Toronto couple built an addition to house without permits told to tear it down.

[ducttape]

Given their nationality (ok, scream racism now) I'd say it was a given. The same reason they figured that they could build it without any permits or variances.

Part of me thinks that the city is using them to set an example. And well, so be it.

Agreed. Their contractor was likely Suk Long Wang, whose business operates out of a post-office box on Spadina Ave and whose company doesn't pay a lot in payroll taxes relative to the number of people who seem to work there. Neither Mr. Wang nor any of his employees will be prosecuted over this, mostly because they will have vanished into thin air.

As near as I can tell from reading between the lines, the family figured they'd buy the house for $700k, put on an $80k addition and rent out at least two rooms in the addition (per the prior Torstar article) at $500 per room tax-free to overseas U of T students (a reasonable estimate for that area) which means after 6 years their addition has almost paid for itself already, then flip the house for a cool $million or more once mamasan and papasan get too old to live there.

Oh, and if they didn't get an inspection, it likely means that their assessment doesn't reflect the true square footage of the house, nor their rental income.

 

[ducttape]

Oh, this should be fun...the Torstar article has been posted to Fark.com:

http://www.fark.com/comments/7234209/Step-1-Build-$80000-addition-without-a-permit-Step-2-Spend-over-$200000-in-legal-fees-only-to-have-courts-order-its-demolition-Step-3-Profit?cpp=1

 

[simon482]

so they break the law, don't do things the way it should be done and are now crying and looking for support. fuck em, if they had the money to build it they had the money to buy the permits. it's a good lesson.

 

[oldjones]

On the other hand, you have related parties living 12 to a house in Brampton. Remember that E.I. wife and mother who was murdered in her own home and the other 15 family members in the house never saw nor heard anything?

If it's no problem, no law is required. If there is a law, it'll take a complaint to get it enforced. Unless we want to be taxed to employ full time Who's Living Here Pol;ice.

 

[jazzpig]

+1

you should be able to do whatever the f you want with your property.

If somebody was building next door to you, and they raised their grade by a couple of feet, would you still feel that way?
What if they were building on both sides and did that?

 

[Moraff]

To those that feel they should just be fined and keep the addition:

It was built with no inspection to ensure that the structure, the electrical and possibly the plumbing was properly done. It was built by a builder who was willing to do so knowing there were no permits pulled for the job. Are you willing to bet that he didn't cut any corners?

 

[d_jedi]

Are there no rules regarding rooming houses? There use to be a house on our block where the absentee owner rented rooms to college students. Loud parties every weekend. Nude co-eds running around the lawn. There must have been 30 people living in that house. I called the city and was advised there are no rules regarding rooming houses.

Musta been a damn shame.
Got any pics??!

 

[d_jedi]

- it sounds like you (and the Tsengs, apparently) are assuming that the original clapboard structure would have been allowed by current bylaws had it been newly built. Are you willing to consider that the zoning bylaws may have changed since the original addition was built?

Even if the bylaws change, they should be able to replace what is already there with an equivalent (but more structurally sound) addition. That's my opinion, at least..

 

[Tangwhich]

Even if the bylaws change, they should be able to replace what is already there with an equivalent (but more structurally sound) addition. That's my opinion, at least..

I don't believe that's true. I saw an episode of Love it or List it and the back garden had a falling to pieces shed next to a ravine. They wanted to tear it down and rebuild it but the city said no, either keep it or demolish it permanently.

 

[d_jedi]

To those that feel they should just be fined and keep the addition:

It was built with no inspection to ensure that the structure, the electrical and possibly the plumbing was properly done. It was built by a builder who was willing to do so knowing there were no permits pulled for the job. Are you willing to bet that he didn't cut any corners?

So inspect it, ensure everything is up to code (might need to partially tear down some stuff to do this, but not the entire structure), fine them, and all is good.

 

[jazzpig]

To those that feel they should just be fined and keep the addition:

It was built with no inspection to ensure that the structure, the electrical and possibly the plumbing was properly done. It was built by a builder who was willing to do so knowing there were no permits pulled for the job. Are you willing to bet that he didn't cut any corners?

The daughter's a lawyer, I'm sure she had proper working drawings and had somebody check the work.
I'll bet they built it to code too, with the forethought that if the city got involved, they'ld argue that at least the house was built to code.
They didn't pull a permit because they were pretty certain they wouldn't get a variance it seems, not for anything else.

You know the old saying: Better to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission,
They gambled and lost and fuck 'em for not giving a shit about their neighbours who also are entitled to enjoy their properties.

 

[d_jedi]

You know the old saying: Better to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission,
They gambled and lost and fuck 'em for not giving a shit about their neighbours who also are entitled to enjoy their properties.

The one neighbour has a parking lot for a backyard. I don't think the addition in any way would spoil their "enjoyment" of their property..

 

[d_jedi]

I don't believe that's true. I saw an episode of Love it or List it and the back garden had a falling to pieces shed next to a ravine. They wanted to tear it down and rebuild it but the city said no, either keep it or demolish it permanently.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.. but that's the government for you.

 

[Tangwhich]

The daughter's a lawyer, I'm sure she had proper working drawings and had somebody check the work.

I bet they didn't. Nobody would go to that sort of length and then forget the permits. They are peanuts compared to the cost of proper drawings.

 

[Tangwhich]

Dumb, dumb, dumb.. but that's the government for you.

Well I thought it was a bit extreme, but as I recall structures are no longer permitted that close to a ravine for environmental reasons, so I get the city's point of view on it.

 

[d_jedi]

And apparently, the city spent half a million dollars fighting this family.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/art...amily-cost-city-about-500-000-councillor-says

Your taxes at work!!

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Looking at the Tseng's house, is an addition really necessary?? They are 2 old people, I dont think their kids live at home anymore, WTF do they need an addition for??

I dunno, the whole thing seems stupid

 

[Tangwhich]

And apparently, the city spent half a million dollars fighting this family.

In this case, so be it. The end result is worth it. Give in once and you've opened up the city for a frenzy. I see unapproved work all the time. It's everywhere and lots of it is dangerous. Permits are required for a reason. That half million is an investment to prevent future hazards.

 

[ducttape]

They are 2 old people, I dont think their kids live at home anymore, WTF do they need an addition for??

Rental income.

 

[GPIDEAL]

I fucking hate Adam Vaughan

Irrelevant but he bugs me too.