BURST
Two more properties in Surrey will have notices filed on their land titles as city council continues to crack down on illegal construction.
The first property, at 13466 87A Avenue, received multiple stop-work orders for seven different projects the owners of the home carried out without proper permits.
According to a city report to council on Monday, owners Kuldip Singh Mundi and Narinder Kaur Mundi received a building permit for the property in 2023 for a single-family home. But in December 2024, a bylaw officer observed several construction projects, either completed or in progress, that were unpermitted.
The work included a two-storey addition to the southeast corner of the house; an accessory building in the southwest corner of the property, which included a self-contained dwelling unit and a rooftop deck; an addition in the southwest corner of the basement; a rear deck on the main floor with a staircase; a rear deck on the upper floor; a laundry room in the east side of the house; and four dwelling units in the basement.
“The owners here carried out substantial unpermitted work,” Guillermo Flores, assistant city solicitor, told council. “The owners have applied for a building permit, which has been rejected at this time. Staff don’t see a realistic path for the owners to obtain a building permit in the circumstances.”
Surrey created an illegal construction enforcement team in 2022 after the city noted an increase in stop-work orders being filed. While demolition orders take longer to obtain through the courts, city council can, in the meantime, approve the filing of notices on land titles for properties not complying with permits.
The notices serve as a public notice to lenders, buyers or anyone else that a property contravenes bylaws for building without permits.
In correspondence with the owners of the 87A Avenue property in August, the city stated the only possible way the property could be in compliance with policy would be the demolition of the unauthorized construction, due to the “egregious nature and extent of the unpermitted work.”
Jessica Wonfor, the city’s manager for residential building permit approvals, stated in a letter to the owners in March that the work done on the property did not meet zoning or building codes.
Additionally, individuals have been occupying the illegal dwellings without proper permits, Flores stated.
Neither of the owners of the property attended the hearing. Fees of $912 for site visits have also gone unpaid, Flores said.
The second property, located at 12464 77A Ave., will also have a notice filed on the title to alert potential buyers or occupiers of the illegal construction on the site.
In 2020, city bylaw noted several unpermitted projects on the property, including a two-storey addition at the back of the house, which consisted of two dwelling units, a deck, an awning, a staircase and laundry room. The property also had a two-storey addition to the west side of the house, an addition to the garage, and a upper-level deck at the front of the house.
“When you compare the houses, they look like completely different houses,” Flores said. “The house bears little resemblance to the original house. And again, this is all done without permits.”
As with the first property, work continued on this property even after the city filed stop-work orders. Four site visit tickets for a total $900 were also filed, in addition to $2,000 worth of bylaw and municipal tickets related to the unpermitted work. The owners have not paid any of these fees, Flores said.
As with the first property, the city stated the only way to bring the property into compliance would be to demolish the unpermitted work.
Armit Singh Sohal, who was present at the hearing to speak on behalf of the owners of the home, expressed his desire to bring the home into compliance with the city.
“During this process of the restructuring of the house, I was not living there,” Sohal said.
“My stepdad at the time ended up restructuring the house himself and did everything at that time. He does not live with us anymore. He divorced my mom, but we would like to bring the structure into compliance.”
The owners have obtained a lawyer, he said, and now registered the previously unregistered suites and are preparing to give eviction notices to the tenants who were occupying part of the property.
Sohal asked council to consider adjourning the meeting and give his file another review before making a decision.
While Coun. Gordon Hepner moved to adjourn, his motion failed and council instead approved staff to file the notice on the title.
“If they are able to bring this property into compliance, then the notice can be removed at that time,” Flores said.