Town Board Petrocelli Resolution

 

TOWN OF RIVERHEAD

TB Resolution 2025-599

RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TOWN OF

RIVERHEAD, AS LEGISLATIVE BODY FOR THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD AND

GOVERNING BODY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY,

DESIGNATION OF J. PETROCELLI RIVERHEAD TOWN SQUARE, LLC. AS A

QUALIFIED AND ELIGIBLE SPONSOR FOR THE PURCHASE AND DEVELOPMENT

OF A PORTION OF TOWN-OWNED PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS SCTM# 0600-129-

1-LOTS 13, 14 ,15 AND SCTM# 0600-128-6-86.1) LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE

OF MAIN STREET, RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK

Councilwoman Waski offered the following resolution,

which was seconded by Councilman Rothwell

WHEREAS, for several decades beginning as far back as the early 1980’s

the Town recognized and expressed its desire to revitalize and assist in the

redevelopment of the Downtown Business District, particularly the East Main Street

corridor, beginning with the condemnation, purchase, demolition and improvement of

lands along the Peconic River east of Peconic Avenue, including installation of bulk

heading along the riverfront to provide transient boat dockage (Country Fair and

Nautical Festival), purchase of the Vail Leavitt Music Hall, purchase of the Cavanaro

property (located behind former Sweezy’s) for parking, purchase and lease of land to

East End arts, together with other public improvements such as installation and repair of

sidewalks and planting of street trees; and

WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Town and Community Development Agency’s

determination to restore the economic vitality to the Downtown Business District and

need to address the increasing numbers of vacant or underutilized structures, areas of

blight and deteriorated structures, in 1992 the Town and Community Development

Agency pursued the designation of the East Main Street corridor (along the north and

south side of Main Street east of Peconic Avenue and hereinafter after referred to as

“EMSURA”) as an urban renewal area (General Municipal Laws Article 15 and 15A) to

create a legal mechanism to accomplish the redevelopment, economic development

and beautification goals of the community; and

WHEREAS, in 1993, the Town and Community Development Agency adopted

the East Main Street Urban Renewal Plan reciting the major goals and objectives as

promotion of tourist and river related redevelopment; encouragement of commercial and

recreational uses more directly related to the Peconic River; creation of tourist

destination, with land uses such as restaurants, retail of products indigenous to the

region, and art galleries; encouragement of private financing, state funding, subsidies

and capital grants to achieve desired urban renewal goals; and

WHEREAS, the 1993 East Main Street Urban Renewal Plan recited potential for

acquisition, preservation, and redevelopment of the Vail-Leavitt Music Hall (constructed

in 1881 over a haberdashery with second story opera house); Suffolk Theatre (a 1920’s

9.22

Packet Pg. 167

movie theatre with balcony seating); and a host of properties on and along Peconic

Avenue and Main Street and unimproved portions of properties along Main Street,

including SCTM # 600-129-1-14; and

WHEREAS, in 2000, as part of the Town and Community Development

Agency’s continued efforts to restore economic vitality to the Downtown area,

the Town a retained a firm to prepare a “Revitalization Strategy for Downtown

Riverhead” (later incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2003) which

included the following goals and policies: preservation and enhancement of pedestrian

access and views corridors between East Main Street and the Peconic River; establish

park uses along the edges of the waterfront: implement streetscape and landscape

improvements: build pedestrian walkways between Main Street and the waterfront; and

WHEREAS, due to changes in land use, including but not limited to, Atlantic

Marine World; Suffolk Theatre; Vail Leavitt Music Hall; Suffolk Community College

Culinary Arts Program; Grangebel Park Improvement Project, Peconic Riverfront

Pedestrian Improvement Project: restoration of John Lombardi Park gazebo and garden

area, and, public policy changes, including but not limited to, the adoption of the 2003

Comprehensive Plan and changes in zoning from Business D District to Downtown

Center 1, Downtown Center 2 and other zone changes, in 2008 the Town and

Community Development Agency studied and adopted an update to the East Main

Street Urban Renewal Plan; and

WHEREAS, the 2008 East Main Street Urban Renewal Plan Update recited

similar goals set forth in the studies above, including, encouragement of more scenic

vistas along the Peconic River Corridor; pedestrian parks and courtyards to provide

positive aesthetic quality; dual entrance design to connect commercial and retail uses to

the waterfront and parking areas; promote open space and community facilities for

tourists and local residents; enlargement of public space along the river corridor south

of East Main Street by reducing land dedicated to parking and seeking public/private

partnerships to make improvements and maintain view sheds; minimize alleyways and

hidden spaces that pose risks to public safety; and implementation of beautification

projects; and

WHEREAS, the 2008 East Main Street Urban Renewal Plan Update (at page

23), not dissimilar to the 1993 East Main Street Urban Renewal Plan, “there are

properties both north and south of East Main Street and West of McDermott that are

being considered for public and private acquisition. Public acquisition of additional

lands, where warranted, may be necessary to foster the overall goals of this update.

Public land within the EMSURA, such as areas utilized for parking, should be reviewed

periodically and a determination rendered as to whether parking is the appropriate use.

If not, public/private funding for reuse of parking with acceptable development or

conversion to parkland should be considered; and

WHEREAS, since the early 1980’s through to the present, the Town, together

with the Community Development Agency, have made some significant

accomplishments consistent with the revitalization plans above, and continued to

update and study the East Main Street corridor with a focus on the goals to

encouragement of more scenic vistas along the Peconic River Corridor; pedestrian

parks and courtyards to provide positive aesthetic quality; dual entrance design to

connect commercial and retail uses to the waterfront public/private partnerships to make

9.22

Packet Pg. 168

improvements and maintain view sheds encouragement of private financing, state

funding, subsidies and capital grants to achieve desired urban renewal goals; and

WHEREAS, in December of 2019, the Community Development Agency

successfully made application for grant monies wherein the Town of Riverhead was

awarded an $800,000.00 grant through the Long Island Regional Economic

Development Council for a project to create a Town Square consisting of a public

gathering space, pedestrian connectivity and open vistas from Main Street to the

riverfront; and

WHEREAS, two parcels located on East Main Street , 121 East Main Street

(SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-013.000) and 127 East Main Street (SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-

014.000) were identified for possible acquisition and included as part of the Town’s

grant application to the Long Island Regional Economic Development Council and five

parcels located on East Main Street, including 117 East Main Street (SCTM# 0600-129-

1-12), 121 East Main Street (SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-013.000) and 127 East Main Street

SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-014.000 were all identified by the Town as priority parcels for

acquisition with funding through the Old Drinking Water Protection Program 12-

D reciting the parcels proximity to the Peconic River with rehabilitation of such parcels

mitigating known negative impacts and achieving desired goals of the Peconic Estuary

Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP); and

WHEREAS, the Town and Community Development Agency identified the

purpose of purchase of 117 East Main Street SCTM# 0600-129-1-12, 121 East Main

Street SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-013.000) and 127 East Main Street SCTM# 0600-129-

1.00-014.000 as creation of public gathering space and encouragement and pursuit of

private financing, public and private partnership(s), federal, state and local funding,

subsidies and capital grants to design and construct commercial and retail uses

compatible with public space all consistent with the urban renewal policies and goals

recited above; and

WHEREAS, after providing the opportunity for all interested individuals to be

heard at a public hearing held on July 21, 2020, the Town Board by Resolution #2020-

399 and Community Development Agency by Resolution #2020-6, adopted on August

4, 2020 subject to permissive referendum requirements, the Town and Community

Development Agency, respectively, authorized the purchase of three properties located

in the center of East Main Street, to wit: 117 East Main Street SCTM# 0600-129-1-12,

121 East Main Street SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-013.000) and 127 East Main Street

SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-014.000 in furtherance of the goals recited above, specifically,

creation of a public gathering space with pedestrian connectivity and open vistas from

Main Street to the Peconic River, together with encouragement and pursuit of private

financing, public and private partnership(s), federal, state and local funding, subsidies

and capital grants to design and construct commercial and retail uses compatible with

public space all consistent with the urban renewal policies and goals recited above; and

WHEREAS, in addition to the above, the Town, by Resolution #2021-68 adopted

on January 20, 2021 retained Urban Design Associates, Ltd. (“UDA”) to assist with the

design for the Town Square with such services including renderings of a Town Square

and the Town, by Resolution # 2021-481 adopted on July 7, 2021, the Town Board

authorized a professional services agreement with National Development Council

(“NDC”), one of the oldest national economic development non-profit organizations with

a focus on creating housing, jobs, and communities and performing work exclusively on

behalf of municipalities and local development corporations to assist with the Town

Square project and Transient Oriented Development project; and

WHEREAS, after purchase of the above parcels, the Town and Community

Development Agency, by Resolution #2021-555 and Resolution #2021-8 adopted on

August 26, 2021 authorized the Town Clerk to publish notice to bidders for the

demolition of 117 East Main Street SCTM# 0600-129-1-12 and/or 121 East Main Street

SCTM# 0600-129-1.00-013.000) in furtherance of the goal to create a public gathering

space with pedestrian connectivity and open vistas from Main Street to the Peconic

River, together with design and construct commercial and retail uses compatible with

public space known as the "Town Square" project; and

WHEREAS, the Town received five bids and based upon recommendations of

the Purchasing Agent and Town Engineer, by Resolution #2021-10 and Resolution

#2021-624 adopted on September 30, 2021, the Town Board and Community

Development Agency authorized the award of bid for demolition of 117 & 121 East Main

Street to Petrocelli Contracting, Inc.; and

WHEREAS, at or near the time of completion of the demolition of the structures

located at 117 and 121, Petrocelli Development, LLC, now and hereinafter known and

referred to as J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC., well-known for the

rehabilitation and development of the Long Island Aquarium/Hyatt Hotel, historic

renovation of the East Lawn Building, Howell House, and restoration of the Preston

House,    what tax benefits?  expressed interest and desire to develop and present a plan for the public

space, reuse and redevelopment of 127 East Main Street; and

WHEREAS, J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. met with the Community

Development Agency and Town Board to express his interest and outline a

development plan, with projected financial plan, to achieve the goals recited in the

original EMSURA, 2008 updated EMSURA and goals recited in numerous resolutions

recited above and in turn, the Town Board requested a more detailed plan, with

architectural renderings depicting size, mass and design; identification of intended uses

for commercial, retail and identification of all public improvements; identify

maintenance/operation of all proposed spaces; and projected costs and funding (both

private and public); and

WHEREAS,  in early February of 2022, J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square,

LLC. presented a more formal plan to the Town Board and Community Development

Agency which additional detail and description for Town Square Project, a narrative for

the conceptual plan design concepts, sketches, diagrams, pictorials, details of proposed

public amenity/open spaces, street trees or planting areas; scale; density and design of

the buildings, structures and improvements with consistent scale and sufficient detail to

clearly show the types, design, dimensions and locations of all proposed uses,

improvements, alterations, etc.; and

WHEREAS, after J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC.’s submission of the

above, the Community Development Agency met with UDA and NDC to discuss not

only design, financial commitment of a potential master development proposing such a

project, participation of Town, be it funding through grants or otherwise, and after such

meeting tasked J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. to modify the design and

more importantly provide additional information that would enable the Town Board

and Community Development Agency to evaluate the designation of Petrocelli

9.22

Packet Pg. 170

Development, LLC, again as referenced above now J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town

Square, LLC., as Master Developer; and

WHEREAS,  on April 14th, 2022, the principal of J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town

Square, LLC. met with the Town Board, Community Development Director, NDC and

UDA and presented in open forum at a regularly scheduled work session a plan and

design for the Town Square and addressed all aspects related to and necessary for

successful completion of the Town Square Project; and

WHEREAS, the Town Board, as legislative body for the Town of Riverhead and

legislative body of the Community Development Agency, based upon the

recommendation of the Community Development Agency and recommendations and

guidance from UDA and NDC, did adopt Town Board Resolution 2022-325 and

Community Development Agency Resolution 2022-5 determining J. Petrocelli

Riverhead Town Square, LLC. as master developer, subject to negotiation of all terms

and timeline to complete the Town Square including hearing requirements necessary for

determination that J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. is a qualified and eligible

sponsor for an Urban Renewal Project and compliance with all applicable provisions of

the General Municipal Law; and 

WHEREAS, the Town Board authorized the Community Development Agency

and Office of the Town Attorney participate in negotiations of this Master Developer

Agreement for final approval by the Town Board after publication with the Town Clerk

and upon designation of J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. as the "qualified

and eligible sponsor” (the "Sponsor"), pursuant to Section 507 (2) (d) of the General

Municipal Law and in accordance with the established rules and procedures of the

Agency; and

WHEREAS, the Town and CDA requires the Master Developer and its proposed

Town Square Hotel Project to comply fully with the New York State Environmental

Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and

WHEREAS, note that the Town Board did declare itself lead agency for

Riverhead Downtown Revitalization Projects and did classify the action as a Type 1

action pursuant to SEQRA as more fully described in Resolution 2024-982 adopted on

