Loading...
RAB - Approval of Minutes - 08-24-99 p= 0 — -,n T, II17TIL LT fiL-+ I i"ATIOl. ,w."-- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD BUILDING REHABILITATION APPEALS BOARD AUGUST 24, 1999 The regular meeting of the Rosemead Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board was called to order by Chairman Vasquez at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard,Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag was led by Chairman Vasquez The Invocation was led by Boardmember Taylor ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Boardmembers Bruesch, Imperial, Taylor, Vice-Chairman Clark, and Chairman Vasquez Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 27, 1999—REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY BOARDMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY BOARDMEMBER IMPERIAL that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 27, 1999, be approved as adopted. Vote resulted: Aye: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. I. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH The Board Secretary administered the oath to all persons wishing to address the Board. H. HEARINGS A. 3341 DEL MAR AVENUE The subject property consists of an owner-occupied single family dwelling located in the C-3 zone. A"Please Letter" was mailed to the property owner on March 10, 1999. Inspection on April 5, 1999 revealed no progress. The Building Official declared the property substandard and filed a Declaration of Substandard Property with the Los Angeles County Recorder's office. On April 13, 1999, a Fifteen Day" certified letter was mailed and posted on the property, requesting abatement of the substandard conditions. On April 15, 1999,Michael Cruz, one of the property owners, obtained a"Repair per Rehab" permit. A follow-up inspection on May 17, 1999 showed no progress. Inspection on June I, 1999 revealed some yard area cleanup, however, the other defects remained. Inspections on July 1, and August 4, 1999 revealed no further improvement at the property. A Notice of Hearing was mailed and posted on the property on August 9, 1999. All interested panics have been notified. It is recommended that the Board find the property substandard and order all substandard conditions be removed and/or corrected by October 4, 1999. However, if sufficient progress is achieved by October 4, 1999, the abatement date may be extended to November 1, 1999. RFTABB-24-99 Page a1 Michael Cruz, 3341 Del Mar, Rosemead, the property owner, stated that he has three jobs and works evenings and weekends. Mr. Cruz stated that those jobs are winding down and that he will now be able to spend time on the corrections. Mr. Cruz agreed to the conditions and hopes to have the exterior walls finished by October 4, 1999. MOTION BY BOARDMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY BOARDMEMBER IMPERIAL that the Board find the property substandard and order all substandard conditions be removed and/or corrected by October 4, 1999. However, if sufficient progress is achieved by October 4, 1999, the abatement date may be extended to November 1, 1999. Vote resulted: Aye: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. B. 7646 NEWMARK AVENUE-HEARING The subject property consists of an owner-occupied single family dwelling with an unpermitted unit above the garage. The property is zoned R-l. The aforementioned garage was built with benefit of permits in 1983 as a 525 square foot single story structure. The building inspector went to the property on September 2, 1998 as the result of a citizen complaint. The tenant, Mr. Kohne, warned the inspector to leave the property and to obtain a warrant for any further inspections. Despite this confrontation, the inspector was able to compile a list of defects. A"Please Letter" was mailed to the property owner on September 15, 1998. On October 7, 1998, the building inspector returned to the property with Assistant City Manager, Donald Wagner. Mr. Bohne provided access to the interior of the garage. It was noted that the attic area had been converted to living space, including a stairway, bathroom, skylight and windows. Mr. Bohne was advised of the necessity of permits and approvals. A revised list of defects was compiled and mailed to Mr. Cherrington, the property owner. A follow-up inspection on November 10, 1998 revealed no progress. The Building Official declared the property substandard and filed a Declaration of Substandard Property with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office. A"Fifteen Day" certified letter was mailed and posted on the property on November 18, 1998, requesting abatement of the substandard conditions. On November 24, 1998, the Building Official received a letter from Mr. Cherrington. He stated his intention was to sell the property to the tenants, Mr. & Mrs. Bohne. He stated the Bohnes planned to demolish the residence and construct a new house on the property. Mr. Cherrington was granted a