TWIN TOWERS ON THE BOARDWALK: SHOULD LONG BEACH GROW UP, OR “JUST GROW UP”

In February, Long Beach's zoning board approved by a 5-1 vote a variance for a Manhattan developer, iStar, to build two 15-story luxury buildings with 522 units and 11,000 square feet of commercial space. City officials welcomed the outcome. The so-called “Superblock” has been on the planning board for decades, having had a series of “false starts” and awards to contractors who could not finish through on the project. The Superblock sits by the oceanfront boardwalk between Riverside and Long Beach boulevards.

 The 160-foot tower proposal is taller and denser than present zoning allowed, so iStar asked the city zoning board of appeals for the variance last month.  iStar already had approval to build two 110-foot towers with 425 units on the property, but company officials said they believed the larger proposal would be more economically viable. The zoning board's vote capped weeks of debate over the project. Several city leaders endorsed it as a way to revitalize an unused piece of land along the boardwalk. Residents spoke pro and con at a January public hearing. The city council cleared the way for a variance approval in January when it unanimously voted to settle lawsuits with iStar and the property's former lead developer, Philip Pilevsky, which previously had stalled development. The Superblock was originally 13 separate lots with various owners.

City officials say that the completed project will generate needed property tax revenues, construction work and permanent jobs. The developers say the towering twin buildings rising high above the ocean will be "world class" and that the structure will add prestige to Long Beach, will energize the community and add beach-front commercial space. iStar spokesman Roger Ardan said they "look forward to being good neighbors and to starting on the single most exciting project on Long Island in 2014, showing that Long Beach is back and open for business." The Long Beach Chamber of Commerce said they were "100 percent" behind the project.  The project could be completed by 2016.

Opponents say that the building project is just too big. They point out that its 15 stories are actually additional to two stories of base structures, making the buildings actually the equivalent of 17 stories.  Critics believe that buildings that high overwhelmingly eclipse the current maximum heights and will affect views from every part of the barrier beach. They say that such a generous ZBA variance approval creates dangerous precedent for future developers who might ask to build higher and higher.  Finally, critics muse "what would happen if the rentals fail?”  Will the buildings be pressed into service for subsidized housing?  Or is the project “a camel’s nose in the tent," an early infrastructure for easy conversion to a casino gambling site, should casino gambling come to Long Beach. Others would have preferred condos to rentals, as condos would return a better bang for the property tax buck, and would have liked to see more commercial usage of the property so that more of the public could have access to the developed site.

What do I think?  I generally support the notion of dynamic Superblock development.  But there is a foundation issue that colors my opinion. My problem is the role imputed of Michael Zapson as attorney for i-Star on this project. Michael G. Zapson is the Managing Attorney of the Long Island office of Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP, a prestigious law and lobbying firm.  Zapson also is Chairman of the Long Beach Democratic Committee and is a member of the Executive Board of the Nassau County Democratic Committee.  As an attorney his practice is focused on commercial litigation, real estate, and zoning.

Zapson was on the Long Beach City Council during the hey-day of the Gene Cammarato regime. He successfully ran for County Legislator, but was voted out after just one term in 2003, when Republicans took control over City government after decades out of power.  He resurrected after several years as Chair of the local Democrat Party. I cannot feel he has grown far from his Cammarato-era roots, when over-development in Long Beach ran rampant.  I do not trust he can remain objective politically in the City’s best interests while working for his law firm's needs. I believe his presence made the i-Star project fly through ZBA and City approval, with little deference to current impact studies and with unjustifiably generous accommodation.

Fifteen stories is not the only thing casting shadows.

Should Long Beach “grow up” (that is, “higher and higher”) or should it finally just “grow up” (that is, show political maturity for once in its history.)  I know that perpetual negativity is bad for the community and seems easy to do without an alternate plan.  Part of me is really excited about the development of the Superblock. But the advantages fall short of “don’t let perfect get in the way of good.”  I feel a better settlement could have been made, that more accurate impact statements could have given a longer process to study, that a better return could have been realized by insisting on condos rather than rentals, that the tall buildings did not have to be so tall and that there could have been more commercial space.  

“The divil’s in the detail.”  And speak of the "divil," I cannot help but to question the entire project if it uses Michael Zapson as a representative.  Zapson's past record and apparent conflict of interest now casts shadow over the credibility of those behind the present incarnation of the Superblock.