SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 1

Home Browse Search

August 12, 1992 Mr. hen Blakamore San Joaquin County Courthouse RECEIVED 222 E. Weber Ave. , Rm. 303 Stockton, CA 95205 AU G 3 1 1992 Re: 1766 Monte Diablo Ave. ENV NMENTAL HEALTH Stockton, CA 95203 mlt%§'OVIPF-q Dear Mr. Blakamore: As per our discussion, I am requesting the parcel located at 1766 Monte Diablo, aka/ Chapin Brothers Inc. , be considered for reassessment. Enclosed you will find documents submitted to support my opinion regarding the devaluation of the site. From 1942 to 1985 this site was leased by my brother and I as an automobile gasoline service station. In 1985 we purchased the land and structure for the sum of $36,000.00 (See article 1) . Early in 1991 in association with a proposed real estate transaction, we conducted a subsurface environmental investigation which determined there was a significant degree of petroleum contamination of the soil and groundwater (See article 2) . Due to this contamination, a successful forty-six year old business has turned into a very significant liability. Thus, a fair market value cannot be established representing the best return while there is uncertainty about the degree of contamination. This contamination has further reduced our revenue for the last several years because of the lost sales by the gasoline pump closure and our compliance with the laws concerning underground storage tank removal and remediation (See articles 3,4,5) . Information for compliance on our application for underground tank closure permit should be directed through the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Division. The E.P.A. site number is OCHC000670256 and Mr. Harlan Knoll is acting for the lead agency. Our only source of income on this property is the lease of facilities for minor automobile repair. This generates very little return and is of a temporary status due to the fact the cleanup effort may make it impossible to continue a viable business environment. In addition, we are advised it will take years to cleanup this site which will make the property of little value for a long period of time. All this material might be considered excessive, but we feel it will help delineate our position. We are presently reviewing our options, one of which may be a total abandonment of the site as a simple solution. This contemplated action is supported by our view as a taxpayer because this property has no economic value and is worthless. However, it is our present position that a more responsible course of action can be found. Thus, we request consideration be given for a reduction in our assessment reflecting a current fair market value of the property in question. Yours very truly, Russell F. Chapin Sr.