Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Board of Appeals 9-8-97MINUTES CITY OF TUSTIN BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 8, 1997 CALL TO ORDER: 6:05 p.m., City Council Chambers Boardmembers: Present: Chairman Mitzman Scott Browne Douglass Davert Steve Kozak Leslie Pontious Staff Present: Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director Rick Brown, Building Official Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney Kathy Martin, Recording Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda.) CONSENT CALENDAR: NO ITEMS PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. APPEAL OF NOTICE AND ORDER: 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW SECOND DWELLING UNIT Recommendation - That the Board of Appeals uphold the decisions of the Building Official as contained in the Notice and Order issued April 2, 1997 by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution 97-01. The Notice and Order requires the property owners to correct zoning violations of the Tustin Municipal Code and housing violations of the California State Health and Safety Code within certain time limits. Building Official, Rick A. Brown presented the staff report. Boardmember Pontious asked if the property is being used as a rental. The Building Official indicated that he believed so but did not know for certain. Boardmember Browne asked about the size of the lot. Board of Appeals Minutes September 8, 1997 Page 2 C The Director replied that the property is a little over 12, 000 square feet. Boardmember Browne indicated that he viewed the property and asked if safety concerns had been addressed. The Building Official summarized the building code violations that were still existing. Chairman Mitzman asked if there was an immediate concern for automotive exhaust entering the unit from the garage. The Building official stated that there was a health and a fire concern due to vehicle exhaust and the fact that there is no fire separation between the vehicle storage area and the dwelling unit. The Director noted that the two issues being considered are the building code violations and the use of the. property. The appellant has identified that they are wiling to correct numbers 2 C through 7 of the Notice and Order. The appellant first needs to legalize the use on the property and land use issues are not appealable to the Board of Appeals. Chairman Mitzman asked the City Attorney what liability the City has if someone gets hurt in the non -permitted unit. Lois Bobak indicated that there are discretionary immunities in the government code that protect the City against liability for negligent inspections or failure to inspect properties. The City is taking reasonable action now and it would be an extreme longshot in.this case, particularly where the City is not the property owner, if there were any liability to the City. Boardmember Browne asked what the precedent would be for .rezoning the property. The Director indicated that "spot zoning" would not be a good precedent to establish. Chairman Mitzman asked if the unit would need to be vacated to make the necessary repair. The Building official indicated that the unit could be occupied while the repairs are made. / The Public Hearing opened at 6:20 p.m. William Cavanaugh, attorney for the property owner, asked for the hearing to be continued but the property owners have agreed to make the.repairs and to build.the garage. Board of Appeals Minutes September 8, 1997 Page 3 The Director clarified that a conditional use permit is required to build the garage. A conditional use permit requires a public hearing and the appellant has not submitted an application to date. William Cavanaugh indicated that there was previously no reason to submit an application because the property owners were not willing to construct a garage. Boardmember Davert stated that the request for continuance was reasonable if the appellant is going to comply but he would like to set some timelines. The Director noted that there are two timeframes established, one for the unit to be vacated by October 8th; and the kitchen and plumbing be removed and all code violations be remedied by October 15th. Boardmember Davert asked the applicant when he anticipated submitting an application. William Cavanaugh indicated that he looked to staff for the answer to that question. Chairman Mitzman asked if the applicant's tenant knows about the hearing. William Cavanaugh indicated that he has not personally talked to the tenant. The Director indicated that the property was posted for the hearing regarding this matter. Boardmember Pontious asked if the resolution could be modified to change the dates for more flexibility to the appellant. She does not want the appellant to come back before the Board. Boardmember Kozak stated that the Board needs to uphold the findings of the Building Official but suggested that the resolution be modified to allow more time for the appellant. William Cavanaugh stated his appreciation. Lois Bobak summarized the changes made to the•Resolution. William Cavanaugh stated his agreement with the changes and noted that the windows could be repaired immediately. The Director indicated that staff is concerned about all violations and would wish to have them corrected at the same time and noted that it would be appropriate for the property owner to notify the tenants of this pending action. Board of Appeals Minutes September 8, 1997 Page 4 Chairman Mitzman asked that the appellant send a copy of the notice back to the tenant. The Public Hearing closed at 6:35 p.m. The Building Official noted that a reasonable time period to construct the garage would be approximately 45 days. Lois Bobak noted that the construction of the garage could be addressed with the conditional use permit and summarized the changes to the resolution. The Director noted that it would be appropriate for the applicant to speak with staff before the close of business on September 22nd. Chairman Mitzman asked if staff could collect expenses incurred for staff time. The Director indicated that there are no provisions for that at this time. Staff has conducted special inspections that should have been paid for but were not. The policy has been when the City goes to court, we request cost