>> this is regular meeting of the abatement apeels board. i would like the remind everyone to please turn off all electronic devices. the first item on the agenda is roll call. [roll call] we have a quorum and the next item is item b, the oath. will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand?

do you swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? [response] thank you. you may be seated. ok. >> let's do this. i just wanted to -- for the record -- to state the time allowed for the cases. the department will present their case first. and then the apel lanlts. each side has seven minutes to present their case. next will be public comment and members will have three minutes each to speak. and lastly we have rebuttal time of three minutes for the department and then the appellate. the next item is item c, election of officers, president and vice president. discussion and possible action to elect a president and vice president of the abatement appeals board. >> do i have any motions?

>> we have a motion to approve. >> it's actually -- i would like to entertain a motion or make a motion to nominate commissioner warshall as president and commissioner lee as vice president. >> second. >> would you guys like to accept that -- [laughter] >> go ahead. >> any objection to that? >> no objection to that. a bit of surprise. but no objection. thank you. >> that's what happens when you go away on vacation. >> thank you so much. >> thank you, commissioner. >> so, there is a motion and there is a second. ok. is there any public comment on the motion? seeing none, are all

commissioners in favor? >> yes. >> yes. >> then thank you. congratulations to our new president and vice president. item d, approval of minutes. discussion of possible action to adopt the minutes for the meeting held on june 20, 2018. >> i have a question on the minutes. >> sure. >> i refused item e and on the notice of decision section, it says the a.a.b. made the following decisions. did we do that? i don't know if we did. because we continued the matter. just curious. >> i'm not sure. i could have been incorrect. i'd have to double-check that. i'm not certain. we could -- we can make that correction if that's an issue. we would just correct it. >> so -- >> continue these minutes. >> have the sentence struck out.

>> what page is that on? >> item e, the continue appealed on page -- this is one, two, three, four -- page five. >> ok. >> notice of decision. the last sentence. it says the a.a.b. made the following findings and decisions. and so on and so on. i think that should be struck out because we continued the matter. >> ok. if we make that adjustment, are you ok with approving the minutes? ok. so, we'll make the correction before the final minutes are approved. is there any public comment on the abatement appeals board minutes? ok. seeing none, are all commissioners in favor once we make the correction? >> aye. >> any opposed? ok. then the minutes will be approved. ok. item e. new appeals, order of abasement.

case number 6847 57 taylor street. owner of record apel lanlts. 57 taylor l.l.c.1 place street. action requested by apel lanlts and extension until october 2018 to complete electrical upgrade. would the department like to come forward? i'm sorry. the department has to present its case first and then the apel lanlts will go. sorry about that. >> good morning, all. a complaint was generated by electrical department for 57 taylor. itselfer was reviewed and investigated by the electrical department. notice of election was issued

on june 28, 2017 for inadequate electrical service and noncore complaint wiring in violation of electrical service. so it's related to code enforcement and it's the outstanding, all the [inaudible] haven't corrected. there is an electrical permit to comply, but hasn't been corrected yet. established recommendation is to uphold the order of [inaudible] and oppose the assessments of cost. >> so, can you -- i'm looking through here. when was the -- ok. when was the permit taken outs to do this work? is that -- -- i'm looking at the --

>> the permit was issued on -- >> july 18? >> actually, there's a permit issued on june 22. i have an electrical permit that was issued. >> and then it expired. >> it hasn't expired. but the work hasn't been completed to correct the notice. >> thank you. >> excuse me. would the apel lanlts like to come forward? >> good morning. my name is david thomas, owners rep for 57 taylor.

just to give some quick background of this case and i have the property manager here and our project manager for the electric upgrade. this case was originally opened in may 2016 prior to our ownership of the building. and at that time no, n.o.v. was issued. there was just a side observation of inadequate electric.on june 28, 2017, the n.o.v. was issued and that was the exact day we purchased the building. so, we kind of got an n.o.v. on our day the very first day of ownership on a case that had been open for over a year at that point. during that year, previous ownership, a deal was made with d.b.i. that no permits would be pulled on the building until the electrical upgrade was complete. currently in the building we have nine units that are off-line plus the commercial space as we've kept with that same standard, not pulled any permits on the building and not done any work pending the completion of this electric upgrade. so, we do have off-line housing and we're incutinger about a $30,000 a month revenue loss until this electric upgrade is xlaoe. as soon as we purchase the building, june 28, we quickly mobilize to work with

