Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Noise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board conditions Google permits after tenants cite persistent construction noise at Rincon Towers
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on May 9 granted tenant appeals of two Google alteration permits for 121 Spear Street and conditioned issuance on mitigation measures (Exhibits A–D) and daily public access to sound‑monitoring data, after residents complained of excessive rotor‑hammering and sleep‑disrupting noise.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals granted appeals by residents of the Towers at Rincon on May 9 and approved the previously issued alteration permits only after adopting a package of mitigation measures and access requirements for sound data.
The board’s action said the permits may issue if the permit holder adopts the measures listed in Exhibits A through D (submitted May 3) and publishes daily access to the construction noise monitoring data for tenants. The motion was moved by Commissioner Anne Lazarus and passed with President Frank Fung, Commissioner Daryl Honda and Vice President Rick Swigg voting aye.
Tenants and their counsel told the board that months of cutting and rotor‑hammering at the Google project at 121 Spear Street have produced continuing health and sleep impacts. “We are months out from notification to Google of the monumental, deleterious effects on the health of my tenants of the noise caused by Google’s construction,” said tenants’ attorney Steven Miyake during the hearing.
Residents submitted video, in‑building decibel readings and accounts of work outside permitted hours. Clint Van Horn said he measured 94 decibels on his cellphone during a Saturday event, a level he said exceeded what residents considered reasonable.
Google’s representative, Amy Lee, told the board the company has reduced louder construction activity substantially, limited Sunday work, curtailed Saturday schedules, expanded tenant communications and is using engineering measures such as acoustical wrap and barriers. “As a result…we now only have 10 hours available for saw cutting and currently are only utilizing 5 hours for rotor hammering per week, resulting in an overall…reduction in available hours,” Lee said in her presentation and pointed to exhibits describing monitoring locations and tenant protocols.
The board’s conditions adopt that mitigation plan as permit conditions and add a requirement that daily monitoring data be made available to tenants (the applicants said data collection may be one day behind). DBI staff advised that the department will treat complaints and may pursue stop‑work orders if enforcement confirms violations of permitted hours or conditions. Commissioners said they intended the conditions to be enforceable by DBI and that tenants should have a clear path to lodge complaints and request inspections.
Next steps: the permits will be finalized only after the permit holder formally incorporates Exhibits A–D as conditions and implements tenant access to the monitoring data; DBI retains enforcement authority if the conditions are not met.
