HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchick, Nicholas
-~
...
.
'.
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P,O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
RfalVED
AUB 6 935
August 6, 1985
T_ o..tr SoutIIoIcI
To:
Judith Terry
Town Clerk
~
Dept.
From:
Victor Lessard
Exec. Admin. Bldg.
Subject: Nicholas Schick Inc.
(Unsafe BUildings)
The building has been removed, and the property made
safe by burying the foundation. All the legal charges by
Town Court have been satisfied and an ADOC proceeding has
transpired. Building Dept. has in its files,records that
all conditions laid down by the Town Board have been sat-
isfied and suggests that this file can now be closed.
VL: smw
,
...
(.P.L. 170.55 170.56 ~ORM NO. 400 -WMSOH LAW BOOK co., ROCHESTER, N. Y. 14609
"'"'0'''"''0"', m~'o' 5~~~~ ,(?
~ COURT /~ OF_%if~:L-
,;
)
;
(ti!1' 'I'opll' of tI!1' ~tl1tr of Nl'w Work
(lJ;c/ld L ffS~c/lC'C~ / pC,
Defendant
\
ADJOURNMENT
IN
CONTEMPLA TION OF DISMISSAL
'1
I
WHER~~~he ~~ named delendant was arraigned belore this Court on the
\:;Ve~19q-~ upon an accusatory instrument charging him with the alfense 01
, - . 0. - ~CIjq~i.ol' oj Section fGl..,) u~divi - 0 1 01 the
Low 01 the Stat 01 N:';-Yo'rk, a , and
WHEREAS, t e Court is considering granting to said Defendant an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal pursuant
to Section (170.55) (170.56) 01 the Criminal Procedure Law 01 the State 01 New York in connection with said charge, and
:1
WHEREAS, the said Delendant hereby represents to the Court:
I:
(1) That he has never previously been granted an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal in any court in this state,
AND
,
,
"
.
\:
(2) That he has never been previously granted a dismissal under Section 170.5601 the Criminal Procedure Law 01 the State
of New York, AND
(3) That he has never been previously convicted in the State of New York or any other state of any offense involving
dangerous drugs or controlled substances, AND
(4) That he has never been previously convicted in the State of New York or any other state of any crime (except
.j AND
(5) That he has never been adjudicated a youthful offender in this state or any other state on the basis of any act or acts
involving dangerous drugs or controlled substances (except
.j AND
r
I"
(6) That the above statements are true to the best of his knowledge. .:~~-i I _ __ _' '-- _ __ i ,
IIlIil"'{ (.. \ Dele~d~;:N;~~O'(4S~~'~~~,tLI1~
The consent of the DistrIct Attorney of C; l/Fro t..z< County (which is required in all cases under Section 170.55
and in those cases under Section 170.56 where paragraph 4 or 5 is applicable) is hereby given to the ad' urnment in
contemplation of dismissal under consideration by the Cour!.:__"') ('
DlSTRI .)<T~OR~-op' ':>v COUNTY
B . ~( ?
Y -~ - i ,~~ 7
Titl~ Cw>t'5 )0..<1 u-i'fy 'h.,. "rf-e--.~-4';'
c p
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above charge against the said Delendant be adjourned until J(/ t Y / )../ /y r r-
and, unless restored to the calendar by the Court prior to said date, the said charge shall thereupon be deemed t~ have been
dismissed in furtherance of justice, and it is further
See Back for any Conditions
01
ORDERED that, during such period 01 adjournment, the said Delendant
:::::u=JO{? liP]e 01 this Order.
/ .
.
.
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
october 25, 1984
Town Board of the Town of Southold
53095 Main Road - Town Hall
Southold, New York 11971
RE: Nicholas Schick, Inc. (Orient Point
Inn Property), Orient, New York
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that on October 17, 1984, I inspected
the above-captioned premises located on the northerly side
of Main Road (N.Y.S. Route 25), Orient, New York, which
were the subject of a Notice Pursuant to Chapter 90 of the
Code of the Town of Southold dated July 24, 1984.
The inspection revealed that the above named property
owner has complied with the Notice in that the building
located on the premises has been demolished, and accord-
ingly, I am closing the file on this matter.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
(1~~ 7t~
Curtis W. Horton
CWH:bc
.
'.
TEL,765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O, BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
July 2, 1984
Town Board
Town of Southold
Southold, NY 11971
Gentlemen:
On June 30, at approximately 10:45, Victor Lessard and I arrived
at the Orient Point Inn to look at current conditions. We entered
premises and went to rear of building for access. I found the
building to be in much worse shape than two years ago. The floor
is sagging more. The center of the building seems to be crumbling.
I noticed more effects of dampness than before. The roof is in
worse shape. I checked each wing in the center section and took
pictures noting where repairs are needed. .
We went to the third floor. In the west section I found
large holes in the roof. Walking had to be done carefully to
avoid going through the floors. I looked carefully, with Mr.
Lessard, for old timber and noted none. All is rough-hewn,
which is not of Revolutionary Age. It is my opinion that this
building, due to neglect, weather, and age, is beyond repair and
should be torn down.
Also, as a result of an agreement between the Town and owners
in 1982, the owners have done a commendable jOb in meeting safety
guidelines. The shoring was done. The only complaint I have is
that the area around the fence has grown again, preventing sur-
veillance. It should be clear at all times.
The inspection was completed at approximately 11:50.
Very truly yours,
C~~?/~
Curtis W. Horton
Building & Ordinance Inspector
CWH:ec
j
[
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STHISTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
June 2S, 1981i
William W, Esseks, Esq.
108 East Main Street
Riverhead, New York 11901
Dear Mr. Esseks:
I refer to my letter of April 16, 1981i to Abigail Wickham, copy
to you, and my letter to you of May 9, 1984, concerning the liS day
extension granted to Nicholas Schick to return to the Town Board
with a demolition or reconstruction plan for the Orient Point Inn.
On behalf of the Town Board, please advise me immediately, in
writing, what Mr. Schick's plan is for demolition or reconstruction.
Very truly yours,
~~d'~:r-
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
-
~
.
.
RECEIVED
EDWARD JOHN BOYD "Jl
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW
SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK IIQ71
JUN 14"
SU5.7eS-ISS!5
Town o..tr 5out~Ald
June 13, 1984
Southold Town Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Orient Point Inn
Orient, New York
Gentlemen:
As attorney for the Orient Fire District I urge the Southold Town
Board to take immediate action to eliminate the immense hazard to
the community caused by the continued existence of the structure
known as the Orient Point Inn.
As the Town Board is aware, the proposal for rehabilitation of the
Orient Point Inn has been drifting for several years while the phys-
ical condition of the structure has been concurrently deteriorating.
Notwithstanding the fact that the structure has been declared "un-
safe" pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Southold Town Code, enforcement
action under that chapter has been delayed time and time again.
Within the past two months the Orient Fire District has been ap-
proached by an attorney representing the owners of the Orient Point
Inn with a request for demolition of the structure through a con-
trolled burn conducted by the Orient Fire Department. This request
was promptly denied by the Board of Fire Commissioners due to the
manifest dangers presented by the burning of so large a structure.
Subsequent to the Orient Fire District's refusal to participate in
any demolition by fire there has been public mention of a plan to
ask other North Fork Fire Departments to supervise such burning.
Aside from the fact that such action would not be considered by any
fire department without the cooperation and approval of the Orient
Fire District, mere mention of such a plan stands as an open invita-
tion by the building's owners for any manner of vandalism or arson
which would result in the razing of the Orient Point Inn.
Since the threat to the community posed by fire in the Orient Point
Inn is so great and the owners appear to have given tacit, if not
actual, approval to any scheme which would result in the destruc-
tion of the building regardless of the dangers involved, it is in-
cumbent upon the Southold Town Board to take immediate action as-
suring the safe and orderly removal of the Orient Point Inn.
Edward John Boyd V
EJB/bv
f?7iith &~1-r:( f:ft!J~h-t~
{'c: ~ua77X~7'
.
.
RICIIVED
MAY,171984
Orient Fire District
ORIENT, LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK
"957
T QW1\ CItdi So!stIiok(
/}l!'(J 13, /?J'Y
'}
//17 -//
, 4~A.unv-rV ,I
Ji:' v ,~lt:i/ t/ (2;&)~{f.). ,( /C;:rj, ~<A) :!t<r<-7>C
,;1 ,-/;' a; f tf . /' ---r/J J--
,1;(J/ - )lAu....--fO ,J7. i u/ C1-?1.'77u'~.'~ ,,:::,~.) I QC'tV-<-k.e. A-<o . .'.11[12/ ;)/tk</
l{'~,{J AU~ Ai< {!;~~A:~~i f;/,,~~ f)rc~n.T"'(;, /t~1--v
d,-c~ .Jl (5?~U/T'C.t fP~~I 1n-7V' . q;;t;/ ~.,-v>y,<~~.-,w~
I --; . () -/-,/ ;J ;J j).!' /l ~/ /) . -ff
d!'""n~V ",'<<A~/"d ~7~r:{ /'(8' n; ~2A"<.J'
.'1:-cA'> 11/ 1~~J A'~ ~/li!~ (//!aJ y ~ ~.
J~....0\... :SP!f>JJ <-<red) ~ ..b- &// /' r 'j} // -rr
, "'-" t--o-f.u I tJ /l; () (""'l/..{.-n~ ~-<:!~
1~;t'&r'
;t/L/U4-,~~JJ;t f)~)v
/k.
Rec. fro V'
m lctor Lessard:
This' t
lS he Orient F' ,
. . lre Dlstrict's
Wllllam Esseks letter response to
to them regarding
1 Orient Point I Schick's
nn.
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL SL\TISTlCS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
May 9,1984
William W, Esseks, Esq.
108 East Main Street
Riverhead, New York 11901
Dear Mr. Esseks:
I refer to my letter of April 16, 1984 to Abigail Wickham, copy
to you, concerning the 45 day extension granted to Nicholas Schick
to return to the Town Board with a demolition or reconstruction plan
for the 0 rient Point Inn.
On behalf of the Town Board, please advise me immediately as
to when they may expect to receive the abovementioned plan.
Very truly yours,
~:~
Southold Town Clerk
cc: Southold Town Board
Building Department
....
.
...rJ'l.xLtL~?"'-
i"{~>;FiH' .,:?,:...
,,;v C'~\ , ,."J( l'n'~:
/)' '" ""'~~'
fl ifi/ ~~
(1~ ~n
'" -- .,~~
~'-'.~. "..- '.
N ~ " r','p
t~ Vi. t ::;~;: f
"~.v;? ~ ~~\ ~..l':
,"" 'f, ....~ ^/
';.>:;..<.'IJI....,0 .:"
~::::r~~>'t _ yi ..1; ;).>-"
'~~;.",
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
May 9,1984
Mr. Lawrence Bruno
6979 Winkler Road
Ft. Myers, Florida 33907
Dear Mr. Bruno:
In response to your letter of May 5. 1984, the address of
Mr. Nicholas Schick is:
, c/o Orient Point Realty
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10035
Very truly yours,
~~~-
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
~ .
itkrl~'S LARGEST CHAIN .OTELS, HOTELS AND RESORTS IFOR REa
ATlONS DIAL TOLL FREE (800) 528-1234
MAY 91984
:~ .
T o-:t~ CINk Southol '. . .'
w~
Best Western Beach Motel
684 ESTERO BLVD
ESTERO ISLAND, FORT MYERS BEACH, FLA. 33931
(813) 463-4815
~ J~/78'f
tJJb/\ ~~ \J
~ ~ ~ -;JJJ- o~
f~~ ~ ~ JJ--v~~
~~.ti~A ~.
~.~ .MLiL~r~
~ q~ A-J~"- .~ .J2
~ " ~.~~tJ~
~_,J~~~~cf)~
~~~ . ~T6--
~ ~{ 'f.~ );h. d+
cd; ~ o~.;t ,q..-vvc ~"'" ~ J'-~
, J 1_ _ ~ ~./<.{)-~'<f-
~ y~.r::f;y~
;( 1: .~ ~ ~ ;t 6111 w,Nkl.C.e,
A~ R f ~'3'lo7. D_
.. \ ( '1 Y C ~ s L-, ,~ ./,~.v-<../v~~
~~, ~ J I '
~~
,;
..
.
.
,
RECEiVED
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD. N.Y. 11971
APK 23 1984
April 23, 1984
TO'Nn Clerk Southold
Southo1d Town Board
Town Hall
Southo1d, NY 11971
Re: Fence, Orient Point Inn
Gentlemen:
At 3:00 on this date, I received a phone call from Mr. Shik
regarding the Orient Point Inn. He had received my letter of
April 16, 1984, ordering a response by April 20 (copy attached) .
He told me that he did not know the current conditions of the
fence and was very sorry about any unsafe conditions. He also
asked for two (2) weeks to correct the situation. The time
period was agreed upon.
I requested that he send a letter confirming these arrange-
ments and he promised to do so.
Sincerely yours,
{3~w: ?I~
Curtis W. Horton
Building Inspector
CWH:ec
Attachment
xc: Judith Terry, Town Clerk
~,
..
.
.
TEL. 765-1802
,
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECfOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
April 16, 1984
Mr. Nicholas Shik
% Orient Point Realty
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10035
Dear Mr. Shik:
Based on a recent inspection of your property at Orient Point
(Orient Point Inn), I have found a major break in your chain link
fence behind the sign that you have erected on your premises.
