This week, in a letter to all Westport Community Gardens members, 1st Selectwoman Jen Tooker outlined her recommendation for a new site: Baron’s South, adjacent to the Senior Center.
The Gardens’ steering committee takes strong issue with that proposal. They write:
Dear First Selectwoman Tooker,
This letter serves as a response to your continued efforts to designate Baron’s South as the future location for the Westport Community Gardens.
We appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to promoting what you believe to be a viable and beneficial alternative to the current site at Hyde Lane. We recognize your intent to make thoughtful decisions for our community.
Westport Community Gardens (left), east of Long Lots Elementary School. (Drone photo/Brandon Malin)
However, we believe that the Baron’s South location does not meet the critical requirements for establishing a sustainable, thriving community garden. Specifically, there are several concerns regarding the site that we would like to address.
Sunlight Availability
A successful community garden requires ample, direct sunlight, which the proposed site at Baron’s South does not offer. The area is heavily shaded by mature trees to the east, south and west — precisely the directions where sunlight is most needed.
Creating the proper growing conditions would require the removal of dozens of mature trees from both public and private land, an action we, as a committee, are not comfortable pursuing.
Terrain and Accessibility
A significant portion of the Baron’s South property is sloped. This introduces both erosion concerns and challenges for our senior gardeners, who make up a large portion of our membership.
Sloped land not only complicates planting and maintenance but also creates additional risks for gardeners who rely on flat, accessible terrain.
The proposed new site, at Baron’s South.
Parking and Accessibility
As you mentioned, the Westport Center for Senior Activities is an extremely popular location, and parking there is already limited. Gardeners often need to carry equipment, soil, plants, and other materials, which makes the current proposed site impractical. Distant or diverted parking options would impose undue strain on the gardeners, particularly those with physical limitations.
Additionally, it has been suggested that time limitations at the Senior Center parking lot may be imposed, which would not resolve the issue of restricted access during the school’s operating hours. This would essentially mirror the time constraints already proposed for the school property, further limiting the usability of the site for the Community Garden.
Invasive Species
The Baron’s South area is currently infested with invasive species, including bamboo, which is notoriously difficult to eradicate. It has taken nearly 2 decades of effort to manage invasive plants around the Hyde Lane location. Repeating this process at the proposed site would be a significant undertaking and should not be underestimated in terms of the time, effort, and cost involved.
Before creation of the Long Lots Preserve, invasive vines choked trees.
Soil
We believe that the town should proactively clean up the land to better assess its true potential for a community garden or other recreational use. Without this step, it is difficult to make a fully informed decision about whether this location is truly suitable for gardening or if other recreational purposes would be a better fit.
We remain open to exploring other potential locations in town that could meet the essential criteria for a community garden, including ample sunlight, flat terrain, adequate parking, accessibility, and a reliable water supply.
Locations like Winslow Park may offer a more suitable alternative, and we hope that further discussions can explore these options.
Thank you for your understanding, and we look forward to continuing this conversation.
Sincerely,
The Westport Community Gardens Steering Committee
Louis Weinberg, chair
(“06880” covers all sides of controversies like the Community Gardens. If you appreciate our hyper-local journalism, please click here to support our work. Thank you!)
A very reasoned and seasoned response by people who know what it takes.
Indeed. and one that won’t be given the response it deserves.
The town can prove its commitment to community gardening for its citizens through:
– Funding
-Town Advocate
-Land dedicated to this use in perpetuity
– A framework of legal rights for a community garden
I suggest a town commission made up of gardeners selected by gardeners be established to design a new community garden at a suitable site, funded by the town in total..
Further, begin facilitated discussions immediately with Winslow Park stakeholders and adjoining property owners as a potential new location. If a deal can be reached, the town must store all garden artifacts and important plantings during the transition, and commit to rebuild and transplant the native habitat.
A site plan for Long Lots School is due to go to the PZC very soon. The current site plan direction does not fulfill the existing §8-24 given the desire for a big non-school-related athletic field. Thus, the selectperson’s next step will be to withdraw its current §8-24 Municipal Improvement that requires a garden at Hyde Lane, and submit a new §8-24 with no such promise. This is a familiar tactic.
I implore the Planning and Zoning Commission to not endorse, agree to, recommend or approve a positive §8-24 or site plan that erases the current community garden from Hyde Lane. Perhaps bifurcate the parcel and prohibit any proposed site plan that uses the Hyde Lane Tier 1 until and unless a mutually agreed upon solution is found.
As a daily user of Winslow for dog walking, I oppose any further development there, whether it be a fenced dog park or gardens. Parking is already limited, and the park is great just the way it is. Reducing the space available would really be unfortunate, as it can already get very busy at peak times. Plus, I imagine putting gardens in there would cause all sorts of friction between dog owners and gardeners. Surely there’s a better option in all of Westport.