December 23, 2024 and Part 1 Narrative of the full EAF; and

WHEREAS, after coordinated review, by Resolution #2025-263 adopted on

March 18, 2025, the Town Board, as lead agency, did issue a negative declaration

pursuant to SEQR; and

WHEREAS, in addition to the detailed analysis and consideration of numerous

potential environmental impacts related to the actions described as Phase I in the FEAF

and the issuance of a negative declaration recited above, the negative declaration

recites that the development of the individual projects listed the Phase I, II, and III in the

FEAF, including the Town Square Hotel Project, shall be subject to further SEQRA

review for compliance with the narrative and standards set forth therein; and

WHEREAS, Section 507(2)(d) of the General Municipal Law requires that a

public hearing, following at least ten (10) days public notice, be held by the Town and/or

Community Development Agency on the question of designating J. Petrocelli Riverhead

Town Square, LLC. the Sponsor for the redevelopment of the aforesaid properties; and

WHEREAS, the Town and Community Development Agency now desires to call a public hearing on the designation of J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC as the Sponsor for the sale and redevelopment of a portion of town-owned property described as SCTM# 0600-129-1-Lots 13,14,15 and SCTM# 0600-128-6-86.1 located on the south side of Main Street, Riverhead, New York. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a public hearing will be held at the Riverhead Town Hall, 4 West Second Street, Riverhead, New York 11901, on July 22, 2025 at 6:00 p.m., prevailing time, on the question of designating J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. the Sponsor for the sale and redevelopment of a portion of townowned property described as SCTM# 0600-129-1-Lots 13,14,15 and SCTM# 0600-128- 6-86.1 located on the south side of Main Street, Riverhead, New York and to hear all persons interested in the subject thereof, concerning the same, and to take such action thereon as is required or authorized by law; and be it further, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby directed to publish the attached notice of public hearing once in the July 10, 2025 edition of the News Review, the newspaper hereby designated as the official newspaper for this purpose and one having general circulation in and available to residents to the Town. Such publication shall be made no less than ten (10) days before the date designated for the public hearing. The Clerk is further authorized and directed to cause a copy of such notice of public hearing to be posted in such places as he deems appropriate under the circumstances, such posting to be done not less than ten (10) days before the date designated for the public hearing; and be it further, RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby directed to forward a copy of this resolution to the Office of the Town Attorney and the Community Development Agency; J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC., Eric Russo, Esq.; and be it further RESOLVED, that all Town Hall Departments may review and obtain a copy of this resolution from the electronic storage device, and if needed, a certified copy of the same may be obtained from the Office of the Town Clerk. THE VOTE 9.22 Packet Pg. 172 FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF PROPOSED RIVERHEAD TOWN BOARD LEGISLATION A. Type of Legislation Resolution XXX Local Law B. Title of Proposed Legislation: Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing on the Town of Riverhead, as Legislative Body for the Town of Riverhead and Governing Body of the Community Development Agency, Designation of J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. as a Qualified and Eligible Sponsor for the Purchase and Development of a Portion of Town-Owned Property Described as Sctm# 0600-129-1-Lots 13, 14 ,15 and Sctm# 0600-128-6-86.1) Located on the South Side of Main Street, Riverhead, New York A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD, AS LEGISLATIVE BODY FOR THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD AND GOVERNING BODY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, DESIGNATION OF J. PETROCELLI RIVERHEAD TOWN SQUARE, LLC. AS A QUALIFIED AND ELIGIBLE SPONSOR FOR THE PURCHASE AND DEVELOPMENT OF A PORTION OF TOWN-OWNED PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS SCTM# 0600-129-1-LOTS 13, 14 ,15 AND SCTM# 0600-128-6-86.1) LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAIN STREET, RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK C. Purpose of Proposed Legislation: D. Will the Proposed Legislation Have a Fiscal Impact? Yes No XXX E. If the answer to section D is “yes”, select (a) or (b) below and initial or detail as applicable: (a) The fiscal impact can be absorbed by Town/department existing resources set forth in approved Town Annual Budget (example:routine and budgeted procurement of goods/services)*if selecting E(a), please initial then skip items F,G and complete H,I and J; or (b) The description/explanation of fiscal impact is set forth as follows: F. If the answer to E required description/explanation of fiscal impact (E(b)), please describe total Financial Cost of Funding over 5 Years G. Proposed Source of Funding Appropriation Account to be Charged: Grant or other Revenue Source: Appropriation Transfer (list account(s) and amount): H. Typed Name & Title of Preparer: Karen Occhiogrosso I. Signature of Preparer J. Date 6/20/25 K. Accounting Staff Name & Title Jeanette DiPaola, L. Signature of Accounting Staff Jeanette DiPaola M. Date 6/23/25 9.22 Packet Pg. 173 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TOWN OF RIVERHEAD AND TOWN OF RIVERHEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY TOWN OF RIVERHEAD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Town of Riverhead, by its Town Board as legislative body of the Town of Riverhead and governing body of the Community Development Agency, Town of Riverhead, Suffolk County, New York will hold a public hearing at Riverhead Town Hall, 4 West Second Street, Riverhead, New York 11901, on July 22, 2025 at 6:00 pm, prevailing time, pursuant to General Municipal Law 507(2)(d) for the purpose of considering whether J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC., having its principal offices located at 100 Commack Street, Ronkonkoma, New York 11779 (previously designated "Master Developer) should be designated the "qualified and eligible sponsor" for the sale and redevelopment of a portion of property described as SCTM# 0600-129-1-Lots 13,14, 15 and SCTM# 0600-128-6-86.1 located on the south side of Main Street, Riverhead, New York pursuant to a certain proposed Master Developer Agreement outlining the sale, transfer and redevelopment of the properties, which said Master Developer Agreement is on file in the office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Riverhead and is available for public inspection during regular business hours. Pursuant to the Master Developer Agreement, J. Petrocelli Riverhead Town Square, LLC. will redevelop the property it acquires in accordance with the Intended Development Plan more fully described in the Master Developer Agreement, to wit: to construct a mixed use five-story building consisting of up to 76 hotel rooms and 12 condominium units, with restaurant space and retail space (retail wet use approx. 976 sq ft; dry retail approx. 2,339 sq. ft; and restaurant approx.. 133 seat) and underground parking (12 stalls) on a portion of Lot 14, Lot 13, Lot 15, small portion of SCTM# 0600-128-6-Lot 86.1. and easement over portions of Lot 14 to be retained by the Town and easement over a portion of small portion of SCTM# 0600-129-1-Lot 23 collectively known as the “Town Square Hotel Project ” (the “Project”). At said public hearing, the Town of Riverhead, by its Town Board as legislative body of the Town of Riverhead and governing body of the Community Development Agency, will hear all persons interested in the subject matter thereof. Dated: Riverhead, New York July 1, 2025 BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE TOWN OF RIVERHEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY

Photos and artist renderings of Town Square design

https://saveepcal.blogspot.com/2025/06/town-square-with-hotelcondo.html

Town Square with hotel/condo

 

"The buildings located at 117 and 121 East Main Street will be demolished, while 127 East Main Street would remain in place, although it will be extensively renovated."