This break allows intruders free access to the property. I have
also found in my inspection that the barbed wire top on various
portions of the fence has also been broken, making it very easy
for people to climb the fence.
You are hereby directed to repair and fix this fence imme-
diately. Kindly give me a call in the next week when you have
completed the repair. If I do not hear from you by April 20,
I will report the matter to the Town Board and appropriate action
will be taken.
Sincerely yours,
{3~ 44;: ?I~
Curtis W. Horton
Building Inspector
VL:hd
Executive Admin.
cc: Francis Murphy
Supervisor
Judith Terry
Town Clerk
.
.
~fJn !o
I
LAW OFFICES
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
MAl N ROAD, P. Q. BOX 1424
MATTITUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 11952
WILLIAM WICKHAM
ERIC ..I. BRESSLER
ABIGAI LA. WICKHAM
RECEiVED
516-298-8353
FRANKLYN A. FARRIS
pC: t\ '1 9 '1984
April 18, 1984
lo.......' Clerk Soufho:d
Mrs. Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Nicholas Schick - Orient Point
Dear Judy:
Thank you for your letter dated April 16, 1984.
I no longer represent Mr. Schick, and I trust that
Mr. Esseks will be in touch with you on the matter.
Very truly yours,
/4JtIJ~
Abigail A. Wickham
AAW: emu
cc: William Esseks, Esq.
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR or VITAL ST.\TISTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 16, 1984
Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Main Road, P. O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
Dear Gail:
This is to remind you that the 45 day extension granted to
Nicholas Schick to return to the Town Board with a demolition or
reconstruction plan for the Orient Point Inn, expired today. S'ince
this report was not filed with me today, I shall expect it in the
immediate future.
I am enclosing herewith a copy of a memorandum to me from
the Building Department stating the fence around the Orient Point
Inn has been cut in numerous places and the public has access-
ibility to that unsafe building, as' well as a letter to Nicholas
Shik, dated April 16, 1984, from the Building Department, direct-
ing him to repair and fix this fence immediately.
Very truly yours,
AdLr
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosures (2)
cc: William Esseks
.
.
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOW
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
RECEIVED
APR 1 6 tl84
April 16, 1984
Town Clerk Southold
Mr. Nicholas Shik
% Orient Point Realty
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10035
Dear Mr. Shik:
Based on a recent inspection of your property at Orient Point
(Orient Point Inn), I have found a major break in your chain link
fence behind the sign that you have erected on your premises.
This break allows intruders free access to the property. I have
also found in my inspection that the barbed wire top on various
portions of the fence has also been broken, making it very easy
for people to climb the fence.
You are hereby directed to repair and fix this fence imme-
diately. Kindly give me a call in the next week when you have
completed the repair. If I do not hear from you by April 20,
I will report the matter to the Town Board and appropriate action
will be taken.
Sincerely yours,
{J,~ ~ ?I~
Curtis W. Horton
Building Inspector
VL:hd
Executive Admin.
cc: Francis Murphy
Supervisor
Judith Terry
Town Clerk
.
.
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
RECEIVED
APR 1 2 1984
Town Clerk Southold
DATE:
April 12, 1984
TO:
Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk
(,~
Lessard, Executive Administrato~,
FROM:
Victor
SUBJECT:
Orient Point Inn
Upon receipt of numerous telephone calls regarding the
fencing around the Orient Point Inn, I sent an Inspector to
physically inspect the fence, and I received the following
report.
The fence has been cut in numerous places and the public
has accessibility to this unsafe building.
The Building Department wants the Town Board to be aware
of this condition and awaits its instructions.
VL:ec
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 14, 1984
Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Main Road, P. O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New Yrok 11952
Dear Gail:
This is to confirm the decision of the Town Board concerning
the Nicholas Schick IOrient Point Inn matter.
The Town Board granted Nicholas Schick, Inc. a 45 day extension
to April 16, 1984 to return to the Town Board with a demolition or
reconstruction plan for the Orient Point Inn, pursuant to Chapter 90,
Unsafe Buildings, Code of the Town of Southold, and that Mr. Schick's
. consent, in writing, to the aforementioned decision be filed with the
Town Clerk as soon as possible.
Very truly yours,
~dr-
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
.
.
cfJ, j..s- ~/I{
$/3)q
LAW OFFICES
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
MAl N ROAD, P. O. BOX 1424
REt:tJ"ti) MATT1TUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 11952
WIl.LlAM WICKHAM
ERIC'), BRESSLER
AElIGAIL A.WICKHAM
MAR 91964
516-298-8353
Town Clerk Southold
March 7, 1984
FRANKLYN A. FARRIS
Ms. Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Town Hall - Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Application of Nicholas Schick
Dear Judy:
Prior to obtaining a decision fran the Town Board on the rezoning,
Mr. Schick had proceeded with a cluster subdivision plan as an
alternative in the event the rezoning was not granted. The application
was initially suJ:rnitted to the Planning Board on February 23, 1983. On
September 5, 1983, at the suggestion of the Planning Board, a revised
map was suJ:rnitted to canply with a cluster subdivision based upon
two-acre zoning. At that tiJre, we requested that the matter be
scheduled for the next available meeting of the Board. On November 8,
1983, at the request of the Planning Board, three additional copies of
the sketch plan, together with a rretes and bounds description, were
submitted to the Planning Board for its referral to the Town Board, who
thereafter approved the cluster concept and referred it back to the
Planning Board. I last appeared before the Planning Board on December
5, 1983 and requested at that tiJre that the Board do anything possible
to expedite the application. They advised rre that they would make a
field inspection and schedule sketch plan review. In spite of repeated
telephone and written requests, we have not yet been scheduled for
sketch plan review. I have been advised that it is tentatively
scheduled for April 9, 1984, subject to Mr. Raynor's approval.
In the rreantiJre, Mr. Schick has been working on a site plan for the
Inn property itself which would involve tearing down the Inn and
rebuilding a smaller facility. However, since the property is now
se=ed by fencing and has been kept maintained, he would prefer to
defer derrolition until such tiJre as the Planning Board has approved both
applications so that all work can be done at the sarre tiJre.
I would appreciate an appointrrent with the Board at the next
available meeting to review this matter.
Very truly yours,
!t:::~~~
AlWI: emu
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1801
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 1, 1984
Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Main Road, P. O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
Dear Gail:
This is to advise you that the time has expired for Nicholas
Schick, Inc. to return to the Town Board with a progress report
on the renovation of the Orient Point Inn, pursuant to Chapter 90,
Unsafe Buildings, Code of the Town of Southold.
Please advise me when the Town Eoard will be in receipt of
the aforesaid report.
Very truly yours,
~-
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
cc: Building Department
Town Board
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 19, 1983
Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Main Road, P. O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
Dear Gail:
The Southold Town Board at a regular meeting held
on October 18, 1983 adopted the following resolution with
respect to your request for a further extension for Mr.
Nicholas Schick to take action on demolition or reconstr-
uction of the Orient Point Inn:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of
Southo1d hereby grants a further extension
of four and one half (4~) months, to March
1, 1984, to Nicholas Schick, Inc. to return
to the Board with a progress report on the
renovation of the Orient Point Inn, pursuant
to Chapter 90, Unsafe Buildings, Code of the
Town of Southo1d.
Very truly yours,
~
Judith T. Terry
.-Southo1d Town Clerk
cc: Building Department
D:;T 1 '7 1983
LAW OFFICES
p~
/o/It' ~
c:f?-' ~;D /l(
RECiWW
.
-.-, '. ,.
-/, J'j
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
MAl N ROAD, P. O. BOX 1424
MATTlTUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 11952
WI LLlAM WICKHAM
ERIC J. BRESSLER
ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM
5\6 - 298-6353
FRANKLYN A. FARRIS
October 14, 1983
Southold Town Board
Main Road - Town Hall
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Application of Nicholas Schick
Property at Orient Point
Gentlemen:
Mr. Schick was given an extension until October 15th
on the question of demolition or repair of the Orient Point
Inn. I would like to submit a progress report and request
an additional extension.
Since our last meeting in the Spring, Mr. Schick has
prepared a draft environmental impact statement upon which
a hearing was held. We are in the process of preparing
the final environmental impact statement pursuant to the
last resolution.
In the meantime, we have filed a sketch plan with the
Planning Board for a residential subdivision, as an alterna-
tive in the event the change of zone is not granted. Mr.
Schick also prepared a site plan for the Inn itself. This
will be presented to the Planning Board in the very near
future for development of the Inn property as an Inn accord-
ing to the current density requirements.
I have made an appointment with your Board at the
October 18th meeting to discuss this matter in more detail.
Very truly yours,
Ct6(~oJ Cl.l0l,-ICh"""I...~
Abigail A. Wickham
AAW: emu
cc: Mr. Nicholas Schick
Mr. George Buchanan
Mr. Myles Weintraub
Mr. Russell Bodwell
.
,.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 8, 1983
Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Main Road, P. O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
Dear Gail:
The Southold Town Board at a regular meeting held
on April 5, 1983 adopted the following resolation with
respect to your request for an extension until October
15, 1983 for Mr. Nicholas Schick to take action on
demolition or reconstruction of the Orient Point Inn:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold hereby grants a further extension
of nine (9) months, to October 15, 1983, to
Nicholas Schick, Inc. to return to the Board
with a progress report on the renovation of
the Orient Point Inn, pursuant to Chapter 90,
Unsafe Buildings, Code of the Town of Southold.
Very truly yours,
~d'r
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
cc: Building Department
.
.~
.tJL
LAW OFFICES
"
March 22, 1983
'., 'Qfl. $PUTHOLO
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C ^'
MAl N ROAD, P. Q. BOX 1424
MATTITUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 11952
WI LLlAM WICKHAM
ERIC J. BRESSLER
ABIGAIL A. WICKHAM
516-298-8353
FRANKLYN A. FARRIS
Southold Town Board
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Schick - Orient Point Property
Gentlemen:
As we discussed at the meeting this morning, I would
like to request an extension until October 15, 1983 for
Mr. Schick to take action on demolition or reconstruction
of the Orient Point Inn pursuant to the Unsafe Buildings
Ordinance. Mr. Schick will continue to keep the grounds
trimmed during the extension period.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
16:t~~~
AAW: epu
cc: Mr. Nicholas Schick
Mr. George Buchanan
Mr. Myles Weintraub
Or1:;. . ..-/
~ ../.....- ''''
_1'"\ .~ Tn ".'-J"
. _ ,1
CO;]'I: s _---~-'.~'----------_::~:--------
Adg. 03to ------~----
:, ----.----- ---------
r"e -,.----
.
.
JUDlTII T. TERRY
Tow"S' CLERK
Rn:!STRAR 01 VIL\L 5T\ IISTles
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
January 24, 1983
Mr. Curtis Horton, Building Inspector
Town Hall, Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Curt:
Attached hereto is a reply from Abigail Wickham
to my letter of January 20th concerning the progress
report which was due on January 15th concerning the
Orient Point Inn Unsafe Building determination.
Before this goes forward to the Town Board, may
I have a formal report from you to determine whether
Mr. Schick has adhered to the conditions of the resolutions
of January 15th and June 22, 1982.
Very truly yours,
~c~r-
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
,
RECEIVE~
JAN 2 4 1983
.
..
LAW OFFICES
TCIWII CIerfc SouthoId
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
MAl N ROAD, P. O. BOX 1424
MATTITUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 1\952
WILLIAM WICKHAM
ERIC.). BRESSLER
A61GAI L A. WICKHAM
FRANKLYN A. FARRIS
516-298-8353
January 21, 1983
Mrs. Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Town Hall - P.O. Box 728
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Orient Point Inn
Dear Mrs. Terry:
In December of 1982, I telephoned the Supervisor's office and spoke
to Mrs. Hogan to inquire about the upcaning expiration of the extension
period and whether the Town Board would like us to appear to present a
progress report. She checked with Mr. Horton in the Building
Depart::Irent, who advised that the extension had been granted until the
middle of January. Since we were then in the midst of the public
hearings on the zone change, Mrs. Hogan said she would speak to Mr. Pell
and let lIE know sareti!IE in January how the Town Board wanted us to
proceed with requesting another extension. It is for this reason that a
progress report was not sul::tnitted by January 15th.
Since the meeting on June 22, 1982, and pursuant to the
representations made at that meeting, Mr. Schick has cleared and llVWed
the grounds around the Inn and has erected a laminated sign showing a
rendition of the proposed renovation to the Inn as presented in the
rezoning application. Since June, Mr. Schick has diligently pursued the
rezoning application through the public hearing stage at the Town Board,
has carpleted the water study and obtained technical approval fran the
NY State Board of Health and has had considerable work perfonned by the
architects in the overall design of the proposed project. He is
currently having the draft EnvironIlEntal Impact Staterrent prepared, and
it is expected that it will be ready in about three or four weeks.
Because Mr. Schick has diligently pursued the application, we would
respectfully request an additional six-Il'Onth extension, to allow for
review of the EIS and SEQRA process, and a determination of the rezoning
application. To require raroval or repair of the building at this point
would create a hardship, since Mr. Schick I S decision on reIl'Oval or
repair will depend upon the outcare of the rezoning application.
