No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout133-0074Worksheet for Building Combo Permit City of Newport Beach -Building Departm#969WmESUKE Rr P!,ease pe�'nt 3 copies GradinC7 OFNEWPORT B uilding g [.—.Drainage Elec F I Mech ) 1. Project Address (Not mailing, address) Muul ........... .............. ............ .. ....... ..... ............ ..... ........... . .. ............. Tenant Name(if Applicable) # Units (if Residential) . . ..... . . .... y4i F77: .... ........ j . . ..... .. 2. Description of Work Use 7-1 . . ........ Valuation $ Add/Reconstruct House SF Exist House SF Demo House SF ............ 7 11..�., ............ r....... . - - ---- --- ------- Exist Gar SF Demo Garage SF Add/Reconstruct Garage SF # Stories F777: TOTAL HOUSE SF Cu Yd Cut —1 Add Alte r er f—Demo ........... TOTAL GARAGE SF Cu Yd Fill uneCK Appropriate box for Applicant f713. Owner's Name Last First . ....... ..... ... ........ .... .. .. .. .. .. . ... ... ....... ........ Owner's Address . ..... ...... City State CA__ .... . .......... Owner's E-mail Address 17 .......... ... .. ............................... .. ....................... .... .. . ....... ......... ......... .... ........ ...... Zip Telephone 7 .... .......... ...... ............. 4. Architect/Designer's Name Last First Lic. No. ............................................... .................. .................. ............................................ F .. ......... Architect/Designer's Address F . . ................... ..... .... ....... .... .... .. City State ........................ ........... ...... . . , . . .. ...... .... .... . .. . ..... OFFICE USE ONLY ENERGY P/C FEE $ Rev 1178107 GRADING P/C FEE $ ELEC/MECH/PLUM P/C Architect/Designer's E-mail Address ........... ............... .. ............. .. 1.1-1 ............... ... ................. ........ ................... .. . .. ..... . ........ . ZjPF_ Telephone ....................... I ............ PERMIT NO. PLAN CHECK NO. PLAN CHECK FEE $ I p Output Page I of I `I, v � I SIR Vl- OU 11 !"I"Irl" / %�\`�� M Wd V � Rd /Oki, > W\ FT 0 �n r � o ® O N w M _U 0 C� N 'eor N N rn 4 u VcoW Q. � U) rn aaid 5u sixa i M.Bo,eZo�s IV ei �, t56,, � o G b� o � ©� a 00 �e4.CA q( F-oo, 00 7PO, . . �r\� \ \ } k } . \ } � \ ƒ } =3 @ S Co. i e c } 7 / C", ) B \ } co /OD ƒ 0.) } G m f ). R § \ § « / \ } E / / CO .} k/}+ /a)\ » ƒ ( 2 / E 1 $ .C/)\� cu ) E . } CD / § \ }�\/ \ % \ \ $ 7 } 12 E a)co )® c CY)(0.CL co 2 / 0 ƒ CO a (R > 2 m z / a ( . . >} f 7 § / / / f f \ n �3 � } a E E m \ } \ > ^ e / )cc 3 / / I §®& .. (/ƒ ƒ ƒ f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FIRE MARINE DEPAP-rMENT HARBOR PE. .11T APPLICATION (Please print all into, elation) -TO h I\% SB 1'0 0 Aha --V 1. Applicant (Property Owner) Address Telephone 2. Project Address (Street Address) Harbor Permit N mber 3. New Construction Revision Maintenance 1,1/ Dredging 4. Fee X:7 S_/ Check No. 219 `f -3 Date 5. Brief Description of Proposed Work: 6. Submit 81i2" x I Drawings (3), include: 1). Location and dimension of proposed structure including piles and location of existing structures. on adjacent properties. 2). Location of bulkhead, pierhead and project lines. 3). Location of property lines. 4). Location of channel markers within 200 feet. 5). Lot sizes and lot numbers, if available. 6). Existing ground profile beneath proposed structure. 7). Elevation of top and bottom of bulkheads and piles with respect to M.L.L.W. 8). Area and profile of any proposed dredging with elevations showing depths with respect of M.L.L.W. 9). Any special conditions affecting the construction or affecting boating operations. 10).Complete all information required in information block, bottom of sheet. Note that the OWNER, of the property is the applicant. 11).Drawing size shall be 8 - 1/2" x 11". 12).Scale shall be adequate to clearly show the above information. 13).Existing structures shall be shown in light dashes. New work shall be shown in heavy solid lines. 7. Owner -Builder Declaration mus/beco, ple d (onrev rse side of this sheet) 8. Applicant's/Agent's Signature: Date: 6Joint Permittee Signature (If ap: Date: 9. Work can begin once the City has. received evidence of the following, additional approvals and you have , been notified to proceed. If you begin prior to the notice you will be in violation of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and subject to penalties, 10. Your permit will not be final until we have conducted an on site inspection once construction is completed as per Municipal Code, Section 17.24, if we have not been contacted for a final inspection. OFFICE USE ONLY Approval in Concept. Approval of the City of Newport Beach Council. Approval of the Army Corps of Engineers Approval of the California Coastal Commission. Approval of the City's Public Works Department. %l) 7XV y-;V/J Approval of the City's Building Department. Approval of County of Orange. Electrical and/or plumbing permit (Building Department) Issued. (Permit is stamped drawing) Site Inspection. (call 644-3043 for appointment) Site Re -Inspection Conditions: Date Date Date Date Date _Z( Date Date Date Date - Z,0 'L Date L0 ^ Date �®"�"�"° Tlen. ��f1�. rl'.I" CI f1 A T A TT r1►I T AIP11t'1.1,,�� A��O� �11 IIII"Ti--�10TY�f�F1 T7�-1- , 1645 Monrovia Avenue X Costa Mesa, CA 92627 i (714) 645-2842 X Telex 676308 TH OMPSON CSMA Flange width 3' on all 4 sides B FIGURE 2- FLOATATION UNIT DIMENSIONS Dimensions (in) Weigpht ( 1be Buoyancy (lbs ) wits plywood in salt water Model A B C top cover per inch total' 1117 63 36i 16 96 66.95 1,103.2 '.1. its 38 K � %'0 103- 68.95 1,379.0 iii9 S"-'8 63 353' 11 9 58.95 973.9 i 129 5' E'? 4(i l �', 1.04 81.06 1:187.6 1130 G 72 `ic . 1' .�---- 122 ---- 1 e2.. 7.t1, 451.2 1131 �'96 10 i4 101 140.0i 1,978,8 1230 (0 72 -18 -� -- —128---- --� 102.79 1,657.7 1231 f'96 18 16 167 140,01 2,259.0 �1430� 72 - 48 - 23 — -- -145 102.71 2,376.9 1431 �' 96 18 2.5 198 110.04 3,519.8 P41ant No. 0 270 529 12,a 849-C WEST 18TH STREET COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92527 AREA CODE (714) 646.0244 FAX (714) 646-8261 (D THE FOSS COMPANY POLYURETHANE FOAM B cl QaF Flange 1/4" 0r, A, " Flange Fc 1 Ulacr; F'edcral. A' c r-101117-001111 C14PAC17-Y 8 fr111v 15-4#IIAI, SV9M, NO, I DATE 1 REVISION: 0 01 oil i 01 1 4, 17! . . .... 7� ri, % Z'3 J Z)111_!�r:__� J A 4 X, �, 0- 74" f 7" 111Qr- �vl J 4 4 fi Dredging Is not Iffe-d below the�e confcurelava,,,�O,,15., 'x �4_ x' /* z 00� ------------- v, -4- f f A­lk x 6o N x Dredging Is not permit-11,ed below IT" T these contour ele 'T ­7"'77 T "T 41 -7, 'o� 71 C!, re, — 7, 4 x Ilf- w", Vt hEVIEWED BY PUBLIC WORKS DEpARTMENT A", Ir j� V" '4 _7 NO EXCEPTIONS TAKEN ,4 By v A DATE WORK SHALL BE DGVZ ' *4 ACCORDANCE WITH THE Sr"'ARO $`mE'-C*_1CAT10"8 FOR PUBLiC IvyoaKS 'CO=TRUCTION AV40 IS SUa'JECT To Cj­ry INSpECTIOK ell //X4 4 The HOrbOr PerMit for this facility #010 0 _x Shall be conditioned to allow berthing *I( One v �x 461. 4WW ore fft, TVVT MWX VG7*'W7= /'11A "Al 1 001-10001111111 ORAWIS vy SHEET NO� I " ­ _i/ & DESIGN SIRO"ONIAN 0ATt M ARINE "UNSULTIN" 1 0 Ill SCALE 324 EL MODENA AVENUE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 No 74 LINDA ISLE NEW­*vt�T BEAUN CALIF 41 N� S, w� 949 642 — 2206 HUGO D. DE CASTRO HILTON CHODOROW MARVIN G. BURNS SAUL L. LESSLER JEROME A. RABOW NEIL CARREY RICHARD H. HICKS LAWRENCE R. RESNICK BRUCE S. GLICKFELD EUGENE D. SILVERMAN BUDDY EPSTEIN JAMES A. GINSBURG EDMUND S. SCHAFFER SHARON L. KERTON MENASCHE M. NASS MICHAEL W. LUCAS NONA J. MACPHERSON DAVID C. RUTH MICHAEL R. WHITE JONATHAN I. REICH SCOTT M. MENDLER SUSAN B. FRIEND LAW OFFICES OF - DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS, INC. EIGHTEENTH FLOOR 10960 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90024-3804 TELEPHONE (213) 478-2541 February 18, 1988 MESSENGER & CERTIFIED MAIL Carol A. Brown, Esq. Walker & Kendrick 4000 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 450. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Schafer adv. Siroonian Dear Ms. Brown: ROBERT S. WEST RETIRED CABLE ADDRESS TAXING TELECOPIER (2131 473-0123 TELEX 67-4438 'TAXINC LSA- OUR FILE NUMBER This will confirm our January 17, 1988 telephone conversation. You advised me that your client, John Siroonian, filed a civil action against Earl H. Schafer and asked me whether I was authorized to accept service on Mr. Schafer's behalf. I told you that you should send a copy of the Summons and Complaint to me along with a Notice and Acknowledgment of. Receipt and that I would accept service if, as I believed, my client would authorize me to do so. I have spoken with my client and I am authorized to accept service on his behalf. You told me that the Complaint contained two causes of action as follows: (1) A declaratory relief cause of action to establish the existence of a prescriptive easement over our client's water rights; and (2) an alternative cause of action to recover damages your client may sustain as a result of a forced sale of his boat which, as moored by your client, encroaches on our client's exclusive easement over water adjacent to our client's property and within a projection of our client's property lines. We discussed the lawsuit's possible effect on the City of Newport Beach's intention to enforce its policy LAW OFFICES DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODORUW S BURNS, INC. February 18, 1988 Page -2- against encroachment of water rights. You told me that you had hoped to avoid serving the Complaint but that you were forced to do so because of a letter you received from the Harbor Department stating that it would not delay enforcement of its policy because you had failed to prosecute the civil action you told them you were going to initiate against our client. I told you that I did not believe that the filing or service of your client's civil action would have the effect you desired and that, on Mr. Schafer's behalf, I would demand that the City of Newport Beach enforce its policy without delay. I intend to send a copy of this letter to Mr. Melum, Tidelands Administrator, so that he is aware of Mr. Schafer's position that it would be inequitable to delay enforcement of the City's policy to await the outcome of civil litigation which will probably take a period of years. Your client has no right as a matter of public record to encroach on our client's exclusive easement. On that basis alone the City of Newport Beach should proceed. Further, for the reasons hereinafter set forth, your client's prescriptive easement claim should not deter the City from enforcing its policy. I told you that your claims of a prescriptive easement right and your alternative claim for damages were filed solely to harass our client and to delay our client's ability to enjoy his water rights.Specifically, I told you that the prescriptive easement claim was nonsense. Your service of that action to delay enforcement of the policy of the City of Newport Beach is an abuse of process. Evidence of that abuse of process will be you failure to raise any prescriptive easement claim before the Harbor Department and your abandonment of the equally groundless legal arguments concerning laches. There is no legal basis for a recovery of damages against our client based upon his failure to respond to a letter he did not receive, even if we would assume, arguendo, that he did receive it. Further, as you now apparently concede, the doctrine of laches will not afford your client the relief which he seeks. I told you that when our client prevailed in this case, I was sure that he would insist on commencing a malicious prosecution action to recover the damages he will suffer because of the prosecution of your client's totally groundless lawsuit. In response, you said that you had spoken with the former owner of Mr. Siroonian's house and learned that that former owner had moored a 50 foot boat there. I asked you whether you had made any inquiry as to LAW OFFICES C.ASTRO, WEST, CHODOR&W F6 BURNS. INC. _ February 18, 1988 Page -3- whether the former owner's boat encroached on our client's water rights. You replied that you had not made that inquiry, but that your client's boat was only 42 foot, as opposed to the 50 foot boat owned by your client's predecessor. I told you that the boat's size was irrelevant and that, in this case, the first issue would be whether there was ever any encroachment. We discussed the fact that your client rebuilt his dock after our client purchased his property. I reminded you that when our client bought his property there was no boat encroaching on his water rights. I corrected your misunderstanding as to who instigated your client's decision to rebuild his dock. Our client did nothing more than give his consent to such reconstruction upon request by your client's contractor. However, when our client gave that consent he did so in ignorance of any intention on your client's part to moor a boat which would encroach upon our client's water rights. Demand is hereby made that you forthwith dismiss with prejudice your client's civil action against our client. If you do dismiss the action, and your client