Proposed White Barn development on Norwalk/Westport line may be revised

NORWALK, Conn. – An application to build on the old White Barn Theater property at the Norwalk/Westport line is “sort of on hold,” according to Assistant Planning and Zoning Director Mike Wrinn.

“They may look to revise their plans,” Wrinn said at a recent Zoning Commission meeting. “If they get too far away from what they had, they’ll withdraw the application and submit new, so we’re not sure where they’re going right now.”

Jim Fieber of New Canaan, who made the application to build 21 homes at 78 Cranbury Road under the entity Special Properties II, declined on Monday to elaborate. “It’s not finalized yet what our approach will be,” he said.

Wrinn said Special Properties II has an extension to the middle of April on the need to have a public hearing. The application must go through the Conservation Commission, he said.

“My suspicion is maybe they end up withdrawing if they wind up with something different,” Wrinn said.

The proposal has reinvigorated the Save Cranbury Association. Leader Julian Henkin and the Stony Brook Environmental Trust filed for intervener status in the application on Feb. 6, asserting that the development would adversely affect the land adjacent to a conservation easement, including wetlands.

Attorney Liz Suchy said at the Jan. 8 Plan Review Committee meeting that the proposal conforms with the Norwalk regulations regarding conservation development. Part of the requirements for a conservation development is that at least half of the land be in a conservation easement area, and Fieber would add 2.2 acres to the existing conservation easement to make it just over 7 acres on the 15.4 acre property, she said.
“The goal is to conserve or preserve land, or preserve land for parks and recreation purposes, or preserve and protect areas of natural beauty or historic interest, to preserve streams, rivers and ponds or to preserve wetlands,” she said of the regulation.

But Henkins’ intervener status application says the proposal does not meet the conservation requirements because it fails to do what Suchy described.

“The proposed open space is gerrymandered into a narrow band such that it would not have the shape, dimensions, character and location to accomplish the purpose and intent of the conservation development regulations which protect the natural resource of open space, especially in light of alternatives of lesser impact,” the application states.

Two thirds of the property would be clear cut with the “reasonable likelihood of increasing storm water runoff, erosion and sedimentation of Stony Brook, increasing the temperature of Stony Brook thereby decreasing its suitability as a cold water habitat, increased flooding of downstream lands with attendant damage to soils and vegetation, destruction of habitat for wildlife species extant on the property – including the sharp-shinned hawk (endangered), eastern box turtle (special concern species), aquatic waterfowl, various small mammals, invertebrates and amphibians,” the application states.

The application goes on to say Fieber’s plan would fragment open space and “abuse pre-existing open space conservation easements to obtain greater density for development  resulting in overdevelopment of existing land; the excessive removal of trees and vegetation; destruction of wildlife habitat: erosion and sedimentation of wetlands and watercourses.”

Three of five Conservation Commission members who were present at the Feb. 10 commission meeting expressed concerns about the application, according to the meeting’s minutes.

The conversation began with Suchy announcing that the developer would be revising the plan based on comments from the neighbors and the Zoning Commission. Commission member Karen Destefanis was concerned about the clear cutting and the direct and indirect impacts to the wetlands, according to the minutes. Marybeth Sullivan was concerned about the creation of new wetlands and Lou Bonsangue agreed with the others that a second opinion should be sought from a third-party scientist about the creation of a new wetland, the minutes say.

The plan to develop the property that once belonged to the late actress and producer Lucille Lortel resulted in the formation of Save Cranbury in 2003. Eventually, 5.5 acres of what was then an 18-acre estate were put into a permanent conservation easement. In 2007, a plan that the neighbors liked better, to build a campus for the Connecticut Friends School, was approved by the Commission, but that has lapsed, and the property is back in Fieber’s hands.