1/15/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JAN 15 enbK 63 is-n)E 301 have the opinion of the Building Department as we do not want the church go in there if there is any safety problem. Attorney Vitunac advised that there is no legal problem with asking the Building Director to do another inspection to see if the building should be condemned. Director Rymer, however, says there is nothing obvious from looking at it and that it would require having a structural engineer do an expensive report. We have suggested the owners give us such a report. Commissioner Bird asked if COs are issued individually for each unit within the building or if one CO has already been issued for the entire building? The Building Director advised they have issued COs on the entire facility, and Administrator Wright explained the only reason the church had to come in for a CO was that a church represents a change of use for this particular zoning. Chairman Scurlock stated that where he has a problem is our process. Our Building Department does not have a whole staff of engineers and architects, and because of that we rely on the seal of certified professionals, which generally works pretty well. However, just as a lay person looking at this, he can see plainly there is a ridiculous drainage situation and there may be a problem with the septic system, and this gives him some real concern. Commissioner Lyons concurred that Director Rymer does not inspect for structural capability of a building but just as to whether it meets the Building Code and the approved plans, and Commissioner Wodtke agreed there is only so far we can go; we can't protect everyone against everything that might possibly go wrong. _ Chairman Scurlock assumed Mr. Galanis of Environmental Health will see if the septic system works, and if it does, that takes care of his concern. Mr. Galan -is confirmed that it is a functioning system, and he felt strongly that it will work because of the elevation. 60