HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-31-ATM-STM-CEC-rpt (Final - incorporates Updates and Errata 03-31-14)
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
CEC
APITALXPENDITURESOMMITTEE
TL
OWN OF EXINGTON
REPORT TO THE
2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING (ATM)
&
2014 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING, March 24, 2014 (STM)
Released March 17, 2014
INCLUDING UPDATES & ERRATA
Released March 31, 2014
Submitted by:
Jill I. Hai, Chair
David G. Kanter, Vice-Chair
Bill Hurley
Wendy Manz
Beth Masterman
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Summary of Warrant-Article Recommendations
is Appendix C at the end of the report
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1
The Mission of the Capital Expenditures Committee ................................................................................. 2
How to Read This Report ........................................................................................................................... 2
Summary of FY2015 Capital-Budget Requests
..................................................................................... 3
Capital Budget ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Big-Ticket Projects ........................................................................................................................... 4
The Community Preservation Act (CPA) ........................................................................................ 6
Enterprise-Fund Projects ................................................................................................................ 11
Revolving-Fund Projects ................................................................................................................ 12
Small-Ticket Projects ..................................................................................................................... 12
Five-Year Capital Plan
........................................................................................................................... 13
Programs ................................................................................................................................................... 17
Conservation and Open Space ....................................................................................................... 17
Lexington Community Center & Muzzey Senior Center .............................................................. 18
Fire ................................................................................................................................................. 19
Police .............................................................................................................................................. 22
Library ............................................................................................................................................ 23
Public Works .................................................................................................................................. 23
Public Facilities .............................................................................................................................. 28
Recreation ...................................................................................................................................... 31
Schools ........................................................................................................................................... 32
Information Technology (IT) (Town-wide) ................................................................................... 32
Affordable Housing \[Note: This is new to this Committee’s reporting.\] ...................................... 33
Warrant-Article Explanations and Recommendations ............................................................................. 38
2014 Special Town Meeting, March 24, 2014 .......................................................................................... 38
STM Article 2: Cary Memorial Building Upgrades ...................................................................... 38
STM Article 3: Amend Article 5 of November 4, 2013 Special Town Meeting, Renovation to
Community Center ......................................................................................................................... 39
2014 Annual Town Meeting ..................................................................................................................... 40
th
Article 7 (4 Fund Only): Establish and Continue Departmental Revolving Funds—PEG
Access Fund ................................................................................................................................... 40
Article 8: Appropriate the FY2015 Community Preservation Committee Operating Budget
and CPA Projects (Multiple Categories) ........................................................................................ 40
i
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Article 9: Appropriate for Recreation Capital Projects .................................................................. 46
Article 10: Appropriate for Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment ........................................ 46
Article 11: Appropriate for Water Distribution System Improvements ......................................... 52
Article 12: Appropriate for Wastewater System Improvements .................................................... 53
Article 13: Appropriate for School Capital Projects and Equipment ............................................. 54
Article 14: Appropriate for Public Facilities Capital Projects ........................................................ 55
Article 16: Rescind Prior Borrowing Authorizations ..................................................................... 60
Article 17: Establish and Appropriate To and From Specified Stabilization Funds (SFs) ............. 61
Article 18: Appropriate to Stabilization Fund ................................................................................ 62
Article 19: Appropriate from Debt Service Stabilization Fund ...................................................... 62
Article 22: Appropriate for Authorized Capital Improvements ..................................................... 63
Article 23: Amendments to the District Agreement of the Minuteman Regional Vocational
School District ................................................................................................................................ 63
Appendix A: CPA Fund—Project Revenues and Expenditures ............................................................ A-1
Appendix B: Information on the Town’s Current Specific Stabilization Funds ..................................... B-1
Appendix C: Summary of Warrant-Article Recommendations .............................................................. C-1
ii
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Executive Summary
Beginning last October, the Capital Expenditures Committee (“CEC”) vetted proposals from municipal
departments, school administration, and various citizens groups for capital projects to be included in
Lexington’s Fiscal Year 2015 (“FY2015”) budget. Of those proposals, the ones in the recommended
budget are addressed in this report, along with this Committee’s recommendations. A Summary of
Warrant-Article Recommendations is at the end of the report and the individual Warrant-Article
Recommendations begin on Page 38. As a result of the detailed review and resulting refinement of capital
requests since the initial presentations, Town Meeting will observe that the CEC most often has joined a
consensus among the boards and committees relative to the capital articles being presented to it.
Our committee would like to draw Town Meeting’s attention to the following items:
Community Center
On December 3, 2013, the Town completed the purchase of the land, now with the address of
39 Marrett Road, from the Masons. The expressed purpose of that acquisition was for use as a
Community Center. The prior use of the primary building on that property was as office and training
space. The Board of Selectmen (BoS) created the Ad Hoc Community Center Advisory Committee
(“AhCCAC”) on April 22, 2013, to identify short-term improvements needed to permit occupancy as
soon as possible and for long-term improvements to the property to support additional programs at the
new Center. Through an ongoing iterative process, the AhCCAC continues to work with the architects—
with inputs from key decision makers, stakeholders throughout the Town, the BoS, and other
committees—on what would be a multi-year commitment to expand the facility’s functionality. While a
second phase of expansion has been put on hold because of other pressing Capital needs the Town faces,
on March 10, 2014, the BoS approved the AhCCAC’s recommendation for a more-robust first-phase
build-out with occupancy planned for next March.
The CPA
Use of the CPA in Lexington is now eight years old.The bonds that financed the purchase of Busa Farm,
Cotton Farm, and the Leary Land have been paid in full, eliminating a nearly $2 million annual debt-
service burden on the CPF. The absence of that burden this year has expanded the opportunity for new or
continuing projects in FY2015. The beginning of the debt service for the land purchase off Marrett Road
is among the beneficiaries of that in FY2015.
Big-Ticket Projects
In the foreseeable future, the Town must consider many "big-ticket" projects (i.e., approximately
$1 million or more). The following are only those that will be considered at this STM and ATM. (See the
Big-Ticket Items listed in The Projects Agenda on Page 5 for a more comprehensive list including those
beyond these Town Meetings.) Except for the first item which has been stated by the BoS as the Town’s
highest importance—and with which this Committee agrees—no such ranking is intended by the rest of
the order of this listing.
Fire Station Central Headquarters—Renovation or Replacement
Cary Memorial Building—Upgrades
Community Center—Build-out (including the Carriage House)
Visitor Center—Expansion & Renovation
Community (Affordable) Housing—Development and Acquisition
Minuteman Regional High School—Renovation (through annual assessments)
Recreation Facilities—A continuing need
Roads—Continuing needs
Sidewalks—Continuing needs
Traffic Mitigation—Continuing needs
Affordable Housing
See the new section on Page 33 that addresses how this topic is addressed in the Town.
1
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
The Mission of the Capital Expenditures Committee
From the Code of the Town of Lexington (§29-13):
A. Each year the Capital Expenditures Committee shall request and receive from the Town
boards and departments a list of all capital expenditures that may be required within the
ensuing five-year period. The Committee shall consider the relative need, timing and cost
of these projects, the adequacy thereof and the effect these expenditures might have on
the financial position of the Town.
B. The Committee shall prior to each annual meeting for the transaction of business
prepare, publish and distribute by making copies available at the office of the Town
Clerk and at Cary Memorial Library, and by mailing or otherwise distributing to each
town meeting member, a report of its findings, setting forth a list of all such capital
expenditures together with the committee’s recommendations as to the projects that
should be undertaken within the five-year period and the approximate date on which
each recommended project should be started. This publication may be combined with and
distributed at the same time as the Appropriation Committee Report.
From the Code of the Town of Lexington (§29-14): The term capital expenditures shall mean any and all
expense of a nonrecurring nature not construed as an ordinary operating expense, the benefit of which
will accrue to the Town over an extended period of time.
From the Code of the Town of Lexington (§29-26):…the Capital Expenditures Committeeshall state
whether it endorses each recommendation of the Community PreservationCommittee.
How to Read This Report
Our report is divided into four sections:
An overview of capital projects in Lexington;
Presentation of a five-year capital budget;
Spending history and general capital plan for each department and program; and
This year’s capital articles.
“Town Warrant” refers to the “Town of Lexington Town Warrant for the 2014 Annual Town Meeting”,
January 27, 2014. “Brown Book” refers to the “Town of Lexington Fiscal Year 2015 Recommended
Budget & Financing Plan”, March 3, 2014. Where our narrative includes a “See Article __” (which is to
an ATM Article unless “STM” is included), it is referring you to that Article in the last section—
“Warrant-Article Explanations and Recommendations”. In that section you will find:
We have quoted the Town’s or a Town Committee’s documentation for each of the Articles on which
we are reporting. If we believe that quote has both adequately described the proposed work and
satisfactorily made the case for the Town’s need, you will not find us paraphrasing or otherwise
reiterating either of those matters in this report. However, additional narrative is included if we don’t
feel that is the case.
Our Committee’s recommendations and how we voted are shown only in the boxed header for each
Article and, if applicable, in any sub-elements unless there are further comments on our
recommendation. If there are such comments, they will be in italics at the end of the text below the
boxed header.
Our oral report on Town Meeting floor will reiterate our written report and present any new information
not available as of this writing. When we report on a capital article on Town Meeting floor during the
deliberations, a committee member will provide the committee’s recommendation and, if applicable,
comments related to that recommendation.
2
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
SummaryofFY2015Capital-BudgetRequests
1
Requests
General FundEnterpriseApprop. &
CEC
2345
Art.CategoriesDebtDifferences
CashFundsCPAAuth. Other
Total
Community/Economic Development
Historical Commission Inventory Forms for Listed
8(d)$35,000$35,000
Buildings
Parker Meadow Accessible Trail Design and
8(l)$34,500$34,500
Construction
Public Safety
10(m)Ambulance Replacement$185,000$65,000$250,000
10(n)Heart Monitor$105,000$105,000
Culture and Recreation
8(h)Lincoln Park Field Improvements$231,000$189,000$200,000$620,000
8(i)Park and Playground Improvements$65,000$65,000
8(j)Park Improvements - Athletic Fields$100,000$100,000
8(k)Park Improvements- Hard Court Resurfacing$85,000$85,000
9Pine Meadows Equipment$51,000$51,000
Public Facilities Department
STM 2Cary Memorial Building Upgrades$235,230$8,241,350$200,820$8,677,400
STM 339 Marrett Road Community Center Renovation$422,816$5,797,184$6,220,000
(To be
39 Marrett Road Community Center Sidewalk
8(a)
Indefinitely Postponed)
8(b)Visitor Center$161,276$59,332$220,608
14(a)School Building Envelope and Systems Program$230,000$230,000
14(b)LHS Heating Systems Upgrade—Phases 2 & 3$75,000$75,000
14(c)Municipal Building Envelope and Systems$178,302$178,302
14(d)(1)School Building Flooring Program$125,000$125,000
14(d)(2)School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair$50,000$50,000
14(d)(3)Interior Painting Program$153,750$153,750
14(d)(4)Middle School Nurses Stations$45,000$45,000
Renovation & Update of Diamond Kitchen and
14(d)(5)$25,000$25,000
Cafeteria
14(d)(6)Clarke School Gymnasium Dividing Curtain$25,000$25,000
14(e)School Paving Program$100,000$100,000
14(f)East Lexington Fire Station Physical Fitness Room$75,000$75,000
14(g)Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000$75,000
Middle School Science , Performing Arts, and General
14(h)$40,000$40,000
Education Spaces
14(i)Clarke Elevator Upgrade ($275,000)$73,406$161,266$40,328$275,000
14(j)Clarke School Auditorium Audio Visual System$69,300$69,300
(To be
Fire Station Hq Replacement Design
14(k)$0
Indefinitely Postponed)
Nov
2013Lexington High School Modular Buildings$7,700,000$7,700,000
STM
Lexington High School Modular
22$495,000$495,000
Buildings—Supplement
Public Works Department
8(c)Hastings Park Gazebo Repairs$120,000$120,000
8(e)Battle Green Streetscape Improvements$27,000$63,000$90,000
10(a)Center Streetscape Improvements and Easements$600,000$600,000
10(b)DPW Equipment Replacement$428,440$257,000$14,560$700,000
10(c)Street Improvements$2,254,924$961,105$3,216,029
Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES
10(d)$270,000$70,000$340,000
Compliance
10(e)Hydrant Replacement Program$50,000$50,000$100,000
Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water Management
10(f)$390,000$390,000
Implementation Measures
10(g)Massachusetts Ave. Intersections Improvements$500,000$500,000
10(h)Sidewalk Improvements$400,000$400,000
10(i)Dam Repair$150,000$150,000
10(j)Town-wide Culverts$390,000$390,000
10(k)Town-wide Signalization$125,000$125,000
10(l)Traffic Island Renovation$83,000$83,000($83,000)
11Water Distribution System Improvements$293,000$607,000$900,000
12(a)Wastewater System Investigation and Improvements$900,000$300,000$1,200,000
12(b)Pump Station Upgrades$600,000$600,000
Lexington Public Schools
13(b)School Technology$1,110,000$1,110,000
13(a)Systemwide School Furniture$261,594$261,594
13(c)Design Funds for School Traffic Safety Mitigation$30,000$30,000
13(d)School AED Replacement$30,500$30,500
Information Technology Department
10(o)Replace Town-wide Phone Systems—Phase III$260,000$260,000
10(p)Network Redundancy & Improvement Plan - Phase II$38,913$101,087$140,000
Non-Government
8(f)Vynebrooke Village Renovations
$300,551$300,551
8(g)LexHAB Set-Aside for Housing Acquisition $750,000$750,000
$14,383,759$5,481,045$2,054,000$15,850,917$1,216,813$38,986,534($83,000)
Totals
1
Not included is the $124,057 debt service using State reimbursement for school projects (Art. 19) or the $246,193 of Bond Issuance Premium received that is
being applied to exempt-debt Schools projects (Article 22) concurrent with rescinding debt authorizations in the same amount for the same projects (Art. 16).
