Save Cranbury, Norwalk Land Trust sound clarion call to rally opponents to development

NORWALK, Conn. – If you want to save a “special” wildlife habitat in urban Norwalk, you need to contact the Zoning Commission and the Conservation Commission, members of Save Cranbury and the Norwalk Land Trust said Saturday.

“This is not just another building lot. As you can see it’s very special,” Save Cranbury founder JoAnne Jackson said at 78 Cranbury Road during a Wednesday press conference called to draw attention to the Zoning Commission’s public hearing on the 15-home development proposed for the White Barn property on the Westport/Norwalk line, as well as the Conservation Commission’s June 23 hearing on the same topic.

“Save Cranbury and the Norwalk Land Trust are united in our goal of saving the preserve from the effects of over-development,” Jackson said.

Special Properties LLC, a legal entity of the Fieber Group, is looking to build the Conservation development. It will need a special permit, which means the commissioners have discretion.

“They will weigh public sentiment along with other criteria, such as the traffic, destruction of wetland and so forth,” Jackson said. “And also another significant concern is the near-complete deforestation of 5 acres. Five acres is a vast amount of land in basically an urban setting like this.”

Fieber’s original 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. In 2008, 5.5 acres of what was then an 18-acre estate were put into a permanent conservation easement to create the White Barn Preserve with $700,000 in city and state open space  grants.

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.

The Norwalk Land Trust (NLT) and Save Cranbury were on the property Saturday to do their annual cleanup, removing invasive species and picking up trash. NLT President John Moeling said the open space they intended to work on had once been a tennis court, and could perhaps become a Monarch butterfly garden. It was disappointing that the school plan fell through, he said, because there had been plans to use the nature preserve to teach children natural science.

“It was a marriage,” Moeling said. “When the property came up, the 15 acres, the school popped up before anybody else. He basically sold the property to the school… but kept ahold of the string.”

That was reasonable, Moeling said. “A lot of people wouldn’t have done that much,” he said.

“That’s all fine, but we spent $5,000 to pull a tennis court off so we can restore it, and then he says in order to do this I have to eliminate an equivalent amount of wetlands. That’s a zero sum game and we’re going to have a problem with that,” Moeling said.

The development plan calls to fill in nearly 2,900 square feet of wetlands to widen the existing driveway off Newtown Avenue. This would be offset by excavation of 2,750 square feet of previously filled-in wetlands as the driveway off of Cranbury Avenue is eliminated. Additionally, there would be nearly 12,000 square feet of buffer improvements.

This plan would mean 1,200 square feet less of wetland disturbance than the Connecticut Friends School plan that was approved in 2007, Attorney Liz Suchy told the Zoning Commission recently. 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.

Moeling said he disagrees with the plans to handle the wetland connection. “I think we should have three 18-foot culverts running under the entire length of the 15-foot road,” Moeling said, calling that “not as good as the original” connection between the wetlands but a “good compromise.”

The Westport Conservation Department has issues with the proposal.

“It is well documented that there will be environmental impacts and water quality degradation from clearing and grubbing, excavation, filling, utility trenches, stockpiles, staging areas, erosion and sedimentation, wind-blown debris, basement footing and roof drains, runoff from paving, non-point pollution, dumping and habitat fragmentation such as what is proposed with this development proposal,” Westport said in a May 5 letter to the Inland Wetland Agency.

Westport said, as do Save Cranbury and Norwalk Land Trust members, that Norwalk should abide by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP)’s recommended 100-foot buffer for wetlands. Information on the depth to the groundwater table has not been submitted, Westport said.

Many neighbors to the property have flooding issues, said Jackson, a lifelong resident and the founder of Save Cranbury, who lives near the preserve. The wetlands are vital to the health of the area as most people are on well water, she said.

“We are very concerned about the effects this will have on the aquifer, on our drinking water,” Jackson said.

The “looming 15-house over-development” will lead to the destruction of wildlife habitat and destruction of wetlands, she said.

“The wildlife that uses this area for food and for sanctuary and for raising their families is amazing,” Jackson said. “In fact, in the past few weeks there was a magnificent family of great horned owls, during the daytime, because, at this time of year, they basically hunt 24/7 to feed their young.”

There would be a house on the other side of the picturesque pond at the edge of the preserve, she said. The idea that it is conservation is dubious, as almost all of the trees behind the preserve would be removed, as cleared land counts toward the “conservation” area, she said.

Both groups understand that it will probably be developed, but think 15 houses are too many, she said.

“The plan in its current state is far, far too dense and, in its current state, the houses that are proposed are far too close to this preserve,” Jackson said.

Again, public money went into the creation of the preserve.

“Every one of us has a fiduciary responsibility to protect this asset, but in particular the city and the state truly have a fiduciary responsibility to protect this asset,” Jackson said. “For the neighborhood, for Norwalk, for the state and for future generations.”