Professional engineer Yulee Aronson, and architects Joseph Vallone and Patricia Chen offer these thoughts:
For the past 6 months we’ve followed the saga that is the proposed reconstruction of Long Lots Elementary School
During this time we’ve learned about this property, its history, stakeholders, and users.
Like many of us who have followed the public debate on various blog posts regarding these issues, we’ve observed the temperature rise of some of these comments to unacceptable levels.
We understand how emotional it may get for some with a lot at stake, but we should all remember that we are neighbors and need to treat each other with respect. We attribute some of the emotional outrage to the lack of awareness of the due process required to take a project like this from concept, through regulatory approvals to final design and construction.
Long Lots Elementary School. (Drone photo/Brandon Malin)
To begin, the first step in the regulatory approval is to follow 2022 Connecticut General Statutes, Title 8 – Zoning, Planning, Housing and Economic and Community Development, Chapter 126 – Municipal Planning Commissions, Section 8-24. – Municipal improvements. For short, this has been referred to as P&Z’s commission 8-24 review.
It is important to note that this being a school reconstruction project, the most important element to include in this application would be to show the new plan for the school and deal with the other elements later in the process. Considering that the school replacement would reduce the school’s footprint on the property, the approval could have been easily gotten on the first go-around in December of last year.
Unfortunately, in addition to the new school the proposal included construction of new athletic fields. Had the athletic fields remained the same size as the existing ones, adding them to the proposal wouldn’t be an issue. However, the proposal contained expansion of these fields, ignoring the earlier ruling by P&Z in 2010 and thus jeopardizing almost certain approval by P&Z.
Below is an excerpt from Eileen Lavigne Flug, assistant town attorney’s memo dated April 26, 2022″
On February 11, 2010 (modified June 10, 2010), the P&Z issued a Special Permit/Site Plan at the request of the Parks and Recreation Department for the expansion of the community gardens, stating that, “The Commission finds that the use of this site for the Community Garden, instead of the previously proposed use for athletic fields, remains in keeping with the 2007 POCD.”
With all the back and forth surrounding reconstruction of LLS, all stakeholders unanimously agree that the new school must be replaced as soon as possible. According to the initial schedule in the RFQ for feasibility study, the study should have been completed in August of last year and 8-24 application was soon to follow. Six months later and the December application withdrawn, the new application is yet to be resubmitted. Why?
As an independent group of professionals, we would like to offer our time and expertise to help our elected officials expedite the reconstruction process while working to ensure minimal disruption to the functionality of the site and the neighborhood. We understand that a similar offer was made by the chair of the Public Site & Building Committee. Let’s all work together and get it done for our kids!
Thanks but “all stakeholders unanimously agree that the new school must be replaced as soon as possible” couldn’t be further from the truth. There’s been no fundamentally sound economic argument as to why a new school is more attractive from a ROI perspective a renovation project. THAT’S the critical case to make first, THEN worry about gardens and multi-sport areas.
Have you researched other school districts and new builds vs renovations? Cost- benefit analysis? It is interesting to see what empty nesters say vs parents with babies or young children.
What does that mean ? You realise the empty nesters paid for the schools…. ? Duhhhhhh
I could not agree more vehemently with mark post.
This school needs immediate rehab.
It does not need to be a new build.
And it will be better for it.
I think we will be better off with a new build. It will be better in the long run.
May I ask what your qualifications are that allow you to determine that a renovation is better than a new build in this case? Multiple experts have concluded that not only would a renovation be more expensive and take longer but also that it is likely not possible while the kids are in the school due to materials used in the era that the building was constructed. With all due respect I do not want my kids living through a renovation in a school building constructed with asbestos and that is likely filled with mold. If you have ever stepped foot in Long Lots (or seen it from the outside) you would agree that it is would be unsafe to tear down walls and renovate while kids are inside. The private school you are referring to was undoubtedly in much better shape pre-renovation.
