elevator. this sign was up all year. so this sign was currently up there even when we had the last hearing, and we're still having these problems. we don't always go deeply into this history of every case that comes before you. but since there were so many questions last time, we decided -- i had my staff look this up. it's hard to see because it's very small, but each line here represents a case at this building. it has a history of elevator cases. one, two, three, four, five, six, and they began 12 years ago. so this has been a chronicle issue in this building that we consistently have to go out on.

it's building, hot water, a case in order to get them to comply. the elevator has been particularly chronic and a difficult issue. at the last hearing, the members of the board asked me to check with our code enforcement outreach groups. our group in the tenderloin has a clinic, did some outreach to the tenants who were concerned about the elevator issues. they will probably be speaking during public comment. we had a very interesting letter from the landlord group, the san francisco apartment association, and the owner has actually been a longtime member of the apartment association and knows this owner well. this was strongly worded from charlie goss. this letter is to inform you your building requires a

modernization to its elevator. if problems persist, they could civil section 1941.1. given mobility, it's important you address this as soon as possible. this is from a group that know this is particular owner. there were questions also about the cost and the idea of displacing people was raised at the last hearing. i looked up -- we did some more research into modernization of elevators. this chart lists about 15 to 20 components of an elevator, including the cab and the shaft, the lobby and the machine room.

all but five of these components can be restored by modernizing the elevator. there's only five that would require a full replacement. now, i met with the owner after the last hearing. we have not heard back from the owner since the last hearing, but we did just talk a little bit before the meeting, and he showed me some estimates that were not in my packet that show a much lower amount and did say that it could be modernized from three different companies. so i would urge them to put it up on the board too. >> and we're requesting an order of abatement with these. >> commissioner walker? >> so there has not been any discussion from the owner with

the tenant? >> i believe there was a discussion, and it was included in the packet, yes. >> is this -- i mean, it's great that we have the new information about the history of the violations. it would be great if we could get a copy of that and maybe -- >> i could pass it around if everyone wanted to take a look at it. >> or just give it to sonia, and she can give copies, especially the chart of the other item you just showed about the renovat n renovation. that will be helpful because i think this is going on. i think that's it for now. >> okay. any other questions? >> of course. >> you mentioned about the five that can be modernized in san francisco. >> there's 15 to 20 categories, and the majority of them could be addressed through

modernization. there's only five that can't be. >> oh, five that can't be. okay. >> hello, everyone. glad to see you. the last time, i believe you asked us to contact the tenants and see what they had to say and see whether -- is this loud enough? i hope it is. to get a consensus from them on what their opinion is, what their references might be with respect to this particular elevator and following your instruction we sent a notice out to all the tenants, and we had a meeting at the building site in

the lobby. there were a few tenants that walked in and out and did not actually participate in the meeting, but there were about 20 tenants there. so we asked for a discussion and we asked for input from them. so the suggestions they came up with, this is the package that was submitted earlier. they asked for a prominent warning sign. they said anybody who doesn't know of this issue can be notified of it. they said, yes, good. the second thing was adjusting the weight that the elevator is levelling at at some number that most closely approximated the

most frequent usage of the elevator, and we determined that to be somewhere between one and two people. assuming that a typical person weighs about 150 pounds, that we would set it at 1 and a half so if one person was there, it would be half off, and if two people, it would be half off and also telling people, don't load the elevator with more than two people. that's not always honored by the tenants, but we can ask them to do that. so i believe that that was done. another suggestion was to place a scale near the elevator in the lobby so that people could determine when they were going in there, whether they were going to be off from that and therefore it would mac the levelling be off. then also increasing the

frequency of the elevator technician visits to keep making sure if it got off for one reason or the other because there's too much weight, et cetera, that it would more frequently be updated or kind of levelled again. that also including new tenants, that when they're moving in, they cannot overload the elevator because it causes it to go off. and when they're leaving with the furniture, it would make it be off, and basically informing everyone what's going on. old tenants, new tenants, et cetera. we also went into some of the practical issues with respect to replacing the elevator. the architect was there. the elevator technician was

