HomeMy WebLinkAbout17- Planning 7 Buil i
CITY OF SAN BERN* _ADINO - REQUEST F%,R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Al Boughey, Director Subject: 588 Western
(see attachements)
Dept: Planning & Building Services
_ Appeal to the Mayor and Common Council of the
.D�te:Urr�ecmeber 17, 1992 Board of Building Commissioners Order X61711,
Meeting of August 7 1992
'Synops&6 Previous Council action:
No previous Council action
Recommended motion:
That the Mayor and Common council deny the appeal and accept staff recommendation as follows:
(a) A Public Nuisance existed at the time of inspection, and that a subsequent fire
at this location caused the structure to become dangerous as determined by the
Building Inspector;
(b) The owner(s) is to pay all current costs associated with emergency abatement action
taken against the property, and if unpaid shall become a lien on said property and
the personal obligation of the owner(s) . The cost incurred , the City for abatement
proceedings against the property was $7,433.00. This amoun s ould be paid to the
City Clerk's Office within thirty (30 ays o $ ty C un it Action.
ture
Al Bou ector
Contact person:_ Al Boughey, Director Phone:
Supporting data attached: Background, supporting documents. Ward: 1
staff response N/A
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262 n .__�_ �__-- .�_ /�7
NEW
0
ATTACHMENTS AND INDEX
Attachment Page(s)
Subject (Exhibit A) 1
Staff response 2
Background summary 3 - 7
Building Division Report 8
Fire Department Report 9 - 11
Police Department Report 12 - 14
Copies of the SBMC 15 - 19
Requisition form 20
Order No# 1711 21 - 25
Correspondence received from prop owner 26 - 33
588 WESTERN
(Exhibit A)
SUBJECT (Attachement)
On May 7 , 1992 a fire at this location warranted emergency
abatement. The property was demolished and the matter set before
the Board of Building Commissioners for July 10, 1992 . The matter
was continued until the meeting of August 7 , 1992 .
On August 7 , 1992 , the Board of Building Commissioners accepted
Staff's Recommendation as follows:
(A) A public nuisance existed at the time of inspection, and
that a subsequent fire at this location caused the structure
to become dangerous as determined by the building inspector;
(B) The owner is to pay all current costs associated with
emergency abatement action taken against the property, and if
unpaid shall become a lien on said property and the personal
obligation of the owner(s)
REQUEST
The property owner, Ms. Cynthia Robles has appealed the Board of
Building Commissioners order (#1711) , to the Mayor and Common
Council.
0
STAFF RESPONSE
Introduction:
On Friday, August 7, 1992 , the Board of Building Commissioners
passed Order # 1711, declaring 588 WESTERN a public nuisance and
'upholding the action taken by staff to abate this nuisance under
y
emergency abatement proceedings.
Ms. Robles, one of the property owners of this fire damaged single
family residence, questioned the ordinances which addressed
emergency abatement action. She was concerned her procedural due
process had been denied as no notice was received prior to the
demolition of the property.
These allegations can be summarized as follows:
Procedural Due Process
Ms. Robles owned a vacant and severely vandalized single family
residence at 588 WESTERN. This structure was subsequently destroyed
in a fire under suspicious circumstances, (San Bernardino Police
Department Case #92-21116) . Although the property was listed for
sale with a local realtor, it remained easily accessible to
transients and unmaintained.
By Ms. Robles own admittance, neither she nor her realtor inspected
the property on a regular basis. The realtor learned of the fire
only after an unidentified caller told him. Although Ms. Robles was
advised, she failed to make a site visit to check the extent of the
damage or to secure it from unlawful entry until twenty-five (25)
days later.
The responsibility of securing it from unlawful entry and
preventing a potentially hazardous situation was placed upon the
city when the property owners failed to act. The property was
posted as required in the San Bernardino Municipal Code, Section
15.28. 140 (1) . In addition, as outlined in Section 15.28.1501 a
notice together with the cost incurred and the property owners
right to appeal was mailed via certified letter to all vested
owners of record as shown in the title report obtained by the city.
The chronology of events clearly show the City acted in accordance
with the code, and summarily abated the nuisance after it was
determined to be an immediate health and safety hazard and
potentially injurious to the public.
-2 -
588 WESTERN
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1992
Complaint received from the Public Services Department regarding an
Unsecured single family residence with trash, debris, and graffiti.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1992
Code Compliance Officer Al Williams made a site inspection. His
field observation report noted the following conditions:
A vacant unsecured residential unit located between two
occupied dwelling units in a residential zone;
The flooring in the house was noted to be weak with holes in
several areas;
Evidence of transients continually occupying the dwelling
unit; bedding material found in several rooms inside the
structure;
A prostitute was found servicing a client on the floor in what
appeared to be the dining room area;
Trash and debris both inside and outside the dwelling and the
garage; this included beer cans, food items; misc. trash,
clothing, paper, etc. ;
Heavy graffiti both inside and outside the structure and
detached garage;
Overgrown vegetation alongside the house and garage;
unmaintained landscaping to the front of the house;
A dilapidated garage with an inoperable vehicle protruding out
of the doorway;
The officer returned to the office and prepared a ten day
correction notice for mailing to the property owner of record as
required in the San Bernardino Municipal Code, Section 15.28 . 030.
3
0
Page -2-
588 Western
THURSDAY, MAY 7, 1992
The Fire Department responded to a fire at this location at
approximately 4 : 45 AM, (Incident #92-1014) . As stated in their
report, "Vacant structure had been used by transients. Fully
'involved upon arrivall'. The cause was under investigation as
"suspicious".
The Fire Department dispatcher contacted the Code Compliance
Division at approximately 8: 00 A.M. and requested abatement action.
The Building Department was routed to the scene for a fire damage
assessment report. Senior Inspector, Jack Master completed the
inspection.
His report dated 5/7/92 stated, "a total loss with portions of the
bearing walls completely burned and many rafters burnt beyond
normal structural limitations". His notes stated, "House should be
demolished immediately. Foundations is inadequate to rebuild on,
garage and shed on rear of property are both delapidated and should
be demolished at the same time as the house.,,
FRIDAY, MAY 8, 1992
The first notice prepared by A.L. Williams was canceled and not
mailed as the subsequent fire compounded the violations at this
location. Urgent abatement was ordered as outlined in the San
Bernardino Municipal Code, Sections 8. 30. 120 and 15. 28 . 150.
Requisition #181-356 was submitted to the Purchasing Department
requesting urgent action on a demolition project. This action for
summary abatement was based upon the immediately dangerous and
hazardous conditions the structure posed to public health and
safety. HUNTS WRECKING COMPANY obtained the necessary permits and
demolished the structure to Purchasing Department specifications.
During the month of May, a title report was ordered and research
was done on the property. The following notes were recorded in the
file.
BOYD REALTORS obtained the listing for this vacant house
February 8, 1992.
Southern Ca. Gas disconnected service April 1992
Southern Ca. Edison disconnected service April 1992.
Water service was disconnected April 1992 .
14
Page -3-
588 Westerm
WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 1992
The contractor's invoice was received in the Code Compliance
Division. Code Compliance Officer A.L. Williams was routed to the
site to verify completion of the project.
FRIDAY, MAY 29, 1992
All supporting documentation and the approved invoice were
forwarded to the clerical staff for processing. A notice of action
taken to include a statement of costs was being prepared for
mailing to all vested owners of record as shown in the title
report. This matter was set before the Board of Building
Commissioners for July 10, 1992 .
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1992
Senior Code Compliance Officer, Bonnie Garcia received a call from
Ms. Cynthia Robles, one of the property owners of record. Ms.
Robles stated she lived in Moreno Valley and her realtor had
advised her approximately three weeks prior that a fire had
occurred at 588 Western. He was unable to tell her the extent of
the damage as he had received the information from an unidentified
person over the phone and he had not inspected the property. Ms.
Robles further stated she had not made an inspection of her
property until Thursday May 28, 1992 at which time she discovered
the structure had been demolished and the property cleaned.
Ms. Robles was advised the fire had completely destroyed the
structure. The building inspector had recommended summary abatement
based upon the extent of the damage and the danger it posed. The
San Bernardino Municipal Code required a statement of costs be
included with the notice of action, therefore it could not be sent
until the project was completed and the invoice approved. She was
advised a notice of action taken and statement of costs was being
prepared for mailing to all vested owners.
