Tag Archives: Chip Stephens

Golden Shadows Gets Trimmed

Westporters continue to debate the best use for Golden Shadows.

But no one can argue that the area in Baron’s South — once the handsome home of Baron Walter von Langendorff and his wife — looks a lot better today than it did yesterday.

This morning, historic preservationists Morley Boyd and Wendy Crowther organized a work party. They and Planning & Zoning Commission members Al Gratrix and Chip Stephens were joined by Mike Bernie, one of the baron’s original landscapers.

Golden Shadows is hidden from view, in the middle of the property. (Of course, the town owns Baron’s South, and it’s open from sunrise to sunset.)

But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take care of it. Nice to see some concerned Westporters lend a helping hand.

Golden Shadows cleanup 2

Morley Boyd and Wendy Crowther, hard at work.

Golden Shadows cleanup 1

Chip Stephens (left) and Al Gratrix get their hands dirty.

Golden Shadows cleanup 4

The still-impressive hillside near Golden Shadows, after trimming, raking and weeding.

Golden Shadows

Golden Shadows

 

Westport Inn: New Owners Revealed

So who exactly purchased the Westport Inn, saving it from possible demolition and Westport from the specter of a 200-unit, 5-story housing complex? And what did they pay?

The new owner is Building and Land Technology. The purchase price was $14.5 million.

Building and Land TechnologyBLT is described in a press release as “a leading real estate investor, developer and operator in Fairfield County and nationally.” It owns over 50 hotels across the US, and has developed numerous mixed-use projects, including Stamford’s Harbor Point.

Among its “premier commercial holdings”: the Nyala Farms complex, adjacent to I-95 Exit 18. Originally built for Stauffer Chemical, it now counts Bridgewater Associates as its anchor tenant.

“We’re pleased to add the Westport Inn to our local portfolio,” said Carl R. Kuehner III, CEO of BLT. “We believe that the Inn complements our office holdings here, and will continue to provide benefits for local corporations as well as residents of the Westport community.”

The Westport Inn began as The New Englander, in 1960. With BLT's purchase today for $14.5 million, it will remain a hotel.

The Westport Inn began as The New Englander, in 1960. With BLT’s purchase today for $14.5 million, it will remain a hotel.

First Selectman Jim Marpe — who with Planning and Zoning Commission chair Chip Stephens worked to find a purchaser for the Sheldon Stein-owned Inn — said that BLT has “an extraordinary local and national reputation as a real estate investor, and is an experienced hotel owner. It’s gratifying to achieve a result that forestalls previous plans to develop multifamily housing on the hotel site, which we determined was not an appropriate use here.”

Stephens noted that apartments would have resulted in “excessive densification,” as well as the loss of much-needed hotel rooms.

The  Westport Inn recently underwent a multi-million dollar renovation. It includes 117 rooms, plus 6000 square feet of event space.

Cleanup Time!

It takes a government ban to produce a scene like this:

I-95 after snow - Nico Eisenberger

That’s a shot of I-95 without a car in sight. Nico Eisenberger went cross-country skiing at Sherwood Island, and enjoyed this view from the Beachside Avenue bridge.

A bit further east, Chip Stephens saw 25 or so trucks parked near the Athena Diner. From Texas.

Their drivers don’t have much to, other than laugh at us panic-stricken Easterners.

Tree crews -- Chip Stephens

Meanwhile, Mark Mathias cleared his driveway. We all know the Board of Ed member/Mini Maker Faire co-founder is an energetic guy, but this video will blow you away.

Just like the snow.

PS: Seems like every gas station on the Post Road is open. Every liquor store, too.

 

David Lessing: Put The “P” Back In “Planning And Zoning”

David Lessing is a Planning & Zoning commissioner. He responds to chairman Chip Stephens’ recent comments on “06880,” regarding the P&Z’s vote against developing senior housing on the Baron’s South property:

Chip Stephens has attempted to defend his vote against text amendments that would have facilitated progress on developing senior housing on the Baron’s South property. While Westporters should appreciate his effort to help us make belated sense of the disappointing vote, unfortunately the defenses he offers are internally contradictory and fail to provide a road map for our other elected officials. In the future, the P&Z needs to fulfill its responsibility for “planning,” rather than — after an abbreviated deliberation — handing down “no” votes that sharply reverse progress made by the painstaking efforts of other elected officials from both parties over multiple years.