immediately moves his boat so that it does not encroach on our client' water rights, I have been assured that our client will let this matter end. Our client is not looking to start or to perpetuate a dispute with his neighbor. It was for that reason that our client did not file his own civil action during the pendency of the permit proceedings by the City ofNewportBeach. So that you have no doubt about the bases for our claim that your law firm and your client will be liable for malicious prosecution of this civil action, I want to call your attention to the following: (1) Your investigation of your client's purported right to assert a prescriptive easement claim totally ignores the basic elements required to prevail in such an action: So that you do not mistake our meaning, you did not investigate, and you have no evidence to show, that your client's predecessor openly, hostilely, notoriously, adversely under a claim of right and continuously for a period of five years, encroached upon our client's predecessors' water rights; (2) As you know, when our client purchased his property, there was no boat encroaching on his water rights and there was absolutely no way for anyone to know that any boat ever encroached upon his water rights or those of his LAW 0F110E )F DE CASTRO. VVEST, CHODOxOW F6 BURNS. INC. February 18, 1988 Page -4 predecessor. Our client is a bona fide purchaser of his property and his exclusive easement on which your client is encroaching. He purchased his property in good faith and without any notice of a claim of prescriptive easement right against the property he acquired; therefore, even assuming arguendo that there ever was a prescriptive easement to encroach on our client's water rights, that prescriptive easement of which our client had absolutely no notice, actual or constructive, has been terminated. We suggest that you read the case of Mesmer v. Uharriet (1916), 174 Cal. 110, 116-117, 162 P. 104. which held that an easement by necessity would not be recognized as against a bona fide purchaser of the servient tenement. A fortiori, your client's claim of prescriptive easement will not prevail against our client; (3) The law is clear that a contract cannot be created based on a party's silence in response to an offer, the rationale being that there is no duty to speak in the absence of some relationship or previous course of dealing. Sorg v. Fred Weisz & Associates (1970) 14 Cal.App.3d 78, 81; 91 Cal.Rptr. 918. Under the circumstances in this case, where our client did not even receive your client's November 14, 1986 letter, there is no legal basis whatsoever for your client's cause of action for damages; and (4) There is no causal relationship between our client's conduct and your client's decision to sell his boat. Why doesn't he moor his boat on the other side of his dock where it will not encroach on our client's water rights? Your client has no case and he never did. If you advised him to commence this action and if you advise him to continue to prosecute this action against our client, you will, in our opinion, be guilty of malicious prosecution. Our demand for dismissal with prejudice of this civil action and removal of your client's encroaching boat should be regarded by you as a settlement offer which must be honored by the dismissal with prejudice and removal of the boat prior to March 1, 1988. I trust you will be able to communicate that offer to your client and take the appropriate action within that time period. If our LAW OFFJCEc OF DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS, INC. February 18, 1988 Page -5- client's demand is not honored within that time, our client will resort to his legal remedies. Very truly yours, D Lawrence R. Resnick of LRR:ag DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW & BURNS, INC. cc. Tony Melum -e WALKED & KENDRICK A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION JOSEPH A. WALKER OF COUNSEL JOHN J. KENDRICK MICHAEL J. MATLAF LAURA A. MYERS C. BENNETT eJACKSON, JR. GARY WRIGHT ALLAN P. LEGUAY CAROL A. BROWN MARK S. FAULKNER OLGA NUNEZ DEAN February 18, 1988 Mr. Tony Melum Tidelands Administrator City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92658-8915 Re: John H. Siroonian Harbor Permit No. 133-74 Our File No. 1055-1 Dear Mr. Melum: Enclosed for your review is a copy of a Complaint and its Exhibits entitled J. H. Siroonian v. Earl H. Schafer. As you can see from the complaint, we have requested that the Court declare that Mr. Siroonian has a prescriptive easement for the encroachment by his boat into the waters belonging to lot 73. In the alternative, however, if the court does not so rule we also have prayed for a cause of action for damages in case Mr. Siroonian is forced to move his boat from its present location. We sincerely hope that the filing of this complaint will bring a speedy resolution to the issue of the encroachment rights as between Lots 73 and 74, and therefore, will obviate the necessity that the City has to follow through with any of its steps to enforce the Harbor Permit Policy. Please call me if you have any questions or concerns or if you feel that it is still necessary for the City to proceed to enforce its Harbor permit policy. SECURITY PACIFIC BANK BUILDING 4000 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD EAST TOWER -SUITE 450 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 TELEPHONE: (714) 752-2522 - TELECOPIER: (714) 752-0439 WALKER & KENDRICK A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION Mr. Tony Melum February 18, 1988 Page 2 In the meantime, I have been in contact with Mr. Schafer ` s attorney and we will see if the parties can resolve the dispute. Very truly yours, WALKER & KENDRICK lxv-� dz!5� CAROL A. BROWN CAB/sib Enclosures cc: Client LTCB2/TM SECURITY PACIFIC BANK BUILDING, 4000 MACARTHUR BLVD., SUITE 450, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TELEPHONE (714) 752-2522 February 16, 1988 Mr. Tony Melum City of Newport Beach PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Re: Harbor Permit 133-74 Dear Mr. Melum, In reference to your letter dated February 11, 1988, there has been a complaint filed by Walker & Kendrick on February 2, 1988. in regards to this matter. Carol Brown assured me that she would call you on February 16, 1988 and fill you in on what had been done pertaining to the civil remedy referred to in your letter and send you a copy of the ,complaint that is on file. Also you will find a copy of a letter that confirms the phone conversation that I had with Carol Brown at the Walker & Kendrick . firm. Please contact me if there are any further questions on this matter. We feel we have fulfilled the requirements that you had set forth in the letter of February 11, 1988. I can be reached at either 1-800-742-1968 or 209-275-1110. Sincerely, II�J� Becky Dodero Secretary BD/bms enclosure J. H. SIROONIAN incorporated 0 2750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93711 (209) 275-1110 February 16, 1988 Ms. Carol Brown Walker & Kendrick 4000 MacArthur Blvd., # 450 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: 1055-00001-006 JJK Dear Ms. Brown, Per our phone conversation on this day; find enclosed the latest correspondence Mr. Siroonian received from Tony Melum, Tidelands Administrator for the City of Newport Beach. He states it appeared to him that nothing had been done in the last two months, therefore, we have until February 26, 1988 to come into conformance. You stated to me the complaint had infact been filed on February 2, 1988. You did not forward a copy of the complaint to Mr. Melum's office because they were not named but would do so today, attention Tony Melum. You also stated you would follow up with a phone call to Mr. Melum today February 16, 1988 to inform him of what had been done since his meeting of December 14, 1987 with Mr. Kendrick and that a copy of the complaint would be mailed soon to his attention. Should you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Beck ' Dodero BD/bms cc: Tony Melum enclosure J.H.SIROONIAN Incorporated —7= 4 r7= 2750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93711 (209) 275-1110 �£W PpR T I� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U I P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 February 11, 1988 John H. Siroonian 74 LInda Isle Newport Beach, CA 92600 Re: Harbor Permit 133-74 Dear Mr. Siroonian: On December 14, 1987 we met with your attorney, John J. Kendrick, to discuss a resolution of the problem dealing with your vessel's encroachment between numbers 73 and 74 Linda Isle. There has been no dispute that the vessel berthed at your pier does, in fact, encroach into the permit zone of #73 Linda Isle. As I recall, at our meeting Mr. Kendrick felt that there were legal theories upon which you could rely to establish your right to continue encroaching into the water of the property owner at #73. Mr. Kendrick proposed to immediately pursue some type of civil remedy to establish those rights. Mr. Kendrick asked if your boat could remain in its present location. City staff indicated that we could not allow an exception to the permit policies, which is what Mr. Kendrick was proposing, but we would delay enforcement of the policies pending the filing of your legal action. It has now been two months since our meeting and it appears to us that nothing has changed. In that regard we are again asking that the vessel berthed at #74 Linda Island be brought into conformance with the Harbor Permit Policies Section 21. A which states: 21.A. "Boats moored at private or public docks shall not extend beyond the projection of the property lines of the property to which the dock facility is connected.// If conformance to the permit policies does not occur within the next fifteen days, it will be necessary for us to go to the City Attorney's office and ask that either an injuction be filed relative to the encroachment and/or a request be made of the City Council that the Harbor Permit for #74 Linda Isle be revoked for violation of the Harbor Permit Policies. If you have questions in this regard please contact me at 644 3044. Sincere, Ton e-et. y � , i elands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach C I TY NEWPORT-BEACH � �q; s-s� CITY OF NUIPOU BERM REST fT ? �i ( 'f bta I O.o MLLW BRLDOAISLFM- aw y p��IFIC � P,�� CEO � iHMT VICINITY MAP JEM PROF I.LE 1 " = 40' �sr . �af+oar aar, guaan hT'y SOUNDINGS FIE DVrU= IN FEET AID M40TE ELEVFITIONS ,BFISED ON MERN LOWER LOW WRTER. L, � � �� i / �� ,. �y �emo�c ��� fc ,dace n�of �ro ►A- ernovc 4 eePbtcc 2 9anyN,el r v fir. Z PLAN VIBV 1" = 40' FPPLIGNT'S NAME J-ohn Sifoonta JOB BnDREss 7c/Gr44 .Ts% 6-.9 - 4 i Cirf OF NFWPORT REACH ARBOR PERMIT FSFIMISSFON IS Fz9EBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN. ON THE REVERSE HEREOF AT THE SITE INDICATED, SUBJECT: TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE HARBOR PERMIT POIJCIES OF; NEWPQ ST BEACH AND ANY SPECIAL CONDITIONS .USTED HEREON. THIS PERMIT IS NOTTRANSFERABLE WIT 6&THEWRITTEN CONSENTOF THE CITY HARBOR COORDINATOR OR' COUNCIL. THE RIGHTS GIVEN UNDER THIS PERMIT PERMISSIVE ONLY AND THIS PERMIT RNO BY CITY COON IN ACCORDANCE 1 F MUNICIPAL. CITY. BOR COORDINATOR 7-2D PERMIT NO. BATE ?�d , OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the contractor's license law for the following reasons: (Sec. 7031d.5, Business and professions Code). Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provision of the Contractors License Law (Chapter 9, commencing with Section 7000, of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he is exempt therefrom and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty for not more than five hundred dollars ($500). I, as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner -builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with a Contractor(s) License pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). I am exempt under Sec. of Business and Professional Code for this reason: Owner's Signature: Contractor: D L-1 Address: 5 OQ__ License class: _— License Contractor's Declaration Date: I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 7000) of Division 3 of the Bu ' ess and Professions Code, and my effect. Contractor's Signature DatE (commencing with Section license is in full force and 6-07-205 O:52AM FROM BRIGGEMAN—LAND—CO- 9A97232O36 P.2 ' �• "4yc t vi i ZUW*-U4-uI Ut:44:2%; (L5M I) +1-U49-2tsb-8188 prom: Walter Havekorst III 04/0642005 11:29 18088221446 DIANE MCLAhE PAGE 01101 41-94R-201-87B6 From: VWtor I I riakar'at ill IA4R-a0-20oe os�e8P11 FR*ICRITAp9 &g= NfiVrPPORT BXASFI �4q 8�D t266 Tart -827 JUAuo.R P�'.�' wT 7XW.SF= APPLZCATXO.N Dato of Applla®Eon: S-1—b J opermil Itumb®ra Pr°P®rty Addnmw.- -7 1—l" C-111- ,-Z:rZS L %yees Ndmas: Ruling Addre";:_ Tolophon, a we.: B�r'd Slgrstdu�; , C senses Ala nw-. 1-ane. H"W �S®ller's Ipigr��rele: • er 4, Joint Owner 09nature.