Riverhead Ciderhouse gets one last bite at the apple: Planning Board in 3-2 vote OKs already-built expansion, calling it final

In a divided Planning Board vote last night, Riverhead Ciderhouse got what planners called its last chance to get site plan approvals for changes or additions to its Sound Avenue premises built without prior permits or site plan amendments.

The resolution adopted by a 3-2 vote, with Vice Chairperson Ed Densieski and Member Joseph Baier opposed, grants site plan approval, legalizing an already-built tasting room expansion and outdoor patio.

Any further expansion of the tasting room use “shall be prohibited,” according to the resolution, because “any additional expansion would exceed the customarily incidental and accessory nature” of the use.

The tasting room use is officially “the processing and retail sale and tasting of hard cider,” which town officials have in the past determined to be a “customarily incidental and accessory” accessory use to the 108,000-square foot building’s principal use: “agricultural processing and warehouse.”

Riverhead Planner Matt Charters said, with the already-built expansion, the tasting room accessory use is roughly 11% of the overall premises. Any additional expansion would make the tasting room exceed the “customarily incidental and accessory nature” of an accessory use.

Once again, the Planning Board faced a crowd of residents who were not shy about expressing their opinions, both from their seats — with cheers, jeers and, in the end, shouts of “Shame! Shame!” — and at the podium.

Planning Board members Chairperson Joann Waski told the crowd before the vote, “I want you to understand that I am you. I am a resident of Riverhead. I was born and raised in this town and I see your signs and I know that you are upset and I empathize with you. And probably if I wasn’t sitting in this seat, I’d be sitting with you with my own sign.” Waski went on to say she understands, as a member of the Planning Board, that the board is “not here to punish the applicant.”

“We are here to move the application forward, to legalize the application.” Waski said. “We actually have no reason — at least I do not have one within the realm of my job to say no to this.”

Waski said a no vote would not accomplish anything except perhaps attract a lawsuit from the property owner. “And nothing else will change,” she predicted.

With the resolution approved last night, she said, “We are drawing a line in the sand. He cannot come before this board and ask for any more expansion again.”

Residents weren’t buying it. Speakers pointed to the previous approvals by the Planning Board of already-built changes to the Ciderhouse site plan.

“We all know from the get-go that these people ignored all sorts of permits, health code regulations, to do what they wanted to do to make money. And now we’re here once again,” Kathy Kirkpatrick of Baiting Hollow told the board.

“You are setting are really wrong precedent to let people come in here, do whatever they want to do, without regard to town, permits, health code regulations, or whatever, and then get it rubber-stamped at the end,” Kirkpatrick said.

“You are undermining your own authority,” Claudette Bianco of Baiting Hollow said. “What good is having rules if you approve it after the fact?”

Mike Foley of Reeves Park pushed back on the premise advanced by Waski and Planning Board lawyer Eileen Powers that an approval is justified by the board’s lack of enforcement authority, which is vested in the Code Enforcement Division and the Town Board.

“We’re not asking you to enforce anything. We’re asking you to establish a unanimous ‘no vote’ so that code enforcement can enforce things,” he said. “They can’t enforce things that you approve they can only enforce things that you deny.”

Foley said the approval actually legalizes and establishes an events space and “wedding hall” on Sound Avenue, which the Ciderhouse advertised on its website — in spite of prior covenants prohibiting weddings and large parties there. He pointed to other provisions of prior covenants the applicant signed and recorded, as required by the Planning Board, which the applicant violated.

“We are now talking about an applicant that has without permission without filing an application built a 6,681-square-foot segregated catering hall,” Foley said. “It is separated by a wall and a door from the rest of that place… We want you as a planning board to say ‘this guy cannot be approved by flouting the application process.’”

Foley noted that Sound Avenue was designated a historic corridor on July 6, 1975 — “48 years ago today.”

The applicant is “calling his catering hall, his wedding reception hall, an ‘overflow assembly,’” Foley said. “It doesn’t pass the sniff test. It has been disproven by video. And it is incumbent on this board to stop these rogue actors before they take over the entire Sound Avenue historic corridor.

Foley questioned the legality of the approval. After reading aloud the oath of office of a planning board member, he asked, “So what does faithfully performing the duties of a planning board member mean? Does it mean that when an applicant who comes before you who has knowingly violated the zoning requirements and been told he cannot do something chooses to do what is not permitted, that you will even do worse than to turn a blind eye? You’ll approve it without regard to the community or the law,” Foley said.

“Who needs a planning board if business owners can do whatever they want, without an application, get caught, ask forgiveness and get a rubber-stamp of approval from the board that they thumbed their nose at?” Foley asked.

He said the community is not asking the board to enforce anything, but to uphold its own covenants and respect the law. The community will then turn to the Town Board to demand enforcement, Foley said.

Member George Nunnaro voted yes, joined by the board’s newest member, John Hogan, who participated in his first Planning Board meeting last night. Hogan, of Wading River, was appointed by the Town Board last month to the seat previously held by longtime member and former chairperson Richard O’Dea, whose term had expired Dec. 31, 2022. Neither member commented on the resolution before voting.

Densieski and Baier cast their votes in opposition.

Densieski called himself “a big supporter of the Riverhead Ciderhouse.”

“I think it’s a great addition to historic Sound Avenue. The inside and outside of buildings and grounds are beautiful. The business is well run and very family orientated and, in my opinion, a great fit on Sound Avenue,” Densieski said.

“I think would be a great spot for a wedding or an event that I would love to support. But the covenants and restrictions, which were agreed by both sides and were recorded with the county, restrict special events and weddings. And I feel that these are event rooms and I have to vote no,” Densieski said.

Baier said he generally favored the “most things in this resolution.” He added, “But I am not in favor of the conversion of the tasting room and I vote no.”

That put the chairperson in the position of casting the deciding vote. Waski did not add to the comments she made at the beginning of the public portion of the meeting reserved for comments on resolutions.

“I vote yes,” Waski said, drawing jeers and shouts of “shame, shame” from members of the audience.