Today, the Westport Community Garden Steering Committee sent an update to its “gardening families.” The email offered reasons to reject a relocation of the garden from Long Lots School to Baron’s South.
They propose a different site: part of Burr Farms Field, off Long Lots Road. The steering committee wrote:
You may have read that the town of Westport has submitted a new 8-24 for 13 Hyde Lane/new Long Lots School Site Plan, removing the Westport Community Gardens completely from the property to make way for a multi-use Parks & Recreation field, post-construction.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to meet to discuss, and possibly vote on, this 8-24 on Monday, June 9.
As a possible relocation site for the gardens, the town suggested Baron’s South.
After carefully touring the property and thoroughly researching its suitability, we, as your Steering Committee and representatives of this community, came to the conclusion that we could not, in good conscience, recommend it.
Proposal for Community Gardens at Baron’s South.
The safety and health concerns — along with accessibility and environmental factors — would place too many of our gardeners at risk. Baron’s South is not a long-term solution to a long-term problem.
We have consistently asked the town for a collaborative effort to identify an alternative location, should we not be allowed to co-exist with the new Long Lots School. Despite multiple outreach attempts and ideas, we have not received any meaningful response or engagement.
In light of that, we recently submitted a formal proposal to relocate the Westport Community Garden to a portion of Burr Farms Field, located on Burr School Road off Long Lots Road.
Burr Farms Fields, located on the site of the former elementary school.
If you are unfamiliar with the property, we encourage you to visit it. This site offers many of the same benefits that made our current garden so successful: It is sunny, flat, centrally located, easily accessible with ample parking, and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. We believe it offers a truly viable and equitable path forward.
A copy of our submitted proposal is attached for your review.
The letter noted that “the space is underused, with a portion currently chained off from any use at all.”
The steering committee asked to share the property. One baseball diamond would remain, with the outfield “still available for tot soccer or other light recreational use.”
One possible location for the gardens. Burr School Road is at the left; the parking area is at top …
The location “also complements the property’s character and history,” the committee said. From 1958 through the early 1980s, it served as athletic fields for Burr Farms Elementary School. The building to the north of the fields was demolished, and was replaced by homes.
Existing fencing could be repurposed, with “only minimal infrastructure, such as hose hookups and permiter fencing” needed to get started.
… and a second one.
The steering committee called deferring a relocation decision to a townwide planning process with consultants “expensive, slow, and frequently re-opened by incoming administrations to suit shifting priorities.”
The letter to gardening families continued:
Thank you for being a part of what makes our community garden so special. Your spirit, care and commitment have built more than garden beds — you’ve created a deeply rooted community. We remain hopeful that together we’ll soon be planting new seeds in a new, beautiful space where this community can continue to grow and thrive.
The current Burr Farms site.
It is hard to imagine that Westport, an extraordinary town, would not offer a viable solution to a community garden. I am in favor of creating the best possible space for those who have worked the garden for years, and their families. Many in the community benefit from the joy that it brings. Remember that in the science of the “Blue Zones”, the assessment is that people live longer, healthier lives when connected to nature and to community.
Brava to the Steering Committee for this excellent idea. Ready to rebuild my plot.
This is a cool idea, but the maps are not clear. Are there better maps available?
Will the Community Gardens Steering Committee oppose the new 8-24 unless there is a positive response to this proposal?
Would the garden replace the current ball fields? If so, how does that solve the issues we keep reading about concerning ‘lack of sports fields in Westport’?
Lou Dorsey used to hit home runs there. I was there in 1958. It’s a great choice!
Coach Dorsey, there’s a memory…..
I don’t understand how the steering committee is asking for the Buff Farms multipurpose fields to be replaced with community gardens. These fields are in use, and they are not abandoned.
Also, the article says “removing the Westport Community Gardens completely from the property to make way for a multi-use Parks & Recreation field, post-construction”. That is an inaccurate sequence of events. The construction of the new school building in a different spot, and the higher requirement for drainage on this site, result in a new landscape that is not the same as pre-construction. The community gardens and the athletic fields will no longer exist once the construction starts. It is then a matter of what can be put back on that property. Athletic fields have been there long before the community gardens were added. And it is the norm to have athletic fields next to schools. There were no additional fields added that were not there before.
You just can’t let it go, Mr. Nader. Stick to your knitting on the Long Lots project. Leave us alone.
Let me guess. He favors Baron’s South?
And that’s folks how you lose the argument.
I don’t need to respond to these knee-jerk reactions.
No – the gardeners lost the argument when they were unnecessarily kicked off the campus. (And kicked off a year earlier than needed to be just to spite them).
Thank you, Robert. I will never forget that you were the only Board of Ed member to stand up for the garden.
What position exactly are you jockeying for?
The amount of time you spend on this blog I’m sure could be channeled elsewhere.
Don’t turn into a ‘Toni’
Long time, “Daniel”. Where have you been?
Dan Woog, take note of the imposter. Such cowardice.
Planting. Tending to my garden. But I have noticed, nothing grows within my garden continuous whining on social media platforms.
No. Active citizen engagement is sunlight needed to help a garden thrive. You are stomping indiscriminately on your seedlings with derisive and cowardly behavior. Identify yourself if you want to be taken seriously. I know who you are; let others in on the fun.
All recreational activities have been suspended at Long Lots, including gardening and after-school sports. And the reason is much simpler, they need to start prepping for construction as soon as the approvals are in. It will be very difficult to do that if there are activities in progress, and will cost even more delays. Keep in mind that the existing school is getting the bare minimum in terms of maintenance because they don’t want to spend money on a school that is going away. I learned recently that the project to seal the windows by an external contractor was tossed away for that reason. So we are just sitting and waiting now for the new school, and hope nothing breaks till then.
This demand for Burr Farms was sent to the P&Z and can be found in the new 8-24 application. It is clear that the strategy is to hold the Long Lots project hostage. I do not support such tactics, do you?
Like you held the Gardens hostage for a soccer field?
The fact that all after school activities stopped were stopped so soon – and the garden wasn’t destroyed earlier this years is NUTS. When are these approvals coming in ? Why would planting tomatoes get in the way of leaking school windows? I’m on BOE and on the Finance and Facilities Committee and don’t even know about the window project being scrapped.
We certainly don’t need any more delays to the school…and the garden wasn’t a reason for the delay.
Had the gardens been in another location, we would without a doubt be a lot further ahead in this project.
Probably we would have secured the funding by now and been able to buy a majority of materials before they were subject to tariffs.
Now that P&Z is going to review a new 8-24 report, the steering committee is willing to relocate only if they move to Burr Farms?
What the steering committee should do instead of making demands is to let the Long Lots project proceed without a garden, and work with the town for a new location. No more delays.
Joe, it would be greatly appreciated if you directed your frustration with the deteriorated state of LLS and its construction delays toward the administration and committees that have overseen this process. Hint: it’s not the gardeners—no matter how much you want them to be the scapegoat.
Per the pre-application meeting between P&Z and the LLS Building Committee, P&Z asked LLSBC to identify a relocation solution for the Community Garden other than Baron’s South in order to confidently move approvals forward. The volunteered proposal for a portion of Burr Farms Field is a viable, equitable option that could reduce potential roadblocks and be a step toward bringing this town back together. As the person who authored that proposal, I would know.
Also, the sequence in the letter is accurate: the garden is eliminated to make way for a Parks & Rec multi-use field after it serves as a staging site. No more mansplaining, please. No reply necessary.
Laureen,
A reply is necessary, and I will ignore your last derogatory comment which says more about you.
You should not assume that the garden will be located at exact same place or even exist at Long Lots after the new building is constructed and the landscape has changed entirely from its original configuration. Therefore, you cannot make the claim that the garden was moved to make way for a field. Otherwise, that is considered manipulation.
The LLS building committee role is to construct a new Long Lots building, demolish the existing building, and place back what they can. A baseball field was lost in the process, and they are not looking for a new place for that baseball field. This will be the responsibility of the Parks & Recs. The WCG steering committee needs to work with Parks & Recs as well, and should not expect the building committee to find them one.
The new 8-24 is for 13 Hyde Ln. I did not hear the commissioners in the pre-application meeting object to the finalized plans that did not include a garden. With this new 8-24 plan, we should be able to get a positive report in order to move forward. The topic of where the gardens should go needs to be its own separate 8-24 once a location is found. I urge you to work with the town to find a new location. We all want to keep a community gardens in Westport, at the same time we do not want any more delays for the new school to be built.
Sadly we all know it doesn’t work that way.. the FSW has ZERO intention of finding a suitable spot for the gardens. That’s been patently clear.
No new 8-24 should be approved until a new spot is found for the gardens in a sunny, flat area, with parking.
All delays on the school are for reasons other than the gardens.
It’s called consequences.
I played Little League on that field, Joe. You are right. These are public lands and I use Burr Farms to walk my dog since Wakeman got all rigid and nasty. You want a garden, I assume you have a back yard? http://www.carladdisionswanson.com
Don’t forget that the first, and what should have been , only 8-24 was approved with the gardens on the site.
If this proposal doesn’t make you happy, then the new 8-24 should be thrown out in a vote.
It’s pretty simple.
So maybe you should support the suggestion.
Why doesn’t the Town buy a small house, doze it and plant a nice big garden?
Thank you Dan for always supporting the garden and the gardeners. I am really missing my peaceful little plot of land at the garden. To be at Burr would be an amazing gift to me and so many others.
Given what the community gardeners have endured at the hands of our FSW, her strategically selected committee members, Chainsaw Scarice and the libelous stories and comments directed at them by those trying to push for the bulldozing of Westport’s Community Garden, the Town of Westport – its residents and elected officials – should go above and beyond to support this effort and desired location for a new Westport Community Garden. I am not a gardener but greatly appreciated the hard work of these individuals to create something that was very special in Westport.
Great idea. Fairfield and Wilton have community gardens. Stamford, Norwalk, Darien and New Canaan have community gardens. Greenwich has three community gardens! it’s unthinkable that Westport not find a new location for the highly successful and much loved Westport Community Garden. Burr Farm Field looks like a perfect location.
The community garden was a jewel and the need to destroy it seemed dubious. The gardeners deserve a suitable location. I feel the Town should be going out of its way to accommodate their needs.
If we find any suitable land, the Joe Nader’s of the world will want to claim it for a soccer field and the BOE will claim it when they need it.
This world needs more gardens. Plain and simple. Gardens are places to grow nourishment and to grow good people. People that care about their neighbors and communities. In the 30 years that we have lived in and contributed to the Town of Westport, we have never been so saddened and dismayed by this current administration and boards that have simply tossed our community gardeners aside. Although we cannot offer you a plot of land to dig your earth, we can offer you a respite within our little sanctuary. You are welcome to walk through Prospect Gardens and breathe deeply.
The world needs more peonies! I should bring you another bucket this year!
Thank you for this. Your gardens are amazing and legendary. You understand us! What a great role model you are for all of Westport.
I agree that the Burr location is the best suggestion so far, and hope it will be approved by the town.
I’ve been walking my various dogs there for more than 30 years. If the gardens are moved there, will I be welcome with my dogs?
And as has been stated above the field is very busy with many activities, what happens to them?
When commenting on the use of public fields, it might be a good idea to review the regulations…
https://www.westportct.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/102238/638750561606030000
I moved to Westport from a local town 42 years ago because it offered it’s citizens a better quality of life, geared to the human element. I wanted IN and was willing to pay for it! I have been on many committies and helped shape the town we live in and have always been very proud that this is my home.
Now, I feel I was living in a bubble. It popped, and we’re back in Kansas. What happened to our Yellow Brick Road?
We had made a garden other towns used as a model.
The Burr Farms property would be a saving grace for this town. The gardens give Westport the well documented “Blue Zone”. Like great schools, it draws in the type of people we want living here, and they are willing to pay for it. Please share Burr Farms property and give Westporters back our gardens.
So many people to compliment with respect to the ongoing yest still unsuccessful efforts to have a Community Gardens. Many of those who have worked so hard for this outcome are reflected in sent comments above. I will just call out and thank Robert Harrington.
Seems like a reasonable proposal. Good dor the environment
Evolving from little league catcher to retired 80 year old Westport gardner fosters fortuitous appreciation of the beauty , essence and joys of both. Westport’s intellectual capital is certainly able to ensure meeting the higher ordered …mutual …needs of involved parties. We KNOW this can be done. ALL of our talented leaders need to make it happen.
In a town starved for more athletic fields, I’m not sure without an alternative, how you take the Burr Farms fields away.
In the early 2000’s when we were flooded with little girls wanting to play softball all of a sudden, we had to get creative and find some new fields. So we resurrected two of them – 1) what used to be called Luciano Park down by the train station, and 2) the field behind what’s now The Saugatuck. We used them both for several seasons, although I remember The Saugatuck people being tremendously difficult, even though I believe the Town allegedly has forever access to that field.
Not sure either is large enough for the community garden – so maybe we re-imagine Luciano Park, put some lights on it – and see if we can get more use from it. And figure out exactly what the Town’s rights are to the field behind The Saugatuck.
I’m sure these have already been explored, just an idea.
I recall many years of practices on the field that was the playground of the Saugatuck Elementary school. While too small, according to former Parks and Rec assistant director Mike West for regulation games, and suffering from a tree crushed baseball backstop that wants repair, it also has limited parking. More to the point, due to a 1988 court ordered stipulated settlement (certified and part of the Land Records), the property is limited to the 36 dwellings in The Saugatuck, a few public parking spaces at the head of the connecting ramp, and the “playing fields shall remaIn open to the pubIic, with access provIded and assured.” When I asked Mike why practices were no longer held there, he explained that the traffic problems on Bridge St. (Soon to get much worse, with CTDOT’s taking the First Selectwoman’s permission to replace the Cribari Bridge with a truck-bearing one.) made drop-offs and pick-ups too inconvenient. However there are usually a couple of frisbee or touch football games every week and kids have always provided joy to the field.
I threw a no hitter on that field in 1976, Go Rams! Still have the ball, signed by all my teammates. A prized possession.
We made the parking situation work for softball practices, but yea that’s the issue.
Did you go on to win a Block S at Staples? Or flame out after like so many Staples athletes do?
Southpaws with two pitches eventually flame out. However as a 58 year old father of three daughters, all also failed athletes, those days on the fields and the courts and the pools with our friends were the absolute best.
I’m community garden age now, not instructional league dad softball age – but never discount how important and formative those elementary school age sports leagues are.
I can’t count the number of lacrosse, hard- and soft balls the local dogs have pulled out of the weeds around the field. Hundreds. Didn’t see one with your autograph, though.
What I continuously do not understand is the underutilization of Winslow Park as a dog toilet. Seems to me to be a perfect place for town built affordable housing. However, I gather Westport doesn’t really want “those people” sending “their kids” to Westport schools preferring dogs rather than kids notwithstanding the sympathetic comments on posts about Bridgeport schools.
But, I get it. No affordable housing. But why not the community garden. The committee would rather displace ballfields used by kids rather than part of the dog toilet? Seems like misplaced priorities to me. And sort of a cheap clapback because of how the old location played out.
Mr. Harrington. What’s your view? Do you prioritize dogs vs kids? Dogs vs garden?
I certainly wouldn’t dare speak for Robert Harrington.
Speaking for myself – a dog owner who does NOT use Winslow – it is the one substantial dog park in Westport. Just as the Community Gardens were the single Community Garden.
“Do you prioritize dogs vs kids? Dogs vs garden?” is an absurd premise when we have more than twenty ball fields in Westport. Maybe we should flip the question and ask if you think anything other than “children” should have any access to Town resources? People who are dog owners? People who are gardeners?
I think the question is more about a fair allocation of resources. The “it’s about the children” crowd brings out that lame trope whenever they want access to resources used by someone else.
Even though I don’t use it, I wouldn’t advocate for getting rid of the dog park any more than I supported getting rid of the gardens. Can Westporters pretend that there are individuals in Town, who pay property taxes, who have interests separate from their own? If often doesn’t seem like it.
