The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 05111999 - SD10 d� TO. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS S Vontra ' US}to FROM. CARLOS BALTODANO, DIRECTOR i�` .�= ounty BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT DATE: Jure 21 , 1999 SUBJECT: Appeal Of Abatement action at 57 Poinsettia Ave. , Bay Point APN # 096-€333-007 {Owner: Sean Shafique SPECIFIC REQUEST{S} OR RECOMMENDATION{S} & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS : After hearing the appeal , it is recommended to deny the appear and affirm the determinations of the County Abatement Officer and direct the County Abatement Officer to proceed and perform: the work of abatement . FISCAL IMPACT: $8 , 000 . 00, if the County does the abatement . SACRGROCJNI?/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS : on June 4 , 1998 a complaint was received regarding open and abandoned dwellings, including large amounts of garbage and debris on the property. On rune 25, 1998 a site inspection was conducted and the inspection revealed two substandard, fare-damaged dwellings with piles of garbage and debris on the property. The property has undergone cycles of being secured and broken into. The following violation of the County ordinance exists : Title 7, Chapter 712-2 . 002 & 712-2 . 004 (substandard building & hazardous or unsanitary premises . ) The owner of the property has been notified through written correspondence and certified mail . As of this date compliance l not been gained. On January 2:� , 9.� , y 09 the Building Inspection Department declared �. the property a public nuisance and posted a Notice Order to Abate under Title 1 , Chapter 14-6 . This appeal is being made under the provisions o.r this title . The public hea--ing on this matter was opener. on May 11 , 1999, at that time, the hearing was cont"hued to August 2.0 , 1-999 at 9 : 00 a .m. in the Board' s Chambers . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: I YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR —RECOMMENDATION OF BO*ZD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE{S}: ACTION OF BOARD ON Aagust 10,E APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X_ The hearinR on this matter was CONTINUED from May 11 , 1999 . The public hearing was OPENED and Sean Shafique, Appellant, 4231 San Pablo Darn Road, #28, El Sobrante, commented on the matter; No one else desiring to spear, the hearing was CLOSED, and the Board tools the following action: SUSPENDED action indefinitely on the hearing on the appeal from the decision of the County Abatement Officer. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE ML UNANIMOUS(ABSENT. — � — ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSENT; ABSTAIN: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED August 10, 1999 cc: Building fnspectlon Department PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINIS TOR BY DEPUTY TO: BOARD OF SUPER viSORS Contra FROM: CARLOS BALTODANG, DIRECTOR �' Costa BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT cIIty LATE: April 12, 1999 SUBJECT: Appeal of Abatement action at 57 Poinsettia Ave. , Bay Plaint APN # 090-033-007 Owner: Shafique SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION EE C�_IENDATIONSS : After hearing the appeal, it is recommended to deny the appeal and affirm the determinations of the County Abatement Officer and direct the County Abatement Officer to proceed and perform the work of abatement . KCAL IMPAC`. $3, 000 . 00, if the County does the abatement . BACKCRC3MM/REAaQN5 FCR REC-OMMENDA'I�IQNS : On June 4 , 1998 a complaint was received regarding open and abandoned dwellings, including large amounts of garbage and debris on the property. On Mune 26, 1998 a site inspection was conducted and the inspection revealed two substandard, fire damaged dwellings with piles of garbage and debris on the property. The properties have undergone cycles of being secured and broken into. The following violations of the County Ordinance exist : Title 7, CI apter 712-2 . 004 (substandard building) Chapter 74-3 . 101 (permits required for construction) Title 8, Chapter 88-4 .206 (junkyard conditions) The owner of the property has been notified through written correspondence and certified mail . As of this date compliance has not been gained. On January 21, 1999, the wilding Inspection Department declared the property a public nuisance and posted a Notice Order to Abate under Title 1, Chapter 14-6 . This appeal is being made under the provisions of his title. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE y RECOM#4#1cNEiAT#ON OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE($): ACTION OF BOARD ON-May il ;, APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _OTHER X IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED the hearing on the above matter is CONTINUED to August 10, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Y,XI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT_= m j AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ASSENT: ABSTAIN:- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Buiiding Inspector!Department ATTESTED M a y 11,_ 1999 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF HEtD COUNTY ADMINIBOARD OF SUPER RS ST TO BY DEPUTY } BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTS', CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IN THE MATTER OF: ) Seam Shafique ) 57 Poinsettia Ave. ) Bay Point, CA 94565 ) 3 Re: APPEAL DECISION ) I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned have been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited with the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid., a copy of the Beard of Supervisors ' decision on May 111 1999, in the above matter to the following: Sean Shafique P.O. Box 2544 .Berkeley, CA 94702 Sean Shafique 57 Poinsettia Ave . Bay Point, CA 94565 Sear_ ,Shaf iaue 4.23" San Pablo Dam Rd. #28 Ei ,Sobrante, CA 94803 Creat Western Bank P.O. Box 1900 Northridge, CA 91328 Doan #1.-301.441.-2 I declare ander penal ty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct . Dated: Jane 16, 1999 at Martinez, California J jJ i� 67 PCD CLERK The Board bfupervist. _ Phil Batchelor C Clerk o;the Board County Administration Building �. ostr� �'d County Administrator 651 Pine Street, Floorn 106 (925)335-;900 Martinez, California 94563-1293 County Jahn Glola, 1 st District Gayle Ullkerna,2nd Disirict = Donna Gerber,3rd District �g Mark DeSauln€er,4th District Joe Canclamilla,5th District ; April 16, 1999 Sean Shafique 57 Poinsettia Avenue Bay Point CA 94565 Lear Mr. Shafique: In accordance with Contra Costa.County Ordinance Code Section 14-6.410(public nuisance), you are hereby notified that Tuesday, May 11, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. is the date and time set for the hearing of your appeal from the decision of the County Abatement Officer declaring the substandard building,permits required for construction and junkyard conditions at 57 Poinsettia Avenue, Bay Point, in violation of Sections 712-2.2004, 74-3.101 and 88-4.206 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and declaring said violations a public nuisance. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with procedures set forth in Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 14-6.410. A copy of the Uniform Public Nuisance Abatement Procedure is enclosed for your reference. If you challenge this matter in Court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at,or prior to,the public hearing. Very truly yours, PHILL,BATCHELOR, County Administrator andClerk of the BoArd By Barbara S."'100 an , eputy Clerk attachment eo:County counsel Building Inst tion rile List Pot e- 13 RECEIVED � '` � '' ' r EEMAV -15 J seams C0 � t "17 ,�°'`� ''• COY3 f tk`f .. pp a,, v 513-5 INVERSE CONDEMNATION § 513.01 PART A DEFINITIONS 513.01. Inverse Condemnation Refined The California Supreme Court has defined inverse condemnation as an invasion or an appropriation of some valuable property right that the landowner possesses by a public entity without compensa- tion, the invasion or appropriation must directly and specially affect the landowner to his or her injury.+ It is one of the two basic procedural devices for insuring that the constitutional proscription that private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation having first been made to the owner2 is not violated. The other procedure is eminent domain. One signifi- cant difference is that in the latter, the public authority takes the initiative.whereas in the former, it is the property owner who com- mences litigation.3 Another important difference is that in eminent domain litigation, the focus is usually limited to the amount of compensation owed the property owner;in an inverse condemnation action, before the compensation issue is even reached, the property owner must establish that the public entity has, in fact, taken or damaged his or her property.4 The United States Supreme Court has adopted a similar defini- tion. It has held that the phrase `"inverse condemnation" appears to be one that was coined simply as a shorthand description of the manner in which a landowner recovers just compensation for a taking of his or herr property when condemnation proceedings have not been instituted. It is a cause of action against a governmental defendant to recover the value of property taken by the governmen- tal defendant even though no formal exercise of the power of emi- nent domain has been attempted by the taking agency. A landowner is entitled to bring such an action as a result of the self-executing character of the constitutional provision with respect to compensa- tion.4 1 Selby Realty Co. v. City of San Buenaventura(1973) 10 Cal. 3d I I0. 119-120, 109 Cal. Rptr. 799, 514 P.2d 111. 2 Cal. Const., art. 1, § 19. 3[lopping v. Whittier(1972) 8 Cal. 3d 39. 43, 104 Cal. Rptr. 1, 500 P.2d 1345. 4 San Diego Cas and Electric Co.v. Superior Court(1996) 13 Cal.4th 893.939- 940. 55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 724, 920 P.2d 669; Beaty v. Imperial Irrigation Dist, (1986) 186 Cal. App. 3d 897. 903, 231 Cal. Rptr. 128. a United States v.Clarke(1980) 445 U.S.253, 100 S.Ct. 1127, 63 L.Ed.2d 373. (Matthew sender k Cu.,Inc.) (Rel.52-3197 Pu8.271) 3 513.02 CoNDEMATION PRACTICE 513-6 As indicated above, the basis of the doctrine of inverse condemna- tion is the provision in the United States Constitution that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensa- tion* and the provision in the California Constitution that private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation has been paid to the owner.7 513°024 Taking or Damaging Under the California Constitution, compensation is required when property has been "taken or damaged.", The "damaged" language was added to the California Constitution to broaden the "taking" language found in the United States Constitution.2 Any technical distinction between "taking" and "damaging" that may once have existed has been blurred to the paint that the terms are now used either together or interchangeably,3 In California, the determination of whether there has been a compensable taking or damaging depends on whether the owner of the damaged property, if iuncom- pensated. would contribute more than his or her proper share to the public undertaking. In ether words, the underlying purpose of the constitutional provision is to distribute throughout the commu- nity the loss inflicted upon the individual for a public benefit. The policy consideration on the other side is that compensation, too freely allowed, will seriously impede, if not stop, beneficial public improvements because of the ,greatly increased cost.4 There is*no"single test or formula►'that can be applied in all situations to determine whether a compensable "taking or 377: see Agins v.'Tiburon(1980)447 U.S.255, 100 S. CL 2138. 65 L. Ed.2d 1136; Hagman. Urban Planning and Land Development Central Gest 197 1) at 328. 0 U.S. Const., amend. V. "Cal. Const.. art. 1, § 19: see Agins v. City of'Tiburon (1979) 24 Cat. 3d 266, 273, 157° Cal. Rptr. 372, 598 P.2d 25 , aff d 447 U.S. 255 (1980). !Cal. Const.. art. 1. § 19. s See Van Alstyne. Statutory Modtfication of Inverse Condemnation: The Scope of Legislative Pourer, 19 Stan. L. Rev. 727, 771-776 (1967). a Holtz v.San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist.(1976) 17 Cal.3d 648. 655 n.3, 1.31 Cal. Rptr. 646. 552 P.2d 430; see. e.g., San Diego Cas and Electric Co. v.Superior Court(1996) 13 Cal.4th 893,940.55 Cal.Rptr.2d 724.920 P.2d 669. 4 Varjabedian v. City of Madera(1977) 20 Cal. 3d 285, 296, 142 Cal. Rptr. 429, 572 P.2d 43 cited to San Diego Cas and Electric Co. v. Superior Court (1996) 13 Cat. 4th 893, 941, 55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 724, 920 P.2d 669: Holtz v. Superior Court (1970) 3 Cat. act 296, 303-304, 90 Cal. Rptr. 3145, 475 P.2d 441. (Muftw Sender&Co..inc.) (PAL52_W7 Pub.273) RECEIVED E513.03 CONDEMNATION PRACTICE 513a-8 r 513.03. Property MAY The California Supreme Court has defined "property"very broadly CLERK BOAR,Op SijpEpCCL for inverse condemnation purposes. The term is not used in the ' `' ` ._.. . vulgar and untechnical sense of the physical thing with respect to which the citizen exercises rights recognized by law. Instead, it denote: the group of rights inherent in the citizen's relation to the physical thing, such as the right to possess, use, and dispose of it.i For instance, taking of a building restriction in a deed by condemn- ing the land requires compensation to the owner of adjacent land in whose favor the building restriction runs.a And the fact that a plaintiff lost his property interest by foreclosure did not preclude his recovery of precondemnation delay damages (see Section 513.24) for the period before his loss of the property.a Despite the language in some cases referring to real property, it is clear that the principles of Inverse condemnation also apply when tangible personal property is physically taken or damaged.4 How- ever, taking licenses or privileges that are unenforceable against the owner of the property does not require compensation,b and the owner of an expired option is not entitled to compensation.6 A water district's right to lay pipe in the streets is a franchise,7 ),0 Agtns v. City of Tiburon (1979) 24 Cal. 3d 288, 273. 157 Cal. Rptr. 372. 598 P.2d 25, affc1. 447 U.S. 255 (1980) (citing United States v. General Motors Corp. (1945) 323 I.T.S. 373. 377-378, 65 S. Ct. 357. 89 L. Ed. 311). 2 Southern Cal. Edison Co.v.Bourgerie(1973)9 Cal.3d 169, 172-175. 107 Cal. Rptr. 76, 507 P.2d 964. 310opping v.City of Whittier(1972)8 Cal.3d 39, 58, 104 Cal. Rptr. 1, 500 P.2d 1345. 4 Eli v. California (1975) 46 Cal. App. 3d 233, 235. 120 Cal. Rptr. 63; Sutfin v. California, (1968) 261 Cal. App. 2d 50, 53, 67 Cal. Rptr. 665; see Armstrong v. United States (1960) 364-U.S. 40, 80 S. Ct. 1563. 4 L. Ed. 2d 1554. Community Redevelopment Agency v.Abrams (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 813, 833---834, 126 Cal. Rptr. 473, 543 P.2d 905; Fresno Police Officers Assoc. v. State of California (1987) 190 Cal. App. 3d 413, 417, 235 Cal. Rptr. 474. a Belmont County Water Dist. v. State of California (1976) 65 Cal. App, 3d 13, 19. 135 Cal. Rptr. 163. 0 City of Walnut Creek v. Leadership Housing Systems, Inc. (1977) 73-Cal.App. 3d fall. 619, 140 Cal. Rptr. 690; but see County of San Diego v. Miller(1975) 13 Cal.3d 684.688-693, 119 Cal.Rptr.491,532 P.2d 139(condemnation of property on which defendant had unexpired option is compensable). `r Marin Mun. Water dist. v. City of Mill Valley (1988) 202 Cal. App. 3d 1161, 1166-1167, 249 Cal. Rptr, 469, (M*UW-W$e,ser&Cc..Im.) M01.52-3M Pub.270 /' 513-•7 INVERSE CONDEMNATION 513.02 damaging" has occurred. Rather, the courts have decided the issue on a case-by-case basis. The less difficult cases involve situations when a public entity causes physical damage to plaintiffs property. For example, permanent physical invasions are takings even if they occupy only relatively insubstantial amounts of space and do not seriously interfere with the landowners use of the rest of his or her property.! A public entity also takes or damages private property when it causes physical damage to that property without physically invading it, such as by withdrawing lateral support caused by excavation on an adjacent street.