HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-2016 CBOA Agenda Correspondence (White 2)From: Advisory BodiesEJAN ' tl L
To: Linda White
Subject: RE: Construction Board
292016
Y' C Li
From: Linda White
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 11:28 PM
To: Advisory Bodies; Cocina, Cassia; Codron, Michael
Subject: Re: Construction Board
OOPS! It appears that I attached the original letter to the Construction Board rather than the response. I'll try
once again and then I'm off to bed. Obviously I am half asleep already.
Linda White
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Linda White - > wrote:
Attached is a follow up letter to the Construction Board. Please see that it gets to the members and also all of
the staff in attendance, especially the person who was so rigid in her defence of her position although she
mentioned numerous times that she had never seen the property.
Also, I tried sending an email via the website but kept getting errors. The lack of transparency, difficulty in
knowing if correspondence is delivered to the proper members in a timely manner, lack of a correspondence
tab, necessity of sending the correspondence through the very staff who are being questioned or appealed just
increases the overall lack of trust in our city staff.
Linda White
The Construction Board meeting earlier this evening was interesting. Thank you for your patient
attention. At first, by the questions asked by the board, I was encouraged that a common sense
decision would be made. The direction to staff to cooperate with the Walkers that was made at
the end of the meeting was also thoughtful.
However, to me, a fair, common sense decision would have been to uphold the appeal. There
certainly was enough evidence that this case has been grossly mishandled. Then direct the staff
to return to the home and inspect for health and safety issues. Issue a permit to have these issues
corrected within 30 days. I am sure that the Walkers are even more anxious to correct true safety
concerns than you are to see them done. Then, and only then, have staff return to the property to
address the various violations that they believe occurred.
Just before the meeting today, I picked up copies of all my property permit records, copied from
the actual property file. Yesterday, using the computer in CDD, the only permits listed on the
computer for my personal residence were from 2005 to the present. That was extremely
frightening.
As I mentioned at the meeting, luckily there are permits for all of the additions to my personal
residence at 2077 Slack St. However, the permit to actually build the home is missing. Where
does that put me? Will I ultimately be forced to bring the original home up to present day codes?
or 1958 codes when the first addition was made? or 1967 when the second addition was made?
or 1968 when new circuits and feeders were installed? Oh, and is my master bedroom and bath
really a bedroom and bath or is it still a living room as it was in the no- permit original house?
Lucky for me, the work was all done by reputable contractors such as: Volny Construction,
McNamara Electric, in later years Thoma Electric, and architecture by Rod Levin of Ross, Levin,
MacIntyre. When I am forced to bring my home up to code, will anyone be around who
remembers these names? Shall I get affidavits from contractors living today regarding their
predecessors reputations?
As for my rentals - - -all fixer uppers, I will never allow a city housing inspector inside. The
Walker fiasco has changed a Rental Home Inspection supporter who attended and
enthusiastically spoke at every meeting into a staunch opponent.
Thank you for your attention today. I wouldn't have your job but that doesn't stop me from
saying that I wish that you had been firmer with the obvious city staff overreach. I am a firm
believer in the spirit rather than the letter of the law. I had hoped that your commission was of
the same mind.
Linda White, co- chairman
Monterey Heights Neighbors