In Prentiss v. City of South Pasadena (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 85, the homeowners applied for a building permit to construct an addition to their residence, which had been designed by a noted architect shortly after the turn of the century. (15 Cal.App.4th at pp. 86-87.) The City of South Pasadena believed the State Historical Building Code applied to the project, and that the city had discretion to impose architectural conditions on the building permit. (Id. at pp. 88-89.) However, the Court of Appeal held that under the local ordinance, the issuance of building permits was a ministerial act. (Id. at p. 91.) "The homeowners' application for a building permit required no variance or conditional use permit, homeowners' building plans complied fully with the Uniform Building Code, and homeowners met all requirements for issuance of a building permit, . . ." (Id. at p. 88.) The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of a writ of mandate to compel issuance of the building permit without conditions. (Id. at pp. 86, 98.) It explained that South Pasadena "erroneously interpreted the State Historical Building Code to give it discretion to disallow any alteration to an historical building even where . . . the owner's proposed alteration meets all the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the owner is not requesting any special treatment under the State Historical Building Code." (Id. at p. 96.)