by being designated as
an historical building or structure.
Based on the Notice of Completion for 520 Pacific Street and the City of Tustin
Historical Survey, the main dwelling house and garage are the historic structures on the
site. "It is the intent of the CHBC to allow non -historical expansion or addition to a
qualified historical building or property, provided non -historical additions shall conform
to the requirements of the regular code (CHBC Sec. 8-102.1.1)". Therefore, only those
qualified structures would be afforded the historic leniency and all other additions,
alterations, and/or repairs would be subject to current code requirements.
Given the applicability of the CHBC, staff took a step further analyzing the substandard
conditions using the timeline provided by Mr. Gaylord. The following are the City's
building code timeline which applied at the time the structures were built.
• The 1927 Uniform Building Code (UBC): in effect from June 3, 1929 until July 7,
1942, when the City of Tustin adopted the 1940 Uniform Building Code.
• The 1946 UBC updated in 1947
0 1949 UBC updated in 1949
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 6
• Current 2007 California Building Code (note: codes area typically updated every
three to five years).
In summary the following timeline could be used when comparing the time when each
structure was built and the applicable Uniform Building Codes:
• Unit above the Garage — UBC 1927
• Unit behind the Garage — UBC 1946 and 1949
Original Construction (General)
Following the Planning Commission meeting, staff was provided with a copy of the
original Notice of Completion which was issued to the original owners, George and Alice
Gaylord, on January 7, 1929 (Attachment B). The Notice of Completion noted that the
buildings constructed included "A dwelling house and garage" (see page 4 of
Attachment B). This indicates that the only habitable building on the site was the
"dwelling house" and that the garage was ancillary to the main house. Some other
violations include, but not limited to, the following:
Issues:
• The use of the property as a triplex (with 3 units) changes the building occupancy
from R3 (single family residential) to R1 (multiple family)
• It could not be determined if footing/foundations exist to provide adequate structural
bracing and support to the structures
• No fire separation walls between units; therefore not in compliance with one hour
separation requirements which poses a potential fire hazard to occupants
• Pursuant to the zoning code; the property does not have sufficient lot size to
accommodate a second or third unit (Requires min. 12,000 sq. ft. lot; however this
lot is 10,000 sq. ft)
• Guest unit (no kitchen facilities) requires CUP.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 7
• This number of units would need to be located in an R-2 or R-3 district and would
require a minimum of 7 parking stalls to support the added residential use.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit; California Fire Code Section 102.3
Change of use or occupancy; California Fire Code Section 102 Unsafe Building or
Structures
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• 1927 UBC Sec. 2204 Foundations required California Fire Code Section 102 Unsafe
Building or Structures
• 1927 UBC Sec. 503 Mixed Occupancy
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code A105.1 — Permits Required
• 2007 California Building Code Table 503; California Fire Code Section 110.1 Unsafe
Conditions
• TCC 9223a7(b)- minimum building site for second residential unit is 12,000 square
feet
• TCC 9223b2 Accessory buildings used as guest rooms, providing no cooking facility
is installed or maintained, subject to Conditional Use Permit
Garage and Unit above the Garage
As noted, there are several substandard conditions that exist on the unit above the
garage. These substandard conditions are not only in violation of UBC 1927, but also
the subsequent building codes adopted by the City. Exhibit A provides detailed
information for each of the code violation; however, the following provides general
examples of the issues and violations.
Issues:
• The second story wall construction and windows
adjacent to the property line do not comply with
fire protection requirements.
• The opening is not permitted as shown
• Exterior wall is not fire rated;
• Primary (and only) stairway restricts ingress
egress in case of fire or other emergency.
• The staircase is built over the property line
• A guest unit requires a 5 foot setback to property
line (PL). There are several issues associated
with the location of this staircase; most imminent
is the lack of emergency access and safe egress
from the unit.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 8
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings and Walls and 2007 CBC Section 1024.3 Exit
discharge location
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings and Walls and TCC 9223b2(e) requires 5 ft.
setback to property line
• 1927 UBC Sec. 3206 Roof Drainage, 2007 CBC Section 1101.1 all roofs shall be
drained into a separate storm sewer system, and 2007 CBC Section J109.4 —
Drainage across property line
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings and Walls and Section 1403 of TCC 8100
Adoption of 2007 California Building Code
Issues:
• Railing has no intermediary posts and the run and rise are not compliant with
Building Code requirements nor is the unprotected back which is open. This
poses a potential falling hazard for small children.
• Note: Given that the structure at this location is constructed over the property line
a person that may fall through, would fall onto the adjacent property.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• 1927 UBC 3305 Railings
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code Al 05.1 — Permits required
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code 1012 Handrails — handrails
required for stairways
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code 1013 Guards
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 9
Issues:
• Furnace installed without required permits
and does not meet clearance requirements
and creates a potential fire hazard.
• Exposed electrical next to unpermitted
furnace which causes potential fire hazard.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing
Code
• 1927 UBC Sec. 3707 Warm Air Furnaces
• 1927 UBC Sec. 3714 Other Sources of
Heat TGC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California
Building Code A105.1 —Permits required
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing
Code
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California
Building Code A105.1 —Permits required
Issues:
• Shower added on to original structure. This requires a building permit to add
additional square footage (pop -out) and permits for plumbing, and waterproofing.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 10
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code A105.1 —Permits required)
Issues:
• Kitchen cooking facilities not permitted in guest unit.
• Plumbing and electrical installed without permits. Permits are required to insure
that life safety protocol is followed and installation is done according to plan.
Without such permits and inspection, installation may create fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
• TCC 9223b2 No cooking facilities permitted in guest unit
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code A105.1 —Permits required
Issues:
• No rating separation between walls of
garage and living units; thus exposing
tenants above and next to the garage
to fire hazard originating in the garage.
• Electrical wiring:
• Romex cannot be exposed or
unprotected and must be
attached/secured. (Romex was first
used in the 1950's. Color coding
(yellow) wasn't available until 2001)
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 11
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings and Walls 2007 CBC Table 406.1.4 Fire -
Resistance Rating Requirements for Exterior Walls Based on Fire Separation
Distance
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
• 2007 CEC Article 334.15 Exposed Work and Article 330.30 Securing and
Supporting
Unit behind the Garage
There are several substandard conditions exist on the unit behind the garage. These
substandard conditions are not only in violation of UBC 1927, but also the subsequent
building codes adopted by the City.
Issues:
• Unit does not meet fire rating
requirement;
• 5 foot setback required to property line
to protect occupants from fire hazards; or
• Safety personnel responding to an
emergency.
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings and
Walls 2007 CBC Table 602 Fire -
Resistance Rating Requirements for
Exterior Walls Based on Fire Separation
Distance (1927 UBC Section 1403, less
than 3 feet)
• TCC 9223b2 minimum side yard
setback 5 feet
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 12
Issues:
• Ceiling heights vary and do not
meet the 7'6" height requirement
Code Violations:
1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for
Permit
• 2007 CBC Section 1208.2 Ceiling
height minimum
Issues:
• Heater installed with a gas line without permits.
• It is installed on a combustible wood sided wall which poses a potential fire hazard
due to the combustible material
• Unsecured and exposed gas line on the interior which poses a potential gas leak
and fire hazard within the rear unit
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 13
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• 1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code All 05.1 — Permits required
• Subject to manufacture's installation standards and mechanical/plumbing permit
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit 2007 CMC Section 1311,2.6 Hangers,
Supports, and Anchors and 1311.7 Outlets
Issue:
• Insulation (appears to be straw
bale) has high flame spread
rating
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1403 Openings
and Walls 2007 CBC Section
719.2 concealed installation.
Insulating material shall have a
flame spread index rating of not
more than 25 and smoke
development index of 450 or less
Issues:
• Improper and substandard
electrical wiring without permit
• Power strip next to kitchen sink
where a range might have been
previously
• Plumbing added without permit
• Kitchen is not permitted (per
zoning)
• (i.e. plumbing, electrical, etc.)
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
1927 UBC, Electrical Code, and Plumbing Code
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 14
• 1927 UBC Sec. 3710 stoves
• 2007 CFC Section 605.5 Extension Cords
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• TCC 8100 Adoption of 2007 California Building Code A105.1 — Permits required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking facilities permitted in guest unit
Other Structures (Recreation Room)
Issues:
• The room is considered "habitable space' and appears to not provide sufficient,
ventilation, heat and light
• Ceiling height is too low and should be a minimum 7'6"
Code Violations:
• 1927 UBC Sec. 201 Application for Permit
• 1927 UBC Sec. 1405 Light, Ventilation and Sanitation
• Habitable space as defined by CBC is a space in a building for living, sleeping,
eating or cooking. Therefore, it requires sufficient light, ventilation, heat, etc
• 2007 CBC Section 1208.2 minimum 7'6"
Conclusion to Building Violations
As shown in above and Table 1 of Attachment A, there are several code compliance
issues that met neither the 1927 Uniform Building Code (UBC) nor the current 2007
California Building Code (CBC). There were several additions, alterations, and/or
repairs that have been done to the structures at the property subsequent to the
construction of the original buildings without benefit of permit. Several of the code
compliance issues that were in violation of the 1927 Uniform Building Code similarly
violate the 1927 UBC, and the 2007 California Building Code, as utilized today.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 15
Essentially, the same or similar code provisions were in effect since the time of
construction of the original home in 1929.
Zoning Code Violations
The City incorporated in 1927 and the adoption of the first Zoning Ordinance by the City
of Tustin was on April 7, 1947 (Ordinance No. 71). The ordinance provided
comprehensive zoning for the City at that time. It established zoning regulations for the
"R-1 One Family District" that allowed a guest unit for "temporary guests" of the
occupants; however, no kitchen was allowed subject to site limitations (i.e. minimum
8,000 square foot lot).
On November 6, 1961, Ordinance No. 157 provided a new Zoning Code which
permitted a guest house with no cooking facilities and was subject to a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP). Second residential units were first established in the Tustin Zoning Code
at that time and set forth standards to which a second unit was subject, including a
minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet and one additional parking space (in addition to
one for the main house). The site standards have remained much the same with the
exception of the 2002 State Law which required second units to be reviewed
ministerially and not be subject to a CUP.
Although the garage was indicated on the original Notice of Completion at the site, the
use of the second story as a residential unit with a kitchen was not permitted and the
subject site has never met the minimum lot size required to accommodate a second
unit. There are no permits on file for use of the structure as a livable unit. In the R-1
Single Family District, guest houses or guest units were historically intended for
"temporary guests" and the use is accessory to and in conjunction with the main house;
not as two commercial apartment units.
How the City determines if a structure can remain if it has no permits
In Mr. Fairbanks letter to the Planning Commission submitted at the October 26,
hearing, the appellant indicated that there are several properties in Old Town that do not
have permits on file with the City (Attachment C, page 2). Mr. Fairbanks also
questioned if the City would consider a structure legal if it is deemed historical on the
survey and has no permits.
City records indicate that, in 1959, several "old permits and job records" on file with the
County were destroyed by resolution order. It is not uncommon that permits are either
unable to be located or have been destroyed; however, all buildings and structures built
in the City of Tustin would have been subject to obtaining permits which would have
ensured compliance with the code requirements of the time. Therefore, even if permits
cannot be located, all structures, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing work would have
been subject to meeting the minimum code requirements at the time they were added,
altered, or repaired.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 16
The City in the past has encountered properties with similar violations. These
properties have been either brought into compliance or currently have pending case
files.
Non -conforming structures
Mr. Fairbanks also noted that both units on the property existed at the time of the
adoption of the Zoning Code and therefore should be considered non -conforming
structures. A nonconforming structure, as defined in the American Planning Association
A Planners Dictionary (April 2004), "is a structure or a portion thereof which was lawfully
erected and which has been lawfully maintained," but which "no longer conforms to the
regulations and requirements of the zone (district) in which it is located". In the Curtin's
California Land Use and Planning Law, a non -conforming use is described as a lawful
use existing on the effective date of a new zoning ordinance restriction that has
continued since that time without conformance to the ordinance.
In order to be considered nonconforming structures, the structures at 520 Pacific Street
must have been lawfully erected and maintained. Therefore the structures are not
considered nonconforming.
Densification of Old Town
At the last Planning Commission, several individuals indicated that there are other
properties in Old Town that have several units on a property. As indicated in the prior
staff report (Attachment D, page 7), the City has considered several proposals to
increase the density of properties located in this area of Pacific Street and the broader
Old Town area; however, each time the community has been outspoken against any
increased density and the City has denied such requests.
Additional documentation evidencing such opposition to another property located at 440
Pacific Street has been included for reference (Attachment E). The petition was signed
by several neighbors on Pacific Street, including Bret and Stephanie Fairbanks,
opposing the proposal for their neighbor to build a guest house. The property owner at
440 Pacific Street went through the Conditional Use Permit process which was
approved by the Zoning Administrator. He then obtained all the required permits and
ultimately rebuilt the unit to conform to Tustin City Code requirements.
Amy Thomas, ICP
Senior Planner
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
November 9, 2010
Page 17
Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Building Official
Elizabeth A. Binsack
Community Development Director
Attachments:
D.
E.
F.
G.
Code Compliance Issues Table with 1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
January 7, 1929, Notice of Completion
October 25, 2010, Letter submitted at
Fairbanks
PC Staff Report and Attachments from
440 Pacific Street opposition petition
PC Resolution No. 4161
PC Resolution No. 4162
Planning Commission Meeting from Bret
October 26, 2010
S:\Cdd\PCREPORT\2010\PC Agenda Appeal 520 Pacific continued.docx
ATTACHMENT A
Code Compliance Issues Table
with 1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
EXHIBIT A
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
pp
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3,1929]
Photos
The use of the property
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 required that a building permit
as a triplex (with 3
Application for Permit
be obtained before constructing a structure. This
units) changes the
California Fire Code
requirement is essentially the same requirement (in the
building occupancy
Section 102.3 Change of
2007 CBC) as it has been since the adoption of the first
from R3 (single family
use or occupancy,
Building Code which was adopted by the City of Tustin
residential) to R1
California Fire Code
on June 3, 1929.
(multiple family)
Section 102 Unsafe
Specifically, the 1927 UBC states that "No person shall
� `-
Building or Structures
erect or construct any building or structure, nor add to,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
enlarge, move, improve, alter, convert, extend or
2007 California Building
demolish any building or structure, or cause the same to
Code At 05.1 —Permits
be done, without first obtaining a building permit
Required
therefore from the Building Inspector."
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
It could not be
1927 UBC Sec. 201
prior to any addition that was constructed.
determined if
Application for Permit
Foundations were required in the 1927 UBC to support
footing/foundations
exist to provide
1927 UBC Sec. 2204
Foundations required
all exterior walls.-
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 further indicates that :Every
s" Multiple residential
3 units built after
adequate structural
California Fire Code
such application [for building permit] shall show the use
original structures
bracing and support to
Section 102 Unsafe
or occupancy of all parts of the building and such other
w/o pemlits
the structures
Building or Structures
reasonable information as may be required by the
d
Building Inspector."
_
The occupancy of the original structures, as indicated in
the Notice of Completion issued to George and Alice
Gaylord in 1929, incidated that "a dwelling house and
garage" were the permitted structures on-site; thereby
acknowledging that the only livible structure or dwelling
on-site at the time of original construction was the main
house and that any other dwelling unit to be constructed
I
would re uire a building permit.
l
No fire separation walls
1927 UBC Sec. 503
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
-
between units;
Mixed Occupancy
requirements have been required to separate the
therefore not in
2007 California Building
occupancy of a building such that different portions of
compliance with one
Code Table 503;
the building are placed in different occupancy groups.
hour separation
California Fire Code
The fire separation between the garage and the second
requirements which
Section 110.1 Unsafe
and third livable units on site did not include the
poses a potential fire
Conditions
necessary vertical or horizontal separation as has been
hazard to occupants
required since the original Building Code. Therefore, the
units were not built to code as it was originally adopted
or pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
11 Page
EXHIBITA
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin lune 3, 1929)
Photos
Mechanical, electrical,
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Code,
and plumbing (including
Code, and Plumbing
Electrical Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. Therefore,
Bathroom
HVAC) installation
Code
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
in upper
work done without
TCC 8100 Adoption of
conversion extension or demolishion has required a
unit wl no
permits
2007 California Building
permit. There were electrical and plumbing code
permits
Permits are required to
Code Al 05.1 — Permits
standards that were required to be consistent with the
insure that life safety
required
code requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of
protocol is followed and
kitchens and bathrooms (including the shower that was
installation is done
added on to the rear of the upper unit), would have been
according to plan.
subject to first obtaining permits and inspections to
Without such permits
ensure compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code
and inspection,
and Plumbing Code or any subsequent Code as
installation may create
adopted by the City.
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
The original structures on the site, as indicated in the
code; the property does
minimum building site for
Notice of Completion, did not Include multiple dwelling
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
units onsite. The document indicates that only "a
+
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
dwelling unit and garage" were originally constructed on
a Second and
second or third unit
TCC 9223b2 Accessory
the property. Any subsequent construction of units
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
would have been subject to Zoning Code requirements.
third residential
sq. ft. lot; however this
rooms, providing no
In accordance with the City of Tustin's First Zoning
units
lot is 10,000 sq. ft)
cooking facility is
Ordinance adopted on April 7,1947, a guest house use
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
intended for "temporary guests" were not permitted to
facilities) requires CUP.
subject to Conditional
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
_
This number of units
Use Permit
development standards (e.g. minimum lot size of 8,000
would need to be
square feet).
-
located in an R-2 or R-3
November 6, 1961, adoption of a new Zoning Code
district and would
required that a guest house use required a CUP and no
require a minimum of 7
cooking facilities were permitted. It also established
parking stalls to support
second unit standards which allowed a kitchen subject
the added residential
to a CUP and minimum site standards (e.g. minimum
use.
12, 000 square foot lot; 1 parking garage space for 2m
unit in addition to parking requirements of main dwelling;
etc.)
Plumbing and electrical fixtures installed in the second
unit, third unit, and garage, appear to have been
installed within the last decade and therefore would
have been subject to permits. No permits are on file and
no CUP has been obtained for use of the units as guest
unit or second unit use.
2 1 P a g e
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
The second story wall
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
construction and
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that "all exterior walls.. .
windows adjacent to the
Section 1403 of TCC
shall have no openings therein and shall be of not less
property line do not
8100 Adoption of 2007
than one-hour fire -resistive construction". "All openings
comply with fire
California Building Code
in exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less
protection
than four(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
Insufficient
requirements.
protected by metal -clad doors and wire glass windows
setback to
The opening is not
with metal covered sash and frame".
permitted as shown;
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over
PL
exterior wall is not fire
the property line of the neighboring property. The rear
rated; primary (and
unit was constructed with a different siding (which
only) stairway restricts
indicates it was built after the original structures) and is
ingress egress in case
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
a
of fire or other
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
2
emergency.
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings
and have one-hour fire resistive construction. Therefore,
This creates an additional concern since there are
the stairway and rear unit would not have been
unprotected openings either too close and/or over
a
permitted as built whether it was constructed in 1929 or
the property line creatin a fire hazard
m
resent day.
Fumace installed
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
without required permits
Code, and Plumbing
required a permit and were subject to specific code
c
does not meet
Code
requirements to ensure safety, of the occupants. The
clearance requirements
1927 UBC Sec. 3707
1927 UBC required to "rest on masonry or concrete
v
and creates a potential
Warm AirFumaces
floors". As shown in the photo at right, the warm air
0
fire hazard.
1927 UBC Sec. 3714
furnace installed in the upper unit was installed on a
y
Other Sources of Heat
wood floor which was not in compliance with the 1927
TCC 8100 Adoption of
UBC nor is it in compliance with the 2007 CBC.
-
2007 California Building
I
Code Al05.1— Permits
I '
�I
required
Exposed electrical next
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
to unpermitted furnace
Code, and Plumbing
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. Therefore,
which causes potential
Code
installation of electrical has required a permit since
fire hazard.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
1927. The electrical shown in the photo appears to be
2007 Califomia Building
one that was in production within the last decade,
Code A105.1— Permits
therefore it was not installed consistent with any
Electrical device
required
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present. No
next to heater
permits are on file and the current installation causes a
otential fire hazard to occupants.
31 Page
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Kitchen cooking
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the City of Tustin's First Zoning
facilities not permitted
Code, and Plumbing
Ordinance adopted on April 7, 1947, a guest house use
in guest unit.
Code
intended for 'temporary guests" were not permitted to
Kitchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 9223b2 No
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
upper unit
installed without
cooking facilities
development standards (e.g. minimum lot size of 8,000
permits. Permits are
permitted in guest unit
square feet). The adoption of the Zoning Code on
required to insure that
TCC 8100 Adoption of
November 6, 1961, required that a guest house use
m
life safety protocol is
2007 California Building
required a CUP and no cooking facilities were permitted.
—
followed and installation
Code Al 05.1 – Permits
The kitchen appliances, including range and refrigerator,
_
is done according to
required
sink and cabinetry produced more recently than 1929,
plan. Without such
1933 or 1947. This indicates that the kitchen has been
permits and inspection,
added, enlarged, moved, improved, altered, converted,
installation may create
or extended at one or more times since 1929 when the
fire hazard, water
original structures were built. Therefore, the kitchen was
damage, etc.
added without benefit of the necessary building,
–
electrical, plumbing permits. Furthermore, kitchen and/or
4
cooking facilities have never been permitted in a guest
unit by Zoning Code. There are no permits and the
kitchen would not be permitted based on the site
restrictions (i.e. min. lot size of 12,000 sq ft for second
unit).
Shower added on to
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Code,
m
original structure. This
Application for Permit
Electrical Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. Therefore,
T`!
o
requires a building
1927 UBC, Electrical
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
r
a
w
permit to add additional
Code, and Plumbing
conversion extension or demolision has required a
a
square footage (pop-
Code
permit. There were electrical and plumbing code
i0k
0
out) and permits for
TCC 8100 Adoption of
standards that were required to consistent with the code
Z2
plumbing, and
2007 California Building
requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of the
N
waterproofing.
Code All 05.1 – Permits
bathrooms (including the shower that was added on to
.0
required)
the rear of the upper unit), would have been subject to
r
0
first obtaining permits and inspections to ensure
d
compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code and
Shower added w/o
F
co
Plumbing Code or any subsequent Code as adopted by
permits
the City.
41 Page
EXHIBIT A
Code Compliance
Issue
Railing has no
intermediary posts and
the run and rise are not
compliant with Building
Code requirements nor
is the unprotected back
which is open. This
poses a potential falling
hazard for small
children.
I here is no property
line firewall separation
between staircase and
the property line.
The staircase is built
over the property line
A guest unit requires a
5 foot setback to
property line (PL).
There are several
issues associated with
the location of this
staircase; most
imminent is the lack of
emergency access and
safe egress from the
Roof drains onto
neighboring property
which may cause
flooding.
51 Page
Code Sections
applicable
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Application for Permit
1927 UBC 3305
Railings
TCC 8100 Adoption of
2007 California Building
Code Al 05.1 —Permits
required
TCC 8100 Adoption of
2007 California Building
Code 1012 Handrails—
handrails required for
stairways
TCC 8100 Adoption of
2007 California Building
Code 1013 Guards
Openings and Walls
2007 CBC Section
1024.3 Exit discharge
location
Openings and Walls
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
5 ft. setback to property
line
1927 UBC Sec. 3206
Roof Drainage
2007 CBC Section
1101.1 all roofs shall be
drained into a separate
storm sewer system
2007 CBC Section
J109.4 — Drainage
across property line
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 19
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC Sec. 3305, the City
has required that stairways provide walls or well secured
balustrades or guards on each side and handrails
placed on at least one side of every stairway. The
stairway built to the second unit over the garage was not
built consistent with requirements in 1927 to present.
Over time, the Building Code requirements have
increased the requirements on stairways to ensure
safety of those utilizing the stairs. Current code
requirements do not allow the unprotected back, as
shown in the picture to the right, due to failing hazard.
Note: Given that the structure at this location is
constructed over the property line a person that may fall
through, would fall onto the adjacent property.
City of Tustin has required minimum one-hour fire wall
separation and minimum setbacks for livable dwelling
units to a property line.
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over
the property line of the neighboring property which
indicates it was built after the original structures and is
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings
and have one-hour fire resistive construction. Therefore,
the stairway would not have been permitted as built
whether it was constructed in 1929 or present day.
The 1927 UBC requires that roofs of all buildings do not
drain onto neighboring properly. As shown in the photos
at 520 Pacific Street, the stairway has been built over
the property line and the roof drains onto the
neighboring property. Current code requirements still
limit drainage across a property line.
Window at PL
requires 5ft
setback
Built over PL
Photos
No inner
posts
EXHIBIT A
61 Page
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Structural supports do
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC all wood structural
-
not provide sufficient
Application for Permit
members were required to be of sufficient size and
supporting rafters Roof
1927 UBC 2502
strength to carry their imposed loads safely. The floor
Inadequate
members are
Structural members
joist appears to be supported along block fence rather
_ —
undersized to provide
2007 CBC Section
than cantilevered from the two story structure. This does
structural
adequate support
1604.1, 2301.2 General
not provide adequate support to the structure and may
supports
Design Requirements
compromise the garage and main house to which is it
attached.
Carport
The carport is attached
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The structure appears to have been constructed after the
to both the main house
Application for Permit
1929 original dwelling and garage. From 1929 until
and the 2 -story garage
1927 UBC 2502
present, permits have been required to construct the
attached to
and attached rear units;
Structural members
carport and calculations would have been necessary to
main house
making this a tri-plex
Change in occupancy
determine the required size of timber members for
J _ -- and garage
unit pursuant to building
constitutes a multitude of
sufficient structural support._
code fire rating. These
CBC and Fire Code
deficiencies create
violations:
1 I ■
access hazards for fire
California Fire Code
access and may pose
Section 102.3 Change ofIt
c
additional hazards to
use or occupancy,
a
occupants since the
California Fire Code
V
occupancy changes
Section 102 Unsafe
with a tri-plex (common
Building or Structures
terminology).
Unsupported electrical
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
metal conduit (EMT)
Application for Permit
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. The installation of
between garage and
house. The potential for
1927 UBC, Electrical
Code, and Plumbing
the unsupport EMT appears to have been installed
within the past decade and no permits were obtained.
Unsupported
line over carport
damage and failure due
Code
Therefore, installation of electrical has required a
to the exposure of the
TCC 8100 Adoption of
permit since 1927. Therefore it was not installed
line is increased and
2007 California Building
consistent with any electrical code requirements from
poses a potential fire
Code Al05.1— Permits
1929 to present. The current installation may cause a
hazard.
required
potential fire hazard to occupants.
61 Page
EXHIBIT A
7 1 P a g e
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
No rating separation
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
between walls of garage
Openings and Walls
requirements have been required to separate the
and living units; thus
2007 CBC Table 406.1.4
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
Romex wiring is
exposing tenants above
Fire -Resistance Rating
building are placed in different occupancy groups. The
unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
to fire hazard originating
Requirements for Exterior
Walls Based on Fire
fire separation between the garage and the second story
in the garage.
Separation Distance
and rear units on site did not include the necessary
vertical or horizontal separation as has been required
since the original Building Code adoption in 1929.
f
Therefore, the units were not built or converted to livable
units pursuant to code requirements as it was originally
adopted nor pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
t7
New junction box without
Electrical wiring:
1927 UBC, Electrical
The installation of the Romex appears to have been
Romex cannot be
Code, and Plumbing
installed after 2001 and no permits were obtained.
permits
exposed or unprotected
Code
Permits have been required for electrical since adoptionand
must be
1927 UBC Sec. 201
of the 1927 UBC and Electrical Code adopted in 1929.
y
attached/secured.
Application for Permit
Therefore it was not installed consistent with any
(Romex was first used
1927 UBC, Electrical
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present.
in the 1950's. Color
Code, and Plumbing
Furthermore, the current installation may cause a
coding (yellow) wasn't
Code
potential fire hazard to occupants who live above the
available until 2001)
2007 CEC Article 334.15
garage and to the rear of the garage.
Exposed Work and
Article 330.30 Securing
and Supporting
Unit does not meet fire
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
rating requirement; 5
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that "ail exterior walls... shall
foot setback required to
2007 CBC Table 602
have no openings therein and shall be of not less than
"All
property line to protect
Fire -Resistance Rating
one-hour fire -resistive construction". openings in
1._
11
occupants from fire
Requirements for Exterior
exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less than
hazards; or safety
Walls Based on Fire
four(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
personnel responding to
Separation Distance
protected by metal -clad doors and wire glass windows
m
an emergency.
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
with metal covered sash and frame".
c
less than 3 feet)
The rear unit was constructed with a different siding
v
TCC 9223b2 minimum
(which indicates it was built after the original structures)
side yard setback 5 feet
and is not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires
that exterior walls within no less than a four foot setback
m
have no openings and have one-hour fire resistive
construction. Current 2007 CBC requiment s include
Min. 5 it
setback and fire -wall separation requirements. Therefore,
setback
the rear unit would not have been permitted as built
required
whether it was constructed in 1929 or present day.
(zero - 4 ft
provided)
7 1 P a g e
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Heater installed with a
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
gas line without permits
Application for Permit
required a permit and were subject to specific code
It is installed on a
1927 UBC, Electrical
requirements to ensure safety of the occupants.
combustible wood sided
Code, and Plumbing
Separation from flamable surfaces have been required
wall which poses a
Code
since the original Building Code. As shown in the photo
Heater
potential fire hazard due
TCC 8100 Adoption of
at right, a newer heating unit has been installed directly
installed
to the combustible
2007 Califomia Building
onto wooden siding. No permits were obtained.
W/o
material
Code Al 05.1 —Permits
permit
required
Subject to manufacture's
installation standards and
mechanical/plumbing
permit
Ceiling heights vary and
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The rear unit appears to have been added onto over
do not meet the 7'6"
Application for Permit
time. Evidence as such include the lower ceiling heights
height requirement
2007 CBC Section
where the middle addition and rear addition come
1208.2 Ceiling height
together at the interior of the unit. The 1927 UBC states
minimum
that "No person shall erect or construct any building or
structure, nor add to, enlarge, move, improve, alter,
convert, extend or demolish any building or structure, or
cause the same to be done, without first obtaining a
building permit therefore from the Building Inspector."
Ceiling
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
height does
prior to any addition that was constructed.
not meet
min. 7'6°
8 1 P a g e
EXHIBIT A
91 Page
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Improper and
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The kitchen installed in the rear unit appeared to have
substandard electrical
Application for Permit
previously had a range located to the left of the sink.
wiring without permit -
1927 UBC, Electrical
According to the 1927 UBC Sec. 3710, stoves uses for
Power strip next to
Code, and Plumbing
heating were not to be located closer than 12 inches to
kitchen sink where a
Code
combustible partitions. However, it appears that the stove
range might have been
1927 UBC Sec. 3710
would have been place against the wooden siding shown
previously
stoves
in the photo at right. The electrical strip would have been
Plumbing added without
2007 CFC Section 605.5
inches from the open flame. Furthermore, the stove
_
permit
Extension Cords
would have blocked the exiting door which is at the far
left side of the photo.
Kitchen is not permitted
1927 UBC Sec. 201
(per zoning)
Application for Permit
(Le. plumbing, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
etc.)
2007 California Building
o
Code At 05.1 — Permits
6
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
n
facilities permitted in
,^
guest unit
Unsecured and exposed
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
gas line on the interior
Application for Permit
Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. The installation of the
which poses a potential
2007 CMC Section
unsupport gas line appears to have been installed
gas leak and fire hazard
1311.2.6 Hangers,
subsequent to the original structures and no permits
within the rear unit
Supports, and Anchors
were obtained. Therefore of unsecured gas line was not
and 1311.7 Outlets
installed consistent with code requirements from 1929 to
present. Further more, the current installation may cause
a potential hazard to occupants.
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
91 Page
EXHIBIT A
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
SACdAfty\Code Enforcement\520. Pacific\CodeCompliance issues Ezhibft A.doc102610
101 Page
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Insulation (appears to
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
be straw bale) has high
Openings and Walls
requirements have been required to separate the
flame spread rating
2007 CBC Section 719.2
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
concealed installation.
building are placed in different occupancy groups. The
Insulating material shall
fire separation between the garage and the rear unit
have a flame spread
appears to consist of combustible hay material which is
index rating of not more
not consistent with the fire -wall separation requirements
than 25 and smoke
which has been required since the original Building Code
m
development index of
adoption in 1929. Therefore, the units were not built or
,q
450 or less
converted to livable units pursuant to code
p requirements
>
as it was originally adopted nor pursuant to current 2007
mCBC
requirements.
Combustible material
installed between walls
2010 9 10
The room is considered
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, all portions of building
"habitable space' and
Application for Permit
used for eating, living and/or sleeping purposes must
appears to not provide
1927 UBC Sec. 1405
provide sufficient light and ventilation. The recreation
sufficient, ventilation,
Light, Ventilation and
room was not built with permits and requires inspections
a
heat and light
Sanitation
to ensure that it meets Code requirements.
u
Habitable space as
m
defined by CBC is a
-;
space in a building for
E
living; sleeping, eating or
cooking. Therefore, it
9
requires sufficient light,
>
c
0
ventilation, heat, etc
2
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CBC Section
w
and should be a
1208.2 minimum 7'6"
- -
minimum 7'6"
Ceiling height
does not meet
minimum
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
SACdAfty\Code Enforcement\520. Pacific\CodeCompliance issues Ezhibft A.doc102610
101 Page
ATTACHMENT B
January 7, 1929, Notice of Completion
Recorded at rearrest of frantaa for -3, Me at 30 Yin. peat 6 A.Y.. In gook 2161 FMV
y1'
61. Official Records of Orange Oouuty. Jpstlne Whitney. County Reaardar. Ruby OmmorOnl
Adele Luis COMPARED Else Opallffa
;.
35054
OORPORATIOS
ORAWT USED.
SANT or ITALY NATIONAL TRUOT AND SAVINOW ASSOOIATICNs a national banking &.aOOtatietml
In omolderatlon of Ten " 00/100 Dollars, to 1% In hand p.1d, the recelpt of wbiah 1s hereby
.okaowladged, doe. hereby grant to GEOROE GAYLORD and ALICE R. 0ATLORO, husband and wife, u
Joint Loamt.. With right of .UrVATerohlp, all that real property situated 1. the County of
_•
Orange, State of Oallfornla, deeorined an follow.;
'
That portion of Lot OWN of the Stafford A Tuetln Treat, a6 .ham on a Yap roaoxlMYn
Boot 2, page 616 of Yisoallmews Records of Loa Angeles OenntY. Calllurala, described u
beginning at a point on the West It.. of maid Lot, 410 fast South .f the WOrthwast corner of
said Lot; running thence South &long the West lino of Raid Lot 50 feet; theme Cast parallel
to the North time of said Lot, 200 feet; thence North parallel to the West line pf said Let,
50 feet; theme. West parallel to the North line of said Lot, 200 feet to the point of beglmiim
As an appurtenance to the above described property a right of way, for Ingress and
agrees and for ga. and Waterpipe line. and for electric light poles end wires over the follow-
ing deeOrlbed portion of Lot OV' of Stafford d Tustin Tract, as sham on a Yap re.ordsd in
Book 2. paFa 616 of YS BCe11.eDe... Ra..rem of LOB Angelae CountY, Oolifornla, dem4Tlbad ae
begluning at a point on the North line of said Lot BY', 196.56 feet West of the Northeast
corner of said Let, running thence Southerly parnllel to the West line of said Lot, 666.97
foot to a paint on the South line of amid Lot, whI ah point Se 200.61 feet Welt of the gouth-
meet cornerof said Lot; thence Went along the South line of said Lot, 60 feet, more or leu,
to a point on raid South line, which le 200 feat teat of the 80uthwaat corner of veil Lot;
thence Northerly along s line parallel to and 200 feet each of the Neat line of Bald Lot,
667.02 feet, to a polo% on the North lice of spld Lot; the moa teat 60 foot, wore or lase. to
IL. paint of beginning.
This conrayamae I. Glee upon the following ezpr...od oondltions,
let. That me portion of amid property shall be at any time I ... sd to or occupied by
a member of any race other then the Caume8lm race, Yerlcme not permitted.
