Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the 1215 20 Ninth Units Appeal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds notice of violation for 1215 20 Ninth Avenue, citing long enforcement history

San Francisco Board of Appeals · August 12, 2020
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Appeals denied an appeal by the property owner of 1215 20 Ninth Avenue, finding the zoning administrator did not abuse discretion in issuing a notice of violation for two unauthorized units. The board noted extensive enforcement history and documentary evidence supporting the NOV.

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 12 denied an appeal by the owners of 1215 20 Ninth Avenue and upheld a notice of violation that finds two unauthorized dwelling units on the ground floor.

Counsel for the appellant, Norman Chong, asked the board to reverse based on alleged defects in mailed notices, inconsistent citation of the number of units over time, and inclusion of evidence tied to unrelated litigation. He said the property owner is working to file permits and asked for leniency on penalties and time for compliance.

Corey Teague, the zoning administrator, summarized a lengthy enforcement history dating to 1999 and noted documentary evidence—including rent-board documents and litigation materials—supporting the determination that two unauthorized units existed. "Given the abundance and documentation, the landlord's testimony under oath, the denial to allow a site visit and other documentation, the current notice of violations before you now was issued on March 2 of this year," Teague said.

Commissioners noted long-running compliance problems on the property and the code's emphasis on abatement rather than punishment; Teague said planning-department fees due to process costs were roughly $5,000 and that civil penalties could accrue up to $250 per day if abatement does not proceed. Commissioners found no error or abuse of discretion in the zoning administrator's decision and voted 4–0 to deny the appeal and uphold the NOV.

The decision leaves the planning department's enforcement determination in place and allows the department to continue working with the owner on abatement and any administrative fee assessments.