07/31/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED BOARD OF BUII,DING CODE APPEALS 1VIIlNUTES - SPECIAL MEETING . JCTLY 31, 1996 1. ROLL CALL: Chainnan Burk called the meeting to order at 8:05 P.M. Present: R. Burk, P. Engoglia, D. Spoerke, and J. Kazak Absent: W. Piar. Also Present: Building Commissioner Conway, Assistant Build.ing Commissioner Rymarczyk, and Assistant Clerk of Commissions Cornish. H. REVIEW AND CORRECTIONS OF MIlNUTES: Deferred until next meeting. III. COMMUNICATIONS: No items. N. HEARINGS: 1) George Blazey, 4724 Canterbury Road. ' Request by Building Commissioner for the Board that the above listed structure should be considered a public nuisance and the nature thereof is such as to require its swmnary abatement as required in North Olmsted Codified Ordinances, Section 1131.07(a). Building Commissioner Conway corrected the notice stating this actually violates North Olmsted Codified Ordinance, section 1131.07(a). Chairman Burk called all interested parties before the board. The oath was administered to Mr. Scully, Mr. and Mrs. Krause, Ms. Hovan, and Mr. Blazey. Mr. Couway stated that, as a result of a complaint filed by neighbors of W. Blazey, inspectors were sent out to tlus property. He explained Assistant Building Commissioner Rymarczyk, present tonight, is one of the inspectors who observed this property first hand. As a result of inspection, reports were filed relative to the coudition of the home, which prompted Mr. Conway to send the fire department out for investigation of the premises. He feels this structure meets the definitions contained in the unsafe structure chapter, and has deemed it to be a public nuisance and an unsafe structure. The purpose of tlus hearing is to determine if the board is in agreement that this is an emergency condition, whereby it is not only uusafe, but dangerous to the public, as well as to the occupant of the structure. Photographs, various corespondence, etc., have been provided, and if the board determines this is an emergency case the building commissioner would take the next course of action, whereby, a notice would then be sent out to Mr. Blazey giving him five (5) days to vacate the structure and to raze it. He further explained, if Mr. Blazey did not comply within that five day period, he would have to go through all the channels that uormally occur. Mr. Conway elaborated that Mr. Blazey would then be entitled to a hearing before couucil and a determination will be made as to whether they will set aside fuuds for the city to perform tlus function. Mr. Conway further stated, it would be explained to Mr. Blazey in the correspondence, at any point in time, he has the right of appeal to the building board to get an extension of time, come up with au alternative to the razing of the structure, or argue the fact that in case the structure is more than fifty (50%) percent damaged and deemed in the condition that it canuot be repaired. Mr. Conway wanted to make the board aware tlus afternoon he discussed tlus matter with some of the people associated with Mr. Blazey, and that they may or may not have some alternative solutious. He would like for the board to hear those issues, if it is spoken of tolught. Mr. Blazey stated he is not overly