ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: May 24, 1995
Dept. File No.2168IC.COV
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Chief License Inspector
SUBJECT: Regal Place Hotel, 144 West Hastings Street
Request for a Show Cause Hearing
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council resolve to have a Show Cause Hearing relating
to the suspension or revocation of the 1995 hotel business
license for the Regal Place Hotel at 144 West Hastings
Street.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS
approval of the foregoing.
COUNCIL POLICY
Section 278 of the Vancouver Charter states:
"The Chief License Inspector may, in any case, recommend to
Council in writing the suspension or revocation of any
license setting out the reasons for such recommendation.
The Council shall not suspend or revoke the license without
previous notice and an opportunity to be heard being given
to the holder thereof, except when by reasonable efforts the
holder cannot be found."
PURPOSE
This report provides Council with information on the licensed
hotel premise at 144 West Hastings Street, and identifies
concerns related to the management practices of the hotel's
owners, Mow Wah Gee and Yuet Wan Gee, who also operate and manage
the business.
BACKGROUND
Many social and policing problems in the Downtown Eastside
community have been related to inadequate management and
supervision of some bars and hotels in this area. Numerous
problems have been identified in the Regal Place Hotel, which are
directly related to the quality of management provided by the
owners, who also manage the building.
The Permits and Licenses Department has carried out a number of
recent inspections in this building, and has gathered information
from the Fire, Health and Police Departments related to calls and
inspections in the Regal Place Hotel. These reports portray a
consistent picture of poor management relating to unsafe
conditions, poor maintenance and lack of supervision and
management of the hotel.
DISCUSSION
The Regal Place is a seven-storey residential hotel containing 26
dwelling units and 12 sleeping units. Attached as appendices are
a number of inspection reports related to 144 West Hastings
Street:
Permits and Licenses:
Appendix A consists of four Standards of Maintenance reports over
the period November 29, 1994 to March 28, 1995. On November 29,
1994, 34 deficiencies were recorded; January 19, 1995, 27 items;
March 23, 1995, 27 items and March 28, 1995, 81 items were
identified.
Many of the same deficiencies are identified on all reports over
the four-month period, with repairs not attempted by the owner.
Examples are the broken toilet in unit 301 and the missing
bathroom sink in unit 701. Some repairs have been attempted and
completed by the owners.
The lack of supervision and management style are also a big
concern. The district inspector and Deputy Chief License
Inspector have monitored the building and interviewed many of the
tenants. The following concerns have been raised:
(a) On numerous occasions there is no operator on the premise.
The office is locked and tenants just come and go. On
April 28, 1995, staff attended the building from 11:40 a.m.
to 12:35 p.m. No manager was present, and staff freely
walked through the halls.
(b) A proper register of tenants is not kept by the manager as
required by Section 19.2 of License Bylaw No. 4450. There
are usually two or even three registers with varying numbers
of tenants in each register. Tenants told staff that they
are often registered in different rooms from where they
actually stay. It appears a lot of tenants do not receive a
receipt.
(c) On April 25, 1995, the inspector visited the building. The
manager (Mrs. Gee) handed him all the keys for the building,
and told him to go into any rooms he wanted. After
completion of the inspection (with tenants permission), the
inspector could not return the keys as the office was
closed, and the manager had left. The keys were taken back
to City Hall and returned the next day. The manager
apparently did not miss the keys and did not bother to
telephone the inspector.
(d) The managers have moved double bunk beds into a number of
rooms. While these rooms are large enough to allow this
under the bylaw, the tenants tell us that they are required
to find their own room-mates, in order to fill up the bunks.
The owner then receives rent for each bunk.
(e) One room with four bunks had two monthly tenants. One
tenant was upset because the managers move nightly tenants
into the spare bunks without the tenant's permission.
(f) One tenant advised she was offered $5 to clean her room. A
carpet shampoo machine was in the middle of the room.
Another tenant advised he was promised the paint if he
painted his own room.
(g) People had urinated in the halls and stairwells in a number
of places, with no attempt at clean-up.
Fire Department:
Orders were issued in 1994 for repair of exit lights/signs,
repair fire separations, adjust/repair door hardware and remove
combustible waste from means of egress and around building.
- January 26, 1995: Still some outstanding deficiencies, but
most completed.
- January 31, 1995: Very slight progress made.
- February 7, 1995: Work completed.
- April 26, 1995: By-law order to repair fire alarm,
adjust/repair door hardware and remove obstructions from
means of egress. Accessed every room and found numerous
deficiencies.
- April 27, 1995: Order delivered to owner.
Building incidents include three fires in 1994:
January 22, 1994, fire in room.
February 7, 1994, arson or set-fire in lobby.
July 12, 1994, suspected set-fire in stairway.
Health Department:
Attached as Appendix B is a January 25, 1995, letter to the
building owners from the Health Department outlining health
related deficiencies. These include "foul odours and
accumulation of filth, mouse and cockroach infestations and heat
and hot water complaints".
Police Department:
Since January 1994, the Vancouver Police Department has responded
to 98 '911' calls relating to this hotel. Police note that
problems stem from poor management and lack of supervision.
Incidents include break and enters, thefts, fights, stolen
property and assaults, some of which involve management. A
Police Department report is attached as Appendix C.
CONCLUSION
The Regal Place Hotel has a history of poor management, bylaw
infractions and a management style that is contributing to the
problems of the neighbourhood. The owner has stated that "the
tenants are not very good people; always breaking everything; do
not let him in the rooms and do not tell him about the damage".
The Chief License Inspector feels that the Regal Place Hotel is
being managed in a manner that constitutes gross negligence which
is impacting negatively on the tenants and the community.
* * *