Comparing the rehab of GFA to this project makes 0 sense. A renovation and expansion at an elite private school with millions of $ of internal funding is not the same as a public elementary school that was 1) never designed to be an elementary school and 2) sadly has not been maintained properly in the last 70+ years. Have you been inside Long Lots? I know your children don’t attend our public schools but if you had been inside the school you’d understand why renovating will cost us time and $ we don’t have.
Anyone else here ever renovated an old home? Then you know exactly what happens when you open the walls.
We need a new LLS. Now. No more delays.
Thank you to the people offering their help but in all due respect I think we are beyond this phase.
I could not agree more with mark ! And I am a mom of 4. Not an empty nester.
But my kids do go to a school that spend 35 million making it( a bigger school than long lots by almost double) and doing it while kids were insanity.
I rest my case.
Again not an empty nester !
Bragging that your kids go to an elite private school while simultaneously telling us lowly public school parents that our kids don’t deserve a new school might not be the winning argument you think it is. But please, go on.
Agreed! Her kids do not even go to Westport schools. Says it all!
Wait! Wait, wait. Ciara’s children do not attend Westport Public Schools?
This is all maki no perfect sense now! Thanks for clairfying!
Clarification:
The fact that Ciara’s four children do not attend Westport schools and she is against a new build, says it all.
These experts are not only most valued assets to the town of Westport and its residents, they have unselfishly and graciously spent hours upon hours studying this mess. I applaud them for trying to untie the Gordian knot created by the town administration and its myopic school committee.
Again it seems like our select woman is in over her head.. Maybe if she spent more time knowing the procedures than having pictures taken at small business openings this project would be towards completion. I also agree that the school could be rehabbed for much less of a cost and disruption. Us empty nesters paid for the school as well as the residents with children. Why shouldn’t we take advantage of these professionals to benefit of us all. Thank you your offer. Let’s see if our town government is open minded enough to utilize them.
In situ lol not insanity…. Though insanity might be more aprop…
Very gracious offer. Thank you.
What do we do to get our Ms. Tooker to play ball, no pun intended. Has all of this chaos been because we NEED larger athletic fields?
I understand wanting a brand new school. No need to be greedy adding larger ball fields. Can’t we concentrate on the school and then see what else will fits on the property?
What can we do to get this done responsibly and honestly? The emphasis on HONESTLY.
What we want is a new school building without any further delays. It is not true that the new school has a smaller footprint when accounting for the school building and the playground area. And given that the new building is going over a flat area over Terrace 3, we need a replacement for the upper fields, so they need to go over the existing Terrace 1 and Terrace 2. While I understand the interest in “saving the gardens”, I would like to remind everyone that the Westport Community Gardens has a memorandum of understanding to give back the gardens location for future athletic fields. No one is taking the gardens away, and they will be rebuilt similar to athletic fields, just in another location. The focus must remain on building a new school as quickly as possible. No more delays!
Yes indeed let’s all work together on this issue. First let’s prioritize the children. They need a new safe and functional school yesterday. Next let’s think of the gardeners. They would like a community garden and to avoid ever having to tear it down and wait 2 years to start over again. And since this process has made clear that these two facilities are far from ideal neighbors it would be tremendous if the town could offer a new location for the gardens. Then they wouldn’t have to wait 2 years and maybe they could expand and let a few more people into their club? Sorry what? The town already offered this? So then what’s the point of this article? Maybe Yulee and co. could move on and offer their expertise to issues in Westport that haven’t already been solved.
This entire process is just WILD. We now have people who were not hired for the job, nor did they bid on the job, writing in that they will offer help? Is anyone listening to parents and the kids in this town at all? Parents, teachers, kids, all coming forward sharing stories how the conditions in the school are beyond repair. There’s no more delays, no one is having it anymore. This political fiasco is done. The attempts to continue to block Frist Councilwoman Tooker from doing her job have come to an end, its backfiring at this point and people see right through it. So what does this group propose, anyone up for another delay while we take a gander here??