She further requested and was provided with the incident number and
name of the Fire Department investigator.
MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1992
Certified letters were mailed to the property owners of record, Mr.
Jack Ramirez, Mrs. Cynthia Robles and Mr. George Ramirez,
(certified mail 0905431987 and P905431988) .
Page -4-
588 Western
MONDAY, JUNE 22, 1992
A letter of protest was received from Ms. Cynthia Robles.
FRIDAY, JULY 10, 1992
The Board of Building Commissioners continued this item until
Friday, August 7, 1992 .
FRIDAY, AUGUST 7, 1992
Ms. Robles presented her case before the Board of Building
Commissioners. She provided copies of letters she had written to
Councilman Hernandez, former Facilities Management Director, Wayne
Overstreet and the City Clerk's office. Ms. Robles was upset
because the city had initiated emergency abatement action against
her property and she had not been advised until after the buildings
were demolished. She further stated she had obtained proposals from
several demolition contractors which were lower than the costs
incurred by the city. She asked the Board for relief of all costs
based upon emergency demolition being completed without her
knowledge.
Senior Code Compliance Officer, Bonnie Garcia, presented her
evidence before the board. She provided photographs taken in April
by Public Services, photographs taken May 6, 1992 by the Code
Compliance Division and reports prepared by the Fire Department and
Building Division. She explained urgent public nuisances as
defined in the San Bernardino Municipal Code, (Section 8. 30. 010 and
15. 28. 150) ) and the notification procedure outlined in Section
15.28 . 140. She offered as evidence the immediate life threatening
hazards noted by the building inspector, the fact that transients
had continually occupied the structure as documented by three
agencies, (Public Services, Code Compliance and the Fire
Department) and the fact that the structure was located in a
residential neighborhood.
Copies of Mrs. Robles' letters were submitted as evidence and
contradictory statements relative to the abatement action taken
were discussed.
In her letter to Facilities Management, (dated June 10, 1992) she
claimed her realtor informed her May 20, 1992 a fire had occurred
at her property and she immediately called the Fire Department and
requested a fire report.
6
Page -5-
588 Western
In her letter to Councilman Hernandez, (dated June 19, 1992) she
stated her realtor informed her May 13, 1992 a fire had occurred at
her property and May 14 , 1992 she called the Fire Department and
requested a copy of the fire report. She did not mail the required
fee until May 20, 1992 .
In both letters, she clearly indicated the realtor advised her of
the fire but neither of them went to inspect the fire damage or to
secure it from unlawful entry. Ms. Robles did not go to the site
until Thursdav, May 28, 1992 , twenty five (25) days after the
original fire.
The Board examined all the evidence and accepted staffis
recommendation to declare the property a public and incur the
costs.
Prepared by: Debra Daniel, Code Compliance Supervisor
for Al Boughey, Director of Planning & Bldg Services
Attachements: Letter of Appeal to Mayor and Common Council
Order of the Board of Building Commissioners 41711
Staff Response
Background summary
Building Division Report
Fire Department Report
Police Department Report
Copies of the SBMC
Requisition form
Correspondence from property owner
7
Fire Damage Report
Location: l�� �/�J � Dote of Fire:
Cause: —
Reported By: Date:
Extent of Damage: LQ11� -t-
Comments: t ZQ
Estimated Valuation:
Plans Required �(
Bldg. Elect. Inspector)
y
Permits Required /
Plbg. ® Mech. Date
San City Fig.- wit pasp=me and PZOr T moo.,} Nye
cS'�tc-c1
�� ?roc Doti
TTA;;�vajo,
S s g z _
% o %
S B$ Rio, t�.�<< _ ^ s
SBFD e
eic MAYO 7 1992 e
r
�c3
t 411
SZ2
5
u 1
`L P
` -.ice--"••
1 1 1
a z
:r
C=xditiCm lEld7 type 'ng►e-5var-::,-�ooca
T�rz"V%r— 10=Vanr-y GG-n�'
Sit=tim
wscue
�CSt�e Mt o�.s� o n o c-{•h
_ � clearGu �.1
Frequer=Z Traffic c=rt=nl 6 Air Truck Pall m
.. Name r, �� F7dLSC�rI
Relief Rea amass
cas �nY Foos and mink Li
involves•T-o ` Isize � C�e c C3,
��/�7zsies
lass CYO C�
tc=�
Ouse �.c> er = v e��- c�CL, ,C^
•v-^ Pc� ^= c �o�.r.c�. O r�� 1 3Yct�' <?�p o 3 u.c-ti. 1 r.e.. �o P c-Ctc.L-t
• �rP
1
2
..ed In this report are STATE OF CALIFORNIA
,r the sole use a the OFFICE OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL
•'Ire Marshal. Estimations INCIDENT NO.
.evaluations made herein repro- FIRE INCIDENT REPORT Sq�
sent '•most likely' and ••most
probable" cause and effect. Any
representation as to the validity or
accuracy Of reported conditions DEL Conn
outside the State Fire Marshal's CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO I ❑ 2
office• is neither Intended nor FIRE DEPARTMENT
Implied. (DE PAR THE NTAL USEI
I LOCATION OF INCIDENT SP/APT NO. ALARM
SOURCE T E L A J7 RADIO I
S vERBAL DTHER
2 OCCUPANT/PATIENT a0X
ADDRESS ZIP SP/APT 1
L 2
OWNER NAME ADDRESS
3 CITY 21P
FDZ
3
MANAGER NAME ADDRESS CITY
4 ZIP TELEPHONE N0.
4
A. INFORMATION (PAGE 17)
[;IRE DEPT ID INCIDENT N0. EXPOSURE N0. TIME 4JNT'1 DAY YEAR DAY COUNTY DIST OUT OF JURISDICTION
1
6 9 5 O O Q CODE OF FIRE CITY 1
CHECK IF VES
B. PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION ( PAGE 19) C. PROPERTY TYPE (PAGE 41 )
CODE TrPE OF INCIDENT CONSTR RODATE PROPER-Y MANAGEMENT
1 PRE T2 ST TI -YT FED STATE COUNTY CITY DISTRICT FOREIGN OTHER
3 a c_ 6 T 1
CODE PROPERTY CL SSIF ICA'ION (C014PLEX; B
2 CODE STRUCTURE, 9UILDING OR VEHICLE - PROPERTY TYPE BUILDING
NO. 3708 IE3
�i� 6__ _5 - F e>12 C zj po
3 Z
CODC PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION IINDIVIDUA;. STRUCTURE, BUILDING OR VEHICLE - CONSTRUCTION TYPE
EXT WALL INT. WALL FLOOR - ROOF FIRE RATED 3
_ N/C COMB N/C COMp Nrc - C OMB YES NO
2 3 4 S 6 T B
D. EXTENT OF DAMAGE (PAGE 45) E. LOCATION & CAUSE (PAGE 49)
CODE EXTENT OF DAMAGE - FIRE CODE LEVEL OF ORIGIN
1 = v I
2 CODE EXTENT OF DAMAGE - SMOKE CODE SOURCE OF HEAT CAUSING IGNITION
Z
CODE EXTENT OF DAMAGE - WATER CODE FORM OF MEAT CAUSING IGNITION ry
3 /
ESTIMATED LOSS - PROPERTY - T
ESTIMATED LOSS - CONTENTS CODE ACT OR OMISSION CAUSING IGNITION
4 7 S C _ a
F. AREA. MATERIALS & SMOKE SPREAD (PAGE 631 G. SPREAD OF FIRE (PAGE 77) ��ty
CO
1 DE AREA OF ORIGIN CODE MAIN AVENUES FIRE SPREAD
/ C — Q C IS t
ECODEFORM TYPE OF MATERIAL FIRST IGNITED CODE TYPE MATERIAL CAUSING SPREAD
2 _
O
2
OF MATERIAL FIRST IGNITED CODE FORM MATERIAL CAUSING SPREAD
3 —r
5 3
CODE MAIN AVENUES SMOKE SPREAD
4
CODE ACT OR OMISSION CAUSING SPREAD
4
H. PROTECTION FACILITIES (PAGE 91 ) 1. PROTECTION FACILITIES (PAGE 97)
CODE SPRINKLERS - TYPE _ - ! CODE PRIVATE 91111IGAOE- TYPE
Z CODE SPRINKLERS - EFFECTIVENESs ) 1 CODE PRIVATE PRISAOE - EFFECTIVENESS
Z
CODE STANDPIPES - TYPE CODE SPECIAL HAZARD PROTECTION - TYPE
CODE STANDPIPES - EFFECTIVENESS nT CODE SPECIAL HAZARD PROTECTION - EFFECTIVENESS
4 -
- 4
CODE PORTABLE EXTINGUISHERS - TYPE CODE SIGNAL OR WARNING SYSTEM
c
TYPE CODE EFFECTIVENESS
S
CODE PORTABLE EXTINGUISHERS - EFFECTIVENESS CODE SIGNAL WARNING SYSTEM - MEANS OF ACTIVATION
6
6
CODE SIGNAL/WARNING SYSTEM - TYPE DETECTORS
J. MISCELLANEOUS (PAGE 109) 7
FIREFIGHTER CIVILIANS CODE WATC H04AN
1 NO. INJURED N0. OF DEATNS NO. INJURED NO. OF DEATHS CODE OTHER iACI CITIES
EFFECTIVENESS EFFECTIVENESS B
SFM FORM 60-1 SU9MITTED FOR EACH DEATH
Z (CHECK BOX IF YES)
...cvua IIV11-UHMAT1UN
osponse In
Mutual Aid In 4.9-:,,, 6.Condition
7.Weather Conditions
3.Mutual Aid Out 5.Police A C X
L. UNITS RESPONDING
1. UNIT RADIO NO.
2.DISPATCHED y � O V V C
3.ARRIVAL y
.10-8 and 10-19 V k P, S 1016 .3 O
5.TOTAL TIME O 5 3
6.PUMP TIME
7. RESPONSE TIME
M. EQUIPMENT
1.HOW EXTINGUISHED
2.TANK❑ 3.DRAFT 4.HYDRANT
5.HOSE USED BOOSTER 1" 11 12" 1
2/z" 3^
6.NO.LINES
7. FEET
I
8.LADDERS USED—NO 9.TOTAL FEET
sio d b a
10.SPECIAL EQUIPMENT
' G
N. PERSONNEL RESPONDING
NAME NAME
NAME NAME
zC_ y JS
3.
5
6
O. VEHICLE
1.TYPE MAKE MODEL YEAR
P. INSURANCE INFORMATION LICENSE NO. STATE
PROPERTY CONTENTS TOTAL AGENT
LOSS
ADDRESS
Q. REMARKS
SITUATION:
=-el —
MN C
S
IN CHARGE OTHER
/[ OFFICERS
REPORTING OFP'�CER RANK PLATOON APPROVE BY
FIRE 1.06-4 (Rev.889) C- - OE-RDw
+,5ER V.,ES
-1 R� -•, �.
,,,,:- * ,' ►` SAN BERNARDINO POLJCE DPARTMENT'
..� ._ �.. . c�r�o�+,a -�...._,...,_..�....
= 468 West 4th Street(P.O.Box 15M :°"'�''"•
- Ta� bfreoeir. _ _
..... __ San Bemardino.CA 92401(1141 383-5ML- 5x �� = -
—
•� ♦IYr
S. Na � • •
`ow` ---�
�a ver«r..M•. rar�i•c rwa u e•� w erw ,i _ is ooe it owe..,
K w.
- n wr•.a.r�N w w a t« river►
n.w..rw■uca.Ww a�. aau ay. aow aa•.rr a.w -
a�oe�M.r•oe 3•
---Rwtla --
sieir•e�dl.arawr� as area aAee, 3L o115F ice,:
a. cw a ar £
...
s u•... a UM a W IO a rn* a rrr
7-0 11L
arr A....
61.FlIEAt"(An li 111YEii1oAT10N l�11Y FACT= � 7 oil -4 Ie�leree a iw
Argi lfee4r_. - - .=_7 11ee1dd Ceeedet hom. - - - ... -� i
_ 2 area d Sewn 7 / wbm colm"d
= S b wee Cdler_ —- LT.! ae�.ee.w Neer*
- L Yews Ewrsi a .- �algeeLan mien
-
_ . AeYueret = a weeer Te1u - Q'f-Feuer+w over ollm- cr Is Seed eve 1�vd r Isnee/
=At
= 1 Edlwiee CeMeler = R 'wee edewe tare C f arrw rrer.a ter It 1Uw ie•Mlrn�
Kwkmftmvmbw
«.
64 ,-VlW
!low roftowc�
VALM - --•---- - 3
i11e1 aAK ww pry
rte• � a, .,-
erg
fl.rsw«•r hq«Ir - i
--
a1.VICIM
Teed Ykorr _ t - ---- ft aa1 11E - — -- Y cow ow wow weyw
at MeerrtaAlO - �.
ohm tm oea•wt
rrrrt�r
I R�
r•..e�EA.,a - - - -
y C •
eL1y1�01a. ye i0 Ma M f«rMMi a Ow el h�wr eY
,(/ �..c.�"-! L1?�7� _r•s t ere .avi��_7,
�rrrirrr ..
'POLICS DsPARTIINT,, CA0361 00 92-21116
BAN BERXARDIMO j CALIFORNIA PAGE 1
PC 451 ARSON CLASSIFICATION: RESIDENTIAL
RAMIREZ, JACK
I•D• INfTESTIGATION:
At approximately 1030 hours, Thursday, 05-07-92, I was dispatched to 588 N.
Western, in response to an Arson fire investigation. Upon arrival contact
was made wi .h Arson Fire Investigator AL RICE, of the San Bernardino City
Fire Department, who requested photographs of the scene. The request was
complied with. Black and white film was used. The film will be processed
and filed.
PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN:
1. Overall view exterior northwest side of residence.
2. Overall view exterior west side of residence.
3. Overall view exterior southwest side of residence.
4. Overall view exterior southeast side of residence.
5. Ovp►rall view exterior east side of residence.
6. Overall view exterior northeast side of residence.
7. Overall view of living room, looking east.
8. Overall view of living room, looking west.
9. Overall view of living room ceiling.
10. Overall view of family room, looking east.
11. Overall view of family room, looking west.
12. Overall view of_faKUY room ceiling.
13. Overall vi tchen, looking north.
14. Overall v
en, looking south.
15. Overall view of kitchen ceiling.
16. Overall view of kitchen floor.
17. Close-up view of doorway to family room and kitchen area.
F 24907/m -07-9 D BY: RECORDS USE ONLY
SBPD CR-2a
;.n
1 Z
x
"POI�IC� DXPARTMENT, CAO 3 i�_0 0 ® 92-21116
?
BAN B=RXMWXIIO, CALIFORNIA PAGE 2
PC 451 ARSON _CLASSIFICATION: RESIDENTIAL
RAMIREZ, JACK
PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN CONT'D:
18. Overall view northwest bedroom, looking east.
19. Overall view northwest bedroom, looking west.
20. Overall view northwest bedroom floor.
21. Close-up view of baseboard in northwest bedroom.
22. Close-up view of electrical box.
23. Close-up view of gas meter area.
TOKBOC/24907/mf 0 07-92
REVIEWED BY: RECORDS USE ONLY
SBPD CR-2a
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Commissioners and confirmation by the Mayor and Common
Council, shall be liens upon the respective lots or premises
subject to abatement. The City officer shall institute pro-
ceedings for hearing and determination of the charges to be
assessed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.68. (Ord-
MC-181, 7-6-82; Ord. 3039 (part), 1969; Ord. 3028 § 9,
1969.)
830.100 (Repealed by MC-460.)
ARTICLE H. URGENT PUBLIC NUISANCES
8.30.110 Definition.
An "Urgent public nuisance" means anything constituting
an immediate hazard to life or property as defined in Section
3479 of the Civil Code, Section 7004 of Chapter 70 of the
Uniform Building Code, 1967 Edition, Section 15.28.010 or
anything defined as a public nuisance by any other ordi-
nance of the City or law of the state or by any court of
competent jurisdiction and which should be summarily
abated. (Ord. 2973 § 1, 1969.)