I would appreciate your scheduling an appoint!lEnt for lIE at the
next Town Board meeting relative to the above.
v=~~
~ Wickham
AAW: epu
cc: Mr. Nicholas Schick
~: ~~ew~~
.
.
,,'
"
; ':~
! ' , 'f
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
JUDITH T TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL ST.\ llSTICS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
January 20, 1983
Mr. Nicholas M. Schick
Schick Realty International
392 Fifth Avenue
11th Floor
New York, New York 10018
Dear Mr. Schick:
The Southold Town Board at a regular meeting held on June
22, 1982 adopted a resolution granting you a six month extension
from July 15, 1982 to January 15, 1983 to return to the Board with
a progress report on the renovation of the Orient Point Inn, pursuant
to Chapter 90, Unsafe Buildings, Code of the Town of Southold.
It is now past January 15th and we have not received said
progress report. I await your reply in this matter.
Very truly yours,
L //,;'?' ~~
~V~-<-Z. </' ~A~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
cc: Abigail A. Wickham, Attorney
Town Board Members
.
..
.
LAW OFFICES
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
MAIN ROAD, P. Q. BOX 1424
MATTITUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK 11952
WILLIAM WICKHAM
ERIC ,J. 8RE:SSL.ER
ABIGAIL. A. WICKHAM
516 -298-8353
August 12, 1982
Southold Town Board
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Att: Supervisor William R. Pell, III
Re: Orient Point Inn Property
Dear Mr. Pell:
This office has been advised that the property
surrounding the Orient Point Inn has been cleaned up
and that the weeds have been cut back. We have also
been advised that the sign has been completed and
can be installed within the next few days.
Very truly yours,
;~Ii/~
Abigail A. Wickham
AAW:ep
cc: Mr. Victor Lessard
Building Dept. Administrator
Mr. George E. Buchanan
Ii\'
tJ'rl~. ~~-e..=:...c.:c
,
Cbpies_T.C.._ T.B. ,
Mg. Date
ftle ~~.", '.
1ft
.-'....-.._--.:.,~
..ft._ru~._~.___,
AllYL
RlCElVEQ
BEB 1 9
. .
.. .; """
.&
TOllR CIItk
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD. N.Y. 11971
Fe bruary 19, 1982
Southold Town Board
Town of Southold
Town Hall
Southold, N.Y. 11971
Re: Unsafe Buildings, Chapter 90
Gentlemen:
This is to report the status of the buildings which were
in violation of the Unsafe Buildings Ordinance, Chapter 90.
Nicholas Schick (Orient Point Inn. Area has been cleared,
fence erec e. BUllding has not been shored up yet.
Harold Reese & Frederick Reese (Mallard Inn). Some win-
dows have been boarded up. Porch has not been cleared away or
shored up yet.
I do not approve of the way that the windows are boarded up.
Mattituck Shores Association, dwelling on Oregon Road &
building on Sound View Avenue.
Both of these buildings have been removed to my satisfaction.
Anastasios Parianos (cellar hole, Sigsbee Road).
been fenced in and he has applied to us for a Building
to build a new dwelling.
Area has
Permit
Simeone & Macari (burned out dwelling, Bergen Avenue).
Building has been removed and cellar area filled in.
Cutchogue Joint Venture, Main Rd., Cutchogue. Heard from
Mr. Kessler and he requested a 30 day extension of this order.
Yesterday I received a phone call from a Mr. Barry D. Pincus.
He informed me that Serpentine Real Estate Corp. had just pur-
chased the property. They (Serpentine R. E. Corp.) requested
an extension of time. I granted them until 11: 00 0 I clock,
April 20, 1982. I have enclosed their letter which explains
the situation.
. ..i RfCEIVED
&8 1 9 1982
.
.
r.a.llIIdIlIDuIIlGIl!outhold Town Board
2/19/82
Unsafe Buildings, Chap. 90
Page 2
Marlake Associates (unsafe dwelling, North Road, Cutchoguel.
I have been in touch with a Mr. I. S. Friedman of Marlake Asso-
ciates. He said that the problem will be taken care of. The
dwelling has been sold and will be moved away by mid April.
I gave them until 11:15 o'clock A.M., April 20,1982 to accomp-
lish this. A letter in regard to this is enclosed.
Very truly yours,
e~"t'.;?I~
Curtis W. Horton
Building Inspector
CWH:ec
Enclosures
.I ,
.
.
.
.
JUDITII 1. TERRY
Tow~ CLERK
RFGISTR:\R or VITAL 5r \TlSTICS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1801
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
June 24, 1982
Mr. Nicholas M. Schick
Schick Realty International
392 Fifth Avenue
11th Floor
New York, New York 10018
Dear Mr. Schick:
The Southold Town Board at a regular meeting held on
June 22, 1982 adopted a resolution granting you~ six month
extension from July 15, 1982 to January 15, 198$ to return
to the Board with a progress report on the renovation of
the Orient Point Inn, pursuant to Chapter 90, Unsafe Build-
ings, Code of the Town of Southold.
In the meantime, as a condition of this resolution, you
are to clear and maintain the grounds at the site, and erect
a suitable sign depicting the proposed plan for the property.
Very truly yours,
~d.cd"~~~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
cc: Bldg. Insp. Horton
../. .~--..
~
. .
.
tII~
e 02~"nc~
{J rU"/~'ltIbank
411 Fifth AnnUl
New Yorll, N.V. 1001'
Shill Realty
(PuentComlllny)
94.20 Jam.lea Avenue
Queent, N'w Yorll 11421
.9~,~ $
Established In 1965
NORTH AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLD WORLD-WIDE
","OMp.,.
.
."
a
,
"
.
,
!
392 FIFTH AVENUE (COR. 36th ST.ll1th FLOOR
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10018
Telephones:
SALES: (212) 947-3200
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT: (212) 695-6610
TELEX: 427112 SHIK UI
Mr. William R. Pell, III
Town Supervisor
Town of Southold
Town Hall
Southold, N.Y. 11971
Re.: Orient Point Inn
June 6, 1982
/',.-- ill1
IT"'" ce: FC' ';{\...I I'." \~'
,_~ \ ~ ,,) i: \"', .':'.;oj
r.:'I\ \' .;:, -,. '0..'-~. .'~-'-"" \ \
\\ll\-"~'--' .,.
,~ :X"'~ :i 1 l
\" _.~.
".\ . \/"1...., '\
n\\ JUrl - (5 1:;8L\\U
U ~~WN OF SOUTHOLD
Dear Mr. Pell,
On January 12, 1982 the Town Board adopted a resolution concerning
an "unsafe building notice" issued by the Building Department. We
have complied with the requirements to protect the Inn structure and
property to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
We now wish to appear (within 6 months of the date of the resolution)
before the Town Board to fulfill the other part of the resolution
directing us to report on our activities toward the restoration of
the Inn. We wish to appear at your June 22nd meeting to request a
six-month extension to the demolition order. We understand from
Robert Tasker that your formal meeting starts at 3 P.M., but that
we would be able to appear at the morning work session to explain in
detail what work we have performed on the Inn and the remainder of the
property.
I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Yours truly,
SCHICK REALTY INTERNATIONAL
A- 0,,. / k tJ-€Ji!..~
Nicholas M. Schick
cc. Robert Tasker
Town Attorney
Henry Raynor
Chairman Town Planning Board
INVESTMENT CONSULTING. SALES. LEASING. COMPUTERIZED MANAGEMENT. FINANCING
Properties offered are subject to change in price, omissions, errors, prior sale, or withdrawal without notice
MEMBER, NATIONAL. STATE AND LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS OF BOARDS OF REALTORS
.
t
,
-~
i
i
The Southold Town Board made the following decision on January 15,
1982 in the matter of Nicholas Schick, Inc., Unsafe Building Hearing:
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board held a hearing at 11:00 A.M.,
January 15, 1982 in the matter of Notice to Nicholas Schick, Inc.
pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of the Town of Southold relative
to a structure located on the northerly side of Main (State) Road,
Orient, New York, which was determined to be structurally unsafe and
dangerous by Building Inspector Curtis W. Horton, now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED that as a result of said hearing on January 15, 1982, the
Southold Town Board agrees with Building Inspector Horton that the
structure owned by Nicholas Schick, Inc. on the northerly side of
Main (State) Road, Orient, New York, the site of the former Orient
Point Inn, is structurally unsafe and dangerous and as such con-
stitutes a hazard to safety by reason of inadequate maintenance,
dilapidation, and abandonment. In particular large sections of
the roof have been removed or have collapsed, there are large holes
in other sections of the roof, numerous windows and doors have
either been removed or are broken leaving portions of the interior
exposed to weather; there are large holes in the floors, and debris
from the building is scattered around the property, and the property
has not been adequately fenced and secured and the remains of this
structure have been left exposed resulting in children being attracted
to and entering the property at will which is dangerous to their
health and safety, and be it further
RESOLVED that within 15 working days from January 19th, a chain
link fence with barbed wire across the top will be erected around
the site of the former Orient Point Inn, Orient, New York. The
area around the fence shall be cleared to enable the Building
Department to maintain surveillance of the area, and the fence
will be repaired immediately if it should be damaged. Within
six months from this date, January 15, 1982, the owner of the
property will provide the Town Board with a detailed plan relative
to demolition or reconstruction of the building in question. Within
30 days from this date, January 15, 1982, the temporary repairs to
the front header, shoring up in the dining room area and rear kitchen
area shall be completed.
Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Townsend, Councilman
Murphy, Councilman Murdock, Councilman Nickles, Supervisor Pell.
- I
"'"
.
~
.
.
HEARING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
11:00 A.M., TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 1982, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 90 OF THE
CODE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, "UNSAFE BUILDINGS", RE: NICHOLAS SCHICK, INC.
Present:
Supervisor William R. Pell, III
Councilman John J. Nickles
Councilman Lawrence Murdock, Jr.
Councilman Francis J. Murphy
Councilman Joseph L. Townsend, Jr.
* * *
Town Clerk Judith T. Terry
Town Attorney Robert W. Tasker
Special Attorney Richard F. Lark
SUPERVISOR PELL: I call the hearing to order on Chapter 90 of the
Southold Town Code, referred to as "Unsafe Building Code",against
Nicholas Schick, Inc., defendant, in the Town of Southold. Counsel
Dick Lark please proceed.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Supervisor, I call as the Town's first witness
Curtis Horton. If you will swear him in.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Please raise your right hand. Do you swear that
the testimony that you are about to give will be the truth, the whole
truth, so help you God?
MR. CURTIS W. HORTON, Southold Town Building Inspector:
I do.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Please be seated.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Mr. Horton, I am going to hand you a Notice
dated November 27, 1981, and ask if you recognize that?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Is that the Notice that you caused to be sent
to an owner of said property in Orient, New York?
MR. HORTON: Yes, it is.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I am also going to hand you an Affidavit of
Service By Mail & Posting and ask you if you can identify that?
MR. HORTON: Yes, this is what I signed after I sent the notice on
November 27th, and I signed this on the 11th day of December.
(Special Attorney Lark entered the "Notice pursuant to Chapter 90
of the Code of the Town of Southold" dated November 27, 1981, signed
by Curtis Horton, as Town's Exhibit I, and the "Affidavit of Service
By Mail & Posting" sworn to by Curtis Horton on December 11, 1981 as
Town's Exhibit II.)
~
,~ ~
, PAGE 2 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING
JANUAR~2, 1982
(Special Attorney Lark identified and introduced Mr. Myles Weintraub,
Architect, representing Nicholas Schick, Inc., who is the owner of
the property that is the subject of this hearing.)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Mr. Horton, the Notice that you sent out
which bears the date of November 27th, which is Exhibit I now before
the Board, in preparing that Notice did you do an inspection of the
property on the northerly side of Main Road in Orient? .
MR. HORTON: Yes, I did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you determine who owned that property?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: How did you determine who owned it?
MR. HORTON: By checking through the Assessor's rolls.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And could you tell us who owns it?
MR. HORTON: Mr. Nicholas Schick.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you cause an inspection to be done
of Mr. Schick's property?
MR. HORTON: Yes, I did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Is Mr. Schick's property, the property that
you're interested in, commonly known as Orient Point Inn?
MR. HORTON: Yes, it is.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Did you cause an inspection to be made on or
about November 27th, 1981?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you take pictures of the property
when you were down there?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I am handing you a group of photographs. Are
those the photographs that you took when you were down there on
November 27th?
MR. HORTON: Yes, they are.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
four photographs. Now,
November 27th?
I'm handing you a group of one, two, three,
did you take those photographs on or about
MR. HORTON: Yes, I took these photographs.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And where were they taken? Could you just
generally describe where you took these photographs?
~ .~ PAGE 3 - NICHOLAS SCJltK, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~, 1982
MR. HORTON: This one here I took in the front of the building where
the front porch was, this is the front door opening. This picture
here of the whole hotel was taken from the road by the sign, approx-
imately.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And that's an overall view of what formerly
was known as the Orient Point Inn?
MR. HORTON: Yes, it is. This one here is approximately taken in
the northeast corner of the building overlooking what used to be
the kitchen area. This one here is again taken from the front of
the building on the corner of the east side. This one here is taken
from the east side.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: East side of the building?
MR. HORTON: Yes. This one here is again taken a little bit past
the center of the building, you can see the collapsed porch.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Now, do these series of photographs that you
just described, they were taken by you on November 27th?
