HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 008-03RESOLUTION NO. 0 0 8 ' 0 3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD DENYING AN APPEAL BY STEPHANIE
LAWSON OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT'S
DENIAL OF A ZONING MODIFICATION TO ALLOW THE
RETENTION AND ENLARGEMENT OF A TREE HOUSE AT 0
(ZERO) FEET IN THE STREET SIDE YARD WHERE A 10
FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED AND AT 15 FEET IN THE
FRONT YARD WHERE A 25 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED
IN A R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE LOCATED AT
1720 DOOLrl-rLE AVENUE (MOD NO. 02-0870)
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment denied a zoning modification
application by Matthew Hill (MOD No. 02-0870) to allow the retention and enlargement of a
tree house at 0 (zero) feet in the street side yard where a 10 foot setback is required and at
15 feet in the front yard where a 25 foot setback is required in a R-1 (One Family Dwelling)
zone located at 1720 Doolittle Avenue. This tree house would also extend into the street
right-of way of Fremont Street; and
WHEREAS, said Board through its Secretary set Tuesday, November 12,
2002, at the hour of 3:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, Bakersfield, California,
as the time and place for a public hearing before said Board on said project, and notice of
said hearing was given in the manner provided by Title Seventeen of the Municipal Code of
the City of Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing the issue was duly heard and considered, and
the Board of Zoning Adjustment denied said modification; and
WHEREAS, a timely appeal was filed by Stephanie Lawson objecting to the
Board of Zoning Adjustment's decision with the Clerk of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council through its Clerk set January 15, 2003, at the
hour of 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, Bakersfield, California, as the time
and place for a public hearing before said Council on said appeal, and notice of said
hearing was given in the manner provided by Title Seventeen of the Municipal Code of the
City of Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public hearing(s), all facts, testimony
and evidence concerning the project was considered by the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council hereby adopts the Board of Zoning Adjustment's
findings as contained in their resolution (No. 02-41).
The City Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the decision of
the Board of Zoning Adjustment.
.......... o0o ..........
-2-
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted
by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
JAN 15 ~003 , by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ASSENT:
COUNCILMEMBER CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO
COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER
PAMELA A, McCARTHY, CMC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED JAN 15
HARVEY L. HA~"L
Mayor of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form
BART J. THILTGEN
City Attorney
0
I'---
~0
0
I
Z
0
I H~NOS
£~S H HINOS
EXHIBIT 3
RESOLUTION NO. 02-41
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD DENYING A MODIFICATION TO ALLOW RETENTION AND
ENLARGEMENT OF A TREE HOUSE AT 0 (ZERO) FEET ALONG THE STREET SIDE
YARD WHERE A I0 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED AND TO PERMIT A REDUCTION
OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET (REQUIRED) TO 15 FEET
(PROPOSED).
(MODIFICATION NO. 02-0870)
WHEREAS, Matthew Hill, filed an application with the City of Bakersfield Planning
Department requesting a modification to allow retention and enlargement of a tree house at 0 (zero)
feet along the street side yard where a 10 foot setback is required and to permit a reduction of the front
yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 15 feet (proposed). The proposal is located at 1720 Doolittle
Avenue and is within a R-1 (One Family Dwelling) zone district; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, through its Secretary, set TUESDAY, October 8,
2002, at the hour of 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue,
Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public heating before them on the proposal, and
notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal
Code; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on said date,
and testimony was received only in support of the project; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by
city staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustment; and
WHEREAS, the above described project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of
CEQA in accordance with Section 15305; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Planning Department (1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield,
California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials upon which approval of the
environmental determination is based; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, initial study, and evidence received both in
writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public heating(s), support the findings
contained in this resolution; and
1
WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public hearing(s), the proposal was heard and all facts,
testimony and evidence was considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, and they made the
following findings regarding the proposed project:
All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding the proposed
project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project area and published
in a local newspaper of general circulation 10 days prior to the hearing.
The provisions of CEQA and City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures
have been followed. Staffdetermined that the proposed activity is a project and
that it is Categorically Exempt from CEQA under Section 15305.
The granting of the proposed modification will be materially detrimental to the public
welfare, and could be injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity
in which the subject property is located. Location of the tree house within the road right-
of way could pose a threat to public health and safety.
The approval of this modification would permit an inappropriate improvement on the
site. Approval of the modification would be a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by
other property owners in the vicinity.