pg&e and our electric contractors to get electric upgrade done and i'll give an explanation of our progress. >> great. >> good morning. i'm a project management consultant specializing in pg&e upgrades. we do about 30 or 40 electrical jobs a year. we have a good relationship with pg&e. we took this project over. there was already an open application. we had what was called an empty file so i completed the design. in fact, yesterday i got the approved pg&e drawings. canning electric pulled the electrical permit and we have an approved design from pg&e. and i have copies of this if we need to submit this for anybody's records. but that is the approved pg&e drawing. they're processing the contract. we're commited to doing this job because of what dave alluded to earlier. we have a lost revenue and we're motivated to get this service up and running.

so, we're -- we started work yesterday. we started receiving some of the electrical gear i was hoping to have photos of the project thus far. but i don't have that. >> through the chair. when was the application filed with pg&e. >> it was filed by prior ownership some time in -- i want to say -- >> it is in your notes. it doesn't say when. but when the case was opened there was already a project application that was in but like what i said i had what was called an empty file, there was no -- >> yeah. so there was no submit -- >> it was just an open app with nothing. >> it was open when the -- in 2016? >> yeah. so, you go online with pg&e, you can open up an application to have a reference. but if there is no substance it to, there is not a true project or design going. >> when were you brought in? >> when we acquired the --

actually, it was brought in because they're my main client. during due diligence when we went through the purchase of this 11 building portfolio. so, i was actively involved in the acquisition and we noticed that this particular building was in trouble. because i knew it was undersized and we knew the vacancies and i know the inspector, mr. van cole would not pass and inspect before it got in -- >> so it's taken a year to get to this point? >> that's standard. pg&e has lost a lot of resources. you've hear. everybody's business si. it's just like every other city agency i deal with as well. >> not city, but -- maybe if they were, we wouldn't -- >> public. we are rolling, trust me. >> you can't blame this one on us. >> what's that? >> you can't blame this one on us. >> no. law officer laugh no. >> no, pg&e, we understand that the application is minimum six to eight months' process if everything is going right. >> and i got early releases on

the switch gear. so everything is on a schedule. >> it's a complicated journey. >> and d.p.w. permits going in. there's still some design elements. >> does pg&e still need to do any sfwhork do they have to come out to the site as well? >> i'm sorry? >> will pg&e need to come out to the site as well? >> i'll have to review this drawing. but, yes, they will -- >> ok. >> at minimum, drop the transformers and pull the -- >> the reason why i ask is that i know your appeal requested an extension until october. how likely is pg&e going -- >> not likely. >> that is going to be tight. it's possible. but i'd have to call in some favors and get some acceleration on that. which i'd like to. go ahead. >> when we filled out the appeal paperwork, october -- i think it was back in june we filled out the paperwork. october at that time was our best guess but it depended on when we got these drawings back

to pg&e. it may be that there is appeal to push out the paperwork. we may potentially have extra time to work with pg&e to get this done. >> may i say d.p.w. because i have to have the approved drawing before d.p.w. gives me an encroachment permit, which i have contracted. but that's going to be critical path. so that's likely to push that -- >> is the building empty? is the building -- >> no. there's nine vacant units and 113 residential units. >> so my understanding from what they've presented is that there was -- there is needed work in nine other units that have been delayed because they are committed to not take out permits until this one's resolved. >> one large commercial unit as well. >> ok. >> yep. ok. thank you.

>> there public comment on this item? ok. seeing none, does the department have rebutttal? >> no. this time the permit has no rebuttal. >> could you clarify for me, chair, so in 2016, we inspected and there was an -- there was an -- there was an initial notice of violation. it was basically trying to work with the building owner at the time to upgrade. >> yes. it was to monitor the progress of the service. it was a side visit by the inspectors. and that's how it was open. there was an application for pg&e that was proposing may of

2016. >> and so then in 2017 -- because there wasn't any movement, we went back. is that what prompted us? >> it seems the electrical department had communications with the engineer and there was issues with the sidewalk. so they were monitoring the case. but it seems like at some point the case had no more action. and, therefore, the case had to be sent to code enforcement. so back in june of actually august 4 of 2017. no more action. >> but you're satisfied -- sorry. to the khaifrment you are satisfied that there is good faith effort in correcting this permit. right? >> yes. >> ok. thank you. ok.