Riverhead Town Press Release  March 22, 2021

Town Square from front of Suffolk Theater

building on left where Carft'd is located is to be replaced by Petrocelli hotel/condo.  Building on right has been saved to become the Science Center

Two story renderings from the Pattern Book produced by Urban Design Associates, January 2021

Original entrance concept

August 12, 2021 Town of Riverhead Press Release

Original Petrocelli four story hotel design 

Revised Petrocelli Concept of five story hotel plus condos 

Looking from the river side, dominating presence of hotel on east / right side of square   

       

Earlier portrayed view from the river of two large buildings overshadowing the Town Square

Town's goal had become two large buildings flanking the Square 

East End Arts Council historic buildings also overshadowed between two new tall constructions

Share above page illustrating design concepts for Town Square   https://tinyurl.com/RHTOWNSQUARE 

Click here to watch April 14, 2022 Town Board Work Session to hear original Petrocelli proposal  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6qdJaw4j2I&list=PLRyI_wXN-pW160RvYJey63BDGyaOb-wl6&index=72

Click here to take a google poll that offers an opportunity to weigh in anonymously about the future of the Town Square  https://tinyurl.com/RHhotelpoll  

Click here to sign a petition to oppose the demolition of Craft'd and construction of a hotel/condominium in Town Square. 

Tell the Town Board directly if you support or oppose the proposed Petrocelli hotel / condominium on land currently owned by the town after seizure of lease from Craft'd by eminent domain. Write personally to Townclerk@townofriverheadny.gov

Attend in person or by zoom the "qualified and eligible hearing" in Riverhead Town Hall at 6 p.m. Tuesday, July 22d.  In reality this is the first and decisive public hearing about the hotel and condo project.

The Master Developer Agreement.pdf  can be found on the web

 page of Town Clerk Jim Wooten, click here  

Legal Rights Against ICE Derechos Legales

 

Conozca Sus Derechos: ¿Qué puede hacer si usted es arrestado o detenido por Inmigración?

Este recurso tiene información general sobre qué hacer si usted es arrestado o detenido por inmigración.

Los inmigrantes parados, arrestados o detenidos por las autoridades de inmigración u otras fuerzas del orden tienen ciertos derechos. Pero cualquiera que no sea ciudadano de EE. UU. debe tener particular cuidado cuando se encuentra con las fuerzas del orden dentro de los Estados Unidos o en la frontera. Si tiene un encuentro con las fuerzas del orden en el trabajo, en la calle, por una infracción de tránsito o en su casa, en general usted tiene los mismos derechos constitucionales que los ciudadanos de EE. UU. Puede tener menos derechos cuando interactúa con los agentes del orden en la frontera o en un aeropuerto.

Descarga de responsabilidad: Este recurso de Conozca sus derechos brinda información general. No constituye asesoramiento legal. No se ha adaptado a su situación en particular. Si necesita asesoramiento legal, hable con un abogado de inmigración.

Si tiene un encuentro con las autoridades de inmigración o las fuerzas del orden, es importante mantener la calma y recordar esta información general.

Conozca Sus Derechos:

• ¿Quién puede preguntarme sobre mi condición migratoria?
• ¿Qué puede pasar si me encuentro con agentes del orden en la frontera o un aeropuerto?
• ¿Qué debería hacer cuando las autoridades de inmigración u otras fuerzas del orden se acercan a mí en la calle?
• ¿Qué debo hacer cuando las autoridades de inmigración golpean la puerta de mi casa?
• ¿Qué debo hacer si las autoridades de inmigración vienen a mi trabajo?
• ¿Qué debo hacer si las autoridades de inmigración me arrestan?
• Estoy bajo custodia penal en una cárcel o prisión. ¿Debería estar preocupado por mi condición migratoria?
• ¿Cuáles son mis derechos una vez que fui detenido por las autoridades de inmigración?
• ¿Qué derechos tengo en mi caso de inmigración?
• ¿Qué le debo decir a mi abogado?

Centro Nacional de Leyes Migratorias

https://www.nilc.org/resources/conozca-sus-derechos-si-usted-es-arrestado-detenido-inmigracion/

Information about how to protect from ICE legally by the National Immigration Law Center is here in English https://www.nilc.org/resources/know-your-rights-what-to-do-if-arrested-detained-immigration/ y en espanol https://www.nilc.org/resources/conozca-sus-derechos-si-usted-es-arrestado-detenido-inmigracion/

Please share as widely as possible with friends and neighbors who are vulnerable to detention and expulsion.

Future of EPCAL

Codify the Citizens Cooperative Development Team

by Andrew Leven

My two cents re Epcal  citizens cooperative development team- it is not about giving Tim advice (although that certainly matters). 

It is about whether or not the town is going to give residents an actual voice on Epcal. Not winks. Not informal understandings and quiet hopes. Not using the public when convenient. 

Simply put we need the formalization. We need it now. We need to push for it. Because we already tried winks, informal understandings and quiet hopes and we know the effort required to dodge that bullet.

Formalization means the Town finally acknowledges that the residents should be at the table. A decision to not formalize means they still reject that basic critical principle. Which is unacceptable. Let's do the work now of mobilizing the community to press this issue and save hundreds of hours later relitigating the next idiotic proposed use of Epcal that will inevitably emerge if the community is again fenced out when proposed uses are being considered on the front end.

Turning Legal Limbo into Opportunity: Riverhead’s Path Forward at EPCAL

by Robert Gass

The situation surrounding the proposed development at EPCAL (Enterprise Park at Calverton) has become a complex and contentious issue for the Town of Riverhead. The saga began when Calverton Aviation & Technology (CAT), primarily owned by the Canadian conglomerate Triple Five, entered into a contract in 2018 to purchase over 1,600 acres of land at EPCAL for $40 million. The plan was to transform the site into a hub for industry and innovation, with a focus on logistics centers and potentially using the site's runways for aviation-related activities.

However, this project quickly met with local opposition, primarily due to concerns that it would lead to the creation of a cargo jetport. Residents and local civic groups were alarmed when a CAT engineer’s presentation hinted at such a use, despite later denials from CAT. The controversy deepened when the Riverhead Industrial Development Agency (IDA) refused to grant CAT the necessary financial incentives, citing the company’s failure to clearly outline its development plans and demonstrate the project's financial viability.