MR. HORTON: Yes, they were.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And do they fairly and accurately represent
those portions of what was known as the Orient Point Inn that are
depicted by the photographs?
MR. HORTON: They do.
(Special Attorney Lark introduced six photographs taken by Curtis
W. Horton, dated November 27, 1981 as Town's Exhibit III.)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: You testified before the Board that you did
an inspection on November 27th. What directed your attention to go
down to the Orient Point Inn to do this inspection?
MR. HORTON: Well, I think anybody in the room, excepting maybe one,
has always noticed this building and through the years we've all seen
the condition it has turned to. It's gotten worse and worse. Suddenly
there appeared a big hole in the center of the roof and everything else,
and all the windows being removed and I have occasion to go down to
Orient quite often. In fact, I take one of the Board of Appeals
members back and forth to the ferry and on many occasions we talked
about something ought to be done. What an eyesore it is. A person
comes off the ferry and sees, "Welcome to New York State" and sees
this in the background. Finally they finally enacted a law in
Southold Town, not due to a lot of pressure being brought to bear,
just the buildings in this Town so the building inspectors could go
ahead and perform this duty of doing something about these unsafe
buildings. Well, we did have one, down in New Suffolk, what we call
the Old Oyster House and it was a new experience for us, it took a
lot of legal work and ground work to make sure we get it all right
and everything else, and we finally had this building removed. The
next one on our mind, and I would like to bring something out right
now before I go any further. It's been told around this building
and different places in Town that I was pressured by the Town Board
J
~ PAGE 4 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~, 1982
to go after this. It is not the truth. I don't think there's a
member up there or the other ones that are not here today, that
has ever approached me about getting this Inn. I would like to
bring this out. I did this strictly on my own with the approval
of Senior Building Inspector George Fisher. I did speak to him
last summer, he can vouch for this on the stand, I said, "George,
what are we going to do?" He said, "Curt, go get them." I said,
"I will." Now, I did go ahead, I did start this and I did not
know that this time that this building had been sold. We started
the procedure and October 6th we brought it to a head. I have a
letter here that a grandmother gave me and she said something has
got to be done. If you don't, somebody is going to get killed.
MR. LARK: Excuse me, that letter you are referring to, is that
in the form of a complaint to the Building Department?
MR. HORTON: It was given to me personally, yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Do you have a copy of that letter?
MR. HORTON: Yes, I do.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
to Mr. Weintraub. What
exhibit to the Board.
any written complaints?
Can I have that, please? I'm showing it
I am going to do is introduce that as an
Other than that letter, have you received
MR. HORTON: There has, I understand, a few years back, there had
been some written complaints. I did not see them, but I have many
verbal ones, being a member of the fire district we talked about
it. This whole unsafe buildings code has been discussed by all your
fire departments and everything and there have been many many
complaints. Verbal, I can bring you 20 people verbal, but this is
the only written one. But I would like, like I said before, it known
that I myself, with the approval of my boss, went after it. We did
not go after just this, we are going after many buildings in the
same condition.
(Special Attorney Lark introduced the letter from Mrs. Carl H. King,
dated December 6, 1981 addressed to Mr. Curtis Horton, as Town's
Exhibit IV.)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Mr. Horton, as a result of your inspection
down there, could you tell the Board what you did and what you found?
Just in general terms, initially.
MR. HORTON: Well, that's kind of hard. By inspecting this first off
we noticed the front porch is completely collapsed.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: When you refer to the front porch or the
rear or the side, if you could orient the Board as to northerly
or southerly exposure, I think it would help them.
MR. HORTON: This is the southerly, facing the Main Road. I do
think you have a postcard over there you could show them what it
originally looked like, approximately 1960.
~
. PAGE 5 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~, 1982
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I'm showing you a postcard depicting the
Orient Point Inn. Where did you obtain that?
MR. HORTON: I obtained this is a restaurant or snack bar down in
Orient. They had some on the wall there and I happened to--the man
gave it to me.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And this depicts what the building looked
like in the early 1960's, it says on the back?
MR. HORTON: Correct.
(Special Attorney Lark introduced a color photo postcard depicting
the Orient Point Inn and with verbiage on the back of the postcard
giving a little history of the building and then saying that is
what it looked like in the early 1960's, as Town's Exhibit V.)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: So when you are referring now to the Board
what you found on your inspection in November 27th, just tell them
generally, and if you could orient them as to the southerly exposure
or southerly elevation or northerly elevation.
MR. HORTON: The southerly exposure faces on the Main Road and
the front porch is all gone. The main part of the building is
like in two sections. The header is down on the second story,
the floor joists are sagging in this area.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Let me stop you there. Not everybody is
familiar with the alphabet terms. When you say a header, what
do you mean?
MR. HORTON: Well, it's the header across the door where the big
doors used to be.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Does that support anything, a header?
MR. HORTON: Yes, it supports all your joists.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: What is a joist?
MR. HORTON: A joist is a floor timber.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And they support the floor. So a header
supports the joist and the joist supports the floor?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Now, what about these headers and joists?
MR. HORTON: They are all hanging approximately a foot to a foot
and a half down. So that means the second floor supports there are
all--the floor is all lowered and everything in this area. I also
noticed that the foundation is crumbling in the main places. It
appears to me that vandals or somebody has been removing stone
foundation. As we all know today stone is valuable.
~
~ PAGE 6 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~2, 1982
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Does the building have a foundation?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: What kind of foundation does it have?
MR. HORTON: Well, parts of it--the main part has got a stone
foundation basically. On the wing that they added on later on
in life, like on the east side, that part, I don't know how many
years ago, that's got a few cement block piers.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Does the building have a basement or cellar?
MR. HORTON: There's a basement, I don't know how far it goes under-
neath there. We were in it yesterday, Mr. Fisher and myself, and
we were in the west section in the basement and there was an open
cellarway there. We did go down through to approximately the middle
of the building.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: So portions of the structure have a basement.
MR. HORTON: Correct.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Go ahead with your stone foundation.
MR. HORTON: There's big holes where stone has been removed and like
that. Now, going around to the east side of the building--we'll work
around counter-clockwise--the east side there there was some additions
to the building that are completely collapsed there. They have fallen
down and the chimney is down and like that. Going around to the rear,
there's a big section of the foundation---
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Would that be the northerly side of the
building?
MR. HORTON: That would be the northwest. It's like a "T" back in
the kitchen area. The door opening is all gone and they've been in
there and you go down to the next door opening that is completely
collapsed and you come to the kitchen and inside the kitchen there's
holes all through the roof and everything. That is pretty rotted.
That is the worst part, but that is something new that has been added
on to. I don't know when. That is pretty well gone. And you go
around the other side, you're still on the north side there, you're
still across the back, and that's where you find the cellar door and
go down cellar and in that northwest corner they have removed various
floor beams, all sawn out of there and various supports that hold the
second, third and fourth floor. You can see these supports start
right from the cellar and go right on up through the building. And
they're sawed out like every--they've left one and taken out two
right through this whole west section.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: When you say "they", do you know who sawed
these?
MR. HORTON: No, I don't know.
; ,> PAGE 7 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY4It2, 1982
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Oh, they've been removed, in other words?
MR. HORTON: They took more than one. So then we go around to the
west side there, the chimney is collapsed, where the chimney was
ene;time has fallen into the cellar and a great big opening is left
there and like I say, every window is gone, a lot of them stripped
out of there, holes in the wall. You go again around to the front
again and the whole corner is gone. Part of a chimney laying there
on top of the roof. Like I say, in my opinion it is pretty well in
dispair.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Did you observe in your inspection what the
condition of the roof was?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And could you tell us what you observed?
MR. HORTON: Holes throughout it. A big center section has been
removed, cut out of it.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: When you say removed, the rafters or the
roof itself?
MR. HORTON: Yes, they've been cut right out of there. It doesn't
show too good in the pictures, but you can see the center section
where it's gone.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: What about the shell of the building. What
is the condition of what is referred to as the shell?
MR. HORTON: It's in dispair. If you would have been back yesterday,
if you were to return down there, I went with Mr. Fisher, you can see
evidence of where shingles have been freshly removed and like that,
wood shingles. But the wood frame building just has lath, wood lath
and wood shingles against it and they've been removing these shingles.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: From the pictures that were in there,
especially the postcard, the building had a lot of windows, does it
not?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Are the windows still in the building?
MR. HORTON: There is a few frames left. No sash.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: The sash has all been removed?
MR. HORTON: All been removed and busted out, both. And a lot of
the frames have been removed.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Now, as a result of the windows being removed,
are the interior of the building in that area exposed to the elements?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
;
~ PAGE 8 - NICHOLAS SC~K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~, 1982
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Now, I think you've adequately described
what you saw there on November 27th, now, did you form an opinion
after you did your inspection on that day as to the condition of
the building?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Can you tell the Board what your opinion
was?
MR. HORTON: I definitely declared, and my experience as being a
contractor and builder for thirty years, and being a building
inspector and various things, that this building is unsafe.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And as a result of that that's what caused
you to draw up the notice which is Exhibit I before the Board?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And
owner to do, if you recall?
your recollection?
in the Notice, what did you direct the
Do you have a copy there just to refresh
MR. HORTON: Fence it in, secure the place-"demolish and remove the
remains of this structure; or immediately board up same in order to
prevent any further deterioration and properly fence and secure the
perimeter of the property to prevent unauthorized oeople from enter-
ing upon the property. After this is accomplished if you choose to
rebuild and refurbish this structure you will have to obtain a
Building Permit from the Southold Town Building Department. The
above work shall commence within ten (10) days"----"and shall be
completed within thirty (30) days---"
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Since sending out that Notice--serving that
Notice, has any work been done on the building to your knowledge?
MR. HORTON: No.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And you said, when you were telling us about
the building, that you were down to the site yesterday, is that
correct?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
determined that nothing
the Notice?
And as a result of that inspection you
had been done since the time you served
MR. HORTON:
If anything, it has gotten worse.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you take photographs when you were
down at the building yesterday?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And I am showing you a series of five
J
.1 PAGE 9 _ NICHOLAS SC.K, INC. HEARING - JANUARY~, 1982
photographs and ask if you can identify that those are the photographs
that you took of the building, various exposures?
MR. HORTON: Yes. These were taken yesterday.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Were they taken by you?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And do they fairly and accurately represent
the Orient Point Inn in the various phases of it that you took?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
(Special Attorney Lark introduced five photographs taken by Curtis
W. Horton, dated January 11, 1982 as Town's Exhibit VI.)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Just one or two more
From your experience as a building inspector
on the building, is it your opinion that the
refurbished? In your opinion, if you know.
say you don't know.
questions, if I may.
and doing inspections
building could be
If you don't know just
MR. HORTON:
today.
I personally don't think so, but anything can be done
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Do you have any questions, Mr. Weintraub,
of Curt?
MR. MYLES WEINTRAUB: No.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Does the Town Board have any questions of
him?
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: During your inspection, Mr. Horton, did you
happen to notice whether there were any cesspools on the premises
and what shape they were in?
MR. HORTON:
like that.
1976, but I
I did not find any because of the undergrowth and
We have a picture showing one that was discovered in
did not observe any, no.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Any other Councilmen? (No response..)
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
time.
I have no further questions of him at this
SUPERVISOR PELL: Mr. Horton, you can step down.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
I call George Fisher.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Please raise your right hand. Do you swear that
the testimony that you are about to give will be the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
MR. GEORGE FISHER, Senior Building Inspector, Town of Southold:
I do.
I
\ PAGE 10 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~2, 1982
SUPERVISOR PELL: Have a seat.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Just for the record, your name and address.
MR. FISHER: George Fisher, 375 Tucker's Lane, Southold.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Are you employed by the Town of Southold?
MR. FISHER: I am.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: In what capacity?
MR. FISHER: Senior Building Inspector.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: How long have you been so employed?
MR. FISHER: Thirteen-fourteen years.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And prior to that, what was your occupation?
MR. FISHER: Carpenter.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And how long were you employed as a carpenter?
MR. FISHER: Twenty-some years.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: You were here when Mr. Horton testified, were
yuo not?
MR. FISHER: I was.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you hear Mr. Horton testify that you
accompanied him on an inspection of the premises, I believe it was
yesterday, which would be January the 11th?
MR. FISHER: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Were you present?
MR. FISHER: I was present.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And did you go in and about the building known
as the Orient Point Inn in Orient, New York?
MR. FISHER: I did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
accompanied Mr. Horton
the premises?
And did you form an opinion after you
on his inspection as to the condition of
MR. FISHER: I did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And what was that opinion?
MR. FISHER: I feel the building is unsafe.
/
.1 PAGE 11 _ NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~2, 1982
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And could you give us the reasons that you
feel that the building is unsafe?
MR. FISHER: Sections of the foundation are open, they're removed,
or missing. There is timbers unsupported which support structure
up above it. Some of the floor joists have been removed. The windows
are all open and the roof is open in areas, exposed to the elements
and water. There are some places of rot. There's holes in the
ceilings. The floor boards have been removed. I believe I mentioned
the floor joists have been removed in what used to be the old dining
room area. I would say it's unsafe for anybody to go into.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: You formed that opinion as a result of your
personal inspection yesterday?
MR. FISHER: I did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: On January 11th?
MR. FISHER: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I have no other questions. Do you have any
questions Mr. Weintraub?