2
All types of General Fund (including set-aside for roads from FY2001 Override);for the specific types, see the Summary in Appendix C or the Warrant Article
Explanations and Recommendations starting on Page 38.
3
Includes use of retained earning and debt; for specific types, see the Summary in Appendix C or the Warrant-Article Explanations and Recommendations
starting on Page 38.
4
Includes both cash & debt, but does not include $1,600,808 for debt service (see Art. 8(m)) or $150,000 Administrative Budget (see Art. 8(n)).
5
Includes $200,820 of PEG Access Revovlving Funds, $54,888 of unused balances from prior Capital appropriations, and $961,105 of State Chapter 90 funds.
3
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Capital Budget
Lexington allocates appropriate resources to needed capital projects by considering them in four
categories:
Big-ticket projects (greater than $1,000,000);
Small-ticket projects (between $25,000 and $1,000,000);
Enterprise & Revolving Funds projects (greater than $25,000); and
Community Preservation Fund projects (any dollar amount).
The Capital Expenditures Committee:
Assesses capital needs brought forward by each department (municipal and schools) as well as the
Community Preservation Committee (CPC) through the annual budgeting process;
Works with those departments and the CPC to identify capital needs anticipated to manifest during
the next five years; and
Independently considers public facilities, infrastructure systems, and prospective longer-term needs,
as well as issues and facilities not being addressed within any department;
Through this report and in presentations, this Committee advises Town Meeting about the necessary
and prudent investments to maintain, improve, and create new facilities required to serve Lexington
citizens safely, effectively, and efficiently. During the year, Committee members also work with and
advise staff members in various departments, consult with other public committees, and make our
views known to the Selectmen and School Committee, in an effort to shape a responsible capital
budget for Lexington residents.
Please note these important caveats:
All cost figures are estimates and generally do not reflect the cost in then-year dollars. The degree of
accuracy varies by project. Those projected several years into the future are the most uncertain.
They are subject to refinement as projects are designed, bid, and built. Even relatively near-term
work is subject to cost uncertainties until projects are bid and contracts signed as material, labor, and
contract-management costs are often highly variable even over a period of just a few months.
The scope of future projects is often highly uncertain. Accordingly, project budgets are subject to
significant revision as the work is defined through the political and budgeting processes.
Dates for appropriations and taxpayer impact of financing projects are given in fiscal years,
beginning July 1, unless otherwise specified.
Big-Ticket Projects
Big-ticket capital projects typically cost about $1 million or more and satisfy the conditions under which
the Town is permitted to borrow funds for at least 10 years. They require careful analysis, budgeting, and
broad support. The Town Manager and BoS’ capital policy has generally maintained that such big-ticket
projects be funded through borrowing, consistent with their expected life and annual budgeting for
operating needs.
This borrowing can be done in one of two ways:
Through voter-approved debt exclusions that place the costs of financing outside the Proposition 2½
tax-levy limit and ensuring broad support, or
By absorbing into the operating budget any portion of the borrowing not covered by CPA funds. This
option has significant implications for the financing of other Town needs.
For example, the costs associated with renovating the Cary Memorial Library where deadlines had to be
met in order to preserve State certification and accompanying, substantial State funding were covered in
the operating budget.
4
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
When projects are funded under the CPA, a debt-exclusion vote is not required. Three past examples of
this are:
The authorization at the 2009 May STM to purchase the Busa property (total cost $4.197 million).
The authorization at the 2010 ATM of $1,500,000 of a $1,825,000 appropriation for the Town Office
Building Renovation.
The authorization at the March 18, 2013, STM of $7,652,500 toward the $11,212,500 purchase
expenses of the land off of Marrett Road with the intended primary use as a Community Center.
The authorization at the November 4, 2013 STM of $2,846,184 as the initial funding for the build-out
of the Community Center.
TheProjectsAgenda
The following is a fairly comprehensive list of big-ticket items that are under consideration in Lexington.
Except for the first three items that have been stated by the BoS as the Town’s highest importance—and
with which this Committee agrees—no such ranking is intended by the rest of the order of this listing.
Fire Station Central Headquarters—Renovation or Replacement (See Article 14(k), but this is expected
to be Indefinitely Postponed at this Town Meeting)
Police Station—Renovation or Replacement. Needed to accommodate current demands and to
improve working efficiencies.
School Buildings—Expansion, Renovation & Reconstruction. Expansion is needed at the Lexington
High School, renovation or replacement of the Hastings Elementary School, and ultimately renovation or
replacement of the High School.
Cary Memorial Building—Upgrades. (See STM Article 2)
Community Center—Build-out. Building just purchased off Marrett Road; will require build-out for
occupancy and expanded functionality. (See STM Article 3 & Article 8(a))
Visitor Center—Expansion & Renovation. (See Article 8(b))
Community (Affordable) Housing—Development and Acquisition. (See Articles 8(f) & (g))
Conservation/Open Space Land—Acquisition and Enhancement (See Articles 8(c) & (l))
Greenways Corridor—Implementation. Projects to link open spaces with trails. The major West
Lexington Greenway Project—the proposed trail network west of I-95/Route 128 linking all Town-owner
open space with the centerpiece of the project to consist of a universally accessible trail linking the
Minuteman Bikeway with the Battle Road Trail in the Minuteman National Historic Park—has been
studied.
Hammond A. Hosmer House, 1557 Massachusetts Avenue (previously called the White House)—It
has been stabilized; will now require build-out for a use.
Minuteman Career & Technical High School—Renovation (through annual assessments) (See
Article 23)
Munroe School—Reuse if current license with the Munroe Center for the Arts is cancelled. (The
license has been renewed annually since its original term ended on October 1 2008, but has a 120-day
right for cancelation by either party.)
Recreation Facilities—A continuing need (See Articles 8(h–k) & 9)
Roads—A continuing need. There are several arterial roads that need reconstructing. At the time of
this report, there are no plans for a debt exclusion for roads. (See Article 10(c))
Sidewalks—A continuing need. A large amount of work is needed on our sidewalks—in residential
areas, in the Central Business District (“CBD”), and in other business districts elsewhere in Town. At the
time of this report, there are no plans for a debt exclusion for sidewalks. (See Articles 8(a) & (e) and 10(a)
& h))
Stone Building, 735 Massachusetts Avenue (previously the East Lexington Library)—Build-out. It has
been stabilized; will now require build-out for a use.
Traffic Mitigation—A continuing need. This remains an important matter in recognition of it often
being a major concern to those in our residential districts. Actions taken are often an element of road-
related projects, rather than being solely to achieve the mitigation. (See Article 10(c))
5
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Muzzey Senior Center, 1475 Massachusetts Avenue (a unit within the Muzzey High Condominium
building). When that Center’s operations move to the new Community Center, a decision is expected to
be made about what, if any, future use the Town has for that Town-owned property. As there is currently
no commitment to retaining the property, it is not being shown in this Committee’s Five-Year Capital
Plan.
The BoS, School Committee, Community Preservation Committee, and Permanent Building Committee
will continue to evaluate, refine, prioritize, and schedule these projects for the next several years and
propose realistic cost proposals in the 5-year projections. The Town-wide Facility Master Plan, still a
work in progress, will contribute to that process.
The Community Preservation Act (CPA)
On March 6, 2006, Lexington voters approved adopting the CPA for our Town at the level of a
3% surcharge on property taxes. The proceeds under the CPA may be used for various capital projects
within the categories of Community Housing, Historic Resources, Open Space, and Recreational Use.
There are limitations in the Act regarding which projects within those categories can be funded under the
Act.
Projects are put forth to Town Meeting for action by a Community Preservation Committee (CPC) whose
membership, in our Town, is prescribed in the Code of Lexington as follows:
§ 29-23A
. There is hereby established a Community Preservation Committee pursuant to Section
5 of Chapter 44B of the General Laws (the “Act”) consisting of nine members. The Board of
Selectmen shall appoint three members of the Community Preservation Committee and the
following bodies shall each select one of its members for membership on the Community
Preservation Committee: the Conservation Commission, the Planning Board, the Recreation
Committee, the Historical Commission, the Housing Authority and the Housing Partnership.
Town Meeting can only approve, reduce the funding, or disapprove a project and it cannot change the
purpose. Town Counsel has provided an opinion that Town Meeting can change the funding mechanism
(cash or debt). As with any capital project, this Committee will give our recommendation on each of the
projects put before the Town Meeting. (See Article 8)
The CPA provides an alternative funding mechanism for capital projects. The CPA creates a separate
pool of money that can be used for a limited set of projects and cannot be prioritized against the Town’s
traditional capital needs.
According to the CPC’s “CPF Account Balances” & “FY15 CPA Project Recommendations and
Summary”, as of November 4, 2013:
6
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
For Projects and Administrative Budgets:
Lexington Authorizations of CPF Relative to 2014 ATM & STM (March 24, 2014)
1,2
PreviousProjected
Cumulative (If All Approved)
FY2015
CPA Categories
Approved
PercentageRequestPercentageAmountPercentage
Community Housing$6,985,84815.6%$1,050,5517.9%$8,036,39913.9%
Historic Resources$19,167,76342.9%$11,569,68287.3%$30,737,44553.0%
Open Space$9,643,51721.6%$9,643,51716.6%
Recreation Use$3,717,8928.3%$484,5003.7%$4,202,3927.2%
3
Pending Assignment
$4,319,0009.7%$4,319,0007.5%
Sub-Totals for Projects$43,834,02098.0%$13,104,73398.9%$56,938,75398.2%
4
Administrative Budget
$880,0002.0%$150,0001.1%$1,030,0001.8%
Totals$44,714,020100.0%$13,254,733100.0%$57,968,753100.0%
1
Unlessexplicitlynoted,doesnotreflectreturntotheCPFofanyunneededappropriationafterthefinalaccountingfollowing
completion of the project or, in the case of the Administrative Budget, at the end of the fiscal year.
2
Theunspent$561,518ofCPFcashappropriatedintheHistoricResourcescategoryatthe2012ATMunderArticle8(d)forthe
MuzzeySeniorCenterUpgradedesignandengineering(D&E)andtheinitialconstructionwerereleasebacktotheCPFandare
not included.
3
Represents the authorization to purchase the Busa Farm property for which the allocation between Community Housing and Open
Space is still pending.
4
Although an exact amount of the unused previous appropriation that has been returned to the CPF has not been reported, it is a
very substantial sum so the indicated "Previous" amount, and thus its percentage, are significantly more than what has actually
been used.
The following table reflects what is available as a cash appropriation from the CPF at these Town
Meetings.
CPF Cash Available for Appropriation at the 2014 ATM &
STM (March 24, 2014)
SourceAmountPercentage
Estimated FY2015 Revenue
CPA Surcharge$3,907,00047.2%
1,2
State Supplement$927,31011.2%
Investment Income$14,0000.2%
Sub-Total$4,848,31058.6%
Prior Available Funds
Community Housing Reserve$388,4854.7%
Historic Resources Reserve$82,4271.0%
Open Space Reserve$504,7306.1%
3
Unbudgeted Reserve$576,9917.0%
Undesignated Fund Balance$1,875,73022.7%
Sub-Total$3,428,36341.4%
Total$8,276,673100.0%
1
This source is explained later in this section of the report.
2
Calculated based on 24.6% supplement percentage.
3
Any balance in this account that is unspent as of June 30, 2014 (the
closeofFY2014)isaddedtotheunspentUndesignatedFund
Balanceandthattotaliswhatbecomesapartofwhatisavailablefor
appropriation in FY2015.
