CITY OF VANCOUVER

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

 

Date:

April 27, 2004

 

Author:

Kathy Morgan

 

Phone No.:

604-873-7760

 

RTS No.:

04200

 

CC File No.:

2701

 

Meeting Date:

May 20, 2004

TO:

Standing Committee on Planning and Environment

FROM:

City Building Inspector

SUBJECT:

4410 Ontario Street
Warning to Prospective Purchasers

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of the foregoing.

COUNCIL POLICY

Section 336D of the Vancouver Charter provides a mechanism whereby the City of Vancouver can warn prospective purchasers of contraventions of City By-laws relating to land or a building or structure. It provides that if the City Building Inspector observes a condition that he considers to be a contravention of a By-law relating to the construction or safety of buildings; or as a result of that condition, a building or structure is unsafe or unlikely to be usable for its expected purpose; or is of a nature that a purchaser, unaware of the contravention, would suffer a significant loss or expense if the By-law were enforced against him, he may recommend to City Council that a resolution be considered directing the City Clerk to file a notice against the title to the property in the Land Title Office.

Sections 334 and 571 of the Vancouver Charter allow the City to seek injunctive relief for any By-law contravention.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to request approval to file a 336D Notice against the title to 4410 Ontario Street to warn prospective purchasers of By-law violations and to request approval to seek injunctive relief.

BACKGROUND

The four-storey building at 4410 Ontario Street is located in an RS-1S (One Family Dwelling) District. It appears to have been constructed in 1931 or earlier as a one family dwelling. As a result of a complaint, an inspection in May of 1989 indicated that there were three separate dwelling units in the building, one each on the first, second and third storeys with the fourth storey being vacant. No enforcement action was taken at that time pending the completion of a neighbourhood review of illegal suites. After the review, the area was rezoned from RS-1 to RS-1S, inspections were carried out and the owner was notified of upgrading requirements. No application was submitted to retain a suite and in May 1993 the owner was ordered to restore the building to its approved use as a one family dwelling. Inspections in September 1994 and October 1995 indicated that the building was being occupied as a one family dwelling.

DISCUSSION

As a result of a complaint, in February 1999 our inspection services reported that construction was being carried out without permit or approval in contravention of the Zoning and Development and Vancouver Building By-laws. The owner was ordered to stop work and either obtain the required permits or remove the unapproved construction (new roof over the first storey side entry door, an approximate 4' x 8' addition to the front porch and new drain tile). In 1999, the required permits were issued for interior and exterior alterations to remove the existing stair and landings, to sprinkler the first storey and to legalize the first storey as a permanent secondary suite.

As a result of a complaint, in May 2000 our inspection services reported that the building was again occupied as three separate dwelling units with an unapproved suite on the third storey. The owner was ordered to discontinue this use and remove the cooking facilities. A reinspection in June 2000 indicated that the third storey had been vacated.

As a result of another complaint, in September 2000 our inspection services reported that the front porch had been partially enclosed, the front door was relocated, rear stairs leading to the attic (fourth storey) had been installed, the attic and the third storey were being used as separate living quarters (for a total of four dwelling units) and unapproved electrical work had been carried out in contravention of the Zoning and Development, Vancouver Building and Electrical By-laws. The owner was ordered to remove the unapproved work and restore the occupancy of the building to a single family dwelling with a secondary suite on the first storey. Subsequent inspections indicated that the order had not been complied with.

It should be noted that this owner has repeatedly carried out work without permits since 1989.

It has come to our attention that the building has been listed for sale. The listing states that there are five bathrooms, five kitchens, a total rent potential of $5,000 per month, new plumbing, new electrical, new stucco, a new roof and that all work was done with permits. We have advised the realtor that his listing is not accurate and that the building is only approved as a one family dwelling with a secondary suite.

CONCLUSION

As the building is currently listed for sale, it is recommended that a 336D Notice be filed against the title so that any prospective purchasers will be warned that there are violations of the Zoning and Development, Vancouver Building and Electrical By-laws. Subject to Council approval, I will be referring this matter to the Director of Legal Services to request that she commence legal action or an injunction if, in her opinion, it is appropriate to do so.

* * * * *


pe20040520.htm