Board upholds abatement and assessment for 204 Tingley Street despite appeals over contractor challenges

The Abatement Appeals Board voted unanimously to uphold an order of abatement and an assessment of costs for 204 Tingley Street, concluding a contested appeal that featured DBI testimony about safety risks and the appellant’s plea for time to obtain financing and hire qualified contractors.

Senior Building Inspector Joe Ng told the board that DBI found an unauthorized rear addition and multiple construction deficiencies dating to earlier inspections; he said the exposed wood framing and lack of protective exterior materials increased the fire hazard to the house and neighboring properties. Appellant representative Ahmad LaReside said permits had been pursued, blamed prior contractors and administrative challenges, and warned that recording a lien could prevent the owner from qualifying for a loan needed to finish repairs.

Commissioners discussed several options, including a limited abeyance to let owners seek financing and the city’s subordination process (where the city can subordinate its lien to a lender in exchange for escrowed repair funds). Commissioner Alexander Toot proposed a 60‑day abeyance; other commissioners worried a short continuance would not produce meaningful progress given a history stretching back to 2012.

After deliberation the board moved to uphold DBI’s order of abatement. The same board then considered whether to waive the assessment of costs; after discussion a second motion to uphold the assessment was approved on a unanimous roll call. The board recorded no modifications to the order and directed DBI to note the record for potential subordination requests from lenders under the city’s established process.

The board’s decisions preserve DBI’s enforcement authority while leaving technical avenues (fee waivers or subordination agreements) available to the owner if they pursue financing and comply with required inspections.