?me. That no etruOtdre shall no oractod upon said property eraapt a dwelling hOUGa
for the habitation of hunan beings and the ordinary outbuildings usually ...Gtruoted for use
of '6.14 property as a dwelling plea..
3rd. That no dialling or structure for pee as n dwelling shell Da eraotod whidh
shall coat lase than 63000.00.
4tb. That no dwelling or structure shall be ercotedpn said lot, the front part of
which 1a nearar the front it.. of said property than twentY feet.
All of the foregoing conditions are declared to be eorenenta rearing with the land add
the sauna are made fpr the bem fit of the remaining property 1A the sabdivi+ion Of whloh .aid
property LB a part, and In the "cut of a violation Of mN Of sold aeronautsOrconditioner
then the title to said property shall rarart to the Grantor.
With remerwatlon &.roes amid property for water pipe line far Irrigating adjulmlng
Taxes.
TO NAVE AND TO BOLD to tha amid grmteos, .e Joint tenants with right of .arrimaroblp.
IN sITPEaN MAIO?, the BAN[ OF ITALY NATIONAL INGOT 00 SATIM A6Nd6JAlYD�r
hereunto "end Ste corporate nem- to be Signed M Its Ho etreGide05 and A ds4AaiP
officer, thereunto duly wthbli-bd by resolution of its Board of Directors, this
day Of October, 19RN,
I
BANK OF ITALY NATIONAL TRUST AID SATIHON A$06(A4'�3
By 0. L. Cotant T1oe-Prealdent.
Amit R. D. Fedex Assistant treat Offlall
r
state of California
County of Orange,
On tale 16th day of October, 1926, before m•. A.E. HadaFlie
a Notary Public In And for sold 0,I1Lty and state, Isoldip>S;
therein. duly-Ora10a1onad and sworn, pgroonaily appeared 0. L, Ootent, known t0 m to be `.
the Flee-Prealdtnt, and It. D. Fuller, known to me vo be the Assistant trust Officer, of tb +
Corporation demorlbed In and that cxeeuted the within instrument, And kxwn t0 as to be the
Pay sone who ..touted the within instrument on behalf Of the oorperatlon thertin noed, and
mkaowledgtd to as that Such corporation executed the saes,
IP N1TNfsB UNEFIOr, I bays hereunto at my band and affixed my official seal, the dj
and Veer in this Certificate first above written.
((SEAL)) A. Ni sIIERSIN Notary Public In
and for Said Conray end stats,'.''
Filed for Record At Ne r""t of Grout" Nov_g, 1926 ut 90 Nin, past 6 o'clock Adl ai
and Recorded In Book 216, Page 96, of Official R000rdd, Oreoge County, California. Justine-.
Whitney, Recorder, By Ruby Demarco, Deputy.
M-10 Lott COBPAAEO Elea Oeellfa
75055
j CORPORATION GRANT M..D
TITLI GUARANTEE AND TRUST OO{IPANY, a corporntion axgmisad under the law, of the
Hint' of Callfarnla, and having "0 prlAcipal place of business in the City of Los Angela,,
County of Loa Angeles, State of Oallforala, In consideration of Ten Dollar, (=10,00) to it
In hand paid, the receipt Of which Is hereby acknowledged, does hereby DRAW TOI RALPH P.
YASINT and IRINN MASERY, husband and wife, An Joint tenants, all that real property situate
In the County of Orcngee State of Chlifoxnlao aM pertloularly described as followat
Lot Teenty-eight (96) of Tract so. 747, ee Per SAO r000rdad in Sock 22, Page 29 of
YS scall aneoue Yaps. Raoonda of Orange County, California, in the offloa of the County
Recorder of Said County,
i
subject to Oonditione, Restrictions, Reservations and Rights of Nay of Record.
Aeaervl-9 an eseemaAt .,or the rear throe feet of said promises for pole, And lino fur the
dletrinutian of eleOtilCal anergy. and other public utility lines.
Subject to tease for Yhe fiscal yeei 19ES-29•
aibjaot t0 County 11eno and Aeaeeswents, if any,
Provided, "waver, that tale Wnreyanoe is mrd- and ancepted upon each of the folles1ty
coMItlona, which shall apply to and be binding upon the Orantees, their helrm. dealYoe
ssacutors, adIdElOtrass
tora and aign;
Tired net Gadd prealses mball not be Said, Conveyed, leaned or rented to, or oesopl
by ony Person of African, Maroc.. or Aalatlo dssoent.
SSoondt That saldprsei--s shall be uAed for raeidenoe purposes only and in Yhf. srAa
. Aueh, purpoGes ghali be dealgnatad o xAGldenoe purposes, tech purpCaas ,Nall W ncaav F
� 1
ft c
Apployed this 3rd day of July, A.D. 1929.
The Premum obergged for this Bond
is 110.00 for its tare.
t: J. mark,
Judge of the Snootier Court of the oouat) Of
Orange, State of 0a11foruls.
Blot* of OAllfomlb,
Bounty of Lost ea. -
ngalse. On tole 2nd c.v .>f July, An the year Dae .tRWghd mine hlmdr
and twenty -Dine, before m, B. B. Smooth, a Notary Public,
and for veto County, residing %herelu, duly aowleelonod and ewom, personally appeesad , .
0. L. Cola, known to as, to be the esteem Seems, Dawe to aubeoribed to the within sod annexed
knee ruaeet, ns, the attorney in foot of the Royal InSwIty Company, and acknowledged to es,
that he eebsonbdl the nese of the Royal Iudeeolty Oommeny thereto as, Surety end bis oen.*ey
ea Attorney in feet.
IN TITNBSS ■BCMF, I Gave bareunto set ay hand end affixed " official. nal, at N
office, in said Canty of ram Angeles. the dq end year lame aboo Still..
((SGL)) S. R. Redpath Notary Public,
to end for said county of Gee Angeles,
State of California.
NY CdOodsslon Bradlee Aug. 26, 1932.
State of California,
County of Orepga, se.
I do totearly near (or nM.) that I will suctort the Cohatltutimpf the Onstad
Stetea, std the Omeltutl Vn or the State of California, end that I will faithfully discharge
the duties of Sotexy Pablio In and for the mid County socordlog tokhe beet :f 4 ability.
Be. S. Pstton.
SObaOMbed and aware to before nae, this 3rd day of July, A.D. 1929.
((OOOBT ML)) J. B. Book. County Clark
By A. L. Rltchmdk Calmly.
Filed Jul 3.1929.7. N. Back., County Clerk. By H. Sanely.
Retardoo est request of Ben B.Petton, Jul 3, 1929, at 53 Nin. oast 10 A.Y. 1n Book 890,
Page 311 Official Records of Orange Ocunty. Justine Whltney,Coubty Recorder. Stacy Bei®lbalob
Beauty.
20760
Iles 00aliffe COMPARED Adele Lots
- - 0 0 a - - -
NOTICE Cr 00"ISTION
MIT �r CALIFORNIA. 3
GEORGE GAYLORD sod *aa R. GAYLORD, husband and wife, being first duly swam. deport
and rayl that they [re not, and are upon the 7th day of Jeewri. 1929. the -core 1n fee Sloe
of that oertaln reel orewrty eltwted in the Olty of Tustin, County of Orange, State of
California, end aertl a.le tlf deaarlbaa ea fella.., to-eutu
That Denim of Lot or of the -Stafford who Tustin Tracts, as shown on a Nep recorded
to Book 2, Pages 616 end 619 of N1 ape 1L .W Reaerde of Los Angeles County, California, dtNer
no Tlglnolt[ at a Vola% on the !lest line of weld Let 410 fast Booth of the Terthwawt comer of
r,mning
vs,ld let;etheme South along the Teel 'She of geld Lot 50 feet: thence Bert parallel tothe
north 'too of Ovid Lae 200 feet; $boom Nath parallel to the bat Jim. .l said tet 60 foot;
tbemw West Danllsl to the North 11.0 of veld let Ron feet to the Wlnt of beginmIM. --
F "71
,n 1017 as With onsrs of said land, affdenb, elect the 7th day of Janusky,190,
waeended the erection Satl construction, upna the lead sloes described, of oertaln 6011
eo wits
A d"lllughomae and gerage,
THAT Said bulldtngm bEve been duly oouatrunted, and the ewe pre actually outs,
.� On the 3rd day of July, 1929, end aooepted by the undersigned on the ape day.
Me louse 1. giveb in ourawnoe of the prorislome of section 1167 of the code
Civil Prooedure of this state.
George Gaylord
Alias H. GaylOrd
SUBSORIBOD AND 611GRN to before .e %bit 3rd lay of July,1929•
((SGL)) W. L. Andrews Netery Public
( 1. and fox said OOuaty sod State.
State of Oellfora"
Deputy of Ormga, ) ea.
Georg. Gaylord mold Alice H. Gaylord, being first duly aworo, depose and may, tbat
they are the owners of the property described in 4.ia foregoing u"Icn; that they have road ts,
MMS and know the content. thereof, and that the .ane to true of their Om, knowlsdp:
George Gaylord
�
All.. B. 0eyloM
SDBSORiBMO AND SWORE to before se this 3rd day of July, 1929.
((SGL)) F. L. Andrews Notaxy Polio
to and for aid county and State.
Raw Med at reuuw.t of Owner Jul 3,1929. at 55 Min.peet 10 A.M. in Book 290, Page
312 Official Records of Orange Omu.y. Jostles Whitney, County Recorder. Nancy 6eame lbeloa,
Deputy.
91. seniums ooMPAlsa Adele lrlc.
o 0 0 - - -
i20761
Sante An., California, July 2, 1929.
The Board met in regular session. Present Scoerriaor Willard Smith. Chairman, 0. L
ObaP®n, Joan C. Mitchell, We. Bohumeob*r, George Jeffrey and ties Block.
To Re; peed of Right of Way.
0. notion of 6noervlvot Obepnan, duly Seconded end cmrraad, Dead for Right of Way
from The Imus 0omeany, . OOrpnretion, to the Wwrth Bead District, we aooepted mod declared
e oubit. highway, which amid reed is sora nartl.elarly described me follow., to -Witt
A .trip of land sixty (60) feet in width and belt tblrty (30) fact on each alae of
the following dmeorlbed center lines
a 0491nning at tagime.fle Station 139-34.52 of that cartel. public highway commonly
topes ae County Park Road as laid Out mad improved by orange County 1. 1921 and 1922, and
running thence from aid Point of beginning, N. 26 deg. 191 W., 1423.00 feet to the beginning
Of m was tangent hewtnR a "clue of 2000 That and being mnaaya Masterly; thence, Tortherly,
along said curve through a central angle of 3 deg. 551,
136.72 bet to a limp Levgeot; sponse
N. 22 deg, 241 W., along Baia tangent line, 165.34 feet to an intervention with the Nnntn-
Uaetsrly ISOs of Irvleele Subdtel.ion cs abowo on a Mao thereof "corded in Book 1, Pap GB,
MSeoellmeous Record Nape, Records of Orange Oaunty. Californla• AL the Snterms xiou of
the Ikea of this right-of-way with thos of County Part Hoed, the w"er. sty ta. be art u410i'
the radii as bown on the eQueeeudying gap.° ,
,.r1..,,. +. w.:,�rtp,ma.n•w.. t�,e.- .•.e+��.�-.-____. .n ..... ,..r•+.,.», ..., n , _ Wit,.,...... ...... y,...- �. -. .. __.
ATTACHMENT C
October 25, 2010, Letter submitted at Planning Commission Meeting
from Bret Fairbanks
October 25, 2010
Planning Commission
Board of Appeals
From: Bret Fairbanks
Subject: Appeal of Notice and Order at 520 Pacific Street
My name is Bret Fairbanks and I live at 520 Pacific Street with my wife and four
daughters. We have lived at this house for over ten years. I grew up in old town Tustin
on Myrtle and 1 st. My great grandmother lived in Tustin, my parents lived in Tustin, and
now my family lives here. My daughters go to Tustin High, Hughes, and TMA. We
have been heavily involved in the athletic community for over 8 years playing Tustin
Girls softball, AYSO, NJB, and Tustin United club soccer. Our home has a main house
with a unit above the garage and one unit behind the garage. These units were there
when we purchased the house and have been there for over 60 years.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS LEADING UP TO APPEAL
I'll make this as brief as possible but I think it is important for you all to understand how
this all came about. In December of last year we put our house on the market. We love
our home and old town but with four girls, one in junior high and another in highschool,
we are running out of room. We were planning on moving to another home here in
Tustin. In July we finally secured an offer on the home and started packing. The buyer's
appraiser phoned the city to see if the units burnt down if they could be rebuilt. They
were told there was no permits for the units and therefore could not be rebuilt. The
appraiser then gave zero value to the units making the home undervalued and the buyer
unable to get a loan. I went down to the city and requested a bum down letter (attached
July 27, 2010). I later met with Dana (Assistant Director) and Justin (Principal Planner)
who gave me a letter (attached August 4) saying basically that there was no permits.
I later met with Elizabeth (Director) to speak with her regarding the letter. A few days
after our meeting she sent a letter (attached August 13) saying due to unpermitted
structures I needed to schedule an appointment for an inspector to come out to the house.
It was at that time the buyer could not wait any longer and we lost the sale of our home.
After receiving the letter I returned to speak with Justin who suggested I apply for a
conditional use permit (CUP). I got the application and had initial plans drawn up for
review and the inspection was put on hold (attached August 20). The week of August
30"' I went down to speak with Justin regarding the initial site plans I had submitted for
the CUP. She explained the changes that needed to be done and other documents that
needed to be submitted as well. I expressed my concern regarding spending money on
the CUP applications, making all these changes, and still getting turned down for the
CUP. I do not have that kind of money. I asked her regarding the California Historical
Building Code and when did the city recognize the units were built and she explained that
it might be better to talk with Henry (Building Official) and Dennis (Principal Engineer)
at the building department and gave me their cards. I went over and spoke with Dennis
and Henry who were very friendly and helpfiil and they suggested they come out to the
house, not for an inpection but to give their opinion on when the house was built. They
said they would call me soon for a time to meet at the house. On September 10, I
received a call from Justin saying that they would be at the house in an hour. I asked
who was coming out and she said Dennis, Henry, Elizabeth, and herself. I expressed my
strong concern with Elizabeth coming out because of our disagreements in the past. I
asked specifically what they were coming out for and she reassured me that it was to
observe the units to determine when they were built and not a code inspection. With
some reluctance and showing some good faith I met them at the house. Dennis,
Elizabeth, and Justina met me at the home. Henry, who was the one person who I wanted
and who suggested the meeting, was not there. They went through the units and we
briefly discussed the age of the units but they did not give me any specifics. I wanted
Dennis to give me his thoughts on when he thought the units were built, since that was
the purpose of the meeting, and be said he would get back to me. On Wednesday
September 15a', a few days after our meeting, I phoned and spoke with Justina asking for
any updates and she said they are working on it and would get back to me. On Friday the
17th I received the Notice and Order / Declaration of Public Nuisance (attached Sept. 16).
The following Monday September 20`h, I went down to speak with Henry regarding our
original conversation of determining when the home was built. I also spoke with Justin
about our conversation on the phone and her reassuring me that was the purpose of the
visit. They both seemed surprised by the letter I received. Henry said he had briefly
looked at the pictures and had not spoken with Dennis in depth about what he saw. I
expressed my disappointment with the whole visit because it was not what we had agreed
upon. Henry said he would speak with Dennis and get back to me and Justin was going
to look into when the fust permits were issued in Tustin.
I wrote the letter of appeal which is attached and here we are
I went down to the city in good faith seeking assistance with the sale of my home and it
has turned out to be a giant nightmare. This has been an extremely trying and stressful
time for my family and me, financially and emotionally. We were excited and looking
forward to moving and now we are trying to save the home we live in.
QUESTIONS FOR TIRE CITY
There are several questions I have asked the city on numerous occasions that no one has
an answer to that are critical to my home and many other homes in old town. When does
the city recognize the units were built? When was the first residential permit issued in
Tustin and who issued it? Why do many homes (not guest houses) in old town built
between 1927 and 1950 have no permits? How does the city determine if a structure can
remain if it has no permits? For example my home and all other historic homes. What
documents are necessary to determine if something is historic and can remain? If a
structure is deemed historical on the survey and has no permits, what is it legally?
APPEAL OF CODE VIOLATIONS
In regards to the code violations. Code A105.1 Any owner or authorized agent who
intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a
building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace
any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated
by this code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the
building official and obtain the required permit.
I have no intentions of rebuilding or reconstructing any portion of the said structures. I
am just trying to sell my house. I purchased the home over 10 years ago and the
structures already existed when I purchased the property. I have provided evidence to the
city showing that the structures have existed for over 60 years and I will provide that
evidence again tonight. I understand the city has no records of permits of the structures
on my property but that is true for most homes built in old town prior to 1950. Most if
not all of the homes would be in violation of this code.
Amy mentioned in her agenda report that "the city has responded to complaints that have
arisen in old town area of construction being done without permits". These are
situations where construction had started without permits. If I were rebuilding or
constructing something I would get a permit but the units are existing structures and I am
not and have no intention to build.
With regards to permits in Tustin. After doing much research and speaking with OC
Archives, Chi Tran the county building official, and numerous people at the county and
city, there is a big gray area with the city of Tustin regarding permits between 1927 and
1950. I understand we were a growing city and trying to get established and organized
but who issued permits, the county or the city? Did they issue permits? Who kept the
records? When were they transferred to the city? Where are they? I pulled permits on
homes (not guest houses) along main street in old town built in 1930, 1944, 1945 and
1950. Not one of them had a building permit from when it was built and these are homes
along main street of old town.
In regards to violation 9223(6)(2) and 9223 (b)(2)(d). Both of these codes are part of
Ordinance 157 which was adopted on November 6, 1961. Both units on my property
existed prior to this ordinance. According to Tustin City Code 9273 (a) of that same
chapter:
Non -Conforming Structures and Uses:
Except as otherwise provided in this Section, uses of land buildings or structures
EXISTING AT THE TIME of the adoption of this Chapter may be continued
although the particular use or the building or structure does not conform to the
regulations specified by this Chapter for the district in which the particular building or
structure is located or use is made; provided, however, no nonconforming use is
discontinued or abandoned, any subsequent use of such land or building shall conform to
the regulations specified for the district in which such land or building is located. If no
structural alterations are made therein, a nonconforming use of a nonconforming building
may be changed to another use of the same or more restrictive classification upon the
securing of a use permit. If the nonconforming use is replaced by a more restrictive
nonconforming use, the occupancy thereafter may not revert to a less restrictive use. If
any use is wholly discontinue for any reason except pursuant to a valid order of a court of
law for a period of one (1) year, it shall be conclusively presumed that such use has been
abandoned within the meaning of this Chapter, and all future uses shall comply with the
regulations of the particular district in which the land or building is located. (Ord. No.
157, Sec.6.1)
Both of the units on my property existed at the time of the adoption of this Chapter
and should be considered nonconforming structures.
9273 (c) A nonconforming building, destroyed to the extent of more than fifty (50)
percent of its reasonable value at the time of its destruction by fire, explosion or other
casualty of act of God, may be restored or used only in compliance with the regulations
existing in the district wherein it is located. (Ord. No. 310, Sec 2)
In Amy's report she talks about nonconforming structures and states that "Provisions for
reconstruction of nonconforming buildings do not apply to structures or additions which
have been constructed without the benefit of permits." Where in the code does it say
this? There is a difference between legal nonconforming and nonconforming structures
and the city of Tustin has adopted nonconforming structures and uses according to
ordinance 157, Sec. 6. 1, which I have read above.
HISTORY OF THE HOUSE
A few good things that have come about with this whole situation is that I have met a lot
of nice people in the neighborhood and community and I have found out a lot about the
history of Tustin and the history of my home. On several occasions I have had the
pleasure to speak with John Gaylord and Robert Gaylord who are the sons of George
Gaylord, the original owner of the property and the man who built the structures. I
appreciate the effort that went into the historical assessment of my home done by
Thirtieth Street Architects. There are some points that he got right but some
discrepancies. Attached is a letter written by Robert Gaylord, one of the sons who
actually grew up in the house and would know the history better than anyone of us.
October 25, 2010
To whom it may concern,
My name is Robert Stephen Gaylord, one of three sons of George and Alice Gaylord. I
grew up at 480 South Pacific Ave. (now 520 Pacific St.) in Tustin, CA. My father built
our house, the garage, and the apartment above the garage all in the time and with the
processes it takes for a single individual to do all that.
The best that I can recall is the unit above the garage was built roughly between 1938 and
1942. The fust tenant was my uncle who was stationed at an anti-aircraft defense base in
EI Segundo. We visited him several times at his Army air defense battalion and saw the
search lights and anti-aircraft guns. Dad finished the apartment for him and his new wife
to stay near us while he was serving in Southern California_
Later, the apartment was rented to Marines stationed at El Toro Marine Base.
I recall the stairs to the entrance as a child. In my memory they were always there on the
side of the garage where my parents would catch rainwater. We were not allowed to go
up those stairs.
The unit behind the garage was built by my father roughly between 1945 and 1950. ]
judge this based on the fact I was born in 1933 and when my brother John and I were
young teenagers my father built the two rooms and bathroom for us to occupy.
After we moved away from our old home, the rooms were made available to others. The
only person I remember was, (I believe the spelling is) Ms. Grennan, who helped take
care of my parents to the very end. In fact, she called me about health problems my father
was having when we moved him out and sold the house.
My father worked at the grammar school as a woodshop, boys' athletics and natural
science teacher. He was an Eagle Scout, a Scout Master and a Deacon with the
Presbyterian Church in Tustin. He was often involved in construction work in and
around Tustin_ He was in every way a faithful law-abiding citizen.
Sincerely,
Robert S. Gaylord
(See attached letter) I would also like to point out that city records show that George
Gaylord, the man who built the structures, was the city building inspector for Tustin
between 1956 and 1958.
s
Also attached are numerous documents that prove the units have existed for some time
and have been recognized by the county as multifamily dwelling units.
- A copy of the Historical survey of my home which discusses the two story garage.
-Tax assessment records dating back to 1952 which have two addresses and a map of the
main house and both rental units.
-There is also a copy of Luskeys Santa Ana & Central Orange County Criss Cross City
directory from August of 1952 with two addresses with the name of the person who is
living in one of the units.
-A property detail report from the County building department with a land use description
of multi -family dwelling with 3 units.
-A public service information form from when we purchased the property showing multi
family residential dated May 5, 2000.
-A letter from the Orange County Sanitation District charging multi -unit residential rates.
- A permit from the city of Tustin for a second electrical meter for the units in the back.
- A permit from the city of Tustin allowing a new roof on the back units as well as other
permits for my property.
HISTORICAL WELDING CODE
The following is a copy of the purpose of the California Historical Building Code which
the city of Tustin adopted in 2007.
Section 8-101.2 Purpose. The purpose of the CHBC is to provide regulations for the
preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, relocation or reconstruction of buildings or
properties designated as qualified historical buildings or properties.
Chanter 8-2 of the CHBC defines Qualified Historical Building or Property. As defined
in the Health and Safety Code Section 18955. Any building, site, object, place, location,
district or collection of structures, and their associated sites, deemed of importance to the
history, architecture or culture of an area by an appropriate local, state or federal
governmental jurisdiction. This shall include historical buildings or properties on, or
determined eligible for, national, state or local historical registers or inventories, such as
the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical resources, State
Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county registers,
inventories or surveys of historical or architecturally significant sites, places or
landmarks.
My property is listed in the city of Tustin Historical Resources Survey which satisfies the
requirement of CNBC Chapter 8-2 as a qualified historical property. Attached is a copy
of the historical survey of my home. In the description in talks about the two story
garage and shows a picture of it. According to the CHBC and the Cultural Resource
Overlay District my home and property are historic. We should want to keep these
structures because they have a great history behind them, it adds to the culture of old
town, and there is no distinct danger to anybody.
6
Section 8-102.1 Application. The CHBC is applicable to all issues regarding code
compliance for qualified historical buildings or properties. aaragraph 1. The state or
local enforcing agency shall apply the provisions of the CHBC in permitting repairs,
alterations, and additions necessary for the preservation, restoration, reconstructions,
rehabilitation, relocation or continued use of qualified historical building or property
when so elected by the private property owner.
I have asked the city on numerous occasions why are we not going by these codes. This
again demonstrates that the code has not been accurately applied to my property.
CNBC Section 8-303 Residential Occupancies
8-303.1 Purpose The purpose of this section is to provide regulations for those buildings
designated as qualified historical buildings or properties and classified as occupancies.
The CHBC requires enforcing agencies to accept any reasonable equivalent to the regular
code when dealing with qualified historical building and properties.
8-303.2 Intent The intent of the CHBC is to preserve the integrity of qualified historical
buildings and properties while maintaining a reasonable degree of protection of life,
health and safety for the occupants.
The units have been there for decades and they have been rented for decades. The last
thing I want is for somebody to get hurt or be in danger living in the units.
According to the CHBC Section 8-201 the definition of a Distinct Hazard is: Any clear
and evident condition that exists as an immediate danger to the safety of the occupants
or public right of way. Conditions that do not meet the requirements of current regular
codes and ordinances do not. of themselves, constitute a distinct hazard.
Again the purpose of this code (CNBC) and the Cultural Overlay is to preserve old
structures and make sure they are safe and I have done both.
SITUATIONS SEMH AR TO MINE
Lastly, I do feel like I am being treated differently because there are other properties just
like mine, and the city has responded differently. Precedence has already been set. For
example: There is a property on B street that is a duplex with another unit above the
garage with stairs and entrance just like mine (see attached photo). This property is
zoned RI and has no permits from when it was built. There are a few permits given in
the 60's -80's but no original building permits and no conditional use permit. In 2006 the
city thoroughly inspected the property in response to an application made for the Mills
act. In the city's report they stated the importance and historical significance of the
property and did not mention anything about current zoning or building violations and the
structures remain.
There are numerous other examples where the city has given permits to existing
structures that have no original building permits. There are examples of people in old
town who wanted to tear down unpermitted structures and were stopped by the city
because they were historic.
The last example is more directly related to my original problem. All I needed was a
letter from the city. On 6t' street there is a SFR with a duplex behind the house. Very
similar to mine. Attached is a letter the owner received in 1998 regarding his property.
It reads: The subject property is currently zoned Single Family Residential (R-1), which
permits single family residences. Second single family dwellings may be considered in
the R-1 District on properties with more than 12,000 square feet of lot area, compliance
with several other development standards, and the approval of a Conditional Use Permit
(TCC Sec. 9233(B)(1). Our records indicate that the main residence was constructed in
1929. We also have on file various building permits for the duplex on the rear of the
property, dating back to 1964. However, there is no record of an approved Conditional
Use Permit for the use. As such, the duplex is considered to be a nonconforming use.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9273(C), nonconforming buildings destroyed to the
extent of more than 50 percent of its value by a catastrophic event may be restored or
used only in compliance with the regulations existing in the district wherein it is located.
For my property, I have a permit for a second electrical meter that the city inspected and
permitted that goes directly to the back units. I also have a permit for the roof on the rear
structure that the city inspected and permitted_ According to Section 9273 of TCC my
structures should be considered nonconforming use. I relied on the city when issuing the
permits and would not have purchased the property or spent money on the roof if not
allowed.
To summarize:
• Code Al05.1— An owner who intends to construct. I don't have any intentions of
building.
• Codes 9223 (b)(2) and 9223 (b)(2)(d) were written in 1961. The structures
existed prior to this ordinance.
• The property is historic and we should want to preserve the history.
• The structures should be nonconforming.
I want to thank the commission for your time and consideration. I am not trying to get
away with anything or build anything without permits. All I am asking for is the city to
do what they have done with other properties similar to mine, to follow code 9273, and to
recognize the structures as nonconforming.
I am asking the planning commission for help and to see that the code violations have not
been accurately applied to my property and to simply recognize the structures as
nonconforming as the city has appropriately done in the past.
9
July 27, 2010
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
Justin Wilkom, Principal Planner
Dear Ms. Wilkom,
My name is Bret Fairbanks and I am the owner of the property located at 520 Pacific
Street, Tustin, CA 92780. We are currently selling our home and are in escrow. Our
property has a single family residence in front with 2 guest homes in the back.
According to the attached county records we have 2 addresses 520 and 520 ''/s, we have
and pay for 2 separate electric meters, and have various city permits for improvements
we have done on the home since we purchased it in 2000.
The buyer, lender is requiring a letter from the city stating in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster, the city would allow the guest houses to be rebuilt. Attached are
documents from the county tax assessors office showing the guest houses have been here
long before we purchased the property.
Thank you for your time and consideration. This letter is all we need to close escrow. If
there is anything I could do to help speed up this process please let me know.
Bret Fairbanks
C.P.(949) 933-6886
1 Community Development Department
J
TU S T I N
z
F
F
O
August 4, 2010
u
Brett Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780
HisTa0.Y
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
SUBJECT: ZONING CONFIRMATION FOR 520 PACIFIC STREET
Dear Mr. Fairbanks:
Thank you for your letter, received July 27, 2010, requesting zoning confirmation for the property
located at 520 Pacific Street. In your letter, you indicated that the property has a single family
residence in the front with two guest homes in the back. You have also included copies of tax
assessor information related to your property for the City's review. In the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster, you inquired if the City would allow the guest houses to be rebuilt.
The subject property is zoned as Single Family Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural
Resources Overlay (CR) District. Accessory buildings used as guest rooms are allowed as
conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 zoning district, provided that no cooking facilities are
installed or maintained. A guest house is defined in the Tustin City Code as detached living
quarters of a permanent type of construction and without kitchens or cooking facilities and where
no compensation in any form is received or paid.
No permits exist for guest houses at the subject property and no conditional use permit is on file to
establish guest houses at the subject property. In your letter you indicated that there are two
addresses at the subject property, 520 and 520 1/2 Pacific Street. The City has not assigned a Y2
address to the subject property.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9273(c), "A nonconforming building, destroyed to the extent
of more than fifty (50) percent of its reasonable value at the time of its destruction by fire, explosion
or other casualty or act of God, may be restored or used only in compliance with the regulations
existing in the district wherein it is located:' The provisions for reconstruction of a nonconforming
building does not apply to structures or additions which have been illegally constructed or
constructed without the benefit of permits.
Should you wish to establish guest houses at the subject property, approval of conditional use
permits and obtaining necessary building permits would be required. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 573-3123.
Sincerely,
Rya wiontek
Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Single Family Residential (R-1) standards
B. Cultural Resources District (CR) standards
C. Guest House Definition
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P: (714) 573-3100 • F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org
Community Development Department
Seat by first glass mail
August 13. 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
SUBJECT: 520 PACIFIC STREET APN # 401-371-07
Dear Mr. Fairbanks:
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Or. August 4, 2010, you were advised by City staff that no permits exist for your two guest
houses and that no conditional use permit exists to allow guest houses at 520 Pacific Street. A;
such. City staff hereby requests to inspect your property. Please contact me at (7114) 573-3 i 35
by no later than Tuesday August 24, 2010 tc schedule an onsite inspection of your property.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely, p�
Br d Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachment: Letter, dated August 4, 2010
Cc! Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P: (714) 573-3100 0 F: (714) 573-3113 9 www.tustinca.org
Community Development Department
Sent by first class mail
August 20, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
SUBJECT: 520 PACIFIC STREET APN # 401-371-07
Dear Mr. Fairbanks:
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for meeting with City staff yesterday afternoon to discuss your two guest houses.
During the meeting, you stated that you would start developing plans to submit to the City soon,
along with a completed conditional use permit (CUP) application to attempt to legalize both
guest houses. As such, the recent request to inspect your property will be put on hold.
However, you understand that an inspection of your property may be necessary during the
approval process and that if approved, both guest houses would not be permitted to be rented,
nor could they be provided with kitchen facilities. You also agreed to contact Amy Thomas
within ten days to provide a status on the submittal of your plans and CUP application.
Therefore, please contact Amy Thomas at (714) 573-3126 or athomasnc-tustinca.org on (or)
before Tuesday September 7, 2010 with an update on your pending submittal.
Once again, thank you for your continued cooperation.
Sincerely,
d i —
Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Cc: Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
Justina Willkom, Principal Planner
Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P:(714)573-3100 • F: (714) 573-3113 • www.tustinca.org
Community Development Department
Sent via first class and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address:
Assessor Parcel Number:
Case Number:
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
520 Pacific Street
401-371-07
V10-0312
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you foF meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to.the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore. please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29.
2010•
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P:(714)573-3100 9 F:(714)573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org
Notice and Order at
520 Pacific Street
September 15, 2010
Caae a V10.0312
Page 2
OR
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincerel ,
Br d Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A —Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
NoOwv OrdwM
520 Peaft SImM
SepNmi m 10. 2010
Caw N W 0-0312
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Comer lot line: 10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet.
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
Community Development Department
r*'41111 i ff.1
Administrative Citation Process
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUl1URE
HONORING OUR PAST
In accordance with Tustin City Cods (TCC) 1182(d), fines may be assessed by means of an
adminbtrative citation an follows: $100.00 for a first elation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation: Building
and Safety Cods (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $500.00 for a second vlolatlon of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The City. may also take further legal action including issuing
the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the violation(s) with the cost of such
abatement andlor prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property
owner(s), and/or the property as a lien.
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fine(s). Additionally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penatiles prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding flne(s), and contact the City to request a re-
inspection, or
2) Pay the corresponding flne(s) and requed an extension of time In writing pursuant to
TCC 1185(b), which shows a reasonable hardship; or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative Citation pursuant to TCC 1188 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrathre citation, together with an advanced deposit
of thi corresponding finals).
Request for Hearing fortes and other information on Administrative Citations may be obtained
on the City's website at www.tustinca.om.
September 22, 2010
Brad Steen, Code Enforcement officer
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
Letter of Appeal for: Notice and Order/ Pre -Citation Notice
Declaration of Public Nuisance
Address: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin, CA 92780
Assessor parcel number: 401-371-07
Case Number: V 10-0312
Dear W. Steen,
This letter is to appeal and request consideration on the recent notice I received regarding
unpermitted units. The code violation reads any owner or authorized agent who intends
to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a building
or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace any
electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by
this code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the
building official and obtain the required permit. I have no intentions of rebuilding or
reconstructing any portion of the said structures. I purchased the home over 10 years ago
and the structures already existed when I purchased the property. I have provided
evidence to show that the structures have existed for over 50 years. I understand the city
has no permits of the structures on my property but that is true for most homes built in
old town prior to 1950. Most if not all of the homes would be in violation and considered
a public nuisance.
