Seaside Development A Show Of Connecticut’s Business Environment, Steiner Said

For more than 10 years, Mark Steiner has been trying to buy and develop the former Seaside Sanitarium. In that time, he has encountered a variety of obstacles, from the state’s give and take, to neighbors complaining and filing lawsuits, and facing the stiffest zoning district in town in a state with the nation’s toughest zoning regulations.

All of that proves Steiner’s point, he believes.

“We have a struggling state economy and there are reasons,” Steiner said. “(Connecticut) is not considered a business-friendly state, and we are seeing the reasons.”

Steiner said he has friends who are former CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, and they consider Connecticut a state they would not do business in, he said. All the reasons are on display on the Seaside proposal, from the state’s lethargic processing of the property to the neighbors' attitude, he said.

“We are seeing that people just want everything to stay the same,” Steiner said.

The state is struggling to balance a budget, and is dead last in job creation, he said. This project, and others like it, will not only bring construction jobs to the area, but also bring in a wealthier clientele to shop in the community, which could pump millions of dollars into the local economy, Steiner said.

“We are in one of the most significant areas in the world, on the Boston-New York corridor, and we should be able to be attractive,” Steiner said. “But that isn’t happening. Businesses don’t really relocate in this state.”

Steiner is proposing to build high-end condominiums at Seaside. The state has once agreed to sell him the property, then took that offer back at the last second in 2007, while neighbors Kathy Jacques and Philip Antupit  have also unsuccessfully sued Steiner over the proposal.

Steiner is currently proposing zone changes to the Seaside district, most notably one to remove the restriction that it must be 55-and-older housing and another allowing him to knock down the buildings if independent preservationists agree.

Change From 2003; Ritter Critical

In a report called “Land Use Analysis” by Richter & Cegan, Inc, submitted by Steiner in 2003, the group argues that zoning the land for a 55-and-older community and reusing the buildings are a matter of “public policy.” The report argues that the age restriction will make the development less disruptive to the community and both the reusing of the buildings and the 55-and-older restrictions are consistent with the town’s plan of development.

Removing the 55-and-older restriction will still not cause a major disruption to the community, as traffic will still be slow, Steiner said. Without that restriction removed, banks will not finance the development, Steiner said at a public hearing.

Reusing the buildings has always been the intent, Steiner said. However, that report was submitted eight years ago, and in that time the buildings have been allowed to rot, he said.

“It is still our intent to keep the buildings,” said Steiner, who added he would only knock them down if it was proved by an independent preservationist they were not salvageable.

However, State Rep. Betsy Ritter is not buying Steiner’s argument. She has pushed for the state to meet its commitment for years by selling the property, and now Steiner is not fulfilling his, she said.

“That’s like a bait-and-switch,” Ritter said. “Its very difficult for the town when Steiner went into the deal knowing full well about the conditions and then immediately pleaded economics trying to get that zone changed. That is very frustrating.”

Ritter’s biggest fear is the town will “lose complete control of this and have full tract housing there.”

Steiner was diplomatic in his response to Ritter.

“My reaction fundamentally is that we, like the town, recognize the zoning regulation has its roots in the 1990s and we are working to bring it to the current realities,” Steiner said. “And everything we committed to doing can be achieved.”

Why No Plan

Many residents have complained that Steiner should changing the zoning amendments. Steiner said that is not the way things are done, a statement confirmed by the town’s planning department.

Once the zoning amendments are changed, Steiner will meet with the neighbors, and then a plan will be submitted, he said. That plan still needs to go through the public hearing process, and be approved by town planning boards, he said.

Dismissing Myths

Many people have criticized a zoning amendment proposed by Steiner to allow a “dining facility” on the grounds. The dining facility would attract rats, and trucks driving up and down the road around the clock, Antupit said.

The dining facility will be basically a clubhouse for people who live at Seaside, Steiner said. It is not going to be a restaurant, as some people have alleged, he said.

“It’s absolutely positively not going to be a restaurant open to the public,” Steiner said.

Additionally, there will be no marina at Seaside as well. The spot is in a “terrible location” because there is no protection from storms, and there are plenty of open slips at nearby marinas, Steiner said.

“It absolutely is a terrible location for a marina. Period,” Steiner said.