Loading...
Rehab Appeals Board - Minutes 05-23-00NOT OFFICIAL IIN'.IrfL APPROVED BY THM ROSE X-FEAD RFH ABTLTT2yTLL'ON E:?'i' ` LLu DO 'uID MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD BUILDING REHABILITATION APPEALS BOARD MAY 23, 2000 The regular meeting of the Rosemead Building Rehabilitation Appeals Board was called to order by Chairman Clark at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag and Invocation were waived as having been completed during the meetingjust adjourned. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Boardmembers Bruesch, Taylor, Vasquez, Vice-Chairman Imperial, and Chairman Clark Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APRIL 25, 2000 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY BOARDMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY BOARDMEMBER TAYLOR that the Board approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 2000. Vote resulted: Aye: Vasquez, Bruesch, Clark, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. 1. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH The Board Secretary administered the oath to all persons wishing to address the Board. H. HEARINGS The following item was taken out of order in deference to those in the audience B. 3044-3046 SULLIVAN AVENUE - HEARING The subject property consists of two, tenant-occupied single family dwellings located in the R-1 zone. The rear house has an unpermitted addition that has been converted to a third unit, but is not occupied. A "Please Letter" was mailed to the property owners on October 26, 1999. On November 1, 1999, Mr. And Mrs. Lee, the property owners, came to City Hall. The building inspector explained the list of defects, permit requirements, and the County record search procedure. Inspection on November 23, 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. A "Fifteen Day" certified letter was mailed and posted on the property on December 1, 1999, requesting abatement of the substandard conditions. Inspection on December 16, 1999 revealed no visible change at the property. On January 4, 2000, the inspector made contact with Mrs. Lee. Mrs. Lee informed the inspector that she was waiting for the results of the County record search. She also indicated that they had purchased the property in the present condition twenty years ago. Inspection on February 3, 2000 revealed no change at the property. The same day, Mr. Lee came to City Hall. He spoke with Planning Department staff regarding the third unit. He was informed that his property was not large enough to allow a third unit under current density limitation, and that a more complete set of plans was required for further review. Mr. Lee reiterated that they had purchased the property in its present condition, REHAB T1nN':5.23-00 Page 9 1 and that the only change that had occurred was a roof repair. (No permit on file for the roof repair). On February 10, 2000, the City received a letter from the lender, G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, acknowledging the list of defects and their willingness to cooperate. The letter stated that they would be notifying the borrowers, and would keep the City informed and updated on the status. On February 17, 2000, the property owners provided staff with information that had been obtained from the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. This information indicated an "enclosed patio" discovered from a field check. Permit information from the County Building and Safety records was not provided. Mr. and Mrs. Lee submitted plans to Planning Department on February 22, 2000 On February 24, 2000, the tenants from both 3044 and 3046 Sullivan Avenue called the Building Department to request interior inspections. Access confirmed that the addition at the rear of 3044 Sullivan Avenue was configured as a separate unit, consisting of a bedroom, bath, and kitchen. A revised list of defects was compiled and mailed to the property owners on March 6, 2000. Mrs. Lee picked up Planning Department corrections on March 7, 2000. A follow-up inspection on April 4, 2000 revealed no progress. A new set of plans was submitted to Planning Department on April 18, 2000. However, there are outstanding corrections and are not yet approved. Another inspection on April 20, 2000 showed no change at the property. A "For Sale" sign is now posted at the property. The City Building Official recommends that the Board find the property substandard and order all substandard conditions bp~ed and/or corrected by July 3, 2000. However, if the required permits are obtained, and sufficient progress is achieved by July-3, 2000; the abatement date may be extended to August.1 '2000 - Woon & Helen Lee, 8636-2erelda Street,-Rosemead, property owners were pre ent._Mr. Lee stated that they bought the propertyas is H years ago with two houses :on one lot and one vacant lot. Mr. Lee stated that the structure does riot have a permit and the entire property is illegal, but they are not responsible for any of it. Frank Tripepi, City Manager, asked Mr. Lee, for the record, tharhe admits that everything on that property is illegal. Mr. Lee denied that and continued to explain that the combined square footage ofthe two " houses would be legal. James Guerra, Building Consultant, stated that the Building Department is not contesting the legality of the two dwelling units. They are contesting the conversion of one of the dwelling units into a duplex, and contesting the addition to it. Mr. Lee refuted that statement and said again, that the extension was already there when they bought it. Mr. Lee asked for the Board's help in legalizing the property. Mr. Lee asked if the enclosed patio is illegal. Mr. Guerra responded that the patio was not built with a building permit. Boardmember Taylor explained that the issue is not the legality of the second house, but the addition that was put on inside of the dwelling. Mr. Lee stated that the permit is for the front house and that the rest of the structure is Regal, and is he being forced to tear down a legal dwelling. Vice-Chairman Imperial explained that the Board is addressing a segment of the house that is illegal, not the whole house. Steve Bailey, Building Official, clarified that in the Building Department records, there are legal building permits for both residences. REHAB MIN:5-23-00 Page a2 Ms. Lee stated that she had submitted new plans drawn up by an architect to the Planning Department. Ms. Lee, referring to her drawings, stated that she wants to get that portion legalized and to comply with corrections. Ms. Lee went over the list of corrections for the interior portion, such as removing the linen closets. Brad Johnson, Planning Director, explained that the corrections are trying to make the structure flow as a single family home, with hallways and bedrooms lined up, to prevent the dwelling from being converted back into an additional unit. Mr. Guerra added that the current violation is that it is a duplex and the Planning Department conditions are restoring it back into a single-family dwelling. Boardmember Taylor requested that this item be deferred for 30 days to enable staff and the owners to work out their discrepancies, there are too many open ends remaining to make a decision tonight. Ms. Lee pointed out the front porch area and asked why they are being required to demolish it. Mr. Johnson responded that the front porch leads into a bedrotyn. z _ Boardmember Taylor pointed that the other front door that leads in the living room i`s the normal entry, but the porch going into the bedroom could be interpreted as a potential for a rental unit with it own entry. Ms. Lee stated that they could cover that porch door with a wall instead of removing the entire porch. Boardmember Bruesch explained that most of the defects can be cleared up, but the concern is that the addition will never be used as a third unit. Mr. Tripepi stated that this item will be deferred and for staff to work with the owners on working toward some progress. A. 8242 KEIM STREET Frank Tripepi, City Manager, stated that this case is now closed and no action is necessary. III. STATUS REPORTS A. SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES B. BUILDING REHABILITATION APPEALS BOARD C. CITY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY REFERRAL UPDATE No action was required on the aforementioned items. IV. MATTERS FROM OFFICLALS V. ADJOURNMENT REHAB NIIN:5-23-00 Page n3 There being no further action to be taken at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The ne regular meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: APPROVED: Board Secretary CH.AIRNLAN REHAB MIN:5 ?3-00 Page x4