HomeMy WebLinkAbout33-Development Services
ORIGINAL
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: March 28, 2006
Subject: Building Permit No. B0503040 -
An appeal of the Building Official's
revocation of a permit to construct a second
dwelling unit on a 3-acre property located at
3923 W. Meyers Road in the RE,
Residential Estate land use district.
From: James Funk, Director
Dept: Development Services
MCC Date: ApriI1?,2006
Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None
Recommended Motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and uphold
the Building Official's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040 to construct a second
dwelling unit on a 3-acre property located at 3923 W. Meyers Road.
Vdfw>>(J. R~t JP
James F
Contact person:
Rrl~n Foot~ A!':"nclM~ Pl::mn~l'
Phone:
~R4-'iO'i7
Snpporting data attached:
Staff Retloct
Ward:
5
FUNDING REQillREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No.
33
ifl J1 /Ofl
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Mayor and Common Council Meeting of April 17, 2006
SUBJECT:
Building Permit No. B0503040 (Appeal No. 06-03)
OWNER/APPELLANT:
Ramon Hernandez
2447 Ogden Street
San Bernardino, CA 92407
(909) 709-3690
BACKGROUND
The subject of this appeal is the Building Official's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040
to construct a second dwelling unit on a 3-acre property. The property is currently vacant and
has another approved building permit, No. B0503041, for one detached single-family dwelling.
The subject property is located at 3923 W. Meyers Road, approximately %-mile north of Little
League Drive and 850 feet south of Martin Ranch Road (Exhibit 1 - Location Map). The
appellant filed Appeal No. 05-27 on December 2, 2005, which was denied by the Planning
Commission on February 8, 2006. The appellant filed Appeal No. 06-03 on February 21,2006, to
the Mayor & Common Council in order to overturn the Planning Commission's decision.
Building Permit Nos. B0503040 and B0503041 were applications to construct two detached
single-family houses on one property (Exhibit 2 - Planning Commission Staff Report). The
appellant submitted plans to the Building Division on September 15, 2005, requested expedited
plan check processing, and the plans were reviewed and approved by an outside consulting firm.
Building Division staff did not review the plans internally, and did not discover that one of the
proposed units was defined as a "second dwelling unit" until after the permits had been issued.
The Building Division issued both permits on November 14, 2005. The Building Official mailed
a letter on November 17, 2005, revoking Permit No. B0503040 for the second unit (Exhibit 2 -
Planning Commission Staff Report). Permit No. B0503041 for the main unit stands as approved.
The development standards for second dwelling units outlined in Development Code
S 19.04.030(2)(P) regulate the construction of second units throughout the City. In order to
receive approval for a second unit, the property must have water, sewer, gas, and electric
services readily available for connection to the second unit. The nearest existing water, sewer, or
gas lines are in Little League Drive (approximately %-mile south of the subject property) and.are
not available for connection to the proposed second unit. Therefore, the plans submitted by the
appellant cannot meet the applicable provisions for second units, and Permit No. B0503040 does
not conform to the Development Code. The provisions for second units contained in the
Development Code were specifically established to preclude development in areas of the City
that have inadequate infrastructure to support second units.
Appeal No. 06-03
Hearing Date: April 17, 2006
Page 2
The appellant's grounds for the appeal, as explained on the application form (Exhibit 3 -
Appeal), is that a septic system accounts for a sewer system. However, the Development Code
specifically requires existing adequate infrastructure, including a sewer connection, for second
units. Development Code ~19.04.030(2)(P)(9) states, "Second units may only be established on
lots where water, sewer, gas, and electricity are available." There are no exceptions in the
Development Code for septic systems. Septic systems are not permitted for second units.
In conclusion, the appellant may have plans that conform to all applicable regional and state
regulations, yet the plans may not conform to the City's Municipal (Development) Code. In this
case, the appellant's plans meet the requirements of the California Building Code, yet the plans
do not conform to the City's Development (Municipal) Code provisions for second dwelling
units. The appellant has not provided any information to support his position that a septic system
is an acceptable substitute for a sewer connection, or that the Building Official's determination
was incorrect.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
No impact to the City of San Bernardino. The appellant paid the processing fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council deny the appeal and uphold the Building
Official's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040 to construct a second dwelling unit on a
3-acre property located at 3923 W. Meyers Road,
EXHIBITS: 1.
2.
3.
