Mandatory retrofitting could shake up San Francisco homeowners
2026
Here’s a heads-up to owners of older buildings vulnerable to earthquake damage in San Francisco. If legislation proposed by Mayor Gavin Newsom becomes reality, you could be forced to spend money retrofitting your property.
The residential buildings most vulnerable to earthquake damage are wooden soft-story buildings built before May 1973, Newsom said recently. (A soft-story building is a multi-level property, with a store or garage on the first floor. You might remember that a number of soft-story buildings in the Marina suffered damage in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.)
There are about 4,400 such buildings throughout the city, with 2,800 at high risk. Their potential for being damaged in an earthquake is San Francisco’s “biggest vulnerability…in terms of economic damage.”
The cost: $9,000 to $28,000
The retrofits Newsom is proposing could cost $9,000 to $28,000 per residential unit, according to a report commissioned by the city in 2009. The report recommended mandatory retrofits for the 2,800 highest-risk buildings. Total cost: about $260 million, which could prevent $1.5 billion in damages following a major quake, according to the report.
Three-part legislation
Newsom wants to push a three-part legislation requiring S.F. property owners to seismically upgrade their vulnerable buildings.
Two parts of the legislation would require approval by the Board of Supervisors. One makes the seismic retrofits mandatory and will carry fees for non-compliance.
The second would create a special tax district, to help property owners borrow money for the retrofit work at a reduced interest rate. Money borrowed would be paid back to the special tax district through property taxes, amortized over 20-25 years. If the building is sold, the new owner would inherit the cost.
The third component would repurpose part of $280 million in unused bond money that’s currently designated for retrofitting unreinforced masonry buildings. This component will require voter approval and is expected to be on this November’s ballot.
Of course, earthquakes are an unpleasant but unavoidable part of life in San Francisco. Unfortunately, so are lots of city-imposed restrictions. I certainly get the need to reinforce buildings vulnerable to earthquake damage, for safety reasons. I would just hate to see new, potentially costly seismic retrofit mandates hit property owners at a time when the real estate market is still getting back on its feet.
