Abatement Appeals Board orders Warfield Hotel to add public bathrooms after tenant testimony

San Francisco — The Abatement Appeals Board voted unanimously on Nov. 21, 2012, to require the owner of the Warfield Hotel (Taylor & Turk/Taylor Street area) to apply for building permits within 30 days and to begin and complete work within three months to meet minimum public-bathroom standards in the San Francisco housing code.

Rosemary Bosque of the Housing Division told the board the 1906-era hotel has 63 guest rooms — 38 designated residential and 25 tourist — and that Chapter 5 of the San Francisco housing code (the Hotel Conversion Ordinance and related retroactive provisions) requires a minimum number of public bathing and sanitary facilities per floor. Bosque summarized the code schedule and told the board it requires at least two bathing/sanitary fixtures on floors with 2–20 rooms in order to protect health and sanitation. She said a notice of violation was issued in August after DBI field inspection and code-enforcement outreach work.

Tenant organizers and residents urged the board to deny the appellant's appeal and proceed to abatement. Pratibatheke (organizing coordinator, Central City SRO Collaborative/Tenderloin Housing Clinic) and a program coordinator identified as Ben summarized outreach work and enforcement history, saying the Warfield had received multiple notices: "from 2010 till present, there's a total of about 29 NOVs ... total complaints filed against the Warfield is about 49 complaints," and that common-area habitability problems persist. Tenants described lack of heat, bed bugs, broken elevators, filthy showers and blocked access. Tenant Kelly Spearman told the board, "It is filthy. Bed bugs still," and Arthur Grama said units were often so cold at night he could "shiver" and that elevators frequently failed, hindering residents with mobility needs.

The appellant's representative (identified in the transcript as Senecorno Oezom, representing lessee/manager Bill Thakor) acknowledged the hotel's age and the ordinance but asked for time, saying conversions would remove private bathrooms that current tenants now use and could trigger rent-board claims. He said the owner would "need some time" and suggested a 3–6 month window to perform conversions when rooms become vacant. Bosque and organizers countered that conversions can proceed when tourist rooms are vacant and urged prompt permitting.

Commissioner Walker moved to require the appellant to file for permits within 30 days and to initiate and complete the conversion work within three months. Walker explained the timeframe as a compromise intended to balance construction realities with residents' urgent sanitation needs. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Barr and carried unanimously.

Board staff and counsel discussed procedure after the vote. Because the property owner waived a director's hearing and came directly to the Abatement Appeals Board, staff said the board "is then, in effect, issuing an order of abatement" and that they would prepare an order and attach a notice of decision. The board voted to uphold the department recommendation and to have staff prepare the formal order.

The board's action applies only to the housing-code requirement for minimum public sanitary/bathing facilities and does not in itself resolve other habitability claims; multiple speakers urged continued enforcement and inspection for other outstanding violations. The case file will include the board's direction on timing and the department will prepare the written order of abatement and notice of decision for recordation and follow-up.