The Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee
Amended Minutes of April 12, 2011 Special Meeting
Newtown Senior Center, Riverside Road, Sandy Hook, Connecticut
Present: Michael Floros, Paul Lundquist, Robert Maurer, Nancy Roznicki, and Deborra Zukowski. Absent: Michael Mossbarger, Ben Roberts, Alan Shepard, and Gary Steele. Also Present: E. Patricia Llodra, First Selectman.
Mr. Floros called the meeting to order at 7:25 pm.
Public Participation: Ruby Johnson, 156 Chestnut Hill Road, discussed the public session. She felt the second session was dominated by a strong opposition to housing. She suggested having a large map where ideas could be noted. She revised and distributed a new map that outlines her thoughts. She also said there were discussions over parking for the playing fields. She said during the Planning & Zoning meeting there were discussions over land banking for a school.
Approval of Minutes: Item tabled.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Floros said that in looking at the charge of the committee and the current master plan, there are two highly passionate topics, housing and commercial. He felt there is a major shift from earlier renditions in keeping the campus and structures intact. The survey and the aquifer are additional topics to discuss.
First Selectman Llodra discussed a conversation she had with George Benson about how the campus can be developed to serve what is the best use of Fairfield Hills (FFH) for the community. She referred to a recent application for a circus/carnival to be held on the grounds and said that although it is currently allowed, there are barriers for using the campus for such events. Mr. Benson discussed having an area on the campus designated for community events that would have sufficient parking, hard surfaces, and proper amenities that would serve the recreational and social uses of the community. Facilities were also brought forth by people who attend playing field activities. Ms. Llodra said there is also discussion about a community garden and that there is an application for a flea market. Mr. Maurer discussed
the FFH Authority and thought they already approved a flea market. Ms. Llodra said flea markets are not currently an approved use, but was not sure what was being considered.
Mr. Lundquist asked if all the related events would be held in the same space. Ms. Zukowski said representatives of the Farmers Market and Relay for Life discussed the need for hard surfaces for mobility purposes and that a carnival may require more acreage which would limit the availability of hard surfaces.
Ms. Llodra said that if it is determined that the best and right use for the campus is to support the social, civic, and recreational uses of the community, then they need to figure out what that means and where would it go. Ms. Zukowski said that in the 2005 Master Plan there is a sentence relating to outside events and that they are allowed in “all of the other areas”, which would include the east meadow, the west meadow, and the high meadows. Ms. Llodra said those areas are not appropriate for those activities.
Mr. Floros discussed alternatives sites, such as schools, where there are amenities. It was noted that the high school field has artificial turf where tents could not be staked down. Mr. Floros then discussed concerns over parking at Glander Field and suggested a central parking lot that can be shared by several uses on campus.
Ms. Llodra said it is difficult to compel a Question & Answer process that is not tainted by misinformation. She felt if housing is decided against by the community, it should be decided upon by proper well thought-out information, and not a result of advocacy that is disconnected from what might be the right and best solution.
Mr. Lundquist said he cautioned that the committee be sensitive. He said issues driven by organized advocacy can artificially raise the intensity of issues and under-represent other opinions.
Ms. Zukowski opened discussion on the aquifer protection and the recharge areas, stating that the current Master Plan requires no more than 20% of impervious surface, which results in a total of 30 acres. She said a good portion of the 30 acres are already impervious and felt the uses be appropriate. Ms. Llodra said the science has improved and more information should investigated by the Land Use Agency with George Benson as their point person.
Ms. Llodra said the committee is driven to answer the big questions; i.e., what is in the best interest of the Town and what should be there, and why. It means a yes or no on housing and commercial development. If yes, why, how much, and what kind. If no, why not. Mr. Floros said schools are included in that too. Ms. Llodra said there needs to be a clear and narrow definition of what the future is for the property. Mr. Floros said the themes should be reviewed to see whether modifications are required.
Ms. Roznicki asked about quantification of the survey. Mr. Lundquist discussed the structure of addressing the current Master Plan and folding in public opinion results. He said the committee can use the information that has been gathered during our research and subcommittee work to help integrate the public opinion results with our own final recommendations.
Mr. Maurer suggested that every committee member write down their own ideas, bring them together and review them as a group.
Mr. Floros discussed the format of the Master Plan, stating that he feels the vision statement should be first followed by historical information, and then details can follow.
Ms. Zukowski discussed past controversy and how changes rise just within five years. She sees failure if the report mimics the current Master Plan. Mr. Floros discussed the misperception that the property was bought in order to be a park.
Ms. Roznicki discussed the charge and vision, stating that half of the Master Plan referenced economic development. She shared concerns over Cochran House being used for housing and referenced that there were only 60 parking spaces. Mr. Floros said with respect to housing, the question would be where should it be (FFH or not) and if so, what should it look like, etc. He sees diverse housing as more of a mixed use community center, like Sandy Hook, with apartments above offices that can handle multiple age groups with shared services.
Ms. Zukowski discussed a future vision should be focused for the future 20 years but would also include a five year plan.
The committee discussed a timeline of the report with an estimate of three weeks to prepare the survey, have it available to the public by May 5th or 6th; then have two to three weeks for public participation and summarization of data, then another two to three weeks to digest the information.
The committee also discussed how to balance survey results (public opinion) with what is feasible on the campus in relation to the committee’s research.
With no further comments, Mr. Maurer motioned to adjourn at 10:00 pm. Motion seconded by Ms. Zukowski. Motion approved unanimously.
