Neighbor dispute spills over into Village Board meeting

A party at a home on South Bayview Avenue that got a little out of hand, as well as other issues, brought residents of that area to a recent Village Board meeting. They want the Village to assist them in resolving some of their complaints.

"It is like living next to a group of college students," said one resident at the meeting. "It's nonsense what goes on there."

The residents told the board that the owner, Steve Berger, moved out of the home and now rents it out to five young men. They said that the home is being used as a multi-family residence and is in violation of Village codes, including having more than 40 percent of the front of the home used as a driveway and converting a detached garage into living space.

But the problems have deeper roots. Berger and another neighbor, James Carbone, had been at odds for a few years while Berger and his family lived in the home, prompting Berger to eventually move. The dispute has apparently spilled over now with the tenants, and the Village is in the middle, trying to sort it all out.

Berger acknowledged at the meeting that he rents the house to five unrelated individuals, but that does not, by law, define the premises as an illegal multifamily residence according to legal precedent. A Supreme Court case in 1990 largely superceded local codes and ordinances that limited occupants of a single-family home to those related by genetics. The broader scope focused on the use of the home indicating that if they shared common space, such as a kitchen and living room, those within the unit can be considered a single family, even if they are unrelated.

Berger also acknowledged at the meeting, however, that he has five separate leases with the men, which may have an impact on the legal issue.

Amityville Village attorney Bruce Kennedy said that the Village is responding to concerns and com- plaints about the home and has already cited the owner over the illegal parking. As for the broader question involving the possibility that the home may be an illegal multi-family residence, Kennedy said that the Village must either get affidavits from those with personal knowledge that the home is illegal or make application to the Village Justice, with probable cause, for a search warrant. "We are proceeding normally as we do in other instances in which the public makes complaints about violations," said Kennedy. "All of this takes time."

Following the meeting, both sides declined to elaborate on their concerns saying they did not want to fuel the flames of controversy. Berger has, however, indicated he will be selling the home, while his neighbors indicated that they are considering taking legal action against him if the problems are not resolved.

"Our position is that we want to work with both sides to get these problems resolved," said Kennedy.