No decision on hotel

Press, 9 October 1979, Page 6

No decision on hotel

Two weeks ago today the Licensing Control Commission made an order giving the premises licence-holder of the United Senice Hotel in Christchurch three months to begin work on fire safety, but no decision has been made yet whether the work will be done The premises licenceholder is Central City Estates. Ltd, although under the terms of the lease the company which has to do the fire prevention vork is Idris Freeholds. Ltd. Its managing director, Mr Duncan McFarlane, jun., who is also a director of Central City Estates, Ltd, -aid that no decision had been made yet. The commission made an order under section 210 (2) of the Sale of Liquor Act on September 25, giving the

premises holder three | months in which to “cause to be carried out” work neclessary to enable the premlises to comply with the fire code for licenced premises. i Under the terms of order, ;the work must be “placed in 'hand” within three months and completed within six months. i In December last year the • lessee applied for exemption from the Fire Code require[ments, but this was rejected ;by the commission. The ! commission then gave six | months notice before making ithe final order, under which Central City Estates would (have to show cause why its 'licence should not be cancelled or suspended if it did (not comply with the order. The United Service Hotel, built in 1885. is due to be demolished by May 31, 1989,

■because of the requirements [Of the Earthquake Regu■llations.. ■ I The request for compliance with the Fire Code was originally made in 1973, .■the commission said in its ’ [decision last month. ■I The installation of an au- ’ tomatic fireTsprinkler system . would cost at least $130,000, lit has been reported. i The Canterbury Hotel /Workers’ Union is interested /in developments, because about 80 of its members work at the hotel.