With regards to the other violations regarding conditional use permits and lot lines, I am
not in violation of these codes because the structures existed prior to issuing of
conditional use permits and the first zoning ordinance of Tustin.
In response the letter, it is my intent to apply for a conditional use permit and progress
accordingly however I do not feel I have violated any code and am not in any way a
public nuisance.
Sincerely,
Bret Fairbanks
Community Development Department
October 13, 2010
Bret Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
SUBJECT: APPEAL HEARING FOR NOTICE AND ORDER AT 520 PACIFIC STREET
(APN 401-371-07)
Dear Mr. Fairbanks:
The City of Tustin has received your request for hearing to appeal the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at your property located at 520 Pacific Street.
In accordance with Tustin City Code Sections 9294 and 8101, the Planning Commission will act as
the appeal hearing body and act in its capacity as the Board of Appeals respectively to consider
the appeal. A public hearing has been scheduled on October 26, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California.
As the appellant contesting the Notice and Order, you will be provided the opportunity to testify
and present evidence concerning the Notice and Order at the public hearing. A written report
concerning the appeal for consideration at the hearing will be provided to you by mail prior to
the date of the hearing.
Should you have any questions regarding the appeal hearing, please contact me at (714) 573-
3126 or athomasatustinca.oro.
Sincerely,
Amy Thomas, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Y. Henry Huang, Building Official
File
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P: (714) 573-3100 • F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org
�G
CITY OF TUSTIN
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Appeal of Notice and Order at 520 Pacific Street, Tustin, California
Appellant Bret Fairbanks, current property owner of 520 Pacific Street
Project Address: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin (APN 401-371-07)
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission acting in its capacity
as the Board of Appeals (per Section 8101 of the TCC) of the City of Tustin, California, will conduct a
public hearing on October 26, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin,
California, to consider the following:
On September 16, 2010, and pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the City of Tustin recorded a
Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pacific Street providing written notice of the existence of a public
nuisance and requiring the correction of code violations related to illegal structures constructed in violation
of the Tustin Building Code and Zoning Codes. In part, Section 5502(b) states a public nuisance exists
when "any condition... exists upon any premises that is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health
as determined by an appropriate city official." The current property owner of 520 Pacific Street (APN
401-371-07) has filed an appeal of the Notice and Order filed on his property.
Pursuant to Section 112 of the City of Tustin's adopted California Building Code, the Planning
Commission will act in its capacity as Board of Appeals in considering evidence supporting the City's
determination that a dangerous condition exists at the subject property due to the present violation of
the following Building Code section:
1. California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) - Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move,
demolish, or change the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter,
repair, remove, convert or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first
make application to the building official and obtain the required permit.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294, the Planning Commission will also consider the evidence
supporting the City's determination that a dangerous condition exists at the subject property due the
present violation of the following Zoning Code sections:
2_ Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1) — Conditionally
Permitted Uses and Development Standards — Accessory buildings used as guest rooms,
provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit
3. Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1) — Minimum side
yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses — Corner lot line 10 feet; interior lot
line: 5 feet.
If you challenge the subject item in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
of Tustin at or prior to the public hearing.
If you require special accommodations, please contact the Planning Commission Recording Secretary at
(714) 573-3106.
Information relative to this item is on file in the Community Development Department and is available for
public inspection at City Hall. Anyone interested in the information above may call the Community
Development Department at (714) 573-3126.
Pamela Stoker
Tucfin Nawc rlctnhor 1d 9n1n
If you require special accommodations,
please contact Tustin City Hall, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin 92780 714-573-3000
_==5<<€ �
ADDRESS:
520 PACIFIC ST
DATE:
29
STYLE:
CALIFORNIA BUNGALOW
SOURCE: RATING:
T C
ALTERATIONS:
F
HISTORICAL DISTRICT:
YES
COMMENT:
DESCRIPTION:
CITY OF TUSTH4 HISTORICAL SURVEY
The single -storied house at 520 is topped with a front facing gabled roof and matching centered porch. A small louvered vent is
centered below the peak Shiplap siding, in a style made in the 40's and 50's, covers the gables, indicating that the roof is not
original. Narrow clapboard siding covers the fust floor exterior. Square posts, resting on tapered clapboard -clad piers, support
the roof. The concrete porch extends to each side, topped with pergolas. The front door features a mullioned border and is flanked
by large plate glass windows. Double -hung windows are used .throughout the rest of the house. A red brick chimney on the south
side is flanked by windows. A carport and a two-story clapboard -clad garage are located on the south side, behind the house. The
garage, which appears to be original, is topped with a gabled roof with a hip at the peak. The siding is narrow clapboard, which
seems to indicate that the house once was also all clapboard -sided with a hip at the peak of the front -facing gabled roof.
SIGNIFICANCE:
This California Bungalow was built on one of the lots along South Pacific Street which were subdivided by Harry Marple. He
was the son of Richard and Edna Matple, fruit growers, who owned an orchard on this property from 1903 until the property
passed to Harry in 1924. He dedicated a strip down the center, from Main to Sixth Streets, for the extension of Pacific Street.
He sold this lot to George Gaylord in 1929. The Gaylords received a completion notice on their home that same year. George was
a well -liked wood shop and physical education instructor at the Tustin Grammer School for several years. After he retired in the
1950's, he became a carpenter. The Gaylords were stall living in the house in 1965. This bungalow fits well into the streetscape
of the Tustin Historic District and contributes to the tree -lined street because it is of an appropriate size and scale.
.
I
INS
among
� ��YP��.�11
P•iR��♦Y
YvY1.: .1F'� �'. �e_6
PD h... 9 .. _
�..
(\ !
{:
Hung
s
ri
gyp{
Won
mong
VIS
, _ .
uman
IMIM
r a
w
�®lp
R
s
f
fall
.
�No
among
SIMNNW
rNNA
k'-.s.:r��C�.•.BfJ l ��_it 1k �:.-. .. .. � 'xY�u /•• .�7 1
it
y y1P v r MEN_
-� eSx
�� 3
�yJJ�••p�fCyN �yl�Y�{gam
yy
MEN
��yy��..��
:�kmgi,
y
amY$y.
y"2
L
§2
M
..
�jJ.,...t�y
OK YPO
fDRRERLYSO
ORMERL88
_
ORANGE COUNTY ASISESSOR _
MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL UNIT APPRAIML RICA-
vES ND
80
vo C ND
AOORE88
P'c� TRACT
A.P. NO. *$w37I-61
—
TB rI ND C
DWYRICT
LOT
810E OF'.'
In4inC1 AC
OWNER
BLOCK
PROJECT NO.
RLNNIT
LAND VALUE COYMflATRNr
LAND ON UKLT ATTRERM
DATE
nAR UNIT YNR YAWL V.LLUe
+ WIDTH
fes, at)
IMM.
+In Sn Lc
MNKIT
RCLIL0.
MINW W5G NGV1.D, _.w AC1M.0. NM
YIM147 YULTIN.YE NNIN.ATd1E
NI
T
6 RSTIIFMATATIve
N3 6. L A K UNIT MILT.
«
.
CONCiiIAWN R
II IMNDYLM
TFD p ND
SUMMARY
_
APPR AMM ORAOII
AA®I1EW rola
1. i T' 1,�
11 cul.De-Lw _
ree p Iq
'
mJ Ross ✓
—
J
MON11N DAY YLAR
7l
R
ID VIM
p '[3
PBtsDNAL NAolillTf YA{A NM"TOII
AGl.N.6 IG G 1.t, Il NpHT. FRONT .... ..
Y6t p MO IB
IANC YAwe _._
_/ 9 acx+ _ ! f�
m ASD". ATTMOT _
I p i p a p
4
MMIITIDN IIdICJTDA (i li VWT Cd�01111.
+p1 i p i p
C.LA.
_LYZV.1% _ _.
14 VTIUTm
I. I IR.
- _._ _.... M_
+ j' a C, i p
L A. A, K INOIGAIOR
._ _.
-
UNIT MUTT. IND"TM-.......
_._-. '_. -. �- _
le LOT VT_
I p F
INDIUTND sALSN MIDS
IT WAT N Fl GMIT
m NO
1.151110 MILL. IS DOCNIND. RIGHTS
TN CONING
MrAl. PROPERTY YAL
15
S LD,ININ TVMg51.
yn r, ND
tAYD_YNLN _
-RINbYd01T..
_ _
SI IAMD VY
RLIISDIIN, RROTgTY VALYL
II MYIACeO IM
_1
YD � MG f'1
b1.
- -
a ,"L UNIT_
` T • • , ,.•- - —
Rls"n
Ttl n No p
2_a. J' i.,
� LYG LLMYL TRYiIL
YLL r' No p-
---� - --
MAM vMKI
a TEft
C, iD i
'r
AAANINO
_
?�'BO G<yri7 tic
n MIMIC`
P.v! 0322 • jr �I ti'i ---- - --
Dwi _,WaX .
- -- --
s us cmL
LS(�MML{'S
«
F,•DMrad Ss:.a�wsi9C
.4 /£t
ae
OK YPO
fDRRERLYSO
ORMERL88
_
AY
yo AD TDs rMar NEEAEA-to 415.awTrNt43 9--/�/b - - ----
__-- .-
_._,.---._---- iT
_.. _.— NEiONR0a0600D ATTRINUTBE
— _.._ _ _. _ . _ _ _ y mN FAN Use YLL p W7
a1. MAT. RAIK Un _. -. TIES p ND
b DOYM, Vel
vES ND
M INDUST. uNN
vo C ND
_
« GLUSTSA TYTN
—
TB rI ND C
_..
« TRNND
In4inC1 AC
_
_
« aLAiNllllO
� p a p 3 C
IMM.
+In Sn Lc
RCLIL0.
MINW W5G NGV1.D, _.w AC1M.0. NM
YIM147 YULTIN.YE NNIN.ATd1E
NI
T
1s CAs MICEIIKKF!
N3 6. L A K UNIT MILT.
«
CONCiiIAWN R
T. P. 10,L61S
--
C
- 1.AL10
~`
APPR AMM ORAOII
MNR
w
O[ IINL
T011K MIL F.OAK VNR MIT. DIR^"^"
'
Do*. Tae:. Muw6wT
J
Ot
PBtsDNAL NAolillTf YA{A NM"TOII
V
ree M DANK ioiL NNS. "Al
4
-.
Oi M56NLe
AI ARNF - San
a am CaNer. mIxt.
L W. RIOTAI. UNITS
IN TWA
At
. ... . . . . . . F=IA
IN III. ANNA
To' pi.%vi %
IN, oIti-Aait,
IX MITI
r
NI Alo CRAFT
wil
'a Fp
T. 8
WRI, ftv,,o J.
LNIChTY� I
COMPUTAMNSI's
.cN;F., MIT I,
ql MO SartcaRrI;cmTj I,,T Ir mm"m ft.
--- 4 "A "R. ARG 7
IT
FT011
AMR Aw. F oft L
ia—_CaNiilltcL- �
�w. samm C T-
.0. IAMB.
TO
Ifl
Ams"
ra ow.
IN
IN
18 'm MIN. `IOKx I
— IST IooL an
In
P. 0. 0=1'
It"d
VIFf MO
In
r
Coy
uw modw ITAc—
'I-- T
AN
Ti
K,T ING L&V TW
rjow�w
_--
O.
19N
III
N
C L OATS
.
ALIONINAIN
mIi
A C DUCHIPMU
EXTU
COW
DOTAL
COOL
RIENIARNIS
IT11!9I
Nt
cm
I
01
DOMATIM TYIf.
Qmi
Will 4L
♦2
MAU
a
�I� t 9 3
4 w I
A--
a
IxIiINITinIni I a 3
AMwo
Attilli. j';d' - -
4. � 6
BAINC CGIrr DATA
�. .. Gow-
309COAANNOUG
STRUMMM
r
o<RIGL IMP. cart
I_— ITIRIA.,
a am CaNer. mIxt.
L W. RIOTAI. UNITS
IN TWA
At
. ... . . . . . . F=IA
IN III. ANNA
To' pi.%vi %
IN, oIti-Aait,
IX MITI
r
NI Alo CRAFT
wil
'a Fp
T. 8
WRI, ftv,,o J.
LNIChTY� I
COMPUTAMNSI's
.cN;F., MIT I,
ql MO SartcaRrI;cmTj I,,T Ir mm"m ft.
--- 4 "A "R. ARG 7
IT
FT011
AMR Aw. F oft L
ia—_CaNiilltcL- �
�w. samm C T-
.0. IAMB.
TO
Ifl
Ams"
ra ow.
IN
IN
18 'm MIN. `IOKx I
— IST IooL an
In
P. 0. 0=1'
VIFf MO
In
F OW.
APPR. DATT
IMEIIA
w mp ml�fm acHo--
74
ci
Ir
MATH DETAIL
wil Ri
MINE
vs
g�
77 TOM pawn
!) Fln rMT AREA
"ORD"
of i isoiF—rACTde
MI AREA
loo UiRm now ii
at
mmmw�=
to TWU
Ift GOV PAM
FF
APPR. DATT
IMEIIA
w mp ml�fm acHo--
74
ci
Ir
MATH DETAIL
wil Ri
vs
77 TOM pawn
!) Fln rMT AREA
"ORD"
of i isoiF—rACTde
MI AREA
loo UiRm now ii
at
to TWU
Ift GOV PAM
ul- atem
I f
RED. w RED wl
MISCOAMEOUS WMUCTURES
70 W, —�cooFt
83 ttO.00�lli ll��
JL
CT
IiNO
T' r
UNF-
11
CON. EXT
Ii
I i I FL Iw 3,
L
&A AMOUNT
is Birt[ DERR
Y" now
i --cm
57 ��un
CM FACTORS
APPR. DATT
IMEIIA
P. c
w mp ml�fm acHo--
FL N —An
—FACTOII
wil Ri
vs
!) Fln rMT AREA
of i isoiF—rACTde
MI AREA
loo UiRm now ii
at
to TWU
Ift GOV PAM
vi Ac Car
70 W, —�cooFt
7mo lim—FLAn mi
it] CAR A"
11
T3 Ow
&A AMOUNT
is Birt[ DERR
P. c
Laserficbe WebLink
Page I of I
LaserflchW WebLink
A Ma IMNNANN.
H* Lm Pt Mrvj"m
Browse Search
PW 14 ail Lad
a SW MOM
SIN Me a 0—
Of pegeo 14-- ft 17
lrn"W AGENDA PACID:B
N Nwcm.m*C �pw,.JC P.C. AlM.
MLENUMOM
MEEIIW DAIS
02 R A.Almomp tlwr. Yww.LM SAMA MA lrHHMff JOINING MOMNY
ms CROSS
OUA�
Y.
Yip
"Win— L�
wm� �Ow$w
2OWMI
L,
60A Ar L .......
�w
149"
R� NAME
DM l
HWr MG NOMINATION SM
PACIFIC ST
2077:::}W=irYYMl..1lT
OL.......19
1
A Ma IMNNANN.
6AY7w20101
a SW MOM
F"If ......ap�
Flow, .:e.....
ON ll��
RURAL gnU= ADDRESS DIRECTORY
MFMrIYyNrt,2."
lrmrl=ONION" & WIMP-.& wm�w 4 ML—
..Ymm� .......
.... I " & 24M
SEWPNNN-p 10
ReWs am i P..� W�
Fm a . , . 91 m !!.�A Aq fi�wfira
"C'm �Jeem
L Mi.— 7C.. ..Nzmm w4r.W,
lrtiFM
z"u tffIwN
Mmm
iff 9 d me
iW PE �w
eFe, ?n= -
....... le� !�Jvslm
dWwc`w-------NJZ �J4
LEI
NJ ...... a . p
INS. MAE T
OFF fill:11L
J, NOW drA=....-� � SHO
........ W� I amme,'NOZ
oft 9 M3 A"aA AV Z="V=) WjX
r ww
m =0 we um+N`a Or .....
,d
�
Property Detail Report
Property Detail Report for:
520 PACIFIC ST, TUSTIN CA, 92780.4329
Owner Information:
Page 1 of 1
JI DIGITAL MAP Bc,.V.P.
4 ..
Owner Name:
FAIRBANKS,BRET S
Mailing Address:
520 PACIFIC ST, TUSTIN, CA, 92780- 4329
Vesting Code:
Phone Number:
Location Information:
Legal Description:
STAFFORD & TUSTIN TR LOT V S 50 FT OF N 460 FT OF THE W 200 FT
County:
ORANGE FIPS Code:
06059
Census Trct/Blk:
0755053/3
APN:
40137107 Alternative APN:
40137107
Map Ref:
A4.830
Twnshp-Rnge-Sect:
-- Legal Book/Page:
401-371
Tract No:
Legal Lot:
V Legal Block:
Subdivison:
STAFFORD & TUSTIN TR
Last Market Sale Information:
Sale Date:
01/03/2005 Sale Price:
1st Mtg Amount:
$341,900
Sale Doc No:
0000002609 Price Per SgFt:
1st Mtg Int Type:
Transfer Doc No:
0000161105 Price Per Acre:
2nd Mtg Amount
$56,800
Multi/Split Sale:
1 sl Mtg Doc No:
337621
2nd Mtg Int Type:
Sale Type:
FULL CONSIDERATION
Deed Type:
Tide Company:
FIRST SOUTHWESTERN TITLE
Lender:
WASHINGTON MUTUAL FSB
Seller Name:
LOUIS METRO INTER R E PROPERTI
Property Characteristics:
Building Area:
1,749 Total Rooms:
Construction:
Living Area:
1,749 Bedrooms
Heat Type:
Garage Area:
Baths:
Air Cord:
Basement Area:
Fireplace:
Roof Type:
Parking Type:
No of Stories:
Roof Material:
Yr Built/Effective:
1928/ Quality:
Style:
Pool Code:
Tax and Value Information:
Assessed Value:
$453,539 Assessed Year.
2009
Est Market Val:
$556,033
Land Value:
$274,512 Property Tax:
$5,046
Assessor Appd Val:
Improvement Value:
$179,027 Improvement %:
39.47
Total Taxable Value:
$446,539 Tax Exemption:
HOMEOWNER
Site Information:
Assessor Acres:
0.2296 Zoning:
Land Use:
133
Assessor Lot SgFt
10,000 No of Buildings:
Land Use Desc:
MULTI FAMILY
DWELLING
Assessor Lot W/D:
/ Res/Comm Units:
3
County Use Code:
Calculated Acres:
0.2296 Sewer Type:
Calculated Lot SgFt:
Water Type:
Not in Seismic Liquefaction Hazard
Not in Seismic Landslide Hazard
Not in Fault Zone Hazard
In One Mile Industrial Commercial Zone
Not in 100yr. FEMA Flood Zone
In Dam Inundation Hazard
Not in Wildland Fire Hazard
Not in Severe Fire Hazard
http://maps.digitahnapcentral.com/production/CityGIS/vO7_O2_003/index.htm] 8/10/2010
.a'
Design Type Codes
001 - Single Family Residence
002.Aulti Family
999 - Misc. Improvements
Requested By
Address 3;10 W eF"/
Phone (
Signature
PUBLIC SERVICE INFORMATION FORM
MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
1
APN
2
BLDG#
3
CONST
YEAR
4
USE
CODE
5
DESIGN
TTYYPEE
6
INISHE
BSMT
SIZE
1 7
BLDG
IZE-1S
2ND Fj
8
BLDG
SIZE
3RD FL
9
BLDG
SIZE
4TH FL
10
BLDG
SIZE
5TH/UP
11
UNIT MIX
12 13
GARAGE/
CRPRT POOL
SIZE YIN
G
14
LAND
SIZE
U Dod
d
o
m
F
m
ZLV.
z
2
= =
t,
m
C
C
r
0
0
A
9 QUATTROPRO
Check Amount $
Cash Amount $
Mailed Date By
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
We protect public health and the environment by providing effective wastewater collection, treatment, and recycling.
June 30, 2010
FAIRBANKS, BRET S
520 PACIFIC ST
TUSTIN,CA 92780-4329
11 U II T I t L7 Y'r11 �'�{' i
Biu Y
To the Owner of Record of Parcel Number: 40137107
Situs Address: 520 SOUTH PACIFIC STREET TUSTIN
During the past year, the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) has conducted
a review of a portion of parcels in its service area. Prior to the review, the OCSD
data represented the parcel as non-residential. You are receiving this notice
because a parcel review was performed and it was determined that there
should be a correction to the OCSD's data. An adjustment in either the
property use code and/or number of residential units will result in a change in
the annual sewer service fee effective Fiscal Year 2010-11.
Your property is provided sewerage services by OCSD. OCSD is part of a large
regional sewerage system serving 23 cities and unincorporated areas within Orange
County. Wastewater is collected first by your local sewering agency, such as your
city, and then transported by OCSD's large trunk sewers to one of two regional
treatment plants. These facilities treat and dispose of nearly 230 million gallons of
wastewater each day. The cost of the regional sewerage system of residential
properties is assessed based upon the number of dwelling units.
The sewer user fee is for the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater.
Although the OCSD's sewer user fee is not a tax, it is collected as a separate line
item on the property tax bill. Using the services of the County Tax Collector -
Treasurer significantly reduces the OCSD's administrative and collection costs. The
sewer fee charge rate for fiscal year 2010-11 for a single family residence is $20.33
per month ($244 per year). The multi -unit residential rate is $14.23 per month
($170.80 per year) per dwelling unit.
If you have questions regarding this information or would like specific information
.regarding your parcel, please call the OCSD "Rate Line" at (714) 593-7281 between
7:30 am and 4:00 pm Monday through Friday. Inquiries may also be made by email
at rates(a)ocsd.com, or writing to the OCSD Financial Management Division, 10844
Ellis Ave, Fountain Valley, CA 92708. Please include your name, telephone
number, and Parcel Number with any correspondence to help us promptly respond.
10844 Ellis Avenue . Fountain Vallev. CA 92708-701 R . 17141 9F2-2411 . www aced arm
SEWER CONNECTION APPLICATION AND PERMIT
[AREA DEVELOPMENT—SINGLE OWNERSHIP)
CITY OF TUSTIN
r 135 W. Third St.
•f.,i� Tustin, California 6 r
ej /
APPLICATION
To be completed by owner or agent and submitted in quin-
tupli-eaatte with required fees and plans - see reverse tide
Applicant,Or'D-------'----- hereby requests the
following connection(s) to City's sewerage facilities:
Location Lot Nos. Size Type
(See reverse side for instructions)
To ---
2.
o 2. - - -- .._-- - - --- -
'-'--.-. -- _-.---. -_. '- .---- To._. — —
3. -- - -- - ---
To -
Tract No- _ Total lots. - _ - --Estimated date of occupancy -----
If commercial or industrial property, total acreage served --.---•
The waste to be discharged to City's sewerage facilities, if other then purely domestic sewage will have the
fcilcwinq general characteristics as to estimated quantities, time of peak dischargeand principal source or sources:
In making this application, applicant acknowledges thai any permit issued will constitute a contract, if accepted by
oppfcant, nodnay a enforced by civil action at law and/or injunction.
Date: G^ //U -7/.
SIGNATURE
PERMIT
For Connection to City Sewerage Fau rues
and for Discharge of Domestic Sewage Only y
Permislon to c,,,0ruct connections) to the sewerage facilities of the City Is hereby granted to applicant providing
•u,ch connectanis) is mace in accordance with plans and specifications hereby approved. and attached hereto:
furl her pro+id;ng that request for inspection must be given to the Tustin City Hell (5444820) of least 24 hours prior
to the commencinq of any construction work..
This permit also gives the applicant permission to discharge only purely domestic sewage through the con-
"cicn(s) herainabove authorized into the sewerage system of the City. The discharge of any industrial or commer•
,;,I wnstc is not authorized without a further and separate permit from the City.
Racmpt of raquired foes and charges ns specified by Orange County Sanitation District No. 7, Ordinance No. 705,'=
is hereby ecknywledggod. •.�i•'
/� /
Date:.. CITY OF STIN P.
Amount Paid f `-iVf2 --- � - '- Y- j6'�'-^�r
.e`n0
t_
APPLICATION FOR PLUMBING PERMIT
APP#ANT' PLEASE FILL IN SHADED A& ONLY --
USI I':ilf LIBLE PENCIL, BALL POINT PEN i OTHER
NON_ERASAI}LESUBSTANCE
1
CITY OF
AFFLICANT !LIN SLATED AREA •+!I• r' I,:. I¢lr rr A
ONLY —FILL INCOMPLETELY T '? / . • U Z '+ J
uu u,u lNl,
•1UU%+I :. �'y+ ,_/(/ p y r PERMIT FEES
/„rY :Lll ^T p�� — • _. .- —_—. NC TYPF, r)F (IM IURE ff1117(41 (FE$
WA TL R CLfaETr TOILE I I C•
.1 _O9 E'•L !!4TH T!%b —.
iT"� Tim✓
L44 vrn)
6.L :HUif OI $FO:r'/.,
�j7 ,.q�'� f I%NonY Tn v r +U O wn n Mcnl _--I�^.•
III .•.R
6-34/�i OISHWAFHEn '- --- —
rre ... ”'^r •I. ...n..., ....r, .Lnn lh rl ❑F PbI(1E SINE.
..I •. a ...,, ELOUH LINK
n
--
mC it ,:•r. --1 In r .. �pOH L`HA LV
9
IJRr�:KNI(i cU •„ _
U�IT� ,INS!
� III �
4
��
..
SWIMMING POOL
_—.
—
.r
WATER-pAreR
WATER SOFTENERS
—�
—
LAWNSPRINKLERS RES.O
COMM.r
TRAILER HOOK UPS
—_--
.AS SYS SEM
�pV
NO. OF OUTLFTS
NdT ❑
'.I wlu
+�.`•
` HOUSE SEWER IVALUATIONI
I INAI
_
PERMIT ISSUING FEE
ulll llr f.0 N.•In 111.
._—
—.._ Ilio:' I�"P
�(i'.--_—..._._..�._
TOTAL
FEE S
PFHMI I VALiU%rtlVh+
t;9nn.0
WHEN PROPERLY VALIOATfU I
CASH
HISSPACEI THIS IS YOUR PERMIT.
9
CITY OF TUSTIN
Community Development Department— Building Division
300 Centennial Wg Tustin CA 92780
B
VOW Building Counter (714) 573-3131 -Inspection Recorder (714) 573-3141
BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER:1101-0499 ADDRESS: 520 PACIFIC ST TUST SUITE
ASSESSOR'$ PARCEL NUMBER:. r 40t=371-07 SUITE NUMBER..:
LOT NUMB •••..;_...::
. TRACT NUMBER.:
DEVELOPMENT ...........::Y
AREA ..
TUSTIN ISSUED BY .............:
.....,
" •, , .: - DATE ISSUED.......:
PROPERTY OWNER ....... ._...-,
....... : LOUIS METRO [NM R E PROP ERT
PLUMBING PERMIT.
10➢1WINDSOR LN
0
TUSTIN CA92780-4329
CONTRA CTOlt ARCHITECT
AA ALL AMERICAN ROOFING
1824 E. CARNEGIE AVE.
SANTA ANA, CA92705
(949) 250-1221
JOB DESCRIPTION:
TIO RF, REP W/ 25 YR OAF, 300 FELT, 3.50 -REAR
FFF_ SUMMARY
BUILDING PERMIT.
.
O.C.F.A. Nwoher........ :
MECH PERMIT:
$0,00
PLUMBING PERMIT.
OCCUPANT LOAD:
0
OCCUPANCY GROUP:
R3
CONSTRUCTION TYPE.:
GRADING PERMIT:
RESIDENTIAL SQ.FT:
0
COMMERCIAL SQ FT:
0
INDUSTRIAL SQ FT:
0
GARAGE SQ FT:
0
OFFICE SQ FT:
0
WAREHOUSE SQ FT:
0
ROOF SQ FT:
0
TENANT @MPR. SQ FT:
0
OTHER SQ. FT:
0
NUMBER OF UNITS:
l
NUMBER OF STORIES:
0
UBC EDITION: 1997
TOTAL FEES: $0.00
NUMBER OF SEATS:
.0
VALUATION...:
$0.00
BUILDER VALUATION:
50.00
PLAN CHECK
$0.00
FFF_ SUMMARY
BUILDING PERMIT.
$0.00
-
MECH PERMIT:
$0,00
PLUMBING PERMIT.
$0.00
ELEC PERMIT;
50.00
SIGN PERMIT:
$0.00
GRADING PERMIT:
$0.00
PRIVATE Deli
$0.00
NEW DEV. TAX:
$0.00
TSO? ZONE A FEE;
$0.00
TSIP ZONE B FEE:
$0.00
SMTP FEE:
$0.00
MICROFILM FEE:
$0.00
OCFA FEE:
$0.00
PENALTY FEE.:
$0.00
REFUNDABLE BOND:
$0.00
MISCELLANEOUS:
$0.00
TOTAL FEES: $0.00
MCENSED CONTRACTOR DECLARATION:
I hereby M. drat 1. • licensed Contractor ander the pmvb9ms ofekapkr9 (comments with Section 7000).1 Dividice 3 ofthe Busivesa k Prefesiom Cde, and my liana is
t oto formed eDea.
LICENSE NUMBER: 071912 LICENSE CLASS; C39 RIC
Expiva DATE:USf3112M
OWNER BUILDER DECLARATION:
I Iwmby affirm that lam exempt from the Conuacmr. Li. Less for the following rerun (Section 7MI.5, Business Pmfesaiuns Code: Any City Or county which re7uba a Perrot
W maeueL.ter, improve, demolish, mregir any druu7m, prior m its iaeuameq.ko requires the applicant fersuch petmil m file a signed Mtonsnl that to Orden if booed
pursuant W the pmvisima ofthe Cmmacmh Licanae law IChapa 9 with Section 7000) ofDivisim 3 ofthe Bnsima 6 Pmfessima edel or that heerr she n crimp
denebnm.nd the bub for the alleged cdempdoo. Any violation of Smtim 70313 by any applimnt for a pemit subjects the applicant m a civil Penalty ofnot snort Dun five hudred
&It.($500.00).
I of owum of the face", orrny employees with wages as their ante coropernaden, will do the wort and she uucmre is tot inkndd or offered for sak (Section 7044,
Busimts R Pmkatiom Code: the Conoactmh Liume Law does tot apply to an owoer ofPropeny who bills Orintpersea theme, and who dna such work himselfor hmelfm
through his mea own ®pl,ocs, provided thatouch impovemonu are tot intended or offered for sok. If, howasr, Rha building or impeovermm is sold wilhin one Year of
cornpleden, the owner-buihlor will have the burden arneviog that he or she did no, build Orin ion. for purpose f.l.).
1, as owns ofthe ProPa Y. are aselesiyely mntncttg wish licensed conu.cmra In construct the preden(Suction 7W. Business 1 Prefeniom Cede: The Contractors Licaua
Law doe not apply to an own. fpo pony who beildc or improves mencon, ed who cunlncb for such pej" wish • ombac n(s) he. p.I w the Conuacmrr. License
Law).
_ I un cnenst under Secdon. Bunsen 3 Professions Code for the following raun(s):
I booby alfnm mrdm Penalty ofpepmy osa ofth. folkwbrg decluuions:
I leve W will snsinsain a cerdficak of consent he ulf-imum for Wersces Compensation, es p svided for by Section 3700 ofthe Labor Cods. for the perfmmma ofthe wt
forte which one person 9f teed.
I have and will mattaio Wodtera Coospeouttsa ia., u required by Section 37M ofshc Labor Curio, for the perfunrmas ofthe work fee which We permit is issued.
My Woftr's CompvraadOn imumcc carrier ad Policy Nombre es;
POLICY NUMBER: 24MM7 COMPANY: WARHINOMN INT_ INC
(This union need not be complaint Ifshe pconit is fee One, hundred doll ) or Icer),
I cents, that in the pmfonvaoce of she work for whi tis iarsed,lairan mtmryloy any pnuntanY mannans amlecermaubjentoOre Warkrls
Compenmion tw ofCdifomiasadlape. haat' uIt became subject mshe Worked CompenWiw Provision,ofSNM. 3700 oftha Labor Cada l dill fmmwlm comply
ci rboae pmdhkns.�. !
W the cat ofeompensadan, danagn as
ofthe Labor Code, IntmW and seem" fees.
up b om hundred thousand dolWa
ApplkWmitboobynudemrhe Bundln$Olfudforapmnitmbjmmtheeondiomaandremrktionssetfreshmshisy li ion.Parb Anonuponwhoabemuthieepp&.new
i3madedadaces,neonat whoreugme cadfats'whoa ndceowork11performedcedehtpmmsaalamy Ch2 k oftha00011n AdeappGwdoo apron agree
shag,tupy Or
and heel harrrtkaa the City ofTustiq iN olfuzn, agau vd sogdoym in accordance with the pmvWero of Chrpud2 ofthe Uniform AMoinktrative Code. I agree oil m occupy m
Blow mcupamy ofmy btldiog aushorjmd by [hie pennn uNil flet iospmdon bat bee rocalvd. f eertlry that I lave red oticVoI.Cade and seam dor the above tfomadm is
terror. I agra m comply wish Jl Ciry W State kwerettins onthe buildiag000ntnedm• ed hereby acd o ice a uftha City m enkr upon the.hove mentioned pruyorry
for impedes pumora.
7_ 4 /
OF ISSUANCE OR IF WORK IS SUSPENDED FOR 10 DAYS...
CITY OF TUSTIN
Community Development Department- Building Division
300 Centennial Wry, Tustin CA 92750
Building Coumor (714) 573-3131- Inspection Recorder (714) 573-3141
BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER.BD14)W ADDRESS: 520 PACIFIC ST TUST SUITE
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: 401-371-07
LOT NUMBER........................... _..:
DEVELOPMENT AREA ................: TUSTIN
PROPERTY OWNER ......... BRETTFAMBANKS
520 S PACIFIC STREET
TUSTIN CA92790-4329
CONTRACTOR
A -I ALL AMERICAN ROOFING
1524 E. CARNEGIE AVE.
SANTA ANA, CA92705
(949)250.1221
SUITE NUMBER...:
TRACT NUMBER:
ISSUED BY .............:
DATE ISSUED.......: 10/30/2001
JOB DESCRIPTION:
TIO RF, REP W/ 25 YR OAF, 30th FELT, 3.5M - MAIN
BUILDING PERMIT:
$175.00
O.C.F.A. Number.........:
MECH PERMIT:
OCCUPANT LOAD:
0
OCCUPANCY GROUP;
R3.-
CONSTRUCTION TYPE.: 5N
RESIDENTIAL SQ.FT;
0
COMMERCIAL SQ FT:
0
RMUSTRIAL SQ FT: 0
GARAGE SQ FT:
0
OFFICE SQ FT.