If all the projected requests for use of the CPF cash are approved at both the upcoming ATM and STM
($6,163,190), that would leave a cash balance in the CPF at the end of the March 24, 2014, STM and the
2014 ATM of $2,113,483.
It is important to note that the projected available CPF cash is not a limitation on what the CPC can
recommend to Town Meeting for approval. The method of paying for what the CPC recommends can—
and now often does—include, in part or in total, the issuing of debt instruments. It remains the
7
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
recommendation of this Committee that any such debt be for as short a term as practical after considering
the funding projected for the CPF over at least the next 10 years and consideration of projects that might
come before the CPC for consideration which would require funds beyond those allocated to the three,
mandatory, 10% of revenue, purpose-category Reserves. (Those are the first three Reserves cited in the
above table.) If front-end loading of such debt were practical, that, too, remains a recommendation.
The debt service on such debt instruments is an obligation borne by the CPF throughout the term of those
instruments—whether short-term financing (e.g., a Bond Anticipation Note \[BAN\]) and/or long-term
financing (i.e., a Bond). In the future years, it is incumbent on the CPC to recommend to Town Meeting,
and for Town Meeting to appropriate in full, those obligatory debt-service payments.
One approach that provides flexibility in making a decision about how much, if any, CPF cash should be
applied, up front, for a very-large project is to defer that decision by initially issuing a BAN that has a
term of 1 year or less for the full amount of the project. When that BAN matures (which typically carries
an interest rate substantially below even the relatively low rates on the Town’s bonds), at that time make
the decision on whether to use CPF cash to reduce the total for which a bond would then be issued. Doing
so permits the Town to have a better idea of how much CPF cash should be held in anticipation of the
next—and later—years’ demands upon the CPF. That mechanism has been used in the past and this
Committee would expect it to be proposed for FY2015 and in the future for other very-large projects.
As shown in the previous table our CPA-surcharge funding is eligible for supplemental State funding
based on each town’s prior-fiscal-year’s property-tax surcharges, but the percentage is not guaranteed.
ndrd
When there are not sufficient funds for a 100% match, the State does a 2-round, and potentially 3-
round, calculation to determine the final supplemental funding for those communities that have adopted
the maximum 3% surcharge, including Lexington.
Since the passage of the CPA, the supplements have been funded from the State’s CPA Trust Fund that
gets its revenue from surcharges on the fees on property transactions at the Registries of Deeds. That
process continues, but there has been a significant enhancement beyond those transactions.
Initially based on State Legislature action and signature by the Governor on July 9, 2012, of the
FY2013 State budget, to the extent the State ended FY2013 with a surplus, up to the first $25 million of
1
that surplus also shall be added to that Trust Fund. The State Comptroller then certified the FY2013
consolidated net surplus in his report on November 5, 2013, at $106.8 million—thereby allowing the
$25 million to be added to the Trust Fund. The result—as the next table shows—was nearly a doubling of
the distribution in FY2014.
Although that initial Legislative action only applied to any FY2013 surplus, there were indications
from the Legislative leaders they intend to repeat that provision in each future fiscal year, and when the
Governor signed the FY2014 State budget on July 12, 2013, it did contain a provision reaffirming the
potential for a similar addition to the Trust Fund of the first $25 million from any FY2014 consolidated
2
net surplus. If that potential should become a fact, then the distribution the Town receives in FY2015
should, again, be substantially more than it would be if it relied only on the surcharges at the Registries of
Deeds.
As both funding sources for that Trust Fund are highly variable and dependent upon future actions by the
Legislature and the Governor, there will always be a significant degree of uncertainty about the level of
future State-supplement funding.
1
The Acts of 2012, Chapter 139, Section 155
2
The Acts of 2013, Chapter 38, Section 145
8
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
This has been the history of distributions at the State level under the CPA in the years relevant to
Lexington:
For Communities Having Adopted CPA (out of total of 351)
Total of all CPA
Total Supplement
Year in which Percentage of
Surcharges ($M)
supplement distributedNumberMassachusettsAmount ($M)Percentage
100.0%
FY200811332.2%$68.1$68.1
73.7%
FY200912736.2%$74.1$54.6
40.4%
FY201013538.5%$78.2$31.6
31.5%
FY201114240.5%$82.0$25.9
30.9%
FY201214340.7%$84.8$26.2
31.1%
1
FY201314842.2%$89.2$27.7
2,3
59.3%
FY2014
14842.2%$92.5$54.9
50.8%
Totals$569.0$289.0
1
DistributioninFY2013wasnetof$9,577asanadjustmentwasmadeacrossthedistributiontocorrectforaprior-
year error for Phillipston.
2
SevencommunitiesthathavepreviouslyvotedtoaccepttheCPAwillbeeligibletoreceivetheirfirstsupplementin
FY2015.
3
Thesourceofthesupplement(theState'sCommunityPreservationTrustfund)receiveda$25millioninfusionfrom
the State's surplus at the end of FY2013.
And here is the supplemental funding received by Lexington from the State, along with a projection for
FY2015:
Prior-Year's CPAState Supplement Percentage
Year in whichTotal Suppl
1
supplement receivedSurcharge Collected1st Round2nd Round3rd RoundTotalAmount
FY2008 (Actual)$2,556,362100.0%N/AN/A100.0%$2,556,362
FY2009 (Actual)$2,777,88267.6%1.8%N/A69.4%$1,927,708
FY2010 (Actual)$2,931,67834.8%0.9%0.5%36.2%$1,060,390
FY2011 (Actual)$3,042,58727.2%0.6%0.4%28.2%$858,729
FY2012 (Actual)$3,206,11726.6%0.6%0.4%27.6%$885,463
2
FY2013 (Actual)$3,344,37126.8%0.6%0.4%27.8%$929,507
3
FY2014 (Actual)
$3,572,46052.2%1.1%0.7%54.1%$1,932,347
Total Actual:$21,431,457Received to date:47.4%$10,150,506
4
FY2015 (Projected)
$3,709,240TBDTBDTBD25.0%$927,310
Totals including projected:$25,140,69744.1%$11,077,816
1
The "actuals" are the net amounts as used by the State; the "projected" is the Town's projection for the gross collection.
2
/85 />B1; .C??; )<>C=B 9=3;C45A %(( B> 3>@@53B 1= C=45@?1F<5=B 9= +0%#$% 6@>< 1= 5@@>@ D9B8 -89;;9?AB>=IA AC@381@75"
3
The Total Suppl Amount reflects there was a $25 million addition to the State's CPA Trust Fund because the State finished
+0%#$& D9B8 1 AC@?;CA >6 1B ;51AB B81B 1<>C=BHB85@52F ?5@<9BB9=7 B85 <1E9<C< 1<>C=B 1CB8>@9G54 2F B85 .B1B5 ,579A;1BC@5
to go into that Fund.
4
The projected percentage does not include any increase that would result from the State deciding to continue to infuse the
State's CPA Trust Fund with additional funding from a prior-year budget surplus.
At this time, the latest estimate of the potential supplement percentage for FY2015 by the Massachusetts
st
Department of Revenue (DOR) Division of Local Services (DLS) is that the 1 Round should be 23%. As
ndrd
shown above, our experience in the 2 & 3 rounds has been at least an additional 1.0%. For the FY2015
projections in the above table, we are using about the same percentage as being used by the Town—which
is without any additional funding from a State surplus.
So while the supplement level had fallen substantially since our first year, our Town will continue to
receive significant help from the State toward the cost of our CPA-funded projects.
9
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Although there are other factors that will affect the size of the State’s CPA Trust Fund from which the
supplements are made (e.g., its administrative expenses and interest earned on that Fund), the following is
a year-to-year comparison of CPA Trust Fund collections at the Registry of Deeds, its revenue source, for
the first 4months of this Trust-Fund year which is the latest data we have been given, so far. Also
included in the last column is the change from last-year’s collections to the year before that so the chart
provides the percentages for each of the last two year-over-year comparisons.
CPA Trust-Fund (CPATF) Collections at the Registries of Deeds ($M)
Comparison of CPATFs
Current to LastLast to Its Previous
1
Month
FY2013/2014FY2014/2015ChangePercentagePercentage
Nov$2.736$2.286-$0.450-16.5%25.1%
Dec$2.558$1.836-$0.722-28.2%8.2%
Jan$2.769$1.875-$0.893-32.3%10.2%
2
$2.116
Feb$1.685-$0.431-20.4%-2.7%
3
Totals
$10.179$7.683-$2.496-24.5%
Source:MassachusettsDepartmentofRevenue's(DOR's)MonthlyReportsofCollections&
Refunds ("Blue Book")
1
ThemonthoftheDOR's"BlueBook".AlthoughfeesallocatabletotheCPATrustFundare
collectedineachmonth,theJulythroughAprilcollectionsarereportedinthesubsequentmonth's
report, and then the May & June collections are combined and reported in the June report.
2
SourceisadvanceinformationfromtheMassachusettsDORofwhatwillbeintheFebruary"Blue
Book".
3
Totals may differ due to rounding. Does not include any adjustments that may have been made to
monthly data prior to the latest month.
Notwithstanding the significantly diminished receipts shown, year-over-year, for the opening months of
the current Trust Fund year, regardless of the percentage the Town uses in its budget projection, the Town
will receive whatever amount is determined by the DOR when the DOR uses the established formula to
determine each participating municipality’s share of the distribution that is now being made in November
of each year.
10
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
After all currently contemplated FY2015 actions, our projection for the CPA funding available for
FY2016 is:
SourceAmount
Projected End-of-FY2015 Balance (rounded down)$2,113,483
Estimated FY2016 Surcharge at 3% Rate with 3.5% increase over
$4,043,745
FY2015 Budgeted Surcharge
Estimated State Supplement Received in FY2016 at 24.6% of
$959,766
FY2015 Budgeted Surcharge
CPF-related Share of Premium Received at February 5, 2014, Sale
$1,631,467
1
of Town Bonds
Estimated FY2016 Interest Income on the CPF Balance (3.5%
$14,490
increase over FY2015 Budget)
Estimated Total Available for FY2016$8,762,951
Existing Obligations (including estimated)
Wright Farm Purchase Bond Debt Service$424,800
39 Marrett Road Purchase Bond Debt Service$1,065,100
2
$63,140
39 Marrett Road Build-out Bond Debt Service (projected)
2
Cary Memorial Building Upgrades Bond Debt Service (projected)$1,153,789
Debt Service$2,706,829
$6,056,122
Net Balance Available Before Reserves
New Addition to Open Space Reserve (available for use)$501,800
New Addition to Historic Resources Reserve (available for use)$501,800
New Addition to Community Housing Reserve (available for use)$501,800
Reserves (available for use)$1,505,400
Info Only Net Balance Available Discounting Reserves Allocations
$4,550,722
(which, however, are available for use)
1
This amount may change when the final bond-issuance costs are known as that
could affect the allocation of the balance of the Premium.
2
Final amount will be known when the debt instrument as been issued.
See the CPA Summary in the Brown Book (Appendix C, Page C–3) for a summary of the CPF status as
of its publication on March 3rd of this year.
Enterprise-Fund Projects
The Town operates three enterprise funds for revenue-producing activities funded outside the tax levy by
user fees: water distribution, wastewater distribution \[sanitary sewers\], and certain recreation services,
such as the golf course, swimming pools, and tennis courts. Recreational playground equipment, in
contrast, is not fee generating and capital investment for such equipment is therefore funded as part of the
small-ticket program. $100,000 per year is paid from the Recreation Enterprise Fund for Lincoln Field
debt service that is expected to continue until February 1, 2018, when that debt will be retired. Unlike
property-tax revenues, enterprise-fund fees are not subject to a limit under Proposition 2½.
Coming before this Town Meeting are recommendations for projects in support of responsibilities of the
Water, Sewer, and Recreation Enterprise Funds. These include Park and Playground Improvements (see
Article 8(h–k)), Pine Meadows Golf Course Equipment (see Article 9), DPW Equipment Replacement
), and Wastewater (
(see Article 10(b)), Water Distribution System Improvements (see Article 11Sanitary
Sewer) System Improvements (see Article 12)).
11
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
From a capital standpoint, enterprise-funded projects are evaluated in terms of service and cost. For
example, Recreation-Enterprise Fund funds have been used in the reconditioning of the fields at Lincoln
Park, beginning with Field #1 under the 2013 ATM Article 8(h) and, as noted above, in the same Article
at the 2014 ATM—which addresses reconditioning of Field #2 at Lincoln Park.
Revolving-Fund Projects
Revolving funds established under the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44,
Section 53E½, must be authorized annually by vote of the Town Meeting. The fund is credited with only
the departmental receipts received in connection with the programs supported by such revolving fund, and
expenditures may be made from the revolving fund, without further appropriation, for those programs.
