The property at 1145 Chartwell Crescent in West Vancouver is worth $6.7 million. The owners built a 1,500 square foot structure on it near Brothers Creek. They obtained zero permits. They had zero inspections.
Their own contractor walked off the job in December 2023, warning them repeatedly that permits were required as the project expanded beyond its original scope. The contractor’s concerns were documented.
The District of West Vancouver discovered the structure in May 2024 after a public complaint. They posted a Stop Work Order. In August 2024, following investigation, Council voted unanimously to order demolition. The owners had been fined a total of $14,800 — and had paid only $500 of it.
By 2025, the case was in BC Supreme Court, with the owners alleging the original complaint was racially motivated and arguing the demolition order was issued under a bylaw that had since been repealed. They described the 1,500 sq ft structure as a “gazebo.”
This story has three lessons that apply directly to any Vancouver or Metro Vancouver property owner.
Lesson 1: Your contractor quitting over permits is a serious warning sign
The contractor on the Chartwell property walked off the job specifically because they believed permits were required and were not being obtained. In British Columbia, licensed contractors face personal liability for work performed without required permits. A contractor who refuses to continue a project without permits is not being difficult — they are protecting both themselves and you from serious legal exposure.
Under the Vancouver Building By-law 2025, the By-law “applies to the alteration, change of use and demolition of existing buildings” as well as new construction. A 1,500 sq ft new structure on a residential property — regardless of what it’s called — requires a building permit. A structure near a creek protection area also triggers environmental review requirements separate from the standard building permit process.
If a contractor tells you a permit is required, get the permit. This is not optional and not negotiable.
Lesson 2: “Zero permits, zero inspections” is not a grey area
District of West Vancouver officials described the situation directly: “They built it with zero permits, zero inspections and it’s an unacceptable safety risk.”
The inspection requirement is not bureaucratic formality. Under the Vancouver Building By-law 2025 (Part 8, Safety at Construction and Demolition Sites), construction work on buildings is subject to inspection requirements that exist specifically to verify structural safety, fire safety, and compliance with the By-law’s technical provisions. A structure that was never inspected at any stage of construction has no verified compliance with any of those requirements.
The municipality has the legal authority to order demolition of any structure that was built without required permits and inspections. This authority exists under the Vancouver Charter in British Columbia and equivalent municipal legislation throughout Metro Vancouver. The demolition order is not punitive — it is the only way to verify whether the structure is safe, since permits and inspections are the verification mechanism.
A structure built without permits is not a building. It is an uninspected assembly of materials.
Lesson 3: The “it’s just a gazebo” argument does not work
The owners’ position in court was that the 1,500 sq ft structure was merely a “gazebo” and therefore did not require the permits the district claimed were required.
Vancouver and Metro Vancouver building bylaws do have thresholds below which small accessory structures — garden sheds, small gazebos — may not require permits. Under the Vancouver Building By-law 2025, small, non-habitable, non-connected accessory structures under specific size thresholds may be exempt. But those thresholds are measured in square metres, not in what you choose to call the structure.
A 1,500 sq ft (approximately 139 m²) structure with a roof, walls, and connection to the property is not a gazebo by any reasonable interpretation of the bylaw’s definitions. A gazebo, by its ordinary meaning and by the functional definition used in bylaw interpretation, is a small, open-sided garden structure. A 139 m² enclosed structure is approximately the size of a 2-bedroom apartment.
The court was not persuaded by the framing. The demolition order stood.
What this means for creek protection areas specifically
The Chartwell property’s proximity to Brothers Creek is separately significant. The District of West Vancouver’s Creeks Bylaw and associated environmental permit requirements apply to construction within specified setback distances from watercourses. These requirements exist independently of the standard building permit requirements.
A property owner who builds near a creek without environmental permits faces:
- Building bylaw violation (no permits)
- Environmental bylaw violation (no creek setback compliance review)
- Potential federal Fisheries Act exposure for work affecting fish habitat
The combination of violations on the Chartwell property — no building permit, no environmental permit, creek setback area — is why the fines were $14,800 and why the council vote for demolition was unanimous.
The financial reality
The owners of the Chartwell property spent:
- Construction costs for the 1,500 sq ft structure
- $14,800 in fines (and counting)
- Legal fees for BC Supreme Court proceedings
- Facing demolition costs for the structure if the court case fails
A development permit and building permit for an accessory structure of this type, obtained legitimately, would have cost a fraction of the fines and legal fees. The permit process would also have identified the creek setback issue before any construction began, allowing the design to be adjusted.
The cost of compliance is always lower than the cost of enforcement. In this case, by a very significant margin.