UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Housing: a problem in skid row rehabilitation Gutman, Emil 1972

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1972_A8 G88.pdf [ 8.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101628.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101628-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101628-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101628-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101628-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101628-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101628-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101628-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101628.ris

Full Text

HOUSING: A PROBLEM IN SKID ROW REHABILITATION by EMIL GUTMAN A., University of Alberta at Calgary, 1 9 6 6 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR • THE DEGREE OF Master of Arts in the School of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard. THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1972 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Bri t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that per-mission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is tin&erstood that copying or pub-lic a t i o n of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allovjed without my written permission. Emil Gutman School of Community and Regional Planning The University of Br i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, B. C • » Canada ABSTRACT R e d e v e l o p m e n t s e e k s t o b r i n g a b o u t a " h i g h e r " u r b a n l a n d u s e i n d e c l i n i n g n e i g h b o u r h o o d s a n d o f t e n may r e s u l t i n t h e d i s l o c a t i o n o f l o c a l r e s i d e n t s . S i n c e t h e mid--19o0 !s a f o r m o f p r i v a t e l y - f i n a n c e d r e d e v e i o i m e n t h a s b e e n a s a l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e G a s t o w n / C h i n a t o v m s e c t i o n o f V a n c o u v e r ' s s k i d r o w . The h y p o t h e s i s i n i t i a t i n g t h i s s t u d y p o s t u l a t e d t h a t t h e r e d e v e l o p m e n t o c c u r r i n g i n t h i s a r e a , h a s c a u s e d a n d w o u l d c o n t i n u e t o r e s u l t i n l a r g e - s c a l e d i s l o c a t i o n o f t h e i n d i g e n o u s p o p u l a t i o n . To o b t a i n a g r e a t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f s o c i o - e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t e s a n d e f f e c t s i n t h e a r e a , t h r e e f e a t u r e s o f t h e com-m u n i t y w e r e i n v e s t i g a t e d . The f i r s t two a s p e c t s s e t t h e f o u n d -a t i o n f o r i n q u i r y , w h i l e t h o t h i r d f e a t u r e e n a b l e d a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e i m p a c t o f r e d e v e l o p m e n t o n t h e h o u s i n g s e c t o r . The f i r s t a s p e c t r e q u i r e d a n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l a t t r i -b u t e s o f t h e a r e a a n d i t s r e s i d e n t s ; t h e s e c o n d e l e m e n t i n -v o l v e d a n a . c c o u n t i n g o f t h e m a g n i t u d e o f r e d e v e l o p m e n t -- b o t h i n t e r m s o f t h e a r e a ' s c h a n g e s i n e c o n o m i c f u n c t i o n a n d i n e c o n o m i c v a l u e ; w h i l e t h e t h i r d r e q u i r e d a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f wh a t i m p a c t o n t h e r e s i d e n t p o p u l a t i o n h a s r e s u l t e d f r o m r e d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e a r e a ' s h o u s i n g s e c t o r . F o u r m a j o r c l a s s e s o f r e s i d e n t s -were f o u n d t o p r e -d o m i n a t e a n d i n h a b i t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2,200 d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n n e e d o f m a j o r r e p a i r s , o r c o m p l e t e r e s t o r a t i o n s . E x i s t i n g s e r v i c e s — b o t h p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e were f o u n d t o be c h a r a c t e r -i z e d b y i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s a n d l a c k o f r e s i d e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e i r p r o g r a m s . The vastness and rapidity of redevelopment in the area can .best be characterized by the dramatic land and floor usage changes from industrial to commercial., Further• the market values of properties in Gastovm/Chinatown have undergone great increases, as have assessments and taxes — used as ap-proximate indicators of property values. The housing sector, however, has not been a conspicu-ous component part of these redevelopment changes. Though redevelopers have invested in the purchase of residential properties which act as the triggering mechanisms in a sequen-t i a l process of redevelopment, the other outlined sequences (i.e., eviction, rehabilitation, rent increases, and change i n clientele composition) have not followed. In sum dislocation has not been a prominent character-i s t i c in t h i s community, and the hypothesis which initiated this study has been refuted. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. .. INTRODUCTION 1. The Setting for Dislocation and the Skid Row Phenomena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. The Historic Preservation Area Setting . . . k 3 . Approach . . . . . 7 II* THE RESIDENT POPULATION 1. Introduction . 10 2. Demographic Characteristics 14 3« Residential Characteristics. . . . . . c . . 21 k. Social Problems and Services . 2k 5. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c 29 III. THE SCOPE OF REHABILITATION 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2. Assessments and Taxation . . . . . 32 3o Land Usage . . . . 38 3„1 Land Usage (by Floor) 43 IV. REHABILITATION AND THE HOUSING SECTOR 1. Introduction . . . . k9 2. Ownership . 50 3. Physical Alterations. . . . . . 57 5 . Clientele 67 iv CHAPTER PAGE IV 6 . Summary . . . . 7 3 •V CONCLUSION 1 . Summary . 76 2 . Strategies for Public Intervention 7 9 3 . Implications of Public Intervention . . . . . . 84 NOTSS 8 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . , 9 5 APPENDIX ' . " . 9 8 V LIST OP TABLES TABLE PAGE 2.1 General Population and Sex Distribution. . . . . 15 2.2 Age Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.3 Sources of Income Distribution . . . . . . . . . 16 2.4. Income Distribution 1? 2.5 Employment Distribution . 1.8 2.6 Length of Residence Distribution . . . . . . . . 18 2.7 Resident Attitudes on Selected Topics. 20 2.8 Housi ng Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3.1 Assessments, Rents and Taxation - Gastown/ Chinatown . . . . . . . . . . . .33-36 3 02 Land Use Profile (Floor Area). . . . . . . . . .45-46 4.1 Ownership Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2 Physical Alterations to Buildings 59 4.3 Rent structure 1968 - 1975 • • . 6 4 4.4 Clientele Make-up . 68 v i . LIST OF.FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 4 . 1 Ownership C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s I966-I975 56 4 . 2 Ph3 rsical A l t e r a t i o n s to Dwelling Units. . . . . . 60 4 . 3 Rental Changes 1968-1975 . . . 65 v i i LIST OF MAPS MAP PAGE' 1. H i s t o r i c Preservation Area and Skid Row, Vancouver . . . . . . . . . . . . 2a 2. Housing Location and R e s i d e n t i a l Density . . . . 23a 3. Housing Units with Health Code V i o l a t i o n s . . . . 2kb ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The writer wishes to thank Dr* Craig Davis f o r h i s useful c r i t i c i s m and guidance during the writing of t h i s study. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1. The Setting for D i s l o c a t i o n and the Skid Row Phenomena Within North America thousands of households are forced to relocate every year''" to make way f o r changes i n urban land use deemed necessary by the public or private sector, or both. The former may cause d i s l o c a t i o n i n order to make way for public improvements, such as urban renewal, 2 public housing, enforcement of municipal and health codes, and other a c t i v i t i e s which may serve public p o l i c y . The l a t t e r may s i m i l a r l y cause displacement through i t s d o l l a r votes, i n order to bring about a "higher" urban land use. As the extent of t h i s a c t i v i t y has expanded, there has been an increasing recognition and concern that d i s l o c a t i o n i s a disruptive experience for the i n d i v i d u a l s affected and for the community as a whole. This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y true for the low income and e l d e r l y segments of the population, which 3 form the great majority among skid row inhabitants. The impact of d i s l o c a t i o n among poor and e l d e r l y c i t i -zens i s two-fold. From the vantage point of the community, the dislocated w i l l move to e x i s t i n g substandard or marginal communities, thus increasing the density and the possible rate of decline of these areas. In t h i s manner, r e l o c a t i o n merely s h i f t s some of the socio-economic problems of one area of the c i t y to another with no accompanying b e n e f i t s . From the van-tage point of the dislocated i n d i v i d u a l , r e l o c a t i o n may cause both economic and psychological hardships. The possible increases i n housing costs together with the monetary costs of r e l o c a t i o n — meagre though they may be — would be too 4 great a s t r a i n on the budgets of the displaced person e x i s t -ing on welfare or on other forms of public assistance. At the same time, the disruption of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s within a neighbourhood may have harmful consequences, p a r t i c u l a r l y 5 for those e l d e r l y longtime residents. This study attempts to inquire into the e f f e c t s which one form of redevelopment, within a unique area, has on the inhabitants of that area. In t h i s study redevelopment con-s i s t s of the privately-financed r e s t o r a t i o n and r e h a b i l i t a -t i o n of e x i s t i n g structures. This constitutes a private form of urban renewal without demolition. The investors' objec-ti v e s are to maximize income through (a) changes i n land-use patterns from r e s i d e n t i a l to commercial, or (b) increases i n r e s i d e n t i a l rents following the redevelopment of a r e s i d e n t i a l structure. The i n i t i a l assumption of t h i s inquiry i s that the f i r s t approach of the investor would remove r e s i d e n t i a l units from the marketplace and thus decrease the l o c a l housing supply, while the second method would change the socio-economic composition of the resident population from low to high income. Both approaches would thus r e s u l t i n the d i s -l o c ation of l o c a l indigents. The unique area i n question i s the "Gastown/Chinatown H i s t o r i c Preservation" section of Vancouver's skid row.^ The H i s t o r i c D i s t r i c t encompasses approximately one-half of the land area of the row, and includes one-third of i t s resident population. P r i o r to an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the p o t e n t i a l l y disrup-t i v e e f f e c t s that redevelopment within such an area has on that population,, one requires the following knowledge: (a) who are the inhabitants of skid row? (b) what are skid rows? (c) what constitutes a " h i s t o r i c preservation d i s t r i c t " ? and (d) does the existence of such a d i s t r i c t help to constrain the d i s l o c a t i v e process that might otherwise be a s a l i e n t concomitant of redevelopment? The term "skid row" generally r e f e r s to a geographical area within a c i t y with a high concentration of substandard hotels and rooming houses which charge minimal rents and cater 7 to the lowest economic stratum of an urban community, g Bogue's comparative study of 41 such areas depicts a number of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which further help to characterize skid rows, such as t h e i r land use patterns (e.g., low cost restaurants, pawnshops, second-hand stores, penny arcades, and night clubs). These forms of commercial a c t i v i t i e s , to-gether with missions which provide free meals and public i n s t i t u t i o n s , such as employment agencies f o r u n s k i l l e d workers and welfare agencies, combine to function as the " i n f r a s t r u c t u r e " which supports the l i f e and channels the 9 behaviour of a s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of skid row inhabitants. Studies"^ undertaken during the 1960's to i d e n t i f y the resident populations of such areas revealed population composi-tions of e l d e r l y men l i v i n g on public assistance and small 4 . pensions; p h y s i c a l l y disabled men, also e x i s t i n g on public welfare; young transient workers, and chronic a l c o h o l i c s . Chapter II of t h i s study presents the author's findings of the s o c i o l o g i c a l and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of one section of Vancouver's skid row and i t s residents, i n an attempt to i d e n t i f y the area and i t s peoples as a p r e r e q u i s i t e to speculating about the possible e f f e c t s that redevelopment may have on them. A b r i e f i n s i g h t into some of the more s a l i e n t of these a c t i v i t i e s i s outlined below. 2. The H i s t o r i c Preservation Area Setting The redevelopment occurring i n the Gastown/Chinatown section of Vancouver's skid row has been described above as p r i v a t e l y financed urban renewal without demolition. I t i s the i n t e n t i o n at t h i s point to b r i e f l y o utline the factors detering the more negative aspects of the renewal process, together with the factors which d i r e c t the present-day a c t i v i t i e s and constraints upon the redevelopment process i n Vancouver's H i s t o r i c Preservation A rea. On January 28, 1969, Vancouver C i t y Council i n i t i a t e d the " B e a u t i f i c a t i o n Studies" for the Gastown/Chinatown Pre-servation Area."^- One impetus for the attempt at creating a preservation d i s t r i c t out of an area encompassing approxi-mately one-third of Vancouver's skid row population arose out of the successful b e a u t i f i c a t i o n project on "Theatre Row" on 12 G r a n v i l l e Street, completed m 1968. The Theatre Row project introduced a workable planning process i n which a team of l o c a l property owners and merchants, consultants and various c i t y departments operating under the co-ordination of the C i t y Planning Department developed principles.and guidelines for the b e a u t i f i c a t i o n of a designated area of the c i t y , and 13 c a r r i e d i t to completion. * Concomitantly, pressures emanating from a new group of owners/merchants who had recently located t h e i r business a c t i v i t i e s i n the Gastown area were making t h e i r presence f e l t for a b e a u t i f i c a t i o n / 14 preservation program for the area. T h i r d l y , the property owners and merchants who were established i n the area p r i o r to the redevelopment a c t i v i t i e s of the mid - 1 9 6 0 's provided yet another impetus for a preserva-t i o n project through t h e i r vocal concern over the s t r e e t a c t i v i t i e s of l o c a l indigents. This concern was expressed through t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e request for the c i t y to c u r t a i l the omnipresence of the l o c a l population at both the r e s i d e n t i a l 15 and s t r e e t l e v e l s , with emphasis on the l a t t e r . Fourthly, inter e s t e d i n d i v i d u a l s , committed to the. preservation of h i s t o r i c a l l y and a r c h i t e c t u r a l l y " s i g n i f i c a n t " buildings ( i . e . , structures s p e c i f i c a l l y representing a h i s t o r i c a l epoch or event, or a p a r t i c u l a r a r c h i t e c t u r a l style) pressured f o r a preservation program v i a the "Archeological and H i s t o r i c 16 Sites Protection Act. " L a s t l y , pressures for such a project emanated from within the C i t y of Vancouver Planning Department 17 from 1 9 6 7 - 1 9 7 1 from A. W. Parker, formerly a planner with the " B e a u t i f i c a t i o n D i v i s i o n " of the Department. 6 • Through use of the Act, owners and merchants invest-ing i n the area are encouraged to r e h a b i l i t a t e e x i s t i n g structures on the understanding that any desired s t r u c t u r a l changes to buildings w i l l be submitted for a r b i t r a t i o n to the " H i s t o r i c Area Advisory Board" — an agency set up by the Planning Department with the support of area owners/ merchants to decide on the a d v i s a b i l i t y of any physical 18 changes i n the area. As the process of private redevelopment within the scope of stringent p u b l i c guidelines gained momentum during 19 1969 and 19 70, concern over the p o t e n t i a l d i s l o c a t i o n problems which might be caused by redevelopment a c t i v i t i e s 20 was voiced by a number of public and private sources. The reasons for the expressed concern can be traced d i r e c t l y to the physical development of the area, inasmuch as a large number of private entrepreneurs during 1969-1970 had moved into the area to refurbish and renovate old buildings, i n keeping with the recommendations of the Gastown B e a u t i f i c a -21 t i o n Study. "Though no i n d i v i d u a l m e i t h e r the public or private sectors had empirical evidence on the t o t a l d i s l o c a -t i o n caused by Gastown redevelopment a c t i v i t y , both sectors were c e r t a i n that large numbers of indigents were regul a r l y 22 being evicted by the redevelopment process. This conviction was expressed by the C i t y of Vancouver Planning Department i n a d r a f t report on skid row which suggested that: .... the older residents of the area are being evicted r e g u l a r l y from t h e i r small b e d s i t t i n g rooms. No figures 7. are avai l a b l e as to what percentage are pensioners, or a l c o h o l i c s , or have no other place to go, as rents are increasing i n the area. However, i t would seem apparent that there w i l l be fewer and fewer places to go i f the trend i s allowed to continue. In a year's time the opportunities for intervention w i l l probably be past as the economic p r i o r i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l entrepreneurs w i l l 2 rule and the community as we know i t w i l l be destroyed ... 3. Approach I t i s on the expressed concerns outlined above that t h i s study w i l l focus. The hypothesis underlying t h i s study i s that private redevelopment i n the area has had, and w i l l continue to r e s u l t i n substantial d i s l o c a t i o n of the resident population. Given t h i s hypothesis, the objectives of t h i s study at the d e s c r i p t i v e l e v e l are: 1. i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the socio-demographic a t t r i b u t e s of the area and i t s residents, 2. i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the economic changes that have been and are being r e a l i z e d i n the area. Examination of these s o c i a l a t t r i b u t e s and economic changes w i l l lead to a better understanding of the evolution of the area. The t h i r d objective i s to i d e n t i f y what disruptive e f f e c t s , i f any, these economic changes have had on the housing n O . sector and on the resident population. "Disruptive e f f e c t s " i n t h i s study means and includes any d i s l o c a t i v e e f f e c t s caused by area redevelopment. The study on those e f f e c t s ( i . e . , Chapter IV) i s p a r t i a l l y based on data c o l l e c t e d by the author i n i n t e r -views with owners, lessees and managers of multi-unit r e s i -d e n t i a l structures i n the area. Interviews were also held with planning o f f i c i a l s and other i n d i v i d u a l s chosen due to t h e i r involvement i n one or more aspects of area a c t i v i t y . 2 ^ The baseline for the study was set as 1965-1966. The dates evolve from suggestions made by various economic i n t e r e s t s , planning o f f i c i a l s and other sources chosen because of t h e i r involvement i n the area, when asked to approximate dates for i n i t i a l developmental changes of s i g n i f i c a n t economic impact i n the d i s t r i c t . Chapter II i d e n t i f i e s the area, i t s functions and i t s residents, i t s housing and i t s socio-demographic processes 25 by use of measures commonly employed i n the l i t e r a t u r e , such as residents' income, employment status, health and welfare standards, housing conditions, and public and private services. Chapter III presents the economic s i t u a t i o n and i t s evolution since the mid-1960's by use of such variables as property values — disaggregated in t o land, improvement, re n t a l and o v e r a l l assessment -- taxation, and patterns of land usage. Through observation of the trends i n these fa c t o r s , an understanding of the changing economic functions ( i . e . , through land usage changes) and economic value ( i . e . , assessment changes) of the area i s gained. Chapter IV presents an analysis of the ef f e c t s upon the l o c a l c i t i z e n r y caused by developmental a c t i v i t i e s within the r e s i d e n t i a l sector and o f f e r s a methodology with which to' approach inquiry into problems e x i s t i n g i n somewhat simi-l a r s i t u a t i o n s . L a s t l y , Chapter V presents a b r i e f summary of the author'.s findings, together with some observations and comments on the implications f o r public p o l i c y . CHAPTER II 10. THE RESIDENT POPULATION 1. Introduction Chapter II of t h i s study inquires into the socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the residents, what forms of p u b l i c and private assistance they receive and t h e i r general habits and a t t i t u d e s . The Chapter i d e n t i f i e s how the area functions, describes the s a l i e n t a t t r i b u t e s of residents, inquires into the housing conditions and general r e s i d e n t i a l character, and examines those s o c i a l problems and services most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the area. The H i s t o r i c Area and those locations immediately peripheral to i t — bounded by Gore Avenue, Georgia, Cambie and the waterfront* — serve several d i s t i n c t types of residents, each of whom has a d i f f e r e n t r a t i o n a l e for r e s i d -ing there. Four major classes of residents are predominant and comprise over ninety per cent of the community's indigents."'' (a) The e l d e r l y , i l l and handicapped, who are generally unable to work or to hold employment for any extended length of time -- supported by pensions, welfare and other kinds of public and p r i v a t e a i d . This group comprises the l a r g e s t single segment of the population — a p p r o x i m a t e l y one-third. (b) Non-working men under 65 who are p h y s i c a l l y able to work but choose, for varying reasons, not to do so. They comprise o n e - f i f t h of the indigent popula-t i o n . * See map on p. 2 a» 11. (c) Chronic a l c o h o l i c s and heavy drinkers, often arrested for drunkenness or disorderly-conduct comprise approxi-mately one-quarter of the-population. (d) The smallest of the four major classes - working men, of whom some are unemployed, but seeking work -comprise approximately one-seventh of the area's residents. Such i n d i v i d u a l s , when employed, work at un s k i l l e d or low-paying jobs, and although permanent • residents, they frequently move from one hotel or room-ing house to another. The residents choose the area for a va r i e t y of reasons, the most common of which are: (a) the c i t y ' s lowest rents, (b) the a v a i l a b i l i t y of welfare and s o c i a l support services, and (c) tolerance of " s o c i a l l y deviant behavior," and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of companionship for the s i n g l e , lonely outcast. Low Rents and Cost of L i v i n g Rents range from $27 to $80 per month with higher 2 rent l e v e l s for weekly and d a i l y rates. Although single-room accommodation within s i m i l a r p r i c e ranges i s available i n other areas of the c i t y , such as K i t s i l a n o and Point Grey, the major-i t y of such units are i n private homes and cater to the un i v e r s i t y • 3 . student market. I t i s thus u n l i k e l y that the residents of the H i s t o r i c Area would f i n d accommodation outside the Downtown East Side l o c a t i o n . Furthermore, i n most other areas of the c i t y (with the exception of South G r a n v i l l e , from Theatre Row to the Bridge) rent i s paid on a monthly basis, whereas i n the hotels and rooming houses of the H i s t o r i c Area, monthly, weekly and d a i l y rates are a v a i l a b l e . Inexpensive stores and restaurants which accept meal t i c k e t s a s s i s t i n creating a.low cost of l i v i n g . A number of r e t a i l outlets o f f e r services that help to support d i s t r i c t residents. U n t i l t h e i r recent closure, the White Lunch, New Zenith and Plaza restaurants were often frequented by the • - 4 indigents, due to the f a c t that a l l accepted meal t i c k e t s . 5 At present the Alpine C a f e t e r i a services the same function. Prices i n most restaurants i n the area are well below those i n the -rest of the C i t y . Further, r e t a i l outlets such as the Army and Navy Stores and F i e l d ' s , provide c l o t h i n g , u t e n s i l s , t o i l e t r i e s and other essentials at discount p r i c e s . Secondhand clothing,' hardware and fu r n i t u r e stores abound and also serve as inexpensive sources of e s s e n t i a l goods f o r area residents. Small confectionary stores provide,at low p r i c e s , the d a i l y n e c e s s i t i e s such as bread, bay rum, dog food and other staples. L a s t l y , s o c i a l service agencies re i n f o r c e the indigent's a t t r a c t i o n and dependence to the area by d i r e c t i n g emergency rents and other forms of finan-c i a l a i d towards the cheapest a v a i l a b l e m i l i e u — that of skid row. By providing f i n a n c i a l a i d to applicants to spend the night i n a l o c a l h o t e l and to eat i n a cheap r e s t -aurant, a public or private s o c i a l service organization can provide assistance for many more i n d i v i d u a l s than i f i t were to seek better accommodations. A v a i l a b i l i t y of So c i a l Services In t h i s community, a v a r i e t y of s o c i a l services operate to serve the homeless man. The Salvation Army, f i v e missions, the Ci t y Health Department, and "drop-in" centres are the major ones. Many pensioners and other e l d e r l y men reside i n the area because of the proximity of such services. When t h e i r pensions or welfare cheques run out, they frequent such i n s t i t u t i o n s as the missions for a meal and a place to 7 sleep. Some al c o h o l i c s come to the area to control t h e i r drinking through the programs offered by one of the missions 8 or the Salvation Army. Moreover, the s o c i a l services pro-vided a t t r a c t i t i n e r a n t workers and some transients who often are i n immediate need of free food and lodgings. 9 Tolerance, Companionship, and other Selected S o c i a l A t t r i b u t e s Some residents have s e t t l e d here to escape from t h e i r " s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s " i n other locations as i n the case of some of the addicted, the a l c o h o l i c and the heavy drinkers. Others are " s o c i a l outcasts," uncomfortable with the authority of "accepted s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . " Both these groups can f e e l at home i n the area as i n no other place. Here they f i n d tolerance and acceptance, regardless of t h e i r background. E l d e r l y men i n p a r t i c u l a r , who are often ignored i n other communities, f i n d peers with s i m i l a r problems and d i s p o s i t i o n s . A l c o h o l i c s form friendships and pool resources for food, li q u o r or bay rum. They share a b o t t l e with another a l c o h o l i c who has none and pro-t e c t those who are drunk from a r r e s t or from being " r o l l e d . " In summary, the H i s t o r i c Area performs at l e a s t three i d e n t i f i a b l e functions for i t s varied resident population. The s p e c i f i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of which are set out i n Section 2 of this chapter, immediately below.^ 1 4 . 2. Demographic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s used to i d e n t i f y the area's population are: sex, age, r e c e i p t of public assistance, income status, employment status, length of residence i n area, and general attitudes on selected aspects of l i v i n g i n the area. The geographic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s used i n Tables 2.1 to 2.7 are two-fold: The f i r s t shows the breakdown between the t o t a l Downtown East Side and the H i s t o r i c Area contained within i t ; * while the second gives a sub-area breakdown within the l a t t e r . The sub-areas used i n t h i s study are A to J i n c l u s i v e as delineated on the area maps on page 1 a. The bound-aries of the sub-areas are based on the precincts outlined by the C i t y of Vancouver Planning Department. Sex Table 2.1 shows that the residents of the area have a much higher male/female r a t i o than that found i n the general population. Adult males over 25 comprise some eighty per cent of the residents, female fourteen per cent and s l i g h t l y under s i x per cent are youth under 25. I t should be noted that childre n and young persons are to be found i n greater concentra-t i o n on the eastern fringes of the t o t a l area ( i . e . , Main Street and Gore Avenues) and i n Precinct J (East Chinatown of the H i s t o r i c Area). Within most of the area, adults form nearly one hundred per cent of the t o t a l population. * For a graphic presentation, see maps on p. 2a. 15. Table 2.1: General P o p u l a t i o n and Sex D i s t r i b u t i o n Popu- T o t a l T o t a l P R E C I N C T S l a t i o n % A r e a H i s t -o r i c A B C D E F G K I J A r e a ilen 80 4 , 852 1, 792 38 85 134 - 933 162 - - 228 212 Women 14 847 314 7 16 23 - 163 28 - - 4 0 37 C h i l d r e n and y o u t h 6 365 130 2 6 10 67 12 - — 17 16 under 25 TOTAL 100 6 ,064 2,236 47 107 167 - 1,16 3 . 202 - - 285 265 Age The r e s i d e n t s , as p o r t r a y e d i n Table 2.2 are con-s i d e r a b l y o l d e r than a d u l t s i n the g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n . Those over 65 and e l i g i b l e f o r pensions form the l a r g e s t s i n g l e group w i t h over 28% of the area's p o p u l a t i o n . Concomitantly, those over 45 comprise 74% of the t o t a l . T able 2.2: Age D i s t r i b u t i o n Age T o t a l Area T o t a l H i s t -P R E C I N C T S % o r i c a r e a A B C D • E F G • H I i _ i j Under 24 5 303 110 2 5 8 - 58 10 - - 14 13 25 - 34 6 364 131 2 6 9 - 70 12 - - 17 15 35 - 44 15 910 333 8 16 2 4 - 174 30 - - 42 39 45 - 54 20 1,214 445 i d 22 33 - 232 40 - - 56 52 55 - 64 26 1,571 585 12 28 45 - 302 53 - - 74 70 65 p l u s 28 1,702 622 13 30 47- — 327 57 — — 82 7 6 TOTAL i 100 — 6 ,06 4 2,236 47 107 167 - 1,163 202 - - 285 26 5 R e c e i p t o f P u b l i c A s s i s t a n c e E i g h t y - t h r e e per cent of the r e s i d e n t s draw some form of pension or s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e ; the l a r g e s t source of income b e i n g w e l f a r e , w h i c h i s r e c e i v e d by 41% o f t h e t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n . The second l a r g e s t group c o m p r i s i n g s l i g h t l y under 30% o f a r e a r e s i d e n t s , a r e t h e e l d e r l y who r e c e i v e government p e n s i o n s . Other t r a n s f e r programs p r o v i d i n g such a s s i s t a n c e as h o s t e l , accommodations, meal t i c k e t s , unemploy-ment i n s u r a n c e and workmen's co m p e n s a t i o n i n v o l v e a n o t h e r 12% o f t h e a r e a ' s p o p u l a t i o n . Many i n d i g e n t s supplement t h e p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e t h e y r e c e i v e w i t h some form o f payment o r s e r v i c e , p r o v i d e d t o them by p r i v a t e a g e n c i e s . M i s s i o n s , f o r example, p r o v i d e a r e a r e s i d e n t s w i t h such s e r v i c e s as f r e e f o o d o r l o d g i n g s . The d a t a p r o v i d e d i n T a b l e 2.3 s u g g e s t t h a t t h e m u n i c i p a l , p r o v i n c i a l , f e d e r a l and p r i v a t e programs o f a s s i s -t a n c e a r e t h e c h i e f economic m a i n s t a y s o f t h e r e s i d e n t s o f t h e H i s t o r i c A r e a and s k i d row i n g e n e r a l . T a b l e 2.3: Sources o f Income D i s t r i b u t i o n Forms o f Income & A s s i s t a n c e % T o t a l A r e a T o t a l H i s t - P R 1 ] C I N C T S o r i c A r e a A B C D • E F i G H I J S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e 41 2,486 920 20 4 4 70 477 83 117 109 ( w e l f a r e ) P e n s i o n 30 1, 819 - 674 14 33 50 — 349 62 — _ 86 80 Unemployment I n s . 3 182 67 1 3 5 - 35 6 - - 9 8 Workmen's Comp. 1 61 23 - 1 2 — 12 2 - — 3 3 Employment 14 849 308 7 14 22 - 162 28 — — 39 36 Unemployed ( w i t h -> 182 67 1 3 5 — 35 6 — — 9 8 no p u b l i c a s s t c e . ) H o s t e l s a n d / o r 8 485 177 4 9 13 — 93 15 — — 22 21 m e al t i c k e t s TOTAL 100 6,064 2 ,236 47 107 167 - 1,16 3 202 - - 6 0 r 4.. \J ~J 255 ± I. Income a n d E m p l o y m e n t The i n c o m e a n d e m p l o y m e n t s t a t u s o f t h e r e s i d e n t s a g a i n e m p h a s i z e s t h e u n i q u e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e d i s t r i c t . The f e w t h a t a r e e m p l o y e d h o l d some o f t h e l o w e s t p a y i n g j o b s i n t h e V a n c o u v e r economy. Some o f t h e s e men a r e w o r k e r s i n m i s s i o n s a n d l o c a l s e r v i c e i n d u s t r i e s , s u c h a s r e s t a u r a n t s w h e r e e m p l o y e e s a r e g i v e n a m e a l a s p a r t o f t h e i r p a y a n d h a v e t h e c a s h v a l u e o f m e a l s s u b t r a c t e d f r o m t h e i r w a g e s . The m e d i a n t o t a l c a s h i n c o m e o f t h e r e s i d e n t s i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y $1,200 a n n u a l l y . E i g h t y - t w o p e r c e n t h a v e a n n u a l i n c o m e s o f l e s s t h a n $1,500 a n d 86% w e r e f o u n d t o be u n e m p l o y e d . I t s h o u l d b e e m p h a s i z e d t h a t t h e f i g u r e s i n T a b l e s 2.4 a n d 2.5 w h i c h i n d i c a t e 14% e m p l o y e d a n d 1 8 % h a v i n g i n c o m e s g r e a t e r t h a n $1,500 a r e o v e r e s t i m a t e d due t o l a c k o f s e a s o n a l a d j u s t -m e n t s , s i n c e t h e d a t a w e r e o b t a i n e d d u r i n g t h e summer p e r i o d o f r e l a t i v e l y h i g h e m p l o y m e n t . T a b l e 2.4: Income D i s t r i b u t i o n I n c o m e O, "o T o t a l A r e a T o t a l H i s t -o r i c /urea -•• — • • P R E C I N C T S A 3 C P- E F G H I J U n d e r $ 1 , 5 0 0 $ 1 , 5 0 0 & o v e r 82 18 4,972 1,092 1,834 402 38 9 86 21 137 30 - 956 207 166 36 - - 234 51 217 48 TOTAL 100 6,064 2,236 47 107 167 - 1,162 202 - - 285 265 18. Table 2.5: Employment D i s t r i b u t i o n Employment % T o t a l Area T o t a l H i s t -o r i c Area P R E C- I N C T S A B C D E F G H I J Employed Unemployed 14 . 8 6 84 9 5, 215 313 1,923 7 40 15 92 23 144 -163 1,000 28 174 -- 40 245 37 228 TOTAL 100 6,064 2, 236 47 107 167 - 1,163 202 - - 285 265 * Overestimated due to lack of seasonal adjustment Length of Residence The area has remarkable r e s i d e n t i a l s t a b i l i t y and contains within i t r e l a t i v e l y few transients as can be discerned from Table 2.6. Fewer than 8% have l i v e d within the area less than a month and only o n e - f i f t h of the popula-t i o n have l i v e d there less than one year. Thirty-eight per cent of the population have resided i n the area for longer than ten years. Table 2.6: Residential S t a b i l i t y C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s -Length of Residence D i s t r i b u t i o n Length of T o t a l P R E C I U C T S Residence "6 T o t a l H i s t -i n Area Area o r i c A B C D. E F G H I J Area Under 1 mo. 8 485 179 4 9 13 - 93 16 - - 23 21 1 - 3 mos. 5 303 110 2 5 8 - 58 10 - — 14 13 4 -12 mos. 7 4 24 157 8 12 - 81 14 - — 20 19 1 - 5 y r s . 26 1,570 597 12 27 43 - 320 52 - - 7 4 6S-6|-10 y r s . 16 970 353 8 17 27 - 181 32 — — 4 6 4 2 11 y r s . p l u s 38 2 ,312 840 18 41 64 — 430 78 — — 108 101 TOTAL 1 100 6,064 2,236 47 107 167 - 1,163 202 - - 285 265 Selected Attitudes . Table 2.7 shows that only 17% of the area residents indicated general s a t i s f a c t i o n with l i f e i n the area and saw no need for improvement. The largest s i n g l e group — 40% — expressed d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the housing s i t u a t i o n and suggested s p e c i f i c aspects requiring immediate action. Among these, i n order of p r i o r i t y , were: (a) e s s e n t i a l improvements to present housing to eradicate d e t e r i o r a t i o n and reduce health code and lodging code v i o l a t i o n s ; (b) action to lower rents where "necessary," and to freeze rents at an "acceptable" l e v e l ; and (c) p r o v i s i o n of public hous-ing . From those who suggested the need for improving the housing stock, complaints included bad management, lack of cleanliness and r e p a i r , i n f e s t a t i o n s , and lack of adequate heating, plumbing and i l l u m i n a t i o n . Reduction of t r a f f i c and noise, and more adequate control of drunks were supported by 17% and 14% r e s p e c t i v e l y . Only some 5% of respondents saw a need for the p r o v i s i o n of r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and vocational t r a i n i n g centres. The l a t t e r f i g u r e , however, i s under-estimated due to the f a c t that c e r t a i n of the young employ-ables working or seeking work may have been outside the area during the r e l a t i v e l y high employment period of the summer. I t i s among thi s group, however, that the greatest need for such services e x i s t s . 20 . Table 2.7: Resident Attitudes on Selected Topics General A t t i t u d e s of Residents on Various Aspects of the Area (related to Chanoes which the Residents v:ould l i k e to see Emerge) Aspect U T o t a l T o t a l H i s t -pr i c Area P R E C I N C T S Area A B C D E F G H I J * Housing 40 2,427 897 19 43 67 - 466 82 - - 114 106 Uo Changes Deemed E s s e n t i a l 17 1, 031 377 8 18 27 - 198 34 - - 48 44 Reduction of T r a f f i c 14 849 413 7 14 24 - 163 28 - - 40 37 Control of Drunks & Youth 10 606 225 5 11 17 - 116 20 - - 29 27 Increased Employment 7 424 157 3 8 12 - 81 14 - - 20 19 P r o v i s i o n of R e h a b i l i -t a t i o n & V ocational 5 303 110 2 5 8 - 58 10 - - 14 13 T r a i n i n g Centre P r o v i s i o n of Meeting Areas (includes both 7 424 157 3 8 12 - 81 14 - •- 20 19 indoor & outdoor) TOTAL 100 6,064 2,236 4 7 107 167 - 1,163 202 T 285- 2 65 *Housing includes improvements to present housing; the lowering and/or f r e e z i n g of rents; request for p u b l i c housing; e t c . Source: Downtown East Side report, p. 29, Table 24. Sub-area D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s Water Street and the north end of C a r r a l l Street tend to have a greater proportion of transients and youth than other sub-areas. Concomitantly, Chinatown, and p a r t i c u -l a r l y Precinct J , have a higher r a t i o of family units and childre n than other subsections of the H i s t o r i c Area. Precincts A and B are r e l a t i v e l y free of residents, with only three small hotels and a rooming house. Precinct D contains no residents - r e t a i l and wholesale a c t i v i t i e s being the primary land uses. Precinct H at the southern periphery of the H i s t o r i c Area i s a warehouse and redevelopment sub-area 21. containing no r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s . Precincts E and C include some 60% of the population and h a l f of the hotels and rooming houses. They also contain the .oldest of the area's indigents and the highest rate of unemployment. 3. Residential C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s This study found a t o t a l of forty-seven r e s i d e n t i a l or mixed r e s i d e n t i a l structures within the H i s t o r i c Area and * 132 such structures within the entire skid row complex. The great majority of hotels and rooming houses are located i n structures that are over two-thirds of a century o l d . Dwelling Units The t o t a l skid row area contains 6,187 dwelling units, among which 4,826 are cubicle s t y l e sleeping rooms, 990 are housekeeping rooms ( i . e . , rooms containing a r e f r i g -13 erator, stove and s i n k ) , and 371 are self-contained u n i t s . The l a t t e r are mostly concentrated at the eastern periphery of skid row, on or near Main and Gore Streets. The H i s t o r i c Area contains 2,296 dwelling units, or 14 t h i r t y - e i g h t per cent of the t o t a l . Of these, seventy-eight per cent are s i n g l e cubicles, sixteen per cent are housekeep-ing rooms, and s i x per cent are self-contained u n i t s . Of the l a t t e r , the majority i s to be found i n Precints I and J ( i . e . , Chinatown). The l a r g e s t proportion of s i n g l e cubicle rooms * For l o c a t i o n of area housing, see map on p. 23a. are found i n the hotels and rooming houses of Precincts E and C. * Physical.Condition of Dwelling Units Within the H i s t o r i c Area sixteen of the r e s i d e n t i a l structures containing 89 8 dwelling units were found by the Ciizy Health Department to contain one or more Health Code 15 v i o l a t i o n s . Among the more common of these were v i o l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g to c l e a n l i n e s s , r e p a i r , plumbing, i n f e s t a t i o n s , i l l u m i n a t i o n , v e n t i l a t i o n , dampness, safety, water supply and heating. Further, lawyers working on an analysis of skid row problems i n the summer of 1971 with the "Vancouver Com-munity Legal Assistance Society" uncovered the f a c t that i n numerous area hotels, the heat, during the winter months, i s turned on only between 6:00 - 8:00 a.m. and during the late afternoon. This writer's own observations inside t h i r t y - e i g h t hotels and rooming houses i n the area suggest that the above findings of the Health Department are underestimated. Those code v i o l a t i o n s i d e n t i f i a b l e to the untrained eye of t h i s observer ( i . e . , general lack of cleanliness and r e p a i r , dampness, unpainted walls, d i l a p i d a t e d f u r n i t u r e , and so forth) were present i n the great majority of dwelling units v i s i t e d . 17 F a c i l i t i e s Only minimal f a c i l i t i e s are generally a v a i l a b l e i n the dwelling units of the H i s t o r i c Area. The majority of * See map on p. 2 3 b. 23. r e s i d e n t i a l structures contain only cubicle sleeping rooms. Most hotels and rooming houses have a bathtub and t o i l e t on each f l o o r . Most of these are kept locked, with the keys made availab l e to users at the hotel desk. The f a c i l i t i e s are over-crowded, unclean, often not working, i n need of general repair or complete r e s t o r a t i o n . A few r e s i d e n t i a l structures have cooking f a c i l i t i e s on one or more f l o o r s . These consist of a stove, or more often a hotplate; sometimes a r e f r i g e r a t o r which is- seldom used, for fear that residents would s t e a l each other's stored food; and a sink. As i n the case of washroom f a c i l i t i e s , they are unclean, or i n need of r e s t o r a t i o n . House-keeping rooms, t o t a l l i n g 367, comprise 16% of t o t a l dwelling units and provide more adequate f a c i l i t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y for cooking. Washrooms, however, are shared and i n s i m i l a r condi-t i o n to those found i n cubicle hotels and rooming houses. Self-contained u n i t s , as stated above, comprise 6% of t o t a l dwelling units - 138 i n the H i s t o r i c Area, and few e x i s t i n the central Precincts E and C which together contain approxi-mately 60% of a l l housing within the study area as shown i n Table 2.8. Occupancy Vacancy rates were found to approximate 15% by the 18 . Downtown East Side study. This rate, however, i s over-estimated, as the study was conducted i n the summer months when some of the employed residents are out of town, and when others f i n d i t cheaper and cleaner to sleep outside, or on doorsteps and i n hallways. In addition, two to three rooms i n 2 3 a . HISTORIC PRESERVATION AREA AND SKID ROW, VANCOUVER HISTORIC PRESERVATION AREA AND SKID ROW, VANCOUVER most of the larger hotels are used for storage and are unavail-able for r e n t . ^ A better, seasonally adjusted estimate would suggest a 5% - 10% vacancy rate. Table 2.8: Housing C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s HOUSING: RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND DWELLING UNITS (Including Mixed Residential) a T o t a l Area Tot a l H i s t -o r i c Area P R ] 2 C I N C T S A B C D E F G H I J Buildings 138 47 1 3 2 - 22 3 - - 12 Dwelling Units 6,187 2,296 (100%) 48 (2%) 10 9 (5%) 170 (7%) — 1,222 (52%) 206 (9%) - - 291 (13%) 27 (12% Sleeping Rooms 78) ) ) 16) ) «! 4,826 1,805 "(72%) 38 82 133 — 953 161 — — 227 21 Housekeeping Rooms 1,090 361 (16%) 7 18 24 - 192 33 - - 47 4 Self-Contained 371 128 (6%) 3 7 10 — 63 12 — — 17 1 No.of Vacancies 15 928 344 7 16 25 - 182 31 - - 43 4 No.of Bldgs.with Health Code V i o l a t i o n s 35 50 16 1 1 - - 10 1 - - -Dwelling Units with Health Code V i o l a t i o n s 39 898 48 9 - - 568 75 - - - 19 4. S o c i a l Problems and Services Among the four classes of residents previously i d e n t i f i e d , two s a l i e n t types emerge: f i r s t , those who l i v e i n the area primarily because they are disorganized and have a drinking problem, and secondly, those who are there p r i m a r i l y because they are poor and do not have s u f f i c i e n t income to l i v e elsewhere, or v/ho choose to l i v e there for personal reasons. Certain of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and problems.of.these men are outlined below, together with an i n d i c a t i o n of e x i s t i n g services a v a i l a b l e for the.amelioration of such problems. Drinking Though the "Downtown East Side Study" reported that only one i n s i x respondents i n the area showed signs of being "intoxicated, impaired or hung over" while interviewed and concluded that a l c o h o l i c s and heavy drinkers comprise one-20 s i x t h of the population, there i s reason to suspect these findings. Interviews were conducted at the respondent's home or on the s t r e e t during daytime. Had the interviews been at night and i n the early morning, and included respondents i n the numerous bars of the area, the proportion of "problem drinkers" would have been higher. Further, p o t e n t i a l respondents who had passed out or were "sleeping o f f a week's drunk," may have been d i s i n c l i n e d to open t h e i r doors to interviewers. According to the Alcoholism Foundation of B.C., a l c o h o l i c s ("l O r\v>o T . T V » r\ A -y A v> V o c* A vr r\ V r n A V o v\-I >-» -I- c r s - P T.tV« *i n V n u r \ v + - V * o A v equivalent per week), and heavy drinkers ( i . e . , one who drinks three to f i v e pints of whiskey or t h e i r equivalent per week) 21 comprises over one-quarter of the residents. In the H i s t o r i c Area t h i s would include approximately 600 persons, and more than 1,500 i n the t o t a l skid row complex. The Alcoholism Foundation suggests that there i s a much greater tendency to alcohol-related problems among the young population than among the e l d e r l y for three reasons: (a) young men tend not to reside i n the area unless they have a drinking problem; (b) heavy drinkers have a tendency to die prematurely and hence not reach old age; and (c) i n d i v i d u a l s who do not drink heavily and d i s l i k e the area are not forced by economic circumstances to l i v e there u n t i l they become 22 older and cannot earn enough to l i v e elsewhere. Drugs The Narcotic Addiction Foundation of B. C. estimates that there are 2,400 - 2,500 heroin addicts i n the Greater 23 . Vancouver area. The Foundation suggests a f l u c t u a t i n g figure of 1,000 - 1,500 such cases i n the entire skid row complex of the Downtown East Side. I f the above figures are accurate and the addicts are evenly dispersed throughout Skid Row,an approxi-mation of 350 -500 for the H i s t o r i c Area i s suggested. This, of course, does not include data on " s o f t " and "hallucinogenic" drugs endemic on the streets and i n the bars and shops of the area. The Handicapped and the 111 The "Downtown East Side Study" reported that only about one-third of respondents suffered from one or more of the following ailments: urinary diseases, a r t h r i t i s and 24 rheumatism, and cardiovascular diseases. In the most com-prehensive work on' skid rows, Bogue's "Skid Rows i n American 25 C i t i e s , " some 80% of respondents indicated having one or more ailments; with a r t h r i t i s and rheumatism, impaired hearing, d i s -orders of the respiratory system, ul c e r s , hernia, and heart disease being the most common. 27. Eight per cent of respondents indicated i n the Soc i a l 26 Planning Study that they have suffered i n j u r i e s within recent months, the most common types stated being broken bones, bruises, cuts and bumps. The E l d e r l y T h i r t y per cent of a l l residents i n the H i s t o r i c Area are pensioners and h a l f of these are over 70 years o l d . At these ages, u n s k i l l e d , homeless men experience a high rate of health breakdowns and can no longer support themselves. According to the Alcoholism Foundation of B. C , the incidence of alcoholism and heavy drinking among the e l d e r l y i s lower 27 than among the general population of Skid Row. Fewer than one i n f i v e i s defined as an a l c o h o l i c or heavy drinker. For the H i s t o r i c Area, t h i s would comprise less than 150 persons. This supports the study's i n i t i a l premise that the majority -some 80% - of e l d e r l y people l i v e i n the area not because of drinking habits, but rather, because t h e i r poverty forces them to l i v e there; or for reasons of "community." „. ., 2 8 Of the 246 accidental deaths occurring i n Vancouver during 1970, 113 involved residents of the Downtown East Side area and nearly one-third of those resided i n the H i s t o r i c Area. Accidental deaths include alcohol and drug associated m o r t a l i t i e s , i n addition to l i t e r a l accidents. Moreover, i n numerous cases where death was caused by a f a l l , head i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g from f i g h t s , t r a f f i c , and so f o r t h , alcohol and/or drugs were found present i n the bodies and thus assumed to be an i n d i r e c t cause of death. In summary, a high proportion of residents die 28. annually from unnatural causes i n t h e i r rooms, bars, hallways, or on the s t r e e t s . E s s e n t i a l Goods Services A m u l t i p l i c i t y of s o c i a l service support agencies and centres - public and private - are operative i n the area. FiVe missions, two branches of the Salvation Army, and two health units provide e s s e n t i a l hard goods services to the area. Four of the f i v e missions, one branch of the Salvation Army, a.nd Unit 1 of the Vancouver Health Department are located within the H i s t o r i c Area. The smaller missions - a l l but the Central C i t y Mission on Abbott Street - provide meals ( i . e . , 29 e i t h e r a sandwich or soup). The Central C i t y Mission pro-vides d o m i c i l i a r y care (100 beds),emergency care (30 beds), an 30 alcohol recovery unit (30 beds), and s t a f f doctors. The Harbour Lights Centre of the Salvation Army s p e c i a l i z e s i n the "care" and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of homeless unemployed men, and 31 p a r t i c u l a r l y the a l c o h o l i c . Some 800 - 1,000 men are given free meals d a i l y and a medical c l i n i c s t a f f e d by doctors from the Medical C h r i s t i a n Fellowship i s a v a i l a b l e . Additioxially, bed accommodation i s offered to some 95 i n d i v i d u a l s undergoing r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . Unit 1 of the Vancouver C i t y Health Department off e r s services to area residents with emphasis on g e r i a t r i c h e a l t h . 3 2  Soft Services "Soft services support centres" r e f e r to those agencies o f f e r i n g such s o c i a l aid as r e f e r r a l and r e l o c a t i o n , employment and vocational r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , l e g a l a i d , c o r r e c t i o n a l services, v i s i t a t i o n to courts and drop-in centres. St. James Church o f f e r s help to el d e r l y pensioners i n the d i s t r i c t and makes a clubroom avai l a b l e to them d a i l y , and of f e r s counselling 33 help of various kinds to the mixed population of the area. The Gastown Residents Association and the St. James' associated premises at 213 East Cordova Street provide a drop-in centre, medical counselling service twice per week, a l e g a l aid c l i n i c , and general counselling v i s - a - v i s housing problems, employment-34 r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , and so f o r t h . The "Dugout" i s a drop-in s o c i a l centre operated by men from the area, and provides counselling services for those with an alcohol problem and 35 those seeking employment. As mentioned m the previous.sub-section, both the Central C i t y Mission and the Salvation Army provide r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and c o r r e c t i o n a l services for the area residents. 5. Summary The resident population of the H i s t o r i c Area i s diverse and composed mainly of the e l d e r l y pensioner, the handicapped, the a l c o h o l i c and problem drinker, and the u n s k i l l e d worker. The area i s viewed as a refuge for single men and women whose common denominator i s endemic poverty and who l i v e there be-cause there i s no other community that can provide the basic n e c e s s i t i e s of existence at such low subsistence l e v e l s . Forty-seven structures i n the H i s t o r i c Area and 138 i n the t o t a l Skid Row area provide respectively some 2,200 and 6,200 sleeping spaces to the resident population; with a 30. vacancy rate ranging from 5% to 10% and with high r a t i o s of Health Code v i o l a t i o n s . Services for the indigents are provided by a pot pourri of public and private agencies.and i n s t i t u t i o n s which attempt i n a d i v e r s i f i e d manner to come to terms with the serious s o c i a l problems e x i s t i n g i n the area. Before i n q u i r i n g into any d i s l o c a t i v e problems r e s u l t -ing from l o c a l redevelopment on the resident population, i d e n t i f i e d above, the following chapter investigates the magnitude of that redevelopment. I t does so i n order to achieve a better understanding in t o the changes of the area -both i n terms of the community's economic function and i t s economic value. 31. CHAPTER III THE SCOPE OF REHABILITATION 1. Introduction This chapter w i l l i d e n t i f y and outline the s a l i e n t economic changes that have been and are being r e a l i z e d i n the Gastown/Chinatown area i n keeping with the second objec-t i v e of the study ( i . e . , presenting the economic changes brought about by area redevelopment s t i p u l a t e d i n the introduction. The r e s u l t s of the economic survey"1" of the H i s t o r i c Area are presented i n a manner 'which w i l l delineate the economic functions and usage value of the area. This w i l l be done by i s o l a t i n g and examining c e r t a i n economic forces and patterns e x i s t i n g at the present time and i n a previous period ( i . e . , 1965). From t h i s , conclusions regarding economic trends w i l l be presented. More s p e c i f i c a l l y t h i s chapter w i l l o u t l i n e and compare for two time periods (a) property values, (b) taxes l e v i e d on properties, (c) r e n t a l assessments, and (d) land use patterns. In addition, trends i n these variables w i l l be presented and conclusions drawn. The f i r s t three measures w i l l present the reader with a rough approximation of the changing economic values of the area. The fourth i n d i c a t o r w i l l o u t l i n e the changing economic functions of Gastown/Chinatown. The purpose i s to present the p r i n c i p a l elements of redevelopment as they have evolved since the mid-1960's. This chapter w i l l provide the reader with a means of under-standing i n some depth what refurbishment and r e s t o r a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s i n a skid row community imply i n the evolution of a l o c a l economy. The methodology employed has been influenced by the fact that the H i s t o r i c Area i s a r e l a t i v e l y small and diverse d i s t r i c t . The s i z e of the area allowed inquiry to be characterized by s p e c i f i c i t y and p r e c i s i o n as the r e s u l t s i n Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 w i l l show. The economic d i v e r s i t y of the area, as suggested by the m u l t i p l i c i t y of functions prominent within i t and presented i n Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 dictated that usage or f l o o r space data be d i s -aggregated by f l o o r s , by a c t i v i t y , and by sub-area. The sub-areas used are half-block u n i t s . As a consequence, the reader w i l l be able to assess the present economic functions and changes over time i n those functions by t o t a l area, by f l o o r , and by half-block u n i t s . 2. Assessments and Taxation Assessments and property values act as approximate indi c a t o r s of a l o c a l i t y ' s economic value. To provide the reader with an approximation of the H i s t o r i c Area's changing economic value from 196 5 to the present Table 3.1 presents the author's findings on the assessments of the area. The t o t a l assessments are disaggregated into t h e i r land and improvements component i n order to observe whether deprecia-t i o n on buildings i s an economically a t t r a c t i v e pursuit from » TABU, 3.1 ASSESSMENTS, RSjlTS AM) TAXATION - GASTOWN/CHINATOWN (in dollars) SU3 AREA Overall Assessment Land Assessment Improvement Assessment Rental. Assessment | Taxation 1965 197:-. I Incre-ment 1965 1971 Incre-ment 1965 1971 % Incre-ment 1965 1971 t Incre-ment I 1965 i97i.: rent S/S 200 E. Ponder, LL 196, 31k. 16, Lets 1 c 2; 25-37 534,280 889,1:24 52.2 j 162,480 357,174 119.B 421,800 522,350 23.8 45,720 70,110 53.4 13,825.49 23,143.58 67.4 ::/s 200 E. Ponder, LL i>6. Elk. 11, Lot! 5-2 3 392,260 752,S94 92.0 J 150,960 360,644 138.9 241,300 392,350 62.6 25,460 35,680 40.1 J 9,983.64 20,063.47 101.1 Z/3 100 E. Pender', DL Vii, Blk. 15, Lots 1 & 2, and 24-30 973,800 1,168,380 19.4 | 321,500 421,220 31.0 657,300 747,160 13.7 45,450 63,270 ... j 23,394.41 26.324.10 12.5 L"/S 100 E. Ponder, LL li6, 1.1k. 12, Lot", 1-26 1,417,600 1,599,190 12.8 1 497,000 610,600 22.9 920,600 988,690 7.4 73,430 102,010 38.9 27,903.55 34.796.82 24.7 ."/: 00 E. Ponder, OL 106, Elk. 14 Lots A, B 4 C 664,130 783,595 18.0 438,080 530,435 21.1 226,050 253,160 12.0 40,550 66,520 64.0 8,628.50 10,447.60 21.1 :;/s 00 E. Pander, LL 150, Blk. 13, Lot; U-34 745,520 918,350 I 23.Z ! 324/220 422,410 30.3 421,300 434,950 17.5 44,980 49,310 19,040.75 23.95S.13 25.8 S/S 00 w. Pender LL 541, Dlk. 17 Lots 1-3 a-.d., ; 25 92,020 102,150 ! 11.0 35,520 49,580 39.6 56,500 52,570 -7.0 850 2,310 —•— 171.8 1,584.19 2,062.70 30.2 :;/S 00 w. Pender, LL 541, Blk. 13, Lots A, B, C, H . ar.d J. 126,270 140,03.0 10.9 90,970 103,610 13.9 35,300 36,400 3.1 4,400 5,320 20.9 3,732.56 3,929.35 5.3 Continued 9 TABLE 3.1 ASSESSMENTS, RENTS AND TAXATION - GASTOKN/CHINATOWa (in Dollars) — \ S'JJ-AKEA OVERALL ASSESSMENT LAND ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT RENTAL ASSESSMENT TAXATION % Incre-1965 1971 mcnt Ihcrc-1965 1971 mcnt % Incre-1965 1971 mcnt Incrc-1965 1971 r.cnt 1965 l<!-\ ..... ": : '.0 Plktll. .:. ir... 7, : • . : « I - i : 185,020 263,520 42.4 67,600 116,570 72.4. 117,420 146,950 25.2 6,300 17,160 172.4 4,925.87 6.?:?.52 - C i -278,830 493,520 77.0 90,620 141,660 56.3 188,210 351,860 87.0 40,000, 56,000 40.0 6,973.33 13.675.76 9r.l . =:<. 7, 218,000 315,280 44.7 109,000 149,900 37.5 109,000 165,380 51.7 700 9,930 132.6 6.306.44 S.107.4J :S.r • i . i . .••.»stir.j», E/S JCiO Carrall, j 1-4. Ji-34 214,500 244,260 13.9 161,300 186,790 15.8 53,200 57,470 8.0 21.840 25.720 17.8 6,570.29 6,966.66 6.0 i 0. h. Hasti-js, • L •>'., i i i . 13, Uts 1-4 398,900 486,190 21.9 81,800 100,040 22.3 317,100 386,150 21.8 93,210 101,960 9.4 8.973. 23 12.S94.5t- 43.,.. • ' . , •<.;•/. II 385.180 541,385 40.6 135,180 191,385 41.6 350,000 250,000 40.0 170,420 200,800 17.8. 9,409.26 15,3:5.9! «'.2.° i ICi £. Coriioia, S/S 100 Powell VJ'., Ilk. ''. Lots 22-30 9S.5S0 143,070 49.7 62,600 97,220 55.3 32,950 45,850 39.2 7,850 17,200 119.1 2,967.56 4.075.66 37..1 .'. j Pr-ell, S/S lOO Alexander, s r . . J. 236,420 274,500 23,8. 45,220 63,500 54.6 191,200 211,000 7.4 26,900 58,650 68.7 5.483.25 9.344.80 33.-; : i , t:'.. a, u:« 1-6 736,240 881,895 19.8 160,640 248,395 54.6 575.600 633,600 10.1 109,360 150,526 37.6 15.745.90 26.565.74 41.? :» j '.a'.er, 208,860 258,545 16.1 72,460 112,045 40.4 136,400 146,500 10.4 26,600 44,870 118.0' 5,237.67 6,985.41 70.4 .... Continued TABLE 3.1 ASSESSMENTS, HCTTS AND TAXATION - GASTOWN/CHINATOWN (in dollars-) SVS-AP.EA OVERALL ASSESSMENT LANO ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT RENTAL ASSESSMENT TAXATION f, Incre• 1065 1971 meat . / % Incrc-1965 ' 1971 ment Incre-1965 1971 ment Incrc-196S 1971 ment Ir.c.-t-1965 1971 rr.: - »a*.-.-rp S/S 300 w. Cordova. » l k . 10. lots 1-19 460,400 605,040 31.4 173,500 259,815 49.8 286,900 345,225 20.3 53,750 83,680 S5.7 12,004.94 15.51S.17 . 29.3 . \ Vi K. C-.r*»va. K/S 300 Cacbio •J T*.; » . fiis: ir.rs , . : ; . A ot is « to 1,024, 690 1,086,280 6.0 334,590 395,180 18.1 690,100 691,100 .15 130,280 168,007 29.0 25,761.19 2S.1S5.41 9.* .:. ss:. s:k. Lots l - 10 8(3,100 922,050 6.8 209,700 276,050 31.6 653,400 646,000 -11.3 - 20.150.19 22.616.22 13.2 • ~. ::>.. 1 . Lots 7-13 487,560 932,560 91.3 142,460 251,415 76.S 345,100 681,145 97.4 8,100 84,850 947.5 12.526 J3.4c4.frl 87.3 • > Cv "jttr, K/S 200 Carrall 495,390 818,030 65J1 172,190 298,780 73.5 323,200 519,250 6p.7 34,800 55,660 59.9 12,490.75 20.629.01 ii.Z *. Corcova, W/S 200 Carrall . =lk. 2. Lots 6-15 554,070 742,780 3U.1 314,170 413,605 31.7 239,900 329,175 37.2 28,040 35,790 27:6 13,510:55 16,40r.47 21.4 :• i -0 ». Ctrdova, E/S 300 Abbott '. ~ CO liiSlir.is, r:. s. u-.s l-s, 16 s 17 1,046,370 1,244,280 17.0 525,990 637,700 21.2 520,380 606,580 16.6 64,790- 92,240 42.4 27,771.32 23.709.67 3.4 Cor.ti: t T A B L E 3 . 1 • A S S E S S M E N T S , R E N T S A N D T A X A T I O N - G A S T O W N / C H I N A T O W N (in DollarsV S ' JB -AP .EA O V E R A L L A S S E S S E S : ; ? L A N D A S S E S S M E N T I M P R O V E M E N T A S S E S S M E N T R E N T A L A S S E S S M E N T T A X A T I O N - • •—rr I n c r e -1 9 6 5 1 9 7 1 m c n t % I n c r e -1 9 6 5 1 9 7 1 m c n t % I n c r e -1 9 6 5 1 9 7 1 m c n t I n c r e -1 9 6 5 1 9 7 1 m e n t 1 9 6 5 1 9 7 1 l'Cr-' :•. 0 w . C T r i ^ \ a , E / S 3 0 0 C a b M e '- ': r l a s t i r . j s E : I . i . L o t s T X - I / 2 - i i 1 , 0 9 2 , 2 1 0 1 , 1 1 6 , 1 0 5 2 . 2 7 S 7 . 5 1 0 7 2 4 , S O S - 4 . 3 3 3 4 , 7 0 0 3 9 1 , 3 0 0 1 6 . 9 6 1 , 0 0 0 6 4 , 5 4 0 5 . 8 3 1 , 8 8 7 . 3 0 3 0 . 8 9 0 . 1 5 - 3 . 1 ; 3 i-.'V « i » : t r , c / :> 2 u 0 C u u i b i e , . ' . 7 , 3 , L o t s 1 - 8 7 4 1 , 1 5 0 9 8 6 , 2 0 0 3 3 . 1 1 9 0 , 7 5 0 3 6 2 , 5 0 0 9 0 . 0 5 5 0 , 4 0 0 6 2 3 , 7 0 0 1 3 . 3 9 6 , 1 7 0 9 8 , 1 2 0 2 . 0 1 7 , 2 4 7 . 9 4 2 5 . 3 1 1 . 6 3 4 6 . S I 1'1'J * . C ^ r J o v a . : C a r . M e , » / S 2 0 0 A b b o t t , '.'•77. E i i . . 3 , L o t s 9 - 1 6 1 , 8 7 5 , 3 5 0 3 , 5 1 5 , 4 8 5 8 7 . 5 3 4 5 , 9 9 0 5 1 4 , 2 8 5 4 8 . 6 1 , 5 2 9 , 3 6 0 3 , 0 0 1 , 2 0 0 , 9 6 . 2 9 , 8 6 0 2 1 1 , 7 7 0 . 2 0 4 7 . 8 3 8 , 6 1 5 . 6 1 8 0 . 2 1 5 . 6 1 1 0 6 . 7 '• S 1 « a : c r , 7-77, B I * . 6 , L o t s 9 - 1 6 4 6 9 , 4 0 0 6 3 9 , 2 9 5 3 6 . 2 1 7 4 , 6 0 0 3 3 7 , 5 2 0 9 3 . 3 2 9 4 , 8 0 0 3 0 1 , 7 7 5 2 . 4 4 3 , 5 6 0 4 8 , 8 0 0 0 . 5 1 2 , 0 7 4 . 2 1 . 1 6 , 6 1 3 . 6 2 3 7 . 6 • 3 ; 0 A l e x a n d e r , S/S 0 0 P o w e l l 1 / 0 , t U . 2 , L o t s 1 - 1 1 2 2 6 , 0 2 0 2 9 8 , 3 0 5 3 2 . 1 . 5 2 , 6 7 0 8 7 , 5 3 5 6 6 . 2 1 7 3 , 3 5 0 2 1 0 , 9 7 0 2 1 . 7 1 0 , 9 0 0 1 1 , 6 5 0 6 . 9 5 , 2 9 3 . 7 9 7 . 3 4 1 . 1 5 3 ? . 7 A l e A a r v i t r , N / S 1 0 0 A l e x a n d e r , M ISO, hit. 1 , L o t s 1 - 2 5 2 2 4 , 6 1 0 4 1 4 , 6 9 0 8 4 . 6 8 1 , 4 1 0 1 2 1 , 3 4 0 4 9 . 1 1 4 3 , 2 0 0 2 9 3 , 3 5 0 1 0 4 . 9 3 5 , 3 0 0 6 7 , 3 3 0 9 0 . 7 6 , 0 0 3 , 2 5 1 0 . 5 3 2 . 5 7 7 5 . 5 : ' . 7 A L S A : : 3 PER C E N T A V E R A G E S 1 7 , 5 1 8 , 7 0 0 2 3 , 5 7 7 , 6 6 8 3 4 . 5 6 , 4 8 2 , 6 8 0 8 , 9 4 3 , 7 0 8 3 7 . S 1 1 , 0 3 6 , 3 2 0 1 4 , 6 2 3 , 1 6 0 3 2 . 4 1 , 3 6 5 , 5 7 0 2 , 0 9 9 , 6 3 3 5 3 . 8 4 0 6 , 8 3 0 . 2 4 5 8 2 , 2 4 0 . 6 7 4 3 . 1 CO 37. the perspective of l o c a l property owners. Table 3.1 shows the assessed o v e r a l l valuation of the H i s t o r i c Area to have increased by over one-third since 1965. Data revealed that land and improvement values increased by approxi-mately the same rate, thus c l e a r l y i n d i c a t i n g that depreciation of structures i n recent years could not have been a rewarding a c t i v i t y for l o c a l property owners. Table 3.1 indicates that the pattern of valuation warrants several observations: (a) the closer properties are to Maple Tree Square, the higher the assessed values; (b) commercial intensive half-block units carry the highest valuation, followed by i n d u s t r i a l , with r e s i d e n t i a l l y intensive half-block units carrying the lowest valuation. There appears an abrupt drop-off i n the land values as one proceeds south from the north end s t r i p of the H i s t o r i c Area along Powell, Water and Alexander Streets. I t thus appears as i f land assessment bears some con-sistency with the d i f f e r e n t i a l land usages. At present , the warehouse a c t i v i t i e s are valuated at a l e v e l which may bring about economic pressures for conversion of t h i s land from i n d u s t r i a l and indigent-oriented, low-grade commercial uses to high grade commercial, including r e t a i l , entertainment and general o f f i c e usages. Despite the one-third valuation increase since 1965 both land and improvements i n the H i s t o r i c Area are s t i l l generally under-assessed. The implications of higher assess-ments and increased taxes f o r the H i s t o r i c Area's economy are extensive. Though the i n d u s t r i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l usages 38. have declined since 1965, at the present time both functions seem economically v i a b l e enterprises because of the r e l a t i v e -ly low assessment rate i n the area. If property assessments were s u b s t a n t i a l l y increased as seems warranted, because of the newly-arrived commercial i n s t i t u t i o n s , and i f increases i n taxes followed, the impact on both the property owners and the i n d u s t r i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l sectors would be considerable. The e f f e c t would seem to be that the owners would r a i s e t h e i r rents and consequently the i n d u s t r i a l and r e s i d e n t i a l tenants would l i k e l y be dislocated. Thus, i f assessments and taxes are r a t i o n a l i z e d , the pressure to convert H i s t o r i c Area properties to a "higher" intensive commercial use would r e s u l t i n an even greater land usage change than the area has already been experiencing since the mid-1960's. 3. Land Usage Land and f l o o r usage data are d i r e c t i n d i c a t o r s of an area's economic a c t i v i t y . Further, land usage, or f l o o r space — more than being a planning consideration — bears a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p to the employment p o t e n t i a l of an area's economy. Consequently, the following discussion i s used to h i g h l i g h t the changing economic a c t i v i t i e s of the H i s t o r i c Area. Usage data w i l l be discussed i n terms of the d i f f e r e n t types of economic functions occurring i n the H i s t o r i c Area as well as by the i n d i v i d u a l f l o o r s for which the author extracted a l l relevant data. Table 3.3, shown i n Appendices A - B>f which sets f o r t h the aggregate usage p r o f i l e for the t o t a l area shows the magnitude of change i n the community's economic func-t i o n . Although the table disaggregates usages into twenty precise categories, f o r reasons of s i m p l i c i t y , the present discussion i s l i m i t e d to seven general c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s which completely outline the area's economic functions. The seven categories used i n Table 3.2 are: r e t a i l , enter-tainment, r e s i d e n t i a l , i n d u s t r i a l (includes manufacturing and storage), general o f f i c e , transportation (parking f a c i l -t i e s ) , and unused (includes both vacant f l o o r space and vacant land). R e t a i l A c t i v i t i e s R e t a i l i n g has i n recent years become an important sector i n the area's economy. Tot a l figures shown i n Tables 3.2 and 3.3 show the r e t a i l i n g function to have almost doubled since 1965. The strength of t h i s sector i s derived p r i m a r i l y from the H i s t o r i c Area's extensive complex of newly established s p e c i a l t y shops. Table 3.3 shows that l o c a t i o n a l the rapid growth of r e t a i l i n g has taken place almost exclu-s i v e l y i n East Gastown, within a one-block radius of Maple Tree Square. The r e t a i l space t o t a l i s presently t h i r t e e n per cent of a l l f l o o r area as compared with approximately seven per cent i n 1965. Further breakdowns as portrayed i n Table 3.3 show that, while the type of r e t a i l i n g which accom-modates skid row residents ( i . e . , store which deals i n perish-able foodstuffs, medicine and general servicing) has remained 40. constant; r e t a i l i n g i n apparel, f u r n i t u r e , antiques, jewellery, a r t and other miscellaneous .goods have f a r more than doubled t h e i r share of t o t a l land use .and f l o o r space. Entertainment For the purpose of this discussion, entertainment r e -fers to such businesses as restaurants, dining rooms, cafes, nightclubs and cabarets. The rate of growth i n the enter-tainment sector has been as great as i n r e t a i l i n g — that i s an approximate doubling since 1965, as indicated i n Table 3.3. P r i o r to 1965, the entertainment outlets i n the Gastown sec-ti o n of the H i s t o r i c Area catered almost exclusively to the l o c a l residents and included such businesses as coffee shops, small restaurants, pool h a l l s and s t r i p cabarets. The growth i n the entertainment sector since then has been almost exclu-s i v e l y i n Gastown, and p a r t i c u l a r l y on both sides of. Water Street as shown i n Table 3.3. Chinatown and the southern part of Gastown have shown no appreciable increases i n enter-tainment o u t l e t s . Housing The r e s i d e n t i a l sector i s discussed i n depth i n the following chapter. For present purposes a b r i e f summary of changes i n housing f l o o r area w i l l s u f f i c e . Since 1965 there has been a small decline of approximately eleven per cent i n t o t a l f l o o r area devoted to r e s i d e n t i a l usage. At that time the housing sector occupied some f i f t e e n per cent of t o t a l f l o o r space compared with approximately t h i r t e e n per cent at the present time. The t o t a l decline thus i s r e l a t i v e l y small. I n d u s t r i a l A c t i v i t i e s A considerable number and va r i e t y of i n d u s t r i a l out-l e t s e x i s t i n the H i s t o r i c Area which contribute i n various ways to the economy of the d i s t r i c t and which occupy a large proportion of the land and f l o o r area of the community. As used i n t h i s study, the i n d u s t r i a l sector includes such businesses as small manufacturing firms and storage or warehousing. In 1965 these two functions occupied over forty-^three per cent of the land and f l o o r space i n the t o t a l area, as compared with t h i r t y per cent at the present time. In absolute figures t h i s represents a decline of over one-half m i l l i o n square feet. Most small manufacturing firms which are presently located i n Gastown are there p r i m a r i l y on the basis of hi s t o r y . They have occupied t h e i r locations for a long time and now do not f i n d i t economically f e a s i b l e to move. The increasing rates of assessments and rents, however, may force many of them to seek other locations i n the near future. Although many of the structures i n the area have ample vacant space which could accommodate these enterprises, the vacancy rate has had l i t t l e influence i n area taxes, rents and assessments as indicated i n Table 3.1, which shows rapid rates of increase i n both taxes and assessments. Warehousing a c t i v i t i e s and storage generally s t i l l form the single largest components of the area's economy, i n terms.of land usage. The great proportion of t h i s a c t i v i t y i s situated on the northern s t r i p of the H i s t o r i c Area along Water, Powell and Alexander Streets. Storage for <\2. r e t a i l , wholesale, and manufacturing, i n descending order, are the main components of the warehousing sector. As i s the case with small manufacturing firms, rent and tax increases w i l l act to r e t a i n or even accelerate the rate i n proportional decline of the warehousing sector u n t i l the area's f l o o r space vacancy rate reaches an "un-acceptable" l e v e l . General O f f i c e * General o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s r e f e r to such usages as banks, professional functions, white c o l l a r functions, associa-tions and public i n s t i t u t i o n s . There has been a growth of these a c t i v i t i e s i n the area from approximately eleven per cent of area f l o o r space i n 1965 to t h i r t e e n per cent at present. As indicated i n Table 3.3 the increase i s made up almost e n t i r e l y of the o f f i c e s used by professional people and has taken place p r i m a r i l y along the northern s t r i p of the H i s t o r i c Area. Transportation Parking f a c i l i t i e s have increased from a l e v e l where they occupied f i f t e e n per cent of the t o t a l land area i n 1965 to s l i g h t l y under twenty per cent i n 1972 as shown i n Table 3.3. As such, parking l o t s and structures are second only to the warehousing function as users of the land and f l o o r space of the H i s t o r i c Area. Almost a l l of the increase was caused by the recently complete Woodward's parking structure on the south side of the 00 block on Water Street. Another hefty increase i n th i s f a c i l i t y can be expected i n the near future, 43. as a s i m i l a r structure i s presently proposed.for the north-east corner.of C a r r a l l and Cordova Streets. Vacant.Land and Floor Space. Vacancy r a t i o s , as indicated by Table .3.3, are high but represent a considerable decline from s l i g h t l y under eighteen per cent of the area's land and f l o o r usage to just over eleven per cent at present. Economic establishments cannot af f o r d to pay rent any greater than the success of t h e i r business w i l l allow and property owners cannot pay any more for buildings and land than the rent they expect to receive. Consequently a healthy l o c a l economy should r e f l e c t i n higher rents and increased property values. These factors also measure general development pressures generated by d i f f e r e n t uses competing for scarce land and f l o o r space. Yet, while higher rents and increased property values are s a l i e n t econo-mic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the H i s t o r i c Area, as i l l u s t r a t e d by Table 3.1, no appreciable competition for land and f l o o r space exists since neither i s scarce and both are i n ample supply. 3.1 Land Usages (by Floor) Land and f l o o r usage data w i l l be discussed i n terms of.economic functions occurring at f i v e f l o o r l e v e l s i n order to present a v e r t i c a l d e lineation of the H i s t o r i c Area's economic a c t i v i t i e s . Basement Space Table 3.2 which sets f o r t h the H i s t o r i c Area's space p r o f i l e for 1965 and 1972 shows that there was a t o t a l of 4.8 m i l l i o n square feet of f l o o r space i n the area-in 1965 and 5 m i l l i o n at present. R e t a i l , entertainment and unused basement f l o o r space occupied approximately two-thirds of a l l i n d u s t r i a l space i n the area i n 1965. At present vacant space i s the larg e s t component occupying 25 per cent of t o t a l i n d u s t r i a l space, followed by i n d u s t r i a l usage, which occupies nineteen per cent of the t o t a l . F i r s t Floor Space Main f l o o r s accommodate one-quarter of the enti r e area's a c t i v i t i e s . In 1965 seventy per cent of a l l r e t a i l and over one-half of a l l the entertainment i n the H i s t o r i c Area was located on the main f l o o r . At present both functions have d i v e r s i f i e d s l i g h t l y and r e t a i l i n p a r t i c u l a r has i n -creased i t s share of the occupancy of other f l o o r s , p a r t i c u -l a r l y basements and mezzanines. I t i s of note that t o t a l main f l o o r area has increased by some 100 thousand square feet while t o t a l mezzanine space has declined by approxi-mately the same magnitude. The above being i n d i c a t i v e of area redevelopment as mezzanines were restructured and re-h a b i l i t a t e d into main f l o o r s . Mezzanines Mezzanines, as shown i n Table 3.2, have not been and are not a primary source of f l o o r space i n the area. Their primary function i n 1965 was i n d u s t r i a l which changed to r e t a i l at the present time. The percentage of t o t a l area TABLE 3.2 LAND USE PROFILE (FLOOR AREA - 1972) Basement Sub-T o t a l Main Sub-T o t a l % Mezzanine Sub-T o t a l % Second Sub-T o t a l % Upper Sub-T o t a l f Per T o t a l Cent Sub-T o t a l % R e t a i l Entertainment R e s i d e n t i a l I n d u s t r i a l ( i n c l u d e s : manufacturing and storage) T r a n s p o r t a t i o n (parking f a c i l i t i e s ) Unused (Vacant lands and f l o o r space) General O f f i c e 93,514 15.8 60,971 24.6 7,900 1.2 374,524 63.2 125,938 50.9 60,594 9.4 241,834 18.8 241,977 18.8 97,910 10.2 361,088 37.5 147,223 24.7 21,640 3.3 108,534 18.2 119,331 18.2 22,723 3.8 6,205 2.5 73,693 12.4 33,713 13.6 232,572 36.2 27,956 4.7 20,571 8.3 342,710 53.3 592,410 11.-9 247,398 5.0 642,776 12.9 30,616 2.4 189,681 14.8 581,487 45.2 1,285,595 25.3 118,344 12.3 386,036 40.1 963,378 19.3 1,600 0.3 2,654 0.4 92,210 15.5 213,396 32.6 246,059 41.3 298,166 45.5 595,626 12.0 655,187 13.2 TOTAL 670,992 13.5 1,391,986 27.9 63,798 1.3 953,609 19.1 1,902,985 38.2 4,983,370 TABLE 3.2 LAND USE PROFILE (FLOOR AREA - 1965) Basement Sub-T o t a l % Main Sub-T o t a l Mezzanine Second Sub-T o t a l % Sub-TotajL Unner Sub-T o t a l Per T o t a l cent % T o t a l % R e t a i l Entertainment R e s i d e n t i a l I n d u s t r i a l (includes manufacturing and storage) T r a n s p o r t a t i o n (parking f a c i l i t i e s ) Unused (vacant land and f l o o r space) General O f f i c e TOTAL 72,417 20.2 251,432 70.2 6,499 1.8 21,955 6.1 5,797 1.6 358,100 7.5 30,084 22.6 70,084 52.4 2,194 1.7 15,157 11.4 15,901 11.9 133,420 2.8 8,150 1.1 81,866 11.3 - - 263,545 36.3 372,260 51.3 725,821 15.1 258,344 17.7 250,720 17.2 129,618 8.9 251,758 17.3 565,728 38.9 1,456,168 30.3 54,410 7.3 350,498 47.1 84,134 11.3 255,536 34.3 744,578 15.5 185,073 21.4 144,193 16.7 22,305 2.6 118,152 13.7 393,323 45.6 863,046 1S.0 15,015 2.S 134,390 25.6 3,214 0.6 171,986 32.7 200,780 30.2 525,385 10.9 623,493 13.0 1,283,183 26.7 163,830 3.4 926,637 19.31,809,325 37.64,806,518 47. uses located i n mezzanines i n 1965 was barely over three per cent, and presently stands at s l i g h t l y over one per cent. Second Floor Space Second f l o o r s occupy approximately o n e - f i f t h of t o t a l area space and have seen some rather dramatic changes i n usage, whereby the r e s i d e n t i a l function has declined dramatically from 1965 while general o f f i c e and i n d u s t r i a l usage has increased s u b s t a n t i a l l y . The l a t t e r i s rather s u r p r i s i n g since the i n d u s t r i a l function has declined dramatically for the t o t a l area from forty-three per cent of t o t a l area space to t h i r t y per cent, and thus, i t seems that i n d u s t r i a l "holdouts" are most observable at second f l o o r l e v e l s . Upper Floors ' This space i s the t o t a l area of a l l f l o o r s above the second. The general rule on most half-block units i s that the amount of area for the i n d u s t r i a l , r e s i d e n t i a l , general o f f i c e and vacant usage i s greater on the upper f l o o r s than on the main f l o o r , or on the other f l o o r s combined. In descending order of usage f o r both 1965 and the present — r e s i d e n t i a l , i n d u s t r i a l , general o f f i c e , vacant, and parking f a c i l i t i e s form the main a c t i v i t i e s on the H i s t o r i c Area's upper f l o o r s , as i s shown i n Table 3.2. Summary on Land Usage The greatest single proportions of space users i n the H i s t o r i c Area i n 1965, i n descending order, were i n d u s t r i a l , vacant, parking and r e s i d e n t i a l . Presently i n d u s t r i a l , parki 48 . general o f f i c e and retail.usages comprise the largest a c t i v i -t i e s i n the area. Although the i n d u s t r i a l function s t i l l uses the single l a r g e s t proportion of area space, i t has declined from forty-three per cent of the t o t a l to t h i r t y per cent. When f l o o r space i s compared to the assessed value of the area, as can be done by perusing Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, considerable consistency can be seen between sets of data. With a greater appreciation of the magnitude of change i n economic a c t i v i t i e s , the study can now proceed to inquire into the e f f e c t s of skid row r e h a b i l i t a t i o n within the r e s i d e n t i a l sector on those i n d i v i d u a l s who have t r a d i t i o n a l l y inhabited that sector. This i s presented i n the following chapter. 49. CHAPTER IV REHABILITATION AND THE HOUSING SECTOR 1. Introduction The objective of t h i s chapter i s to ascertain whether area redevelopment, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the housing sector, has had and/or may have a "substantial" disruptive impact on the l o c a l population. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of l o c a l housing market behavior i s i n the nature of a case study and consequently the generalizations developed are suggestive rather than conclu-si v e . The scope of the study was determined by the objective above and by a v a i l a b i l i t y of data. Within these constraints, however, i t i s considered that s i g n i f i c a n t and o r i g i n a l material has been assembled to i l l u s t r a t e the ef f e c t s of re-development on skid row residents and the kind of analysis that can be undertaken to advance the understanding of housing market behavior i n a tenement neighbourhood, subject 4-Q 2rsst02rs.t1i.CAA 3.nci 2TGCLGVOlOpmSTit 3.CtXTvTiti.GG » A review of the e x i s t i n g housing s i t u a t i o n i n the area has been presented i n Section 3 of Chapter I I . The present chapter investigates those factors that produce r e s i d e n t i a l changes i n the H i s t o r i c Area and consequently a f f e c t the d a i l y l i f e patterns of i t s indigents. The chosen parameters are: (a) ownership, (b) phys i c a l a l t e r a t i o n to r e s i d e n t i a l structures, and (c) rents. Each i s observed i n terms of i t s changes over the period 1968-1975. As previously stated, the H i s t o r i c Area contains 47 hotels and rooming houses with 2,296 dwelling u n i t s . Resi-d e n t i a l buildings containing f i f t e e n units or fewer were not considered i n the following analysis. The nine such buildings contain only eight per cent of area dwelling units and i t i s considered that the 2,10 7 dwelling units within the remaining 38 hotels and rooming houses provide an adequate basis for in v e s t i g a t i o n . 2. Ownership On the assumption that knowledge of the changing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of ownership transfers may p a r t i a l l y explain housing market behavior and a s s i s t i n developing techniques for such an i n v e s t i g a t i o n , an attempt was made to obtain data on ownership t r a n s f e r r a l s i n the study area since 1965, and to project estimates to 1975. For the purpose of t h i s study, ownership c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are defined i n terms of property transactions over a s p e c i f i e d time period. No attempt i s made to i d e n t i f y the socio-economic backgrounds of the owners. Ownership d i s t r i b u t i o n -both i n terms of parcels and i n terms of value - i s charac-t e r i z e d by small holdings."1" Of the 38 r e s i d e n t i a l structures and 2,107 dwelling units, 34 hotels with 1,800 units are 2 owned by si n g l e , small holdings.' The pattern of ownership transfers outlined below p a r a l l e l s e x i s t i n g s i t u a t i o n s i n 3 other s i m i l a r multi-unit, slum housing neighbourhoods. Since 1965 seventeen hotels and rooming houses have undergone changes i n ownership. Together they represent 1,092 dwelling units, or fi f t y - t w o per cent of the t o t a l , i n d i c a t i n g high market a c t i v i t y . Purchase p r i c e s , on a per dwelling unit basis range from a low of $350 for the 'Cansino and Hildon Hotels on the 1-99 block West Cordova to $5,500 paid for the Pennsylvania Hotel, located within the corridor connecting Gastown to Chinatown. Since 1965 one hotel (23 units) was purchased i n 1966; tv/o (125 units) i n 1967; four (152 units) i n 1970; and four (255 units) during 1971. Three hotel s , containing 128 dwelling units, are presently on the market. Two of the r e s i d e n t i a l structures, containing 124 units or s i x per cent of the t o t a l , w i l l undergo a change of usage i n the immediate future. The Cansino Hotel v/as recently purchased by Army and Navy Stores (April 1969). A l l tenants have been removed from the premises — e f f e c t i v e September 1, 1971 — and the b u i l d i n g w i l l undergo i n t e r n a l renovations for storage purposes. The Alhambra Hotel, owned by the Town Group since November 1968, may be renovated for e i t h e r o f f i c e or night club usage. Projected ownership changes for the 1975-1975 study period as presented i n Table 4.1, show the following: the Anchor and Frazer Hotels and the Burns Building are presently on the market and contain 128 dwelling u n i t s . From interviews with owners, lessees and managers, i t appears that owners of s i x hotels with 243 units — the Grand, Terminus, Tremont, Cambie, Commercial and Drexel — are w i l l i n g to s e l l . In addition, interviews with i n d i v i d u a l s and groups having r e a l estate and r e s t o r a t i o n i n t e r e s t s i n the area revealed that f i v e a d d i t i o n a l hotels, with 186 units are deemed good prospects future r e s i d e n t i a l property t r a n s f e r s , such as the Town Group, Jack. V o l r i c h , Richard Wilcox and Gerald Thomson, stated that they are p r i m a r i l y interested i n r e s t o r a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s pursuant to purchase of b u i l d i n g s . Most such redevelopers have c e r t a i n reservations about future invest-ments i n the housing sector. Their opinion, as presented to t h i s author, i s that r e s t o r a t i o n of e x i s t i n g hotels may bring a highly unstable c l i e n t e l e to the area and thus reduce the security of t h e i r investment. Secondly, the larger r e a l estate and development i n t e r e s t s within the C i t y have shown a uniform d i s i n t e r e s t i n the r e a l estate a c t i v i t i e s and opportunities a v a i l a b l e i n the H i s t o r i c Area. The t h i r d factor a f f e c t i n g future r e a l estate a c t i v i t y i n the housing sector of the area, i s the lack of a "substantial" rate at 4 which buildings are being depreciated for tax purposes. 5 One of the working hypotheses of a number of studies on skid row tenement ownership economics assumes that the frequency with which such properties change ownership i s l a r g e l y a function of the rate at which they are depreciated for tax purposes. The hypothesis i s based on the premise that the a v a i l a b i l i t y to successive purchasers of r e s i d e n t i a l pro-perties of repeated depreciation deductions, based upon each owner's separate a c q u i s i t i o n cost, stimulates frequent turn-overs i n such properties by encouraging each owner to operate his holdings " i r r e s p o n s i b l y " while w r i t i n g them of f i n the shortest possible time and then passing them on to the next set of purchasers who repeat the process. Due to the extensive redevelopment i n c e r t a i n parts of the a r e a / the above pattern.of ownership behavior i s mini-mized, since income derived by.means of depreciating property for tax purposes i s o f f s e t by the rates of market increases i n each successive a c q u i s i t i o n . Moreover, such redevelopment creates substantial d i s p a r i t i e s between assessed value and 7 market prices and presents a further i n d i c a t i o n that depreciating r e s i d e n t i a l buildings for income purposes i s an unrewarding a c t i v i t y from the perspective of the owners of such structures. In view of the nature of the properties and the re-development a c t i v i t i e s surveyed, one may draw the general observation from the data that an e x i s t i n g pattern of rapid tax w r i t e - o f f s -- while encouraging frequent changes i n ownership i n most tenement neighbourhoods, and indeed, encouraging such changes i n the study area, both p r i o r to redevelopment (circa 1968) and immediately thereafter — w i l l not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t future ownership transactions. The missing factor i n t h i s analysis of ownership c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s the data regarding the owner's return on equity. The only study providing such information known to t h i s w riter i s Sporn's i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the economics of slum ownership i n Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where, because of the state's p o l i c y of allowing i n v e s t i g a t i o n of tax returns 9 fo r research purposes, inquiry on owners' return on c a p i t a l invested i s possible. Sporn's study revealed that the annual return on equity invested i n skid row housing ( i . e . , mult-unit for ownership transfer to be followed by comprehensive re s t o r a t i o n and refurbishment. These are: . the Anchor, Ferry, Grand Trunk, Kings and Frazer Hotels. These three groups of hotels, containing 453 dwelling u n i t s , comprise the most l i k e l y t o t a l of r e s i d e n t i a l r e a l estate transactions to' 1975. Five of these twelve buildings have had at l e a s t one ownership transfer since 1965. With the exception of the Anchor, these hotels are among the smallest r e s i d e n t i a l structures i n the area with an average of 37 dwelling u n i t s . In terms of l o c a t i o n , ten hotels with 397 units, which have recently become or are shortly to be the subject of t r a n s f e r s , are situated within a half-block radius of Maple Tree Square — the nodal point of the area, and the centre of current b e a u t i f i c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . The high l e v e l of r e a l estate a c t i v i t y within Gastown and the corridor contrasts sharply with the stable s i t u a t i o n i n Chinatown where only one hotel and one rooming house have changed ownership since 1966, and only one of those since 1968. These two buildings contain 116 u n i t s , cr twenty-six per cent of the 432 units i n Chinatown, as compared with f i f t y - t w o per cent for the whole of the H i s t o r i c Area including Chinatown. Interviews with owners indicated that no transactions are l i k e l y to occur i n Chinatown during the next four years. A number of factors suggest that future trends i n Gastown housing investments w i l l decline from the high market a c t i v i t y of past years. The major new investors i n T A B L E 4 . 1 : O W N E R S H I P C H A N G E S PRE-CINCT NO.or DWELLING UNITS OWNERSHIP CHANGES 1966 - 71 1972 - 75 PURCHASE PRICE OF BUILDINGS V.TICI: HAVE UNDERGONE OKNERSKI? T r a n s a c t i o n 1966 - 1971 PURCHASE PRICE PER UNIT (NO ACCOUNT Asses s m e n t TAKEN OF FIRST P e r B u i I d i n a A s s e s s m e n t P e r U n i t (No A c c o u n t t a k e n o f F i r s t 1. B o u l d e r Rooms 9 W. C o r d o v a E 23 O c t . 1966 S 19,000 S 800 $ 22,000 5 900 Town Group 2. C a u s i n o H o t e l 24 w. C o r d o v a E '* 9 3 A p r i 1 1969 + S115.000 $1,200 $ 88,000 $ 900 Army 6 Navy S t c r e a 3. H i l d o n H o t e l SO W. C o r d o v a E 150 7 1969 $142,000 $ 900 Army & Navy S t o r e s 4 . T r a v e l l e r s H o t e l 57 w. C o r d o v a E 45 \ $ 61,000 $1,400 D. i H. H o l d i n g 5. M a r b l e Rooms 107 w. C o r d o v a E 19 S 41,000 $1,000 B. I z e n 6. A i h a n b r a H o t e l 6 Water E 31 Nov. 1968 $130,000 $4,300 $140,000 $4,700 Town Group 7. Grand H o t e l 24 Water E 59 « $ 46,000 $ 600 K. L a c k a y 8. T e r m i n u s H o t e l 30 Water E 28 ? 1968 * $ 34,000 51,100 Con Wo * Chan Sub 9. H o t e l B u t l e r 110 Water C 80 Nov. 1970 5 38,000 $ 500 $ 71,000 S 900 M.P.W. Ko.-.g 10. C o l o n i a l H o t e l 122 Water C 90 $ 71,000 $ 300 Bak L. t Chew Y . 11. F e r r y H o t e l 58 A l e x a n d e r E 28 • $ 21,000 $ 700 Lue J a r & L e c G i n 12. E u r o p e H o t e l 43 Powe11 E 120 S e p t . 1970 $105,000 $ 900 $ 65,000 S SOO Claymore H o l d i n g 13. Grand Trunk H o t e l 55 P o w e l l E 24 • S 19,000 $ 800 M a r i a C o s a r z o 14. A n c h o r H o t e l 103 C o l u m b i a E 80 ? 1971 # $ 98,000 $1,200 15. T rcmont H o t e l 204 C a r r a l l E 30 Feb. 1971 $125,000 $4,100 . S 52,000 $1,700 W. R. Mason 16. K i n g s H o t e l 210 C a r r a l l E 30 March 1968 ' * $ 12,000 * $ 400* $ 41,000 $1,400 Lee Kim D i c k 17. F r a z c r H o t e l 227 C a r r a l l E 24 # $ 59,000 $1,SOO J . K. Chow 13. R a i n i e r H o t e l 30 9 C a r r a l l E 46 $140,000 $2,800 R a i n i e r H o l d i n g s 19. P e n n s y l v a n i a H o t e l 412 C a r r a l l F 75 O c t . 1967 $410,000 $5,500 $134,000 SI,BOO C. i S. C Y. Kong 20. West H o t e l 444 C a r r a l l F 95 March 1971 $405,000 $4,300 $169,000 $1,800 C. Busman e t a l . 21. w i u t e r s H o t e l 205 A b b o t t E 99 $ 97,000 $1,000 S. Wong 22. D o minion H o t e l 210 A b b o t t E 72 $110,000 $1,500 J . t F. E n t e r p r i s e 23. O l a n d Rooms 247 A b b o t t E 16 $ 42,000 $2,600 D.W. li C E . H a r k l e 24. H o t e l M e t r o p o l e 320 A b b o t t E 63 Aug. 1968 $328,000 $5,200 • $145,000 $2,300 M. Bauche* 25. Cambie H o t e l 160 Cajnbie A 48 • 26. Gastown Inn 314 Cambie B 50 J a n . 1971 $207,000+ $4,100+ V a l l e y H o t e l Co. . 27. C o m m e r c i a l H o t e l 340 Cambie B 50 • 23. D r e x e l R O O M S W. H a s t i n g s E 28 •} 1970 • S 50,000 $1,500 S. f> J . K l a u s n e r 29. Beacon H o t e l 9 W. H a s t i n g s E . 55 S 84,000 $1,500 • S h a f f e r H o l d i n g s 30. Burns B l o c k 18 w. H a s t i n g s F 24 • # $ 59,000 $1,000 Ray B r o s . 31. H o t e l E a s t 445 Gore J 66 O c t . 1970 $ 80,000 $1,200 F. Bor, c t . a l . 32. 5 9 - 6 5 E . P e n d e r 59-63 E. Pender I 40 $178,000 $4,400 Y i p Sang L t d . 33. 7 3 E . P e n d e r 73 E. Pender I 50 J u l y 1967 $ 48,000 $1,000 S 79,000 $1,600 Gim Lee Yuen 34. Sun Ah Rooms 100 E. Pender I 48 $ 87,000 $1,900 Lung Kong Rung 35. Tuns 7\h Rooms 101 E. F e n d e r I 36 36. Ari Chew ?co.-c 139 E . Pender I 35 $ 77,000 $2,000 Man S o c i e t y o f N o r t h Am 37. 2 2 8 E . P e n d e r 228 E. Pender J 28 $ 53,000 $1,900 E a s t Van E s t a t e s 38. H o t e l S i d n e y 258 E. Pender J 129 $193,000 $1,500 Shon Yea Bcnev. S 2107 * w i l l i n g n e s s t o s e l l «l/3 v a l u e ( i e . , t r u e i v a l u e $36,000) • change o f usage + \ v a l u e ( i e . , t r u e v a l u e $414,000) # p r e s o n t l y up f o r s a l e slum housing or tenements) i s greater than twenty-five per cent."^ Moreover, the assumption i s that t h i s figure i s on the conservative side, since Sporn's study revealed that a l l deductions claimed by the taxpayer were accepted at face value i n determining the tenement owner's net profits."1""*" A d d i t i o n a l -l y , the si z e and values of repair deductions taken on a number of returns i n the Milwaukee study suggested that some of the .items claimed were more properly c l a s s i f i a b l e as c a p i t a l 12 improvements and thus not tax deductable. Sporn's data indicates that, i n at l e a s t some skid row areas, a point may have been reached where market prices are being set with a view to future a c q u i s i t i o n for refurbishment, r e s t o r a t i o n and general redevelopment and not vice-versa. Interviews with owners of r e s i d e n t i a l buildings i n the H i s t o r i c Preservation area support the study's premise stated above that such future ownership changes w i l l be notably reduced from a reported high of 294 dwelling units i n 1970 to an average turnover of approximately 100-120 units annually, as indicated i n Table 4.1. FIGURE 4.1 • OWNERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS c c 3 O Z ° D r-M_ O. ° £ E 5 = O 300 250 200 150 100 50 1 P R O J E C T E D 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Source : Table 4.1 1972 1973 1974 1975 57 . 3. Physical A l t e r a t i o n s In the introductory chapter, the redevelopment taking place i n the area was defined as urban renewal without demolition. This, of course, re f e r s to refurbishment and r e s t o r a t i v e a c t i v i t y on the e x i s t i n g structures i n the Gas town/Chinatown area. The changes i d e n t i f i e d i n aggregate terms i n Chapter III suggested that a c t i v i t i e s on a somewhat si m i l a r scale were taking place i n the hotels and rooming houses of the area -- p a r t i c u l a r l y i n those which had recent-l y undergone a change of ownership. The following section i s a survey of such a c t i v i t y , together with an attempted i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p which exists between such a c t i v -i t i e s and ownership tr a n s f e r s . Table 4.2 indicates whether or not physical a l t e r a t i o n s have taken place i n the r e s i d e n t i a l structure of the area. Three c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s are presented i n i t . One — i n d i c a t i n g no a l t e r a t i o n s have taken place i n the b u i l d i n g . Two --s t r u c t u r a l a l t e r a t i o n s , including conversion, rewiring, re-plumbing, or replacement of f l o o r s and c e i l i n g s . Three — redecorative a l t e r a t i o n s , including such changes as painting, r e t i l i n g , panelling and general r e p a i r s . I t should be noted that only changes to the r e s i d e n t i a l segments of multi-usage structures w i l l be considered. For example: the f i r s t - f l o o r a c t i v i t i e s of buildings that may include bars, restaurants, and shops of various kinds that have or have not undergone renovation or refurbishment are excluded. 5 8 . Since 196 6 twelve hotels and rooming houses have undergone some form of physical a l t e r a t i o n . In sum, they contain 611 units, or twenty-nine per cent of the t o t a l . This l a s t f igure, however, may be misleading as ten of the twelve hotels with 557 units underv/ent only redecorative changes. Only the two r e s i d e n t i a l structures owned by the Town Group underwent s t r u c t u r a l changes. Of note i s the fact that ten of the twelve hote l s , containing 493 of the 611 u n i t s , have undergone ownership changes during the past f i v e years. Projected changes for the 1972-1975 study period indicate that twelve buildings with 714 units are expected to.undergo some form of physical a l t e r a t i o n s . Further, owners of two addit i o n a l buildings with 4 8 units are undecided on renovative plans at present. Ten of the hotels, containing 570 u n i t s , have undergone some form of a l t e r a t i o n during the preceding four years. Of the twelve hotels expected to under-go a l t e r a t i o n s , ten with 596 units have experienced at le a s t one ownership transaction as of 1966. The above implies a c o r r e l a t i o n between ownership transactions and phy s i c a l a l t e r a t i o n s to r e s i d e n t i a l sections of b u i l d i n g s . Of seventeen structures (1,092 units) which have changed ownership, twelve (611 units) have experienced some form of a l t e r a t i o n on t h e i r upper f l o o r s . Of the twelve structures (714 units) expected to renovate i n the near future, ten (59 6 units) have s i m i l a r l y experienced a change i n owner-ship as of 1966. I t perhaps c l a r i f i e s matters to examine the reverse s i t u a t i o n : only two (118 units) of the twenty-one TABLE 4.2: PHYSICAL ALTERATIONS TO BUILDINGS Hotel Address Precinct No. of Dwelling .Units 1966 -PHYSICAL ALTERATIONS 1971 TO. RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS OF 1972 - 1975 1. Boulder Rooms 9 W. Cordova E . 23 S A v N A 2 Cansino Hotel 24 w. Cordova E 93 N A N A * 3. Hildon Hotel 50 W. Cordova E 150 N A N A 4. Travellers Hotel 57 W. Cordova E 45 N A RA 5. Marble Rooms 107 W. Cordova E 19 N A N A 6. Alhambra Hotel 6 Water E 31 S A S A # 7. Grand Hotel 24 Water E 59 N A N A 8. Terminus Hotel 30 Water E 23 R A RA 9. Hotel Butler 110 Water C 30 N A N A 10. Colonial Hotel 122 Water c 90 N A N A 11. Ferry Hotel 58 Alexander E 28 N A N A 12. Europe Hotel . 43 Powell E 120 N A N A 13. Grand Trunk Hotel 55 Powell E 24 N A U 14. Anchor Hotel 103 Columbia E 80 ' R A RA 15. Tremont Hotel 204 Carrall E 30 RA RA 16. Kings Hotel 210 Carrall E 30 N A • N A 17. Frazer Hotel 227 Carrall E 24 N A N A 18. Rainier Hotel 309 Carrall E 46 R A RA 19. Pennsylvania Hotel 412 Carrall F 75 RA L\j \ R A 20. West Hotel 444 Carrall F 95 R A R A 21. Winters Hotel 205 Abbott E 99 N A S A 22. Dominion Hotel 210 Abbott E 72 R A RA }3. Oland Rooms 247 Abbott E ' 16 N A N A 24. Hotel Metropoie 320 Abbott E 63 RA R A 25. Cambie Hotel 160 Cambie A 48 N A N A . 26. Gastown Inn 314 Cambie . 8 50 RA R A 27. Commercial Hotel 340 Cambie B 50 N A N A 28. Drexel Rooms 5 w. Hastings E .28 R A N A 29. Beacon Hotel 9 W. Hastings E 55. N A N A 30. Burns Block . 18 W. Hastings F ' 24 N A U 31. Hotel East 445 Gore J 66 N A N A 32. 59-63 E.Pender 59-63 E. Pender I 40 N A N A 33. 73 E.Pender 73 E. Pender I 50 ' N A N A » 34. Sun Ah Rooms 100 E. Pender I 48 N A N A 35. Tung Ah Rooms 101 E. Pender I 36 - N A N A 36. Ah Chew Rooms 139 E. Pender I 35 N A N A # 37. 228 E.Pender 228 E. Pender J 26 N A N A 38. Hotel Sidney 258 E. Pender J 129 N A N A SA - S t r u c t u r a l A l t e r a t i o n s RA - Redecorative A l t e r a t i o n NA - No a l t e r a t i o n s U - Uncertain Usage Change - from r e s i d e n t i a to storage Future Usage Change - from r e s i d e n t i a l to o f f i c e or n i g h t c l u b . i. 60. hotels (1,015 units) maintaining ownership s t a b i l i t y ( i . e . f no transaction 1966-1971) have altered t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l component i n any manner. In the matter of physical a l t e r a t i o n s to r e s i d e n t i a l buildings, the s i t u a t i o n i n Chinatown again d i f f e r s from the experience of Gastown and the co r r i d o r . None of the eight (432 units) hotels and rooming houses of Chinatown have undergone al t e r a t i o n s of any kind, and none are expected to within the next four years. Although ownership changes i n H i s t o r i c Area are expected to s t a b i l i z e , physical a l t e r a t i o n s — at l e a s t of the redecora-t i v e v a r i e t y -- are expected to continue t h e i r present trend according to the hotel owners and lessees interviewed. FIGURE 4-2 : PHYSICAL ALTERATIONS TO DWELLING UNITS a 3 o o 6 2107 2000.H 1500 -1000 -500 N0' of Dwelling Units Which Have ^ or Will Undergo Alterations. 1966-1971 1972-1975 Source •  Table 4.2 4. Rent Data on rent changes over time should reveal (a) e x i s t -ing trends of the filtering-down process of a community, (b) trends of income of residents, and (c) other housing market c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as vacancy d i f f e r e n t i a l s . An analysis along these l i n e s assumes that an area under study contains dwelling units somewhere above the lowest economic stratum within a community, with a capacity for further decline, thus allowing inquiry into the re l a t i o n s h i p s between the housing components and such aspects of r e s i d e n t i a l change as general p r i c e changes, income changes and f i l t e r i n g . The area under study would, of course, o f f e r such p o t e n t i a l to the student interested i n studies of 30, 40, 50 or more years. This would allow him the prospect of i n v e s t i -gating downward r e s i d e n t i a l changes over a great enough period of time.to perceive the community's evolution from one socio-economic type to successively lower ones. The genesis of the present study, however, begins i n the mid and l a t e 1960's when the area could not f i l t e r down to a lower socio-economic l e v e l , and where changes i n the resident's income or changes i n general prices would not appreciably a f f e c t the l o c a l housing s i t u a t i o n i n terms of downward f i l t r a t i o n since the area had long reached the lowest such l e v e l . The following data on r e n t a l changes were obtained from interviews with hotel owners and lessees, and i s presented i n frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of contract monthly rents as of 1968 13 and projected to 1975. The behavior of rents - 1968-1975 - w i l l be grouped i n t o low, high and average categories i n Table 4.3. This c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s a consequence of survey r e s u l t s which indicated d i f f e r e n t rates of changes occurring i n rent prices v i s - a - v i s the lower and high priced dwelling units within the respective hotels. The opportunity to observe re l a t i o n s h i p s between rents and the other factors of change i n the housing sector ( i . e . , ownership transactions and physical a l t e r a t i o n s ) , seemed excellent due to the f a c t that as of 1968, twenty-two of the H i s t o r i c Area's t h i r t y - e i g h t hotels, containing 1,050 dwelling units have not increased t h e i r rents; while at the other pole, sixteen hotels con-tai n i n g 1,057 units have had increases of rents, from a low of four per cent (average rent) to a high of seventy-five per cent. Thus, the 50/50 d i s t r i b u t i o n provides ample perspective to observe the r o l e s , i f any, of other variables on the rent structure. The reader should note that rent averages were not computed by the author, but obtained from the answers of the respondents i n the survey of owners, lessees and managers of area hotels and rooming houses. Survey data indicated that rent increases for the lowest pri c e d dwelling units i n the sixteen hotels which have changed t h e i r rents have over the past four years ranged between a low of eight per cent and a high of one hundred per cent. Compara-t i v e l y , the continuum for the highest priced units has ranged between seven per cent and s i x t y per cent. L a s t l y , the reported averages i n d i c a t e a spectrum of from four per cent to seventy-five per cent. Of the twenty-two hotels (1,050 units) with no rent changes, eight (465 units, .or 44 per cent) have undergone recent ownership transactions. . Of the sixteen hotels (1,057 u n i t s ) i n d i c a t i n g rent increases, nine (627 units, or 60 per cent) have undergone recent ownership changes. In terms of physical a l t e r a t i o n s , of the 1,050 units with s t a b l i z e d rents, s i x hotels with 317 units (30 per cent of the tota l ) have undergone some form of physical a l t e r a t i o n s to t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l sections. Concomitantly, of the 1,057 units which have had increases in.rents as of 1968, 304 units (29 per cent of the tota l ) have altered or renovated t h e i r structures i n some form. Results from interviews with hotel owners — as can be observed from Table 4.3 -- indicated the following rent picture for 1972-1975: Twelve hotels with 818 dwelling units intend to increase t h e i r rents from a low (average rents) of f i v e per cent to a high of twenty-six per cent. Nineteen hotels containing 82 8 units expressed no expectation or intent to increase rents. Eight of these, with 432 uni t s , are situated i n Chinatown and have had no changes i n t h e i r rent structures since 1968. Five hotels with 337 units are, as of the survey date, undecided on the rent s i t u a t i o n i n the near future. L a s t l y , two hotels, the Cansino and Alhambra (124 u n i t s ) , w i l l undergo usage changes .-- storage i n the Cansino and an o f f i c e or nightclub i n the Alhambra. Of the twelve hotels (818 units) intending to increase rents (1972-1975), f i v e (430 units) have undergone recent T A B L B 4.3: RENT STRUCTURE 1968 - 1975 1 1 R E N T .PER CENT CHANGES IN RENTS \ i 1968 - 1969 1970 - - L 2 I J L 1972 - 1975 LOW HIGH AVERAGE i<H 1 H IT) m rH in in rH m 1 tr* i y <u j i-» r~ r~ r- r- r» Q> <D 1 0 cn cn cn cn cn o cn o ) *~* Cn Cn Cn ) rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH U • i w NO. OK sr. rt u -C rt •U s: rt { 1 j CO I rsj 1 CO i CO 1 OJ i CO 1 CO 1 c ; 1 CO DV/ELLING *> CP o Low 0> \D vo r- vo V  r» HOTEL ADDRESS 1 ° ' UNITS 0 tA •H > < Low •H > < 0 •H V — > < J 0 1 1 ^ cn cn —i cn r-l cn rH cn rH cn cn rH r-i 1 Boulder Rooms 9 W. Cordova ' E 23 20 45 32 40 65 52 40 65 52 100 _ 100 45 45 63 63 2 Cansino Hotel 2 4 W. Cordova E 93 40 60 43 45 65 52 13 3 9 3 H i l c o n Hotel 50 VJ. Cordova E 150 60 88 70 65 92 73 70 97 77 8 8 16 5 5 10 4 5 10 -1 T r a v e l l e r s H o t e l 5 7 W. Cordova E 45 40 50 45 50 60 55 60 70 65 25 20 50 20 17 4 0 23 IS 43 Marble Rooms 10 7 W. Cordova E 19 36 50 42 46 80 62 50 85 70 23 8 38 60 6 70 4 8 1 •? -t — 71 *_» Alhambra H o t e l 6 Water E 31 40 65 52 45 70 57 13 8 10 7 * Grand Hotel 24 Water E 59 40 45 43 40 45 43 40 45 43 3 Terminus Hotel 80 Water E 28 40 80 60 40 80 60 - _ _ 5 Henei B u t l e r 110 Water C 80 30 45 38 45 48 47 50 50 50 50 13 67 7 4 11 24 6 39 10 C o l o n i a l Hotel 122 Water C 90 40 45 43 45 50 48 45 50 48 13 - 13 11 - 11 12 _ 12 11 Ferry H o t e l 53 Alexander E 28 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 12 Europe Hotel 4 3 Powell E 120 38 65 . 58 35 65 50 - - _ i i Grand Trunk H o t e l 55 Powell E 24 40 60 50 40 60 50 40 60 50 - - - — - - _ _ _ 1 i Anchor Hotel 103 Columbia E 80 40 50 45 40 50 4 5 - - -1 :5 Trcmont Hotel 204 C a r r a l l E 30 40 55 48 45 60 52 50 65 58 13 8 25 9 8 18 8 12 20 1-5 Hi.ncs Hotel 210 C a r r a l l E 30 38 40 39 38 40 39 38 40 39 17 Fr a z e r Hotel 227 C a r r a l l E 24 45 52 48 56 60 58 56 60 58 25 • - 25 15 - 16 20 — 20 l i R a i n i e r Hotel 309 C a r r a l l E 46 52 70 62 52 70 62' - - -1 j Pennsylvania H o t e l 412 C a r r a l l F 75 42 48 4 6 50 65 55 55 75 62 19 10 31 35 14 56 19 13 3-; 20 V,"est Hotel 444 C a r r a l l F 95 ' 40 45 42 50 60 53 55 55 60 25 10 3S 33 8 4 4 26 11 43 21 : Winters H o t e l 20 5 Abbott E 99 j 30 65 38 45 95 65 60 110 80 50 33 100 46 15 70 75 2 3 3 j 2 22 ; Dominion Hotel 210 Abbott E 72 i 48 68 60 48 68 60 60 30 70 - 25 25 - 17 17 - 16 16 23 . ; Oiar:d Rooms 24 7 Abbott E 16 '• 40 40 40 40 40 4 0 40 . 40 40 *_ °* ' Hotel Metropole 320 Abbott E 63 ! i 65 65 65 65 65 65 - - -2 5 • Gambia Hotel 160 Cambie A 40 • • 30 40 35 35 45 40 42 55 48 15 20 40 13 23 38 14 20' 3 8 2 6 Gastown Inn 314 Cambie B 50 40 90 50 56 90 GO 56 90 60 40 - 40 - - - 20 - 20 27 : ; Commercial H o t e l 340 Cambie B 50 : 43 4 6 45 48 53 50 53 60 56 11 10 23 13 13 30 11 12 2 5 2S . Drexel Rooms 5 VJ. Hastings E 28 ': 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 23 ' . Beacon H o t e l 9 VJ. Hastings E 55 32 40 35 40 50 45 50 65 57 25 25 56 25 30 62 29 26 6 3 *5 ^ w ^  • Burns Block 18.W. Hastings F 24 30 80 55 30 80 55 30 80 55 - - - - - - - - - -3i Hotel East 445 Gore J 66 | 28 40 35 28 40 3 5 28 40 35 32 59-63 E. Pender 59-63 E. Pender I 40 30 4 2 36 30 42 36 30 42 36 - - - - - - - - _ 3 3 73 E. Pender 73 E. Pender I 50 30 42 36 30 42 3 6 30 42 36 - - - - - - - _ _ ? «n . Sun Ah Rooms 100 E. Pender I 48 23 40 32 28 . 40 32 28 40 32 - - - - - - _ _ 35 Tung Ah Rooms 101 E. Pender I • 36 27 47 35 27 47 35 27 47 35 - - - . - - - - -2C ."-.h C h R o o m s 139 E. Pender I 35 29 40 35 29 40 35 29 40 35 3 7 228 E. Pender 22 8 E. Pender J 28 40 40 40 40 40 4 0 40 40 40 3 3 H o t e l Sidney 25 8 E. Pender J 1 . 129 '27 45 32 27 45 32 . 27 4 5 3 2 - - - - - - - - _ spaces i n d i c a t e u n c e r t a i n t y on f u t u r e rent chancros, i f any.) ownership transactions and four (272 units) have had some form of physical a l t e r a t i o n s . o r renovations. Of the nineteen hotels (828 units) with no expected increases, s i x (247 units) have-changed ownership as of 1966 and three (101 units) have alte r e d t h e i r p hysical make-up i n some manner. L a s t l y , of the f i v e hotels (337 u n i t s ) , which have indicated uncertainty regarding future rent changes, four (291 units) have recently changed ownership and four (217 units) have experienced physi-c a l a l t e r a t i o n s . The above data on the behavior of rents i n the H i s t o r i c Area presents a s i t u a t i o n from which i t i s d i f f i c u l t to draw causal inferences. No d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the other stated variables ( i . e . , ownership changes and physical a l t e r a -tions) and rents can be observed. FIGURE 4.3 i R E N T A L CHANGES 2107 2000 N ° - of D w e l l i n g U n i t s W i t h R e n t I n c r e a s e s . 1968- 197 1972-1975 Source : Table 4.3 The physical condition o f f and a l t e r a t i o n to the dwelling units f a i l s to o f f e r any pl a u s i b l e explanation for 14 the differences i n rent behaviour. S i m i l a r l y , vacancy r a t i o s also f a i l to o f f e r explanations with which to i n t e r -15 pret the rent s i t u a t i o n . As a consequence, any e f f o r t towards i n f e r r i n g c a u s a l i t y i s la r g e l y speculative. . One observation i s that the key determinant of area rents i s the owners' or lessees' perceptions of what the market w i l l bear. By way of i l l u s t r a t i o n : during interviews, a number of owners and lessees - p a r t i c u l a r l y those suggesting e i t h e r future rent increases or uncertainty - indicated that the expected rent s i t u a t i o n w i l l be l a r g e l y dependent on future increases i n welfare allowances, pensions and D.V.A. payments. The implication being that any increases i n the r e l a t i v e l y s t a t i c incomes of e l d e r l y pensioners, veterans and welfare r e c i p i e n t s r e s i d i n g i n the community w i l l t r i g g e r an upward movement i n area rents. Further, increases i n operational costs, such as the upward trends i n assessments and taxation outlined i n Chapter III seem not to have had any e f f e c t , that can be i d e n t i f i e d , on r e n t a l behaviour — at l e a s t not on a t o t a l or aggregate scale. This further reinforces t h i s study's suggestion that the p r i c i n g mechanisms for area rents r e l y more on the e f f e c -t i v e demands for housing made by the l o c a l population than on the cost of tenement operations. As with ownership transactions and renovative a c t i v i t i e s the rent s i t u a t i o n i n the Chinatown section of the H i s t o r i c Area provides the exception. The data i n Table 4.3 indicates an appreciation by owners/lessees of the general long-term tenure of tenants, expressed - i n complete rent s t a b i l i t y . There i s the p o s s i b i l i t y that owner-tenant re l a t i o n s h i p s i n Chinatown are dictated by c u l t u r a l f actors, which i n turn have affected the rent s i t u a t i o n — but t h i s , of course, i s again purely speculative. 5. C l i e n t e l e A review of the present demographic s i t u a t i o n i n the H i s t o r i c Area has been presented i n Section 2 of Chapter I I . Those demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are here presented i n terms of two d i s t i n c t d i s t r i b u t i o n patterns. The f i r s t c l a s s i f i e s residents over two time periods: 1968-1971 and 1972-1975; while the second.attempts to categorize four resident "types," according to the proportion of each such type r e s i d i n g i n the respective hotels. The types chosen are: pensioners, welfare r e c i p i e n t s , working men and transient youth. The above are c l a s s i f i e d i n t o three columns i n Table 4.4 according to the proportion of each type r e s i d i n g i n the respective h o t e l s . A-placement i n the f i r s t column of Table 4.4 below indicates that a p a r t i c u l a r type of resident ( i . e. , pensioner) occupies a minimum of two-thirds of the dwelling units i n that hotel; placement i n the second column indicates a one-third to two-th i r d s occupancy; and placement i n the t h i r d column indicates * There i s , of course, further "type ,sub-breakdowns and a l t e r n a t i v e breakdowns as i l l u s t r a t e d i n Chapter I I , Section 1 ( i . e . , a l c o h o l i c s , heavy drinkers, handicapped, etc.) which, for purposes of s i m p l i f i c a t i o n , are not included i n the above typology. 6 3. HOTEL ADDRESS j _ PRECINCT . u, M Z.1 lo • CL 19G3 - 1971 1972 - 1975 j _ PRECINCT . r-i 1 c fN . , 1/3 - 2/3 1/10 - 1/3, 2/3-1 i/3 - 2/3 1/10 - .1/3 1 Boulder Rooms 9 W. Cordova E 23 P 2 Cansino Hotel 24 W. Cordova E 9 3 W WP 3 Hildon Hotel 50 W. Cordova E 150 P Ww 4 Trave l le r s Hotel 57 W. Cordova E 45 P W P W 5 Marble Rooms 107 W. Cordova E 19 VJ v; VJ w 6 Alhambra Hotel '6 Water E 31 Y 7 Grand Hotel 24 Water E 59 VJ P W P 8 Terminus Hotel 80 Water E 28 W Pw 9 Hotel But le r 110 Water C 80 W Pw w Pw 10 Co lon ia l Hotel ' 122 Water C 90 WP WP 11 Ferry Hotel 58 Alexander E 28 WP WP 12 Europe Hotel 43 Powell E 120 P w P w 13 Grand Trunk Hotel 55 Powell E 24 w w w w 14 Anchor Hotel 103 Columbia E 80 PW PW 15 Trenton t Hotel 204 C a r r a l l E 30 p Ww p Ww 16 Kings Hotel 210 C a r r a l l E 30 w w 17 Frazer Hotel 227 C a r r a l l E 24 YW wP YW wP 18 Ra in ier Hotel 309 C a r r a l l E 46 Pw Pv; 19 Pennsylvania Hotel 412 C a r r a l l F 75 20 West Hotel 44 4 C a r r a l l F 95 Pw W Pw VJ 21 Winters Hotel 20 5 Abbott E 99 V PW 22 Dominion Hotel 210 Abbott E 72 p Yw Y 23 0.1 and Rooms 24 7 Abbott E 16 w P W P 24 Hotel Metropole 320 Abbott E 63 w 25 Cambie Hotel 160 Cambie ' A 48 PW PW 26 Gastown Inn 314 Cambie 50 F W 27 Commercial Hotel 340 Cambie B 50 PWw PWw 28 Drexel Rooms 5 W. Hastings E 28 P W P W 29 Beacon Hotel 9 VJ. Hastings E 55 ' 30 Burns Block 18 W. Hastings F 24 P WW 31 Hotel East 445 Gore J 66 P Ww P Ww 32 59-63 E. Pender 59-63 E. Pender I 40 P £ 1 P w 33 73 E. Pender 73 E. Pender I 50 P w P w 34 Sun Ah Rooms 100 E. Pender I 48 i j P wW P WW 35 Tung Ah Rooms 101 E. Pender I 36 Pw W Pw w 36 Ah Chew Rooms 139 E. Pender I 35 P w P w 37 228 E. Pender 228 E. Pender J 28 P wW P WW 38 Hotel Sidney 258 E. Pender J 129 P wW P wW 2107 P - Pensioners, DVA w - Working men _ may or may not be .presently employed. W - Welfare rec ip i en t s Y - Transient Youth a smaller but s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t proportion ( i . e . , greater than one-tenth occupancy). The above c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l i n order to understand the implications of p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s — that i s , the type of indigent affected by public and/or private intervention, such as code enforcement, changes in-usage function, rent increases and renovations. Twenty-one buildings (1,047 units or f i f t y per cent of the t o t a l ) show a high l e v e l of s o c i a l and s p a t i a l s t r a t i -f i c a t i o n i n the sense that upwards from two-thirds of t h e i r c l i e n t e l e are of one prescribed type. The breakdown i s as follows: (a) Pensioners, e l d e r l y men on D.V.A. payments, and the aged generally, occupy two-thirds or more of the dwelling units i n fourteen of the area's hotels (722 u n i t s ) . (b) Working men (either presently employed or looking for work) form such majorities i n two hotels (162 u n i t s ) . (c) Welfare r e c i p i e n t s are i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n i n four hotels (132 u n i t s ) . (d) Young transients t o t a l l y occupy one h o t e l (31 u n i t s ) . The rate of self-imposed r e s i d e n t i a l segregation as portrayed by the above data c l o s e l y p a r a l l e l s e x i s t i n g 16 s i t u a t i o n s i n other skid rows. Table 4.4, based on the author's interviews with hotel owners and lessees, indicates that the c l i e n t e l e composition w i l l r e t a i n i t s s t a b i l i t y for the 1972-1975 time 70 . period. The owners and lessees of twenty-eight hotels (1,496 • units or seventy-one per cent of the tota l ) were d e f i n i t i v e i n s t a t i n g that no changes i n t h e i r c l i e n t e l e - t y p e proportions would take place. Two hotels (124 units) w i l l undergo usage changes before 1975. The remaining eight hotels (487 units) exhibited varying degress of uncertainty about t h e i r future r e s i d e n t i a l make-up and indicated that future s t a b i l i t y or change would depend on ownership, or renovation, or rent changes, i f any, i n the immediate future ( i . e . , to 1975). The above inquiry on c l i e n t e l e make-up was i n f l u e n t i a l i n l a r g e l y r e f u t i n g the i n i t i a l hypothesis of t h i s study. Though redevelopment a c t i v i t i e s i n selected parts of the study 17 area have taken place on a r e l a t i v e l y large scale, and though changes i n the economic variables used i n Chapter III suggest that assessments and land usage have undergone trans-formations during the past four years; very l i m i t e d disruption has been caused to the l o c a l residents. This s i t u a t i o n refutes not only the i n i t i a l hypothesis employed.in t h i s study, that redevelopment i n the H i s t o r i c Area has caused and w i l l continue to r e s u l t i n large-scale d i s l o c a -t i o n of the l o c a l residents, but also the s i m i l a r hypotheses of many of the i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s d i r e c t l y or other-wise involved i n the area, such as.the C i t y Planning Department and l o c a l redevelopers, as noted i n the introductory chapter .of this, i nquiry. Chapter IV was conceived upon the assumption that with-i n the o v e r a l l redevelopment a c t i v i t i e s i n the study area, a "somewhat" sequential process of change, was at work. That i s : an investor purchases a property; evicts the user ( i . e . , r e sident); renovates, restores .or refurbishes i t ; and rents i t at a higher rent l e v e l to a s i m i l a r user ( i . e . , r e s i d e n t i a l ) i f the property's usage i s unchanged by the renovative a c t i v i t y , or~ to a d i f f e r e n t type of user ( i . e . , commercial), i f the re-development changes resulted i n changes i n usage. I t was stated above that t h i s economic process i s "somewhat" sequential, for though ownership transfer forms the i n i t i a l step to redevelopment, the succeeding steps need not necessarily take place i n the order postulated above. As such, the only constant i m p l i c i t i n the hypothesis i s that area redevelopment would be i n i t i a t e d by a new type of owner-ship and would eventually r e s u l t i n a new type of c l i e n t e l e ; and that between these phenomena the indigenous population would be the subject of large-scale d i s l o c a t i o n . The pattern described has seldom been r e a l i z e d . Pur-suant to ownership transfers, few new owners c a r r i e d out t h e i r T v>f O ' n T - 4- /~\ V A V \ A T T T ) - r - n A v> T I r * 4 - v » t i / * i 4 - n v * o T w c»-v\ v \ \ - - v ..rvv. , n v \ - f - A r * l m / - » f ? +• for.redecorative changes. As a r e s u l t , since no s u b s t a n t i a l operational costs were incurred by the new owners, increases i n rents remained a function of the e f f e c t i v e demand of the indigenous population. . . .. . Two p o t e n t i a l factors i d e n t i f i e d by area redevelopers and hotel .owners may share r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the above-stated condition. Though the depreciation aspect no longer acts as a determining variable i n the H i s t o r i c Area, expectation of rapid market value increases i n properties may have acted as a deterrent to hotel renovation. Thus a holding action may have dominated the housing sector, whereby rapid ownership transfers may be minimal, as the new owners, motivated by the expectation of increased property values, hold on to a r e s i d e n t i a l property for several years, s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r annual return on equity i n the manner of the " t r a d i t i o n a l tenement landlord" and expecting t h e i r greatest income from, c a p i t a l gain upon resale, rather than from depreciating the b u i l d i n g i n the manner of the "slum landlord." A second factor -- one often c i t e d by "Town Group" representatives and other redevelopers — i s a recent reluctance to invest i n the housing sector. Some r a t i o n a l i z a -tions for t h i s were offered to t h i s w r i t e r, which provide a d d i t i o n a l confirmation of t h i s study's findings that d i s -placement of l o c a l residents w i l l continue to be minimal i n the near future. A number of redevelopers indicated t h e i r expectation that refurbished housing i n the area w i l l a t t r a c t a highly unstable c l i e n t e l e . This judgment i s l a r g e l y based on the Town Group's experience with the only two completely renovated hotels i n Gastown: the Alhambra and the Boulder Rooms. In both cases, a c l i e n t e l e with a stable r e s i d e n t i a l h i s t o r y was evicted shortly a f t e r the ownership tra n s f e r s , as the redevelopment process outlined above took form. The hotels were completely refurbished, rents were s u b s t a n t i a l l y rai s e d , and new residents, not indigenous to the area, moved i n . Their tenure, however, proved highly e r r a t i c , and the Income derived from t h e i r rents proved unsatisfactory to the new owners due to the increased operational costs caused by the new c l i e n t e l ' s r e s i d e n t i a l i n s t a b i l i t y . Through a some-what .amorphous "grapevine" other redevelopers became aware of t h i s s i t u a t i o n and hence the hesitancy to (a) i n i t i a t e e victions of indigents, (b) i n i t i a t e renovative a c t i v i t y , and (c) impose substantial rent increases. The suggestion at t h i s point i s that a new equilibrium i s at work. I t suggests that minimal renovation i n the hous-ing sector exists as the new owners carry out a "holding action," with the expectation of future c a p i t a l gain as the non-residential sector i s being "substantially redeveloped. This i s combined with the deterrent to redevelop, a r i s i n g out of the r e s i d e n t i a l I n s t a b i l i t y which i s expected to follow i f the owners of r e s i d e n t i a l properties renovated and restored t h e i r holdings i n the manner of those who own non-residential properties i n the area. 6. Summary The Gastown/Chinatown H i s t o r i c Area's housing sector includes 47 hotels/rooming houses containing over 2,200 units. T h i r t y - e i g h t of those structures, comprising 2,107 units were investigated. Vacancy rates i n them range between f i v e and ten per cent, depending on seasonal adjustment, the state of the economy, and other factors enumerated i n Chapter I I , Section 3. Generally, high r a t i o s of Health Code and Lodging By-law v i o l a t i o n s are present i n many of the buildings or i n d i v i d u a l rooms within them. High leve l s of r e a l estate transactions were indicated during 1968-1971. Fifty-two per cent of dwelling units i n the area have undergone at l e a s t one ownership change since 1968. Projections suggest a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n such transactions. Renovative a c t i v i t i e s to dwelling units have been minimal and only two very small hotels ( i . e . , 23 and 31' units r e s e p c t i v e l y ) , owned by the same group, have undergone s t r u c t u r a l renovations. Approximately twenty-five per cent of the hotels have undergone purely redecorative changes since 1968, and some twenty per cent are expected to do so through 19 75. Thus, while ownership transactions are expected to decrease sharply i n the immediate future, physical a l t e r a t i o n s are expected to continue at approximately the same rates as i n the recent past. Half the dwelling units i n the area have been subject to increased rents since 1968. Approximately f o r t y per cent of owners intend to increase rents one or more times through 1975. In the majority of cases these are the same owners who have already done so; thus i n d i c a t i n g a high degree of rent s t a b i l i t y on behalf of the other structures i n the d i s t r i c t . This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y true of the r e s i d e n t i a l units of Chinatown which exhi b i t high l e v e l s of s t a b i l i t y i n a l l observed i n d i c a t o r s . But f o r a few exceptions, the c l i e n t e l e make-up has been the s i n g u l a r l y most stable element of a l l the s t i p u l a t e d v a r i a b l e s , a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s a r e t h a t i t w i l l c o n t i n u e t o be s o . L a s t l y , t h e a b o v e d a t a i n d i c a t e s a much l o w e r d e g r e e o f d i s r u p t i o n a n d d i s l o c a t i o n o f i n d i g e n t s b y t h e s o c i o -p h y s i c a l - e c o n o m i c c h a n g e s w h i c h h a v e t a k e n p l a c e a n d a r e p r o j e c t e d t o t a k e p l a c e t h a n t h i s w r i t e r i m a g i n e d when i n i t i a t i n g t h i s s t u d y . 76. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION 1. Summary The three objectives of t h i s study were, f i r s t , to i d e n t i f y the socio-demographic a t t r i b u t e s of the H i s t o r i c Area's residents; second, to i d e n t i f y the p r i n c i p a l economic changes that occurred during a period of area redevelopment; and, t h i r d , to investigate what e f f e c t s , within that period., redevelopment i n the housing sector has had on the resident population. Four major classes of residents — (a) the elderly, i l l and h a n d i c a p p e d ( b ) non—working vrelfare r e c i p i e n t s ; (c) chronic a l c o h o l i c s and heavy drinkers; and (d) young, u n s k i l l e d working men — were found to predominate and i n -habits approximately 2,200 dwelling units i n need of major repa i r s , or complete restorations. Almost eighty per cent of these units are single rooms. Cooking f a c i l i t i e s are almost non-existent while washroom f a c i l i t i e s are over-crowded,. unclean, often not working, and i n need of major re p a i r or complete r e s t o r a t i o n . E x i s t i n g services — both public and private — are generally characterized by ineffectiveness and lack resident p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e i r programs. The vastness and r a p i d i t y of economic growth i n the H i s t o r i c Area i s best characterized by dramatic land and f l o o r usage changes from i n d u s t r i a l and low-grade commercial 77. (i.e., commercial outlets catering to local indigents) to high grade commercial (i.e., commercial outlets catering to other than local clients). The order of magnitude of land use changes is spatially differentiated. The northern strip of the Historic Area has undergone the greatest proportion-a l change in i t s economic functions, and the magnitude of the change becomes progressively less as one proceeds south-ward. Further, changes in floor usage is greatest on the main and upper floor levels, and least on the second floor and basement levels. The market values of properties in Gastown/Chinatown — as illustrated by recent property pur-chases outlined in Chapter IV and by increases of assessments and taxes as illustrated in Chapter III — have been concomi-a U V O W X £)X, WCJ> U- ^ i i O i J . ^ ^ ^ JL.I1 O-iAW OVJu WO* *J U O L v ^ v * The housing sector, however, has not been a conspicu-ous component part of the redevelopment changes outlined above. Though redevelopers have invested in the purchase of residential properties which, as outlined in Chapter IV, act as the triggering mechanisms in a sequential process of redev-elopment, the other outlined sequences (i.e., eviction, re-habilitation, rent increases, and change in clientele compo-sition) have not followed. In sum, ninety-three per cent of the dwelling units of the Historic Area are s t i l l inhabited by the same typology of clientele as in the period prior to Gastown/Chinatown rehabilitation. Two propositions were presented in the preceding chapter as sharing responsibility for the stable, residential situation in the area. The f i r s t i s that due to r a p i d l y increasing property values, the new owners are carryi n g on a "holding action," s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r present return on equity and w i l l i n g to wait f o r a "su b s t a n t i a l " c a p i t a l gain. The second proposi-t i o n i s that the new owners are increasingly apprehensive about e v i c t i n g t h e i r present c l i e n t e l e , who have a h i s t o r y of r e s i d e n t i a l s t a b i l i t y and replacing them with a new c l i e n t -ele whom the owners perceive to be r e s i d e n t i a l l y unstable. Though t h i s writer's i n q u i r i e s into area redevelopment revealed d i s l o c a t i o n to be i n s i g n i f i c a n t , i t was found that the vastness and r a p i d i t y of growth has served to accentu-ate the decay and b l i g h t of the housing sector. Inquiry into the physical and s o c i a l conditions of the area's r e s i d e n t i a l x u p c j . U J . C C J. c i u x u i ^ c u ( / i i j . c K X i i i C i o J L C w U ^ i i J * u x y i i O x i / i i c u c v c i s -s i t y f o r r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of Gastown/Chinatown housing. It i s thus suggested that an important case f o r hous-ing r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and conservation within the H i s t o r i c Pre-servation Area i s evident, since i t i s inconceivable to t h i s writer that the s t r u c t u r a l l y sound but run-down r e s i d e n t i a l structures should be permitted to deteriorate further. The supply of such housing i s e s s e n t i a l , as i t provides the main opportunity f o r i n d i v i d u a l s within the lowest income stratum of society to f i n d housing accommodation at a price they can a f f o r d . 79 . 2. Strategies for Public Intervention Any plan or program designed to ameliorate the bad housing conditions e x i s t i n g i n the Gastown/Chinatown section of Vancouver's skid row must embody two basic elements: (a) the concept of treatment — that i s , the curative aspect — and (b) the notion of prevention — that i s , the process of constraining or detering the spread of substandard hous-ing. The notion of "slum clearance" as a dominant planning technique with which to solve the m u l t i p l i c i t y of skid row housing problems sat* i t s demise i n the 1950's. At approxi-mately the same time two new approaches to the problem con-servation and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n — were gaining academic and professional currency. Before proceeding to suggest public p o l i c i e s f or the area, r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and conservation as planning techniques require b r i e f d e f i n i t i o n s : r e h a b i l i t a t i o n implies the repair, the modernization and refurbishment of b a s i c a l l y sound buildings which have been allowed to f a l l into b l i g h t and d i s -r e pair; conservation i s here defined as the maintenance and improvement of buildings i n d e c l i n i n g neighbourhoods which may not yet have been affected by b l i g h t and d i s r e p a i r , but which are vulnerable to f a l l i n g into such categories.. Conservation thus implies prevention of bad housing through such methods as stringent enforcing of l o c a l by-laws and housing codes while r e h a b i l i t a t i o n implies the usage of curative measures 80. aimed at improving the e x i s t i n g housing stock. The primary d i f f e r e n c e between these two programs on the one hand and e a r l i e r e f f o r t s aimed at correcting bad housing conditions on the other, i s that the former v i s u a l i z e the p l a u s i b i l i t y of "prevention" not considered i n previous programs of slum clearance, urban renewal and the e s t a b l i s h -ment of new public housing. Almost a l l of the housing i n the Gastown/Chinatown area i s owned by in d i v i d u a l s and enterprises who are "absentee tenement ovmers," for whom there i s l i t t l e economic incentive to r e p a i r and r e h a b i l i t a t e , and f o r whom r e h a b i l i t a t i o n w i l l r e s u l t i n increased costs through high assessments and taxes to the detriment of t h e i r net incomes. Hence, no expectation of p r i v a t e l y i n i t i a t e d and financed r e h a b i l i t a t i o n should be warranted. Concomitantly, since skid row housing constitutes the only r e s i d e n t i a l accommodation av a i l a b l e to low income, l o c a l indigents, who, as such, w i l l provide an av a i l a b l e market with a high return on equity,1 there again, i s no i n -centive to conserve or r e h a b i l i t a t e l o c a l housing. Lastly, since the r e s i d e n t i a l property owners of the H i s t o r i c Area have been reluctant f o r the two p e c u l i a r l y l o c a l reasons out-l i n e ^  above ( i . e . , t h e i r "holding action" and t h e i r perceived fear of introducing a r e s i d e n t i a l l y unstable c l i e n t e l e ) , to invest i n the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of l o c a l housing, the prospect fo r r e s i d e n t i a l improvement looks bleak. Any attempt at conservation and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n 81. . requires certain ingredients i f the programs attempting to 2 operationalize these concepts are to be successful. Among the more prominent of these ingredients are: (1) a forceful demonstration by the City of Vancouver of i t s commitment to spend public funds to improve the Gastown/Chinatown community. This assures local property owners that the neighbourhood is going to improve and that structures not in conformity with the new milieu may be subject to spot clearance. A coercive form of incentive is thus applied to assure compliance with a general policy of rehabilitation, (2) A stringent enforce-ment of the codes and by-laws which govern the maintenance of dwellings and the standards of occupancy of skid row housing i s essential. Both the Vancouver Community Legal Assistance Society and the Social Planning Department have recommended changes to Vancouver's Lodging By-law as a potential course of action to upgrade housing conditions in the City's skid row. Recommendations involve amendments to By-law sections regard-ing penalites against hotel owners and operators, licensing of managers, sanitation, f a c i l i t i e s , lighting and cancella-tion of operating permits.^ stringent codes and by-law en-forcement and upgrading assures the improvement of a l l housing to at least minimum standards. New H-T, H-2 Historic Area zoning for Gastown/Chinatown should f a c i l i t a t e the city's powers of persuasion in directing residential property owners to make whatever required changes are deemed necessary to meet the standards of the overall rehabilitation and beautification programs. 82. (3) F i n a l l y , the success of any r e s i d e n t i a l conserva-t i o n and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n programs i n the H i s t o r i c Area requires the confidence of the private sector i n the v i a b i l i t y of i t s investment and the commitment of the public sector to invest i t s s t a f f and monies whenever and wherever the private sector perceives that investment i n r e h a b i l i t a t i o n i s not i n i t s economic i n t e r e s t . In the l a s t analysis i t i s the property owner i n a r e h a b i l i t a t i o n program who must contribute his e f f o r t s and monies i n order f o r such a programme to succeed. Consequent-l y , i t i s i n e v i t a b l e that he w i l l require informational and monetary assistance. As revealed i n Chapter IV, H i s t o r i c Area r e h a b i l i t a t i o n has greatly affected the non-residential sector of the l o c a l economy, while having only the s l i g h t e s t impact on the housing sector. As a r e s u l t , the bulk of the e f f o r t and resources of the c i t y i n the area must be aimed at housing. Since r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of the H i s t o r i c Area i s a prime public objective and stated p o l i c y of the c i t y , and since r e h a b i l i -t a t i o n and conservation of the non-residential sector i s proceeding r a p i d l y — as outlined i n Chapter III — the prime e f f o r t of the municipality's assistance to the area must con-sequently be channelled to the improvement and maintenance of the neighbourhood's housing. This implies that among varying forms of assistance which may be made a v a i l a b l e to owners of r e s i d e n t i a l structures, a primary form of assistance would involve tax rebates to those owners who r e h a b i l i t a t e or conserve t h e i r b u ildings. This very strategy was recently 83. proposed by the Vancouver Community Legal Assistance Society i n a b r i e f ^ to Council's Standing Committee on Health, and Welfare which proposed that implementation of such a p o l i c y would allow h o t e l owners to bring t h e i r structures to a new code standard without increased costs to them, since the monies spent on such upgrading would be covered by subsidies through rebates. As such, the expectation i s that since no new costs are incurred by the owner, he can well a f f o r d to r e t a i n his property in. r e s i d e n t i a l usage, and at the same time act as an agent of area r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . In sum, conservation and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of H i s t o r i c Area housing may be looked at as techniques of r e t a i n i n g and improving the tenement housing stock i n one section of Van-couver's skid row. As a process of urban renewal without dem-o l i t i o n i t may be operatlonalized by l o c a l property owners acting with the assistance of the municipality or by public a u t h o r i t i e s . I t i s c l e a r that most owners of r e s i d e n t i a l structures would prefer to c o n t r o l any economic a c t i v i t y i n -volving t h e i r properties. I t may be, however, that i n c e r t a i n instances no amount of publicly, provided incentives w i l l be s u f f i c i e n t to induce a high proportion of hotel owners to r e h a b i l i t a t e t h e i r properties. In f a c t , the r a p i d l y increas-ing market values of these structures and the r e s i d u a l c a p i t a l gains accruing to owners who conduct a "holding'action" may — as suggested i n Chapter IV — act as deterrents to owner-induced r e h a b i l i t a t i o n . In such instances, i t may be necessary for the municipality to consider a c q u i s i t i o n and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n 84.. through public action i f the c i t y ' s stated goals f o r the H i s t o r i c Area are to be r e a l i z e d and the housing stock i s to be conserved and improved. .3* Implications of Public Intervention Three strategies f o r public action were suggested above. 3ach was advanced as a technique through which the objectives of conservation and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of the H i s t o r i c Area's housing could be r e a l i z e d . Yet, xvhile they are intend-ed to achieve two stated goals, they may act as factors i n the development of other undesirable by-products. Though simulating the e f f e c t s of these strategies on the Gastown/ Chinatown r e s i d e n t i a l component i s beyond the saope of t h i s study, two p l a u s i b l e , undesirable by-products which may occtir from t h e i r implementation are discussed below. The dilemma of reform i n code enforcement l i e s i n i t s p o t e n t i a l f o r reducing the housing stock i n the H i s t o r i c Area rather than maintaining or increasing i t . This dilemma occures through ignorance of the economic aspects of code en-foreement. In analyzing the s i t u a t i o n , A. H. Schaaf sugges-ted that there are three possible r e s u l t s from stringent code enforcement . Assuming that: ^1 = pre-renewal value of b u i l d i n g ; ^2 = value of b u i l d i n g i f renewal i s undertaken to meet )( minimal code requirements; ^2 = value of b u i l d i n g i f restructured and redeveloped; C = cost l n complying to minimal code, and C" = cost i n r e s t r u c t u r i n g and redeveloping b u i l d i n g ; 8 5 . the three l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t i e s are: (a) . i f V £ > C and (V£ - C') > (Vg - C») the owner would merely comply with, the minimum requirements of the code; (b) i f Vg>C» and (Vg - C") > (V£ - C ) the owner . xTould renovate and redevelop his property; and (c) i f , however, V £ < C ! and V£ < C", the tenement owner would either change the property usage to n o n -r e s i d e n t i a l or s e l l to a new owner who, faced with si m i l a r decisions, would act accordingly. In short, compliance with code enforcements implies a d d i t i o n a l costs.. Due to the low income of the resident population, those costs wcould not be passed on to the tenants. Consequently, i f the value of the property pursuant to code compliance i s not greater than that before compliance plus the cost incurred by compliance, and not greater than the V/C r a t i o of r e s t o r a t i o n and renovation, the r e s i d e n t i a l property would be removed from the market. The dilemma i s r e a l , and suggests to t h i s writer that stringent codes and enforcement may not only f a i l to ameliorate the problems of d i s l o c a t i o n and substandard housing, but could also aggravate the process of d i s l o c a t i o n where i t exists and i n i t i a t e i t where i t i s absent. The Gastown/Chinatown area may, however, provide the exception to portions of Schaff's suggestions. R e h a b i l i t a t i o n of the area's non-residential properties has — as outlined in' Chapter III — increased the market value of a l l properties i n the neighbourhood by such a rapid rate, that i t may well 86. be that no residential property owner could afford to remove his holdings from the market. The lost opportunity costs (i.e., opportunity to capitalize from capital gain upon resale) would simply be too great to allow him the luxury of abandon-ment. Thus, i t is suggested that while Schaff's postulates have relevance in skid row neighbourhoods which have not experienced the magnitude of redevelopment characteristic of the Historic Area, in Gastown/Chinatown, dislocation of the indigenous population would not be a result of stringent code enforcement since and VU, of residential properties would always be greater than C and C" respectively. A second negative implication — one which may result from a policy to retain residential usage through the grant-ing of tax: rebates to residential property owners who rehabili-tate their buildings is that i f improvements to buildings are to be subsidized at public expense, nothing may deter the owners from proceeding to restructure and renovate their properties to the point of attracting a higher income client-ele to replace the resident population unless such rebates were applicable only to minimal improvements to bring the building to code standards. In other words, since V£> V£ and since owners incurring the costs of achieving V£ and V£ would be publicly subsidized by tax rabates, the redevelopment process, which to this point has not greatly affected the housing sector, would be greatly accelerated and would l i k e l y result in massive dislocation. 67. Three strategies, or policy options,have been suggested as techniques with which to advance the notions of rehabili-tation and conservation of the Historic Area's housing supply. In sum they can be categorized as (1) the continuation of the area's beautification projects; (2) the instigation of stringent by-law and code enforcement, both in the issuance of operating permits for multi-unit residences and in the s t r i c t prosecution of owners not completely in compliance with such codes; and (3) the subsidization by the municipality of either the rehabilitation or conservation of residential properties through tax rebates, or — in those instances where subsidization proves to be an inadequate incentive to property owners ~- direct acquisition and rehabilitation. 88. NOTES: Chapter I - ' "^U. S. Congress , House , Study of Compensation and Assistance for Persc ns Affected by Real Property A c q u i s i -t i o n i n Federal and Federally Assisted Programs, Committee on Public Works, 13 6 4', p. 258'. 2 'Grobergs Robert P., Centralized Relocation:. A  Municipal Service, National Association of Housing and Redevelopment O f f i c i a l s , Washington, D.C, 1969 , pp. 1-2. 3 See Income and Age d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n Tables 2. 2 a n c 3 2.4in Chapter I I . , pp. 15 - 16. . 4See Table 2.4 i n Ibid. . 5 Reynolds, Harry, W., J r . , "Population Displacement i n Urban Renewal," American Journal of Economics and  Sociology, XXII (January 1963), pp. 113-128. 6^  See map on p. Za. 7 Bogue, Donald, J., Skid Row m American C i t i e s , University of Chicago. Press, 19&3, p. 1. 8 I b i d . 9 See Chapter I I , below, for a more de t a i l e d delinea-t i o n of th i s a c t i v i t y . 1 0Tenants Relocation Bureau, City of Chicago, The Homeless Man on Skid Row, 1961, p. 15, and Bogue, o p . c i t . 11 Ci t y of Vancouver Planning Department, (CVPD), General Report - Gastown/Chinatown, June 12, 19 70, p . l 12 CVPD, Restoration Report: A Case for Renewed L i f e  i n the Old C i t y , 1969, p. 4. 13 T, Ib i a . 14 Parker, A.W. (Planner, CVPD, r e t i r e d ) , L. Killam, President, "Town Group" (interviews ) , June, 1971. 89. 1 c Aylward, G., (Manager) of the Real Estate Department for Woodward Stores Ltd., and Lesser., David (representative) of'"Hastings Street Merchants," p e t i t i o n from 44 merchants located mostly i n the "corridor" section of the H i s t o r i c Area, July, 17, 19 70. ^^Archaeological and H i s t o r i c Sites Protection Act, Chapter 15, Pri n t e r to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty i n the r i g h t of the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1960, c 2 ' s . 1. "^Parker, o p . c i t . 18 T V . , Ibid. "^9See CVPD, Restoration Report, op. c i t . , and CVPD, General Report - Gastown, Chinatown, bp.cit. 2 0 CVPD, Report on Skid Road, September 1969, pp. 1-3; Lloyd, A., School of So c i a l Work, l e t t e r to A.W. Parker, October 1969, pp. 1-3; Aylward, et a l , op . c i t . ; CVPD, Skid Road Terms of Reference, dr a f t copy, August 1970; Baker, Rev., Glen, W., Secretary, The Downtown-Eastside Clergy  Association, b r i e f on area redevelopment, May 19 71. 21 CVPD, Report on Skid Road, Ibid., p. 2 22 Cross, M.M., and Parker, A.W. , Planners (interviews) (CVPD); Killam, L., Thomson, G., et a l , (Gastown entrepreneurs), June, 19 71. 23 CVPD, Report on Skid Road, op. c i t . , p.2 24 . See Chapters II and IV, and Bibliography. 2 5 See for example Bogue, o p . c i t . , and the Ci t y of Chicago study, o p . c i t . \ 90. Chapter II -"'"Absolute numbers on demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are extracted from the author's interviews with owners, lessees and/or managers of area hotels and rooming houses. Most of the q u a l i t a t i v e data ( i . e . , proportional breakdowns) were extracted from sub-area 1 of the Downtown East Side study of the City Department of Soc i a l Planning and Community Development, May, 19 71. Sub-area 1 approximates the author's study area. I t should be noted that the absolute numbers i n the "Downtown East Side" study, erived from t h e i r sample, obtained i n the summer of 1970, are erroneous To i l l u s t r a t e : the East Side study underestimates t o t a l skid row population by fourteen per cent, and under-estimates t o t a l housing units by eleven per cent. However, the East Side study did not include Chinatown with i t s 550 residents and 561 r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s . Thus, t h e i r aggregate data underestimates population and housing units by approxi-mately twenty-three per cent. Also see Tables 2 . 2 , 2 . 3 . - 2 . 4 and 2 . 5 below and Table 4 . 4 - i n Chapter IV, for d i s t r i b u t i o n s on resident typology. 2 • _ . See Table 4„3 i n i b i d . 3 . For a general impression of the magnitude and pros-pective c l i e n t e l e of such housing see any recent housing l i s t prepared by the "UBC Student Services O f f i c e . " 4 Boyd, W.C, (Director) Vancouver Welfare and Rehabil-i t a t i o n Department, (interview), August, 1971. 5 I b i d . 6 I b i d . 7 Higgs, Cannon Stanley, E., (Executive D i r e c t o r ) , Central City Mission (interview), July, 1971. 8 L e s l i e , Major William, (Administrator), Harbour Light Centre (interview), July, 1971. 9 Ibid.; Higgs, o p . c i t . ; Boque, op . c i t . ; Chicago Study, o p . c i t . ; on sub-section 91. The bulk of the information which follows i s extracted from two major sources. My own i n q u i r i e s into quantitative . data and extractions of q u a l i t a t i v e data ( i . e . , percentages) from the "Downtown East Side" report of May, 1971. "^Department of Soc i a l Planning & Community Develop-ment, "Downtown East Side," May 1971: p.. 29, Table 24. 12 For an economic d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , see Chapter I I I . 1 3See Table 2.8. 14_, . , Ibid. 15 Downtown East Side Report, o p . c i t . , map on p. 9. "^Vancouver Community Legal Assistance Society, Skid  Road Housing Conditions, p.. 5. 17 Based on author's spot checks and random interviews with- residents. 18 Downtown East Side Report, o p . c i t . , p. 3. 19 Interviews with owners, lessees, and/or managers of area's hotels and rooming houses. 20 Downtown East Side Report, o p . c i t . , p. 21, Table 14. 21 McRae, E.D., (Executive D i r e c t o r ) , Alcoholism Foundation of B r i t i s h Columbia, July, 1971. 2 2 T , . , Ibid. 23 Hoskm, H.F., (Executive D i r e c t o r ) , Narcotic Addiction Foundation of B r i t i s h Columbia, July, 1971. 24 Downtown East Side Report, o p . c i t . , p. 19, Table 12. 25 Bogue, o p . c i t . , Chapter I. 2 & Downtown East Side Report, o p . c i t . , p. 18, Table 11. 27 McRae, op . c i t . 28 . See Coroner's O f f i c e Cases Report, 1970, for a complete d i s t r i b u t i o n . 29 . Higgs & L e s l i e , op.cit.. Higgs, Ibid. 31 L e s l i e , Ibid. 32 Bonham, Dr. G. H. (City Medical Health O f f i c e r ) , Vancouver City Health Department, July, 1971. 33 Gutteridge, M. C. (Parish-worker), St. James' Anglican Church, July, 1971. 34T. , , Ibid. 35 T,., Ibid. Chapter III -The sources for land use data were the "Assessment R o l l s " i n the Assessment D i v i s i o n of the Finance Department of the Ci t y of Vancouver. Discrepancies, whenever found, i n the Assessment Rolls were checked with Mr. John Spearing, Business Tax Valuator with the Assessment D i v i s i o n . Whenever Mr. Spearing's generally excellent memory proved inadequate, f i e l d checks were made by the author with l o c a l property owners and merchants. The sources of r e n t a l assessments, land assessment, improvement assessments and o v e r a l l assessments v/ere the same as above. The sources for business taxes were the "Business Tax R o l l " i n the Assessment D i v i s i o n . Chanter IV 1See Table k.l. 2 I b i d . 9 3 . ^Grebler, Leo. Housing Market Behavior i n a D e c l i n i n g Area, Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , New York, 1952, pp. 95-105". Sporn, A r t h u r , D., " E m p i r i c a l S t u d i e s i n the Economics of slum Ownership," Land Economics. (November, I 9 6 0 ) , pp. 333-338. L See sub-sections on t a x a t i o n and assessments i n Chapter I I I . iSporn, op. c i t . , p. 333 and G r e b l e r , Leo. Experience i n Urban ..Real E s t a t e Investment, Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press," New- York, pp. I8.3-I8&. See Chapter I I I . ?An e x c e l l e n t example of sixch d i s p a r i t i e s i s the Terminus H o t e l assessed i n 1971 at $34,000 w i t h a market value of $145,000. ^Sporn, op. c i t . t p. 3 3 8 . ^Wisconsin S t a t u t e s , S e c t i o n 71.11 (44) (c) (1959) lOsporn, op. c i t . , p. 338. i : L I b i d . 1 2 I b i d . 1 3 S e e Table 4,3. 14 r, ' Downtown East Side Report, op. c i t . , p.- 8. ^ s e e Chapter I I . ^Bogue, o p . c i t . , Chapter I . 1?See Chapter I I I . Chapter V Sporn, A. D» " E m p i r i c a l Studies i n the Economics of Slum Ownership", Land Economics, (November, i 9 6 0 ) p. 3 3 6 . 2 S l a y t o n , W. L. "Conservation, R e h a b i l i t a t i o n " , J o u r n a l of Housing, V o l . 2 0 , No. 5. ( J u l y 1 9 6 3 ) . . '9k. Vancouver Community Le g a l A s s i s t a n c e S o c i e t y . Skid. Road Housing' C o n d i t i o n s . •• B r i e f to the " C o u n c i l of the C i t y of Vancouver", (September 19?1). Department of S o c i a l Planning/Community Development,- S k i d Road Report. D r a f t r e p o r t to the "Standing Committee ~ra Health and Welfare of the C o u n c i l of the C i t y of. Vancouver", (November 1971) pp. k - 6 and 10-12. ^ I b i d . 5 I b i d . ^Schaaf, A. H, The Economic Aspects of Urban Renewal. Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y o f " C a l i f o r n i a Press, i 9 6 0 . 95. BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Abrams, Charles. The City Is the Frontier. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Bogue, D. J. Skid Row in American Cities. Community and . Family Study Centre: University of Chicago Press, 1963. Friedman, L. M. • Government and Slum Housing. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1968. Grebler, Leo. Experience in Urban Real Estate Investment. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955. Housing Market Behavior in a Declining Area^ New York; Columbia University Press, 1952. Groberg, R. P. Centralized Relocation: A Municipal Service. Washington, D.C: National Association of Housing and Redevelopment O f f i c i a l s , 1969. Hunter, D. R. The Slums: Challenge and Response. New York: The Free Press of GlenGoe^jJfBk~T Nash, W. W. Residential Rehabilitation:.Private Profits and Public Purposes. New York:"McGraw-Hill, 1959.. Niebank, P.L. Relocation in Urban Planning: From Obstacle to Opportunity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968. The Elderly in Older Urban Areas: Problems of Adaptation and the Effects of Relocation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 19t>5. Ontario. Housing Code Programs: A Summary of Experience of Selected American Communities. Department of Municipal Affairs - Community Planning Branch: Toronto, 1961. Schaaf, A. H. The Economic Aspects of Urban Renewal. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1960. Schorr, A. L. Slums and Social Insecurity. Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 19"53» 96. Sternlieb, George. The Tenement Landlord. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Urban Studies Center: Rutgers University Press, 1966. • ; . PERIODICALS Reynolds, H. W. Jr. "Population Displacement in Urban Renewal," American Journal of Economics and Socio- . logy, Vol. XXII (January7~19~63T. Slayton, W. L. "Conservation, Rehabilitation," Journal of Housing, Vol. 20, No. 5, (July, 1963) Sporn, A. D. "Empirical Studies in the Economics of Slum Ownership", Land Economics, (November i 9 6 0 ) PUBLICATIONS. REPORTS, BRIEFS AND MEMORANDA OF GOVERNMENTS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS: PUBLISHED AND UNPUBLISHED Aylward, G. (Manager of the Real Estate Department of Woodxfard Stores Ltd.) and Lesser, David. (Represen-tative of "Hastings Street Merchants")* Petition to the Council of the City of Vancouver, (July, 1970) Baker, Reverend G. W. (Secretary, "The Downtown Clergy Association") Brief to the Council of the City of Vancouver, Skid Row Redevelopment. (May 1 9 7 1 ) . B r i t i s h Columbia. Archeological and Historic sites Protection Act, c.2, s . l . ( I 9 6 0 ) Assessment Equalization Act. Statute No. 87. ( i 9 6 " 6 7 r ~ " ™ City of Vancouver Planning Department. General Report -Ga s t o wn/Ch i na t own. (June, 1970) Restoration Report: A Case for Renewed Life in the Old City. (1971) Restoration Report: A Case for Renewed Life in the Old City. (1969) . Report on Skid Road.. (September 1 9 6 9 ) . Skid Road Terms of Reference.. Draft Report, (August 1 9 ? 0 ) . . Dovmtown East Side. (June 1965) 97. C i t y of Vancouver Department of S o c i a l Plamiing/Community Development. Downtown Bast Side. (May 1971) C i t y of Vancouver, O f f i c e of the Coroner. Cases Report: 1970. (1970) ! ' L l o y d , A. (School of S o c i a l Work, U.B.C.). O f f i c i a l Memorandumf (October 1969) . Tenants R e l o c a t i o n Bureau, C i t y of Chicago. The Homeless  Man on Sk i d Row, ( 1 9 6 l ) . U. S. Congress, House, Study of Compensation and A s s i s t a n c e f o r Persons A f f e c t e d by Real Property A c q u i s i t i o n s i n Fe d e r a l and F e d e r a l l y A s s i s t e d Programs. Committee oh P u b l i c ~ W o T k T T T i ^ z ^ ^ Wisconsin, State o f . "Wisconsin S t a t u t e s " , S e c t i o n ? 1 . 1 1(kk)(c) (1959) . 98. APPENDICES APPENDIX PAGE A Table 3 0 Land Usage - Functional Categories by Area, 1965. . o . . . . . . 99 B Table 3.3 Land Usage - Functional Categories by Area, 1972. . . . . . . . . . 102 C Interview schedule - Residential Property Owners. 105. D Interview schedule -* Redevelopment "Interests" 110 E L i s t of Gastown/Chinatown "Key Redevelopment "Interests". * . . 113 F Coding Schedule f o r Land Usage Categories Table 3«3« • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 114 APPENDIX A o oi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 ( I I I 1 t i i l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 4 1 l * * o o o Ol c fl 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 - I 1 1 I I I I i 1 vo r-i c o o o o O -3 O) f» a o o o O o o o o o o 'Jl o O CO lO (1 O- lO o o O O »A - -r -Jl r-i f -t o CO CO CO V0 ' I t '1 * - 1 1 1 - » | « . 1 1 1 l t - - 1 1 1 Ol oi o- >n r- to v O o- o l oi O) oi r-rH *-< ( 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1  1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 l t 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - i t o o o n o o G O Ol try VO I t ' l l o ( I I IT. CO O vo VO CO 1 1 ' I 1 1 ri 1 1 1 1 1 l i l Ol r-l o OJ o o o in o r-I I 1 I 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 t - i l l 1*1 Ol r-o o r-i <H vr O o »H 11(11 t 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 t - 1 1 1 t I l i i l l Ol o> o o o a m o o o o o O (O VO o o o a O M CO r-i r- VO o • - o o - - 1 * 1 I ( 1 - ... i 1 1 i l l - t 1 1 1 l l 1 1 1 1 1 - - I i i t i o i r- oj r-t T r-i Ol O l CO Ol C o o o o o o o o o a o o OJ m o 'T i ( I 1 1 * - i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1. t - 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i l t t rA "* o i rH o* o o o OJ o o o o o 1.1 o VO o o o o O Ci LO o o o» o o o C l o oi o o in o co r-l Ol m o C l L O O o o i O CO U l o u r-i I - I » I t 1 - 1 1 - 1 I - I ^ - I 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 1 - i i l i r-i *H r-l Ol 1.1 <o Ol H C 1 o* r- co r-o o* Ol o l c in o O C o o o r- m o o in LA O O LO m -7 O Ol oi un I r i - - 1 I 1 1 1 1 l t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - i i 1 1 1 1 i i t i r-i cn "T L I '"^  Ol O O o o <H O O o o i in o o o o o o o o l O O o o a o -j» o r- r- o " ? rH OJ C l vo o OJ 1 <7i 1 1 - I. 1 I 1 r t i l 1 * 1 - * ( t 1 - 1 t t i 1 - i i n ui to vo m r- '1" •V CO O l ^ J* ' O) r-i « n o n m m in o o o o '7 o o o o in H CD cy o V3 o CO Ol o o o ^ o o —1 VO C l LTI oi o O o o i in o •"• I - - i i i - - l i - i - i 1 1 - 1 1 i 1 1 - - 1 1 1 | tr r-i r-i OJ r- >~i -J" ^ Ol VO O i rH K-l o Ot O o K o o in Ot r-» 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i t - t t ( l l I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 i i i r- VJ O VP O o o -r a o o o o o O CT C l C C l CO LI O CO C O 04 ( <-0 CT fH ( m m v o <n oi (1 ' 1 ' ' r-1 ' r» CT oi r-» ,H ' oi ' 1 1 1 ' Ol 1 ' 1 1 1 1 * 1 1 l l r-i r-t vo o m Ol O o a m r; oi m Ul o Ol m r-< T7 Ol CO 0 K l 1 I I ! I - i 1 l I - l 1 1 » " 1 1 1 l 1 1 I I 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l VJ. iH r-t r-i -t < •-i CTI •j» 1 1 1 1 1 I I ( 1 l t t l 1 1 1 I I I l t 1 I I l 1 l t 1 I I i 1 1 1 t 1 l l i j C i o lA LO .~3 o r- o vO o r- o j >r> in o O- Ol oi O O o i o» o» L,I ( Ol CT r~i rs CO O --i r-i Lil in ot OJ 1 1 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 l l r-l oj oi o o o o o o ai l/l r-l oi I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 f i r- r- r» ( ( ( j r-i O) 1 t 1 l i o o o OJ in o o t l o o o (V CJ - J c r- o v / O O •.- —i CO o." m o o l O O - 1 1 1 i 1 1 l i 1 - 1 1 1 - 1 t I 1 l I 1 1 1 t 1 1 i CO f-J ~t Ol •J w i J U <> cr N a Cl G il u J r! (1 -) ^ C' C! N O di o c i: M Q o t : (i r i r; M u ;• -.i -1 "J n. •ii n. •v c; O "1 J • j n ;i t: ri, i : o. *'" ;\: : ; .•> :.» oi S\'SS. a: *•< : J m .r. :; :•: r.j ;; :; M :: ::: Ol ',3 M i> - o. 1.1 ;> f . :,| .' ij V J " •n tt •V- 11 ' " Ui o* i . | i : u» - 1 ~ i'J| o l Ol - <n * I O (.1 - 1 m t * j - - • i ca -<•) •H .4 O • -> ». .-i o I- -1 rt r , ,;. Ol • i •j . . w x <n V C' . I J . l \ .:i . i —1 I'l J . ' . - ' L i l ! ? . ' . ! - Si J.I . i | . 1 y .«. i J' l • i _ . 1 u 1 U U . o ^ o a • o r- « f> r~\ VN, /A i). o o O O O ON V A O V A O O O V N O o » A CM CO* ( A O / H rH <H Oi <V| .•: '.' s: >\ A >: >: <>i; •> O o o n o o o (VJ O -1- -J-f I r j ' o no p j ^ .-} : o »n (Nt o o O » A O N O o o o o o o! (.1 a o o o • A O O O O -Zf CO vO (NI CM --3 f A fAvO *o o CO f A O- CM XA O f A co co CM -3" vA O ON vO O CO VN, r - t A o o O-CO H H COvO r i m CO O - ON C-CO -> VAO-CACM OJ -3 NAO-CTJ CO O rS O -"7 • O O r l - J " f A o.-*to . O N r A O (NJ (M [N v A t N - O - O \z> f A - * CM VN.VN. O O CM CN] O O H vO I A O O O o o o v A O -t V A QNvQ O O O O NOC3 O O ON O CO o . t o o n VA ."A CM CM rH o o o o CA^ O V A O CN-VA O V> ^ CA co rA vO rH rH CA COCO. O O rH O D CM O O -tf O vO ^ ON ONrH CM vQ O CM f A ^ - r H v O CN O CO CO M rH rH CM o o O V \ rH ON U tl H :*: rvt ;J d id i ' i l tx, ni X ;.: r-J ;, Mi]} 101. o r \ o H w »AvO O O ONO 03 lA O O o o o o rAcA o\o \0 vo <A VA £> C N «> w -< M fi a <•> a- r: .x -'i >: >; . M : j o ON O'-O o A^ o o o ^\ o o »AO ^ o o o D O VTNOv 3 O O O ora -d- o 3 ON OM3 AH rAc-o o O CO H ON o o o o o o O 0\ co r» 33 co rg (M ON o o o o o o o o ON N O ,i) >1 >; IN[ ;:> o o o o O*A o o r-- oj *A(>-CV-VA CA CA o o o o CA<M o o o o o o- o o o n >A o H C O CM xr» V\<t> O O fAfA O CIJ NN OH O N o lACO CO *0 "AMD O o o o o o o vACO o o o o o o V O CM O H m o o o o o U-iO H O fO 4- CO oca co o VAvO MJJO o n n o O VA^J-vO rACV (M V A O-* M o O H ifl .rt 4i L: II. 0 >. >; i \ ( : .» o o CO O cr> f A Or-* -d"H N O r-i O O NO iH CO O N N O N O rH O r>-^ r o O iA o fAP-i CM 102 A P P E N D I X B u c 0 L . o M vw 0 o c e < o I I I r i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i I t ' l l i i i i i i i i i i ON rH I i I i I 1 » 1 1 1 i i i i t • i i i i o O OJ 1 "1 1 1 OH 1 I 1 1 I i i t i i i t » i i CO rH o o ui o ~f IN o o O i/l NT o ' ' oi ' O o 1 1 1 o o n o >o O ft ' 3 f i tn ft <j\ •? »n *J> 1 t 1 1 1 j10,960 1  3,250 S ,000 o Ul 1 - 1 1 1 rH O o o o o o </y co vo ' 1 J - » ft Ol O r-1 1 1 1 1 • t i l l 1 t 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i i I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o 1 1 » 1 1 o o o ' vO ' ' ' 1 t 1 1 1 o o o o Ul *J3 ' - ' 1 1 1 to CO f l • Ol rH 1 - I I 1 VO i I i i > CJ o o 1 - I 1 1 H f l o vo o» 1 * 1 1 1 r> 1 1 1 t 1 o o o 1 M ' ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 rH V 1 - 1 1 1 OH i I i I i 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 o ft rH r* o I *• I * i . 01 ft 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O rH o» 1 - I I I 1 1 1 1 1 o ot 1 *• 1 t 1 1 1 1 > t t t 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 o o o o 0 o o o O f o o rH rH r-i ,-1 01 CO f l 171 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 f 1 1,500 j 1,500 j 2,500 j j 1,200 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 t 1 1 f 1 1 I i i i i 1 t I 1 1 t 1 1 t 1 o o o o in o rH. VO tn o IO CO <n 1 1 * 1 ft o» o o o o o Cl Ul o 1 * 1 - -n ui co o o o o o r i r-i o 1 - 1 - -r-i CO VO in o OJ o *r o i 1 - I CH !  6,140 '28,000 37 ,800 o o o O Ul O I I I rH Ul C l rH 1 I I I O r- in r- m I I I - » «H OJ o o o o l i t * -r- -r -H 1 > l l l 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 o o o in m o CH OJ Ul - I I - » *r i in 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 o 0 o m o CD v.-. I - i -*t 01 rH I I I 1 I o o o 0 o o r-> o- o I - i - •* 01 LI CO o o o OJ rH OH 1 - I - -VO rH r» O o Cl 1 I 1 * 1 ui ui . oi «r l » o 1 1 I - -"J" CO O o o a o o CC Ol oi I •> I - -Ci *? *T 1 1 1 1 1 o oi vo Ul rH O -H 1 * - ( I rH i-H o-* co vo vo - * I 1 i rH oi 13,515 10,700 10,000 4,000 l.-> O V3 O r- o I - I - 1 Ol vo •vf CO n t I I - I Ol o I - I 1 1 rH 1,000 | 1,400 i 1 000 1 1 1 1 1 1 r- 1 t 1 1 1 o O o* 1 1 I - 1 r-i l i t i 1 1 1 1 1 Oj o o o oi m T O ! 0-- - > i vo 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U O o o O CO vs uio> in - 1 - 1 •H OJ 0 vn o Ul O CO 0 0 1 co * - 1 - 1 n ^ rs •n* m +r to ci c i I O C 1 H - * - t 1 r» c i o* ui H a co o co oj .-( rH rH o o 0 o 01 Ol o o ft o» vo oi - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O O o ••f t 1 1 1 o m i - l l l o OJ CH 1 I I I Cl o O O es in 1 - 1 - \ rn r-i 1 > 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I t t Ul CN O Cl CO 1 * 1 1 ^» ft 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 > in o o m Cl CN Cl CN o oi m CO CT H H OH OH rH O Ol ro O ul -i - 1 I 1 vn O OH o Ul OJ CO n O H - * I I in v rH CN 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 t I 1 o ft Ul I ' t 1 1 Ol 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OJ rH 1 1 1 1 1 o vo 1 — 1 * 1 ot I I I I 1 O r-i Ul O v o-- - I I I OJ Ol 1 1 1 1 1 0 o 01 rH o o* ' " t i l •VJ- Ol 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 O O rH CO CO OH •f VO - 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 in oi <-t r-4 - * 1 1 1 OJ CO O- OJ O O O rH r-l O .-i O •1 O VD -N O OJ OJ v Ol •H rH o m o o» o ui - - i 1 i OJ rH 0 >n o o -r CO i / l O 01 CO o c> c o o M n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u 0 0 a. .0 U C C H O 11 -rt " 't) .\ ••} d c t: -M >; >; a -j to \-l - v» --1 O iO 1 0 lj ..i 01 'J OJ • • n <i , J .v i' -j \ c • • o tn f- ..") n] , j -n o u t ' " :• •n ; : ; i \< o - - < > O 1. *o -H .1 IN Cl <~i ui »: >: U 0 - N o n rj -u >.\ o.j ;•: ot , j :.) t- o> . . (J -O r-4 -,-i ) •: ' .\; " n o .1 -< ti i : in -'• it -j m :'. N U] *J vO l ) N 1* r-i ( " ' ^ - , ' . 1 • M . - ' • i i -•! >i U O H y -I N Tl t j • t> m k - • LT- V< 13 H i i ( J O 0J vl Il -H • tl "I . : i; x n x cj .1 - < (i <i; • 1 IYiU-1 ) t... Jj u n ci -.1 fi -3 a •J rj ct v: l i , .*.) >: :-; . ti r i [.1 Ul * 1 01 »> «o -1 .-( ui i: N JI N O . : - * o r, o : l ».\.. 1-1 a c H a n .. t N -u a ij fl O il ? \ : : o» L> u CJ C N O p) i o r. tx in ?: o* n * «.» vn '1 VI Ol OJ - r^ i O H H r t 1^ •n i.i • ii . ui i: A ! I» o . i I . ' - . . ' \ . - 'L»l U ul >i o t. .1 i i • i i rc ui .vj i i \ O ' 1 o -C •H -P C o u Am-JNUix a. T A B U ; 3.3 r ;,vr] U S A S S - FUNCTIONAL CATKCOllIES BY AHK1 ( S C . F K C T ) ' ~ l 7 2 A r o & D o f ' J c a a o B by F l o o r 1 i l 1 I 2 1 3 ! '.! 6 7 ' 1 8 1 9 101 11 i i " i 1 2 | 13I 1 4 | - ! 6 | 1 ? j is : 15 ; / : 00 r s w e l l r i s e 1. j! • z I C S ? o - - c i l . ' j i l r . 9.600J. 15.053,; i } 6 _ !; j ! 2.150 2.150 : 1 , 5 0 0 4 . 6 5 0 ! 3.050 i • 1 j 550 13.110, ., I 1 1 . 7 0 0 i l i | 1 3 . S O O 1 8 . 4 0 0 i - 1 • 0 , 0 5 0 • i 4 . 3 0 0 j 1 1 .17 ; : 1 0 . 7 7 5 ! ! 1 « . 0 2 < : : ii 5 . 3 E l | . 5.350 3 . 0 9 o ! " . " - T i . ; 2 » « - s 120^'; 1 . 1 2 3 : ; • j' j i .eoo! i 5.000 250 3,000 ' 2 . 0 6 2 5 . 4 2 a 1 i 4 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 1 | 5.500 3.500 2 3 . 4 0 C 1 4 . 3 4 ; ; li | l i 51.610' 1 18.93s! 1 5 ? . 5 7 2 j ! 1 |! 1 .550 | 1 i i I v i i r i ^ A r * * 7.600. 7 . S S 0 ; j 5.105 1 . 3 5 5 | i 2 . 5 2 3 5 . 8 3 8 j •1 i | • ! l j 1.3S2J; : 1 • L , j^v : 16 , 3 4 0 ' 2 2 5 2 0 9 j 1 7 . 2 0 0 !| 69.333 J  7 . 6 0 0 19,800 I | J:&3 1 j 1 , 4 0 0 3 , l ' / 4 4 2 0 ; 1.750:; 3,200 |. 3.350 1 1 i--; 9.9001 jj - | I - - -i i i 7.950 . i |l •' IO.950 ! 1 • " : 1 , . ' " W o £ l » 3 . 6 1 5 J ; 15 90t> i 1.070! 3.690 ! 252 •• 1 3.920 1 ; 4 , 1 8 4 7 . 7 6 4 2,233 ! 2,000 i 7 . 6 8 0 10,075 26,550 3.300 0,600 19,055 1 4 . 1 7 2 8 , 1 6 0 1 1 . 6 5 6 56,034 • 1 • -17.275 1 ! 900 1 j 1 10.553 ! j i 1 9 .200 i 1 1 1 . 3 5 3 16.507 1 0 . 3 0 0 4 0 , 1 0 7 3.510 19.3501; 22.62S| 8 , 1 7 0 ' 1 0 1 , 2 0 0 1 ' 6 l , 7 4 7 -i l o . 1 9 9 • ; t.520 ; | 3 .740 : j 11.cos • ill i a s e :| l . ? 7 5 ' — ' 5 7 S " a i r . 2,060.| 2 . 6 5 7 j i j • 2 , 0 4 2 1,100 2 6 4 2 . 1 0 0 2,809^  i 4 , 0 0 0 1 ,700 1 1 , 2 4 6 1 , 6 0 0 i ' 7 8 0 1 6 . 7 6 5 •6.534! 6 7 7 7 . 1 5 0 25.234 3.300; i 5.503: 1 l | 6 . 7 0 4 | | , ; j j ! 7 .360 | 1 I . J o ; • I 7 .195 j 1 I 1 3 . 3 7 6 ! li 1 lyr'yX 5.150!l 1.975 • - . ^ 1 5.-.- 8 . 7 2 3 : ' y.lzlz lli-12 V ; . ; e r j : ! i | i . j 3 . W 0 | | 1.500 ! 1.080-: I !| 1 . 6 1 6 1 , 0 7 6 1.690 1 6 , 0 4 3 i 1 | 4 , 5 4 9 3 . 7 2 3 4 . 7 4 0 ! 2 . 0 7 2 1 . 7 4 0 ' 4 4 0 ; 5 , 8 3 1 6,050 • I1 32.400 i | 2 , 1 1 6 32,400. j ' 5D0 64,600. lj 1 2 , 4 3 7 i ' r . - " ' - - jt:re i 5 o i i6 .M5J j ! j 1 8 - 7 0 0 :S:S-' 2 " ' i i 15 . 5251 I I s ' : — *' uj-scr j: e . z o o j . j • g f 7 , o u u 8 , 2 0 0 ii 5.225J; I -• li 15.125: 1.300] 3. 300! 47.925 6,100! P 3.900 1 ' • l ° - 6 i i 6 i 'I fc.050 j 2.31? j l . O O J '' 1 8 , 7 0 0 i ' 1 ! S 6?,05o . I . . — r r r - ^ : ' " 5 1 !! ^U^'iS ' l l 1 W O ' - 16.556! 1.780'. 4.575! 1.26 2 , 'r- - 1 ; ! e.50o:. L o : s 1 - 7 - ? ^ e - !|. :| [ (] 1 »• 11.762 318 1.300 lj i i 1! 8 , 0 3 2 | 5,532 6 . 3 3 3 ^ 7 ,400 1 4 . 3 2 7 1 4 . J O O 9 ,200j | 1 2 . 3 8 5 ! 9 .563J 4 . 3 4 0 J l,300l 1 . 3 0 0 . j 3,300 4,ooo] i 5 ' ! 8 . J 0 0 i I ! !• ! i : i c o n t i n u e d vr» iMlo ' 2,000 AiiotT. mm l.eoc 4.71J 'Jarrall .".czz 1 2r / . i i Upper i ;:-15 ! 3.055!. 1.642; ij 1,600. • '! ! f 1.600 800 1.304!: 6.661' 2,277 SOO;; 2.400' 800 ]•• •; ii '! J 1 3.90o|': |. 24.150!; 1 4 ,600 ; i 1 1.48o: 1.400; i.aooi j 1 1 1,100 4,209 j ! • i i" 3,00 5 ; 17.290'. } 3.W-J' : . I \ \ 1 $ » V • j M - i —? t i t |. i :v3 E a s e j j Arte-.; Ham 84ci 21,001 •-•trr«ll Stsz | { - < - 2 - j ^ _ j 1 . ii li j! 15o!i 528 i: 4,0001 r 4,ooo|. 3.410 700 i| l' 16,300; 13,500; 47,9001; • ;i ' 1 j 3,ooo1 3.730. 950 13,040! 7.600. 1 il 3.ooo! | I 17 . 292; !; 10.300. j II I I 13.350! ', !| ! j 32.170; 1 1 : i i: 1 •: ;r . j ij «• j l.?6V. i 1 1,203; 470;- 150 1; •l- r 15.505 15.892 . 36.986 4.900 4.900 19.600 1 j 3.200 6.400 II i! ' II • !! 22,179 3.849 1.733 li 4 1 , 860: 1 51.729; !: , 1 4 2 . 4 4 4 . i 190.736: 1 1 i 1 i • 1 i •'• \ 1 : .... 4.OOO'' 13.430,: 840 | ;i 1 ? 1 l .OOO i ; i j! ! 1.700 1 ! l! 9.000JJ 2.50ojj 2,500| 16,100 46,SOO i 2,600 26.300J 25.000; 11.500 27.000 1 i !. 43.500' j ' 22.000. ! 43,500' | 130.500. 1 4.300J ! 1 ! : - i : e r B a s e 6,850:. toile Kiln . 24,50V. 1'. '.• A ' - iCvC >:czz ! 1: - ir.d | 10.700;: i I \ 1 2.011: 1 2,110j t 1 ] 8,130 1 8,160 1 i 1 1 j 4,000 4,000 14,770! 10.266 1.500 3.550 5.750 i i i 1 24,054] 1 < 10.C50I 10,150 I i • I 1 < 14.300| 1 33.11°, | • "I i i '•< ! li ! i-Base 1 I 1,*5C{ 4,725: j! i i l! , : 2.550 1 1.891! 1.300 ! |i j 2 4 3 j 550 253 14.843 23.760 1 1 J • 16.071 12.670 5.733 7,384 9.008 5.287 1 6,900 ! 2.100J 1 1 ! ! 1 > 1 i 1 J he 0 0 - Y £ 3 2 5B,; 4;oj' ;; i 1 • ' il : 1; i 5,268 .; i i: i i ; ' i6oi:' 567; j; •5.500 5.537 36.791 1 l| ! Ij 6,18* 1 i-so" : . ! i - i i 1 • i i 1! ».3 b o i 1 1 • 1 — \ \\. 1 I \ i_ t i i • i-• - » . i^z e ' Y.azz Zr.t •11 L'p^er 6.071;. liocol! . j. ii j. 1.350 1,050? 1.130! i j 1! f :< • ! 1.46. 36 e.91: ) 11.86C 15.7K i ji 1 32< 1! 7.59: ' I 4.369 > . 11.017 1 __] J X N | 1 600; .. . \ ••: ;i 640 • K i l n I.'; per ; 1.553.: 1.554| • i i ' • ; ; 1 570 •' j : / 2,483' li 3-2ii3.. 1 ' t I j'. i i 1 , i 1,16 2 1 |- i 1 4.iii.421 1J5.125::242.252J118.167|'j59.452 ;37,141 j; 187.579! 59.819 \$03.1.0' *• 151.83 3J451.93 ;i131,63 7jj 9.20o|' 1.004.892',275.564 5.*«| 563.378; - l i^l.322 17.0= I-1 APPENDIX.' c 10 INTERVIEW SCHEDULE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AREA It HOTEL OWNERS AND/OR LESSEES Name of Hotel Address Name of Hotel Owner,(s) Number of Dwelling Units 1. How long have you owned thi s hotel? (If not constant ownership since 1965, proceed to questions Nos. 2 and 3.) 2. When did you purchase t h i s hotel? 3. What was the purchase price? 4. Would you prefer to s e l l t h i s property some time with-i n the next few years? . . . i . e . , 4 or 5 years? 5. In view of the present redevelopment i n th i s area, do you expect.someone or some organization to make you a purchase price? Yes No Yes No 106 . Has your hotel, had any redecoration, a l t e r a t i o n s , r e s t o r a t i o n or refurbishment of any kind during the past 3-5 years? (If yes, proceed to question No. 7.) Yes No Could you describe exactly what these physical changes were? redecorative s t r u c t u r a l Do you expect the hotel to undergo any form of physical .alterations within the next few years? . . . i . e . , 4 or 5 years? Don't Yes . No Know Could you t e l l what rents you charged for your dwelling units during the past few years? Low and No. of Units ; High and No. of Units Average 107 . * 10. What are your present rates? Low and No. of Units High and No. of U n i t s ; Average 11. What do you expect the rents to be i n your hotel during the next few years? (.If respondent uncertain, proceed to No. 12.) (If respondent indicates future rent increases, proceed to No. 13.) Low and No. of Units ; High and No. of Units Average Don 11 Know 12. What would cause you to keep rents at the present l e v e l or make you increase them? 13. What would cause you to raise your rents? ( l i s t i n descending order of owner's p r i o r i t i e s ) * See note at end of Questionnaire. 108. 14. Could you outline for me who the residents of your hotel are? • Old age pensioners' ; Welfare r e c i p i e n t s Workers ; Transients ; Others ; ( i f others - specify) . 15. Using the same resident type categories, could you t e l l me who the residents of your hotel v/ere over the past few years? Old age pensioners ; Welfare r e c i p i e n t s ; Workers __; Transients ; Others ; . (If others - specify) . 16. Who do you think w i l l reside i n t h i s hotel i n the next few years? (If uncertain on future resident "type", proceed to No. 17.) Old age pensioners ; Welfare r e c i p i e n t s ; Workers ; Transients • ' ; Others others - specify) Don 11 Know 17. Why do you f e e l uncertain on who the future residents of the hotel w i l l be? 109 1 8 . Of a l l the dwelling units i n your ho t e l , how many are -single rooms ; housekeeping rooms ? s.c. suites . • 1 9 . How many dwelling u n i t s , i f any, are now vacant? 2 0 . How many vacant dwelling units do you think you average annually?. 2 1 . What washroom f a c i l i t i e s do you have i n the hotel? 2 2 . What cooking f a c i l i t i e s do you have i n the hotel? 2 3 . Are there any comments that you would l i k e to make regard-ing any of the above questions, or any other subject regarding your ownership or operations of t h i s hotel? * Interviewer to check v a l i d i t y of answers.to question No. 10 by telephoning each hotel and checking on rent p r i c e s . In the telephone conversation, interviewer to play r o l e of prospective customer. APPENDIX p 110. INTERVIEW SCHEDULE OF "KEY" "HISTORIC PRESERVATION AREA" • REDEVELOPERS 1. What hotels i n the area do you most expect to be sold (followed by re s t o r a t i o n , refurbishment, etc.)? 2. Are there any on the market at present? 3. Who are the p o t e n t i a l buyers? 111. 4. Are there any such units that you are interested in buying? . 5. Which hotels are most.conducive to restoration, etc., because of their unique architectural style, location, or other factors? 6. What would be an accurate approximation in your opinion of present and expected purchase price per dwelling unit? 7. What would you approximate the restoration costs to be on a per dwelling unit basis? 112. 8. What percentage changes i n rents would r e s u l t i n refurbished housing i n Gastown? 9. What w i l l the r e s i d e n t i a l make-up of c l i e n t e l e i n the area be within the next few years ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the restored or renovated hotels? APPENDIX E . Gastown Redevelopment11 Interest" John Parke?: - President, Townsite Steering Committee Gerald Thomson - Past President, " " " Richard Wilcox - President, East Gasto>m Property Owners Edward Keate - President, Gastown Merchants Association Larry Killam - President, Town Group Jack Leshgold - Gastown Merchant and Property Owner A l v i n Zipurski ) ) - West Cordova Redevelopment Corporation Arnold Sigesmund) APJ-ENDIX F. LAND USAGE - FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES CODING 114 . The land use data gained i n the f i e l d survey and from the Business Tax Rolls was also broken down f u n c t i o n a l l y into the following categories: 1. R e t a i l A - such operations as department stores, v a r i e t y stores, bookstores, record shops and antique shops. The common denominator here i s that, i n most cases, the operations deal i n small, portable, inexpensive non perishable drygoods of one kind or another that a great deal of the time depend upon impulse buying. 2* R e t a i l B - such operations as f u r n i t u r e , household applianceshardware and home furnishing stores, as well as f a b r i c , c l o t h i n g and photosshops and art and antique stores. The common denominator here i s that, i n most cases the businesses deal i n goods that are more expensive, less portable and non perishable, and/or depend upon some planning i n t h e i r purchase. 3. R e t a i l C - such operations as grocery, food and l i q u o r stores, f i s h and meat markets, bakeries, and confec-tionery stores. .The common denominator here i s that these businesses deal i n basic staples and perishable foodstuffs as well as the more exotic foodstuffs. 4. R e t a i l D - such operations as retail-wholesale stores and manufacturing showrooms. The common denominator here i s that these businesses deal i n goods that, i n some way w i l l be used to help provide a service or furnish another product. They are not used generally by the public at large. 5* Services - such businesses as t a i l o r s , barber, h a i r -dressers, dry cleaners and laundromats. The common denominator here i s that the f i n a l product i s r e t a i l but b a s i c a l l y non tangible. 6. Restaurants, Dining Rooms and Cafes 7. Entertainment - such businesses as theatres, night-clubs, cabarets, bowling a l l e y s and pool h a l l s . 8. O f f i c e s and Banks - includes any white c o l l a r and professional functions. Examples of t h i s are general o f f i c e s , r e a l estate dealers, t r a v e l agents, accountants, finance companies and any professional service. 9 . I n s t i t u t i o n a l associations, i z a t i o n s . -includes such organizations as s o c i e t i e s , unions, c i v i c services and non p r o f i t organ-115. 10. Hotels - includes only those establishments that operate i n the t r a d i t i o n a l manner, i . e . , single rooms with bath or without bath, no cooking f a c i l i t i e s , lobby and perhaps addit i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s , such as.beer parlour and/or restaurant. 11. Apartments and Rooming Houses - includes those e s t a b l i s h -ments that o f f e r rooms.on a weekly or monthly basis and may, as well, o f f e r cooking f a c i l i t i e s of some sort. 12. Single-family Residential - includes only the t r a d i t i o n a l self-contained apartments. 13. Storage - includes R e t a i l and Manufacturing Storage and wholesale and general warehousing. 14. Manufacturing 15. Gas and Service Stations 16. Parking 17. Park or Square 18. Vacant Space i n a Building 19. Vacant Land 20. Other, includes public areas, lobbies, and i n t e r i o r malls. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101628/manifest

Comment

Related Items