Board denies rehearing requests for 5 Lunado after appellant seeks 90‑day extension

The Abatement and Appeals Board unanimously denied two rehearing requests related to a property identified in the record as 5 Lunado (also transcribed as 5 Lonado Way). Appellant Henry Kanelowitz told the board he sought more time to finish work because of difficulty obtaining materials and labor and asked for a 90‑day extension before an abatement is recorded.

Kanelowitz said the property owner is the son of the prior owner and that the prior hearing may have been understood as seeking removal of the abatement rather than an extension. He told the board, "we're just wanting to get an extension of time to get this finished up" and later stated, "we're asking for 90 days." The board solicited whether any new evidence or legal error had been presented; an inspector and commissioners reported none.

A commissioner moved to deny the rehearing requests, saying they had not heard evidence of new legal error or new evidence to warrant rehearing; another commissioner seconded. The chair conducted a roll‑call vote; each voting member recorded a 'Yes' and the motion carried unanimously. The motion as stated on the record denied rehearing for agenda items 1 and 3 concerning the property referenced as 5 Lunado. The board also noted the procedural standard for rehearing on the record (building code and administrative code citations) and that four votes would be required to grant a rehearing.

The meeting then moved on; there was no additional public comment and the board adjourned at 09:31 a.m. The board indicated it would reconvene as the Building Inspection Commission at 10:00 a.m.