Jesup Green — specifically, plans for converting 20% of it (near the police station) into 44 parking spaces — is the first agenda item at Monday’s Planning & Zoning Commission meeting (March 25, 7 p.m., Zoom).
The intent of the Jesup part of the plan to be presented by Department of Public Works director Pete Ratkiewich on Monday is to relocate the parking spaces lost to the proposed redesigned Parker Harding Plaza, to the upper portion of Jesup Green. The plan includes removing 3 healthy mature pine trees, and relocating several other trees.
Three pine trees at the upper part of Jesup Green would be removed, under a proposed parking lot plan. (Photo/Jennifer Johnson)
Ultimately, the town intends to create another plan for the parking spaces currently located on lower Jesup (known as the Taylor lot). The concept for that plan is to move the Taylor lot parking away from the Saugatuck River, toward the green. Funding for that plan has not yet been approved by the Representative Town Meeting.
The new Jesup Green spaces would alleviate parking when Parker Harding is closed for renovation, and make up for spaces lost after the redesign is completed. It would also provide parking for downtown employees.
In August 2020 — amid widespread power outages due to Hurricane Isaias, and during the pandemic — Westporters observed social distancing on Jesup Green, to access the Library’s Wi-Fi.
RTM member Jennifer Johnson — whose district includes downtown — believes that the town needs completed plans for both Parker Harding and Jesup Green before any decision to is made to alter Jesup Green. She writes:
The RTM has not approved funding for design yet.
The RTM Transit Committee — which has jurisdiction over parking — has not approved the plan to convert 20% of Jesup Green into parking.
Jesup Green is our town green. Yes, we occasionally use Veteran’s Green, but there’s something far more special about Jesup. We should keeping it as open space, in addition to the view of the water.
The Green is where we mark important town events together. Who could ever forget the day when the town gathered to honor the Westport Little League World champions?
Jesup Green ceremony honoring the 2013 Little League World Series finalists. (Photo/Jeb Backus)
The Green is where kids can run without falling into the river.
I think the town needs an overall plan — plus a sense of the total cost — before Jesup Green is ripped up for more concrete (and trees taken out).
I fear “interim” could become permanent if we run out of funding trying to complete other capital projects first.
(Click here for the link to Monday’s P&Z meeting. It is also available on Optimum Channel 79 and Frontier Channel 6020).
Most Towns redesign parking lots to add spots. DUH‼️
I thought Jesup Green was preserved by an act of the Selectman in the 1970’s and recorded in the Town’s land record in language by then Town Attorney Stan Atwood as ” Preserved in Perpetuity”.
I hope the P&Z and Town Attorney review this prior to any act that would take this valuable open space away from it’s citizens.
For the love of God I hope Westport has enough sense to keep Jesus green intact and to not remove the trees that have graced the green for decades. It is so sad there aren’t enough parking spaces to park your gigantic SUV so you can strut into town for a Botox injection. You’ll just have to come back another time.
Please keep this beautiful open space. The town needs it, more than it needs additional parking places.
Walking is good for all, including shoppers.
Oh that’s nice. Another planning zombie stumbles out of the woods. Sometimes I don’t know whether to laugh or run. The 2015 Downtown Plan (which the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee is charged with implmenting) calls for the preservation and enhancement of our town green and offers several options for increasing parking nearby – such as a parking deck behind the police station. But no, mainly because of the town’s Parker Harding green space fetish, our town green has to take it in the neck. Good times.
As with the Community Gardens, the FS seems to want to tear up every possible green space she can find.
It seems awhile ago, there was talk of decking the parking lot behind Main Street in the area on opposite side from Parker Harding…retail establishments need more spaces
As do customers
Dorothy Fox
So, silly questions. Since there is talk of a combined public safety complex in the works. Why would we spend the time and money now to reconfigure the parking lot at the police station without knowing it’s future. Will the building remain if the complex is built? Will the building be raised and the area become available for parking? Will the area become green space? Will the building remain and the new parking cause an issue with the building remaining? These questions should be considered too.
Cutting down multiple hundred year old trees and shrinking green space at the heart of our downtown is an absolute travesty. Clearly we only pay lip service to community and environment in Westport.
