HomeMy WebLinkAboutR32-Economic Development Agency
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
FROM:
Maggie Pacheco
Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Hearing - Resolution of Public Interest and
Necessity for Acquisition of Real Property: 795
West 51h Street, San Bernardino, California
(Tien Lee International Limited Corporation,
Fu San Limited, Inc., Ha-Ram, Inc., and
n,nnJaMi~~,!"a,t~ltm,m,mnmmmmmmmmmmnnnnm
DATE:
October 9, 2006
Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council/Committee Action(s):
On February 7, 2005, the Community Development Commission ("Commission") authorized Staff to send out Owner
Participation notices to the property owners who own property in the proximity to the block bounded by 4th, 5th, "G" and' "H"
Streets, the parcels on the nOl111 side of 5th Street between "G" and "H" Streets, the 4 parcels on the northeast corner of 51h and
"G" Streets and 6 parcels on the south side of 5th Street between "G" and "F" Streets in accordance with the adopted Agency
OWller Participation Rules for the Central City North Redevelopment Project Area. No proposals were received.
On November 7, 2005, the Commission adopted a Resolution: I) approving the Downtown Mixed Use Project Concept Plan
("Project") and adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project in accordance with CEQA, and; 2) approving a
Redevelopment Project Study and Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement by and between the Agency and Watson &
Associates Development Company, Inc. ("Watson") relative to the implementation of the Project.
Recommended Motion(s):
Open/Close Hearing
(Communitv Develooment Commission)
Resolution of the Communit).! Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino declaring the Public Interest
l.lnd Necessity of Acquisition of Real Property by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino for
community redevelopment purposes over the property located at 795 West 5th Street San Bernardino, California (Tien
Lee International Limited Corporation, Fu San Limited, Inc" Ha-Ram, Inc" and Jagdish Patel - APN: 0134-093-41) in
nnnnnnnntll~,C:,en,tr~I,c:itx.1'JOrt~n~~~~ve,I()El11~ntf'r()jectAreannmmnm,nmn nnnn,nn, ,mmmn . nnnnnmnn,nn,
Project ilrea(s)
.Maggie Pacheco
Central City North
Redevelopment Proiect Area
Phone:
(909) 663-1044
Contact Person(s):
Ward(s):
Supp0I1ing Data Attached: 0 Staff Report 0 Resolution(s) 0 Agreement(s)/Contract(s) 0 Map(s) 0 Letter(s)
Approx,
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS Amount: $ 3,720,000 Source: Low/Mod Housing Bond Proceeds
SIGNA TURE:
10 Budget Authority:
/~ n .. t/ "
/ 1/) i [v,_):(J _____---
aggie Pacheco, Executive Director
2005-2006 EDA Budget
/',
/
/
::
'-
'/
~_"- <'" ~ C c--_ __/ , '1
Barbara Lindseth, Admin. Servic
Director
Co m ~ is-sio~/c-o~-~-c-iTf.~iotes-:------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------
r;\-\l!CI\(j;l'\Cnmm lln- COllll11i"ion\CDC 2006\tO-16.06 Tien Lee Re\ol"linn of :-;ecessil~. - 79~ We~l ~tll Sln>'e! SRdoc
COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: 10/16/2006
Agenda Item Number: R.~
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
STAFF REPORT
HEARING - RESOLUTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION
OF REAL PROPERTY: 795 WEST 5TH STREET, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
(TIEN LEE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED CORPORATION, FU SAN LIMITED, INC., HA-
RAM, INC., AND JAG DISH PATEL)
BACKGROUND:
On November 7. 2005, the Community Development Commission ("Commission") approved the Central
City North Downtown Mixed Use Project Concept Plan ("Plan or Project") and the Redevelopment
Project Study and Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement ("Agreemenf') with Watson & Associates
Development Co.. Inc. ("Developer"). Through the Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act
(""CEQA") compliance that was undertaken as part of the Plan approval on November 7, 2005, the
AQencv will acquire certain properties in an effort to encourage and effectuate the redevelopment of
ce"rtain'real property ('"Study Area") bounded by, 5th Street to the north, "G" Street on the east, "H" Street
on thc west, and 4th Street on the south, including the north side of 5th Street between "H" Street and "G"
Strcet. the four (4) parcels at the northeast corner of 5th Street and "G" Street, and the six (6) parcels at the
southeast corner of 5th and "G" Streets. but excluding the new TELACU II Monte Vista Senior Housing
Complex and the Holiday Inn Express.
The intent of the Plan is to eliminate blighted conditions, encourage economic development by creating
owner-occupied mixcd use and mixed income housing (i.e., commercial on the ground floor, residential
on the upper floors) for those properties with frontage on 4th Street and 5th Street, with townhouses located
immediately south of the mixed use development on the south side of 5th Street and on the west side of
"G" Street. Moreover. the objective of the Project is to act as a catalyst in the revitalizing of the
downtown arca and to encourage people to live and work in downtown.
The Commission has previously authorized Agency Staff to make offers to purchase certain properties
within the Study Area. and to date. the Agency has acquired nine (9) parcels, one (1) additional parcel is
in escrow and thirteen (13) to seventeen (17) parcels are pending acquisition.
In February 19,2002, Fu San Limited, Inc. ("Fu San") was the owner of record of real property located at
795 West 5th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410 (APN: 0134-093-41) ("Property") and Fu San was
the owner/operator of the Paradise Motel on the Property.
Fu San is a party to a lawsuit entitled Stewart Title of California, Inc. v. Jagdish Patel ("Patel"), Ha-Ram,
Inc. ("Ha-Ram") and Fu San Limited, Inc. (SCVSS 118246) ("Stewart Complaint"). In addition, Fu San is
a party to a related Cross Complaint and First Amended Cross Complaint entitled Ha-Ram, Inc. v. Fu San
Limited. Inc.: Tien Lee International Limited Corporation ('Tien Lee") ("Ha-Ram Cross Complaint")
involving the subject Property.
