Laserfiche WebLink
3. Issue 3. Relevance of past violations. The Division should consider the track record of the <br />applicant in regard to whether or not to grant a new application for an expansion particularly <br />where there are other affected property owners who object. Among these is the failure to give <br />notice to Zellitti Properties when originally required and then notice was given to a wrong <br />address during an extension of time and then notice was given to the correct address only after <br />Zellitti Properties became aware of the application by other means. Also, continuing refusal by <br />applicant to note the ownership interest of Zellitti Properties on required maps in this <br />application. Prior application for an exchange of property in the pit for other property, known <br />in the division file as the Phillips Exchange, shows that no required notice was given to Zellitti <br />Properties of that exchange. And, recently the Division found that Hocker Construction under <br />the Anthony Zellitti permit violated the permit by excavating for sand and gravel on five acres <br />outside of the pit boundaries. On October 24, 1986 there was a cease and desist Order issued <br />to Anthony Zellitti for failure to have the required bond. Currently pending litigation whereby <br />Zellitti Properties seeks relief from the court because Hocker continues to access the permit <br />area and apparently an unauthorized expansion of the pit without the permission of the <br />minority tenant in common. <br />Re ully s fitted. <br />Charles C. Powers, Esq.