830.120 Adoption of state statute.
Government Code Sections 38771 through 38773.5 are
adopted and shall be operative and effective in the City. The
(San Bernardino 9-85) 462
0 0
DANGEROUS BUILDINGS
sold after notice in any manner which the Director of Public
Services may determine to be reasonable; provided, that such
sale shall be made upon condition that the wreckage and debris
shall be removed and the lot cleaned. Any money or proceeds
from the sale of such building or structure and its materials shall
first be used to pay and/or reduce all costs incurred by the City
as set forth herinabove, and thereafter, any surplus of moneys _
remaining,if any,after the satisfaction of all of the costs,shall be t
�.:;...
_ distributed to the parties lawfully entitled thereto. (Ord. MC-344,
2-20-84; Ord. 3481 (part), 1975; Ord. 2291 § 6 (part), 1960.)
15.28.130 (Repealed by MC-177,7-6-82.)
15.28.140 Securing dangerous buildings from entry.
A. In addition to the procedures provided for abatement of
nuisance caused by dangerous and hazardous structures as
set forth in this chapter, the building official or his repre-
sentative is given summary power to secure from entry any
structure which in his discretion he determines to be im-
mediately dangerous or hazardous, or in any other manner
injurious to public health or safety. The building official
may secure such structures using methods at his discretion
to accomplish the purpose which are most appropriate under
the circumstances.The building official shall also post a sign
stating in effect "DANGER, DO NOT ENTER" upon the
structure in at least one conspicuous place, with the word
"DANGER" in letters at least one inch in height.
B. Any person removing such sign without the express written
consent of the City of San Bernardino Building Official is
guilty of a misdeameanor, which upon conviction thereof is
punishable in accordance with the provisions of Section
1.12.010 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code.
C. The building official shall, immediately after such action,
mail a notice to the owners of the real property upon which j..
the structure is located. Notice shall be mailed to the
address as ascertained from title company records, the latest
assessment role of the County Assessor, or if no address is
so shown, to the address of the property as such address
may be known by the building official. Such notice shall
contain the following information: (1) that he has secured
the structure; (2) the cost incurred by the City thereby;(3)
that he has posted signs as provided by this section;(4) the
857 clan Berardino 7-89)
BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION
reasons why he has taken the action;(5) that an appeal may
be made within ten days to the Board of Building Commiss-
ioners, to be set for hearing at the next regular meeting;(6)
that if his action is not annulled by the Board of Building
Commissioners, the cost of securing the property shall be-
come a lien upon the real property unless the cost is paid to f
the City within thirty days of the mailing of the notice.
D. The notice of appeal to the Board of Building Commission-
ers must be verified under oath or under penalty of perjury
and must state the grounds upon which the action of the
building official is appealed;
1. the Board of Building Commissioners shall hear any
evidence or other relevant matter presented by the Ap-
pellant or the building official at its next regular meet-
ing after the filing of the Notice of Appeal;
2. after hearing all the evidence or upon the report of the
building official if no appeal is made, the Board of
Building Commissioners may confirm, amend, or annul
the action of the building official.
(a) if the action of the building official is annulled, the
City at its own expense shall remove any instru-
ments used to secure the structure and any signs stat-
ing that the building is unsafe to enter.
(b) if the Board of Building Commissioners confirms the
action of the Building officials in securing the struc-
ture, then the cost incurred by the City in securing
the structure shall become a special assessment and
r lien against the property to be determined and col-
lected in accordance with the procedures set forth
in Chapter 3.68.
(Ord. MC-607, 9-21-87; Ord. MC-228, 12-6-82; Ord. MC-177,
7-6-82; Ord. 3227 (Part), 1972; Ord. 2291 § 8(a), 1960.
_.,..
15.28.150 Abatement of nuisance by building official.
The same procedures provided in Section 15.28.140 for s
abating nuisances through securing from entry any structure
which is determined by the building official to be immedi-
ately dangerous or hazardous may be used by the building
official in connection with the summary abatement of all
other nuisances upon private property which the building
official determines in his discretion to constitute an immedi-
ately dangerous or hazardous condition. The building official
a
clan Bernardino 7-88) 858 ?
a
- i
w -
P ,
�- DANGEROUS BUILDINGS
or his representative may then summarily abate such nuisances
in his discretion in the most appropriate manner under the cir-
cumstances, which may include, but not be limited to, the fol-
lowing methods: fencing, draining water from swimming pools
and filling with appropriate ballast, removing fire hazards, filling
or covering open holes and grading or strengthing landfills or
excavations. Although the manner and method used by the
building official shall be at his discretion, he shall, in making
his determinations, seek the most economical method and en-
deavor not to place an undue economic hardship upon the
owners of the property, using only those measures which will
eliminate the dangerous and hazardous conditons. The build-
ing official shall immediately after such abatement action mail
notice to the owners as provided in Section 15.28.140(1)set-
ting forth the action he has taken;(2) the cost thereby incurred
by the City; (3) the reasons why he has taken the action; (4)
that an appeal may be taken within ten days to the Board of
Building Commissioners as provided in Section 15.28.140; and
(5) that if his action is not annulled by the Board of Building
Commissioners, the cost of abating the nuisance on the pro-
perty shall become a special assessment and lien on the real
property unless the cost is paid to the City within thirty days
of the mailing of the notice. The procedures hereunder for
appeal, hearing, and any other actions shall be as provided in
Chapter 3.68 for determination and collection of the assess-
ment for costs of abatement. (Ord. MC-177, 7-6-82;Ord. 3593,
1976, Ord. 3227 (part), 1972;Ord. 2291 § 8(b), 1960.)
15.28.160 Discontinuance of utilities.
In the event the building official causes summary abatement
of any condition herein provided and as an alternate method to
insure that payment is made to the City for the costs of such
abatement in cases involving abandoned structures, the building
official is authorized to direct all utility companies to
discontinue any utility services or connection to the property
upon which the structure is located; and the utility companies
( shall not reconnect until full payment of such cost is made to
859 (San Bernardino 3-87)
� h '
BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION
the City as determined by the building official. (Ord. 3227
(part), 1972;Ord. 2291 § 8(c), 1960.) 1
15.28.170 Filing of notice of pendency of administrative pro-
ceedings.
At any time after the building official has initiated action to
locate and serve the owners with the notice of defects referred
to in Sections 15.28.020 through 15.28.040, or has posted a
"Danger" sign upon a structure as provided for in Section
15.28.140, or has begun summary abatement of a nuisance as
provided for in Section 15.28.150, he or the City engineers
may file with the county recorder a notice of pendency of
administrative proceedings which shall constitute notice to any
subsequent owner, purchaser, encumbrancer of the property
described therein or involved in the proceedings, beneficiary
of a trust deed, lienholder,mortgagee, or any other person hold-
ing or claiming any interest of any kind in the property describ-
ed therein who shall be bound by the administrative proceed-
ings,including liability for all amounts and costs and expenses
assessed against the property as a lien for abatement in the same
manner as if he had been the owner at the time of commence-
ment of the proceedings and had been properly served at that
time. (Ord. MC-580, 2-2-87; Ord. 3227 (part), 1972;Ord. 2291
a
§ 8(d), 1960.)
B -
. i
(San Bernardino 3-87) 8C0
RL.. JEST FOR PURCHA
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PCEi4SEORDER THE FOLLOWING FOR DELIVERY'TO Repuisit€on No. 181-356
City of San Bernardino Requisition Date May 8, 1992
300 'North "D! Streat< Priority
Routine urgent X Breakdown
San Bernardino, CA 92418 Required Date
3epartment1.0ivision mate(if known Finance ApprovauFunas Available Commotlity Code
Plannin < & Building Code Enforcement 8 0(it krK
aceaunitttg Codes: nm a.e.ov
001 181 53I5b Eqpt.Na Work Order Haz. Material
4ccount Description: Originator of this request(Print)
I}imolition Debra Daniel
Confirm P.O. No. E Number Iphorw.