any further comment? >> no. >> i don't have any questions. thank you. >> ok. i'd like to make a motion that -- >> i'm sorry. we have to let the appellant have a rebuttal. or none? none. ok. no rebuttal by the appellant. >> based on the findings, i'd like to make a motion that, while we believe the department acted correctly in making the notice of violations, there is good faith being executed here. and in the interest of having this as expeditiously resold as possible, we would like the allow the property owner to have the relief and i would

propose an extra 30 days be added on for more realistic completion. >> yeah. i second all the above. i would be a little bit more cognizant of the timeframe and more time if it's within our jurisdiction to give more time. i'm just legally where we stand here. i would be more -- because i understand in the process. i think if we really look at this, they are october even is a very ambitious timeframe as commissioner lee pointed out. so what are our options hooer to give they will as much timeframe, understanding the process they have to go through. and also considering the d.p.w. permit which will take a couple of months and that's for sure. told get processed. >> the code provides that if the board finds that there is not life safety hazard with this violation, that you can provide -- you can give them up to 18 months to complete the work. >> ok. so, i think al fair time would be january, i think. at minimum.

and i'll be honest with you. in that interpretation, might need a little bit of time based on -- i don't think it will be the issue, just be the process. pg&e needs to drop in a transform tore a box is a lot. could be another three months, you know. as long as there's progress being made, i think that's the -- to me, that is -- >> fine. accept the amendment. amendment to january and that will give us the opportunity to track the progress adequately. >> yeah. >> so let me clear -- be clear about what you're proposing. you're upholding the order of abatement and holding an abeyance until february? >> february 1. >> yep. correct. >> and fees? >> i would waive the fees. >> yeah. i'm not interested in penalizing here. do we have that autonomy there? >> all right. so if we have to, the most

least amount. >> are you asking me? >> yes. sorry. city attorney. yep. >> i believe you -- >> we can waive -- >> the d.b.i. imposed on them improperly in order to waive them completely. >> would be counter-- >> to the smallest amount, i guess. is that right? >> what is the minimum amount that -- they weren't written improperly. >> right. the $50 monitoring fee can't be waived. so you could reduce it to the -- you could impose only the costs that are required by law. >> so, what is that? do you know what that is? >> $50 an hour by the ordinance forbids us from waiving it. the investigating fee, i believe, is $1300. >> that could be waived. >> no. >> so, ok. all right.

what cannot be waived in dollar amount here? >> any costs incurred. >> ok. and that is the investigative fee and $50 an hour monitoring fee. >> ok. all right. unfortunately we can't, you know, the way that it's written, we have to charge those fees -- are you sure about that, that we have to? it's -- is there -- can we not -- did we not before move the fee snout >> this is electrical. i think this is the first one you've heard here. >> ok. that could be it. >> with ours it's times nine and times two. you can drop the times two. but i believe with electrical, it's a investigative fee. >> ok. so how could we vote on this and be clear on what the fee is and all other fees that we don't haves to impose can be waived.

>> you can call 'em back in january and we'll have it figured out by then. you can just say to come back and check in november-december. >> that -- can we do that? city attorney? could we pass the motion with the caveat that the fees will be determined at the january meeting where we're getting a check in from the project sponsor? >> you're proposing bringing the case back here in january? i think -- >> just as an update. >> i think you could say you are going to assess the -- uphold the assessment of cost to the extent that costs are required by law with an intent to reduce that amount to only those requireded by law. >> ok. >> that's fine. >> we can't impose times two. i got confused. >> so, we can. ok. so --

so to the chair, to amendment to your motion, that we defer the fees and costs until an update comes in january-february when it comes back to us. >> that's fine. >> accept the amendment. >> in all favor. >> can we articulate the motion ?*irs [laughter] >> yes. we can do that. >> ok. >> so, a motion from president warshell is to oppose the order of abatement, hold it in abeyance until january 2019, city code to be assessed at -- when the project sponsor completes the work. and the note violation is resolved. and the basis for that motion is that the order of abasement was properly issued to allow some relief costs due to their good faith efforts. is that right? >> correct. thank you. >> thank you.

