Townspeople spoke, and the selectmen were there to listen.
Do a serious study before selling off more Schlumberger land. The taxpayers spent $7 million on Schlumberger: Sell, and get the money back! No big housing developments, the town’s crowded enough already. How about a mixed use development — residential and offices? What about ballfields? Or more open space?
Ridgefielders offered wide-ranging views in the first two public hearings of the selectmen’s three-part listening tour on the future of the Schlumberger property.
A third public hearing on what townspeople would like the selectmen to do with the remaining Schlumberger land will be held Wednesday, June 25, starting at 6:30 p.m. in town hall.
A crowd of about 70 turned out, and 20 people spoke, at the first hearing, Wednesday night, June 11. More voices were added to the discussion Saturday morning, June 14, as a crowd of 25 turned out with 16 speakers — many of whom attended Wednesday’s meeting.
“Several spoke with questions, looking for some clarification,” said First Selectman Rudy Marconi of Saturday’s meeting. “All the others were a repetition from the previous hearing and their point was the same — they want us to hire a professional to study it — someone with no connection to the town, who can look at the property without any financial concern and offer the best recommendation.”
“We can absolutely control the land if we own it,” Helen Dimos told the selectmen last Wednesday’s hearing.
She was the first of many speakers urging what seemed the most widely shared opinion at Wednesday’s hearing: that the town should take a go-slow approach, study the land’s potential thoroughly before selling more of it off, and not be afraid to simply keep some of it the future.
“We don’t need to rush to sell this land,” she said. “This land is an ever-appreciating asset, and we don’t need to rush to sell.”
Ms. Dimos urged the selectmen to have a study of the site’s potential and long range best use done by “an experienced, visionary professional” — a call that was echoed by many other speakers.
Background
The three hearings were called by the Board of Selectmen after voters had rejected a proposed sale of 10 acres of the Schlumberger land to Toll Brothers, a nationwide building firm with plans for a 30-unit age-restricted condominium project on the property.
The sale went down by a close 967-to-961 vote as part of the May 13 budget referendum ballot.
The proposed sale was part of the selectmen’s effort to recover a good portion of the $7 million voters had approved spending on the 45-acre Schlumberger property.
The selectmen had previously engineered the sale of five acres to developer Steven Zemo — who is pursuing plans for a mixed-use complex, including a hotel, on the site. The town got $1.25 million from Mr. Zemo for the five acres off Old Quarry Road.
The 10 acres on the other side of the Schlumberger property, off Sunset Lane, were rezoned for multifamily use at the selectmen’s request last summer, and the proposed sale to Toll Brothers that was voted down would have brought in $4 million.
One speaker Wednesday night asked if it might be possible to simply revive the Toll Brothers deal, and Mr. Marconi said that in light of voters rejection of the deal, the selectmen had decided not to pursue a contract extension.
Focus on the money
Ed Tyrrell supported the selectmen’s decision to get the money back.
“The market has determined the 10 acres are worth $4 million,” Mr. Tyrrell said. “To get less than $4 million at this point would be nothing more than a giveaway to the purchaser at the taxpayers’ expense…
“The Board of Selectmen has a well thought-out plan and they should continue implementing it, so we can get our money back,” he said. Mr. Tyrrell was one of three speakers among Wednesday night’s 20 who urged the selectmen to focus on getting back the $7 million taxpayers spent to buy the 45-acre Schlumberger property.
“Number one, I’d like to get the money back,” said Joe Savino, a member of the Police Commission and the chairman of the Republican Town Committee. “I think mixed use is something you guys should definitely be thinking seriously about.”
“This is taxpayer money,” said Linda Lavelle. “If you can’t recoup that $7 million, it’s our loss.”
Not just about 10 acres
Chuck Hancock, who has spoken to the selectmen about Schlumberger on a few occasions, added his voice to those supporting Ms. Dimos’ call for a thorough professional study of the property.
“I’m going to second or third or fourth or fifth Helen’s point of view,” he said.
A study could help the town decide which parts should be sold to recover costs, and which portions should be kept for the town’s future, he said.