Revolving funds are usually expended to cover non-capital costs and, therefore, this Committee normally
doesn’t report on their annual authorizations unless a capital expense is contemplated. Such an expense is
contemplated in FY2015. (See Article 7)
Small-Ticket Projects
Capital projects that do not qualify as big-ticket projects are funded from the tax levy. Generally, they
cost between $25,000, the minimum qualification for consideration as a non-CPF capital expenditure, and
$1 million, and represent projects that should be funded on a regular, timely basis to maintain Town
infrastructure. With the creation of the Department of Public Facilities as well as the Building Envelope
“set-aside” passed in the June 2006 operating override, a new emphasis has been placed on continual
infrastructure maintenance, a move that this Committee applauds. We continue to work closely with the
stewards of our assets to prioritize, plan, and project such work for a period of five years or more.
12
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Five-YearCapitalPlan
The table on the next three pages summarizes the five-year capital plan that this Committee is submitting
for Town Meeting’s consideration. It reflects the expected FY2015 appropriations at the 2014 ATM and
the March 24, 2014, STM, and the contemplated FY2016–FY2019 requests. We started with the amounts
and timing shown in the Brown Book, Page XI-23. Those requests have been updated based on any
information we received after it was published and we have made some additional entries or changes in
the out years where we feel there might be potential requests based on earlier studies,
design & engineering work, or the existence of a multi-phase project, but where there is no formal
position taken by the Town. In that vein, there are important caveats to that table:
Please see the footnotes for some information on the status of many of the entries and how this
Committee’s position differs from that presented by the Town in the Brown Book.
There are a large number of GF, CPF, and potential, debt-exclusion, Big-Ticket Projects facing the
Town in the near future, not all of which are shown in the out-years of this five-year plan which
only goes out to FY2019. The largest of these not shown would be the replacement or major
renovation of the High School, which has been preliminarily estimated near $200 million in the
final report of the Town’s Ad hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee
(August 30,2013). Excluding the millions of dollars of to-be-determined (TBD) entries, the future
Capital Budget Requests in the Plan exceed $150,000,000. The FY2015 capital funds, both cash
and financed by debt, have been increased by more than 50% from FY2014, and the Capital-related
Stabilization Fund is receiving a significant net infusion for FY2015 (See Article 17). These funds,
along with available CPF resources, will allow us to make significant progress on our more-routine
capital projects, but will still leave us with a huge challenge to fund all of the possible out-year
projects.
Because of that huge challenge this Town faces with regard to the renovation/replacement/renewal
of its Capital Assets, this Committee continues to urge the BoS to move forward promptly to
develop a formal, Town-wide, Facilities Master Plan for the Municipal facilities and urges the
School Committee to update its Plan for its facilities to be included in the Town-wide Plan. A
BoS-appointed committee has provided its input to the BoS for such a Town-wide Plan. This
Committee stands ready to assist in any way that it can toward achieving such a Plan
This Committee appreciates the Town’s concern about citing a preliminary estimate for projects
that are not at all well defined. We continue to urge the Town to present a prioritized and
time-phased list of Big-Ticket Projects and their funding using a “best guess” for the likely costs.
The Town’s out-year amounts generally do not reflect the costs in then-year dollars. As this
Committee does not have the means reasonably to adjust current-year values to then-year values,
we are using the Town’s dollar values.
13
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2015–FY2019 1
)
Capital Project RequestsFY2015Non-TBD
(by executing department)RequestFY2016 PlanFY2017 PlanFY2018 PlanFY2019 PlanTotals
Community/Economic Development
Historical Commission Inventory Forms$35,000$35,000
Parker Meadow Accessible Trail Design&Construction$34,500TBD$34,500
Subtotal—Community/Economic Development
$69,500$0$0$0$0$69,500
(note TBD)
Fire
Software (Police & Fire/EMS)See joint entry below under Police
(Joint Entry)
Ambulance Replacement$250,000$280,000$530,000
Heart Monitor$105,000$105,000
Portable Radio Replacement TBD TBD
(Joint Entry with Police)
See joint entry below under Police
Town-wide Public Safety Radio Network (Joint Entry)
Ladder Truck Replacement$1,000,000$1,000,000
$355,000$0$1,000,000$280,000$0$1,635,000
Subtotal—Fire (note TBD)
Police
2
$425,000$425,000
Software (Police & Fire/EMS)
(Joint Entry)
Portable Radio ReplacementSee joint entry above under Fire
(Joint Entry with Fire)
3
Town-wide Public Safety Radio Network TBD$0
(Joint Entry)
$0$0$0$425,000$0$425,000
Subtotal—Police (note TBD)
Information Technology (IT)
Replace Town Wide Phone Systems-Phase III$260,000$52,000$204,000$516,000
Head End Equipment Replacement $125,000$250,000$375,000
MIS Technology Improvement Program$109,000$100,000$55,000$264,000
Network Redundancy & Improvement Plan - Phase II$140,000$110,000$100,000$50,000$50,000$450,000
$400,000$271,000$429,000$400,000$105,000$1,605,000
Subtotal—IT
Public Facilities
4
$1,000,000$13,000,000$14,000,000
Fire Station HQ Replacement D&E and Construction
5
$900,000$12,100,000$13,000,000
Police HQ Replace/Renovate D&E and Construction
6
TBD$0
Build-out of the Stone Building
6
TBD$0
Hammond A. Hosmer House Build-out
Roofing Program$285,560$416,408$704,834$802,620$2,209,422
School Building Envelope and Systems Program$230,000$210,000$215,000$221,000$226,000$1,102,000
LHS Heating Systems Upgrade Phases 2 & 3$75,000$893,000$968,000
7
$178,302$212,760$187,329$192,012$196,812$967,215
Municipal Building Envelope and Systems
School Building Flooring Program$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$625,000
School Paving Program$100,000$150,000$153,750$157,593$161,901$723,244
Interior Painting Program$153,750$157,594$161,534$165,572$169,896$808,346
Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$375,000
Diamond Energy Improvements$250,000$3,500,000$3,750,000
Visitor Center$220,608$2,080,375$2,300,983
Middle School Science, Performing Arts, & General
$40,000$500,000$3,100,000$3,640,000
Ed Spaces
8
$4,000,000$44,000,000$48,000,000
Maria Hastings School Renovation/Replacement
9
$3,151,000$3,151,000
Community Center Build-Out
Renovation & Update of Diamond Kitchen & Cafeteria$25,000$325,000$350,000
Clarke Gymnasium Lockers$30,000$30,000
Cary Memorial Building Upgrades $8,677,400$8,677,400
School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair$50,000$50,000
East Lexington Fire Station Physical Fitness Room$75,000$75,000
Middle School Nurses Stations$45,000$45,000
Clarke School Elevator Upgrade$275,000$275,000
LHS Modular Bldgs (incl $7.7M appr. Nov. 2013 STM)$8,195,000$8,195,000
Clarke School Gymnasium Dividing Curtain$25,000$25,000
Clarke School Auditorium Audio Visual System$69,300$69,300
School Traffic Mitigation for Safety—D&E and
TBD TBD TBD $0
10
Construction
$21,785,360$10,294,289$65,834,021$13,741,011$1,757,229$113,411,910
Subtotal—Public Facilities (note TBDs)
Public Works
Center Streetscape Improvements$600,000$6,675,000$7,275,000
Automatic Meter Reading System$657,250$496,000$496,000$1,649,250
Continued on next page
14
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2015–FY2019 1
) (continued)
Capital Project RequestsFY2015Non-TBD
(by executing department)RequestFY2016 PlanFY2017 PlanFY2018 PlanFY2019 PlanTotals
DPW Equipment Replacement$700,000$803,000$685,000$695,000$665,000$3,548,000
11
$3,216,029$2,531,250$2,546,851$2,562,843$2,579,234$13,436,207
Street Improvements
Storm Drainage Improvements & NPDES Compliance$340,000$340,000$340,000$340,000$340,000$1,700,000
Sanitary Sewer System Investigation and
$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$6,000,000
Improvements
Hydrant Replacement Program$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Pump Station Upgrades$600,000$600,000$600,000$600,000$600,000$3,000,000
Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water Management
$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$1,950,000
Implementation Measures
Water Distribution System Improvements$900,000$900,000$660,000$660,000$660,000$3,780,000
12
$500,000$50,000$6,550,000$7,100,000
Massachusetts Ave. Intersections Improvements
Sidewalk Improvements$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$2,000,000
13
$100,000$100,000
Community Center Sidewalk Construction
Dam Repair$150,000$525,000$675,000
Battle Green Streetscape Improvements$90,000$200,000$900,000$1,190,000
Battle Green Master Plan - Phase 3$570,438$570,438
Town-wide Culvert Replacement$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$1,950,000
Town-wide Signalization Improvements$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$625,000
Hartwell Avenue Infrastructure Improvements$3,000,000$1,750,000 TBD $4,750,000
14
$0
Hastings Park Overhead Wires
15
$40,000$440,000$480,000
Municipal Parking lot improvements
Bikeway Bridge Repairs$80,000$80,000
Hartwell Avenue Compost Site Improvements$350,000$350,000
Hastings Park Gazebo Repairs$120,000$120,000
Traffic Island Renovation$83,000$83,000
$9,904,029$18,409,250$11,704,539$14,948,843$7,945,234$62,911,895
Subtotal—Public Works (note TBDs)
Recreation
Athletic Facility Lighting$287,552$483,150$770,702
Pine Meadows Improvements$275,000$75,000$350,000
Park and Playground Improvements$65,000$65,000$65,000$65,000$65,000$325,000
Irving H. Mabee Pool Project$1,188,308$1,188,308
Park Improvements - Athletic Fields$100,000$110,000$75,000$150,000$210,000$645,000
Pine Meadows Equipment$51,000$65,000$116,000
ADA Accessibility Study$60,000$60,000
Park Improvements- Hard Court Resurfacing$85,000$55,000$55,000$60,000$255,000
16
TBD$0
Potential Land Acquisition
Center Track and Field Reconstruction$3,000,000$3,000,000
Lincoln Park Field Improvements$620,000$620,000$1,240,000
$921,000$1,262,552$1,658,308$3,275,000$833,150$7,950,010
Subtotal—Recreation (note TBD)
Schools
Food Service Equipment$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$120,000
Systemwide School Furniture$261,594$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$1,861,594
17
$1,110,000$1,320,000$1,220,000$1,220,000$1,220,000$6,090,000
School Technology Capital Request
School Traffic Mitigation for Safety—Analyses$30,000$30,000$40,000$100,000
School AED Replacement$30,500$30,500
$1,432,094$1,780,000$1,690,000$1,650,000$1,650,000$8,202,094
Subtotal—Schools
Town Clerk
18
$60,000$60,000
Election System Upgrade
18
$20,000$20,000$20,000$20,000$80,000
Archives&Records Mgmnt/Conserve/Preserve
$0$20,000$20,000$80,000$20,000$140,000
Subtotal—Town Clerk
18
Community-Wide (CPFFundedor,ifnoted,likely jointlywithsupportfromtheGF)
Vynebrooke Village Renovations$300,551TBD$300,551
19
TBD$0
Other Lexington Housing Authority Projects
LexHAB Set-Aside Funds for Development of
$750,000$750,000
Community Housing (Busa)
19
TBD$0
Community Housing on the Leary Property
19
TBD$0
LexHAB Set-Aside for Housing Acquisition
Continued on next page
15
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2015–FY2019 1
) (continued)
Capital Project RequestsFY2015Non-TBD
(by executing department)RequestFY2016 PlanFY2017 PlanFY2018 PlanFY2019 PlanTotals
19,20
TBD$0
Land Purchases
19 TBD$0
CPA Restriction Drafting & Enforcement Funds
20
TBD$0
Greenways Corridor Projects (also GF)
Subtotal—Community-Wide (CPF Funded)(note
$1,050,551$0$0$0$0$1,050,551
TBDs)
Totals (No Allowance for TBDs)$35,917,534$32,037,091$82,335,868$34,799,854$12,310,613$197,400,960
1 Thefollowingapplytoallitemsbelow:(a)theamountsincludeallfundsources;(b)"TBD"indicatesundefinedatpresent,butthe
potentialexistsforoneormorerequestsinthoseyears;(c)mostFY2016–FY2019amountsarenotpresentedonaninflation-
adjusted basis; and (d) individual amounts may be below the $25,000 capital threshold if projected to be funded from the CPF.
2 DelayedoneyearasthisCommitteeexpectsthistobepurchasedafterboththereplacement/renovationofthePoliceandFire
Department Headquarters has been defined.
3 Study was funded in FY2013 and this Committee is now forecasting implementation of recommendations in FY2016.
4 StillbeginsinFY2016,nowidentifiedwithaplanningestimateforD&E—timingbasedonsiteselectionandfeasibilitystudyin
FY2015(likelyatanSTM)—andplanningestimateforconstructioninFY2017.(Bothamountsconsideredtheamountsprojectedin
theFinalReportoftheLexingtonAdhocTownwideFacilitiesMasterPlanningCommittee,August30,2013.)(AhTFMPC).Movedby
this Committee to be under Public Facilities.