>> and roll call vote on this motion in just a moment. [roll call] >> the motion carries unanimously. our next item is item two, case number 6848, 780 post street. action requested by apel lanlts. reinspection by senior allen davidson and reversal of the order of abatement. would the department like to come forward? >> sonia, is this working? >> yes. you just have to place your item there. >> ok. thank you, mr. deputy. and good morning, commissioners. james matsu, acting chief

housing inspector. 780 post street is a 36-unit, five-storey building. there are full of tenants, many older tenants there. we received a complaint eight months ago, in january, from somebody that had fallen in the elevator because it wasn't aligning properly with the hallway. so we wrote a notice of violation. the elevator starts and stops abrumentzly. we posted the notice. we did a reinspection. we referred the case to a director's hearing. we mailed a notice to all interested parties. posted the notice. did another reinspection. the elevator still was not operating properly. here's a picture of the elevator. another picture.

and there's a third picture. director's hearing was dully held on march 29. a hearing officer issued a continuance and gave more time to the owner. in april, we reposted the building because the work still had not been completed. in may, we did another reinspection. on may 10, there was an advisement with order of abatement. the advisement period expired. there was another reinspection prior to issuing the order of abate that was issued in june and posted on the building. the owner appealed. there's some business about who it was doing the reinspection, but we cleared that up. we had senior inspector alan davidson go back in august, august 2 to take these pictures.

notice is not satisfied. it continues to stop abruptly and jolts when you right it. so, we're recommending that the order of abatement be upheld at and all cost by the department be assessed. thank you. >> thank you. would the appellant like to come forward? >> good morning. i'm the elevator service provider for building and i have been for nearly 25 years. never at any time throughout this entire period has the state of california elevator division not issued an operating permit. this elevator was manufactured and installed in the 1920s. and it's 99% original and it is termed in the industry as a reecstatic control.

the elevator is adjusted a certain -- to a certain load and the brake spring tension on the brake drum, on the brake shoes on the brake drum is set at a certain tension for a specific load and the elevator circuitry and controller does not have the capability to adjust for a varying load as newer elevators do. so we tried to set it at an average and we've been setting it at about two people to stop. and i contacted the state of california elevator division who issues the permits. the issue with the expired permit is nearly all the buildings in san francisco have expired permits and they're very far behind. we requested a reinspection and received a letter that they have received the request and will get to it when they can. that is just the issue of the permit itself. but furthermore, dave henderson is the head person for this area and i asked him about if the elevator was adjusted with

one person or two persons and it stops even with the floors in both directions. is that acceptable? and he said absolutely acceptable. so we have -- i just handed this gentleman some letters from other elevator companies that maintain the same type of equipment and speak to the accuracy or inaccuracy of the ability of it stopping accurately with varying loads. one of those letters from an elevator consultant who has about 50 years in the industry. so we just wanted to share those with you. i've been out to four or five of the inspections and have made adjustments. i'm there periodically. and as the elevator, say it gets a lot of use in a month, somebody's moving or something. the leveling accuracy will change with that given load. so i'm there tweaking the adjustments here and there. further more, we rebuilt the motor, put in new brake shoes and there is a fine line between stopping accurate and

then being a little too abrupt. if we soften the abruptness, it will be less accurate. so, that is the story with respect to the technical side, if i'm not getting too technical about the elevatorment again, those letters address the type of drive this is. again a reecstatic control and just how they cannot adjust for a load like the more sophisticated elevator like in these buildings. if they fall off half an inch, it automatically relevels. and it can adjust for varying loads. this elevator does not have that capability. the sbraek set at a given tension and there is a given amount of slide with that load that we set it with. should the load change, the slide will change greater or lesser depending on the load. >> commissioner. >> thank you. i do have a question. i'm very familiar with old elevators. there is one in the building i live in. but is there a way to manually

bring the elevator up level? >> manually, of course. but that would be -- >> by the person riding? >> no, i'm sorry. no. there's not. for me as a technician, i would have to manually do that. but no, this doesn't have the capability to do that feature. >> do you see why it might be a problem that somebody can't bend their knee or if they're in a wheelchair that it might -- >> of course. and, again, i've been working for this landlord for 25 years that the building and others and i'm there on a regular basis so i'm doing tweaks all the time. >> ok. thank you. >> ok. i wanted to mention one more thing. the alternative is a full renovation to a modern elevator and that brings in a whole litany of code compliance issues and that issues the code compliance, life safety, a different kind of machinery and a new structure and it's quite involved on the elevator side. i can't speak for building structure itself, but i can

speak to the elevator side. >> good morning. my name is richard parker and i'm an architect and i have been working with the land lord here on this property to study what it would take to bring in a new, modern 88-code compliant elevator and we really would have significant issues with it. if i may, just briefly. this is 780 post street right here. it is actually quite a beautiful building. it is located here in the tenderline neighborhood of san francisco. we have these really beautiful, large light courts that services the building. and this is the street facade right there. but here's the floor plan. and this is a way to get to see the whole floor.

