we really commend the offer. it seems generous in the level of the way it was offered. however, it is obvious it is not suitable to your client, is that correct? >> no that is not correct. we have not rejected the offer. that is not correct. we have not received the actual offer. it was never made known to us these are terms. i was told have your client go look at this place, and she did. it wasn't really suitable for her family. i responded by saying let her talk to whoever is finding this place for you and the way anybody would when they are looking for a new place and there is a broker involved you tell the broker what you are looking for, obviously, they should know what ms. long's needs are before they just pluck something. she is totally willing to work

within that framework. it is not until i get the letter from mr. patterson on november 13th. i was informed this was a definite offer with termed and we had rejected those terms. none of that is true. >> that is important. i agree with you. the timeframe to make a decision is very difficult. i certainly wouldn't do it. i am in agreement that timeframe was a bit too short. that one issue. we now can understand this is something that could be acceptable to your client if presented correctly and if it takes the boxes for them to make that decision, correct? >> that is true, yes. the fact that i have now been informed the unlawful retainer action is dismissed, it takes pressure off the time pressure from that standpoint. >> to your point earlier which i would be very cog an cognizant .

would they like to move back into that building when it is done and live like the they havr 40 years, i believe? >> she understands there might be -- because we are aware of the big picture here, substantial rehabilitation they wantheywant to have going, extrs in the garage and staircases from the top to the bottom floor so the place that we originally started when we were negotiating is that since the middle floor is already gutted, if they finish that and they don't have to put in granite countertops, but if they finish that the family would move down stairs and have the top and bottom floor unit to put the roof deck

in and extra rooms in the basement and make the 11 room unit they are looking for. >> i get that, but i still go back to my position. no one has seen the drawings of the work to be done. that is going to be a hardship on that family. as a contractor i wouldn't want to do that job with a family living in a building like that. that is just me. i.ei see that as a stretch. i know you are not questioning that, but we talk about that here. i see that as a real problem for the family. i will always take that point of view. my end game, and i am sure the commission's end game is a fair and equitable outcome that works for everybody. since you haven't rejected mr. patterson's original idea, the other part this could be that they move back in there,

like commissioner walker was saying when this was remodeled as part of the agreement. what they want is could we get that. >> that could be part of it, too. we are putting everything on the table. would h we are available to talk. >> miss long. >> good morning. i am jackie long. i have resided at 109 pierce street for 40 years. it is my home. i would like to stay there. no, i don't own it. i rent it. the issue is my expanded family. my daughter is mentality disabled, my son-in-law is physically disabled and they have a 9-year-old son. my presence is required in the

home to just try to keep the waters calm for the 9-year-old. my adopted 23-year-old sons also lives there. the issue is i need at least a three bedroom house and space for my family. the unit i looked at even though i was ill, it was nice. i liked it. the problem, the open kitchen. there is insufficient space to store foodstuffs and cooking utensils for a family of three stay at home people, income is limited, budget would go up 90 to $100 be per month just for transportation because we can't carry food on the muni, which

means we would have to use a taxi. that is not feasible, and the kitchen is so tiny that if you are preparing a peopl a meal, it go in to make a cup of coffee. thus, the refusal of the unit. everything after looking at the unit are things i am learning of. never received a firm offer, and lastly, i would like to address the issue of my sunglasses. due to years of diabetes, i am experiencing bleeding in the eye. for the last 11 months i have received an injection in my right eye. as timing will have it, i had it yesterday afternoon. hence, the sun glasses. thank you for your attention to this matter.

>> i addressed you last month. i am back. i did take ms. long to look at the unit. i drove her over there. she was sick and i was leaving to go out of the country. i want to to respond. the generous offer of $100,000. i did the math. $100,000 rent supplement would cover them for about 18 months of rent in san francisco at this point. what are they to do after the 18 months? the other thing i wanted to address since i am the next door neighbor is the ridiculousness of the building leaning. i have intimate knowledge of that building.

it is identical to my building. i have knowledge of the dutch gutter. the building is not falling over. it needs work, but this exaggeration is ridiculous. i do want to get on to what i wanted to get on to having been the neighbor for 26 years. i have been to weddings, funerals, they are one of the last remaining african-american families in our neighborhood. i didn't need this project and i took it on and filed the original appeal because i was so outraged about them coming in. i want to remind you, jackie long didn't contact d.b.i. the owner contacted d.b.i. to get violations to wave in her face. he didn't count on her being smart and didn't count on a snarky neighbor to get involved which everybody should count on a snarky neighbor in san

francisco. i have been there and watched her raise three children then she raised her husband's grandson. now she is raising a 9-year-old. her daughter is seriously disabled. i know this from what i have witnessed first hand. her own significant disabilities trying to do what is right by her grandson. i will leave one last thing. how much profit does someone have to make. they can accommodate them and make a profit on this building. thank you. >> any further public comment? public comment is closed.

