Riverhead Planning Board advances Summerwind Farms project despite active stop-work order

The Riverhead Planning Board granted conditional approval for the final plat for the major Summerwind Farms subdivision, despite objections from neighboring residents and the active stop-work order on the Aquebogue property. 

After some time in executive session, the five board members unanimously voted in favor of the conditional approval, but added an amendment stating “no further site work shall be performed prior to the filing of the signed final plat with the Suffolk County Clerk and satisfaction of all applicable conditions of this resolution.” 

The decision comes weeks after the Riverhead Building Department posted a “Stop Work Order” on Aug. 11 at the proposed 16-lot residential subdivision at 200 Peconic Bay Boulevard after code enforcement officials discovered substantial site work started before approvals and permits were issued. The project consists of two agricultural preserve areas, on approximately 30 acres within the RA-40 and RA-80 zoning districts. 

Board member Ken Zilnicki defended the planning process and staff, as well as acknowledged how builder Vincent Calvosa “started early without all the proper permits.” He agreed nothing more should be done on the property until corrective actions are taken, but argued the conditional approval can move forward.

“This department works their tail off, and it may not be to the liking of everyone in the room, or in the town, but there is an unbelievable amount of work that we do with [Senior planner] Greg and the rest of the planning department,” said Ken Zilnicki. “Ed [Densieski] and I have been out to the property numerous times, we’ve had open sessions with both sides, and this development is exactly what we all agreed on.”

Deputy Town Attorney Danielle Hurley told the crowd at the Sept. 3 meeting that although the stop work order is still in effect, it is not a factor in the planning board’s consideration to grant conditional final plat approval. 

“The council for the applicant and the office of the town attorney is working to discuss the violations and see if there can be a resolution,” Ms. Hurley said. “There are two separate matters that are happening at the same time, and we will continue to address the stop work order.” 

Officials were notified of possible tree clearing at the site where inspectors found that “a substantial portion of the property had been cleared, and excavators, bulldozers and other earthmoving equipment were observed on the premises,” according to previous reporting by the Riverhead News-Review. They also documented improvements throughout the site related to grading, excavation, drainage, parking with fencing and temporary electric service.

Officials said at the time of the inspection that the project had only received preliminary planning board approval, and the Town had not issued building permits necessary to authorize the extent of work observed on the property.

The project had already been under fire back in the spring, as previously reported, when the Riverhead Planning Board rejected three “unacceptable” sketch plans for the proposed subdivision after an engineering firm called out Mr. Calvosa for submitting illegitimate entries and a fabricated traffic study report on behalf of the applicant.

Senior planner Greg Bergman said the applicant satisfied several conditions set in the preliminary approval in March, such as submitting draft covenant language regarding the agricultural reserve areas and access easements. The planning board’s consulting engineer also reviewed the revised final plat, road grading and drainage plans and recommended a $920,000 performance security bond estimate. 

At least six sketch plans were provided as well, with Sketch Plan 6 ultimately selected because it was considered the least disruptive layout, while still meeting safety and open space goals, based on professional engineering review, Mr. Bergman said. Residents’ concerns submitted to the record about lighting, property lines, clearing, existing vegetation preservation and other issues were also considered during the board’s review.

Sketch Plan 6 places the common driveway at the southeast corner of the property, connecting to Peconic Bay Boulevard, adds a recharge basin and preserves a wooded area near the south bend of the street. 

Mr. Bergman agreed the clearing that already occurred should have been done with proper permits in place. However, he stressed it was going to happen anyway once the map was approved. 

“The board is aware in its selection and of its preferred sketch plan that this area was going to be cleared,” Mr. Bergman said. “This area was going to be excavated for a recharge basin, as well as the creation of a town roadway, so, just the fact that there was no awareness of clearing or tree removal is not accurate.” 

Many residents who live near the property urged the planning board to table the vote and wait until the legal matters surrounding the stop work order and Mr. Calvosa has been resolved. 

“We are not asking for you to deny anyone the right to develop their property, we’re asking for something much more fundamental: that the rules be followed, that representations to this board be truthful, that the board conditions mean something,” said Ruth Arnone, who lives on Foxchaser Place. “That neighboring property’s owners’ rights are respected, and that every applicant is held to the same standard — if the rules can be bent for one applicant, then they’re not really rules at all.”

Lois Leonard, who has lived on Foxchaser Place for 35 years, described the entire situation as “bizarre,” and questioned why the developer was allowed to proceed after falsifying information and clearing “100-year-old trees” without permission. 

She called Mr. Calvosa’s clearing “the saddest loss of land yet,” with roughly 20 acres of farmland now lost behind her house, she said. 

“He didn’t have permission to do that, it now looks like a war zone,” Ms. Leonard said. “Why did he do this? Where was the oversight?”

Ms. Leonard also raised the fear of a big greenhouse close to her house. However, the senior planner explicitly stated that greenhouses are not allowed in that RB-40 zone. The allowed agricultural structures could be a barn or fencing associated with agricultural production. 

Only a couple of days before the Riverhead Planning Board approval, Supervisor Jerry Halpin was the only town board member to vote no on a resolution approving a notice to bidder for the installation of water mains and appurtenances at the proposed Summerwind Farms subdivision on Sept. 1. 

Following the meeting, Mr. Halpin said in an interview the developer falsified documents and was allegedly arrested for it, so he believed the town shouldn’t move forward with the water-related part of the project until the legal process and planning board vote are resolved.

“I’m not helping someone move the ball quicker if they haven’t been able to abide by our guidelines so far,” the supervisor said.

Josh Sirefman, a Foxchaser resident who also spoke in opposition of the project, said the early community support of the “least offensive” sketch plan was based on trust.

“That trust started to get eroded with the bizarre incident around the engineering,” Mr. Sirefman said. “We continue to engage with the developer, we continue to engage with the town — that trust is now completely broken.”