It’s been asked multiple times, and not one reasonable answer yet has been shared. The community garden, which is a private social club, is going to be part of a construction site for 2 years, it is going to be touched in the process. You cannot keep hoping that it is not going to be comprised and delaying the school because of it. There is already precedent for moving this community garden. With this being the case, why is the group not looking to the future with optimism to find a more permanent location for the garden. Wouldn’t that make sense?
If you say “this is where the gardens have been for 20 years, and that is where they shall stay…” there’s no reasoning with you. The world is a different place then it was 20 years ago, and with a new school being built it’s hard to imagine you’re going to have easy access to that garden during the school day, the same way people don’t have access to fields during the school day. Things change, rules change, security measures have changed…embrace it.
If decision makers are actually reading these blogs, I encourage them to make a decision that benefits the greater good and just end this mess. The school and the REPLACEMENT (call it what they are, they are replacing and updating the ones lost) fields will no doubt benefit substantially more community members then a select group of people who have locked access to a private social club.
And really…someone please come forward and present a reasonable explanation why the gardens shouldn’t be moved if the town is willing to find a more permanent location. If there’s truly a reason, parents with children in the school district need to understand.
Exactly! That question continues to go mysteriously unanswered. I’m not holding my breath.
Dan P, you are missing the point. The article is not about the gardens, it’s about FS disregarding P&Z’s ruling of 2010 regarding the site and her own attorney advising her of that in 2022. So instead of prioritizing the school, her committee continues to pursue a dead-end path. If you are an advocate of expediting new school construction, you may want to reconsider your blind support of what they are doing. As far as your sarcasm, I ask that you keep it to yourself. Thank you.
Yulee. Ok let’s try it as clear and dry as possible. Lou acknowledged that the garden cannot be untouched by this project. So how is it in the best interest of garden advocates to keep delaying the new school? Why isn’t the new location the better option for not just the kids but also the gardeners? And please don’t respond with “Lou is incorrect.” I refer you to just about every comment Joe Nader has made where he clearly lays out why Lou wrote what he wrote. Any comments to the contrary either come from ignorance or more likely a vested interest in holding the process and our children’s well being hostage to appease the unreasonable demands of a few. And if you can’t handle my sarcasm then click away. We are OUTRAGED and I imagine my sarcasm is going to be preferable to the tone that comes next from the parents fighting for their kids if this project is delayed any further.
Dan – Lou said “if” and “truly need.” You are misrepresenting him.
If you are so outraged, you should target your ire at the FS, who has prioritized sports field space over the school. She missed another P&Z meeting deadline with the 8-24 that is presumably being posted today.
And while it is tiresome enough to listed to people refer to the community gardens as a private club (when they are as much of a public parks & rec function as any other) that the sports fields were being designed on behalf of local private sports organizations is kind of ironic.
If the FS is going to continue to emphasize fields over students, I guess you should be prepared to be outraged. Though, given your lack of respect for others in Town, I not going to lose any sleep over your outrage.
I sincerely (not sarcastically) appreciate every time you attempt to split hairs by fixating on “if” and “truly teed” in these comment sections. When you do that, you insult the intelligence of every Westporter who knows how to read and how to think thus doing more damage to your illogical position than any sarcastic comment I can think of.
It is not “splitting hairs” to point out that it seems to be a genuine offer if there is a genuine need, rather than a capitulation to people who would act like crybabies if they don’t get every single thing that they want (far beyond a rebuilt school). Get ready to be outraged.
What additional “facts” have been uncovered since the P&Z meeting on December 18th to foster this new proposal? Did Parks & Rec finally provide a detailed usage schedule of all the fields for the 2023 calendar year instead of the color-coded grid that no one was able to read or decipher? If so, is the public going to have sufficient time to review the results prior to the next P&Z meeting ? Why has the supposedly much needed Babe Ruth league field been scrapped for a multi-purpose field? Could it be because baseball field usage proved that a 4th babe ruth league field was NOT needed, even though at the October 30th Parks & Rec meeting Parks & Rec tried to convince the taxpayers that one was needed by using misleading information (see pg 2 of the Parks & Rec Property Review & Usage report dated September 23rd).
