Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Scale Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds three Fifield/Rincon Hill demolition permits despite appellants’ traffic and cumulative‑impact concerns
Summary
The Board of Appeals upheld three demolition permits for properties at 375, 385 and 399 Fremont Street tied to the Fifield Development Rincon Hill project. Appellants raised traffic, idling trucks, dust, and cumulative construction impacts, but the Board found the Rincon Hill EIR mitigation measures and planning approvals supported issuance and voted 5–0 to reaffirm the permits.
The Board of Appeals heard protests to demolition permits for three Fremont Street buildings proposed for removal as part of Fifield Development’s Rincon Hill project and voted to uphold the permits 5–0.
Appellants, including the owner of an adjacent manufacturing business, argued the neighborhood is already subject to heavy construction activity (notably the 1 Rincon Hill project), that pedestrian access and traffic at the Fremont/Harrison intersection are degraded and that the Rincon Hill environmental review did not adequately account for cumulative impacts at that specific corner. Appellants urged the Board to delay demolition until the existing construction concludes or until a more detailed traffic/mitigation review is completed.
Fifield’s counsel and project representatives said the master Rincon Hill plan and its certified EIR expressly covered mitigation measures for multiple projects, that the project had received required planning approvals and that the planning commission had imposed specific construction‑period mitigation measures addressing dust, noise and traffic management. Fifield representatives also said the project had conditional entitlements and financing in process, and that demolition was needed to remediate hazardous, broken‑into structures and to advance the project that will deliver housing and pay significant in‑lieu and infrastructure fees.
The Board acknowledged the appellants’ disruption concerns and emphasized that many of the potential impacts are subject to mitigation and enforcement, and that the underlying policy decision to redevelop Rincon Hill had already been made by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. After discussion, the Board voted 5–0 to uphold the three demolition permits, noting that construction mitigation measures (including restrictions on idling and dust suppression) were part of the approved EIR and project conditions. The Board asked the project sponsor to cooperate with neighbors to keep sites clean during any interim periods between demolition and construction.