MR. WEINTRAUB: No.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Does any of the Board have any questions of
Mr. Fisher?
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: With your experience of building and so forth,
why don't you tell me what the nature of the structure is. I under-
stand it is an old building, is that correct?
MR. FISHER: It is.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: And what makes you think that, just from what
you know or the way it looked or the kind of construction they used,
or what?
MR. FISHER: The structure part, it's old.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: I mean, what kind of materials were used, could
you tell from the size and shape and technique of structure how old
the building is?
MR. FISHER: I observed the underside of some of the floor timbers,
and I was looking because I heard this was an ancient--originally
started out as a small house, and I was looking to see if I could
find some of the old bark, old logs hewed down like the old houses,
and the only section of the cellar I was in, I did not notice any.
There is some old timbers there, but I did not notice any that still
had bark on them like I have seen in the real real old houses. A
lot of the structure has been--the original has been added on to and
added on to and it has square cut timbers.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: And the condition of those beams that were left,
the support beams that were left, were they rotted, or what was the
~
.\ PAGE 12 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
condition of them?
MR. FISHER: The timbers are good, they're solid. Just sections
have been rotted and where it has been exposed to the weather, why
more rot is in that part.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: Okay, thank you.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Any other Councilman?
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Do you have any idea when that building was
built?
MR. FISHER: I have no idea. I heard it was many years ago, the
original part, but--I've read, but I do not recall just what year.
MR. WEINTRAUB: I have.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Go ahead. This is an administrative hearing.
Sure, go ahead.
MR. MYLES WEINTRAUB: I had a conversation with Madeline Goodrich,
the Town Historian, last week. She informed me that the Inn was
opened in 1796, but that the structure of the Inn was probably not
the original house which dates, I think to 1672, but that some timbers
from the original house were used in the Inn. Whether the structure
you see now was all there then, I haven't gotten a clear answer.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: There's one more witness, I think that wants
to testify before the Board, Mrs. Judy King, who did write a letter
to the building inspector. Mrs. King, come on up and be sworn in.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear that
the testimony that you are about to give will be the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
MRS. KING:
I do.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Mrs. King, will you state your name and
address for the Board?
MRS. KING: Mrs. Carl King, 350 King Street, Orient, New York.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Mrs. King, did you cause a letter to be
written to Mr. Horton, which I think was introduced as Exhibit IV?
MRS. KING: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And you're the author of that letter?
MRS. KING: Yes, I am.
I'm the grandmother that wrote the letter.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I understand the occasion of your writing
the letter was that you had been made aware of the fact that some
children had been visiting the site which is known as the Orient
Point Inn and the subject of this hearing. Is that correct?
i
)
( PAGE 13 -
NICHOLAS S~CK, INC.
HEARING -
JANUAR~12,
1982
MRS. KING: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Could you just tell the Board generally in
a narrative form---first of all, how long have you lived in the
area?
MRS. KING: Twenty-seven years. I summered there for years.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Could you tell the Board the nature of your
complaint about the children playing in the area? From your knowledge.
MRS. KING: It just came to my attention one Sunday evening at dinner.
My ten year old grandson, Jeffrey, was very upset and it all came out
that he'd been to a birthday party at the Point with three or four
other boys and they all went across the street to the Inn and walked
around and Jeffrey had been forbidden to go in there. But the other
four boys went in and Jeffrey was very scared, he stayed on the road.
And a policeman came along and asked Jeffrey what he was doing there,
if he had run away from home. Jeffrey said, no, his friends were in
the Inn. So apparently the policeman blew his siren to get the
attention of the children, but they didn't come out because they were
frightened, so the policeman sent Jeffrey in. Jeffrey's father had
told him not to go in, so it was very iffy. So he went to the door,
up to the front outside and called to his friends and told them to
come out, which they did, and they ran down the road calling Jeffrey
a poor sport, a tattle tale and so forth. So that's when I decided--
I had heard that Curt was doing something about the old buildings, so
I thought it would be a good time--I thought somebody should know.
There have been children there for years.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
your knowledge, has the
young people?
That's what I am going to ask you. From
place been known as a gathering place for
MRS. KING: Yes, it has, especially Halloween and then every summer--
every year summer kids come in and find this very interesting and
fun to go into the place. And coming from the village you meet some
different children from the town, so I thought it was up to me to--
and it happened in my family--I should tell someone.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Thank you very much.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Do any Councilmen have any questions?
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: In your letter you say that the building--rotted
burned out building--had that building been burned?
MRS. KING: Yes, it had. I would say probably ten--maybe five or six
years ago they had a fire down there on a Saturday--Saturday or Sunday,
and the firemen, I guess it was Pete Nathanson, he discovered it. And
the firemen went down and they decided it was from vandals or somebody
living in there.
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: But there had been a fire in the premises?
MRS. KING: Yes, and that's what started the roof, as Curt said, there
I
I PAGE 14 _ NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUARtt12, 1982
is a huge portion of the roof gone.
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Anybody else? Any Councilman or anyone else?
(No response.) If not, thank you, Mrs. King.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I have nothing further at this time. I
believe Mr. Weintraub wants to make a statement or presentation
to the Board on behalf of the owners. I indicated to the Board
he is an architect who is representing the owner in these proceed-
ings.
MR. MYLES WEINTRAUB: My name is Myles Weintraub. I am an architect
from New York City. My partner, George Buchanan and I have been
retained by Nicholas Schick to be the architect for the property in
question as well as the large vacant parcel which Mr. Schick also
owns east of the Inn going down to the Point. We were hired on
11 December, 1981, which you will note is approximately two weeks
after the building inspector issued his Notice to Mr. Schick. When
we were hired we did not know of the Notice on the building. We
were informed about it, I would say, within ten days--we got a copy
of the Notice. In the period of time that has elapsed since we were
hired, we have done a survey, a very superficial survey of the site
and the history of the building so far as we can ascertain it and
discussed various development proposals with the owner. He has
authorized me to state at this hearing that he is willing to comply
with the Notice and erect a six foot high chain link fence with
barbed wire on it, if the Board so requests, around the site, all
around the building,to secure the site. He is reluctant to enclose--
board up the building as requested by the building inspector and to
seal the roof for the following reasons: We are about to start a
feasibility study to determine whether it is feasible or not to
restore the Orient Point Inn and reopen a facility similar to the
Inn. In order to do this we obviously need a fair amount of time.
We need to get a structural engineer on the site to survey the
structure and report to us. We need to do economic feasibility
studies. There are a host of investigations that have to take place.
He has authorized us to start that work and we are gathering the
preliminary information to do that. Therefore, he feels that if
he can secure the site by putting up a six foot high fence and
therefore satisfy the Board that children will be severely deterred
from getting in there and I should add that the vandalism is probably--
considering the size of the timbers that appear to have been removed--
the vandalism is not only by children, to keep people out of the site.
And we would request approximately six months from today for the
completion of this study. He would be reluctant to board up and
enclose the shell until he knows whether--the study might say we
have to take the building down. He's reluctant,therefore, to spend
the extra money to board up the structure which he may end up demolish-
ing in a few months time. We have an estimate on the fencing. He
is prepared to spend that money immediately, even though he may end
up taking the structure down. As to why the Notice has not been
complied with, I am sort of limited in being able to answer that
since we were hired after he was served with the Notice. I think
that's my statement.
; PAGE 15 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR'12, 1982
SUPERVISOR PELL: I would like to ask the Councilmen if they have
anything they would like to address to you. Councilman Townsend.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: Actually I would like to address our attorney.
What are the penalties for non-compliance of the Notice such as they
were given?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: The way the ordinance is set up, if he does
not comply within the time frame given to him by the building
inspector, which they have not, which is 30 days from the date of
the Notice, then a hearing is held by the Board. Then the Board has
to make a determination at the hearing, based on the evidence before
it when we're all done and we're not completed yet. When it's all
done, whether or not you determine that the building in question is
unsafe and dangerous and whether or not what the owner is going to
do about it, because it provides that in the neglect or refusal of
the owner to repair or remove within the time provided, the Town may
remove the building or structure. The purpose of this is the first
thing to make a finding as to whether it is unsafe, and second of all
is what's to be done about it after that finding has been done. Now,
in the event that there is no compliance or no cooperation from the
owner, the ordinance does provide, to answer your question directly,
for penalties for somebody who fails to comply, of a fine not to
exceed $250.00 and imprisonment for 15 days or both. Now, that would
have to be a separate criminal proceeding that would be brought on
after it's determined here that the owner is not going to comply.
Now, as of this morning, I'll make a statement here in response to
that, I first met Mr. Weintraub when he came out, talking to the
Building Department, and he called last week and wanted to do some-
thing. I met with him this morning prior to the hearing and as he's
indicated, his client is willing to construct, and I have a survey
and he can "X" on there where they're willing to construct a six foot
high fence. I take it in talking to the Building Department, preferably
with barbed wire, around the perimeter, and he'll indicate--he can
draw on the survey that I have here, where he's willing to do that.
And he's willing to do that within a 30 day period, bet it in. I
think 30 days because after talking with him, with what the ground
is and so on and so forth, by the time he got a contractor on to the
site he could have it completed within a 30 day period. The next
thing he's requesting the Board from, is from relief, because---the
mans an architect, he's seen the building and I think he readily
concedes that it's unsafe and dangerous and something has to be
done. I think we're beyond that issue, but still you'll have to
make a finding on it. I'm kind of doing a summation in answer to
your question and leading into what he talked about in his statement.
If the Board--in think in everybodys interest that the thing be
fenced--in the Town's interest. He's willing to do that. He's
willing to do it within a 30 day period so we don't bring any criminal
sanctions against him, or there are other sanctions in the ordinance
that we can go in--the Town can go in--at your order, and remove it
and then bill the owner. That becomes another proceeding on the cost
and expenses of collecting it. But, he says that the owner wants to
do a feasibility to find out whether or not it is safe to go ahead
and refurbish it or just tear the whole thing down. Now, in the
conference with the building inspectors on this, I think the Board
should be aware of this, and you might want to ask some of the
~ PAGE 16 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUARtt12, 1982
building inspectors on this, they say fine with the fencing, that's
reasonable, 30 days, get it done. Even though he didn't do it the
first 30, get it done, get the job done. As to the building, whether
it should remain or not remain, that's a tough question. They will
not take a position on it. The owner feels that--represented by his
architect--that he wants some time to do this type of study. The
building inspector, as I get it from looking at it, and from their
expertise, feel that if the Board were to grant this, if the Board
were to grant this extension, so he can do his feasibility after he
fences it and does the thing, that certain portions of this structure
would have to be shored up,because the building inspector--shored up
in the sense of temporary shoring--temporary piers if you will. I'm
told that it's something that a house mover does. It's temporary, it's
not a permanent thing. Temporary timbers, temporary piers to hold it
because as I get it, certain portions of it are just totally unsafe
and subject to cOllapse at any time. The owner, as Mr. Weinbraub
says, takes the position, "well if it collapses, it collapses".
MR. WEINTRAUB: I didn't say that.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Well, okay, I'll withdraw that. But they
don't really care too much about that. At least that's the impression
that I got. So the building inspector tells me that he would go along
with the request of the owner that within 30 days of today that a permit
be obtained a fence be installed and I'll have him indicate where he
wants to do it on the survey so you will know. And then it would be
up to you, the Town Board, as to whether or not you would be willing
to grant an extension of time. He feels, the architect feels, that he
would need six months. My position is that at the end of the six
months they would agree to remove within a period of time or to begin
construction, not let it stand there, immediately, for the refurbishing.
That would be something for the Board to consider at that point. If
they want to go to the expense of trying to refurbishing and to rebuild
the thing, because they would have to apply for the necessary building
permits and so on and so forth. The architect is well aware of that.
The only problem I have is that the Building Department, Mr. Horton in
particular, says that after his crawling around and looking at the
structure, that there are just certain portions of it that would
require some temporary shoring during this period of time and that
would be up, I suppose, when you go into your finding session with
the Town Attorney ought to decide whether or not you want to grant
or not grant. Did I fairly state what we talked about?
MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes, can I add a couple of things?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Sure, and I want you to indicate, I'll give
you a pen, where you would be willing to get this fencing done, and
you will give that to them. Just draw a zig zag line around the
perimeter. While he's doing that, keep in mind that this parcel is
part of a larger parcel, so when he went out there to determine what
fencing, he's enclosing what he feels would protect the building. The
building inspectors have looked at what he proposes and is going to
hand up to you and they would have no objection if that portion alone
was fenced.
MR. WEINTRAUB: This is the property outline, this is the Inn and
)
~ PAGE 17 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
this is the perimeter that we propose to
indicated on a survey of the property.)
away from the building, plus or minus on
fence. (Mr. Weintraub
Essentially it's 50 feet
all sides.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: You might want to have some questions of
him.
MR. WEINTRAUB: The eastern end the survey shows a fence on the
property line between the Inn and the Long Island Lighting Company
property. We don't know how high that fence is. If it's high
enough to satisfy the building inspector, we would not propose to
duplicate it, but we would simply connect to it. So we're either
talking about a fence that goes four sides around the building or
three.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And this will be a cyclone fence, is that
correct?
MR. WEINTRAUB: Chain link.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Would you clear the underbrush and the stuff
that's growing all around it, eight - ten foot strip, in order---
MR. WEINTRAUB: Around the fence?
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Before you put your fence in. Clear, rather
than just try to run it through that.
