At Fairfield Hills –

Advisory Committee Hears Public Skepticism About Corporate Park

By Steve Bigham

Understanding that sometimes “the best ideas come from the least expected source,” members of the Fairfield Hills Advisory Committee met with the public late last week to solicit suggestions on how the town might use Fairfield Hills should it decide to purchase it. About 75 residents showed up for the 21/2 –hour meeting.

And the feedback indicated that Newtown is still a long way from forming any kind of consensus. It is also becoming evident that many questions being asked by the public will not be answered when and if the issue ever reaches a townwide vote.

For example, residents will likely be asked to vote on whether or not to buy Fairfield Hills without knowing who will get the use of the so-called “entry plaza,” which is framed by Newtown and Woodbury Halls, as well as Shelton House. Town officials say they will not know whether or not that area will be given to a corporate tenant until they begin negotiations with a corporate tenant. The advisory committee admits that a lot of questions will have to go unanswered, but says its job is to simply answer the question: is buying Fairfield Hills a concept that makes sense for the community to consider?

And there were some at the February 17 meeting in the high school cafeteria who admitted they do not want to buy Fairfield Hills if it means they will have to settle for a corporate park dominating the area. If we’re going to buy it for municipal needs, then fine. Otherwise we’re not interested, they said.

Members of the advisory committee struggled with that point of view as they sat face-to-face with residents who showed up to contribute their ideas to the round-table discussions. Splitting the 186-acre campus up into six elements, the advisory committee presented residents with an array of options for its future use. And residents went straight to work in the small group discussions around the room, expressing concerns and doubt on the corporate park plan, which has been unofficially endorsed by the committee.

Advisory committee member Walter Motyka, a proponent of the corporate park vision and an influential voice on the panel, may not have heard what he had hoped at his table. Members of the public at his table were not as keen on the corporate plan, and he struggled during his presentation to reflect that point of view.

Resident and longtime Legislative Council member Melissa Pilchard argued forcefully in Mr Motyka’s group that a corporate park of this magnitude will only serve to bring in more families to the town, creating further need for schools and other town services.

At advisory committee member Al Martin’s table, there was not a tremendous amount of support for corporate use, either. He and fellow member Larry Haskel attempted to reassure residents that the corporate park plan was not set in stone. This all could change. We’re here simply to determine if buying the campus is a viable option for the town, they said.

Ruby Johnson, an opponent of the corporate plan, said major economic development at Fairfield Hills would become a reality if First Selectman Herb Rosenthal wants it to be.

“After all,” she said. “He’ll set up a committee that will be directed to act the way the selectman wants it to go – to implement his vision.”

Ian Engelman’s group had similar worries.

“There was the concern that if you buy something without a well-defined plan, it may never get implemented as suggested,” he said.

And at Ed Marks’ table there was some skepticism about the town being able to attract the kind of corporation that proponents of the corporate park approach envision. They noted that the state failed to bring in much in the way of business during its marketing efforts.

Advisory Committee members are now saying that the state’s inability to attract big business to Fairfield Hills is further proof that marketing is not the state’s strongest suit. Also, some residents believe a prospective tenant may already be lined up and officials aren’t telling the public about it.

Traffic Concerns

Then there was the issue of traffic, which attracted attention when the need for 1,500 parking spaces was raised.

Representatives from the firm Vita Nuova, LLC, which has facilitated the advisory committee, explain that issues such as traffic will be firmed up once a master plan is created – long after a town purchase. But if last week’s discussion was any indication, Newtown residents want those questions answered before they buy the property, not after. An additional 1,500 cars to the area each day might require additional roads and access ways into the campus, they said.

Al Cramer’s group opposed the idea of demolishing Cochran House, as well as some of the homes surrounding the campus, saying they were too valuable to destroy. In response, Mr Rosenthal said the Board of Education is no longer considering Cochran House for use as a 5/6 school. He said it was deemed too much trouble to renovate and had too much square footage for a worthwhile reimbursement from the state. Instead, the school board wants to use the Watertown Hall site – on the opposite side of Wasserman Way – for the 5/6 school. It proposes to knock down Cochran House and “land bank” the land for a future school.

Residents also asked about potential groundwater problems brought on by the addition of so many parking spaces.

Mr Cramer believes Newtown might not want to consider buying Fairfield Hills unless it is able to bring in a major revenue producer.

“If we don’t have the commercial developers to defray the costs, then I for one will be scared that I may not be able to afford to live in Newtown.”

The big question, as advisory committee Chairman Michael Floros explained, is how much money are people willing to pay? If they are not willing to pay more, but still want control over the property, then they have to be willing to bring in commercial and or housing, he said. Open space, the cultural arts and town offices would be great to have at Fairfield Hills, but can residents afford that? To abate environmental problems in all buildings and demolish some buildings without bringing in some economic development would cost the town an estimated $18 to $20 million.

A Quality Of Life Issue?

Resident Bill Colbert, calling it a quality of life issue, suggested the town might not need that corporate presence.

“We should go to the state with an offer they can’t refuse. We can get help from the state on this,” he said. “There’s nothing that says we have to pay for this now. Take it and develop it. Let different people pay for it over many years.”

Mr Colbert asked for a show of hands to see how many people actually supported the corporate-based vision for Fairfield Hills. However, facilitator Michael Taylor of Vita Nuova, LLC, quickly squelched his suggestion.

“We’re not here to vote,” he said.

“The issue of Fairfield Hills is the issue of vision,” said Mrs Johnson. “What do you want this town to be – an urban community or a suburban community? Other questions can be answered once you decide where your vision takes you.”

State Representative Julia Wasserman, who headed the original Fairfield Hills Re-Use Task Force, agreed. “You have to build consensus. In all fairness to the ultimate policy makers – the Board of Selectmen and the Legislative Council – you need to find out more before you go any further.”

 The meeting gave the board an opportunity to get a sense of what the community was thinking, although those in attendance represented just a tiny portion of the overall population. Queen Street resident Jill Beaudry voiced her disappointment in the turnout. She had hoped for better publicity in the week leading up to the meeting.

“You need more people talking about this,” she said. “More people need to be here.”

According to the discussions, the town would stand to receive approximately $1 million in annual rent from corporate tenants. However, that may not be realized for the first few years as a corporation might seek to receive tax or other incentives early on.

Many residents indicated they would like to see the town hold on to Shelton House, as well as Woodbury and Newtown halls. They fear the town will “give” those buildings to a corporation in negotiations.

The advisory committee is pushing Stamford and Stratford houses – two buildings in an “out-of-the-way” section of the campus – for town usage.   The advisory committee was slated to reconvene later this week to discuss what it will include in its final recommendation to the Board of Selectmen and the Legislative Council.