|
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO OCTOBER 16,2017, STMs 2017-2&-3
<br /> from the scope and the Town will independently contract for them. The project funding has, therefore,
<br /> been reduced by the same request amount as the increase in the authorization for the Revolving Fund as
<br /> that Fund will now pay for those bins.
<br /> Article 8:APPROPRIATE Fund Funding
<br /> DESIGN FUNDS FOR Authorization Source Committee Recommends
<br /> VISITORS CENTER Requested
<br /> $150,000 GF Approval(5-2)
<br /> "To see if the Town will vote to raise and appropriate a sum of money for design, engineering and
<br /> architectural services for the Visitors Center, including production of design development and construction
<br /> documents; determine whether the money shall be provided by the tax levy,by transfer from available funds,
<br /> by borrowing,or by any combination of these methods; or act in any other manner in relation thereto."
<br /> "DESCRIPTION: The Visitors Center was built over 50 years ago for the Battle of Lexington
<br /> Bicentennial. It is the information gateway for tourists, residents, newcomers, and corporations
<br /> considering locating in Lexington. Prior Town Meetings approved funds to develop a design for an
<br /> updated Visitors Center. The additional funds will conclude the design work at the Visitor's Center
<br /> and produce construction documents. Funds for construction are anticipated to be requested at
<br /> Annual Town Meeting in Spring 2018."
<br /> (Town Warrant, 18 Sep 2017)
<br /> Analysis
<br /> The 2014 Annual Town Meeting appropriated$220,608 to develop a design for renovation of the Visitors
<br /> Center through construction documents. Input was received from the Tourism Committee, Historical
<br /> Society, Historic Districts Commission, Lexington Center merchants, and others. In order to
<br /> accommodate the design and programmatic requirements of the stakeholders, the preferred option was to
<br /> replace the existing building with a new building on the same site, even though, as a replacement rather
<br /> than a renovation, the project would no longer be eligible for CPA funds.
<br /> At the 2017 ATM, a request was submitted for an additional $118,500 to be added to the $131,496
<br /> remaining from the 2014 appropriation, in order to complete a schematic design and provide construction
<br /> documents—each with the associated cost estimates—for an approximately 8,000 square-foot building.
<br /> At that time the estimated total cost of the new building, including design/engineering, construction, soft
<br /> costs and a contingency, was $3,933,500. This Committee concluded that the cost was too high, and that
<br /> additional "value engineering" was required to reduce costs and should be done before proceeding past
<br /> schematic design. This Committee was prepared to support such schematic-design work if covered by the
<br /> balance available in the previously appropriated funds with just a$21,000 supplement. This Committee's
<br /> amendment to that supplement amount was approved by that ATM.
<br /> The Town now has a schematic design for a two-story building with additional space in the basement for
<br /> public bathrooms and storage, with a total 6,693 square feet. The Town acknowledges that the architect
<br /> was instructed to proceed based on the agreed-to-programmatic stakeholder requests,but was not given a
<br /> suggested budget for the project. The current estimated total cost to complete the design through
<br /> construction documents, construction, and with ancillary costs, is $4,315,000—which reflects $202,000 in
<br /> reductions reviewed with the Permanent Building Committee. The funding request before this STM is
<br /> $150,000 of the$4,315,000 to accomplish the Design Development.
<br /> Because of concerns about the increasing cost, this Committee has reservations about the size of the
<br /> current building design and the efficient use of space to meet programmatic needs.
<br /> The Historic Districts Commission (HDC)—which must make a judgment on the massing and exterior
<br /> appearance of the building in the context of its placement—has not yet taken a formal position to support
<br /> the proposed building,but has acknowledged reservations about the building's size and bulk.
<br /> 9
<br />
|