Public Documents
Public Comment
Despite my repeated pleas for assistance and oversight from the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors, no meaningful support or intervention was provided.
Public Board of Building Appeal Hearing
Bridge Timeline
October 1, 2017: A neighbor allegedly falls through the dilapidated planks of the bridge causing closure of the unsafe bridge.
March 19, 2018-2019: Previous owner sued for negligence in bridge maintenance, leading to its dilapidation and endangering the public. The injured neighbor and adjacent property owner shared legal representation against the previous owner. The bridge solely benefited the adjacent property as a service and fourth entrance. The bridge is taken down to beams. The bridge and beams were allegedly suppose to be destroyed.
February 12, 2021: We purchase the property.
June 6, 2022: Paul Hannah, Enforcement Planner with Santa Barbara County confirms permits will be needed to rebuild the bridge.
June 21, 2022: Neighbor begins rebuilding the bridge (new wooden beams, new decking, and railing) without permits. Complaint filed.
August 8, 2022: County inspector, Carl Lindberg, allegedly visits site but fails to document with photos. Determines “The bridge over the creek was existing and was in the process of being repaired. It was not new construction.” No permits needed.
September 29, 2022: Building and Safety Supervisor, Kevin Greene, visits site and issues Stop Work Order for “Bridge repairs without a permit.” Cites violation of County Code Chapter 10.
October 4, 2022: Inspector Carl Lindberg issues Notice of Violation, citing the need for a design professional's to review and assess bridge adequacy of abutments and structure. Omits mention of bridge being in violation of County Code Chapter 10 for "Bridge repair w/out permit," as previously noted by Supervisor Kevin Greene.
February 23, 2023: We submit our first structural engineer report to the County, which states the bridge is NOT safe for pedestrians or motorists.
“The Abutments appear to have large structural cracks and appear to be in poor condition.”
“It is our opinion that the Bridge is in an unsafe condition and shall not be used by pedestrians or motorists. Any future repair work shall be performed under the supervision of a licensed CA structural engineer as well as a licensed CA general contractor in order to obtain applicable building permit(s) from the Building of Department and Safety.”
February 24, 2023: Neighbor submits civil engineer report stating bridge is "adequate for light use vehicle or pedestrian egress…With proper maintenance the useful life of the bridge for light vehicle use should be 10-15 years.”
In the official documented designs filed with the County. The bridge reconstruction does not match the engineer designs:
Handrails: The bridge was reconstructed per the designs and approved by the County. However, my third engineer found the handrails to be deficient and not up to code. This prompted Building Official Craig Johnson to issue the over the counter permit for the railing on 4/16/2024.
Abutments & Epoxy: This report includes adding epoxy to repair the broken abutment. To potentially circumvent environmental regulations, the abutments were not repaired per the submitted designs.
March 13 2023: We submit our second structural engineer report to the County, which states the bridge is NOT safe for vehicle or pedestrians.
“The abutments supporting the wood and steel beams are showing signs of failure in some areas as evidenced by several cracks as can be seen in various photos attached to this report.”
“The abutment on the north side of the creek has significant movement as can be seen by a large fissure at the north east corner of the bridge.”
“To conclude the bridge is not safe for vehicle or pedestrian use in its current state. The concrete abutment foundations are in need of repair and the railings are not safe. The bridge should be removed, repaired, or replaced. Proper engineering and building permits will be required.”
March 13, 2023: California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) determines neighbor's bridge repairs require a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSA) due to environmental concerns. The bridge's location within an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA), a stream, a Flood Hazard Zone, and the Coastal Zone, coupled with the potential for the used epoxy to be considered a pollutant, required this permit. Since the broken abutments were not fixed, they continue to crumble into the stream, potentially violating California Fish and Game Code regulation 5650, per CDFW.
March 14 2023: County Structural Engineer Jason Crabtree (CA license #5796) reviews the conflicting engineer reports. He states:
“I believe the bridge to be deficient in its current state. Photos from the report(s) show cracks & voids in the abutments (it also appears that the top of one of the abutments may be out of plumb or leaning inwards toward the creek but this is not mentioned in either report); the February 23, 2023 report from _____ notes for the eastern abutment “it appears the bottom of the abutment is at the same grade elevation of the current creek bed.” With additional precipitation and flow within the creek this may lead to scouring below the abutment causing the bearing capacity to be diminished and/or unstable. The abutments are the primary area of concern based on current conditions. “
March 16 2023: Santa Barbara County Building and Safety completes its in-house review of conflicting engineering reports and . The County determines that the bridge abutments are deficient in their current state and will ask owner “to repair (with a building permit) or remove the bridge.”
October 17, 2023 : I emailed Inspector Carl Lindberg to follow up on the lack of building permits for either properly rebuilding or removing the bridge. Inspector Lindberg falsely claimed there were no updates and no permits were issued or in progress. In reality, Inspector Carl Lindberg works with the neighbor’s “Agent” to circumvent the permitting process. Inspector Lindberg asks supervisors, 5 times, over the year, to finish the construction without permits.
November 02, 2023: I escalate concerns of no permits to repair or destroy the bridge to the Director of Planning and Development, Lisa Plowman. Ms. Plowman concludes that the neighbor has fenced off the bridge, effectively ceasing its use. County concludes the matter is now a private one.
March 20, 2024: A year after the in-house review determined the abutments were deficient, the violation is abated with no permits or even a site visit.
April 16, 2024: In efforts to legitimize the illegal reconstruction, the Building Official knowingly issues a same-day permit for minor alterations outside the previously recorded 1915 easement and on my private property. The Building Official incorrectly states in the Board of Building Appeal Hearing Memorandum that the same-day permit is for the repair and replacement of wood planking on the deck/floor. That’s factually incorrect. This over- the-counter permit is for installation of (1)steel mesh, (2) signage, and a (3) vertical bollard.