I agree with Jennifer Johnson and several comments already posted. Cutting down mature trees and eliminating the green space that is Jesup Green for a “temporary” parking solution to construction downtown is a terrible idea.
Looking at the plan, and correct me if I’m wrong, it calls for removal of two trees (red on plan) and “Relocation” of two trees (yellow) to a location TBD by Tree Warden. Hopefully not the chipper, assuming they survive. Not even any replacement trees are envisioned. Removal of mature trees, never mind 30%+ of the Green (my guesstimate, of course not spelled out in the Narrative), for more parking is idiotic. Remember, way back in 2021-22, when the Town was obsessed with Mature Tree preservation on homeowner property?
I do not understand why, say, Imperial Lot appears unsuitable for employee (and their business owners’!) parking, as opposed to destroying part of Jesup.
At the very least write in to pandz@westportct.gov , stick CGS 8-24 #PZ-24-00133 in the Subject and let ’em know how you feel before they close it to comments. Speak out on Monday evening’s Zoom call.
This needs to be re-thought.
Ken, you are absolutely correct, it makes far more sense to use the imperial lot, along with a shuttle ( it’s a 17 minute walk to the Talbots end of town) as was custom and practice in 1987, 37 years ago. The shopper schlepper transported shoppers and staff from the imperial lot to the downtown.
Owners of businesses downtown have been pleading with DPIC, to start the renovation of the imperial lot first and to embark on other lots( maintenance only) ONLY, after the imperial lot is completed.
This would achieve 2 things.
It would mean the imperial lot, would become a viable portion ( 150 parking spots- 7 days a week from 8am-6pm) of downtown parking and if it is designated staff parking, with a shuttle bus then I do not hear anybody complaining.
Business owners are not asking for themselves, or our staff to be able to park outside businesses doors, however in order to turn the lights on and run our businesses we do need our staff to be able to park somewhere safe, and secure.
At no stage did any business owner suggest that upper jesup be touched, in any way shape or form.
This is the collective “genius” of Jen tooker, Randy, Herbertson and Pete Ratkiewich.
We agree a horrible idea.
We still await the numbers of staff to be counted in Westport, in the downtown area.
Have asked on multiple occasions, for this information to be gathered and simply to show us where staff are allowed to park.
That number needs to be equal to the staff working in the downtown area.
I presume these are numbers that the P&Z will absolutely require before removing parking in any more parking lots.
They are, after all, our town planners.
Hardly any point in having hundreds of businesses in downtown and over 1000 staff with nowhere for them to park.
The number is 1200 staff FYI.
It was estimated at a similar number in 1987 in that New York Times article, 37 years ago, before second floor retail was allowed a few years ago( to placate landlords)
35 spots have already been lost in the Baldwin lot.
22 spots are lost 7 months a year when church lane closes to facilitate the few businesses who benefit from it especially the restaurants which double the size of their businesses.
So we are 57 spots in deficit before any green space is added to PH or lower jesup. Add to that second floor retail,
This is an impossible situation in a town already busting at the seams.
Merchants have never asked for parking to be removed from jesup green. NEVER.
We just need to know where our staff can safely park for an 8 hour shift.
Teachers have parking at schools, hospital staff at hospitals, police officers and fire fighters have parking at their places of work.
Other towns have not created this problem by bringing in a 3 hour parking time limit, which will crush the businesses.
It makes no sense.
So again.
FS tooker ! Show us where you want the staff to park ! Do NOT place blame for this asinine plan for jesup on business owners. And please show our P&Z a full accounting for where staff will be expected to park- 1200 parking spots, so our town planners can see you are thinking about the big picture.
Not some lifetime show.
How does the FS expect businesses to operate without a place for the operators who operate them to park ?
For someone who rumor has it is planning on running for governor of the state of Connecticut, she hasn’t a bulls notion on how businesses are run, CLEARLY.
Not a clue.
Grrreat at the photo ops and ribbon cuttings though.
She is going to devastate the businesses of the downtown with the biggest anti business policy any Connecticut town has ever seen.
Surely not a good look for a would be hopeful for governor of the state.
