Canonsburg Manager Terry Hazlett provided council Monday night with copies of proposed ordinances to regulate buildings and dangerous structures and to address nuisances.

Mr. Hazlett submitted the dangerous structures ordinance because, he said, it seems as though a building has to be almost falling down before the borough can take it down.

The proposed ordinance is based on a common version used by many municipalities throughout the country, he said. He also distributed copies of the nuisance ordinance used in neighboring Chartiers.

Solicitor Pat Derrico said the borough has ordinances that address dangerous structures, some probably dating back to 1912. The real problem is a matter of enforcing what's already there, he said. The borough needs to conduct regular inspections.

Mr. Hazlett said he receives many complaints about homes that he passes on to code enforcement officer Diane Poellot, who tells him the borough can't enforce anything because there are no ordinances allowing it to do so.

One example of a dangerous structure that isn't being fixed or torn down was provided by Councilman Steve Lucas, who said a home on Elm Street was burned in a fire in November. He said the windows are blown out and the porch is falling down.

Borough engineer Harvey Treschow said the borough could adopt the part of the state's Uniform Construction Code regarding maintenance of existing structures. Mr. Derrico said the code would provide modern laws in a few pages.

Councilman Richard Russo said the borough has 60 vacant homes and suggested the borough hold a workshop to discuss the Uniform Construction Code. Instead of looking for bits and pieces of borough ordinances, the state already has done the work in creating a clarified code, he said.

Councilman George Coleman said greater enforcement may cost the borough extra time and money, but it is worth it to protect people living in dangerous structures.

"I don't care about the beautification of this town as long as the people are safe and we don't carry them out in body bags," he said.

The proposed ordinance regarding buildings, which was meant to clarify what constitutes a land development, was withdrawn from council's agenda for tomorrow night.

Council could vote tomorrow to advertise an ordinance or amend its existing ordinance on vacant dwellings.