5 D&EandconstructionbothdelayedoneyeartoreflectthisCommittee'sexpectationthatthePoliceStationwouldfollowtheFire
DepartmentHeadquartersreplacement.(Bothplanning-estimateamountsconsideredtheamountsprojectedintheFinalReportof
the Lexington AhTFMPC, August 30, 2013.) Moved by this Committee to be under Public Facilities.
6 Added by this Committee
7 FY2016 amount increased by this Committee to reflect increased work.
8 Nochangeintiming,butrevisedplanning-estimateamountforbothD&Eandconstruction.(Bothamountsconsideredtheamounts
projected in the Final Report of the Lexington AhTFMPC, August 30, 2013.)
9 ThisCommitteerecognizesthattheAdhocCommunityCenterAdvisoryCommitteehaslookedatoptionsforaPhase2ofthebuild-
out,butduetoothercompeting,major,projectsinthisCapitalPlan,thisCommitteedoesnotforeseeanyfurtherbuild-outwithinthe
time frame of this Plan.
10 Moved by this Committee to be under Public Facilities.
11 Theremaybeadditionaltraffic-calmingprojectsduringtherestofthisCapitalPlanthatwouldrequirefundingbeyondthatbeing
currently projected, but as the scope of any such projects is unknown at this time, no allowance has been included in this Plan.
12 The FY2016 funding is a placekeeper in case the final design entails any land purchases required to accomplish the project.
13 AddedbythisCommitteeasitsfundingwasseparatedfromthatfortheCommunityCenterbuild-outandisexpectedtobe
executed by DPW, rather than DPF.
TBDamountwasdeferredbytheTownfromFY2015.BasedonwhatthisCommitteeviewsthisasalow-priorityprojectevenifthe
14
estimated cost were below the initial estimate, this Committee does not expect this project to be funding by FY2019.
15 ThefirstamountshownwasdeferredbytheTownfromFY2015.AsthisCommitteebelievesanynear-termworkonthoseparking
areasshouldcommenceafteritisknownwhatwillbedoneabouttherenovation/replacementoftheadjacentPoliceHeadquarters
building, this Committee has slipped both of the Town's amounts (without any adjustment) to FY2017 and FY2018, respectively.
16 WhiletheTownhadaTBDinFY2017,asthisCommitteeisnotawareofanythinginthatyear,theTBDisbeingshownas
applicable across the remaining timeframe of this Capital Plan.
17 This Committee has increased the FY2016 amount to that understood to be what was intended.
18 Added by this Committee as it is understood this was an inadvertent omission.
19 Added by this Committee as likely requests to the CPC during the time frame of this Capital Plan.
20 The West Lexington Greenway Project could be included in the out-years in this line.
16
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Programs
Conservation and Open Space
The debt service for the Busa Farm has been fully paid. On March 19, 2012, the BoS endorsed the Busa
Land Use Proposal Committee (BLUPC) recommendation by directing the Town Manager to issue an
RFP for farming and to request LexHAB develop a proposal to use approximately ¼-acre of land along
Lowell Street for affordable housing. It has been presumed that the operation and maintenance of the farm
will not require any Town funds.
Following the Town’s purchase, the property initially remained under lease for farming with the
original owner,but in November 2013 the Town signed a lease with the Lexington Community Farm
Coalition, Inc., to operate a community farm on a 7.39-acre portion of the property. The term of the lease
is for 10 years, commencing on January 1, 2014, with an option for two 5-year renewal periods. At the
time of this report, the coalition has hired a farmer and operation of the farm has begun.
th
On March 10 of this year, the BoS approved a LexHAB proposal to build two, 3-unit, buildings
on the land allocated for affordable housing. Funding for the new appropriation from the CPF to complete
the funding of that project is before this ATM. (See Article 8(g))
Continuing the prior practice, funds are included in the Administrative Budget of the CPC to enable the
Conservation Commission to do preliminary appraisals and land surveys. (See Article 8(n))
With regard to the West Lexington Greenway Corridor Project, the 2007 ATM voted $125,000 from the
CPF to hire an engineering firm to create a Master Plan for the entire West Lexington Greenway Corridor
with a focus on creating a new pedestrian and bicycle trail through conservation land by connecting the
Minuteman Bikeway with the Battle Road Trail. The planning and engineering firm Vanasse Hangen
Brustlin, Inc. (VHB) was hired and completed a Master Plan in August 2011 and, following comments by
the Greenways Corridor Committee, the 25% Design Drawings for the proposed Minuteman Bikeway
and Battle Road connector trail were completed by October 2012. While the full West Lexington
Greenway Corridor is not ready for implementation, last-year’s ATM funded the route marking for the
remaining 35 miles of an approximately 40-mile pedestrian and bicycle route throughout the Town.
For FY2015, there is a request for the design of an accessible trail for Parker Meadow. (See Article 8(l))
A funding request for its construction is expected at next year’s ATM.
17
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
ConservationandOpenSpace5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(All
Sources)
FY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
1
Leary Land Purchase$2,153,100
2
Busa Farm Purchase$4,197,000
3
$3,357,000
Cataldo/Cotton Farm Acquisition
$320,000
Minuteman Bikeway Preservation
$3,047,000
4
Wright Farm Acquisition
$25,000
Conservation Restriction Enforecement
$21,500
Lexington Center Pocket Park
$5,875
ACROSS Lexington
$30,000
5-Year Open Space & Recreation Plan
Update
Totals
$6,350,100$3,677,000$0$3,047,000$82,375
1
Purchase authorized at 2009 ATM, Article 12. Closing date not known.The full purchase price for the 14.2
acres was $2,763,100, but the allocation was the shown $2,153,100 for Open Space (13.5 acres),
$600,000 for Community Housing (0.7 acres), and $10,000 for Historic Resources (the house).
2
Purchase authorized at May, 6, 2009, STM, Article 6. Closing date was December 4, 2009. The amount
shown is the full purchase price for the entire 7.93 acres, but subsequently, the BoS allocated about 0.5
acre of that total for Community Housing; however, as of the time of this report, the total purchase price
has not been allocated between the two purposes (Open Space & Community Housing); therefore the full
purchase price is being shown.
3
Purchase authorized at the 2010 ATM, Article 9. Closing date not known. The full purchase price for the
about 4.2 acres was $3,857,000, but subsequently, the Town accepted a $500,000 State LAND Grant
(2011 ATM, Article 33) in regard to this purchase and it was subsequent received at the end of FY2012;
therefore, the amount shown above is net of that $500,000.
4
Purchase authorized at the 2012 ATM, Article 9. Closing date was December 20, 2012. The purchase
price for the about 12.6 acres (Parcel 1) was $2,950,000 and there were $97,000 needed for purchase-
associated costs.
Lexington Community Center & Muzzey Senior Center
Lots A2 and B1 of 33 Marrett Road property (which lots are now referred to as 39 Marrett Road) were
purchased for $10,950,000 (with an additional $262,500 for costs ancillary to the purchase) with funding
appropriated at the March 18, 2013, STM, Article 2. Title to that land passed from The Supreme Council
of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasons to the Town of Lexington on December 3, 2013,
and was recorded on December 5, 2013. The prior owner/occupants used the primary building as office
and training space, and the Carriage House just for storage. The BoS created the Ad hoc Community
Center Advisory Committee (“AhCCAC”) on April 22, 2013, to identify short-term and long-term
improvements to the property needed to support Town and potentially other programs to be housed there
at a new Community Center.
Through an ongoing iterative process, the AhCCAC continues to work with the Steffian Bradley
Architects (“SBA”), key decision makers, stakeholders, the BoS, and other committees on what was to be
a multi-year commitment to Design & Engineering, and then to construction to redevelop and expand the
facility’s functionality as a Community Center
To enhance the quality of life for all Lexington residents by creating a warm, welcoming and
inclusive environment. \[Mission Statement for the Community Center as adopted by the
AhCCAC, October 17, 2013\]
At this time, the Senior Center remains located at the Muzzey Condominiums. In addition to senior
activities, that Center houses the Town’s Human Services Director and the Veterans Services Agent‘s
office. As anticipated by this Committee, with the Town’s purchase of the 39 Marrett Road property for
the purpose of redeveloping the property for a new Community Center, no further funding is requested for
18
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
improvements to the current Senior Center. The new Community Center will incorporate space to provide
for the continued functions of the current Senior Center and other Town staff and programs as mentioned
3
above.
At the November 4, 2013, Special Town Meeting $3,169,000 were approved to:
Complete the D&E (including construction documents), the bidding process, and the construction for
the Phase 1 initial occupancy at the primary building at 39 Marrett Road ($3,099,000), and
Design of a sidewalk to the primary building ($20,000) and to extend the schematic-level design for
the full build-out ($50,000) to provide more detail on what future phase(s) might entail and cost.
At that time, it was anticipated that bids would be issued for Phase 1 with responses required by the end
of January 2014, and award by mid-February 2014. Construction would continue through mid-September
2014, and the facility should being ready for occupancy by mid-October 2014.
As is often the case with renovations versus new construction, there is a set of unknowns only revealed
after purchase when architects, engineers, and other professionals can inspect the building in detail to
identify and evaluate the condition of what currently exists and the performance that can be expected by
the systems within that building. (That inspection occurred a month after that STM.) Then as the D&E
proceeds and the programmatic demands were identified by the AhCCAC, the true scope of work
evolved. Additional costs associated with upgrading systems and making other structural changes to
incorporate new uses consistent with the stated community values and goals adopted by, in this case, the
AhCCAC on behalf of the Town of Lexington and a wide range of stakeholders have been identified.
There has been an ongoing, challenging, cost-benefit analysis by the AhCCAC in their careful
consideration of the equally important priorities of expediting occupancy and avoiding construction
disruption of people and programming. It became clear that increased occupancy rates (far beyond the
previous owner’s use) would tax the heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems beyond
their existing capacity. Because of higher-priority capital needs in the Town, the originally contemplated
Phased 2 build-out of the Community Center (with its planned HVAC upgrades) has been deferred.
Therefore, the recommendation is now that far more be done under Phase 1 than was contemplated at last
fall’s STM. The goal is to open the Community Center with an interior environment that would be
suitable “for the long haul” without the need for later interior work that would, by its nature, interfere
with the on-going use of the facility. At this time, the Phase 1 project is now expected to be put out to bid
in early April, 2014, with contract award in late May, and occupancy of the building projected for early
March, 2015.
See STM Article 3 for the request for further information on the elements for which the additional
funding, in addition to that provided at last fall’s STM, is being requested to cover the latest total project
cost for all the work needed for Phase 1.
Fire
The Fire Department uses industry standards and its own experience to establish the replacement schedule
for its capital equipment. Unlike many pieces of Town equipment, fire engines and medic (rescue-
ambulances) trucks are partially custom-made and equipped, require very detailed specifications, and
3
For the record, this is a recapitulation of the Muzzey Senior Center improvement plans. In Phase I, DPF directed a
study by Bargman, Henrie and Archetype ($45,100 under 2010 ATM, Article 8(o)) that produced a report in
May 2011 entitled "Muzzey Senior Center Life Safety Improvements". It recommended several infrastructure
improvements to the present Senior Center to proceed in two subsequent phases. Phase II, funded from the CPF
($561,518 under 2012 ATM Article 8(c)), was to do the D&E up to construction documents for both phases and to
fund higher-priority work. None of the Phase II monies had been used because negotiations with the Muzzey
Condominium Associations regarding the planned work were not successful, and then the potential Marrett Road
purchase warranted a hold. The Phase III FY2014 CPF request for $526,818 was Indefinitely Postponed. (See this
Committee’s Report to the 2013 ATM, page 29, Article 8(d), for a description of the work contemplated under both
Phases II & III.)
19
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
typically require many months between placing the order and the delivery and acceptance of a piece of
equipment.
st
The mission of the Fire Department in the 21 century has shifted beyond traditional firefighting to
emergency services, homeland security, and community education—with our firefighters now being
trained for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Advanced Life Support (ALS). The equipment to
perform these missions has changed with new technologies for firefighting and communications, yet the
basic pumper truck, ladder truck, and rescue-ambulance are still essential to the mission.
There are four FY2015 Capital requests by the Fire Department: Replacement of an ambulance (see
Article 10(m)), replacement of three heart monitors (see Article 10(n)), creation of a physical-fitness
room at the East Lexington Fire Station (see Article 14(f)), and a request for design funds for a new
Headquarters Station, but that’s expected to be Indefinitely Postponed. (See Article 14(k) regarding that)
Lexington must continue to replace its aging equipment and retain back-up capacity. The table on the next
page includes the forecasted need for replacing major capital vehicles in the current Department
inventory.