TO 8E USED FOR(Must be completed) � X 5205
Demolition
Item Complete Nomenclature 1 Description of Material Dimensions. Color, Mfg. & Quantity Unit i Unit Price
No. Number, Etc. Detail description of work to be done. If replacement part—Mfg. To I of or Best Extension
Name. Part no., Model& Serial no.of Machine. Order Measure Estimate
1 588 Western
Report/Project # 92-1014
APN 138 103 03
Complete demolition
walls, fences, walks, drivewalks and foundations,
basements, dead trees and bushes. Cap all utilities.
Fill and compact all holes to 90%. Leave lot clean
with drainage to street. Contrator to supply all
[labor and materials. Permits are required before
starting work. Dust control to be enforced and
work to be completed within one week after award
of contract.
ommended Vendor. I Phone:
;PP Diamn1 i inn T i g SUB TOTAL
Press:
SALES TAX
tact: Delivery Date: EST. FREIGHT
rs:
T.O.B. Point GRAND TOTAL
tither vendor contacts use reverse s€tm:
'eby certify ttat the items are necessary for
depart ;and a be Used sdefy for the benefit Buyer. APPROVED:
ie city:.
DE. ^ '••EN1 nivi Ncen
` Vi NARp��o
r
C I T Y O F
� O
Bernardino
�_
VID) It
D E P A R T M E N T OF P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G S E R V I C E S
A L B 0 U G H E Y A I C P
D I R E C T O R
CYNTHIA ROBLES September 15, 1992
12030 POUTOUS COURT ORDER NO: 1711
MORENO VALLEY CA 92388
Pursuant to the action of the Board of Building Commissioners taken
on August 7 , 1992 , a nuisance was found to exist at 588 WESTERN.
Attached hereto, is a copy of the Board of Building Commissioner's
Order, which states the findings of the Board, and the action
necessary to abate the public nuisance(s) , and any costs that have
been incurred by the City in the abatement of said nuisance(s) .
All costs have been approved by the Board of Building
Commissioners, and shall become a lien upon the property which may
affect the property title.
As owner(s) an/or vested parties of record, you may appeal the
Board's findings to the Mayor and Common Council within fifteen
(15) days of the date of the notice. This appeal should be filed
with the City Clerk's Office, 300 North "D" Street, 2nd floor, San
Bernardino, Ca. 92418 . A fee of $75. 00 must accompany your
request. The written appeal should include:
(a) Property location, parcel number and report/project number;
(b) Specific grounds for appeal ; and
(c) The relief or action sought from the Board
The cost incurred by the City for abatement proceedings against the
property was $7 ,433.00. This amount should be paid to the City
Clerk's Office, 300 North "D" Street, 2nd floor, San Bernardino,
Ca. 92418, within fifteen (15) days of this notice or the City
will proceed with placing a lien against the property.
If you have any questions regar these costs or appeal
procedures, please contact the CityllCle''rk's Office at 384-5002 .
Code' Compliance supervisor
cc: City Clerk
PRIDE 44
�+
300 NORTH D STREET SAN BERNARDINp , IN PROGRESS
C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 4 1 8 - 0 0 0 1 (7 1 4 ) 3 19{• 5 0 7 1 / 5 0 5 7
., , �l
j ORDER OF THE BOARD OF BUILDING COMMISSIONERS
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING
2 THE ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE
3 ORDER NO. 1711 REPORT NO. 92-5008
4 WHEREAS, pursuant to the San Bernardino Municipal Code, Title
5 15, Chapter 15. 28, the Building Official has posted a building(s)
6 located at 588 WESTERN , San Bernardino, California, with a "Notice
7 to Abate Nuisance" and has notified the person(s) having and
8 interest in said property that the said building(s) or premises
9 constitute a public nuisance;
10 WHEREAS, the Building Official ordered abatement of said
11 property to protect the health and safety of the community;
12 WHEREAS, pursuant to San Bernardino Municipal Code, the
13 Building Official has served a "Notice of Hearing Before the Board
14 of Building Commissioners of the City of San Bernardino", relating
15 to abatement of said nuisance, to the person(s) having an interest
16 in the above property, and has prepared a declaration of mailing of
17 the notice, a copy of which is on file in these proceedings; and
18 WHEREAS, a hearing was held to receive and consider all
lg relevant evidence, objections or protests on AUGUST 7. 1992 , and;
20 WHEREAS, the Board of Building Commissioners heard the
21 testimony and examined the evidence offered by the parties relative
22 to the alleged public nuisance,
23
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED BY THE BOARD OF BUILDING
COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
24
25
26
27
28
�Z
1
2 BOARD OF BUILDING cOMMISSIONERS
ORDER NO. 1711 REPORT NO. 92-5008
3 Page 2
4 SECTION 1. Based upon the evidence submitted, it was found
5 and determined that the building(s) and or premises located at
6 588 WESTERN San Bernardino, California constituted a public
7 nuisance.
8 SECTION 2 . Based upon the evidence submitted, it was
9 determined that the City of San Bernardino was required to initiate
10 abatement actions upon which the City incurred costs in the sum of
11 $7 ,433. 00 to abate the above property and that these and future
12 costs to the City to abate the above property shall be the personal
13 obligation of the owner(s) as well as a lien on the above
14 property.
15 SECTION 3 . Any person aggrieved by this order may, within
16 fifteen (15) days of the date of this notice dated September 15,
17 1992 , may appeal to the Mayor and Common Council by filing with the
18 City Clerk a written statement or the order appealed from the
19 specific grounds of appeal and the relief or action sought from the
20 Mayor and Common Council.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
� 3
BOARD OF BUILDING COMMISSIONERS
ORDER NO. 1711 REPORT NO. 5008
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing order was duly adopted by
the Board of Building Commissioners of the City of San Bernardino at a
regular meeting thereof, held on the _7rh day of �Auzust.__ __' 1992, by the
following vote, to wit:
COMMISSIONERS: AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT
Chairman-Herb Pollock X
Vice Chairman-Gene Pensiero x
Dan Westwood x
Pete Cortez x
Jack Hunt x
Benjamin Gonzales x
Manuel Flores x
Thomas Chandler x
Clerk, Board of Building Commissioners
The foregoing order is hereby approved this 15th day of September,
1992 .
Clirirman, Boar of Building Commissioners
Approved as to form and legal content:
James F. ,-enman, Cit Attorney
By:__��
June 22, 1992
Clerk's Office
City of San Bernardino
San Bernardino, CA
This is my formal written Appeal on the Certified Letter dated June 8, 1992
regarding the 588 Western Avenue, San Bernardino property. The information
that was on the letter stated for:
Violation: Open/Vacant/Fire
Assessors No: 138-103-03
Report/Project: 92-5008
My specific grounds for this Appeal are attached and I am also seeking relief from
the City. As indicated in the letter a hearing has been scheduled for July 10,
1992 at 9:00 a.m. before the Board of Building Commissioners, 300 North "D"
Street, Council Chambers, San Bernardino, CA 92418. If that date has to be
rescheduled, I would like to be notified in writing. My address is:
Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
Thank you_,
n
Cynthia Robles
Enclosures
Ltrs 6/10/92 & 6/19/92
7G
June 10, 1992
Wayne Overstreet, Director
Facilities Management Department
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, California 92418-0001
RE: Case # 92-VAP-338-05
Dear Mr. Overstreet:
I'm writing to you and maybe I have two complaints that need to go to two different places.
If that is true, I would appreciate feedback from you as soon as possible to resolve this
dilemma.
On Saturday May 16, 1992, I picked up a Certified Letter that was delivered to my home on
Friday, May 15, 1992 when no one was home. Anyway, the letter was regarding an
Inoperative Vehicle" located on the property of 588 N. Western, San Bernardino,
California.
On May 20, 1992, our Realtor informed us by telephone that a fire had occurred at the
above mentioned residence and it wasn't the City or the Fire Department that had contacted
him. My concern is why didn't anyone contact the property owners? On this same date, I
call the City of San Bernardino, Fire Department and they only told me that a fire had
occurred and that I could request a report in writing or come in person. I did request a
report and received that report on June 4, 1992.
On Thursday, May 21, 1992, I called your office (384-5366) at approximately 12:30 p.m.
and spoke to a female and unfortunately I didn't get her name requesting information on the
Certified Letter regarding Inoperative Vehicles. I questioned the 10 days waiting period
before action would take place to remove the vehicle. I wanted to make sure that since the
letter was typed on a May 14, 1992 date and I didn't receive it until May 16, 1992, I was
concerned when those 10 days would commence and if they include working and or calendar
days. She stated that it only-included working days and not weekends. So with that
Page 2
92-VAP-338-05
information we assumed that commencing on Monday, May 18, 1992, would start the 10
days procedure to remove the vehicle or else the Abate Office would remove it, so with that
understanding, technically the car should have been out by May 29, 1992.
To my disbelieve on Thursday, May 28, 1992, I went to the residence to check two things,
evaluate the property damage cause by the fire and check to see that the vehicle was removed
by the proper owner (who is not me, but a Mr. M. Hernandez, from San Bernardino). I was
in total shock when I got to the residence. NOT only was the vehicle gone but all the
surrounding structures wc;re gone and someone had roll-a-tilled and semi-leveled the property
WITHOUT NOTIFYING THE PROPERTY OWNER. I am still in a state or disarray over
this.
Again, why wasn't the property owner notified? I then called the Fire Department thinking
maybe they knew something about destroying the property and they told me they were also in
shock that we were not notified and that there was no Life Threating or Life Hazard for
anyone to destroy the property without the authorization of the owner or owners.
Who has that authority to destroy private property? Also, when I went to inspect the
damages and what I needed to do to commence cleaning the property, it was all gone. I
wanted to salvage all that was still standing of the structure and I wasn't even given that
right! Who's paying for all this if indeed the owner is responsible. Why should that owner
have to pay when they weren't given the opportunity to do it themselves? If I am, I need to
know what procedures need to be filed with who or whom to Appeal this and file for
unlawful destruction of personal and private property. I am simply appalled that if the City
of San Bernardino took it upon themselves to destroy someone's property without notice,
they were in serious default and they should pay for the cost as to whomever did demolish
my property.
On June 3, 1992 at approximately 3:00 p.m. by the direction of the Fire Department, I
called your office and they transferred me to someone named Bonnie. She stated that the
City did take it upon themselves to demolish my property. Up to this point and time I still
have not received any notification from anyone stating why and how come this was done.
The point of the matter is the property owner should have been notified by a certified letter
or some type of letter letting them know they had so many days or whatever options were
available to clean the property after the fire. I still cannot believe this has happened. I am
so upset of the whole situation I what an explanation and also how I go about having an
Hearing or through Arbitration Hearing/Procedures.
Page 3
92-VAP-338-05
Mr. Overstreet, thank you for your time and if I need to direct my concerns to someone else
please let me know as soon as possible. I would appreciate a response in writing. My
mailing address is:
Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
Respectfully Submitted,
c: W. R. "Bob" Holcomb, Mayor of San Bernardino
300 N. "D" Street, S.B.
Manuel PI Moreno, Jr.-- Public Svc/Sts
300 N. "D" Street, S.B.
Council Members:
Estrada
Reilly
Flores
Maudsley
Minor
Pope-Ludlam
Miller
_7Q
June 19, 1992
Mr. Ralph Hernandez
City of San Bernardino
San Bernardino, CA
RE: 588 Western Avenue, San Bernardino, California
Mr. Hernandez,
As per my telephone conversation with you on this date (6/19/92), I have put
together an outline as to the best of my recollection of events that occurred on the
above mentioned property.
On February 8, 1992, Cynthia Robles (Jack & George Ramirez) placed 588 No.
Western Avenue, San Bernardino, California up for sale with Boyd Realtors in
San Bernardino.
On May 13, 1992, Mr. Mel Shawhan (Boyd Realtors) called me to advise me that
some anonymous caller had telephone his office letting him know that the house
had caught fire but no indication that it was destroyed by fire.
On May 14, 1992, at approximately 12:40 p.m. I called the City of San
Bernardino, Fire Department located at 200 East 3rd Street, San Bernardino,
California regarding the residence. The dispatcher could only tell me that it was
a recent fire and I would have to request the report in writing or in person with a
fee for $8.00.
On May 20, 1992, I submitted my request in writing with a check for the amount
of $8.00. Which was to be for Report #592-1014, as indicated by the dispatcher.
On June 1, 1992, I received two separate reports which were not the same
number as the dispatcher had told me on May 20, 1992. The reports that I
received were S92-1118 and S92-1124.
On June 2, 1992, I called the Fire Department again regarding the reports I had
received on June 1, 1992 and also wanted an explanation as to what happened. I
was transferred to the Senior Fire Investigator (Mr. Rice).
In the meantime back on May 16, 1992, which was a Saturday, I picked up a
Certified Letter #905429495 (it was a single sheet letter), from the City of San
Bernardino Facilities Management Department, which had Case # 92-VAP-338-05
"Notice of Intention To Abate And Remove An Abandoned Wrecked, Dismantled
-0)G
Page 2
Report 92-5008
[588 Western]
Or Inoperative Vehicle(s) or Part(s). There Of As A Public Nuisance", it stated
"no registered owner" but License number KBD808. Requesting that the vehicle
be removed within 10-day period.
On Saturday, May 16, 1992, I called the owner of said vehicle that they had 10-
days to remove or else the City would haul it away. So they agreed to remove it
within that time frame.
On May 21, 1992, I called the Facilities Office at approximately 12:30 and a
female told me that if we needed more time to remove the vehicle to call back and
ask to speak to a Supervisor. My other reason for calling was to make certain
that weekends were not calculated in the 10-day time frame. Which she indicated
no, but workdays. So with that clarification, the 10-day time frame would have
ended on May 29, 1992, since we also had a Holiday on May 25, 1992.
On May 28, 1992, approximately at 5:00 p.m., I went to the residence of 588
Western to check two things; first, to evaluate the property as to what damage the
fire had done and second, to check on the vehicle that was to be removed. To my
disbelieve, not just was the vehicle gone --- the whole property structure had been
removed!!! I was in total shock and appalled that we were not notified of this. At
this point and time of this writing. I still cannot believe that City Officials would
have the audacity to take it upon themselves to destroy or demolish someone's
private property without giving notice or even giving the owner the opportunity or
options of having the property cleaned, if that was to be done. I am so appalled
and want answers!!
Yet, by this date (May 28, 1992), I still have not received any notification from
any City Office as to why and how come this was destroyed.
On June 2, 1992, I again called the Fire Department and spoke to the
investigator asking him if he had any idea who had destroyed/demolished the
residence. He told me he was also surprised that the owners were not notified if
indeed the City destroyed the property. He indicated that there was no "Life
Threatening or Life Hazard" for anyone to destroy the property without the
authorization/notification of the owner.
�n
Page 3
Report 92-5008
[588 Western]
On June 3, 1992, at approximately 3:00 p.m., I called the Code Enforcement
Section of the City and spoke to a female named Bonnie. She stated that the City
took it upon themselves to demolish the property. She also stated that it was to
protect the neighborhood and it was the City Management that determined the
property was a total loss and unsafe and demolition had been completed and all
charges would be sent to me. At that point, I told her I was appalled of the
situation and also appalled that trees were also up-rooted. I also indicated the
point of the matter was we were not given any notice or time frames or options
and that I wanted to Appeal this matter. She then told me to hold on. She placed
me on "hold" and when she got back she told me that a letter was being typed up
while we were speaking by a clerk. I told Bonnie to send my any information in
the way of Certified Letter/mail.
On June 4, 1992, at approximately 4:25 p.m., I called the Fire Investigator to let
him know what the Code Enforcement Office had told me and he stated that when
he was reviewing his notes and file on the residence, that the initial fire happened
sometime on May 7, 1992, but he wasn't aware of that initial fire. He did indicate
that when he went to finish up his investigation the City Code Enforcer was at
the residence and was surprised to see an investigator (fire) at the property. This
was the week of May 18th, since those were the two reports I had received and
was never informed if indeed the initial fire taking place on May 7, 1992.
On June 10, 1992, I received notice from the Postal Mail Carrier that I had a
Certified Letter #905 431 987 and I could pick that up after June 10, 1992.