Even the Ukraine stunt does not make up for this nonsense.
And she is doing it eyes wide open !
Ciara
Business owner and resident -22 year resident.
Ciara, thank you for your detailed reply.
However, you repeatedly use, ‘safe’? I enjoy taking my grandchildren to downtown from Fairfield, should I be concerned? Is downtown Westport unsafe in the evenings only?
Hi Barbara, downtown Westport is “safe” in as much as anywhere is safe nowadays.
On the other hand as it now stands the imperial lot is absolutely not safe.
It needs more lighting. Some police presence and it needs to be repaired. Think Westport robberies and car jackings. It is the perfect storm.
It is ideal and appropriate, according to Randy and Pete for the “great unwashed” that is the staff and business owners.
Yes, the same business owners who pay colossal property taxes for the priveledge of paying colossal rents to landlords in the downtown.
Merchants were put very clearly in the “your opinion does not matter box” by the DPIC committee, at the last meeting I attended.
Disgraceful and disrespectful but a common trend with this administration and their henchmen.
So to answer your question, the Parker Harding and Baldwin and jesup lots are “safe”. The imperial lot is not !
Not yet. Not at all.
Lights, cameras, security, shuttle bus… then it might be safe/ safer.
As a district 9 member Jenny and I ask you all to contact town hall all of your rtm members and The p And z and board of selectwomen asap Thanks sal liccione
I don’t understand why we would reconfigure PHP (at a loss of 40 spaces) and then destroy the grassy hill at Jesup Green (to add 40 spaces).This is nuts. Sometimes a parking lot is just a parking lot. BTW if you all are determined to spend money, deck the Elm St. lot, and put in meters there and call it a day.
Keep green space green. Park in the Imperial Avenue lot and WALK. Unless one is handicapped, it is good for you.
Andrea Turner
Couldn’t agree more with you Andrea. Keep green space green and jesup should not be touched.
There’s a prettier view from jesup green anyway than there would be along the actual river. There’s not a merchant on Main Street that does not agree with you on the jesup green being left alone.
37 years ago when Westport had the exact same problem it has now, there was a shuttle bus from the imperial lot to the downtown.
No reason why when we can spend Willy nilly 600,000 $ for a design that we cannot instead use a small fraction of that that to have a shuttle and encourage people to park at the imperial lot.
Nobody should be expected to walk 17 minutes to the brooks corner end of Main Street, in 90 degree heat, or in the torrential downpours we see more and more often, or on slippery pavements if there is a snowstorm.
And as crime ( robberies, car jackings) is on the increase, and very brazen today,even involving guns, I believe that the imperial parking lot could most certainly use some maintenance and upgrades before I would want my teenagers for example parking there, and consequently in that case I’d feel the same about my staff parking there and going back there in the dark.
Cameras, more lighting and a shuttle bus.
That way at night there is another set of eyes at least deterring criminals from being opportunistic.
I do not think that is too much to expect.
I also believe that the town has had 37 years to come up with a solution and it has not happened.
Why I have no idea. So in order to not put the cart before the horse, imperial should be the next parking lot to be renovated/maintained.
We have a new school to build, we have longshore park to improve, we have maintenance on parking lots to do.
There ought to be a pecking order on these projects which are not going to pay for themselves, nor can the board of finance possibly approve them all.
Some may have to be put on the back burner.
If that is the case for any part of the parking projects, I think they should be tackled all together starting with imperial.
Looking at the beautiful, relaxing, Jessup green by river where families bring their children to play, residents come to picnic and stroll, is perfect for complete thoughtlessness in order to accommodate people too lazy to walk. The lot between Church Lane and Main St is the perfect site to build additional parking with a one or two level structure. Why is this even a discussion? Preserve the remaining beauty of Westport by the river and stop trying to destroy it.
Two things:
1)The Jesup Green plan should not be done piecemeal but should wait until it is complete; and it should be reviewed by the RTM before it goes to P&Z; and,
2) This may be an opportune time to take a close look at a modest parking structure on the Baldwin lot which could be partially below ground and would in any event be virtually invisible from the street. That’s the obvious answer to the downtown parking “problem” and should be fully investigated before anything is done to compromise Jesup Green. It has always seemed to me that opposition to such a structure is irrational in the extreme.