In October 2023, the Riverhead Town Board voted unanimously to cancel the contract with CAT, effectively putting the project on hold. CAT responded by filing a lawsuit against the town, accusing it of deliberately scheming to avoid fulfilling its contractual obligations. The lawsuit has resulted in a legal stalemate that prevents the town from selling or further developing the property until the dispute is resolved, which could take up to five years.

Given this protracted legal battle, it would be unwise for the town to sit idly by for the next half-decade. Instead, Riverhead should take this time to meticulously plan for the future of EPCAL. The town could begin by outlining a detailed and community-supported vision for the site, which addresses environmental concerns, economic benefits, and potential uses that align with the needs and desires of the residents. By engaging in proactive planning now, Riverhead can ensure that once the legal dust settles, it is ready to move forward with a project that genuinely benefits the community, rather than scrambling to react to whatever proposal happens to be on the table.

The town has a unique opportunity to turn this legal pause into a period of thoughtful preparation, ensuring that when the time comes, they are not only ready to proceed but are doing so with a clear and community-backed plan. Waiting passively would only serve to waste valuable time, potentially leading to rushed decisions in the future. Riverhead must use this time wisely to prepare for the eventual development of EPCAL in a way that aligns with the community's long-term interests.

This approach would demonstrate true leadership and foresight—qualities that have been lacking in the EPCAL saga so far.

This current legal impasse surrounding the EPCAL site in Riverhead presents a golden opportunity for the town to engage in a well-structured, professional-led planning process that can set the stage for a successful and community-supported development in the future, regardless of who wins the lawsuit. Rather than relying on committees filled with non-professionals or politically motivated individuals, the town should consider a strategic investment in engaging experts across multiple disciplines to conduct thorough studies and provide actionable recommendations. Here's how this approach could be structured:

1. Engage Urban Planning and Public Consultation Experts

• Role: These professionals can facilitate comprehensive public consultations, ensuring that community members have a voice in the development process. By using surveys, town hall meetings, and focus groups, they can gather valuable input on what residents want and need from the EPCAL development.
• Benefit: This approach ensures that the final plan has broad community support, reducing the risk of future opposition and aligning the project with local priorities.

2. Hire Environmental Law and Impact Assessment Consultants

• Role: These consultants can assess the environmental implications of various development options, ensuring compliance with state and federal regulations. They can also identify potential constraints and opportunities related to the site's unique ecological characteristics.
• Benefit: A well-informed environmental strategy will not only ensure regulatory compliance but also enhance the sustainability and appeal of the development.

3. Commission Financial Analysts and Economists

• Role: Financial experts can conduct feasibility studies to evaluate the economic viability of different development scenarios. They can analyze potential revenue streams, return on investment, and the economic impact on the local community.
• Benefit: By understanding the financial implications, the town can pursue development options that are both economically sound and beneficial to the community.

4. Consult with Engineering and Infrastructure Specialists

• Role: Engineering consultants can assess the technical feasibility of various development plans, including infrastructure requirements such as transportation, utilities, and waste management. They can also identify any structural challenges related to the site's existing assets, like the runways.
• Benefit: Ensuring that the development is technically feasible and well-integrated into the existing infrastructure will prevent costly overruns and logistical challenges.

5. Leverage Government Relations and Incentive Experts

• Role: Professionals with expertise in government incentives can identify and secure grants, tax breaks, and other financial incentives at the local, state, and federal levels. They can also navigate the complex regulatory landscape to ensure the project benefits from available resources.
• Benefit: Maximizing government incentives can significantly reduce the project's cost and increase its appeal to potential developers and investors.

6. Develop a Comprehensive Master Plan

• Role: With input from all the above experts, the town can create a detailed master plan that outlines the vision, goals, and specific steps needed to develop EPCAL. This plan should include zoning recommendations, infrastructure plans, environmental safeguards, and financial projections.
• Benefit: A master plan provides a clear roadmap for development, ensuring that all stakeholders are aligned and that the project progresses smoothly once the legal issues are resolved.

7. Create a Professional Steering Committee

• Role: Instead of a committee of non-professionals or party-affiliated individuals, a steering committee composed of the engaged experts, town officials, and select community representatives should be formed. This committee would oversee the planning process, ensuring that it remains on track and aligned with the town's goals.
• Benefit: A professionally guided steering committee would bring accountability, transparency, and expertise to the project, leading to better outcomes.

Investing in professional expertise now will save the town from potential headaches down the line. Rather than waiting for the lawsuit to conclude, Riverhead should seize this opportunity to plan thoughtfully and meticulously. By doing so, the town can ensure that when the legal dust settles, it is not only ready to proceed but is doing so with a clear, detailed, and community-backed plan that will benefit everyone involved.

This approach represents a far better use of time and resources than relying on well-meaning but inexperienced committees. It positions Riverhead to emerge from this legal battle stronger and more prepared to take advantage of the opportunities that EPCAL presents.

There are companies and consulting firms that specialize in providing comprehensive services across urban planning, environmental law, financial analysis, engineering, and government relations. These firms often operate under the umbrella of "multi-disciplinary consulting firms" or "integrated planning and development firms." Here are some examples and their specialties:

AECOM

   - Specialties: AECOM is a global firm that offers services in urban planning, environmental consulting, engineering, financial analysis, and government relations. They work on large-scale infrastructure and development projects, providing end-to-end solutions from conceptualization to implementation.

   - Services: Environmental impact assessments, economic feasibility studies, infrastructure design, community engagement, and securing government incentives.

ARUP

   -Specialties: ARUP is known for its expertise in engineering, urban planning, and sustainability consulting. They provide integrated solutions that cover all aspects of development projects, including legal and financial considerations.

   - Services: Urban master planning, environmental consulting, financial modeling, engineering design, and public consultation.

HDR

   - Specialties: HDR is a multi-disciplinary firm that focuses on architecture, engineering, environmental services, and strategic consulting. They offer a holistic approach to development projects, including government and public affairs consulting.

   - Services: Environmental assessments, engineering design, financial planning, and public policy consulting.

WSP Global

   - Specialties: WSP Global provides consultancy services in engineering, environmental science, and urban planning. They work with both public and private sectors on complex projects requiring a multi-faceted approach.

   - Services: Feasibility studies, environmental impact assessments, urban planning, engineering design, and public consultation.

Tetra Tech

   - Specialties: Tetra Tech offers consulting, engineering, and technical services. They are particularly strong in environmental consulting, but also provide urban planning, financial consulting, and engineering services.

   - Services: Environmental compliance, urban and regional planning, infrastructure design, financial analysis, and government relations.

