Riverhead sets Dec. 1 hearing on environmental review of golf cottages zoning

The Riverhead Town Board has scheduled a Dec. 1 public hearing on a draft environmental study of proposed zoning changes that would allow up to 108 golf cottages across six golf courses.

The hearing will take place at 2 p.m. at Riverhead Town Hall.

The board voted unanimously Oct. 20 to accept the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement as adequate for public review. The action advances the environmental review of the proposed zoning changes; it does not adopt the zoning or approve construction of cottages.

See Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (below)

Prepared by the town’s Planning Department, the study evaluates a new Golf Course zoning district that would allow small lodging units through the purchase and redemption of farmland preservation credits. It projects limited increases in traffic, water demand and wastewater from the cottages and proposes no additional mitigation beyond the zoning restrictions and reviews required for individual development applications.

The proposal would rezone The Rock Golf Club, Baiting Hollow Club, Friars Head, Cherry Creek Golf Links, The Woods at Cherry Creek and Long Island National Golf Club into the new district. Each course is currently in either the Residence B-80 or Agricultural Protection Zone district.

Each course could develop no more than 18 cottages, limited to 600 square feet apiece. Cottages could be freestanding or attached in pairs, with no more than two units sharing common walls.

The cottages would remain under the golf course’s ownership and operation. They could not be subdivided or placed into condominium ownership for sale, and could not be used to establish residency in Riverhead. The proposed definition would not authorize restaurants, spas or other amenities associated with the cottages.

Preservation credits would fund development rights purchases

The proposal ties cottage construction to the town’s transfer of development rights program, which allows development rights to be removed from eligible land and used for development in designated receiving areas.

One preservation credit would permit 1,200 square feet of cottage floor area — enough for two cottages at the maximum permitted size. A course developing all 18 cottages at 600 square feet each would need nine credits.

At full development across all six courses, the study calculates that 108 cottages would require 54 credits, representing the preservation of 54 acres elsewhere in town.

Using an estimated price of $80,000 per credit, based on a recent transaction cited in the report, the study puts the potential private investment in preservation credits at $4.32 million. That estimate excludes construction, engineering and permitting costs.

The redemption rate is half the one-credit-per-cottage rate recommended in the town’s 2024 comprehensive plan update. According to the DGEIS, board members sought the reduction because they were concerned the cost of credits could discourage golf course owners from building cottages.

Study projects limited traffic and water impacts

The environmental analysis assumes the cottages would function similarly to hotel or motel units.

Using county health department standards for that type of lodging, it estimates 150 gallons per day of water demand and sanitary flow per cottage. Eighteen cottages would generate an estimated 2,700 gallons per day at each course, or 16,200 gallons per day if all six courses developed the maximum number.

All six courses are within existing Riverhead Water District extensions and already have public water service, according to the study.

The report concludes that the added sanitary flow would fall within the county’s allowable sanitary density for the properties. It acknowledges that the courses already generate wastewater from clubhouses, restaurants, maintenance buildings and other existing uses. Individual proposals would require Suffolk County Department of Health Services review and approval, along with review by the Riverhead Water District.

For traffic, the study uses a motel trip-generation rate of 0.62 vehicle trips per room during a peak hour, the highest rate in the range it cites. That produces an estimate of about 11 additional vehicle trips per peak hour at a course with 18 cottages, or roughly 66 trips across all six courses.

Given the relatively small increase and the geographic separation of the courses, the report concludes that full development would not cause significant traffic impacts and proposes no traffic mitigation.

To address visibility and neighborhood character, cottages would have to be at least 125 feet from property lines. On courses fronting Sound Avenue, cottages and related improvements, including parking areas, would have to be set back at least 300 feet from the road.

Individual golf cottage proposals would require site plan approval from the Planning Board and architectural review by the town’s Architectural Review Board. They would also require Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval and review by the Riverhead Water District.

New district would avoid broader residential density increases

The proposed district follows several revisions to the golf cottages legislation, which initially would have applied only to Baiting Hollow Club and Friars Head.

After residents criticized the proposal’s limited reach and the size and configuration of the cottages, officials reduced the proposed maximum size from 1,200 to 600 square feet and restricted attached units to pairs. They also considered rezoning additional courses to RA-80 to make them eligible to receive development rights.

See: Golf cottages, take 2: Town Board responds to public pushback, revising proposed code change (March 2, 2026)

By June, officials had shifted to a separate golf course district because RA-80 zoning could also allow development rights to be used to increase residential density if courses were redeveloped for housing.

See: Riverhead reworks golf cottages plan with new zoning district, environmental review (June 12, 2026)

The DGEIS compares the proposed district with two alternatives: leaving existing zoning unchanged and rezoning the courses to RA-80.

Taking no action would avoid the additional water use, wastewater and traffic associated with cottages, the study says, but would also forgo the proposal’s opportunities for preservation-credit purchases and tourism development.

The RA-80 alternative could allow residential lot density to double through the redemption of development rights if eligible golf course properties were redeveloped, according to the report. That could bring greater water demand, wastewater generation and traffic.

The sites in the Golf Course District would retain an 80,000-square-foot minimum residential lot size. If a golf course closes, it could still be developed with a two-acre residential clustered subdivision, provided the course has its development rights intact, Senior Planner Greg Bergman told Town Board members at the Pct. 15 work session during a review of the DGEIS. “They’re not losing the potential for residential density,” he said.