In his statement, Mr. Stephens cites as his reasons for voting against the text amendments: concerns about fairness regarding who would be eligible for the new senior units, and a desire to limit density of development and preserve open space. These are each valid concerns, but are mutually exclusive.

If Mr. Stephens opposes the text amendments because they would permit additional development and more density in Westport, then he should not also purport to be concerned about the quality and fairness of allocation of the senior housing that he would not allow in any case. Arguing about who gets housing you don’t support in the first place is a pointless exercise.

Debate over what to do with the Baron's South property has continued for years.

Debate over what to do with the Baron’s South property has continued for years.

I understand the rhetorical benefit of offering both rationales and not wanting to appear unsupportive of senior housing, but as elected officials we have a responsibility to the town to provide guidance that can actually be used in planning for the future. The P&Z vote and Mr. Stephens’ explanation of it leave it unclear whether any proposal for senior housing and recreational facilities on town-owned land would be approved, regardless of how much affordable housing is associated with it.

A different result could have been achieved if members of the P&Z participated earlier and more often in public consultation with other elected officials. Too frequently, our commission criticizes plans that are developed by others, rather than rolling up our sleeves and helping guide the development of plans that would either satisfy existing zoning regulations or present strong justifications for changing them. Rather than publishing statements defending our votes rejecting efforts as significant as Baron’s South, we should be embarrassed that we were forced to vote that way in the first place.

Certainly we had ample opportunity in the several months of public testimony and the more than 5-year saga leading to last week’s vote to contribute to the development of a proposal that would have satisfied our concerns. We cannot be viewed as setting ourselves above and apart from others working to keep Westport the wonderful community we all love. We need to form consensus through our public decision-making process that will give direction to others who rely on us to provide guidance on solutions that will work.

The P&Z must take a proactive role in downtown development, David Lessing says.

The P&Z must take a proactive role in downtown development, David Lessing says.

The need to improve how we operate will become even more critical in connection with the ongoing efforts of the Downtown Steering Committee, which has worked for months to gather input from a broad range of Westporters. The DSC hosted a successful and well-attended 2-day charrette that I attended last weekend. They have had effective leadership from a bipartisan group, including chair Melissa Kane and Westport operations director Dewey Loselle. As a community, we cannot afford to have this group devote significant effort on our behalf to improve our town, only to subject any eventual recommendations requiring P&Z approval to the same process we just experienced with Baron’s South.

To be clear, the P&Z cannot always give unified, clear, and actionable guidance for why it makes its decisions. However, by not even trying, we weaken our credibility and waste the time of the well-intentioned individuals and groups trying to improve Westport. It is our obligation to provide a positive road map for the development of our town. As a member of the commission and the sole vote in favor of the text amendments, I look forward to working with my fellow Commissioners to meet that obligation in the future.

Chip Stephens: Why I Voted No

In the wake of Thursday night’s 6-1 vote by the Planning & Zoning Commission defeating a text amendment that would have permitted development of senior housing on the Baron’s South property, Chip Stephens sent this statement to all Westporters:

As chair of the Planning & Zoning, I owe you my explanation of our decision on text amendment 677.

Let me address 3 points that drove me to my position. There were more, but these were the biggest issues in my decision: fairness, density and open space.

Chip Stephens

Chip Stephens

Fairness. 20% is the bare minimum affordability required of most projects, mandated by state statute. It is the minimum that also entails fairness of the affordable units, so they are not clustered by themselves, and match the same quality and size as other units.

This idea was dismissed in the original sub-text. It showed that affordable units would be limited to 1 bedroom, not necessarily the same size and type. It was later withdrawn due to concerns of the commissioners.

It was obvious from the start that the project planners were trying for the very minimum affordability offering they could get away with, in order to satisfy the developer’s “needs.”

Then we were told there would be a second tier of “moderate” affordable units (20%, with the possibility of being raised to 25%). This level may be moderate to some, but in reality was out of reach for many Westporters of that certain age. Believe it or not, not all have $1 million or more left in home equity or resources when they reach the qualifying age. Add to this the true price of market-driven units (the new 60 %).