- Eacrow Comp&ny;Y i, Addr6sa o . Escrow Number, Cloaing Date Iftsm ): r d Inspection Date., Reinepectlan We Fee ArmUnt -09ta Feld. Chonk Iwnbbr; - Applketion Comply i�otal�a �d�e;wr�atl� Sollm+afar cAnQ : This_PMM h 1eWIDcMbM by IIOw Cav�ro�dl e nM wl;h Tdpii ?T od'ihe AWWWO-i•Beac* d�4s�r' 1*01 Cody. t , 1 March 2, 2005 Heritage Escrow Fax 949-640-2299 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 829 Harbor island Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92659 949-644-3034/Fax 949-723-0589 Re: Pier Permit #133-75 75 Linda Isle, Newport Beach Escrow # 19942-WJ Dear Sirs: The City of Newport Beach has inspected the above pier and found it to meet City standards. However, please make the buyer aware that the electrical plug needs to have a cover put on it in the future. Once we receive the application signed by the buyer, seller and joint permittees, the pier will be transferred. Thanks for your help and if you require further assistance in this matter, please call 644-3034. Sincerely, Lo rrf�e A ro es e Lorrie Arcese Harbor Resources Division qr- Lorrie Arcese City of Newport Beach 829 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92659 Harbor Resources Division 2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 120 Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 (949) 640-2225 Fax: (949) 640-2299 www.heritageescrow.com Date: June 7, 2005 Escrow No: 304-19942-WJ RE: 75 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, CA 92660 PIER # 133-75 Enclosed is the fully executed Pier Transfer information for the above mentioned property. Please transfer the pier to George S. Briggeman, Jr. as soon as possible. Please call me if you have any questions. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you in this transaction. Should you have any questions, please call us at the telephone number referenced above. Sincerely, THE H Wendy Escrow COMPANY com _ .. INSPECTION FORM Harbor Resources Department Date: 3 j 0 $� Inspection Requested By: _ Inspector: Don Duffy i Pier Address: Pier Transfer Reinspection GFI Present Yes ,,N. ed None Needed Yes Need Anti -Siphon / Backflow Present Other Comments Ra Eelgrass Yes. No Present' Pump Out Pier Location Yes No Operational Recommended Action . Encroachmenet Address of Complaining Party Boat Description -.C.F .Number Location on .Dock Comments / Observations Other Request I 'L I TY BERG S, J7r CITT OF NE WPORT SERCH4- M TBw UPPER R BFLBOR ia.ANB BFLJ WEST O�E� PIfx 1 JETTY PROF ISLE 1 40' -VICINITY MAP asr Saar err, JEM SaMINGS ARE EXAR= IN FELT AND DENOTE EL.EVRTIONS,,BASE13 ON M€M LOWER LOW WATER. I_ / ' 1 \ / f c-tA e avd reP /Q cc z jh*tytjq . 11 Ile •\ � f i Z o lffvuw's rm Tohn 51foonnta,) PLAN • I EW r 4 00 + JOB FinaREss 7V 1,144 .Tslc �-��' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 829 Harbor Island Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92659 949-644-3044/Fax 949-723-0589 March 27, 2007 Diamond Country Escrow, Inc. Fax: 949.718.2915 Re: HARBOR PERMIT TRANSFER Pier Permit # 133-75 Escrow#2594 75 Linda Isle The Harbor Resources division has received the completed & signed application and fee for the pier permit transfer. The pier inspection performed by our office has determined that it meets City standards. The permit will be transferred into the buyer's name. Thank you for your help. For further assistance in this matter, please contact me at 949. 644. 3044. Sincerely, C�Sa waters Harbor Resources Division • i,�PO,< HARBOR PERMIT TRANSFER APPLICATION • , '�S. n F Date of Applicaton: C,3 0 ;"IA7 Permit Number: 133-- 74 Property Address: 2 S Buyer's Names: Ti // I ,-s 1,4 9 /f� Billing Address: Sao V 6; Gd�,eT �c' /_ G 710- '1- ClIx q Z 13- 3 Telephone No.: Buyer's Signatures: Seller's Names: Seller's -Signatures: Joint Owner Signature: Escrow Company: Diamond Country Escrow, Inc. orpora a laza, buite Address92660 each, CA Escrow Number: Fax #: Closing Date .(Estimate): 3 Inspection Date:�5�� Reinspection Date: Fee Amount. * bo Date Paid: �3o Check Number: 161 Application Complete: ' Harbor Resources Signature/Date Special Conditions: This permit is revocable by the City Council in accordance with Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. r AQQ, O ��e+ HARBOR PERMIT ` TRANSFER APPLICATION Date of Applicaton: Permit Number: 135-' Property Address:�- Buyer's Names: Rillina Address: Telephone No.: Buyer's Signatures: Seller's Names: 'R&E S.,MI � -WO ^' PROPF Seller's Signatures: Joint Owner Signature: Escrow Company: Address - Escrow Number: 'Sq --, Fax #: --7) Closing Date ,(Estimate): Inspection Date: Reinspection Date: Fee Amount: Date Paid: Check Number: Application Complete: Harbor Resources Signature/Date Special Conditions: This permit is revocable by the City Council in accordance with Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. si ,?- 7,,,S— INSPECTION FORM Date: Inspection Requested By: Inspector: Harbor Resources Department ,5)151017 ji`bcl-, Don Duffy �o Pier Address: J LL--. Pier Transfer Reinspection GFI Present Yes Reed None Needed Yes Need Anti -Siphon / Backflow Present Other Comments /o Eelgrass Date Time Eelgrass Within 15' of Project Eelgrass Within 15' - 30' of Project No Eelgrass in Project Area Pump Out Pier Location Yes No Operational Recommended Action Encroachmenet Address of Complaining Party Boat Description CIF Number Location on Dock Comments / Observations Other Request Map Output Page 1 of I http://www6.city.newport-beach.ca.uslservletleom.esi'l.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=n... 03/16/2007 DATE-�4�"' -TIM.E FOR WH E YOU WERE OUT M OF - PHONE N�3-/ L_,,?, EXT. TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL, RETURNED YOUR CALL WILL CALL AGAIN CAME IN TO SEE YOU URGENT P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 February 11, 1988 John H. Siroonian 74 Linda Isle Newport Beach, CA 92600 Re: Harbor Permit 133-74 Dear Mr. Siroonian: On December 14, 1987 we met with your attorney, John J. Kendrick, to discuss a resolution of the problem dealing with your vessel's encroachment between numbers 73 and 74 Linda Isle. There has been no dispute that the vessel berthed at your pier does, in fact, encroach into the permit zone of #73 Linda Isle. As I recall, at our meeting Mr. Kendrick felt that there were legal theories upon which you could rely to establish your right to continue encroaching into the water of the property owner at #73. Mr. Kendrick proposed to immediately pursue some type of civil remedy to establish those rights. Mr. Kendrick asked if your boat could remain in its present location. City staff indicated that we could not allow an exception to the permit policies, which is what Mr. Kendrick was proposing, but we would delay enforcement of the policies pending the filing of your legal action. It has now been two months since our meeting and it appears to us that nothing has changed. In that regard we are again asking that the vessel berthed at #74 Linda Island be brought into conformance "with the Harbor Permit Policies Section 21. A which states: 21.A. "Boats moored at private or public docks shall not extend beyond the projection of the property lines of the property to which the dock facility is connected." If conformance to the permit policies does not occur within the next fifteen days, it will be necessary for us to go to the City Attorney's office and ask that either an injuction be filed relative to the encroachment and/or a request be made of the City Council that the Harbor Permit for #74 Linda Isle be revoked for violation of the Harbor Permit Policies. If you have questions in this regard please contact me at 644- 3044. Sincerely, Tony �4451—a—nds Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach LAW OFFICES OF HUGO D. DE CASTRO DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW 6 BURNS, INC. HILTON CHODOROW EIGHTEENTH FLOOR MARVIN G. BURNS SAUL L. LES5LER 10960 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD JEROME A. RABOW NEIL CARREY LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024-3604 RICHARD H. HICKS TELEPHONE (213) 476-2541 LAWRENCE R. RESNICK BRUCE S. GLICKFELD EUGENE D. SILVERMAN BUDDY EPSTEIN JAMES A. GINSBURG EDMUND S. SCHAFFER SHARON L.KERTON MENASCHE M. NASS MICHAEL W. LUCAS NONA J. MACPHER50N DAVID C. RUTH January 5, 1987 MICHAEL R. WHITE JONATHAN 1. REICH SCOTT M. MENDLER SUSAN B. FRIEND Mr. Tony Melum Attention: Marine Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Mr. Melum: ROBERT S. WEST RETIRED CABLE ADDRESS "TAXI NC" TELECOPIER (213) 473-0123 TELEX 67-4438 "TAXING LSA" OUR FILE NUMBER This will confirm our telephone conversation of January 4, 1988. As I told you, our law firm represents Mr. Earl H. Schafer who resides at 73 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, California 92660. Our client purchased his house in April 1986. As you know, our client is having a dispute with his neighbor, Mr. John Siroonian, who resides at 74 Linda Isle. The dispute arises out of Mr. Siroonian's appropriation of our client's water rights without our client's consent. We are writing this letter pursuant to your request that we express our client's desire to have the City of Newport Beach enforce its policies as the same relate to Mr. Siroonian's encroachment on our client's water rights. As I told you, our client was not living in his house during the periodof time that this dispute arose. The house was being remodeled. Our client never consented to Mr. Siroonian's encroachment and Mr. Siroonian has not obtained any legal right to encroach. Based upon our telehone conversation, it is my understanding that when a permit is granted to construct a dock, the permittee is required to accept and agree to abide by the policies of the City of Newport Beach which, among other things, prohibit any encroachment on water rights owned by others. It is my understanding that that policy was adopted for the benefit of neighboring owners LAW OFFICES OF DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW F3 BURNS, INC. January 5, 1988 Page -2- such as our client. As I told you, our client was asked to consent in writing, and did consent in writing, to the reconstruction of Mr. Siroonian's dock; however, no one disclosed to our client Mr. Siroonian's intention to dock a boat which would encroach on our client's water rights. Had such an intention been disclosed, our client would not have given his consent to such reconstruction. You informed me that Mr. Siroonian's lawyers told you that they intend to prosecute a civil action to establish Mr. Siroonian's legal rights. To date, no such action has been commenced. Further, as I told you, because of the nature of civil litigation, many years may pass before the matter is finally resolved. For that reason, and because our client is being deprived of his right to utilize his own property, we ask you to proceed to enforce the policies of the City of Newport Beach without awaiting the outcome of unfiled civil litigation. I very much appreciate your consideration in agreeing to forward to me a copy of the City of Newport Beach policies, the relevant City of Newport Beach Ordinance concerning permits for construction of docks and a copy of the legal memorandum supplied to you by Mr. Siroonian's lawyer. Thank you very much for your courtesy and cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours Lawrence R. Resnick of DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW & BURNS, INC. LRR:ag Is U I V1 IV I U IV lb (CITACION JUDICIAL) ` OTIrE TO DEFENDANT: (Avi§o a Acusado) EARL H . SCHAFER, AND DOES 1 through 10, inclusive YOU ARE BEING SUED BY F'L.AWTI Fa (A Ud. le esta demandando) J. H. SIROONIAN, INC., a California corporation You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this sum- mons is served on you to file a typewritten re- sponse at this court. A letter or phone call will not protect you your typewritten response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case, and your wages, money and pro- perty may be taken without further warning from the court. There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, yoLrmay call an attorney refer- ral service or a legal aid office (listed in the.phone book). FOR COURT USE ON(Y (SOLO PARA USO D£ !A COUTI) Despues de que 6e entreguen esta citation judicial usted tiene un plazo ¢ire 30 DIAS CALENDARIOS Para presentar una respuesEa escrita a maquina en esta torte. Una carn o una ilamada telefonica no fe ofrecerz protecd6n soi mspuesta- escrita a maquina fiene que cumplir can das formalidades )egaies apropiadas si usted quiere que Ga torte escuche su caso. Si usted no presenta su respuesta a hempo, puede perder el caso, y be pueden quitar su salario, su dinero y otras cocas de su-propiedad sin aviso adicional por parte de la torte. Existen otms mquisitos legales. Puede que usted quiera Ilamar a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede Ilamar a un servicio de referencia de abogados o a una oficina de ayuda legal (vea el directorio telefonicco). The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direction de la torte es) l € I ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT l 700 Civic Center Drive West Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714) 834-3734 The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or pla'sItMg without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la direction y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o nlel demandante que no tiene abogado, es) JOHN J. KENDRICK/CAROL A. BROWN WALKER & KENDRICK 4000 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 450 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 752-2522 - a o. g� f Clerk, �i4f I�SL �' t —e.1/� Deputy DATE: rF G 'p88 iV'f'lRY L. 