The city has been on a tear the last week, with city manager Penny Ballem and fire chief John McKearney talking about what they are doing to boost inspections, bring landlords of unsafe buildings into line and more. (Including almost a million for firehall upgrades.)
Some of this is just reporters discovering ongoing activities, a typical process that follows a startling news event. In this case, it was the Pandora Street fire where three young men died just before Christmas after a fire broke out in a house that had been turned into a rooming house. (Apparent cause, a faulty extension cord and some Christmas lights.)
That has prompted a run of reporting on city inspections, fire codes and the rest.
Last week, the chief evacuated a whole apartment building. Now here’s a news release about all the charges, plus a notation that the city has shut down 12 buildings in the last five years, plus it will be inspecting more buildings in the very near future.
It would be nice to sort out somewhere how much of this was already in the works, how much was prompted by the tragic deaths (yes, sad to say, that seems to be what it takes so often), and how much by the ensuing criticism.
City of Vancouver
Information bulletin
Jan. 12, 2011
Services to problem property terminated ;
bylaw prosecutions pending
Following the property owner’s failure to address fire and life-safety issues outlined in the Jan. 6 evacuation order issued by the City of Vancouver’s fire chief, water, electrical and gas services have been terminated at 2154 Dundas St.
City officials are preparing to charge the property owner with 25 fire bylaw and seven other bylaw offences following the evacuation of the property last Thursday over concern for an imminent threat to the life safety of 23 tenants.
A further 14 bylaw charges are pending the owner’s compliance with a Standards of Maintenance Order which expires on Jan. 24.
The fire bylaw prosecutions stem from the building owner’s failure to have functioning fire safety signage, fire extinguishers, smoke alarms, heat detectors, emergency lighting, a fire safety plan and other serious fire safety breaches in the building.
The fine for each bylaw offence is a minimum of $500 and not more than $10,000.
City staff are also preparing charges under each of the building, standards of maintenance and electrical bylaws for infractions ranging from broken windows, doors and flooring to a cockroach and mice infestation, mould throughout the building and broken emergency signs.
The owner will also be charged with failing to comply with three bylaw orders.
The fines for each offence are a minimum of $250 and not more than $2,000.
City emergency services staff have worked closely with representatives from BC Housing and the Ministry of Social Development to ensure the tenants displaced by the evacuation of 18 suites at 2154 Dundas have a place to stay. The tenants have also been assisted to return to the building to pick up their belongings.
Whether or not the building will return to operation as an apartment complex depends on the completion of a long list of repairs, compliance with all City bylaws and a commitment to effective property management.
Over the coming days and weeks, the City’s integrated bylaw inspection team plans to visit at least five more of Vancouver’s worst problem properties, all of which are multi-tenanted. The City wants to send a strong signal to their owners that unsafe conditions will not be tolerated for building tenants and our citizens.
Between 2005 and 2010, the City closed 12 buildings as a result of violations of City safety bylaws.
8 responses so far ↓
1 laniwurm // Jan 12, 2011 at 5:15 pm
It’d be interesting to see if the City has the nerve to go after the SRO hotels that the Province bought. While tenants in those buildings are far better off because of additional resources are being spent to operate the hotels, many of the buildings remain physically decrepit and infested.
Also, Megaphone Magazine has an update from a tenant in one of the most infamous slum dwellings in town, the Balmoral, owned by the Sahota family. http://bit.ly/ihM2nH
Ironically, SROs were all forced to put in sprinkler systems back in the day, so it’s unlikely that they’ll be prioritized because the danger of people burning to death that you suggest spurred the City into action isn’t there.
2 Max // Jan 13, 2011 at 9:02 am
Does this include the City going after the owners of our run down and unsafe firehalls???
Oh, right – the City owns them.
Shameful.
3 Max // Jan 13, 2011 at 9:05 am
@ laniwurm #1
How can the City go after the Bamoral and the Sahota family when they have given that same family a significant tax break on property they own that is now being used as a community garden??
Do you think they will go after them?
I don’t.
4 The Fourth Horseman // Jan 13, 2011 at 12:15 pm
I too have asked when known slumlords would be spanked–instead of getting tax breaks for using their properties to grow lettuce.
Frances, here is my “best guess” breakdown on what has precipated the City’s campaign to clean up the messes:
Already in the works: 20%
Deaths of the three men *: see below
Public pressure and negative media: 80%
* those deaths would have been business as usual without the media and blog coverage and subsequent feedback from the public.
Now, in pointing out the blindingly obvious, I want to congratulate the City for demonstrating that they will evacuate and close down those buildings that are not responding to citations. Keep it up, please.
I also note a public service announcement from the Fire Chief (I think) asking people to remember their responsibilities in clearing sidewalks during snow events. Hooray! The City can’t be expected to do it all, though the thought of Gregor shovelling my walk is kinda goose-bump making…;-)
5 Bill McCreery // Jan 13, 2011 at 12:43 pm
@ Frances, “Apparent cause, a faulty extension cord and some Christmas lights.”
The “apparent cause” of the fire may have been the “faulty extension cords”, but based on what I know now, the apparent case of death was something else, which will IMO be confirmed when the reports are made public.
6 Rod // Jan 18, 2011 at 8:59 am
The tragic death of the three men was caused by a faulty electrical cord. It was not anything to do with code or the house wiring. This could have happened in any home anywhere. It is fine and dandy to go around closing down low rent housing but where are these folks going to end up? More than likely on the street homeless.
7 Bill McCreery // Jan 18, 2011 at 11:10 am
You are not correct Rod. See my comments above.
8 Rod // Jan 18, 2011 at 7:38 pm
Dear Bill
As far as it is known at this time the cause of the fire was a faulty electric cord and/or Christmas lights.
Your remark “but based on what I know now, the apparent case of death was something else” if you know something else then enlighten us all please. Also I am talking about the cause of the fire not the cause of death athough I am sure their deaths had somethng to do with the fire. So therefore their deaths were directly or indirectly the result of a faulty cord or Xmas lights. Unless of course there is some conspiracy theory out there that the fire was set to cover up some crime.
Leave a Comment