>> is there rebuttal? >> commissioner walker. >> this is a hard one because . >> we will do rebuttal for the department first, i'm sorry. department has rebuttal? >> thank you, chief housing inspector. this case touches on a lot of different dynamics in the city right now. real estate speculation replacement of people from an african-american neighborhood. our deadline for the work to be completed was september of last year so we are 14, 15 months out. i have been to five hearings now. simple request. all we ask is the order of abatement. thank you.

>> appellant. >> thank you. i want to start by thanking ms. long for speaking. i think that was helpful to understand and hear directly from her, especially what her concerns were about the unit that was offered, and i really am sympathetic, i think we are all to the challenges that she faces here. the owner also has a set of challenges with the building. it sounds like there was a misunderstanding with the offer of that unit. these were phone calls between my partner and her attorney. i wish i had been in hawaii with him, but i was not. the fact of the matter is ms. long confirmed they rejected that unit. adding more items to that offer,

you know, i don't know what they wanted in terms of a firm offer. it was offered and rejected. it sounds like it was rejected because of inadequate storage space for food and utensils. food storage is an important thing. i wonder if maybe we could add a cabinet to the unit to help with that. you know, if that separates the parties from agreement, i have got to believe there is a way to find agreement there. the issue around timing with that, i appreciate that she came out after a couple days to look at it. the units don't stay on the market that long. as everyone familiar with real estate in san francisco knows, things move quickly and opportunities with a unit affordable at $849,000 asking price is something that doesn't last for long.

i don't know if it is still available. if so, let's talk quickly. the $100,000 offer that the neighbor mentioned to clarify is stated in our letter. we would be willing to offer up to $100,000 of rent subsidy so that ms. long's recent would not go up even though she is getting a three bedroom two bath condo with private patio. it is a nice place. that amount of money would presumably cover plenty of time for her to obtain section 8 rent subsidies or public assistance so we can pencil out this deal. my request at this point is to the tenant let's find a resolution. to the commission, to the board, an order of abatement should not

stand where the owner does not have the ability to solve these problems while the tenant is still in possession. we ask it be returned to staff. i offer to return to mediation at next available date with andrew wesley if the tenant's attorney will accept that. thank you. >> commissioners. >> commissioner walker. >> i know it is simple in one way but difficult in another when these cases come to us. what we do change is the dynamic of it. my fear is no matter what we do that the tenant is not going to be served, and after we do our hearing whatever else happens is sort of we lose the ability to do this.

i want to thank the staff at housing for bringing this forward. these are important issues, and i think that it has been really helpful to illuminate what is going on. i mean we deal with this a lot in many of the cases we see where there is unintended consequences to fix the -- cure the notices of violation/other issues that come up in trying to resolve that realizing that the owner did more work to find the problem. i mean, clearly, we know when there is mold and leaks, there is a reason for it. i am not a structural engineer. maybe they can weigh in. i can't address what the plans that were submitted, i can't

address whether that is appropriate or not. it is the case of what the owner of the building wants to do. that is out of our jurisdiction, whether or not that goes forward. what we have before us is a notice of violation that is re real. the solution that has been put forward by the property owner is way more extensive than that, than the immediate cure or simple cure for the violations. but it doesn't change the fact that the violations are there and still not fixed. you know, i don't think that there was any error in issuing the order of abatement at all. if we had a solution coming forward that just addressed those issues, we wouldn't be here, but that is not what is going on.