Location Map
Planning Commission Staff Report of February 8, 2006
Appeal
Appeal No 06-03
EXHIBIT 1 - LOCA nON MAP
~c~~...../,
'"
,
, ...Joe. Sl"~
.............
r/J
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION 5T AFF REPORT Appeal No 06-03
SUMMARY
CITY OF SAN BER1'lARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
CASE:
AGENDA ITEM:
HEARING DATE:
WARD:
Appeal No. 05-27
3
February 8, 2006
5
OWNER! APPELLANT:
Ramon Hernandez
2447 Ogden SI.
San Bernardino, CA 92407
(909) 709-3690
REQUEST & LOCATION:
An appeal of the Director's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040 to construct a second
dwelling unit on a 3-acre property in the Verdemont area. The subject property is located at 3923
W. Meyers Road in the RE, Residential Estate land use district (APN: 0348-111-44).
CONSTR-\.I~TS & OVERLAYS:
Foothill Fire Zone Overlay (Zone C - Moderate Hazard)
High Wind Hazard Area
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
:J Not Applicable
. Exempt from CEQA, Section 15268 - Ministerial Projects
o No Significant Effects
::J Previous Negative Declaration
::J Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation MonitoringlReporting Program
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
:J Approval
:J Conditions
. Denial
o Continuance to:
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No. 06-03
REQUEST & LOCATION
The subject of this appeal is the Building Official's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040
to construct a second dwelling unit on a 3-acre property. The property is currently vacant and
has another approved building permit, No. B0503041, for one detached single-family dwelling.
The subject property is located at 3923 W. Meyers Road in the RE, Residential Estate land use
district (see Attachment A - Location Map). The property is located on the west side of Meyers
Rd., approximately %-mile north of Little League Drive and 850 feet south of Martin Ranch Rd.
BACKGROUND
Permit Nos. B0503040 and B0503041 vvere applications to construct two detached single-family
houses on one property (see Attachment B - Site Plan). The appellant submitted plans to the
Building Div.ision on September 15, 2005, requested expedited plan check processing, and the
plans were rev.iewed and approved by a consulting firm on behalf of the City. Building Division
staff did not review or approve the plans internally, and it was not discovered until after the
permits had been issued that one of the proposed units was subject to Development Code
S 19.04.030, Section 2, paragraph P (Second Dwelling Unit Housing Design Standards).
The Building Division issued both permits on November 14,2005. However, Building Division
staff defined Pern,it No. B0503040 as a "second dwelling unit" because both dwellings were
proposed to be built on a single residential parceL Therefore, the requirements of Development
Code S 19.04.030, Section 2, paragraph p. were applicable to Permit No. B0503040. The
Building Official mailed a letter on ~ovember 17, 2005, revoking the building permit for one of
the houses (see Attachment C - Revocation Letter). The building permit for the other house
stands as approved and issued.
In a meeting with the appellant on November 21, 2005, Planning staff concurred with the
Building Official that Permit No. B0503040 met the definition of a second dwelling unit. When
the appellant inquired about the process for appealing staffs determination, he was informed that
he could discuss his concerns the City Planner and/or the Development Services Director and
request a review prior to filing an appeal application. On November 23, 2005, the Director
advised Mr. Hernandez that the proposed plan did not meet Code requirements for a second
dwelling unit but could he appeal the determination to the Planning Commission. An application
for appeal ws filed on December 2, 2005 (see Attachment D - Appeal).
ANAL YSIS
The development standards for second dwelling units that are in Development Code S 19.04.030,
Section 2. paragraph P, regulate the construction of second units throughout the city. In order to
receive approval for a permit to construct a second dwelling unit, the property must have water,
sewer. gas. and electric services available for connection to the second unit. Currently, Meyers
Road northwest of Little League Drive does not have water, sewer, or gas lines available for new
dwelling units. Therefore. it would not be possible for the appellant to meet the requirements of
the Development Code. On this basis. the Building Official revoked Permit 1'<0. B0503040.
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No. 06-03
Unfortunately. the building plans were sent out for expedited plan checking, without special
instructions concerning second dwelling regulations. The outside plan check agency reviews
plans for conformance to the California Building Code, but not the City's Development Code. If
the plans had been reviewed internally by Building Division staff that is knowledgeable of the
Development Code. then it is likely that Permit No. B0503040 would not have been issued and
the appellant would have been notified much earlier about the requirements for second dwelling
units. The building plans were routed to the Planning Division for review, but were not checked
by the Planning staff until after permits had been issued.
