Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Demolition Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissions weigh demolition rules, serial permits and emergency orders
Summary
Commissioners and staff debated how to distinguish demolitions from substantial alterations, how to detect serial permitting, and when emergency demolition orders should bypass normal notifications; preservationists warned about post-disaster loss of rent‑controlled units.
The joint hearing’s second item examined how San Francisco differentiates demolition from substantial alteration and how the two departments can stop projects from being fragmented into serial permits that evade discretionary review.
DBI Deputy Director Carla Johnson described the demolition process: mandatory soundness reports, 300‑foot neighbor notification at filing and issuance, postings that allow appeals to the Board of Appeals, and a planning requirement to review replacement structures in many residential neighborhoods. Johnson said a full demolition review may take “anywhere from six months to three years” because of hearing schedules and staffing constraints, while an alteration permit can sometimes be processed in as little as six months.
DBI staff explained an interim policy for substantial alterations that treats certain “tantamount to demolition” projects like demolitions by sending 300‑foot notice and giving DBI discretion to require consolidation of multiple permits when field conditions reveal a larger scope. Staff said inspectors and plan checkers now look for stacks of permits and have authority to require consolidation so the full project is reviewed.
Public speakers, engineers and preservation advocates raised several concerns: how to respond rapidly to emergency hazardous structures, how to prevent manipulated emergency demolitions, and how to preserve historic fabric in post-disaster triage. Joan Gerardo urged seismic strengthening of Marina District seawalls and asked for code changes to address seawalls; preservationists and commissioners warned that emergency decisions after a quake could unintentionally remove rent‑controlled housing if replacements are exempt from those rules.
The commissions requested additional data from DBI on the number and types of unreinforced masonry (UMB) buildings still delinquent in retrofit programs; DBI said 27 buildings remain in director’s hearing or city‑attorney processes and supplied a breakdown would be provided to commissioners.
What’s next: commissioners directed staff to explore unified notice standards, revise guidance for permit consolidation and serial‑permit detection, and return with a report on penalties and the status of delinquent UMB properties.