there. we received information from other elevator companies. i can show you we actually submitted that information prior to the last meeting a month ago, but i don't believe that it was in sufficient time for it to make it into your regular package so he had not seen it, and we were able to show we had done this further diligence and find ways to kind of modernize and do the self-levelling. but anyway, at the end of that meeting, it lasted for something over an hour, like an hour and 20 minutes, like that. we asked the tenants who would like the elevator to be replaced versus taking the measures that were suggested or some --

whichever ones could be implemented. upon the vote, there was zero votes to replace the elevator, and 100% to taking these steps that were suggested. so there was basically a meeting of the minds between the tenants based on, you know, what their requests and suggestions were. so we have taken that into account and, in fact, we have -- i don't know how this thing works, but i'm -- >> you just did it, sir. >> yeah. okay. so these are just some samples of -- here we go. i don't know if you can read it easily. basically, what i'm trying to show you is, yes, we did do the signs as was requested, and then

i believe the architect also did some outreach to the building department based on the suggestion, and we were looking to see how we might be able to work with the building department so that in the eve eventual process -- i don't know what the internal process for that is, but presumably between the architects and the building department, city inspectors and so on, they will be able to figure that out so we're well-placed.

and the question was, should we leave things the way they are until such time as the elevator cannot be repaired and at that point in time. so that was part of that discussion. that's what happened. and, oh, i wanted to quickly put on this, these are some of the other -- i don't think it's very big. i guess you can see that the numbers they are quoting are like four or 500,000, all of them just for the elevator components, not including engineering and other expenses. so it's a fairly expensive process regardless, and i think the numbers that the architect calculated were, you know, considerably in excess of that because at least all kinds of an sill area -- an sill --

ancillilary costs. [ off microphone ] >> hello, my name is rosa marie cavallo. we work with the housing clinic. we work in collaboration with dbi as we're a contractor for dbi. i am the program manager for the program. we do various outreach and take tenants who come into our office with various issues of elevator habitability issues. so over the last few months, we've had tenants come in and talk to us, slash, we've also done research of the building. the jostling of the elevator, the non-functioning of the

elevator, the huge gap. it's a gap and it's also not leveling. there are kind of what we do to assess the building and see who's living in the building, there are individuals who are elderly, who have mobility issu issues, who are a little bit worried about dropping items in the gap. one tenant, in particular, i know mr. sirosh is aware, a tenant had dropped her keys inside this gap, and she had lost her keys in there. i believe it was the 23rd of august of this year that mr. sirosh, who was talking, they did have a meeting with the tenants in the building. what i was told by tenants is that that meeting included discussion about voting on what needed to happen to fix the elevator, how tenants would feel about being charged for the costs of the elevator.

one of the tenants, in particular, she was like, well, if we have to pay for the cost of the elevator, maybe it's better if the elevator is not fixed. it kind of sounded like tenants were being dissuaded from raising the issue of the worrisome elevator. in addition to this, i was also told that tenants were asked by mr. sirosh and his representatives if the tenants who had put forward complaints about the faulty elevator, if they could please withdraw those complaints to better expedite the process that y'all have in front of you here today, and i sent a communication to mr. sirosh and -- of the same company as well as charlie goss of apartment association who we work well with, to please cease

and desist asking tenants to withdraw complaints and kind of coercing them and pressuring them. so that was kind of what i found, my findings, doing outreach and discussing this issue with tenants. >> and you attended that meeting? i did not talk to them. i talked to them after the meeting. >> i have a lot of people who call me and say, the elevator permit has expired, what do we do? well, you send a letter and they send a form letter back saying having an expired permit, there's a new inspection

scheduled. they adjusted the area of the gaps on each floor, which is the left side, six inches on most of the floors. codes reads the gap has to be a minimum of an inch, and a couple of those floors where there's a gap there's a piece of filler that's missing on the left side, not the main walkway, but the left side when the door is fully open. that exceeds an inch, and that will be corrected in a timely manner, and the state will issue a permit. i wanted to address the gap and the permit. and nobody was coercing anybody at that meeting. i was there. >> can i ask a question? >> commissioner walker? >> one of the issues that came up at the last hearing was the response time if people are stuck in the elevator. let's say somebody is in there and can't step up. they're in a wheelchair or whatnot. it seemed like it took an exorbitant amount of time to

