.

Info Meeting on the New Morgan School Dec. 11

Have questions about the new Morgan School and its design? Come to an informational session and check out the new design on Tuesday, Dec. 11.

 

The Morgan Building Committee will hold an information session for the public on Tuesday, December 11, in the Morgan School Cafeteria at 7 pm.

The object is to present the plans for the proposed new Morgan School, and to provide the public an opportunity to ask questions and give their input. 

There will be a presentation by Richard Munday, AIA, a principal from Newman Architects of New Haven.  They are the chosen designers of the new building. 

Community members are encouraged to attend.

Kirk Carr December 08, 2012 at 12:03 AM
Newman Architect Presentation: The presentation you will see on Tuesday was presented jointly on Tuesday 12.4 to the Morgan Building Committee, the Boards of Selectmen, Education and Finance. A video of that meeting is available at: http://youtu.be/2ETdv96-7gE At 19:30 minutes into the video, the architect shows that the building foot print abuts the wetlands at the edge of the Indian River. This violates Clinton Wetland Regulations that require a 50 foot set back. Link:http://clintonct.org/pdfs/iwwr_regs/section6.pdf The plan also includes cutting into the slope and building a floor in the rear toward the Indian River below the ground level entrance at the front, subjecting these classrooms to potential flooding in the Spring. No questions were asked about this placement by any Board members and the public was not permitted to participate in any way.
Art Kuever December 08, 2012 at 02:16 PM
I believe the public will be able to ask questions at the meeting this Tuesday at 7:00 at The Morgan School's Cafe, so I am sure that this will be asked and answered. The set back is a fair question and that 50' set back is there for a reason and I would hope that it is actually 50' from the wetlands but I think the review zone is 100' and a variance would need to be granted if it were at the 50' no touch zone. I would also hope that any possibility that this area floods up to the point of the building would also be addressed. Not every river rises exponentially in the spring so the history of this being flooded should be looked into. Overall, this is your best post. It is on point and on an even keel. Thank You.
Phil Sengle December 08, 2012 at 04:19 PM
I wonder if the soil contamination of the site will be addressed. I direct your readers to a letter to the editor from a parent on this subject in the December 6th Harbor News.
Kirk Carr December 09, 2012 at 01:55 AM
At the meeting last Tuesday, no questions were asked about the environmental assessment reported on June 29 available at: http://edocs.ecsconsult.com/scanneddocs/vprojectscanned/216138/Documents/AutoName_105014.pdf A flyer distributed at the meeting pointed out that if samples taken for this report are representative of the soil found on this site, 14 acres of soil are contaminated an average 3.84 times the Residential Direct Exposure Criteria established by the Connecticut DEEP. This study was dated 63 days after the purchase of the property even though Jerry Vece and Bob Lynn promised to conduct it BEFORE the purchase. Video link: http://youtu.be/ZJOeL2Cv6Fo "A promise made is a debt unpaid." Robert W. Service If you can't trust this Committee to respond accurately to a simple question like this, can you trust members of these Boards and this Committee (who ask no questions about this environmental assessment) with the health of Clinton's children? At least one parent is asking the right questions: http://www.theday.com/article/20121203/OP02/312069888/0/SEARCH
Art Kuever December 09, 2012 at 02:34 AM
Mr. Carr, How is the property where you live? Do you know what the numbers were on your property prior to you moving in? I believe the land where you reside had the same usage as the new location for the high school, yet you seem to be healty. I also believe the State may have criteria that needs to be met prior to the money being sent to the town for the new building. I am hopeful that this will be mediated in a way that will suffice for all involved.
Here We Go Again December 09, 2012 at 02:34 AM
Oh goodness......here we go again. What's the plan this time....same as last time? Disruption? Opposition? Obstruction? I wish you really cared enough about the town of Clinton to make a difference in a positive way. Are any of us looking forward to a new series of nasty posts containing self-serving Internt links and misinformation? Didn't we have enough of this the last time around?
Jay December 09, 2012 at 03:38 AM
If you build on a property that is shown to have Any contamination you are sure to have at least one of your parents suing at some point over the health of their children. This project has already been tainted with false steps and promises that will make any number of lawyers happy to take the case. "Damm the torpedos" was a fine attitude a hundred and fifty years ago but it does not pan out well today..
