~~P~

9COUN?.
f
JN

~
x

~
w

'~
M

a
~

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT

75`7
Olb3S n. 0

September 10, 2015

1650 Mission St.

Suite 400
San Francisco,
CA 94103-2479

Thomas &Monica Casey

38 Gregory Drive
Fairfax, CA 94930

Reception:
415.556.6378
Fax:

415.558.6409
Vic Yang
20 Broderick Street
San Francisco, CA 94117

Planning
Information:
415.558.6377

NOTICE OF DECISION
SF Administrative Code Chapter 41A Short Term Residential Rental

Site Address:
Assessor's Block/Lot:
Zoning District:
Complaint Number:
Hearing Officer:

20 Broderick Street
1240/019
RH-3(Residential- House, Three Family)Zoning District
2015-007923ENF
Audrey Butkus,(415)575-9129 or audre~.butkus@sfgov.orQ

DECISION
T'he Director's appointed hearing officer, Audrey Butkus, has determined that Thomas and Monica
Casey, the owners of 20 Broderick Street and Vic Yang, the tenant of 20 Broderick Street have violated
Administrative Code Chapter 41A for illegally offering a dwelling unit for rent as a Tourist or Transient
use. The details of the violation and decision are discussed below.
This decision is based on the entirety of the record before the hearing officer, including but not limited to
testimony of witnesses and the responsible parties and information submitted by Planning Department
staff, the responsible party/ies, and other witnesses. T'he record may be found at 1650 Mission Street,
Suite 400, San Francisco. Although factual information from the record is summarized below, this
decision is based on the record as a whole.

DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION
T'he subject property contains two dwelling units. The Planning Department received a complaint on
April 24, 2015, alleging that the property was being used for short term rentals. Staff found the property
advertised online for rent on a nightly or weekly basis through the websites, Airbnb (www.airbnb.com)
and HackerHome(www.hackerho.me).

www.sfpfanni ~g.org

20 Broderick Street
Complaint No.2015-007923ENF

Chapter 41A Notice of Decision

September 10, 2015

UNLAWFUL CONVERSION
Chapter 41A of the San Francisco Administrative Code prohibits the offering of residential units for
Tourist or Transient use (which is a rental for less than 30 days), unless the units are registered on the
Short-term Residential Rental Registry. Under Administrative Code Section 41A.6, if the Hearing Officer
determines that a violation has occurred, an administrative penalty shall be assessed as follows:
1. For the initial violation, not more than four times the standard hourly administrative rate of
$121.00 for each unlawfully converted unit, or for each identified failure of a Hosting Platform to
comply with the requirements of subsection (g)(4), per day from the notice of Complaint until
such time as the unlawful activity terminates;
2. For the second violation by the same Owner(s), Business Entity, or Hosting Platform, not more
than eight times the standard hourly administrative rate of $121.00 for each unlawfully converted
unit, or for each identified failure of a Hosting Platform to comply with the requirements of
subsection (g)(4), per day from the day the unlawful activity commenced until such time as the
unlawful activity terminates; and
3. For the third and any subsequent violation by the same Owner(s), Business Entity, or Hosting
Platform, not more than twelve times the standard hourly administrative rate of $121.00 for each
unlawfully converted unit or for each identified failure of a Hosting Platform to comply with the
requirements of subsection (g)(4) per day from the day the unlawful activity commenced until
such time as the unlawful activity terminates.

COMPLAINT AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

On April 24, 2015, Planning Department staff received a complaint that the subject property was
operating as an unauthorized short-term residential rental. Staff located listings on the websites
www.airbnb.com, and www.hackerho.me which offered individual bunk beds and rooms in the upper
unit of the property for short term rentals.

NOTICE OF COMPLAINT AND APPARENT VIOLATION

On June 30, 2015, staff issues a Notice of Complaint to the property owner by certified and non-certified
mail.
On July 1, 2015, staff posts a notice at the subject property notifying the property owner and all interested
parties of the hearing.

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING
On August 12, 2015, the hearing officer convened the administrative hearing. All testifying witnesses
were sworn in and the hearing was audio recorded. The hearing was attended by the following people:
Ms. Audrey Butkus, Hearing Officer
Mr. Adrian Putra, Staff Planner
Mr. Thomas Casey, property owner
Mr. Vic Yang, tenant
Mr. Putra, the case planner, presented the information summarized in the staff report for 20 Broderick
Street including:

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING DEPYRTMENT

20 Broderick Street
Complaint No.2015-007923ENF

Chapter 41A Notice of Decision

September 10, 2015

4/24/15: Staff received a complaint concerning a property being advertised online as a short-term
rental on Airbnb as "HackerHome Haight" located at 4 Monterey Boulevard and hosted by a
person named "Vic."
6/17/15: Staff investigated the complaint and found that the address provided by the complainant
for "HackerHome Haight" was incorrect due to the fact that 4 Monterey Boulevard is located in
the Glen Park neighborhood and not the Haight. However, staff was able to identify 20
Broderick as the location of "HackerHome Haight" by matching a picture of a top floor rear
balcony found in the "HackerHome Haight" listings with an aerial image capture of the
property's top floor rear balcony taken by Pictometry. Staff found that there were 11 listings on
Airbnb advertised rooms at the property under the title of "HackerHome -Haight" or
"HackerHome -Buena Vista." Staff found that the Airbnb listing titled "HackerHome Haight:
Private Room" allowed guests to book the room at the property for a minimum stay of 10 nights.
The 10 other Airbnb listings were for shared rooms requiring 30-night minimum stays. However,
staff found another HackerHome listing on Airbnb titled, "HackerHome SF Hacker Passport,"
which allows guests to book any HackerHome location for a minimum stay of three nights.
Additionally, staff found that HackerHome operates a website (www.hackerho.me.com") that
allows guests to book the property through direct messaging and make online payments to
HackerHome through means outside of Airbnb such as PayPal, Bitcoin, Venmo and Google
Wallet.
6/30/15: Staff issued a Notice of Complaint to the property owner. Staff sent one copy of the
notice via USPS Certified Mail and another copy via USPS Standard Post to the property owner's
address on record. US Postal Service records indicate the notice sent by certified mail was
unclaimed by property owner as of July 23, 2015. T'he notice sent by USPS Standard Post has not
been returned to staff as of August 11, 2015.
7/1/15: Staff posted a Notice of Complaint at the front entrance of the subject property.
7/6/15: Staff found that the Airbnb listing for "HackerHome Haight: Private Room" was
modified to require a 30 day minimum stay. However, the Airbnb listing for "HackerHome SF
Hacker Passport," was still advertised as allowing guests to book any HackerHome location for a
minimum stay of three nights.
8/10/15: Staff found that the Airbnb listing for "HackerHome SF Hacker Passport," was
modified to require a 30 day minimum stay.
Staff has not received a response from the property owner or interested party regarding the
Notice of Complaint before today's hearing.

Mr. Casey, the property owner, gave the following testimony:

He has owned the property at 20 Broderick for approximately 15 years. Vic Yang is his tenant and he
claims Mr. Yang is the primary resident' who lives there. He had been informed by Mr. Yang that Mr.
Yang would be hosting students. He checked with his attorney who believed this type of activity was
legal. He states Mr. Yang also informed him this type of rental was legal. The Notice of Complaint was
the first Mr. Casey had heard of this. He inquired as to whether the law had been changed recently to
which the hearing officer briefed him on the law regarding short-term residential rentals.

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT

20 Broderick Street
Complaint No.2015-007923ENF

Chapter 41A Notice of Decision

September 10, 2015

POST-HEARING SUBMISSION
The tenant, Vic Yang, submitted a packet of additional information on August 16, 2015 and August 24,
2015. A summary of the submittal is below:

Booking confirmations for all bunks and rooms at the property showing that all bunks at 20
Broderick have been rented for a period of at least 30 days with the last short-term rental ending
on July 18th. Additionally, the bookings showed portions of the unit are rented long-term into as
late as mid-October. Mr. Putra conducted a site visit to confirm the leases.

FINDINGS
Based on the review of the record as a whole, the hearing officer finds as follows:
1. That one dwelling unit at the subject property was offered for Tourist or Transient use until at
least August 8, 2015.
2. T'he tenant, Vic Yang, has provided evidence that the dwelling unit at the property was no longer
being used for tourist or transient use as of July 18, 2015 based on booking confirmations
submitted by Mr. Yang.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based on the above findings and the evidence in the record as a whole, the hearing officer determines that
one dwelling unit at the property was offered for Tourist or Transient through at least August 8, 2015 in
violation of Administrative Code Chapter 41A. Because this is an initial violation, the hearing officer may
assess administrative penalties from the date of the Notice of Complaint (here June 30, 2015) until the
date the violation is cured (here August 8, 2015) on both a per diem and per unit basis. Thus, by this
determination the hearing officer assesses administrative penalties against the property owners for a total
of 40 days (forty days per one unit) at a rate of $484 per day. Accordingly, administrative penalties for
the total amount of $19,360.00, is now due to the Planning Department. Please submit a check for the
total amount of $19,360.00, payable to "Planning Department Code Enforcement Fund" immediately.
This decision only concerns the violation of Chapter 41A of the San Francisco Administrative Code and
does not resolve any other outstanding violations under the Planning Code, Building Code, or any other
municipal code.
Sincerely,

Audrey Bu us
Hearing Officer
Cc:

Adrian Putra, San Francisco Planning Department

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT