Editor’s note: The following letter was written to Planning and Zoning Commission members, and submitted to the Westport Journal for publication.
____________________________
P&Z commissioners:
We feel the need to publicly express our reaction to Monday’s meeting.
One thing we all unanimously agree on is how desperately we need a new school for our children and for this town. We have heard from professionals and local constituents alike that the conditions in the current Long Lots building are deteriorating — leaking windows, dangerously failing HVAC and massive building inefficiencies/capacity issues among them.
More importantly, they have all also stressed that there is a finite amount of time remaining for the existing building to be habitable. We trust that you would thus also agree that further delays to the existing timeline will put our children at risk.
Kim Ambrosio and the amazing teachers at LLS continue to do an amazing job at maintaining a good “quality of life” for students during this time — but they deserve decisive action and our unanimous support to know that we see them, we support them and we are doing everything in our power to ensure that there is light peeking from the end of a short tunnel.
We, of course, sympathize immensely with the members of the community garden. They have a right to feel angry and frustrated that a piece of land they have worked for years could be damaged during construction and ultimately moved — especially when they’ve built such a beautiful community.
But as was explained Monday night, it is well within the purview of the town to reclaim the land should it be deemed necessary, and we simply must prioritize what makes sense and is safest for the children of Long Lots Elementary. The children must now, and always, be first on our minds.
For this reason, just as Commissioner Cohn expressed concern over abandoning the several hundred community garden members, we too are concerned that prioritizing those individuals means abandoning not only the 700-plus students and faculty at Long Lots and Stepping Stones, but also the 1,700-plus children that register for soccer each fall and spring and use every inch of the Long Lots fields every day of the week.
This is especially true since the term “community garden” might be considered a misnomer. This garden is shared by a very small and finite number of people within our community; it is fenced off, locked, open only to members and it does nothing for the Long Lots students, their curriculum or the school itself.
That being said, we still maintain that the fate of the gardens should and will be explored — but that is simply not our, or your, mandate at this moment and frankly it shouldn’t be taking this much oxygen out of a conversation that’s mainly about our school and the children therein.
What we should collectively be focused on is a timely and fiscally responsible plan so the new school build proceeds safely, on schedule, and without a single avoidable delay.
Our other area of focus should be the valid concerns expressed by the neighbors to Long Lots. While we maintain that the noise and nuisance of construction is not a reason to object to the 8-24 put forth by our selectwomen, we would like to strongly voice that every care should be taken to minimize any negative environmental or traffic impact that the rebuild may have on nearby residents.
We trust that the professionals on the project will pull on their many years of experience to ensure that every consideration is given to these families, their property and their wellbeing. Neighbors of LLS are neighbors to us all and we want to ensure that they feel safe throughout this process. That being said, these considerations and deliberations are for a future date and are not germane to the proposal before you and should thus not preclude you from voting to move the 8- 24 forward.
Lastly, we would be remiss if we did not call out what we perceived to be an unmistakable favoritism for certain attendees to the meeting Monday night. At the top of the public comment portion, individuals from the community gardens were being called on by first name only and often by nickname. There was an evident rapport there and it took over four hours of these speakers voicing the same opinion repeatedly — and at length — before we heard a single person speak a different point of view.
What we — and hundreds of fellow parents — need to know is: If the building committee comes back on Jan. 8 with answers to questions regarding the gardens that aren’t what supporters and sympathizers would like to hear, OR would pose a delay to the construction of the school and cause the children undue harm, is P&Z prepared to put our children first and issue a positive report all the same?
Thank you for your time. We very much look forward to the meeting on Jan. 8.
Sarah Morrisson
Veronica Tysseland
Sandra Rose
Written on behalf of “Parents for a New LLS”
P.S.:
Regarding the importance of dedicated green space — which we wholeheartedly support — we would like to propose a compromise: Let us incorporate a garden into the recreational space of the new school footprint — a state-of-the-art garden with native plants, overseen by the school, accessible to the students, woven into the curriculum, and even used for the cafeteria.