there's seven units per floor. but this is the area in question where we have the elevator core right here opposite the main stair core and the elevator's add -- add jay sent to a light court right here. in order to increase the size of the hoistway and shaft, we would have to displace 10 tenants for well over a year to do the demolition of the existing concrete frame of the building. and that would take jackhammering that concrete frame out. of the building. and set a new foundation under the hoistway as well as upgrading the structure to the roof for the new mechanical room up there. the elevator itself is probably $500,000 itself. the structural upgrades and other half a million. another $250,000 probably just in life safety upgrades to get the elevator and the building life safety systems to communicate with each other. and then we've got permit fees.

that is over 12k4rr.2 million just to replace the shaft and put it in a new elevator. divide that by 39 tenants. that is over $39,000 of pass-through costs to the tenants in this building. at that point, it is a year's worth of displacement. i really don't know how we're going to -- i understand and i completely empathize with the issues here of these old elevators in these buildings. i use them all the time, too. here in the city. and i empathize with the tenants and those that use it. i trust that the landlord is doing the best he can and the maintenance staff to make this as safe as possible. i just look at the cost and what it will do to the structure as a whole. it is prohibitive, honestly. and i'm here to answer any other questions regarding the architecture and structure of the building, if you'd like.

>> i have a question, but it is primarily to, like, the building manager. what happens if somebody gets stuck currently in the elevator? if it's down -- if they're in a wheelchair and it stops below the floor. what happens? >> they call me and i race over there. >> how long does that take? >> depents on where i am in san francisco. about an hour. >> we near a conundrum. at some point -- i mean, at some point -- >> one thing that was offered up is to post a sign in the elevator saying no more than three people and that would maintain a greater accuracy thank posting. that was just a suggestion. i wanded to offer that. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. my name is sarush, the owner of this building. i've owned it for probably 30 years.

mr. cotton has been maintaining it. we have always received from the state inspection board a permit. they have inspected it and said it's ok. i'd like to request that you would allow them to continue that practice and, you know, let us know what the situation is. as robby alluded to, we'd be happy to place science outside of the elevator letting people know to be cognizant of the height sdoifrns they're not surprised. the problem is with all the effort that we have made, with all the times that robby has gone out to the building to fix it and do whatever we can possibly do, this is the design of the elevator from 100 years ago. there is not much that we can do to repair it. and as -- [bell ringing]

and as richard mentioned, the costs of which we looked into -- you know, we looked into every option. look into every possibility. it would cost an enormous sum and it seems that it would be kind of a lot of overkill for this elevator to be replaced and it cannot be repaired. we are kind of in a tough spot. and i acknowledge that, you know, tenants may be inconvenienced, but i think, on balance, you know, it may be that the cure is worse than the disease. and we are requesting your consideration of the practicalities of what is going on so that we can come up with a good solution and maintain the safety for the tenants. notify them and say please be careful. >> thank you. >> commissioner walker? >> to follow up.

it is a 100-year-old building. i would assume you have a plan for the upkeep of it over time. when are you planning on replacing the elevator? >> well, we have no plan at this time to replace the elevator. due to the, you know, massive cost and the massive displacement that would be required of the te nanlses in place and reduce the housing stock in consequence. if the costs get passed on to the tenants, that is another, i don't know, that is another $100 to $200 per unit. and i don't know whether that's something that the tenants would prefer. certainly it would require a major outlay of capital and that is another big problem. it's just a tough one. and, you know, basically we're

throwing this out there to come one a survival solution. >> could you -- >> yeah. >> jeremy, excuse me. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. >> jim, you're pretty familiar with this building? >> yeah. >> yeah. would you -- would you regard this as a well-run building? >> well, we have had times when we have to go out and write up notices of violation. >> yeah, i understand. but all the violations would always be addressed and taken care of? there is no other standing out violations on the building right now, is there? >> i would have to check on that. however, we have -- can i speak to this issue of the modernization? >> yeah. in one second. i want to get -- i want to get in on it. i find the testimony here very compelling here this morning in regard to the defense of -- and

