Abatement Appeals Board sustains orders for five cases tied to 311 Eleventh Avenue, rejects late permit printouts

San Francisco's Abatement Appeals Board unanimously upheld orders of abatement and assessments of costs for five appeals tied to 311 Eleventh Avenue on May 15, 2024, and declined to admit permit printouts that the appellant introduced at the hearing.

Joe Ng, a senior building inspector for the Department of Building Inspection (DBI), summarized the department's case, saying the board was responding to an order issued May 20, 2021, after officers found unauthorized framing and other work in the ground-floor commercial space and residential areas. "Department staff recommend to uphold the order of abatement and impose assessment cost," Ng said, asserting several permits remained incomplete and that the last inspection status showed open items.

Henry Karnilewitz, agent for the property owner, acknowledged the city’s enforcement costs but said the owner has obtained permits and needs time to complete outstanding inspections. "We do have permits now; it's just a matter of getting the inspections done," Karnilewitz said, asking the board for additional time to close out the corrections. He said some permits had been suspended and may now be expired, and that planning-review steps had delayed work.

The board first debated whether to admit permit documents the appellant provided at the hearing. DBI objected on grounds that the records were submitted that day and lacked clear context about the status of work. Deputy City Attorney Fabian told the board it was within the commissioners’ discretion to accept the late submissions but noted the department objected. A motion to reject the documents carried unanimously.

Public commenter Jerry Drattler, a Richmond District resident, urged skepticism of leniency for the owner and noted an extensive complaint history for the property. "This property has a ridiculous history," Drattler said, citing multiple complaints recorded in planning and public records.

After hearing testimony, the board voted on each appeal separately. For each appeal — recorded on the hearing as appeals numbered 6919, 6920, 6921, 6922 and 6923 — commissioners moved to uphold the order of abatement and the assessment of costs. Each motion passed on a unanimous roll-call vote with President Chavez, Vice President Newman, Commissioner Alexander Toot, Commissioner Shattucks and Commissioner Williams voting yes.

The appeals covered separate notices of violation across building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes, and DBI staff explained that inspectors for different trades had issued separate notices because they enforced distinct codes. Commissioners pressed staff and the appellant on whether any work had been completed within six months of the original May 20, 2021 order and on the precise relief being requested; the appellant had asked for up to 180 days but said 60 days might suffice depending on planning timelines.

The board closed the item after the votes. No further public comment was offered on unrelated matters, and the meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.

The board’s action preserves the original May 2021 orders and leaves outstanding inspections and permit completion to be pursued by the owner and DBI under the existing enforcement process. The board did not grant the delay in recording the abatement for any of the five cases.