The 8-24 (municipal review) request for the Long Lots Elementary School renovation project has been temporarily withdrawn.
In a brief email this morning to Planning & Zoning director Mary Young, with copies to town attorney Ira Bloom and Long Lots School Building Committee chair Jay Keenan, 1st Selectwoman Jen Tooker wrote:
I am withdrawing the current 8-24 application for 13 Hyde Lane.
Following a robust P&Z Commission meeting on 12/18/23, we would like to take into consideration the feedback of the commission members.
After discussing with Chair (Paul) Lebowitz, we have decided to review possible modifications to the application and will file a revised proposal to be heard at the 1/22/24 P&Z meeting.
It is still our goal to start the construction of a new Long Lots Elementary School before the end of 2024, so moving swiftly and decisively remains a priority.
The “robust P&Z Commission” meeting followed months of controversy. Questions have been raised by residents and town officials about various aspects of the project, including construction of new athletic fields and the possible relocation of the Westport Community Gardens.
The plan for Long Lots Elementary School. The next step in the process — an 8-24 hearing by the Planning & Zoning Commission — is on hold.
first smart move
let’s see the rest
A new 110 million dollar school is a waste of tax payers money! Westport needs new leadership!
Dan Woog for first selectman.
I’d move back to cast that vote. ABT.. Anyone But Tooker
no one knows Westport better then Dan
Hopefully this results in a renovation to the existing structure at a much lower project cost. Then perhaps the field and garden can co-exist for the long-term. Wonder if anyone started with the aforementioned objectives and worked out options to solve?? Sure seems like a new school was pre-ordained from the start!
a new school bus needed
a new school is needed
Totally. The school’s 60 years old old. What’s another 60 years? Kids are resilient. Raw sewage in the basement, mold etc… They can handle it. Makes them strong! It’s those essential garden plots that need our real attention!
The next step should be to issue competitive RFP for the next phase of design. The process is a state mandate. https://law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2020/title-10/chapter-173/section-10-287/
This process may take at least two months and would further delay the project, unless commenced now.
Is this what you and junior BOF Dobin text each other back and forth during meetings?
I suggest that before filing a revised 8-24 request, the First Selectwoman should solicit the Town Attorney’s opinion as to whether the Long Lots School Building Committee has any power or authority whatsoever to recommend the construction of a recreational facility unrelated to the school, on an adjacent, unrelated site; and if so, from where that power is derived.
I can find no such authorization in either the BOE Specifications or the First Selectwoman’s statement appointing the Committee, and I suspect that the Town Attorney will find none.
But whether I’m right or wrong, an opinion from the Town Attorney will be helpful to facilitate deliberations at both the P&Z and the RTM should the matter come before it.
Totally agree that the garden is a recreational facility unrelated to the school! Fields, however, are used by the school as well as the greater community and make much more sense to locate on school property.
Im glad they are taking another look at this. I hope they review some of the ideas that other architects and contractors have suggested. I also would like to see the Community Garden stay where it is, and the baseball field should be for elementary school kids, not adults.
A new school is urgently needed. It should have happened years ago. We have already wasted too much time. It was clear as day back in Oct 2023 that that the proposed recommendation was dead on arrival. Let’s not waste precious more time.
The proposed new school building was very welcome and followed the Ed Spec and the unanimous vote of the Board of Education. The LLSBC has done excellent work here.
However, the broader proposed land use changes, beyond the school building footprint itself, risked delays in opening the doors of a new Long Lots School
Putting forward unworkable plans simply leads to delays and more delays.
Even if a home was found for the Community Gardens away from Long Lots – the change / intensification of land-use where the gardens currently sit would STILL be the issue.
Solution = remove the change in land-issue = we get a new school
The land-use situation beyond the walls of the school building was very different at CMS (the prior school building project in Westport). What occurred there was so very different. It should have been treated differently.
But now it’s time to look forward.
The only way we can have shovels in the ground in 2024, and prioritize a new school building is for ALL elected representatives, across multiple boards, to all work together and compromise. We need to talk. We need to talk now.