What These Firms Offer

These firms offer a broad range of services that are critical to large-scale development projects like EPCAL, including:

- Urban and Regional Planning: Developing comprehensive master plans that align with community goals and regulatory requirements.

- Environmental Consulting: Conducting impact assessments and ensuring compliance with environmental laws.

- Engineering Design: Designing infrastructure that supports the proposed development, including transportation and utilities.

- Financial Analysis: Performing feasibility studies to ensure the economic viability of the project.

- Government Relations and Public Affairs: Navigating the regulatory landscape and securing government incentives, while also managing public engagement and consultation processes.

Why Use These Firms?

Engaging with a multi-disciplinary firm allows for a seamless and integrated approach to development. These firms have the expertise and resources to manage all aspects of a project under one roof, ensuring that every component—from environmental impact to economic feasibility—is aligned and that the project moves forward efficiently and effectively. This holistic approach is far superior to relying on fragmented efforts from multiple smaller consultants or committees, which can lead to miscommunication, delays, and increased costs.

These firms would be ideal partners for Riverhead as it navigates the complexities of the EPCAL development, ensuring that the project is both legally sound and financially viable, while also being environmentally responsible and community-focused.

Additional personal thoughts

Having professionals come in and design the project from head to toe is the way to go. Get it out of the hands of the politicians who are trying to do it piecemeal. Get a commitment from them. Make the Town Board sign off on it. They are vulnerable right now because of all the mistakes they have made and the bad press. Decide on an overall theme.

You want something that is both for the Townspeople to enjoy along with something that provides jobs for them. High paying jobs or a mix. A combination. There is no vision in this town. It is all pay to play.  The simplest answer is an industrial park like the Hauppauge Industrial Park. One- or two-story buildings. Big wide streets. Lots of landscaping. You need a hook. Cover the runways and the taxiways with solar panels. Offer free electricity to all new occupants. 

Have one developer. Build it out one company building at a time as they sign contracts. Raise the solar panels off the ground and use the runways for parking or lease part of that space to car dealers for storage or sales or for some type of automobile use. Put a couple of BESS facilities there. Encapsulate them and have dikes around them so they can be flooded easily if there is a problem, using river water. Build a data center or two. Free electric for the data centers will be attractive. They use tons of power.  

Have an overall picture of what you will present to the professionals, so they have something to work on. If the Town loses the lawsuit use the plan as a starting point for negotiating. Couple that with some form of recreational space. Zip line. Nature walks. Bird watching . Bird sanctuary. Experimental farms. Food trucks. Playgrounds. Picnic areas. Driving school on the weekend when businesses are closed. Museums. Make sure there are few if any tax breaks. Make it a paradise , a place for the townspeople to enjoy without breaking the bank. No expensive restaurants and no phony companies with politically appointed CEOs taking up space.

There are a million ideas out there to give the people a place to enjoy and still put money in the politicians' pockets. I sent in ideas for a campus called "The American Institute of Artificial Intelligence" (AIAI) partnered with Brookhaven Labs and Stonybrook University, I sent in plans and ideas for "The Triple R Railroad, (Riverhead RailRoad) with trains using the spur coming from the west and then shuttle trains taking visitors to the east using the LIRR tracks with stops at the Outlets and Raceway, Downtown Riverhead, the wineries with food trucks etc, all coupled with other ideas that I put forward, too many to go over again.

Ag Resorts Maps and Site Plan

Potential parcels for resorts, map provided by David Wortman of VHB Engineering to Annmarie Prudenti and Dawn Thomas on January23, 2023

Site plans provided by Eric Russo, attorney for the Developer, Alfred Weissman Real Estate in Harrison, NY (Westchester County) to Assistant Town Attorney Annemarie Prudenti  February 28, 2023

