September 25, 2007

New school site is the pits

Here's reporter Jackie Majerus' story today on the decision to put a new school off Barlow Street:

Committee members charged with selecting a site for the proposed West End K-8 school on Monday chose the former Scalia sand pit on Barlow Street as their location of choice.
The seven member site selection committee voted 5-2 in favor of recommending the old sand pit.
"They had given this an awful lot of thought," said Mike Audette, who chairs the committee and is principal of O'Connell School.
After hearing from the public and discussing four possible sites, Audette said, the committee voted.
Committee members Michele Currie, Gary Vontell, Don Soucy, Mayor William Stortz and Audette voted in favor of the Scalia site.
The other two members, Ivonne Hamm and Chris Wilson, voted against it.
The site selection committee for the Forestville K-8 school voted unanimously to recommend that the city purchase the former Crowley dealership on Pine Street for a new school.
"Both recommendations are going to City Council," said William Smyth, the business manager for the school district.
Audette said he was surprised and impressed when he went to see the old Scalia sand pit and found a pastoral scene of trees and rolling hills.
"It almost looks like you're in the country," Audette said, adding that he loved the thought of his students – who have only asphalt and no grass at recess – in that setting.
"What a different experience it would be for them," said Audette. "It struck me as such a beautiful setting."
Hamm said the Scalia site was her second choice.
"I thought the Bristol mall was the best site," said Hamm, because it maintained an urban setting, is already owned by the city and is closer to Bingham and O'Connell schools and would require less busing than the other locations.
Soucy said the Scalia site was his second choice. He preferred the site at Park and Divinity streets, which would have required using eminent domain to take many residential and commercial properties, including an abandoned grocery store.
Soucy said the words "eminent domain" probably helped torpedo that site and that the city's intent to develop the mall likely did the same.
"I understand we're not making the decision in a vacuum," said Soucy. "We have to send 'em a site that has a realistic chance of being accepted."
Audette, too, used the phrase "in a vacuum" to describe how the committee was not operating.
Audette said he worried about safety – especially traffic – at the downtown mall site and the Park and Divinity location. The former Roberts property is nice, but "a little too far out," Audette said.
"To me, it's not the West End," said Audette.
Soucy, a member of the city finance board, said he believes city councilors and finance board members will approve the selected site.
"I think it has the best chance," said Soucy.
Soucy said he didn't favor using the former Roberts property for a new school site.
"I still have high hopes of Roberts being developed as a recreation area," said Soucy.

*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm still not convinced that the k-8 concept is the way to go and I fear that it also may be torperdoed after the election, however, I would like to congradulate the BOE West End School site selection committee for choosing Barlow Street. It is a beautiful site, the roads and infrastructure is there, not to mention it is a stones throw from the bus company. It is a nice, flat,level,secluded piece of property. I definately didn't think the mall site, or the old Food Mart, was a great site considering all the red tape, tear town, eminemt domain, etc involved with these sites.

Anonymous said...

The courant reported that Mike Rimcoski is planning on voting against this site when it comes before the city council. he said that there are too many unknowns, including price, and that the location is too remote.

Anonymous said...

I hope more council members follow Rimcoski's lead. There are too many unknowns including price which is a big unknown. After everything that Scalia did that ruined the natural waterway to Rockwell Park, they don't deserve to be rewarded by the City purchasing the property.

This is still being shoved down our throats.

Anonymous said...

Why pay for more land when we have a great piece of land at the Roberts? Talk about wasting our tax dollars!

Anonymous said...

The proposed schools are too big.
Keep the schools small.
Take back the Sherman Park school.
Fix the old small schools - recycle renovate, enhance them at a much lower cost.

Build a new SMALL school, if you must.
The schools should be walkable for most of the students - less oil dependence, less CO2 emissions.

Don't tax the property owners to death over consumptive sprawl orientated energy policies!
Green planning policies, energy conservation planning policies, are needed in this city!
Conservation of resources are needed in this city.

Anonymous said...

Don Soucy will never vote for the school to go to Robert's. Don is the director of the regional little league center on Mix Street. He has been trying to relocate Edgewood Little League and the mens slow pitch softball league to Robert's for years. I think the softball league finally was relocated to Casey Field. If the school is built on Robert's, Edgewood has no where to relocate.

Anonymous said...

As a follow-up to the last post, I have always thought the Robert's property made the most sense both fiscally and location wise for a new school. I thought a mixed use school with alot of Park dept playing fields would be a nice mix.

Anonymous said...

"The courant reported that Mike Rimcoski is planning on voting against this site when it comes before the city council. he said that there are too many unknowns, including price, and that the location is too remote.

Mike isn't voting "no" for any reason. He votes "no" on everything, and looks for a reason later. That's why they called him "Dr. No" when he was on the ZBA, and that's all he has done on the City Council for the past two years. That's not helpful.

Anonymous said...

Mike Rimcoski votes no when the people asking for his vote aren't giving him all the information ncessary for him to make an informed decision. He isn't going to vote yes for something if he is being kept in the dark.

I'm glad he demands the crucial information before he votes. He's the only one that does.

Anonymous said...

Re: Anonymous post at noon

The problem with blogs (although I love them) is that anyone can post just about anything with no factual information.

I have never stated publicly or privately that I wanted to move Edgewood Little League to the Robert's Property. Edgewood Little League is here at the Giamatti Center and there are absolutely no plans and/or thoughts to move them from this site.

As far as the men's Slo-Pitch League, Little League Baseball does not own or control the land they use. As a matter of fact, the land is owned by the New Britain Water Company. You would have to ask them what thoughts they have on relocation.

The Robert's Property was purchased with a specific purpose in mind and it was sold to the city for that purpose - park, open space, fields, etc. I accepted the intended use then, and will not support anything on the site that does not conform to the above.

Anonymous said...

I agree that Scalia does not deserve any city money. He stole sand out of Rockwell Park a number of years ago and made life miserable for countless neighbors of that rotten pit.
If the city wants that land, it should take it by eminent domain.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Soucy, I'm curious about your job. I know you're the Giamatti Little League director, but what is it that you do when they are not playing baseball?

Anonymous said...

I don't think Mr. Soucy does much when they aren't playing baseball. Nice job he has!

Anonymous said...

RE: Anonymous 4:11 post

That's a good question of which many people ask. Actually, I am not the "Giamatti Little League director."

I am the East Region Director for Little League Baseball. The A. Bartlett Giamatti Little League Leadership Training Center is the East Region Headquarters for our 11-state area (the 6 New England states, MD, DE, PA, NY and NJ).

The region is comprised of 2100 Little League Charters with almost 900,000 children playing baseball and softball and 300,000 adult volunteers. It is the largest region in the world.

In addition to holding 5 weeks of summer camp for over 1,000 youngsters and hosting the East Region Tournament in August, the staff at the Giamatti Center conducts adult training for umpires, coaches, managers, league administrators and District Administrators in the fall and winter months.

I and the other two Assistant Directors travel to each state during the off season and conduct clinics for the above mentioned volunteers. We are basically problem solvers for thousands of people that contact this office each year. Our responsibility is to insure that all 2100 leagues operate in a fashion that complies with the rules and regulations of Little League Baseball International. At times, this can be a daunting task because there are also approximately 1.6 million parents that have equal opportunity to pick up a telephone and give us a call.

In addition, you may know that many non-profit groups within our community use the Giamatti Center for various fundraisers to support their individual charities. This, in and of itself requires a good deal of coordination from our support staff. We have 7 full time employees and increase that number to almost 55 (many local high school and college students needing summer employment) during the summer months.

The Giamatti Center is completely funded by Little League International in Williamsport, Pennsylvania with an annual budget of approximately 1.1 million dollars. There are 4 other regional sites in the United States, located in Florida, Indiana, Texas and California. We also have a European Center in Poland.

I hope I somewhat answered your question as to what we do when not playing baseball.

Anonymous said...

"Mike Rimcoski votes no when the people asking for his vote aren't giving him all the information ncessary for him to make an informed decision. He isn't going to vote yes for something if he is being kept in the dark. I'm glad he demands the crucial information before he votes. He's the only one that does."

You're falling for his BS. He has the answers, he just doesn't like them or doesn't understand them, and then bleats that no gives him answers. He got a detailed flyer from the BOE on the K-8 conversion with all the answers to all his questions. He didn't bother reading it because it was either too hard to read or his mind was already made up. He's a fake.