On June 6, 2006, Cross-defendant Tien Lee filed a Motion for Summary Judgment ("Tien MSJ"). The
Tien MSJ alleges that on February 19, 2002, Ha-Ram made an offer to Fu San in the amount of
$1,400,000 for the purchase of the Property. Furthermore, the Tien MSJ alleges that on March 18,2002,
Fu San made a counter-offer to Ha-Ram in the amount of $1 ,600,000 to sell the Property.
_____________________ _______________________________________________________._nn___________________________________________________________________n__n_____.++___._____________________________________n____
P',-\~enda>'Cl""m De\ ,,,mmi,,,,,,, CDC 201)11\1(1.16.0(, lien Lee ResolUlion "fi\ece"itv .79<; We,t 5th Street SR doc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: 10/16/2006
Agenda Item Number:
1t!J~
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
Tien Lee International Ltd Corp - CCN Properly Acquisition (APN: 0134-093-41)
Page 2
The Stewart Complaint alleges that Ha-Ram and/or Patel accepted the Fu San counter offer and agreed to
purchase the Property for $1,600,000 and an escrow was opened with Stewart Title. The Tien MSJ
alleges that the escrow was to close on or before June 30, 2002. Additionally, the Tien MSJ alleges that
on August 9, 2002, Fu San requested that the escrow be canceled due to the fact the Ha-Ram had failed to
pay the purchase price of $1 ,600,000.
The Tien MSJ alleges that in December 2002, Fu San's principal, Bruce Ko, approached Tien Lee about
acquiring the Property for $1,600,000. The Tien MSJ alleges that on May 30, 2003, Tien Lee and Fu San
entered into an agreement whereby Tien Lee would purchase the Property and Fu San would lease and
operate Paradise Motel.
On Mav 30, 2003. a Grant Deed was recorded with the San Bernardino Countv, Document No. 2003-
. . .
1365419, conveying the Property from Fu San to Tien Lee.
On August 26. 2004. Stewart Title filed the Complaint interpleading the monies held in escrow for the
sale of the subject Property. Ha-Ram filed a Cross Complaint and First Amended Cross Complaint for
Breach of Contract, Fraud, Declaratory Relief, Fraudulent Conveyance, Specific Performance and
Conspiracy. The Tien MSJ is set for hearing on December 12, 2006, in the San Bernardino Superior
Court and a trial in the above-described actions relating to ownership of the Property is set for January 22,
2007. There is a dispute between Tien Lee, Fu San, Patel and Ha-Ram as to who owns the Property.
Based on the fact that Tien Lee appears on the records of the San Bernardino County Assessors Office as
the owner of record. on August II, 2006. the Agency sent a purchase offer COffer") to Tien Lee
("'Property Owner") to purchase the Property. The Offer included an Appraisal Summary Statement in
conformity with Government Code Section 7267.2(b), which was prepared by a qualified appraiser. The
Offer was mailed to the address on file with the office of the County Tax Assessor as shown on the last
equalized County assessment roll. Additionally, the Offer was sent to the following parties via certified
mail: Fu San; Patel; Ha-Ram; William Ward, Counsel for Tien Lee ("Tien Lee Counsel"); Thomas B.
Ritchie. Counsel for Fu Sun CFu Sun Counsel"); and Gene R. McKenzie Jr., Counsel for Patel and Ha-
Ram ("'Patel Counsel" and "Ha-Ram Counsel").
In the Offer that was transmitted to the Property Owner, the Property Owner was requested to convey free
and clear title and additionally, free and clear of all leasehold interests in the Property by tenants and any
other parties, if applicable.
CURRENT ISSUES:
On August 29, 2006, the Agency received a letter dated August 28, 2006, from Fu San Counsel stating the
following: I) That Fu San believes the amount offered may be below market; 2) That Ha-Ram had filed
an action against Fu San and recorded a lis pendens on the Property; 3) That the lawsuit filed by Ha-Ram
is scheduled for trial in January 2007; and 4) That it requested that negotiation and execution of a
purchase agreement be placed in abeyance until after a judicial resolution of title of the Property.
On September 21, 2006, Agency Staff spoke with Tien Lee Counsel concerning the Offer. Tien Lee
Counsel stated that his client did not want to sell the Property. Tien Lee Counsel also suggested that the
several lawsuits should be settled as opposed to the Agency exercising its condemnation rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------.---.-.--.-----------._---.---.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.----------------.".-------
P:\A~en(jn"'(omm f)e\ Cotllmissioll\CDC 2006110-16-06 Tien u-e Resolul;nn uf:-i..cmil~- -7% W..'I 5lh SIr....... SR.doc COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: 10/16/2006
Agenda item Number: R.:3'd-
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
lien Lee International LId Corp - CCN Property Acquisition (APN: 0134-093-41)
Page 3
The Agency has received no response from Patel or Patel Counsel.
On October 4, 2006, the Agency received a letter from Ha-Ram Counsel wherein they made a request on
behalf of their client, Ha-Ram, Inc., to appear and be heard at the October 16,2006, hearing relating to the
Property. The letter is attached as Attachment 1.
Therefore, in conformance with the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, on September 27, 2006, a
notice of the October 16, 2006, hearing on the intent of adopting a Resolution of Public Interest and
Necessity ("'Notice") was sent by certified mail to the Property Owners Counsel and the Property Owner
whose name and address appears on the last equalized County assessment roll. in order to afford such
Property Owner a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the Commission. Additionally, the Notice was
sent to Patel. Patel Counsel, Ha-Ram and Ha-Ram Counsel via certified mail.