Text of Resolution for Town Board meeting of August 20, 2024

§301-240 (B) Agri-tourism Inn & Resort. 1. The use of land for Agri-tourism Inn & Resort shall require a special permit issued by the Town Board and shall meet the following minimum standards and adhere to the restrictions and provisions set forth below: 2. The use of land for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort shall require a minimum lot size of 100 aces, either held in single ownership or assemblage of contiguous lots with one or more common property boundaries held in single ownership of no less than 100 acres, located within and limited to the RA-80 Zoning District. 3. The use of land for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort shall restrict development as described in § 301-240 (B) (6) below on no greater than 30% of the property and a minimum of 70% of the property shall be preserved in perpetuity for agricultural production by deed of development rights, conservation easement or offer for dedication consistent with this provision and made part of the special permit criteria set forth in this Chapter. The portion of the land restricting development and preserved in perpetuity recited above, shall demonstrate suitable agricultural soils for crop production. 4. The use of land for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort shall be limited to 150 guest units. To the extent the lot size exceeds 100 acres, the use of land for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort described in § 301-240 (B)(6) and (8) below, each additional acre of land shall yield no greater than 1,200 square feet of floor area and no greater than an additional 4000 square feet for agricultural structures or an additional 100 square feet for use as and for a farm stand, subject to § 301-240 (B) (10). 5. The use of the land shall be configured in such a way to protect the Sound Avenue Historic corridor and provide open space views of agriculture from all external roadways. In addition, the use of land shall comply with Town Code Chapter 219 and limit improvements related to access to the Long Island Sound to one (1) single walkway/stairway with no greater than 10% disturbance of the bluff area for such improvement. 6. The Agri-tourism Inn and Resort shall consist of a building or buildings arranged or designed to be made available as overnight accommodations for guests for a stay of no longer than a two-weeks deemed to be the principal use or principal building(s) and a portion of land dedicated to and in bona fide agricultural production. The following accessory uses shall be permitted and shall be located within such principal building(s): restaurant(s); conference room(s); library; indoor personal amenity space/services i.e. salon or spa; and, recreation customarily associated with inns and resorts for use by overnight guests only, to wit: gym and pool. In addition, limited outdoor amenities may be permitted on that portion of the 9.9.b Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 2024-04-01_Agritourism Inn Resort Part 3. Supplementary Regulations_301-240 (003) with change per AMP 7-8-24 (2024-656 : property arranged and designed for overnight accommodations and customarily associated with inns and resorts, to wit: i.e. pool, tennis courts. Note, all principal and accessory uses described herein above shall be located in permanent structures and use of temporary or non-permanent structures are strictly prohibited. Notwithstanding the above, the total number of restaurant seating available shall not exceed two and one half times the number of guest units. The restaurant shall not be advertised or used as a catering facility. The hosting of parties or events shall be only made available to guests during the time of stay at the Inn and Resort and a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the seating capacity shall remain open and available to all guests of the Inn and Resort and the general public. 7. The deed of development rights, conservation easement, or declaration of covenants shall include or be amended to include a restriction that the lands restricting development and preserved for agricultural production shall be preserved for agricultural production and the agricultural use/production shall be limited to agricultural uses defined in New York State Agricultural andMarkets Law Article 25 AA and shall be agricultural uses dependent on the use of agricultural soils. Notwithstanding the above, no greater than 5% of the lot coverage for the portion of lands dedicated to agricultural production may be for agricultural production that is not dependent on use of agricultural soils provided said agricultural production is located within traditional barn structures and suitably screened from Sound Avenue Historic Corridor. Note, the owner may operate and manage the agricultural production or enter into such lease/agreement or leases/agreements with individuals/entities with experience and expertise in agricultural production to operate and maintain the land in agricultural production. 8. The deed of development rights, conservation easement or declaration of covenants shall restrict or be amended to restrict the number/size/square footage, dimensions and use of agricultural structures as follows: the total square footage for agriculture structures on the lot or lot(s) comprising the agricultural portion of the cluster development shall not exceed 300,000 square feet; single story with a height no greater than 35’; and, agricultural structures may not be used for retail, processing or manufacturing. Agricultural structures used for agricultural worker housing supportive of the on-farm agricultural production shall require application and compliance with Town Code § 301-239. Notwithstanding the above, in addition to the agriculture structures described above, a single farm stand, be it affixed, mobile or without foundation, not to exceed 1500’ square feet shall be permitted for the marketing and/or sale of on-site agricultural grown produce or Long Island grown produce. 9. The deed of development rights, conservation easement or declaration of covenants shall permit farms tours (including education programs, workshops or demonstrations); harvest your own activities, crop maize for hayride, hiking or horseback riding and other passive recreational use related to or highlighting the lands in agricultural production however the restrictions set forth above regarding the number/size/square footage, dimensions and use of agricultural structures shall apply to the uses described in this provision. In addition to the above and regardless of number of attendees or spectators, with or without admission fee, private or held open to the public, the use of land in agricultural production to host festivals, shows or exhibitions, and, bazaars and outdoor shows must be related to the agricultural production on site or regional/Long Island agricultural production and shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 255 limited to six per year. The use of land 9.9.b Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: 2024-04-01_Agritourism Inn Resort Part 3. Supplementary Regulations_301-240 (003) with change per AMP 7-8-24 (2024-656 : preserved for agricultural production shall not include catering events i.e. weddings, birthday celebrations, and instead same are strictly prohibited. 10. The deed of development rights, conservation easement or declaration of covenants shall restrict and prohibit the transfer of sanitary credits and instead all its sanitary density shall be deemed extinguished and shall not be deemed to apply to the development portion of the land. In addition, to the extent the property is already impressed with a deed of development rights for any portion of the property to be included in the 70% of the 100 acre property restricted to agricultural production, there shall be no yield from such preserved property nor transfer of development rights for such portion of the property. 11. In addition to the conditions and restrictions set for above and below, the governing Board shall require the applicant to covenant to construct and maintain a wellsite or wellsites suitable and capable to satisfy the water/irrigation needs for the lands in agricultural production. The wellsite(s) shall be suitably screened from the Sound Avenue Historic Corridor. 12. The governing Board shall impose a monetary penalty of $1,000.00 per day upon the owner of property for any period of time exceeding nine (9) months that Agricultural production ceases on property. 13. The following dimensional regulations shall apply for use of land within the RA-80 zoning district for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort: (a) Minimum Lot area: 100 acres held in single ownership or assemblage of contiguous lots with one or more common property boundaries held in single ownership. Note, lot coverage shall be calculated on only that portion of to be used for development and the agricultural portion of the property may not be included for purposes of lot coverage. In addition, lot coverage shall be calculated on the buildable area of the site. Wetlands, slopes in excess of 15%, and cross-easements for roads, and other such areas shall not be included for lot coverage. Notwithstanding redemption of preservation credits set forth in 301-208, use of land within the RA-80 zoning district for Agri-tourism Inn and Resort shall permit the use of preservation credits to increase the development yield at a rate of an additional 1,200 square feet of floor area per preservation credit redeemed to a maximum 0.25 floor area ratio, not to exceed 150 guest rooms per project area. (b) Minimum width at street: 200 feet. (c) Maximum Building Lot Coverage: 15% (d) Maximum Building Lot Coverage with TDR: 25% (e) Maximum Impervious Surface: 35% (f) Maximum floor area ratio: 0.15 in total for all buildings (excluding agricultural buildings) (g) Maximum Floor area ratio with TDR: 0.25 for all buildings (excluding agricultural building) (h) Minimum Front Yard Depth: 250 Feet* 9.9.b Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: 2024-04-01_Agritourism Inn Resort Part 3. Supplementary Regulations_301-240 (003) with change per AMP 7-8-24 (2024-656 : (i) Minimum Side Yard depth: 60 Feet (j) Minimum Combined Depth for two sides: 120 (k) Minimum Read Yard Depth: 500 Feet (l) Maximum Building Height: 35 Feet (m) Buffer. A minimum buffer shall be provided at the side property lines of 50 feet in width. Such buffer shall maintain, to the maximum extent possible, existing vegetation and natural features but shall be supplemented with native vegetative species to provide adequate screening of the project area from adjacent residential uses. No buffer need be provided adjacent to any open space or conservation zone. (n) Parking. Required parking shall be not be located within the front yard. No parking shall be located nearer than 50 feet of the side property line. All service and unloading areas shall be screened from view of streets by one or more of a combination of walls, fencing, vegetation or berms. *Notwithstanding 301-240 B. 13 (h) Agricultural structures with a maximum floor area of 5,000 square feet, as well as parking associated with said agricultural structures, may be located within required front yard.

 

See Riverhead News-Review article by clicking here 

https://tinyurl.com/RHNRoped

Longer version with additional information:

Can Ag Resorts on the Sound be Stopped?

   By John McAuliff

 

On Tuesday evening August 20^th, the Riverhead Town Board will hold a public hearing that will shape the future of our community and of our neighbors in Southold.  The topic will be new zoning north of Sound Avenue to permit luxury beach resorts under the protective coloration of Agricultural Tourism.

The first target is farmland at 3994 Sound Avenue to the east of Willow Ponds condominiums.  Advocates have suggested that up to six parcels of RA-80 land north of Sound Avenue from Baiting Hollow to the Southold-Riverhead town line are eligible for resort development, bringing as many as 1000 rooms and the traffic to occupy and supply them.  (See map here https://tinyurl.com/agresort )

The inn/resort development would be the principal use, consisting of a building or buildings providing overnight accommodations for guests for a stay of no longer than two weeks. Permitted accessory uses within the building(s) would include restaurant, conference room(s), library; indoor personal amenity space/services such as salon or spa, gym and pool. “Limited outdoor amenities” for overnight guests “customarily associated with inns and resorts,” such as pool and tennis courts would also be allowed in the development site.  Access to Long Island Sound for guests will be provided by a single walkway/stairway with no greater than 10% disturbance of the bluff area.

