Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Any municipality or county may, by ordinance, require the repair, closing, or demolition of dwellings or other structures intended for human habitation which are, as defined in the ordinance, unfit for human habitation or which may imperil the health, safety, or morals of the occupants thereof or of surrounding areas. Such ordinances may include the following:
(Ga. L. 1955, p. 354, § 18; Ga. L. 1960, p. 1052, § 1; Ga. L. 1987, p. 3, § 36.)
- Eminent domain, T. 22.
Condemnation procedure, T. 22, C. 2.
- For article surveying developments in Georgia real property law from mid-1980 through mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 219 (1981).
- When the effect of an ordinance passed pursuant to this section and the application thereof is to take from a property owner the owner's property, not through eminent domain, but by denying the owner a right to rebuild under a zoning code and requiring the owner to demolish under a slum clearance code, the ordinance is unconstitutional, null, and void. Shaffer v. City of Atlanta, 223 Ga. 249, 154 S.E.2d 241 (1967) (see O.C.G.A. § 36-61-11).
Any ordinance which authorizes demolition of a structure within the city without compensation to the owner merely because the cost of repair exceeds the value of the structure or any percentage thereof, without first allowing opportunity to repair (and, if necessary, providing for discovery of the criteria which must be met to bring the structure up to a minimum standard) is unconstitutional and void. Horne v. City of Cordele, 140 Ga. App. 127, 230 S.E.2d 333 (1976).
- 39A C.J.S., Health and Environment, §§ 56, 57.
- What constitutes "Blighted Area" within urban renewal and redevelopment statutes, 45 A.L.R.3d 1096.
No results found for Georgia Code 36-61-11.