Clarence Hayes has lived in Westport for 6 years. A senior vice president in global technology at Bank of America, he manages its user-facing data networks, and associated $225 million budget.
He has been married for 39 years, and has 2 daughters and 5 grandchildren. Two attend Kings Highway Elementary School. He helps with after-school tutoring and swim team practice.
A gardener and amateur naturalist, he is very familiar with Westport’s natural habitat. He takes advantage of, and values, the town’s many amenities, including the beaches and parks, Longshore golf, pool and skating rink, Levitt Pavilion, Library and Earthplace.
But, Clarence wonders:
What is the Westport vision?
As a relative newcomer to town and recent follower of town events on this blog, I’d like to offer a general challenge to my new hometown: Set a long term plan, and be more ambitious.
What could Westport be like, not only for me in a few years’ time, but for my grandkids, and beyond that for my grandkids’ grandkids? We should have a 50- year plan. It should be visionary. The town can have something to measure its progress against every year.
I followed one of my daughters – with a couple of my grandkids in tow — when they moved to Westport 6 years ago. They show no intention of ever moving again, nor will I. This town has amazing assets. With continued improvement, I can imagine Westport as #1 on a “Best Places to Live in the USA” list.
What I observe in the debates over the Parker Harding Plaza evolution, and the Long Lots School direction, and numerous one-off Planning & Zoning Commission decisions, are piecemeal challenges confronting what appear to be irreconcilable differences of opinion. Parking vs. green space; a convenient sport facility vs. a community garden; new development vs. river views; pro-car vs. anti-car; etc.
Parking? Green space? What’s our vision — for downtown, and our entire town? (Photo/Susan Leone)
Of course, not all differences can be reconciled. Choices are required. But I think more of those differences could be reconciled, and a higher quality overall result achieved, if we were more ambitious, and made bigger decisions based on a long- term vision.
Bigger decisions could mean, for instance, instead of minor tweaking of access and marginal rearrangements of which piece of existing Westport property is paved or green, we could look at working with developers to exchange town property for jointly developed major changes.
For example: multi-story/underground parking; taking control of becoming compliant with state affordable housing mandates by the town co-investing and controlling those housing units to achieve some bigger contribution to Westport quality of life; complete conversion of downtown to pedestrian only (basically an outdoor mall more attractive than SoNo or Trumbull); reclaiming all of the waterside for public benefit with walking paths and green space designed across all of downtown which will be used more widely, as opposed to patchworks that sit idle due to lack of connection.
I could go on.
I’d love to see what my fellow citizens imagine as a visionary future; compare it to mine – and debate how to merge these futuristic visions into something that could unite a broad majority of voters around a feasible plan.
A few years ago, architects were asked to imagine the Westport of 2050. Mike Greenberg thought about a way the town could become more neighborhood-oriented. This is a detailed view of the Roseville/ Long Lots/North Avenue/Cross Highway quadrant.
Without such a comprehensive long-term plan, I think the town risks frittering away its comparative advantage, foreclosing opportunities with short-term decisions, and not getting maximum bang for the buck with town tax revenue.
I think it better to consciously define our “brand” and decide what we want the town to be — with ambitious goals — than to leave it to the ongoing happenstance of decisions constrained by short-term implications, and the sense that there isn’t money or a way to achieve something better.
Call to action: The selectwomen’s office, together with the Representative Town Meeting, formally institute a “Westport Vision” process that engages the public and is primarily driven by public input, and has the objective to:
- Document guiding principles for future development of the whole range of town assets – the “who we are” statement;
- Lay out a range of futuristic visions to challenge our ambitions – something to get excited about, and stimulate debate;
- Then, based on that vision, work backward to define and then prioritize ambitious steps that can be taken by relevant town boards and committees for action, to start that long-term journey.
Let’s make Westport the best place to live in the country, for us and our descendants.
This guy’s on to something! Brilliantly stated! The Future! Seize the Moment Westport!
Well said, neighbor….
One man’s vision is his own. Exchanging town property with developers will never be smart thing to do. I for one don’t want to turn Westport into a developer’s dream town. To lose the charm of Westport would be nightmare not a vision.
My point is to think more long term and a have a plan, otherwise you will get developers’ dreams, only adhoc and disjointed.
e.g. until the town is compliant with State affordable housing ratios, any developer can force any kind of development they want on any property in town by exploiting the affordable housing law. Wouldn’t it be better for the citizens of town to define what ‘Westport charm’ means to them and lead, as opposed to letting the developers game the system?
Does Westport ‘charm’ mean 11,000 sf houses squeezing out every loophole in our zoning laws to turn a livable old ranch house on a half acre into someone’s idea of a rich person’s lifestyle? Maybe working with developers in a collaborative manner in which the town of Westport has influence, would be better than simply letting the developers lead. And maybe some kind of deal on a piece town property is part of the answer. I wouldn’t write this option off in a knee jerk fashion, but keep it as one possible tool to consider, depending on the particular circumstances.