Here We Go Again December 09, 2012 at 05:30 AM
And the CTA and CTA-representatives are now suddenly concerned about the environment and the health of children? Pro-environment and pro-children is the plan? Play to hystery and parent fear? Last year you called these children princes and princesses - and tried to take their school away - now you're suddenly concerned about their health? It's another plan to disrupt the process. A process that was voted to proceed. These poor people trying to build this school have to make choices and spend considerable time, often unpaid, to make the best school possible and all the time they've got to go up against a force that just compalins, criticizes, obstructs, spews and gets in the way at every turn. Be a concerned citizen. Be a watchdog. Be a contributor. That's the American way. But don't nip at the heels of people who are making a positive contribution and trying to build a school that we can be proud of. It's no longer about the battle you continue to want to fight - it's now about building a school. The CTA can be a citizen contributor - or a citizen heel biter.
Art Kuever December 09, 2012 at 01:11 PM
Has there been any lawsuits due to the football field at Joel? I believe at one point that this location was a dump of some sort. The Hammocks, a very nice little location was also built on similarly used property yet those who reside there seem to be full of boundless energy. Is the town expecting lawsuits from that location because they approved the building lots? I am a believer that when remediation is done correctly property can be re-used rather then let sit dormant.
Kirk Carr December 09, 2012 at 02:45 PM
Advantageous comparison is the second of eight methods Dr. Albert Bandura of Stanford University has identified that humans use to justify immoral behavior. It may be true that 71-79 Killingworth Turnpike is less toxic than Three Mile Island and no more contaminated than a development that is being built on Beach Park Road. But that makes building a school on soil contaminated with dieldrin, chlordane and arsenic no more sound nor ethical. When the facts are beyond debate, change the subject. Call the adversaries in the debate names. Dehumanize and humiliate them. Can we please stick to the facts and not dismiss them. The people who favor this new school, not its opponents, have piled untruth on top of untruth to sell this ill-conceived and very expensive project. e.g. The current school costs $1 million a year to maintain, the NEASC will suspend Morgan's accreditation if we don't build a new school, the property Morgan occupies is the most attractive commercial property in Clinton, a new school will cost less to build than repairing the existing school, soil tests will be completed before the property is purchased. http://youtu.be/zcpkix3YlpQ http://youtu.be/07NggB2azj4 http://youtu.be/ZJOeL2Cv6Fo Yes, these are well intentioned people fixated on a very bad idea. The cult of a New Morgan is incapable of absorbing new adverse information rationally. It must not be appeased by reticence. The consequences to Clinton, students and faculty are dire.
Veritas December 10, 2012 at 12:26 AM
Once again with deliberate misinformation. In the scale drawing, the building is clearly in compliance with setback requirements.
Veritas December 10, 2012 at 12:28 AM
Be sure to watch the beginning of the presentation when the architect talks about what a beautiful site this is and how Clinton is lucky to have such a unique and wonderful opportunity to create a town campus.
Kirk Carr December 12, 2012 at 10:21 AM
Last night (Dec. 11) Newman clarified statements made at the joint board meetings last week that the wetland line used in the illustration is the set back line, not the wetland border.
Sam Justice December 13, 2012 at 05:36 PM
The representative from the environmental testing service was hardly overwhelmed with questions after the meeting. It didn't seem "dire" once the meeting ended. In fact all the grandstanding on the issue disappeared when there was no throng to listen and no camera to record it. I have some serious concerns about the soil just as I have serious concerns about PCB's, asbestos and mold in the current building. After speaking with the representative who was present I think this is easily solvable. I'm not proud to say this was the first Morgan meeting I've been to, but I realized something very quickly. This isn't a crusade by the CTA to protect our students and staff, it's a desperate attempt to appeal to the greatest human weakness, fear. The CTA's "dire pesticide issue," while valid if addressed with perspective and without hyperbole, is merely an effort to put doubt in the minds of this project's supporters for one end, killing the project. I really hope we are witnessing the exorcism of the CTA. Once everyone in town realizes how simply this organization operates that exorcism will be complete.