If other boards / elected representatives have issues / valid questions that need answering – they should absolutely be answered. However, let’s get those questions going now. Let’s try and get ahead of this for once.
I am highly confident that if this occurs we can get a first class plan with a new school prioritized, create a new home for Stepping Stones at LL, provide multiple playing fields, and keep the garden in their current home. If we pull together we can achieve the positive votes required in January and 1H February.
It’s our duty to the town, our students and teachers to get this done.
The new 8-24 application will hopefully focus on the new school building which is in dire need. There has been a lot of distraction around the ball field size, and this has drawn the conversation away from what is most important. The existing Long Lots building is deteriorating rapidly, and no capital is currently spent improving it since a new building is planned. In order to avoid another crisis like CMS, we must act quickly. This is a complex project, and I don’t see how it can be accomplished without considering the whole site to ensure we have a successful outcome for this project, and minimize disruption to the functioning of the school itself, which will be in the middle of a construction site. It might make sense to discuss how the rest of the land will be restored after the new building for Long Lots is set in motion. The school is an essential part of Westport community and therefore must be preserved. Save Long Lots School!
A new school is urgently needed
Why do community gardens play such a big role here? Today, HUNDREDS of students attended a school in the middle of winter with a failing HVAC system. They attended music class in a hallway. They sat next to makeshift AC units that prevented them from hearing the teacher. Will a single person even go to the gardens this entire month? I applaud the officials for working with urgency to get this school, which is in horrible disrepair, rebuilt. Westport is known for quality education – it’s why people move here. We must protect our schools. I want to also applaud the police chief for pointing out how unsafe it is to have community gardens adjacent to a school. I’m disappointed that this plan is getting caught up in bureaucracy.
Agree, Lindsay! The safety risk is a valid concern many parents have.
The picture in this article is NOT the plan that was submitted to p&z for approval! Does anyone even care about facts anymore?
https://www.westportct.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/83670/638378813288800000
My apologies. The correct plan has been swapped in.
The community gardens happen to be on town owned land ( that means Westport tax residents land) and have been there for 20 years. They have never posed a safety issue for the school. NONE.
What they have to do with the long lots school is that they are neighbors. They are not part of long lots campus. And as such they have every right to stay exactly where they are. It is the only community garden in Westport.
It is 2 decades old, and as such is impossible to move, nor should moving it have ever been entertained, but there has clearly been a hidden agenda to sneak in a 21st ball field( not for use I might add by long lots students.
That is where the administration failed. When they chose to not listen to the people and attach the ball field to the school, instead of correctly leaving the gardens alone they screwed up royally.
Not a single gardener or supporter of the gardens has ever said there was not a need for a renovated or new school. That has not passed their lips.
None of the neighbors whose properties will undoubtedly be affected by the construction has objected or said there’s not a need for a renovated or new school.
So why, when the one clear delay on the school build or Reno, is the possibility of the neighbors suing the town, why oh why would the ball field not have very simply been un- coupled from the school in the 8-24 request ?
It defies all reason other than to be yet another display of blatant arrogance and authoritarianism.
“Don’t tell us what you think we should do”. “We will do what we want to do” and in fact, “you dared to argue with us on this, so now we will double down on it”. And where did that get them ? It got them withdrawing the 8-24.
And in doing so it is the administration who will delay the school, if in fact it is delayed.
Those of you who are so vocal about the long lots school and the need for its rehabilitation or new build should have been looking to un- couple the ball field, after all it is nothing to do with the school. And its mere inclusion is, what is delaying the school.
The field in question is for older children, and not for long lots students.
It can and should be built somewhere else. It should have never ever been thrown into the LLS plan.
And while you are pointing your fingers at the community gardens about failing HVAC systems in the school, those have nothing to do with the gardens.
Nobody will argue that the hvac system should have been fixed years ago. That’s on the administration ! lol..
it has nothing to do with the gardens.
To state otherwise is ludicrous.