“I hope the board is hearing loud and clear, the comments are not on the 10 acres,” he said. “They’re about the whole property.”
If wisely handled, he said, the purchase and resale of the Schlumberger property represented a good chance “to have your cake and eat it, too.”
Finding new voices
Mr. Marconi said Mr. Hancock also spoke at Saturday’s meeting and, although constructive, he believes new voices need to be heard.
“The reality is we’ve heard the same 10 to 12 people and I wonder if they represent the feeling of the whole community,” Mr. Marconi said Monday. “We’re not hearing from a lot of voters.”
He said the selectmen needed to launch an “aggressive public relations campaign.”
“There’s a multitude of reasons the sale was turned down and one conclusion we’ve reached is that people who don’t understand it disagreed with it,” Mr. Marconi said. “There were a lot of people who went into the vote who didn’t know about it…
“Voters need to know this wasn’t a plan conceived in a vacuum.”
He doubted there would another referendum this summer about the property.
“Between now and the fall we can educate the public on the issue,” he said. “We also can survey and poll — we need to hear from people; if they don’t come to us, we have to go to them.”
One chance to get it right
Speakers at Wednesday’s meeting echoed Ms. Dimos’ call for a study of the land’s future, before more of it sold off.
“I agree with Helen very much,” said Nelson Gelfman, who retired from Planning and Zoning Commission last year after decades of service.
“One thing I haven’t heard mentioned tonight is ballfields,” Dr. Gelfman added.
For years, he said, there’d been talk of ballfields on open space near Shadow Lake in Ridgebury. Perhaps the Schlumberger land would be a better site.
“I felt we as a community did not do enough due diligence,” said Bob Cascella, explaining why he’d voted against the Toll Brothers sale.
The selectmen should consider creating a blue ribbon commission to look at the property and come up with the best plan for its future, he said.
A report and a plan for the property might be done in time for a proposal to make it on the ballot in November, when a gubernatorial election would likely draw more voters than turned out for the spring budget referendum that voted down the Toll Brothers’ sale.
“We’ve got one chance at this. One chance! Let’s do our due diligence,” Mr. Cascella said.
Mr. Marconi said he wanted to make it clear that the selectman did have professional studies done of the site. They’d hired Glenn Chalder of Planimetrics, the consulting firm that worked on the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development for the Planning and Zoning Commission.
He had studied a variety of scenarios, including one that showed a potential for hundreds of units of housing there, and had then helped the selectmen with the rezoning the 10 acres for multifamily use, that led to the proposed Toll Brothers sale.
No more housing
A number of people didn’t offer ideas for what should be done with the property, but spoke about what they didn’t want to see there.
“I’m very concerned about any kind of residential development in this area,” said Jose Helu.
“We cannot accommodate everyone who wants to live here without turning our town into the kind of town no one wants to live in,” he said. “If we build too much, we’re going to turn into a city.”
“I want to plan and I want to preserve,” said Allison Pratt. “I don’t want to see a lot of houses.”
“Please leave lots of room so that we can all enjoy the natural aspects of that property,” said Bob Leavitt.
His wife, Loire Leavitt, recalled having written a letter to The Ridgefield Press years ago, suggesting a bypass road along the edges of the Schlumberger property. The idea would be to allow Route 35 traffic to avoid the Main Street area by use of a new road connecting South Street near the town facilities with Prospect Street near Quail Ridge I and II.
“It would give the east side of town a bypass, similar to High Ridge on the west side,” Ms. Leavitt said.
Mr. Marconi said that the town’s previous first selectman, Abe Morelli, had proposed a bypass along those lines. But the idea was greeted with “an outcry from Quail Ridge I and II” and dropped.
Andy Behymer questioned whether the selectmen were being realistic in planning to use deed restrictions to limit future development of the land, after selling it. Would deed restrictions stand up in court?
“There’s nothing iron-clad,” Mr. Marconi admitted. “That hasn’t been tested in court, one way or the other.”
Steve Coulter contributed reporting to this story.