Fairfield Hills: A Public Place

While the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee is not scheduled to deliver its final report to the Board of Selectmen until October 3, the document was released to the public last week. (It can be found online at NewtownBee.com in our “Source Files” in the Board of Selectman folder.) For more than a year, the panel waded through a thicket of issues regarding Fairfield Hills that have dominated the last two municipal election cycles and still animate the local political debate as we head into the final month of the 2011 local election campaign. The review committee, to its credit, has steered clear of politics for the most part, concentrating most of its efforts on assessing public attitudes and preferences for the Fairfield Hills campus. Its recommendations reflect those attitudes and preferences.

The overarching imperative that grew out of the committee’s surveys, focus groups, and public discussions is that Fairfield Hills should be a public place. Setting priorities for public activities there — what is necessary, what is affordable, what is remotely possible — will be the next chapter of the debate. But for now, any use that reduces public access through private and exclusive uses, including housing, school facilities, and large corporate developments, is not recommended. When commercial uses are permitted, they should complement the open and public character of the site with businesses that invite people into the area with small retail shops, restaurants, and services, according to the review committee’s report.

This key insight of the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee — that the campus remain an inherently public place — should inform the work of the Fairfield Hills Authority, the Legislative Council, the Board of Selectmen, and local land use agencies from here on out. Many of the supported uses in the committee’s report, including cultural venues and events, indoor and outdoor recreation, and additional municipal facilities, may prove fantastical in the near term as diminishing local resources are applied to a growing list of needs. But as elusive as the committee’s expansive vision for Fairfield Hills may be, the supporting concept of maintaining the property for the use and enjoyment of townspeople should be grasped now and held firm for the future.

Speaking of the future, we also need to be mindful of the people living in Newtown 25 and 50 years from now. Filling in the blanks at Fairfield Hills forecloses options for those who come after us. Rather than developing Fairfield Hills until it can be developed no more, perhaps we should consider leaving a few options open. Let us not be just owners. Let us also be stewards of Fairfield Hills.