Babylon board reserves decision after neighbors allege illegal business and non‑occupancy at 1473 Second Street

The Town of Babylon board reserved decision Wednesday on whether to revoke an accessory‑apartment permit for 1473 Second Street after neighbors described persistent traffic, frequent police responses and an alleged home business, and the owner disputed those claims.

Neighbors told the board they believe the house has not been owner‑occupied since it was purchased in 2018 and that two separate families have lived there. Resident Joe Jankowski said the property has had “3 separate occupants at the front of the home and a tenant that was renting the rear of the home” since 2018 and that a front‑house occupant operated an eyelash‑extension business at the address; he said he would submit a screenshot of the listing as evidence. Kelly Ann Zimmarti told the board that “the police have been called to the home on an average once a month for the past 2 years,” describing repeated domestic‑disturbance responses and regular daytime and overnight traffic that she said affected safety and quality of life.

Owner Avinash Agnihotri responded that town inspectors found “no business” and took pictures during visits. Agnihotri said he splits time between the West Babylon house and a Manorville residence while separating from his wife, but told the board he would move back to the West Babylon address “100%, fully” and submitted to provide documents — including a driver’s license, phone records and bank statements — to support his claim of residency.

Town staff cited Town Code section 153‑15, which requires accessory‑apartment permits to be on owner‑occupied premises. After questioning and discussion about the leases and who currently resides at the property, the board voted to place the matter on the reserve calendar and require further investigation and evidence from the owner. The chair said it is “more than likely” the permit will be revoked if the owner cannot demonstrate that the dwelling is owner‑occupied.

The board did not issue a final ruling at the meeting; members asked staff to collect and review documentation submitted by the owner and to confirm occupancy findings from code enforcement. The board will revisit the matter at a future meeting once supplemental evidence and any investigatory findings are on the record.