i do understand what they're going through because i know every one of these buildings myself. one of these elevators -- the decision has to be made to revamp it and it does trigger off a huge impact. not saying i'm not doing to do it. but i understand where they're coming from. this is a building that's ran well as far as the city standard would be considered and they are dealing with a situation where we as a department can look and say, well maybe if we all work together here, that thele alternative displacement and doing the upgrades and so on would be better if we would work together and see if we can make this elevator where two people go in at a time and so on, for now. so, that's kind of where -- >> yeah. i wouldn't -- i'm not able to make that kind of generalization about the state of the building at this time. but this photo right here that we showed earlier -- >> yeah. >> taken august 2. there's a tape measure here. and it's showing about five or six-inch difference here.

a couple of years ago, director huey and louis convened all the issue of stakeholders on the elevators. fire department, cal ocea, landlord, tenants, all the various different agencies. there is a difference between replacing an elevator and modernizing an elevator. modernizing is a process where you don't have to necessarily take out the entire shaft of the elevator. the fire department issued a willingness to work with owners to change the dimensional requirements and whether it has to be large enough to get a fire department gurney inside the elevator. which are some of the things that make the costs go up. and so there is modernizing an elevator without displacing the tenants. the elevator, as it stands today, is not just a one-inch difference.

it's five or six inches. it jolts every time you go down the thing. imagine if you were dependent on this elevator to get to your home. so, i just -- i will leave nit your hands. because, you know, you're the final arbiter of whether an order gets put on this. this is one of the few ways we have to hold the owner accountability. and there are people watching this broadcasts that will take a message away from your decision today. >> i'm not quite finished here. >> sure. >> ok. and i dully noted about people watching the podcast and how our decision here. that is why we're having this conversation. it is important if a building like this one, and they come up and make pretty compelling arguments as to their situation on this, and they're coming up with solutions, for example, limiting the amount of people who go on that elevator, they

would eliminate the step issue that you are talk about. >> that is not necessarily proven. i wasn't at the inspection, but there was not a ton of people on this elevator when this photo was taken on august 2. this one right here that shows a five or six-inch gap here. >> ok. >> however, we would like the work with the owner. >> but let me talk to your modernization of the elevator and i'm very much up to speed again, too. to modernize an elevator in a shaft that size, i'm sure the gentleman will come up and back me up on this, you can't. how about that. can you come up here and maybe talk to that? >> i appreciate hearing the option of doing a modernization versus a full replacement. we're working with, again, the

100-year-old equipment. the guide rails would have to be replaced with steel if you wanted to retain the old cab, which is not that pretty. it's steel and it has a certain size to it. it does not immediate the current a.d.a. all the other code issues with controller and life safety and so on would have to be adopted with any change in the controls that control the leveling. so, the physicality of the elevator to do a modernization still would be a dramatic amount of work. >> the shaft size that there's there right now wouldn't meet code, right? >> not for an a.d.a., no. >> step modernization really, when we ire talking modernization or upgrading the cab, we're talking about pulling out the existing one, expanding the space within that. >> to make it meet the current code. that is correct. >> which was to your testimony would impact the building and where we would have major impact to the units in the building. >> indeed. >> and people would be displaced to get that work done. >> indeed. >> to me is at the crux of what we're talking about here.

so i want to stay focused on that. so how do we work together to make this as safe as possible for the tenants? >> one thing i was -- i'll make more frequent visit there is to keep these -- make the tweaks to keep it as level as it can be. i come about once a month. that is about as standard for this type of elevator but i can come more frequently and focus on the tweaking and fine-tuning of the leveling and give it a particular load. one person, two persons, whatever is deemed as the average load. >> how many times have you had the situation before and called in. is this the first time we're dealing with this? >> no, occasionally we'll make adjustments. i want to say -- >> so when a sxlainlt made, you make the adjustment. it's not necessarily called in to the department of correction -- >> that's correct. six years ago this issue came up. we made the adjustments. the inspectors came out. they with respect happy everybody left. they were some of the same people involved in this. they were satisfied. great. it operates the same today as

