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.