Yes!
Fabulous article. My parents moved here in 1953. The brand of westport at the time attracted them. My father was a leader on various town governances such as RTM moderator, chair of board of finance, helped buy Long Shore, cochair of save cochina, etc He helped drive a vision. He died too early. As my mother aged she moved to Landsdowne and finally, with no options at the time, she and several aging women moved to Meadow Ridge. As I am in my 70s, have children and grandchildren here, I dont see a post-individual home for me that fits the way I want to live in later years—multigeneration. We need to include this so Westporters can stay and live vital lives throughout our life cycle.
Has everyone forgotten about our Town Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD)? You don’t remember all those public workshops we attended where input was offered and debated?
That’s the little problem with big picture government-planning-your-more-perfect-future documents: they tend to find a nice spot on a shelf once their state mandated update is complete. Ours is resting comfortably.
Here is the link to Westport’s POCD:
https://www.westportct.gov/government/departments-a-z/planning-and-zoning-department/2017-plan-of-conservation-and-development
The next POCD will look toward 2027 and the incoming P&Z will likely initiate workshops.
Dick
When I sent my comments to Dan, one of the things I’d mentioned was learning about the history of prior long term planning and finding what existed and who was still active. Looking forward to catching up on everything that’s already been done, and working with you on the RTM!
You should run for office. I can’t remember the last time this town had true leadership trying to drive Westport forward.
Nice thoughts. We may not be able to govern by democratic values. Everyone assumes government will be democratic. How can you plan for the future when autocratic leaders will make all our decisions. Ie SALT. Who cut 06880 tax deduction on real estate and more to $10000 maximum. ? Who ??
The ongoing curiousity is why people focus on the $10,000 SALT cap as a bad thing. While it did have an impact in high tax states like Connecticut, the impact was largely on those with higher incomes. There was no impact on lower income taxpayers while the increase in the standard deduction more than offset the SALT cap for most middle income taxpayers.
In that context, eliminating the SALT cap would primarily benefit those with high incomes. Is that what you want? Another tax cut for the affluent?
Excellent piece.
This has been my complaint for the last 5-6 years: where is the Master Plan?
I lived for 20 years in a small town within Los Angeles that suffered from the same issue. Instead of following a Master Plan, they changed things piecemeal. It ended up being a mess.
There has been a boom in development here recently, and it worries me because there hasn’t been any change in the infrastructure to accommodate it.
Listen to Clarence Hayes! Let’s band together to demand a comprehensive, long-range “Westport Vision” and slow the rampant development that threatens to create an unfortunate domino effect.
The biggest impediment is complacency and “If it becomes a real problem that prevents me from crossing the street, parking or giving a damn about open space, or being part of a community-whatever that means, nothing will have impact or foment change. We all are so busy with……other things. If you strive to get the ball rolling somehow, I’m on board. How about a public gathering at town hall or, better, our library. Nice. David Singer, a 65 year resident of “Our Town.”
We too moved to Westport from San Diego, California where we lived wonderfully on the waters edge for thirty five years. It was tough giving up our lives and the weather and great community there but it’s amazing how our daughter’s blossoming family here was the driving force that brought us to make a move like that to Connecticut in our later years. I always say there are those three most important things that are the most valuable that you cannot buy, your health, your happiness and your FAMILY!
As new to the east coast and especially Connecticut we wanted to find a area and town that had that special mix and feel that is WESTPORT. We did and it is Westport.
Their are no perfect places, no perfect towns or communities and certainly no perfect people. There are just a few spots in Connecticut that have that special almost eclectic feel of a town that with it’s own unique history, an amazing people energy and special effort and drive in its residents and Town’s people that gives that sense of “special” for those who choose to settle here.
I also like others feel that we must keep the future in sharp focus, plan for a great future and WORK OUR PLAN. There are a lot of things in and about Westport that are far from perfect and even a few are unacceptable, but too much fooling with the FORMULA may spoil the both that has made Westport what it has always seemed to be for so many!
We must be careful though that we all may not be good enough to see perfectly into the 50 year future! Many of the things that have made Westport so special and appealing to so many were not even really planned or observed or wished with 50 year foresight.
No, they were cooked in the soup of a town and community of many diverse cultures, exceptional individuals and a sometimes quiet spirit and involvement of it’s people to live, work and play in a special place!
That’s what many here in Westport were always drawn to and now and in the future want to preserve and protect.
Sometimes this “Special” of a town and community should not be directed and developed to strongly by a pre-concieved plan that has a 50 year time clock. There is something to be said that “everything in moderation, nothing in excess” for future plan and development may be a better course of action.