Long lots school rehabilitation should have been started years ago.
There are 3 months of vacation time when the school is closed during which many, many well planned “fixes” could have been orchestrated, but they weren’t.
Surely we are not going to blame those failures on the gardeners.
GFA over the past 5 plus years has been undertaking huge renovations/additions etc, during the summer when the students are on vacation.
Maybe the administration should have gone to them and asked how their renovations during vacation time has worked out for them.
As for the blatant circumvention of the state MANDATED process with rfp ETC… this is a very dangerous practice seeping into how business is being done, ignoring state mandates.
There are rules for a reason.
They are for accountability.
They are necessary. They keep processes honest. They keep processes clean, so we can trust in the process.
They keep motives honest.
The blatant disregard for these = arrogance.
The blatant disregard for ignoring these is not the fault of the gardeners. And when these state mandated processes have to be implemented after the fact, because everyone’s now been caught with their knickers down( hoping nobody was smart enough to cop on to the facts and the rules) these will cause further delays but we the people, we the town residents, we the owners of the land, have been asking for months and months and months. This is not a surprise. We told you so 100 times.
We need to fix the school, leave the only community garden in Westport alone where it is( it is not part of LLS campus and never was)
We need to find land elsewhere to build the ball field or fix all the other ball fields already in existence( 20 I believe)
Why are we not demanding those be fixed ?
That will solve the whole problem and save money and time.
It will make most stakeholders happy.
And when the contractors bid on the school project, they need to be clearly told as with the school bus contract, It is incumbent on them to find a staging area for the heavy equipment etc… off site.
That is the cost of doing business.
If I am building an addition on my house I do not get to use my neighbors driveway and garden to store my heavy equipment.
Nope, I find a way to bring it in on an as needed basis. Inconvenient? Sure.
Cost of doing business, absolutely.
And lastly it’s very clear to anybody who cares to ponder the scope of this project, I’m taking an educated guess, that a renovation would cost 30-40 million absolutely maximum, and a new school 80million…
Not the 100m tag it’s conveniently being padded at.
Just like the compo beach bathrooms should have cost no more than 200k.
Why is it the residents are always the ones getting stuck paying for the rip off contracts.
🤔
Ciara, with all due respect, there are many inaccuracies in your statements. I implore you, and others, to seek the facts. They are readily available.
1)The Community Garden is not an adjacency to the school or a neighbor of the school. It is ONE piece of property, 13 Hyde Lane, owned by the town. The Gardens were granted expanded use of that space upon request in 2010 after the land was originally purchased for an expanded parking lot and athletic fields. At the time it was deemed that no additional parking or fields were needed but it was very clearly stated that “expansion would not preclude future conversion of the land from gardens to athletic fields.”
2) There is NO ball field in the original submitted 8-24. Again, NO ball field whatsoever. I understand why this was misleading as the original publication of this article also included the incorrect image (it was fixed this morning). The field that IS in the submitted proposal is simply a relocation of the upper fields that currently exist at LLS since that is where the future building will sit (aka Terrace 3). This is a wide open green space that is used by the elementary school kids at recess, Run Club in the Fall & Spring (which I lead), Field Day, by the over 3,000 annual registrants of Westport Soccer, Summer Day Camps and many, many, more.
3) You are correct that GFA did renovate over the summer. They built a glass enclosed lunchroom. Not a 120,000 square foot school.
4) There WAS an RFP process. I know because I was in the room last Spring when the proposals were being reviewed. It was an open, public meeting, as they all have been. An RFP does not mean you take the cheapest option, it means you take the best option.
As a current and future LLS parent and a neighbor of the property, I have a very vested interested in this project and am begging people to please, please educate themselves on the facts and not accept misinformation that is being spread by individuals who are putting their own personal interests and agendas, whatever they may be, ahead of my and 600+ other children. I am more than happy to point anyone who seeks the facts in the right direction. Please email me at veronica.tysseland@gmail.com or parentsforanewlls@gmail.com.
