Basically confirming what some SF homeowners have been saying in response to an onerous city mandate to install sprinkler systems in every unit of their high-rise buildings, a new report says that, for some older buildings at least, it could cost upwards of $200,000 per unit.

Condo owners in multiple neighborhoods around the city where there are older high-rises of varying ages have been decrying a city mandate, with a deadline of 2027, to have sprinkler systems installed in every unit. Technically, the mandate applies only to pre-1975 buildings of 12 stories or more that don't have two interior stairs separated from the rest of the building by fire-rated walls designed to withstand fire for two hours — about 126 buildings in all, concentrated in Nob Hill, Telegraph Hill, the Marina, Pacific Heights, and Russian Hill.

Fire officials and city leaders had claimed that homeowners were blowing the issue out of proportion, and that sprinkler installations might only cost around $20,000 per unit — which should be considered a good investment in fire safety for out-of-compliance buildings. But homeowners said that after their HOAs had looked into the project, they were getting estimates in the $200K to $300K per unit range, and the mandate was, in turn, depressing their resale values.

Homeowners succeeded in February in getting the mandate delayed by five years, and in the meantime, city supervisors commissioned a report from the Board of Supervisors’ Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office. Now that report is back, as the Chronicle reported Monday, and it's basically good news for some buildings and bad news for others.

The building stock in question, the report finds, is so varied, that while, yes, it might only cost $15,000 per unit for some buildings that already have some of the necessary plumbing there, it will in fact cost $225,000 per unit or more for the oldest buildings that will need to be replumbed at great complication, with new water lines into the building, and new systems throughout to keep there from being unsightly pipes running everywhere.

"When there are this many buildings, there are going to be a lot of edge cases, and buildings that take a lot of work to get water pumped up to the top of a hill," says Supervisor Stephen Sherrill, speaking to the Chronicle. “We can’t have mandates in the name of safety that don’t take cost to residents into account."

Supervisor Danny Sauter, whose district, along with Sherrill's, includes many of the buildings in question, even suggested that he wanted to look into alternatives to wholesale sprinkler installations.

"If there are other improvements and upgrades that still meet the goal of fire safety but can be done in a less intrusive or more cost-sensitive way, I am very interested in that," Sauter tells the Chronicle.

And former SF Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, who now serves as spokesperson for the Building and Construction Trades Council, suggests that the mandate could still go forward because most industry experts believe, for the majority of buildings, the cost will be in the $15K to $20K per unit range.

Advocates for the homeowners have pointed out that other cities that have tried to enact similar sprinkler mandates have mostly walked them back, including San Diego and Houston. San Jose reportedly achieved "full compliance" with its mandate, but it only applied to 11 buildings — and obviously SF is a denser city than any of those three, with more high-rises.

The mandate has already been kicked down the road at least five years — we thought it was 2032, but the Chronicle now mentions a 2035 deadline. We'll see how the Board of Supervisors addresses this in the coming weeks or months, and whether some older buildings might get exemptions.

Previously: Former Fire Marshal Who Wrote SF's High-Rise Sprinkler Mandate Now Consulting With Condos It's Impacting