HomeMy WebLinkAbout32-Building and Safety
tL~
l _
CITY OF SAN BERt&RDIN~EQUEST pQ. COUNCIL ACTION
From:
Larry E. Reed, DirectoREC"O...; AOMINStOf4at:
Building and Safety
1389 OCT 19 PM 12: 5S
Paul & Dulcinea Perea's
appeal the order of the
Board of Building Commission-
ers to demolish residence at
1040 1/2 W Baseline
. Dept:
Date:
October 18, 1989
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
Set for Public Hearing on September 6, 1989.
(Applicant had waived notice of public hearing and has asked to have
appeal placed on the Council's supplemental agenda for September 6.)
Council returned item to Board of Building Commissioners to hear new
evidence.
Perea's appeal was reheard by the Board of Building Commissioner's on
October 13, 1989.
Recommended motion:
That the appeal of Paul and Dulcinea Perea to recind the order of the
Board of Building Commissioners, requiring that a demolition permit be
obtained and demolition be accomplished within sixty (60) days, including
pay for all current and future City costs be denied.
cc: Marshall JUlian, City Adminstrator '
Larry E. Reed
Contact person:
Staff Report
Supporting data attached:
Ek/
Signature
Phone:
6th Ward (V. Pope-Ludlam)
Ward:
384-5274
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.) .
(Acct. DescriPtion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No._ 3~ _
1"""""
'-' "-'
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
BACKGROUND:
The following is an outline of essential facts pertaining to the
background.
1. 2/2/89 Code Enforcement inspected the property in response to
a call from the Police Department. The property was found to
be severely burned, with plywood nailed over the doors and
windows, which did not meet the F.H.A. board-up requirements.
The front entry area was filled with boxes which made the
dwelling appear as it if were being used for storage. Code
Officer renailed some loose sheets of plywood and posted the
property with unsafe warning signs.
2. 2/7/89 File was created and ten (10) day notice was given to
owners to board and secure the property; there was no response.
3.
2/15/89 Reinspection showed the
loose sheets of plywood. Code
property.
property to be open with
Officer again resecured the
4. The following are dates of reinspection by the Code Enforcement
department:
3/16/89
4/11/89
5/16/89
6/26/89
7/24/89
8/14/89
9/18/89
5. Property was scheduled before the Board of Building Commission-
ers on August 4, 1989 to obtain an order for the owner to
demolish the building (see BBC Minutes -Exhibit "A").
6. Owner appealed to City Council. Heard before city council on
September 6, 1989. Council referred case back to Board of
Building Commissioners to hear new evidence (Council minutes
Exhibit "B").
7. Board of Building Commissioners reheard case on October 13,
1989, and readopted the original motion requiring demolition
(BBC minutes for October 13, 1989).
COUNCIL:CA.STAFF-8
CA.STAFF-8
Page 1
10/18/89
75-0264
c
,"...."
....,)
E 'f- r-f I 63 (T
"I}"
BBCMlNUTES8-89
Page 2
Commissioner Miller asked if there was anyone present to
behalf of the subject properties. There being no one
Commissioners briefly discussed subject properties.
testify on
to testify,
Commissioner Westwood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hunt, to
uphold the Staff's recommendation.
Roll call was taken with the motion being unanimously carried.
Motion carried.
ITEM NO.7:
1040 1/2 W. Baseline
/ CASE NO. 89-3367
PRESENTED BY:
Mark Young
Mark Young presented photographs, slides and background information for
the Board's review.
Staff's recommendation is that demolition permits be obtained by the
owner within ten (10) days and demolition be accomplished within sixty
(60) days and to incur all current and future costs in the form of a
lien on the property or a personal obligation of the owner(s).
CURRENT COSTS:
$577.50
Commissioner Miller asked if there was anyone present to testify on
behalf of the subject properties. Mr. Paul Perea was present to
· testify. He indicated he had hoped to work on Monday's and weekends to
refurbish the house for his daughter to occupy. He indicated that he
was unawar~ that the building could not be rehabilitated.
Mark Young noted that the residence was more than 50% damaged by fire,
therefore, was not capable of being rehabilitated, in addition to being
subject to a zoning change. Mr. Perea agreed to obtain the required
permits and arrange for the demolition within the sixty (60) days
required.
Commissioner Gonzales made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ponder,
to uphold the Staff's recommendation.
Roll call was taken with the motion being unanimously carried.
Motion carried.
-
--
I~
~
,..."It,
"-"
, I \ \
~xH(8(1 ~
\^i /I Ak
,~--
.
APPEAL - BOARD OF BUI~IMGCOMKISSIONERS - ABATEMENT OF
PUBLIC NUISANCE 1040 112-"W~8ASELINE STREET
In a memorandum dated August 4, 1989, Larry Reed, Clerk of
the Board of Building Commissioners, provided copies of Order No.
1305 from the Board of Building Commissioners authorizing the
abatement of a public nuisance located at 1040 1/2 W. Baseline
Street. (26 & S-2)
In a letter dated September 1, 1989, Pamela Perea, 1239 N.
ilK" Street, San Bernardino, Ca. 92411, on behalf of Paul and
Dulcinea Perea, 1077 W. 15th Street, San Bernardino, CA 92411,
appealed the Board of Building Commission's decision to demolish
property located at 1040 1/2 W. Baseline Street based on the
following reasons: 1) The house was her primary residence
before the fire; 2) The house was not insured at the time of thj.
fire, and she was unable to rehabilitate it within the 180 days
3) The house was quitclaimed to Pamela Perea in August, 1989
and 4) Pamela Perea is presently in a position to rehabilitat]
the house.
In a memorandum dated August 31, 1989, Patricia Zimmerman
Deputy City Attorney, stated that according to San Bernardin
Municipal Code Section 19.66.020 the building located at 1040 1/~
W. Baseline Street has exceeded its useful life of twenty years.
It would appear that the building could be rehabilitated to meet
present zoning/use requirements versus being demolished.
In a memorandum dated August 21, 1989, Larry Reed, Director
of Building and Safety, provided an outline of facts pertaining
to the Board of Building Commissioner I s findings on property
located at 1040 1/2 W. Baseline Street.
The Director of Building and Safety stated that' after
reviewing the S.B. Municipal Code and ~niform Building Code, the
use of the building cannot be reestablished as a single family
residence. He further stated that the building does not need to
be demolished, but that the building could be allowed to be
upgraded to meet commercial standards for the establishment of a
legal use, either as a retail or an office use.
Pamela Perea, daughter of Paul and Dulcinea Perea, answered
questions regarding whether she has the resources to fix the
building. She stated that she has applied for a ,loan and is
waiting on approval.
City Attorney Penman explained
circumstances as to why the Perea I s
repairs to the building.
..~j~
~}NP~;---
that there were extenuating
have not been able to make
19
9/6/89
1;/
,.<,
<~
<,-"
","\Y ('lER~;
RECE\\'t.\!<-\1 "
'89 OCl 13 p" :32
REC'fJ.... AfDMJH. OFF.
t989 OCT I 7 AM 8 i 7
1077 W.15th Street
San Bernardino, CA
92411
October 13, 1989
Honorable Mayor & Members of City Council
300 N. "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Dear Mayor & Council:
I wish to appeal the decision of the Board of Building
Commissioners on October 13, 1989, relating to my partially
burned house at 1040~ W. Baseline Avenue.
Sincerely,
,._, 1'--\
C~mLfLCL 3d (:iL^,-2~"~'
Pamela S. Perea
G-~~ ~.-/
Dulcinea Perea
cc: City Administrator
City Attorney
Community Development
Building & Safety
Board of Bldg. Commissioners