Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rockslide Debris topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board accepts late appeal, upholds abatement for Twelfth Avenue property after safety debate
Summary
The Abatement Appeals Board accepted a late appeal for 2094 Twelfth Ave., reviewed contested lot‑line and safety evidence, and ultimately upheld the order of abatement and assessments while urging appellants to obtain geotechnical and surveying professionals.
The San Francisco Abatement Appeals Board voted April 16, 2014, to accept a late appeal from the owners of 2094 Twelfth Avenue and then voted to uphold the director’s order of abatement for debris and a rock slide that blocked the sidewalk.
Department staff told the board the site had no permits to address a rock slide and that debris had been falling onto the sidewalk; the order of abatement was issued Dec. 10, 2013, and staff recommended upholding the order and imposing assessment of costs. Inspectors said photographs and site markers suggested roughly 75 percent of the visible debris and soil at the sidewalk was on the private lot, though some material appeared to originate from adjacent city right of way.
Appellants John Lee and Alice Lee said much of the debris comes from city property and described repeated attempts to get city crews to clean the site. Alice Lee said she had photographs and that a hired inspector and geologist told her the debris was not on her property, stating, “it’s not my property line.” Appellants also explained why their appeal papers were filed late: they said payment for the appeal was received after the 15‑day deadline and Alice Lee said family circumstances, including a funeral, delayed receipt of certified mail.
The board initially took a procedural vote to accept jurisdiction over the late filing so it could hear the merits. Commissioners debated the scope of responsibility and the appropriate remedial timeline: one commissioner estimated full engineering and shoring work could take nine to 12 months, while others stressed that the order’s 30‑day permit timeline remains on the record but that the appellants must demonstrate good faith by engaging engineers and surveyors promptly.
After deliberation the board moved to uphold the order of abatement and assessments; the motion passed by unanimous roll call. Commissioners directed the appellants to obtain professional geotechnical and surveying analyses to establish property lines and design any required shoring or mitigation. Several commissioners urged coordination with other city departments if public right‑of‑way work is required.
Next steps include appellants obtaining technical reports and pursuing permits as necessary; the board emphasized safety concerns for pedestrians and said the record will be updated when the work is permitted and signed off.
