My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-E Hist Pres.Comm. (10/14/02)
City-of-Paris
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2001-2010
>
2004
>
07 - July
>
2004-07-12
>
03-E Hist Pres.Comm. (10/14/02)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2012 3:37:11 PM
Creation date
6/30/2004 9:07:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGENDA
AGENDA - Type
MINUTES
Description
Historic Preservation Commission
AGENDA - Date
10/14/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
October 14, 2002 <br />Page 22 of 35 <br />back on page thirteen for judicial review but there is no appeal for Building and <br />Standards Commission to City Council. Your decision stands. It is either complied <br />with, enforced, or the party must appeal that to district court. That is why your <br />paperwork is so very important; because we have to produce it in your record case <br />file to the court and establish to the court that the actions that were taken were taken <br />in accordance with the law. The burden of proof in that sort of case is very, very <br />difficult for the party appealing that. I would point out to you on page fourteen, at <br />the top, " the district court's review shall be limited to a hearing under the substantial <br />evidence rule." That is a rule of law that means if there is anything more than what <br />is called a scintilla of evidence to support the action of the commission then that <br />ruling is sustained. It will not be reversed by the district court. That is a very <br />difficult burden. I have had to face that personally before both in the sense of having <br />to substantiate it on the side and having to defend it and go against it. I mean to <br />impose upon you, or emphasize, I should say, the importance of your deliberations <br />and your decisions because basically it is very unusual that your decisions are not the <br />final decisions as to what happens to these properties. <br />Any questions? The rest of it I think is fairly straight forward in terms of the <br />remainder of the ordinance. <br />Then the second part that starts on page nineteen is what is called the secured <br />building permit which is not something that is within the purview of this particular <br />commission but it was adopted by the Council at the same time as an alternative <br />second approach for property owners to have a property that is structurally sound but <br />is not in compliance with the ordinance to place it in a special status that would <br />exempt it from enforcement actions provided they kept it secured and did not <br />represent a risk to the health and safety of the public allowing the property owner <br />then to bring the property back into compliance. The only time that this affects the <br />duties of the Building and Standards Commission is that if a property owner seeks <br />and successfully achieves that kind of permit, then the Commission may prefer <br />enforcement action further on the property. <br />Any questions? Depending on how you look at it this is the short or the long <br />admission of this ordinance. <br />Man: When do anticipate would be the soonest that this commission would meet? <br />Mr. Schenk: I think you guys decided it would be the third Monday. <br />Man: Do you think you will have anything to present? <br />Mr. Schenk: I think regardless of whether we do or not you still have to sit down and establish <br />your rules and regulations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.