Respectfully submitted by: Tammy Hazen, Clerk
These minutes are subject to the approval of the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee
The Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee
Minutes of April 12, 2011 Special Meeting
Newtown Senior Center, Riverside Road, Sandy Hook, Connecticut
Present: Michael Floros, Paul Lundquist, Robert Maurer, Nancy Roznicki, and Deborra Zukowski. Absent: Michael Mossbarger, Ben Roberts, Alan Shepard, and Gary Steele. Also Present: E. Patricia Llodra, First Selectman.
Mr. Floros called the meeting to order at 7:25 pm.
Public Participation: Ruby Johnson, 156 Chestnut Hill Road, discussed the public session. She felt the second session was dominated by a strong opposition to housing. She suggested having a large map where ideas could be noted. She revised and distributed a new map that outlines her thoughts. She also said there were discussions over parking for the playing fields. She said during the Planning & Zoning meeting there were discussions over land banking for a school.
Approval of Minutes: Item tabled.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Floros said that in looking at the charge of the committee and the current master plan, there are two highly passionate topics, housing and commercial. He felt there is a major shift from earlier renditions in keeping the campus and structures intact. The survey and the aquifer are additional topics to discuss.
First Selectman Llodra discussed a conversation she had with George Benson about how the campus can be developed to serve what is the best use of Fairfield Hills (FFH) for the community. She referred to a recent application for a circus/carnival to be held on the grounds and said that although it is currently allowed, there are barriers for using the campus for such events. Mr. Benson discussed having an area on the campus designated for community events that would have sufficient parking, hard surfaces, and proper amenities that would serve the recreational and social uses of the community. Facilities were also brought forth by people who attend playing field activities. Ms. Llodra said there is also discussion about a community garden and that there is an application for a flea market. Mr. Maurer discussed
the FFH Authority and thought they already approved a flea market. Ms. Llodra said flea markets are not currently an approved use, but was not sure what was being considered.
Mr. Lundquist asked if all the related events would be held in the same space. Ms. Zukowski said representatives of the Farmers Market and Relay for Life discussed the need for hard surfaces for mobility purposes and that a carnival may require more acreage which would limit the availability of hard surfaces.
Ms. Llodra said that if it is determined that the best and right use for the campus is to support the social, civic, and recreational uses of the community, then they need to figure out what that means and where would it go. Ms. Zukowski said that in the 2005 Master Plan there is a sentence relating to outside events and that they are allowed in “all of the other areas”, which would include the east meadow, the west meadow, and the high meadows. Ms. Llodra said those areas are not appropriate for those activities.
Mr. Floros discussed alternatives sites, such as schools, where there are amenities. It was noted that the high school field has artificial turf where tents could not be staked down. Mr. Floros then discussed concerns over parking at Glander Field and suggested a central parking lot that can be shared by several uses on campus.
Ms. Llodra said it is difficult to compel a Question & Answer process that is not tainted by misinformation. She felt if housing is decided against by the community, it should be decided upon by proper well thought-out information, and not a result of advocacy that is disconnected from what might be the right and best solution.
Mr. Lundquist said he cautioned that the committee be sensitive. He said issues driven by organized advocacy can artificially raise the intensity of issues and under-represent other opinions.
Ms. Zukowski opened discussion on the aquifer protection and the recharge areas, stating that the current Master Plan requires no more than 20% of impervious surface, which results in a total of 30 acres. She said a good portion of the 30 acres are already impervious and felt the uses be appropriate. Ms. Llodra said the science has improved and more information should investigated by the Land Use Agency with George Benson as their point person.
Ms. Llodra said the committee is driven to answer the big questions; i.e., what is in the best interest of the Town and what should be there, and why. It means a yes or no on housing and commercial development. If yes, why, how much, and what kind. If no, why not. Mr. Floros said schools are included in that too. Ms. Llodra said there needs to be a clear and narrow definition of what the future is for the property. Mr. Floros said the themes should be reviewed to see whether modifications are required.
Ms. Roznicki asked about quantification of the survey. Mr. Lundquist discussed the structure of addressing the current Master Plan and folding in public opinion results. He said the committee can use the information they have gathered in research on topics to evaluate something that doesn’t have any practical sense but is a strong public opinion.
Mr. Maurer suggested that every committee member write down their own ideas, bring them together and review them as a group.
Mr. Floros discussed the format of the Master Plan, stating that he feels the vision statement should be first followed by historical information, and then details can follow.
Ms. Zukowski discussed past controversy and how changes rise just within five years. She sees failure if the report mimics the current Master Plan. Mr. Floros discussed the misperception that the property was bought in order to be a park.
Ms. Roznicki discussed the charge and vision, stating that half of the Master Plan referenced economic development. She shared concerns over Cochran House being used for housing and referenced that there were only 60 parking spaces. Mr. Floros said with respect to housing, the question would be where should it be (FFH or not) and if so, what should it look like, etc. He sees diverse housing as more of a mixed use community center, like Sandy Hook, with apartments above offices that can handle multiple age groups with shared services.
Ms. Zukowski discussed a future vision should be focused for the future 20 years but would also include a five year plan.
The committee discussed a timeline of the report with an estimate of three weeks to prepare the survey, have it available to the public by May 5th or 6th; then have two to three weeks for public participation and summarization of data, then another two to three weeks to digest the information.
The committee also discussed how to balance survey results (public opinion) with what is feasible on the campus in relation to the committee’s research.
With no further comments, Mr. Maurer motioned to adjourn at 10:00 pm. Motion seconded by Ms. Zukowski. Motion approved unanimously.
Respectfully submitted by: Tammy Hazen, Clerk
| 
