Rosenthal Defends Bridgeport Hall Selection For Town Offices

 

By Kendra Bobowick

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal defended the change of locations for the new town hall this week, following the April 12 Planning & Zoning Commission public hearing that continued on Thursday this week, after The Bee went to press. Plans shift the town hall location from Shelton House as proposed in the 2003 master plan for campus reuse to Bridgeport Hall.

Mr Rosenthal argued that Bridgeport “makes the most sense” for the new town and education office location. Prior plans had the offices relocating to a renovated Shelton House. Early in 2006 the Fairfield Hills Authority members took architects’ advice, however, and focused on the potential of Bridgeport Hall.

A January 2006 authority meeting officially took Shelton House off the drawing board.

Demolition was in the mix of Fairfield Hills Authority members’ swift decisions in January as they favored options for a new town hall. At that meeting architects had provided a combination of scenarios surrounding buildings Shelton House and Bridgeport Hall. Whit Iglehart, with project architectural firm Tai Soo Kim Partners, ran through the possibilities, concluding with the recommendation to raze Shelton. Although that building “has a front portico and could suggest a town hall, there are quite a few negatives. Its general condition is not too good,” Mr Iglehart said. “Our recommendation is that the Shelton option not be pursued, but it should be demolished to open the space to Bridgeport [Hall].”

After he ran through the options, authority members took little time narrowing their preference.

Looking at different options A through D, the members made their considerations.

Leaving no misunderstandings as to option A, which pointed to renovations to Shelton Hall, Chairman Robert Geckle said, “Clearly, you can take Shelton off the menu.”

Making it official, Mr Lavery said, “We should recommend to the Board of Selectmen to demolish and not use Shelton for the town hall.”

Now, more than a year later, Mr Rosenthal said this week, “There were problems with Shelton. A lot had to do with size, design, and condition of the building.”

Architects noted the pitfalls in the January 2006 meeting. At the time Mr Iglehart had listed Shelton House’s drawbacks from the roof to the ground floor. “Shelton has a lot of damage in the wings and other serious problems with looking at it for use.”

He described the floor plan as less than ideal with its narrow, 40-foot widths, which “limit the options.” Mr Iglehart continued dissecting interior problems, saying, “All partitions may need to be removed and inside Shelton they’re all block and terra cotta — that’s major demolition.”

Ceilings also topped the list counting against Shelton Hall. “They are not necessarily high; that’s a problem for new electronics, for example,” Mr Iglehart said.

“As someone said, ‘A River Runs Through It,’” he quipped. “There is water in the basement.”

Explaining that Shelton House’s location and elevation were essentially perfect for collecting water, Mr Iglehart said it would literally make a better site for a pond. One of the two scenarios for which the committee opted involves developing a pond in front of Bridgeport Hall.

Offering the most compelling reason for his firm’s recommended options, Mr Iglehart said, “Bridgeport is in better shape than Shelton, it has large open spaces inside, and there are not a lot of inside partitions to remove.”

He also liked the ceiling height, explaining, “It’s good for conference space and for meetings.”

December of 2006 found design/build team O&G Industries Inc Director of Development Jeffrey Cugno making a presentation before the Building and Site Commission, where he detailed plans and cost estimates for Bridgeport Hall. He had said then, “We saw a lot of back research and were involved in a lot of planning…we went through a lot of scenarios.” During that meeting Mr Rosenthal had noted that changes would have to be made to the master plan through the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said, “We will have to go shortly to the Planning and Zoning for modification of the master plan because we had talked about renovating Shelton House [for a new town hall] but that doesn’t appear to be feasible.”

This week, just days after the initial P&Z hearing, Mr Rosenthal said, “[Shelton House] seemed to be located well and looked stately and was in the center of campus, but further studies showed it didn’t lend itself to a town hall.” Details like a small foyer, narrow halls, small rooms, and renovation costs also worked against the building.

He continued, “Shelton is out of the question, Bridgeport lends itself well…it’s an open building, plans have been progressing.” The Fairfield Hills authority has been pushing designers throughout the year and has already developed drawings and cost estimates — roughly $10.5 million to renovate Bridgeport Hall to accommodate the Board of Education and municipal offices.

“We believe all offices will fit and there is some room for growth. The building lends itself to additions and we know we could add on to it in the future if the town grows,” Mr Rosenthal said.

The change of venue is before the Planning and Zoning Commission this week. The change must be reflected in the campus’s master plan for reuse.

“We meet all the criteria for changing,” Mr Rosenthal said. “We are not inconsistent with zoning, there are no environmental or health issues.” Also, the first selectman said that plans are consistent with the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development.