The proposal is not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The General Plan call for orderly
development that is not a threat to the public's health and safety. Location of a tree
house within a road right-of-way is a threat to public safety.
6. Development options exist which would not require a modification to City Codes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING
ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD as follows:
1. That the above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. That this project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of CEQA.
3. That Modification No. 02-0870 as described in this resolution, is hereby denied.
On a motion by Board Member La Rochelle, the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved this
resolution by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Leonard, La Rochelle, Kunz
None
2
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of
Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of November,
2002.
DATED: November 12, 2002
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
BOARD OF ZONiNG ADJUSTMENT
Donna Kunz, Chairp,~on
3
Minutes, BZA 10/8/02 Page 4
4,B.3.
FILE NO. 02-0870 -- A MODIFICATION TO ALLOW RETENTATION AND
ENLARGEMENT OF A TREE HOUSE AT. ZERO FEET ALONG THE STREET SIDE
YARD WHERE A 10 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED AND TO PERMIT A
REDUCTION OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET (REQUIRED} TO 15
FEET (PROPOSED} IN AN R-1 {ONE FAMILY DWELLING} ZONE LOCATED AT
1720 DOOLITTLE AVENUE. THIS TREE HOUSE WOULD ALSO EXTEND INTO_
THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FREMONT STREET.
Staffreport was given.
One letter was received in support of leaving the tree house where it is. Two telephone calls
were received in support of staff's recommendation, to deny the request
The applicant spoke in opposition to the staff report and stated that he modified his plans. It is
177 square feet and he would be willing to downsize it more. He indicated that he spoke to an
appraiser and whenever he sells the house, it would bring more value to the house.
George Brackia lives directly across from the treehouse. He likes the treehouse indicating that it
is good for the neighborhood. He also indicated that it is well engineered.
Mr. Hill stated that he spoke to an arborist and he told him how to shape the tree for the
treehouse.
Member Fidler abstained after asking for clarification from the City Attorney. He was the
heating officer at a prior heating regarding this issue..
Public hearing was closed.
Member LaRochelle commented that when he first saw this in plan review, he had a problem
with this especially where part of the structure went out over the curb line.
Jim Eggert conunented that the issue before the Board started as a code enforcement issue
because of the structure from a zoning standpoint it is a structure that encroaches into the setback
area, that is as far as the Board's authority goes. The Board carmot grant an encroachment
permit. The applicant would have to pursue that through the Public Work's Department. The
entire tree house violates the codes, the addition included.
Member LaRochelle commented that one of the problems he had was how close it is to the curb.
He further commented that an encroachment permit could remedy this problem.
Jim Eggert replied there isn't anything that prohibits the Board from approving it at least to the
property lines and then the Public Work's Department would have to deal with the encroachment
over the right-of-way. The Board also has the authority to place a time limit on how long it is up
and they could put a limitation on its size.
Minutes, BZA 10/8/02 Page 5
4.B.4.
Member LaRochelle proposed to postpone a decision at least for a month and explore some other
things and talk to Public Works' staff who would be involved with the encroachment review.
Chairperson Kunz supported the proposal to explore other avenues.
Motion was made by Member LaRochelle to continue this item to the next regular meeting.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: LaRochelle, Kurtz
ABSTAINED: Fidler
FILE NO. 02-0875 - DAVE CROSS~ ARCHITECT REQUESTED A MODIFICATION
TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED STREET SIDE YARD SI6'I'I~ACK
FROM 10 FEET (REQUIRED) TO 5 FEET (PROPOSED) IN AN R-3 (LIMITED
MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE DISTRICT LOCATED AT 1028 L STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ALLOW 2 PARKING SPACES TO ENCROACH
INTO THE 10 FOOT STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ACCOMMODATE
4.B.5.
REQUIRED PARKING.
Staffreport was g/yen.
Public heating was opened.
Dave Cross, Architect represented the owners and spoke in favor of the project.
There being no others wishing to speak, public heating was closed.
Motion was made by Member LaRochelle to adopt the resolution with all findings and
conditions, approving Modification No. 02-0875 as depicted in the project description. Motion
carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Fidler, LaRochelle, Kunz
NOES: None
FILE NO. 02-0880 -- KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN~ INC. REQUESTEI} A
MODIFICATION TO ALOW A REDUCTION IN REQUIRED PARKING FROM 738
PARKING SPACES (REQUIRED) TO 551 PARKING SPACES (PROVIDED) IN A C-O
(COMMERCIAL OFFICE) ZONE DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO
CONVERT 45~000 SQUARE FEET OF EXISTING GENERAL OFFICE SPACES TO
MEDICAL OFFICE SPACE WITHIN AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING LOCAl 'ED
AT 1200 DISCOVERY DRIVE.