Mike
I hear you. Not only do I frequent Winslow with my dog, I live a stone’s throw away. This is my neighborhood so I am intimately familiar with the dog park culture.
I didn’t suggest this lightly, but with an earnest interest if a garden could be compatible. There just are not many open spaces left in our town aside from parks and athletic fields. It’s one of the few where clear cutting would not be necessary.
I do recall that construction staging for our sewer project did not seem to interfere too much with the dog park vibe at Winslow.
There could very well be private property (at a church or office complex) that may be suitable and property owners amenable. I don’t know the answer, and I certainly don’t have any authority in these matters. I am quite involved in other garden environments, and I’ve seen some wonderful things happen when people work together and talk to each other.
Toni great comment.
Are you suggesting what I think you are as a possibility.
That the administration, ( who were determined to get their own way from the getgo) will apply for a new 8-24, ( because this one never suited them,( in hopes they can lobby 4 people on PZ to vote favorably to kick the gardeners out altogether.
If all else fails they will rely on the rtm to do imho their bidding.. and ratify or overturn the new and not improved, but , self serving 8-24.
It appears this is the new ( last 3-5 years) way of doing town business in Westport!
If at first you don’t succeed brow beat your way to what it is you want no matter who you trample on in the meantime.
Just my opinion of course.
I wonder if there were 2000 gardeners and not 200 would their future votes and past tax and future tax contributions be taken into consideration.
It sucks to be in a minority group if you live in Westport I guess.
And if you are in the 50 plus bracket and lived here most of your tax paying life, you need not expect any thanks or consideration for all those years of contribution to community.
With the swipe of a pen and determination of some to have their own way, just like that, you are cannon fodder.
Yes Ciara. At the last meeting of the LLSBC this was discussed, as was a site plan with no garden (requiring a new 8-24). It was further acknowledged by the chair of the committee that he never wanted to keep the garden in place. “It makes no sense, as I’ve said all along,” he said.
Winslow seems like a no-brainer. Lots of land there and has to be a spot that can be dedicated to gardens. Some may oppose, but we are a community and assets must be shared.
How about hitting up those altruistic people at Bridgewater to “give back” a small parcel at Nyala Farm for a beautiful community garden(?)
Eric, Bridgewater is a monstrous tax contributor here, not sure why they should be asked to do anything more on top of that. I believe they do plenty for the community already.
And since it would be for our own tax paying gardeners who are getting screwed, I believe it is up to the town to come up with suitable and acceptable locations and foot the entire bill for the move.
Ciara, I get your point (it hadn’t occurred to me actually) and acknowledge it’s validity but it’s not only about taxes, this is a large parcel of unused land – former pasture – why not take a relatively small portion of it and allow it to be utilized for good purposes.
I’m glad someone wrote how much effort and time goes into making land suitable for a garden ..as a gardener Baron south is not suitable without a major investment in time and resources.
Nayala or Winslow might be more reasonably suitable …if offered and evaluated first.
There should be a referendum voted on to determine the will of the constituents for being forced out of the community gardens not a elected officials singular vote to determine what happens.
I always appreciate Toni’s thoughtful, researched positioning, on behalf of the WCG membership. An important point she mentions above is “ Land dedicated to this use in perpetuity & A framework of legal rights for a community garden”
After twenty years of hard work and commitment, by hundreds of residents, the Westport Community Gardens at Hyde Lane is truly a vibrant, flourishing oasis today. As we stand by to witness its imminent destruction, we cannot move forward on any future site without a true commitment from the Town that they will stand by that agreement into the future, or risk this happening yet again. The current offer of Barons South (which is problematic in several ways from soil to sunlight) also includes no such guarantees.
Establishing the current site required decades and countless hours of physical labor, not to mention personal investment made by many gardeners into the thousands of dollars (for things like non-toxic cedar raised beds, soil, and plant support structures). If, in the end, we are ultimately pushed out of Hyde Lane, any future site must be a long-term commitment to Westport Residents that goes beyond a list of empty promises or talking points.
Is there an inventory list of open space properties that the Town of Westport owns? Perhaps that list could offer some ideas. Is there is a property (or a playing field) that is under used that could possibly be turned over to the Community Gardens?
Toni Simonetti continues to be a voice of reason and passion. It would be terrific if Jen Tooker, Lee Caney and Paul Lebowitz simpy sat down with Toni and come up with a site and a plan for the Community Gardens. Those four cannot accomplish the goal on their own, but can put together, support and work for an answer. Westport needs, deserves and cherishes a Community Gardens.