i want be to make sure that whatever we do ends up not hurting the tenant and that it doesn't three months from now when all of this other stuff is resolved, all of a sudden she is on the street without a place to live with her family, that is a failure of our system. i want to encourage a resolution to this, and i appreciate that what you are telling us on both sides there is a willingness to do that. i wouldtend, and i am willing to discuss this that may be we uphold the order and hold it in abeyance as long as we can and there will be a resolution one way or another to go forward after that. there is a resolution and the property owner can do their work within that timeframe or not.

it is what we are dealing with. those are the facts. there is violations, there is no clear proposal to fix it except as to a larger solution, and that creates problems that create the delay. i would like to hear about other solutions. >> may i ask the city attorney what options we would have as commission in terms of uphold be and holding it in abeyance. >> yes, the commission could hold it in abeyance for 18 months if you find no life/safety hazard. >> is there alive/safety issue? apparently not or we would know about it, right? i guess if the foundation needs

leveled. it would be helpful to know what the status of that is. >> let me clarify. the code provides that the language the code uses is abatement appeals board finds not a serious and implement hazard it can be held in abeyance for a period of 18 months. >> inspector is it your opinion there are serious hazards here? >> structurally there was a concern about the second means of egress which they have obtained a permit to temporarily do repairs. >> those repairs have been done? >> temporary. >> our main concern we are not experts, but our concern is environmental issues such as the

severe mold formation in the tenant occupying the bedrooms and kitchens and so on. that will be a concern of us. here we have some pictures taken on november 18th. i will have christina explain what we are looking at. >> hi, i went over to the unit on november 18th to take a look at the work to see if everything was completed or fixed, and in one of the bedrooms, i found there is still peeling paint on the wall, as you can see here, and mold. is that a window silthat we are looking at.

>> yes, a window sil. on the right side i took a photo of this because this is right under the stairway they temporarily fixed, and this is the dry rotted wood that is upholding that stairway. >> is that consistent with the drawings on the permit or a description in the permit? >> that is in the description of the permit. >> next, this wall right here, there is mold and peeling paint. this is also in the same bedroom where i was showing the window. this is the part of it as well. >> would you describe this as imminent danger? what we are trying to figure out if we can give time for a solution to play out as there is an active abatement pending.

>> stairs are typically a serious hazard. that item is still outstanding. there is a temporary fix. the item is serious. >> is it okay right now? >> from is a temporary solution, but the item is not closed. >> i get there. is there imminent danger. >> there is a temporary fix that we do not consider a serious imminent hazard. >> your opinion on the mold issue, do you consider that alive-safety hazard. >> yes, i consider it a health hazard. this mold right here in the kitchen is where the tenants are using their dishes and washing them. it is right above them. not only that, they have a

nine-year-old child in the unit and he is breathing this. i get that it . >> in the legal sense at the moment we do not have serious imminent hazard. these are not permanent solutions. >> i got it. perfect. thank you. >> when you went out, did you have a chance to observe the temporary fix on the tarping of the roof? >> yes, i did, and that tarp was actually halfway blown off of the roof. unfortunately and i apologize, i wasn't able to take photos for that. i am more than happy to do that the next time. that tarp, basically, is a blue tarp and nothing is holding it down. there is no tape around it, and

because of wind or whatever weather issue, it has blown off halfway. >> what was identified by the tenant as one of her primary concerns that it is a persistent problem, the fix that was put into effect, in your opinion, is completely inadequate? >> right. i agree with that. it is inadequate because if there has been rain, that season is coming, and that part is right above the tenant's room. [please stand by]

>> so i think that all parties need to come and i don't know -- i feel like we can't -- we can't tell the property owner what to do. this is what they cant to do iwant todo in response to bug the building and owning it in the future and fixing it up. and old buildings need fixing up, and i don't think we have the ability to limit what people do. until we do, we're hamstrung. so i would make a recommendation to uphold the order of abatement. i think that the fee issue is one that i'm not sure it is fair to keep charging fees if there is actually a resolution process going on. so we should talk about that. i don't know -- maybe

president -- >> commissioner m mccarthur. >> i concur with how you're trying to frame this. >> okay. >> i believe that's where we should go if we can't try another possible scenario here. i'm not trying to complicate it. but it was very helpful mr. lang to be here, and thank you for coming, to hear your testimony, and to your neighbor, who has your back, i do agree with everything you said there as well. so it is good that you guys are working well together and protecting each other like good neighbors in this town. we don't see too much of it often, so i commend you for that. i know we talked last week, and we had made a statement we would give it one month to try to resolve this, and i really believe that that is kind of my line on this issue, but i've heard two things today. first of all, mr. duran came here today and kind

