HomeMy WebLinkAboutS1-Community Development
From: -
CIT'" OF SAN BERNARDlr"4) - REQUEr,. FOR COUNCIL ACT" IN
REC'O.. AnNJ",. OfF.
~u1:jJeCl:
Dire\9Bf<<T 19 PM 4: 19'1ILES VICTORIAN HOUSE
HERITAGE PARKING LOT D
Jf?llD
Kenneth J. Henderson,
Dept:
Community Development
Date:
October 19, 1988
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
On September 19, 1988, the Mayor and Common Council took actions
directing staff to hire a structural engineer and to explore the
possibility of purchasing the Heritage House Parking Lot.
Recommended motion:
That the Mayor and Common Council appropriate $80,000 from the CDBG
Contingency Account for the purpose of purchasing the Heritage Parking
Lot from the San Bernardino Economic Development Council.
Contact person:
Ken Henderson
Phone:
5065
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
1
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
$80,000
Source: (Acct. No.)
121-544-57735
(Acct. Description)
CDBG contingency Account
Finance: (~ tj f\.Y----
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No.
$-1
CIT ., OF SAN BERNARDI' n - REQUE T FOR COUNCIL ACt IN
STAFF REPORT
At the September 19, 1988 meeting of the Mayor and Common
Council, staff was directed to retain a structural engineer to
study the Miles victorian House with respect to its possible
relocation, and to explore the possibility of purchasing the
Heritage House parking lot. Staff retained ASL Consulting
Engineers (for $1,000) to complete the review of the Miles
House. The report submitted by th~ engineer is attached to
this staff report and includes a summary describing the condi-
tion of the areas reviewed, problems, concerns, and specific
recommendations. It is clear there is a significant
possibility the house could be irreparably damaged if moved to
another location.
During the September 19, 1988 meeting of the Mayor and Common
Council, staff submitted five (5) alternatives relating to the
possible resolution of the Miles victorian situation. Included
in each alternative was the purchase of the Heritage House
parking lot for purposes of retaining the lot for use by
Heritage House patrons and as a potential site and parking area
for the Miles victorian House. If the Heritage House parking
lot was to be sold by the San Bernardino Economic Development
Council (SBEDC), the City could not ensure the continued use of
the lot as a parking facility.
Staff has identified funds necessary to purchase the Heritage
parking lot from SBEDC. By purchasing the lot, the City can
ensure the continued use and enjoyment by the community of the
Heritage House. The parking lot is also a potential site for
the relocation of the Miles House if the Community College
District does not allow the house to remain at its current site
(see attached memorandum from Councilman Maudsley to the
Community College District Board of Trustees).
On Thursday, October 13, 1988, the District met and considered
awarding a bid for the demolition and/or removal of the Miles
House. As a result of the presentation of the attached memo-
randum by Councilman Maudsley, the District deferred action on
this matter and established a committee to meet and confer with
City officials.
The reason this matter was placed on the supplemental agenda of
the Mayor and Common Council is that the regular agenda dead-'
line for the October 24, 1988 meeting was October 12, 1988 at
10:00 a.m. The Community College District Board of Trustees
did not meet until 5:00 p.m., on October 13, 1988. In order to
comply with Council direction given (to report back in thirty
(30) days) at the September 19, 1988 meeting, this matter was
placed on the supplemental agenda of the meeting scheduled for
October 24, 1988.
10/19/88
75-0264
staff Report/Miles Victorian House continued
October 19, 1988
Page -2-
I recommend adoption of the form motion.
~.
Kenneth J. H nderson
Director of Communit Development
KJH/lab/1180
10/19/88
~
~
r'
~J
A~L Consuning Engineers
2540 Red Hili Avenue, Suite C
Santa Ana. California 92705.5542
(714) 250-5525
R ~ f'2 0 \\ f7 '":." "0..
LS ~ L.5 '..:-' i~S ,f\,
, ; II
IiI j'
lX:T 3 1988 ilW
PRINCIPALS
William D. LewI.