The hearing by the Commission and the adoption of the Resolution of Public Interest and Necessity are
legal preconditions to the exercise of the Commission's power of eminent domain. Moreover, Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1245.230 requires that the Commission make the following findings and that
each be included in the Resolution of Necessity:
1. The public interest and necessity require the acquisition of the Property: The Agency has
adopted a Plan that includes this Property together with an agreement to assemble land for
eventual redevelopment in accordance with said Plan. The proposed Project is a unified mixed-
use development that will include portions of the Property. During the past year, the Agency has
acquired nine (9) parcels of land, one (1) additional parcel is in escrow and thirteen (13) to
seventeen (17) parcels are pending acquisition within the vicinity of the Property. The Agency
finds it appropriate to continue the program of land assembly and to acquire this additional
Property to provide sufficient contiguous land for the Plan and the contemplated Project,
2, The Proieet is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest
public good and the least private iniurv: The 5th Street Corridor has had years of problems with
crime and blight, particularly near the 1-215 Freeway. The Agency has increased its efforts to
address conditions of blight in this sector of the Central City North Redevelopment Project Area
(the "Project Area") to foster a commercially viable and economically sustainable plan of
redevelopment and reuse of the properties within the Project Area and to prevent the spread of
blight in the Project Area into other surrounding neighborhoods. Redevelopment of the Property
will provide needed residential and retail development and assist with elimination of blight in
other areas in proximity to the Project. The assembly and redevelopment of the Property is
necessary as the Project Area displays a number of conditions of blight including the presence of
old structures that show signs of dilapidation and deterioration, high crime rate, high volume of
code compliance cases, absentee owners and tenants in possession, and substandard and
inadequate lot size. The Project will also facilitate land assembly and reuse of a developed urban
area that has stagnated in years under the burdens of small lot size, diverse ownership, abandoned
properties, absentee owners, high crime and code compliance cases. Part 1 Crimes for this area in
2004 were four hundred twenty-six (426) and four hundred thirty-six (436) in 2005, The number
decreased dramatically to ninety-one (91) from January 11 to April 11,2006. This Project will
provide an architecturally attractive quality housing similar to TELACU with the emphasis in
u_h()I11~()~l1ership'uu!~i~u~r~<lt~.s_<lu~~l1.s_~u()!J:)r_i~_e___<lI1~uillcre<lsesuthep~~li~'~u~_f!()_rt_t()_~~_~ru!heir
P:\"-\gCtld,,<\COllllll [)n Co"",,i..ion\C1lC 2006\10_16_06 Tic" L.... Re.olut;o" of ~......"il~' - 7'15 Wesl 5,h SIred SR.do{ COMM ISSION MEETING AG ENDA
Meeting Date: 10/16/2006
Agenda Item Number: I<J;A
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
Tien Lee International Ltd Corp - CCN Property Acquisition (APN: 0134-093-41)
Page 4
neighborhood safe and secure. This Project will further the positive impact started by TELACU
and the new Holiday Inn Express in the Project Area. The Project will also confer substantial
environmental benefits upon the Project Area and the community generally, in accordance with
the General Plan of the City of San Bernardino. The Redevelopment Plan was amended on
September 7.2004. by adoption of an amendment to reinstate the power of condemnation together
with an Environmental Impact Report SCH#2003031072 (the "EIR") that was duly certified at
that time.
3. The subiect Property is necessary for the Project: The Agency previously acquired several
parcels of real property in the vicinity of the Property and desires to acquire this additional
Property to provide sufficient contiguous land for the Project. This particular Property is located
directly in the middle of the proposed development. It does not make good land use planning to
build the Project around the subject Property. It should be noted that the Property Owners have
never made a request to participate as an Owner Participant in the Project or redevelopment of the
Property.
4. The Government Code & 7267.2(a) Offer has been made to the record Property Owner: On
August 11. 2006, the Agency submitted a formal acquisition Offer to the Property Owner of the
subject Property. Additionally. the Agency submitted the same Offer to Tien Lee Counsel, Fu
San, Fu San Counsel, Patel, Patel Counsel, Ha-Ran, and Ha-Ram Counsel via certified mail. The
Offer complied with Government Code Section 7267.2.
5. The environmental processing was accomplished according to law: The Commission
considered and certified the EIR in accordance with CEQA for the Project Area, which addresses
reinstating the Agency's power of condemnation, and the acquisition of Property contemplated
within the Plan and for the Project. The acquisition of the Property is also consistent with the EIR
for the Project Area. On November 7. 2005. the Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and authorized Staff to file a Notice of Determination ("NOD") with the County Clerk
for the Project pursuant to the approved Agreement. On November 10, 2005, said NOD was filed
with the County Clerk. The statute of limitations applicable to challenges that a public entity
approved a project without making a proper CEQA determination is thirty-five (35) days from the
date of the filing by the public agency of the notice or if there is no notice or formal decision, one
hundred eighty (180) days from the date of the public agency's decision to carry out or approve the
project. There was no CEQA challenge, by the Property Owner or any person claiming to have an
interest in the Property, and the time has expired to do so.
6. Adequate notice was given of this hearing: The Agency provided a Notice to the Property
Owner on September 27. 2006, by certified mail of the October 16, 2006. hearing. Notice was
provided to the Property Owner at the address in the last equalized County assessment roll notice.
Also, a copy of the letter was mailed to Tien Lee Counsel, Fu San, Fu San Counsel, Patel. Patel
Counsel. Ha-Ram and Ha-Ram Counsel.
P,\,'\gendas\CorTlm 0...- Commi"inn\CDC !OO1i\IO_16_0(i Tit'1l ~ R{'sollllioll nr~{'cn,il}. 79~ West !ilh Slrel't SRdoc
COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: 10/1612006
Agenda Item Number: ~
Economic Development Agency Staff Report
Tien Lee International LId Corp - CCN Property Acquisition (APN: 0134-093-41)
Page 5
ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT:
On or about September 7, 2004, the Commission considered and certified the EIR in accordance with
CEQA for the Project Area, which addresses reinstating the Agency's power of condemnation and the
acquisition of Property contemplated within the Plan and for the Project. The acquisition of the Property
is consistent with the EIR for the Project Area.
On November 7, 2005. the Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and authorized Staff to
tile a Notice of Determination ("NOD") with the County Clerk for the Project pursuant to the approved
Agreement. On November 10,2005, said NOD was.filed with the County Clerk.
The statute of limitations applicable to challenges that a public entity approved a project without making a
proper CEQA determination is 35 days from the date of the filing by the public agency of the notice or if
there is no notice or formal decision, 180 days from the date of the public agency's decision to carry out or
approve the Project. There was no CEQA challenge, by the Property Owner, and the time has expired to
challenge CEQA compliance.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Bascd on the formal appraisal. the value of the subject Property is $3.1 00,000 plus court costs and legal
expenses and other ancillary costs normally associated with condemnation proceedings for an
approximate total of$3,720,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Community Development Commission adopt the attached Resolution.
//j /) /\ /).~) ^
;/ v I . I / L-J l2-L
Maggie Pacheco, Executive Director
P:\Agrndas\Comm De\' Commission\CDC 2006\10-16-06 Tien l....e Resolulioo ofl\'ecessity -79~ Welt ~lh Slrel'1 SRdoc
COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: 10/16/2006
Agenda Item Number: R-?J'"
~ -
Q
c:::> ~..,.
HONE52t41 6~zn
(71~1 t34-Z~gg
-< .c: .~ g1
q;!rn
~ "'D .-=i""
31 ;g; ~
i'1'5
Z
o
--;
A TT ACHMENT 1
LAW OFFICES OF
t
NORMAN A. FILER
NORMAN A. FILER
HITENDRA BHAIo(TA
GENE A. MCKENZIE, .JR.
'soo NORTH STATE eOl-LEGE BOULEVARD
T
SUITE 1270
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866
October 3, 2006
VI
w
9>
Maggie Pacheco
Executive Director
Economic Development Agency
City of San Bernardino
201 N.E. Street, #301
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1507
Re: 795 West 5th Street, San Bernardino
APN 0134-093-41
Dear Ms. Pacheco:
Request is hereby made on behalf of our client, Ha-Ram, Inc.
to appear and be heard on October 16, 2006 at 4:30p.m. in the City
Council Chambers regarding the Notice of Intention to Adopt
Resolution of Public Interest and Necessity for Acquisition of Real
Property relating to the above referenced property.
Very truly yours,
ICES OF NORMAN A. FILER
~
BHAKTA
HB/jk
-Oll~
~
en
=
@
8
- - - -,-
"
,
,
,
H."t
,
,
'"
o
~
~
o
~
~
~
",a
~
~~
a"""
"'~
--;;
a",
<0
~K'"
~ 00
u~....
,-
,
"HHI-\--
.
.
, .. " or. .. " " " C'" HU
I" "
:i: , @ @ . @ 0 @ @ @
d;; - .
-
t - : -
- : ~:
I ... "
/'11 .
, . ~ ~ : ~
,..
I @ "^ @ . - @
; : ,
= =
, "" -
, ('to . t{ -~, ." @
I - @:
= ~, .
= . r-.
, ,
" .. < ~
! c, 0 II""
: V
, ,
, . :
! - @
-
,
, : "
: @ -
I " ; ~ ~
: -
~ :
I -<:) ,
~ ,
-
, :
, , ,
," " H'\lf
1
~
;!'
T
I
,
I@
o
C
<:J
L-
o
(I)
(I)
...l
"
(I)
'r<
H
=
..
T
'"
,
CD
c........
0"""
(/)
CD
,0
',,-~)
- ~ -JHIfI-\- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - +;t - --j
l
IG'U'
"
"
"
"
,
~@l@ /!
~
1'"
,,@ :" 0 @
. ~ -. ~ ,
. @ ", -
~
O::::E
>-
:..>
, @ =
",
0> @ ,
C>
@
-~._-
@
-
=
u
C
:L
H'I~'
"
.
@
"
.'
I
:A
Ib'
-
,
tl'"
I
L
I
,
-----
;..--- -
::0
,!,
~ q;
~g I
~.. I
ill". .'
- -", . ~,
.~ \l
-;:=:
'0
- -
~o
-IBm-
,
,
+- _ _-.J
-~8~H: S-t'l-'-'I-
@B~~
-~
=
I
I~
L
~
~
=~
",0
U
o
0.=0
a a ~
:::En...:t:j
~
~... a
~"--,....., I;;;
a- ~
~'" 0
~ '"
~~
~a~
~aa
""""''''
~
~
.
o
o
N
E
o
I RESOLUTION NO.