20
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
MajorCapitalEquipment
1
Following is the current inventory of the Fire Department’s major capital equipment—ordered by the
year of the currently-projected replacement funding:
21
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
FireDepartment5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
FY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Public Safety Radio Connectivity$50,000
Fire Trucks & Ambulances$500,000$240,000$485,000
†
Fire-Department HQ$100,000
Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus
$260,000
Fire HQ Alarm Receiver
$30,000
Firefighter Protection Turnout Gear$88,000
Totals
$600,000$290,000$328,000$50,000$485,000
†
Redesign Study (continuation of what was funded in FY2009 & includes $29,700 CPF)
Police
The Lexington Police Department (LPD), which provides public safety services through a team of
dedicated police officers, detectives, dispatchers and support staff, is supported by the Town’s Capital
Program in the areas of communication systems, computer systems, and improvements to the facility in
which it is housed.
The FY2015 Capital Budget contains no requests for funding Police Department capital projects. The
Lexington Police Headquarters will benefit, however, from funds approved for FY2014 from the ongoing
request for Municipal Building Envelope and Systems (see 2013 ATM, Article 14(a)) to fund of
extraordinary repairs. For the Police Department, it is planned to replace doors, upgrade the exterior doors
and the card-swipe security system, and to improve the kitchen.
We note that the Town’s recommended 5-Year Capital Plan reflects funding D&E related to a renovation
and add-on to the existing Police Station located at 1575 Massachusetts Avenue in FY2016, with
construction funding in FY2017, both as TBD. As noted earlier in the discussion under the Fire
Department, the next study for its Headquarters replacement will be addressed at a later Town Meeting.
Since the renovation or replacement of the Police Headquarters is to follow the Fire Headquarters
replacement, you’ll find that our 5-Year Capital Plan has slipped the timing of the Police Station project.
Beyond correcting very basic needs due to overcrowding and being functionally inadequacy, the
renovation of the police station will include other necessary enhancements. For instance, the Police
Department must substantially improve its ability to process fingerprints with a larger fuming tank and
replacement of the smaller tank. (Standing alone, these costs would exceed $25,000.) Because this
upgrade requires a larger lab and building design to support the use, it will be incorporated into the Police
Station renovation project, when the time comes.
Both the Police and Fire Departments described to our Committee the burdens they face with the current,
primitive, software used to track and report on their activities. The current software does not mitigate
inefficient use of personnel for extensive manual tabulation and does not generate the sophisticated
reporting that is essential and required in today’s environment. A project proposal based on the 2004
Public Safety Staffing Review was drafted on September 15, 2008, recommended replacing the software
with one better aligned with the current needs of the Police and Fire Departments. This Committee fully
supports the upgrade and remains very concerned about this project’s repeated postponement. First having
been in the Town’s FY2011–FY2015 Capital Plan when it was projected that a study would be funded in
FY2014 ($10,000) with purchase in FY2015 ($400,000), and by this year’s FY2015–FY2019 Capital
Plan which has a single funding of $425,000 for FY2017. This Committee appreciates the Town’s
position that on-going coordination with Police and Fire Departments in other municipalities will help to
identify the best option for an enhanced, viable, alternate software, and that a transition to any new
software represents a substantial training burden on the departments. And now with the explicit position
by the BoS this year that providing modern facilities for both public-safety departments—Fire and Police,
in that order—is its highest priority, we accept that independently addressing this long-standing Public-
Safety software issue can’t be addressed sooner than FY2017 and, in fact, may slip further.
22
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
The Police Department continues to consider how the firing range at the Hartwell Avenue complex can be
augmented to meet the current firearms training requirements and needs for modern police work, ensuring
readiness to respond to weapons currently in use and on the streets—and potentially serving a regional
need. Within the next 5-years, conceptualization of the project is expected to mature into something
acceptable to a broad audience. It is for that reason that this Committee continues to challenge other uses
at that complex which could in any way jeopardize—whether through the assignment of land around the
existing range to another purpose or by incompatible activities in the vicinity of an enhanced range—the
Town’s ability to provide such an enhanced range.
The Federal Government has mandated that public-safety agencies (including Lexington’s Police and Fire
Departments) will be required to move their radio-band frequency from the current 400 band, to the 800
band. This will require a complete replacement of radio equipment, including hand held, mobile, and base
stations. The radio system was upgraded and changed in 1994, at a cost of over $1 million. A change to
the new frequency band will be a capital project affecting both the Police and Fire Departments. The
departments are currently studying how best to comply with the new mandates. Cost estimates will follow
once the scope and timing of the project is clearly defined
PoliceDepartment5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
FY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Police Station Space Preservation &$45,000
Needs Study
$31,700
1
Police Station Ventilation System
Totals
$45,000$31,700$0$0$0
1
CPF
Library
In December 2010, architects Adams and Smith were hired to study how operations at the Main Library
could be improved ($25,000 under 2010 ATM, Article 12(q)). Funding of $100,000 for recommended
changes was approved under 2011 ATM, Article 13(l). The recommendations include changes to
workflow and ergonomics. Under 2013 ATM, Article 10(b), $124,000 was appropriated to purchase
equipment and supplies and provide for staff time to convert Cary Library materials to Radio Frequency
ID (RFID) as a direct result of that report. The implementation of that conversion is expected this spring.
Restoration work to, and updating the Massachusetts Historical Commission Inventory on, the Stone
Building (former East Lexington Library Branch), including a new roof, gutters, aluminum siding
removal, painting, and window glazing, were completed in 2010 using $202,933 from the CPF under
2010 ATM, Article 8(q). Although the Historic Structures Report on which this work was based
recommended a small addition to the rear, those plans were not acted upon as the Town has not yet
determined a new use for the building. The building continues to be maintained by the DPF under the
oversight of the Cary Library Board of Trustees.
Public Works
The Department of Public Works (DPW) is responsible for design, bidding, construction, and
management on projects related to all Town facilities except buildings that are assigned to the Department
of Public Facilities (DPF). The DPW is organized around seven elements: Administration, Engineering,
Highway Division, Public Grounds Division, Environmental Services Division, Water Division, and
Sewer Division.
Major components of DPW’s FY2015–FY2019 capital projects include:
Road and sidewalk construction
Water distribution and sanitary-sewer systems improvements
Storm-water control and management
Hartwell Avenue Infrastructure Improvements
Trucks and heavy equipment necessary to accomplish the DPW mission
23
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
DPW’s capital needs—except CPA, Revolving-Fund, or Enterprise-Fund projects—must be funded by
the general tax levy and/or voter-approved debt exclusions. Almost all construction projects for the
sanitary-sewer system and for the water-distribution system are funded from Enterprise Funds. Likewise,
large trucks and heavy equipment used in support of the sanitary-sewer and water-distribution systems are
funded by Enterprise Funds.
Engineering
Engineering for all DPW projects is either done “in house” or contracted to outside consulting and/or
design firms. In addition to supporting on-going DPW work, it represents an essential component of the
development of a majority of our DPW’s future projects. Engineering will oversee the design of multiple
projects funded in this-year’s budget. (See Article 10(a), (c–d) & (f–l))
Roads
Lexington has a total of about 199 miles of roads, including State and unaccepted roads. That total
consists of 134 miles of Town-accepted roadways, about 19 miles of unaccepted roadways, and about
46 State-highway miles. DPW maintains the public roadways; the remainder being maintained by the
private owners or the State.
Funding for roads is a combination of State Chapter 90 funds and Town funds. (See Article 10(c))
In April 2010, the Town retained Fay, Spofford & Thorndike (FST), a civil-engineering consulting firm,
to develop and implement a Pavement Management System (PMS) for its public roadways and its bike
trail (approximately 5.5 miles). The study was completed in November 2010 and updated in
November 2013. That update states “Lexington is in tremendous shape from a Pavement Management
standpoint…the dedication in budget the Town has made to ‘Routine Maintenance’ and “preservation
Maintenance’ is paying dividends.” The comprehensive study developed an extensive roadway database
describing actual pavement conditions and roadway characteristics in order to better understand future
roadway-funding requirements. The study reported the replacement cost for the Town-accepted roadways
would be in excess of $85 million in FY2011 dollars. A more detailed analysis of the report is contained
in this Committee’s report to the 2011 ATM. This Committee was extremely pleased to see the study as it
provides a quantitative basis for determining the condition of the pavements that the DPW maintains.
That information, along with recognition of pending associated impacts on our pavements (e.g., cuts for
utilities work, construction for storm-water and wastewater system improvements, sidewalk-related
projects, etc.) offers the promise of an even-more productive and cost-effective program going forward.
Sidewalks
The town has over 120 miles of sidewalks. Because extending and upgrading many of these sidewalks
was long overdue, the BoS appointed a Sidewalk Advisory Committee in spring 2005. Sidewalk
maintenance is expensive, and issues of obstructions, easements, and objections from residents burden
new sidewalk construction. That committee’s overall policy is to develop a prioritized sidewalk
construction plan focusing on the Safe Routes to School Program, other high-pedestrian-traffic routes,
and high-walking-hazard streets.
This Committee is pleased that funding requests for business-district sidewalks are presented separately
from those for residential sidewalks and that there are now three sidewalk categories: residential, CBD,
and non-CBD business.
The FY2015 sidewalk-funding request in Article 10(h) will allow the accomplishment of residential
projects outside the CBD, chosen through cooperation between the Sidewalk Committee and the DPW.
That work includes D&E (as needed) and construction of new sidewalks and rebuilding/repaving existing
sidewalks in residential areas and a sidewalk at the Community Center. In addition, there will be some
CBD sidewalk work incorporated in the Center Streetscape Improvements and Battle Green Streetscape
Improvements. (See Articles 8(a) & (e) and 10(a))
24
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Town-wideSignalImprovements
Many of the Town’s signals are outdated and sometimes malfunctioning. A DPW Engineering Division
study, funded with Traffic Mitigation funds, has identified those locations most in need of improvement,
after assessment of condition, signal timing, delays, ADA requirements, etc. (See Article 10(k))
WaterDistributionSystem
Many of the Town’s water mains were installed in the early 1900s and need to be replaced or cleaned and
lined. This is an annual program for replacement of unlined, inadequate, aged, and breaking water mains
to improve water quality, pressure, and fire-protection capabilities, and to reduce frequency and severity
of water-main break, as well as eliminate water-main “dead ends”. (See Article 11).
Heavy equipment and trucks used by the Water Division are procured with Water Enterprise funds.
Where equipment is shared with the Sewer Division, the costs are shared. (See Article 10(b))
Work continues to replace any remaining unlined pipes. The work will then focus on replacing aging
mains or those with a higher break history. Engineering has a program plan for this work and its project
list is shortening. Because of the age of some parts of the system (Massachusetts Avenue, for instance, is
over 100 years old), some of the work cannot be completely understood until it is begun and the actual
site conditions are revealed.
The Engineering Division has documented the materials, age, and break history of our water mains and
uses that information as well as material sampling (when appropriate) to determine replacement and
rehabilitation, as well as suitable methods therefore. Some of the “out year” funding in the capital plan is
still approximate because of the difficulty of actual testing in a working water system (unlike roads which
can be analyzed visually and with easily accessible samples, water systems can only be tested by shutting
down service to the section being tested (and the residents that section serves) and deep excavation. This
is both costly and disruptive, and therefore is performed on as limited a basis as practicable.
HydrantSystem
The FY2015 funding for hydrant replacement is evenly divided between Tax Levy funds and the
Water-Enterprise Fund. (See Article 10(e)) This Committee continues to encourage replacement at the
fastest practical rate to ensure public safety and appreciates that the level of funding proposed for this
year is at least what it was last year as that is double what had been the consistent funding prior to last
year.
SanitarySewer
The sanitary-sewer system (also known as the wastewater system), like the water-distribution system, has
sections that date back to the early 1900s. Due to age-related deterioration, some sections are susceptible
to storm-water infiltration which increases the total flow to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority
(MWRA) treatment system, resulting in increased charges to the Town, and causing overloading of parts
of the system. There is an ongoing program of investigating, evaluating, replacing and repairing sections
of the system. (See Article 12(a))
The system has 10 pumping stations that need continual maintenance and periodic updating and which the
Sewer Division has been upgrading. In September 2012, the engineering firm Wright-Pierce performed a
detailed survey of the pump stations, generating a 20-year repair/replacement plan for the 10 pumping
stations. This year’s request is initial funding for work that is consistent with those findings. (See
Article 12(b))
During the 2011 “Halloween day” snowstorm, several of the pumping stations were without power so
even using portable generators, it wasn’t possible to keep four of them from overflowing. Therefore, this
Committee considers funding and installing of emergency generators at other pump stations should be
done as soon as practical. We are pleased to report that DPW has made plans to accomplish that. With a
combination of available Capital funds and their Operating Budget, this important enhancement began in
FY2013 with the Concord Avenue station. Three pumping stations now have backup electric-power-
25
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
generation capability (Main station, Concord Avenue, and Potter Pond) and a comprehensive plan now
exists for the remaining stations. The funding request this year is for design of three and construction of
one additional stations..