0
WAREHOUSE SQ FT: 0
ROOF SQ FT:
2900
TENANT IMPEL SQ FT:
0
OTHER SQ. FT: 0
NUMBER OF UNITS:
I
NUMBER OF STORIES:
0
TIBC EDITION: 1997
NUMBER OF SEATS:
0
VALUATION...: $7,250.00
BUILDER VALUATION: 56,000.00
PLAN CHECK
$0.00
BUILDING PERMIT:
$175.00
MECH PERMIT:
50.00
PLUMBING PERMIT:
$0.00
ELEC PERMIT:
$0.00
SIGN PERMIT:
$0.00
GRADING PERMIT:
50.00
PRIVATE DMIL-
$0.00
NEW DEV. TAX:
$0.00
TSIP ZONE A FEE:
$0.00
TSIP ZONE B FEE:
$0.00
SMIF FEE:
$0.50
MICROFILM FEE:
$0.00
OCFA FEE:
$0.00
PENALTY FEE.:
$0.00
REFUNDABLE BOND:
50.00
MISCELLANEOUS:
$0.00
TOTAL FEES: $17530
LICENSED CONTRACTOR DECLARATION:
I herby aI I. use l w • li¢tncd Comraoar aderthe provides ofchpWil (aessaromg wish Section 7000) of Division 3 oftha Budnm & Pmfeama Coda, red my license is
in fill (cope aM erect
LICENSENUMBER: 621922 LICENSE CLASS: CM BIC
Expim DATEAMInG113
OWNER BUILDER DECLARATION:
1 h=bY lmrrn that 1 w onaopt finm dre Contrame. Li. law for Ne following reran (Secdan 7031.5, Smora. Profession. Code: Any City or caaaty which rcquim. permit
to construct, lltcr, improve, dcxnolirh, arpdr my emctme, poor to its Ire:tsr.s, da maim me apelicard for ..h pandl W file •.igoed mtarcW dart ha or she is li..d
punumt to the psevisiwu ofthe Controm/! Urena law (Chapter 9 (commmeing with Section 7000) of Division 3 ofthe Bases & Kofi aiom tide) orlon bear eh is rxcvgm
theRfmm and the basis for thealleged ermpdon. Any violation of Scetion 7031.5 by my applicant for. pmnit.ubjp the.ppsicant no civil)malty ofnot mor than five mrndrW
dollars ($50D.001
1 as owns ofthe property, or my employed with wsga as their sole eompmatim will do the work and the stmerorc is rot intmdcd oroRael frr ab (Section 7044,
Bolirwa & Pmkesoa Code: We Co raornar Daae Law doe not apply to m owns of property wau builds or bnpovd Iheron, and who door such work himselfor bmelf or
1arough Ns or ba own onskrycu, provided not such impmvevrmts are not inmded or oBmd for ale. If, howsva, the building or armmvwwwm is sold wilMn ons you of
wmplotion, the owns -build. will have the border ofproAng thd N m.k did rot build or improve for purpose ofala)
_ 1, a owner of ma prp.ty, un exeboively contracting with Scarred contracmn m construct the pmjee (Section 7044, Busirs.& Profession. Cada: The Contractors Liana
Law doss not apply to an ow ser of property who Wiats or improves tNru., and who contracts for such Pr*m with. cantracta(s) iicena Pu..[ m the Contractors Litten
Law).
_ I mf cxcano u.der Section . Beirea & Profession Code for tN fallowing msoo(s):
Owner Sigroaae; Dae:
WORKERS' COMPENSATION DECLARATION:
1 hersby affirm a ndapadtyofpedury oro ofthe mllowing dalaralorts:
I have. d will —imm. anlfiwm ofcrosmt retial/ --insure fm WasF.h Companammn, a pr Tided for by Section 37M of the Labor Code, for du perforwoa ofOm work
mr which this Period is ieued.
I Noe and will maintain Wolds Compensationmte, a r
Compensation inmate,
by Section 3700 of the labor Cade, fol 0R pedm
or.nce o din work fa Ods which paed.
past is iav
My Waters Covgxns.tion tmunnce adri. and Polity Numbar are:
POLICY NUMBER: weMS59437 COMPANY: o
(mi. session reed net be cunglo4tl iffle Poona is lorr. 2611sas
(1
100)alw}
I ani% that in Sm P.formma ofthc weak ich Du pnmauimlad, !shallop employ anypesen in any nwmmrmumboara sebja[mthe Workds
Campensetion 4ws of CalifomiA ands .grew Ishodd serene abject to the WaYds Compnaeon previsions of5ec0on 37M ofthe Labor Coda, l sM1Jl forthwith comply
with Oma nrav'itioa, h � — i
WARNING: Pdlur� Warkds Companwtion fovangv it udawfW,a:d dWl abJ.l mempmyerrocdminsl pnWtie epd doss fvun upmore huvddN Novato tlolw.
(p100,dditionm asst ofcompenestion, dawgeuprovldpd far iv Sectiao(3700)of Ow labor Cady, inroR.m mdamtoevvy Ess.
IINPORTANFTANf:
Application u herby nadc ro O:c Building ORcid fun .dross object m..rN conth'tions.nd restrictions at roto on this application. Each .coon upon whose behalf thio applsuiasd
1! mld0 Yd epll .alto a Waea IgPlla>Ad fa Wage bmeEl work a p -..'!!rood adefa .Ulan!!!! m mypemll! WYO a l RYd{Ofna.ppUdt1a11gaeE m, and INIL mdtsml%
ad hellharnoy the Cityof Tett; onofhcm,.gm4 and dlfir Yaa ioaxermmwith Olepmvisicas o dua I ha!2 et the Uniform AdMnia.uve Co de. f Imes:totmaa:apsor
drew aaupumy ofmY buidhal l City i and
by this" mis tines fors Wildin on has acro rcaivW.l csti%dot 1 Nve odd thu.ppsso Cry and walla, tilt Ne shove iaromutivn u
formes. ] !gone m amply with all City tied Safer bon! misting w the building c9Mmetion, W herebLWmhorise RpelenYtive ofBw Ciry m mm' upon the stove memioned Property
for inspccdon pugarca
OF ISSUANCE OR IF WORK IS SUSPENDED FOR IN DAYS—'
CITY OF TUSTIN
Community Development Department - Building Division
COTISMICtiOn Permit
300 Centennial Way, TLMin, CA 92780
Building Counter (714) 573-3131 or 573-3132
Inspection Recorder (714) 573-3141
ASSESOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 10137107
ADDRESS: 520 S PACIFIC ST
SUITE OR UNIT NO:
LOT: TRACT: BLOCK:
Census Team Number: Redir eurpment Area:
Properly Owner:
FAIRBANKS
SBO S C ST
TUSTIlLCA 92780
Archkecu regineec
BERNARD ADAMS
714/636-0294
Contrachm,
OAK -LAND
488 BLAINE
909/737-8858
COBDNA CA 91719
JOB DESCRIPTION:
REPLACE EXISTING SAMMY FIREPLACE
OCe.D.d.v Group:
UBC Edition:
Industrial Square Fast;
Occupant Load:
others Square Fast:
Type at Cpnetructi.n:
WarehOusa Situ... Fact:
Raaidntbl Square Feat:
0
Geroge Square Fear,
Numb" of Units:
0
Other SiNues Fest;
Number o1 Stories:
0
Restaurant Begun,;
Number of B idmarrel
B
Perking SNC":
Cbinmarelal Save,. Fast:
8
Accessible Parking:
valuation: F 98116. W
UBC Edition:
1994
FEE
SUMMARY
Plan Check:
TSIP Zone A FF.. -9
0.00
Building Permit
111
193.48 TSIP Zone B Fee:
S
0. M
Electrical Permit:
B
0.0R SMTP Fe.;
S
6.90
Mechanical permit
9
0.00 Microfilm Fee:
$
1.00
Flumbing Permit:
9
0.00 OCFD Fee:
It0.00
Sign Permit
S
0.18 Refundable Bond:
$
0.00
Drilling Pnmb:
9
0.00 Bond P...ess Fee:
Private mlpmvs. Perron
O.O9 Miec. Fee:
1
R.00
New Dowthbommt To.;
0
O. ORPenahy Fee:
B
8. OR
Total ".: O 263.92
Parma INv.0 gig: IES D...1 II8/07/BO
PERMIT(S) ISSUED AND PERMIT NUMBER(S)
B/0-0561
LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION
I hereby amirm that I am • licensed Conernace under or. Pmwaons of
ch+Otsr S Icemmnang with Section 70001 of DMsien 3 of the
auainus A PfalNab d $d my Iicema b in hall force and efmal.
Lee....Lee....NpmMr: .j -L -1 J - rice... Llus:
Conusggtte�n� Sgnatun
Do,.; we tee
DIVISION OF INWSTRIAL SAFETY PERMIT CERTIFICATION
The California Health and Softly Code nqW. a origiia l PI Intlustrul
..lacy Permit N .'rwnuwit. to Period houanca utile.. The H,phi
slgMaOf IM cnllm.ns we..
1 c.nr, that tie....it. S NOT or ma. iredapth, 'me.
Whin . Parson b nwk" m dNNed, µYl M made I. comem ice W in
work .0 "deed by his M.N. and the, no bWldres. aputtur.,
aceffeldinp, M1luwOrk, .r co m ill inn Or M.m.mXng Mersal, will be
OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I am ..... I from tM Contractor's U.M. Law fa Iha
follkner, titian ISawen 7"115. Nualn+N i P tm.10 w Code: Any City or
County which nwlen+permit ter....trun, slew, Impeva. demelbr,.1 no.b
any Structw.. once to 113 Nourr e; *ISO rawe. the aPoll ... t for such permit
e 1110 a sign" aeme..nsYM1ar he or pal b licensed oursunt to Me provisions
el the Comnter's Ucare. Low IChntal R lF.mmnping wtith Sett,. 70001
OI Division 3 of uM 9udneN A Ptbfnuons a"al .,,hot be m she is a ormal
IhmCom a" IM Muir, foe Ma Alleged esamMlon. Any weather of Section
7031.5 by any applmxm tar a parmrl subjects the Npk.em to a this pamey al
not mon than live hundred dollen16fi0p.001.
❑ las ow..rol thapmperW, army employees withwaBeeaalMexces
compensation, will ee me were and the aouCtve is not w andid.,.Nand Io^'
.]Olson... 7044, Busmeu A Plolesemns CON: Ne Can ffamori s Lice..
Law does net apply m an owner of employ µhe builds or Impeachs thereon.
and who dean such work himself or herself a through his or her own empbyess.
provided that such Improvements . not Intended at offend let sols. 1(,
however. The buildlng OF nprwemamem sold within one year a compleMa. Ma
—1 under —11 here rise bureau el prover, Met he .r she dm rot build .1
anon. Ior µnon. OF aahl
❑ I, as owner of the Pro.nY• am xclusevolycpntnNng with licensed
.nunµt to meseni. the PgIacT ISmhn 7044, Busimss A Prolusaas
Code: Ther Contractor'. LICIne.LN W d0ea notapply 1. mownwol Property wM
Wild. ar imoravu Ihapk., nal who ..mars. Ior ..all wmnte with a
connactimal license pursuant to the Contramm's License Lew).
❑ 1.m exam,, unit., S.mlen
eusmaes E Pr.hcsiom Coda Iter the lollowinp raafenb):
Owner
Data:
WORKERS' COMPENSATM DECLARATION
1 ha{ehy affirm under penalty of perjury one of ma following tlaclwellonu
❑ I have and will ...pane a .M fi.te of comm, TO self-interest far
Worlisi s Compnsab.n, as penedod for bySection 3700 of Me Labor Code, ler
iM do,.. .1 Ill. work Int which fib Oarmll b b..".
❑ 1 hwe a" µIX maintain Wolkn's Cemwnnebn insurance, ea
ret uked by Seoden 3700 at the Labor Cede, far Me pleformence of the work
tar Which this Nrmn . i...ad. My Week.,'. Campneallon pons nca denier
and policy num W, ere fi p
POLICY NUMBER: "- I T••7-�
COMPANY: SI -n 4-E FJ7JA
ITM aaeden Mtl reel pa CPnpbtb N rM pmnit.IP OM nlnda0 deicer 111,01 v tlal.
❑ 1...fly Thw in Me NdOrmence of me Walk Iw whin be permit
45 cued. I shall not employ any parson in airy manna so ea ro become
subpart to the Worker's Cuero.... m laws o1 GXlomle, ntl agree that q I
should aero... subjsm to tM Worker's Compensation ProviNons of S.C11N
3700 at the Labor Cade, I shall hnhe ih comply with Iheea emus ere-nLs.
Sgnaturr. �% —� Oa e' U � a �sYJ
WAPNNG; FaA�e Bacµ. Worker's Camp...nbn cevange a uMliew.
and shall sublet n employer 10 CemNal pndtim and civil ting. up 10 one
hurricane thousand Tar.. 111100.000). in a0dnbn le M. cost of
nomNMalm, Nm.M. a provided ter se lisepan 3700 el me Labor Cod.,
IntnNt "d .nom.y len.
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
I seek, Mflrm that tMr. IN • comtnaMn handing agncy lar ice
pedermann of Th. work for which this panni, Is issued fS+Mion 3017
Owl Cada.
LENDER'S NAME'.
LENDER'S ADDRESS:
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ANO EMISSIONS
STATEMENT FILED
❑A.O.M.D. Date:
❑O.Ci.D. Dau:
ON., uwu"
T. U.B.O. Fees pard Yee ❑ N/A ❑
IMP011TANT
APPlicabon b history, mad. to Th. Buntline enteral Ior • M mel sulmml ID Th.
onm.one red mvmiwu sat fare, n the appli sin. Each pe.ron upon
without behalf the spptiNtion I. roodo and each person at white. n0usst and
for wheat Mnifh work is pedarm" under a PunNnt to any permit curved u
n.Wt of Mb aNlbNen eguN la, and atilt. InEamnOY red hold hsrmlaa Th.
City of Tw in, ...flies,., Nam. and empbues In aecoul.m. µIM the
onNaieru of Crops., 7 o1 he Uniform Admineruariv. rode.
I .0wo no, Is occupy or allow OACUNney of nY buildin amh urllad by mit,
pefMlunli Ilnalinc0eCU0n.OWOW hocbNnre0avc0. Ian RYtheIMNm.d
rola applkstbn and nun that the above Information IS cprract. 1 agree to
oemply wine d Ory ..d Stats laws rasti g M the building cenittucrhon, and
1mNNW.umNi Tion rntallyn of the Oryro-der, uoenme"w. mentloned
prop., for eopeade. pwpeaee.
.'.Th. 3e Ian hOn.
Si(Xutun of Owner, CO/Ottyler, a AuthOriMd Ap.M.
weaE3 As ewner/Wide, 1 wXl net ..Play N.Y.. of Inh d, work wWhich
awM . owmh from the UWbhon dNthal Suety. N noted
so.. unto. such p.a hes. MmgN hem Wt na.,an. SiGNATUNUR DATE
Dlvni e, al bdmmaf 13M." Perron Nu.w,:
In coepplinm wish Federal yeptlatiaer, The City 4. road. alma.. Nsaimiwt.. the Wats arras, rola, Mfia enter. age., dWNllNY.
While. Olga Cansy- Permdln Pick - Alsgtn Galdem"-Ackpi
October 25, 2010
To whom it may concern,
My name is Robert Stephen Gaylord, one of three sons of George and Alice Gaylord. I
grew up at 480 South Pacific Ave. (now 520 Pacific St.) in Tustin, CA. My father built
our house, the garage, and the apartment above the garage all in the time and with the
processes it takes for a single individual to do all that.
The best that I can recall is the unit above the garage was built roughly between 1938 and
1942. The first tenant was my uncle who was stationed at an anti-aircraft defense base in
El Segundo. We visited him several times at his Army air defense battalion and saw the
search lights and anti-aircraft guns. Dad finished the apartment for him and his new wife
to stay near us while he was serving in Southern California.
Later, the apartment was rented to Marines stationed at El Toro Marine Base.
I recall the stairs to the entrance as a child. In my memory they were always there on the
side of the garage where my parents would catch rainwater. We were not allowed to go
up those stairs.
The unit behind the garage was built by my father roughly between 1945 and 1950. I
judge this based on the fact I was bom in 1933 and when my brother John and I were
young teenagers my father built the two rooms and bathroom for us to occupy.
After we moved away from our old home, the rooms were made available to others. The
only person I remember was, (I believe the spelling is) Ms. Grennan, who helped take
care of my parents to the very end. In fact, she called me about health problems my father
was having when we moved him out and sold the house.
My father worked at the grammar school as a woodshop, boys' athletics and natural
science teacher. He was an Eagle Scout, a Scout Master and a Deacon with the
Presbyterian Church in Tustin. He was often involved in construction work in and
around Tustin. He was in every way a faithful law-abiding citizen.
Sincerely,
Robert S. Gaylord
1 —I
r
TL
11
ti
1 —I
r
TL
11
slz=
Community Development Department
July 23, 1998
Mr. Nathan Menard
345 West 6th Street
Tustin, CA 92780
SUBJECT: 345 WEST 6TH STREET
Dear Mr. Menard:
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
(714) 573-3100
On July 21, 1998 we received your request for a zoning compliance letter for 345 West 6th Street,
Tustin.
The subject property is currently zoned Single Family Residential (R-1), which permits single
family residences. Second single family dwellings may be considered in the R-1 District on
properties with more than 12,000 square feet of lot area, compliance with several other
development standards, and the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (TCC Sec. 9233(B)(1)).
Our records indicate that the main residence was constructed in 1929. We also have on file
various building permits for the duplex on the rear of the property, dating back to 1964. However,
there is no record of an approved Conditional Use Permit for the use. As such, the duplex is
considered to be a non -conforming use.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9273(C), non -conforming buildings destroyed to the extent
of more than 50 percent of its value by a catastrophic event may be restored or used only in
compliance with the regulations existing in the district wherein it is located. See attached Code
sections.
If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me at (714) 573-3118.
Sincerely,
Bradley J
Assistant
Attachment: Tustin City Code Sections 9223 and 9273
BE:345West6th.doc
ENO ."T•l:Iivi14Ll19•]
PC Staff Report and Attachments from October 26, 2010
ITEM #3
�Y O.APPEAL HEARING
V
G0��i AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2010
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
BOARD OF APPEALS
FROM: ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Y. HENRY HUANG, BUILDING OFFICIAL
PREPARED BY: AMY THOMAS, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF NOTICE AND ORDER AT 520 PACIFIC STREET
SUMMARY:
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the City of Tustin
sent notice for recordation of a Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pack Street. The
Notice and Order provided written notice of the existence of a public nuisance on the
property and required the correction of code violations related to structures constructed in
violation of the Tustin City Code including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning
Code (see Attachment A).
The current property owner of 520 Pacific Street (APN 401-371-07), Bret Fairbanks, has
filed an appeal of the Notice and Order (see Attachment B).
In accordance with Tustin City Code Sections 8101 and 9294, the Planning Commission
will consider the appeal of the Notice and Order for public nuisance as determined by the
Enforcement Officer for the property at 520 Pacific Street. The Planning Commission will
act in its capacity as:
A. The Board of Appeals in considering Building Code violations and
B. The appeal hearing body for consideration of the Zoning Code violations that
were applied in the Notice and Order.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission (acting in its capacity as the Board of Appeals per TCC
Section 8101 and acting as the appeal hearing body Per TCC Section 9242) adopt
Resolution Nos. 4161 and 4162 affirming the Notice and Order for the property at 520
Pacific Street which provides written notice of the existence of a public nuisance and
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 2
requires the correction of code violations related to structures constructed in violation of
the Tustin City Code.
That the Planning Commission and the Board of Appeals order the property owner(s) to
comply with the requirements of the Notice and Order identified in Attachment A of the
related staff report dated October 26, 2010, with the exception of the date of compliance
which is hereby established as November 30, 2010.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Code enforcement action at 520 Pacific Street originated when the property owner, Mr.
Bret Fairbanks, initiated contact by sending a written request indicating that he wanted
the City to allow the unpermitted units on his property to be rebuilt if they were
destroyed by natural causes. This request initiated meetings between Mr. Fairbanks
and City staff and ultimately led to code enforcement action at the property to abate the
life safety issues caused by building and zoning code violations that are present on the
site. A Notice and Order was filed on the property based on violation of several Building
Code and Zoning Code violations (see Attachment A). Details of the code enforcement
action are provided in the report (Section titled Code Enforcement at 520 Pacific Street).
The Planning Commission has two roles in considering the appeal of both the Building
Code and Zoning Code Sections indicated in the Notice and Order. The roles for
consideration are as follows:
A. Board of Appeals
Pursuant to Section 112 of the City of Tustin's adopted California Building Code
(Sec. 8101), the Board of Appeals may consider evidence supporting the
Enforcement Officer's determination that a public nuisance exists at the subject
property due to the dangerous conditions present at 520 Pacific Street which
originate from violation of the following Building Code section:
California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) -
Permits Required. Any owner or authorized agent who intends to
construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy
of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove,
convert or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any such work
to be done, shall first make application to the Building Official and obtain
the required permit.
B. Appeal Hearing Body
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294, the Planning Commission may
consider the evidence supporting the Enforcement Officer's determination that a
public nuisance exists at the subject property due to the dangerous conditions
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 3
present at 520 Pacific Street which originate from violation of the following
Zoning Code sections:
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1) —
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards — Accessory
buildings used as guest rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or
maintained are subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses.
Corner lot line 10 feet; interior lot line: 5 feet.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The property at 520 Pacific Street is located at the south end of Pacific Street north of
West 6th Street. The property is located within the Single Family Residential District (R-
1) and is within the Cultural Resources Overlay District (CR). The R-1 District allows for
single family dwellings and accessory buildings and uses including, but not limited to,
accessory buildings and second residential units (subject to specific site development
standards; i.e. minimum 12,000 sq. ft. building site; must provide two additional garage
parking spaces; etc.). Accessory buildings used as guest rooms are conditionally
permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and are subject to
specific site development and use restrictions (i.e. no cooking facility may be installed or
maintained; they shall not be rented; etc.).
Aerial photo of 520 Pacific Street
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 4
The lot size of the property at 520 Pacific Street is approximately 10,000 square feet
(0.23 acre) and contains the following structures:
Single story main house (1,342 sq. ft.)
Two-story garage (16'5" x 18') with a studio apartment (309 sq. ft.) above
Third unit (325 sq. ft.) located at ground level to the rear (west) of the garage
Detached storage/recreation room (298 sq. ft.) located directly behind the main
house along the north property line
Small detached storage unit located along the rear west property line (approx.
150 sq. ft.) (not to scale on plan)
Covered parking structure (which is attached to the main house and the garage)
(Numbers correspond to site plan and site photos below)
Site Plan submitted 8130110
(Also refer to Attachment C site plan dated W0/10)
/ tr.w / / .Ir /
I
].V . Ix' / 'J' /
Site Photos at 520 Pacific Street
(Additional site photos in Attachment D)
View from Pacific Street: Main house,
carport, and two-story garage
SITE PLAN
NTS
A
k%I411F4
♦
.�
NOEWTn
r
lmwzx
♦
/ Ir.nw/
w,an-rxYmwrv.v
xll
♦
MAIN
ren.awxvxx
/ 7. /
in.+�
NE51UIiNCN
Mµvxevlivxtr
l 4
�
�nwrr
tuxnne uwr
w
♦
/ ]d / Irc
x1¢rIWNNrt
9f
/ 1'd" /
NlAOC6Y MWNr
LN
\
.�
\
rnnnvYlYCY
_ZV IM.tlY V').Y.
4
4�WWfi1
tY]VFYNI)
-
414'!1\I11MI1
,Y ITII
rAxl:lAllA'
^ r
'xuI 1
r Wii 1
-
\
♦
I
].V . Ix' / 'J' /
Site Photos at 520 Pacific Street
(Additional site photos in Attachment D)
View from Pacific Street: Main house,
carport, and two-story garage
SITE PLAN
NTS
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 5
Staircase to second
level unit over garage
View from front driveway of carport
and two-story garage
7 ;,
View looking east in rear yard: third unit
and second story studio apartment
above garage (shown beyond)
View looking south in rear yard: Third
unit entrance
View looking east toward second
story unit (note: multiple roof lines)
View looking north in rear yard:
storage/laundry/recreation room
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 6
Historical Background:
View looking west In rear yard:
storage unit at rear property line
The City of Tustin was incorporated on September 19, 1927. The subject property at
520 Pacific Street is located within the original City boundaries. The single story home
was built in approximately 1928 or 1929. The first published building code, the 1927
edition of the Uniform Building Code, was adopted by the City of Tustin on June 3,
1929,
Historical Timeline
1929 or 29- House
1926 constructed 1930
1925 1927 City 1929 Building 1931
Incorporation Code Adoptcd
The earliest zoning map on file, from 1961, identifies the property as R-1 Single Family
Residential and the current zoning for the property is R-1 Single Family Residential.
Based on the City of Tustin Historical Survey and annexation records, this property was
part of a subdivision of farmland to build single family homes prior to the City's
incorporation. According to the Historical survey, the subdivider dedicated Main Street
and Pacific Street while subdividing the lots for single family homes; then sold individual
lots, including the property at 520 Pacific Street. Historically, the R-1 District has
allowed guest house or guest unit uses within this district, however, the guest unit use
has been restricted to "temporary guests" and no kitchen or cooking facilities were
permitted. The use of a second residential unit was first established in the City's Zoning
Code in 1961. This use differentiated a guest unit from a second residential unit which
allowed kitchen facilities for more permanent tenancy. However, the second residential
unit has historically been permitted based on specific site development standards
including: minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet; additional garage parking; etc.
520 Pacific Street is listed on the 1990 City of Tustin Historical Survey which noted the
California bungalow architectural style and a brief history of how the area was
developed (see Attachment E). The survey noted that the shiplap siding on the house,
which was made in the 40's and 50's, covers the gables, which might indicate that the
roof of the main house was not original. It also notes a carport and garage located on
the south side behind the house. The survey further noted that the [two story] garage
appeared to be original based on the roof and siding that was consistent with the
original building period.
Appeal 520 Pack Street
October 26, 2010
Page 7
Some permits have been issued on the subject property; however, there are no permits
that authorize the construction or use of additional residential units at 520 Pacific Street.
Over the past several decades, the City has addressed residential conversions that
have been done without benefit of permits. For example, code enforcement officers
have responded to complaints that have arisen in the Old Town area of Tustin of
construction being done without permits or of multiple rental units in the R-1 Single
Family District. Several recent cases, including two cases located on Pacific Street are
currently working through or have completed the permit process to bring their property
and unpermitted accessory units into compliance with the Tustin City Code.
Historically, the City has considered several proposals to increase the density of
properties located in this area of Pacific Street; however, each time the community has
been outspoken against any increased density and the Planning Commission has
denied such requests. Records indicate that, in 1955, The Planning Commission held a
public hearing to consider a variance to add a second dwelling unit at the rear of 530
Pacific Street and to add two additional dwelling units at the back of the property at 540
Pacific Street. However, after discussion with applicants and objectors, the request was
denied. Other requests to increase density in the Old Town area were denied, including
a Zone Change request in 1969 to rezone a parcel at the corner of Pacific and Main
from R-1 Single Family Residential to the Planned Community Residential District in
order to accommodate an increase in density to 34 dwelling units (DU) per acre (more
than eight times the 4 DU per acre allowed by Tustin General Plan).
Code Enforcement at 520 Pacific Street
On July 27, 2010, Mr. Bret Fairbanks, the property owner of 520 Pacific Street, initiated
contact and sent a letter to the Planning Division. The letter stated that he was selling
his property and the home was in escrow. Mr. Fairbanks further stated that the property
has a single family residence in front, with two guest homes in the back. Mr. Fairbanks
requested a confirmation letter from the City stating that, in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster, the City would allow the guest units to be rebuilt (see
Attachment F).
On August 4, 2010, Planning Division staff did a preliminary search of City records and
sent a zoning confirmation letter to Mr. Fairbanks informing him that no permits were
issued for the two guest units which were noted in his letter and that a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) (which is required to a establish non -rentable guest units within his (R-1)
zoning district) had not been issued for the use. Mr. Fairbanks was also informed that,
based on Tustin City Code, a non -conforming building destroyed to the extent of more
than fifty percent of its reasonable value may be restored or used only in compliance
with the regulations existing in the district wherein it is located. Provisions for
reconstruction of non -conforming buildings do not apply to structures or additions which
have been constructed without the benefit of permits. To legalize the existing guest
units (without a kitchen), approval of a CUP would be required (Attachment G).
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 8
Shortly after the zoning confirmation letter was sent by Planning Division staff, the case
was forwarded to Code Enforcement for follow up. Code enforcement officers
conducted a thorough search of city records and requested a search of County records
for any documentation associated with 520 Pacific Street. However, no permits for the
guest units were found.
Code enforcement officers also found the subject
property advertised online and located two "for sale"
postings. Both postings identified a "studio guest
house with kitchenette" over the detached two car
garage and a "second guest house with one
bedroom, living room, and kitchen behind the
garage".
On September 10, 2010, the property owner allowed
City staff to do a cursory on-site assessment of the Online posting for 520 Pacific
property (see photos in Attachment D). Several life Street
safety code violations and other issues were noted by
Planning and Building Division staff (A detailed list of the main concerns/code
compliance issues and the related code violations are shown in Table 1 of the Analysis
section of this report).
On September 16, 2010, the City of Tustin recorded a Notice and Order Pursuant to Tustin
City Code Section 5503 for the property at 520 Pacific Avenue. The Notice and Order
provides written notice of the existence of a public nuisance and requires the correction of
code violations related to illegal structures constructed in violation of the Tustin Building
Code and Zoning Codes. In part, Section 5502(b) states a public nuisance exists when
"any condition... exists upon any premises that is dangerous to human life or is detrimental
to health as determined by an appropriate city official' (see Attachment A).
The Notice and Order provision is set forth in Chapter 5 of the Tustin City Code for
Property Maintenance and Nuisance Abatement Regulations and Standards. The
purpose of this chapter is to "provide for the abatement of conditions which are
offensive or annoying to the senses, detrimental to property values and community
appearance, an obstruction to or interference with the comfortable enjoyment of
adjacent property, or hazardous or injurious to the health, safety or welfare of the
general public in such ways as to constitute a nuisance".
ANALYSIS:
During the cursory on-site assessment of the property on September 10, 2010, City staff
noted several code compliance issues at the property. The following table outlines the
code compliance issues and concerns; code sections applicable (including California
Building Code as adopted by Tustin, California Fire Code, and Tustin City Zoning
Code); and photos taken during the assessment.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 9
TABLE 1
CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Issue
applicable
photos
The use of the property
California Fire Code
as a triplex (with 3
Section 102.3 Change of
units) changes the
use or occupancy;
building occupancy
California Fire Cade
from R3 (single family
Section 102 Unsafe
•-^ �•
residential) to R1
Building or Structures
(multiple family)
It could not be
California Fire Code
determined if
Section 102 Unsafe
footing/foundations
Building or Structures
exist to provide
adequate structural
bracing and support to
the structures
...
- * Multiple residential
No fire separation walls
Building Code Table
between units;
503; California Fire Code
units built after
therefore not in
Section 110.1 Unsafe
original structures
compliance with one
Conditions
w/o permits
hour separation
requirements which
poses a potential fire
hazard to occupants
Mechanical, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
and plumbing (including
2007 California Building
HVAC) installation
Code A105.1 — Permits
work done without
required)
Bathroom
C
pennits
in upper
pe
C
Permits are required to
no
unit
insure that life safety
permits
protocol is followed and
installation is done
according to plan.
Without such permits
and inspection,
installation may create
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
code; the property does
minimum building site for
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
Second and
second or third unit
TCC 9223b2 Accessory
third residential
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
sq. ft, lot; however this
rooms, providing no�
units
tot is 10,000 sq. ft)
cooking facility is
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
-
facilities) requires CUP.
subject to Conditional
This number of units
Use Permit
would need to be
located in an R-2 or R-3
district and would
require a minimum of 7
parking stalls to support
the added residential
use.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 10
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
The second story wall
Section 1403 of TCC
construction and
8100 Adoption of 2007
windows adjacent to the
California Building Code
property line do not
comply with fire
protectionJil
Insufficient
requirements.
setback to
The opening is not
PL
l
permitted as shown;
exterior wall is not fire
rated; primary (and
only) stairway restricts
ingress egress in case
of fire or other
emergency.
FUmaCe installed
TCC 8100 Adoption of
"
without required permits
2007 California Building
does not meet
Code At 05.1 - Permits
clearance requirements
required
and creates a potential
12
fire hazard.
Exposed electrical next
TCC 8100 Adoption of
-
to unpermitted furnace
2007 California Building
nwhich
causes potential
Code A105.1 - Permits
v
fire hazard.
required
Z
0
N
a
c
0
U
m
Electrical device
nexI to healer
Kitchen cooking
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
—
facilities not permitted
facilities permitted In
in guest unit.
guest unit
Kitchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
�f upper unit
installed without
2007 California Building
permits. Permits are
Code Al 05.1 - Permits
required to insure that
required
Ilk safety protocol is
followed and installation
Is done according to
plan. Without such
permits and inspection,
installation may create
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 11
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Shower added on to
TCC 8100 Adoption of
original structure. This
X007 California Building
'+
requires a building
Code At 06,1— Permits
permit to add additional
required)
square footage (pop -
out) and permits for
plumbing, and
waterproofing.
Shower added w/o - ='
its
Railing has no
TCC 8100 Adoption of
Intermediary posts and
2007 California Building
No inner
the run and rise are not
Code Al05.1— Permits
compliant with Building
required
posts
p
Code requirements nor
TCC 8100 Adoption of
is the unprotected back
2007 California Building
which is open. This
Code 1012 Handrails —
poses a potential falling
handrails required for
hazard for small
stairways
children.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
m
2007 California Building
Code 1013 Guards—
guards shall be located
along open -sided
walking surfaces
Including stairways
c
located more than 30
Inches above the grade
below
There is no property
2007 CBC Section
O
line firewall separation
1024.3 Exit discharge
between staircase and
location
Window at PL
the property line.
requires 5ft
setback
The staircase is built
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
over the property line
5 fl, setback to property
A guest unit requires a
line
5 foot setback to
property line (PL).
There are several
Built over PL
Issues associated with
the location of this
staircase; most
Imminent is the lack of
emergency access and
l
safe egress from the
unit.
Roof drains onto
2007 CBC Section
neighboring property
1101.1 all roofs shall be
which may cause
drained into a separate
flooding.
storm sewer system
2007 CBC Section 2007
CBC Section J109.4—
Drainage across property
line
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 12
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Structural supports do
2007 CBC Section
not provide sufficient
1604.1, 2301.2 General
supporting rafters Roof
Design Requirements.
Inadequate
members are
Floor joist supported
structural
undersized to provide
along block fence rather
adequate support
than cantilevered from
supports
the two story structure
The carport is attached
Change in occupancy
to both the main house
constitutes a multitude of
-.z, Carport
and the 2 -story garage
CBC and Fire Code
attached to
and attached rear units;
violations:
making this a tri-plex
California Fire Code
r main house
unit pursuant to building
Section 102.3 Change of
and garage
code fire rating. These
use or occupancy,
deficiencies create
California Fire Code
access hazards for fire
Section 102 Unsafe
_
access and may pose
Building or Structures
C
additional hazards to
occupants since the
m
occupancy changes
with a tri-plex (common
terminolo
Unsupported electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
r
metal conduit (EMT)
2007 California Building
Unsupported
between garage and
Code Al 05.1 — Permits
house. The potential for
required
line over-�
damage and failure due
to the exposure of the
line is increased and
poses a potential fire
hazard.
-
No rating separation
2007 CBC Table 602
between walls of garage
Fire -Resistance Rating
and living units; thus
Requirements for Exterior
Romex wiring is
exposing tenants above
Walls Based on Fire
unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
Separation Distance
to fire hazard originating
in the garage.
-
--c
Electrical wiring:
2007 CEC Article 334.15
w
Romex cannot be
Exposed Work and
exposed or unprotected
Article 330.30 Securing
and must be
and Supporting
attached/secured.
