The owner of a $3-million West Vancouver home says he plans to fight back against the municipality’s attempt to force him to tear it down over alleged building infractions.

The District of West Vancouver claims Philip and Raven Garrow’s new house is too close to the curb, violating regulations that require a home to have a setback of at least 7.6 metres in the front yard.

Garrow told CTV Vancouver that the house is in line with approved building plans, “with minor variations” that do not affects its permissibility.

Last week, the district submitted a petition to the B.C. Supreme Court asking to force the owners to tear the house down within 60 days at their expense, or grant municipal workers permission to do so with the bill to be paid by the homeowners or added to their taxes.

Garrow said he intends to counter that with a petition of his own declaring the home was built within the law.

“The city may say whatever they choose to say, but . . . all of the professionals have provided their assurance that construction was carried out according to plan, and according to these building codes,” he said, adding that the district’s position “defies any logic and reason.”

The now-infamous house at 733 20th Street was built in place of an older one that was exempt from the setback requirements because it was built before the current bylaw was enacted. The district claims the new home encroaches further towards the curb than the previous structure.

“(The district is) basing their position on a number of rudimentary measurements that they have taken. They have never actually had a survey completed of the property,” Garrow said.

The homeowners claim a survey they commissioned correctly measured the home’s height, setbacks and other requisites.

“The bottom line is that we obtained the permits, we have registered professionals (and) they’ve completed the inspections.”

If the home is found to be in violation of the law, the Garrows said they are willing to make the necessary alterations to bring it up to code.

“If it’s found that some part of the construction was non-conforming, then certainly we’ll abide by that,” Garrow said, adding that only “very small changes” would be necessary, if any.

The district contends the discrepancies between the approved plans and the finished product cannot be fixed, and the house must therefore be demolished. Officials have also asked the court to ban anyone from living in the home, or conducting further construction without proper licensing, until it is torn down.