* When a public entity's conduct results in an intangible intrusion onto the plaintiffs property that does not physically damage the property,the issue of whether there has been a"taping or damaging" of the property sufficient to support an inverse condemnation action is more difficult. In these circumstances, the plaintiff must allege and prove that the intrusion has resulted in a burden on the property that is direct, substantial, and peculiar to the property itself.7 A land use regulation can also constitute a taking or damaging L. if it deprives an owner of substantially all economic use of his or her property or if it fails to substantially advance a legitimate public interest. Whatever form a "taking or damaging" takes, it requires an act of some sort. The risk of future harm. such as potential flooding, is not an act, and will not support an action for inverse condemna- tion.s For detailed coverage of public entity liability in specific situa- tions, see sections 513.20D-513.26. i Loretto v.Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. (1982)458 U.S. 419, 430, 102 S. Ct. 3154, 73 L. Ed. 2d 868 (30-foot piece of television cable installed on apartment house roof). s See Holtz v. Superior Court(1970) 3 Cal. 3d 296, 90 Cal. Rptr. 345, 475 P.2d 441. 7 San Diego Cas and Electric Co,v. Superior Court(1996) 13 Cal. 4th 893, 940. 55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 724, 920 P.2d 669» Va.rjabedian v. City of Madera (1977)20 Cal. 3d 285. 298. 142 Cal, Aptr. 429. 572 P.2d 43. •Agins v.Tiburon (1980) 447 U.S. 255, 260. 100 S. Ct. 2.138, 65 L. Ed. 2d 106. 9 See Jordan v. City of Santa Barbara (1996) 46 Cal. App. 4th 1245, 1257, 54 Cal. Rptr. 2d 340. (Maubem Under&Co..Inc.) Iltcl.S2-3N7 P&279) c 3 FRECEIVEDU APR "IQ �} 3 wS.,L.klSiIYOF PES U'.Y31Y 1 1Ss7 QNLR w r,J'aH a.ui,le';I ;y rf €8U.,E, JR O J 3 c 00 ptf µms, •«. Y., U { { 4 b C_+O —....._.._.... -_.__ i^•- � � f-�. v-yr ... c � C+�7 ...{. 17� �' ;:u �. t � S S •, �# µ•h Sf:a C C N ] •� yy .c 0� LIJ u s ;> tn v4`w 3 lU � i 4. r< < 5 •�- ' :.' SC G'O `S- �-y i+.„ F�`I ?C� j a,�+.•'� n ,s,2 •w' .y�.y�ltl t ,1 ��y > Gy 35 ._............ ........,,.... ti •.1 ve.iv'S?W'3;q task pa�-3#11$S.'tW+.°-be'� 3 3.'tZ1.u',»• ^ i CP w �n r L ice• r - 6 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I'�T THE MATTER OF ) SEAN SHAFIQUE 57 POINSETTIA AVENUE ) BAY POINT CA 94565 } Re: APPEAL ) } I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at al P 160 254 16 9 been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I . Contra Costa County Central Service for mailing by the United S P 160 254 1�0 California, first class postage fully prepaid, a copy of the hearing the above matter to the following: US Ps sia4 SEAN SHAFIQUE P 160 254 141 57 POINSETTIA AVENUE BAY POINT CA 94565 € tv€ Receipt for Certified Mail SYED SHAH& SYEDA SHAH p 16-0 254 18 C/O GREAT WESTERN BASK P.O. BOX 1900 ,USP ° €. � Loan#1-301441-2 Receipt for Certified Iilan NORTHRIDGE CA 91328 J SEAN SHAFIQUE SEAN SHAFIQUE 432.1 SAN PABLO DAM RD#28 4321 SAN PABLO DAM RD#28 EL SOBRANTE CA 94803 EL SOBRANTE CA 94803 .u.-.-_ . SEAN SHAFIQUE >� 4'Q ._..-.t P.O. BOA:2544 BERKELEY CA 94702 "'' I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is tnz s.�.� ., California. .Dated: April 16, 1999 Deput C k corm 1^32 , 9/E4 _ SCHEDULE A DATE OF REPORT: September 14, 1958 COUNTY OF: Contra Costa ORDER NO.: 130959 AMOUNT OF LIABILITY: ACTUAL LOSS NOT TO EXCEED $ 1,000.00 PREMIUM: $ 100.00 CLIENT. Contra Costs. County Building Inspection Attention; Pam t, The latest available equa=lized assessment roll in the office of 2. The last document in the chain of title to said land as disclosed the Assessor of said County discloses the following/with by the Official Records of said County purporting to convey respect to the land referred herein: the fee title to said land is: Street Address: 57 Poinsettia Avenue Conveyed To: Sean Shafi.que, a married man, Bay Point, California as ,sole and separate Tax Parcel # : 096-033-007 property Land $27,684.00 Recorded October 4, 1593 Improvements: $80,290.00 Instrument # : 93-276200 Exemption None Shown Book/Page : 19013/194 Total Taxes $861.38 (paid/pa-id) p Transfer Tax: None Shown 3. Subject to any conflicts in boundary lines, or discrepancies that would be revealed by a correct survey,the land referred to in this report is that land located in the County shown above,in the State of California,and is described in the above referenced instrument as follows: For legal description see EXHIBIT" A attached hereto and made a part hereof. 