The District of Mission and a senior building inspector are disputing a petition filed in court by a numbered company, 0773184 B.C. Ltd.
The company owns 33133 First Ave., and wants to open a pharmacy there.
The company purchased the building in an area zoned for such a use, but new legislation from the district now bans pharmacies and medical clinics downtown.
The legal action was launched June 25 after Mission council passed third reading of a bylaw to prohibit pharmacies and medical clinics in the core commercial downtown one zone, which is roughly between Grand and Horne Streets and from North Railway to Second Avenue.
According to the petition, before 0773184 B.C. Ltd. purchased the property, “The petitioner made it known to Mission its intended use of the property, and received Mission’s assurances that the intended use was permitted.”
Renovation plans were first submitted on April 17, but not approved.
Mission council prepared the bylaw to rezone the property on May 2. On May 22, the third set of building plans submitted to the district was accepted, however, the district withheld the building permit.
The numbered company asserts the district “unlawfully and in bad faith withheld issuance of the building permit…”
On June 2, the property changed hands.
The District of Mission and building inspector Mike Rohde filed a response on July 24, claiming 0773184 B.C. Ltd. should not be bringing the petition forward because it is not the building permit applicant. Al Davies Radio & T.V. (1974) Ltd. and its agent Nandakumar Sambandam applied for the building permit before the property was transferred to the numbered company.
The petition respondents claim 0773184 B.C. Ltd. “was not the owner of the property which is subject to the building permit application at the time the application was made; not at the time the application was considered complete by the building inspector.”
The district contends a new building permit application would have to be made. Mission also claims “Section 929 of the Local Government Act authorizes a local government to withhold a building permit application, if by resolution at least seven days before the application for the building permit, it has begun the preparation of a plan or bylaw that is in conflict with that building application.”
The petitioner claims it is losing about $17,500 each month the business is not operating.
A court date has not yet been set.