have someone some and help them get out of it. so i just want to know if you guys have come up with an alternative response to people being stuck in the elevator. >> well, first of all, i would like to know when that was because we haven't had anyone stuck in quite a while. i'm in the city every day. i respond as fast as possible. i was there last night, making sure things are in good shape. levels are -- >> i guess the question is: is there somebody in the building that can respond? >> yes. the building manager. we talked in the meeting. he'll deal with tenant when they move in. he'll be there to tell people not to overload the elevator. yesterday he texted me about 2:00 in the afternoon, and i was there by 5:00 to do an adjustment. if somebody is stuck, i drop what i'm doing and race over there. i can't recall a time when

somebody was stuck. >> on the issue of adjustments, you know, it's been brought up that moving in or moving out creates problems, and if you're saying that a 225-pound limit is what you're recommending for this, i would image most people moving in and out exceed that. there's no freight elevator at this building? >> that's correct. this is the only building. >> they're going to use that. it's a six- or seven-story building? [ please stand by

>> i don't have the date. >> approximately? >> it was after the last hearing. yeah, there was. there isn't elevator company or

entity, except the governor of california that can influence the frequency of those inspections. i'm serious. >> the expired permit, will that get replaced? >> yes, and that is 100% up to that date to do that. it's not the responsibility of the building. we send a letter. it's not for us to say, issue the permit now, none of that. you have to pay the fee and wait for them to inspect it. >> i think it's respectful to ask the tenants what they think. sometimes the cure is worse than the problem. but you probably want an outside person sitting in the meeting. it's good idea. maybe someone from housing or someone from the tenant housing

association to sit in and listen to make sure it was a fair vote. but i think it's respectful to listen to the tenants. thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is richard parker, architect. i was present at the last hearing. i was also a part of the meeting with the tenant. and we presented plans that showed what it would take to provide a fully compliant ada elevator. the purpose of putting in a wheelchair accessible elevator is a significant structural impact. probably just a million dollars for the structural work. the owner has assured me that he will authorize us to move forward with a pre-application

meeting with dbi, fire, electrical and mechanical department to figure out what is the appropriate strategy for this elevator in this building. and we will move forward in that area. work within the city's parameters for modernizing this elevator. >> ok. you were present at that one when i read, you know, i guess the closest thing to a transcript of it, it read to me like we were presenting an option of it's a 1.3, a 1.5 million to redo it and it's going to be inconvenience and the apartments are going to be reduced. the option of modernization that may be considerably hardship to the tenants and lower cost that may be passed on over a 10,

20-year period was really not discussed in the same manner. while i agree with the comment from mr. buscovich that either tenant's unit or someone from our group should have been notified about it, it would have been helpful, so that we're not trying to interpret maybe imperfect transcript. i have to tell you, my reading of what i got was that if i'd been one of the tenants listening to that, i'd have been, let's just live with it, kind of. so, setting up these meetings and being sure that they present everything complete and fair and have the oversight of all parties and all interests well represented, clearing is in

everyone's interest so there is not speculation after the fact. >> understood, commissioner, president. we did discuss the concepts of repair, replace, shut down, signage, modernization options were discussed. if it did not get accurately reflected in the minutes, my apologi apologies. thank you. >> i wanted to address the modernization scope >> additional public comment from people who have not spoken. then rebuttal from the department. >> senior housing inspector. yeah, i had some of the same thoughts before looking at the transcript and hearing the testimony this morning. and it really struck me that the estimate that was put up on the

screen, which was the first time i'd seen it from gr clark, escalator, elevator consulting step, clearly says the solution is modernization. modernization does not involve displacing people. so our business here is the safety of the people in the building. our role is to request that an order of abatement be issued in this case to protect the people that live there. thank you. >> i know we're looking at this specific case, but i'd like to again have perspective on it. both in terms of, you know, possibly expanding some of your comments about the building's history, but you know, really placing them in context. you know, my questions would be pretty much how many buildings are there with similar aged