of laying out how he felt the negotiations went, and open they are to further negotiations, and that was important. and mr. patterson's point of view that he really doesn't want this to be upheld because it affects the overall business plan for his client, and i get that as well. so the question is, is mr. graham -- forgive me if this is inappropriate or appropriate -- i would be interested to hear what your position would be. i have just one question for you, where you would weigh in on -- commissioner walker, to your point, if we were to, let's say, not uphold it here today and send you guys back together to talk further, and honoring kind of both parties, really. one is, obviously, you need more time and exploration on a possible settlement, based on the last settlement, which i thought it was a good step forward. obviously it has to be

vetted. and mr. patterson's position that he would rather not have this upheld today and give us more time to work out a deal, that works for everybody. what would your feelings be on that? >> well, to be blunt, we're going to be working on a deal no matter what happens here today. we think that the notice of violation should be upheld because it has been over a year, you know. justice becausjust because theye better plans for this building later on, it doesn't mean they couldn't have been taking care of the mold and things like that. i'm going to assure the board, we're going to still be talking no matter what happens here today because no matter what happens here today, there is still going to be that elephant in the room, that isn't going to go away. so we will be talking no matter what. >> okay. i guess i'm just trying to keep everybody at the

table, but us upholding the abatement today, which, obviously, i believe we could do, no problem, based on commissioner walker's proposal -- i'm just trying to think -- i'm trying to keep everybody kind of even play, you know. but to your point, your position is you would like to see the abatement upheld here today? >> we would, because as far as we're concerned, the only testimony that you have that directly goes to it is the city's own experts, who have been out there and say the work has to be done, and it can be done with the tenant in place. >> okay. >> and we have hearsay evidence from the owner saying his contractor won't do it, but the contractor is not here, so we don't know what that contractor would say. >> okay. >> so i think mr. patterson thinks the right thing to do is to not uphold it, and i think the right thing is to

follow the city's process and uphold the city's laws and get the owner to start working on fixing serious violations that have been outstanding for over a year. >> thank you. >> but i do want to ensure the board, we're going to be talking, whatever the decision is here today. our involvement is not going to end. we're going to still be involved and working at the long-term resolution of the tenant matter. >> mr. patterson -- thank you. i want to get both statements in and then we can make a decision. mr. patterson, how important is it to you that we -- let's say, for example, we were to offer you another continuance for "x" amount of time and not uphold today, how important is that to you? i want to give you your fair share at that. i think it is important because i want to commend you for coming back with a good step forward, and i want to keep that spirit going. maybe you could explain to

us why it is so important that we don't uphold today and give us reasons as to why we might consider that. >> thank you, commissioner. i guess there are really two reasons. one is: the issue of fines and penalties that may accrue during this time when we can't move forward. and the other is: financing for construction. so to actually do the work, my understanding is that -- >> if it is held in abeyance, it doesn't get filed until the deadline. so we make the order now. we hold it, allowing you to do the work and resolve it, in which case it is not filed. >> right. >> and the fees is an issue. and it is one that i brought up. >> right. the fees are certainly an issue. and even if it is not recorded on title, i would think there still needs to be disclosed to lenders there is an order of

abatement. >> and the fees would be fairly nominal and terms -- >> i could have to ask the staff what daily possibilities wil which would be accruing when we can't move forward. it is wrong to penalize someone when they can't move forward. i appreciate the idea of a continuance -- that gives us time to try to work this out. it would be better than upholding an order of abatement, even if it is held in abeyance, which is better than recording on title. thank you. >> just for the record, the timeframe of continuance from your side would be? >> how quickly can we -- >> get a resolution? >> we're standing here, and we have an offer that we've made, and ms. lang didn't like that unit. and maybe a cabinet can be added and that solves the

storage concern, if that unit is still available. i request two months. i think that would give us enough time to really make a good effort at it. if that unit is no longer available, we'll look for other units. one month is tight, but we'd appreciate anything you can do. >> commissioner walker? >> we gave you a month. i'm just saying that part of what the continuance was last month was to allow time to do a resolution. and so the thing is that i would uphold this anyway because my understanding -- i mean, maybe our attorney can tell me to answer that question of when we hold an abeyance, does it still exist and we have to disclose and all of that. i can't answer that. but maybe we can get a --

