Landlord appeals fire-code order for student rental properties
Fire department says homes on Dundurn are ‘rooming houses,’ but owner says that’s not the case
A Hamilton property owner has been ordered to make changes to his student housing buildings on Dundurn Street South to comply with Ontario’s fire code.
Landlord Peter Dyakowski, a former Tiger-Cat who ran as Conservative candidate for Hamilton Mountain in the 2019 federal election, says he has appealed the decision on “principle.”
It isn’t his first appeal. According to court documents, he’s been fighting the city on this matter for years.
A March 7 decision ordered Dyakowski, managing director and primary shareholder of Hillcrest Properties, “to complete outstanding items” in his buildings — at 33 and 35 Dundurn, and 45 and 47 Dundurn — by June 30.
That includes constructing a second exit from the basement, where there are sleeping accommodations, and to “create a contiguous corridor separating the kitchen and main floor egress hallway” by installing a fire separation with a resistance rating of at least 30 minutes, the decision reads.
It ordered Dyakowski, who is also famous for winning the inaugural CBC contest as “Canada’s Smartest Person” in 2012, to also ensure doors had a fire protection rating of at least 20 minutes, “with self-closing and latching devices.”
The initial inspection of the properties in October 2021 stemmed from a complaint and resulted in “various” orders issued on Jan. 27, 2022. Among them was an order to ensure that each floor of the semidetached units, both of which are two storeys with full, finished basements, have two exits.
Insp. Tom McDermott testified that use of the buildings had changed since the residences were built about two decades ago, and they were evaluated under fire code section that applies to rooming houses, defined as being no more than three storeys high, housing four or more students and having shared facilities like bathroom and kitchens.
Inspectors were “unable to specify when the change took place,” but agreed the homes could be characterized as rooming houses, the decision reads.
Dyakowski, however, says they’re not rooming houses, but rather each operated as a “single co-operative household.” He testified “tenants were aware of one anther’s comings and goings” and students had a shared messaging group, according to the decision.
Dyakowski has maintained that the properties were designed to be student residences and have been used as such since he’s owned them, thus, according to the decision, has argued that “required compliance work … did not apply as no alterations had been carried out to the buildings since the original construction.”
“There never has been a change of use,” he said in an interview with The Spec. “These have always operated the way they’re operating now.”
According to the decision, Dyakowski “failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the buildings are not boarding, lodging, and rooming houses.”
With respect to the fire code, differences between single-family dwellings and rooming houses include types of fire separations and partitions, means of exiting the building, and fire alarm and detection systems,” Dave Cunliffe, chief of the Hamilton Fire Department, said in an email.
He declined to comment on this case specifically due to the appeal.
At the time, the buildings were rented out to around 10 students. Each has four bedrooms on the second floor, two on the main floor and four in the basement, the decision reads.
The kitchen, living area, laundry and bathrooms are shared.
A property manager told inspectors leases range in length from four to 12 months.
Orders are issued “with the intent … to have the violation remedied,” Cunliffe said in an email.
Typically, if an owner “has demonstrated they are working towards compliance” an extension can be granted.
“If by the compliance date, no action has been taken, then the fire department would move to consider laying charges,” he said.
Dyakowski said his company chose to comply with a number of the initial orders, which could also have been appealed, to demonstrate responsibility. This includes modifications like sealing penetrations from pipes and vents in drywall, cleaning dryer lint traps, testing kitchen fire extinguishers, and proper on-site documentation of smoke detectors and fire extinguishers.
But he says he’s refusing to undertake the remaining work, which he says is “unnecessary” and “cost prohibitive.”
Meanwhile, Hillcrest proposed an alternative solution proposing a door between the kitchen and corridor, and a remotely-monitored fire alarm panel be installed in each house, which has been approved by the fire department with several conditions.
Still, Dyakowski proceeded with the appeal in hopes that all requirements be dismissed.
Hillcrest Properties goes “above and beyond” to ensure residences are safe, he said. He feels that, as a company with multiple residences, they’re an easier “target” for firecode violations than some of the less visible student rentals in west Hamilton, near McMaster University.
“It’s frustrating to be treated like someone who’s trying to do something sneaky,” he said. “That accusation and the desire to clear our reputation … is quite enough to motivate me to pursue further appeals.”