elevators? and in relation to that, how does the post history of complaints, service outages or performance deficiencies compare? and then a second question is really, are you aware of any such restrictions really, you know, quite to this level of gap of no more than two people, scales, 220 -- >> given the -- >> let him answer. >> that's a very unusual situation. never heard of that before. been working here over 20 years. so, yeah, never seen that, never heard of that in cases that we're working on. getting at the universe of elevators in the city, that information is only available at the -- we did a survey a couple of years ago on sro elevators,

so we have numbers to that extent, but there are more elevators in the apartment buildings. we've got 8 or 9 active cases with elevators. there are two other ones that have a similar complaint history. that's what i was able to find since the last meeting. >> thank you for this. we have a lot of older buildings in our city, so i think that all of us are interested in this. do you see an option for a short-term and a long-term solution in these kind of situations? it is a likely disruption of use for everyone in the building to replace it. and it will incur some sort of costs that will have to be pushed through, the pass through, would have to be looked at by the rent board.

those are real things for the folks who are living in the building. it's not -- it's real. i mean, it's a real consideration, whether they were properly advised in the tenant meeting. it is the reality. so how do you look at that when you see one of these projects? i mean, i get that what we're looking at is that there is a deficiency. so we have to issue the notice of violation. do you look at a staged response from the building owners, what they could do in the short-term to make it usable, versus a long-term plan for replacement or modernization? >> well, thank you. you know, our district inspectors have the knowledge and the history of the district. and so they are looking at how frequent they're called out to particular buildings. so if you get called out to a building, see the elevator is

not working, notice of violation. they have technician come, adjust it, works again, we give the abatement notice of the violation. when elevators are consistently unable to meet a normal standard, when you have people falling out, as we -- someone hurt themselves in this case. and that you're invited to come back, oh, it's fixed now, you get there, and you saw the picture with the tape measure, that's a different level in that case. and you know, we're encouraged that someone is talking here in modernizing the elevator, so that's what needs to happen here. at the last meeting commissioner lee talked about his volvo and that was a very telling analogy and important statement that at what point are you going to

address something? we do have a 12-year history of problems with this. this would be a good time for us. >> so you're saying there is a 12-year history of problems -- >> with this elevator. >> -- to your valuation of the records, there are possibly two or three other buildings with similar or in the same ballpark histories of complaints and issues reported out of all the elevators that exist in the city? >> they didn't file appeals the way this one did. >> i see. >> thank you very much. >> so are these saying now -- are you saying that if the elevator was modernized instead of replaced, it would solve a lot of the issues, especially the gap and the levelling of the elevator? >> yes. and the owner has a statement, more than one, from -- >> so modernization does not

mean replacing the entire shaft? >> that's right. >> my next question, in your opinion, how long does it take to modernizing a building, how much planning and how much work would it take? maybe robbie can help us on that. >> i think an elevator company would know more speaking of buscovich's now, maybe six months. i think they could attest to that better. they're familiar. >> ok. >> can we ask you to step up again? >> thank you. >> it's a good question. so modernizing means we're going to maintain certain elements of the elevator, for example, the elevator car. if that is retained, then everything around it needs to be

replaced because it has wooden rails. the safety device on the elevator has shark teeth on it that wears into the wood severely. those rails cannot be retained. the only thing that would remain is the elevator car. so we're talking about replacement versus modernization, about 80 -- 20% difference. the elevator car is the only thing that would be retained. the rest would have to be replaced in either case. once you replace the main brain, it opens up the requirement for new code, fire light safety, fixtures, all kinds of things. so the modernization is 80% of the replacement. the replacement could entail ada compliant wheelchair to make a full circle, which is 5-foot circle in the elevator, which this does not have and that would require a larger shaft. that's the difference between the two. >> just a follow-up, i'm looking

at your letter, the letter from the building manager, owner, you talk about getting possible exemptions to building code and regulations to relieve or lessen those requirements that you just discussed, some of them, is that possible in this? are there some of those that you just mentioned that could be granted exemptions? >> in my experience, i've never has. been in the business 42 years, never seen that. you're allowed to get a variance, it doesn't mean you don't have to do it, you're doing it a different way, you're still in compliance with the code. >> are those from our department? >> state of california. >> got it. >> commissioner mccarthy: i think i have the answer to this, but when you're revamping these