>> my understanding is that the abeyance period, the department wouldn't record it until the period ends. it wouldn't show up in, like, a title search. but i can't say whether or not they would have a duty under real estate law to have to disclose that to a lender. >> okay. the issue for me is that i'm serious, you know? that's the deal. so that's why i would make the motion to uphold the order of abatement and allow a timeframe to actually create the resolution that is shorter than -- i guess as long as the permits were filed to do the work, that included some sort of resolution, we wouldn't need necessarily 18 months, but a period of time. and, really, while the resolution is going on, not do penalties and fees.

>> okay. >> and i'm not specific -- i'm talking about it, so i think there are some details to work out in there. >> so, fellow commissioners, are are there any further comments to this discussion? >> i have a question sort of off-topic about the stairs. i would like to have somebody go out there with a trained eye structurally, and i don't know if that means somebody from d.p.i. can go out, or if the owner has to hire a structural engineer and vouch for them. depending on which way we vote today, does that prevent us from doing that? or can we do that regardless of whether we uphold the order or not? >> because of the imminent danger thing? >> thank you. i would like to -- the stairs are important, if you have firefighters coming down the stairs carrying somebody, we want to make sure they're very solid. >> i'm very concerned about these stairs. >> so can we have someone

look at that, and does that change what we decide today? >> well, if i can -- >> please, go ahead. >> there are two legal terms that we work with in our department. there is a life safety hazard and a serious and imminent hazard, and those are different. any time we see a violation on the stairs that emergency crews have to use for a second means of egress, that is automatically a life safety hazard. when i see that propped up like that, i'm scared. i don't hike that. i'm not willing to go as far as say that it is a series imminent hazard because there are other implications, like evacuating the building. it is a life safety hazard, and it is not a serious i imminent hazard. it is serious violation.

and it has also been cited by the city association they are aware of it. we can have other people take a look at it, as much as you would like, but it has been cited, and they're going to have it signed off with engineers and engineers looking at those plans before the item can be abated. >> as a followup, we could include in the motion that all life safety issues are resolved in the interim -- >> to the satisfaction of d.b.i.. >> correct. >> any other points of discussion? okay. is there a motion? >> so i move to uphold the order of abatement and hold in abeyance for six months, during which time any life safety issues are resolved while the tenant

is in the building. and that fees and penalties are halted hence forward -- >> suspended? >> suspended, hence forward. >> the city attorney? >> hi. >> can we get clarification from the department what fees would be accruing in that time period? >> okay,. >> what is at issue is the assessment of cost, not penalties. i think there is a monthly monitoring fee -- >> $5 a month50 a month. >> what are the costs that have accrued to date? >> about $3,000. >> so in the scope of this project, that is quite nominal. >> okay. >> and do we have the capacity to not have these

inadequate fixes, like a blowing tarp -- >> that would be a life safety issue -- if there are leaks or anything that is -- i mean, i don't know how we describe that, but... >> well, if in the course of this month trial period, that was the best they came up with, i would like to be sure that anything that are health safety issues are not treated quite so lightly and inadequately. >> you mean all of them are life -- it's a problem. they've been living, you know, with mold and whatnot, and it isn't healthy. so there just needs to be a resolution. [inaudible question] >> as opposed to what, three months? i don't care about time. i'm just trying to -- >> what's wrong with saying just to have all of the violations corrected?

>> well, there is some window stuff that is probably more in the bigger picture. so certainly the leaks -- i mean, like i said, they have a solution they submitted that is way more than what deals with our violations. so that's not in our purview to determine what happens there. but we do have someone living there in the interim that is affected by what we're doing, one way or the other. so i'm trying to do a resolution that allows for time to do a resolution and remedy the immediate life safety issues, including stairs and leaking and allow time. and whether it is three months or six months, you

guys -- i don't care, but my motion is that, that we collect the current fees and the rest is nominal at this point, so...but we hold in abeyance for a period of time to allow this to mediate, hopefully. >> mr. sandimasu, are we giving you enough direction and clarity as to how we can eliminate -- >> yes. >> maybe our attorneys are better to ask that question. upon the order of abatement, hold in abeyance for six months, assess fees -- >> uphold the assessment -- >> uphold the current assessment of fees -- >> assessment of costs. >> -- and costs and...

