Disgruntled homeowners target West Van coffers From page 1 Wi the exterior granite tiles and mortar are separating from their support, and pose a danger to owners and others; @ ducts and vents are inadequate to provide for air Pressure equalization. “Suffice to say the building is leaking and we're try- ing to get it fixed. It’s just a big horrible mess,” owner Bob Elliott said. Mendes said owners have sued the architects, rhe structural engineers, the developer, and construction companies. All defendants have been sued for negli- gence. The developer is also sued for breach of con- tract, misrepresentation and breaching two parts of the real estate act, said Mendes. West Vancouver District was sucd for failing to properly inspect the building, said Mendes. The municipality has filed a 15-page defence saying it was not negligent or in breach of contract when car- rying out its duties. In addition, the district said the owners failed to commence a lawsuit within the six-month period stipu- lated in the Municipal Act. Mendes estimated the building repairs wil! likely cost between $400,000 to $500,000, a substantial amount for the owners. The owners hired a construc- tion company to do repairs, which are nearing comple- tion. Mendes said a trial date in 1997 or 1998 is being applied for. _ Meanwhile, homeowner Douglas McRae Mitchell, a condo owner at a three-storey development at 2419 Bellevue, said the District of West Vancouver paid condo owners there $280,000 last year in an out-of- court settlement involving water damage. Rosemary Pawliuk, the lawyer for the owners, said owners obtained a more-than-$300,000 judgment against developer Polygon. She explained it’s common practice for developers to set up new companies with each new development to limit the liability of company directors. In this case, Polygon set up a company and after the development was finished, renamed the company Mara Properties itd. By the time owners launched the law- suit, there were no assets in the company, said Pawliuk. “We got a judgment against them in excess of $300,000 but it wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on,” she said. So owners had to look for someone else who had deep pockets or insurance to sue. In this case, West Vancouver was the target. The out-of-court settlement was reached last year. West Vancouver city manager Doug Allan said he would not comment on the 2419 Bellevue issue because the matter is not closed. As part of the out-of- court settlement, West Vancouver has taken over the judgment against Folygon and is pursuing its options to recover the judgment, said Allan. He added it’s not unusual for municipalities to be named when fault is found with buildings. Municipalities as ongoing cntitics are disadvantaged when developers can attempt to set up shell companies and be successful, said Allan. He said municipalities need meze protection against building lawsuits. Proposals have been made to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, which is looking at some options, said Allan. Michael Engelbert, who has his dentistry office in 2419 Bellevue, said he didn’t want to sue the city because, as a West Vancouver businessman and resi- dent, he’s suing himself. West Vancouver has also con- tributed to an out-of-court settlement involving water damage at a building in the 1900-block of Bellevue. | smoking ban te Bur the majority of North Vancouver District council now say’: the Heart and Stroke Foundation of B.C. and Yukon. SCAFFOLDING greets owners of 2243 Bellevue as they ente thelr building, which they say was poorly constructed. r. io North Vancouver backs off on 100% prohibition of tobacco ‘smoke in indoor public areas _By Martin Millerchip . | Contributing Writer - AFTER much political huffing and puffing a uni- - fied North Shore approach to the vexing question of benning or controlling smoking in pub‘ic places now seems about as likely as getting ail local tobacco addicts to quit. On: Mondiy night both North Vancouver City and District councils backed away from previous support of 100% bans on smoking in all indoor public places. . 