This item is continued to the November 12, 2002 meeting due the the parking analysis not being
completed in time for the Board's review.
Public hearing was opened and continued to the November 12.2002 meeting.
Minutes, BZA, 11/12/02 Page 10
4.B.2. PUBLIC HEARING - FILE NO. 02-0870 -- MATTHEW HILL HAS REQUESTED
A MODIFICATION TO ALLLOW RETENTION AND ENLARGEMENT OF A
TREE HOUSE 0 (ZERO) FEET ALONG THE STREET SIDE YARD WHERE A
10 FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED AND TO PERMIT A REDUCTION OF THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET (REQUIRED) TO 15 FEET
(PROPOSED) IN AN R-I (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE LOCATED AT
1720 DOOLITTLE AVENUE. THIS THREE HOUSE WOULD ALSO EXTENHD
INTO THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FREMONT STREET
Staff report was given.
This case was continued from the October 8, 2002, BZA hearing to allow time for staff to
assess the existing structure and to identify required permits. City staffmembers from the
Building Department and Public Works Department visited the site on October 25, 2002,
to view the existing trey house. Staffdetem~ined that the applicant must submit
engineered plans and obtain an encroachment permit.
Public bearing was opened.
Applicant Matt Hill spoke in favor of the application. He indicated that he has some
plans and further commented that he plans on having an engineer look at this.
There being no others wishing to speak either in favor or opposition, public hearing was
closed.
Member LaRochelle commented that From an encroachment standpoint, it didn't ap. pear
to have a problem with getting in the way of traveling vehicles or pedestrians.
Member Leonard informed Staffand Board Members that he wasn't at the October 8th
meeting, however he did Iist~o the tape. tie commented that he visited the site. He
stated that as a Civil Engineer, the existing tree house is unstable, and suggested that the
applicant have an engineer analyze it. He was concerned from a health and safety
standpoint that ifa child should fall fi-om the tree house, it could cause great bodily injury
and even death. He was also concerned that if something should fall out of the tree house
and someone is walking doyen the sidewalk, it could injure someone causing a liability
issue for the city. Ite noted that restricting access would be difficult to control since it
was m the front yard and it would become an attractive nuisance.
Member Kunz commented that this is going to be popular with neighborhood kids but
there could be liability issues to the city and the overall safety of it ~,~as questionable.
She felt it would be more manageable if'it x~ere in the back yard. She further commented
that she agrees thai it should be structurally cngineered.
Minutes, BZA, 11/12/02 Page 11
Motion was made by Member LaRochelle to adopt the resolution with all findings,
denying Modification No. 02-0870 as depicted in the project description.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: LaRochelle, Leonard, Kunz
NOES: None
COMMUNICATIONS
None.
BOARD COMMENTS
None. \
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Board, meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m.
lsabel Williams
Recording Secretary
STANLEY GRADY, Secretary
Planning Director
MEMORANDUM
Development Services Department
Planning Division
November 12, 2002
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT
JIM EGGERT, PRINCIPAL PLAN~/~~-'
MODIFICATION NO. 02-0870 t,_ , i'~
RETENTION AND ENLARGEMENT OF A TREE HOUSE AT 0
(ZERO) FEET ALONG THE STREET SIDE YARD WHERE A I0
FOOT SETBACK IS REQUIRED AND TO PERMIT A REDUCTION
OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET (REQUIRED) TO
15 FEET (PROPOSED).
BACKGROUND
This case was continued from the October 8, 2002, BZA hearing to allow time for staff to
assess the existing structure and to identify required permits. City Staff members from the
Building Department and Public Works Department visited the site on Friday October 25,
2002, to view the existing tree house.
Staff has determined that for the tree house to be legal, the applicant must submit
engineered plans and obtain an encroachment permit.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff continues to recommend denial of the requested modification to front and side yard
setbacks. The applicant has not provided justification for it to remain and approval would
be a grant of special privilege. Staff recommends that the tree house be dismantled and
removed within 15 days of the effective date of the Board's decision.