>> they don't need to add anything else. >> as an aside, i would like to have an update on this at some point from everybody, to see if -- >> would you like to state a basis for the motion? >> that's presented. the facts presented do support that there were violations, and all of those facts are part of what was given to us. >> and the order was properly issued. >> intraorder was properly issued. >> that motion, i would like to second. again, i think we all have great concern for the family that is living here. we have people with disabilities, seniors and a child, all of which cause us great concern. and to the extent that our goal is to enhance the quality of life for all residents for as long as

they're there, and, hopefully, provide the greatest incentive to equitable and speedy resolution that is satisfactory to all parties, i feel this resolution is appropriately seconded. >> we have a motion and a second. i'll do a roll call vote. [roll call vote] >> the motion carries unanimously. >> our next item is item "e," case number 6869.

mariah mullcha, action requested by appellate, additional time due to bankruptcy. the staff would like to come forward? >> good morning, all. mi'm the chief building inspector for code enforcement. i understand in 2018, a complaint was filed with this department regarding windows that do not open, no secondary exit, outlets do not work. an inspector was assigned to the case and performed a property profile search and found this to be a mixed-use building, two stories, commercial and residential. on october 4th, inspector mulcha obtained inspection for the

property, and a complete remodel with a full kitchen and bathroom, without the benefit of a building permit or planning approval. in 2019, a final warning letter was issued, and the case was referred to code enforcement, and inspector mulcha found that the owner did not comply with the notice of violation. february 8, 2019, code enforcement prepared the case for a director's hearing on march 5th, 2019. on march 5th, 2019, a notice of abatement was issued and pointing out that the owner did fail to attend the hearing. a conclusion based on the facts submitted, code enforcement believed that the order of abatement was totally given, so they want to uphold the order and impose the assessment costs. i want to point out this is the second time this property has been in

violation for the exact same conditions. back in 2000, the second floor was actually converted to a residential use, which there was a notice issued in september 2001a permit that they had to file for for the changes on the second floor. this is another complaint for the first floor now being converted to residential. >> so did the top unit go through -- >> yeah. the top floor got a certifcate of final completion. this is pictures of the kitchen. >> that's the first floor? >> yes, that's the first floor. >> have they been guided to do an a.d.u. process? >> yes. the owner actually came in

and filed an application, but it was just an application, and they never did anything with the application. >> got it. >> as you can see, for the log on the complaint, the tracking system, this case is almost a year old. so they were given enough time to go through the planning process, and if -- we did give enough time for the owner to comply. >> the second floor was converted into residential -- >> yes. >> -- after the notice of violation -- >> correct. the notice of violation in 2001. >> is it the same owner? >> no. there is a new owner now. >> is it owner occupied upstairs? >> no. >> it's all rental? >> there are two tenants at the property. >> okay.

>> p th would the appellate like to come forward. >> that's a drag. the appellate is not here. any public comment for this item? okay. seeing none -- >> i would move to uphold -- >> second. >> -- based on the order was correctly written, and it is in violation. assess all fines and penalties. >> is that motion okay? >> yes. >> did you say uphold the assessment process as well? >> yes. all fines and penalties. >> he's learned quicker than me. >> i'm trying hard. [laughter] >> there is a first and a second for this motion. i'll do a roll call vote. >> i'll second.

[roll call] >> the motion carries unanimously. >> item "f," general public comment. is there any general public comment for items not on the appeals board agenda? seeing none, motion to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor. >> yea. >> we are now adjourned. it is 10:26 a.m., and we'll take a five-minute or 10-minute recess and reconvene at the building assessment commission.