elevators to whatever level that is decided, you will have an elevator that is out of use for what time frame? >> minimum of six months. >> commissioner mccarthy: what is your experience with the building where an elevator doesn't work for six months, what happens to them? >> it's a challenge. my experience, there is clear and concise and timely notifications to the tenants. you know, it's a little bit beyond me. the projects have been involved in, there is modernization, scheduled ahead of time and they inform the tenants accordingly. >> commissioner mccarthy: is there a lot of seniors in that building? >> i really don't know. also i wanted to mention, talked about wheelchair access, it's impossible for a wheelchair to come in from the sidewalk and enter the lobby. there is a flight of stairs. so i was confused by that. >> got you. >> commissioner mccarthy: i'm wondering if there has to be

relocation? >> i don't know. the elevator realm is where i'm at. >> you guys are familiar with the building and some of the tenants in it. how do you see -- how do you see this roll out if there is modernization? >> so i think in past buildings where there has been modernization or effort to fix up the elevator and there is potential to displace a tenant who is adjacent to the elevator shaft, what is proper to be done is that the landlord gives notification and provides an alter nate space on side. we help tenants through that. what i very much would not like to see in this situation, which

i've seen in other situations with landlords, tenants are told you need to leave, we're giving you this amount of money and it's confusing and scary. and they're also given a notice that essentially says you need to be out by the end of the month. and you'll get a check in the mail and they're not following the proper guidelines, so i would really hope since they've been interacting with the dbi, with you all, with the commission, with everyone here, that they understand that there they need to follow the process, so tenants are very fully aware. we will be in contact with all the tenants, so if anything comes up, we might come back and talk to you guys. >> thank you. >> appellant have rebuttal? >> yes, thank you very much.

so i think that we have heard from the elevator expert that the item, you know, may have been 1 out of the 20 items that were mentioned, would require replacement, but in fact in this instance, that particular item is the item, or one of the items in question, and so it would trigger all those codes which would then become a state issue, which i think it's beyond the scope of any of us here to be able to impact. so that would argue for a project that may be larger in scope than we are contemplating now. the second point that i would like to make, is that while -- i don't know if you can see this or how visible it is -- but what they are talking about for

modernizing is a budget of 4 or $500,000 just for the elevator work, not for the engineering, not for the permitting, or anything of the other stuff. even if it is not $1.3 million, it's still a significant number, or maybe a very significant number for the tenants in the building who would wind up paying each month $100 more, whether it was the bigger or the smaller number, 10, year, 20 year, all of those. we did the calculation, it's between 250-350. it's not trivial for tenants who are paying $1,000, $2,000, i don't know. the other question regarding -- what is it? disabled and elderly. we do have some tenants who are in the 50s or 60s, i suppose

much like myself but there is no possibility of anyone in the building having a wheelchair because there are the steps that have to go up just to get into the building. they'd have to navigate that before think being the 1 inch, 2 inch, they have to step out of the elevator. they've already navigated it much, much more. with all of that, i would like to request -- i'm not sure whether the order has to be -- [bell ringing] -- i'm not sure what the language is, but whatever the language, i'm requesting that action from you. >> at the last hearing, i asked if you had a long-term plan for this because clearly, whether it's now or whether it's a year from now or two years from now, this elevator is going to have to be dealt with. it can't go on forever. it clearly is on the last legs,

so have you thought about that, as i was talking to our housing inspector, the concept of a short-term versus a long-term plan of really dealing with making sure that this is a modernized elevator for your tenants? it's going to have to happen at some point, have you thought about that? >> yes, ma'am. >> and? >> what we are doing is to, you know, with mr. parker and city officials, to examine what all the requirements may be, which requirements maybe waived, which requirements may be adjusted, et cetera, so that we actually have a pretty close idea of what we actually wind up having to do. once we have that, then we can figure out how to deal with it.