That’a whole lot of words just to say that you think a Community Garden in a wealthy town where everyone already has a yard is more important than children’s education, health, and well being.
The gardens absolutely have no “right” to be there. Let’s put the children first. We are lucky there have been no safety issues in the past, but why create the opportunity for issues in the future? We have enough to worry about. The garden doesn’t benefit entire community or the school and can be moved. A new school is the necessity here. Let’s focus on what’s important.
Long Lots school project is currently at risk because a small group of people have been spreading misinformation and fighting any way to not prevent the new school building construction break ground. It is clear at this point, and from some of the comments on this article that the gardens should not have been allowed on a school campus from the start. The gardeners are putting the health and safety of the students at risk. It is the students who are the vulnerable ones and are the primary stakeholders without good representation. This ought to change. Regardless to what happens, the existence of the gardens on school property must be remedied and addressed so that we never have to make the choice between public health and a garden ever again.
Correction in my comment above:
“fighting any way to prevent the new school building construction break ground”
The Gardens is all about public health and education. We are fortunate that the gardens and the school are neighbors as schools throughout our country are making space in parking lots and school roof tops for gardens to be used in every aspect of the school curriculum.
Those forward looking schools imbed science, math, art, reading, writing, health and research into authentic learning opportunities for our students. The gardens and the school
are a perfect marriage!
For the garden to be on school property, it would have to be under the authority of the school itself. The state provides the BOE authority on how to run the school including its facilities. Those are not managed by the town. And when construction is needed, the town bodies understand that the school takes first priority, not the fields or gardens for that matter. This is what the main issue is at the moment. The gardeners are blocking a critically needed new building because they do not want their gardens to be touched. The garden plot was given to them because they were unused, and with the understanding that they will be taken away one day when needed. What could be more justifiable than building a new school? This has to stop, and the way to stop it is to petition for the removal of the gardens from school property independently from anything else.
It’s also worth adding to Joe s thoughtful comments that, in its now 20 years lf existence, the “community” gardens has not only not offered any partnership with the LLS, they have either refused or ignored requests to create a partnership or be part of the curriculum. That that concept is now being put forth as a reason to encourage the rest of the stakeholders to compromise while the gardeners do not is too little, too late. And, in my own humble opinion, disingenuous at best.
There is so much misinformation.
Fact: renovation is more expensive than a rebuild.
Fact: Chief of police recommends no access to gardens during school hours.
Fact: Keeping the garden in its current location incurs additional costs $$$$
Fact: renovation is a fraction of the cost of brand new build. Anybody who claims otherwise is lying to you
Fact: the chief of police gave zero good reason for the gardens being a safety risk to the school and there is no reason to recommend no access to the gardens during school hours. And if they are such a safety risk why then has there been absolutely no incident whatsoever in the 20 years they have happily co existed.
Fact: keeping the gardens where they are does not mean incurring extra expense in order to renovate or build a new school. This has been pointed out by other experts who do not sit on the LLSBC.
Again nobody is entitled to a staging area.
The gardens are actually not used by the LLS students, it is not imbedded in any LLS curriculum. It would seem like a lovely marriage (I agree!) but the garden is locked for the private use of garden members in town. So while it’s a wonderful concept, in practice that’s not the reality. For the new school, I would LOVE to incorporate a separate garden into the school plans, so the children can become environmental stewards and eco conscious citizens. I fully believe in the beauty and power of community, and it’s a shame the gardens have to be moved. AND while that’s true, the PRIORITY has to stay on our children, on giving them a safe place to learn and grow and play. That is what is most important and that is what this should be about. This new school is about our kids! This new school is desperately needed, our students need a safe building, our teachers and staff need viable space, and the parents need to have a voice in this. The last P&Z meeting I attended, I hopped on at 7p and logged off at 12:30am and Not One Parent from LLS had been “called on” to speak. After hours and hours of commentary about the gardens, apparently fellow parents finally got to speak at 1:30AM for the first time
I’m all for the new school being built. The gardens would have to be made more accessible to the students either as part of the school or a next door field trip. I encourage rethinking things as they were and looking at the outdoor classroom opportunity with a new and improved lens. I’m hopeful we can do both.