MR. WEINTRAUB: Well, I don't know, I think that's something we'd
have to discuss with the contractor. I mean, the rear--the northern
edge of the fence wouldn't require that at all so far as I could tell.
We haven't done a close survey. Obviously he's got to get there to
work there and if that requires tearing up the brush, we'll tear up
the brush.
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: George (Fisher), do they need a permit for that
fence?
MR. FISHER: Fences in Southold Town require building permits.
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: Is that business property?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: It's zoned "M".
MR. WEINTRAUB: "M-I".
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: Then he needs a permit.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: A permit, yes, but you're not restricted on
the height of the fence. They seem to think a six foot fence with
barbed wire would be an adequate situation here to----
(Special Attorney Lark introduced "Map of Property surveyed for
Harold W. & Ernest E. Wilsberg and Richard J. Cron at Orient, Town
of Southold, N.Y.", surveyed July 16, 1970 by Van Tuyl & Son, as
Town's Exhibit VII.)
,
~ PAGE 18 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR"12, 1982
MR. WEINTRAUB: May I just add something?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Sure, you sure can.
MR. WEINTRAUB: Lest you be left with the impression that the
owner's actions just started yesterday or last week, another
architect from, I believe from Southold, had been engaged by
the owner and sent a letter, I believe, to---
SUPERVISOR PELL: It's on file here.
MR. WEINTRAUB: You have the letter?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Yes, on December 14th he sent a letter---
MR. WEINTRAUB: In response to the original Notice,asking for a
year extension and it doesn't say that in the letter, but what he
meant by a fence there was a snow fence. And he apparently was
turned down. And there was a hiatus caused by I don't know what
and there was no action and then the owner got anxious and he asked
us to take over--see into this affair.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Councilman Murdock has a question.
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: I've got a couple of comments, both to the
Building Department and Mr. Weintraub. I, for one, would like to
see the building restored. I think there are very few people who
reside in the Town of Southold who are not aware of the history of
the building and realistically would like to see it restored,
continued. I know several times in the past fifteen or so years
the former owners were asked, when are you going to do this and
it was not their intention to operate an inn, so they never restored.
My sentiment lie with restoration. The Town has been plagued for
many years with vandalism problems, up to and including adult
children, up on the roof, taunting the police to come up and get
them. Many things as well as the unsightly condition. During this
time there have been many efforts to get the former owner to do
something about rehabilitating or removing the structure. Now I
find that there was fire damage. And under fire damage we had a
code that was existing that at the time of that fire damage and
since then it could have been applied to--in the event of fire
damage we had the right to go in there and force repair and keep
it in a state of repair for the protection of the public.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND:
It has to be 50%, over 50% isn't it, Larry?
COUNCILMAN MURDOCK: For removal but not for protection of the public.
It has to be boarded up, the public has to be protected from access
to that building and I don't want to get into a long technical discussion
but while we were looking for a vehicle, which is one reason for the
unsafe building code, that we had structures in this Town that were
beyond our reach for us to affect a repair or removal. I think the
building would not have gotten as far in a state of disrepair if
the existing Fire Code would have been applied sooner. I don't know
when they had the fire, but I think that this procedure has gone on
entirely too long and is the reason why the building inspectors are
,
~. PAGE 19 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
moving on many structures in the Town. The Town Board decided over
two years ago that we would make a concerted effort to force
compliance by property owners for the safety of the people of the
Town as well as the visitors into the Town and we are proceeding
at that. In practicality, although you come in at the tail end,
this is the end of a long procedure and I would like some assurances
from the owner that given the six month extension, and I would like
that assurance in writing, that given the six months extension, he
is fully prepared that if it becomes practical feasibility to restore,
that it is his intent to restore at that time, at the end of that six
months rather than we keep this dragged out for another three or four
years. While I don't want to see a heritage destroyed, I think it's
gotten beyond saving, but if the owner feels he can save it I'm
certainly willing to give him that time, but I would like to see a
written assurance from him that at the end of the six month extension,
if it be granted, that he is prepared to invest the money and make the
physical changes that are necessary rather than then say to us, okay
it's going to take me two years before I'm ready to do it.
MR. WEINTRAUB: I can't, obviously, commit him to that, but can say
from my discussions with him, I don't think that would be a problem.
I think he's shown every sign to us that he intends to move regardless
of what that move is going to be and he's paid a lot of money for this
property and he's got a mortgage on the property and it's in his interest
to get this matter cleared up. I would say, just quickly, it may be
obvious, but a summary demolition of the building, immediate demolition,
would be detrimental to an effort to restore the building because I
have checked now in the Town, the Oyster Ponds Historical Society,
and the County Historical Society and so far as I, right now am able
to state, there are no measured drawings of this building and in order
to restore, even if we have to knock the building down and build it
up again, we need to measure that structure. If there is nothing there
there is nothing for us to measure. So I'm holding out that. We may
not be able to feasibly leave most of what's there, we may have to take
it down, save certain pieces which are deemed to be 18th Century, and
use them in the reconstruction. We don't know yet how that is going
to pan out.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Anybody else wish to address Mr. Weintraub?
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: I'd like to sum up if I could. I think
based on the evidence before you, you are charged under the ordinance,
as I indicated answering Councilman Townsend, to determine whether or
not pursuant to Chapter 90, you have to determine whether or not the
building known as the Orient Point Inn is unsafe or dangerous to the
public, and once you reach that finding, then you have got to decide
whether or not you want it repaired, secured, taken down, removed,
what have you. I think it has been admitted by overwhelming evidence
and also by the owner's representative that something has to be done.
They've come forward with a proposal which will have to be considered
by you after you make your findings as to fencing the perimeter as
he's indicated on the drawing of Exhibit VII, and then within 30
days obtaining the necessary permits, with the approval of the build-
ing inspector. And then the second portion of his request is whether
or not you would grant him an extension of time, which he's asking
six months, and if you did grant the extension of time, what conditions
J
~ PAGE 20 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
you'd place on it and if one of the conditions being is that what
would happen at the end of that six months. He'd have to have an
affirmative plan now that he's going to do either "a" or "b". I
think that would be reasonable if you get that. And also, that
the building inspector's office request that if you do grant any
extension that you do give consideration that immediate or emergency
repairs be made in shoring up certain portions of this structure
which they deem totally unsafe for any reason whatsoever, and they're
requesting that. Are there any other requests that you would have
or any other recommendations the Building Department has?
MR. FISHER: No.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: That's about it. I think we're done with
our presentation of the hearing and it would be up to the Town Board
to make a determination, and he said that he would give his name and
address if there is any further communication that has to be given
to him for clarification of anything.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Thank you. I would like to ask Town Board members
do they have anything further they would like to ask of Mr. Lark or
Mr. Weintraub? If not, I would like to suggest that the Board con-
sider this. Do you want to consider it at this time or wait until
you get the minutes to review?
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: I'm ready to move.
TOWN ATTORNEY TASKER: Can I say something? Now, we have heard
statements made that the Building Department has suggested that
certain structural changes be made. But we have no testimony
whatsoever as to where it is, what it is, the extent of it, cost
of it, and so forth. I think you ought to have this.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Good point. (Mr. Horton took the stand.) I want
to remind you Curt you are still under oath.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: We had a conversation this morning, did we
not, with Mr. Weintraub, the architect who represents the owner.
MR. HORTON: Yes, we did.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: As a result of that converation as to what
could be done and not done with this building, you made certain
observations to him based on your inspection as of yesterday and
as of a month or so prior, is that correct?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Could you be specific and direct your remarks
to the Board's attention of those things that you felt had to be done
immediately to that structure because of the damage or the disrepair
that you find it in?
MR. HORTON: Yes. By the front of the building as you notice from---
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Give an exposure so the Board understands.
J
~ PAGE 21 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
MR. HORTON: The front of the building, approximately from the
center of the building. From the pictures you will notice where
the ceiling joists are hanging down and the header across the front
of that building. We discussed this that this would have to be
shored up. One end is handing, so there'd have to be--I'm not saying
how many shores, but this should be shored up in a proper way.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: When you say shored up, could you be a little
bit more specific and tell the Board what you have in mind by shored
up.
MR. HORTON: Well, they'd have to put a support underneath starting
from the ground up and go up there approximately one floor.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: What type of support would that be?
MR. HORTON: Well, it's kind of hard to sit here and say that. I
would say something equivalent to lake a 6 by 6 timber or something
like that. Something adequate to support that load.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: And that would be sort of like a support
column that would hold the structure in that place?
MR. HORTON: Yes.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Why do you feel that's necessary in this
particular place? I think the Board wants to know that.
MR. HORTON: Well, anybody--even if they're going to go and make a
study of this building and they go upstairs, that whole section is
hanging there right now.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: What's supporting it?
MR. HORTON: Nothing.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: That's good reason. Any other areas that
you saw? What would you estimate the cost of that? I think that's
important.
MR. HORTON:
I don't think this is a fair question.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: All right, tell us why it isn't.
MR. HORTON: Well, I don't think it's that expensive. I think if
you went to a--I say a mover because these people seem they would
be more qualified than a general contractor or like that. They have
the equipment and they know all about supporting buildings with
temporary shoring, as I call it. And they could do this, I think,
very easily. I don't think it's that involved. It's just a question
of doing it.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
It would be a temporary support?
MR. HORTON: Right.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK:
Is there any other areas in the building
i
, .
.
~
PAGE 22 - NICHOLAS
S~CK, INC.
HEARING - JANUAR~12, 1982
that requires----
MR. HORTON: Yes, in the northwest corner.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Northwest corner?
MR. HORTON: Yes, in the rear, I guess Mr. Fisher said the dining
hall. I don't know, I never was in this place for dining or like
that. But they cut out approximately---there's a whole bunch of
supports that carry the second, third and fourth floors. They cut
out, I guess, two out of three. These are big supports. I'm not
saying how big they were, 6 by 8 or 8 by 8. They sawed them right
off. Consequently where there were 10 or 12, there's now, I think,
3. These are supports which are the main spots should be put back.
Something temporary, they don't have to be permanent, there should
be supports there.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: These missing supports should be replaced
on a temporary basis?
MR. HORTON: Correct.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Could that be done by a general contractor
or again a house mover?
MR. HORTON: A general contractor could do it, but I would say a
house mover would be better qualified to do this.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Is there any other areas of this building
that would require these temporary repairs?
MR. HORTON: There is. In the back corner, the northeast corner,
back by the kitchen, there is a spot there which seems to be---
as you go in the door right by the kitchen, they pushed the foundation
in which I think there should be a support and Mr. Fisher and I
concurred on this yesterday, right in this one area.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: A support you mean right from the ground up
to the first story?
MR. HORTON: From the ground up, right. Now, we did not go a venture
to the second and third stories like that. Observing it from the
ground it looks fairly solid up there. Just like, what would you
call it, jack straws or something, you know you can hold everything
up with two or three and you knock one out and down it comes. This
seems to be exactly what this building is like.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Now, those are the only areas--I believe
there are three areas you talked about--that would require some,
what you call, emergency temporary supports?
MR. HORTON: Right. If they plan to make a six month study, what
they're talking about, I definitely think and I know Mr. Fisher does
too, that this be done at once.
SPECIAL ATTORNEY LARK: Okay. Do you have any questions of him, Mr.
Weintraub?
J" ~ PAGE 23 _ NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAR~2, 1982
, >
MR. WEINTRAUB: No, I guess I don't. I've seen the pictures.
He showed me the pictures and I think their analysis is correct.
The sum of money is something that obviously Mr. Horton could
not be expected to comment on. Since the conversation this morning
with Mr. Horton and George, I have spoken to Mr. Schick and he
advised me that if the Board so directs that he is willing to make
these emergency repairs, take these emergency measures to provide
temporary support where the Building Department says it's necessary.
Assuming that it is within this range of this scope.
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: Mr. Horton, you're suggesting that these repairs
be done immediately in spite of the fact there is going to be a fence
put around it. I'll rephrase my question. If the property is fenced
in, why would it be necessary to do these shoring up as you call it.
MR. HORTON: All right, I'll put it this way. This is just my feeling.
If they are talking about restoring this building, the longer you wait,
the less chance you're going to restore the building. This building,
I think, could collapse, at least sections of it-number one. Number
two, as we all know fence is great, but I never saw a fence yet that
kids couldn't crawl underneath or somehow get in there.
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: You wouldn't recommend a fence then?
MR. HORTON: Oh, yes, I recommend a fence. It will keep 99% of
everybody out but there is always somebody who can get in through a
fence.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Any other Councilmen?
Mr. Townsend.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: I'm not sure you'd be interested in answering
this or qualified, but just as a building inspector, a survey such
as they're talking about is---I'm a little confused as to why it
takes six months to perform such a survey.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Mr. Weintraub, you can answer that.
MR. WEINTRAUB: A survey is not only a survey of the structure, that's
probably the easy part and the fairly straight forward part. The
difficult part of the survey will be the financial feasibility of
the operation. To open up an inn which will be in compliance with
the building code. We will have to bring the building, which Mr.
Horton has told me over the telephone, we can't have a four story
wood frame building in the Town of Southold. We will have to take
fire prevention measures, we'll probably have to make a fire proof
building here or at least a higher rating than it was. So this is
not a simple operation, this is a delicate operation and it is going
to cost a lot of money and obviously Mr. Schick doesn't want to make
any promises until he finds out how much this will cost. Leaving
aside the whole question of is there a market for an inn at this
location and all that sort of thing.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Any other Councilmen wish to address anybody?