Until a detailed usage report of all the fields has been produced I can not see how a new multi-purpose field on the Hyde Lane property can be approved. If there really had been a critical need for an additional field why did it wait to be coupled with the Long Lots School project which wasn’t going to start construction until the fall of ’24?
Why haven’t the 4 NON-profit organizations that have a vested interest in the towns fields gotten together to see how they could best utilize the $3.8 million they have sitting in cash & investments to rectify the dire field situation and then present that plan to P&Z? The lack of urgency on the part of these organizations shows that it isn’t as dire a situation as being presented and its more of a convenient land & money grab. It makes you wonder what else in the $100 million budget for this project is NOT necessary. Hopefully the Finance Committee will scrutinize this when requested to authorize the funding for this project.
FYI: The $3.8 million figure is taken from the balance sheets of the latest tax filings (Form 990) of Westport Soccer Assoc ($1.191 million), Westport Baseball & Softball ($1.144 million), Westport PAL ($1.037 million) and Friends of Westport Parks & Rec ($428 thousand). You would think with the incredible amount of money sitting on the balance sheets of these NON-profit organizations the possibilities would be endless on what can be done to the EXISTING fields in town. For example, overhauling the underutilized Doubleday field into the premier multi-purpose field in town. Also, Doubleday & Wakeman baseball fields which have been neglected (pitching mounds not the standard 10″, grass growing in the infield dirt, dangerous infield lips, etc) could be drastically improved including adding dugouts, scoreboards, etc.
These are among many unanswered questions that need to be addressed before the most expensive project in town gets approval from P&Z and the Finance Committee.
It seems to me that placing the fields closest to the new school would be most advantageous to the children. It’s going to be a long walk for little legs to get over to the first terrace where new fields are being proposed.
When the old Long Lots is demolished there will be a very large area, that is adjacent to the new Long Lots School, that can be used for playing fields/athletic fields much in the same way the current fields are used and located. No one has proposed this and I can’t understand why not. Because a school is already located in this spot there shouldn’t be any issues with neighbors like there are moving the fields to the first terrace of the property.
The Community Gardens are NOT a private club. The gate is locked because if it wasn’t there would be vandalism in the gardens. Gardeners are required to keep their plots free of weeds and to log 3 work hours helping to keep up the Community Gardens. Not everyone wants to do this work which is why this garden isn’t for everyone.
Dan,
Once again, it’s not about the garden. Lou, you, me, anyone on this post, we don’t decide on how the town of Westport treats its open space. My letter cited P&Z’s decision re: open space next to LL School, town attorney has opined that the space shouldn’t be used for athletics.
Please consider reviewing 2017 POCD . Here is the link. https://www.westportct.gov/government/departments-a-z/planning-and-zoning-department/2017-plan-of-conservation-and-development
My point is even simpler, if you want the school built and do it quickly, why delay the process by trying to knock down regulatory barriers while doing it? Putting aside the immorality of this act, it is simply harder and more time consuming. But wait. Alas, we have the Gardners. Yes, you can blame them for your incompetence and stubbornness – they are reason for all the delays. This political scapegoating is despicable.
I think my point might be even simpler: what is best for the children both during the process and after the build is for the whole of the property to be available to the school. That point has been made and that matter is settled. Consequently it’s also best for the garden in the short and long term. So who does it serve to do it your way? This is not an accusation or implication. I and others on here are still sincerely waiting for a reasonable explanation.
The explanation is simple. Submit the proposal for the new school that is compliant with regulatory requirements and once the design of the school is finalized (5-6 months later at this point), develop a construction staging plan that is tailored to this design.
Yulee, you still did not answer the question, but thank you. Think like you’re dealing with agitated parents on a blog worried about their kids, not the P&Z. It has nothing to do with regulatory requirements. Why wouldn’t a parks and recs function with limited access and a capped membership not want a bigger, better, more permanent location to better serve the community and more people? This is a WIN, and at the same time helps a new school be built. So again, that is the question and really the only question that parents with children in the school district are concerned with. I’ll ask it again so its clear – The question below remains UNANSWERED and the solution has been offered by the Town. Parents need to understand if you hope to achieve compromise.