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
Attached to the appeal application. the appellant has presented a summary of his previous
application to subdivide the property. Mr. Hernandez submitted a Tentative Parcel Map
application on February 25, 2005, to subdivide 3 acres into 3 parcels for one house on each lot.
The land use district in which the property is located allows the subdivision of land with a
maximum density of one unit per acre, or 3 single-family dwelling units for 3 acres of land.
Shortly thereafter, staff met with the appellant to discuss the zoning, density, subdivision
regulations. and similar proposals in the Verdemont area that did not have staffs support
because of the lack of necessary infrastructure. Staff advised Mr. Hernandez that it did not
appear that the proposed subdivision would meet the requirements necessary for approval, such
as providing standard routes for access and connecting to City water and sewer services. A
subdivision approval is contingent on improvements to infrastructure such as public roads, water
and sewer lines. possibly on-site fire hydrants, and other public improvements that serve to
minimize serious public health and safety problems. Staff also advised Mr. Hernandez that he
could proceed with a recommendation for denial, or withdraw the application and request a
refund. On May 24,2005. Mr. Hernandez requested a withdrawal of the application and a refund
of the application fees. both of which were granted.
In the same meeting. the appellant inquired about the requirements for constructing detached
houses on the property. Staff advised Mr. Hernandez that the construction of a single-family
house on an existing lot requires only a building permit, and plans would need to be submitted to
the Building Division and the Public Works/Engineering Division for review and approval. Staff
also advised the appellant that construction of three houses would require three separate lots.
The appellant prepared and submitted construction plans (e.g. building permit, grading plan,
street improvement plan, etc.) at his own risk.
The appellant states that the Building Division would allow installation of a private septic system
If the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County of San Bernardino ",,'ere agreeable.
\\'hile this is technically correct, the Building Division does not exercise discretion when
Jpproving a building permit that includes a septic system. If the proposed septic system
conforms to the regulations of the Water Quality Control Board, County. and California Building
Code, then the issuance of a building permit is an automatic ministerial action that does not
involve discretion on the part of the Building Division staff. In other words, the Building
Division would have no choice but to issue a permit for plans that conform to all applicable
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No 06-03
codes and regulations. However, the requirements of Development Code S 19.04.030, Section 2,
paragraph p, are still applicable to the second dwelling unit.
The appellant states that the Public Works/Engineering Division would allow grading for two
detached houses if permitted by the Planning Division, and a grading permit was approved on
October 18, 2005, and issued on October 19, 2005. However, the Planning Division did not
indicate approval to the Public Works/Engineering Division for two building pads. Prior to
approval of the grading permit, the City Planner/Deputy Director had indicated verbally to the
Public Works/Engineering Division that two detached houses would not be permitted due to the
lack of services required to support a second dwelling unit.
CONCLUSION
The appellant has not provided any information to support his position that the Building
Official's determination was incorrect.
RECOJ\1J\1ENDA TlON
Staff recommends the Planning Commission uphold the Director's revocation of Building Permit
No. 80503040. and deny Appeal No. 05-27 based upon the analysis in the staff report.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mfl/~ {;,J}'#-t"<Jf
James Funk
Director of Development Services
~~
---.... -
8rian Foote
Assistant Planner
Attachment A
Attachment 8
Attachment C
Attachment D
Location Map
Site Plan
Revocation Letter
Application for Appeal
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No. 06-03
ATTACHMENT A - Location Map
~~,
---
t
"
,
~ ',ojee' sltet=c>-
.............
-
~
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Appeal No. 06-03
A TT ACHMENT B - Site Plan
Unit A - Main Dwelling Unit
3923 MEYERS RD. 259.83'
'~'-"-;;YI'-"-"-'r'-"~y' "-"-'~-"-:;y-r"-"-"-"-":::'-'~'-"-':VI"-"-;;~\:'~::r:;-'
. I j " , , \ '
\.
,
~"-;"-y-"~-"-"
~
I~
:,
~\
4 :
,.,
(i.:
"\
0,
",.
~,
o.i
~:
-\
\
\
\
, :
: 10'_O';lC'-O~
f \ \
: '\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'\
\ 7:> \
\
\
\
,
\
\
. r- ,
~ co. \
" U) ,
, r'l \
: Ul .