P,e,ident
Zareh G. AaIourlan
$eniOl Vice PrNicIenI
Dougla. J. Reintwt
Vice P,elidenl
Robert H. Rei,*,
Vice P,elidenl
Thomas N. O'laughDn
Vice P,elidenl
Paui R. Gilmore
WilHam E. Bennett
Shahnawaz Ahmad
Pamela J. Steinhart
Dale E. Wah
ASSOCIATES
Terry l. Kerger
RETIRED
Frank E. Alderman
Founde,
Frank M. Swift
September 28, 1988
Nr. Nestor Nazario
Ci ty of San Bernadino
COl1l1lunity Development Department
300 North · D' Street
San Bernadino, C3liforni392418
Re: Residential Building
439 Eighth Street
San Bernadino, California
Dear Hr. Nazario,
On Wednesday, September 28, a visual structural observation was made of the above
referenced structure. The following is noted indicative of the north half of the
residenoe which is the original construction. It is our understanding that this
portion is to be relocated to another site to be used as an office space while the
southern half is intended to be demolished.
Structural Systems
Sloping Roof ........ . . . . . .. Standard camposi tion Shingles over wood
shingles over 1x slats supported by
conventional wood framing supported by
perimeter and interior stud walls.
Flat Roof . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Roofing over 6" nominal decking supported by
conventional wood framing supported by
perimeter and interior stud walls.
Second Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 6" nominal decking supported by conventional
wood framing supported by perimeter and
interior stud walls.
First Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Hardwood flooring over 6" nominal deoking
supported by conventional wood framing
supported by perimeter and interior stud
walls. Beams at this level are supported by
posts to foundations.
Office locations:
Arcadia - Corporate Office
(818) 447-4494
FAX (818) 447-4543
Santa Ana
(714) 250-5525
FAX (714) 250.5592
Palm Springs
(619) 320.4220
FAX (619) 320.3580
Rancho Cucamonga
(714) 989.8983
FAX (714) 944-9766
Camarillo
(805) 388.2344
FAX (805) 388.3082
4/-' ~:"\t
~ OUR ~
~ 40TH ~
~ YEAR ~
~ Iff
~~
r.
~;J
t::;
~:
Nr. Nestor Nazario
City of San Bernadino
Page 2
September 28, 1988
Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2x studs with interior plaster on wood lath
and exterior wood siding. "alls at first
level are supported by beams which are
supported by posts to foundations.
Concrete continuous footings beneath
perimeter walls and concrete isolated
footings beneath posts.
Perimeter .a11s. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Site Observations
Item 1
Observation
Roof shingles appear to be properly positioned. Edge flashing appears
to be properly made. No distress at eaves is noted.
Conclusion I Recommendations
No structural distress noted. No remedial repairs necessary.
Item 2
Observation
Residence exterior exhibits no significant distress.
Conclusion I Recommendations
No structural distress noted. No remedial repairs necessary.
Item 3
Observation
Masonry Chimneys exhibit no distress from the foundations to the roof.
Above the roof, chimneys are laterally braced by steel angle framing.
Capacity of framing is Questionable. East Chimney is cracking and is
losing mortar from the joints.
Conclusion I Recommendations
Chimneys are considered unstable. If structure is to be moved, it is
reconmended that chimneys be demolished.
Qj
("I
.}i
Hr. Nestor Nazario
City of San Bernadino
Page 3
September 28, 1988
ItetD 4
Observation
Suspended porch at residence entrance exhibit no distress. Oeck is
securely nailed to supporting joists. Joists are securely attached to
supporting framing. Joists beneath porch exhibit no signs of distress.
One beam which supports the porch joists and an exterior wall exhibits
termite damage. Wood columns which support the low roof exhibit some
termite damage at their bases at the porch elevation.
Conclusion I RecOfJlllendations
No structural distress noted with the exception of the termite damage.
Damaged beam and column should be replaced or strengthened. Extent of
termite damage to colurms and beams not noted should be investigated.
Item 5
Observation
No significant foundation settlement is noted. floors are essentially
level with the exception of the southeast second floor room. In this
case, floor slopes dOln at south end of room. floor at room below is
level.