Knowing your garden is going to be a construction site…Why wouldn’t a parks and recs function with limited access and a capped membership not want a bigger, better, more permanent location to better serve the community and more people? Thank you.
Wow, this debate is fun. All the conversations remind me of my time there, as a student at Long Lots. When I went there, Long Lots was exclusive for 7th 8th & 9th graders. It was during these years that I became increasingly focused on music. We had a little combo rock outfit. That song” Turning Japanese” came out. There were great groups at the time, Ozzy went solo, he actually bit the head off a bat. Van Halen, Rush, the Police. But anyway, to stay on topic, sorry for drifting, Westport is about the kids. Thats it. Growing up, Westport is for that. Exploring being a human. Going downtown, going to the beach, having friends. I was on the soccer team for a bit. On that field, the upper field I ran the mile–617. Only one kid beat me with a 611. But anyway, my point is this; you guys sound like immature crybabies. Please stop insulting Jen Tooker, she deserves respect. She knows, not to speak for her because I dont know her, but i know she knows Westport is for the kids. The concept of Westport is for the kids. “It feeles like a party for the kids that has been taken over by the adults” i forgot who said it. But anyway, westport is not a resort town, it doent have nightclubs– it has first rate schools— everything else comes from that, that’s why well-to- do folks move here when there priority is their children. At some point in the middle of the 80s their was a change. People started moving here because westport was cool or artsy. But what made westport magical was that it was the best place in the world to grow up. The garden club, i know all about it believe me, is just an after thought. So stop making yourself look foolish and get your perspective straight. Hey, there can be fun clubs for adults too but westport is about being a kid and that is why it is magic–never forget that. That is what makes the real estate valuable–nothing else. My parents sent me to private school for 9th grade, man sucked.This is of course why the Hamlet project is such a mistake. We need to drop are personal agendas and get back to growing kids
The special permits issued for the gardens specifically state that nothing in the approval would prevent the land being used for fields if the need arose. Well, times they are a-changin’ and the need has arisen. We need a new school. Seems everyone agrees on that. In order to rebuilding the school, while still accommodating 550 students during the construction, that space will be needed. I truly don’t understand why the Garden wants to continue in that space? The garden will be inaccessible for two years during construction and destroyed. They’ve been offered to be relocated by the town and I don’t understand why they wouldn’t jump at the opportunity for a more permanent home with room for growth and more members. The multipurpose fields are used by students, and kids all over town who participate in soccer, camps and other after school activities. Let’s put these kids first and get this project moving.
That question has been addressed by the Town Attorney’s statement. (Also, building plans that destroy the Gardens could well violate Town’s Plan for Conservation and Development, which was written subsequent to the creation of the Gardens).
The Gardeners probably don’t see being uprooted after twenty years as being an “opportunity.” Given the history in this Town with the Community Gardens, I’d be concerned that the next move would be to the next place that they would spend twenty years building up until someone wanted it for a ball field.
If building an $100 million school isn’t “putting these kids first,” I don’t know what is.
With all due respect, why are an engineer and a couple of architects offering legal opinions?
Our Planning & Zoning Commission will be voting on any proposal to remove the gardens from their present location. The process is referred to as an 8-24 Report. The Commission will either issue a negative or a positive report. It is most likely that the decision of the Commission will be based substantially on whether or not the action proposed is violative of or consistent with the principles set forth in the 2017 Town Plan of Conservation & Development. It appeared to some that the Commission was about to issue a negative 8-24 Report as to the change in the use of the gardens site proposed in the first 8-24 filing by First Selectwoman Tooker. However, Jen Tooker withdrew that application so we do not know the final thinking of the P&Z Commission. It would have been helpful to have learned that. Quite possibly, the Commission will again be inclined to vote to issue a negative report because that outcome is the one most consistent with the Town Plan of Conservation & Development. None of this need delay progress on a new school.