three month extension to allow time for the transfer on the property and for the preparation of plans for the proposed new residence. An inspection on January 19, 1999 revealed no change at the property. On January 25, 1999, Mr. Cherrington telephoned and stated the property was in escrow. On February 3, 1999, Ruth Ann Bohne, the buyer, phoned and spoke with the Building Official. He explained the rehabilitation and permit process to her. She indicated that she and her husband intended to comply. An updated title report confirmed that the property had sold. A"Thirty Day" certified letter was mailed to the new owner and was posted on the property on March 2, 1999. On March 31, 1999, a letter was received from Mrs. Bohne requesting a public hearing. She also requested that the City discontinue sending any correspondence by certified mail and further requested that the City cease all communication with Mr. Cherrington. (Mr. Cherrington is listed as beneficiary on a second trust deed, and is therefore considered an"interested party" and will remain on the mailing list.) On April 5, 1999, the"Thirty Day" certified letter was returned "unclaimed" and was sent again by first class mail. On May 5, 1999, James Guerra, Consulting Building Official, met with Mrs. Bohne at the property. Mr. Guerra inspected the interior of the garage and the upstairs converted storage area. At that time, Mr. Guerra and Mrs. Bohne discussed the list of defects and agreed that the case REGAB8-24-99 Page#2 would not be taken before the Property Rehabilitation Appeals Board in May, as previously scheduled. Mrs. Bohne also requested permission to correct the garage violations in conjunction with the construction of a new dwelling. Mr. Guerra discussed this request with Planning Director, Peter Lyons. Mr. Lyons had no objections provided that the garage remain unoccupied and that final approval of the new dwelling is contingent upon correction of the violations. To date, no plans for a new residence have been submitted, nor has Mrs. Bohne been in contact with Planning or Building staff. A Notice of Hearing was mailed and posted on the property on August 9, 1999. All interested parties have been notified. The City Building Official recommends that the Board find the property substandard and order that all substandard conditions be removed and/or corrected by October 4, 1999. However, if the required permits are obtained, and sufficient progress is achieved by October 4, 1999, the abatement date may be extended to November 1, 1999, or, if plans are submitted for a new residence by October 4, 1999, the abatement date may be extended to allow sufficient time for the plan check process. However, the plans must be approved and permits obtained no later than April 1, 2000. Ruth Ann Bohne, 7646 Newmark Avenue, Rosemead, property owner, stated that she is trying to obtain financing to rebuild their new house and to comply with the City regarding their garage. Ms. Kohne stated that they cannot obtain a loan because of the City's Declaration of Substandard Property on the Title. Boardmember Bruesch asked why the owners don't vacate the illegal addition and then proceed to build their new home. Ms. Bohne stated that they are not occupying the illegal garage addition, but are using it as storage. Ms. Bohn explained that her husband uses the bathroom in the garage to cleanup prior to entering the house. Ms. Bohne continued that they are planning on building a 2- bedroom, 2-bath house and once that is completed, they will not need the extra bathroom in the garage. Ms. Bohne stated that that is why they had requested that the City put aside the Declaration of Substandard Property to allow them to build the new house, and once it was built, they will then comply and tear out the bathroom. Boardmember Bruesch asked if there is a code violation in having a 'A bath, commode and shower in the garage? James Guerra, Consulting Building Official, responded that there is no prohibition in the Building Code, but that this particular addition restricts parking in the garage and also has a stairway to the second floor attic. Peter Lyons, Planning Director, added that if the bathroom prevents the garage from being 20'x20', then by default, they are in violation of the parking requirement. Ms. Bohne stated that currently there are two cars parked in their garage. One of the cars is parked behind the bathroom. Boardmember Bruesch asked if the bathroom can remain during the construction of their new home, and that it be the last item to be removed. Mr. Guerra responded that that was what the property owners had requested in May. Their request was to keep the garage vacant and not use it, construct the house, and before they occupy the house, they will convert the garage. Mr. Guerra stated that he and the Planning Director had agreed to that plan in principle. Currently, the owners now have a different request. Boardmember Bruesch asked if there is a way to remove the "cloud" from