~ ~
" \
\
\
\
\
\
\
,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
':z
.",
':~
,,.
-4
":0-
0;
"
lni
"l:
SOD
.."
O~\-.Jt
~......
~ .. -
..,.JIlL..l, ~\,...,
%\.Oc."-S\J~~:'" ,.1t~
.' 'f"\G'f4.a..:,t....... t' 'It
tl St.~~..., \ ~t\.\.
t.t.~.... --'
..'
....
soo
'00
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
..'
....
~........
",",,'\~
.~~
~,\\'" ~
_S\Ol '\ ,.
..... ~"Oto/l
~
..\" d"'Io,O'"
'" or'\l~( .....:....,... <t1"
S"l':t't \,0" tc \,,\J~___ ,0"'0
,~... ',1,040 \0 ",~- l''''
,flfl'v" \0,..0"(, "'0\'0":",,, ot'f' ,..0....
.... . fI'J c,.~f ~~".....~40\'O a. ..".
. (lie.' ...9 \19' _ ",.... 0' ,
. ,og' , fl- ." (,~O' ....~\,O. 06 \'
~o;c.~ ~c.".6 ,,.,, ~c;." \ ,.....
9 \..,,6 .""c'''' . \~ \," l'" \,,0
l 00 \f'>O ~O\"o" ,l(l tfA. ~
c. ,# 4'o"''''_.n~'''' ",-",'II.. "AI'
. ..Do ~ -.d''' .""~ oJIO
S~v'" . \ q""'", ,. fI"
o '0'. ~ "". F., ,_\. - C
", }Q~ ,0....0'" _~6.., Ct." cIA III
f:j~('oO\.yf.'a ..' oar" vd""
...,..r . ('to\. ,&..,,,,.,. 4 .\.
..,.,p 'w'''C\.l f1'.\.1 ,..- c.r".,.
ttC)\.:~od~:\....._.\f~\' ,
t. \0 a' ,_ ,..0,..
\'f~.c.d"?
~\Ol;.""
'i::
""
~\
4'
'"
c.:.
''''
'"
'0
''''
"..I:.
".
e\
__,~-o-----' --\______
-- #- # #. \
1'1 g_---f"\-- -#--_# " "
- - - - , '
r;-_----#- \ "
--~~~ \ ..
,
, ,
,~ ,
,~ \
"0, "
,
v#~\
,
,~
,~
'0
,
,
,
..<
"",,t.
,
, -,
,
,
,
,
,
, -
- -\
,
....'\
- ,
,
'-' \ --
;';"\,O"O"~ _-- ---
~~~#-... '...-----'
.,....~~
\-r \
:'~
-- -
"
---
, ,-
, ,
I \~
, "
, ,
~~--t~~~~~4--------~~:=====
------~--~~.Q..-:~ -------
~ ---- - ,-- - ---s!-
.... :
____~:..o_--
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No. 06-03
A TT ACHMENT B - Site Plan
Unit B - Second Dwelling Unit
3923 MEYERS RD.
...... - ........ -...... ......... .....-.. -..-... ........ ......-...... ........-...... ........-............ ........ ...~ .._.._.._.._.._,~._.._.._.._.._..
,
~
~ - ~"..: "I~'"
.. ,,,
.... ..,," " \
"I I I'
',,:~:\~~,,' ''', ..f!"
, ...~~, ....-...'
,', c' ;.~~ .' ','. .;,;,":...
'. \ c,~ c:aO \ \ :l" ~~~..r I
,\ e'A. \ '.\ .."'..:t:.."'-.....' /
, '. \\_....~~\'} I
, \)...... ;..r, \ J "
'. ..>--k,.' ......~\, I (:'~'
\\ .. ...\ ....,' ...,,' \ \
''.....-1'' \ " lQ\)\\" ~....I.... ,,\
\,.. \\..... " at L'~ "-i o~.. \ \
,0 , \'" e'-\. ---,'
\'. "10.'.. ~\"Q\~G ........'\.....,
\ ' .." e,u\\. t~ct , \'r..._....,
\\ ,- ""t..~ p.~S\o ~'\ " ,'"
" s' 0 sa , '
\ \ I .,... ......:. \ \
\ \,' ). .. ... \ \ , '., '
,I I'
\\ I \ ," \\ I)........~\
I' I I' \ , ..10
\:~..:/':-.-_ ,\0:: ~,,:,:::::--
",'. . \ " " \
"<.:::\....:-: \
\
'\
\
"
.'