it has five years ago. again, we replace the brake shoes to make it stop as bests as we can and i can make more frequent tweaking to kiept as accurate as it can be. >> ok. commissioner walker? >> again, i'm really familiar with old elevators and the expense of keeping them up. however, we have tenants in this building. so, i'm also aware that over time an old elevator that can be repaired now eventually cannot be repaired. as we look at this, and that is the truth, because you don't get -- you don't have parts. other main things that will end up costing as much to modernize as to keep it up. >> not necessarily. >> maybe not for you, but for the building owner. yeah. at some point, these do need to

be replaced. that is the point here is that if you're a tenant and stuck on that elevator and there is a fire or there is -- you're stuck in between floors, for some reason you can't get up or out. i don't know what happens at the ground. does it sink at the ground also? >> no. >> our first exiting level, you can still go down if you -- there's still shaft left. there's still places to go. it's not leveling on the ground. if it can sink at the first floor exit, do we know that? are you aware of that? >> the lobby is obviously used more so we pay a little more attention to that. and there is a resident manage every there. when there is -- >> first floor. >> i'm sorry. there is a resident manager on site so he'll call me and say,

hey, robby, the elevator is stuck. >> i have a picture of it. >> i'll say do this, do this, do this. >> this is the issue that i'm weighing as a commissioner is that we have the issue of tenants and if it's an exiting issue, on the first floor, it is slightly different than being stuck on the second floor. though probably not for the tenants. >> i don't think the issue is at the first floor. it is some of the intermediate floors that i need to tweak. that's all. there's no photograph of the lobby floor. if it was, it's leveled. >> i'm concerned about this. i am -- i feel -- i mean, we can talk about it after we, you know, do public comment and whatnot. let's chat about it. >> good. we'll close public comment then.

>> no, open to public comment. >> oh, i'm sorry. is there public comment on this item? >> good morning. my name is jerry dratler. the specific issue before the commission is what is the correct public policy for noncompliant elevators that are in operation well beyond their intended service life. the commission is weighing public safety ante tenant displacement versus cost. my suggestion, because this is a televised meeting is that the commission develop a bright line where increased cost is more important than public safety antenanlts displacement. thank you. >> i have replaced an elevator like this.

it took us 18 months of planning te get all the permits, the parts were delivered before we started. and we spent five months switching out the elevator. all the issues you've heard are there. had to make the cab bigger. the shaft bigger. switch out the wood rails. it was about half a million dollars so it is not an inexpensive issue. the other side, which i'm not hearing and a little concerned. there are certain parts that they break. you can't replace them. some of the cast steel parts, they break -- the state won't allow you to replace them. there is a time you can continue maintenance and there is a time if it breaks it will be out for a year. or you get ahead of this. but it is a very, very long period to design a replacement elevator and it is incredibly expensive. >> ok. any further public comment?

seeing none, public comment is closed. ok. commissioners? >> are we going to do our rebuttal? i'm sorry. does the department have any additional rebuttal? >> i thought we'd already done them. >> it was kind of intertwined. we officially didn't. >> so, it's simple. from the point of view of the housing inspection division. we get a complaint. we go there. we see it is not operating properly. we go as to what our notice of violation says. so, at the end of the period of time, have they satisfied our notice of violation? they haven't done that. it's basically operating the same as it was when we were there eight months ago. there are ways to work around a.d.a. there are ways to work around fire department issues, to control the costs. when you -- when they are talk

about tenant displacement, that is temporary displacement. you're not allowed to permanently displace tenants in that kind of situation. that would violate the rent ordinance. again, our department has -- we understand there are issues that are a very difficult issue with elevators. we spent two years meeting with all the stakeholders on this when the director convened that working group. we're sympathetic with the plight of the owner. however, there are also comments that were submitted in your packet from the tenants that live in the building. who are impacted. and we're simply asking for order of abasement. that's it. >> i have a question. that is 36-unit building? >> that's right. >> so if there is not an elevator, would all 36 people be -- would all the people on

the top floors be relocated or what is the process for that? >> it's governed by the rent board so we would have to go through that process with them. >> thank you. >> appellant, rebuttal? >> thank you for hearing us. we have made every good faith effort to investigate, to fix, to correct, to repair, to upgrade whatever we have been able to do. we are at a place where the only option that appears before us to satisfy the building department is -- seems to be a lot of overkill for something that may be addressed by signage and notices. and, you know, i just don't have any great, good solution because if i did, you know, we would have done it.