4. That an examination of the chain of title to said land as disclosed by such Official Records reveals no mortgages or liens purporting to affect said land,other than those set out below under Exceptions;provided,however,that no liability is assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in this Schedule,nor with respect to the validity,legal effect or priority of any smatter shown as an Exception.No report is made regarding matters affecting the beneficial interest of any mortgage ordeed of trust which may be shown herein as an Exception. Exceptions: 1. DEED OF TRUST Dated January 18, 1991 Amount $67,500.00 `"rustor Syed I H Shah and Syeda R. Shah Trustee : California Reconveyance Company Beneficiary: Great Western Bank Address P.O. Box 1900, Northridge, CA 91328 roan No. : 1-301441-2 Recorded January 31, 1591, Instrument No. 91-17882, Book 16378, Page 509. 2. NOTICE OF VIOLATION Recorded . January 15, 1598, Instrument No. 98-8374 -°� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . OWNER'S.MAILING.ADDRESS: . r 57 Poinsettia Ave. , Bay Point, CA 94565 P Continued on Page 2 Contra Costa County Building Inspection Attention: Pam Order No. 130959 (Shafique) Page 2 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The North one-half of the East 138.75 feet of Lot 10, in Block B, as designated upon that certain Map entitled, Ltled, "Poinset�-4- ia Land Co. , West Pittsburg Tract, Unit No. ill, filed June 8, 1926 in Map Book 19, Page 506, in the office of the County Recorder of Contra Costa County, State of California, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of Lo'.'- 10; thence along Lot boundary West 138.75 feet; thence South 50 feet; IV-hence South 50 feet; thence East 138.75 feet; thence North 50 feet to the point of beginning. END OF REPORT Building Inspection Department onto PROPERTY CONSERVATION VVISIO Carlos Sa todano t O OO PRESERVATION PROGRAM Direc.ur cx EW!.'Ung nsper on 651 Pine Street, 41i Roor Uqumy M,ar inez, Ca ifornia 4553-015�2 PCD (325) 335-1-11 4,/ jf= P (925) 335-1137 FAX (325) 646-4450 � F I xl w \ ti April 5, 1999 Barbara Grant Clerk of the Board 651 Pine St. Martina:, CA 94553 SITE: 57 Poinsettia Ave.,:Bay Point APN: 096-033-007 REF: RF980505 ` The May 11"'hearing date„fit 9:15 a.m. is acceptable to us and is in a timely manner. ` Enclosed are all knows dresses that should be notified. For further information or to work out a collaborative solution to this matter,you may contact me at(925) 335-1113 any workday between 8:00 and 10:00 am. Our offices are closed the first, third and fifth Friday of every month. Sincerely, 7 11Z Tim.Griffith Building Inspector I TG:cw4 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Clerk of the Board Inter-Office Memo TO: Carlos Baltodano, Director Building Inspection Department Attn: Tim Griffith, Building Inspector I DATE: March 31, 1999 FROM: Barbara Grant, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Appeal by Sean Shafique of the County Abatement Officer's decision declaring the abandoned dwellings in violation of 712-2.402 & 712.2004 located at 57 Poinsettia Avenue, Bay Point. This office is in receipt of the attached Appeal and previously submitted check in the amount of$125 from Sean Shafique, from the decision of the County Abatement Officer declaring as a public nuisance, the abandoned dwellings in violation of Section 712-2.002 &. 