Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> - . <br /> CAPITAL 4-5431 <br /> ALLE N So COURTNEY <br /> ATTOR'JS'EYS AT LAW <br /> E-14Q5 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING <br /> CLAUDE H, ALLEN SAINT PAUL It MINl'ifESOTA <br /> VINCENT P,COURTNEY 1958 <br /> WILLIAM L.DEVITT September 29, <br /> I!Irs. Lorraine ~. Stromquist <br /> Clerk of the Vi112ge of .Arden Hills <br /> L5b.l Lakeshore Place <br /> St. Paul, l'-Iinnesota <br /> Dear ;"-'h:- s. Stromq\1i st: <br /> Several questions have been raised requiring a report by me at <br /> the Council meeting toni~ht. The questions and my opinions on them are <br /> surnnarized ir. this letter'_ <br /> ,1) A questicn v~s raised regarding an apparent conflict bet~reen <br /> par8gr2ph /.!,-6 and pagagraph h-l7 of our Building Cede 1:!ith reference to the <br /> inst.al1~::t:~on of piping for ~n incinerator. Paragraph 4-6 does not specifically <br /> n.ention Bn incinerator but imposes 8 .CO fee for any machine or appliance <br /> :reC{ui ring t.he use of 93S, pLus 3D additional .00 fee for gas piping if it is <br /> required in the installation of the appliance. I 8SSllile that piping is neceS- <br /> sary in connection -~lit.h the installation of an incinerator. Paragraph 4-17 <br /> provides a fee cf .00 for the instal18ticn of 8ach domestic portnble incinerator. <br /> In !:J.y opinion the provision in h-l? c?v~rs an~: type. of. ir:.ciner-~t~l', <br /> 2nd I believe t.-he addition of the 1.00 fee In L!-t) for l.DstaJ.latlcn of pIpIng <br /> cn a 92S i~ciner8tor is proper. <br /> (2) The matter of t.he tUlfinishcd building on Tiller L2De has been <br /> with us for 8 considerable period of time. Lz.st Saturday I examined the house <br /> from the outside and t~ere is no qU2stion that it is an eye sore in that neigh- <br /> borhood. ?C1.ragr~Jphs 1-33 to 1-43 of our Building Code cover this situation and, <br /> in effect, authorize the buildiDg inspector, after 8 hearing before the CounciJ, <br /> and notice to the oBner, to do such things to the structure 8S, in his opinion, <br /> !lrr~ay be necess3ry for the protecticD of life or adjoining property.1I <br /> The problem of handling a building ltlich may be 8 nuisance is not <br /> U.I-'1USU8l but it is generally true th8t a municipBlity may only act to the extent <br /> that is necessary to correct a public nuisance. A public nuisance, as opposed <br /> to 8 private nuisance, is one Hhich adversely affects 8 substantial number of <br /> pEople, r8t~er than o~J.ly a feu. Also, and I consider this quit~ im.portant in <br /> this Dituation, asswning that a buildir.g does constitute 8 publi~ nuisance, <br /> - - <br />