recovery for staff time. If individual stipulates prior to trial, we require cost recovery for staff time. The Building Official noted that an investigative fee could be collected for work that was done illegally and subsequently issued a permit. Standard permit fees plus investigative fees would be appropriate in this matter. Chairman Mitzman stated that he did not want the citizens of Tustin to bear the cost of this hearing. Commissioner Browne moved. Commissioner Pontious seconded, to uphold the decisions of the Building Official by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 revised as follows: Section III, A, delete 1 and 2 and insert 1, 2 and 3 as follows: 1. The property owners or their agent shall file a complete application for a conditional use permit for the second dwelling unit by 5:00 p.m. on September 22, 1997. If a complete conditional use permit application is not filed by September 22, 1997, the second dwelling unit shall be: a) Vacated and inspected by October 22, 1997; and, b) The kitchen and plumbing improvements and remaining code violations shall be removed, corrected, and inspected by October 29, 1997. Board of Appeals Minutes September 8, 1997 Page 5 2. If a conditional use permit for the second dwelling unit is denied, the property owners shall: a) Have the unit vacated and inspected within 30 days from the date of denial; b) Have the kitchen and plumbing removed and inspected within 45 days of the date of denial; c) Have all remaining code violations corrected and inspected within 45 days of the date of denial. 3. If a Conditional Use Permit is approved, the property owners shall promptly complete the correction of all code violations and comply with all conditions of approval within the time limits established by the approved Conditional Use Permit. Motion carried 5-0. REGULAR BUSINESS: NONE ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Davert moved. Commissioner Browne seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 6:42 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The next meeting of the Board of Appeals will be set as items are scheduled for appeal. A>17FlnAN7IT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA COLTNITY OF ORANGE I ain a citizen of the united States and a resident of the Count% aforesaid. I ani o,.cr The agc of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the Tustin News, a newspaper that has been adjudged to be a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Orange; State of California, on August 24, 1928 Case No. A-601 in and for tine City of Tustin, Counry of Orange, State of California; that the notice of which the annexed is a true printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in anv supplement thereof on the following dates, to -Mt. August 28, 1997 I declare under penalty of per un• that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Lake Forest, Orange Couri California, on August 28 Date ly 97 ZAP G Sierinturc / The Tustin News 22481 Aspan St. Lake Forest, CA Q263 (714) 454 - 7380 Space Below for filing Stamp Only. Proof of Publication of BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice Is hereby given that the Board of Ap- peals for the of the City of Tustin, California, will conduct a public hearing on September B. 1997 at 6:00 p.m. In the City Council Cham- bers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin. California to consider the following: An appeal of the Notice and Order of the Building Official regarding substandard building conditions and zoning violations at 145 Mountain View. (Appellant: William E. Cavanaugh Owners: James W. Paldl: Richard Delaney, C.P.A.; Riverside Properties and Lambrose PT.) 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 correspon. Bence delivered to the City of Tustin at, or prior to, the public hearing. If you require special accommodations, pleasecontact the Building Official at (714) 5 73-3130 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 Depart- ment at (71 41 573-3130. PAMELA STOKER, CITY CLERK Published: The Tustin News August 28, 1997 BLu600102 A14-415 f CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: F%M. dWC6W4l6]ZF6 CONSENT CALENDAR: PUBLIC HEARINGS: A G E N D A CITY OF TUSTIN BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER B, 1997 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers Browne, Davert, Kozak, Mitzman, and Pontious (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda.) At this time members of the public may address the Commission regarding any items not on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission (NO action can be taken off -agenda items unless authorized by law). IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY MATTER, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE SO THAT YOUR REMARKS ON THE TAPE RECORDING OF THE MEETING CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO YOU. WHEN YOU START TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. IF YOU REQUIRE SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY AT (714) 573-3031. NO ITEMS 1. APPEAL OF NOTICE AND ORDER: 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW SECOND DWELLING UNIT Recommendation - That the Board of Appeals uphold the decisions of the Building Official as contained in the Notice and Order issued April 2, 1997 by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution 97-01. The Notice and Order requires the property owners to correct zoning violations of the Tustin Municipal Code and housing violations for the California State Health and Safety Code within certain time limits. Presentation: Rick A REGULAR BUSINESS: NONE ADJOURNMENT: Brown, CBO, Building Official The next meeting of the Board of. Appeals will be set as items are scheduled for appeal. TV p� DATE:SEPTEMBER 8, 1997 Inter -Com Z GS TO: BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW SECOND DWELLING UNIT RECOMMENDATION That the Board of Appeals uphold the decisions of the Building Official as contained in the Notice and Order issued April 2, 1997 by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution 97-01, as submitted or revised. The Notice and Order requires the property owners to correct zoning violations of the Tustin Municipal Code and housing violations for the California