Kirk Carr December 14, 2012 at 02:40 AM
Clearly Jerry Vece did not want Matt Kennedy to answer contamination questions publicly. He promised that Matt would answer questions at the end of the meeting and then only offerred off-line questions. Denial will result in not confronting serious problems that could be averted if addressed. Vece promised that a phase 2 soil test would be conducted by BEFORE the property was purchased. Here is the link repeated from above: http://youtu.be/ZJOeL2Cv6Fo But the property was purchased 63 days before the test was released. Now you trust him to shoot straight about the test results. Dehumanization is the 7th of 8 methods humans use to justify immoral behavior. One who dehumanizes others dehumanize's one's self. Likewise with those who demonize others. The CTA is here to stay as long as profligate spending threatens to impoverish Clinton's taxpayers. Therefore, the CTA has never had more supporters nor been better organized. Growing in strength and growing in numbers, thanks in part to vicious attacks like this. When a cogent case can't be made, throwing stones is the last refuge of a limited intellect.
Sam Justice December 14, 2012 at 04:14 AM
No group throws more stones than the CTA. So, other than "stop the project" what are your or the CTA's solutions to remediate the contaminated soil on the purchased property? If you provide real answers to the town's problems and prove you can avoid Machiavellian fear mongering or pomposity, rational people may start to listen. Solutions are valuable, time to hear some.
Tom Riccio December 18, 2012 at 07:06 PM
I recently reviewed the video of this meeting and I am extremely disappointed by the proposed building. I counted nearly 12 different roof lines. Although not flat, wasn't that the point of not putting money into the current school? It is also uncanny how the proposed buildings physical layout is nearly the same as the current building. What has been incorporated from the first achitect we paid thousands to, whose drawings were fine? The bell in front? Can we just admit money was wasted on an expensive ad campaign. We could have put a picture of any other new high school in front of the voters for free. An ad campaign which seems to be unravelling behind closed doors. Contaminated land needing millions in remediation (hence the built in 9 million for just such a contingency?), added costs for a bridge and maintenance building, and inevitable cost overruns. We have not learned our lessons from past mistakes of which the ad hoc expansion to the current Morgan was. A new school is a major town investment. I urge all parties to reconsider just not what we want, but what we need. We must remember Morgan acts as a public gathering spot using the gyms and the auditorium routinely throughout the year. Any negotiation on having a smaller space in either is a non-starter. Please recommit to a building such as that of Mr. Thompson which voters envisioned and had input to. Thank you for your efforts and time on this project.
Kirk Carr December 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM
No one in authority is listening. Even some fervent supporters of a new Morgan voiced disappointment with the "mini me" plan presented by the architect. By the end of the meeting, the architect and chair were retreating and promised to go back to the drawing boards before the next public meeting. With this audience reaction this may be the last public meeting they have the temerity to hold. A week later the committee met and not one word was spoken about this public reaction. They spoke mostly about a flying tower in the auditorium, acoustic separation in the gymnasium, bridges over the river and a tardy and ridiculously expensive ($140K) study to prove building new will cost less than to refurbish as new. Selected reactions at the public meeting followed by the uncut committee meeting is available at: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qvaWiDCdJ9A Remember this is the same chair who promised that Phase II soil tests on the Richard's farm would be conducted BEFORE the property was purchased. In fact the damning soil test results were reported 63 days after the property was purchased. See the promise made: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJOeL2Cv6Fo Expectations are not well managed and buyers remorse is setting in before a shovel is in the ground. Prepare for more nasty surprises and disappointments and for legitimate questions to be stonewalled. It is the committee's emerging shameful MO.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »