Environmental advocates and several Riverhead residents urged the Town Board Tuesday to reject Island Water Park’s latest request to loosen restrictions on uses at Scott’s Pointe, warning that the proposal would undo environmental safeguards the board relied on less than a year ago when it approved a prior site plan amendment for the Calverton amusement park.
Island Water Park owner Eric Scott sharply rejected criticism of the application and repeatedly characterized opponents’ statements as “fake news.”
“I don’t care about the complainers,” Scott said. “What I want to do is state facts and straighten out the fake news.” He said his operation protects the environment and provides family fun, calling critics of Scott’s Pointe “people that don’t enjoy fun [and] try to ruin it for everybody.”
The hearing concerned Island Water Park Corp.’s application to amend its site plan and special permit for the property at 5835 Middle Country Road. The application seeks approval for a zip line across the site’s manmade lake, temporary floating docks for battery-powered bumper boats, a fire-suppression well and changes to recorded covenants restricting use of the go-kart track and lake.
More coverage of Island Water Park/Scott’s Pointe
The most controversial part of the application is a request to amend a covenant that currently limits the track to go-karts and prohibits other vehicles. The applicant wants the restriction changed to allow special events using drift cars, according to Senior Planner Greg Bergman, who summarized the application for the board at the start of the hearing.
Bergman noted that the go-kart-only restriction was imposed as part of a conditioned negative declaration adopted by the Town Board in March 2025 in connection with the last site plan application. The board granted final site plan approval for that application on June 17, 2025.
The current application also seeks to rescind a 2014 covenant restricting use of the lake and replace it with language allowing “sealed environmentally safe marine battery-powered motorized watercraft,” including bumper boats, e-foils, canoes, kayaks, rental sailboats and similar watercraft, Bergman said.
More coverage: Riverhead weighs lifting go-kart-only, motorized boat restrictions at Scott’s Pointe
Bergman also told the board the state Department of Environmental Conservation’s Division of Mineral Resources issued final reclamation approval for the site April 16, ending DEC’s mined-land jurisdiction over the property.
Claudette Bianco of Baiting Hollow urged the board to deny the application, saying the go-kart covenant was placed on the property “just one year ago” to avoid a full environmental impact study.
“This was not a suggestion, and Mr. Scott agreed to it,” Bianco said. “The purpose of the covenant is to protect environmental safety.”
Bianco said allowing other vehicles on the track “opens the door to untold activity” and creates a risk of contamination. She said that risk is especially concerning because the site is near the former Grumman property at EPCAL, where the Navy is responsible for cleaning up a groundwater contamination plume.
Jennifer Hartnagel, director of conservation advocacy at the Group for the East End, said the board should not approve the requested change to the track covenant. She said the overall development of the site “has never received a comprehensive environmental review” and said the covenant was used as mitigation when the board adopted the conditioned negative declaration.
“Nothing has changed about the potential for the vehicles, other than go-karts, to impact the surface water quality,” Hartnagel said.
Hartnagel said repeated amendments to the “size, scope, use and magnitude” of the site through separate site plan applications amount to segmented review, contrary to the purpose of the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
“At some point, ‘what’s good for business is good for the town’ is not an acceptable mantra, especially when a natural resource that is shared by all of us and relied upon by all of us is jeopardized by the actions of one,” she said.
Former Riverhead council member Barbara Blass of Jamesport also urged the board not to lift the covenants, saying the prohibition on automobiles was “the foundation” of the board’s prior no-significant-impact determination.
“You cannot amend this site plan approval to remove a condition which supported your determination of non-significance without reopening SEQRA, issuing a positive declaration and commencing coordinated review with the other involved agencies,” Blass said.
Blass said expanded automobile use would introduce impacts not associated with go-karts, including noise, air quality, fugitive particles, petroleum fluids, runoff, vehicle accidents and fire suppression concerns. She also raised questions about the proposed battery-powered bumper boats, saying the town should require more information about battery type, handling, storage, charging stations and emergency protocols.
“There has never been an environmental review evaluating the cumulative impacts of the whole action, including all the development that occurred without permits,” Blass said. “Since day one, development has taken place on this site with complete disregard for the lawful process.”
The property has a long history of after-the-fact approvals. The board’s June 2025 site plan approval legalized several already-built improvements, including the go-kart track, pickleball courts and a second-floor catering space. The go-kart-only covenant was one of the conditions tied to the board’s decision to issue a conditioned negative declaration rather than require a full environmental impact statement.
James Fischler, who said he grew up on Long Island and has known Scott since childhood, supported the application. Fischler said he has worked with companies including Apple, Sony and Samsung and has evaluated locations for major facilities.
“One of the first things we look at is tax impact, local talent availability, but as important, if not more important, is how local governments treat businesses already in a market,” Fischler said.
He said Scott’s Pointe creates jobs, enhances tourism and provides “a safe, fun, engaging place” for families.
“Decisions these local governments make send a loud message,” Fischler said.
Myers later told the board he had been working with Riverhead Water District Superintendent Frank Mancini on additional testing that would be performed if drifting events are approved. Myers said the testing would be done monthly during the summer drifting season and would include a more extensive response if there were an incident such as a spill, fire or vehicle accident.
“This is to make sure that there’s no concerns with that moving forward,” Myers said.
Council Member Ken Rothwell asked Myers to clarify that the additional testing would be tied specifically to lifting the drifting restriction.
“This additional testing would only proceed if we allowed the drifting?” Rothwell asked.
Myers said yes.
Rothwell also asked Myers to describe water testing already performed at the site. Myers said the lake and wells are regularly tested and that the water is “some of the cleanest water you’re going to see in New York State.”
“The water is immaculate and remains that way, and we intend on keeping it that way,” Myers said.
Council Member Bob Kern asked about the use of electric boats on reservoirs. Myers said battery-powered boats are used “all throughout reservoirs” and described electric watercraft as part of the future of marine recreation.
Scott said the lake is not drinking water and compared it to other nearby surface waters, including Artist Lake. He said a drift car could not get into the lake from the track and argued that any spill in water would be easier to clean than a spill on dirt or pavement.
“You cannot come to my facility and not see we worry about the environment and our community,” Scott said. “It’s first class.”
Scott said Scott’s Pointe has never had the police called and said the business is operating at “10% capacity” because of obstacles placed before it. He did not describe the obstacles he was referring to.
“Any family, kid that’s left my place leaves with a smile,” Scott said.
He also criticized the town for allowing cannabis dispensaries while making it difficult for his amusement park to expand.
“I’m the place to keep the kids off of drugs,” Scott said. “We put them in my place. All they do is they run, have fun, have a blast.”
Warren McKnight of Riverhead said Scott’s Pointe should offer discounts to Riverhead residents, particularly families who may not be able to afford the park’s attractions.
“This should benefit Riverhead people,” McKnight said.
Mike Foley of Reeves Park opposed allowing drift cars on the track and criticized the owner’s prior approach to construction and approvals.
“Some of the persecution complex you have is because of your disregard for the process,” Foley said via Zoom, addressing Scott. “If you came through on normal channels and adhered to those things, I don’t think you’d hear as much negative stuff.”
Foley said he had no objection to the zip line and might support battery-powered boats after further review, but said the track should not be expanded beyond go-kart use.
“Under no circumstances should this go-kart increase in danger to our aquifer be allowed,” Foley said.
John McAuliffe of Riverhead said the application raised broader questions about governance and whether the applicant was receiving favorable treatment.
“I hope the board is able to separate all of the not-so-obvious reasons to let something like this go through from an objective decision,” McAuliffe said.
John Cullen of Northville said he enjoys watching drifting but opposes allowing it at Scott’s Pointe. Cullen said he recently rode his bicycle near the EPCAL runway where drifting takes place and saw signs that cars had gone off the track.
“I’ve watched drifting racing on TV for 40 years,” Cullen said. “Is there ever a wipeout during the drifting? Absolutely. Cars fall apart. They go rolling over.”
Mancini, the Riverhead Water District superintendent, told the board Island Water Park has agreed to “more monitoring than any other project in Riverhead” and more than any other project he has worked on in his career.
Mancini said sampling the lake monthly for contaminants identified as potential risks would be “the highest level of monitoring that we could ask for.” He said incident-based testing would also benefit both the water district and the applicant.
“If our well gets impacted, I’m going to litigate the polluter and go after them for the cost of treatment,” Mancini said. “So these arrangements benefit both of us. It protects them and it also protects the water district.”
After public comment ended, Supervisor Jerry Halpin said the hearing would remain open for written comments for 10 days.
The board took no action on the application Tuesday.
The survival of local journalism depends on your support.
We are a small family-owned operation. You rely on us to stay informed, and we depend on you to make our work possible. Just a few dollars can help us continue to bring this important service to our community.
Support RiverheadLOCAL today.