>> a way of life in san francisco. when the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. tell me a little about the soft story program. what is it? >> it's a program the mayor signed into law about a year and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help

homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. >> did you the soft story program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame? >> it only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. it's aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. but the openings at the garage level and the street level aren't supported in many buildings. and without the support during a major earthquake, they are expected to pancake and flatten ~. many of the buildings in this program are under rent control so it's to everybody's advantage to do the work and make sure they protect their investment and their tenant. >> notices have gone out to more than 6,000 owners of potentially at-risk properties but fewer than one-third have

responded and thousands might miss an important deadline in september to tell the city what they plan to do. let's talk worst case scenario. what happens in a collapse? >> buildings have the tendency of rolling over. the first soft story walls lean over and the building collapse. in an earthquake the building is a total loss. >> can you describe what kind of strengthening is involved in the retrofit? >> one of the basic concepts, you want to think of this building kind of like rubber band and the upper three floor are very rigid box and the garage is a very flexible element. in an earthquake the garage will have a tendency to rollover. you have to rubber band analogy that the first floor is a very tough but flexible rubber band such that you never drive force he to the upper floors. where all your damage goes into controlled element like plywood or steel frame. >> so, here we are actually inside of a soft story

building. can we talk a little about what kinds of repairs property owners might expect? >> it's a very simple process. we deliberately tried to keep it that way. so, what's involved is plywood, which when you install it and make a wall as we have done here already, then you cover it with this gypsum material. this adds some flexibility so that during the earthquake you'll get movement but not collapse. and that gets strengthened even more when we go over to the steel frame to support the upper floor. >> so, potentially the wood and the steel -- it sounds like a fairly straightforward process takes your odds of collapse from one in 4 to one in 30? >> that's exactly right. that's why we're hoping that people will move quickly and make this happen.

>> great. let's take a look. so, let's talk steel frames. tell me what we have going on here. >> well, we have a steel frame here. there are two of these and they go up to the lower floor and there is a beam that go across, basically a box that is much stiffer and stronger. ~ goes so that during the earthquake the upper floor will not collapse down on this story. it can be done in about two weeks' time. voila, you're done. easy. >> for more information on how to get your building earthquake ready, hi, i'm lawrence. we are doing a special series about staying safe. let's look at issues of water and sewer. we

are here at the san francisco urban center on mission street in san francisco and i'm joined today by marrielen from puc and talk about water and sewer issues. what are things we should be concerned about water. >> you want to be prepared for that scenario and the recommendation is to have stored 1 gallon per person per day that you are out of water. we recommend that you have at least 3-5 days for each person and also keep in consideration storage needs for your pets and think about the size of your pets and how much water they consume. >> the storage which is using tap water which you are going to encourage. >> right. of course at the puc we recommend that you store our wonderful delicious tap water. it's free. it comes out of the

tap and you can store it in any plastic container, a clean plastic container for up to 6 months. so find a container, fill it with water and label it and rotate it out. i use it to water my garden. >> of course everyone has plastic bottles which we are not really promoting but it is a common way to store it. >> yes. it's an easy way to pick up bottles to store it. just make sure you check the label. this one says june 2013. so convenient you have an end date on it. >> and there are other places where people have water stored in their houses. >> sure. if you have a water heater or access to the water heater to your house, you can drink that water and you can also drink the water that the in the tank of your toilet. ;

not the bowl but in your tank. in any case if you are not totally sure about the age of your water or if you are not sure about it being totally clean, you can treat your water at home. there is two ways that you can treat your water at home and one is to use basic household bleach. the recommendation is 8 drops of bleach for ever gallon of water. you add 8 drops of bleach into the water and it needs to sit for 30 minutes. the other option is to boil water. you need to boil water for 5-10 minutes. after an earthquake that may not be an option as gas maybe turned off and we may not have power. the other thing is that puc will provide information as quickly as possible about recommendations about whether

the water is okay to drink or need to treat it. we have a number of twice get information from the puc through twitter and facebook and our website sf water.org. >> people should not drink water from pools or spas. but they could use it to flush their toilets if their source are not broken. let's look at those issues. >> sanitation is another issue and something people don't usually or like to think about it but it's the reality. very likely that without water you can't flush and the sewer system can be impeded or affected during an earthquake. you need to think about sanitation. the options are simple. we recommend a set up if you are able to stay in your building or house to make sure that you have heavy duty trash bags available. you can set

this up within your existing toilet bowl and once it's used. you take a little bit of our bleach. we talked about it earlier from the water. you seal the bag completely. you make sure you mark the bag as human waste and set it aside and wait for instruction about how to dispose of it. be very aware of cleanliness and make sure you have wipes so folks are able to wash up when dealing with the sanitation issue. >> good morning. welcome to the november