Abatement Appeals Board upholds order for 221 Eleventh Street, denies 60-day continuance

The Abatement Appeals Board voted unanimously on Feb. 21, 2018, to uphold an order of abatement for Case No. 6836, 221 Eleventh Street, and to assess costs against the property.

Senior building inspector Maurice Hernandez told the board the department received a Dec. 15 complaint alleging work without permits and found the commercial space had been converted to residential use, with new partitions, a washer and dryer and a full-size gas stove installed without a vented hood. "On December 15, we got a complaint about work done without a permit," Hernandez said during his presentation.

Appellant counsel Francisco Gutierrez, representing owner Don Ramon's Real Estate LLC c/o Leonella Ramirez, asked the board for a 60-day continuance while the owner secures land-use counsel and pursues a conditional-use authorization with the planning department. "So at this point we request a 60 day continuance of the hearing," Gutierrez said, describing plans to retain professionals to move the matter forward.

Tenants' counsel Lisa Jimpali urged the board to keep the abatement in place until the owner completed legalization of the unit, saying prior efforts to obtain conditional-use approvals had faltered. "On behalf of the tenants, I would ask that the order of abatement stand, until the landlord actually takes the necessary action to legalize the unit for residential use," Jimpali said.

Inspector Hernandez emphasized enforcement and life-safety concerns, noting the agency could not resolve underlying civil landlord-tenant disputes and that an unvented gas stove posed a potential fire risk. "We don't want to have an issue where fire occurs," he said, urging the board to maintain the abatement procedure.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to deny the continuance and uphold the order of abatement, including assessment of costs; another commissioner seconded the motion. The board conducted a roll-call vote and recorded unanimous support. President McCarthy and the other members voted to uphold the abatement.

The board's action preserves the department's order while leaving open the parties' ability to pursue planning or conditional-use proceedings independently; commissioners noted that an abatement recorded as a lien can be cleared by resolving the violations. The board did not rescind the order and instructed the parties to pursue parallel remedies through the planning process or civil channels.

Next steps: the abatement remains in place and costs stand as assessed; the parties may return to the board with evidence of permits or planning approvals.