6
CITY OF VANCOUVER
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
A Special Meeting of Council was held on January 30, 1996 at
approximately 10:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers, Third Floor, City
Hall, to hear representations regarding the issuance of a 1996 Business
License to Welcome Hostel Ltd., Mayor Owen in the Chair.
PRESENT: Mayor Owen
Councillors Bellamy, Chiavario, Ip, Kwan, Puil
and Sullivan
ABSENT: Councillor Clarke (ill)
Councillor Hemer
Councillor Kennedy (Civic Business)
Councillor Price
CLERK: Marnie Cross
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
SECONDED by Cllr. Chiavario,
THAT this Council resolve itself into Committee of the Whole,
Mayor Owen in the Chair.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
1. Hearing to Review Issuance of Business
License for 1996 to Welcome Hostel Ltd.,
404-410 Union Street
Mr. Terry Bland, Corporation Counsel, advised Welcome Hostel Ltd.,
held a 1995 Business License for a multiple dwelling with 10
housekeeping rooms and five sleeping units in an RT-3 zoning district.
During the course of 1995, evidence was produced to the Chief License
Inspector the premises were in violation of the Zoning and Development
By-law in that rooms were rented on a daily and/or weekly basis. This
is in contravention to the RT-3 zoning.
As a result of inspections and various by-law violations up to
November, 1995, Mr. Paul Teichroeb, Deputy Chief License Inspector met
with the operators/lessees of the premises and on November 17, the
business license was suspended to the end of the year.
In a letter dated November 27, 1995, Mr. Bruce Redekop, Kerr
Mouzourakis Redekop & Leinburd, solicitor for Welcome Hostel Ltd.,
appealed the suspension.
As no meeting was able to be arranged to hear the appeal to the
suspension of the 1995 license, the appeal is now academic. The
purpose of the hearing is to decide whether a 1996 business license
should be issued to Welcome Hostel Ltd., and if so, when.
Mr. Bland indicated he would call various witnesses and Mr.
Redekop would have the opportunity to ask questions. After this is
completed, Mr. Redekop would then call on his witnesses.
In response to questions from Mr. Bland, Mr. Teichroeb indicated
the premises are located in an RT-3 zone and the license was issued
authorizing 15 units rented on a monthly basis. Mr. Teichroeb noted
that members of the community had expressed concerns regarding the
operation of the premises as a hotel renting rooms on a daily or
weekly basis. The Police Department visited the premises on a number
of occasions and the Property Use Inspector made two inspections. A
letter was issued to the operators of the Welcome Hostel Ltd. advising
they could not rent on a daily basis. The inspection noted the use of
unauthorized rooms, some below standards such as ceiling heights, etc.
The licensees understood the by-law requirements and agreed to comply
with the by-law requirements in a letter dated May 18, 1995 to Mr.
Teichroeb.
After the operators indicated they would comply with the by-laws,
information was received from the Police Department indicating the
rooms were being rented on a daily basis. Mr. Teichroeb called the
premises on October 4, 1995 and enquired about a rental for the
evening. The operator said there was no problem. It was $25 for a
single or $12.50 if he shared a room.
On November 17, Mr. Teichroeb met with the licensees to hear their
reasons for non-compliance. The licensees were emphatic they were
complying and not renting anything illegally; that the Police
Department had lied and that Mr. Teichroeb had never called the
premises.
At this meeting the situation was reviewed and the business
license for 1995 was suspended for the remainder of the year.
In response to Mr. Redekop s question as to the previous history
of the building, Mr. Teichroeb indicated originally the building was
two stores with dwelling units above and subsequently converted into
housekeeping and sleeping units. Mr. Redekop advised Mr. Teichroeb
the present operators bought the business in March, 1994.
Mr. Redekop requested Mr. Teichroeb to advise the total number of
units in the building. Mr. Teichroeb indicated that with the
authorized rooms, and unauthorized store rooms, mezzanine, small rooms
6 x7 , there could be up to 25 or more rooms in the building. He also
responded that there were no records to show these rooms were operated
illegally prior to 1994.
Mr. Redekop asked how many tenants occupied the premises at any
given time as observed through City inspections. Mr. Teichroeb
indicated there could have been 40-50 people in the building at one
point. When asked if he noticed an improvement since meeting with the
lessees, Mr. Teichroeb indicated an improvement. In an inspection the
previous week, the unauthorized units were vacant and there appeared to
be a maximum of two persons per room. It was difficult to determine
actual occupancy, but the lessees appeared to be trying to comply.