On June 11, 1992, I picked up Certified Letter P 905 431 987 (total of 7 pages). It
was from the City of San Bernardino, Department of Planning and Building
Services regarding the Code Enforcement Division's finding the property to be an
Open and Vacant and an attractive nuisance. This letter was dated June 8, 1992.
Prior to receiving Letter #P 905 431 987, I wrote to the Facilities Management
Department telling them of my two complaints and was requesting feedback in
writing. My letter was dated June 10, 1992 with copies going to the Mayor and
Council Members. Up to that point, I have not received any feedback from
anyone.
Page 4
Report 92-5008
[588 Western]
,On June 14, 1992, I was able to reach the owner of the vehicle that was to be
removed at the residence regarding notice of Certified Letter #905-429-495 (single
sheet). He stated that on the morning of May 28, 1992, he went to 588 Western
to remove his vehicle and he was also appalled that a demolition crew was on the
property destroying the structure and one of the trees. He also stated that it was
his calculations that Friday, May 29, 1992, was to be his last day to remove the
vehicle and it was only the vehicle in question. He too, was in a disbelieve state
seeing everything was being demolished.
On June 19, 1992, at approximately 10:15 a.m., I called (384-5205) the Code
Enforcement Division regarding clarification on the June 8, 1992 document. A
person named "Bret" told me that someone would get back to me that day
between 3:30 - 4:30 p.m. I gave him my work number and told him I would be
available up to 5:15 p.m., but no call back.
On June 19, 1992, I also called the Office of Mr. Ralph Hernandez seeking advice
and council on this matter. The office indicated, he was out and would call me on
Monday, so I left my name and work number for him to call me back. At
approximately 4:30 p.m., Mr. Hernandez returned my call.
My question is, if the Department's of Planning and Building Service, the Code
Enforcement Division, the Facilities Management Department were able to send
me Certified Letter's after the fact, why couldn't or why weren't they able to
send me any information or notification prior to them demolishing private
property? I am requesting answers and I also want the fee of $75.00 Appeal
waiver since I believe my rights were violated! I do not have any insurance
coverage for the residence and I am currently facing financial difficulties due to
the recent death of my father. This whole situation has been very stressful to me
and my family, we all feel violated.
As indicated in the document dated June 8, 1992, a hearing is scheduled for July
10, 1992, at 9:00 a.m., before the Board of Building Commissioners, 300 North "D"
Street, San Bernardino, California 92418. It also stated to provide evidence when
I went as I stated earlier, there was no structure, it was destroyed before I could
get any pictures of what had happened. I am also seeking relief of payment and
whatever options can be arranged once the hearing has been heard. If the City of
San Bernardino is interested in purchasing the property for redevelopment, please
provide me with any information.
Page 5
Report 92-5008
[588 Western]
A final note, if the July 10, 1992 hearing date has been cancelled or rescheduled,
I
lease notify me in writing since I am a working individual I need advance notice.
My mailing address is:
Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
Sincerely,
Cynthia Robles
Enclosures
Copies Certified Letter
Appeal Letter
Fire Reports
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS �� W
PHOTO $ DATE aw
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
zd�-07�
DEPICTS �(
PHOTO = 300 DATE Z
TAKEN 3Y --
CAS E 1
Z ON I.7G
DEPICTS JlUltoLCAn
VQ
t
KY/EG/94 4', -
i
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS --
PHOTO � � DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPT_CTS
A
PHOTO = DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE 4
ZONING
DEPICTS
MY/EG/9 4
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS —
PHOTO $ DATE
TAKEN BY
CAS E 7
ZONING '
DEPIC'T'S
I �
a
y-S
y
PHOTO = DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE ?
ZONING
DEPICTS
?�SY/E G/9 4
.-� r'b l.kK'd. �� _ A—.. .; .., ,�-,�;! css-i,"y,".. ''- .,,a - t a✓"'t-t _;g$•. *� ,��'�r�'iM 'a�i ,r ,ncy"�[r_ ,
b CITY or sAx HERNARDINO - - --_ �.
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION .
- PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS
PHOTO # DATE
I
TAKEN BY
CASE #
ZONING
y
DEPICTS - '
_ _ a
PHOTO T DATE
—gz
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING I
i
DEPICTS
Mot-
.•`�i < __ .c • 4-.-_ ° ter
MY/EG/94
f CITY-.QF SAN - --- '
000E EIOROE
PHOTOGAAP4 a
ADDRESS Vj a S r ER tJ
PHOTO
TAKEN BY CASE
DEPICTS: F(2 e aT l Eta.) 0 C-
i
,,
CO-) SITED kj--1 THE' IZErg rL W l-r�
C-#z INsoo e 6V wN I�tjpN
PHOTO DATE
TAKEN 8Y a
DEPICTS: w VLAK F\ooRS, Ho ES
pK
,. y.
r
or SAN BERNARDINO -
CODE ENMCEMENT OIVISI
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ti.
ADDRESS
PHOTO DATL'-1�re7 A-y•� -
TAKEN BY - - -
CASE
ZONING _ >.
DEPICTS ��m5E —y� 1 16W
PHOTO T DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS
MY/EG/94
t
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS
PHOTO Z� DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS CIO-S16 t"R y/46u> 4�
�EDfZbo►�'1
PHOTO = 7-1 DATE �iH�y•9"L
TAKEN BY
CAS E
ZONING
DEPICTS
�1�et'R.tca4� 3Ox � ,
K
R
MY/EG/94
.�a
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE . - EMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS a
PHOTO •
TAKEN BY
CASE 4
ZONING
L t .
e
DEPICTS
��a
'� �;.5.�-rte�Y�± �_•` •
i
• • U
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
f
Z' r.
i: .
' 00 ti( ',. .'�; _ - .fir� ��,•,�•�'�.�,� ` '.�, h
CITY OF E/' •
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS
• • 4 DATE
TAKEN BY
CASEy� 7
ZONING
!,r � J �#` ` � - '> wit • � ,�
r _
DEPICTS l Cx • • 4
l
.w
f
• • z' DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS q 7 Y r.� ��.� Mli- L • yr t
co
CITY OF
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS T:
• • DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS
��K'f^►p -_ � !T•., t'. •jam
• •
DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE 4
f � f
� Y•
i 1 T
ZONING
DEPICTS &V4F-lElq11 VIC4J '01E
I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS _
PHOTO 4 / Z DATE 7/rlpy-92
TAKEN BY
CASE 4
ZONING
DEPICTS OVF4X,11 V IOW O�
FRml/y 2oo.n 'G g Al 91
PHOTO = /3 DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING - .I
DEPICTS DMI.F.f// V/akJ 49 I '
��r 7"CH,E.✓ LooKrldg l�ylCr'� - .-_
MY/EG/94
low
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS STa W EST,2Al
/� DATE 7-MA 9'Z
PHOTO $ -
TAKEN BY f3 4W.1
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS OVOWWA' k1'0id
: .G
PHOTO = // DATE - -- -
TAKEN BY
i
t
CASE # ,,
ZONING s� r
D // 1/iEicJ of �jgMi� � •:.., �: ;-.
DEPICTS ✓E�� '.
ROOM, T �
MY/EG/94
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOG
ADDRESS
PHOTO DATE 7 may'9Z
TARN BY
CASE
ZONING a
r
DEPICTS V,51
PHOTO = DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS 49V49 e-411 mF Z /ice
/Qoo�n ear//i,Aa
MY/EG/9 4
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS
PHOTO $ DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPIC'T'S
,�xTE2/DEC /1,V 0WeAf,?` SI
DF 2�i D�Nc�
PHOTO = 7 DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING '
DEPICTS Ot/L'KA// V/�iV •F .0 .c/in '• ' `
t� 3
MY/EG/9 4
CITY OF -D •
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
..-
• • DATE:
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
J i
r,
• • DATE
TAXF-N BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS L9
i�Alf
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS
PHOTO 4 DATE
TAKEN BY 4W
CASE
r
ZONING -
DEPICTS t9VS9 4ll View
S�n E of i2�.s��t�vcE ... �-___---• "..
