2016-12-08-AC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

12/08/2016 AC Minutes Mr. Michelson noted that the Town had placed a legal bid notice in the paper for these services, thus complying with notification laws. DPW also individually contacted a few large entities, telling them of this opportunity but did not contact all the individuals who had previously worked for the Town in this capacity. Mr. Michelson questioned whether more competitive quotes would have been forthcoming with more outreach, adding that the contract for the roadways is only for one year, so this can be addressed next year. He also reportedthat the Town will no longer be repairing contractors’ equipment, which had been the practice in the past.It was noted that there were available mechanisms for funding cost overruns for snow and ice removal. 4.School Department Capital Planning; Potential Uses of 20 Pelham Road Mr. Parker reported that there would be a joint meeting of theBoard of Selectmen (BoS), School Committee, Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC)and this Committee at 8 p.m. on December 12 to discuss potential uses of20Pelham Road. A majority oftheBoS supportsan eminent domain taking for municipal orschool use; this wording allows for flexibilityin future uses of the property by the Town.The valuehas beenestimatedby an appraiser hired by the Townas $7.4 million, but the owner will havetwo years tolegally challenge the value. The School Committee has indicated interest in using the site for the Lexington Children’s Place (LCP)program. Ms. Hai reported that the CEC is meeting at 7:30 a.m. on December 12 to review the issues. She identified several of her concerns, including: This appears to be an expensive way to accommodate the LCP needs, especially ifthe land purchase is included inthe cost. It is premature to make a commitmentto a particular use; another use may have a higher priority as we move forward. Earlier discussions identified advantages for the LCP being located on a site with another school in order to share some resources. The following points were made by committee membersduring the ensuing discussion: The Harrington site, which currently accommodates Harrington Elementary School, the LCP, and the school administration offices, has traffic and parking issues. Enrollment projections indicate the need for relief from an increasingly untenable situation. The current LCP facility needs additional space to avoid paying outside tuition if the number of LCP students continues to increase, as projected. The LCP facility only needs one totwo acres of land, and 20 Pelham includes eight acres, leaving room for alternative uses. Bringing the Pelham Road building for the LCP up to code would costapproximately $18.0 million. The building would then be “adequate” but not “as new”. The Pelham Road facility could be used for the school administration offices. Buying the property and holding it ties up capital and results in some maintenance and security costs. The following opinions were expressedbut do not necessarily reflect a consensus of the Committee: The estimates for building the LCP at Pelham Road should not be burdened with the entire purchase cost of Pelham Road. 2