RTM Rink MI Appeal: Explanatory Comments Urge Town to Go Back to the Drawing Board

On Dec 22, four Byram residents – all current and past leaders of the Byram Neighborhood Association – exercised their rights as property owners to appeal the Municipal Improvement status for a new Hamill Rink and Strazza field to the RTM.

The Greenwich Planning & Zoning commission voted 4-1 to approve the MI back on December 10. (That doesn’t mean the project is fully approved, because Final Site Plan must also be approved and the Preliminary Site Plan was only approved with lengthy requirements.)

The proposal is to locate a new rink in the middle of the natural grass field, referred to as “the flip,” rather on the existing footprint in the corner of the field. This offers the benefit of continued use of the existing rink during construction and a chance to create an optimally oriented ball field.

At the Dec 10 P&Z commission meeting, BNA land use chair Al Shehadi, said the planning for the new rink had started with the defining goal of “no loss of rink time.”

Further, he said comparable rinks cited by the applicant were “were in larger open spaces or commercial areas.”

Lastly, he refuted the argument that the proposal resulted in more green space in Morlot Park, saying, “They are adding up multiple small pieces of green spaces to get to the same square footage, and that is not in any way comparable to the current large contiguous open green space.”

On Dec 28, Bill Drake, chair of the Rink User Committee for Design and Planning, penned a letter to the editor requesting the four Byram property owners present an alternative plan in writing.

Back at the Wednesday Nov 13 P&Z meeting, Mr. Drake said much the same thing, urging the commissioners to, “Please leave the designing and programming to others. There is no practical alternative proposed by the very small, recalcitrant minority.”

To be fair, the Byram residents who have opposed the application have testified against “the flip,” not the need for a new rink.

Their explanatory comments start off by saying they agree the current Hamill Rink is outdated, and support the replacement of the current Dorothy Hamill Rink with a new one.

However, they go on to say they believe the plan is inconsistent with many objectives and guiding principals of the Town’s POCD, particularly Guiding Principal #1: “Preserve our community character and sense of place.”

They also cite:

• POCD Objective 3.1e: Increase buffer space, as well as planting requirements, between institutional and residential uses, particularly around parking lots, auditorium spaces, and athletic facilities.
• POCD Guiding Principal 4: Sustain and improve our natural environment and landscape
• POCD Objective 4.1: Encourage the use of existing building footprints in redevelopment or re-use
• POCD Objective 6.3: Support institutional uses while balancing their needs with those of the surrounding neighborhoods.

Further Eckert, Shehadi, von Brachel and Kantorski’s explanatory comments say the decision to prioritize ice time over other concerns, including the impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood, loss of green space in a dense neighborhood, or the cost, “is consequential.”

Also, they refer to the 8 rinks in Fairfield County identified by the Town as comparable to the proposed Hamill Rink replacement, and argue they are not “comparable” given they are not located in dense residential neighborhoods like Byram.

Exhibit A from the explanatory comments for item #18 on the RTM Call, which is an appeal of the Municipal Improvement for Hamill Rink

The Byram property owners also argue that unlike outreach for projects including Cohen Eastern Greenwich Civic Center, Central Middle School, and the North Street bridge project, the Town failed to organize information sessions or public hearings for the rink.

They also say the Town has largely ignored feedback and requests for information from the BNA, Byram Veterans Association, Greenwich Tree Conservancy, RTM, Board of Estimate and Taxation and other stakeholders, and have not substantively changed the proposal since it was first presented in 2021.

“No professional estimate and impact assessment comparing building in place vs. moving the building and field has been provided. There have been no professional estimates for the cost of a temporary rink. Requests to look for efficiencies that would reduce the footprint of the facility have gone unanswered.” – Explanatory comments for item #18 on the Jan 21, 2025 RTM call

The recommendation of the Byram residents is for the RTM to reject Municipal Improvement application by the Town and instruct the Town to come back with an application which is consistent with the POCD, which reflects the involvement of the neighboring community and neighborhood association, and which responds to consistent feedback from local organizations such as the BNA, Town commissions and the general public.

On his Jan 3 radio show First Selectman Fred Camillo defended ‘the flip,’ and said thousands had responded to a survey to support it.

“Hamill Rink was built in 1972 with just a slab of ice,” he recalled. “It’s the worst rink in Fairfield County, maybe the worst in the state.”

“You have to do ‘the flip. The reason is if you try to rebuild where it is now, it will cost more money. There’s more ledge there.” – First Selectman Fred Camillo

“On top of that, everything we do now, we try to make sustainable and environmentally friendly. You can’t even put solar panels on where it is now because of all those trees.”

“Also you don’t lose two years of programs – that’s something we heard from lots of skating groups – that some of those groups and leagues would be shut down because they have no place to go.”

The Municipal Improvement is #18 on the RTM’s Jan 21 call. The deadline to sign up to comment is noon on Jan 21.