'..
@
,
,
. _l_L
,-'
~-r~....--"
.)-' ,
...",..._ ,..~.J
..
__---""i-- ..--
"'~.. -'\.. ---.. -:-';-"". ~~ ..J.-" -........-
__~.-;.c,o- _\ _._-..-
~--- _:'~------$~'
~--- ~ ~
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
A TT ACHMENT C - Revocation Letter
Appeal No. 06-03
...ppeal No. 05-27
Heeting Date: Feb. 8. 2006
Page 6
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
300 North "0" Street" San Bernardino" CA 92418-0001
Planning & Building 909.384.5057 " Fax: 909.384.5080
Public WorkslEngineering 909.384.5111 "Fax: 909.384.5155
www.sbcily.org
11/1 7/2005
Mr. Ramon Hernandez
2447 Ogden St.
San Bernardino, Ca. 92407
Regarding: 3923 W. Meyers Rd.
Dear Mr. Hernandez:
The Department regrets to inform you that building permit B0503040 has been issued in
error for the reasons stated below, and is hereby revoked by the Building Official
pursuant to S.B.M.C. 15.04.020, C.B.C.I 06.4.5.
I. City of San Bernardino Development Code requires that a second dwelling unit may
only be established on lots where water;"sewer, gas, and electricity are available. (San
Bernardino Development Code 19.04.030, Section 2, paragraph P, #9). There
currently is no sewer service to this parcel.
2. A grading permit is required to be issued prior to the issuance of building permit, you
are currently in plan review with Public Works.
As a result of this revocation action we will process a refund of fees paid for this permit.
We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you. If you should nave any
questions regarding this matter, please contact our office for assistance.
Sincerely,
/~~
, .--
Joseph Lease
Building Official
EXHIBIT 2 _ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No 06-03
A TT ACHMENT D - Appeal
A~
0&$- '2-7
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "E" Street, 3rd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Phone (909) 384-5057 . (909)384-5080
\Veb address: w"..w.sbcity.org
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE (check one)
Ei Development Services Director
o Development/Environmental Review Committee
o Planning Commission
Casenumber(s): {3 oSo~ot{o 1s.,-1.:\-'.h~.-5-{...;;'\(
I
Ar05--21
Project address: :1 Cf :\.3 I-\. t: 'i '12" ~ C .
Appellant's name: ~!..Y\.ow lAJ.rzJ.1~,.Jo(''Z.-
ppellant'saddress: .:Jc{'I7 OhDL.~ sT. 5f:>...J. 'O€.t'Z.N_lZ..O;,-Jt). 'fd-.YQ7
;'''l'~'' r,,:-..\.. .. \\\ _L.L
. _ 1.-. -..... ' l I
Appellant's phone: a, 0., - 70 Cf - 3 ,,~ 'D (c.t. u.)
:lpellant's e-mail address: "("CL._c....hlo'Q~ <!. _~I'\.. c....-
Contact person's name: 0~"",c>....J L.\..~~.v"""'.J)c"Z....
Contact person's address: -l '" ~ 7 en 0 t. i1J ~.
Contact person's phone: c;'o-r. 101 - 3 "., 0
Contact person's e-mail address:
>( c;..yy.. ......l.o.. \, .. \(. .. """~ J'\.
t.:> _
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100' of the Development Code, an appeal must be filed on a City application form
within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate appeal filing fee.
Appeals are normally scheduled for a- determination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common
Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing, of the specific date and
ne of the appeal hearing.
OFFICE USE ONLY
.:te appeal filed: i ~ /.2j b)'
Received by: Lf..n
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No 06-03
A TT ACHMENT D - Appeal
(EQUIRED INFORMATION FOR AN APPEAL
pecific action being appealed and the date of that action: Tk 'lr<.Voc..~ ~ - 0 {. r,L.J~ \ a~-r
PC""i,,":~~ &OSo3~"'i:J //-.,J!-oS""
Specific grounds for the appeal: '/L.. re-.SD" .f:,.", +h yev-.:>c..+.o....;.) lc:.c\L-O+- 6e..~
I C#Wl"'C......+'"'l h......V-L "- ~:""a-- .O~"""'.+ c:..v 0.- 5..c..f'+=.c.. ~lt~+-f'-- .