4 Instead, the district directed staff to reword its bylaw to ect: a : iia 70% smoking ban in restaurants; .. a 30% smoking ban in pubs and clubs; and fa 50% smoking ban in casinos and bingo halls. : :Meanwhile, two weeks after narrowly approving the concept of a 100% smoking ban by Jan. 1, 1998, North Vancouver City. also stopped to test the public air. After hearing input from the beverage industry, council ‘voted to refer the smoking issue to a public meeting and hold off on proceeding with its bylaw. And while the local moves pleased those involved in local drinking, establishments, they horrified Lesley MacGregor of Former council “Even with 70% no-smoking in restaurants you are still hav- ing smoke transfer from one section to another so, from a health perspective, you haven't really protected either the work- ers or the patrons,” MacGregor told the News. The district passed third reading of a smoking regulation bylaw seven months ago that would have imme- diately implemented a complete smoking ban in alJ restaurants, pubs and clués. At the time, council patted itself on the back for being a “leader” among Lower Mainland municipali- ties and derided West Vancouver's “phased-in” approach to a smoking ban as preventing a unified North Shore smoke-free zone. West Vancouver adopted a smok- ing bylaw Jan. 6, 1997, that requires: @ a 100% smoking ban immediately in casinos, bingo halls, pool halls, office workplaces and indoor public places; a a 70% smoking ban in restaurants, bars,.pubs and lounges by 1997; #8 an 80% ban by 1998; @ a 90% ban by 1999; and a 100% ban by 2000. Separate smoking rooms are permissible if separate ventila- tion is provided. Ironically, the so-called “weak” West Vancouver bylaw presently stands up as the strongest North Shore stance against the problems of second-hand smoke inhalation. “Tt looks like we should be passing a motion that says whatever the City of North Vancouver does we'll go along with it.” they are more concerned with an economic backlash to the food’: and beverage ind: in the event of a complete smoking ban-: Representatives from local pubs and neighborhood. pubs lined up at the microphone: Monday to tell council about busi-.. nesses going bankrupt in Vancouver, as a result of smoking bans. in Louise Flemming, general: man-: : ager of the Queens Cross Pub, told :. council her pub has 25% of its floor” area designated non-smoking: and -, has had no complaints from anyone, . \ while: Terry Crown warned that /a 100% ban would lead to. drops in sales and corresponding layoffs: - : Corrie Kost . reminded : council : that the Edgemont Community’. Association has already voted. in‘ favor of a 100% smoking ban. “It’s a health issue, not a business’ _—~ Com. Pat Masree issue,” added Kost. a Agreed MacGregor, “When one person smokes in an estab-.. lishment, everyone smokes.” uy ee Bur Mayor Don Bell said that while he had empathy for the :. second-hand smoke issue, he was also concerned that council”. might take action that has economic impact (the 100% ban) and later change its mind. - “It looks like we should be passing a motion that says what-. ever the City of North Vancouver docs we'll go along with it,” - commented Coun. Pat Munroe. oo See City page m Bright Lights Coltins Horth Shore Mews, founded in 1969 2s an inde- pendest suburban + and qualified under Schedule 311, Parngraph 191 off the Excise Tan Act, Joan Gadsby alleges over- prescription of medication By Anna Marie D’Angslo News Reporter A former North Vancouver District council- lor’s lawsuit against her doctor of 24 years is being played out this week at a trial in B.C. Supreme Court. Joan Elizabeth Gadsby, 56, alleges that her North Vancouver doctor, Roderick MacGillivray, did not warn her of risks when he prescribed anti-depressants, tranquilizers and sleeping pills fr»m about 1967 to 1990. Gadsby alleges that the doctor owed a duty to her to help in her withdrawal from the medication after she became dependent on it. She claims she experienced numerous problems including hallucinations and paranoia after she stopped using the addictive prescription medications in 1990. Gadsby also alleges thar while being over-pre- scribed with the medications, she experienced altered moods and other injuries. Gadsby’s statement of claim alleges that she first received the medication after suffering grief and sor- row over the death of her four-year-old son on Christmas Day in 1966. A Vancouver psychiatrist, Dr. Norman Hirt, first prescribed the medication in 1967. In MacGillivray’s amended statement of defence, the family doctor denied all of his former patient’s alfe- See Doctor page 18 lor sues doctor FORMER coun. Joan Gadsby suing North Vancouver MD.