2 RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DECLARING THE PUBLIC INTEREST
3 AND NECESSITY OF ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY BY THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR
4 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES OVER THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 795 WEST 5TH STREET, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
5 (TIEN LEE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED CORPORATION, FU SAN
LIMITED, INC., HA-RAM, INC., AND JAGDISH PATEL - APN: 0134-093-41)
6 IN THE CENTRAL CITY NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
7 WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino (the "Agency"), a
8 public entity created pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code
9 Section 33000, et seq.), is authorized to acquire and redevelop blighted properties located in the City
10 of San Bernardino (the "City"), in accordance with the Community Redevelopment Law; and
11 WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino (the
12. "Commission"), as the governing board of the Agency, has authorized the Agency to assemble and
13 acquire real property for community redevelopment purposes in the Central City North
14 Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"); and
15 WHEREAS, the Project Area displays substantial and pervasive symptoms of blight that
16 cannot be remedied by private parties acting alone without community redevelopment assistance;
17 and
18 WHEREAS, as of February 19, 2002, Fu San Limited, Inc. ("Fu San"), was the owner of
19 record of real property located at 795 West 5th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410 (APN:
20 0134-093-41) ("Property") and Fu San was the owner/operator ofa motel on the Property; and
21 WHEREAS, Fu San is a party to a lawsuit entitled Stewart Title of California, Inc. v. Jagdish
22 Patel ("Patel"), Ha-Ram, Inc. ("Ha-Ram"), and Fu San Limited, Inc. (SCVSS 118246) (hereinafter
23 the Complaint is referred to as the "Stewart Complaint"); and
24 WHEREAS Fu San is a party to a related Cross Complaint and First Amended Cross
25 Complaint entitled Ha-Ram, Inc. v. Fu San Limited, Inc,; Tien Lee International Limited
26 Corporation ("Ha-Ram Cross Complaint") involving the subject Property; and
27 WHEREAS, on June 6, 2006, Cross-defendant Tien Lee filed a Motion for Summary
28 Judgment ("Tien MS.J"); and
P_'\gemias\Resolullo",\Resu!ullon,\:OOt>,IO-16.06 Tlen Lee - err-..: 79~ West ~Ih Street CDC Reso,doc
1 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ alleges that on February 19, 2002, Ha-Ram made an offer to Fu
2 San in the amount of $1.400,000 for the purchase of the Property; and
3 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ alleges that on March 18, 2002, Fu San made a counter-offer to
4 Ha-Ram in the amount of $ 1,600,000 to sell the Property; and
5 WHEREAS, the Stewart Complaint alleges that Ha-Ram and/or Patel accepted the Fu San
6 counter offer and agreed to purchase the Property for $1,600,000 and an escrow was opened with
7 Stewart Title and the Tien MSJ alleges that the escrow was to close on or before June 30, 2002; and
8 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ alleges that on August 9, 2002, Fu San requested that the escrow
9 be canceled due to the fact the Ha-Ram had failed to pay the purchase price of$I,600,000; and
10 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ alleges that in December 2002, Fu San's principal, Bruce Ko,
11 approached Tien Lee about Tien Lee acquiring the Property for $1,600,000; and
12 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ alleges that on May 30, 2003, Tien Lee and Fu San entered into
13 an agreement whereby Tien Lee would purchase the Property and Fu San would lease and operate
14 the motel: and
15 WHEREAS, on May 30, 2003, a Grant Deed was recorded with the San Bernardino County,
16 Document No. 2003-1365419, conveying the Property to Tien Lee; and
17 WHEREAS, on August 26, 2004, Stewart Title filed the Complaint interpleading the monies
18 held in escrow for the sale of the subject Property; and
19 WHEREAS, Ha-Ram filed a Cross Complaint and First Amended Cross Complaint for
20 Breach of Contract, Fraud, Declaratory Relief, Fraudulent Conveyance, Specific Performance and
21 Conspiracy; and
22 WHEREAS, the Tien MSJ is set for hearing on December 12, 2006, in the San Bernardino
23 Superior Court and the trial in the above-described actions relating to ownership of the Property is
24 set for January 22, 2007, in the San Bernardino Superior Court; and
25 WHEREAS, there is a dispute between Tien Lee, Fu San, Patel and Ha-Ram as to who owns
26 the Property; and
27 WHEREAS, on February 10,2005, the Agency sent a letter via certified mail to the Tien Lee
28 advising that the Agency was reviewing a plan for the redevelopment and reuse of certain properties
2
P '.Agendas"..Reslllult()n,\Re,,,lutions"..~OU6".1O-16-iJt> Tien Lee CCo,,; 795 We,! -,th Slreel CDC Re,,, do[
1 in the downtown area that included the Property and requested its submission of statement of
2 interest to participate; and
3 WHEREAS, the Agency has acquired other real property in the Project Area; and
4 WHEREAS, on March II, 2005, the Agency mailed a notice to Tien Lee, the Property
5 Owner of record of the real Property located within the Project Area, and informed such person(s)
6 that the Agency intended to appraise the Property for possible acquisition; and
7 WHEREAS, the Agency retained the services of an appraiser to appraise the Property and
8 the appraiser has reported an opinion of the fair market value of the improved Property; and
9 WHEREAS, the Property is improved with a building, being used as the Paradise Motel, that
10 Tien Lee advised is being leased to Fu Sun as the motel operator; and
11 WHEREAS, due to the passage of time, the Agency obtained an updated appraisal for the
12 Property: and
13 WHEREAS, based upon such updated real property appraisal report, the Commission
14 authorized the Agency to send a purchase offer ("Offer") to the owner of record, to attempt to
15 purchase the Property at the appraised value in lieu of condemnation; and
16 WHEREAS, due to the pending lawsuits, the Agency determined that notices involving the
17 Property should be provided to the various parties; and
18 WHEREAS, on August II, 2006, the Agency mailed an otTer based on the updated
19 appraised value of the Property described in this Resolution to the owner of record, Tien Lee at the
20 address on file with the office of the County Assessor, as shown on the last equalized County
21 assessment roll and to his Counsel of Record, William Ward at the Law Offices of Ward & Ward,