So many statements, so much misinformation. The Gardeners support the need for a new school. The gardeners want to retain their gardens on the Town land next to the School. The destruction or relocation of the Gardens is not necessary in order to move ahead with a new school. I assume the Babe Ruth ballfield will not now be sought by Jen Tooker and Parks & Recreation. The gardeners seek only to maintain what has long existed.
You CANNOT support the need for a new school without providing the space to do construction and keep the 600+ students safe, while they simultaneously attend school in the current building during a massive construction project. To say that you can have both, without sacrifice, is misleading and what has gotten us into this mess in the first place.
You can only support the need for a new school without touching the gardens if you also support delaying construction another 6-9 months, an additional 6-8 million dollars (low end of the estimate)for staging offsite and you have the means to get the BOF to agree to the additional expense. If you want to ask BOF to spend the money and delay the students to keep the gardens, then by all means ask for it. But don’t try and tell everyone they can have their cake and eat it too; we all have to compromise to make this desperately needed new school a reality.
In order to build the school in the quickest, most cost efficient manner, you have to touch terrace 1 where the gardens sit, it’s as simple as that.
Furthermore for the 100th time, the P&Z application did not include a ballfield.
Spot on Sarah. The LLSBC have stated numerous times that the whole site is needed in order to support both building a new school, and maintaining existing one functioning. The project is complex, and to put out misinformation that both the gardens and the new school construction can coexist is unfounded and that has become a dangerous narrative that is putting the health and safety of our children at risk.
I would also add that I would rather see a multipurpose field than a garden on school property. The athletic fields are used by elementary school aged kids across the town. The gardens are used by no elementary school aged kids.
Well unfortunately for you Joe, and fortunately for the majority of the town including it would seem the opinion of many P&Z commissioners we do not want any big field on the LLS campus.
Nor do we want to see the gardens on the chopping block to be used as a staging area.
In Manhattan they stage remotely. They can do that here too. They can use the empty spaces at the train station at greens farms. It’s a perfect area for holding large equipment until needed. It’s about 6 minutes drive from the school campus. It is what home owners do when building.
It will be far less dangerous for the children in fact, to not become a storage place for oversized enormous equipment which will sit more than it will be used.
Let’s face it the LLSBC refused to look at alternatives to axing the gardens. So now their recommendation is causing a delay. The building of the school and gardens remaining where they are has been shown on alternative plans by several professionals who live in Westport. All with every bit as much building experience as the LLSBC.
The narrative changes, on the needs of this project every 5 minutes.
One minute it’s for staging next minute it is for a field, Not for use by long lots. Next it’s safety and expense.. it’s basically being changed to suit the agenda on an almost daily basis.
The gardens should stay where they are. Popular opinion in town of the vast majority, who kindly acknowledge that school improvements are long overdue. That is the fault of this administration and the last 10 years of total and utter inaction.
That can hardly be blamed on the gardeners who have been there for 2 decades, not 2 minutes.
Ciara,
I disagree that the project must be catered to save the gardens. This is not the priority. The priority is and must be to build a new school as quickly as possible, AND to keep the current school functioning during that time. We don’t want the children to be in a construction zone for 3 years in order to save a garden, and we are in a race to get out of the existing building as quickly as possible. We have reached that point and we must act swiftly. To take longer time requires a substantial investment in the current building in the order of 10 million dollars to keep it going for a few more years, and that would be a waste of money because we would still need a new building.
How much is the town willing to spend on a garden that can be moved to another location?
How much is the town willing to delay the new construction at the risk of our children’s health and safety?
On athletic fields, we do need those fields, and they go perfectly on a school property. These fields are used primarily by elementary school aged kids from across the town contrary to what is falsely being said. I don’t see many baseball games, but I do see the baseball grass field used during soccer practices. So we do need a larger field than just an 11v11 soccer field.