'G.LnAl" N ,i E- Cl ersaficil (Delrgado) ISEAL anfc.l,.ORY'I`r.Y NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are`' ee eO'"' r 1. as an individual defendant. 2. as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): 3. on behalf of (specifpr): under: CCP 416.10 (corporation) CCP 416.2.0 Wefunct corporation) CCP 416.40 &association or partnership) other: 4. = by personal delivery on. (date): 0 CCP 416.60 (minor) (� CCP 416.70 (conservatee) CCP 416.90 (individual) Fom, Adopted by Rule 962 Juo,val Council of California ?B2iauoi IRe, Janua,v 1 198=1 (See reverse for Proof of Service). SUMMONS CCP 412.20 1-12 PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS - (Use separate proof of service for each person served) 1. I served the _ a. summons '`i complaint = amended summons amended complaint completed and blank Case Questionnaires Otner (specify!: b. on defendant (name): c. by serving defendant, other (name and title or relationship to person served): d. = by delivery at home Q at business (1) date: (2) time: (3) address: e. = by mailing (1) date: (2) place: 2. Manner of service (check proper box): a. Personal service. By personally delivering copies. (CCP 415.10) b. Substituted service on corporation, unincorporated association (including partnership), or public entity. By leaving, during usual office hours, copies in the office of the person served with the person who apparently was in charge and thereafter mailing Iby first-class mail, postage prepaid) copies to the person served at the place where the copies were left. (CCP 415.20(a)) C. Substituted service on natural person, minor, conservatee, or candidate. By leaving copies at the dwelling house, usual place of abode, or usual place of business of the person served in the presence of a competent member of the household or a person apparently in charge of the office or place of business, at least. 18 years of age, who was informed of the general nature of the papers, and thereafter mailing (by first-class mail, postage prepaid) copies to the person served at the place where the copies were left. (CCP 415.20(b)) (Attach separate declaration or affidavit stating acts relied on to establish reasonable diligence in first attempting personal service.) d. Mail and acknowledgment service. By mailing (by first-class mail or airmail, postage prepaid) copies to the person served, together with two copies of the form of notice and acknowledgment and a return envelope, postage prepaid, addressed to the sender. (CCP 415.30) (Attach completed acknowledgment of receipt.) e. Certified or registered mail service. By mailing to an address outside Calif omia (by first-class mail, postage prepaid, requiring a return receipt) copies to the person served. (CCP 415.40) (Attach signed return receipt orother evidence of actual delivery to the person served.) f. Other (specify code section): additional page is attached. 3. The "Notice to the Person Served (on the summons) was completed as follows (CCP 412.30, 415.10, and 474): a. as an individual defendant. b. as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): C. on behalf of (specify): under: CCP 416.10 (corporation) CCP 416.60 (minor) other: Q CCP 416.20. (defunct corporation) CCP 416.70 (conservatee) 0 CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) CCP 416.90 (individual) d. by personal delivery on (date): 4. At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this action. 5. Fee for service: $ _ _ _ __- 6. Person serving: a. California sheriff, marshal, or constable. f. Name, address and telephone number and, if applicable, b. Registered California process server. county of registration and number: c. Employee or independent contractor of a registered California process server. d. Not a registered California process server. e. Exempt from registration under Bus. & Prof. Code 22350(b). I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State (For California sheriff, marshal, or constable use only) of California that the foregoing is true and correct. I certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: Date: !SIGNATURE) SS21a)(91 [Rev. January 1. 19841 !SIGNATURE) - Z 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 12 14 i5 i6 171 18� 1s 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 '1 WALKER & KENDRICK A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 4000 MACARTHUR 6LVD., SUITE 450 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TELEPHONE (714) 752.2522 BELOW FOR 7=21 G STAMP ONLY) Plaintiff, Jr H Si::oonian, Inc., FEB 0 2 19QQ AttamM fo• U a California corporation GARY L. G�+rk By SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE J. H. SIROONIAN, INC., .F, California corporation, Plaintiff, —vs— EARL Ho SCHAFER, AND DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, �. 0. } CASE NO:5:4,6 } COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATION OF A PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT AND DAMAGES PLAINTIFF J. Hs Siroonian, Inc., a California corporation alleges for causes of action against Defendant Earl He Schafer as follows. 1. Defendant is, and at all times herein mentioned. was, a resident of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. 2a Plaintiff J. H. SIROONIAN INC., ("SIROONIAN") is and at all time mentioned herein was a Califcrnia cerpo- ration organized and existing under the laws of the State od` California wi-11. its princil)le place of business in Fresno, California. 3. Plaintiff, owns a bay front home, -with a dock, at number 74 Linda Isle, Newport Peach, California. Defendant ::jARL H. SCHAFER. (°'SCI�lx:'BM") owns the next door bay front PLCE13/JS/1055®1 �-1-� I 2 home, also with a boat, dock on the bay side, at- number 73 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, Califon ia. 4. Atrachad as E -bbit "'A' to: this Complaint is a 5 copy of a Tract Map slows -ULL Y e-native T.)Ja,cement of 6 the docks and water s.pacc i.n 2.ron.t of Lot 73 and. 74. The 7 Dots are -not parallel; the shore lime curves in a sharp bend 8 right at the start of Lot 74. Consequently, the bay side of 9 Lot 74 is significantly narrower than the street side of the 10 Lot. The actual shape of the bay side of the Lot is impor- 11 tant in determining the amount of dock space and water space 12 available in front of each respective Lot. �-� ,3 5. in the summer of 1986, Plaintif'°SIROONIAN was J 14 considering purchasing a 42 foot motor yacht which. was to be 15 moored on the south side of the dock in front of the home at 1s number 74 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, Califo:rni. E where the .17 . previous owner had a .fifty (5 0) foot power boat moored and ,s had established a pattern of use. 19 6. Plaintiff SIROONIAN.had a diagram prepared showing 20 the placement of the motor.yacht at the dock im, relationship 21 to Defendant SCHAF'ER`s dock in front of the Lo,- at number 73 22 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, California. 23 7. Before Plaintiff purchased the boat, however, John 24 Siroonian on behalf of plaintiff wrote a letter. dated July 25 26, 1986 to Defendant SCRAPER, enclosing e:� copy of the 26 diagram showing the relative position of the motor yacht as 27 between the water in front of Lot 73 and 74, and alerted 2g Defendant SCHFER to the: fact that the boat would protrude a 29 few feet into the water space in. front of lot 73 --and 30 infringe on the water rights of Lot 73 The previous zi property owner had used this water space of Lot 73 and 32 established a history of continuous use, and Plaintiff only g3 wanted to continue to occupy the same water space belonging 54 to Lot 73, A copy of this, letter, which includes the „5 diagram, is atta.chad to this Con lain, as Exhibit "B" and 35 incorporated hereinby referen:c:. PLCB13/JS/1055-1, r2­ 4 7 10 11 12 14 -15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 27 28 7 29 30 31 32 ad 34 35 36 S. This letter, Exl-Libjl�-, 1-121", also informed Defendant: SCHAFER that the: yacht broker would bring the boat to the dock for viewing by Dc-ifenaant, SCM�,_r!ER at a time convenient to him, so he could observe `cl�at t1ic-, boat did r=-16.-rude into his water space. Plaintiff SIROONIA,11'�,, recalved no response to the letter. 10. in November, 1986, P_Uziintiff SIROONIAN was con- cluding the final negotiation 8 :i'_or the purchase of the motor yacht- and again John Sirooniar, �w:='Ee to Defendant: SCHAFER on behalf of Plaint--iff, a copy of this letter, dated 11/14/86, is attached to the Complaint as Exhib4 t "C" and incorporated t- herein by reference. As this letter indicates;- the large and very visible boat had been, continuously parked at the, dock in front of Lot 74 for some time, but before the: purchase of the boat was finalized, plaintiff wanted to know .if the extension of the boat_- past the property line of Lot 74 into the water area. for Lot- 73 "created a problem" for Defendant SCHAFER. Plaintiff SIROONIAN received.no response to that correspondence. 11. The following August-., 3.987, upon xeturning from an extended trip out of the country, John Siroonian received. a - telephone message the Defendant SC=ER had called him "con- cerned" about the motor yach-1-1- parked 11n, front of his home which extended into the water space Df lot 73. John Siroonian responded to Defendant SCHAFER via a letter, dated August 18, 1987, a copy of - which attached to the Comvlaint as. Exhibit "D" andi herein by reference. 12. Following this lettel-, sant more than a year after -IL--.he original lette,�.- c)-l'.7 July, 1986, Defendant SCHAFER had his attorney con -tact SIROONIAN. The fist of Defendant- .SCHAPEREIconce=,. way hat- he had never consented to the parkJ_L_ng, of mvtof ozi the west side of the dock, the only plFioc. it be parked in PLCB13/JS/1055-1 -3- 7), 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I.8 19 20 21 22 231 241 30 31 32 33 3f� 36 36 relation to -she docks at Lot. 73 and 74, and no�-T Defendant SCHAFER wished Plaintiff SIROONIAN to move the boat. Defendant was asserting the,-. -fact that the he had the exclu- sive right -to use the water -space within his property line and Plaintiff's boat was cle=112- encroaching on those water rights. This objection, came afte- not only had. Plaintiff had the boat parked there continuously for over a year, but that the previous owner had moored a. fifty (50) foot power boat in the same -location for a. number of vears and had established a pattern of use for that space without objection from Defendant or from his predecessor in interest the, previous owner of Lot'73. 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the previouF owners of Loy:. 74 had, for a substantial period of time, boats of -he samie size moored in the same water space belonging to Lot 73. Plaintiff SIROONIAN, as the present property owner of Lot 74, was interested In continuing w��th that pattern of use of the water space between Lot 74 :and 73 with the encroachment into Lot 73's water. As a courtesy, however, he alerted Defen- dant SCHAFER was altered to this intention and was asked.in the July 28 and November 14, 1986 letters if there would be. any problems with Siroon.iaz, continuing to moor a boat in front of Lot 74 that protruded into the cater space of Lot 73m 14. Because of the established patter°, of use of the water. by previous property owners, Defendant SCHAFER's Tack --- _response to the two letters was reasonably interpreted by Plaintiff as tacit approval./consent. 15. I'M actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Plaintiff and Defendant concerning their respective rights and duties as to the water; space in front of Lot 73. It is obvious from. SCHAFER' s present, pDsition that .he never consented to Lot 7 4 ' s i.sa of Lot 7 3 ' s water space. PLCB13/JS/1055m1. 1, 2� 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i8 1g 20 21 22 23 24 25. 2..6 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Defendants SCHAFER, however and hi_ -, predecessor .in interest did .let the use occur Without objeuli-on for years. 16. Plaintiff desires E�. judicial determination of his rights and duties apd a declaration rr,z to . a prescriptive use easement over the water rights oS.' Lot 73 for Lot 74.. Between Plaintiff and the previoo owner of Lot 74, boats have been continuously moored in tl-is water area belonging to Defendant and the previous ow?,a of this Lot for the required prescriptive period; a cleanly visible to Defendant so as to put him on notice as to the encroachment, was done, obviously without the consent or permission by Defendant; was done with the knowledgee of Defendant, and it is clear from the present dispute that Defendant did not agree to this encroachment over his water space, but rather let it develop without objection over: a number of years. 