HomeMy WebLinkAboutCircuit Court (decision) - 12/03/1970 •
STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT WINNEBAGO COUNTY
OSCAR L. HILDEBRAND,
Petitioner,
vs. Case #33983
EDWARD L. REIMER, and
CITY OF OSHKOSH,
Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
By William E. Crane
Circuit Judge, Br.I
December 3, 1970
The above - entitled proceeding is an application by
the petitioner, Oscar L. Hildebrand, to the Circuit Court of
Winnebago County for an order restraining the building in-
spector of the City of Oshkosh from razing and removing a
frame shed located on premises owned by the petitioner in
accordance with the provisions Sec. 66.05(3) of the Wisconsin
Statutes.
Oscar Hildebrand, petitioner, is the owner of a
frame shed 24' x 84' situated on the following described
property:
The South 117' of Lots 23, 24, 25 and 26,
Block D, 2nd Addition, 8th Ward, City of
Oshkosh, which is known as 58 -62 Broad
Street of said city.
It is stipulated by the parties that the assessed valuation
of the storage shed is $200.00, and that its equalized value
would be in excess of $400.00.
On January 22, 1968, Edward L. Reimer, Building
1 -
•
•
Inspector of the City of Oshkosh served a "Notice to Raze"
said building on the petitioner setting forth that the A
premises were out of repair to the extent to be dangerous,
unsafe and unsanitary, and unfit for occupancy and use, and
further alleging that said frame shed was in danger of
structural collapse, and requiring said petitioner to raze
and remove said buildings within 60 days from the date the
•
order was served upon him. On February 6, 1968, an affidavit •
by petitioner in support of a temporary restraining order
together with a restraining order issued by Honorable Arnold
J. Cane, Circuit Judge, was served upon said building in-
•
spector and the City of Oshkosh, restraining: the' razing and
removing of said frame shed.
This matter came on for hearing .before the Circuit
•
Court on March 6, 1970, William E. Crane, presiding, for
determination as to whether the order of the inspector for
buildings was reasonable. Testimony was taken, and a view
of the premises was held in the company of the petitioner,
and the building inspector, Edward L. Reimer, Evidence
. establishes that the petitioner used and occupied said frame
shed for the storage, and sorting of milk and pop bottles,
and he did business as the Oshkosh Bottle Exchange on said
premises. The building is of frane construction, the south
•
and east walls being of a stud wall construction, the west
wall consisting of a header and approximately six or seven
large size door ppenings.: inclosed with triple folding doors.
2 - •
The roof of the shed was constructed of 2 x 4 roofing joists,
said roof being supported by beams resting on support posts. 1
The building did not have any floor, and no foundation, or
footings other than poured concrete or stone platforms upon
which support posts rested. From the view taken, the building .
appeared to be an old frame shed formerly used as a contractor's
shed, and in earlier days as a car barn for storage of street-
cars. The condition of the building had deteriorated dtte to
weather and aging some of the supporting members had shifted,
{
and settled to some extent, and the building appeared to be
in need of paint on the exterior south and east walls.
Testimony on behalf of petitioner was received from
E. A. Rehbein, and Gilbert Pitz, both recognized contractors
in the City of Oshkosh, who rendered opinions to the effect
that the premises were not dangerous, and could be repaired
at a cost of $150.00 to $200.00 to be fully usable as a
storage shed, to be used in the manner of the petitioner for
storage of bottles, lumber, and equipment.
Testimony was received by the Building Inspector
that the building was dangerous, and should be torn down
because of the rotting sills, increased /eakness of the west
wall due to shifting, and the waviness of the building. The
City Building Inspector was of the opinion that it would be
necessary to completely rebuild the building, and require a
new foundation, and thecost would be approximately $2000.00.
Mr. Yarbro, a recognized architect licensed by the
State of Wisconsin, testified that the south wall sill was
- 3
rotted, that the building could be repaired but the expense
would be a minimum of $1500.00, and a partial foundation
would be needed. Mr. Yarbro also testified that there are
many other buildings in the City of Oshkosh constructed in
the manner of said building without a foundation or floor.
• Mr. Rehbein testified that the building was not
in danger of-structural collapse, that the rotted wood, and
waviness could be eliminated by jacking -up of the vertical
support post replacement of some boards.
Mr. Gilbert Pitz was also of the opinion that the
building could be repaired to be serviceable without requiring
too expensive repairs, but merely'by installing a post, and
timber, and a few boards in back of the building, and that
it would not be unreasonable to make the repairs.
After hearing testimony, viewing the premises, and
examining the picture exhibits in evidence, this Court
determines that the building is not in danger of collapse,
and is fit for use as presently employed; that the order of
the Building Inspector requiring the razing and removal of
the frame shed building was unreasonable, and accordingly, -
the restraining order in respect to the Building Inspector,
and the City of Oshkosh is continued provided however that
the City may require the petitioner, Oscar L. Hildebrand,
to paint and repair said premises in a reasonable fashion so
as to permit the continued use of the premises as a storage
shed, and no costs shall be awarded to the petitioner.
Dated this 4th day of December, 1970.
L1/4)/( \
William E. Crane, Circuit Judge
- 4 -