Wiacek - bus parking use, CtPost article

Residents of Summerfield Garden are concerned about the use of city-owned property for parking of school busses.

As is my custom and reason I created this blog, I comment on articles in the news directly with my thoughts and without filter. Given the dynamic nature of data available on the web, I try to go beyond that regarding this news-story. The BOA have a public portion component at the start of their regular monthly meetings. During the 2009/Feb/11 meeting (minutes at City website) the residents of Summerfield Gardens raised concerns over what would become of nearby City property. There was also a community activist who recorded video for two of the speakers, and uploaded it to youtube. (Video 1, Video 2).

I have opinions on the comments recorded in the meeting's minutes, spoken in the video, and writen in the caption/info component entered for the videos by username sheltonpulse (which is Irving Steiner of the WeR1 organization). I will refrain from making those here as there isn't enough space, and will instead try and contain myself to the newspaper article.

I encourage readers to go to the CtPost article as they are the content creator of the article and have methods for readers to comment on their articles within their website. I cut/paste with my comments under right of fair-use for public education as Chairman of the Conservation Commission.

http://www.connpost.com/ci_11717245

Condo residents angry over bus plan
By Kate RamunniSTAFF WRITER
Posted: 02/16/2009 06:24:40 PM EST

SHELTON -- It began late last year when residents of Summerfield Garden condominiums on Constitution Boulevard began to see marks in the road and a driveway being forged into the nearby city-owned Wiacek property.

++ The Wiacek property is located between Constitution Boulevard and Meadow Street, adjacent to the open space set-aside acquired by Shelton during the subdivision of land into the Summerfield Garden condos. The CC advocated to the BOA during a powerpoint presentation at their 2004/Jan/7 meeting that the Wiacek farm along with two other parcels in the City be acquired for various reasonings. The case made by the CC for the Wiacek property begins on p.7 of the above link.++

They were even more upset to learn the land the city took by eminent domain and later bought for open space several years ago could end up being a parking lot for the city's school buses.

++ The BOA agreed with the CC thoughts presented to them. The BOA authorized the Mayor to negotiate with the 3 property owners to purchase them. Clearly in the CC presentation to acquire these open spaces was the possibility for use by the City beyond it's current state of undeveloped agricultural land. This included possibly trails for passive recreation, sports fields for active recreation, preservation of streetscape to retain a natural landscaped rural character atmosphere, further environmental enhancement via accumulation or compilation to a greenway corridor, and future municipal uses which included enhancements for complementing the existing school and/or teaching environments. The focus for much of the potential uses of the Wiacek property was its central location in the community and proximity to the already existing campus of the SHS and SIS. At the end of our BOA presentation, in the presence of several people, the Wiacek owner stated that he would not sell and the only way the City would get his property was eminent domain. The City attempted negotiation over the subsequent months, but could not do so to an amicable resolution. The BOA on 2004/Sep/30 authorized bonding in the amount of $500k. Important to note in the above link's minutes regarding motion for bonding funding $500k of value: "for the acquisition of land in the City of Shelton for the purpose of open space preservation" Next motion at the above meeting was to enter eminent domain prodeedings on a piece of the land aka "Wiacek Farm Estates", a recently approved subdivision map for apx 24 lots referred to when legally describing the taken area of apx 20 building lots. The amount of compensation was $2.5million for 39.7 acres (apx. $63k/acre, or apx.$125k/unimproved building lot) with funding coming from the Capital Project Fund Account (see p.4 of the minutes). Important to note in this eminent domain motion was "Said taking is for City Open Space and recreational purposes consistent with such open space " The court has since found that the City was in the right to use eminent domain (I testified in the case) but has yet to render a decision as to value. I understand that the funds the City has forwarded ($2.5million) still remain in escrow. To clarify the article: The City purchased the property as open space and completed the acquisition by eminent domain proceedings. Despite the CC promotion for mixed use, the BOA motion states no use other than recreational purposes associated with it being open space. +++

Speaking with Mayor Mark A. Lauretti recently, Summerfield Gardens Association president Diane Alterio said she made it clear those plans wouldn't fly with the residents. She also spoke at the Board of Aldermen meeting last Thursday. "We wouldn't tolerate such a thing in our residential neighborhood," Alterio told the board. "It would hurt our property values."

+++ I understand the neighborhood concerns over what currently exists and what may change in the future, but this neighborhood will change dramatically from it's feeling of secluded cul-de-sac. It's access entrance is from Constitution Boulevard, a future arterial road that will connect to the White Hills area of town as shown in many City planning maps. Traffic, noise and light pollution will increase when this road is pursued, and any substantial residential growth in the City's north section of town will cause the road's build-out sooner rather than later. That is a reality which I feel not everyone in this neighborhood (nor the nearby Old Dairy Estates) appreciates. +++

Those plans won't be implemented in the immediate future, Lauretti said, but could be down the line. "It's only talk" at this point," Lauretti said Monday. "It's not necessarily going to happen, and if and when the time comes we will let them know about it so they can voice their opposition." What will happen soon is the area will be open for overflow parking for the nearby baseball and soccer fields, Lauretti said.

++ The Mayor is correct in that there had been "talk" from his office regarding the buses being located on the Wiacek parcel. The school buses were located at a leased lot on River Road, and the City offered a City-owned parcel for overnighting the vehicles which would have reduced the contract fee charged the BOEd for school transport services. (apx.$100k). The City prepared a parcel on Riverdale Avenue near the sewer treatment plant downtown, but contamination issues arose that caused a return to the private lot on River Rd. The BOEd contracts for the transport services, and the City had promised them to find a location - which apparently led to the idea of using the Wiacek parcel. The Mayor informally mentioned this concept and asked if there were any restrictions for use of the land during a meeting I had with him in his office on 2008/Sep/5, the results of which I emailed to the CC members and the public could read on our google group. The Mayor was exploring the option of locating buses on the City owned Wiacek parcel. I told him that there is no deed restriction on the City's use of this land that I am aware of, but intentions and representations to the public were made as evidenced during the 2004/Sep/30 BOA mtg. The CC has not been asked to comment on any application for development to the parcel by the City, either for bus parking or for vehicle parking to access the school campus' sports fields. If the property were used for active or passive recreation (sports fields or trails), there would be a need for parking. Thus in my personal opinion, parking for better access to sports fields is an appropriate use of open space when it is associated with open space use for active recreation. There is significant drainage issues on the property that has plauged the upper ball fields for years. Any use of the site that causes disturbance to topography or creation of impervious surfaces, should go through a review process from first the IWC and secondly the PZC. No applications to either agency have occured to my knowledge. +++

"There is a consistent problem with parking there and they know about that," Lauretti said. The marks the residents saw in the road were put there when city officials called in Call Before You Dig, a nonprofit organization that by law must be notified before any excavation is done on a property. Someone from CBYD will go out and mark what utilities run on the property free of charge in order that they not be disturbed during the work.

+++ Again, I have no knowledge of any application for use to a City agency. This should be done, even with the fact that the City owns the parcel. +++

The city was bringing in wood chips to the property to prepare it for parking, Lauretti said, and had to cross a section of the Iroquois Pipeline to do so. "That's why there were markings in the road," he said.

+++ Actually, anytime you have excavation on any land you must execute a CBYD (call before you dig) action. Simply depositing materials onto a site doesn't warrant a CBYD, excavation does. Further, I'm no engineer, but organic material such as wood chips does not make an ideal base material for a parking area. If there is a wet soil area that requires preparation for parking use, it is likely a wetlands and requires an application by the City to the IWC. +++

The traffic from the games is bad enough, one Summerfield resident said; to put a school bus lot there would only make it worse. "When there is a game we have some traffic constriction," said Judith Falango, a Summerfield resident. "If you have buses going there every day, it will get really heavy."

"If you have 58 school buses and [drivers'] own cars going in there, you're talking about 232 cars on the road each day," said Chris Macri, which is more than the total number of people living at Summerfield, where Macri resides. Add to that the approximately 100 Summerfield residents who work, Macri said, and you have a traffic nightmare.

+++ As stated earlier, the feeling of a quiet cul-de-sac in the form of Constitution Boulevard terminating where it does now, is temporary. More traffic and congestion is guaranteed to occur at that location at some point, and any purchaser of property in that area should have been made aware of such by their real-estate agent or via simple search of City records and plans +++
But if the city needs the space to park the buses, it will, Lauretti said. "It is city-owned property," he said. When the buses were parked on River Road, it cost the Board of Education $100,000 a year in lease fees, he said. A city-owned lot on Riverdale Avenue is being readied for the buses, but fears of contamination surfaced there at the beginning of the school year because of soil dumped there, forcing the buses back to the privately owned River Road site.

+++ On this I disagree. The CC advocated and advised for the parcels mixed use to the community. Despite this, the BOA voted for taking and funding the property acquisition cost solely under the concept of open space, a poorly thought thru decision in my opinion. Simply creating parking lots for non open space purposes is now contrary to the BOA intentions. Further, the Mayor's statement has an air of presumption that the only alternative spot to River Rd or Riverdale Ave is this location. Just because the City owns a property, doesn't give it the right to do with it as it pleases. Alternatively, I would submit that their are numerous parking areas where the bus fleet could be more intimately located - the schools themselves. This would be more efficient as a geo-disbursed resource rather than a fixed root-tree layout of resources(currently being followed due to emination of equipment from extreme southern end of town) or a spoke-wheel style layout (if busses were to eminate from a central spot such as Wiacek outward to where they were actually used). It is done in numerous communities, and can be done in Shelton. +++

There are no plans now to park the buses on the Wiacek property, Lauretti said, but if there are, "we will be sure to let them know."

+++ Again, there are no plans for buses that I'm aware of, but there are plans to alter part of the overall parcel's use thru the Mayor's own admission regarding woodchips and CBYD actions. The CC advocated for such mixed use activity, but the BOA didn't clearly state that they desired that intention to be followed, and only stated a open space use as reason for acquiring the land. Not being forthright and transparent in goals, even as activities have taken place upon this land and there has been no discussion about it among agencies that should review it, is a bad sign. I am not for or against use of this land in ways that enhance the education campus until I have seen a presentation. To attempt these actions in a clandestine manner is sneaky, a term I purposely use to show such manner of action is not building confidence that the outcome will be positive for the community. Communication of plans or goals WILL make for a better outcome. +++