. 1
VI~u-'... .-.:.. ~v.,v..~ ~........~'5~5-l-c....... -rU ",,_11-4 ~+evt1uc..h:4.y
Co",4-ro' ~<L-...:l ~_~ +~ SAw "....VJ"1..v..!.;,I\.O (....,~~"t c.."-v~v.,,,_....J-.t
\.i eo", l-\- "'- \....c..v--c.. 0. pp rnu r_ d -+ L... ", ~ 5'7' r..~_.
Action sought:
'To:> 'r'C..,.i"",~+"'~ f",...-l' f'-c.,\'-:.+ ~ ~ oSo~o \oft)
Additional information:
::> t. i. 04. '"T'"'r A<.. U. to 0
:::>lgnature of appellant: _
/~
Date: /a -();).-or-
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Appeal No. 06-03
ATTACHMENT D- Appeal
From: Ramon Hernandez
Subject: Appeal
To whom it may concern:
This is a brief history of the facts in relation to this case; on February 25th, 2005 I, Ramon
Hernandez, submitted an application for a parcel subdivision, one three acre parcel to be
subdivided into three- one acre parcels.
Two months later the Planning Department mailed me an appointment for the
presentation of the project to the City Council for May 26th, 2005. Approximately two
weeks before my appointment I received a call form Mr. Brian foot - Mr. Foot asks to
meet with me to go over some issue in regards to the lot subdivision application. We met
the following day; Mr. Foot explained the process and also told his recommendation to
the City council was going to deny my petition due to the lack of a second access road. as
required by state codes, to the proposed project.
My response to that was, is there a possibility to build three houses in that parcel? His
answer was yes, because, the zone for that parcel is "ONE UNIT per acre" he said, "but
you won't be able to sell those houses separately because they are going to be attached to
one parcel. My response to that was "not a problem I'm building those houses for us"
"my family" and we are planning on living in those houses.
"OK" he said, before that you need to check with the Engineering and Building
Departments for their requirements
Based on that information I proceed to talk to the building Department about the
requirements for the sewer system. Their response was, as long as the Regional Water
Control Board allows it and the San Bernardino County approves the installation and
percolation test we will be able to issue a permit for a private sewer system.
My next stop was at the Engineering Department and my question to them was to know
what the requirements were for Building two houses on this parcel. Mr Lyn Parker told
me that one of the requirements was the Planning Department approval; my response was
I cleared that with Mr. Brian Foot in the Planning Department. OK, he said I will have to
check on that, and you need to submit a Grading Plan and Street Improvement Plan.
I submitted the Grading plan to the Engineering Department and they approved it on
Octoberthe 18th, 2005.
My Building Plans had been in plan check and were ready to be approved as soon as
could show proved of an approved grading plan. Building and Safety Issued the Building
Permits for both houses on 11/14/2005
EXHIBIT 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Appeal No. 06-03
A TT ACHMENT D - Appeal
On 11/17/2005 the Building Depanment mailed me a notice of revocation for permit
B0503040.
On 11/21/2005 I met with Mr. Joe Lease (Building Official) and Mr. Brian Foot (Planner)
to clarify this issue. Mr. Foot told to make an appointment with his supervisor andJorthe
Social Services Director
On 11/23/2005 I received a telephone call form Mr. James Funk (Social Services
Director) to notify me that I need to submit an application for appeaL
Application submitted on 12/02/2005
Sincerely,
f.2-/..J
Ramon Hernandez
EXHIBIT 3 - APPEAL
Appeal No. 06-03
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "E" Street, 3'd Floor
San Bernardino. CA 92418
Phone (909) 384-5057 . (909) 384-5080
Web address: www.sbcity.org
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE (check one)
o Development Services Director
o DevelopmentlEnvirorunental Re~{ew Corrunittee
.0" Planning Commission (1 T 0(;-
Case number(s): 8 OS03D~O
'.) '12. 3,
Project address: i S ~ oS J.1 I. 'IE. tz. S IZ 0
Appellant's name:_.p~u...a N I+&:'Ro-J A.~O t.L
Appellant's address: do </ ti 7 Dtr OL.AJ ~t:
Appellant's phone: q 01 - i D" - .3" 'f 0 .
