The abandoned house, which is about to collapse, has not lost its conservation values, states the Administrative Court of Turku. The municipality has practically no communication with the owner of the house.
Turku The administrative court has rejected the appeal of the municipality of Kemiönsaari regarding the protection of the so-called “Varislinna”.
The more than a hundred-year-old luhtikädi building has been a stone in the municipality’s shoe for years, and for example, there has already been a fire twice. The dilapidated two-story building was protected under the Building Heritage Act and by the decision of the ely center in 2012.
The municipality would like to demolish the building, because it considers the building dangerous, even more so when it is located near schools in the center of Taalintehtaa and attracts young people to its interior.
Museum Agency and Varsinais-Suomen liitto, on the other hand, were afraid that if the protection was repealed, it would lead to a domino effect: Some old buildings would be allowed to deteriorate elsewhere, and protection obligations would be waived when the building is beyond repair.
The administrative court organized an inspection of the building at the beginning of October, and found that the building’s status as a landscape-significant working-class residential building reminiscent of industrial history had not changed after the preservation decision was made.
The court stated that the building is severely damaged in places. However, according to the court, the stone footing and the walls built with plank-end technology were preserved in relatively good condition.
“The frame of the building was orderly, the roof was largely intact, and the characteristic exterior architecture of the building had been preserved despite the decay,” states the court.
The house owned by a private person whom the authorities and HS have tried to reach with little success. Formerly worked as business manager in Kemiönsaari municipality Tommy Wass previously told HS that the current owner from outside the municipality is not known at all in the municipality and the pursuit of the owner has been unsuccessful.
HS told in January, that the owner is the same man who became public in the late 1980s because of the treason trial against the Soviet Union. After the court proceedings, the man, together with another man, was ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of marks to the state for violating the regulations on the export monitoring report. However, the man was not convicted of a crime.
However, one method is still unused. As a last resort, the authority can threaten to repair the house arbitrarily, and send an invoice to the owner. If threats do not help, the authority can carry out its threats.
The Ely center told HS in January that such a so-called commissioning threat process has already started. At the turn of last year, the owner had already been notified of the decision to impose a threat of execution. It is followed by a decision to enforce the threat of commissioning, which decides on commissioning repairs at the owner’s expense.
Of course, the threat of commissioning includes the risk that the owner will never be able to collect the money spent on repairs.
On Thursday, HS could not reach the ely center’s expert to tell what stage the process is at.
Administrative Court stated that neglect of property maintenance or safety deficiencies at the construction site are not grounds for revoking building protection. Under the Land Use and Construction Act, the municipality’s building control authority has the obligation to monitor the building’s maintenance and environmental safety and, ultimately, by means of administrative coercion, the possibility to oblige the owner of the property to correct neglect of the building’s maintenance and safety.
The decision can be appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court.
#Turku #house #tormented #islanders #ordered #protected #Municipality #powerless