their Title to enable them to obtain a loan. REGAB8-20.99 Page a3 Mr. Guerra explained that in previous dealings with Change of Titles and Declaration of Substandard, the new owners are asked to assume the responsibility for substandard conditions. Mr. Guerra stated that they have not previously removed a declaration for the same owner to maintain the property. Ms. Bohne stated that when they purchased the property, the escrow company made them sign a document stating that they are responsible in dealing with the City on this matter, otherwise, they could not purchase the property. Mr. Guerra stated that the City did not remove the Declaration during the escrow process, as it was already on the Title before they acquired it. Robert Kress, City Attorney, explained that if the City took the Declaration off and the problem remains, that would be committing a fraud on the lender. Boardmember Taylor asked where the walls are deteriorated, and how much will it cost to repair it. Steve Bailey, Building Official, referred to the siding in the photographs and other areas of the house, of which photos are not available, as he was not able to gain access to the property. Boardmember Taylor stated that the owners have to put money aside and a realistic figure needs to be arrived at. Mr. Guerra stated that in the past, a cost agreement between the City and the applicant is worked out. Mr. Guerra stated that the cost for this would depend on the removal of the bathroom, or if the unpermitted stairway remains, and the inclusion of the storage area. The floor would have to be assessed as to whether it is adequate to support the load and has foundations. Mr. Guerra stated that those are unknowns at present and could drive the bonding cost up. Boardmember Bruesch asked Ms. Bohne if they are willing to set aside the money to go through the process of removing the"cloud", in order to obtain their loan. Mr. Bruesch stated that that money would then be used to remove the bathroom, reinforce the second floor, and to bring the stairway up to code. Ms. Bohne responded that she agrees to that, but they told the bank that the money was for the bedroom and bath addition. MOTION BY BOARDMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY BOARDMEMBER TAYLOR that staff meet with the owners to clear the Title on the property and to bring this item back at the next meeting. Before vote could result, more conversation ensued. Ms. Bohne stated that Mr. Bohne plans on doing all the work himself Ms. Bohne explained her difficulty she experienced with staff, and that she was told that they could not use the bathroom at all during construction of their home, but could use a chemical toilet. Boardmember Taylor stated that the Planning Director could not arbitrarily waive procedure for them, as everyone needs to be treated equally, and these types of problems need to be resolved by the Board if any exception is going to be granted. Mr. Taylor stated that keeping the bathroom to cleanup during construction is a reasonable request. Discussion ensued about the options for removing or relocating the unpermitted stairway to allow space for two cars and the bathroom. Vice-Chairman Clark asked if it is a safety issue that is prohibiting the owners from using the bathroom during construction? Mr. Guerra responded that it was constructed without permits. REGAB8-24-99 Page#4 Vice-Chairman Clark stated that since the owners are in the permitting process they should be able to use the bathroom while constructing their house. Frank Tripepi, City Manager, stated that staff cannot make that decision, that the Board can make that decision. Mr. Lyons stated that that is the outstanding issue. MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN CLARK, SECOND BY BOARDMEMBER BRUESCH that the Motion be amended to allow the owners to use the bathroom during construction at the time they obtain the loan; that staff meet with the owners to help them clear Title on the property, and that this item be returned at the next meeting. Before vote could result, more discussion ensued. Boardmember Imperial stated that his concern was that the stairway may be a liability, rather than usage of the bathroom. Boardmember Imperial than called for the question. Vote resulted: Aye: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. III. STATUS REPORTS A. SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES B. BUILDING REHABILITATION APPEALS BOARD C. CITY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY REFERRAL UPDATE The foregoing items on the Status Reports did not require any action. W. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS Boardmember Bruesch requested a study session in the future to discuss the permit fee structure. V. ADJOURNMENT There being no further action to be taken at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for September 28, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: APPROVED: Board Secretary CHAIRMAN REGAB8-24-99 Page#5