YourCT.com header image 2
← Norwalk: Where Are All The People? Summer Sounds of the World and Sweetport Music and Arts Festival →

Norwalk: Oyster Shell Park Development Moves Along


by turfgrrl


July 8th, 2007 · 10 Comments

The Courant leads with a story about repurposing landfills throughout the state. Mentioned within the article are the plans for Oyster Shell Park, which snakes along the Norwalk River, underneath and south of I-95. According to the Courant:

The city of Norwalk, meanwhile, plans to spend upward of $1 million over the next several years to build Oyster Shell Park, located on a landfill that closed more than three decades ago.

But because the landfill has been closed for so long, most people see it as abandoned land, said Susan Sweitzer, senior project manager for development at the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency. “There are very few people in this community who actually remember dumping their garbage there,” she said.

The contract for the park work should go out to bid by next spring, Sweitzer said. The site has sweeping views of the city’s harbor and of Long Island Sound.

“New Englanders have an absolute knack for picking the absolutely most beautiful places to dump their garbage,” she said.

source: The Courant, From Trash To Treasure by THOMAS KAPLAN, July 8, 2007

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

10 Responses so far ↓ “Norwalk: Oyster Shell Park Development Moves Along”



  • 1 Jerry Aldrich // Jul 8, 2007 at 8:02 am

    Can we hope that they will have their own bus/auto parking there? Or is it another “Let someone else worry about where we dump our traffic mess situation?”

  • 2 Anonymous // Jul 8, 2007 at 8:10 am

    We can hope. I was down there yesterday and didn’t see any places that were spacious enough for public parking. Could it be that the property around there is more valuable to the developer as incoming-producing space than a giveaway to the City?

  • 3 Mr Greenpeace // Jul 8, 2007 at 11:43 am

    If anyone has any questions on the landfill and wants to hear from someone who knows something about its status as a productive parcel for future plans and what may have to happen so we can go forewood , one can contact Douglas Zimmerman at 1 860 424 3800 he is a district supervisor for the state who has some information on the land. He is the one the EPA contacts for the site at its regional office that contact person is also available through Douglas as well.

    Contacting Douglas and asking him about the site prevents any rumors or suggestions that could be said regarding any possible problems the site may have.

    New Englanders do have a knack for picking the most beautiful places to dump thier trash and by products of an Industrial city along streams and waterways. This site has always been considered a low priority on the envoronmental scale becuase at the time of remediation it did not directly effect any drinking water supply.But where there are beaches down gradient along the river some concern should be given to its present day status and if any chemicals were ever found in its original explorative reports and what still needs to be seen in the form of a good bill of health has been done I see no reason this project will make our city even more appealing for residents of our city.

    I only write with caution knowing Norwalk has one superfund site where many chemicals were found , and many other sites within the city were trageted for cleanup and the Brownfield report still has to be given to us where other possible waste still awaits remediation I would hope after listening to the accounts of the past we move forewood into the future and make sure profit does not interfere with a clean environment.

  • 4 Anonymous // Jul 8, 2007 at 1:07 pm

    Lots of arsenic in the soil there, I read where there was quite a bit of remediation done before the Harbor Yards project could go up. As for the people who visit the park, God knows what they’ll be exposed to.

  • 5 Mr Greenpeace // Jul 8, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    I simply wonder what environmental background our senior project manager has,do we have more project managers are on board , if so how many, ..and how much do they know about the old landfill.what do they know that maybe the EPA doesn’t

    I asked a couple of people in town including a couple reporters what the deal was there,,they all responded in varous degrees, what bothered me the most it didn’t match what I read and was told by senior officials in charge of the site.

    you can tell by an interview what hasn’t been said and what hasn’t been asked,,observations which leads to deductions

    They dredged the river did they disturb any sediment around the site, they did some paving around the cementary did they change any water runnoff that could effect the landfill,,these are simple questions that i imagine the project manager could answer,,

    when you say quite a bit done in Harbour Yards there must be what they call cradle to grave waste reports telling us all of this has anyone read or seen anything like this? How much, what chemicals and who gave the clean bill of health on that site,,figure the ink on the paperwork is still wet correct?

