Master Plan Review Nearly Complete

By Kendra Bobowick

Ideas were ripe for discussion among Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee members this week as they continued Monday and Wednesday to work toward a final report.

With three meetings behind them this month and another scheduled for Monday, June 20, members’ opinions and emerging vision statements have filled many evening hours recently.

Wednesday night they took “straw polls” or gauged ideas’ popularity by unofficial show-of-hand counts. A majority of those in attendance voted against housing or land-banked space for education as popular ideas, although Chairman Michael Floros feels housing should be considered in a future master plan review.

Nancy Roznicki said, “I think we agree there is a need for housing for elderly and the [younger generation], but not at Fairfield Hills.” Noting that member Alan Shepard convinced her during an earlier discussion, Deborra Zukowski said, “Let the character of the property emerge and at some point we could allow housing, but let the character emerge.”

Mr Floros noted that a full report could reflect sentiments, but as for a front-page synopsis or summary, he said, “Housing is not at this time.”

Members primarily did not favor setting aside a large footprint of land for an eventual school. While Michael Mossbarger looked at the uses, practically saying that if it comes to a soccer field or a school, “the soccer field has to go.” He was also partial to looking elsewhere first, before turning to the Fairfield Hills campus for educational space should the need arise. Members felt that adequate space should remain available if future reviews determine new community needs.

Mr Mossbarger favored leaving future space and options open without “locking in a school.”

There was lengthy discussion of the size, type, and scale of possible retail, and the idea of what would be needed to create a regional destination center, or a smaller community destination center.

Addressing the board Wednesday was Main Street resident Sherry Bermingham, who recalled meetings from “eons ago when the town decided to buy Fairfield Hills. At that time most people did not want housing and from what I have heard, that has not changed much.” She felt that “no one wants to look at a subdivision.” Buying the 180-plus acres gave the town a chance to house an ambulance garage or firehouse, and to have a town center to fit the town’s needs, she said.

Reviewing The Review

Ben Roberts on Monday noted that Fairfield Hills as a destination for the community is a popular concept, based on public survey results and research. Certain reuse ideas have also emerged. “It’s pretty clear that the community doesn’t want housing — good luck making that change,” he said. But before delving into differing opinions regarding housing, what type, and where in town, not only at Fairfield Hills — Mr Roberts expressed “some things concerning me” about the review process.

“My big question is how we will have impact,” he said. “I am not clear on how our changes [to the master plan] will change anything.” He feels that the master plan itself “isn’t really an instrument with much control over outcomes.” He asked the committee, “Will we make a whole lot of difference?”

Mr Roberts continued, “If we do standard recommendations, five years from now things won’t be much different.” He explained, “I don’t really have an answer, but we might recommend a change in the process.”

Making a another point, he said, “I also feel there are some land mines that might not be addressed by what the master plan should say.” He senses “a lack of confidence in the town’s ability to manage development” and the “lightning rods” to look for are demolitions of unviable buildings and infrastructure costs. Should the town spend money to make development possible?” he asked.

Paul Lundquist also felt that “much of what we talk about is fairly close to the master plan.” He stressed that “it’s not a fair culmination of our work if after all this we endorse the current master plan.” He does not want to have spend months of research and community involvement to “pass along the current master plan saying it’s ok.”

Mr Roberts seeks a vision beyond the master plan, but said, “I don’t think we’re in a position to pass on a vision, but we can recommend.” Consultant Rosa Zubizarreta had confirmed that “people have said they want a clear sense of vision.”

Nancy Roznicki had said, “I found myself looking at the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development for a vision, mainly because it deals with the whole town.” One point members raised in past months was to note that the master plan addressed Fairfield Hills alone, and planners might consider issues facing Newtown and Fairfield Hills as a whole. She believes Fairfield Hills “exemplifies characteristics that define our town — rolling terrain, green planting — the property should be maintained as a community gathering place, include open space, areas for passive and active recreation, areas that support community programs, cultural activity…” She said, “I strongly recommend professional help for planning services.” The idea of a city planner occupied members for several minutes.

Gary Steele Monday offered some of his vision, asking that the group “create something with shape and form to it and present it to the Board of Selectmen for definition, details.” While he does not favor a “gigantic athletic complex,” he does want to “demo the buildings” once they decide what should be there.

The review committee members are striving to assemble both a full report of recommendations and a vision statement in coming weeks, which they will provide to the Board of Selectmen.