Let us as a community keep our selves focused and balanced on the contributions, changes and solutions that Westport needs for today, tomorrow and the future! Let us also always remember that sometimes in Westport some great places just come to be. JMHO
While Mr. Hayes is entitled to his opinion, I find it troubling that he neglects to mention that he is actually running for office–making this a campaign piece. What’s more troubling, however, is that he never mentions the term “climate change.” Instead of worrying about where to put the cars, perhaps we can focus on getting people out of their cars–and reducing our carbon footprint.
Climate change is not an issue to autocratic and a policial Party I cannot mention. That was my point in my prior reply. How can you plan when science and facts may no longer be one of our values ?
“…..actually running for office–making this a campaign piece”
He is running unopposed in RTM District 4, which makes the original comment gratuitous
Valerie, if you’d like to talk some day 1:1 I’d be happy to. My email is 21629pcs1@gmail.com. I am well informed on this topic, and have global warming and the degradation of the natural habitat at the top of my own personal list of political priorities. My point in this opinion piece is focused elsewhere.
I think that the town ought to have a defined long term plan based on debate and input of the town’s citizens – and this would lead to better long term outcomes. I personally would advocate for principles in that plan which would do as much as feasible to mitigate our environmental impact.
But I am only one voter out of many in this town, and everyone has a voice and a vote. This is a suburb in which land use patterns can not be radically altered. Almost all the land and most of the population are single family houses on good sized lots. That’s why many of the residents chose to live here, and that fact will not substantially change. Private personal transportation – cars – are not going away. Any long term plan has to recognize that, while mitigating the impact on the margins.
I would hardly call joining the RTM where there is one open slot and only one person interested in the slot as ‘running for office’. I am looking for a way to contribute some of my time to community service. The work of the RTM and all the other town Boards is a lot of unpaid volunteer effort.
I love the idea of trying to formulate a 50 (or maybe less) year plan. The thing is that it has to be flexible enough to adjust to new challenges that will inevitably come up. If the biggest issues were named and connected – to avoid the piecemeal decisions- there could at least be a road map to follow. Every town issue is ultimately connected to every other seemingly distinct issue. I have no problem with Hayes’ running for office. We are sorely lacking in leadership in town at the present moment. All candidates should present their ideas, hopefully in a positive manner and truthfully with real transparency, and residents can choose via the ballot box. Idealism? Guilty as charged but hopeful.
Great idea! Interestingly, the first recommendation in the recent LWV Greenwich Capital Projects Study is “Strategic Vision: the Town [of Greenwich] needs to identify critical elements of what it wants to look like in 20 years…The First Selectman sometimes outlines a vision for [Greenwich], including buildings, roads, parks and recreation, and schools, but there is not a forum for diverse input in creating a shared vision. In addition, elections can change leadership, which makes specific implementation plans and funding difficult.” How about a Community Conversation in our town sponsored by the League of Women Voters Westport to kick off the formulation of Westport’s Strategic Vision? I would love to help with that effort! Thank you Clarence for this idea and for throwing your hat into the RTM ring, (full disclosure, I currently serve as an RTM member in D9 and am running for re election in a contested race).
Nancy, you‘re views are already in direct opposition to those of your voters . While I recognize you using this self serving opportunity to tout for votes in november( because your position is incredibly precarious, having not wanted to put your money where your mouth was on Parker Harding and the access road. )
Quite frankly you do not represent D9 views at all !
The first selectwoman loves to liken us to Greenwich !
Thanks but no thanks.
Greenwich residents wish they had half the values of Westport.
And we in Westport do not want to become Greenwich.
You however clearly do.
Forget Greenwich !
You live in and for the moment, represent Westport.
Get a grip and represent those who elected you and stop the BS while trying to commit to nothing and straddle. It is not appreciated.
Nancy, for heavens sake, you’re an elected official, not some low information arriviste. Are you actually unaware that such document already exists in the form of our Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD)? It’s regularly updated per state statute and subject to extensive public input. Just go to the town site and download it.
A civil exchange now turned nasty – once again. This is very thoughtful of you- thank you Mr. Hayes.
It is by no means a civil exchange turned nasty..
canvassing or campaigning in this situation is self serving and incredibly disingenuous. Nancy was along with Kristen the last to come to the assistance of their voters. Let alone even bother to listen to the vast vast majority of those who elected them.
In fact they still both really have not committed to a stance on Parker Harding.
Straddling.. that’s all it is. It really is bs.
Take a committed position and no more pussy footing around. Nothing uncivilized about that. Stand up, speak out and face the consequences.
