The Abatement Appeals Board on Oct. 15 unanimously upheld an order of abatement and assessment of costs for 2374 Fulton Street, citing unresolved permit activity and ongoing safety concerns after a neighboring excavation undermined the property’s foundation.

Department representative Mauriz Hernandez told the board that the case arose from an over-excavation by a neighboring project that undermined the west-side foundation; the department issued notices of violation to both the property that caused the damage and to 2374 Fulton. Hernandez said permits had been pulled but only one inspection had been recorded in 2023 and that little follow-up activity had occurred since. Staff recommended upholding the March 21, 2025 order of abatement.

Property owners Calvin and Stanley Young acknowledged the seriousness of the condition and said they had taken stabilization steps. They said the neighboring contractor performed geogrouting and cribbing under city-issued permits and that the owners had engaged engineers and contractors and obtained bids for full repairs; the owners said they had not finalized all permits because they are pursuing litigation against the contractor they say caused the damage, and because final repairs could complicate recovery in that suit.

Owners provided engineering reports and said geogrouting and cribbing were completed and that the adjacent structure has been repaired. The department said it appreciates that work has been done but remains concerned because the permits have not been finaled and the department lacks routine inspection documentation. Staff noted it previously issued an order of abatement against the adjacent property and that the enforcement here follows a period of advisement and limited compliance activity.

Board members said litigation does not, by itself, excuse unresolved public-safety questions. Several commissioners noted owners could seek a secondary engineer’s sign-off and submit documentation to the department to finalize the work required to close the NOV; the department said that would be an appropriate path if owners can produce verifiable evidence that the stabilization work was inspected and completed. After deliberation, the board voted to uphold the order of abatement and associated fees.

The board’s action was unanimous. The department and the owners were advised to coordinate on obtaining necessary engineering verification and permit sign-offs; if the owners cannot provide the required documentation the order and assessment will be enforced.