17. A judicial declaration is necessary and appropri ate at this time under the circumstances in order the Plaintiff -may ascertain the rights and duties concerning the water'=ights in front of Lot 73 because if it is determined that plaintiff does not have an easement over the water rights of Lot 73 the motor yacht, will have to be sold at a significant loss, SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (For Damaetes ) 18. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully set forth herein. 19. Before Plaintiff finalized the purchase of the forty -two toot Mnoter yach as a cost Qf appro�ianately $300,000.00, John Siroonian, on behalf of plaintiff specif- ically asked Defendant if the mooring of that boat between Lot 74 and 73 would be a "problem'. That was the entire purpose in having a diagraiii prepared showing the relative positioning of the boat as it was moored at the dock of Lot 74 and as it, extended 5�..t� thz water in front of Lot 73. PLCB13/JS/1055-1 -3 1 1� 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 That diagram was enclosed with a letter sent by John Siroonian to Defendant dated July 26, 1986. 20. Then, again before the purchase of the $30`0,000.00 motor yacht was completed,. John Si,roonian, on behalf of - Plaintiff sent Defendant a second letter, dated November 14, 1986, asking him, again if the docking of the boat presented a "problem". 21. -Then, and only then, after receiving no response to the two letters, receiving no telephone messages, no personal visits from a neighbor who owned the property right next door, did Plaintiff complete the purchase.: of the motor Yacht. It was certainly reasonable of Plaintiff to inter- Dret Defendant's silence and lack of protest or response to the two letters as consent to the continued use of Lot 73`s water space by Plaintiff. Plaintiff .relied on this si- lence/consent to finalize the purchase of the motor yacht. 22. Then eight months later, after Plaintiff con- S_I=mated the purchase: of the boat .in July o�" 1967, Defendant expressed a concern and left Plaintiff a. message on Plain- tiff's telephone answering machine., it no%&T appears that the mooring of the motor yacht does present "problem" to Defendant. 23. If Plaintiff does not receive an easement over a few feet of 'Defendant's water space aD as to allow for the continued mooring of the motor yacht in front of Plaintiff`s home at Lot 74, Plaintiff will be forced to sell the motor yacht and loose _approximately $100,000.00 because of this forced salAttached hereto and incorporated herein by e reference as Exhibit "E" is a copy of the original purchase. order showing at purchase price of $299,980.00. Attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "F" is a copy of an appraisal by the yacht broker, John F. Martin, indicating what the motor yacht could be sold for in a forced sale.. The appraisal indicates that'Plaintiff would incur a loss of approximately $100,000.00. PLCB13/JS/1055-1 4 5 6 7 IO 12 13 14 15 16 17 .18 is .20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 24. Plaintiff only purchased the motor yacht after attempting to dete=ibe whether its extension into the waters In fronC. of Lot 73 was a "probleE', Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defamdant's nog response to the two let -ter inquiries (Exhibits 'B" and 'C"� as a consent to the use of the water and if Plaintiff is forced now to sale the motor yacht, it will cause extreme financial detriment. 25. In addition, besides reasonably relying on Defen- dants failure to object or even to respond to the two letter inquiries, Plaintiff also had the boat moored in its posi- tion at the dock in front of Lot 74 for over a vear before Defendant determined '"hat the motor yacht was a "problem",, In addition, the previous owner of Lot 74 had similarly similarly .sized boat moored In the. same location for a. number of years. 26. Because of the established pattern of use of. the water by previous property owners, Defendant SCHAFER's lack of response to the two letters was -reasonably interpreted by Plaintiff ff as tacit approval/consent. 2-7. If it is not nm�,)- determined that Plaintiff has easement rights to the use of the water space in front of Lot 73 into which the motor yacht-_ extends, and the boat must be sold Plaintiff will be dama,ged in the amount- of all- leas-16- $100,000.00. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment as followsz 1. For a declaration tlat Plaintiff has am. easement for water rights i_n the water area in front of Lot 2, Damages in the sum oi $100,000.00; 3. Foz- costs of the 5u_i-L- herain. inaurred,, PLCB13/JS/1055-1 't 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Z8 19 20 21 22 . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3D 31 32 33 34 35 36 t 4. For such other ?',ne f 'C-h relief as the Court may deem proper,, DA3'BD ,- January 29, 1986 IUIXE . L, MEMRICY, J .-KENDRICK CAROL A. BROWN Attorneys for Pigi.ntiff J. Ho Siroonian, a California corporation a:� w o IIPLCB13/JS/1055-1 -a- ` _CE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 WALKER & KENDRICK A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 4000 MACARTHUR BLVD., SUITE 450 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TELEPHONE (714) 752-2522 Plaintiff, J. H. Siroonian, Inc., Attorneys for a California corporation SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE J. H. SIROONIAN, INC., a ) CASE NO: 54 76 10 California corporation, ) Plaintiff, ) EXHIBITS "A F". TO COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATION OF A PRESCRIPTIVE -vs- ) EASEMENT AND DAMAGES ) EARL H. SCHAFER, AND DOES 1 ) through 10, inclusive, ) I ) I Defendants. ) Attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference are Exhibits "A F" that were referenced in the Original Complaint for Declaration of A Prescriptive Easement and Damages that was filed on February 2, 1988 and inadvertently omitted DATED: February .16, 1988 WALKER & KENDRICK _-.---_-..-- -_-- _-__A Professional Law Corporation By HN J. KENDRICK CAROL A. BROWN Attorneys for Plaintiff J.H. Siroonian, INC., a California corporation PLCB14/JS1/1055-1 1?'rr ` � r �ayw t �41'• �o i .f tiy. • F ST AV.,3 ! t � qtT�/ •ter 1 t �i0 .1, ( ( - �#� L i — wee AbC :.. •r_ -,- ; _- _ _ fi's w-ae RT SAY �"AC �FoctNlA _. o -- J - - # fps.-� ' �-' - o4rpf�.n •'be.o ` Mrorl• Co er �o.�'Wof�r'.'-ti9ot�cw•.:., - rangt .a{ r`.o'z. gprrvx�•�cva�e✓ 1 ore rs+vo/�3j,�d r» �hr5 sCt'�io .af.l9wr�p.�� !r` -:77 J r i `P J , r - FL_ - S� _ f`l] Wry OF MrWPO" INEACH HARBOR PERMIT PIMMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN THE FACILITY SHOWN ON THE REVERSE HEREOF, AT THE SITE INDICATED. SUBJECT TO TII- PROV.SIONS OF THE HARBOR PER UT POLICES OF N—VVPO:ZT 13EACH ANI• ANY ,SPECIAL CONDITIONS LISTED IIEs.EVIA. THIS PERFAI" IS NOT TRANSFERABLE WiT:TOUT TRZ l:'::iTTEN CONSENT G: THE CITY HARBOR COORDINATOR Of: CITY CGI)NCIL. TH.- RIGHTS GIVEN UND=Iffg-aft— t11t551VE ONL'. AND THIS, PERMIT CITY COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WICIPAL CODE. RDINATOR 133�- PER 4. DAT Jul-, 2E, I9B6 Sari Schafer isIcrz p4exacr: Beat: A 2660 Dear a ar 1: I an interLr:jir to Purchase a forty-tv foot Rivo motoryachf very soon. Tile boat would tie on the south side of ray dock xhich is iacent per4y. Tne Riva isPPr a=imately rKelve feet to .you.: Pro uauld rotrude a few feet into your u:�ter nine inches wide and P Space. Sirmly stated, =uld ,you III low ,me the LSE o f sane of you a•,�ier swage' -- 7 have enclosed a diaeram that sho= the CV, —innate dimensions in and relat.ionshiP of .e. both st w=i I labr�ing the boa btotrry a`occso that }�-_ .ion Mart in of Riva lire you -may see the actual situation. P1 ease . i et me know xizen you wilt be avaitaDle to do thi j, - _I thank you in advance i or your �?cir Cons iciera� i on and attention o this r�e=e 6oia� Siroonian 'bi L 3 Saw xt ,-! C�.l,'`�—ICJ'✓ Prapcnics Limited (209) 275-III 0 ?7iU \. PARvNVA)' DRIV . '�R:S`10. CALIrpRN1A 93711 November 14, 1986 Earl Schafer 73 Linda Isle Newport, Cri 92660 Dear Earl, I am in final negoiations in buying a 42 foot Reva Motoryacht and hope to close soon. I wrote you a letter back on .1uly 28, 1986 with a diagram enclosed showing the dimensions of the yacht. Mr. ion hartin from Reva West has been kind enought to leave the yacht parked at the slip for quite some time. In the last thirty days, :I have taken the opportunity to look at many of the boat docks at Linda Isle and observed .them in order to establish if there were infact any similar situations. I found several occasions where boats would protrude a 'Law feet into the _neighbors water space. The 42 foot Reva has been :in my dock f or quite some time and I know you have had the, opportunity to see it here. Please let me know if this will create a problem for you. �y Properties Limited 2750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93722 (209) 275-1110 August 1S 1987 earl Schafer 73 Linda Isle yF a 92660 Dear Zr1, I am w,�ting ycu tihi C le`�r in res-se to a telephone:tas5age that .I received in duly w>,ile I was on vaca: in the Qriert. I have been back since the first. Pa= �- of August and �ave been trying to catch up. Mike Stevens who nelps me with all my boats re cone.�nec1 werep cal on =t behalf while I w-as cone and informed ne that yot� abot,L the 42 foot I va i�Otoryacht that w,, s pafke3 ircy dock a. 74 T i ncl . .We we_*e S== sed to near that you had ,raised a cane-�-i that the yacht �„-�ng in ywr water space: Bo'rh Jon Martin frc�tt ova West anct myseL wrote you 1D-s ;nformtng ttL ng you of the situation. Also since purrhas; the yacht in I er of 1986, it has been parked. at -the cock for aver six :tCas on a -permanent basis. -- Son — ;n f:' ova West wrote you a let-, ez along Tr_th a r; agr= M ta1y 28, 1986, mat--Iy one yea ag° �' mY behalf that S Signed. 1 also wrote you a let"tc-Ir on Navanber 14, 1986 and heard no objections. In talking with Peter Pbdgers that .=s doing the work on yot= house, ti many times in the past to see .if yOu-were ''nfact pi-c-inch yo= mail uP and . °v. a by ?3 Linda Ssle on. regvla� . ba_si s assured me several times - •: you w--.se wing bye?-a=Y- ;that 1 :aiay�e l ing copies of the �� or twO leers that we s you, to this matt S riope this does not caLse an inconvenien—m. Please feel , I'resno o =ice - i y questions. to cahl,.ac:� at s-800-742-1968 �21icr: is ttty w-`h an Properties Limited 2750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93722 (209) 275-1110 HUGO D. DE CASTRO HILTON CHODOROW MARVIN G. BURNS SAUL L. LESSLER JEROME A. RABOW NEIL CARREY RICHARD H. HICKS LAWRENCE R. RESNICK BRUCE S. GLICKFELD EUGENE D. SILVERMAN BUDDY EPSTEIN JAMES A. GINSBURG EDMUND S. SCHAFFER MENASCHE M. NASS MICHAEL W. LUCAS NONA J. MACPHERSON DAVID C. RUTH MICHAEL R. WHITE JONATHAN I. REICH SCOTT M. MENDLER SUSAN B. FRIEND RICHARD S. 2EILENGA YAAKOV G. VANEK ALAN J. EPSTEIN DAVID J. HIRSCH • / LAW OFFICES OF DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW F3 BURNS, INC. EIGHTEENTH FLOOR ROBERT S. WEST RETIRED 10960 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024-3804 TELEPHONE (213) 478-2541 CABLE ADDRESS 'TAXINC" TELECOPIER (213) 473-0123 TELEX 67-4438 "TAXING LSA" March 7, 1988 Mr. Tony Melum Attention: Marine Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: Schafer adv. Siroonian Dear Mr. Melum: OUR FILE NUMBER On this date I received a telephone call from Mr. Kendrick, the attorney for John H. Siroonian. He has advised me that his client intends to move his boat and that his client will not encroach upon our client's exclusive easement over the water in front of his house. Under the circumstances, it appears that it may not be necessary for the City of Newport Beach to proceed with any action it may have contemplated against Tsar. Siroonian. However, if Mr. Siroonian's boat is not moved on or before April 30, 1988, we shall contact you to request that action be reinstituted. Very truly yours, L wrence R. .e ick of DE CASTRO, WEST, CHODOROW & BURNS, INC. LRR:ag encl. Lido Yacht Ancnorage �ea�cuarers 717 Lido Park Drive, Suite A 720 West 17th Street Newport Beach. CA 92663 ORDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Costa Mesa. CA 92627 (On the Gold Coast) AND 714-650-0743 714-675-8092 AGREEMENT OF SALE Telex No. 298853(RVAW-UR) Riva West agrees to order for (it necessary) and sell to: Buver's Name John S i roon i an Date 12/16/86 Home Address 74 Linda Island City,Newport Beach Phone(714)673-8383 Business Address City Phone (hPr,min_-ftP.r calied BUYER). and BUYER agrees to purchase from RIVA WEST the following oescribed vessel. YEAR MODEL ENGINES DESCRIPTION SERIAL n PRICE C;=ins - 555 1984 /ti�I i= 20223774 " �2r Riva Motoryacht RYD11005I1 1 283,000.00 .... Place of Delivery: Nevvori Beach CA o See remarks below j Approximate Delivery Date: ' ACCESSORIES: The boat oescribed above will be delivered with all standard equipment and the accessones oescrioed below and those described on the OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT LIST which is/is not attached to this Aoreement and incorporated by reference. OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT I1� ICOM Y-80 (Installed) Antenna 5206 w/336 mount Sun avuninc w/stainless steel rods II V-Berth l-i I l er w/cushion ?pans f ormer w/shore cord .Fix fiberglass dings: Combing stb side, bridgel& (� misc small I� I TOTAL OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT Ij included 5 Included TOTAL SELLING PRIG 283,11/. 