The gardens have to move to another site in town. They were given this spot at Long Lots 10 or 15 years ago with the understanding that this is not permanent, and that if the space is needed, it will be taken back. There is no better justification to use the gardens than when we need to build a new school and be constrained in space.
If today the garden community approached the town to find a site for their garden, I guarantee you that the decision will not be on school property. First, because this weakens the school security when there are people on school premises during school hours. And second, the gardeners are clearly not great partners, and this creates a conflict of interest when it comes to the school needs as we are witnessing. It was a mistake to locate the gardens at Long Lots, a mistake that can only be understood in hindsight, and that needs to be addressed now.
Totally agree, Joe. Thank you for advocating on behalf of our kids. The gardens are a private club ON school property. The barriers our town has encountered trying to put logic and reasoning first is unfounded.
The school is deteriorating, and will continue to deteriorate. Our kids will suffer. Our beloved staff will continue to suffer. These are the key points.
The narrative remains- regardless of the use of Terrance 1 post-construction, it has always been designated as a staging area during the build. The gardens will be off limits. Moving the gardens is the ONLY way to save them. Post construction, the only logical choice is to make terrace 1 a field, to replace the one lost due to the location of the new building.
You aren’t listening/reading. The narrative hasn’t changed. The need for that piece of land (Terrace 1) is for staging during the build, which means the gardeners won’t have access to the garden. Then the land (Terrace 1) would be used for the field. It’s not changing any narrative.
The only thing changing is people’s reasoning to vote against the project. First you say the project is too expensive and then you say, spend more money staging offsite. It can’t be both. Then people say the fields are never used, but then say it’s too loud near neighbor’s homes. Also can’t be both.
Also, the gardeners have been there for 20 years and there is a MOU stating that the town would need this land in the future for a school or field and was signed/agreed to. Now it’s ok to reneg on that?
Lastly, the LLSBC looked at over 25 different options, so to say they “refused” to look at alternatives is grossly inaccurate.
The gardens are not on school property. They are not part of the campus !
Nobody’s reneging on anything the gardeners are not the sacrificial lambs here.
Contractor has zero right to a staging area.
The project should be a renovation ! Not a new build. I’ve done construction projects all over the world, staging is a nice to have… NOT a requirement. And if this contractor says staging off site is 10 million then we know from the outset we are being completely screwed.
That number alone tells its own tale.
It’s Bullshit
Secondly I’ve done many many renovations. Again all cheaper than a new build.
Well, I can see business must be slow tonight. Nice language. People get louder when they know the facts aren’t on their side.
Are you insinuating Joe, that the gardeners are a security risk ? Are you suggesting they are a bunch of Westport tax payers disguised as terrorists, and pedophiles ? Maybe some are car jackers disguised as gardeners.
What are you talking about…. Seriously ! What a disgraceful insinuation.
What security risk do they pose ? Since there has not been one single incident in 20 plus years, 2 decades. Why would there ever be ?
The community gardeners are moms, dads, grandparents, single people, some whole families, who have never caused one single security risk in the entire time the gardens have been adjacent to the long lots campus. Actually to even dare to insinuate this is just scandalous.
They are NOT part of the long lots campus.
They are all without exception, tax payers who have contributed to the school community their whole working life.
They have also been supporters of improving and or building a new school !
They have been quiet and safety conscious neighbors to the separate LLS campus.
I mean seriously I keep having to go back to read your comment because it is so outrageous.
The gardeners deserve their garden EVERY single bit as much as the school deserves its renovation or build.
The former being at least half the cost ! And perfectly adequate.
I think you owe the community gardeners a huge heartfelt apology which I have no doubt will not be forthcoming.
Gardens cannot be physically moved.
It’s years of soil amending, pollinating, etc etc… it protects the neighboring homes from flooding.
Not to mention the neighboring homes should not be subjected to some builder getting a “gimme” of a deal with staging included… on their back door step…
The staging comes with the job… contractor makes less profit…
Too bad !
Take it or leave it.
This thread is closed to comments.