The only proponents of this plan visible so far are on the Town Board and staff of the Planning and Legal Departments and Long Island Farm Bureau Executive Director Rob Carpenter.  Former Supervisor Yvette Aguiar was an enthusiast, “let’s go be farmers for the weekend”.

Public reaction at Board meetings and in letters has been overwhelmingly negative.  Willow Ponds on the Sound Homeowners Association President Bill Wandling, accompanied by a dozen members, told the Town Board at its Dec. 19 meeting it is “a terrible idea”.  The response from the Supervisor and Board members was patronizing and dismissive.

There is an EPCAL like tone in the official discourse that demeans critics.  Advocates claim to have a mission to protect the agricultural land north of Sound Avenue by encapsulating 70% of it in resorts on the premise that folks from outside will pay for having a holiday or holding a conference embedded in local farming.  

Skeptics who think this is just spin to ease entry of resorts point to the history of the proposal:

1)       The first public alert came from a story in the Riverhead Local by Alek Lewis on July 26, 2023.  He reported that Alfred Weissman Real Estate (AWRE) in Harrison, NY (Westchester County) had this on its web site:

“This extraordinary 105-acre site on the North Fork Wine trail offers the potential to build a truly unique campus beach resort experience. The property has a private beach with over 600 linear feet of coastline and a 70-acre organic farm, that will allow for the offering of an organic farm to table experience. AWRE is looking to build a 5-star resort, taking advantage of the property's natural beauty, proximity to NYC, the Hamptons and the North Fork wine trail. The property is located less than 90 miles from NYC and 13 miles from Westhampton Beach.”

2)       Director of Planning Dawn Thomas minimized the importance and defended the secrecy to the reporter by describing it as “just a concept proposal.”  She admitted that town officials had met with the developer “at various times over the last two years”, justifying that “a project like this wouldn’t put kids in the school district.” 

 3)      There was a big problem, zoning of the intended land restricted use to agriculture and low- to medium-density residential development.  Weissman had two solutions.  First, in the well established tradition of local politics, make contributions to at least two members of the Board, Tim Hubbard ($1,275) and Ken Rothwell ($1,000). 

 4)      Second, pay for outside technical assistance to influence and enable what town planners and lawyers recommend to the Board.  On January 30, 2024, Alek Lewis revealed that was exactly what had happened.  On April 13, 2023, Eric Russo, the attorney for the resort developer, confirmed to Dawn Thomas that Weissman was paying VJB Engineering to provide assistance to the Town for “the preparation of the necessary SEQRA analysis review/compliance for TDRs and Special Permit Amendments for Agri-Tourism”.

 5)      Town officials were misleading about their level of knowledge and the length and depth of collaboration between Riverhead authorities and the developer.  On October 19, 2022, Hubbard, Rothwell, Thomas and Assistant Town Attorney Annemarie Prudenti met with VJB Engineering and Weissman’s attorney.  On January 27, 2023 VJB provided a map of six available potential resort parcels.  By February 14, Prudenti was exchanging draft language with Russo.    On February 23 Russo sent Prudenti a site plan including drawings of building layouts.  (for copies see https://tinyurl.com/agresort ) As Alek Lewis wrote, “even though Thomas was a part of nearly three dozen emails discussing the project and the draft code revision, Thomas said in a July 26 interview that she was only ‘a little bit’ familiar with the project.”

 6)      “Agritourism resort” appeared in Chapter 13 of the draft CompPlan with no discussion in the Central Advisory Committee.  It first appeared in the public update meeeting on December 13, 2023, and received largely negative response.  (see below*)    Who was responsible for its sudden and late insertion?

Board member Rothwell is the primary advocate of the project.  He consistently tries to deflect criticism of the resorts by saying it is premature, obscuring that each decision-making step is essential to go on to the next.  “People are jumping ahead to a project. First, we’re just talking about zoning implications.”

Supervisor Hubbard is at one moment enthusiastic and at the next critical, reminiscent of his evolving stance on EPCAL.  This was reported from his remarks at a July 16 meeting with members of the Southold Town Board who oppose the resorts :  “At this point in time, it’s still a discussion,” Hubbard said. “And the farmers aren’t 100% on board with it for various reasons. The people don’t seem to be on board with it. And then you have to weigh the negatives versus the positives; right now I see a lot more negatives than positives.” 

Despite what they heard from their Southold counterparts and previously from their own citizens, a few hours later the Riverhead Board unanimously approved the rezoning resolution that is the subject of the August 20th hearing. (text here https://tinyurl.com/agresort )   When there was an uproar about construction of a charter high school in the same area on the south side of Sound Avenue, the Board lost enthusiasm for that project.  Can the same thing happen to the resort zoning?

In addition to the dubious logic that this is the best way to save agricultural land, the old chestnuts for every development project of generating tax revenue and jobs will be brought forth.  They may even be true in the short term, but that misses the point about what future we want for Riverhead.  To see the impact of the inexorable path of profit driven development, look west of us to the rapidly growing suburban towns and east of us to the resorts along the Sound in Greenport.  Is that what we want for Riverhead?   If you can’t be there in person or by zoom, write to Townclerk@townofriverheadny.gov

-----------------------------------------------------

*  Agri resorts were publicly "discussed" on December 13, 2023, although no attention was paid to the comments as summarized in the official report.

1. Zoning and Land Use

Agrotourism Resort: Some residents expressed concern about the concept of allowing for an agrotourism resort with the use of TDR credits. There was some opposition to a hotel and spa that was proposed by a developer across from Doctor’s Path on Sound Ave. Comments expressed desire to preserve this land as open space.

5.  Agricultural Lands Agrotourism:

 Strong feelings were expressed in regard to agrotourism. Participants expressed that agrotourism is a commercial use, distinct from agriculture, has higher impacts on infrastructure, and should be taxed higher and regulated differently than farms. Regarding the definition of agrotourism, one commenter said it is not wedding receptions and catering halls. Another commenter wrote that “Farms” which accept income from tourist attractions, such as playgrounds, mazes, rides, music, etc. should have a higher tax rate than a true farm.” Concerns were raised about quality-of-life issues including noise, traffic, safety. There was additional opposition to allowing agrotourism resorts, which some commenters felt would compete with downtown hotels and existing inns and disturb residential neighborhoods.