00 SALES TAX �I S 16, 980. 00 -TOTAL S 299, 980. 00 -REMARKS---_ See ,idditionaZ Terms and Conditions attached i� DEPOSIT ON ORDER 1/3 DU� March 15 ' 1967 I', S 100, 000. 00 S 100, 000. 00. BALANCE DUE June 14, 1987 I S 99, 980. 00 THIS AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON REVERSE SIDE. Please read these provisions carefully: This agreement shall not be binding on RiVA WEST unless sioned by a Partner of Riva WEST. rrl /t E s Signature wrtl 1 r — �.uSTOMER Buyernignature Y December 7, 1987. Mr. John Siroonian 74 Linda Island Newport Beach/ Ca. 92663 Dear John: Per vour request I have inspected your Rive 42' Malibu and have determined that a reasonable value ( selling price ) for a quick sale ( 30 days ) to be at two hundred thousand dollars. 'If I can be of further assistance please don't hesitate to call me. Sincerely, ion - . arti n Rive West JFM/jad -3 /f r� Riva West Headquarters • 720 West 1'7th Street • Costa Mesa, CA 92627 714-650-0743 PORT +� CITY OF NE IPO T BEACH v = P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 q</FOFN December 30, 1987 Steve Brown 2901 South Bayshore Drive Suite 14C Coconut Grove, FL 33133 Re; Harbor Permit 139-3 for the property at 3 HarboxIsland Newport Beach, CA Sir: , %, Our records show that the above permit is in the name of Stout/Beverly Hills Realty. A transfer ap"vlication must be completed and a transfer fee paid each time the permit has changed ownership. Failure to pay the transfer fees can be grounds for revocation of the Harbor Permit, in accordance with Chapter 17.24.090 of the.Municipal Code. Your cooperation in bringing this permit up to date will avoid any action by the City. We wish to further call your attention to the"fact that a vessel tied to the dock at the above address is encroaching on the adjacent property at 4 Harbor Island. We have corresponded with Mr. Stout about the problem but to date no solution has been reached. For. your information we attach some recent correspondence in regard to the encroachment. The City Attorney's office can wait only a short time before carrying the matter to resolution. If you have questions please call me at 714-644-3044. Sincerely, Tony M lum Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard,, Newport Beach Mr. Tony Melum City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Dear Mr. Melum, Per my conversation with your office yesterday, November 23, 1987, we are enclosing our check # 10629 in the amount of $70.00 which represents, the 1986 and 1987 annual pier permit fees for permit l 0133-0074. Please make note in your files of the correct address and phone number for our coporate offices. J.H. Siroonian, Inc. 2750 N. Parkway Dr. Fresno, CA 93722 (209) 275-1110 Attn: Becky Helms Please direct any billings or correspondence to this address for handling. Should you not be able to make contact for any reason, then feel free to use the following address. J.H. Siroonian, Inc. 74 Linda Isle Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 673-8383 We would like to thank you for your assistance in this matter. Should you have any questions, please feel to contact us. Sincerely, 6�Y��JYYu4J Becky lms Secretary BH/bms enclosure J. H. SIROONIAN incorporated 7= Z r7= 2750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93711 (209) 275-1110 PO�� O� Cq��FORN� P CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 November 24, 190 Siroonian, Inc. 74 Linda Isle Newport Beach, cA 92660 Re: Harbor Permit 133-74 Dear Sir: The pier and float at 74 Linda Isle,,, -were inspected on 11/23/87 for the anti -syphon device: The anti -syphon device that is in place is not a City - approved type. Please see the enclosed information as to the type of device that will bring your instllation into compliance with. City requirements. After the installation is complete, please telephone to let us know so that we can re -inspect and then conclude the transfer process. Sinnc ly a� �i. um Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach 'PORT BEACH T BEACK CA 92658-8915 74 Linda Isle port Beach, CA 92660 dear Siroonian, Inc.. in reviewing our files of pier permits we note that on 11/8/85 a request was made to transfer pier permit 133-074 at 74 Linda Isle, e%Tort Beach. The pier permit at this address was not transferred from Pearson to Siroonian, Inc. for the following reasons: The requirement to install a City -approved anti -syphon device has not been met so far as we know. The Newport Beach Harbor Permit Policies require that the pier permit be transferred upon the sale of the abutting upland property. Failure to transfer will result in additional fees and revocation of the pier permit. City requirements must be met before the permit can be transferred. Please contact this office to let us know if the above requirements have been completed. At your request we will re -inspect the facility. If the requirements have been met we will then transfer the pier permit. if you have questions, I can be reached at 644-3044. Sincerely, Tony Me i-at' Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport ]Boulevard, Newport Beach TRAUTWEN BROS. vv�►z�tt� CONST]I 1�CTX-H —r—" � a '73 �,.4 A /J.1 � MIL 2410 WwrA *'-L Nn peg sock, idl#. n663 BY 'Jl &T3-I M lOvA A441,1l3U czizn. sr DAT* 3 r. ,a 'DIZA-Fr 31 74 _ &V CATAD a _ \1 ` A ?�— SEW CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 1� P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 �P (714) 644-3131 JRN November 20, 1987 Robert E. Ward, Esq. Kimble, McMichael & Upton 4201.West Shaw Avenue P.O. Box 9489 Fresno, CA 93792-9489 Re: Violation of Harbor Permit Policy Section 21.A (Harbor Permit 134-74 for the Property Located at 74 Linda Isle) Dear Mr. Ward: The Marine Department of the City of Newport Beach has requested that this office take legal action against your client, Mr. J. H. Siroonian, the property owner at 74 Linda Isle, for disregard of Harbor Permit Policies. Specifically, by letter dated October 29, 1987, Tony Melum, Tidelands Administrator for the City of Newport Beach, requested that your client either relocate the vessel to bring it into conformance with Harbor Permit Policy Section 21.A, or remove the vessel from the property. This letter is to notify you that as a final effort to clarify any misunderstanding, and to resolve this matter without resort to legal action, a meeting has been scheduled to take place on December 14,'1987 at 9:00-A.M. in our offices. If you have any questions concerning the above, please call Mr. Craig .Seipel, Administrative Hearing Officer, at 714/644-3131. Otherwise, I look forward to your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, Carol A. Korade Assistant City Attorney CAK/ ] c cc: Mr..Tony Melum 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach �WPO CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH �c► OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY n P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 V 1 (714) 644-3131 C'9C/ FO R��P November 20, 1987 Mr. J. H. Siroonian Siroonian Properties Limited 2750 North Parkway Drive Fresno, CA 93722 Re: Violation of Harbor Permit Policy Section 21.A {Harbor Permit 134-74 for the Property Located at 74 Linda Isle) Dear Mr. Siroonian: The Marine Department of the City of Newport Beach has requested that this office take legal action against you for disregard of Harbor Permit Policies. Specifically, by letter dated October 29.,- 1987, Tony Melum, Tidelands Administrator for. the City of Newport Beach, notified your counsel, Robert E. Ward, that you must either relocate the vessel to bring it into conformance with Harbor Permit Policy Section 21.A, or remove the vessel from the property. As a final effort to clarify any misunderstanding, and to resolve this matter without resort to legal action, a meeting has been scheduled to take place on December 14, 1987 at 9:00 A.M. in our offices. Failure to appear as scheduled, or to promptly reschedule the meeting will result in this office taking. appropriate legal action against you and your Permit. If you have any questions concerning the above, please call Mr. Craig Sei`pel, Administrative Hearing Officer, at 714/644-3.131. Otherwise, I look forward to your anticipated cooperation in this mattes. Ver truly yours, Carol A. Korade Assistant City Attorney CAK/ ] c cc: Mr. Tony Melum 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 October 22, 1987 Robert E. Ward Kimble, McMichael & Upton 4201 West Shaw Avenue PO Box 9489 Fresno, CA 93792-9489 Re: -Nos. 73 and 74 Linda Isle Dear Mr. Ward: Thank you for your letter of October 1, 1987, wherein you described the background of water use at the properties at 73 arils 74 Linda Isle. While it is informative to know what has; transpired relative to the water use bayward of the two properties, once an adjacent property owner has failed to acquiesce to an encroachment across a common property line, then that encroachment must be removed. Over the. past few weeks I have had several conversations with his. Schaffer, daughter of the property owner at 73'Lnda Isle. She has stated to me that her father has never responded to the letters you attached and, in fact has in the past, attempted to get the very large vessel removed from his water area. We must therefore again request that the property owner at 74 Linda Isle either relocate the vessel to bring it into conformance with the policy quoted in my earlier letter, or remove the vessel from the property. In addition to the above, we have not transpered the pier permit for 74 Linda Isle because we have not been notified that a City approved anti -syphon device has been installed on the water line to the dock. When this installation has been accomplished and approved, then the permit will be transfered from Zeimer to Siroonian. If you have questions please feel free to call me at 714-644-3044. Sincerely, Tony M lu Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach \ \ � � \� � �ƒ S. \\ \� CL : oLw< / . . f .o myae»2 . §. UJ : . : '0 -he§ C ƒ � \\ \U ! \ui : M/ 2 »�� E (-D « « r 3 o y: .$ U 2. _ &<: ±si:\dam\ W NAME ADDRESS OF PROPOSED FACILITY j� TELEPHONE NO. FEE CHECK NO. MAILING ADDRESS �'f moo G ��FJJI hJ d g 1C HARBORPERMITTO APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A APPROVED BY: DATE ❑ CONSTRUCT/REVISE A OCHD' AT THE ABOVE LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF ENGR NEWPORT BEACH PE�.MIT POLICIES AND THE ATTACHED DRAWING COMPANY VV.r �. ❑ V �.c+' By `� COUNCIL ❑ DATED PUBLIC WORKS DE PT. ❑ DATE ESCROW , ❑ _ INSPECTION o4fe ///SIGNATUR /®/ij' f/�'I�A - - I SPECIAL CONDITIONS: _ CITY OF NEW PORT -BEACH, CALIF. WX FORM 66-1010 i I i 7Ltj 75- C / am Nwmoo�Pr 6XACA1 2 i 40,oat7 h' Pock g I �c "Ff • 0 w,'aRrQ O�® .� i aovParr 4P' Jeq Iwc6oA 'e'i170 B }l`C � iioJe' .11 ! ® a oss Mwt V 1 C) AJ ! TY SKETCH wasr JBrry 3 .c,"r i JBrrr Nrwaoar OAY • CAt lcoo.nraa Y / w �� SOUnd�ng5 nrJ afrprtssad />+ fee¢ tend d�!no�� o'op th s 6 el'ow �ieor/ Gower G o w !s✓o �cr. Maxnoru�ss ronye of �."de ppproxrorAp{�?r /D {mef. Hcvr6or /Macs ' are eziableshed i;9 .1h;s . sechoor ofNawporil Bob: y - % l �a I4 IAPALICAAIrS AlclWul J©hW SILOON4100 G o r 7 c,-, 7-AEAC7 coo sae rQ DD B 5 y LAMr �a coAq .4c roa 5 w i-P" S i OA 7--f ; -6 Cl T Y N"Rogr BE,tclv T Low eoeh i � T a' .,.._ _..._.--- •-^�."4�' Nr.viewr ���' y`+ � '� o �4 TQ � ewcBOA D � CO�M°Mw 0 e N wur /iTr 7 VIC�tViTY SKETCH n Cwsr Jerry NEWOOrrr LSAY CAL WOMMIA y / w SoUndinys ore expressed /n Aee24 and dangle dop fh s b eIOW tiie007 Lower Low Wofer. Nloxr s�t/.s� rem 0, of /idc Qpprvx/Moifs/y /O HorhOe 4. yes I %pre esiob/tshed /i7 {his ,SCCAorr of'Newporte Sor. ,r 0 ` 3 / 4(rr�h'0a') / 14 L. / C'A.vT s J o 51 t n) d n] G c r 7 T,rt� cr ✓oe AoDzcss :":7q 14eUiDA 6.C- Ga.vrAPACroe oAram' -1 Nei 5cha-(ev FNCIDSC4 if I[ ?/'r plr�►J4/ p ¢ err &fe_ !% C+�► jam+ fel4biw5ho -to year, Ive!yAhoel, Die- cA4,,yetr 17 fro)POw are. s�a►�•v ►�ry ��,� is . s ou (d, _ �� /a cowf'l� c► -. YIN Sed Ale P w� tVhleWI` P s t s�k bclow �#cc�' 4* , cew $fig,tr v~rvf ,� . fir Q . sle :y PO _° CITY OF NE 'PORT BEACH U = P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 I October 6, 1987 Ed Ziemer PO Box 656 i Balboa, CA 9266 R property e• Harbor .Permit 134-74 for theat 74 Linda. Isle � Dear Mr. Ziemer: On September 17, 1987 we contacted you regarding an encroachment bayward of your residence at 74 Linda Isle. As of this date the encroachment still exists and we have no alternative but to turn this matter over to the City Attorney for follow up.. If you have problems in this regard please contact me at 644.