Here, the trial court correctly granted summary judgment and properly ordered the railing's and stairway's removal. Harris failed to supply evidence showing that the roof work was ordinary maintenance, undertaken solely to sustain the structure's existing capability. Rather, the facts showed that the roof work constituted capital improvements, something that expanded the existing capability of the structure by converting a roof into a roof deck. The roof work included reinforcement of lateral and vertical weight-bearing elements, and this allowed patrons to stand on the new roof and use it for new purposes. The old roof would not permit patrons to stand on it.
New uses are a characteristic of capital improvements.
Such capital improvements needed a prior DNR permit. We also reject Harris' remaining arguments. First, the trial court had no duty to stay its nonfinal removal order pending entry of a final judgment. The trial court could rightfully demand compliance on an interlocutory basis, and Harris had a choice to either obey on an interlocutory basis or seek interlocutory relief from an appellate court. The trial court also correctly held Harris in contempt for violating the nonfinal removal order.