    Was this an old rail yard at one time? I know if I lived out at the point after reading the links sent to me about its history I would be asking some questions about the clean ups..the railroad was always the worst offender with our environment and being on the coast we saw a lot that and barges on the river wich gave us terminals with tanks with more than gas and oil.

    Just questions , is Oster park ready for the public to safely roam about and the kids are able to have their hangouts ,should we know before election time, so if someone wants to stump on an issue we know them now..and not after we assume its all been taken care of..

  • 6 Jerry Aldrich // Jul 9, 2007 at 9:39 am

    not after we assume its all been taken care of..

    Assume = makes an ass out of both U and ME.

    Sorry just could not resist.

  • 7 Mr Greenpeace // Jul 9, 2007 at 11:04 am

    It’s ok Jerry I still use perfection prevents piss poor performances it makes one think the old adages are sometimes the correct ones,,I probably spelled that wrong,in the wrong context,,English major anyone?

  • 8 Vet Park Junkie // Jul 10, 2007 at 3:40 pm

    Am I missing something here? I just did a web search and came up with the following pricing grid for soil testing. It appears to be ballpark (pardon the pun) for pricing purposes. Add in the test packs, figure a hundred tests and the lab costs are around $22K. Even if we double, it, we’re under $50K. Worthwhile expense before we plop down $1MM on bed of garbage?

    http://www.aasl.psu.edu/EnvirSoilTests.HTM

    I’m not attempting to come up with a budget. I’m trying to ID an order of magnitude on costs.

  • 9 Anonymous // Jul 10, 2007 at 3:56 pm

    Mr. Greenpeace - Perhaps under FOIA you can investigate? Sounds like you have environmental knowledge enough to understand what is going on at these sites…

  • 10 Mr Greenpeace // Jul 10, 2007 at 11:25 pm

    bear in mind Vet Park Junkie if a fingerprint ID is done on chemicals and can be traced lets say back to a suoerfund site here or in Stratford or Stamford the cost of cleanup can be passed to the feds, some companies left waste byproducts one of a kind unique to its own process.
    .
    I know from experiece when it comes to PCB’s and Dioxin certain chemicals hold a unique pattern even if its generic,,I use to take samples of drums discarded in the woods and forgotten paths and once the contents were examined they found the source from other waste companies toxic stream for disposal.In Vermont they use to use old milk trailors to dump 5′000 gallons of waste at 10 dollars a gallon to dispose of in rest area’s abandoned for someone to find..

    your right #9 I have worked the field for years , worked with the coast gaurd simply taking waste samples along the outfalls of cities and finding the source within the city..Bridgeport was something when the gas tanker went over on 95 the gas went into the city and showed how many business’s had illegal drains it reversed direction and went into thier buildings when the fire dept drenched that fire..the storage company suffered the most on that one..

    Site assessments are interesting the scope is not where the chemicals are but where they came from,,EPA created paper trails years ago some considered them wasteful some forms were so thick they were hard to write on as many as 14 copies but each one went somewhere some were the cradle to grave reports which gave details on chemicals and their own ID like a DNA. when sent to landfills,,they leak out of landfills you still are responsible for the cleanup there as well.

    I simply wish the news outlets start asking some questions, they were pointed in the right direction, now there talking tank farms for the electrical companies and residents are worried about noise,,what about the product going into the 10′000 gallon holding tanks and who determines what safe to dump into the storm drains,,we have issues and because of the criteria most don’t understand the behind the scenes questions that need asking,where are our city officials,,they seem to be somewhat lost when asking tech questions,,all those tanks in I see in Dariend and tank farms in Noroton means the tech is there but again nothing in the papers..does anyone else see these things? Have anyone read what the power companies are doing,,even the power plant we have is leaking fluids out of their transmission lines in the sound,,what gives seems all acceptable to mkst unless they are missing the one article they slip in on the want ad page.

Leave a Reply