To the Editor:

I recently posted an editorial piece entitled The New Battle of Ridgefield about the residents’ concerns over development. Someone responded that Ridgefield doesn’t “need” to stay small. I believe that ship has sailed. We have not been a small town for some time. Although Bob Jewell likes to point out that our growth is a lot lower than it was in the past (as he represents new project after new project), there‘s only so much growth we can have. A glass that is almost full cannot take as much additional water as a glass that’s half empty. Is there anyone who can argue that we don’t have a traffic problem in town? Our infra-structure is being maxed out.

We have reached a point in time where we need to stop approving appreciable development. It’s not that we need to stay small - it’s a question of if we want to get bigger. The 2010 POCD introduction states that “Ridgefield has long recognized the importance of its rural character and the need to manage its growth.” When P&Z Chairwoman Rebecca Mucchetti ran for a Commissioner slot in 2017, she promised to "vote proactively, not on how attractive, popular, or unpopular, a project is, but objectively based on whether it conforms to our regulations, our Plan of Conservation and Development, and is in Ridgefield's best interest.” The Commission has ignored its duty to adhere to the POCD. A bigger Ridgefield means sacrificing the town we love. It means less New England, more traffic and crowded neighborhoods. Bigger isn’t always better.

Jeff Hansen

Old South Salem Road, July 14