Project 1~o. 02-0870
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Chair and Members of the Board of Zoning Adjustment
Stanley Grady, Planning Director
October 8, 2002
SUBJECT:
Modification No. 02-0870:
A modification to allow retention and enlargement of a tree house at 0 (zero)
feet along the street side yard where a 10 foot setback is required and to permit
a reduction of the front yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 15 feet
(proposed) in a R-1 (One Family) dwelling zone. The tree house would also
extend into the street right-of-way of Fremont Street.
APPLICANT/OWNER:
Matthew & Zhang Wie Hill
1720 Doolittle Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93304
LOCATION:
1720 Doolittle Avenue (APN: 023-137-12)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached resolution with all findings, DENYING Modification No. 02-0870 as depicted in
the project deschption.
PRO,IECT ANALYSIS:
Pro.[ect Description/Facts
The applicant is requesting a modification to allow retention and enlargement of a tree house at 0
(zero) feet along the street side yard where a 10 foot setback is required and to permit a reduction of
the front yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 15 feet (proposed) in a R-1 (One Family) dwelling
Project No. 02-0870
zone. The tree house would also extend into the street fight-of-way of Fremont Street.
Construction of the tree house was in progress when a complaint was received by the Code
Enforcement Division of the City's Development Services Department. On June 21, 2002, the Code
Compliance Officer assigned to the subject area issued a 7 day notice to abate to the property owner
(applicant). The City of Bakersfield Building Director held a heating on July 23, 2002, regarding the
tree house at which time the applicant indicated he would request a modification from the City to
permit the tree house within the side and front yard setbacks. Staff repeatedly informed the applicant
that the request could not be supported by staff and that he should remove the tree house. The
applicant submitted fees to process the modification on August 27, 2002.
Photos of the tree house show that the structure is located within the Fremont Street road fight-of-way.
The plot plan submitted by the applicant indicates that a future expansion of the tree house would put
it directly above the existing curb and gutter for Fremont Street with an ultimate size of about 430
square feet. At this time, based upon the drawing submitted by the applicant, Staff calculates the size
of the existing tree house at about 220 square feet. Typically, improvements such as tree houses can be
found in the rear yard of homes in order to provide a measure of safety and privacy for children using
the tree house.
No justification for the modification was submitted by the applicant. The curb to property
measurement on the Fremont side of the subject lot is 12 feet. About half of the tree house is within the
Fremont Street road right-of-way. Public Works Department staff indicates that an encroachment
permit has not been applied for by the applicant for the portion of the tree house within the Fremont
Street road fight-of-way. The City Building Department requires a building permit for any structure
over 120 square feet.
Staff notes that alternatives exist for the applicant. For example, the applicant could construct
additional living space in the backyard area. No special circumstances exist with regard to site's shape,
size or topography which limits development on the site. In addition, granting of the modification
would be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. Although the
Board does not have authority to allow this tree house to encroach into the City fight-of-way, its
presence would be a considerable public safety concern.
Zoning and General Plan Consistency
The site is designated LR by the General Plan and is zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling Zone). The
subject site is located on the northeast comer of Fremont Street and Doolittle Avenue. Surrounding
uses are single family residential in nature.
Conclusions
Staff finds that placement of a tree house within the front yard setback and street side yard setback is
not appropriate. This tree house was the subject of a public complaint. The applicant has provided no
justification to locate the tree house within the setbacks and road fight-of-way. Approval of this
Project No. 02-0870
modification would be a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the area. It would
be a public nuisance and would compromise public safety. Staff, therefore, recommends denial of the
modification.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION:
The general plan designation, zoning and existing uses of the site and surrounding properties are
shown in the following table:
LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING EXISTING LAND USE
DESIGNATION DISTRICT
SITE LR R-I Single Family Dwelling:
North LR R- 1 Single Family Dwellin~
South LR R- 1 Single Family Dwellin[g
East LR R-I Sing:le Family Dwellin~
West LR R-I Single Family Dwelling
Public notice for the proposed project and environmental determination was advertised in the
Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board in the City of Bakersfield Development
Services Building; 1715 Chester Avenue; Bakersfield, California. All property owners within 300 feet
of the project site were notified regarding this public hearing in accordance with city ordinance and
state law.
This project has been found to be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures in accordance with
Section 15305 because the prOJect represents an alteration to a land use limitation (setbacks). A Notice
of Exemption has been prepared.