712.2004 (C. C. C. Code 14-6.410)of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code at 57 Poinsettia Avenue, Bay Point. The Board of Supervisors has tentatively scheduled this appeal for hearing on May 11, 1999, atr1. in the.Board Chambers. i,r y t, , Please notify this office in writing by April 8, 1999,whether the Board of Supervisors should hear this appeal on the calendared date. If the appeal is timely and should be heard, please include the names, addresses and zip codes of all parties to he notified in. addition to the Appellant. If the appeal is to be heard on May 11, 1999 as scheduled,please submit the appropriate material for Board consideration to this office not later than April 20, 1999. Thank you. attachment cc: County Counsel bg _ EE EMMAR ISO Ac- fi;7715C Hll�k rW6 Alf got, - ' an va,;, 7u. 3 V a 5N vwasIL a f i 444 , swe , , ij u r �, z 1d . -,�A 3) ,5 p y4 P)l 13 L t L),�qjp &At", 131219 A78 04, sez�; f, I61 wv k 'w Centra -� iepection Department � P � � ONSERVA"rlON DIVISIONsta z� # ,� �., M D PRESERVATION PROGRA�� Cour003 M AYR-721-3 k 4th tea= Emig 94553-01522 0 7 5 MAILED FFROMMARTINEZ cep 9 4 5 5 3 Sean Shafique P.O. Sox 2544 CERMEDMAI elm Berkeley, CA 94702 ,,. / No. BMW KIC r !) c14'702.—OS 44 ilIII is{ss1111Jilt fit III HIM 11111111sLlll11141III IIII IIIII iepeotion Department Contra ONSERVAnON DIVISION �� .....�....�. :)OD PRESERVAnON PROGRAM - -{ 1 '�yv%MAW a.�. 9694022 County 001'o IN 02.980 PB It 4th Floor MAR 23 99 arta 94553-0152 2 0 7 4 MAILED FROM MARTINEZ CA 9 4 5 5 3 Sean Shafique 4231 San Pablo Dam Rd. #28 � *IED�L El Sobrante, CA 94803 No. � OWNER:Shaf ique c nN 0 T I CE AND 0 R D E R T 0 A B A T Ell C. C. C. ORDINANCE CODE 14-6 .410 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the abandoned--dwell.ings are in violation of Section 712-2 . 002 & 712 .2004 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code . The violation has been declared a public nuisance by Tire Criffith,Building Inspector I and must be abated immediately. The public nuisance is on property located at , 57 .,.Poinsettia Ave. , Ba Point. , APN# 0964033-007 . YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO ABATE SAID PUBLIC NUISANCE within (10) ten consecutive calendar days from the issuance of this order. The issuance date is specified below. You may abate the nuisance by rehabilitating or demolishing the structures . if you fail to abate the public nuisance within the number of days specified, the county may order this abatement by public employees, private contractor, or other means. The cost of said abatement, if not paid, may be levied and assessed against the property as a special assessment lien and may be collected at the same time and in the same mariner as ordinary county taxes are collected, subject to the same penalties, procedures and sales in case of delinquency. YOU MAY APPEAL FROM THIS ORDER OF ABATEMENT, but any suc.h. appeal must be brought prior to the expi'ration of the number of days specified above for completion of abatement . The appeal must be in writing; specify the reasons for the appeal; contain you name, address and telephone number; be accompanied by an appeal fee of ONE HUNMRED TWENTY FIVE dollars ($125 .0b) ; and be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at the following address: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street, 1s1[-. Floor, Martinez CA 94553 One who is legally indigent may obtain a waiver of the appeal fee. Upon timely receipt of the appeal and accompanying fee, or waiver, the Clerk of the Board will cause the matter to be set for hearing before the Board of Supervisors and notify you of the date and location of the hearing. If you have any questions regarding this matter, you may direct them to the county officer issuing this notiCe at the address or telephone number listed below. ISSUANCE DATES March 23, 1999 Tim Griffith, Building Inspector I -E ED 651 Pine St, 4t-h floor, Martinez, C.A. 94553 REC (925) 335-1113 MAR 2 3 19991 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS -- --_,CONTRA COMM_ REQUEST TO SPEAK FORK (THREE (3) HISS LIKIT) Complete this farm and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. 117 a z Name: f Phone: Address: Acity: N d� I an speaking for myself or organization: (nems of organization) CHECX ONE: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # ate: My comments will be: general - for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to considers