{"id":null,"ids":[],"kind":"named in documents","name":"San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings","tied_by":"name","block":null,"release":"v0.7.1","rows_columns":["t","id","year","y","date","kind","topic","outcome","summary","tier","source","leaf","scan","addr","quote","note","title","how","g","rec","sc"],"rows":[["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:152/1",1990,1990,"","alternative","study or report",null,"UMB Alternative 2 retrofit of vacant buildings · other: four to six weeks minimum","unverified","C124905937",152,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n151",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:152/2",1990,1990,"","alternative","study or report",null,"UMB Alternative 3 retrofit of vacant buildings · other: four to 12 weeks minimum","unverified","C124905937",152,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n151",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:152/3",1990,1990,"","alternative","study or report",null,"UMB Alternative 2 retrofit · other: about two-thirds of UMBs would not have to be vacated completely","unverified","C124905937",152,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n151",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:152/4",1990,1990,"","alternative","study or report",null,"UMB Alternative 3 retrofit · other: about half of UMBs would not have to be vacated","unverified","C124905937",152,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n151",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:152/5",1990,1990,"","alternative","study or report",null,"UMB Alternative 1 retrofit · other: no UMBs would have to be vacated for retrofitting","unverified","C124905937",152,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n151",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:153/1",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Alternative 1 UMB seismic retrofit · other: about 10% of building space could not be occupied at a time","unverified","C124905937",153,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n152",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:153/2",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Alternative 1 UMB seismic retrofit · other: 0% for industrial buildings to 40% for small-footprint, one-story commercial and residential buildings","unverified","C124905937",153,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n152",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:153/3",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Alternative 2 UMB seismic retrofit · other: about one-quarter of each building not occupiable at any time","unverified","C124905937",153,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n152",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:154/10001",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Alternative 3 UMB retrofitting · finding: only 50% of all UMBs could remain partly occupied during retrofitting","unverified","C124905937",154,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n153",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:154/10002",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Alternative 3 UMB retrofitting · finding: retrofitting would disrupt about 40% of a building at a time on average","unverified","C124905937",154,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n153",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:72/1",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofitting Alternative 1 for San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings (UMBs) · finding: owner-burden ratios for most UMBs in the range of 11% to 40%","unverified","C124905937",72,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n71",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","m",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:76/1",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 1 for San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings · finding: 13% of owners in greater or greatest hardship categories","unverified","C124905937",76,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n75",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","m",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:76/2",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 2 for San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings · finding: 33% of owners in greater or greatest hardship categories","unverified","C124905937",76,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n75",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","m",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:76/3",1990,1990,"","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 3 for San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings · finding: 75% of owners in greater or greatest hardship categories","unverified","C124905937",76,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n75",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","m",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:139/1",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 1 (unreinforced masonry buildings) · finding: range of annual rent increases clusters around two","unverified","C124905937",139,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n138",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:139/2",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 2 (unreinforced masonry buildings) · finding: range of annual rent increases clusters around three","unverified","C124905937",139,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n138",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:139/3",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofit Alternative 3 (unreinforced masonry buildings) · finding: range of annual rent increases clusters around four","unverified","C124905937",139,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n138",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:145/1",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings retrofitting · other: construction period implications analyzed assuming retrofitting work done for all buildings","unverified","C124905937",145,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n144",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:146/1",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"Seismic retrofitting Alternative 1 for San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings · finding: would pose the least hardship for building occupants among the retrofitting alternatives","unverified","C124905937",146,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n145",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","m",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:148/1",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"UMB buildings under Alternative 1 retrofitting · finding: It is unlikely that any buildings would be required to be vacated for retrofitting under Alternative 1","unverified","C124905937",148,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n147",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:148/2",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"UMB prototype groups A, E, G, K under Alternative 2 · finding: Buildings in prototype groups A, E, G, and K (small, one to three story UMBs) assumed vacated for retrofitting under Alternative 2","unverified","C124905937",148,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n147",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:148/3",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"UMB prototype groups A, E, G, K, I, L, M under Alternative 3 · finding: Buildings in prototype groups A, E, G, K, I, L, and M assumed vacated for retrofitting under Alternative 3","unverified","C124905937",148,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n147",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124905937:148/4",1990,1990,"1990","finding","study or report",null,"UMB retrofitting under Alternative 2 · finding: One-third of the UMBs would be vacated for retrofitting under Alternative 2","unverified","C124905937",148,"https://archive.org/details/C124905937/page/n147",null,null,null,"Seismic retrofitting alternatives for San Francisco's unreinforced masonry buildings : socioeconomic and land use implications of alternative requirements","n","a",0,-1.0],["f","dl-sf-facts-v1.1-haiku55-2026-10/C124918171:12/2",1991,1991,"","finding","study or report",null,"Survey of San Francisco unreinforced masonry buildings · other: Condition of all of the City's unreinforced masonry buildings was carefully surveyed","unverified","C124918171",12,"https://archive.org/details/C124918171/page/n11",null,null,null,"San Francisco's Loma Prieta experience : with an emphasis on state programs and policies and their implications for local recovery","n","m",0,-1.0]]}