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: I listened to the testimony and I favor the
idea of fencing in the property. I would also like to see those
areas that Mr. Horton feels are under imminent threat of collapse
~
~
.
PAGE 24 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUAJlt15, 1982
shored up and that the owner of the property be allowed six months
to carry out his study, at which time as I understand at the end of
that six months he make a decision either to tear it down or to
restore the premises.
MR. WEINTRAUB: Or to tear it down and restore.
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: Tear it down and rebuild. And I think there
has been non-compliance and I think the Board should consider
whether or not to impose the fine of $250.00.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: That's not legal.
SUPERVISOR PELL: We would have to go to a criminal procedure.
MR. WEINTRAUB: I might add that the Code does allow for an extension
of time.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Yes, it does. I would like to ask the Board if
they are ready to rule on this now? Or would you like to bring it
back up on the 19th? I would like to do it now. (The Board agreed
to rule at this time.)
How does this sound to you. I made a few notes going along with
what John says and if you want to discuss it you can.
To allow 15 working days to erect a six foot fence with barbed
wire at the top.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Bill, in this weather you might be stuck with
that.
SUPERVISOR PELL: It's going to warm up 25 degrees tomorrow.
Six foot chain link fence with barbed wire at the top.
Fifteen working days I mean Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday,
Friday, not weekends. I'm cutting a week off his 30 days.
To clear the area where the fence will be put. This I'm
referring to underbrush. And maintain the fence. By that I mean
in case somebody goes down there and cuts a hole in the fence, the
building inspector sees it or somebody calls up your outfit you can
get down there and fix it up, by maintaining the fence.
To allow six months for a detailed plan on the inn to be provided
to this Town Board, with dates of starting demolition or starting
repair to be included and approximate finishing dates.
To provide and do, within 30 days, the temporary repairs such as
the header in the front of the inn facing south as described. Temporary
repairs of the northwest corner in the dining hall, to reshore that up.
Temporary repairs of the northeast corner, supporting from ground level
the kitchen as described by Mr. Horton.
Can the Board agree to that?
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: I'd like to add one thing to that. At the end
of six months period I think, and if it is determined by Mr. Schick
that it is potentially economically feasible to establish a hotel
structure, at that point I think he's going to have to make the
economic decision. He's going to go ahead and make the economic
investments, he'd have to go several Boards again, which process
can take six months or more before he finally gets what he's looking
.J ',.. *' .. ..
,: PAGE 25 - NICHOLAS S~CK, INC. HEARING - JANUA~5, 1982
for. At that point I think at the end of six months he should make
a decision either to board it up or to tear it down because it could
possibly stay in that same condition for a long period of time while
he makes the decision to go for it. Even if ultimately the Planning
Board turns him down, I think at that point the investment is warranted.
Do you follow me? The investment is warranted in the building if he
decides he's going to go for the approval of rebuilding the building
to board it up. So that in six months it's either boarded up or
torn down or construction is started.
MR. WEINTRAUB: There might be--for example if he boarded up the
ground floor that would effectively keep people out of the structure.
We might not be talking about boarding up the whole thing if it comes
to that. I just want to state that. There are a lot of openings in
this building. Off hand I don't think that will be a problem. But
if he starts construction site on that property he'll have to protect
himself for insurance reasons.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: If he decides in six months not to tear it down,
the Town Board--well, that's a negotiable point. Should it be the
first floor or should it be the whole thing. If it's agreeable the
first floor, that would be fine, but I think that six months from
now we should know something.
SUPERVISOR PELL:
demolishing start
It was in there.
I said that at the end of six months, give us a
date if he is going to demolish it or fix it up.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: Okay, good.
SUPERVISOR PELL: Does the Board agree to this?
SUPERVISOR PELL: I will just rephrase to make sure you and I and
the Board understands each other.
15 working days, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday,
as of today for the fence.
The area will be cleared where the fence is to be so our Building
Department can maintain surveillance of it and make sure it is up and
not put down. That's why I ask for the clearance of the fence around.
If the fence is hurt, cut, ripped down, we will notify you (Mr.
Weintraub) and you can immediately repair it to keep the fence in
order.
In six months you will notify this Board of a detailed plan when
you are going to start to demolish or repair the building and approx-
imately completion date.
The front header, the dining hall shoring up, and the back in
the kitchen, shoring up shall be done within 30 calendar days.
Mr. Weintraub, can you agree on that on behalf of your client?
MR. WEINTRAUB: I believe so. Did you say the 15 working days for
the fence start today?
SUPERVISOR PELL: Starting Monday (January 18th). That will give
you three full weeks and a half.
MR. WEINTRAUB: What is the time period required to take out a permit
for this?
~ ." ,"' . ~
"---" PAGE 26 - NICHOLAS S~ICK. INC. HEARING - JANUAW15, 1982
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: For the fence?
SUPERVISOR PELL: That can be done, Mr. Fisher, how soon?
MR. WEINTRAUB: Can we apply for that permit today?
SUPERVISOR PELL: Sure. And he must get it out within 10 days.
MR. WEINTRAUB: We can't start until we get the permit, is that
right?
SUPERVISOR PELL: You apply today. It has to be out with 10 days.
It is either granted or denied by law, Town Code.
MR. WEINTRAUB: Should the 15 working days start with the issuance
of the permit?
SUPERVISOR PELL: No, I would not like that. How fast can you get
that permit out, George? In hours, not days.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: By the end of the week do you think?
SUPERVISOR PELL: By the end of the week, George, could that be out?
MR. FISHER: In this particular zone, Mr. Tasker can correct me,
fences are a structure and all structures in Southold Town requires
a bui lding permit. In the "M" zone we are not authorized to issue
any building permits for any structures outside of the proper setback.
Therefore, it would be a Zoning Board of Appeals approvable, because
there is no height limit.
COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND: What's the proper setback?
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Wouldn't it be a safety thing, George?
MR. FISHER:
not even get
by the book.
Personally I'd like to see that they be authorized to
a permit. It's a minor thing, but if you want to go
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: If the Town Board had decided to do this we
would have done it and put it on his tax bill. So maybe we don't
need a permit in this case.
MR. FISHER: Personally myself---
COUNCILMAN NICKLES: If we were to erect the fence we'd put it up as
we see fit to erect it to be a safety factor to the people in general,
so I don't know why we need a permit. Inasmuch as this is an administra-
tive hearing and this is the ruling of the Town Board, how do we get
around that?
MR. FISHER:
I would say in this case he doesn't need a permit.
SUPERVISOR PELL: I agree with you, John.
Bob?
TOWN ATTORNEY TASKER: I don't really know, I haven't looked at
the code.
.' .t,
o.. ......._....
PAGE 27 -
NICHOLAS S*ICK, INC. HEARING - JANUA; 12, 1982
SUPERVISOR PELL: Let me suggest this and counsel will look it up
and see if we can do this under Code. This is an administrative
hearing on an unsafe building structure. The Town Board would--is
directing the Building Department, if a permit is needed, to issue
it at once. Counsel will advise if you can do that after he gets
a chance to research it. Anything else? (No response.)
* * *
~d~~f~
Judi th T. Terry 0' ~
Southold Town Clerk
The Southold Town Board made the following decision on January 15,
1982 in the matter of Nicholas Schick, Inc., Unsafe Building Hearing:
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board held a hearing at 11:00 A.M.,
January 12, 1982 in the matter of Notice to Nicholas Schick, Inc.
pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of the Town of Southold relative
to a structure located on the northerly side of Main (State) Road,
Orient, New York, which was determined to be structurally unsafe and
dangerous by Building Inspector Curtis W. Horton, now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED that as a result of said hearing on January 12, 1982, the
Southold Town Board agrees with Building Inspector Horton that the
structure owned by Nicholas Schick, Inc. on the northerly side of
Main (State) Road, Orient, New York, the site of the former Orient
Point Inn, is structurally unsafe and dangerous and as such con-
stitutes a hazard to safety by reason of inadequate maintenance,
dilapidation, and abandonment. In particular large sections of
the roof have been removed or have collapsed, there are large holes
in other sections of the roof, numerous windows and doors have
either been removed or are broken leaving portions of the interior
exposed to weather; there are large holes in the floors, and debris
from the building is scattered around the property, and the property
has not been adequately fenced and secured and the remains of this
structure have been left exposed resulting in children being attracted
to and entering the property at will which is dangerous to their
health and safety, and be it further
RESOLVED that within 15 working days from January 19th, a chain
link fence with barbed wire across the top will be erected around
the site of the former Orient Point Inn, Orient, New York. The
area around the fence shall be cleared to enable the Building
Department to maintain surveillance of the area, and the fence
will be repaired immediately if it should be damaged. Within
six months from this date, January 12, 1982, the owner of the
property will provide the Town Board with a detailed plan relative
to demolition or reconstruction of the building in question. Within
30 days from this date, January 12, 1982, the temporary repairs to
the front header, shoring up in the dining room area and rear kitchen
area shall be completed.
Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Townsend, Councilman
Murphy, Councilman Murdock, Councilman Nickles, Supervisor Pell.
~\
t
~
~
~
~
~
\
~ I~ .. -
..J~~~d JIL ro.j"J-
-
~~ff p?lr.J- I
I
I
2k.~$-<'t.~~Y1- ,/n./'~
. ~~~,~ff ~Y'~
oJ
Historic OriN" Po;"t I"". [.oUK J...lwI(L i'l'. r.~
-r.W""S iF... H,-"'" -"-
,/I>II'A.
Cu/or 1'1l,,/o/,,'\Iiff I'r;n'
,to
~
e~t~71F ~/.tl/'-<.
J~
t'~.LlZ /f'0l./1"el-
\
~
~~
~J.~;'~
(t6'ftrlMr-. ~/
}4O?/tf'~
...
(
-------,
---~
-:J . ___ 1/ _ I
E~'A~ -"'- ~ 1;&,/'1".2..-
f
\
~ I
~N- 1/ 16L/1'.:I..
,
t
I ..II'~
_-!:~~~ddi- 1/leIf ~
fd-Iw'Ji~.JfJ- _
-
1"'.... ~ ~_
.
.
STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
LOCAL CRIMINAL COURT : TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
against
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
BY MAIL & POSTING
NICHOLAS SCHICK, INC.,
Defendant.
- - - - - - - -X
STATE OF NEW YORK:
55. :
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK:
CURTIS W. HORTON, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. Deponent is a Building Inspector of the Town of Southold,
is over the age of 18 years, and resides at Mason Drive, Cutchogue,
New York.
2. On the 27th day of November, 1981, deponent served a copy
of Notice Pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of the Town of
Southold (The Unsafe Building and Collapsed Structure Law of the
Town of Southold) upon Nicholas Schick, Inc., 392 Fifth Avenue,
New York, New York, that being the address designated by said
corporation for that purpose, by depositing a true copy of the
same enclosed in a postpaid properly addressed wrapper in an
official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the
United States Postal Service at Southold, New York. Said Notice
Pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of the Town of Southold was
mail to Nicholas Schick, Inc. by certified Mail, Return Receipt
Requested.
3. On November 27, 1981, at 11:30 A.M. deponent posted a
true copy of the Notice Pursuant to Chapter 90 of the Code of the
J~~d- ~71
r~/~
.......-:....
" ..
,
.
.
of the Town of Southold (The Unsafe Building and Collapsed
structure Law of the Town of Southold) in a conspicuous place
on the premises owned by Nicholas Schick, Inc. on the northerly
side of State Highway, Route 25, Orient, Point, New York.
Sworn to before me this
II~ day of December, 1981.
~77/_ ~
I Notary Pu l~c
BMETTE CORo!INE
NOTARY PUBLIC, Slofe of f'h:-w York
Suffolk Co~~ry f1u. 52-5792200
Comm;~siCll bc;ires Mmch 30, 19~.J.;"
{! t'4~ ~ ~r~
urt1.S . Hor n
.,
"
.
.
-.
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
NOTICE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 90 OF THE CODE
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Date: November 27, 1981
TO: Nicholas Schick, Inc.
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York
A. The last Assessment Roll of the Town of Southold shows
that you are the owner of the following described
premises:
~i ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land
with the buildings and improvements thereon
erected, situate, lying and being at Orient Point,
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of
New York, bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the assumed northerly
road line, State Highway Route 25, at the south-
easterly corner of lands now or formerly of Ruth L.
Young, formerly of Howard S. Latham, and the south-
westerly corner of premises herein described;
running thence North 2022' 20" East 223.07 feet;
thence North 820 48' 40" East 70.17 feet; thence
North 10 54' 00" East 143.95 feet to a post; thence
along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D. Latham,
South 890 25' 30" East, 210.73 feet to a post; thence
still along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D.
Latham, and land of the Long Island Lighting Company
the following two courses and distances: (1) South
80 4' 40" East, 205.15 feet; (2) South 150 50' 00"
East, 89.84 feet to a point; thence along said assumed
northerly road line, State Highway Route 25, South 760
26' 40" West, 357.65 feet to the point or place of
BEGINNING.
Suffolk County Tax Map Designation: District 1000,
Section 015.00; Block 0900; Lot 006.00
. ---
~7-ff~--L ~/.2-//~
.