and that is the situation. and so, you know, i hope that you would recognize our good faith and, you know, allow the state's department of industrial safety to, you know, which does actually charged with inspecting all of these elevators. they have jurisdiction over issuing of those permits. and let them do their job. thank you very much. >> ok. thank you. commissioners? >> commissioners, comments? commissioner walker? >> this is truly a conundrum. i feel for all sides on this. i think that it is not so easy as just replacing it, you know w a magic wand. it takes time where the elevator will be shut down.

and it may very well displace some folks who need that elevator to get around. the issues that need to be addressed by the rent control body and in their jurisdiction will be. older buildings, we have a lot of them in the city and i do agree with mr. matsu that ultimately we want to make sure that elevators are safe and serve the people living in them. if you owned a building, it is your job to make sure the elevator works. and that people can leave safely. so, i feel like this order was issued properly. i would like to also just put out there that there is a potential for this to be a life safety issue in the event of exiting the building. so, as much as i'd like to be

as lenient as we can, it makes me nervous if something goes wrong here. that is an expense beyond any that we can imagine in trying to find resolution here. so, i am leaning towards upholding the order of abasement and allowing some time for the process to unfold. but these elevators need to be maintained. i would also assume that the department would come up with a workable solution so we don't have one at this point. that works. >> ok. >> or discussion -- i'm not making a formal motion yet until we talk about it. >> ok. commissioner mccarthy? >> you go ahead. i'll be interested. commissioner lee. >> i'm a little torn about this. i feel that i hate to, as a commission, i would hate us to

compel an own tore replace an elevator. it should be voluntary. for example, i own an old 1995 volvo car. and it is getting harder and harder to find parts for the car. and i know i have to plan on replacing that car and i'm planning on replacing it now. i'm not going to wait until the car breaks down and can't move and then replace the carpet i hope the owner of the building recognizes the fact that this elevator needs to be up grated or repaired or replaced someday and i would hope he starts planning for it now. i mean, not until there is no elevator or it's not working. i heard the owner saying that he has no plans to replace that elevator. currently. so i hope that changes after this meeting. but in terms of what to do with the current situation, i don't

know. maybe there is some reasonable interim thaoption we can take. i hear that there is a live-in resident manager there. right? could that person escort people up and down the elevator? i'm just thinking out loud. i'm just thinking out loud of what type of solution we can put in place now to make the tenants feel safer. another idea then poped in my head or option. if the elevators contents, let's say, varies from one person to five people and that shifts the elevator floors, right, in balance, what happens if the elevator is constantly heavy? meaning instead of just zero person or one person, five-person, it varies, rightsome is what happens if

the elevator is constantly heavy. would that limit the variation? you know, if that's the case, why not load the elevator? >> [inaudible]. >> it can be set for a given load. the spring tension, etc.. the slide would be set for a given load. five people, three people, one person, southeaster row load. as it changes, the stopping distance would change. if we set for an average is what we've been doing for years. setting it for like two people. >> what happened if you set it heavier and put some weight in the elevator? would that keep the floor level from -- >> no, it would not. it would be set for a higher load and then when it's empty, it would be dramatically out. >> you're asking if the variation has changed with a heavier load. >> the way i'm thinking is the difference between one person, five person is say 200 pounds to 1,000 pounds, right? so the floor level would vary -- >> it would. >> now if you have constantly

1,000 pounds in there and one person gets on, it's only like 20% more. >> it's still going to change. the way -- there is a lot of engineering that went into this in the 1920s technology about gear raich yoes and loading speeds. >> i'm not an elevator expert. but i'm just thinking out loud. >> the braking of it is set at a given load. >> what i'm hoping for is maybe an interim solution that everybody will be satisfied with. to help make the tenants feel safer. other than that, i don't know. >> i would agree that this is a perplexing situation. we don't want tenant displacement. we don't want tenant lack of safety. we don't want risk of life hazard by people on upper floors not being able to get out. like commissioner lee, i opted to get rid of an old car

because it wasn't worth it anymore. i live in 130-year-old house and my experience with it is that when things need to get replaced, you can do things in the interim. but eventually you will be facing them. and having a plan to accept that eventually and budgets for it and execute the plan in an orderly manner. it is always expensive. is always painful. but is part of owning an older property. and there is really very little way of getting around that. i don't understand the tech kals of maintaining old elevators. i'm glad that the director put together a working group on this. i'm glad that we