PHOTO = Z DATE 7 M*4)*A'9Z - -- _
TAKEN BY
CASE 4 `
ZONING
DEPICTS CV-Se/911 VIEW
9XW41 D/t LJES7" S/D�' F
2,ES�DEwG�
E
MY/EG/94
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
PHOTOGRAPH DISPLAY REPORT
ADDRESS - ME
PHOTO DATE 7-/y1A}/-7Z
TAKEN BY -
CASE �- -
- 9
ZONING
DEPICTS
F-x7WRi oie EAUrr sr/de m _
PHOTO = .S-A DATE
TAKEN BY
CASE
ZONING
DEPICTS rft*"T m F RF51 DFNCE
w, r l else 19,60c.,
x- --
MY/EG/9 4
Q 0
September 2 , 1992
L•}
TO: Honorable Mayor of San Bernardino
W.R. "Bob" Holcomb
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, California 92418
VIA: Jeannie -
City Clerk's Office
San Bernardino, California
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
RE: Appeal To Mayor And Council
Attached is in letter form my Appeal papers to the Mayor and his
Common Council.
Should you have any questions, please call me at work (714) 787-
5604 .
Sincerely;
Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
Enclosures
Qf al ga (ArS"an +0 h90e
c 9arl,J.3)
4
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
NOTICE OF APPEAL _
APPEAL TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL
_2 11-17 :c--
Appeal Filing Date: September 2 , 1992
Name of Appellant: Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, Ca 92557
Regarding Property: 588 Western
San Bernardino, California
Parcel Number: 138-103-03
Contact Person(s) Cynthia Robles
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, CA 92557
Home Telephone: (714) 242-3991
Work Number: (714) 787-5604 **Prefer not to be
contacted at work only if an
emergency/necessary.
Alterative: George Ramirez
4749 Woodruff
Lakewood, CA 90713
Home Telephone: (310) 425-2832
TYPE OF APPEAL: I believe it is directly to:
PLANNING APPEAL TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL
I. Specific Action Appealed/Date of Action:
On August 7, 1992 , I went before the Board of Building
Commissioners and the Common Council at which time Ms.
Bonnie Garcia presented her findings on the property
located at 588 Western, San Bernardino, California
which her staff recommended that owner pay costs
associated with the emergency abatement action taken
against the property.
II. Specific Grounds Of Appeal:
As I stated before back in July and again in August
1992 , I feel that the City of San Bernardino should
have given me the opportunity to clean the property
located at 588 Western, San Bernardino, California.
Page 2
Appeal
588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, CA
(Cynthia Robles)
I know I am repeating myself but, I strongly feel that
I should have been given the option and opportunity to
comply with the City of San Bernardino.
Ms. Garcia (Code Enforcer) gave me copies of the codes and
definitions as to what was considered under policy,
"Urgent Public Nuisance" . This was given to me after I
requested them from Ms. Garcia on the morning of August
7, 1992 . After reviewing them when I got home, I still
felt that I should have been given the right to seek
compliance. The only notice I received was when I
received the Certified Letter stating the cost that
needed to be paid for the demolition.
So at this time I am asking the Mayor and his Common
Council to re-evaluate their agreement from the Hearing
proceedings to reduce the charges.
Should this Appeal be a waste of my time and money I
would like to know in advance to make a stop payment on
the $75. 00 fee that was required; if indeed the City
stands with their decision. In that case, I see no
point in continuing this Appeal and would like to be
reimbursed my fees.
III. Action Sought From the Mayor and Common Council
What I seek as relief from the Mayor and his Common
Council is to reduce that cost from the letter dated
June 8, 1992 "Statement of Cost" of $7 , 433 . 00.
I cannot understand why if each Unit/Department has
employees to do their specific jobs, why should the
property owner pay for Code Officer's cost, Clerical
Staff Cost, Supervisor's Costs, Vehicle Mileage,
Certified Mailings, Notice of Pendency and a 40%
Additional Cost when in fact they are already paid to
do that job by the City! !
I had made several telephone calls to
Wrecking/Demolition Companies and they gave me quotes
over the telephone and the lowest bid was $2 , 500. 00.
So I feel that the City should allow me to pay that
$2 , 500. 00 since that would have been the lowest bid to
have a demolition crew come to 588 Western Avenue, San
Page 3
Appeal
588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, California
(Cynthia Robles)
Bernardino, California. If indeed I was
given that option and opportunity, but I was not! !
As for additional cost, I myself had to take time off work,
add mileage to my vehicle, take photographs of what was
left from the property, pay attorney cost, pay City
Clerk's Cost/Fees, pay for copies of paperwork
submitted, which was not part of my employer's cost but
in fact my own personal time that was needed to make
all the Appeals. So with that reasoning, I feel the
City should reduce the amount stated on the "Statement
of Cost" .
As I've stated time and time again, I feel even though the
City can do whatever they want and approve any
Municipal Codes and Regulations, I still stand to
believe that my rights as the property owner were
violated because I was not given any notice to comply!
Even after reading notes that Ms. Bonnie Garcia had
prepared for her presentation, she has it written under
the May 6, 1992 date, "the officer started the research
on property ownership in order to prepare a ten day
correction notice for mailing to the property owner. "
My question is: WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT 10-DAY NOTICE?
Like I've said before and probably as the same member
of Council would say, you are repeating yourself. So
why can't that be answered? Why wasn't I notified on
May 6, 1992 like Ms. Garcia stated I was to be?
My other question is, why were trees removed when you
can see from my photos (attached) , that the surrounding
shrubs/trees were not removed. There were two "mature"
trees taken out. When I called several nurseries, they
stated that "mature" trees run about $1, 000. 00 each to
install. Looking at the photos you can see there was
sufficient room for a tractor to get on the property
without destroying those trees and also, if those trees
were damaged by fire, I can't believe the surrounding
trees were not, they were just as close to one another.
Can you show pictures? Because as I can remember, I
wasn't shown pictures of the house when it was burned
just six (6) pictures that Ms. Garcia presented showing
the house with holes/floors destroyed and the house
written with gang graffiti.
0
Page 4
Appeal
588 Western Avenue
San Bernardino, California
(Cynthia Robles)
The bottom line is that I request to the Honorable Mayor of
San Bernardino and his Common Council that I pay only
$2 , 500. 00 out of the $7,433 . 00 that was recommended.
This is what I feel is equitable and fair.
hank yo y much.
Cynthia Ro le �
12030 Poutous Court
Moreno Valley, California 92557
Enclosures:
Check for Fees
Pictures of Property
Appeal Request
i
err+'
L
t
4','Y•r1� 1."
-',i:•: .,-.rte _ _ �� K '��:'`,T
1 �
Y:w
a
7wr ti z i er •� ,, •1
7 -lot�_� a'�Y✓' :r4�� 'C..� a.�� x � ,
--�,.C„{ Y •,c t .t' r`�rY.✓,,,'s�es '�`, �s ,. s,�a� ,7+r ' b.
Ak
_• - _-_-,�'"'y "_-y' "'p"'°��"".� - .t .�.tea.
I
r-.
A
J
e
fir..
7T 1 t ,..1 t.i Q -1
f
1 }1 1 O
_ a.w �!
R
,�!`- _ '•/ ,and � ``� kPv 7 /'!?
r-
•
rib ♦ ;IV
/� r•�_ � y���i�1L i r .�- �y,,gym r c y'!"1'O �'4y'�-...` .� / -.
�gf'/yit My,
'Er", ,apin
T.♦����•s��,+� •�w��Y�iv�i.•.. „M".M�"7F4.S'�!''Y•„i��.A...i..�R►�a'�` ..•r! .Y
i
1
0 0o v -n
� O S CD 0 C
A L CD
c CD O
r -n
a O c w o T r D
O D
F�. �.. Z z
C7 to F, M co
m P- co rn to O m
'C o m � C 70
c� N z
::I (D (D
D
v_
H (D rt o �r CO) z
x h H. � FJ
O O
' P) =
r fv
lc o °) h o m
cD rh N tr' n
> (D m m
Goa M
x � n o rt �
m o _
o rts✓ m N
o N
V O H
3 � �
�,o Lq O O
o
Fl-
CL
n N 7
I~
CJ7
c N
O
CAD
s n
^ n
-1 I O
o n O c
tx,-n O z
o r o Uj
�. I Z
_.L .� b o
-Ell c
� V
O p
O O c
O
i
i
I