Quantcast
Advertisement

Mayor: City says ‘no’ to alternative Washington Village plan

April 7, 2015
–
Mark Chapman
Norwalk Mayor Harry Rilling said Tuesday the proposed change to the Washington Village redevelopment plan has been rejected by the city.

Updated 12:18 p.m.

NORWALK, Conn. – A plan to rearrange the layout of Washington Village when it is redeveloped has been rejected by the city.

A statement released Tuesday morning by Mayor Harry Rilling said the proposed change that would include the relocation Ryan Park would require multiple city approvals that would delay the project.

Rilling’s statement:

“Trinity Financial is the private development firm selected by the Norwalk Housing Authority as the developer for the redevelopment of Washington Village. In early March, Trinity made public a project layout (titled) “Alternative Park Layout” without consulting with the city or the Housing Authority.  This revision is a substantial change to the Conceptual Master Site Plan previously approved by the city and involves the potential relocation of Ryan Park. If advanced this plan would require multiple City approvals.

“With this in mind the city has informed Trinity that as a matter of public policy the city will not seek to relocate a public park to accommodate private development interests.

“The city of Norwalk’s approved plan successfully competed for the allocation of $30 million in Choice Neighborhoods funding. The HUD selection committee was duly impressed with the site selection, its access to necessary services, its demographic diversity and the promise of the neighborhood’s future. The committee was also very favorably influenced by the Choice Neighborhood Implementation Plan which involved many community groups, service agencies, city agencies, non-profits and for-profits to support and commit to the success of Norwalk’s application and this project.

“For these reasons and the desire to advance this important redevelopment initiative into construction, the city has advised Trinity to focus on the approved Conceptual Master Site Plan and that which has already been approved by the city’s Zoning Commission.

“Trinity has appropriately withdrawn the “Alternative Park Layout” from further consideration.”

When the grant was announced last summer, the Norwalk Housing Authority anticipated a fall start for construction.

“We are prepared to start construction on Phase 1 in October with our developer,” NHA Deputy Director Candace Mayer said. “But that part didn’t include the robust family services that are going to enable families to change their lives and pursue their dreams in ways that they haven’t been able to before.”

Phase 1 is expected to be ready for occupancy in spring 2016; when it is, 40 Washington Village families will move in, Mayer said.

A demand by the Friends of Ryan Park and the Coalition of Norwalk Neighborhood Association for a hearing with the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) has put that on hold, though, pushing the entire project back indefinitely. DEEP had originally planned to waive the hearing.

The civic groups expressed concern over rebuilding the residences in their current location due to flooding. They also were concerned with the fate of Ryan Park, which some members of the group said could be bisected by a pathway or roadway that would serve as an escape route during flooding events. That plan would render the park useless for athletic pursuits, they said.

Rilling and other city officials said the requirement for “dry egress” from the residences did not mean the park would be bisected.

 

More Stories

Comments

10 responses to “Mayor: City says ‘no’ to alternative Washington Village plan”

  1. Oldtimer

    Did the DEEP approve the waiver for building in a flood zone ?
    If they get a look at the alternative plan, and like it, that may have an effect on their decision.

    1. Mark Chapman

      @Oldtimer

      No decision yet.

  2. Tony P

    Good news!

  3. srb

    whew—Rilling knows a good thing when he sees it. 1/2 the people complaining about Washington Village are truly concerned about Ryan Park and the other half just don’t like public housing. Public housing will still exit at Washington Village even if the grant gets scuttled, it’ll just continue to deteriorate

  4. Mike Mushak

    Amen. Alternatives were considered long ago and deemed to be infeasible for lots of reasons.

    Building in flood plains is nothing new and routinely occurs all over the country and the world regularly. It is called “resilient” design and is written into many building and zoning codes, including in NYC most of which lies in a flood plain.

    In fact, resilient design is happening all over South and East Norwalk as we speak. The flood comes in with plenty of notice ahead of time to move the cars, the hard surfaced garage fills with water, the water recedes and leaves residue behind that is hosed out, and the cars return, with no damage to living quarters that are built higher than both the 100 year and 500 year flood level, the latter of which covers all of the alternative sites some were claiming were out of the flood zone.

    Basically, if we were to stop all building in flood plains, we would have to abandon most of our coastal towns and cities and our economy would collapse. . Humans are resourceful and have always adapted to the environment, going back to the first villages on stilts that are built to survive both wet and dry conditions.

    Simply put, modern technology and building techniques allow structures to be built that can bounce back quickly after a flood, which is exactly how Washington Village is being designed.

    There never was a disregard for the folks who will live there, which was a disappointing accusation to advance individual agendas.

  5. Don’t Panic

    There is no evidence that alternatives were considered and discarded formally. Most of NYC was only mapped inside a flood plain after FEMA redrew the maps and that was in the last ten years or so.

    Nobody is suggesting that all building stop in floodplains. That is a straw man argument. They are correctly pointing out that our own Federal Government is against using Federal dollars to do so. The fact that we are seeking a waiver to do exactly that flies in the face of good sense.

    There has never been an engineering solution that nature doesn’t eventually defeat. Designing for today’s flooding scenarios is seriously short-sighted, given the effects of global warming.

    Oddly enough, historically, it is ALWAYS the poorest neighborhoods, communities and countries who take the brunt of these decisions made by well-meaning people.

  6. Mike Mushak

    Don’t Panic, I know those “poor neighborhoods and countries” well, that you say take the brunt of the decisions to build in flood plains. Except for New Orleans’ low-income Ninth Ward which is below sea level (but still was only flooded in Katrina because of a breached levee from poor engineering), those “poor neighborhoods” in flood plains would include lower Manhattan and Wall Street, most of Brooklyn, all of Miami Beach, all of Boston Back Bay, and closer to home, Rowayton, Westport’s Compo Beach, the Hamptons, Fire Island, parts of Fairfield, and some of the wealthiest towns along the Jersey Shore.

    As countries go, let’s just say the Netherlands is not a poor country. I do not see the world-wide pattern of decisions by the powerful to stick poor people in flood plains. Please explain that comment. It seems paranoid to me, coming from someone I greatly respect who has a fair assessment of most issues.

  7. Kevin Di Mauro

    I think the public is much more aware of the dangers of living
    in a flood plane area than it was prior to Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sandy.

    This project seems to be unique, because attempts to combine subsidized housing with market rate housing. If I were looking for market rate housing, I would certainly avoid a flood plane area. Good luck to the developers of this project.

  8. Mike Mushak

    Kevin, just so you don’t waste your time, if you wanted to avoid market-rate housing in Norwalk that is in a flood plain, you would have to avoid most of the condo buildings in SoNo south of Washington St and east of South Main, (Including one I used to be Condo President of, the Coachworks at Water and Haviland), the new Ironworks, the Maritime Yards across from the Aquarium, and all of the condo buildings lining the eastern shore of the Harbor in east Norwalk beginning near Harbor Lights and Overton’s.

    All market-rate housing in a flood plain. And if you wanted a single family home that is not in a flood plain, you’d have to avoid many popular and expensive East Norwalk and South Norwalk neighborhoods, including Harborview, Harbor Shores, Shorefront Park, Village Creek, Marvin Beach, and Cove Avenue area.

    All popular areas where many folks WANT to live, close to the water despite the occasional threat of flooding.

  9. Kevin Di Mauro

    Thanks for the info. Mike. If I ever decide to relocate, this will certainly save me a lot of time, since I prefer higher ground much more than flood plains.

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Secret Link