It is about too many rules. And too many who like to keep them. It is mere common sense that an individual will prefer or gravitate to dogs, children, gardens, horse wrestling, adult nude bowling leagues, etc. depending on their position in life. The rah rah, all for all Westport, take one for the team, has left the building with Elvis.
Don’t need to completely get rid of the dog toilet. The community garden was, what, an acre? Maybe two? Winslow Park is 29 acres. Seems like plenty of room for the gardens and dog toilet to coexist. And some parking. Without sacrificing ball fields.
Unless the point of the garden committee is to discomfort ball field users (since they seem to think the ball field people are the reason the old garden was closed) vs reducing the dog toilet by 10%.
I’m sorry, but are you a child, that you keep saying “dog toilet?” It’s making it difficult to take you seriously. (I’ll not use the terms “soccer toilet” or “little league toilet.”)
While the gardeners took a “grow together” approach to the gardens and school, the Joe Naders of the world tried to make it about school vs garden (a lie) because they want more ball field space. Scare Long Lots parents into attacking the gardeners. It was disgraceful. Pretending the gardeners were a threat to children.
I still remember Jay Keenan saying, in effect, “you’d be angry if we removed a ball field you used and didn’t replace it…” to justify killing the garden without replacing it. And then he blamed the gardeners for the delays to the building project (in meetings with neighbors – that he asked attendees to not record, btw).
I’m not sure why the sports dads think that everything should be sacrificed for them. One dog park. One (now zero) community garden. 20+ ball fields. They don’t even pretend that anything is important if it isn’t in their personal interest.
It would have made a very nice home for the old YMCA as well Bill. Thanks Dianne. http://www.carladdisonswanson.com
Indeed. Or Barons South.
Winslow was a consideration. Parking inventory is a huge obstacle at Winslow and ensuring it is located near the garden for mulch, tools, soil, plants, etc. This leads to locating a flat area and getting water to the property. All costlier than a turn-key proposal for an approximate split, as requested, of Burr Farms.
Going to have to put in parking at Burr Farms fields. Probably need to reroute some plumbing as well. Not sure why it would be less expensive to do it at Burr Farm vs Winslow Park. Would save the ball fields and while only taking a fraction of the dog toilet away.
Laureen answered your question. You just didn’t like the answer.
Your repeated use of “dog toilet” suggests you are a moron. Or that you just prefer using stupid names instead of making valid points. Taking a page from the MAGA playbook, I guess.
Laureen’ s answer was disingenuous. Parking is an obstacle at Winslow? Parking would have to be built at Burr Farm. Could just as easily be built at Winslow Park, maybe even with additional parking to appease the dog crowd. Getting water to the property? There is town water all around Winslow Park. Turn-key proposal for Burr Farm? A couple of sketches? Costlier? Maybe, maybe not.
As for dog toilet, given the number of posts on 06880 regarding the amount of dog poo that is not picked up by entitled owners, it is pretty clear that a not insignificant proportion of the folks that take their dogs to Winslow Park use it for just that purpose so it is simply a fact based description. You calling me a child and a moron, on the other hand…
Why does Westport need a dog park? I get why Manhattan does, but more than 98% of all Westport residents live in single family homes. So you have a yard, and you can leash your pup and walk anywhere you want.
It’s a historically under exploited resource. The Y should be there, but since it’s still open space, there has to be a better and higher use.
Probably for the same reason that other Towns in the area have dog parks. People have dogs. People like to be social. Dogs like to run around. It is a reasonable recreational activity.
You might as well ask why we have so many tennis courts, when many homes could put one in the back yard. Different people like different activities. It’s nice to have community recreational opportunities for different groups. These things are Town attractions which, as the golfers like to say, help increase our property values.
If you think that Town should get out of the Parks and Rec business, that is a philosophical conversation for another time.
And to Bill’s retort – if you are going to say childish things, expect to be called out. Act like one of the grown-ups in the conversation. It’ll be better for all of us.
I fully support starting a community garden at the Burr Farms location. This is a good opportunity for the current administration and P&Z to do the right thing.