Conclusion I Recommendations
Existing foundations are considered adequate. Floor movement is
anticipated to be due to termite activity. An in-depth investigation
in order to determine the extent of termite damage is reconmended.
Item 6
Observation
Concrete foundations visible to view show no distress.
Conclusion I Recommendations
No structural distress noted. No remedial repairs necessary.
Item 1
Observation
Sidewalks around buildings exhibit some random hairline cracks. No
vertical offsets at cracks or at joints have occurred. Curb at front of
residence near street is leaning. Soils appear essentially stable.
Conclusion I Recommendations
No significant structural distress noted. No remedial repairs
necessary.
(::~
--I
,--,"
tir. Nestor Nazario
City of San Bernadino
t .-:1
....,. :
Page 4
September 28~ 1988
Item B
Observation
Water staining is noted in the attic area beneath the roof and at the
ceiling above the porch. Some rotting is noted. No movement or distress
is noted wi thin the attic area.
Conclusion I Recommendations
Rotted areas should be repaired or replaced. Roofing at flat roof areas
is probably defective. Re-roofing of the flat roof is reconmended.
Observation
Interior plaster finish is cracked at the following locations:
FLOOR UNIT NO. ROOM CRACK TYPE
1 1 North Cracks radiate from the upper
corners of the north window
opening. Walls ei ther side of
the window opening are
significantly cracked.
Cracks radiate from the upper
corners of the northwest door
opening. Ceiling is cracked in
the north-south direction
roughly in line wi th west
exterior wall of the north room.
Plaster finish is separating
from the structure above at the
north-south crack.
No significant cracks noted.
Diagonal cracks are noted in the
south wall. Ceiling is cracked
in the north-south direction
roughly in line with east
exterior wall of the north room.
Hairline cracks are noted in the
ceiling.
No significant cracks noted.
Cracks are noted radiating from
the corners of the west window.
Diagonal cracks are noted in the
south wall.
No significant distress noted.
Item 9
1
1
South
1
1
2
2
North
South
2
3
North
2
2
3
4
South
North
2
4
South
1 and 2
Conmon Area
c' ~'J'"
\;,,;*
(~. ,
\2,:.
Hr. Nestor Nazario
City of San Bernadino
Page 5
September 28, 1988
Conclusion I RecOIII1Iendations
Cracks noted above are considered structural due to their detrimental
effect on the lateral resisting system of the structure as a whole.
When the structure is relocated, additional cracking is anticipated.
Remedial measures should be made after the structure is relocated.
Item 10
Observation
Doors typically bind or touch the jambs at the head opposite the
hinges. No set pattern is noticed which would suggest racking of the
structure. Hovement noticed is slight.
Conclusion I Recolllllendat10ns
No significant structural distress noted. No remedial repairs
necessary.
Item 11
Observation
Stair stringers and tread exhibit no distress. Stairs are solid.
Conclusion I Recommendations
No structural distress noted. No remedial repairs necessary.
Item 12
Observation
At the second floor east rooms, substantial termite damage of the
flooring is noted. At the second floor southwest rooll\, floor is covered
with linoleum but warping of wood flooring is noted. Termite damage is
suspected. In both instances, flooring is soft.
Conclusion I Recommendations
Structural capacity of flooring is questioned. In addition, the
termite damage to supporting structural members is questioned. An in
depth investigation is recommended. Substantial replacement of
structural framing may be required.
(:. .
~y
\ . .
. .
Hr. Nestor Nazario
City of San Bernadino
Page 6
September 28, 1988
SUHMARY
As previously stated, an investigation has been made of the north half of this
structure only. It is our understanding that this portion is to be relocated to
another site lIlhile the south portion is to be demolished. In addition, after
relocation, the north half is anticipated to be used for office space.
Several items of concern are as noted above. The most significant item is the
termite infestation and its effect on the structure. As a minimum. it is anticipated
that the floor system at the second floor need be replaced. However, it is quite
possible that the supporting joists, beams and walls are also damaged. An in-depth
investigation of these members presently hidden from view is recoll11lended.