Heavy equipment and trucks used by the Sewer Division are procured with Sewer Enterprise funds.
Where equipment is shared with Water Division, the costs are shared. (See Article 10(b))
DamRepair
The State Department of Conservation and Recreation mandates inspecting every dams that are rated
“significant-hazard dams” every five years. An engineering study in 2010 of the Butterfield Dam on
Lowell Street revealed significant potential problems with the dam. The 2011 ATM, Article 10(a), funded
the Phase I engineering and construction and partial Phase II engineering for that dam. The 2012 ATM,
Article 12(g), funded continued Phase II engineering, construction services and the construction of Phase
II improvements. Phase 1 is now complete and Phase 2 is being bid this spring. FY2015 funding is
requested for design work to correct deficiencies in, and make improvements to, the dam at the Old
Reservoir. (Article 10(i))
Storm-WaterDrainageandNationalPollutionDischargeElimination
Systems(NPDES)
Storm drains which line the Town’s streets occasionally fail due to heavy loads passing over them and/or
loss of supporting soil around them thereby creating holes in the street. In addition, as streets are repaired
and repaved, it is frequently discovered that the storm-drainage system is seriously deteriorated.
Concurrent drainage system repairs are required to prevent further deterioration of a failing condition and
to protect newly paved secondary streets. It is also necessary to study and repair drains where overflow
conditions develop and/or complaints are received. (See Article 10(d)) This work is part of a National
Program that requires a State permit. New permitting regulations are anticipated that are expected to
increase costs and complexities of this work in future years.
CulvertRepair
There are more than 50 culverts in Town and many are near, or at, failure. Occasionally a culvert not on a
public roadway is discovered following a major rain event. The on-going culvert inspections are
confirming a need for replacement and extraordinary repairs. This is a companion program to the
on-going Watershed Management Plan. The 2011 ATM, Article 7(s), appropriated $65,000 for the
review, design, and permitting for repairs to the three culverts under the access road to the Hartwell
Avenue Compost Facility. The 2012 ATM, Article 12(d), appropriated $390,000 for replacement of those
three culverts and for D&E for repairs to culverts identified in storm-drainage studies. Two additional
culverts have been replaced this year (Concord Avenue and at the entrance to the compost facility). Two
additional culverts are in design. Additional funds are being requested this year to continue this work.
(See Article 10(j))
ComprehensiveWatershedStormWaterManagementSystems
The Town must maintain its 18 brooks, three watersheds, and its numerous wetlands in a condition such
that they do not reduce the volume of water that can be handled by our storm-drainage systems. Sediment
and broken tree limbs impede the flow of water and cause flooding and damage to private property, thus
creating liabilities for the Town. (See Article 10(f))
PublicGrounds
The Town has approximately 630 acres of land of which approximately 110 acres are in parks,
playgrounds, conservation areas, athletic facilities, school grounds, and historical sites. In addition, Town
staff administers and maintains four cemeteries with a combined area of a little over 30 acres. The
Forestry staff maintains approximately 10,000 trees along roadways and an indeterminate number of
trees, shrubs, and plantings on Town-owned land.
26
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
This year’s request is for the renovation of the gazebo at Hastings Park. (See Article 8(c))
MinutemanBikeway
The 11-mile Minuteman Bikeway, which was opened in 1993, runs from the Alewife MBTA Station to
the railroad Freight House in Bedford. About half the total length of the Bikeway lies in Lexington. The
DPW’s Public Grounds Division maintains the Lexington segment.
The Town’s 5-Year Capital Plan indicates that a request will be made in FY2016 for repairs to the bridge
carrying the Bikeway.
DPWEquipment
DPW has 167 pieces of equipment, of which 90 pieces had an individual acquisition cost in excess of
$25,000; therefore, their replacement would normally be subject to this Committee’s review. the
replacement value for the equipment today is approximately $8 million.
DPW has developed a well-conceived program of replacing the older, less fuel-efficient and high-
maintenance-cost equipment with standard, off-the-shelf vehicles and equipment that will last longer and
cost less to maintain and operate. Equipment replacement when acquisition costs are under $25,000, and
all automobiles, is funded with operating funds. The current 5-year equipment-replacement schedule
projects annual costs between $700,000 and $803,000 per year, in FY2014 dollars. FY2015 requested
procurements are consistent with that replacement schedule. (See Article 10(b))
27
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
DPW5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
FY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Capital using Tax Levy & Chapter 90 Funds
DPW Equipment$520,923$400,384$365,000$595,000$349,000
1
Street Improvements & Easements$1,238,125$1,376,578$1,546,602$4,026,000$2,814,238
Street light/Traffic lights/Traffic mitigation$50,000$217,000$87,000$125,000$125,000
CBD Streetscape$240,000
Battle Green Area Improvements$203,845
Town-wide Culvert Replacement$390,000$390,000
Drainage/dams/brook cleaning$160,000$270,000$770,000$600,000$340,000
Sidewalk/bikeway improvements$340,000$200,000$550,000$3,304,000
Geographic Information System$84,000
Street Acceptance—Pitcairn Place$125,000
Comprehensive Watershed Study & Implement$110,000$110,000$50,000$165,000$390,000
Hydrant Replacement$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000$50,000
Public Grounds$35,000$15,000
Tax Levy & Chapter 90 Totals$2,313,048$2,738,962$3,078,602$6,919,845$7,777,238
1
FY2013 includes $175,000 of D&E & $1,500,000 of construction for Grove Street & Robinson Road work that, although off
the site and, thus, is the responsibility of DPW, is in conjunction with the New Estabrook School project.
Capital using Enterprise Funds
Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary Sewer System$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000
Pump station upgrades$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000
DPW Equipment$263,500$45,000$145,000
Geographic Information System$14,400
Automatic Water-Meter Reading System$25,000
Sewer Sub-Totals$1,602,900$145,000$1,300,000$1,300,000$1,445,000
Water
Water Mains Relining & Replacement$900,000$900,000$900,000$900,000
DPW Equipment$119,000$57,420$145,000
Automatic Water-Meter Reading System$25,000
Geographic Information System$21,600
Hydrant Replacement$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000$50,000
Rehabilitate Standpipes$160,000
Water Sub-Totals$1,090,600$1,142,420$25,000$925,000$1,095,000
Enterprise-Fund Totals$2,693,500$1,287,420$1,325,000$2,225,000$2,540,000
Capital using DPW Compost Operating Revolving Fund
Culvert Replacement$65,000
Revolving Fund Totals$0$0$65,000$0$0
Grand Total$5,006,548$4,026,382$4,468,602$9,144,845$10,317,238
Public Facilities
The Department of Public Facilities (DPF) is responsible for the coordination and care of all Town-owned
buildings including those under the control of the BoS, Town Manager, Library Trustees, and School
Committee. Expenses associated with the DPF staffing, maintenance (including preventative
maintenance), custodial services, capital-project management, utilities, landscaping and grounds (at
schools only), and building rentals are the responsibility of this department.
The DPF is organized around four areas of responsibility: Administration, Project Management, Facility
Maintenance and Repair, and Custodial Services. Administration is responsible for the administration of
the Department. Project Management is responsible for major capital renovations and providing staff
support to the Town’s Permanent Building Committee for new construction. Facility Maintenance and
28
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Repair is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all the facilities listed below. Custodial Services is
responsible for custodial services in all those facilities.
This calendar year has required attention to continuing project management of the new Estabrook
Elementary School, the major renovations of the Bridge and Bowman Elementary Schools, and the
designing/implementation of the first phase of renovation to the newly acquired property at 39 Marrett
Road for a Community Center to accommodate the Senior Center programs, expanded programming for
all ages in the community, and for the Social Services and Recreation Department staff which manage
those activities. Project Management also continues on previously authorized projects with the project for
modular buildings at the Lexington High School—which will be executed in two phase over this calendar
year and the next. (See this Committee’s Report to the November 4, 2013, STM, Article 4, for details on
the project, and Article 22 in this report for a supplemental funding request.) There will be significant,
continuing, management demands on the Facilities Department as other major and minor projects are
being explored in the coming years.
The Estabrook School was completed ahead of schedule—permitting full occupancy, as planned, after
last month’s school vacation—and that project is proceeding within the budget. (There is still the major
demolition of the old school to be accomplished.) The renovated Bridge and Bowman Schools were both
available for occupancy last October and that project is anticipated to be completed this summer when the
final abatement work on the Bridge School is scheduled to be completed.
With regard to the Maria Hastings Elementary School—which is the remaining elementary school that
has not yet had a major renovation or replacement—the School Committee submitted a Statement of
Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) on January 12, 2014, asking for
financial assistance from the State to address the significant deficiencies of the school—the primary one
being the severe overcrowding. The response by the MSBA is anticipated by this fall and, if the MSBA
ranks the project for near-term financial support, within 270 days the Town would need to appropriate its
own funding of a Feasibility Study for the work—which usually would entail the matter being brought to
a Special Town Meeting.
DPF is responsible for buildings at 23 locations: Town Office Building, Cary Memorial Building, Police
Station, Fire Department Headquarters, East Lexington Fire Station, Samuel Hadley Public Services
Building, Stone Building (previously used as the East Lexington Library), Cary Memorial Library,
Visitors Center, Council on Aging Facility (Senior Center in the Muzzey Condominiums,
1475 Massachusetts Avenue), Community Center (property at 39 Marrett Road to which the Town took
title in December, 2013 and to which a transition of the Senior Center is planned at the completion of the
first phase of renovation to that property; see STM Article 3), Westview Cemetery, the Hammond A.
Hosmer House, 9 schools, and the Schools Central Administration (in the old Harrington School).
DPF has taken a systematic approach to solving problems that affect both Municipal and School
buildings, including roofs, flooring, building envelope, and school paved parking and sidewalk areas.
During FY2013, DPF further refined its estimates for these programs, which in some cases should be
more on-going maintenance than capital expenditures. However, as the needs exist and the work will be
funded using GF cash, the Committee supports these projects being in the FY2014 Capital Budget—
although we would look for them eventually to transition into the Operating Budget. (See Article 14(a–c,
& e))
This year’s request for DPF Capital funding includes a wide range of important work to both enhance
buildings to meet the programmatic demands of the programs that occur in them as well as to attend to the
extraordinary repairs and maintenance that are essential to extending the useful life of the buildings. See
Articles 8(c) & 14 for the specifics.
29
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
PublicFacilities5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
ProgramFY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Department-wide
Town-wide Facilities Master Plan$65,000
Municipal
1
Public Services Building$200,000
Hosmer House Stabilization$381,000
Library Material Handling System $100,000
Design
Building Envelope$157,594$161,534$165,572$169,711$173,954
2
Fire Headquarters$70,300$450,000
East Lexington Fire Station $75,000
Kitchen Upgrade
Cary Memorial Library
$135,000
Town Office Building Renovation$325,000
Municipal Sub-Total$302,894$486,534$850,572$750,711$173,954
Schools
Eval of Middle Schools Science $35,000
Labs and Performing Spaces
New Estabrook$1,250,000$42,342,248
Diamond Energy Improvements$25,000
Hastings Natural Gas Conversion$45,000
High School Overcrowding $175,000$400,000$362,000
3
Renovations
4
Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000$175,000
Grounds Vehicle$80,000$80,000
Building Envelope$376,500$272,400$300,000$215,000$235,000
Mechanical/Elec/Plumbing$390,000$50,000
Landscaping/Paving$120,000$175,000$238,347$100,000$150,000
Interior Renovations$305,000$174,000$75,000
Bridge/Bownman Renovations$750,000$21,950,000
3
Extraordinary School Repairs$378,000$395,000$610,000$666,500
Security Standardization$370,000
Wall Unit Air Conditioners$56,000
Clarke Middle School Bus Loop$35,000
Hastings School Kitchen $90,000
Renovation
Schools Sub-Total$1,191,500$1,799,400$24,383,347$43,927,248$2,219,500
Grand Totals
$1,494,394$2,285,934$25,233,919$44,742,959$2,393,454
1
Allowed use of insurance-claim proceeds toward project cost; was not an increase in the project's
budget.
2
FY2010 fundings were for D&E; FY2012 funding was for repair of the main equipment floor.
3
FY2012 funding for High School Overcrowding Renovations had been appropriated as part of
Extraordinary School Repairs, but is separated here as there is follow-on funding in FY2013 & FY2014
for Phases 2 & 3.
4
FY2014 includes $100,000 from the CPF for D&E for the initial build-out at 39 Marrett Road for use as
the Community Center.