-3044. Sincerely- 114� Tony 1 Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JOSEPH C. KIMBLE 1910-1972 THOMAS A. MACMICHAEL JON WALLACE UPTON ROBERT E. BERGIN JEFFREY G. BOSWELL STEVEN D. McGEE ROBERT E. WARD JOHN P. ELEAZARIAN DAVID D. DOYLE MARK D. MILLER MICHAEL F. TATHAM W. RICHARD LEE D. TYLER THARPE CARLTON R. ERICSON E.ALEXANDRA DELATEUR MARY ANN BLUHM LAW OFFICES KIMBLE, MAcMICHAEL & UPTON A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 4201 WEST SHAW AVENUE, SUITE 100 POST OFFICE BOX 9489 FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93792-9489 October 1, 1987 Mr. Tony Melum Newport Beach Marine Department P. 0. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Re: Nos. 73 and 74 Linda Isle Dear Mr. Maleum: TELEPHONE (209) 275-S200 TELECOPIER (209) 276-7625 File #2349.32 Thank you for a copy of your letter dated Septem- ber 17, 1987, which was addressed to Mr. Ed Ziemer relating to Harbor Permit 133-74 for the property of 74 Linda Isle. I do not believe Mr. Zeimer any longer has any interest in 74 Linda Isle. The real property improvements were conveyed by Zeimer & Pearson, a joint venture, to our client, J. H. Siroonian, Inc., on August 30, 1985. The leasehold interest assigned to J. H. Siroonian, Inc., was converted to a fee interest by purchase by J. H. Siroonian, Inc., from the Irvine company on August 30, 1985. Inasmuch as Harbor Permit 133-74 is apparently still listed in Mr. Zeimer's name, I would appreciate if you could provide me with whatever forms are necessary to assign the permit to the current owner of the real property. I am also enclosing a copy of a letter which was drafted to respond to concerns raised by the attorney for Mr. Earl Schafer, owner of 73 Linda Isle. The purpose of the letter is to point out that the dispute is not merely a simple one involving the mooring of a boat in someone else's water. Rather, it is a situation: (1) Where a boat of approximately the same size has long been moored on the east side of the dock at No. 74 Linda Isle prior to the mooring of the new motoryacht of approxi- mately the same size which is the subject of the complaint; (2) The moving westward of the dock at No. 73 where it crowded the extended property line of No. 74; (3) The subsequent relocation westward of the dock at No. 74 to allow more space between No. 73 and No. 74's waterway; KIMBLE, MacMICHAEL & UPTON Mr. Tony Maleum Page Two October 1, 1987 (4) The series of letters to the property owner of No. 73 requesting consent to moor a new motoryacht at approxi- mately the same size prior mooring on the east side of No. 74 which would encroach no more than the boat that had been previously moored; and (5) The fact there was silence of the owner of No. 73 for over a year, at which time he voiced his objection. I personally believe this problem is compounded by possible misunderstanding of No. 73's property owner about where his extended property line really is out in the bay. The home at No. 73 is perpendicular to the shoreline and squarely faces the bay. The extended property line of No. 74, however, angles across behind No. 73 at a rather sharp angle and the motoryacht moored at No. 74 obstructs the bay view of No. 73. The problem is the same at No. 75 that obstructs No. 76's view at the present. Even if the motoryacht were totally moored within the waters of No. 74, it would still obstruct the view of No. 73. I hope the neighbors can work it out among them- selves. Thank you for your courtesy. S'ncerely, Robert E. Ward REW/lp Enclosure LAW OFFICES KIMBLE, MAcMICHAEL & UPTON JOSEPH C. KIMBLE 1910-1972 A PROFE5SIONAL CORPORATION TELEPHONE (209) 275-5200 THOMAS A. MACMIC HAEL JON WALLACE UPTON 4201 WEST SHAW AVENUE, SUITE 100 ROBERT E. BERGIN POST OFFICE BOX 9489 TELECO PIER (209) 276-7625 JEFFREY G. BOSWELL STEVEN D. McGEE ROBERT E.WARD FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93792-9489 File #2349.32 JOHN P. ELEAZARIAN DAVID D. DOYLE MARK D. MILLER MICHAEL F. TATHAM September 30, 1987 W. RICHARD LEE '. D. TYLER THARPE CARLTON R. ERICSON E.ALEXANORA DELATEUR MARY ANN BLUHM Lawrence R. Resnick, Esq. De Castro, West, Chodorow & Burns 18th Floor 10960 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90024-3804 Re: Nos. 73 and 74 Linda Isle Dear Mr. Resnick: We have had several conversations about the water rights relating to Nos. 73 and 74 Linda Isle in Newport Beach, and I thought it would be appropriate to share with you a drawing which shows the respective property lines, the dock locations and the Reva motoryacht which has been the subject of our discussions. As you can see, only a small portion of the port side of the motoryacht protrudes across into the water where your client has an easement. I am also enclosing two photographs of the area, both of which show the alignment of the houses and the position of the respective docks and boats. No. 74 Linda Isle, the resi- dence of Mr. John Siroonian, is the white building with the red tile roof. No. 73 Linda Isle, your client's residence, is the brick and glass structure with the shingle roof. It is ap- parent from these photographs that the two houses are not parallel, that is, that they do not face the same direction. No. 73 Linda Isle faces a more westerly direction, while No. 74 Linda isle faces a more southerly direction. Because the shoreline curves in a sharp bend right at No. 74, the lots are roughly pie -shaped rather than being rectangular. The same problem exists between No. 75 and No. 76 and there is an encroachment between those two lots. The bay side of the lots are smaller while the street side of the lots are larger. As a result, the property line extension of No. 74 angles across the water through what would otherwise be a substantial portion of No. 73's water. If the survey diagram is accurate, No. 73 is a KIMBLE, M cMICHAEL & UPTON Lawrence R. Resnick, Esq. Page 2 September 30, 1987 trapezoidal -shaped water easement which is 45 feet in width at the shore and 28 feet, 4 inches in width at the bay side of the property line extension. The significance of the off -shore property line extensions is that even if the Reva motoryacht were entirely parked within the water allocated to No. 74, it would still extend across 17 linear feet of water directly off shore of No. 73. My point in bringing this to your attention is to illustrate that regardless what course events may take between our respective clients, we are discussing only a very small displacement of the motoryacht, not whether or not the motor - yacht is moored off shore of. No. 73 and is part of the off- shore view from the residence. I am also enclosing copies of correspondence from Mr. Siroonian to Mr. Schafer. I am doing so in order to provide you with a full and complete record of the contacts between them. Judging from your letter of August 27, 1987, I assume you are aware of the correspondence between our respective clients, but one aspect I would like to point out is that Mr. Siroonian made the investment decision to purchase the Reva motoryacht after having formally requested permission from your client to moor the motoryacht in the position indicated. A mutual accommodation between the parties would certainly be the most desirable solution. I would like to point out that Mr. Siroonian sought to accommodate Mr. Schafer's moving of his dock. Several months ago, Mr. Schafer moved his boat dock approximately six feet toward Mr. Siroonian's dock. Mr. Siroonian responded by moving his dock away from Mr. Schafer's dock so there would be clear water available for use of both parties between the docks. As you can see from the diagram, the relocation of Mr. Schafer's dock now leaves only 7 feet, 4 inches of water available from the extended property line to his dock at the, west side. As I discussed with you in our initial conversation, a mutual combination of cross -easements may be workable. In such a manner, Mr. Siroonian could switch the two boats and place the one with a lower silhouette at the dock nearest No. 73 and continue to moor his boats. Mr. Schafer could still approach and depart the west side of his dock. I would also like to point out this problem is not a new one. Prior to hearing from Mr. Schafer, Mr. Siroonian's boat had been in the same waters for almost a year. Prior to KIMBLE, MACMICHAEL & UPTON Lawrence R. Resnick, Esq. Page 3 September 30, 1987 that, Mr. Siroonian and the previous owner of the property had more or less continuously moored boats in the same water for the past several years. It is certainly hoped that this dispute can be solved by mutual accommodation between the neighbors. Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. Sincerely, Robert E. Ward REW/lp Enclosure CITY OF NE PORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 September 17,.1987 Ed Ziemer PO Box 656 Balboa, CA 92661 RE: Harbor Permit 133-74 for the property at 74 Linda Isle Dear Mr. ("'Ziemer:, ,Ziemer: a The City of Newport Beach has received a complaint regarding the use of your residential float bayward of Lot 74, Linda Isle. Specifically, the complaint is that the dock is being used in violation of Section 21.A of the Harbor Permit Policies, which. states; Section 21.A. "Boats moored at private or public docks shall not extend beyond the projection of the property lines of the property to which the dock facility is connected." Please contact, us within 15 days of receipt of this letter to preclude further action by the Newport Beach Marine Department. We can be reached at 644-3044. Sincerely, Tony Melum Tidelands Administrator 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach August 18, 1987 Earl Schafer. 73 Linda Isle Newport, CA 92660 Dear Earl, I am writing you this letter in response to a telephone message that I received in July while I was on vacation in the Orient. I have been back since the first part of August and have been trying to catch up. Mike Stevens who helps me with all my boats returned your call on my behalf while I was gone and inform me that your were concerned about the 42 foot Reva MAtoryacht that was parked at my dock at 74 Linda. We were surprised to hear that you had raised a concern that the yacht was protruding in your water space. Both Jon Martin fran Reva West and myself .wrote you letters infonning you of the situation. Also since purchasing :- the yacht in. December of 1986, it has been parked. at the dock for over sic - ,months on a peananent basis. Jon Martin fran Reva West wrote you a letter along with a diagram on ': = July 28, 1986, appmtely one year ago on my behalf that I signed. I also wrote you a letter on Novanber 14, 1986 and heard no objections. _- In talking with Peter Rodgers that..is doing the work on your house, r many times in the.past to see if you -were infact picking your: mail up. and ,`caning by 7.3 Linda Isle, on a *�+,� ar..basi.s. He assured me several times that you were caning by regularly ♦` ' f '..�{''+f',t4�r��'' n s:F � °. e�...%„f~ r+la Lhio ,iy. • '. .[.. ..,a .. .,. :,..+'. a .. - ..� ._ ,'r•9. —;. S•; 0.if•oFr}RH4 •i~l y,�?�' aaa enclosing cx}pies of the prior two letters that we sent you pertaining Y R,�s,; tito this matter. I hope this does not cause an inccrivenience. Please feel free " ''"'to contact me atr1-800-742-1968 which is Fresno office with an questions. my Y � ly JS/bh enclosures .ei Properties Limited FC ffZ7. 2 750 N. PARKWAY DRIVE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93722 (209) 275-1110 4 November 14, 1986 Earl Schafer 73 Linda Isle Newport, CA 92660 Dear Earl, I am in final negoiations in buying a 42 foot Reva Motoryacht and hope to close soon. I wrote you a letter back on July 28, 1986 with a diagram enclosed showing the dimensions of the yacht. Mr. Jon Martin from Reva West has been kind enought to leave the yacht parked at the slip for quite some time. . In the last thirty days, I have taken the opportunity to look at many of the boat docks at Linda Isle and observed them in order to establish if there were infact any similar situations. I found several occasions where boats would protrude a few feet into the neighbors water space. The 42 foot Reva has been in my dock for quite some time and I know you have had the opportunity to see it here. Please let me know if this will create a problem for you. n ly, John Siroonian JS/bh U.... _ July 28, 1986 Earl Schafer 73 Linda Island Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Earl: I am intending to purchase a forty-tuo foot Riva motoryacht very - soon. The boat would tie on the south side of my dock which is adjacent to your property. The Riva is approximately twelve feet nine inches wide and would protrude a few feet into your water space. Simply stated, could you allow me the use of some of your water space? - -IJ have enclosed a diagram that shows the approximate dimensions and relationship of both of our docks with the boat in place. =W. Jon Martin of Riva Vkst will bring the boat to my dock so that you may see the actual situation. Please.iet me know when you _ wi1I be available to do this. - to this rQ ue�k�iri consideration and attention I.thank you in advance for your ^1 gr- ;--Since ei Y � _. o Stroonian - /'ad Date -2'3 "00C CITY OF NE HARBOR PERMIT N0. f ,j3-751 BEACH'MARINE DEPARTMENT APPLICATION Fb,HARBOR PERMIT Site address::t�7 Owner Telephone Owner Mailing Address s ",✓f, City & Zip N)6 Description of work: New Revision MaintLaance Other Work to be done: 5&-f-ery OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am exept from the contractor's license law for the following reason: (Sec.7031.5, Business Professions Code) Any City or w ich requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demo or re structure, prior to its issuance, also re- quires the applicer ant for such p_ e a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provision of the Con or License Chaper 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Bus' s and Professions Code) o hat he is exempt therefrom and the basis fo the alleged ption. Any violation of Section 70 . an applicant for a permit sub - the a .cant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500). as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will o e work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec.7044, Business and Pr f ssions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, pro- vided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion,the owner -builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.) I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to co truct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Profes The Contractor's License Law does o wilds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with -a c or' s suant to the Contractor's License Law). I am exem er Sec. of By ess and,iPr�essions Code for this reason: Date Owner Signatu Ile Contractor Telephone Address City & Zip License Class State License No. City License No. LICENSED CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and.my license is in full force and effect. Contractor signature Date : . i, a. �...:. , i js'. »hr„!