22 685 East Carnegie Drive, Suite 140, San Bernardino, California 92408 ("Tien Counsel"); and
23 WHEREAS, on August 11,2006, the Agency mailed the Offer to Fu San at 795 West 5th
24 Street, San Bernardino, California 92410 and to its Counsel of Record, Thomas Ritchie at the Law
25 Offices of Ritchie, Klinkert & McCallion, 3281 East Gausti Road, Suite 425, Ontario, California
26 91761 ("Fu San Counsel"); and
, 27 WHEREAS, on August 11, 2006, the Agency mailed the OtTer to Patel through his Counsel
28 of Record, c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State
3
p"gend~s'ResohJlions\Res,'ILJt;()m"2C>06' 10-]6-06 Tie" Lee ce....- 7q~ West ~lh Street CDC Reso doc
1 College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868 ("Patel Counsel"); and
2 WHEREAS, on August II, 2006, the Agency mailed the Offer to Ha-Ram through its
3 Counsel of Record. c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North
4 State College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868 ("Ha-Ram Counsel"); and
5 WHEREAS, on August 29, 2006, the Agency received a letter dated August 28, 2006, from
6 Fu San Counsel stating the following: I) That Fu San believes the amount offered may be below
7 market; 2) That Ha-Ram had filed an action against Fu San and recorded a lis pendens on the
8 Property: 3) That the lawsuit filed by Ha-Ram is scheduled for trial in January 2007; and 4) That it
9 requested that negotiation and execution of a purchase agreement be placed in abeyance until after a
10 judicial resolution of title of the Property; and
11 WHEREAS. the Agency did not receive a response to the Agency Offer from Patel and Ha-
12 Ram: and
13 WHEREAS, the Agency has not been able to satisfactorily complete a negotiated purchase
14 with the Property Owner to acquire the Property for community redevelopment purposes; and
15 WHEREAS. the Commission has served as the "lead agency" as defined in the California
16 Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") for the purpose of conducting an environmental review in
17 connection with the acquisition of the Property; and
18
19 WHEREAS, on or about September 7, 2004, the Agency considered and certified
20 Environmental Impact Report SCH#2003031072 (the "EIR") in accordance with CEQA for the
21 Project Area. and the acquisition of property contemplated within the Plan and for the Project is
22 consistent with the EIR; and
23 WHEREAS, neither the Property Owner nor others who claimed an interest in the Property
24 made a CEQA challenge and the time has expired to do so; and
25 WHEREAS, on November 7, 2005, the Commission adopted Resolution No.CDC/2005-39
26 approving a Redevelopment Study Agreement and Exclusive Right to Negotiate (the "Agreement")
27 by and between the Agency and Watson & Associates Development Company, Inc. (the
28 "Developer"), and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Downtown Mixed Use
4
1",Agenda,\Rewlulions\.Re,oluliol1,\2006',IO-16-06 Tien Lee eeN 7')~ Wesl 5th Street CDC Reso doc
] Project Plan (the "Plan") and for the Project (the "Project") described in more detail in the CEQA
2 Initial Study dated October 11,2005; and
3 WHEREAS, Part I Crimes within the area of the Plan and Project were reported as ninety
4 one (91) incidents of crime for the period January II through April 11,2006, four hundred thirty six
5 (436) for :2005 and four hundred twenty-six (426) for 2004; and
6 WHEREAS, the Agreement contemplates the Agency acqulflng or obtaining control of
7 parcels necessary for the Plan either through purchase negotiations or alternatively, by eminent
8 domain proceeding, if necessary; and
9 WHEREAS, on September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
IO the Tien Lee at the address of record on file at the office of the County Assessor and at the last
II known address for the owner of the Property; and
]2 WHEREAS, on September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
I3 the Tien Lee Counsel at the Law Offices of Ward & Ward, 685 East Carnegie Drive, Suite 140, San
]4 Bernardino. California 92408; and
15 WHEREAS. on September 27. 2006, Notice ofIntent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
16 Fu San at 795 West 51h Street. San Bernardino. California 92410; and
] 7 WHEREAS. on September 27. 2006. Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
]8 Fu San Counsel at the Law Offices of Ritchie, Klinkert & McCallion, 3281 East Gausti Road, Suite
]9 425. Ontario, California 91761; and
20 WHEREAS. on September 27. 2006. Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
21 Ha-Ram Counsel c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State
22 College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868; and
23 WHEREAS, on September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
24 Ha-Ram Counsel at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State College Boulevard, Suite
25 1270, Orange. California 92868; and
26 WHEREAS. on September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
27 Patel Counsel c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State
28 College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868; and
5
P"Agcndas\!l.clo]utions'"Rc,oI1lIi"ns",21l0()'1Il.16-06 Ticn Lee CC:-< 7'J:i We.\! 'lh Street CDC Rem doc
1 WHEREAS, on September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed to
2 Patel Counsel at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State College Boulevard, Suite
3 1270, Orange, California 92868; and
4 WHEREAS, on October 4, 2006, the Agency received a letter from Hitendra Bhakta,
5 Counsel for Ha-Ram requesting to appear and be heard on the Notice ofIntent to adopt a Resolution
6 of Public Interest and Necessity related to the Property; and
7 WHEREAS, on October 16, 2006, after not less than fifteen (15) days written notice to Tien
8 Lce, Tien Lee Counsel, Fu San, Fu San Counsel, Ha-Ram through its Counsel, and Patel through his
9 Counsel, the Commission conducted a hearing for the purpose of affording Tien Lee, Tien Lee
10 CounseL Fu San, Fu San Counsel, Ha-Ram through its Counsel, and Patel through his Counsel, a
11 reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on the. matters referred to in the Code of Civil
12 Procedure Section 1240.030 and whether the Agency has met all other prerequisites for the exercise
13 of eminent domain to acquire the Property for the Plan and community redevelopment purposes;
14 and
15 WHEREAS, the Commission has determined as a result of such hearing on October 16,
16 2006, that the public health, safety and welfare require the Agency to acquire the subject Property
17 for community redevelopment purposes and to facilitate the Project.