State Health and Safety Code within certain time limits. BACKGROUND The property at 145 Mountain View Drive contains a detached single family dwelling unit with a detached garage. The garage contains a usable space above the vehicle parking area that has been converted to a dwelling unit without City approvals or permits.' Mountain View Drive was developed with single family dwellings constructed during a period between 1919 and 1940 according to the City Historical Resource Survey. The house at 145 Mountain View Drive is listed in the City Historical Resource Survey and is identified as "California Bungalow". The survey estimates that the house was constructed in 1920. The house has a rating of "D" and is not located within the Cultural Resources Overlay District. The house and detached garage appear to have been constructed during the same period. This assumption is based upon the similarities in architecture, materials and methods of construction. The construction of the house and garage occurred prior to incorporation of the City. The property is located within the original City boundaries as incorporated in 1927. Construction of these buildings occurred prior to the existence of the first published building code, the 1927 Edition of the Uniform Building Code. Therefore, there are no building permit records for the original construction of these buildings. The earliest zoning map from 1955 identifies the property as R-1 single family residential and the current zoning for the property is R-1 single family residential. Board of Appeals Report / 145 Mountain View Drive c September 8, 1997 Page 2 The City received a complaint regarding use of the area above the'garage as a dwelling unit. The property owner was contacted, and the City conducted an inspection and confirmed violations of the Zoning and Building Codes. Subsequently, the Building Official issued a Notice and Order on April 2, 1997 (Attachment A). The property owners' attorney, William Cavanaugh, wrote to the Community Development Department on April 16, 1997, and requested a meeting on the matter. On April 23, 1997, Elizabeth Binsack and Rick Brown met with Mr. Cavanaugh at which Mr. Cavanaugh indicated that the property owners did not object to the requirement to correct the building code items which are listed. as Nos. 2 through No. 7 in the Notice and Order. The property owners did object to Notice and Order item No. 1 which identifies the living area as a non -permitted or approved dwelling unit which exists in violation of the City Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Cavanaugh was advised that the property is large enough to allow for a second dwelling unit if the property owners wished to pursue legalization of the second dwelling unit. Such legalization would require correction of the outstanding code violations and construction of covered parking for the second dwelling unit. On Apri130, 1997; the City received an application for an appeal hearing regarding the second dwelling unit. On May 30, 1997, the appellant requested a time extension for the appeal hearing. The purpose of the time extension was to provide additional time for the property owners to consider legalizing the second dwelling unit. The time extension was granted for 90 days. Since granting the time extension, the City has not received plans or an application for the legalization of the second dwelling unit. On August 19, 1997, notices of the hearing date, time and location were sent to Mr. Cavanaugh and the property owners. DISCUSSION Mr. Cavanaugh, on behalf of the property owners, contends that the second dwelling unit was established prior to the creation of a City Building Department and, that the conversion took place during the time that the City contracted with the County of Orange for building safety services. It is further contended that the conversion was in compliance with the codes and standards that were applicable at the time of conversion and that the multi -family use of the property occurred prior to the current R-1 zoning. The second dwelling unit is plumbed with ABS drain, waste, vent and piping. This piping material was first approved for residential installations in 1968 by the County of Orange. ABS piping first appeared as an approved piping material in the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1973 Edition. The City of Tustin created its Building Department in 1964 and terminated contract building safety services from the County. The dwelling conversion would need to have occurred prior to 1964, for the conversion to have been completed while the County was { providing building services to the City. The piping material used was not available for use until 1968. Therefore, the conversion had to occur during 1968 or later at which time the City of Tustin Building Department would have maintained permit records. C Board of Appeals Report 145 Mountain View Drive September 8, 1997 Page 3 The contention that the second dwelling was built in compliance with applicable codes and standards at the time of creation is also erroneous. The date of dwelling conversion has been established at 1968 or later based upon the type of piping material used. The code related items in the Notice and Order Nos. 2 through No. 7 are longstanding code provisions that were applicable in 1968 and are currently applicable. As an example, the stairway serving the unit has stair treads which are too narrow to comply with Uniform Building Code requirements that have been applicable since 1927. Yet the stairway is constructed with nominal sizedlumber not full dimensional lumber as was used for the original garage construction. Nominal sized lumber came into use during the latter 1960's. As an example, a nominal sized 2 X 4 measures l Ih inches by 31h inches and full dimensional lumber measures 2 inches by 4 inches. The property was originally zoned R-1 single family residential in 1955 and that zoning designation remains as R-1 under the current zoning code. The dwelling conversion was accomplished by use of 1968 and later building materials. The argument that the conversion occurred prior to R-1 zoning is not consistent with the time frame that the non permitted conversion occurred. CThere are no records for building permit for any work at