Whoa, hold on Larry. I object to a parking garage being plopped into my neighborhood over next to Elm Street and I’m definitely not irrational. An an aside, we JUST finished fitting out the new Baldwin Lot after a really, really, really expensive renovation.
No parking garage or structure should or will solve the issue on Baldwin Lot. It is intrusive to the surrounding homes and aesthetics of Main Street. That is also an important area for capture and drainage of rainfall and provides much protection to residents homes.
In fact, $1.5 million was spent to redo Baldwin Lot which included raising the parking lot by four feet in elevation in the back, improved drainage with catch basin tie in, and becoming ADA approved meeting current standards of MUTCD federal requirements.
This current vision, is bringing more green space to the actual river front where the current parking lot is, and putting parking at the top of the green.
The green would still remain. It is essentially, a swap. It would allow more public walking and access on the waterfront.
A prior 8-24 vote for the restoration of the retaining wall I recall in a past vote, would install some sort of safety railing guide to prevent those from falling into the river, without obstructing the views of the river. This was in 2021.
DPIC has provided on their website proposed vision and imagery. I believe last year also, I saw a rendering of Jesup Green. Furthermore, in 2017 there was a town study completed for all to see
https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/CSC/1_Dockets-medialibrary/1_MEDIA_DO500_600/DO510/ApplicantSubmissions/Application/bulk/Plan-of-Conservation-and-Development.pdf
This is an on going discussion, and has many other steps and committees that must have hands on it and eyes to oversee before it comes to us.
I encourage all to come and learn, observe, listen and speak this Monday March 25th by zoom at the Planning & Zoning Meeting.
https://www.westportct.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/89398
Hope this helps.
Thanks for that review, Andrew.
Fun flood fact: before we filled it all in, the area where the Baldwin Lot now sits was known locally as The Swamp – because that’s what it was…
I just have few questions: why, in your opinion, is DPIC apparantly substituting its own vision of Jesup for that which is illustrated in the Downtown Plan? Isn’t this how the trouble started in Parker Harding? Wasn’t DPIC charged, more or less, with implmenting the Plan? What was the point of all those public feedback sessions which helped shape it? Was it just very expensive bread and circus? In any event, the 2015 Downtown Plan is at pains to recommend conserving – and expanding – the green. It also offers several strategies for securing considerable additional parking nearby. So my last question is this: to your knowledge, were ANY of these options considered by DPIC? Or is blacktopping green space and felling mature trees the best anyone could come up with?
Andrew what you missed is the 5 million dollar question.
This plan being presented to the P&Z elected to represent the residents not the administration much to the chagrin of the administration is this : the “swap meet “is an attempt to placate our p&z commission charged with planning and zoning of the town.
I suspect because our P and Z knows more than anybody else how a town needs to run and what that requires from a planning perspective.
Clearly DPIC and the administration haven’t the first clue.
As you know I am a long time resident and a multiple business owner.
The proposed plan seeks to do two things.
Disingenouosly lull the p and z into a false sense of security that spots lost at PH will be made up at upper jesup. What it fails to do is take into account future lost spots at lower jesup AND allllll the lost spots at Baldwin and church lane. 35+22
It fails to account for the crap redesign of PH, non angled small car spots, with zero loading zones etc… it’s a disaster.
It also attempts to portray the merchants/owners/ and staff of the downtown as selfish individuals hell bent on sabotaging green space in town, something I have never heard come out of the mouth of a merchant.
This plan is a s show !
It is grossly anti business, it is demeaning the way some ppl refer to the staff as though they are lucky to be here.
Let’s remember it is us the merchants who pay collosal taxes for the priveledge.
As such we should have been involved from the get go. It would have saved the town all the wasted money on garbage studies.
We are the downtown.
We know what it takes to pay rent, and exist here with viable and popular businesses. While also paying huge property taxes.
To ignore us is to completely disrespect us.
Might want to rethink your last comment.
Nobody wants jesup green sacrifices for a vanity project and another photo opp.