at this point in time, in the absence of those waivers of those exemptions, or expected waivers or exemptions, we're unable to be precise about what we have to do and so we have -- to plan for it, we have to know what we have to do. that's a precursor step. >> right. >> and we're in that process. >> ok. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> ok. so... >> i'm sorry. >> i'd like to thank the owner for reaching out to his tenant, i appreciate that you held a meeting and invited your tenants to learn about the situation and what you're trying to do. i'm also thinking there is a solution that doesn't require a full replacement of the

elevator. i feel thmodernization is a solution, a possibility. we heard from the contractor saying he's unsure what components need to be replaced, or how, and what type of waivers can be obtained so that they can fix the elevator. so in the interim, i appreciate that the owner is trying to speak to a tenant about mitigation matters.

and maybe ask that the department, give us an update of the process in maybe 6-9 months time. >> commissioner lee, i kind of concur with the direction you're going. i mean, it's pick your poison. it's one of these situations where once again to commissioner lee's point, everybody's heart is in the right place, trying to do the right thing here, i think it's very compelling that the tenants are involved in this decision. i'm cognizant of the costs being added onto the tenants' bottom line. i'm kind of leaning towards if we could give more time based on everybody's involvement here with the caveat, this is

probably inspected every month and make sure it's levelled and due diligence is done to make sure that continues. which i believe based on the testimony twice here, everyone will do that. i would be interested if the other commissioners are interested in the same format that commissioner lee pointed out there. >> commissioner walker: again, thank you for the process, it's really important to all of us. i would ask that we, in addition, really do engage our code enforcement outreach folks and maybe housing inspector when it comes to keeping the tenants as part of this process. they will be inconvenienced. they are being inconvenienced somewhat the way it is. and i think that it would be good to recognize that. i think you're doing that. but even going forward with a fix, it's one that will benefit

everybody. it will inconvenience the people living there, so as you go forward, i hope that you keep that in mind in looking at things like the pass-through and what not, that there are inconveniences. it's their home and they will be inconvenienced. so i tend to support the motion. i am also ok with even more time than that, because i realize it's a complicated issue as long as there is a constant communication with folks living in the building. i think that is the point here, is that doing something collaboratively, that makes sense for people. it's a hard situation, but it's one that we're trying to help you address now as opposed to later when it's more of an emergency. so i appreciate your input on that.

so... >> president warshell: question to deputy city attorney. is one year the maximum amount of time? or more than one year? >> where there is not a safety hazard, you can give up to 18 months. >> you want to do that? >> commissioner walker: yeah, i would say 18 months. that should give time to have a long-term solution in effect, that is one that is worked on with the building tenants as well the management i think. >> ok. >> maybe an update in a year? maybe something like that. >> ok. >> commissioner konstin: great. >> commissioner moss: i support the 18 month as well. the only thing i would add is that, can we require proof of regular updates from the tenants? please stand by.

>> to keep them informed of developments on the elevator situation. >> are we asking for any further check ends with us? >> i don't think we can. >> anything else? >> we have to say why you are doing it. >> state a basis for the motion. >> uphold. >> with the basis for your motion be that the order of abatement was properly issued? >> yes. >> the order of abatement was properly issued. >> yes, it was properly issued. >> sorry. our testimony is closed.

>> ok. >> ok. so we have a motion by commissioner lee. is there a second? >> i will second. >> ok. we have a motion and a second. we will do the roll call vote. [roll call] >> motion carried unanimously. next item is item f. general public comment. it is general public comment for items that are not on the abatement appeals board agenda. seeing non, item g. is adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> moved to adjourn. >> second. >> we are now adjourned. it is 10:30 am. we will take about a ten minute

recess and reconvene as a building inspection commission.

>> clerk: ladies and gentlemen, the chair has called the meeting to order. can you please turnoff your electronic devices. they tend to interfere with the equipment in the room, and can you please rise for the pledge of allegiance. [pledge of allegiance] >> clerk: commissioner mazzucco, i'd like to call roll. >> commissioner mazzucco: please do. [roll call] >> clerk: commissioner mazzucco, you have a quorum. so