Also, the affordability of the nursing or memory units was not addressed. Both of those units were guaranteed to be very profitable and very pricey, but merited very little discussion in the proposal (understandably so, to sell this project).

My  biggest problem regarding fairness was that we were told to “believe” that well-deserving Westporters would be the first and only to qualify for these subsidized units. What is a “deserving” Westporter ? Who decides this? On what basis?

Is it a lifelong resident? A resident of less than, say, 5 years? One who rented, or was on subsidized housing, or just summered in Westport and spent the balance of the time in Florida?

Is it a paid elected official? A non-paid elected official? A Little League coach, teacher, artistic contributor or longtime charitable volunteer ?

Chip Stephens wonders who would determine which "deserving" Westporters would be able to live at the Baron's South housing complex.

Chip Stephens wonders who would determine which “deserving” Westporters would be able to live at the Baron’s South housing complex.

Would there be a point system of lifelong taxes paid, of public and charitable activity, or would it just be whoever was the longest on the list of those wishing this type of housing?

Who would make that decision, and who makes the rules of what is right and fair? Would these decisions and rules be challenged by social advocates, using laws that “protect” the poor, religious rights, or race and nationality? This is a very slippery slope I believe we would face with such an exclusionary policy, whether state and federal funds were involved or not.  There is no certain promise or guarantee of such a “deserving Westport” — only entitlement.

Density. Regulations that set a cap on multifamily housing units to limit density were enacted by prior commissions. That cap is close to being reached. With hundreds of units being considered and on the drawing boards, we better be thinking about what kind of density we envision here in the next 3-5 years.

Do we accept the eventual morphing of Westport into a community like many Westchester County neighbors?  The recent downtown planning survey showed very strong agreement that residents appreciate the character and rural nature of the town today — not of the town of the 1950s, ’60s or ’70s. When we envision hundreds of new multifamily units, how will that impact our resources, taxes, schools and infrastructure?

Yes, the sub-text proposed said that raising this cap would apply to this one “issue” (though it did open the door to at least 13 qualifying locations). Nothing we face at P and Z is one-off. Just look at the issue of preservation of historic houses, or listen to developers use previous “one-offs” to justify their proposals.  This is a discussion which we all face now. It will intensify over the coming months.

Chip Stephens worries about other proposals for multifamily housing that are in the pipeline.

Chip Stephens worries about other proposals for multifamily housing that are in the pipeline.

Open space. Westport open space, both public and private, is a finite resource. Once developed, open space is unlikely to revert back. Robert Moses tried to run multi-lane highways through Central Park in the ’60s. If not for the efforts of those looking to maintain New York’s open space as a sacred cow, today’s city would be much different.

Our beaches, open spaces and parks are not out of the reach of development. Such use has been discussed beyond just this project. Some people want more athletic fields, new art venues, new community center space, more affordable housing. All are very well-intentioned, laudable goals.  But there is only so much free space left in this town. When it is gone, it is gone.

We need to balance our goals, expectations and well-intentioned wants with the realities of limited space, our fragile watershed, etc. Our predecessors on earlier P&Z Commissions, along with others, worked long hours and gave great thought to the regulations that make Westport what it is today.

As your  current commissioners, we are the guardians of those rules. Of course, we are open to all who look to alter those rules to fit their intentions, whether socially or financially driven. It is our mandate to fairly consider all that comes before us. But it is our responsibility to judge in the spirit of  yesterday’s lessons, today’s opinions, and tomorrow’s inheritance of the legacy we leave behind.

The Planning & Zoning Commission must consider many different  -- and often competing -- "town character" interests when interpreting existing regulations, and crafting  new ones. Chip

The Planning & Zoning Commission must consider many different — and often competing — “town character” interests when interpreting existing regulations, and crafting new ones.

In conclusion: Remember, there still stands a regulation allowing a project of the Baron South type. That has not changed.

To those who are passionate and committed to this: The door is not shut. To all who that came and spoke both for and against; to those who worked hard over the past years on this effort, and to those who agree or disagree with our decision:  We gave it our best. We gave it an abundance of our time and thought. We gave all their chance to speak and their voices heard. We did what we saw as right, affirming Westport’s regulations and character.

We stand on our decision. I hope this helps you understand it.