Another item of concern is the cracking presently noted in the lIlall and ceiling
finishes. These finishes are the principle lateral resisting system for the
structure. During the relocation of the residence, it is anticipated that these
brittle finishes will exhibit additional damage. Remedial measures are suggested to
be made after the move.
Masonry chimneys are considered unstable above the roof line. Since the structure
is to be relocated, is is suggested that the Chimneys be abandoned and demolished.
Framing and finishes which are rotted should be strengthened or replaced.
A concern not noted above is the anticipated occupancy of the structure. From the
structural standpoint, additional framing may be required in order to comply with
the higher floor loading requirements specified by Code. From the occupancy
standpoint, additional exits and fire separations may be required dependent upon
the relocation site.
Overall, it appears that the structure will survive the relocation if done with
care, however. remedial measures will be necessary in order to correct the present
and anticipated deficiencies.
Only those items noted above have been reviewed.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
~~~
Sam S. Vacek
/lh
t ,"'
\. ~ -
~~
~.
C I T Y 0 F SAN B ERN A R DIN 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
8810-1306
TO: Community College District Board of Trustees
FROM: Councilman Michael Maudsley
Fourth Ward
SUBJECT: MILES VICTORIAN HOUSE
DATE: October 13, 1988
COPIES: Mayor Wilcox; Common Council; Acting City
Administrator; Director of Building and Safety;
Director of Planning; Director of Community
Development; Director of International and Cultural
Affairs;; File
-
-------------------------------------------------------------
The situation regarding the potential demise of the Miles
Victorian House has been well chronicled by the Sun News-
paper. As you know, the Mayor and Common Council of the City
of San Bernardino took an action directing the Director of
Community Development to retain a structural engineer and to
identify funds for the possible purchase of the Heritage
House parking lot. The structural engineering report has
been submitted and the Community Development Department of
the City has identified a potential source of funding to
purchase the Heritage House parking lot, contingent upon the
action taken by the District Board of Trustees.
In view of the fact the District is to award today a bid for
the removal and/or demolition of the Miles Victorian House, I
am requesting, on behalf of the City, and based upon the
report rendered by ASL Consulting Engineers, that the Dis-
trict allow the house to remain at its present site, and that
the addition to the house and the structure in the rear of
the house be demolished and the space realized be used by the
District for parking. There is a very significant possib-
ility that moving the house could irreparably damage the
structure, resulting in the loss of a significant part of San
Bernardino's history.
While reorganizing the money invested in the District's
office renovation project, the City believes that by
realizing additional parking spaces (approximately 13) and
entering into a reciprocal parking agreement with the City,
the District would have at its daily disposal the vast
majority of the 82 or 84 parking spaces that would be
available. Furthermore, the District, the private owner of
the Miles House and the City could enter into a lease
(~} C'.
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM: 8810-1306
MILES VICTORIAN HOUSE
October 13, 1988
Page 2
agreement whereby the private owner of the Miles House would
be required to meet certain conditions, covenants and
restrictions ensuring the use and enjoyment of the restored
house by the general public. The private party would acquire
the appropriate insurance to protect the City and the
District's interests and hold harmless bot~ public agencies.
Without the cooperation of the District, the Director of
Community Development advises me it would be difficult to
recommend to the Mayor and Common Council, the purchase of
the Heritage House parking lot for $80,000 without a recipro-
cal parking agreement.
In summary, I believe it is in the best interest of the
District and the City to restore the Miles House at its
current site. To risk the destruction of this home for the
construction of a parking lot is symptomatic of the manner in
which San Bernardino has traditionally gone about attempting,
but never succeeding, in restoring its points of historical
interest. I urge you to give this matter the attention and
consideration it deserves.
",. . \ " r
1\ . . l .'
I I \ '~." ,. ...
,~~(~l \ ~ .(.\.l'\. ~W
Councilman M chael Ma dsley
Fourth Ward
MM/KJH/lab