(Romex was first used
In the 1950's. Color
New junction box without
coding (yellow) wasn't
permits amn �! In
available until 2001)
_
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 13
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
Photos
Unit does not meet fire
2007 CBC Table 802
rating requirement; 5
Fre-Resistance Rating
foot setback required to
Requirements for Exterior
property line to protect
Walls Based on Fire
occupants from fire
Separation Distance
hazards; or safety
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
personnel responding to
less then 3 feet)
an emergency.
TCC 9223b2 minimum
side yard setback 5 feet
Min. 5 fi
setback
required
(zero - 4 ft
provided)
Heater installed with a
TCC 8100 Adoption of
gas fine without permits
2007 Califomia Building
It Is installed on a
Code At 05.1 -Permits
combustible wood sided
required
a
wall which poses a
Subject to manufacture's
Heater
m
potential fire hazard due
installation standards and
installed
v
to the combustible
mechanical/plumbing
w/o
material
permit
.��,�,,
permit
Ceiling heights vary and
2007 CMC Section
do not meet the 7'8"
1208.2 Ceiling height
-
-
height requirement
minimum
Gelling
height does
not meet
min. 7'8"
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 14
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Improper and
2007 CFC Section 805.5
_
substandard electrical
Extension Cords
wiring without permit -
Power strip next to
V
kitchen sink where a
s
range might have been
previously
Plumbing added without
TCC 8100 Adoption of
permit
2007 California Building
Code A105.1 — Permits
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
Kitchen in rear unit- not permitted
Kitchen is not permitted
(per zoning)
facilities permitted in
(i.e. plumbing, electrical,
guest unit
etc.)
Unsecured and exposed
2007 CMC Section
m
gas line on the interior
1311.2.6 Hangers,
-
which poses a potential
Supports, and Anchors
gas leak and fire hazard
and 1311.7 Outlets
within the rear unit
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
L —,
Insulation is nonrated
Wall and opening
and is combustible
protection 2007 CBC
(appears to be straw
Table 602 Fire -
bale)
Resistance Rating
&
Requirements for Exterior
C
Z
Walls Based on Fire
W
Separation Distance and
Table 704.8 Maximum
Area of Exterior Wall
'0
Openings
-
m
m
— Combustible material
installed between walls
PH iii 9 !II
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 15
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
Photos
The room is considered
Habitable space as
"habitable space" and
defined by CBC is a
appears to not provide
space in a building for
sufficient, ventilation,
living, sleeping, eating or
v
heat and light
cooking. Therefore, it
requires sufficient light,
ventilation heat, etc
v
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CMC Section
E
and should be a
1208.2 minimum 7'6"
8
minimum 7'6"
c
0
m
-
d
rc
Ceiling height
does not meet
minimum
(Note: Code compliance issues noted in Table 1 based on cursory observations by City staff on September 10, 2010.
The full extent of violations is unknown due to the limited ability to conduct a thorough assessment.)
Building Code Appeal
The appellant is requesting reconsideration of the Notice and Order for the determination
of a public nuisance filed for the property at 520 Pack Street. The appellant has
indicated, in part, in his letter of appeal (Attachment B) that the Building Code section
which requires permits would not apply to his property because he purchased the home
over 10 years ago and the structures already existed.
However, the current property owner is ultimately the responsible person for maintaining
the property. "Responsible Person", as defined by the Tustin City Code is "the owner of
property upon which a violation of the Tustin City Code occurs or continues to occur.
This term also includes any owner, occupant, or other person or entity in control of the
property who is creating, causing, or maintaining any condition in violation of the Tustin
City Code".
The current property owner may have purchased the property in the current condition
with multiple units that are not permitted, however, he has also, knowingly or not,
maintained the structures and collected income from tenants who live in numerous
substandard building conditions.
Zoning Code Appeal
The appellant is also requesting consideration of the Zoning Code requirement for a
Conditional Use Permit and lot line [setback]. His letter indicates, in part, that the
property is not in violation of these codes because the structures existed prior to
Conditional Use Permits and the first zoning of Tustin (see Attachment B).
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 16
The Notice and Order indicated violation of Tustin City Code sections that require a
CUP to establish accessory buildings used as guest rooms (provided no cooking facility
is installed or maintained)(TCC 9223(b)(2) and that a minimum 5 foot side yard setback
be provided for accessory buildings used as guest houses (TCC 9223(b)(2)(d)).
Although the two story garage structure was probably original to the site, the use of the
second story apartment above the garage was not permitted. In the R-1 Single Family
District, guest houses or guest units were historically intended for "temporary guests"
and the use has been permitted accessory to the main house. Kitchen facilities were not
permitted in guest units nor are they permitted to be rented out for compensation.
Further second units require additional garage parking and a minimum lot size, of which
this property does not meet.
Appeal Findings
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294, the Planning Commission should consider
the evidence supporting the Enforcement Officer's determination (as shown in Table 1)
that a public nuisance exists at the subject property due to the dangerous conditions
present. As the hearing body, the Commission should determine whether or not the two
accessory buildings that are currently being utilized as rentable residential units (with
kitchen facilities) should:
• Be brought into conformance with Tustin City Code requirements as indicated in
the Notice and Order; or
• Determine whether the code sections were accurately applied to the property; or
• Modify the Notice and Order
Independent Evaluation
In considering appeals, the Board of Appeals has the right to employ qualified
individuals to assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed Architect John
C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The firm specializes in historic and older
buildings and was able to provide professional judgment as to which structures may
have been original and which had been added and/or modified over time.
The architect provided a report that concluded that "the front house and two-story
carriage barn are both historically significant. It is apparent that there was only one
living unit on-site (main house] in 1929 when the City of Tustin was incorporated. There
is strong physical evidence that the second and third living units were added much later,
post WWII" (See Attachment H).
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and the Board of Appeals deny the
appeal; affirm the Notice and Order; and direct the property owner(s) to comply with the
Appeal 520 Pacific Street
October 26, 2010
Page 17
requirements of the Notice and Order identified in Attachment A of the related staff
report dated October 26, 2010, with the exception of the date of compliance which is
hereby established as November 30, 2010.
Amy Thomas, AICP
Senior Planner
7 e2
Y Aienry Huang, P.P, C.B.O.
wilding Official
(z1. r4�
Elizabeth A. Binsack
Community Development Director
Attachments: A.
Notice and Order
B.
Letter of Appeal Received Sept. 23, 2010
C.
Site Plan dated 8/30/10
D.
Photos taken during Sept 10, 2010 assessment
E.
City of Tustin Historical Survey for 520 Pacific Street
F.
July 27, 2010, letter from Mr. Bret Fairbanks
G.
August 4, 2010, zoning confirmation letter from City staff
H.
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
I.
PC Resolution No. 4161
J.
PC Resolution No. 4162
SACddVlmy\Code Enforcemenl1520 PacificlPC Agenda Appeaftaring 520 Pacific doc
ATTACHMENT A
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first ciass and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address: 520 Pacific Street
Assessor Parcel Number: 401-371-07
Case Number: V70-0312
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
TUSTIN
msrnuY
BUILDING OUR FD"rURE
HONORING OUR. PAST
Thank you for meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore. please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29,
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P- (714) 573-3100 • F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.urg
Notice and Order at
520 Padfic Street
September 10, 2010
came 0 VIO-0312
Page 2
Me:
:
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
Issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincerely
BrKd Ste1je�n�`I'n^e
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A — Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Development Department
EXHIBIT A
Administrative Madan Process
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
In accordance with Tustin City CWe (TCC) 1182(d), fines may be assessed by means of an
administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation. Building
and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $800.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The City. may also take further legal action including issuing
the responsible pamon(s) a criminal citation andlor abating the vlolation(s) with the cost of such
abatement and/or prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property
owner(s), and/or the property as a lien.
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fine(s). Additionally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fins(s), and contact the City to request a to -
Inspection, or
2) Pay the corresponding fine(s) and request an extension of time in writing pursuant to
TCC I I85(b), which shows s reasonable hardship; or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1188 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrative citation, together with an advanced deposit
of the corresponding flne(s).
Request for Hearing forms and other information on Administrative Citations may be obtained
on the City's website at www.tus#ncs.ora.
300 Ccntcnnial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P:(714)573-3100 • R(714)573-3113 • www.tustinca.org
NWce mW We,W
520 F.ai st'.1
sew.T ' 15.:010
Co.. MV10J 12
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert of
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Corner lot line: '10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet.
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
ATTACHMENT B
Letter of Appeal Received Sept. 23, 2010
September 22, 2010
RECEIVED
Brad Steen, Code Enforcement officer SEP ? 9j 2010
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT
Letter of Appeal for: Notice and Order/ Pre -Citation Notice
Declaration of Public Nuisance
Address: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin, CA 92780
Assessor parcel number: 401-371-07
Case Number: V10-0312
Dear Mr. Steen,
This letter is to appeal and request consideration on the recent notice I received regarding
unpernitted units. The code violation reads any owner or authorized agent who intends
to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a building
or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace any
electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by
this code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall fust make application to the
building official and obtain the required permit. I have no intentions of rebuilding or
reconstructing any portion of the said structures. 1 purchased the home over 10 years ago
and the structures already existed when I purchased the property. I have provided
evidence to show that the structures have existed for over 50 years. I understand the city
has no permits of the structures on my property but that is true for most homes built in
old town prior to 1950. Most if not all of the homes would be in violation and considered
a public nuisance.
With regards to the other violations regarding conditional use permits and lot lines, I am
not in violation of these codes because the structures existed prior to issuing of
conditional use permits and the first zoning ordinance of Tustin.
In response the letter, it is my intent to apply for a conditional use permit and progress
accordingly however I do not feel I have violated any code and am not in any way a
public nuisance.
Sincerely, J
Bret Fairbanks
FAM U1 4cm`LIA kii Cal
Site Plan dated 8/30/10
,
,
,�
\�|jig § >
�
«
I
wl
��|
±
;
Q
�
-
/j
\)
�-
#ACLFI STIR PET
|
FAIRBANKS RESIDENCE
,
Ba PACIFIC @ne
!
|;
ms % CALIFORNIA 92780
m•
s
,
,�
ATTACHMENT D
Photos taken during Sept 10, 2010 inspection
th
All
-, VA:,;,
�
I
i
ol
744
-rte. f
' � A
73d i
wli
i
1
It
W27
„i
W27
- _Ir � 7
--add
n
�r�
I
I
I
N I
ATTACHMENT E
City of Tustin Historical Survey for 520 Pacific Street
ADDRESS:
5'F.0 PACIITC ST
OATS%
1929
STYLE:
t'.ALBrORNIA BUNGALOW
SOURCE: RATING:
f C
ALTERATIONS:
F
HISTORICAL DISTRICT:
Y13S
COMMENT:
OESCRIPTION:
CITY (OF TUSTIN HISTORICAL SURVEY
'fhe single -storied house at 520 Is topped with a frost facing gabled roof and snatching centered porch. A small louvered vent is
centered bellow the peak Shiplep siding, in a style made in the 40's and 50's, covers the gables, indicating that the roof is not
.xiginal. Narrow clapboard siding covers the first floor exterior. Square posts, resting on tapered clapboard -dad piers, support
dtu roof. The macrem porch extends to each side, topped with pergolas. The front door features a mullioned border and is flaked
by large plate glass windows. Double -hung windows are used throughout the rest of the bouse. A red brick chimney on the south
nide is flanked by windows. A carport and a two-story clapboard -clad garage are located on the south side, behind the house. The
garage, which appears to be original, is topped with a gabled roof with a hip at the peak. The siding is narrow clapboard, which
m wus to indicate that the hoose once was also all clapboard -sided with a hip at the peak of the front -facing gabled roof.
SIGNIFICANCE.
This California Bungalow was built on one of the lots along South Padfic Street which were subdivided by Harry Merida. He
was the son of Richard and Edea Marple, fruit growers, who owned an orchard on this property from 1903 until the property
passed to Harry is 1924. He dedicated a strip down the center, from Main to Sixth Streets. for the extension of Pacific Sorest.
i le sold this lot to George Gaylord in 1929. The Gaylords received a completion notice on their he= that same year. George was
a well -Wuxi wood shop and physical education instructor at the Tustin Grammer School for several years. After he retired in the
1950's, he becacs a carpenter. The Gaylords were still living in the house in 1965. This bungalow fits well into the sueescape
of the Tustin Historic District and contributes to the tree -lined shat because it is of an appropriate size and scale.
ATTACHMENT F
July 27, 2010, letter from Mr. Bret Fairbanks
E
July 27, 2010
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
Justin Wilkom, Principal Planner
Dear Ms. Wilkom.
My name is Bret Fairbanks and 1 am the owner of the property located at 520 Pacific
Street, Tustin, CA 92780. We are currently selling our home and are in escrow. Our
property has a single family residence in front with 2 guest homes in the back.
According to the attached county records we have 2 addresses 520 and 520 %x, we have
and pay for 2 separate electric meters, and have various city permits for improvements
we have done on the home since we purchased it in 2000.
The buyers lender is requiring a letter from the city stating in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster, the city would allow the guest houses to be rebuilt. Attached are
documents from the county tax assessors office showing the guest houses have been here
long before we purchased the property.
Thank you for your time and consideration. This letter is all we need to close escrow. If
there is anything I could do to help speed up this process please let me know.
Bret Fairbanks
C.P. (949) 933-6886
j
'sign Type Codes tested By
101 - Single Family Residence Address 3. k) F�U eF*/cv .
102 - Multi Family
199 - Misc. Improvements Phone ( )
Signature
PUBLIC SERVICE INFORMATION FORM
MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
1
1 2
1 3KINISHEJIBLOG
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
APN
BLDG#
CONSTZE"1SSIZE
YEAR2ND
F
BLDG
3RD FL
BLDG BLDG
SIZE SIZE
4TH FL 5TH/UP
UNIT MIX
GARAGE/
CRPRT
SIZE
POOL
YIN
LAND
SIZE
4
ot
m
qT7
31
ILI
i
f
m
D
C
=F
r
m
0
A
QUATTROPRO
Check Amount $
Cash Amount $
Mailed Date By
7 -7
MISCELLANEOUS STRUCI
..cdplba Yr. Hoar Dlmemlam An. / Cf
w alDawb Wall
Nu =
do
3sv g7
rwe5'=ua ., I.. . -
c ✓ rao � I_xb Ia q.L.
I
YR' - RCLNIS AV
.rsnv on-� raea-eowf .rco. ��.r..
4.A. -I
'norrp /4
�9u Nod1
YEAR r,RyRp..
s Trace _
kpl(l
_..
At.6ead'
_
-- cRa4
O
up
9
/390
It -
a Call dEld
t✓ 0 •
ROSIORNCR UNITI V
0.ryryN�f
M PN
_
Nom,
AOOPHI tow �-Shad
Hlp 6ab
and Rare, CW Up
RI.e n.�Me TSlhhate .4t14 Ad
Gnral
GbraY� hRRR - Alum.
INTWIOR
UdIn4Wd
Plxlar
Dq.Wdf
Ir.
IJ Zdd
/
WALL$
FgaM 1- z Y y G
rump
OEfWRtP
SNCCO.
" Ma}/1414 W,fn
_ tdt4 P�py
— ShnlNq:✓
JHP,ypyyf .�yud
p��L. - i"1rO -
CalmTde "d st
FOUNDATION
Rock
'IN PLOOF_
erGNmx
i Oou"
wead Thick
OP. A..
P-
Ci61Na:
...
Opart H%m
Acttr'.1s.
_PWIrt '.
2.d FLOOR
tWda o— ! L
Deubla-
HHaa�dinod /� Mick
oP: cY.
_.
LItl1NGRM
DIN
PAMILP RM
/EGRUOMi
...-
T -T
-_
—
T Owmrr -
R,147HEa
1 I
r
RAIHROOM
Ftw
.
e
remit -
ow J L
Wd4
_
—.&f
U.
RIMARq U96D. ArrH_ g4)'An
Tdlet'
?D
'norrp /4
�9u Nod1
YEAR r,RyRp..
�aep
A1dpM.-
Caol'.
_..
At.6ead'
_
-- cRa4
O
up
9
/390
It -
a Call dEld
t✓ 0 •
y/
?D
78
A-r6e
10A -e)
700
37,1
aeo
/390
990
'e• -Pr -1.
__ ..__ .
� �i _ -.
.�
OF jig COUNTY ASSESSOR
MULTIPLE ROWDENTIAL UNIT APPRAISAL RECC 80
i - TRACT fAp. No. 001.371.07
T_. LOT SIDE OF
-
BLOCK PROJECT NO.
LAND VALUE COMPUTATIONS LAND OR UNIT AT
VEAp L•Wr I UNIT LN.bf au'6
A,eepwexr Yeah
_ -�'--�—.
/'9 ;t�
..
..
, ennl
Gry
APIMIEDI
a nLM>
I.YRn>
LI RETFp:JIHIeCrvF
'r"�' 1�0 �"
pl IMAGULMI
'C'! r 40 :q,
1 GULL NII
rm NO
A,eepwexr Yeah
_ -�'--�—.
/'9 ;t�
..
/92P...
IN
APIMIEDI
I.YRn>
fIcWINM
IEc �-«Dm
MO,N1N PAY__ ME ...
.G•Sa"-
J .1
/O S _7 9
S ALLEY
E.—
I6 NO M
_ IfA
R.6N.
lot vim
• - , I-' ] F�
J.i
ICI
. !�. L/+_V
CL ! O.
tl Nowrt. MONT
,Ea r NO
LAND VNUF
i J�^Y y�,.'y�
/ A l' Sd
Q. ANON. IRI ,
1 J 20 ] L
IUNMATIg1 INPIGTM
'' _
/.LLQ..__
1 GV �i `/!
I] UNIT POWPRN
I M20 ] ❑
C.E.A.
III UTILITIES
I
66.QOQ
�/ LIND IMM
B moo, N. INOIGTdI
`Y
____
._ C ❑
UNIT MULY. INDIGTOA
Ipi lPT UIIII IV
J 2❑ ]❑
IMGIGTES wES MICE _ _
I
(PG000
Ir'WATEII Md!T
IFI I❑ NO n
LISW ERIC!DOONINP
pIOM1
KS ❑ NO I"l
43
IE w; Mal 14 I
TOTA4 nMRERTT VALUE ___..
_-
-
ILNIIN, COMIPMI,
�n -I ND ("1
AMP vALU!
z -—
IDIEOM_ pgTY V_A_L_U(
E
N M13 LACM IMP
Y(Y ^� Ip ❑
-
]] TIES UNIT _
I ❑ ,❑ ll�
d! L TEIIMb 'Y, � y
,f MINIM NIDNTG
YFp /-I MO
•ya. .... n~ _ N EXCESSIVE TNI VEB ,� XP I❑
TEM"? PAM'" IC Irl SO
R OUEOT YAMINO I r 2❑ ]❑
,f 91rt11IPT
C_Ie.w:rX_',re P.v"G33z-.Iv,L+ ..Ti.Y/]i allay %IFSYCTd1j n us[eaoe
YN�a , is �e �aMI vf..
.i74 To A.7a0 IV — --
0.7 b'.
£�>Y+Maa4 .8oii>_
MARY, 7D T .EIgo
%Eo.YriiL. S nr __ SGawrvCCS Z [�--_. ....
ME
OX 'to uo 4GTI] roe r AIII
FOR14ERLY80
062-090-00
OAR I- Cnn MME`
Tom INS,
NEDNRORNow
a SINGLE VAN , USE
MUL, MM. USE
YO COMM use
.1 I INDUST 45E
'MEND
YI LUNM4 CDNYONM
b VInNNINu
DEIIKI
SII DNTE d 1Mn]
I' bCGIAt AERVICSA
MI "SLID EERVIGES
p.G1.x.0. MN n sN
L1 .
I. C p. M UNIT MMM
'IMIi YUII {qn vL�
Yn " No
S
CONCLUDION YN AA �
Sn L.1rvP JV U rZ X.OI
M, Q(] 1
Da Trac. NumbOrI_pBAssL,'�•1_1
DIRSONAL RROPERY VALUE INDICATOR O
SAI[LIIY 0 O1NFE VW MOF X V
DNI YfX F40
N. Sa IIaWTa molt
n _ -?SINE. 7A[L ry ❑ NG
ENRLPYfE 1001,41,111,ir� e�—
,TIFLE
.a
OIEL,Iemllk
» FLCON %
W !4 AREA
I}-
Iw NO N AN Tv
191 FLOOR %
A'
1NIT ROOMIAM
155 Fl nN6A
4W
�P
}0 !AN
i OFF
11 GLPLOr_vi IIIBAN
rw TOT FONCN b
I I'—
l5N ANN/6TAI.5
Itl G E
y"fM
KFIiilHi
' YES NO
.
IRI CEM1,
I NILl
STON
VEM,_1LCK_...F
Iw FP CM
I
1
110 Fi. NIT COeI
till EE. FLW. Cas+
I.L NNtt
INWINtl B
4 C B86CRIITION STAIL,
4"V
15 L'1N FCViiiLlp
Ip: OPEN PA, 6
INT
i-I11LSAi ]:0:. VFwAeF4yOEt
I
IIII INCRYdTG 1
1161 RFC
'
M alip"Iob 111.
ul OEPNTYPr
e ITEM
R
SNINCLi
F 5VAI,
G�10. CL dodni
GOVT
04121 —1
nT CANADA
Ai EU.,ONAL I'LAMPO
r IIF ]AN ANN,
.
_
_
IORA-41
IM CARPORT OC. It
CARPO",
CAMO!EW
A
NAP
vola
AA WgNNMAN,XIIBASIC
• _ -
_ N POIIM /6NC6 5
EF 4 am
.._
IM•F00. COOT
__..._
ipi'nOOL rPrR.
COST DATA
Ba: y
AnBCEwuBouB aTBBeruw
Iw "vOf.A OAR
•
6
PILI iwIG1.Nl0E Y,OF+
C(roi 6 POGT
ttEECPIPTTM F12E
MAl IMN. COEf
M[I. INIT CObT
'LOON
—
LV IF C. car.
_
__
'Nadi COOT
6
GWNIRT[ NAI
''.•
Alf
VA. Nie
a}�n- a
_NLacN
N rrni
1 main AI; ,r
'kw
THW�A
CLAN
FL AREAF
UNITSONdT MOO.
0 Ni OF Fla.
IN TOTAL NO, NdNrK UNIT, '
1
. N IIOCII %
.s�cai+ F`O.TON
ANA AOI, EMSrOP
WILD CIOVIST I c+ON
Ap &A,IC —
WIO COST IIAMA
INdA AW. FACION
GPWP 60X6:. F¢ION
y[m eNT
M FL MFA
» FLCON %
W !4 AREA
I}-
Iw NO N AN Tv
191 FLOOR %
1
155 Fl nN6A
_
IW NU. 05 UNI IN
rw TOT FONCN b
l5N ANN/6TAI.5
!�
?f.5
• INi A.0 C6NT. ..
Z1
' YES NO
.
IRI CEM1,
Y69 I NO 1^jl
IW I Am cONT�K—
Iw FP CM
I
1
110 Fi. NIT COeI
till EE. FLW. Cas+
1
1151 I',ON PAT, I
•
_
Ip: OPEN PA, 6
I
IIII INCRYdTG 1
1161 RFC
'
e ITEM
O� ItE.V r FAC MRFO <ICgT � YA...
bNIT /R._... I Id I Put"'O RM S
MET1
GOVT
04121 —1
nT CANADA
r IIF ]AN ANN,
.
I15 CAN f(y.l
fi 'lv
K
_
IM CARPORT OC. It
CARPO",
_.
F3 P A LRFA
,
vola
h
• _ -
_ N POIIM /6NC6 5
EF 4 am
.._
IM•F00. COOT
__..._
ipi'nOOL rPrR.
• ':b OC:Cn COd?
Iw "vOf.A OAR
•
PILI iwIG1.Nl0E Y,OF+
-±TnQR I
LV IF C. car.
is IV.. yarn
HN
1, .mr,
Alf
1* .
1 main AI; ,r
'kw
Ti-jeffi— 4#ulta�mo:
ATTACHMENT G
August 4, 2010, zoning confirmation letter from City staff
Community Development Department
August 4, 2010
Brett Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780
SUBJECT: ZONING CONFIRMATION FOR 520 PACIFIC STREET
Dear Mr. Fairbanks:
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for your letter, received July 27, 2010, requesting zoning confirmation for the property
located at 520 Pacific Street. In your letter, you indicated that the property has a single family
residence in the front with two guest homes in the back. You have also included copies of tax
assessor information related to your property for the City's review. In the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster, you inquired if the City would allow the guest houses to be rebuilt.
The subject property is zoned as Single Family Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural
Resources Overlay (CR) District. Accessory buildings used as guest rooms are allowed as
conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 zoning district, provided that no cooking facilities are
installed or maintained. A guest house is defined in the Tustin City Code as detached living
quarters of a permanent type of construction and without kitchens or cooking facilities and where
no compensation in any form is received or paid.
No permits exist for guest houses at the subject property and no conditional use permit is on file to
establish guest houses at the subject property. In your letter you indicated that there are two
addresses at the subject property, 520 and 520'h Pacific Street. The City has not assigned a 1/2
address to the subject property.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9273(c), "A nonconforming building, destroyed to the extent
of more than fifty (50) percent of its reasonable value at the time of its destruction by fire, explosion
or other casualty or act of God, may be restored or used only in compliance with the regulations
existing in the district wherein it is located" The provisions for reconstruction of a nonconforming
building does not apply to structures or additions which have been illegally constructed or
constructed without the benefit of permits.
Should you wish to establish guest houses at the subject property, approval of conditional use
permits and obtaining necessary building permits would be required. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 573-3123.
Sincerely,
00
Rya wiontek
Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Single Family Residential (R-1) standards
B. Cultural Resources District (CR) standards
C. Guest House Definition
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P;(714)573-3100 • F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org
CC: Elizabeth A. Binsack
Dana L. Ogdon
Justina Willkom
S:\Cdd\Ryan\Zoning Confirmation\520 Pacific St.doc
ATTACHMENT H
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
thirtieth
street
architects
inc.
October 20, 2010
Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin
Dear Elizabeth:
Aundiag principals
john c, loomis, arehi tcet
james c. Wilson, architect
principal
elwood I. gullcy, architect
Pursuant to our letter agreement, we have conducted a cursory review of the
photographs of structures provided by staff of the existing structures at 520 Pacific
Street. The following is a summary of our findings:
Terminology
We will refer to the street facing side of the complex as the "front', the two sides
as the "left and right' based on looking at the site from the street and the structures
built behind the carriage barn as the "middle" and "rear" structures.
Zoning
Zoning issues are not part of our Scope of Work and are not addressed.
Building Sequence
It appears that the main front house and two-story or loft type carriage barn may
have been originally built on the site in 1928. Both of these structures exhibit the
same type of exterior siding and window and door trim. The historical survey
indicates that there is evidence that the original front gable of the residence may
have originally had a modified hip roof at its roof peak, but was later modified. It
appears that the original development probably involved one living unit in the
main house.
2821 newport boulevard - newport beach, ca 92663 - 949/673-2643
At some point later in time, it appears that the upper portion of the carriage barn
was converted into a second living unit with the addition of the stairway at the left
side of the property. The carport and rear one-story middle addition may also
have been added at this time or later, subsequent to the original construction of the
residence. Both the enclosed entry and one-story addition have vertical siding and
no carpenter cuts on the window trim that distinguishes these alterations from the
original construction. The deepened fascia detail at the rear elevation of the
enclosed entry is a clear indication of a later alteration. The date of these
alterations is unknown, but they were likely constructed much later than the
original residence, probably during the late 1940's or early 1950's.
Later, another rear addition was constructed that may have initially been used as a
garden shed or children's playhouse (because of the very low ceding height). The
building has vertical board and batt siding and different detailing than the original
structures and a vintage TM Cobb front door. This was probably converted into a
third living unit some time in the early 1960's, based on the knotty pine interior.
This is a very substandard structure in terms of ceiling height and construction
methods.
Additional alterations to the middle addition were made later, including a rooftop
shed structure with a skylight that is apparently over a shower.
There is evidence of fairly recent electrical work based on the yellow Romex that
is visible in many of the building cavities.
Changes in Use
The original development of the site in 1928 included the construction of a single-
family residence with one living unit and a two-story carriage barn that was
apparently used as a garage and agricultural storage.
At some time after WWII, the carriage barn was converted into a second living
unit, with the addition of the front stair, carport and middle addition at the rear.
Another rear addition was added behind the middle addition during the late 1950's
or early 1960's. This very substandard structure was probably originally used as a
storage shed or kids playhouse. It was later converted into a third living unit.
Historic Significance
The original building has been noted in the Tustin Historic Survey as "one of a
variety of California Bungalow buildings that contributes to Tustin". Although
substantially modified when the second living unit was added, the middle, two
story carriage barn structure appears to retain enough of it's original architectural
integrity and detailing (horizontal redwood siding, carpenter cuts at window trim,
2821 ncwpon boulevard — newpurt beach, ca 92663 —949/673-2643
modified hip roofs, etc.) to also be considered historic as part of the original
development of the property.
The mid -addition and rear additions were later alterations that are inconsistent
with the architecture of the original structure and are, therefore, not considered
historically significant.
Building Code Issues
There appear to be a number of serious building hazards and code violations in the
current development. The most significant is the construction of the enclosed
stairway to the upper unit that actually encroaches across the side yard property
line. This addition is illegal and constitutes as hazard, in our opinion, by blocking
access in the side yards for fire fighting, as required by the CBC. This stair
addition should be removed and a new stairway/entry constructed elsewhere.
The rear living unit structure is very non -conforming to Building Codes and it
does not appear to be economically viable to bring this structure up to current
codes.
Further Study
Further research using Sanborn and Building Survey Maps could confirm the
construction sequence and provide proof of construction dates. There also could
be information relating to the use of these structures at the time of mapping. The
cost of retaining an Architectural Historian to research this property would
probably be about $1,000.
Conclusion
We feel that the front house and two-story carriage barn are both historically
significant.
It is apparent that there was only one living unit on-site in 1929 when the City of
Tustin was incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and
third living units were added much later, post WWII.
Recommendations
We would recommend that the illegal stairway be removed and that code
violations be corrected at the carriage barn ASAP, if the continued use of this
space as a second living unit is allowed by the City of Tustin. We would hope that
future improvements could include the reversal of some of the inappropriate
alterations to the carriage barn to help restore the architectural integrity of this
resource.
2821 newport boulevard - newport beach, ca 92663 -949/673-2643
We do not recommend the occupancy for habitation of the substandard, rear
addition.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
John Loomis
Principal
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
ATTACHMENT
PC Resolution No. 4161
RESOLUTION NO. 4161
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
AFFIRMING THE NOTICE AND ORDER FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE AS
DETERMINED BY THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE PROPERTY
AT 520 PACIFIC STREET (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN 401-371-07)
The Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
The Board of Appeals hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. That, on July 27, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of 520
Pacific Street, sent a letter requesting that City staff provide written
verification that the two guest homes located at the rear of the single family
residence at 520 Pacific Street could be rebuilt in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster;
B. That, on August 4, 2010, City staff provided a written zoning confirmation
letter informing Mr. Fairbanks that the property is zoned as Single Family
Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural Resources Overlay (CR)
District and that accessory buildings used as guest rooms are only allowed
as conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 district, provided that no
cooking facilities are installed or maintained and that no compensation in
any form is received. The letter further informed the property owner that no
permits or entitlement exist for the guest houses at the subject property;
C. That, on September 10, 2010, City staff conducted an on-site assessment of
the property at 520 Pacific Street. The assessment revealed that several
unpermitted modifications and additions had been made to the rear units
that were not in compliance with Tustin City Code requirements;
D. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the
City of Tustin sent notice of recordation of a Notice and Order for the property
at 520 Pacific Street to Mr. Fairbanks. Said Notice and Order provided written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance on the property as determined by
the Enforcement Officer and required the correction of code violations related
to unpermitted structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code;
E. That, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the Enforcement Officer is
defined as the Director of Community Development or any other person or
City officer or employee as may be designated by the City Manager to enforce
property maintenance, zoning, and other nuisance abatement regulations
and standards of the City;
Resolution No. 4161
Page 2
F. That, on September 22, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of
520 Pacific Street, filed an appeal of the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at his property;
G. That on October 14, 2010, the City gave public notice by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation, by posting the project site, and by mailing
to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site of the holding of a
public hearing at which the appeal would be considered;
H. That on October 26, 2010, a duly called, and noticed public hearing at which
interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or in
opposition to the appeal and, at which the Planning Commission, acting in
its capacity as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice
and Order filed at 520 Pacific Street;
That, pursuant to Section 112 Board of Appeals of the Building Code as
adopted by the City of Tustin, the hearing was held to consider evidence
that is relevant to whether the true intent of the City of Tustin's adopted
California Building Code or the rules legally adopted thereunder have been
incorrectly interpreted; the provision of such code do not fully apply; or an
equally good or better form of construction is proposed.
J. That, pursuant to Section 112 of the City of Tustin's adopted California
Building Code, the Planning Commission, acting as Board of Appeals, shall
not have authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions
of the Tustin Building Code or to waive requirements of such code. Further,
the hearing shall be de novo and the Board of Appeals may approve,
approve with conditions, or disapprove the matter in accordance with the
Tustin City Code or remand the matter to the Community Development
Director or the Zoning Administrator for further proceedings in accordance
with directions of the Board of Appeals.
K. That, the Board of Appeals considered evidence supporting the
Enforcement Officer's determination that a public nuisance condition exists
at the subject property due to the present violations of the following Building
Code section:
California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) -
Permits Required. Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct,
enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a
building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove,
convert or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any such work to
be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain the
required permit.
Resolution No. 4161
Page 3
L. That there is substantial evidence that the violations identified in the Notice
and Order exists as evidenced by the Building Code violations observed on
a cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
provided hereto in Exhibit A.
M. That the violations identified herein and in the Notice and Order
demonstrate that substandard housing and property maintenance
conditions exist which create a dangerous condition at the subject property
due to the present violations of the California Building Code as adopted per
Tustin City Code 8100;
N. That the extent of repairs ordered by the Enforcement Officer are
appropriate for the property;
O. That the time limitations for starting and completing the repairs are
reasonable;
P. That the Board of Appeals has the right to employ qualified individuals to
assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed
Architect John C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The architect
provided a report that concluded that "the front house and two-story
carriage barn are both historically significant. It is apparent that there was
only one living unit on-site [main house] in 1929 when the City of Tustin was
incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and third
living units were added much later, post WWII" (attached hereto in Exhibit
C).
Il. The Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the Board of Appeals pursuant
to Section 112 of the Building Code as adopted by the City of Tustin, hereby affirms
the Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pacific Street which provides written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance and requires the correction of code
violations related to illegal structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
subject to the following condition:
The property owner(s) is/are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of
the Notice and Order identified in the related staff report dated October 26,
2010, as attached hereto Exhibit B and incorporated herein with the exception
of the date of compliance which is hereby established as November 30, 2010.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting on the 26th day of October, 2010.
Resolution No. 4161
Page 4
Jeff R. Thompson
Chair Pro Tem
Y. Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Board of Appeals Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Y. Henry Huang, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Board of Appeals Secretary
of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4161 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Board of Appeals, held on the 26th
day of October, 2010.