EXHIBITS:
A. Resolution with exhibits 1. Location map
2. Site plan
3. Elevation
BAKERSFIELD
NOTICE AND ORDER FOR ABATEMENT
OF CONDITION CONSTITUTING
A PUBLIC NUISANCE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Building Department
Matthew & Zhang Wei Hill
1720 Doolittle Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93304
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3674
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that after a duly-noticed hearing on July 23.2002, at 10:00 a.m.. 1715
Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California before Dennis C. Fidler, Buildine Director it is found, after
consideration of all the evidence presented, that a condition constituting a public nuisance does exist at
1720 Doolittle Avenue (APN 023-137-12'1 and there is the necessity for timely abatement of tiffs
nuisance, to wit: a variance and l)uildine hermit are reouired for the tree house.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that you apply for a variance with the Planning Department by August
2, 2002.
AND, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that should the nuisance fail to be abated according to the terms
and time limitations set forth herein, the City of Bakersfield shall proceed with the abatement of the
nuisance pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 8.80 of the Bakersfield Mun/cipal Code and ail other
applicable provisions thereof.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN you may appeal this decision to the City Manager by filing with the
City Clerk, at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California 93301, a written request to appeal within
ten (10) days from the date of this notice. Said request for appeal must be actually received in the office
of the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on the tenth day from the date of this notice. The cost of appeal must be
paid upon filing the request for appeal.
Please contact Gary Fenstermaker, Code Enforcement Officer, at (661) 326-3521 to discuss any
questions you have regarding tiffs matter.
D~/' July 23, 2002
!
Dennis C. Fidler
Building Director
BAKERSFIELD
SECOND NOTICE TO ABATE PUBLIC NUISANCE
AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Building DeparUnent
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, Cfi. 93301
~ & Zhang Wei Hill
1720 Doolittle Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93304
Re: 1720 Doolittle Avenue (APN 023-137-12) - Case No. 02-2279
On June 21,2002, you were notified to contact our office to discuss informal resolution o fan illegal
condition existing on your property.
NOTICE IS I~EREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 8.80, that the
condition of your property constitutes a public nuisance, in violation of Bakersfield Municipal Code
Chapter 15.12 which incorporates by reference Uniform Building Code section(s) 106.1 namely:
building permit required for accessory structure (tree house).
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that you may remove or repair the condition before the date of
hearing stated below. Otherwise, the City of Bakersfield may obtain permission to remove the illegal
condition. If the illegal condition has not been resolved within the time specified above, you wilt
be chareed a $145.00 administrative fee to cover the cost of reinspection. This fee, and any other
costs r~ecessar¥ to remove the violation will be charged to you personally and/or will be assessed
l~gainst the land and can be foreclosed on or made a tax assessment which will be placed on the tax
rolls to be collected.
YOU ARE FURTItER NOTIFIED to appear before the hearing officer for the City of Bakersfield
on July 23. 2002, at the hour of 10:00 a.m., at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California to
show cause, if any you have, why said nuisance should not be found to exist and the same ordered
abated.
YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that at the above-stated hearing you may call wimesses to
testify on your behalf, present documentary evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and otherwise show
why said nuisance should not be ordered abated. You may be represented by legal counsel at your
own expense.
SHOULD YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT SUCH HEARING it shall be deemed a waiver of your fight
to a hearing. Please contact Gar~' Fenstermaker, Code Enforcement Officer, at (661) 326-3521 to
discuss any questions you have regarding this matter.
Date~/y 11, 2002 ,
Dennis C. Fidler, Building Director
B A K E R S F I E L D
7-DAY NOTICE TO ABATE
MUNICIPAL CODE VIOLATION
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Building Department
Code Enforcement Section
June 21, 2002
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 326-3521
MATTHEW & ZHANG WEI HILL
1720 DOOLITTLE AV
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93304
Re: 1720 DOOLITTLE AVE (APN 023-137-12-00-9)
Case No.: 02-00002279
Your property is in violation of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. Refer to the specific violations
on the attached page.
Please contact the undersigned officer with/n seven (7) days of the date of this notice to discuss
informal resolution of this matter between the office hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. or 1:00
p.m. and 2:00 p.m.
Please be aware that violations of the City's Municipal Code cannot be taken lightly. If the
illegal condition has not been resolved within the time specified above, you will be charged a
$145.00 administrative fee to cover the cost of reinspection. This fee and any other costs
necessary to remove the violation will be charged to you personally and/or will be assessed
against the land and can be foreclosed on or made a tax assessment which will be placed on the
tax rolls to be collected.
We trust you will respond promptly to this important matter.
~d,~/ly'
ary I/enstermaker
Code Enforcement Officer