High School Gymnasium to be Demolished in February

The decision to take down the gym despite the pending appeal was announced at Wednesday's School Committee meeting and will serve as the first true construction at the site.

Superintendent of Schools Joanne Benton announced during Wednesday’s School Committee meeting that the Wilmington High School gymnasium will be demolished over February vacation.

Though the high school project is currently being appealed to Superior Court, it was previously ruled that the Activities and Use Limitation (AUL) was not allowed as part of the appeal, leaving the door open for the town to begin work on at least part of the project.

February vacation is slated to begin on Monday, February 20. On February 11, Benton said fencing will be put up in the area.

As a result, an alternate parking plan will be put into place. To date, 90 seniors applied for and received parking stickers. There is also room for about 80 additional student parking spaces, in addition to staff parking. A lottery system will be put into place to issue those remaining passes.

Benton said the decision to demolish the gymnasium as the first phase of construction is due to the anticipated spike in costs that will result from the delays the appeals have caused over the last year-plus.

“Every day we do not do construction, we’re losing more money,” said Benton. “I don’t think we can afford to wait any longer, and the town agrees with me.”

Check back on Thursday for more coverage of the decision, along with other topics from Wednesday’s School Committee meeting.

Joe m January 10, 2013 at 01:26 AM
Take that oil boy!!
Kevin MacDonald January 10, 2013 at 01:46 AM
I believe Superintendent Benton is being paid $175,000 per year. She should be the first one to be sent packing if she believes that we are losing money every day that we don't construct. She is receiving doctor-like pay, yet she does not have a PHD degree. I have not heard that she even teaches a single subject. I would encourage Wilmington students (future taxpayers) and current taxpayers to go to the link I will post below and multiply the square footage (192,443 sq.ft.) of the proposed school by the most expensive construction model price example using union labor provided by Reed Construction Data and see what you think of our school superintendent's claim. The proposed high school is 192,443 square feet. Keep in mind that the proposed school will not be built the most expensive way. Every day that we keep the town officials that we have I believe we are losing money - big money !!!!! http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/rsmeans/models/high-school/massachusetts/boston/
Eileen C January 10, 2013 at 02:12 AM
Excellent news! So glad we are finally moving forward with this.
debmar January 10, 2013 at 02:34 AM
Such great news!! Such great news!!!
Wilmington Mom January 10, 2013 at 02:53 AM
Oil boy... HAHAHAHA! Love it!!
ECJ January 10, 2013 at 09:08 AM
I feel good about this move. No reason to delay any longer. "Here we go Wilmington Here we go!!!"
parent and employee January 10, 2013 at 11:42 AM
What is gained by doing the demo in February as opposed to July? Is it going to help enough to offset all the changes and inconveniences for staff and students mid year? I think not. We've been forced to wait this long so it won't hurt to wait a little bit longer.
Randi DeLoreto January 10, 2013 at 01:07 PM
Agreed. Why not wait until after the kids are out of school...that way no one is in harms way. What will it mean for the annual 4th celebration....if it effects it at all?
Kevin MacDonald January 10, 2013 at 08:23 PM
This is just another ill advised, irresponsible, unintelligent decision to chalk up with all the others that these disastrous officials make. It is so disrespectful to the students(future tax payers) and current taxpayers. This will turn into the most expensive disaster the Town has seen. Will Wilmington have to experience this so they can finally realized that Cimaglia and Newhouse should be nonselectmen and Benton a nonsuperintendent. Wilmington should look at the link that I will post below and multiply 192,443 (the sq. ft. of the proposed new school) by the most expensive model square foot price in the link. Keep in mind that the proposed school is not being built the most expensive model way. It is interesting how out of whack the $82 million dollar amount that we are being charged in comparison with this calculation is. I guess hack officials just don't care and don't want to hear it. Let them hear it at the polls !!!!!!!!
Kevin MacDonald January 10, 2013 at 08:41 PM
192,443 sq. ft. x $197/sq.ft. = $37,911,271 http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/rsmeans/models/high-school/massachusetts/boston/
Wayne Sullivan January 10, 2013 at 09:24 PM
Your website uses data from 2008 and we are in the year 2013. There will certainly be a cost increase in construction costs since 2008. Here is the statement on your site - NOTE: This cost estimate uses 2008 RSMeans data. Also, your numbers don't take into consideration all the other costs that are not covered as part of the construction cost such as furniture, computers, etc. I understand where you are going with this, but your cost estimates are not based on 2013 numbers or even projected costs looking forward to 2014 and 2015 which includes the timeframe this school is supposed to be constructed in.
gbd January 10, 2013 at 09:31 PM
As always no one in town know anything but the great Kevin MacDonald. Why don't you run for office? Oh that's right you did and lost BIG. Instead of always being negative why don't you try something new and be positive, just once I would like you to say something positive about Wilmington. Here is a good start Good By Wilmington I’m leaving.
Joe m January 10, 2013 at 11:50 PM
Kevin,are you a descendant of the mayans? Just sayin.
Kevin MacDonald January 11, 2013 at 02:34 AM
$82,000,000 - $37,911,271 = $44,088,729. Does school furniture cost this much Wayne? What's wrong with the current furniture? Is every bit of school furniture junk? Have you seen a list of every cost breakdown to arrive at the $82,000,000 price tag Wayne? I am familiar with wages for construction union members and they certainly have not doubled in 4 years. People like you are the reason taxpayers get steam rolled. PRODUCE the complete cost breakdown list other than in your fantasies.
Wayne Sullivan January 11, 2013 at 12:54 PM
KEVIN YOU ARE STILL NOT ADDRESSING YOUR 2008 DATA!!!! Now that you are called out on it you are in attack mode per usual. If you are going to spread your venom you need to be accurate and you are not! I never said furniture costs the difference and I am in no way implying that. Your numbers are not accurate plain and simple! To get 2012 data or even 2013 data you would need to subscribe to the site you recommend and the lowest subscriptions start in the $600 range and I know you would never pay that. You won't spend a nickle! Your data is outdated and therefore has absolutely NO MERIT BASIS FROM A COST ANALYSIS STANDPOINT! PERIOD, END OF STORY! YOU ALSO FAIL TO MENTION THAT THE STATE IS PAYING ALMOST HALF THE TAB! Another convenient truth being left out!!!! Back to my fantasy land gotta go!
Kevin MacDonald January 11, 2013 at 01:38 PM
Why don't you share the complete list of cost breakdowns with everyone Wayne? Oh I forgot, You never had a list and a complete break down of the total cost. What do you have to offer in terms of protecting the tax payers from being shafted? How are those contracts doing that are not going out for competitive bid on the Central Registry? It sounds like you're protecting your hack crony buddies Wayne !!! http://www.sec.state.ma.us/spr/sprcentral/infocent.htm
BOOKevinMacDonald out January 11, 2013 at 02:39 PM
Gee, check out this link. http://wilmington.patch.com/articles/video-tempers-flare-at-public-forum#video-8111097
Wayne Sullivan January 11, 2013 at 04:42 PM
No protection Kevin and I don't have the costs. I am simply saying your numbers are not accurate. You want to avoid the fact that your information is skewed and flawed and you don't have all the information reflected. Your inability to provide this information doesn't mean it's my responsibility to give it you. I don't work for the town or have any cronies. I just know your 2008 data is not current, plain and simple. Case closed.
Steven McGinley January 16, 2013 at 09:16 PM
Let's hope the judge is on the saintly side of impartial. Being that presumptive might irritate some. Good luck to us all. I've been wondering too, does the delay in the project mean a delay in our taxes going up?


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