Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Demolition 51930 Third topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds demolition permit at 51930 Third Avenue, citing mitigation controls

San Francisco Board of Appeals · September 17, 2008
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 a nearby business owner and upheld a demolition permit for 51930 Third Avenue (3–0). Planning staff had found the structure not a historic resource and building and public‑works staff outlined dust, noise and demolition controls and recovery rules that would apply.

The Board of Appeals on Wednesday upheld a demolition permit for 51930 Third Avenue after hearing concerns from a neighboring business owner about dust, noise and potential contamination.

Appellant Huiting Guan, who operates a nearby cafe, said her business would be harmed by demolition and construction dust and noise and asked the board to reconsider the permit. The property owner and permit applicant, Albert Ko, described the house as a 90‑year‑old, dilapidated building that the owners have sought to replace; he said neighbors on the block had signed letters supporting the project.

Building‑department staff and the planning department told the board there are established mitigation rules that apply to demolition work, including Bay Area Air Quality Management District requirements, a dust control ordinance recently adopted by the city, police‑code noise limits and a construction and demolition debris recovery ordinance. Chief building inspector Lawrence Kornfield said the city’s dust and noise rules and demolition mitigation practices would apply and offered to be a direct point of contact for neighbors if problems arise.

Planning staff noted the planning commission had previously reviewed the demolition under discretionary review and unanimously approved it; the department’s environmental review concluded the property did not qualify as a historic resource for CEQA purposes. After questioning, Commissioner Mandelmann moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit. The motion passed 3–0 with Commissioners Goh and President Garcia recorded as voting aye; the permit was upheld with no additional conditions.