 

A Shi**y Day At Winslow Park

Alert “06880” reader Chip Stephens took a walk in Winslow Park this beautiful early spring morning. He sent along a photo, of a cute-looking puppet or sculpture or something, hanging in the trees:

Winslow 2

Or not.

Here’s what else Chip emailed:

The crocuses were up, but so was something else: many, many bags of dog droppings.

Folks pick them up with plastic bags, then throw them into the woods, or trees.

Winslow 1

I got a large bag, and started picking them up. The final tally was about 317 blue bags. Most were filled with dog doo. There were also a half dozen beer bottles in blue bags, plus a dozen soda cans.

We have a beautiful park. Do you think we can all help keep it clean? Drop those droppings in the receptacle on the way out, please.

Chip Stephens: Passion Powers The P&Z Chair

When Chip Stephens was at Bedford Junior High School — the one on Riverside Avenue, just to carbon-date him — the comment under his yearbook photo read, “Doesn’t like people who don’t like Westport.”

Almost a native — he moved here in 1960 at age 5, when his father got a job in Stamford and found a home on Lone Pine Lane for $18,000 — he went all through the local schools: Bedford El. BJHS. Staples. (In the 1970s he wrote a letter to the editor urging Bedford El not be torn down, but refashioned into Town Hall. Done.)

After earning undergrad and masters degrees (microbiology) from the University of Maine, Stephens came back to Westport in 1979.

Why? “I love it!” he says, in a tone reserved for a question like, “Why do you breathe?”

His return coincided with the beginning of some important zoning changes in Westport. The Wright Street complex replaced woods above Wilton Road — and changed the face of downtown forever. Nearby, on Riverside Avenue, concrete offices replaced old brick buildings.

Stephens joined others in wondering, “How the hell did that happen?”

The corner of the Post Road and Wilton Road -- before the Wright Street office complex was built.

The corner of the Post Road and Wilton Road — before the Wright Street office complex was built. (Photo/Fred Cantor)

For the next few decades, his civic involvement consisted of coaching: baseball, football, wrestling. But in 2011 he got a call asking if he’d run for the Planning and Zoning Commission.

He did. And Stephens — along with 3 other Republicans — all won.

“I love this town,” he reiterates. “But every so often — Wright Street, the midnight demolition of the Victorian house on Gorham Island — something happens. We have to be vigilant or we’ll have another big issue, like the nuclear power plant on Cockenoe Island or B. Altman at Winslow Park.”

Stephens and the Republicans ran on a “Preserve Westport” platform. They were cross-endorsed by Save Westport Now.

“Development is not bad,” Stephens says. “Change is good. But it has to be in small doses. We need to keep our historic landmarks, our old houses, as much as we can.”

Chip Stephens at home. Next to his front door is a poster from the 1978 Great Race -- a townwide event involving homemade boats, the Saugatuck River, and the cleanup of Cockenoe Island.

Chip Stephens at home. Next to his front door is a poster from the 1978 Great Race — a townwide event involving homemade boats, the Saugatuck River, and cleaning up Cockenoe Island.

This month, Stephens was elected chairman of the P&Z. So what is his #1 goal?

“Civility,” he says simply. “We’ve all got to play in the sandbox together.”

He is encouraged by the new commission. “Everyone has the same mission: to give back to the town,” Stephens says. “We won’t always sing ‘Kumbaya,’ but we will work together. We have to.”

The reason, he explains, is that “there’s so much about to happen. We all know some changes — Bedford Square and Save the Children — are in the works. Saugatuck is rapidly changing, and there’s more to come when the Mario’s block gets developed.”

But, he says, many Westporters don’t realize what else is in play. According to Stephens, “every property from Geiger’s to Exit 18 could look radically different in the next 10 years.”

A Maserati dealer is going into the old J. McLaughlin. The Townhouse for Dogs property will be redone. There are “rumblings” about Arby’s, Men’s Wearhouse and Boccanfuso.

Across the river, several dilapidated houses on the crest of Post Road West are set for demolition.

“The challenge is to keep the character and nature of town, with everything going on,” Stephens says.

From the air, downtown Westport does look like a "village."

From the air, downtown Westport does look like a “village.”