Since many voiced their concern over the loss of natural habitat, we imagine this will be a welcome option. What an amazing way to teach future generations about the importance of our environment in a safe, dedicated space for them. We would then love to see other lands within Westport appropriated to the community gardens that would not only grant them a permanent home, but also give them more space that would allow more of the community to participate and enjoy such a worthwhile endeavor.


Finally some sensible comments in this debate!!
Is your recommendation to preserve the garden it its current place and turn it over to the school and to develop a new community garden elsewhere?
What would be productive would be to lobby for plan alt-C that everyone would get behind, with provisional requirements for future additional drainage studies and a turf field at long lots (and hopefully consideration for additional turfed fields elsewhere in town). They could consider the gardens going quiet for the duration of the build as long as they came back afterwards. We understand there will be staging behind us- done safely I don’t think anyone has an issue with that. We understand there will be noise associated with construction- that is not the noise that is concerning to the neighbors. The noise that is a potential issue is what comes from whatever is put behind us permanently. We moved next to an elementary school and the noise associated with elementary level activities is a reasonable expectation. It is possible to resolve this. Fighting over the current plan will be more protracted than immediately considering alt-C and actually having meaningful conversations involving all the stakeholders. Please let’s stop this so we can get this school built.
The compromise in the postscript to this comment written by parents of young students suggests that the children of LLS may be provided a garden in which to play and from which food might be grown to eat in the school cafeteria.
If this suggestion is taken up, the proposed garden area should receive an environmental and health assessment that includes soil and water testing to ensure that the site is safe and that the food grown in its soil is safe for the children to eat.
A 2004 ATSDR Health Consultation (written in collaboration with CT DPH), investigating 11/13 Hyde Lane before the existing community gardens were installed, made recommendations that Westport Public Schools should follow if they are to take on the responsibility for safe use of the site, especially if a food garden is situated on the southern portion of the combined parcel of land, because of historical metal and pesticides contamination. Some of the contaminants identified are persistent and toxic in low doses. (See https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/longlots111804HC-CT/longlots111804HC-CT.pdf.) These are:
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Town of Westport should collect sufficient samples from the southern portion of the 11 Hyde Lane site to fully characterize surface and subsurface soils and groundwater. This characterization should be completed before the area is developed and should include any soils
moved from the northern portion of the site during parking lot construction. In addition, the history of the southern portion of the site should be researched to identify pesticides, herbicides,or fungicides that reasonably can be expected to have been used. Chemical analyses for soil and groundwater should include all contaminants that reasonably could have been applied. For example, analyses should include copper because copper sulfate may have been used in the former orchard.
2. The Town of Westport should consider entering the site into the voluntary remediation program (Section 22a-133x of the Connecticut General Statutes). This would authorize an LEP to verify that investigation and cleanup of the southern portion of the site complies with all
aspects of the CT Remediation Standard Regulations. Alternatively, the town should consider following the CT DEP Guidance on Development of Former Agricultural Properties (CT DEP 1999). This guidance recommends an approach for development of former agricultural lands that
is feasible, yet protective of public health. Following this recommendation will help ensure that the future use of the southern portion of 11 Hyde Lane will not increase exposures or risks.
3. The Town of Westport should monitor groundwater at 11 Hyde Lane to ensure the effectiveness of soil remediation.
Along with these 2004 recommendations, parents may also wan to ensure that the demolition, stockpiling, and movement or removal of soil on the site is monitored for its safe redistribution or disposal, and that the soil and water on 11/13 Hyde Lane is thoroughly environmentally assessed after the soil has been disturbed and before children are allowed to use the space.
Because young children are more vulnerable to illness and injury from environmental exposures to metals and pesticides, special care should be taken by parents and the school to ensure the site is safe to play upon or to garden in, and that any food grown there is safe for them to eat.
I don’t know any of the community gardeners who oppose a new and/or improved school. What I do see are people who are concerned about twenty years of their hard work going down the drain due to a land-grab on behalf of a ball field that isn’t being designed with the Long Lots students in mind.
The “small group” abusing its power is the one that has tried to piggyback the ball field onto the school rebuilding process and, in doing so, has jeopardized the timely rebuild of the school.
Those who support the Gardens have made the point for months that this inappropriate process was going to slow down the school project. To blame them for any delays, now, is blaming the messenger.