18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COMMISSION FINDS,
19 DETERMINES AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:
20
Section 1.
The information set forth in the above recitals of this Resolution is true and
21 correct.
22
Section 2.
The real Property to be acquired under the authority of this Resolution is
23 located in the Project Area in the City and is also known as 795 West 51h Street, San Bernardino,
24 California 92410 (San Bernardino County Assessor's Parcel Number 0134-093-41). The Property is
25 more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A." The interest in the
26 Property to be acquired consists of all of the fee simple absolute title interest in the Property, and all
27 of the right, title and interest of each person and owner of the Property including the acquisition of
28 each and every possessory interest and all easements and appurtenances to the Property.
6
r ";\~endil,'Re~olulion,",Re.<(J1Ll\i"'L\",2QOb']O.lb-06 Tien Lee CC,", 795 West "tll Street CDC Re~;o doc
1 Section 3. On September 27, 2006, the Agency transmitted a notice of hearing to the
2 known owner of record, Tien Lee at 795 West 5th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410.
3 Section 4. On September 27, 2006, Notice of Intent to adopt this Resolution was mailed
4 to the following: I) Tien Lee Counsel at the Law Offices of Ward & Ward, 685 East Carnegie
5 Drive, Suite 140, San Bernardino, California 92408; 2) Fu San at 795 West 5th Street, San
6 Bernardino, California 92410; 3) Fu San Counsel at the Law Offices of Ritchie, Klinkert &
7 McCallion, 3281 East Gausti Road, Suite 425, Ontario, California 91761; 4) Ha-Ram through its
8 Counsel c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State College
9 Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868; 5) Ha-Ram through its Counsel at the Law
10 Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California
11 92868: 6) Patel through his Counsel c/o Gene A. McKenzie Jr. at the Law Offices of Norman A.
12. Filer. 500 North State College Boulevard, Suite 1270, Orange, California 92868; and 7) Patel
13 through his Counsel at the Law Offices of Norman A. Filer, 500 North State College Boulevard,
14 Suite 1270, Orange. California 92868.
15 Section 5. The Commission acknowledges receipt of the written reports and information
16 relating to the Project Area, including the Staff Report and Agreement between the Agency and
17 Developer concerning the Plan. and the appraisal of the Property, staff reports. and oral reports and
18 information submitted to the Commission during the course of the hearing conducted on October 16,
19 2006 or as may be on file with the Agency Secretary.
20 Section 6. The Commission, on behalf of the Agency. finds and determines that the
21 hearing conducted by the Commission on this matter on October 16, 2006, was full and fair, and
22 that each interested person has been afforded a full and fair opportunity to prese.nt evidence and
23 testimony relating to assembly of land for the Plan, and the matters described in Code of Civil
24 Procedure Section 1240.030, and the acquisition of the Property, and all interests in it, by the
25 Commission for community redevelopment purposes by the exercise of eminent domain and other
26 relevant matters.
27 Section 7. The Commission declares its intent to acquire the Property for the Plan and in
28 furtherance of community redevelopment purposes in the name of the Agency in accordance with
7
P 'A~tnda,"Rtsolulion\"'Rt>ullllion~:()(lo,IO-16-06 lien Lee CC~ i9'i West ~th Street CDC RC>ll duc
1 the laws of the State of California, including the Community Redevelopment Law and Health and
2 Safety Code Sections 33391 and 33492.40. The Commission further finds and determines that all of
3 the prerequisites to the exercise of eminent domain by the Agency with respect to such acquisition
4 of the Property for the Plan have been met.
5
Section 8.
The Commission has found and determined that the acquisition of the
6 Propcrty for the Plan is an activity. which is covered under a Mitigated Negative Declaration
7 adopted by the Commission on November 7. 2005. and a Notice of Determination was filed with the
8 Clerk of the County on November 10,2005.
9
Section 9.
The Commission has found and determined the folowing: 1) The public
10 interest and necessity require the Project; 2) The Project is planned or located in a manner that will
11 be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; 3) The Property sought to
12 be acquired is necessary for the Project; 4) The Commission has not made a predetermination to
13 proceed with the Project. regardless of the record; 5) The Offer to acquire did include compensation
14 for all property rights and interest taken or damaged; 6) The environmental process was
15 accomplished according to law; and 7) The notice of this hearing was adequate.
16 Section 10. In accordance with the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure Section
17 1245.230. the Commission finds. determines, and declares as follows:
18
(a)
The public interest. convenience and necessity require the acquisition of the Property
19 for the Project. as necessary to alleviate conditions of blight in the Project Area, which are
20 documented and described in more detail in the 2004 EIR and CEQA Initial Study dated October
21 I L 2005. which Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved on November 7,
22 2005. and to provide for the orderly redevclopment of the Property and other real property included
23 in the Project Area. The assembly and redevelopment of the Property is necessary as the Project
24 Area displays a number of conditions of blight. including, without limitation, prevalence of absentee
25 owners, high volume of code compliance cases, crime statistics substantially higher than the City
26 rate. the presence of old structures that show signs of dilapidation and deterioration and small or
27 substandard lot sizes within the Project Area, including the subject Property. and a diverse pattern of
28 land ownership which prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use of such real
8
P ..,-\gel1dasXesolutiom\Re,ollJIJon\:OOi>" 10.]6-06 Tienlee - eel' 79~ West 'th Streel CDC Res" dOL
1 property in its present condition. For the period of January 11 through April 11, 2006, the number
2 of Part 1 Crimes within the area of the Plan and Project were ninety-one (91). For the 2005 period,
3 there were four hundred thirty-six (436) Part 1 Crimes. For the 2004 period. there were four
4 hundred twenty-six (426) Part I Crimes. For the period of January 11 through April 11, 2006, this
5 equates to three hundred thirteen (313) Part I Crimes per one thousand (1,000) people. Part I
6 Crimes include murder. rape, assault, robbery, burglary, grand theft auto and other theft. Crimes
7 such as drug use. possession and sale, panhandling, prostitution, etc., are not included in the figures.