The Village District Initiative will go a long way to doing that, he hopes. State money will pay for a consulting group to help forge new zoning regulations that limit development in defined “village districts.” In Westport, that could mean the heart of downtown.

“I remember when there were Christmas lights there,” Stephens says. “Now there are no trees, just neon lights zigzagging from the Post Road to the old Bill’s Smoke Shop. And Harder Parking [the Parker Harding lot] is just an abomination.”

The new P&Z chair credits the Downtown 2020 committee with “bringing the ball downfield. They’ve got some phenomenal ideas.” Some, he notes, have been proposed before.

“They can’t just be put back on the shelf,” Stephens says. “Downtown 2020 can help us this time. We’d like to reclaim the riverfront, maybe put a pedestrian walkway over the river, extend things to the new Levitt Pavilion.”

We can't get this Victorian house back on Gorham Island. But Westport is on the cusp of determining a new vision for downtown Westport.

We can’t get this Victorian house back on Gorham Island. But Westport is on the cusp of determining a new vision for downtown Westport.

Stephens wants many stakeholders — including downtown merchants, and the police and fire chiefs — to weigh in on ideas for preservation and improvement.

Money is available, Stephens says. “Good minds” are too. “If we all work together, this will be really good for the town.”

I tell him that all these ideas don’t sound like the usual “business first” words of Republicans.

“I love it!” he says. “The last Democrats on the P&Z pushed the business overlay downtown. They supported demolition of the Gunn House.

“Republicans got elected on a preservation platform. We’re taking grief for being ‘anti-development.’ People say we’re preserving too much. It’s not totally true, but it is quite the opposite of what people think about Republicans.”

So what is Stephens’ biggest pet peeve?

“Hearing developers and presenters, when we ask about traffic and parking, say, ‘There is no problem with that in Westport, and this won’t make it worse.’ And their paid consultants back them up. You and I know that’s not true.

“We’re not looking to stop development. We just want to mitigate problems, and improve what we can.”

“06880”‘s New Header Honors Little Leaguers — And Westport

Like our new header photo?

It’ s courtesy of Chip Stephens.

The longtime Westporter snapped this great shot moments ago, as the parade honoring Westport’s 4th-in-the-world Little League all-stars — and the state champion 11-year-old softball girls — wound its way from Main Street to Jesup Green.

“I never saw such togetherness and positive spirit in 06880 in my time,” Chip says — meaning the town, not the blog.

Though, come to think of it, all the comments on “06880” about our town’s newest heroes have been all warm and fuzzy, too.

Just as they should be.

Meanwhile, here’s another view (hover over it to enlarge). Photographer Jeb Backus says, “As a 3rd-generation Westporter living here for 50 years, this was the most special town event I have ever attended. Absolutely amazing.”

LL parade - Jeb Backus

Aaaaahhhhhrt’s (New Photo Added)

Alert “06880” reader Chip Stephens reports:

Just bit into my first Art’s Special in 20+ years.

Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

An Open Letter, From New P&Z Members

To The Citizens of Westport

As the newly elected members of the Planning and Zoning Board — Chip Stephens,  Cathy Walsh, Jack Whittle and Al Gratrix — we all want to thank you for your support, trust and faith in our campaign promise to you that we will do our very best to PRESERVE WESTPORT for you and generations to come.

We hope to deliver a more transparent and interactive board that will listen to you, the citizens of Westport, and your  concerns and suggestions.  We want your voices to be heard, and we will abide by the plans, rules and Town Plans that have served us so well in maintaining the charm and vision of Westport.

Thank you Save Westport Now for your endorsement.  Thank you Republican Town Committee for your endorsement.  Thank you to all who came out and voted, and thank you to all who are leaving their positions on the P and Z for your service and dedication.

We 4 will do our best to uphold our pledge to Preserve Westport.  We promise to listen and consider all proposals brought to us over the next 4 years, and to judge each application with an open mind and fair hand.

We will do our best to understand the wishes of those that elected us and will welcome any and all suggestions .   Please join us at the meetings live or on cable. Please keep us real and on track with your opinions via email or in person.

We will do our best to make your decision one you will never regret

Thank you from all 4:
Chip Stephens
Cathy Walsh
Jack Whittle
Al Gratrix

Ahead for the new P&Z: many decisions about Westport's future.