this property other than a sewer connection permit that was issued on June 14, 1964 forthe connection of the house to the public sewer system. CONCLUSION The second dwelling unit, located above the garage, at 145 Mountain View Drive is in violation of the City Zoning and Building Codes. The second dwelling unit was constructed without the benefit of building permits and inspections. The construction of this dwelling unit has several violations of basic and longstanding code requirements. These violations of code fundamentals provide evidence that there were no inspections by the City or County. Therefore, the Notice and Order should be upheld by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 and the unit should be vacated. The plumbing and kitchen facilities should be removed and the space restored to its original condition. \ZcL Rick A. Brown, CBO Elizabeth A. Binsack Building Official Community Development Director Board of Appeals Report 145 Mountain View Drive September 8, 1997 Page 4 Attachments: A - Notice and Order B - Correspondence from William E. Cavanaugh C - Correspondence from Community Development Department D - Appeal Hearing application E - Notice of Appeal Hearing F - Photographs of Second Dwelling Unit G - Board of Appeals Resolution 97-01 RB.br.Mww.`b C BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "A" EXHIBIT A NOTICE and ORDER SENT TO: Owners L Riverside Properties 2. Richard Delaney, C.P.A. 3. Elam-Lambrose Pt. 4. James W. Paldi 5. Attorney, William Cavanaugh a Community Development Department April 2, 1997 Riverside Properties c/o Dolphin Real Estate Group 1027 Terra Nova Blvd. Pacifica, CA 94044 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 MAIL P 087 435 611 (714) 573-3100 SUBJECT: NOTICE AND ORDER FOR SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Sir or Madam, The Building official has found this building to be substandard under State Health and Safety Code Section 11920.3(b). The conditions found to render the building substandard are: 1. The City records show that the second story above the garage was only approved as a workshop and there is no record of bathroom addition or other improvements. This structure is currently occupied as a habitable unit which is not allowed according to the City of Tustin Zoning Code. 2. Exterior stair does not comply with the requirements of UBC Section 1006.3 and 1006.9. Threads are less than 911, the minimum allowed. Required guardrail shall be in place and handrail grip shall not be less than 1-1/4" nor more than 211. 3. Non-metallic wiring is exposed in the garage. Electrical wiring shall be protected according to NEC Article 300.4. 4. PVC plastic piping is used for water supply. PVC is not an approved piping material according to UPC Section 604.1. 5. The vent for sink and the shower is improperly vented through the wall. The configuration of piping creates an 'IS" trap which is prohibited. Remove non -permitted work or comply with UPC Sections 906.1, 906.2, 905.5, 905.6, and 1004. 6. Water closet has only 18" of clear space in front. Remove non -permitted work or provide 24" of clear distance in front according to UBC Section 2904. Also provide proper vents according to UPC Section 901. 145 Mountain View Drive Notice and Order Page two 7. Windows are covered with plastic and duct tape. Uncover the windows and provide a minimum glazing area equal to 1/10 of the floor area. Vent area shall equal 1/5 of the floor area. Provide light and ventilation according to UHC Section 504. ACTION REQUIRED: Second story workshop shall be vacated and only be used as a workshop. Non -permitted improvements and additions shall be removed or plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for the required permits. Repair work shall be commenced and completed according to Section 202 of the Uniform Housing Code. The following dates for action are established according to Sections 1101 and 1402 of the Uniform Housing Code: Repair work shall be physically commenced and ready for inspection by May 5, 1997. You need to call for building inspection at (714) 573-3136. Rick Millan is your contact for inspections. All correction work and final inspection of such work shall be completed by June 2, 1996. If the required work is not commenced and completed within the time specified, the Building official will be forced to initiate enforcement action and proceedings to obtain compliance. Any person having any record title or legal interest in the building may appeal from the Notice and Order or any action of the Building official to the Board of Appeals, provided the appeal is made in writing and filed with the Building Official within 30 days from the date of service of .this Notice and. Order; failure to appeal will. constitutea waiver of all rights to an administrative hearing and determination of the matter. Appeal forms may be obtained from the Community Development Department. Thank you for your timely cooperation in this matter. If you need additional information, please contact me at (714) 573-3120. Sincerely, Soroush Rahbari Acting Building Official cc: Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Rita Westfield, Assistant Director Rick Brown, Building official Rick Millan, Building Inspector R8:s1r:145mtnvw.no1 BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "B" WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH C LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH 5140 BIRCH STREET, SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 Facsimile (714) 955-3700 (714) 955-1910 April 16, 1997 i< ( v Soroush Rahberi Acting Building Official City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 RE: Notice and Order: 145 Mountain View Drive, Dated April 2, 1997. Dear Mr. Rahberi: I have been retained to represent the owners of the property located at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin, regarding your recent Notice and Order For Substandard Structure at that address. In an effort to amicably resolve this matter, I request a meeting with you at your office to disscuss it. I would like for either Rick Brown, Building Official, or Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director, to attend. Please call my office to let us know what dates and times are available so that we can schedule the meeting. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH 4,c,e,e civ, 6. Goer � William E. Cavanaugh WEC:Iac cc: Richard Delaney WILLIAM James Paldi M E. CAVANAUGH. Attorney Al Law COMPLEX BUSINESS LITIGATION • CONTRACT AND CIVIL DISPUTES • FRAUD (714) 9554700 (714) 955.1910 Fax 5140 Birch Street, First Flour NMpurt Bcach, CA 92660 aLLIAM E. CAVANAUGH f, WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH C 5140 BIRCH STREET, SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714) 955-3700 April 30, 1997 cnr Ms. Elizabeth Binsack Community Development Director City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 LAW OFFICES OF Facsimile (714) 955-1910 RE: "Notice and Order for Substandard Structure at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin" dated April 2, 1997 Dear Ms. Binsack: This letter is to confirm our discussion in your office on April 23, 1997, regarding the above letter. We take issue with Paragraph No. 1 of the letter, but do not object to the remaining issues. Those items represent safety violations, and we are in the process of complying with your requests. On behalf of my client, we take the position that the second story of the building referenced herein, was converted to a residential living unit dating back to a time before the City of Tustin acquired jurisdiction from the County of Orange, regarding building and construction of the subject property. Further, we contend that at the time the conversion took place, it was done so in proper compliance with the existing codes and regulations. We take issue with your assertion that because there is no permit in your files for a bathroom addition or other improvements, that that is a basis for determining it to be an illegal structure. We contend that the existing residential use of the building is permissible because of the long period of time it has been so used, and further contend that the land itself has also been used for a multiple family purpose for the same period of time. Thus, if that use is different from the City's present zoning ordinance, then, the use variance is also permissible as a result of the period of time it has been so used. Elizabeth Binsack May 1, 1997 Page 2 Enclosed herewith is an executed Board of Appeals Hearing Application on this issue. However, as per our discussion, I request that this issue be sent directly to Counsel for the City of Tustin because of its legal nature. We believe it can be resolved at that level. Sincerely, LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH %�� ��� William E. Cavanaugh, WECclac Enclosure LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH 5140 BIRCH STREET. SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 WILLIAM E. CAVANAUGH (714) 955-3700 May 30,1997 Ms. Elizabeth Binsack Community Development Director City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 M O.Wti{TY DEN EO' Re: "Notice and Order for Substandard Structure at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin" dated April 2, 1997. Dear Ms. Binsack: Facsimile (714) 955-1910 On April 30, 1997 I filed an Application for a Hearing on behalf of my clients, the owners of the subject property. In view of the possibility of a resolution of the matter by other means, I hereby request a 90 day extension of the hearing date previously requested. I appreciate your cooperation in the matter. Sincerely, /LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM E. CAVAN GH William E. Cavanaugh WEC:lac cc: Richard Delaney BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "C' g�O� Community Development Department JUNE 3, 1997 William E. Cavanaugh 5140 Birch Street, Suite 100 Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 SUBJECT: Time Extension for Board of Appeals Hearing Regarding 145 Mountain View, Tustin Dear Mr. Cavanaugh, City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 I am in receipt of your request for a time extension for the scheduling of a Board of Appeals Hearing. I hereby approve the time extension for the hearing by 90 days. The hearing must now be conducted by September 30, 1997. The City will provide you with at least 10 days notice prior to any hearing scheduled. The time extension is granted to provide you and your clients with time to pursue the legalization of the second dwelling unit on the property. Please feel free to contact me at 573-3130 if you have any, further questions. Sincerely, a Rick A. Brown, CBO Cc: Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Code Enforcement File Community Development Department July 17, 1997 William E. Cavanaugh 5140 Birch Street, Suite 100 Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 SUBJECT: Time Extension for Board of Appeals Hearing Regarding 145 Mountain View, Tustin Dear Mr. Cavanaugh, c� City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 I writing to check on the status of your efforts to pursue legalization of the second unit at 145 Mountain View, Tustin. It has been five weeks since the time extension was granted and we have not received any further information or applications regarding the matter. Please give me a call at 573-3130 and inform me of your intentions. Sincerely, Rick A. Brown, CBO Cc bet ck unity Development Director Code Enforcement F e G�'CY O Community Development Department August 11, 1997 William E. Cavanaugh 5140 Birch Street, Suite 100 Newport Beach, Calif. 92660 SUBJECT: Board of Appeals Hearing, 145 Mountain View, Tustin Dear Mr. Cavanaugh, City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714)573-3100 I am writing to inform you that the City intends to schedule the matter of the second dwelling unit'at 145 Mountain View for a hearing before the Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin on Monday, September 8, 1997 at 6:00 p.m The appeal hearing will be conducted in the City Council chambers located at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin This hearing date will allow for the matter to be heard within the time limits contained in your time extension request dated June 3, 1997. The City has not received an application or proposal for the legalization of the second dwelling unit. The time extension was granted to provide an opportunity to pursue legalization. The requirements for a second dwelling unit were discussed during our meeting on May 29, 1997. Please advise me of your intentions as soon as possible. If we do not receive an application or proposal by August 18, 1997 at 5:00 p.m_, I will commence the scheduling and notification required for the hearing. Please inform your clients of the hearing date. I may be reached at 573-3130 for any questions_ S' cerely, Rick A. Brown, CBO Cc: Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Lois Jeffrey, City Attorney Code EnR)rcement Pile BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "D" BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION: Address 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin, California Legal Description Assssor's Parcel Number TypeofConstrvetion ' Wood frame Occupancy Classification Residential APPLICANT INFORMATION: Applicant Name Address Phone Number Board of Appeals Members, Real Estate Group Investments, Inc. APPENDIX S. BB In accordance with the provisions of Uniform Administrative Code Section 204(a), I hereby request a hearing baore the Ory of Tustin Board of Appeals. I wish to contest the decision or interprctation of the BuildinL Official rceardine the I am aware that the Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of the code nor shall the board be empowmd to waive rcquirmnents of the technical oDdcs. William E. Cavanaugh Applicant Signature Attorneyor Applicant Hearing Fee 154, oa Hearing Date s Building Oficial Community Development Director Date CDD Procedural Manual - November 1994 Appendix 5 - Building Division City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way �+ Tustin, California 92680 (714) 573-3000 FiGfk� A?tu i8f 1997s 8:2" 41 Res U1 Validation Receipt CHArut:�- 01030000004r95 u4!79` BOARD OF At -PEAL 141D i570.00 SLtb-1Dtal----- Gx.TFci7'u.0� PAN M- NT— the, k Ai%Ardis u i5f_t.00 BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "E" EXHIBIT E NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING SENT TO: Owners 1. Riverside Properties 2. Richard Delaney, C.P.A. 3. Elam-Lambrose Pt. 4. James W. Paldi 5. Attorney, William Cavanaugh Community Development Department August 15, 1997 Riverside Properties °s Dolphin Real Estate Group 1027 Terra Nova Boulevard Pacifica, Ca. 94044 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING City of Tustin Property Information: Street Address: 145 Mountain View Drive Tustin, Ca. 92780 Assessor Parcel Number: 401-522-06 Gentlemen: 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 The Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin will hear an appeal on The Notice and Order issued by the Building Official on April 2, 1997. The Notice and Order requires the subject property to be brought into conformance with applicable Zoning and Building Codes. An appeal was filed by William Cavanaugh, an Attorney representing the property owners. You are hereby notified that the appeal hearing will occur: September 8, 1997 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Ca. 92780 Please contact me at (714) 573-3130 if you have any questions. Sincerely, (� 1� LL. Rd' Rick A. Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey RB:br:9-8-97.boa CITY OF TUSTIN OFFICIAL NOTICE BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICIAL NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin, California, will conduct an appeal hearing on September 8. 1997, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California to consider the following: 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 Building Official at (714) 573-3130. 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) 573-3130. Pamela Stoker, City Clerk Publish: Tustin News August 28, 1997 b1d9app1.#5 INITIAL DATE REVIEW MAILING LIST & RADIUS INIAP NOTICE TO PAPER Iy 49 NOTICES MAILED PROPERTY POSTED POSTED AT CITY HALL & POLICE DEPART. & If you require special accommodations, please contact Tustin City Hall, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin 92680, (714) 573-3000. BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "F" �. N 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE SECOND DWELLING UNIT BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT ATTACHMENT "G" 1 RESOLUTION NO. 97-01 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF 3 TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE DECISIONS OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE AND ORDER 4 DATED APRIL 2, 1997, REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF A SECOND DWELLING UNIT AND THE CORRECTION OF BUILDING 5 CODE VIOLATIONS AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA. 6 7 e I. The Board of Appeals of the. City of Tustin hereby finds and determines as follows: 9 A. That during December 1996, City staff inspected the 10 garage and second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive; . 11 B. That on April 2, 1997, the Building Official issued 12 a proper Notice and Order to the property owners via certified mail, describing those conditions 13 which -violate city and/or state laws and established reasonable time periods for correction 14 of those violations; 15 C. That on April 30, 1997, an appeal was filed by the attorney for the owners contesting a portion of the 16 required actions contained in the Notice and Order dated April 2, 1997; 17 D. That on May 30, 1997, a request by the property 18 owner attorney, for a time extension for the appeal hearing was filed with the Building Official; 19 E. That on June 3, 1997, the Building Official granted 20 the time extension requested to allow for the property owners to pursue legalization of the 21 second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive; 22 F. That pursuant to such appeal, a Public Hearing before the Board of Appeals was duly noticed for 23 6:00 p.m. on September 8, 1997; and, 24 G. That witnesses were properly sworn and oral and documentary evidence was duly presented to the 25 Board of Appeals on September 8, 1997. 