03
() .~ L( ~.- (t I .~ '-14--U(,110
'Il E
/o..T'>o~- ;).1
~I"H
f,e.'k!::n;.:\irx; (\ A '':'l:l..L{U+
\ppellant's e-mail address: (<io.-.o"","'o ov.... ~ "'^ \^. (.0"""
Contact person's name:
Contact person's address:
Contact person's phone:
Contact person's e-mail address:
s~.....~ .... '\ "" u~vE..
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development Code, an appeal must be filed on a City application form
..'. ithin 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate appeal filing fee.
"lpeals are normally scheduled for a detern1ination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common
Council within 30 days of the filing date of the appeal. You will be notified, in writing, of the specific date and
t! me of the appeal hearing.
OFFICE USE ONLY
~''''pp"l filod, ~~'1 I ~~~
Received by: . &;1'
. --'"
~-,. .~
11104
EXHffirr 3 - APPEAL
Appeal No 06-03
REQUIRED INFORMA nON FOR AN APPEAL
Specific action being appealed and the date of that action: I ~..(. Vc...\JOc......:\"'"lo"\.. cS <(...
Bv, \.t; ^ ~ Pc.... .......+ #- B eSo3 0'10
Specific grounds for the appeal: GI"20v.v6" ~ ~IfCH_.c-~O 7\. u.J....."-'- b" ~~
o~ 1a..c..K. -f- ~~"""'c.y- - "J: C......,..c........+I"'t ~~.,~ '" bd~.l.L_)' pl/-....-...+
fI ~ --'_ I( ..,
;-0.... '1- tU C> ~fJ-f<:, L .57' STC..-~ ..... ,,; c..~ '- L LO-Ol:-'c ( t--oV" ~ .r "'.. elATe...
~
r L u...l a: ~ !:..:f!> i G ""'-
Action sought: To t'<..~\\&-h...~' ~ u,\!~..... ~ p,-~: t +- 13 uS (X,O y 0
Additional information:
Signature of appellant:
Date:
2
11/04
.l~." '_I (iii .....J1J!
.lO..Z6....J.~ .s
lS"~I.""Z
Z~MOllIlIIr'",
to..:e .." .--.....-...- ..
CUt S41~
1<'
EXHIBIT 3 - APPEAL
.1.,,,.110
,UlHS ]1J.!1
tfOJ ~"l.O J........ ]~ OlSOdOaw .,.
___________ _ A.PN.0.348''''-44,
--- ~----------------------------------------
3923 U[ YERS RD
__ ..__ __ _____ _-. --.-- __ - - - --'- --- - - ---__ _ _ --------i. ___ _____n _ __'"
-~
x..--
,,-- ,
x
\ ,-
''-
t
, \
.. '
C'
-'
'.l,,-''''''
...
::T~"'!:.
."\. ~
,.
'1/t;;~~
.,
,
.
.
@
" ,- to \1 _ -- ::':-:=---1,
\-~~"'"
, ~ ." .' . .
I .
~,_.
-'_.
.........,r...
.,.
,
,
~~'
':;'.\
\,-
"
i
\ \.
\ ;\
\','.
\. \
i
=- ..
, I ,
4-
Inl
i
rom
I, ~
p. 'J]-
"
~
;
"f"
I,f-::
Ill;: ..
1/",
Inl
Hi:
t
\
\
?
\
'\ \
. \ '
__ _'~__.__.___.____.______._.._li\,....__._._ -..--.-.-.- ---..- - -- ..... . ... --..- .......~
AppeIll No. 06-03
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
RAcHEL G. CLARK, C.M.C. . CITY CLERK
300 North "D" Street. San Bernardino' CA 92418-0001
909.384.5002' Fax: 909.384.5158
www.sbcity.org
,.
April 20, 2006
Mr. Ramon Hernandez
2447 Ogden Street
San Bernardino, CA 92407
Dear Mr. Hernandez:
At the meeting of the Mayor and Common Council held on April 17, 2006, the following
action was taken relative to an appeal of the Building Official's revocation of a permit to
construct a second dwelling unit on a 3-acre property in the RE, Residential Estate, land use
district.
The hearing was closed; and the Mayor and Common Council denied the appeal and upheld the
Building Official's revocation of Building Permit No. B0503040 to construct a second dwelling
unit on a 3-acre property located at 3923 W. Meyers Road.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the City Clerk's office.
Sincerely,
,
G(~/JCu0L
Rachel G. Clark
City Clerk
RGC:lls
pc: Development Services
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ADOPTED SHARED VALUES: Integrity' Accountability' Respect for Human Dignity' Honesty