�7.,:':Y. �I ..`�...>u�;;viin !,; 7. '.. i r+N.ti 4x . �', .�, _ ! _.., .,—. ..,. ,.... _. •_.___ —. _.; .:... INSURANCE INFORMATION r` Workers' Compensation Declaration I hereby affirm that 'I have a Certificate of Consent to self -insure, or a Certificate of Workers' Compensation Insurance, or a Certified Copy thereof. (Sec. 3800 LAB.C.) Policy No. Company Certified Copy is hereby furnished-,O 1 Cer ified Copy is filed with Marine Dept Date- Applicant , n Federal Longshoremen & Harbor Workers' Insurance Declaration I hereby affirm that I have a Certificate of Insurance for Longshoreman & Harbor Workers' Insurance as required by Federal Law. Date.V-S:C Applicant ; 41 tl Certificate�of Exemption from Workers' Compensation Insurance/Federal Longshoremen and Harbor Workers' Insurance I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California or Federal Longshoreman & Harbor Workers' Insurance. Date Applicant Note to Applicant: If,after making this certificate of exemption, you should become subject to the Worker's Compensation provisions of the Labor Code, or the Federal Longshoremen and Harbor Workers' Act, you must forthwith comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked. I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Cit and Co ty ordinances and State laws relating to building in construction, and hereby au o ize r r entatives of this City to enter upon::the above - mentioned property for p c 'on p rp es. Signature of permittee 1 _ i 4 ".• t e ;yi ��*.��?^�.��.�.A��x."tl9.,�,..�$��w..d°il�t:?t.�.�. icy wa in} r:nr�, p,i,z . P ,; _ — - — —_—__.�..-----'" -- -_..� STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMIT TRANSFER LOCATION 7! 0? PERMIT NO. SelIer Buyer Date Application Received: Date Fee Received: Request for inspection made by: Escrow Co. VCe G'� �a a,Q� Date Escrow Officer /. Escrow No. "_%� , Address Phone: 7 `] Date Inspection made: Deficiency Letter sent: Deficiency corrected: Transfer completed: Date Inspection: 1. Location 2. P l.umbi ng : A) Q Q �"/ _ A) 3. Electrical: 12J 16)I 4. Structural: 5.OTHER: REMARKS: Inspected by: PpRA U ? C'I' O FL •10/24/85 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 Residential Escrow 1470 Jamboree Road Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Sir: The City of Newport Beach has received an application to transfer pier permit # 133-74 for the property located at 74 Linda Isle, Newport Beach' The structure was inspected on 10/23/85 at which time it was determined that the following deficiencies exist: 1, A City -approved anti` -syphon device is :required at -water connection to pier/float. 2. 3. 4. 5. Section 10.D. of the City Harbor Permit Policies states: "At the time of transfer -all harbor structures, shall be inspected for compliance with the City's minimum plumbing, electrical and structural requirements, and the conditions of the existing permit. All structural deficiencies must be corrected prior to transfer of the permit." All the above deficiencies, except those noted as "Informational" must be corrected before the pier permit is transferred. Electrical or plumbing work require a permit from the City Building Department. All other work requires a permit from the Marine Department. - Please advise this department when the above deficiencies have been corrected. Another inspection will be made, and when the problem is solved the pier permit will be transferred to the new owner. If you have questions please call me at 644-3044. Yours truly (& ,,, 31�s Ray Gar , Tidelands Administration 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach y PERMIT �F ti ADDRESSFILI �r,d BUYERS' NAMES) ; l 1,qHECK NO DATE `h TELEPHONE � red ' �._- Tina PERMIT IS,E i h W CR Z O I J W 2 H W CO) O Z W W • S to O a) � z S" Ste.. U ra Z ".. Q O 4-; r r V1 Or � H Q IL cr. U' U O u� 3 o \, a) +-; -0 ` i � r Q v U3 m O s_ S_ U Q) S- ref o Qi 0 4—. m N O Q U 3 ci o a 3. o a� 4 ,o cm v (T C N > CJ m LO kc S_ 00 O o •r Ste.. •� 3 S. aj. Z :: CL M r • mLL 4— a) +-) O , f 4-0 " 0 o Z S_ aj N d o a -N o 3 s p CO w rp Q W CC ,: March 30, 1983 Property Owner 74 Linda Isle Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Sir; The City of Newport Reach has received an application to transfer pier per it. # 133-74 for the property located at 74 Linda Isle, Newport Beach, CA. The structure was Inspected on 3/9/83 at which time it was determined that the following deficiennes exiso -10 I. The slip in front of #75 needs float and piling repair. 2. 3. 4. In accordance w1th Section 10D of the City Hzrbor Permit Policies, All structural deficiencies must be corrected..." A permit for this vork must he obtained from the Building DepArtment, Would you pleAse advise this department when this requirement has been met. It you have any questions, plessi"contact me at 640-2156. TWO you for your cooperation. 3-zx, Sincere'- y Tony MeW Tidelands Administrator Mak 'I tY I Lall ® 3300 NeqX)rt IWAN-ard, I&VIVort Bc-ach, California 921')6""'i 1. Location: 2. Plumbing: 3. Electri'cal: 4. Structural • 5- REMARKS: La Inspector's Initials _-- ..,W i r � f w� ��, " " �. j i .;iw BUYERS' NAMES 11 ADDRESS OF FACILITY PERMIT L; g; LING,ADDRESS °,:. •@ -" •' 'TELEPHONE NO. FEE CHECK NO. DATE I, I '„ APPROVED BY: DATE APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE TO TRANSFER HARBOR PERMIT LILA ENG SELLERS' NAME(S) - BUYERS' .NAME($) ..(ABOVE NAMES TO BE TYPED) . Er COUNCIL PUBLIC PUBLIC WORKS SIGNATURE OF SELLER SkGNATURE OP,BUY E)ir i, ESCROW SIGNATURE OF SELLER SIGNATURE OF BUYER `INSPECTION SIGNATURE OF;-JOINT'OWNER"" "" APPL�CA7ION APP OVED (DATE) --� BUYERS' N ADDRESS OF FACILITY: -- PERMIT!. / se' "'". 1L ` T ELEPHONE NO. FEE CHECK N0. DATE MAILING ADDRE I I I - , tale, ew-pDeb ,.,, APpLICmA�TION,IgS HEREBY MADE TO TRANSFER HARBOR PERMIT +tT� �. .r M-. t a pppROVYc[idY. DATE �a' �t^wau�ratis � A� OCHD— SEL►.�ERS' M O BUYERS' NAMES) ❑ ✓ ( VE NA ES TO BE TYPED) ENG, SIG ATURE OF SELLER SIGNATURE OF BUYER. PUjLIC WORKS DE ` SIGNATURE OF SELLER SIGNATURE OF BUYER' 'i E��yROW IN5ECTION SIGNATURE OF JOINT OWNER i l �✓ APPLICATION APPROVED (DATE) ❑ CITY HARBOR.COORDINATOR ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 COUNCIL IN SPECIAL CONDd TIONS: THIS PERMIT IS REVOCABLE BY THE CITY OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE... CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. CALIF. WX FORM 66.1013 REV. Our records show that you are the joint owner of the pier at 74.and 75 Linda Isle, Newport Beach. The other joint owners are Mr.�nd Mrs. Ariss"who bought the property at 74 Linda Isle in the past year. In order to keep our records'up to date and to.complete the"transfer of the pier from Mr. Holmes to Mr. and Mrs. Ariss it is necessary to'have your signature as joint owner of the pier. I am enclosing the application to transfer the pier. Please sign on the'line with the red 'Y' indicating'the place for "signature of joint owner". I enclose a retul,n envelope for your convenience. Thank you for your att'ntion to this matter. Yours truly, AA 'i %,-- Tony'M um : I Tidelands Administrator TM:db City Hall 3300 Newp D A V I D H. H O L M E S P. O. BOX 712 MEDFORD, OREGON 97SOI April 26, 1982 City of Newport Beach Marine Department -Tidelands Division 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Re: File No. 0133-0074-1 Gentlemen: Relative to your enclosed annual Pier Permit billing, the property at 74 Linda Isle was sold to Mr. and Mrs. David Ariss in May of 1981. To my knowledge, all Pier Permit payments prior to that time had been made as scheduled. I would assume that you would wish to send a copy of the statement to Mr. and. Mrs. Ariss for payment. Should there, however, by any portion of the permit payment which should be paid by me, I will appreciate advice by either you or Mr. Ariss. Sincerely, ', ae", cc: Mr. David Ariss Enclosure Z.74 pr"-C,I 5 —s D A V I D H. H O L M E S P. O. BOX 712 MEDFORD, ORE13ON 97S01 November 2, 1981 Mr. Tony Melum Tidelands Administrator City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, California 92.663 Dear Mr. Melum: In response to your letter of October 25th, I sold my home at 74 Linda Isle last May to a Mr. and Mrs. David W. Ariss; they now re- side at that address. At the time of the sale, Mr. James McLane did own the adjoining property at 75 Linda Isle. I presume Mr. Ariss should be contacted con- cerning any necessary terms of the pier permit. Very truly yours, �'a . C"Ity% I -Jail - 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, Uifornla 9266 STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMITS TRANSFER LOCATION? J ahl,� PERMIT # Seller dL/ Buyer _ z- Za Date Application Rec'v: .�"� "�Date Fee Rec'v: c4W_ Oral Request for -Inspection 'Escrow ' Co. Date. Escrow. Officer Escrow # ate Inspection Made Date, Deficiency Letter Sent (if applicable) Date Deficiency Corrected (if applicable) Date Orange 'County Notified (if applicable) Date Transfer Completed �R,,�' r - 1. Location: i 2. Plumbing: 3. Electricals - 1 4. Structural: REMARKS.:. o -P) p s ni ti Al Ins e c to r I oww-'A October 25, 1981 Yours truly,. ..40007 A/� #-%- Tony' Mel uIn . Tidelands Administrator TM:db January 17, 1977 City of Newport Beach Harbor Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Re: Our Escrow No. 1227-3 Lot 74 of Tract 4003 Gentlemen:" In connection with our above numbered escrow, we enclose herewith Application for Pier and Slip Transfer, together with our check No. 2525 to your order in the amount of $150.00. The new owners will be moving into subject property in approximately 45 days. If there is any correspondence during that time please have it sent to us under our above escrow number. Thank you. Very truly ours, Peg .�'Nic ism Escrow Officer encl. PJN/mr THIRTY-SECOND STREET AT LAFAYETTE • NEWPO'RT BEAT -<, �,-, 7ECgRN6A 92663 675 C333 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA April 29' ► 1975 .Frederick Field 74 Linda Isle Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Sir: City Hall 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 673-2110 Pier Permit # 133-74 for the pier and slip facility located at 74 Linda Isle I is registered to Clark McGaughey. The annual pier administration billing was returned to our office. Upon checking with the City's Finance Department, the above property is listed to you. If you have purchased the property, we will need a harbor permit transfer application and corresponding $100.00 fee as required by City Ordinance 17.24.030. At your earliest convenience, please advise this office if you have acquired this property so that the necessary transfer can be accomplished. Sincerely, Glen E. Welden Marine Affairs Aide Marine Safety Department GEW:lf STATUS SHEET HARBOR PERMITS TRANSFER December 16, 1974 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California Attention: Maiine Safety Department Re: Escrow no. 2226 #74 Linda Isle, Newport Beach Gentlemen:" In connection with the above numbered escrow which closed this date, enclosed ,is our check in the amount of $100.00 representing funds due your office per voucher attached. Also enclosed is executed transfer form. Please effect transfer and send copy of same to Newton H. Minow, Trustee, c/o Sidley & Austin, 1 First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60670. Thank you. Sincerely, ae Rustan Escrow Department DOVER AT SIXTEENTH STREET ° NEWPORT BEACH; CALIFORNIA 92660 0 645-5333