8 Acquisition and assembly of the Property for community redevelopment purposes. the Plan and the
9 Project, together with other lands already owned by the Agency in the Project Area, will foster the
10 elimination of blight and assist with the redevelopment of the Project Area, and assist with
11 elimination of blight in other lands in proximity to the Project Area. The Plan and the Project
12 include. without limitation. mixed income. mixed commercial and residential uses.
13
(b)
The Plan and the Project are planned or located in the marmer that will be most
14 compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury in light of the fact that the real
15 property included in the Project Area displays a number of symptoms of blight. The Plan and
16 Project shall also facilitate the completion of a land assembly program previously initiated by the
17 Agency and foster the rcuse of a developed urban area that has stagnated in recent years under the
18 burdens of economic obsolescence. small lot size. diverse ownership, absentee owners, tenant
19 occupancy, high crime and code compliance cases. property tax liens and inadequate public
20 improvements.
21
(c)
The Property described in this Resolution is necessary for the Plan and the Project, as
22 its acquisition and reuse for the Plan and the Project is part of a neighborhood plan to eliminate
23 blight and provide for the redevelopment and improvement of the other lands owned by the Agency
24 within the Project Area.
25
(d)
The Offer required by Government Code Section 7267.2 has been mailed to the
26 owners of record of the Property by the Agency, and the Agency has not been successful in
. 27 acquiring the Property based upon the conditions contained within the Offer and for the reasons
28 noted in this Resolution. The Commission deems it appropriate and necessary to approve the
9
r ",A~endd_,\Resolulion,.',Re,,)lulltllh.2l>06 ;1>-16-01J Tlen Lee - CC\ ~(j'i We_'l 'ilh Slreet CDC Reso do~
1 Agency acquisition of the Property for assembly for the Plan and the Project.
2
Section 11. (a)
The law firm of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, as legal
3 counsel to the Agency ("Agency Counsel"), is authorized and directed to prepare, institute and
4 prosecute in the name of the Agency such proceedings in the court having jurisdiction, as may be
5 necessary for the acquisition of the Property.
6
(b)
The sum payable by the Agency as probable compensation for the acquisition of the
7 Property by eminent domain. as determined by the appraisal, may, in the discretion of Agency
8 CounseL accompany the filing of the complaint-and may be deposited as follows: (i) with the State
9 of California in the manner provided by law, or upon the recommendation of Agency Counsel to the
10 County Treasury or (ii) at the election of the person(s) who may claim an interest in the Property to
II be acquired by such condemnation proceedings, in such other manner as such interested person(s)
12 may request in writing, subject to the approval of the Executive Director of the Agency and Agency
13 Counsel.
14
(c)
Agency Counsel is also authorized, subject to the approval of the Executive Director
IS of the Agency, to engage in settlement negotiations and, if possible, arrange for purchase of the
16 Property in lieu of condemnation at the appraisal price prior to or subsequent to filing a
17 condemnation complaint to commence acquisition of the Property by eminent domain.
18 Section 12. The Secretary of the Commission is authorized and directed to certify the
19 adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution shall take affect upon adoption.
20 I I I
21
III
. .
22 I I I
23 I I I
24 I I I
25 I I I
26 I I I
27 I I I
28 I I I
10
1',,-\gcndasXesolutlons\Resolutloll,'.200b\IO-16-06 Tien Lee CC,," 795 \','CS[ ~Ih Street CDC Reso doc
1
2
3
4
5
6
RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DECLARING THE PUBLIC INTEREST
AND NECESSITY OF ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY BY THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES OVER THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 795 WEST 5TH STREET, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
(TIEN LEE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED CORPORATION, FU SAN
LIMITED, INC., HA-RAM, INC., AND JAGDISH PATEL - APN: 0134-093-41)
IN THE CENTRAL CITY NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
2006,
7 I CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Community
8 Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino at its
meeting held
9 on
10 Commission Members:
11 ESTRADA
12 BAXTER
13 VACANT
14 DERRY
15 KELLEY
16 JOHNSON
17 MC CAMMACK
18
19
20
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
21
22
23
24
25
,2006 by the following vote, to wit:
Aves
~
Abstain
Absent
Secretary
day of
,2006,
Patrick l Morris, Chairperson
Community Development Commission
of the City of San Bernardino
26 By: c:z;:
27
28
II
I' ..-\gcnd~\",Re\ohlli()n"'..ReSl)]llli"1l_,"..2If)b", 10-16.06 lien Lee - cc~ :'I'i WeSI 'Ill StrCCl (DC Re,o do~
Exhibit HAil
PARCEL NO.1,
THAT PORTION OF LOT' 5, BLOCK 26, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, IN THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 1, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT 100 FEET EAST OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT;
THENCE EAST 50 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT;
THENCE WEST 50 FEET;
THENCE NORTH TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL NO.2,
THE NORTH 37.5 FEET OF THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 4, BLOCK 26, CITY OF SEE BELOW, IN
THE CITY OF SEE BELOW, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER
PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 1, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL NO.3,
THE SOUTH 37.5 FEET OF THE NORTH 75 FEET OF THE WEST 150 FEET OF LOT 4, BLOCK
26, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGE 1, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL NO.4,
PORTION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 26, CITY OF SEE BELOW, IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF
MAPS, PAGE 1, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5;
THENCE EAST 100 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 150 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5;
THENCE WEST 100 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT;
THENCE NORTH 150 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.