Loading...
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