Y. Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Building Official
SACdd1AmylCode EnfomemenW20 Pad8d1PC resolution Appeal 520 Padfic.dou
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO, 4161
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
The use of the property
California Fire Code
as a triplex (with 3
Section 102.3 Change of
units) changes the
use or occupancy;
building occupancy
California Fire Code
from R3 (single family
Section 102 Unsafe
residential) to R1
Building or Structures
(multiple family)
It could not be
California Fire Code
_ ---
determined if
Section 102 Unsafe
footing/foundations
Building or Structures
exist to provide
adequate structural
bracing and support to
the structures
Multiple residential
No fire separation walls
Building Code Table
between units;
503; California Fire Code
units built after
therefore not in
Section 110.1 Unsafe
original structures
compliance with one
Conditions
w/o permits
hour separation
requirements which
poses a potential fire
hazard to occupants
Mechanical, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
and plumbing (Including
2007 California Building
HVAC) installation
Code Al 05.1 — Permits
Bathroom
work done without
required)
_
permits
n upper
c
Permits are required to
unit w/ no
insure that life safety'
permits
protocol is followed and
installation is done
according to plan.
Without such permits
and Inspection,
Installation may create
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
code; the property does
minimum building site for
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
Second and
second or third unit
TCC 9223b2 Accessory
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
third residential
sq. ft. lot; however this
rooms, providing no
units
lot Is 10,000 sq, ft)
cooking facility is
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
facilities) requires CUP.
subject to Conditional
This number of units
Use Permit
would need to be
located in an R-2 or R-3
district and would
require a minimum of 7
parking stalls to support
the added residential
use.
11Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
The second story wall
Section 1403 of TCC
construction and
8100 Adoption of 2007
windows adjacent to the
California Building Code
property line do not
comply with fire
I{Q
protection
Insufficient
requirements.
setback to
The opening is not
—
permitted as shown;
PL
exterior wall is not fire�
`--,
rated; primary (and
q
only) stairway restricts
ingress egress in case
of fire or other
emergency.
Furnace Installed
TCC 8100 Adoption of
" q
without required permits
2007 California Building
does not meet
Code At 05.1 —Permits
clearance requirements
required
and creates a potential
t°
fire hazard.
Exposed electrical next
TCC 8100 Adoption of
m
to unpermitted furnace
2007 California Building
awhich
causes potential
Code A105.1 —Permits
m
fire hazard.
required
f
.=
I
o
i
N
V
O
d
re
Electrical device
nexI to heater
Kitchen cooking
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
facilities not permitted
facilities permitted in
in guest unit.
guest unit
Kitchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
u per unit
pp
installed without
2007 California Building
permits. Permits are
Code A105.1 — Permits
required to insure that
required
life safety protocol is
followed and installation
is done according to
plan. Without such
permits and inspection,
installation may create
fire hazard, water
dame e, etc.
21 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Shower added on to
TCC 8100 Adoption of
-' k
original structure. This
2007 California Building
requires a building
Code Al05.1 — Permits
permit to add additional
required)
square footage (pop -
out) and permits for
plumbing, and
waterproofing.
Shower added w/o
its
Railing has no
TCC 8100 Adoption of
j.
Intermediary posts and
2007 California Building
No inner
the run and rise are not
Code Al 05.1 — Permits
compliant with Building
required
posts
Code requirements nor
TCC 8100 Adoption of
is the unprotected back
2007 California Building
which Is open. This
Code 1012 Handrails—
poses a potential falling
handrails required for
hazard for small
stairways
children.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
2007 California Building
Code 1013 Guards —
guards shall be located
y
along open -sided
walking surfaces
including stairways
Zlocated
more than 30
inches above the grade
below
w
There is no property
2007 CBC Section
V
line firewall separation
1024.3 Exit discharge
o
between staircase and
location
Window at PL
the property line.
requires 511
u1
setback
The staircase Is built
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
over the property line
5 ft. setback to property
A guest unit requires a
line
5 foot setback to
property line (PL).
Built over PL
There are several
issues associated with
the location of this
staircase; most
+"* J;
imminent is the lack of
_
emergency access and
safe egress from the
unit.
Roof drains onto
2007 CBC Section
neighboring property
1101.1 all roofs shall be
- -
which may cause
drained into a separate
.•
flooding.
storm sewer system
2007 CBC Section 2007
CBC Section J109.4—
Drainage across property
line
31 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOS. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
photos
Issue
applicable
Structural supports do
2007 CBC Section
not provide sufficient
1604.1, 2301.2 General
-�
supporting rafters Roof
Design Requirements.
•- - Inadequate
members are
Floor joist supported
undersized to provide
along block fence rather
structural
adequate support
than cantilevered from
supports
the two story structure
The carport is attached
Change in occupancy
to both the main house
constitutes a multitude of
Carport
and the 2 -story garage
CBC and Fire Code
attached to
and attached rear units;
violations:
making this a bi-plex
California Fire Code
main house
unit pursuant to building
Section 102.3 Change of
- and garage
code fire rating. These
use or occupancy,-
ccupancy,deficiencies
deficienciescreate
California Fire Code
access hazards for fire
Section 102 Unsafe
access and may pose
Building or Structures
.�
additional hazards to
- -
00
occupants since the
m
occupancy changes
u
with a tri-plex (common
terminology).
Unsupported electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
metal conduit (EMT)
2007 California Building
Unsupported
pp
between garage and
Code A105.1 — Permits
house. The potential for
required
line over carport
damage and failure due
to the exposure of the
line is increased and
"
poses a potential fire
hazard.
41 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
No rating separation
2007 CBC Table 602
between walls of garage
Fire -Resistance Rating
and living units; thus
Requirements for Exterior
Romex wiring is
exposing tenants above
Walls Based on Fire
unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
Separation Distance
to fire hazard originating
in the garage.
_
Ui
New junction box without
�
Permits :om .i in
Electrical wiring:
2007 CEC Article 334.15
Romex cannot be
Exposed Work and
exposed or unprotected
Article 330.30 Securing
and must be
and Supporting
attached/secured.
(Romex was first used
in the 1950's. Color
coding (yellow) wasn't
available until 2001
Unit does not meet fire
2007 CBC Table 602
L
rating requirement; 5
Fire -Resistance Rating
.
foot setback required to
Requirements for Exterior
property line to protect
Walls Based on Fire
l
occupants from fire
Separation Distance
w
hazards; or safety
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
personnel responding to
less than 3 feet)
"-
a
an emergency.
TCC 9223b2 minimum
side yard setback 5 feet
.D
m
Min. 5 it
setback
., required
(zero - 4 (l
provided)
51 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Heater installed with a
TCC 8100 Adoption of
gas line without permits
2007 California Building
R,
It is installed on a
Code A105.1 — Permits
combustible wood sided
required
-
wall which poses a
Subject to manufacture's
Heater
potential fire hazard due
installation standards and
installed
to the combustible
mechanical/plumbing
_ W/o
material
permit
-
permit
Ceiling heights vary and
2007 CMC Section
do not meet the 7'6"
1208.2 Ceiling height
height requirement
minimum
Ceiling
height does
not meet
min. 7'6"
Improper and
2007 CFC Section 605.5
— —
substandard electrical
Extension Cords
wiring without permit -
Power strip next to
kitchen sink where a
range might have been
previously
:e
e
w
a
c
g0
Plumbing added without
TCC 8100 Adoption of
permit
2007 California Building
Code At 05.1 — Permits
I
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
Kitchen in rear unit- not permitted
p
Kitchen is not permitted
(per zoning)
fac lities permitted in
(i.e. plumbing, electrical,
guest unit
etc.)
6 1 P a g e
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Photos
Issue
applicable
Unsecured and exposed
2007 CMC Section
gas line on the interior
1311.2.6 Hangers,
_
which poses a potential
Supports, and Anchors
gas leak and fire hazard
and 1311.7 Outlets
within the rear unit
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
I
Insulation is nonrated
Wall and opening
and is combustible
protection 2007 CBC
(appears to be straw
Table 802 Fire -
bale)
Resistance Rating
Requirements for Exterior
Walls Based on Fire
�
Separation Distance and
2
Table 704.8 Maximum
m
v_
Area of Exterior Wall
tq
Openings
`m
ar
Combustible material
installed between walls
2010 9 10
The room Is considered
Habitable space as
"habitable space" and
defined by CBC is a
appears to not provide
space in a building for
_
_
sufficient, ventilation,
living, sleeping, eating or
!-
heat and light
cooking. Therefore, it
�
requires sufficient light,
ventilation, heat etc
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CMC Section
Z
E
and should be a
1208.2 minimum 7'8"
g
minimum 7'8'
0
a
m
-
Ceiling height
does not meet
minimum
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory andvisual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
$:\Cdd\Amy\Code Enforcement\520 Paclfic\Code violations.doc
71 Page
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first class and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address.-
Assessor
ddress:Assessor Parcel Number:
Case Number:
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
520 Pacific Street
401-371-07
V10-0312
TUSTIN
PWORY
6uiLDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore. please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday, October 29,
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P: (7f 4) 573-3100 6 F (714) 573-3113 0 www,tustiiica.org
Notice and Order al
520 PacPic Street
September 10, 2010
Case # V70-0312
Page 2
M
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincerer
Br d Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A— Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Development Department TU S T I N
EXHIBIT A
Administrative Citation Process
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAJT
In accordance with Tustin City Cdde (TCC) 1182(d), fines may be assessed by means of an
administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation.. Building
and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $500.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The City may also take further legal action including issuing
the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the violation(s) with the cost of such
abatement and/or prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property
owner(s), and/or the property as a lien.
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fine(s). Additionally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fine(s), and contact the City to request a re-
inspection, or
2) Pay the corresponding fine(s) and request an extension of time in writing pursuant to
TCC 1185(b), which shows a reasonable hardship; or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1188 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrative citation, together with an advanced deposit
of the corresponding fine(s).
Request for Hearing forms and other information on Administrative Citations May be obtained
on the City's website at www.tustinca.oro.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P:(714)571-3100 • F:(714)573-3113 . www.tustinca.org
N.1"S OOMeral
520 PMU4 SIMI
Sao.br 16, 2010
Can N V10-0812
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Corner lot line: 10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet.
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
thirtieth
street
architects
inc,
October 20, 2010
Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin
Dear Elizabeth:
founding principals
john c. loomis, architect
jumes C. wilson, architect
principal
elwcod I. guilty, architect
Pursuant to our letter agreement, we have conducted a cursory review of the
photographs of structures provided by staff of the existing structures at 520 Pacific
Street. The following is a summary of our findings:
Terminology
We will refer to the street facing side of the complex as the "front", the two sides
as the "left and right" based on looking at the site from the street and the structures
built behind the carriage barn as the "middle" and "rear" structures.
Zoning
Zoning issues are not part of our Scope of Work and are not addressed.
Building Sequence
It appears that the main front house and two-story or loft type carriage barn may
have been originally built on the site in 1928. Both of these structures exhibit the
same type of exterior siding and window and door trim.. The historical survey
indicates that there is evidence that the original front gable of the residence may
have originally had a modified hip roof at its roof peak, but was later modified. It
appears that the original development probably involved one living unit in the
main house.
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
At some point later in time, it appears that the upper portion of the carriage barn
was converted into a second living unit with the addition of the stairway at the left
side of the property. The carport and rear one-story middle addition may also
have been added at this time or later, subsequent to the original construction of the
residence. Both the enclosed entry and one-story addition have vertical siding and
no carpenter cuts on the window trim that distinguishes these alterations from the
original construction. The deepened fascia detail at the rear elevation of the
enclosed entry is a clear indication of a later alteration. The date of these
alterations is unknown, but they were likely constructed much later than the
original residence, probably during the late 1940's or early 1950's.
Later, another rear addition was constructed that may have initially been used as a
garden shed or children's playhouse (because of the very low ceiling height). The
building has vertical board and batt siding and different detailing than the original
structures and a vintage TM Cobb front door. This was probably converted into a
third living unit some time in the early 1960'x, based on the knotty pine interior.
This is a very substandard structure in terms of ceiling height and construction
methods.
Additional alterations to the middle addition were made later, including a rooftop
shed structure with a skylight that is apparently over a shower.
There is evidence of fairly recent electrical work based on the yellow Romex that
is visible in many of the building cavities.
Changes in Use
The original development of the site in 1928 included the construction of a single-
family residence with one living unit and a two-story carriage barn that was
apparently used as a garage and agricultural storage.
At some time after WWII, the carriage barn was converted into a second living
unit, with the addition of the front stair, carport and middle addition at the rear.
Another rear addition was added behind the middle addition during the late 1950's
or early 1960's. This very substandard structure was probably originally used as a
storage shed or kids playhouse. It was later converted into a third living unit.
Historic Significance
The original building has been noted in the Tustin Historic Survey as "one of a
variety of California Bungalow buildings that contributes to Tustin". Although
substantially modified when the second living unit was added, the middle, two
story carriage barn structure appears to retain enough of it's original architectural
integrity and detailing (horizontal redwood siding, carpenter cuts at window trim,
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 —9491673-2643
modified hip roofs, etc.) to also be considered historic as part of the original
development of the property.
The mid -addition and rear additions were later alterations that are inconsistent
with the architecture of the original structure and are, therefore, not considered
historically significant.
Building Code Issues
There appear to be a number of serious building hazards and code violations in the
current development. The most significant is the construction of the enclosed
stairway to the upper unit that actually encroaches across the side yard property
line. This addition is illegal and constitutes as hazard, in our opinion, by blocking
access in the side yards for fire fighting, as required by the CBC. This stair
addition should be removed and a new stairway/entry constructed elsewhere.
The rear living unit structure is very non -conforming to Building Codes and it
does not appear to be economically viable to bring this structure up to current
codes.
Further Study
Further research using Sanborn and Building Survey Maps could confirm the
construction sequence and provide proof of construction dates. There also could
be information relating to the use of these structures at the time of mapping. The
cost of retaining an Architectural Historian to research this property would
probably be about $1,000.
Conclusion
We feel that the front house and two-story carriage barn are both historically
significant.
It is apparent that there was only one living unit on-site in 1929 when the City of
Tustin was incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and
third living units were added much later, post WWII.
Recommendations
We would recommend that the illegal stairway be removed and that code
violations be corrected at the carriage barn ASAP, if the continued use of this
space as a second living unit is allowed by the City of Tustin. We would hope that
future improvements could include the reversal of some of the inappropriate
alterations to the carriage barn to help restore the architectural integrity of this
resource.
2821 newpott boulevard—newportbeach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
We do not recommend the occupancy for habitation of the substandard, rear
addition.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
&I
John Loomis
Principal
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673.2643
ATTACHMENT
PC Resolution No. 4162
�Z�Yi1�Ij�[�1��►C�>[f FYa
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, AFFIRMING THE NOTICE AND ORDER FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
AS DETERMINED BY THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 520 PACIFIC STREET (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN
401-371-07)
The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows:
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That, on July 27, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of 520
Pacific Street, sent a letter requesting that City staff provide written
verification that the two guest homes located at the rear of the single family
residence at 520 Pacific Street could be rebuilt in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster;
B. That, on August 4, 2010, City staff provided a written zoning confirmation
letter informing Mr. Fairbanks that the property is zoned as Single Family
Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural Resources Overlay (CR)
District and that accessory buildings used as guest rooms are only allowed
as conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 district, provided that no
cooking facilities are installed or maintained and that no compensation in
any form is received. The letter further informed the property owner that no
permits or entitlement exist for the guest houses at the subject property;
C. That, on September 10, 2010, City staff conducted an on-site assessment of
the property at 520 Pacific Street. The assessment revealed that several
unpermitted modifications and additions had been made to the rear units
that were not in compliance with Tustin City Code requirements;
D. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the
City of Tustin sent notice for recordation of a Notice and Order for the property
at 520 Pack Street. Said Notice and Order provided written notice of the
existence of a public nuisance on the property as determined by the
Enforcement Officer and required the correction of code violations related to
unpermitted structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code;
E. That, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the Enforcement Officer is
defined as the Community Development Director or any other person or City
officer or employee as may be designated by the City Manager to enforce
property maintenance, zoning, and other nuisance abatement regulations
and standards of the City;
Resolution No. 4162
Page 2
F. That, pursuant to Section 9294 of the Tustin City Code, the applicant may
appeal the specific action or seek relief in the appeal, and reasons why the
action taken by the Community Development Director should be modified or
reversed;
G. That, on September 22, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of
520 Pacific Street, filed an appeal of the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at his property;
H. That the appellant is requesting consideration regarding the Conditional
Use Permit(s) and lot lines, indicating, in part, that he is not in violation of
these codes because the structures existed prior to Conditional Use
Permits and the first Zoning of Tustin;
I. That on October 14, 2010, the City gave public notice by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation, by posting the project site, and by mailing
to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site of the holding of a
public hearing at which the appeal would be considered;
J. That on October 26, 2010, the Planning Commission held a duly called, and
noticed public hearing at which interested persons had an opportunity to
testify in support of, or in opposition to, the appeal, and at which the
Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the appeal hearing body,
considered the appeal of the Notice and Order filed at 520 Pacific Street;
K. That pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294, the Planning Commission
will act in its capacity as the appeal hearing body to consider appeal of any
decisions of the Community Development Director;
L. That the City of Tustin was incorporated on September 19, 1927, and the
subject property is located within the original City boundaries. The house
and detached two story garage were constructed in approximately 1929
and the first published building code, the 1927 Edition of the Uniform
Building Code, was adopted by the City of Tustin on June 3, 1929.
Construction may have commenced prior to adoption of the 1927 Uniform
Building Code, consequently, there are no building permit records for the
original construction of the original buildings. The earliest zoning map on
file, from 1961, identifies the property as R-1 single family residential and
the current zoning for the property is R-1 Single Family Residential;
M. That there is substantial evidence that the violations identified in the Notice
and Order exists as evidenced by the Building Code violations observed on
a cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
provided hereto in Exhibit A;
Resolution No. 4162
Page 3
N. That the third unit located behind the garage structure appears to have
been constructed in phases several decades after the original structures.
The varying roof heights visible from the interior and exterior of the unit and
the different siding indicate that the unit was added in sections at different
times.
O. That no permits to construct and/or convert the units are on file and there
are several code violations which indicate that the unit was not built to City
Code requirements.
P. That the third unit building was constructed approximately four feet from the
property line, which is not consistent with the minimum five foot setback
required for accessory structures used as guest units. Additionally, several
issues exist, including the improper and substandard electrical wiring,
installation of a newer unpermitted heating unit, lack of required firewall and
combustible insulation between walls separating units; all of which may
cause a fire hazard to occupants.
Q. That the Planning Commission has the right to employ qualified individuals
to assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed
Architect John C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The architect
provided a report that concluded that "the front house and two-story
carriage barn are both historically significant. It is apparent that there was
only one living unit on-site [main house] in 1929 when the City of Tustin was
incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and third
living units were added much later, post WWII" (attached hereto in Exhibit
C).
R. That the appeal is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) in that the appeal is not considered a project under CEQA
Guidelines;
Il. The Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the appeal hearing body Per
TCC Section 9242, hereby affirms the Notice and Order for the property at 520
Pacific Street which provides written notice of the existence of a public nuisance and
requires the correction of code violations related to illegal structures constructed in
violation of the Tustin City Code subject to the following condition:
The property owner(s) is/are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of
the Notice and Order identified in the related staff report dated October 26,
2010, as attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein with the
exception of the date of compliance which is hereby established as November
30, 2010.
Resolution No. 4162
Page 4
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting on the 26th day of October, 2010.
Jeff R. Thompson
Chair Pro Tem
ELIZABETH A. BINSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning
Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that
Resolution No. 4162 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin
Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of October, 2010.
ELIZABETH A. BINSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
5:1CddWny\Code Enformien6520 PadNic\PC resolution Appeal 520 Pacific.docx
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Issue
applicable
photos
The use of the property
California Fire Code
as a triplex (wish 3
Section 102.3 Change ofIF
units) changes the
use or occupancy;
'A
building occupancy
California Fire Code
from R3 (single family
Section 102 Unsafe
-
residential) to R1
Building or Structures
(multiple family)-
It could not be
California Fire Code
-
determined if
Section 102 Unsafe
footing/foundations
Building or Structures
exist to provide
adequate structural
bracing and support to
the structures
Multiple residential
No fire separation walls
Building Code Table
between units;
503; California Fire Code
units built after
therefore not in
Section 110.1 Unsafe
original strOctures
compliance with one
Conditions
w/o permits
hour separation
requirements which
poses a potential fire
hazard to occupants
Mechanical, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
and plumbing (including
2007 California Building
HVAC) Installation
Code At 05.1- Permits
work done without
required)
Bathroom
in upper
permits
Permits are required to
unit w1 no
ED
insure that life safety
permits
protocol is followed and
installation is done
according to plan.
Without such permits
and inspeclion,
installation may create
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
code; the property does
minimum building site for
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
Second and
second or third unit
TCC 92231J2 Accessory
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
third residential
sq. ft. lot; however this
rooms, providing no
units
lot is 10,000 sq. ft)
cooking facility is
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
-
facilities) requires CUP.
subject to Conditional
This number of units
Use Permit
would need to be
located in an R-2 or R-3
district and would
require a minimum of 7
parking stalls to support
the added residential
use.
1IPag0
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOS, 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Issue
applicable
Photos
The second story wall
Section 1403 of TCC
construction and
8100 Adoption of 2007
4,
windows adjacent to the
California Building Code
-
property line do not
comply with fire
protection
Insufficient
requirements.
setback to
The opening Is not
-
permitted as shown;
PL
exterior wall is not fire
rated; primary (and
only) stairway restricts
4.
ingress egress in case
of fire or other
emergency.
Furnace Installed
TCC 8100 Adoption of
without required permits
2007 California Building
does not meet
Code A105.1 - Permits
clearance requirements
required
rn
and creates a potential
@
fire hazard.
rn
Exposed electrical next
TCC 8100 Adoption of
-
w
o
to unpermitted furnace
2007 California Building
-
which causes potential
Code A105.1 - Permits
fire hazard.
required
c
`
�I
0
m
I SIJ
O
v
d
N
_J
I Electrical device
J next to heater
Kitchen cooking
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
facilities not permitted
facilities permitted in
In guest unit.
guest unit
Kitchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
upper un(t
installed without
2007 California Building
a
permits. Permits are
Code A105.1 - Permits
- _
required to insure that
required
life safely protocol is
followed and installation
is done according to
plan. Without such
permits and inspection,
Installation may create
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
21 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOS. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
Issue
applicable
photos
Shower added on to
TCC 8100 Adoption of
���✓`�,
original structure. This
2007 California Building
P�
requires a building
Code A105.1 - Permits
permit to add additional
required
square footage (pop -
out) and permits for
plumbing, and
waterproofing.
Shower added w/o = -
permlts
Railing has no
TCC 8100 Adoption of
intermediary posts and
2007 California Building
No inner
the run and rise are not
Code A105.1 - Permits
compliant with Building
required
posts
Code requirements nor
TCC 8100 Adoption of
Is the unprotected back
2007 California Building
which is open. This
Code 1012 Handrails -
y
poses a potential falling
handrails required for
hazard for small
stairways
M
children.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
n
2007 California Building
w�---
Code 1013 Guards —
guards shall be located
m
along open -sided
o
walking surfaces
including stairways
a
located more than 30
inches above the grade
below
H
There
There is no property
2007 CBC Section
v
line firewall separation
1024.3 Exit discharge
c
between staircase and
location
window at PL
the property line.
requires 5ft
rn
setback
The staircase is built
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
over the property line
5 ft. setback to property
A guest unit requires a
line
5 foot setback to
property line (PL).
Built Over PL
There are several
issues associated with
the location of this
staircase; most
imminent is the lack of
S
emergency access and
safe egress from the
unit.
Roof drains onto
2007 CBC Section
neighboring property
1101.1 all roofs shall be
which may cause
drama
drained into a separate
flooding.
storm sewer system
2007 CBC Section 2007
CBC Section J109.4 —
Drainage across property
line
31Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
photos
Issue
applicable
Structural supports do
2007 CBC Section
not provide sufficient
1604.1, 2301.2 General
supporting rafters Roof
Design Requirements.
- Inadequate
members are
Floor joist supported
undersized to provide
along block fence rather
structural
adequate support
than cantilevered from
supports
the two story structure
!
The carport is attached
Change in occupancy
to both the main house
constitutes a multitude of
Carport
and the 2 -story garage
CBC and Fire Code
attached to
and attached rear units;
violations:
making this a tri-plex
California Fire Code
main house
unit pursuant to building
Section 102.3 Change of
_ and garage
code fire rating. These
use or occupancy;
-
deficiencies create
California Fire Code
access hazards for fire
Section 102 Unsafe
access and may pose
Building or Structures
.0
additional hazards to
°o.
occupants since the
occupancy changes
with a tri-plex (common
terminology).
Unsupported electrical
TCC 8100 Adoption of
f
metal conduit (EMT)
2007 California Building
Unsupported
between garage and
Code A106.1 - Pefnrfts
house. The potential for
required
line over carport
damage and failure due
to the exposure of the
line is Increased and
_
poses a potential fire
hazard.
41 Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
photos
Issue
applicable
No rating separation
2007 CBC Table 602
between walls of garage
Fire -Resistance Rating
-
and Irving units; thus
Requirements for Exterior
Romex wiring is
exposing tenants above
Walls Based on Fire
_ unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
Separation Distance
_
to fire hazard originating
in the garage.
\ .
Y - _
New junction box without S
permits
Electrical wiring:
2007 CEC Article 334.15
Romax cannot be
Exposed Work and
exposed or unprotected
Article 330.30 Securing
and must be
and Supporting
attached/secured.
(Romex was first used
in the 11950's. Color
coding (yellow) wasn't
available until 2001
Unit does not meet fire
2007 CBC Table 602
rating requirement; 5
Fire -Resistance Rating
foot setback required to
Requirements far Exterior
F
property line to protect
Walls Based on Fre
occupants from fire
Separation Distance
z
hazards; or safety
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
1
3
personnel responding to
less than 3 feet)
an emergency.
TCC 9223b2 minimum
side yard setback 5 feet
a
`m
Min. 5 ft
setback
required
(zero - 4 ft
provided)
5j Page
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
61 Page
Issue
Heater installed with a
gas line without permits
It is installed on a
combustible wood sided
wall which poses a
potential fire hazard due
to the combustible
material
Ceiling heights vary
do not meet the 7'6"
height requirement
substandard electrical
wiring without permit -
Power strip next to
kitchen sink where a
range might have been
previously
Plumbing
permit
Kitchen is not permitted
(per zoning)
(Le. plumbing, electrical,
etc.)
2007 California Building
Code At 05.1— Permits
required
Subject to manufacture's
installation standards and
mechanical/plumbing
permit
1208.2 Ceiling height
minimum
Extension Cords
2007 California Building
Code A105.1 — Permits
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
facilities permitted In
guest unit
Photon
Ceiling
height does
not meet
min. T6"
Heater
installed
w/o
permit
Kitchen in rear unit- not permitted
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NOs. 4161 AND 4162
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
photos
Issue
applicable
Unsecured and exposed
2007 CMC Section
gas line on the interior
1311 .2.6 Hangers,
-
which poses a potential
Supports, and Anchors
gas leak and fire hazard
and 1311.7 Outlets
_
within the rear unit
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
y ti
Insulation is nonrated
Wall and opening
and Is combustible
protection 2007 CBC
(appears to be straw
Table 602 Fire -
bale)
Resistance Rating
..
Requirements for Exterior
a
Walls Based on Fire
ro
Separation Distance and
Table 704.6 Maximum
v
Area of Exterior Wall
Openings
Yo
m
-
°C
Combustible material
installed between walls
zaro S m
The room is considered
Habitable space as
"habitable space" and
defined by CBC is a
appears to not provide
space in a building for
sufficient, ventilation,
living, sleeping, eating or
V
heat and light
cooking. Therefore, It
requires sufficient light,
ventilation heat etc
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CMC Section
E
and should be a
1208.2 minimum 7'6"
Q
minimum 7'6"
1
e
0
a
oc
Ceiling height
does not meet
minimum
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
SACddVsmy\Cade Enforcement\520 Pacific\Code violations.doc
71 Page
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first ciass and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address: 520 Pacific Street
Assessor Parcel Number: 401-371-07
Case Number: V10-0312
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
TUSTI N
IIIYTORY
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST'
Thank you for meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore. please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29,
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard. .
300 (: cntennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 4 P;(714)574-3100 • F;(714)573-3113 0 www.tuitinca.org
Nalke and Order al
520 Pagnc sheet
September 15, 2010
Case eV10.0312
Page 2
Mo
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to Our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincerer
Bred Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A — Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Development Department TUS T I N
EXHIBIT A
Administrative Citation Process
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
In accordance with Tustin City Code (TCC) 1182(d), Ones may be assessed by means of an
administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation: Building
and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $500.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The City may also take further legal action Including issuing
the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the viclation(s) with the cost of such
abatement andlor prosecution assessed against the responsible person($), the property
owner(a), and/or the property as a lien,
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fine(s). Additionally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fine(a), and contact the City to request a re -
Inspection, or
2) Pay the corresponding fine(s) and request an extension of time In writing pursuant to
TCC 1185(b), which shows a reasonable hardship; or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 11811 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrable citation, together with an advanced deposit
of the corresponding fine(a).
Request for Hearing forms and other information on Administrative Citations may be obtained
on the City's website at wywr ,lustinca.om.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 !?r(714)573-3100 • F:(714)573-3113 0 www tustinca.org
N.Ilca aM ON 1.1
520 Pw Shoal
Sap1aM '16,2010
C..•v10+ 12
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility Is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit.
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Corner lot line: 10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet.
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
thirtieth
street
architects
inc.
October 20, 2010
Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin
Dear Elizabeth:
founding principals
john c. loomis, architect
james c. wilson, architect
principal
elwood I. galley, architect
Pursuant to our letter agreement, we have conducted a cursory review of the
photographs of structures provided by staff of the existing structures at 520 Pacific
Street. The following is a summary of our findings:
Terminology
We will refer to the street facing side of the complex as the "front", the two sides
as the "left and right" based on looking at the site from the street and the structures
built behind the carriage barn as the "middle" and "rear" structures.
Zoning
Zoning issues are not part of our Scope of Work and are not addressed.
Building Sequence
It appears that the main front house and two-story or loft type carriage barn may
have been originally built on the site in 1928. Both of these structures exhibit the
same type of exterior siding and window and door trim. The historical survey
indicates that there is evidence that the original front gable of the residence may
have originally had a modified hip roof at its roof peak, but was later modified. It
appears that the original development probably involved one living unit in the
main house.
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
At some point later in time, it appears that the upper portion of the carriage barn
was converted into a second living unit with the addition of the stairway at the left
side of the property. The carport and rear one-story middle addition may also
have been added at this time or later, subsequent to the original construction of the
residence. Both the enclosed entry and one-story addition have vertical siding and
no carpenter cuts on the window trim that distinguishes these alterations from the
original construction. The deepened fascia detail at the rear elevation of the
enclosed entry is a clear indication of a later alteration. The date of these
alterations is unknown, but they were likely constructed much later than the
original residence, probably during the late 1940's or early 1950's.
Later, another rear addition was constructed that may have initially been used as a
garden shed or children's playhouse (because of the very low ceiling height). The
building has vertical board and batt siding and different detailing than the original
structures and a vintage TM Cobb front door. This was probably converted into a
third living unit some time in the early 1960's, based on the knotty pine interior.
This is a very substandard structure in terms of ceiling height and construction
methods.
Additional alterations to the middle addition were made later, including a rooftop
shed structure with a skylight that is apparently over a shower.
There is evidence of fairly recent electrical work based on the yellow Romex that
is visible in many of the building cavities.
Changes in Use
The original development of the site in 1928 included the construction of a single-
family residence with one living unit and a two-story carriage barn that was
apparently used as a garage and agricultural storage.
At some time after WWII, the carriage barn was converted into a second living
unit, with the addition of the front stair, carport and middle addition at the rear.
Another rear addition was added behind the middle addition during the late 1950's
or early 1960's. This very substandard structure was probably originally used as a
storage shed or kids playhouse. It was later converted into a third living unit.
Historic Significance
The original building has been noted in the Tustin Historic Survey as "one of a
variety of California Bungalow buildings that contributes to Tustin". Although
substantially modified when the second living unit was added, the middle, two
story carriage barn structure appears to retain enough of it's original architectural
integrity and detailing (horizontal redwood siding, carpenter cuts at window trim,
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
modified hip roofs, etc.) to also be considered historic as part of the original
development of the property.
The mid -addition and rear additions were later alterations that are inconsistent
with the architecture of the original structure and are, therefore, not considered
historically significant.
Building Code Issues
There appear to be a number of serious building hazards and code violations in the
current development. The most significant is the construction of the enclosed
stairway to the upper unit that actually encroaches across the side yard property
line. This addition is illegal and constitutes as hazard, in our opinion, by blocking
access in the side yards for fire fighting, as required by the CBC. This stair
addition should be removed and a new stairway/entry constructed elsewhere.
The rear living unit structure is very non -conforming to Building Codes and it
does not appear to be economically viable to bring this structure up to current
codes.
Further Study
Further research using Sanborn and Building Survey Maps could confirm the
construction sequence and provide proof of construction dates. There also could
be information relating to the use of these structures at the time of mapping. The
cost of retaining an Architectural Historian to research this property would
probably be about $1,000.
Conclusion
We feel that the front house and two-story carriage barn are both historically
significant.
It is apparent that there was only one living unit on-site in 1929 when the City of
Tustin was incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and
third living units were added much later, post WWII.
Recommendations
We would recommend that the illegal stairway be removed and that code
violations be corrected at the carriage barn ASAP, if the continued use of this
space as a second living unit is allowed by the City of Tustin. We would hope that
future improvements could include the reversal of some of the inappropriate
alterations to the carriage barn to help restore the architectural integrity of this
resource.
2821 newport boulevard - newport beach, ca 92663 -949/673-2643
We do not recommend the occupancy for habitation of the substandard, rear
addition.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
IA-,—
John
Loomis
Principal
2821 newport boulevard — nowport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
ATTACHMENT E
440 Pacific Street opposition petition
REF: 440 S. PACIFIC, TUSTIN
PERMIT FOR GUEST HOUSE
WE ARE AGAINEST the variance permit to build a guest house
located at 440 S. Pacific Street, Tustin, California.
Owner of record: Jose L. Martinez & Evelyn Leong Martinez
James F. Gominsky Sr.
Eleanor A. Gominsky
530 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Doris M. Smith
470 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Bret S. Fairbanks
Stephanie A. Fairbanks
520 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Steven A. Flores
Grace Flores
560 Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Sienature Date
Don H. Matsubayashi Tjl� 6,pd Ing
Kiyoko Matsubayashi %1w\ % (Al ,,. � , ,N nii
435 S. Pacific St.G
Tustin, California P�rni,td
Michael T. O'Brien
Nathalie Neary O'Brien
545 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
OM
VI
Miuling Maureen Li
Douglas A. Schaller
535 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
R Michael Smith
455 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Shealan Spencer
James Spencer
515 S. Pacific St. /
Tustin, California (,
Patrick C. Harris
445 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
Stephen C. Jones
Sharon A. Jones
520 S. Main St.
Tustin, California
Vides
410 S. Pacific St.
Tustin, California
A
Sienature Date
_- ��- , •-•eve � i
0
.7
ATTACHMENT F
PC Resolution No. 4161
RESOLUTION NO. 4161
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
AFFIRMING THE NOTICE AND ORDER FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE AS
DETERMINED BY THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE PROPERTY
AT 520 PACIFIC STREET (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN 401-371-07)
The Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The Board of Appeals hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. That, on July 27, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of 520
Pacific Street, sent a letter requesting that City staff provide written
verification that the two guest homes located at the rear of the single family
residence at 520 Pacific Street could be rebuilt in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster;
B. That, on August 4, 2010, City staff provided a written zoning confirmation
letter informing Mr. Fairbanks that the property is zoned as Single Family
Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural Resources Overlay (CR)
District and that accessory buildings used as guest rooms are only allowed
as conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 district, provided that no
cooking facilities are installed or maintained and that no compensation in
any form is received. The letter further informed the property owner that no
permits or entitlement exist for the guest houses at the subject property;
C. That, on September 10, 2010, City staff conducted an on-site assessment of
the property at 520 Pacific Street. The assessment revealed that several
unpermitted modifications and additions had been made to the rear units
that were not in compliance with Tustin City Code requirements;
D. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the
City of Tustin sent notice of recordation of a Notice and Order for the property
at 520 Pacific Street to Mr. Fairbanks. Said Notice and Order provided written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance on the property as determined by
the Enforcement Officer and required the correction of code violations related
to unpermitted structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code;
E. That, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the Enforcement Officer is
defined as the Director of Community Development or any other person or
City officer or employee as may be designated by the City Manager to enforce
property maintenance, zoning, and other nuisance abatement regulations
and standards of the City;
Resolution No. 4161
Page 2
F. That, on September 22, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of
520 Pacific Street, filed an appeal of the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at his property;
G. That on October 14, 2010, the City gave public notice by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation, by posting the project site, and by mailing
to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site of the holding of a
public hearing at which the appeal would be considered;
H. That on October 26, 2010, a duly called, and noticed public hearing at which
interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or in
opposition to the appeal and, at which the Planning Commission, acting in
its capacity as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice
and Order filed at 520 Pacific Street. The Planning Commission continued
the item to November 9, 2010 meeting and directed staff to do additional
research on the property and to meet with Mr. Fairbanks to discuss possible
alternatives to resolve the appeal.
I. That on November 9, 2010, the Planning Commission, acting in its capacity
as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice and Order
filed at 520 Pacific Street.
J. That, pursuant to Section 112 Board of Appeals of the Building Code as
adopted by the City of Tustin, the hearing was held to consider evidence
that is relevant to whether the true intent of the City of Tustin's adopted
California Building Code or the rules legally adopted thereunder have been
incorrectly interpreted; the provision of such code do not fully apply; or an
equally good or better form of construction is proposed.
K. That, pursuant to Section 112 of the City of Tustin's adopted California
Building Code, the Planning Commission, acting as Board of Appeals, shall
not have authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions
of the Tustin Building Code or to waive requirements of such code. Further,
the hearing shall be de novo and the Board of Appeals may approve,
approve with conditions, or disapprove the matter in accordance with the
Tustin City Code or remand the matter to the Community Development
Director or the Zoning Administrator for further proceedings in accordance
with directions of the Board of Appeals.
L. That, the Board of Appeals considered evidence supporting the
Enforcement Officer's determination that a public nuisance condition exists
at the subject property due to the present violations of the following Building
Code section:
Resolution No. 4161
Page 3
California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) -
Permits Required. Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct,
enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a
building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove,
convert or replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any such work to
be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain the
required permit.
M. That there is substantial evidence that the violations identified in the Notice
and Order exists as evidenced by the Building Code violations observed on
a cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
provided hereto in Exhibit A.
N. That the violations identified herein and in the Notice and Order
demonstrate that substandard housing and property maintenance
conditions exist which create a dangerous condition at the subject property
due to the present violations of the California Building Code as adopted per
Tustin City Code 8100;
O. That the extent of repairs ordered by the Enforcement Officer are
appropriate for the property;
P. That the time limitations for starting and completing the repairs are
reasonable;
Q. That the Board of Appeals has the right to employ qualified individuals to
assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed
Architect John C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The architect
provided a report that concluded that "the front house and two-story
carriage barn are both historically significant. It is apparent that there was
only one living unit on-site [main house] in 1929 when the City of Tustin was
incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and third
living units were added much later, post WWII" (attached hereto in Exhibit
C).
II. The Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the Board of Appeals pursuant
to Section 112 of the Building Code as adopted by the City of Tustin, hereby affirms
the Notice and Order for the property at 520 Pacific Street which provides written
notice of the existence of a public nuisance and requires the correction of code
violations related to illegal structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
subject to the following condition:
Resolution No. 4161
Page 4
The property owner(s) is/are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of
the Notice and Order identified in the related staff report dated October 26,
2010, as attached hereto Exhibit B and incorporated herein with the exception
of the date of compliance which is hereby established as November 30, 2010,
to permit the owner additional time to hire a professional to prepare plans and
process and obtain the necessary permits for compliance with the Tustin City
Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting on the 9th day of November, 2010.
Jeff R. Thompson
Chair Pro Tem
Y. Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Board of Appeals Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF TUSTIN
I, Y. Henry Huang, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Board of Appeals Secretary
of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4161 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Board of Appeals, held on the 9th
day of November, 2010.
Y. Henry Huang, P.E., C.B.O.
Building Official
S:\Cddl4my\Code Enforcement\520 Pacific\PC resolution Appeal 520 Pacifc.docx
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Revised (11/9/10)
EXHIBIT A
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
The use of the property
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 required that a building permit
_ ; F
as a triplex (with 3
Application for Permit
be obtained before constructing a structure. This
f
units) changes the
California Fire Code
requirement is essentially the same requirement (in the
e,
building occupancy
Section 102.3 Change of
2007 CBC) as it has been since the adoption of the first
from R3 (single family
use or occupancy;
Building Code which was adopted by the City of Tustin
residential) to R1
California Fire Code
on June 3, 1929.'
(multiple family)
Section 102 Unsafe
Specifically, the 1927 UBC states that "No person shall
Building or Structures
erect or construct any building or structure, nor add to,
`*- *-
TCC 8100 Adoption of
enlarge, move, improve, after, convert, extend or
2007 California Building
demolish any building or structure, or cause the same to
Code A105.1 —Permits
be done, without first obtaining a building permit
Required
therefore from the Building Inspector."
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
It could not be
1927 UBC Sec. 201
prior to any addition that was constructed.
determined if
Application for Permit
Foundations were. required in the 1927 UBC to support
footing/foundations
1927 UBC Sec. 2204
all exterior walls.
$ ` Multiple residential
exist to provide
Foundations required
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 further indicates that :Every
ts. built after
adequate structural
California Fire Code
such application [for building permit] shall show the use
= original structures
bracing and support to
Section 102 Unsafe
or occupancy of all parts of the building and such other
. w!o permits
the structures
Building or Structures
reasonable information as may be required by the
m
0
Building Inspector."
-
The occupancy of the original structures, as indicated in
the Notice of Completion issued to George and Alice
V
Gaylord in 1929, incidated that "a dwelling house and
garage" were the permitted structures on-site; thereby
acknowledging that the only livible structure or dwelling
on-site at the time of original construction was the main
house and that any other dwelling unit to be constructed
would require a building permit.
No fire separation walls
1927 UBC Sec. 503
Sinceadoptionof the 1927 UBC, fire separation
between units;
Mixed Occupancy
requirements have been required to separate the
therefore not in
2007 California Building
occupancy of a building such that different portions of
compliance with one
Code Table 503;
the building are placed in different occupancy groups.
hour separation
California Fire Code
The fire separation between the garage and the second
requirements which
Section 110.1 Unsafe
and third livable units on site did not include the
poses a potential fire
Conditions
necessary vertical or horizontal separation as has been
hazard to occupants
required since the original Building Code. Therefore, the
units were not built to code as it was originally adopted
or pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
11Fa
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
pP
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3,1929)
Photos
Mechanical, electrical,
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Code,
and plumbing (including
Code, and Plumbing
Electrical Code and Plumbing. Code in 1929. Therefore,
Bathroom
HVAC) installation
.Code
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
in upper
work done without
TCC 8100 Adoption of
conversion extension or demolishion has required a
unit wi no
permits
2007 California Building
permit. There were electrical and plumbingcode
permits
Permits are required to
Code At 05.1 -Permits
standards that were required to be consistent with the
_
insure that life safety
protocol is followed and
required
code requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of
kitchens and bathrooms (including the shower that was
Pill
installation is done
added on to the rear of the upper unit), would have been
according to plan.
Without such permits
subject to first obtaining permits and Inspections to
ensure compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code
a
and inspection,
and Plumbing Code or any subsequent. Code as
,ay _ __
installation may create
adopted by the City.
fire hazard, water
damage, etc.
-
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
The original structures on the site, as indicated in the
'
code; the property does
minimum building site for
Notice of Completion, did not include multiple dwelling
..
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
units on-site. The document indicates that only "a
-
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
dwelling unit and garage" were originally constructed on
}' Second and
second or third unit
TCC 92231J2 Accessary
the property. Any subsequent construction of units
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
would have been subject to Zoning Code requirements.
third residential
sq. ft. lot; however this
rooms, providing. no
In accordance with the City of Tustin's First Zoning.
units
lot is 10,000 sq. ft)
cooking facility is
Ordinance adopted on April 7, 1947, a guest house use
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
intended for "temporary guests" were not permitted to
facilities) requires CUP_
subject to Conditional
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
`gyp
This number of units
Use Permit
development standards (e.g, minimum lot size of 8,000
would need to be
square feet).
located In an R-2 or R3
November 6, 1961, adoption of a new Zoning Code
district and would
required that a guest house use required a CUP and no
require a minimum of 7
cooking facilities were permitted. It also established
parking stalls to support
second unit standards which allowed a kitchen subject
the added residential
to a CUP and minimum site standards (e.g. minimum
use.
12, 000 square foot lot; 1 parking garage space for 2n6
unit in addition to parking requirements of main dwelling;
etc.)
Plumbing and electrical fixtures installed in the second
unit, third unit, and garage, appear to have been
Installed within the last decade and therefore would
have been subject to permits. No permits are on file and
no CUP has been obtained for use of the units as guest
unit or second unit use.
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
The second story wall
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
-
construction and
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that "all exterior walls...
windows adjacent to the
Section 1403 of TCC
shall have no openings therein and shall be of not less
property line do not
8100 Adoption of 2007
than one-hour fire -resistive construction". "All openings
comply with fire
California Building Code
in exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less
protection
thanfour(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
Insufficient
requirements.
protected by metal clad doors and wire glass windows
setback to
The opening is not
with metal covered sash and frame
{ - 1
permitted as shown;
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over
_' PL
exterior wall is not fire
the property line of the neighboring property. The rear
rated; primary (and
unit was constructed with a different siding (which
only) stairway restricts
indicates it was built after the original structures) and is
ingress egress in case
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
of fire or other
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
emergency.
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings
D,
and have one-hour fire resistive construction.Therefore,
This creates an additional concern since there are
the stairway and rear unit would not have been
unprotected openings either too close and/or over
a°
permitted as built whether it was constructed in 1929 or
the property line creating a fire hazard
m
resent day.
•�
Furnace installed
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
-
without required permits
Code, and Plumbing
required a permit and were subject to specific code
o
does not meet
Code
requirements to ensure safety of the occupants. The
w
clearance requirements
1927 UBC Sec. 3707
1927 UBC required to "rest on masonry or concrete
a
and creates a potential
Warm Air Fumaces
floors'. As shown in the photo at right, the warm air
f
ufire
hazard.
1927 UBC Sec. 3714
furnace installed in the upper unit was installed on a
1
in
Other Sources of Heat
wood floor which was not in compliance with the 1927
TCC 8100 Adoption of
UBC nor is it in compliance with the 2007 CBC.
.,
- -
2007 California Building
Code A105.1 Permits
required
I
Exposed electrical next
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
to unpermitted furnace
Code, and Plumbing
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. Therefore,
which causes potential
Code
installation of electrical has required a permit since
fire hazard.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
1927. The electrical shown in the photo appears to be
d
2007 California Building
one that was in production within the last decade,
Code Al 05.1 — Permits
therefore it was not installed consistent with any
Electrical device
required
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present. No
- next to heater
permits are on file and the current installation causes a
otential fire hazard tooccupants
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Kitchen cooking
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the City of Tustin's First Zoning
I
facilities not permitted
Code, and Plumbing
Ordinance adopted on April 7, 1947,. a guest house use
in guest unit.
Code
Intended for "temporary guests" were not permitted to
Kitchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 9223b2 No
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
- upper unit
�vd`
installed without
cooking facilities
development standards (e.g. minimum lot size of 8,000
permits. Permits are
permitted in guest unit
square feet). The adoption of the Zoning Code on
'.
required to insure that
TCC 8100 Adoption of
November 6, 1961, required that a guest house use
life safety protocol is
2007 California Building
required a CUP and no cooking facilities were permitted
Br
followed and installation
Code A105.1 -Permits
The kitchen appliances, including range and refrigerator,
is done according to
required
sink and cabinetry produced morerecently than 1929,
�
plan. Without such
1933 or 1947. This indicates that the kitchen has been
-
permits and inspection,
added, enlarged, moved, improved, altered, converted,
installation may create
or extended at one or more times since 1929 when the
-
fire hazard, water
original structures were built. Therefore, the kitchen was
damage, etc.
added without benefit of the necessary building,
"
electrical, plumbing permits. Furthermore, kitchen and/or
<
cooking facilities have never been permitted In a guest
unit by Zoning Code, There are no permits and the
kitchen would not be permitted based on the site
restrictions (i.e. min. lot size of 42,000 sq it for second
unit).
Shower added on to
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Cade,.-
®
original structure. This
Application for Permit
Electrical Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. Therefore,
-
c
requires a building
1927 UBC, Electrical
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
a
permit to add additional
Code, and Plumbing
conversion extension or demolision has required a
r
square footage (pop-
Code
permit. There were electrical and plumbing code
0
out) and permits for
TCC 8100 Adoption of
standards that were required to consistent with the code
m
plumbing, and
2007 California Building
requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of the
lir
wwaterproofing.
Code A105.1 - Permits
bathrooms (including the shower that was added on to
v
required)
the rear of the upper unit), would have been subject to
'
c
first obtaining permits and inspections to ensure
6
compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code and
Shower added w/o
U)Plumbing
Code or any subsequent Code as adopted by
permits ,
the City.
-
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Railing has no
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC Sec. 3305, the City
1//
intermediary posts and
Application for Permit
has required that stairways provide walls or well securers
_
No inner
the run and rise are not
1927 UBC 3305
balustrades or guards on each side and handrails
compliant with Building
Railings
placed on at least one side of every stairway. The
posts
Code requirements nor
TCC 8100 Adoption of
stairway built to the second unit over the garage was not
is the unprotected back
2007 California Building,
built consistent with requirements in 1927 to present.
which is open. This
Code Al 05.1 –Permits
Over time, the Building Code requirements have
poses a potential falling
required
Increased the requirements on stairways to ensure
hazard for small
TCC 8100 Adoption of
safety of those utilizing the stairs. Current code
children.
2007 California Building
requirementsdo not allow the unprotected back, as
Code 1012 Handrails –
shown in the picture to the right, due to falling hazard.4
handrails required for
Note: Given that the structure at this location is
ru
stairways
constructed over the property line a person that may fall
u
TCC 8100 Adoption of
through, would fall onto the adjacent property.
u
2007 California Building
v
Code 1013 Guards
There is no property
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
line firewall separation
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required minimum one-hour fire wall
between staircase and
2007 CBC Section
separation and minimum setbacks for livable dwelling
Window at PL
the property line.
1024.3 Exit discharge
units to a property line.
requires Sft
location
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over
setback
the property line of the neighboring property which
,r
The staircase is built
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
indicates it was built after the original structures and is
over the property line
Openings and Walls
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
-'
A guest unit requires a
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
5 foot setback to
5 ft. setback to property
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings
property line (PL).
line
and have one-hour fire resistive construction. Therefore,
Built over PL I
There are several
the stairway would not have been permitted as built
I
issues associated with
whether it was constructed in 1929 or present day.
the location of this
staircase; most
as
imminent is the lack of
emergency access and
�f
safe egress from the
{ ?M/n
unit.
r
Roof drains onto
1927 UBC Sec. 3208
The 1927 UBC requires that roofs of all buildings do not
neighboring property
which may cause
Roof Drainage
2007 CBC Section
drain onto neighboring property. As shown in the photos
at 520 Pacific Street, the stairway has been built over
Y
�, —t ;• r
_ 4
flooding.
1101.1 all roofs shall be
the property line and the roof drains onto the
drained into a separate
neighboring property. Current code requirements still
't -
storm sewer system
limit drainage across a property line.
{- -
2007 CBC Section
J 109.4 – Drainage
across property line
EXHIBIT A
61rIf:
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Structural supports do
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC all wood structural
not provide sufficient
Application for Permit
members were required to be of sufficient size and
L
supporting rafters Roof
1927 UBC 2502
strength to carry their Imposed loads safely. The floor
_ Inadequate
members are
Structural members
joist appears to be supported along block fence rather
undersized to provide
2007 CBC Section
than cantilevered from the two story structure. This does
_- structural
adequate support
1604.1, 2301.2 General
not provide adequate support to the structure and may
supports
Design Requirements
compromise the garage and main house to which is it
attached.
!
The carport is attached
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The structure appears to have been constructed after the
Carport
to both the main house
Application for Permit
1929 original dwelling and garage. From 1929 until
and the 2 -story garage
1927 UBC 2502
present, permits have been required to construct the*
attached to
and attached rear units;
Structural members
carport and calculations would have been necessary to
-� t
main house
making this a tri-plex
Change in occupancy
determine the required size of timber members for
and garage
unit pursuant to building
constitutes a multitude of
sufficient structural support.
-r -
code fire rating. These
CBC and Fire Code
deficiencies create
violations:
r
access hazards for fire
access and may pose
California Fire Code
Section 102.3 Change of
1
r
additional hazards to
use or occupancy,
- ---, -
a
occupants since the.
California Fire Code
tj
occupancy changes
Section 102 Unsafe
with a tri-plex (common
Building or Structures
terminology).
Unsupported electrical
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building.
metal conduit (EMT)
Application for Permit
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. The installation of
between garage and
1927 UBC, Electrical
the unsuppEMT appears to have been installed
Unsupported
nsuort pp
house. The potential for
Code, and Plumbing
within the past decade and no permits were obtained.
line over carport
damage and failure due
Code
Therefore, installation of electrical has required a
to the exposure of the
TCC 8100 Adoption of
permit since 1927. Therefore it was not installed
line is Increased and
2007 California Building
consistent with any electrical code requirements from
poses a potential fire
Code Al 05.1 -Permits
1929 to present. The current installation may cause a
hazard.
required
potential fire hazard to occupants.
61rIf:
EXHIBIT A
71
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
No rating separation
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
-�
between walls of garage
Openings and Walls
requirements have been required to separate the
and living units; thus
2007 CBC Table 406.1A
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
Romex wiring is
exposing tenants above
Fire -Resistance Rating
building are placed indifferent occupancy groups. The
_ unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
to fire hazard originating
Requirements for Exterior
Walls Based on Fire
fire separation between the garage and the second story
\
in the garage.
Separation Distance
and rear units on site did not include the necessary
vertical or horizontal separation as has been required\"
since the original Building Code adoption in 1929.
Therefore, the units were not built or converted to livable
units pursuant to code requirements as it was originally
adopted nor pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
New junction box without -- pl-
Electrical wiring:
1927 UBC, Electrical
The installation of the Romex appears to have been
Romex cannot be
Code, and Plumbing
installed after 2001 and no permits were obtained.
permits
exposed or unprotected
Code
Permits have been required for electrical since adoption
and must be
1927 UBC Sec. 201
of the 1927 UBC and Electrical Code adopted In 1929.
attached/secured.
Application for Permit
Therefore it was not installed consistent with any
(Romex was first used
1927 UBC, Electrical
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present.
in the 1950's. Color
Code, and Plumbing
Furthermore, the current installation may cause a
coding (yellow) wasn't
Code
potential fire hazard to occupants who live above the
available until 2001)
2007 CEC Article 334.15
garage and to the rear of the garage.
Exposed Work and
Article 330.30 Securing
and Supporting
Unit does not meet fire
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
rating requirement; 5
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that 'all exterior walls... shall
foot setback required to
2007 CBC Table 602
have no openings therein and shall be of not less than
.<--
property line to protect
Fire -Resistance Rating
one-hour fire -resistive construction". "All openings in
occupants from fire
Requirements for Exterior
exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less than
hazards; or safety
Walls Based on Fire
four(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
^�
personnel responding to
Separation Distance
protected by metal -clad doors and wire glass windows
--
m
an emergency.
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
with metal covered sash and frame".
-
less than feet)
The rear unit was constructed with a different siding
a
TCC 9223b2 minimum
(which indicates it was built after the original structures)
—
side yard setback 5 feet
and is not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires
that exterior walls within no less than a four foot setback
m
have no openings and have one-hour fire resistive
construction. Current 2007 CBC requiment s include
Min. 5 it
setback and fire -wall separation requirements. Therefore,
setback
the rear unit would not have been permitted as built
required
whether it was constructed in 1929 or present day.
(zero - 4 it
provided)
71
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Heater installed with a
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
gas line without permits
Application for Permit
required a permit and weresubject to specific code
p
It is installed on a
1927 UBC, Electrical
requirements to ensure safety of the occupants.
combustible wood sided
Code, and Plumbing
Separation from flamable surfaces have been required
wall which poses a
Code
since the original Building Code. As shown in the photo
Heater
potential fire hazard due
TCC 8100 Adoption of
at right, a newer heating unit has been installed directly
installed
to the combustible
2007 California Building
onto wooden siding. No permits were obtained.
material
Code All 05.1 — Permits
required
permit
Subject to manufacture's
installation standards and
mechanical/plumbing
permit
F'
Ceiling heights vary and
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The rear unit appears to have been added onto over
do not meet the 7'6"
Application for Permit
time. Evidence as such include the lower ceiling heights
height requirement
2007 CBC Section
where the middle addition and rear addition come{
1208.2 Ceiling height
together at the interior of the unit. The 1927 UBC states
minimum
that "No person shall erect or construct any building or
structure, nor add to, enlarge, move, improve, alter,
convert, extend or demolish any building or structure, or
cause the same to be done, without first obtaining a
building permit therefore from the Building Inspector."
Ceiling
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
height does
prior to any addition that was constructed.
not meet
min. 7'6"
81' -
EXHIBIT A
im
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Improper and
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The kitchen installed in the rear unit appeared to have
-
substandard electrical
Application for Permit
previously had a range located to the left of the sink.
wiring without permit-
1927 UBC, Electrical
According to the 1927 UBC Sec. 3710, stoves uses for
Power strip next to
Code, and Plumbing
heating were not to be located closer than 12 inches to
kitchen sink where a
Code
combustible partitions. However, it appears that the stove
range might have been
1927 UBC Sec. 3710
would have been place against the wooden siding shown
previously
stoves
in the photo at right. The electrical strip would have been
Plumbing added without
2007 CFC Section 605.5
Inches from the open flame. Furthermore, the stove
-
permit
Extension Cords
would have blocked the exiting door which is at the far
left side of the photo.
_
Kitchen is not permitted
1927 UBC Sec. 201
(per zoning)
Application for Permit
(i.e. plumbing, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
etc.)
2007 California Building
Code Al 05.1 –Permits
m
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
o
facilities permitted in
guest unit
Unsecured and exposed
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The. City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
gas line on the interior
Application for Permit
Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. The installation of the
which poses a potential
2007 CMC Section
unsupport gas line appears to have been installed
gas leak and fire hazard
1311.2.6 Hangers,
subsequent to the original structures and no permits
= —
within the rear unit
Supports, and Anchors
were obtained. Therefore of unsecured gas line was not
and 1311.7 Outlets
installed consistent with code requirements from 1929 to
present. Further more, the current installation may cause
a potential hazard to occupants.
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
F
im
EXHIBIT A
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
Si\Cdd\Amy\Code Enforcement\520 Pacific\Exhibit A 1927 code coniplaince issues.docll/5/10
1O1Pegr
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Insulation (appears to
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
be straw bale) has high
Openings and Walls
requirements have been required to separate the
flame spread rating
2007 CBC Section 719.2
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
concealed installation,
building are placed in different occupancy groups. The
`s
Insulating material shall
fire separation between the garage and the rear unit
-
have a flame spread
appears to consist of combustible hay material which is
-
m
index rating of not more
not consistent with the fire -wall separation requirements
i
than 25 and smoke
which has been required since the original Building Code
5
development index of
adoption in 1929. Therefore, the units were not built or
_.
450 or less
converted to livable units pursuant to code requirements
/f
`
as it it was originally adopted nor pursuant to current 2007
'-
CBC requirements.
_
ix
Combustible material
installed between walls
2010 9
The room is considered
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, all portions of building
"habitable space" and
Application for Permit
used for eating, living and/or sleeping purposes must
appears to not provide
1927 UBC Sec. 1405
provide sufficient light and ventilation. The recreation
sufficient, ventilation,
light, Ventilation and
room was not built with permits and requires inspections
s
a
Sanitation
to ensure that it meets Code requirements.
m
.c
heat and light
Habitable space as
m
defined by CBC is a
E
space in a building for
living sleeping, eating or
cooking Therefore, it
4
u°
°
requires sufficient light,
; *r \
o
ventilation, heat, etc
m
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CBC Section
m
and should be a
1208.2 minimum 7'6"
minimum 7'6°
Ceiling height
_- does not meet
minimum
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
Si\Cdd\Amy\Code Enforcement\520 Pacific\Exhibit A 1927 code coniplaince issues.docll/5/10
1O1Pegr
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first ciass and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address:
Assessor Parcel Number:
Case Number:
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
520 Pacific Street
401-371-07
V10-0312
TUSTIN
HISTORY
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore. please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard. .
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • P: (714) 573-3100 0 F: (714) 573-3113 0 www.tustinca.org
Notice and Omer at
520 Pac10c Street
September 18, 2010
Case;/ V10-0312
Page 2
Ie;
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincere)
Br d Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A— Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Development Department
EXHIBIT A
Administrative Citation Process
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
In accordance with Tuatin City Cdde (TCC) 1182(d), fines may be assessed by means of an
administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the some ordinance or permit within ons year of the first violatkm: Building
and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $800.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The Citymay also take further legal action including issuing
the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the violation(s) with the cost of such
abatement and/or prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property
owner(s), and/or the property as a lion.
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fine(s). Addidonally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fine(s), and contact the City to request a re-
Inspedlon, or
2) Pay the corresponding fins(s) and request an extension of time In writing pursuant to
TCC I I65(b), which shows a reasonable hardship, or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1188 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrative citation, together with an advanced deposit
of tilt corresponding flne(s).
Request for Hearing fors and other information on Administrative Citations May be obtained
on the City's website at www.tustinca.ora.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 R (714) 573.3100 • F!(714)573-3113 • www.custinca.org
Nolic n OIX rcl
520 Pectic Slro l
Seplembw 16, 2010
Csu N V10-0312
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required.
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 8223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility is Installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit.
Tustin City Code 8223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum aide yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Corner lot line: 10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet.
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
thirtieth
street
architects
inc,
October 20, 2010
Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin
Dear Elizabeth:
f6anding principals
john c. loomis, architect
jamcs c. wilson, architect
principal
elwood I. galley, architect
Pursuant to our letter agreement, we have conducted a cursory review of the
photographs of structures provided by staff of the existing structures at 520 Pacific
Street. The following is a summary of our findings:
Terminology
We will refer to the street facing side of the complex as the "front', the two sides
as the "left and right' based on looking at the site from the street and the structures
built behind the carriage barn as the "middle" and "rear" structures.
Zoning
Zoning issues are not part of our Scope of Work and are not addressed.
Building Sequence
It appears that the main front house and two-story or loft type carriage barn may
have been originally built on the site in 1928. Both of these structures exhibit the
same type of exterior siding and window and door trim. The historical survey
indicates that there is evidence that the original front gable of the residence may
have originally had a modified hip roof at its roof peak, but was later modified. It
appears that the original development probably involved one living unit in the
main house.
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
At some point later in time, it appears that the upper portion of the carriage barn
was converted into a second living unit with the addition of the stairway at the left
side of the property. The carport and rear one-story middle addition may also
have been added at this time or later, subsequent to the original construction of the
residence. Both the enclosed entry and one-story addition have vertical siding and
no carpenter cuts on the window trim that distinguishes these alterations from the
original construction. The deepened fascia detail at the rear elevation of the
enclosed entry is a clear indication of a later alteration. The date of these
alterations is unknown, but they were likely constructed much later than the
original residence, probably during the late 1940's or early 1950's.
Later, another rear addition was constructed that may have initially been used as a
garden shed or children's playhouse (because of the very low ceiling height). The
building has vertical board and batt siding and different detailing than the original
structures and a vintage TM Cobb front door. This was probably converted into a
third living unit some time in the early 1960's, based on the knotty pine interior.
This is a very substandard structure in terms of ceiling height and construction
methods.
Additional alterations to the middle addition were made later, including a rooftop
shed structure with a skylight that is apparently over a shower.
There is evidence of fairly recent electrical work based on the yellow Romex that
is visible in many of the building cavities.
Changes in Use
The original development of the site in 1928 included the construction of a single-
family residence with one living unit and a two-story carriage barn that was
apparently used as a garage and agricultural storage.
At some time after WWII, the carriage barn was converted into a second living
unit, with the addition of the front stair, carport and middle addition at the rear.
Another rear addition was added behind the middle addition during the late 1950's
or early 1960's. This very substandard structure was probably originally used as a
storage shed or kids playhouse. It was later converted into a third living unit.
Historic Significance
The original building has been noted in the Tustin Historic Survey as "one of a
variety of California Bungalow buildings that contributes to Tustin". Although
substantially modified when the second living unit was added, the middle, two
story carriage barn structure appears to retain enough of it's original architectural
integrity and detailing (horizontal redwood siding, carpenter cuts at window trim,
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
modified hip roofs, etc.) to also be considered historic as part of the original
development of the property.
The mid -addition and rear additions were later alterations that are inconsistent
with the architecture of the original structure and are, therefore, not considered
historically significant.
Building Code Issues
There appear to be a number of serious building hazards and code violations in the
current development. The most significant is the construction of the enclosed
stairway to the upper unit that actually encroaches across the side yard property
line. This addition is illegal and constitutes as hazard, in our opinion, by blocking
access in the side yards for fire fighting, as required by the CBC. This stair
addition should be removed and a new stairway/entry constructed elsewhere.
The rear living unit structure is very non -conforming to Building Codes and it
does not appear to be economically viable to bring this structure up to current
codes.
Further Study
Further research using Sanborn and Building Survey Maps could confirm the
construction sequence and provide proof of construction dates. There also could
be information relating to the use of these structures at the time of mapping. The
cost of retaining an Architectural Historian to research this property would
probably be about $1,000.
Conclusion
We feel that the front house and two-story carriage barn are both historically
significant.
It is apparent that there was only one living unit on-site in 1929 when the City of
Tustin was incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and
third living units were added much later, post WWII.
Recommendations
We would recommend that the illegal stairway be removed and that code
violations be corrected at the carriage barn ASAP, if the continued use of this
space as a second living unit is allowed by the City of Tustin. We would hope that
future improvements could include the reversal of some of the inappropriate
alterations to the carriage barn to help restore the architectural integrity of this
resource.
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
We do not recommend the occupancy for habitation of the substandard, rear
addition.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
John Loomis
Principal
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
ATTACHMENT G
PC Resolution No. 4162
RESOLUTION NO. 4162
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, AFFIRMING THE NOTICE AND ORDER FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
AS DETERMINED BY THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 520 PACIFIC STREET (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. APN
401-371-07)
The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That, on July 27, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of 520
Pacific Street, sent a letter requesting that City staff provide written
verification that the two guest homes located at the rear of the single family
residence at 520 Pacific Street could be rebuilt in the event of a fire,
earthquake, or disaster;
B. That, on August 4, 2010, City staff provided a written zoning confirmation
letter informing Mr. Fairbanks that the property is zoned as Single Family
Residential (R-1) and located within the Cultural Resources Overlay (CR)
District and that accessory buildings used as guest rooms are only allowed
as conditionally permitted uses within the R-1 district, provided that no
cooking facilities are installed or maintained and that no compensation in
any form is received. The letter further informed the property owner that no
permits or entitlement exist for the guest houses at the subject property;
C. That, on September 10, 2010, City staff conducted an on-site assessment of
the property at 520 Pacific Street. The assessment revealed that several
unpermitted modifications and additions had been made to the rear units
that were not in compliance with Tustin City Code requirements;
D. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, on September 16, 2010, the
City of Tustin sent notice for recordation of a Notice and Order for the property
at 520 Pacific Street. Said Notice and Order provided written notice of the
existence of a public nuisance on the property as determined by the
Enforcement Officer and required the correction of code violations related to
unpermitted structures constructed in violation of the Tustin City Code
including the City of Tustin Building Code and Zoning Code;
E. That, pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 5503, the Enforcement Officer is
defined as the Community Development Director or any other person or City
officer or employee as may be designated by the City Manager to enforce
property maintenance, zoning, and other nuisance abatement regulations
and standards of the City;
Resolution No. 4162
Page 2
F. That, pursuant to Section 9294 of the Tustin City Code, the applicant may
appeal the specific action or seek relief in the appeal, and reasons why the
action taken by the Community Development Director should be modified or
reversed;
G. That, on September 22, 2010, Bret Fairbanks, the current property owner of
520 Pacific Street, filed an appeal of the Notice and Order for the
declaration of public nuisance at his property;
H. That the appellant is requesting consideration regarding the Conditional
Use Permit(s) and lot lines, indicating, in part, that he is not in violation of
these codes because the structures existed prior to Conditional Use
Permits and the first Zoning of Tustin;
I. That on October 14, 2010, the City gave public notice by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation, by posting the project site, and by mailing
to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site of the holding of a
public hearing at which the appeal would be considered;
J. That on October 26, 2010, the Planning Commission held a duly called, and
noticed public hearing at which interested persons had an opportunity to
testify in support of, or in opposition to, the appeal, and at which the
Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the appeal hearing body,
considered the appeal of the Notice and Order filed at 520 Pacific Street.
The Planning Commission continued the item to November 9, 2010
meeting and directed staff to do additional research on the property and to
meet with Mr. Fairbanks to discuss possible alternatives to resolve the
appeal.
K. That on November 9, 2010, the Planning Commission, acting in its capacity
as the Board of Appeals, considered the appeal of the Notice and Order
filed at 520 Pacific Street.
L. That pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9294, the Planning Commission
will act in its capacity as the appeal hearing body to consider appeal of any
decisions of the Community Development Director;
M. That the City of Tustin was incorporated on September 19, 1927, and the
subject property is located within the original City boundaries. The house
and detached two story garage were constructed in approximately 1929
and the first published building code, the 1927 Edition of the Uniform
Building Code, was adopted by the City of Tustin on June 3, 1929.
Construction may have commenced prior to adoption of the 1927 Uniform
Building Code, consequently, there are no building permit records for the
original construction of the original buildings. The earliest zoning map on
Resolution No. 4162
Page 3
file, from 1961, identifies the property as R-1 single family residential and
the current zoning for the property is R-1 Single Family Residential;
N. That there is substantial evidence that the violations identified in the Notice
and Order exists as evidenced by the Building Code violations observed on
a cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
provided hereto in Exhibit A;
O. That the third unit located behind the garage structure appears to have
been constructed in phases several decades after the original structures.
The varying roof heights visible from the interior and exterior of the unit and
the different siding indicate that the unit was added in sections at different
times.
P. That no permits to construct and/or convert the units are on file and there
are several' code violations which indicate that the unit was not built to City
Code requirements.
Q. That the third unit building was constructed approximately four feet from the
property line, which is not consistent with the minimum five foot setback
required for accessory structures used as guest units. Additionally, several
issues exist, including the improper and substandard electrical wiring,
installation of a newer unpermitted heating unit, lack of required firewall and
combustible insulation between walls separating units; all of which may
cause a fire hazard to occupants.
R. That the Planning Commission has the right to employ qualified individuals
to assist in its investigations and in making findings and decisions. Staff
commissioned a third party survey and evaluation provided by Licensed
Architect John C. Loomis from Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. The architect
provided a report that concluded that "the front house and two-story
carriage barn are both historically significant. It is apparent that there was
only one living unit on-site [main house] in 1929 when the City of Tustin was
incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and third
living units were added much later, post WWII' (attached hereto in Exhibit
C).
S. That the appeal is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) in that the appeal is not considered a project under CEQA
Guidelines;
Il. The Planning Commission, acting in its capacity as the appeal hearing body Per
TCC Section 9242, hereby affirms the Notice and Order for the property at 520
Pacific Street which provides written notice of the existence of a public nuisance and
requires the correction of code violations related to illegal structures constructed in
violation of the Tustin City Code subject to the following condition:
Resolution No. 4162
Page 4
The property owner(s) is/are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of
the Notice and Order identified in the related staff report dated October 26,
2010, as attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein with the
exception of the date of compliance which is hereby established as November
30, 2010, to permit the owner additional time to hire a professional to prepare
plans and process and obtain the necessary permits for compliance with the
Tustin City Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting on the gth day of November, 2010.
Jeff R. Thompson
Chair Pro Tem
ELIZABETH A. BINSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning
Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that
Resolution No. 4162 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin
Planning Commission, held on the gth day of November, 2010.
ELIZABETH A. BINSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
S:\Cdd\Amy\Code EnforcemenM20 Paclfic\PC resolution Appeal 520 Pacific.docx
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Revised (11/9/10)
EXHIBIT A
Table 1: Code Compliance Issues
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
The use of the property
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 required that a building permit
'
as a triplex (with 3
Application for Permit
be obtained before constructing a structure. This
units) changes the
California Fire Code
requirement is essentially the same requirement (in the
-
building occupancy
Section 102.3 Change of
2007 CBC) as it has been since the adoption of the first
t
from R3 (single family
use or occupancy,-
Building Code which was adopted by the City of Tustin
residential) to R1
California Fire Code
on June 3, 1929.
(multiple family)
Section 102 Unsafe
Specifically, the 1927 UBC states that "No person shall
Building or Structures
erect or construct any building or structure, nor add to,
-
TCC 8100 Adoption of
enlarge, move, improve, alter, convert, extend or
^
2007 California Building
demolish any building or structure, or cause the same to
Code Al 05.1 - Permits
be done without first obtaininga building permit
9
.1.
ii
Required
therefore from the Building Inspector.`
( �;
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
It could not be
1927 UBC See. 201
prior to any addition that was constructed.
-
determined if
Application for Permit
Foundations were required in the 1927 UBC to support
footing/foundations
1927 UBC Sec. 2204
all exterior walls::
- Multiple residential
exist to provide
Foundations required
The 1927 UBC Sec. 201 further indicates that :Every
- - units built after
adequate structural
California Fire Code
such application [for building permit] shall show the use
original structures
bracing and support to
Section 102 Unsafe
or occupancy of all parts of the building and such other
w/o permits
the structures
Building or Structures
reasonable information as may be required by the
m
Building Inspector."
-_
The occupancy of the original structures, as indicated in
the Notice of Completion issued to George and Alice
"a
.
Gaylord in 1929, incidated that dwelling house and
garage" were the permitted structures on-site; thereby
acknowledging that the only livible structure or dwelling
on-site at the time of original construction was the main
1
house and that any other dwelling unit to be constructed
would require a building permit.
__
No fire separation walls
1927 UBC Sec. 503
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
between units;
Mixed Occupancy
requirements have been required to separate the
therefore not in
2007 California Building
occupancy of a building such that different portions of
compliance with one
Code Table 503;
the building are placed in different occupancy groups.
hour separation
California Fire Code
The fire separation between the garage and the second
requirements which
Section 110.1 Unsafe
and third livable units on site did not include the
poses a potential fire
Conditions
necessary vertical or horizontal separation as has been
hazard to occupants
required since the original Building Code. Therefore, the
units were not built to code as it was originally adopted
or pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Mechanical, electrical,
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Code,
and plumbing (including
Code, and Plumbing
Electrical Code and Plumbing Code in 1929- Therefore,
Bathroom
HVAC) installation
Code
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
Ir upper
work done without
TCC 8100 Adoption of
conversion extension or demolishion has required a
unit w/ no
permits
2007 California Building
permit. There were electrical and plumbing code
permits
Permits are required to
Code A105.1 —Permits
standards that were required to be consistent with the
insure that life safety
required
code requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of
protocol is followed and
kitchens and bathrooms (including the shower that was
installation is done
added on to the rear of the upper unit), would have been
according to plan.
subject to first obtaining permits and inspections to
Without such permits
ensure compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code
and inspection,
and Plumbing Code or any subsequent Code as
installation may create
adopted by the City.
fire hazard, water
m
damage, etc.
Pursuant to the zoning
TCC 9223a7(b)-
The original structures on the site, as indicated in the
code; the property does
minimum building site for
Notice of Completion, did not include multiple dwelling
not have sufficient lot
second residential unit is
units on-site. The document indicates that only "a
size to accommodate a
12,000 square feet
dwelling unit and garage" were originally constructed on
Second and
second or third unit
TCC 9223b2 Accessory
the property. Any subsequent construction of units
(Requires min. 12,000
buildings used as guest
would have been subject to Zoning Code requirements.
third residential
sq. ft. lot; however this
rooms, providing no
In accordance with the City ofTustin's First Zoning
wits
lot is 10,000 sq. ft)
cooking facility is
Ordinance adopted on April 7, 1947, a guest house use
Guest unit (no kitchen
installed or maintained,
intended for "temporary guests" were not permitted to
�1
facilities) requires CUP.
subject to Conditional
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
11_
This number of units
Use Permit
development standards (e.g. minimum lot size of 8,000
would need to be
square feet).
located in an R-2 or R-3
November 6, 1961, adoption of a new Zoning Code
district and would
required that a guest house use required a CUP and no
++
require a minimum of 7
cooking facilities were permitted. It also established
l
parking stalls to support
second unit standards which allowed a kitchen subject
F
the added residential
to a CUP and minimum site standards (e.g. minimum
use.
12, 000 square foot lot; 1 parking garage space for 2"
unit in addition to parking requirements of main dwelling;
etc.)
Plumbing and electrical fixtures installed in the second
unit, third unit, and garage, appear to have been
installed within the last decade and therefore would
have been subject to permits. No permits are on file and
no CUP has been obtained for use of the units as guest
unit or second unit use.
2�:;i,
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
The second story wail
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
construction and
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that "all exterior walls...
windows adjacent to the
Section 1403 of TCC
shall have no openings therein and shall be of not less
--
property line do not
8100 Adoption of 2007
than one-hour fire -resistive construction". "All openings
— -
comply with fire
California Building Code
in exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less
- –
protection
than four(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
Insufficient
requirements.
protected by metal -clad doors and wire glass windows
setback to
The opening is not
with metal covered sash and frame°.
permitted as shown;
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over!
. PL
exterior wall is not fire
the property line of the neighboring property. The rear
a
rated; primary (and
unit was constructed with a different siding (which
only). stairway restricts
indicates it was built after the original structures) and is
ingress egress in case
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
m
rn
of fire or other
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
m
emergency.
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings
m
and have one-hour fire resistive construction. Therefore,
This creates an additional concern since there are
the stairway and rear unit would not have been
unprotected openings either too close and/or over
s
permitted as built whether it was constructed in 1929 or
the property line creating a fire hazard
R
resent day.
•E
Furnace installed
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
without required permits
Code, and Plumbing
required a permit and were subject to specific code
0
does not meet
Code
requirements to ensure safety of the occupants. The
y
clearance requirements
1927 UBC Sec. 3707
1927 UBC required to "rest on masonry or concrete
'
and creates a potential
Warm Air Furnaces
floors". As shown in the photo at right, the warn air
o
fire hazard.
1927 UBC Sec. 3714
furnace installed in the upper unit was installed on a
v
"t
Other Sources of Heat
wood floor which was not in compliance with the 1927
.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
UBC nor is it in compliance with the 2007 CBC.
2007 California Building
Code Al 05.1 – Permits
required
Exposed electrical next
1927 UBC, Electrical
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
to unpermitted furnace
Code, and Plumbing
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. Therefore,
which causes potential
Code
installation of electrical has required a permit since
fire hazard.
TCC 8100 Adoption of
1927. The electrical shown in the photo appears to be
2007 California Building
one that was in production within the last decade,
j
Electrical device
Code At 05.1 – Permits
therefore it was not installed consistent with any
required
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present. No
next to heater
permits are on file and the current installation causes a
potential fire hazard to occupants.
–
31 „i_
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Kitchen cooking
1927 UBC, Electrical
Since adoption of the City ofTustin's First Zoning.
facilities not permitted
Code, and Plumbing
Ordinance adopted on April 7, 1947, a guest house use
in guest unit.
Code
intended for "temporary guests" were not permitted to
K tchen in
Plumbing and electrical
TCC 9223b2 No
include a kitchen and was subject to minimum site
__ _ upper unit
installed without
cooking facilities
development standards (e.g. minimum lot size of 8,000
--
permits. Permits are
permitted in guest unit
square feet). The adoption of the Zoning Code on
required to insure that
TCC 8100 Adoption of
November 6, 1961, required that a guest house use
life safety protocol is
2007 California Building
required a CUP and no cooking facilities were permitted.
t 1&
followed and installation
Code A105.1 -Permits
The kitchen appliances, including range and refrigerator,
is done according to
required
sink and cabinetry produced more recently than 1929,
plan. Without such
1933 or 1947. This indicates that the kitchen has been
`
permits and Inspection,
added, enlarged, moved, improved, altered, converted,
-
installation may create
or extended at one or more times since 1929 when the
-
fire hazard, water
original structures were built. Therefore, the kitchen was
damage, etc.
added without benefit of the necessary building,
�—
electrical, plumbing permits. Furthermore, kitchen and/or
cooking facilities have never been permitted in a guest
unit by Zoning Code. There are no permits and the
kitchen would not be permitted based on the site
restrictions (i.e. min. lot size of 12,000 sq it for second
unit).
Shower added on to
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Building Code,
-_
v
original structure. This
Application for Permit
Electrical Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. Therefore,
D
>
O
requires a building
1927 UBC, Electrical
any construction, enlargement, improvement, alteration,
permit to add additional
Code, and Plumbing
conversion extension or demolision has required a
a t:
square footage (pop-
Code
permit. There were electrical and plumbing code
out) and permits for
TCC 8100 Adoption of
standards that were required to consistent with the code
F
m
plumbing, and
2007 California Building
requirements in 1929. Therefore, the installation of the
r
a M
waterproofing.
Code A105.1 - Permits
bathrooms (including the shower that was added on to
`b:
-
required)
the rear of the upper unit), would have been subject to
-
first obtaining permits and inspections to ensure
'
d
compliance with the 1927 UBC, Electrical Code and
Shower added w/o i
rp
Plumbing Code or any subsequent Code as adopted by
permits �-
the City.
41
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Railing has no
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC Sec. 3305, the City
I"Y/
intermediary posts and
Application for Permit
has required that stairways provide walls or well secured
No inner
the run and rise are not
1927 UBC 3305
balustrades or guards on each side and handrails
compliant with Building
Railings
placed on at least one sideof every stairway.. The
o posts
Code requirements nor
TCC 8100 Adoption of
stairway built to the second unit over the garage was not
is the unprotected back
2007 California Building.
built consistent with requirements in 1927 to present.'�`��
which is open. This
Code Al 05.1 -Permits
Over time, the Building Code requirements have
poses a potential falling
required
increased the requirements on stairways to ensure
�I
w
hazard for small
TCC 8100 Adoption of
safety of those utilizing the stairs. Current code
children.
2007 California Building
requirements do not allow the unprotected back, as
Code 1012 Handrails -
shown in the picture to the right, due to falling hazard.
handrails required for
Note: Given that the structure at this location is
stairways
constructed over the property line a person that may fall
TCC 8100 Adoption of
through, would fall onto the adjacent property.
2007 California Building
Code 1013 Guards
There is no property
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
line firewall separation
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required minimum one-hour firewall
between staircase and
2007 CBC Section
separation and minimum setbacks for livable dwelling
Window at PL
the property line.
1024.3 Exit discharge
units to a property line.
requires Sft
location
The stairway to the second unit was constructed over
setback
the property line of the neighboring property which
indicates it was built after the original structures and is
The staircase is built
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
over the property line
Openings and Walls
not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires, and
_
A guest unit requires a
TCC 9223b2(e) requires
has since required to current date, that exterior walls
5 foot setback to
5 ft. setback to property
within no less than a four foot setback have no openings)
have
property line (PL).
line
and one-hour fire resistive construction. Therefore,
Built over PL
There are several
the stairway would not have been permitted as built
issues associated with
whether it was constructed In 1929 or present day.
the location of this
staircase; most
imminent is the lack of
- -
emergency access and
safe egress from the.
unit.
Roof drains onto
1927 UBC Sec. 3206
The 1927 UBC requires that roofs of all buildings do not
neighboring property
Roof Drainage
drain onto neighboring property. As shown in the photos
�
which may cause
2007 CBC Section
at 520 Pack Street, the stairway has been built over
flooding.1101.1
all roofs shall be
the property line and the roof drains onto the
drained into a separate
storm sewer system
neighboring property. Current code requirements still
limit drainage across a property line.
2007 CBC Section
=
—
J109.4 -Drainage
across p property line
51 Par•
_Xtnuu_1
M
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Structural supports do
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC all wood structural
not provide sufficient
Application for Permit
members were required to be of sufficient size and
a
supporting rafters Roof
1927 UBC 2502
strength to carry their Imposed loads safely. The floor
Inadequate
members are
Structural members
joist appears to be supported along block fence rather
undersized to provide
2007 CBC Section
than cantilevered from the two story structure. This does
structural
T
adequate support
1604.1, 2301.2 General
not provide adequate support to the structure and may
supports
Design Requirements
compromise the garage and main house to which is it
attached_
r
Carport
The carport is attached
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The structure appears to have been constructed after the
to both the main house
Application for Permit
1929 original dwelling and garage. From 1929 until
and the 2 -story garage
1927 UBC 2502
present, permits have been required to construct the
attached to
and attached rear units;
Structural members
carport and calculations would have been necessary to
'' main house
making this a tri-plex
Change in occupancy
determine the required size of timber members for
and garage
unit pursuant to building
constitutes a multitude of
sufficient structural support.
=-- —
code fire rating. These
CBC and Fire Code
I
deficiencies create
violations:
[
access hazards for fire
California Fire Code
access and may pose
Section 102.3 Change of
c
additional hazards to
use or occupancy,
- - --
a
occupants since the
California Fire Code-
ij
occupancy changes
Section 102 Unsafe
with a tri-plex (common
Building or Structures
terminology).
Unsupported electrical
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
metal conduit(EMT)
Application for Permit
Code and Electrical Code in 1929. The installation of
between garage and
1927 UBC, Electrical
the unsupport EMT appears to have been installedrz
Unsupported
house. The potential for
Code, and Plumbing
within the past decade and no permits were obtained.
line over carport
damage and failure due
Code
Therefore, installation of electrical has required a
to the exposure of the
TCC 8100 Adoption of
permit since 1927. Therefore it was not installed
line is increased and
2007 California Building
consistent with any electrical code requirements from
poses a potential fire
Code Al 05.1 —Permits
1929 to present. The current installation may cause a
hazard.
required
potential fire hazard to occupants.
M
EXHIBIT A
71 rare
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1429)
Photos
No rating separation
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
between walls of garage
Openings and Wallsrequirements
have been required to separate the
and living units; thus
2007 CBC Table 406..1.4Romex
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
wiring is
exposing tenants above
Fire -Resistance Rating
building are placed in different occupancy groups. The
_ unprotected and exposed
and next to the garage
to fire hazard originating
in the
Requirements for Exterior
Walls Based on Fire
Separation Distance
fire separation between the garage and the second story
and rear units on site did not include the necessary
garage.
vertical or horizontal separation as has been required^\
since the original Building Code adoption in 1929.
Therefore, the units were not built or converted to livable
-
rn
units pursuant to code requirements as it was originally
adopted nor pursuant to current 2007 CBC requirements.
)
J1�
c7
New junction box without
Electrical wiring:
1927 UBC, Electrical
The Installation of the Romex appears to have been
Romex cannot be
Code, and Plumbing
installed after 2001 and no permits were obtained.
permits
exposed or unprotected
Code
Permits have been required for electrical since adoption
_
L'``
and must be
1927 UBC Sec. 201
of the 1927 UBC and Electrical Code adopted in 1929.
attached/secured.
Application for Permit
Therefore it was not installed consistent with any
(Romex was first used
1927 UBC, Electrical
electrical code requirements from 1929 to present.
in the 1950's. Color
Code, and Plumbing
Furthermore, the current installation may cause a
coding (yellow) wasn't
Code
potential fire hazard to occupants who live above the
available until 2001)
2007 CEC Article 334,15
garage and to the rear of the garage.
Exposed Work and
Article 330.30 Securing
and Supporting
Unit does not meet fire
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 Uniform Building Code, the
rating requirement; 5
Openings and Walls
City of Tustin has required that `all exterior walls... shall
foot setback required to
2007 CBC Table 602
have no openings therein and shall be of not less than
_ ~'
property line to protect
Fire -Resistance Rating
one-hour fire -resistive construction". "All openings in
occupants from fire
Requirements for Exterior
exterior walls, except on street fronts, which are less than
-
hazards; or safety
Walls Based on Fire
four(4) feet from adjacent property lines shall be
-
personnel responding to
Separation Distance
protected by metal -clad doors and wire glass windows!
m
an emergency.
(1927 UBC Section 1403,
with metal covered sash and frame".
_
c
less than 3 feet)
The rear unit was constructed with a different siding
'o
TCC 9223b2 minimum
(which indicates it was built after the original structures)
P
side yard setback 5 feet
and is not consistent with the 1927 UBC which requires
that exterior walls within no less than a four foot setback
d
have no openings and have one-hour fire resistive
construction. Current 2007 CBC requiment's include
- Min. 5 It
setback and fire -wall separation requirements. Therefore,
setback
the rear unit would not have been permitted as built
required
whether it was constructed in 1929 or present day.
(zero - 4 ft
provided)
71 rare
EXHIBIT A
Location
Code Compliance
Issue
Code Sections
applicable
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Heater installed with a
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, warm air furnaces
gas line without permits
Application for Permit
required a permit and were subject to specific code.
It is installed on a
1927 UBC, Electrical
requirements to ensure safety of the occupants.
combustible wood sided
Code, and Plumbing
Separation from flamable surfaces have been required
-
wall which poses a
Code
since the original Building Code. As shown in the photo
i Heater
potential fire hazard due
TCC 8100 Adoption of
at right, a newer heating unit has been installed directlynstalled
to the combustible
2007 California Building
onto wooden siding. No permits were obtained.
_ - -` w/o
material
Code At 05.1 –Permits
permit
required
Subject to manufacture's
installation standards and
mechanicallplumbing
permit
Ceiling heights vary and
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The rear unit appears to have been added onto over
do not meet the 7'6"
Application for Permit
time. Evidence as such include the lower ceiling heights
height requirement
2007 CBC Section
where the middle addition and rear addition come
1208.2 Ceiling height
together at the interior of the unit. The 1927 UBC states
minimum
that"No person shall erect or construct any building or
�.
structure, nor add to, enlarge, move, improve, alter,
convert, extend or demolish any building or structure, or
cause the same to be done, without first obtaining a
building permit therefore from the Building Inspector."
Ceiling
I
Therefore, building permits were required to be obtained
height does
prior to any addition that was constructed.
not meet
min. 7'6" -.
81Pag:,
EXHIBIT A
9 1 P ,;_
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Improper and
1927 USC Sec. 201
The kitchen installed in the rear unit appeared to have
substandard electrical
Application for Permit
previously had a range located to the left of the sink.
N
Wiring without permit -
1927 UBC, Electrical
According to the 1927 UBC Sec. 3710, stoves uses for
;
Power strip next to
Code, and Plumbing
heating were not to be located closer than 12 inches to
kitchen sink where a
Code
combustible partitions. However, it appears that the stovef
range might have been
1927 UBC Sec. 3710
would have been place against the wooden siding shown
=
L7
previously
stoves
in the photo at right. The electrical strip would have been
r`
Plumbing added without
2007 CFC Section 605.5
inches from the open flame. Furthermore, the stove
permit
Extension Cords
would have blocked the exiting door which is at the far
left side of the photo.
-
Kitchen is not permitted
1927 UBC Sec. 201
(per zoning)
Application for Permit
(i.e. plumbing, electrical,
TCC 8100 Adoption of
.E
etc.)
2007 California Building
o
Code A105.1 — Permits
required)
TCC 9223b2 No cooking
a
facilities permitted in
guest unit
Unsecured and exposed
1927 UBC Sec. 201
The City of Tustin adopted the 1927 Uniform Building
gas line on the interior
Application for Permit
Code and Plumbing Code in 1929. The installation of the
which poses a potential
2007 CMC Section
unsupport gas line appears to have been installed
-
gas leak and fire hazard
1311.2.6 Hangers,
subsequent to the original structures and no permits
within the rear unit
Supports, and Anchors
were obtained. Therefore of unsecured gas line was not
and 1311.7 Outlets
installed consistent with code requirements from 1929 to
present. Further more, the current installation may cause
a potential hazard to occupants.
Exposed and
unsecured gas
line inside unit
y
o ;
I
9 1 P ,;_
EXHIBIT A
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
5:\Cdd\Amy\Codefnforcement\520 Pacific\ExhibitA 1927 code complalnce issues.docll/9/10
101 Page
Code Compliance
Code Sections
1927 Edition Uniform Building Code
Location
Issue
applicable
(as adopted by City of Tustin June 3, 1929)
Photos
Insulation (appears to
1927 UBC Sec. 1403
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, fire separation
be straw bale) ,has high
Openings and Walls
requirements have been required to separate the
flame spread rating
2007 CBC Section 719.2
occupancy of a building such that different portions of the
concealed installation.
building are placed in different occupancy groups. The
Insulating material shall
fire separation between the garage and the rear unit
have a flame spread
appears to consist of combustible hay material which is
m
index rating of not more
not consistent with the fire -wall separation requirements
'
than 25 and smoke
which has been required since the original Building Code
development index of
adoption in 1929. Therefore, the units were not built or
450 or less
converted to livable units pursuant to code requirements
i
as it was originally adopted nor pursuant to current 2007
�r -
dCBC
requirements.
• � ,
_ _ _ _
Combustible material
installed between walls
2010 e is
The room is considered
1927 UBC Sec. 201
Since adoption of the 1927 UBC, all portions of building
"habitable space" and
Application for Permit
used for eating, living and/or sleeping purposes must
appears to not provide
1927 UBC Sec. 1405
provide sufficient light and ventilation. The recreation
P 9
� -- -
-
sufficient, ventilation,
Light, Ventilation and
room was not built with permits and requires inspections-'
v
a
heat and light
Sanitation
to ensure that it meets Code requirements.
- -
.c
Habitable space as
-
defined by CBC is a
Vii, a
.u�
space in a building for
u.nl2'ti
E
living, sleeping, eating or
o
cooking. Therefore, it
9
requires sufficient light,
=
c
ventilation, heat, etc
�k
I
` a
Ceiling height is too low
2007 CBC Section
m
and should be
1208.2 minimum 7'6"
minimum 7'6"
Ceiling height
does not meet
minimum
Building Code observations are based on a 30 minute cursory and visual observation of a site visit on September 10, 2010
5:\Cdd\Amy\Codefnforcement\520 Pacific\ExhibitA 1927 code complalnce issues.docll/9/10
101 Page
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first ciass and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pacific Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
NOTICE AND ORDER/PRE-CITATION NOTICE
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
Property Address: 520 Pacific Street
Assessor Parcel Number: 401-371-07
Case Number: V10-0312
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
TUSTIN
HISTORY
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for -meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore, please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29,
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • P. (714) 573-3100 e F: (714) 573-3113 0 www,tustinca.org
Notice and Order at
520 Pacific Street
September 16, 2010
Case # V10-0312
Page 2
E
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pacific Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specified above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincerer
Br9d Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A — Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor
Community Development Department TU S T I N
EXHIBIT A
Administrative Cltadon Process
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
In accordance with Tustin City Cede (TCC) 1182(d), fines may be assessed by means of an
administrative citation as follows: $100.00 for a first violation; $200.00 for a second violation of
the same ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation; or $500.00 for a third or any
further violation of the some ordinance or permit within one year of the first violation. Building
and Safety Code (TCC Sec. 8100 — 8999) violations may be assessed at $100.00 for a first
violation; $500.00 for a second violation of the same ordinance or permit within one year of the
first violation; or $1,000.00 for a third or any further violation of the same ordinance or permit
within one year of the first violation. The City may also take further legal action including issuing
the responsible person(s) a criminal citation and/or abating the violation(s) with the cost of such
abatement and/or prosecution assessed against the responsible person(s), the property
owner(s), and/or the property as alien.
Should an administrative citation be issued, the responsible person has ten (10) days from the
date of the administrative citation to pay the corresponding fins(s). Additionally, the responsible
person must take one of the following actions to avoid additional penalties prior to the
compliance date specified in the administrative citation:
1) Correct the violation, pay the corresponding fine(s), and contact the City to request a re-
inspection, or
2) Pay the corresponding fine(s) and request an extension of time in writing pursuant to
TCC 1185(b), which shows a reasonable hardship; or
3) Request a hearing to appeal the administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1188 within ten
(10) days from the date of the administrative citation, together with an advanced deposit
of the corresponding fine(s).
Request for Hearing forms and other information on Administrative Citations may be obtained
on the City's website at www.tustinra.oro.
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 0 P:(714)573-3100 • F:(714)573-3113 • www.tustinca.org
Notice and Order at
520 P.fc Street
September 15, 2010
Case 0 V1 M312
Exhibit B
Code Violations at 520 Pacific Street
2007 California Building Code A105.1 (Adopted per Tustin City Code 8100) — Permits Required,
Any owner or authorized agent who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change
the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or
replace any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the installation of which is regulated by this
code, or to cause any such work to be done, shall first make application to the building official and obtain
the required permit.
Tustin City Code 8223(b)(2) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Conditionally Permitted Uses and Development Standards - Accessory buildings used as guest
rooms, provided no cooking facility is installed or maintained are subject to a conditional use permit,
Tustin City Code 9223(b)(2)(d) — Single Family Residential District (R-1)
Minimum side yard setback for accessory buildings used as guest houses - Corner lot line: 10 feet;
Interior lot line: 5 feet,
NOTE: Please be advised that there may be additional code compliance requirements.
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. 4162
Report prepared by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
thirtieth
street
architects
inc.
October 20, 2010
Ms. Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: 520 Pacific Street, Tustin
Dear Elizabeth:
founding principals
,john c. loomis, arohitect
james c. wilson, arohitect
principal
elwood I, gulley, architect
Pursuant to our letter agreement, we have conducted a cursory review of the
photographs of structures provided by staff of the existing structures at 520 Pacific
Street. The following is a summary of our findings:
Terminology
We will refer to the street facing side of the complex as the "front", the two sides
as the "left and right" based on looking at the site from the street and the structures
built behind the carriage barn as the "middle" and "rear" structures.
Zoning
Zoning issues are not part of our Scope of Work and are not addressed.
Building Sequence
It appears that the main front house and two-story or loft type carriage barn may
have been originally built on the site in 1928. Both of these structures exhibit the
same type of exterior siding and window and door trim. The historical survey
indicates that there is evidence that the original front gable of the residence may
have originally had a modified hip roof at its roof peak, but was later modified. It
appears that the original development probably involved one living unit in the
main house.
2821 newport boulevard - newport beach, ca 92663 - 949/673-2643
At some point later in time, it appears that the upper portion of the carriage barn
was converted into a second living unit with the addition of the stairway at the left
side of the property. The carport and rear one-story middle addition may also
have been added at this time or later, subsequent to the original construction of the
residence. Both the enclosed entry and one-story addition have vertical siding and
no carpenter cuts on the window trim that distinguishes these alterations from the
original construction. The deepened fascia detail at the rear elevation of the
enclosed entry is a clear indication of a later alteration. The date of these
alterations is unknown, but they were likely constructed much later than the
original residence, probably during the late 1940's or early 1950's.
Later, another rear addition was constructed that may have initially been used as a
garden shed or children's playhouse (because of the very low ceiling height). The
building has vertical board and batt siding and different detailing than the original
structures and a vintage TM Cobb front door. This was probably converted into a
third living unit some time in the early 1960's, based on the knotty pine interior.
This is a very substandard structure in terms of ceiling height and construction
methods.
Additional alterations to the middle addition were made later, including a rooftop
shed structure with a skylight that is apparently over a shower.
There is evidence of fairly recent electrical work based on the yellow Romex that
is visible in many of the building cavities.
Changes in Use
The original development of the site in 1928 included the construction of a single-
family residence with one living unit and a two-story carriage barn that was
apparently used as a garage and agricultural storage.
At some time after WWII, the carriage barn was converted into a second living
unit, with the addition of the front stair, carport and middle addition at the rear.
Another rear addition was added behind the middle addition during the late 1950's
or early 1960's. This very substandard structure was probably originally used as a
storage shed or kids playhouse. It was later converted into a third living unit.
Historic Significance
The original building has been noted in the Tustin Historic Survey as "one of a
variety of California Bungalow buildings that contributes to Tustin". Although
substantially modified when the second living unit was added, the middle, two
story carriage barn structure appears to retain enough of it's original architectural
integrity and detailing (horizontal redwood siding, carpenter cuts at window trim,
2821 newport boulevard— newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
modified hip roofs, etc.) to also be considered historic as part of the original
development of the property.
The mid -addition and rear additions were later alterations that are inconsistent
with the architecture of the original structure and are, therefore, not considered
historically significant.
Building Code Issues
There appear to be a number of serious building hazards and code violations in the
current development. The most significant is the construction of the enclosed
stairway to the upper unit that actually encroaches across the side yard property
line. This addition is illegal and constitutes as hazard, in our opinion, by blocking
access in the side yards for fire fighting, as required by the CBC. This stair
addition should be removed and a new stairway/entry constructed elsewhere.
The rear living unit structure is very non -conforming to Building Codes and it
does not appear to be economically viable to bring this structure up to current
codes.
Further Study
Further research using Sanborn and Building Survey Maps could confirm the
construction sequence and provide proof of construction dates. There also could
be information relating to the use of these structures at the time of mapping. The
cost of retaining an Architectural Historian to research this property would
probably be about $1,000.
Conclusion
We feel that the front house and two-story carriage barn are both historically
significant.
It is apparent that there was only one living unit on-site in 1929 when the City of
Tustin was incorporated. There is strong physical evidence that the second and
third living units were added much later, post WWII.
Recommendations
We would recommend that the illegal stairway be removed and that code
violations be corrected at the carriage barn ASAP, if the continued use of this
space as a second living unit is allowed by the City of Tustin. We would hope that
future improvements could include the reversal of some of the inappropriate
alterations to the carriage barn to help restore the architectural integrity of this
resource.
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
We do not recommend the occupancy for habitation of the substandard, rear
addition.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
John Loomis
Principal
2821 newport boulevard — newport beach, ca 92663 — 949/673-2643
EXHIBIT B
RESOLUTION NO. 4161
Notice and Order
Community Development Department
Sent via first class and certified mail
September 16, 2010
Bret S. Fairbanks
520 Pack Street
Tustin, CA 92780-4329
Property Address:
Assessor Parcel Number.
Case Number.
Dear Mr. Fairbanks,
DECLARATION OF PUBLIC NUISANCE
520 Pack Street
401-371-07
V10-0312
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
Thank you for••meeting with City staff at 520 Pacific Street on September 10, 2010. During the
inspection, two detached. structures were observed within the rear yard, in addition to a guest
house above the garage and a second guest house behind the garage; all of which are
unpermitted. A preliminary search of City records also indicates that no conditional use permit
(CUP) is on file to establish guest houses at the property.
Other noncompliant issues were also noted during the inspection; which include, but are not
limited to.the staircase on the south side of the garage which does not provide the appropriate
setback to the side property line and the guest house above the garage currently contains
cooking facilities, which is prohibited. Several violations currently exist at your property, which
are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code 1122(a), any violation of the Tustin City Code is a public nuisance.
Therefore, please be advised that the City has determined that a public nuisance is being
maintained at 520 Pacific Street due in that the necessary permits and entitlement were not
obtained for the two detached structures in the rear yard or the two guest houses.
You are hereby directed to do one of the following by no later than Friday. October 29,
2010:
1) Submit a complete CUP application with the appropriate plans and all other necessary
entitlement applications to the Planning and Building Division for the two guest houses
and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NeWA and Order at
520 Pacft Street
September 16, 2010
Case 0 V10.0312
Page 2
OR
2) Obtain a permit from the Planning and Building Division and physically commence with
the demolition and removal of all unpermitted structures and improvements on the
property; which include, but are not limited to the two guest houses, the staircase
attached to the garage and the two detached structures within the rear yard.
NOTE: For information on obtaining permits, please contact the Building Division at (714) 573-
3120 and/or the Planning Division at (714) 573-3140.
Additionally, all permits related to this matter are to be finaled within ninety calendar days of
permit issuance pursuant to 2007 California Building Code A105.5. This letter constitutes your
Notice and Order to abate all public nuisance conditions and violations at 520 Pack Street.
You (or) any person having any record title or legal interest in the property may request
consideration of this Notice and Order or any action of the enforcement within ten calendar days
from the date of service of this Notice and Order. All appeals shall be made in writing.
Failure to comply with this notice within the time limit specked above may result in (1) the
issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to Tustin City Code 1162(a) (reference Exhibit A
attached hereto for further information), and/or (2) all necessary work being completed by City
personnel or private contractor, with all abatement costs being billed against you and/or,,
assessed against the property and/or (3) the referral of this matter to our City Attorney for
further legal action.
Please note that the disposal of any material involved in public nuisances shall be carried forth
in a legal manner. Additionally, this notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Office of the County Recorder. If you need further clarification or assistance with this matter,
please contact me directly at (714) 573-3135.
Sincere
Bld Steen
Code Enforcement Officer
Attachments: Exhibit A — Administrative Citation Information
Exhibit B — Code Violations
cc: Amy Thomas, Senior Planner/Code Enforcement Supervisor