"
.
.
.. -,~.
B. The building on your premises formerly known as the
Orient Point Inn is structurally unsafe and dangerous
and as such constitutes a hazard to safety by reason
of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, and abandon-
ment. In particular large sections of the roof have
been removed or have collapsed. In addition there are
large holes in other sections of the roof, numerous
windows and doors have either been removed or are
broken leaving portions of the interior exposed to
weather; there are large holes in the floors, and debris
from the building is scattered around the property.
Further, you have not adequately fenced and secured the
remains of this structure and have left same exposed
resulting in children being attracted to and entering
the property at will which is dangerous to their health
and safety.
c. You are hereby ordered to either: demolish and remove
the remains of this structure; or immediately board up
same in order to prevent any further deterioration and
properly fence and secure the perimeter of the property
to prevent unauthorized people from entering upon the
property. After this is accomplished if you choose to
rebuild and refurbish this structure you will have to
obtain a Building Permit from the Southold Town Building
Department.
D. The above work shall commence within ten (10) days from
the date of service of this notice and shall be completed
within thirty (30) days thereafter.
E. In the event you fail to comply with the above, a hearing
will be held before the Southold Town Board concerning
same at 11:00 o'clock on January 12, 1982.
F. If the Southold Town Board after the aforementioned hearing
shall determine that the remains of the structure is unsafe
or dangerous to the public, the Southold Town Board may
order the remains of the stru :ture taken down and removed.
G. In the event that the remains of the structure shall be
determined by the Southold Town Board to be unsafe or
dangerous and in the event of your neglect or refusal to
remove or correct same within the time provided, the
Southold Town Board may remove such structure by what-
..
:
.
.
ever means it deems appropriate and assess all costs
and expenses incurred by the Town of Southold in connec-
tion with the proceedings to remove and secure same, in-
cluding the cost of actually removing the structure from
the premises, against the land on which the said structure
is located.
~ A.,~1tI ?l4'7;C;
Curtis W. Horto
Building Inspector
.
.
UNSAFE BUILDINGS - TOWN BOARD HEARINGS
JANUARY 12, 1982
11:00 A.M. - Nicholas Schick, Inc. (Orient Point Inn)
.
.
January a, 1982
TO: TOI'iN SUPERVISOR & TOI'iN BOARD
FROM: TOI'iN HISTORIAN, MITZI GOODRICH
Miles Weintraub, architect from New York called me today re the
history of Orient Point Inn. He has been retained by the new owners
of this property to do a survey, because of a notice his clients
had received about removing the building or boarding it up for
safety purposes . He asked my opinion of the matter in question and
asked if I would be at the meeting. Since he has not made the survey
and study of the property yet . He said it would be costly to the
~vners to bOard the place up until they decide what they want to do.
Whatever their plans, they will expect a return for the investment
they have made.
I told this ~~. Weintraub that as an historian, I would like to
see the Inn restored, if it was at all feasible, since Orient is an
historic-minded hamlet. However, restoration would have to be done
according to the Town Building Code. In using the word feasible" I
assumed that he understood that restoration would have to be done
within the law. The contours of the outside of the Inn could be
foll~ved as it was originally and still be done according to the
Town code - building, fire, etc.
For other data regarding old papers and deed~, I referred him to
the archivist of Oyster Ponds Historical Society. He had her name
from someone else that he had contacted.
Since I am an historian, the financial returns from his client's
investment, is not something that I can predict.
Mr. Weintraub requested that this memo be given to you for the
meeting.
-),~~.
1L.-pL-..~~
;0 ~ ce rn; O~m: rm
nl JM-B~ lillJ
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
Or!~.
.-
Co;::s
/-0
I. 1..-
t-1.'3. V:;Y.
P.dg. c:~:;
'II~
'~
File
.
_ n.
..., .1....
.
.
'I r'
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
NOTICE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 90 OF THE CODE
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Date: November 27, 1981
TO: Nicholas Schick, Inc.
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York
A. The last Assessment Roll of the Town of southold shows
that you are the owner of the following described
premises:
~\ ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land
with the buildings and improvements thereon
erected, situate, lying and being at Orient Point,
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of
New York, bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the assumed northerly
road line, State Highway Route 25, at the south-
easterly corner of lands now or formerly of Ruth L.
Young, formerly of Howard S. Latham, and the south-
westerly corner of premises herein described;
running thence North 20 22' 20" East 223.07 feet;
thence North 820 48' 40" East 70.17 feet; thence
North 10 54' 00" East 143.95 feet to a post; thence
along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D. Latham,
South 890 25' 30" East, 210.73 feet to a post; thence
still along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D.
Latham, and land of the Long Island Lighting Company
the following two courses and distances: (1) South
80 4' 40" East, 205.15 feet; (2) South 150 50' 00"
East, 89.84 feet to a point; thence along said assumed
northerly road line, State Highway Route 25, South 760
26' 40" West, 357.65 feet to the point or place of
BEGINNING.
Suffolk County Tax Map Designation: District 1000,
Section 015.00; Block 0900; Lot 006.00
.
.
..~
~". ..,
B. The building on your premises formerly known as the
Orient Point Inn is structurally unsafe and dangerous
and as such constitutes a hazard to safety by reason
of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, and abandon-
ment. In particular large sections of the roof have
been removed or have collapsed. In addition there are
large holes in other sections of the roof, numerous
windows and doors have either been removed or are
broken leaving portions of the interior exposed to
weather; there are large holes in the floors, and debris
from the building is scattered around the property.
Further, you have not adequately fenced and secured the
remains of this structure and have left same exposed
resulting in children being attracted to and entering
the property at will which is dangerous to their health
and safety.
C. You are hereby ordered to either: demolish and remove
the remains of this structure; or immediately board up
same in order to prevent any further deterioration and
properly fence and secure the perimeter of the property
to prevent unauthorized people from entering upon the
property. After this is accomplished if you choose to
rebuild and refurbish this structure you will have to
obtain a Building Permit from the Southold Town Building
Departmen t.
D. The above work shall commence within ten (10) days from
the date of service of this notice and shall be completed
within thirty (30) days thereafter.
E. In the event you fail to comply with the above, a hearing
will be held before the Southold Town Board concerning
same at 11:00 o'clock on January 12, 1982.
F. If the Southold Town Board after the aforementioned hearing
shall determine that the remains of the structure is unsafe
or dangerous to the public, the Southold Town Board may
order the remains of the structure taken down and removed.
G. In the event that the remains of the structure shall be
determined by the Southold Town Board to be unsafe or
dangerous and in the event of your neglect or refusal to
remove or correct same within the time provided, the
Southold Town Board may remove such structure by what-
,.
-.
.
.
ever means it deems appropriate and assess all costs
and expenses incurred by the Town of southold in connec-
tion with the proceedings to remove and secure same, in-
cluding the cost of actually removing the structure from
the premises, against the land on which the said structure
is located.
(!A(~f'/ ?t'7~
Curtis W. Hortoh'
Building Inspector
.
.
"
<
TEL. 765-1802
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
P.O. BOX 728
TOWN HALL
SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971
NOTICE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 90 OF THE CODE
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Date: November 27, 1981
TO: Nicholas Schick, Inc.
392 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York
A. The last Assessment Roll of the Town of Southold shows
that you are the owner of the following described
premises:
~\ ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land
with the buildings and improvements thereon
erected, situate, lying and being at Orient Point,
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of
New York,. bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the assumed northerly
road line, State Highway Route 25, at the south-
easterly corner of lands now or formerly of Ruth L.
Young, formerly of Howard S. Latham, and the south-
westerly corner of premises herein described;
running thence North 20 22' 20" East 223.07 feet;
thence North 820 48' 40" East 70.17 feet; thence
North 10 54 I 00" East 143.95 feet to a post; thence
along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D. Latham,
South 890 25' 30" East, 210.73 feet to a post; thence
still along land now or formerly of G. E. and B. D.
Latham, and land of the Long Island Lighting Company
the fOllowing two courses and distances: (1) South
80 4' 40" East, 205.15 feet; (2) South 150 50' 00"
East, 89.84 feet to a point; thence along said assumed
northerly road line, State Highway Route 25, South 760
26' 40" West, 357.65 feet to the point or place of
BEGINNING.
Suffolk County Tax Map Designation: District 1000,
Section 015.00; Block 0900; Lot 006.00
.
.
oJ
"
B. The building on your premises formerly known as the
Orient Point Inn is structurally unsafe and dangerous
and as such constitutes a hazard to safety by reason
of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, and abandon-
ment. In particular large sections of the roof have
been removed or have collapsed. In addition there are
large holes in other sections of the roof, numerous
windows and doors have either been removed or are
broken leaving portions of the interior exposed to
weather; there are large holes in the floors, and debris
from the building is scattered around the property.
Further, you have not adequately fenced and secured the
remains of this structure and have left same exposed
resulting in children being attracted to and entering
the property at will which is dangerous to their health
and safety.
c. You are hereby ordered to either: demolish and remove
the remains of this structure; or immediately board up
same in order to prevent any further deterioration and
properly fence and secure the perimeter of the property
to prevent unauthorized people from entering upon the
property. After this is accomplished if you choose to
rebuild and refurbish this structure you will have to
obtain a Buiiding Permit from the Southold Town Building
Department.
D. The above work shall commence within ten (10) days from
the date of service of this notice and shall be completed
within thirty (30) days thereafter.
E. In the event you fail to comply with the above, a hearing
will be held before the Southold Town Board concerning
same at 11:00 o'clock on January 12, 1982.
F. If the Southold Town Board after the aforementioned hearing
shall determine that the remains of the structure is unsafe
or dangerous to the public, the Southold Town Board may
order the remains of the structure taken down and removed.
G. In the event that the remains of the structure shall be
determined by the Southold Town Board to be unsafe or
dangerous and in the event of your neglect or refusal to
remove or correct same within the time provided, the
Southold Town Board may remove such structure by what-
- . -
.
.
ever means it deems appropriate and assess all costs
and expenses incurred by the Town of southold in connec-
tion with the proceedings to remove and secure same, in-
cluding the cost of actually removing the structure from
the premises, against the land on which the said structure
is located.
GA(,,~~k/ ~'7~
Curtis W. Horto .
Building Inspector
.
.
,
'-
SACCO & ASSOCIATE
Architects
54655 Main Road, Box 1412 Soulbold, New York 11971
516.765.5.l55
Alberl A. Sacco, R.A.
Garrell A. Slran/l' R.A.
RECEIVEQ
DEe: 1 5i981
December 14, 1981
Mr. Curtis W. Horton
Building Inspector TOWl! ~'!ll( SoutIIoIiI"
Town of Southold
P.O. Box 728
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Orient Point Inn
Dear Mr. Horton:
Pursuant to your letter dated November 27, 1981, addressed to Nicholas
Schick Inc., regarding the above referenced matter, I have been asked
to petition, on my client's behalf, a one year extension for compliance
with the orders contained in the aforementioned letter,
My client has just recently purchased the subject property and will need
this time so that an adequate evaluation of the structure and its use can
be completed.
It is my client's ultimate intention to comply with the Town's requirements,
however, inasmuch as we are dealing with a structure of some historic
significance, his preference is to avoid having to make a decision without
the benefit of studying the alternatives.
In the interests of safety, arrangements are presently being made to
install a continuous fence around the entire periphery of the area so as
to prevent unauthorized entry into the structure.
In light of this unique situation I hope you will look favorably upon this
petition and anticipate hearing from you shortly as to your decision.
Very truly yours,
GARRETT A, STRANG, R.A.
cc: Southold Town Board
Nicholas Schick Inc.
.
.
.
.
December 6, 1981
350 King Street
Orient, New York
Mr. Curts Horton
Main Rood
Southold.New York
Dear Mr. Horton,
It has been brought to my attention that you ore very interested ~
and pursuing the important project of doing away with unsafe buildings
in Southold Town. This incident that is on my mind, cannot go unheard
or ignored, being 0 parent or grandparent, it is of utmost concern.
A~ 0 family dinner table, our ten year old grandson, hod something on
his mind. Thank goodness he hod the ability to tell it all, it wasn't
easy. Sunday afternoon he was at a birthday party at 0 home not for
from the famous and mysterious old Orient Point Inn. A curious kind
of 0 building and a"forbidden fruit" for young boys. As the five boys
approached the grounds, Jeff remained on the edge of the lawn, waiting
while his friends laughed and giggled about going into the rotted,
burned-out building. In Jeffs head he didn't wont to be called a poor
sport by hi~ friends, but in his heart he knew his parents called this
property forbidden territory. A Southold Town policeman on duty, pulled
up and asked Jeff if he was waiting for the Orient-New London ferry.
Jeff said, No, he was at o birthday party aod his friends were in the
old building. Apparently, the policeman told Jeff to get the kids out,
and he blew his siren, apparently to scare them. The boys ran out,
ducking behind bushes and ran down the road, naturally colling Jeff
the spoil sport, the policeman telling Jeff to get bock to the party.
To much h~s been left undone by Southold Ordinances. We thank our lucky
stars that JefJH->~~d the courage to tell us the whole story and that he
or his friends _ not harmed. Please try to do something with that old
building, on eye sore and a horrible death trap.
Thank you kindly for your attention in this serious matter.
~ Sincerely,
.-3~ ~-1J! i}~/tf~~~ /1./ ~~t