Mr. Bland asked questions of Mr. Ray Mariani, Property Use
Inspector who worked for the City for six years. Mr. Mariani indicated
one of the functions of his job was to see that premises comply with
City by-laws relating to the permitted use. In response to questions,
Mr. Mariani advised that he had inspected the premises on March 24,
1995. He inspected every room and took approximate room measurements
as under the Standards of Maintenance By-law there has to be 50 sq. ft.
provided for each tenant. The ceiling height minimum of 6 8 was not
adhered to, with some rooms having 4.5 - 5 ceiling heights. Some
tenants confirmed they were only there for one or two days. The
physical damage was somewhat minimal. A letter was sent to the
operators indicating the number of units which could be occupied on a
monthly basis were three on the first floor, six on the second floor
and six on the third floor.
Mr. Bland requested Mr. Mariani to outline the results of a
subsequent inspection on September 20. Mr. Mariani indicated that
numerous rooms which were ordered not to be occupied were again
occupied by people who indicated they were tourists and not monthly
tenants. In response to questions with respect to the co-operation
received, Mr. Mariani indicated he was not permitted access to some of
the rooms and the operators stated Mr. Mariani should have provided 24
hours notice. Mr. Mariani confirmed that City inspectors do not need
to provide notice when inspecting premises for compliance with City by-
laws.
Mr. Redekop requested the number of tenants in the building at the
time of the March 24 inspection. Mr. Mariani indicated that the
tenants are not always present in the rooms, but he indicated that
there were between 25-40 people, 25% of whom were monthly tenants.
Mr. Redekop asked if there appeared to be animosity between
monthly tenants and transients. Mr. Mariani indicated that some
tenants offered some concerns for their belongings when there were
people there for only a couple of days.
In response to Mr. Redekop s questions about by-law compliance,
Mr. Mariani indicated maintenance of the building was kept to minimum
standards but there was no compliance with respect to the zoning by-
law. There were no entries in the register for transient guests all
lodging houses are required to keep a register.
As a result of notices received from the City and meetings with
licensing personnel, Mr. Redekop asked if as of June l, the lessees
were complying. Mr. Mariani suggested they were complying somewhat
slowly.
Mr. Redekop requested Mr. Mariani to provide information from the
June 20 inspection i.e. how many daily tenants, how many occupants,
etc. Mr. Mariani indicated he did not gain access to all rooms but he
had spoken to 6 tourists who were only staying a few days. Other rooms
appeared to be occupied but the tenants were not present and it was not
easy to determine how many were in the rooms.
In response to Mr. Redekop s question regarding whether the
tourists were the kind of people you would want in your neighbourhood,
Mr. Mariani indicated they were co-operative and answered questions but
he would not wish to make a judgement on what kind of individuals they
were.
Mr. Bland requested Rick Mattson, Fire Inspection Branch of the
City Fire Department, (17 years, 6 as an inspector) to describe the
inspection of the premises carried out by Fire, Health and Property Use
inspectors on March 24. Mr. Mattson indicated the major infraction
related to the Fire By-law was a locked door with a wooden box which
required a key to open it. This exit would have to be used by at least
5 or 6 suites along the hallway. The occupants would not be able to
exit the building if they were not provided with a key. Mr. Mattson
requested removal of the locking device. On his second inspection
(March 28) the door lock had been removed and all other work had been
completed by April 7. On April 26, the door had been relocked with a
key-locking mechanism. Mr. Redekop asked if Mr. Mattson had spoken to
the operators about the locking device. They indicated the locking
device was to stop people such as drug dealers from entering the
building from the side street. Mr. Redekop asked if the operator
appeared to be co-operative and Mr. Mattson responded he was not co-
operative until the situation became tense and he then unlocked the
door. The operator re-iterated it was to stop drug dealers from
entering the building. Mr. Mattson was asked if the locking device was
removed and replaced with a proper mechanism. Mr. Mattson indicated it
was not.
Mr. Bland requested P.C. James Munroe, 8 years with the City of
Vancouver Police Department, to outline his duties in the Spring of
1995. P.C. Munroe indicated he carried out a wide range of duties as a
designated officer for the Strathcona Community, dealing with other
police officers in the area, members of the community and on-going
community problems. He advised that the Police Department and
community members were concerned with the number of thefts in the area,
thought to be by tenants of Welcome Hostel Ltd. There was drug dealing
in front of the premises and drug paraphernalia around the building.
He had spoken to the operators at least 20 times, if not more. He
encountered problems with the room guest list which did not contain any
listing for day guests.
In response to questions from Mr. Bland, P.C. Munroe indicated he
had observed and spoken to several tourists who indicated they had
rented a room for $12 a day plus key deposit and had received no
receipts for their cash only transactions nor been asked to sign a
register. He asked to see the guest register and there was no
indication that the tourists had stayed at the premises.
In response to questions P.C. Munroe indicated that he had been
provided with an advertisement for the Welcome Hostel "in a downtown
location, rates $15-39 per night, with pickup from the airport, bus
depot, train station". He indicated the tourist picked up the
advertisement in Victoria. P.C. Munroe indicated there were notices in
some of the rooms on the top floor, which appeared to cater to Japanese
tourists, indicating guests could pay for as many nights as they
thought they would be in Vancouver. He noted that any changes to the
premises were as a result of fire, health and license inspections.
Mr. Redekop asked if any other rooming houses in the neighbourhood
rent on a temporary basis. P.C. Munro advised there were not.
As a result of several questions from Mr. Redekop, P.C. Munroe
advised the drug problems are not as a result of the tourists and
indicated that many of the tenants are known to the police and rotate
to different premises, but are a cause of concern.
Mr. Redekop asked several times for the source of the complaints
and was advised it was various sources such as police members,
community members, but it was not important who complained but that
there were a good number of complaints which needed to be investigated.
Mr. Bland requested P.C. Wilkinson, a member of the Police
Department for five years, to outline the events of the evening of
September 20. P.C. Wilkinson indicated she had attended with her
partner in an undercover operation, posing as tourists. They were
greeted at the door and asked if they wanted a room. They were told
there was a room with bunk beds for $35 a night plus $5 key deposit.
Two nights would be $30 a night. When they looked at the room it was
dirty and the operator indicated he would clean it. P.C. Munro came in
to do a lodging house check. The operator known as Raymond came to see
them and refunded their money when requested to do so.
Mr. Bland requested P.C. Jeanie Yee, a Police Department member
for 9 years, to advise of her duties as Co-ordinator for District Two
where the premises are located. P.C. Yee indicated she was responsible
for all problems that were brought to her attention either by community
members or other police members. There were a number of incidents
related to the Welcome Hostel. Once a file is opened on a premises, as
was done in February, 1995 for Welcome Hostel, it is an indication
there are a number of problems which will not be resolved. In response
to questions from Mr. Bland as to her observations and conversations
with the manager, P.C. Yee indicated there are daily rentals, monthly
rentals, rentals to people from the DTES known to the police, people
staying a day or two waiting for their next welfare cheque, quite a few
transients, parking meter heads found inside tenants rooms and in the
hallways, etc. P.C. Yee advised the operators their operation was
contrary to their license as a lodging house. Once letters had been
received from Permits and Licenses, there were some attempts to comply,
but P.C. Yee was present with Ray Mariani when rooms that were
unsuitable and closed were again rented out. Management became
agitated when various departments visited the premises. When P.C.
Wilkinson and her partner posed as tenants, their names were not on the
register. The operator Raymond (Wai Man) always spoke perfect English
and when P.C. Yee asked to go to the third floor he switched to
Cantonese. He responded to two phone calls in English and when P.C.
Yee spoke to him in Cantonese he switched to Mandarin which she did not
understand. P.C. Yee indicated that she felt there would be no
compliance from the operators unless Council takes some action.
Mr. Redekop asked where people in the neighbourhood can stay if
they are short of cash and don t have a place to stay. P.C. Yee
indicated they can stay in the area hotels that have daily rentals.
Mr. Redekop asked if welfare and other organizations refer people
to Welcome Hostel for emergency shelter. P.C. Yee indicated she did
not know. Mr. Redekop asked if the problems with Raymond and his
language resulted after the undercover officers set him up. P.C. Yee
indicated the situation would have been a bit startling for Raymond.
Mr. Redekop asked questions of Tiejun Yuan, known as TJ, one of
the operators of Welcome Hostel. He came to Canada as a student and was
granted landed immigrant status in 1989. Mr. Yuan indicated he bought
the business Western Hostel Ltd. in February, 1994 and leased the
premises for $3500 per month for five years. He made improvements but
not structural changes. The previous owner indicated the number of
rooms which could be rented was 30.
In response to questions regarding occupancy when he took over the
business, Mr. Yuan indicated the owners occupied the top floor, the
second floor contained seven tenants, the main level 4-5 tenants and
two tenants were in the basement. He indicated there were unauthorized
rooms occupied by monthly tenants.
Mr. Redekop asked how tenants find out about Western Hostel. Mr.
Yuan indicated he advertised and has a good relationship with social
services who send people if they need shelter. As well as referrals,
tenants tell others needing housing. Most people cannot afford rooms.
They stay for one or two days until they can afford to pay the monthly
rental.
In response to questions from Mr. Redekop, Mr. Yuan indicated his
costs were approximately $5000 per month. The landlord misrepresented
the business as 30 rooms. Until he read the license in November, 1995,
he did not realize only 15 rooms were allowed.
Mr. Yuan advised that when the parking meter heads were found on
the premises, he called the police and they arrested the person
responsible. Mr. Yuan requested another opportunity to show he will
comply with the City requirements. All tenants are now monthly and he
is only renting 15 rooms.
Mr. Bland noted that in February and March, Mr. Yuan had been
advised of the by-law requirements. He asked Mr. Yuan if he understood
at that time. Mr. Yuan said yes. He denied the rooms were rented on a
daily basis. He said social services sends him people who need a place
to stay, sometimes not on a monthly basis.
In response to questions from Mr. Redekop, Mr. Wai Man Chuk, known
as Raymond, indicated he and Mr. Yuan have owned the business Western
Hostel Ltd. since February 11, 1994. He moved from Hong Kong in
November, 1993. Neither he nor TJ have any experience running a
lodging house. His role is to take care of the business and general
maintenance. He advised that 80-90% of the tenants are social service
welfare people.
Mr. Redekop requested three tenants from the building to discuss
their situations when they arrived at Western Hostel.
Mr. Alexander Goudreau, 23, arrived in Vancouver 15 months ago.
He was robbed in Banff and only had $20. The YMCA referred him to
Western Hostel where they accepted some money and said he could pay
later when he had money. TJ referred him to social services and when
he had money he began monthly rentals. He is currently working to stay
off welfare. He advised if there are any complaints about the
premises, they are attended to by TJ or Raymond.
Mr. Darrell Carter, 45, indicated he arrived in Vancouver in
August, 1995. He stayed at a hotel and then checked out hostels.
Western Hostel was the cleanest and most central. He paid on a daily
basis until he had the money to pay monthly.
Mr. Thomas Bezner arrived in Vancouver in August, 1995. He heard
about Western Hostel from a friend who had stayed there while in
Vancouver. He went directly to Western Hostel when he arrived and paid
for a couple of days. Mr. Bezner plans on staying, on a monthly basis,
until he leaves Vancouver in May. The premises are clean and centrally
located.
In conclusion, Mr. Redekop indicated one of the problems he had in
going through the material submitted was the absence of particulars of
who is issuing complaints. This is a situation where the current
operators took possession in early 1994 and thought they had a building
with 30 rooms which could be rented whereas there are only 15. He
enquired if the occupancy problem is a new one or was it an existing
problem. Complaints appear to stem from some of the problems in the
neighbourhood re unlawful activities, not from the backpackers or the
daily tenants. People seem to be drawn to the building for a temporary
stay and subsequently convert to monthly tenancy. Perhaps there is a
good and legitimate reason why they should be accepted as they turn out
to be good tenants. There is contradictory evidence in the inspection
reports as to compliance. This is a difficult business to run as
people from out of the Province arrive with little money. The
operators are not the problem, it is people who come to the
neighbourhood.
This is a situation where indeed there have been problems
identified but a recent inspection indicates the business appears to be
fully complying. If the licence is not issued the monthly tenants will
have no place to stay. Mr. Redekop suggested a small amount of
tolerance might be in order and a provisional licence be granted and
monitored and if there is a further problem, the City can revoke the
license.
MOVED by Councillor Puil,
A. THAT the monthly tenants of Welcome Hostel Ltd. immediately
be given one month's notice to vacate the premises by
February 29, 1996.
B. THAT no business license be issued to Messrs. Tiejun Yuan and
Wai Man Chuk, operating as Welcome Hostel, 404-410 Union
Street, for three months following that time.
C. THAT if the operators apply for a business license in June,
1996, City staff monitor the operation of the premises to
ensure that it is in compliance with all City by-laws.
D. THAT City staff meet with the monthly tenants of the Welcome
Hostel Ltd. to provide assistance in their relocation.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RISE FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
THAT the Committee of the Whole rise and report
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
ADOPT REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
SECONDED by Cllr. Chiavario,
THAT the report of the Committee of the Whole be adopted.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
* * * * *
The Special Council adjourned at 1:00 p.m.