I’m sure the d9 voters would like to know precisely where their “representatives” stand, on all issues including not just the Parker Harding disgrace but also the more outrageous long lots sh.. show. That way the voters will not be shaking their heads in disbelief when in 12 months those they elect appear to not remotely represent nor in fact even listen to them or their views.
Time to wake up and be more like Sal Liccione who consistently listens to his residents in his district and attempts to speak up on their behalf, even when it’s not winning him a town hall popularity contest.
Thankfully he cares only about doing what’s right. If only there were more rtm who thought like him.
A formal plan for the future of a community’s development authored by a municipal agency with the input of local citizens and professionals is precisely what the framers of Connecticut’s state laws anticipated when Sec. 8-23 was adopted. It calls for the:
“Preparation, amendment or adoption of plan of conservation and development. (a)(1) At least once every ten years, the commission shall prepare or amend and shall adopt a plan of conservation and development for the municipality. Following adoption, the commission shall regularly review and maintain such plan. The commission may adopt such geographical, functional or other amendments to the plan or parts of the plan, in accordance with the provisions of this section, as it deems necessary. The commission may, at any time, prepare, amend and adopt plans for the redevelopment and improvement of districts or neighborhoods which, in its judgment, contain special problems or opportunities or show a trend toward lower land values.”
The commission authorized to carry out this vital function in the Town of Westport is our own Planning & Zoning Commission.
Our Planning & Zoning Commission’s duties are divided between the two separate functions of planning and zoning. Ideally, equal time would be attributed to each of these very different responsibilities.
As a planner by vocation, avocation and experience, I mourn the time lost that might otherwise be devoted to planning, whenever I read another notice of a cancelled Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.
The Town of Westport has all the tools in a toolbox designed for the very purpose the Author correctly identifies as being an essential foundation for the prudent use of land in our community.
Gloria Gouveia
Thank you, Ms. Gouveia, for pointing out that Mr. Hayes is calling on the town to do what the town’s obligation under state law has always been.
Two problems seem to hamper this effort:
Problem number 1: town officials and elected legislators either don’t like the direction already determined and are unwilling to put it into effect or they are ignorant of documents of which they should be aware.
Problem number 2: When people new to the town see the rudderless voyage Westport apparently is on, they attribute the wandering course to a lack of vision and—having had a role in executive decision making in the past—mistake the lack of a hand on the helm as a failure to set a course instead of a failure to adhere to and execute a plan.
Wishing Mr Hayes a belated and warm welcome to Westport. And thank you for your willingness to serve on our RTM.
Before you take office, however, we hope that you will familiarize yourself with our existing Plan of Conservation and Development, which carefully considers our affordable housing needs, our natural and historic resources, commercial conditions, the effects of climate change, and much more, and charts a course that is intended to promote smart, sensible growth and development for the decade, and decades, to come. Our P&Z and others in town are already working hard to address many of the issues you cite. Indeed, the community has been working diligently to preserve and protect that which we all love most about living, working, and playing here, while thoughtfully leaning in to building upon our strong foundations, and guiding change and growth so that it’s smart, sensible, and aligned with that which our times call for, and the fulfillment of our shared vision of the future. Part of that will entail, we suspect, changing attitudes about driving, as well as the use of gas-powered equipment. We hope that you will support that effort.
I am as well new to Wesport (going on three years) and very much support the idea of building on the existing long-term plan for “Westport Vision”. I believe an agreed upon plan is essential to enable the town to thoughtfully and proactively address all the issues Westport is/will encounter including the State’s mandated affordable housing which impacts so many other factors within the town including the ever growing traffic.
Clarence we haven’t met yet but it seems like you have a strong background and I’m excited you’re running for the RTM.
I was on the RTM for a couple terms. I think you’ll find that sometimes the loudest voices on any town issue are the people that do not want change. And I suspect that the majority of people who do have a more progressive view of where the town should go don’t participate because they’re busy with kids, work, etc. This is why I made a point of running for RTM while I had 4 kids under 6. It’s great that you can bring your own experience to the table along with being able to look at the town through the eyes of your daughter and grandkids.
My parents live 4 minutes away and also help with after school homework and swim team/water polo runs. Seeing them almost every day is one of the best parts of our lives.
Mr. Fogel you do realize we’ve lived with a duopoly in politics for some time now. Neither one cares about you save for cultural issues like abortion or LGBTQ folks. They all support unending war and empire , what they differ on is inconsequential to society as a whole. Even small town politics has been infiltrated by money and power sadly.
I vow to support any candidate for any office that promises to increase the budget for people actually doing things for Westport (cutting down Ailanthus, ticketing speeders, teaching students, etc.) and eliminate the budgets for politicians taking photo ops, consultants who tell us what we should do, visionaries who hype the latest technology, advocate the newest transitory trend, tell us how X,y, or z is done in Canada or Alabama or Timbuktu.