Board conditions permits after neighbor complaints about unpermitted excavation at 14620 Third Ave

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Dec. 14 addressed a contested pair of alteration permits for work at 14620 Third Avenue after neighbors alleged unpermitted excavation next to their foundations.

Kieran Maher and counsel Scott Emblidge told the board the permit holder excavated adjacent to and beneath the Maher family's foundation in August without giving the statutorily required notice or permits, then backfilled and covered the earlier work before engineers or DBI could inspect it. Emblidge said the family’s engineers could not verify whether underpinning or other protection had been installed and asked that work stop until the prior work could be inspected. "All the Mahers want is to see what Mr. Monahan did unlawfully and determine whether any danger exists to their foundation," Maher said.

The permit holder’s team acknowledged exploratory work was performed and said they subsequently obtained permits, revised the scope and moved excavation five feet from property lines to reduce risk. Counsel and retained design professionals described revised permits, inspections and engineering steps taken to shore the house and secure approval. DBI inspector Matthew Green outlined the agency’s timeline: two permits issued in October, site visits, a notice of violation for work beyond the initial permit, an order to backfill and requirement for an engineer’s compaction/structural report — which DBI said it had not yet received.

After extended questioning about what remedies would protect neighbors, commissioners balanced the applicants’ safety needs against neighbors’ worries that uncovered unlawful excavation remains hidden. The board voted 4–0 to grant the appeals but to reissue the permits with substantive conditions intended to reduce safety risk before further work:

- DBI start‑work inspection that includes a DBI engineer on‑site and an offer for the neighbor’s and permit holder’s engineers to accompany DBI staff;
- a soils/geotechnical compaction test and report (to DBI’s satisfaction) addressing the prior exploratory excavations and backfill before any other work proceeds;
- ongoing monitoring (benchmarks/survey points) for both adjacent properties, to be in place at or before the DBI inspection; and
- that compaction and any required remedial work be completed and confirmed to DBI satisfaction prior to additional construction activity.

DBI said the permit holder must bear monitoring and testing costs consistent with normal permit conditions; DBI will retain the authority to issue stop‑work orders if inspectors or engineers identify unsafe conditions.

What happens next: The board's decision enables the permit holder to proceed under tight DBI supervision once required engineering reports and monitoring are in place. Neighbors retain civil remedies (and DBI retains code enforcement) if the investigation shows damage or noncompliance.