Lighthouse faceoff

The Hempstead town council and members of the public shined the spotlight on New York Islanders owner Charles Wang and his development team on Tuesday at a marathon hearing to determine the proper zoning for the vast project Wang is proposing at the Nassau Coliseum site.

The town council did not reach a decision on the Lighthouse project at the conclusion of an often heated and emotional meeting that lasted nearly 12 hours and included lunch and dinner breaks.

While the majority of the large crowd at Hofstra University’s John Cranford Adams Playhouse expressed support for the privately funded, $4 billion project, which would refurbish the Coliseum and develop the 150 acres that surround it, there was a vocal contingent of opponents, most of them from neighboring Garden City.

Some criticized the height of some of the proposed buildings, which include two 36-story towers. Opponents addressed what they believed would be negative impacts not only on aesthetics, but on local business, traffic and the environment.

But one young East Meadow resident pleaded with the town board to focus on the Lighthouse’s potential positive influence on the future of Nassau County. “On one hand, there is a tall building and a view from a house three miles away,” said Nicholas Carbone, a Hofstra University sophomore. “On the other hand, there is the future of young Long Islanders. Don’t let that handful of people that are opposed to the progress destroy the future of young Long Islanders.”

The zoning hearing was one of the final steps in the approval process for the project, over which the Town of Hempstead has environmental and zoning authority. An environmental public hearing was held on Aug. 4, at which town officials and residents addressed a state-mandated draft environmental report. A final report, known as the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement, a 4,000-page document, was submitted by the developers to the town at the start of Tuesday’s hearing.

But the focus of the hearing was zoning, and whether the Lighthouse developers would be granted a special mixed-use zone that combines residential, retail, office and recreational uses. Members of the town council grilled the Lighthouse developers on traffic, local business, aesthetics, water, sewage and sanitation.

A ‘comforting’ traffic report?

Town Councilman Gary Hudes (R-Levittown), who represents East Meadow and Salisbury, expressed his concerns about the development’s impact on traffic in the areas surrounding the county’s so-called Hub. Hudes questioned Bob Eschbacher, a longtime traffic expert and consultant for the Lighthouse project, who highlighted mitigation plans that address the potential problem of additional traffic on already congested roadways, including Hempstead Turnpike and the Meadowbrook Parkway.

“You’re saying, ‘Come to the Lighthouse,’” Hudes said to Wang. “We want to be able to get to the Lighthouse.”

Eschbacher outlined improvements that include the widening of Hempstead Turnpike from Hofstra University to Park Boulevard in East Meadow. By reducing the median, adjusting lane size and utilizing space on the shoulder, Eschbacher said, three lanes of the Turnpike would be transformed into four.

He also pointed to a planned major improvement of the Meadowbrook Parkway-Hempstead Turnpike interchange. Eschbacher explained that the remedies at the exits and on the turnpike should prevent major bottlenecks and backup created by additional traffic from the Lighthouse.

Eschbacher endured the brunt of the questions and criticisms from the town council, including Hudes, Councilman Anthony Santino and Councilwoman Dorothy Goosby. He reminded them that the state Department of Transportation had analyzed and supported the Lighthouse mitigations, and was “comfortable” with the plans.

Hudes, however, was not satisfied. “I am just trying to figure out [the state’s] level of comfort,” he said.

Scott Rechler, co-developer of the project with Wang, acknowledged that traffic patterns are crucial to the future of both the Lighthouse and the communities that surround it. “This is very important to us too,” Rechler said. “We are fully aligned with the [property] as neighbors and community developers.”

Other hearing notes

There were shouts of “We need jobs,” periodically from some in a large turnout of construction workers who attended, hoping to get in on the project, which would take between eight and 10 years to build and would be done in two phases. Though the Lighthouse Development Group was questioned on the numbers by town council members, the developer has projected the creation of 75,000 construction jobs at the site, and 19,000 permanent on- and off-site jobs when the project is completed.

Wang was present for the entire meeting, and served as spokesman for the development group. Last week it remained uncertain whether he would be accompany the Islanders to Kansas City, where they faced the Kings in a preseason game at the Sprint Center.

Kansas City has been rumored as a possible new home for the Islanders if the Lighthouse project fails. Though he has vowed to keep the team on Long Island, Wang said that he would “explore all options” if he is not certain about the project’s future by Oct. 3. Town Supervisor Kate Murray has said that she and the council do not adhere to dates set by prospective developers.

“Let’s get to the finish line,” Wang said at the conclusion of the hearing. “Let’s make this project a reality.”

Garden City officials and civic leaders unleashed criticism of the project as planned. Although most said they were not opposed to development at the Coliseum, they expressed fears that new retail and office space would detract from their own downtown, while traffic would impact residents’ quality of life.

There were loud choruses of boos from Lighthouse supporters in response to most of the criticism.