Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Abatement Appeals Board upholds order for 670 Twelfth Ave.; permits due in 30 days, one year to finish work
Summary
The Abatement Appeals Board unanimously upheld the order of abatement for 670 Twelfth Avenue on Nov. 20, 2013, requiring the owner to obtain required permits within 30 days; the board allowed up to one year to complete permitted work. The property is in probate, and staff said initial municipal fees total $1,224.25.
On Nov. 20, 2013, the San Francisco Abatement Appeals Board voted unanimously to uphold an order of abatement for 670 Twelfth Avenue, a property listed in the estate of Christina Young, and to require that permits be pulled within 30 days with up to one year allowed to complete work.
John Hinton of the Department presented the staff case, saying the violation involved unpermitted construction that enclosed space at the rear of the home and that a director’s hearing on Dec. 4, 2012, had issued an order of abatement. Hinton told the board no permits had been obtained to clear the violation and recommended upholding the order and assessing costs. Staff reported an outstanding municipal fee of $1,224.25 and said basic removal or correction of partitions would likely cost substantially less than full legalization; staff’s practical estimate for simple removal was under $10,000.
An appellant identified in the staff report as David Jha told the board the property is in probate and that he, as an heir, lacks full ability to fund or execute repairs. He said he had contacted contractors and gathered some signatures on drawings but that the legal and probate status constrained immediate action.
Board members asked whether probate or a pending sale prevented the department from enforcing the order; the staff attorney and department representatives replied that probate does not preclude upholding an order of abatement against the owner of record and that recording the order can clarify responsibilities for the probate court. Staff advised that whether the property is ultimately transferred, the recorded order provides clarity for the court and encourages estate representatives to cooperate.
During discussion commissioners emphasized that removal of the unpermitted partitions with the necessary permit would satisfy the violation and sharply reduce costs compared with fully legalizing the space. The board debated timing and enforcement language and settled on a motion to uphold the order, require that permits be obtained and paid for within 30 days, and allow one year for work completion (permit terms typically define final completion timeframes).
The motion passed on a unanimous roll-call vote.
Next steps: Staff will record the order of abatement and monitor compliance; the board noted that failure to meet the recorded deadline could prompt action by the city attorney.