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 97-01 Board of Appeals Page 2 II. The Board of Appeals hereby further finds and resolves as follows: A. That there is substantial evidence in the record that each of the violations identified in the April 2, 1997 Notice and Order exists; B. That the violations identified in the Notice and Order demonstrate that substandard building conditions exist; C. That the extent of corrections ordered by the Building Official. are appropriate for the property; and, D. That the time limitations for starting and completing the corrections are reasonable. III. Based upon the above findings and upon the oral and documentary evidence submitted at its September 8, 1997 hearing, the Board of Appeals hereby upholds the decision of the Building Official as set forth in the April 2, 1997 Notice and Order. of the Building Official subject to the following conditions: A. The property owners are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of the Notice and Order identified in Attachment A of the related staff report dated September 8, 1997 as attached hereto and incorporated herein except for dates for compliance which are hereby established by the Board of Appeals. 1. The second dwelling unit shall be vacated and an inspection for that unit scheduled by October 8; 1997. 2. The kitchen and plumbing shall be removed and all other code violations identified in the Notice and Order shall be corrected and inspected by October 15, 1997. B. The Building Official is directed to provide a copy of this Resolution to the Property Owner. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 97-01 Board of Appeals Page 3 C. In the event of non-compliance with the Notice and Order by the property owner within the time frames established by the Board of Appeals, the Board of Appeals has requested that the City Attorney pursue appropriate civil and/or criminal remedies to force compliance with this Notice and Order. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Special Meeting of the Tustin Board of Appeals, held on the 8th day of September, 1997. HOWARD A. MITZMAN CHAIRMAN RICK BROWN BOARD OF APPEALS SECRETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Rick Brown, Building Official and ex -officio Secretary of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 97-01 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Appeals, held on the 8th day of September, 1997. RICK BROWN BOARD OF APPEALS SECRETARY C C C G�'CV O Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 September 10, 1997 Mr. William E. Cavanaugh 5140 Birch Street, Suite 100 Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION REGARDING THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Mr. Cavanaugh: On Monday, September 8, 1997, the Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin heard an appeal regarding the second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin. The Board of Appeals took action on the appeal by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 (attached). The Resolution directs the property owners to either legalize the dwelling unit or remove it. The specific dates for compliance are contained in Section III of Resolution No. 97-01. I look forward to resolving this matter in the near future. If you have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 573-3130. Sincerely, Ric'k�Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey R8:br:9-10-97.boa G�'fY � �GS'C�� Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 September 10, 1997 Mr. Richard Delaney, C.P.A. Dolphin Real Estate Group Investments, Inc. 651 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 790 South San Francisco, Ca. 94080 SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION REGARDING THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Mr. Delaney: On Monday, September 8, 1997, the Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin heard an appeal regarding the second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin. The Board of Appeals took action on the appeal by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 (attached). The Resolution directs the property owners to either legalize the dwelling unit or remove it. The specific dates for compliance are contained in Section III of Resolution No. 97-01. I look forward to resolving this matter in the near future. If you have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 573-3130. Sincerely, R& Rick A. Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey R8:br:9-10-97.boa G�Tv o �GST�� Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 September 10, 1997 Elam-Lambrose Pt. Leo C. Sutliff 2083 Grace Street Riverside, Ca. 92504-5412 SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION REGARDING THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Mr. Sutliff: On Monday, September 8, 1997, the Board of Appeals for the City of Tustin heard an appeal regarding the second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive, Tustin. The Board of Appeals took action on the appeal by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 (attached). The Resolution directs the property owners to either legalize the dwelling unit or remove it. The specific dates for compliance are contained in Section III of Resolution No. 97-01. I look forward to resolving this matter in the near future. If you have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 573-3130. Sincerely, �a _ Rick A. Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey RB:br:9-10-97.boa G�'CY � �S�,� Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 September 10, 1997 Riverside Properties Dolphin Real Estate Group 1027 Terra Nova Boulevard Pacifica, Ca. 94044 SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION REGARDING THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Property Owner: On Monday, September 8, 1997, the Tustin heard an appeal regarding Mountain View Drive, Tustin. Board of Appeals for the City of the second dwelling unit at 145 The Board of Appeals took action on the appeal by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 (attached).. The Resolution directs the property owners to either legalize the dwelling unit or remove it. The specific dates for compliance are contained in Section III of Resolution No. 97-01. I look forward to resolving this matter in the near future have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 573-3130. Sincerely, "a Rick A. Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey R8:br:9-10-97.boa If you GMTV O GS�`2 Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 September 10, 1997 James W. Yaldi 2030 Main Street, Suite 1020 Irvine, Ca. 92714 SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION REGARDING THE SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN Dear Mr. Yaldi: On Monday, September 8, 1997, the Tustin heard an appeal regarding Mountain View Drive, Tustin. Board of Appeals for the City of the second dwelling unit at 145 The Board of Appeals took action on the appeal by adopting Board of Appeals Resolution No. 97-01 (attached). The Resolution directs the property owners to either legalize the dwelling unit or remove it. The specific dates for compliance are contained in Section III of Resolution No. 97-01. I look forward to resolving this matter in the near future have any questions, I may be reached at (714) 573-3130. Sincerely, aRick4a- Rick A. Brown, C.B.O. Building Official CC: William Huston Elizabeth Binsack Lois Jeffrey RB:br:9-10-97.boa If you T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 128 RESOLUTION NO. 97-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLD-ING THE DECISIONS OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE AND ORDER DATED APRIL 2, 1997, REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF A SECOND DWELLING UNIT AND THE CORRECTION OF BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS AT 145 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA. I. The Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin hereby finds and determines as follows: A. That during December 1996, City staff inspected the garage and second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive; B. That on April 2, 1997, the Building Official issued a proper Notice and Order to the property owners via certified mail, describing those conditions which violate city and/or state laws and established reasonable time periods for correction of those violations; C. That on April 30, 1997, an appeal was filed by the attorney for the owners contesting a portion of the required actions contained in the Notice and Order dated April 2, 1997; D. That on May 30, 1997, a request by the property owner attorney, for a time extension for the appeal hearing was filed with the Building Official; E. That on June 3, 1997, the Building Official granted the time extension requested to allow for the property owners to pursue legalization of the second dwelling unit at 145 Mountain View Drive; F. That pursuant to such appeal, a Public Hearing before the Board of Appeals was duly noticed for 6:00 p.m. on September 8; 1997; and, G. That witnesses were properly sworn and oral and documentary evidence was duly presented to the Board of Appeals on September 6, 1997. I C 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 _5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26I 27I _8 Resolution No. 97-01 Board of Appeals Page 2 II. The Board of Appeals hereby further finds and resolves as follows: A. That there is substantial evidence in the record that each of the violations identified in the April 2, 1997 Notice and Order exists; B. That the violations Order demonstrate conditions exist; identified in the Notice and that substandard building C. That the extent of corrections ordered by the Building Official are appropriate for the property; and, D. That the time limitations for starting and completing the corrections are reasonable. III. Based upon the above findings and upon the oral and documentary evidence submitted at its September 8, 1997 hearing, the Board of Appeals hereby upholds the decision of the Building Official as set forth in the April 2, 1997 Notice and Order of the Building Official subject to the following conditions: A. The property owners are hereby ordered to comply with the requirements of the Notice and Order identified in Attachment A of the related staff report dated September 8, 1997 as attached hereto and incorporated herein except for dates for compliance which are hereby established by the Board of Appeals. 1. The property, owners or their agent shall file a complete application for a conditional use permit for the second dwelling unit by 5:00 p.m. on September 22, 1997. If a complete conditional use permit application is not filed by September 22, 1997, the second dwelling unit shall be: a) Vacated and inspected by October 22, 1997; and, b) The kitchen and plumbing improvements and remaining code violations shallbe removed, corrected, and inspected by October 29, 1997. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 (_8 Resolution No. 97-01 Board of Appeals Page 3 2. If a conditional use permit for the second dwelling unit is denied, the property owners shall: a) Have the unit vacated and inspected within 30 days from the date of denial; b) Have the kitchen and plumbing removed and inpsected within 45 days of the date of denial; c) Have all remaining code violations corrected and inspected within 45 days of the date of denial. 3. If a Conditional Use Permit is approved, the property owners shall promptly complete the correction of all code violations and comply with all conditions of approval within the time limits established by the approved Conditional Use Permit. B. The Building Official is directed to provide a copy of this Resolution to the Property Owner. C. In the event of non-compliance with the Notice and Order by the property owner within the time frames established by the Board of Appeals, the Board of Appeals has requested that the City Attorney pursue appropriate civil and/or criminal remedies to force compliance with this Notice and Order. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14, _5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 l_s Resolution No. 97-01 Board of Appeals Page 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Special Meeting of the Tustin Board of Appeals, held on the 8th day of September, 1997. • •• CHAIRMAN a , ,L, /q RICK BROWN BOARD OF APPEALS SECRETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Rick Brown, Building Official and ex -officio Secretary of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the Board of Appeals of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 97-01 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Appeals, held on the 8th day of September, 1997. -4 �'� C'- /cy. 12 7 RICK BROWN BOARD OF APPEALS SECRETARY