30
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Recreation
Recreation Department programs are funded from three sources:
Tax Levy (e.g., used for neighborhood playgrounds, athletic fields, and basketball court
•
improvements)
Recreation Enterprise Fund (e.g., used for fee-based activities such as Pine Meadows Golf
•
Course, Irving H. Mabee Pool, Old Reservoir, and tennis courts)
CPA funds (e.g., preservation of recreation facilities, including those for fee-based activities)
•
Fee collections for Enterprise Fund-based activities are weather dependent and can vary from year to
year. The Recreation Enterprise Fund makes an annual debt-service payment of $100,000 per year for
Lincoln Fields (ending in February 2018). It also makes an annual indirect payment to the Town that in
FY2015 will be $233,600.
CPA monies have enabled some large projects to be fulfilled, which otherwise might not have been
financially viable. Most recently, the Center Playfields Drainage Project has been funded $2,392,754
through CPF appropriations in FY2011–FY2013. Significantly, amendments to the CPA that were signed
into law on July 8, 2012, now allow CPA funding to replace playground equipment and other
rehabilitation work on fields not originally purchased with CPA funds.
At this Town Meeting, Recreation-related funding requests include funds to:
Replace synthetic turf at Lincoln Field #2. (See Article 8(h)) CPA funds cannot be used for
installation of synthetic turf, but are available for grading, underlayment, and related work.(The
unusually heavy snow over the past winter has delayed completing the comparable replacement
at Field #1 that was funded at last-year’s ATM under the same-numbered Article. That
replacement, including work on adjacent pathways, is currently projected to be complete by May
of this year.)
Replace athletic equipment at Garfield Playground. (See Article 8(i))
Grade and crown multipurpose field at Clarke Middle School for proper drainage, and add
amenities. (See Article 8(j))
Resurface Center track and tennis courts, as well as neighborhood basketball courts. (See
Article 8(k))
Replace two pieces of Pine Meadows Golf Club equipment. (See Article 9) The Recreation
Department tracks all of its capital-equipment life expectancy based on manufacturers'
recommendations, but replacement is based on the actual, observed, condition.
Recreation5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
ProgramFY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Athletic Fields$70,000$50,000$60,000$65,000
Park, Playgrounds, & Tot Lots$185,000$147,500
Pine Meadows Golf Course$200,000$46,000$75,000
Swimming (Old Res & Center)$569,000$25,000
Tennis & Basketball
Center Playfields Drainage$875,173$911,863$605,718
Town Pool Renovations$165,000
Lincoln Fields Improvements$565,000
Totals
$839,000$950,173$1,076,863$896,718$852,500
31
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Schools
Overview
The Lexington Public Schools provide educational, athletic, and club activities for 6,584 students in
grades K–12. (A year earlier, the total was 6,507.) Pre-school programs are also offered at the elementary
st
schools. Enrollment figures are those as of October 1 as required by the State’s Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) for each academic year. For October 1, 2012, in the six
elementary schools there were 2,924 students (versus 2,875 the year before), in the two middle schools
the total was 1,657 (versus 1,641 the year before), and the high-school number was 2,002 (versus 1,991
the year before).
In addition to the six elementary-school buildings, and two middle-school buildings, the high school is a
complex of four, freestanding, academic buildings and a field house. Central Office (“Administration”)
personnel and services are located in what had been the old Harrington School. The maintenance of those
fourteen buildings is overseen by the DPF.
The new Estabrook Elementary School opened in February this year and renovations have been
performed at the Bowman and Bridge Elementary Schools. The next school that needs attention is the
Maria Hastings Elementary School and the School Committee has submitted a Letter of Intent to the
DESE to either replace or renovate that school. When the outcome of that request is known, a plan will be
developed and funding to execute it will be subject to a future Town Meeting.
SchoolTechnologyProgram
There is a long-term plan to upgrade technology throughout the schools by replacing the oldest computers,
peripherals, projection systems, network-delivery systems, and other associated hardware and software to use as
(See Article 13(b))
enhanced instructional and administrative tools.
ClassroomandAdministrativeFurniture
On an annual basis the school department replaces and/or repairs old or outdated furniture such as student
and teacher desks, chairs, tables, filing cabinets and other basic furnishings. In addition to classroom and
office furnishings, other system-wide furnishings include conference and cafeteria tables, bookshelves,
and storage units. (See Article 13(a))
Equipment
Food-service operations in all schools serve hot and cold meals to thousands of students each school day.
It is essential to purchase and maintain equipment for preparing and maintaining cooked items and that
provides for safe distribution. The food-service operations are contracted to a private vendor, but the
purchase of equipment is the responsibility of the school system.
School5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
ProgramFY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
Technology$600,000$696,000$737,000$1,002,000$1,213,000
Classroom Furniture$50,000$58,571$150,000$83,000$281,031
Pre-K–12 Master Plan
†
Food Service Equipment$75,000$99,500$64,000
Time Clock/Time Reporting System$97,000$30,000
Totals
$725,000$951,071$951,000$1,085,000$1,524,031
In FY2012, includes $30,000 from the Food Services RF.
Information Technology (IT) (Town-wide)
“The Information Technology Department (formerly Management Information Systems) provides
technology hardware, services and resources to all Town staff. It also supports the accounting and payroll
32
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
applications, along with other core services and applications for both the general government and school
department.
“…IT supports, maintains and manages the Town's information technology systems (hardware, software
and web sites) that are critical elements of service delivery and program management for all of the Town's
departmental operations. This includes: hardware and software support for all information technology
activities in all municipal operations; training of end users; the maintenance of financial management
hardware and software (MUNIS) that serves town and school departments; electronic mail and internet
access; support of the Town’s website on the internet and intranet; voice over internet protocol (VoIP)
telephone infrastructure and applications; head end management and support; and co-management with
School Department IT staff of the Town's metropolitan area network that connects 27 town and school
buildings.”
\[Brown Book, Page X-24\]
There are two requests for capital upgrades to the IT infrastructure. (See Articles 10(o) & (p))
IT5-YearCapitalAppropriationHistory(AllSources)
ProgramFY2010FY2011FY2012FY2013FY2014
$50,000
Public Safety Radio Connectivity
$55,000$591,000$146,000
Telephone System Replacements
1
$154,500$465,000$165,000$256,000
MIS Technology Improvement Program
Town-wide Electronic Documentation $410,000$145,000$60,000
Management System
Totals
$154,500$520,000$575,000$786,000$462,000
1
FY2011 includes $55,000 for a MUNIS Financial-Software Upgrade
Affordable Housing \[Note: This is new to this Committee’s reporting.\]
The Capital Expenditures Committee recognizes that to provide for the needs of its residents and to meet
the requirements of State law, the Town must plan and budget for the creation of units of affordable
housing, in parallel with the continuing private production of market rate homes. Following is a brief
primer on the requirements of State law and Lexington's efforts to provide affordable housing.
Lexington Housing Partnership (LHP)
The is a 14-member board of Town residents appointed by the
Board of Selectmen to 3-year terms. The LHP was instrumental in Lexington's adoption of the CPA in
2006, as housing is one of the project categories that may be financed with funding under that Act. The
LHP's primary mission is to keep Lexington residents informed of the Town's housing needs and to plan
and advocate for the preservation and creation of affordable housing units on an ongoing basis.
Lexington Housing Authority (LHA)
Thewas created under Massachusetts General Law,
Chapter 121B, Section 3, passed by the State legislature in 1969. Under the statute, municipal housing
authorities manage State- and Federally-subsidized housing units and administer Federal housing
vouchers to individuals and households who qualify. Four members of the LHA are elected, and a fifth is
appointed by the Governor. As of December 2012, the LHA owned or managed 240 units, which include
one-bedroom units for elderly or disabled residents at Countryside Village, Greeley Village, and
Vynebrooke Village, as well as 18 two-to-four-bedroom units scattered throughout the Town. The LHA
also administers 78 housing vouchers, which are used by households to pay private landlords. Depending
on the size and type of housing unit, the LHA's wait time for eligible households varies from 1½ to 8
years.
Lexington Housing Assistance Board (LexHAB
The) is unique to Lexington. It was founded in 1983 by
a group of citizens concerned about the need for affordable and transitional housing for Lexington
residents experiencing economic difficulties. With initial contributions from the developers of the
Brookhaven Life-Care Living Facility and the Potter Pond condominium, LexHAB acquired attached and
detached rental-housing units, which now total 64. They are administered by the volunteer 7-member
Board, which uses rents to maintain and improve the units as needed. Since Lexington's adoption of the
CPA in 2006, Town Meeting has approved annual allocations of CPA funds to LexHAB for the
33
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
acquisition of additional units. LexHAB also maintains a reserve fund to be used to purchase units on
which the deed restrictions maintaining their affordability may expire.
Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B,
passed in 1969, is the State statue which requires each
municipality in the Commonwealth to have 10% of its housing "affordable" as defined by the statute and
its regulations. An affordable unit is defined as one that could be purchased or rented by a household
receiving income of up to 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), assuming that the household spends
no more than 30% of that income on housing. AMI for the Greater Boston Area is adjusted annually, and
varies according to household size. To be maintained as affordable, a unit must be subject to a long-term,
preferably perpetual, deed restriction limiting its sale price to the affordable level as determined at the
time of sale. To encourage the creation of more rental units, the statute also provides that if a
rental-housing development deed restricts 25% of its units, allof the rental units will count as part of the
town's Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI), even though 75% of them are actually priced at market rate.
To avoid unlawful discrimination, the State requires affordable units coming available to be assigned by a
lottery among applicants whose eligibility has been established.
Lexington's SHI
. The housing units administered by the LHA and those LexHAB units which have been
assigned under the State's lottery procedure all count on Lexington's SHI. In 2007, the completion of the
rental complex Avalon at Lexington Hills gave the Town 387 additional rental units, all of which count
on the Town's SHI, although only 25% of them are deed-restricted. (Prior to including these units, 7.3%
of Lexington’s housing was on the SHI.) This put Lexington's affordable housing (per the statutory
definition) at 11.2%, making Lexington one of only 50 of the 351 Massachusetts municipalities that have
met the statutory 10% requirement. (However, it should be noted that the actual percentage of housing
units that are subject to deed restrictions maintaining them as affordable is closer to 5%.)
If the Town's SHI falls below 10% of Town-wide housing units, the statute provides that private
developers who deed-restrict 25% of units in their projects may not be subject to the density restrictions
of Lexington's zoning bylaw, allowing them to build larger and more densely sited subdivisions than
Lexington would otherwise allow. Prior to reaching 10%, Lexington saw such a "40B project"
constructed on Lowell Street.
The Community Preservation Act (CPA)
provides that 10% of each year's revenue under the Act (i.e.,
the designated tax surcharge revenue, plus what is now partially matching State contribution, and interest
earned on the Community Preservation Fund (CPF)) be allocated for community (affordable) housing.
Since Lexington's adoption of the Act in 2006, the Town has relied primarily on the CPF to create and
support community housing. The CPC has recommended, and Town Meeting has approved, annual
appropriation of funds to the LHA, LexHAB, and the LHP as set out in the following table.
34
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Town MeetingDescriptionProponentAmount ($)
2007 ATMReplacement of windows at Greeley Village LHA228,404
Construction of affordable units for brain Douglas House300,000
1
damaged individuals
Structural evaluation of Muzzey LexHAB & 26,750
Condominimum (includes 12 affordable units)Muzzey
Condominium
Assocation
Subtotal555,154
2008 ATMWindow replacements at Vynebrooke VillageLHA158,686
Purchase of three condomominium units at LexHAB652,800
Parker Manor for deed restriction
Survey and define affordable housing LHP & LexHAB25000
programs
Subtotal836,486
2009 ATMRoof replacement at Greeley VillageLHA320,828
Purchase of 4 units at scattered sites for LexHAB845,000
rehabilitation and deed restrict
Purchase of Leary property on Vine Street LexHAB600,000
2
(30,022 square-foot portion (0.7 acres))
Subtotal1,765,828
2009 STM Purchase of the 7.93-acres Busa property on LexHABTBD
(May 6)Lowell Street. Portion of $4,197,000 purchase
price allocated for the land for affordable
housing (about 0.5 acres) verus Open Space
(about 7.4 acres) is yet to be determined.
2010 ATMStudy for replacement of Vynebrook drainageLHA10,000
Replacement of siding at Greeley VillageLHA386,129
Purchase of 2 units at scattered sits for LexHAB695,000
rehabilitation and deed restriction
Subtotal1,091,129
2011 ATMConstruction of Vynebrooke drainage systemLHA364800
Set aside for purchase of properties as LexHAB450,000
available
Subtotal814,800
2012 ATMConstruction of 4 handicapped accessible LHA810,673
3
units at Greeley Village
Set aside for purchase of properties as LexHAB450,000
available
Subtotal1,260,673
4
2013 ATMLHA172,734
Replacement of doors at Greeley Village
Total without
6,496,804
5
Busa Housing
1
Remainder of funds raised by the Douglas House
2
Purchase price for 14.2-acres parcel was $1,659,749, of which $1,059,749 was allocated to
Open Space (13.5 acres)
3
Total project cost was $1,110,673 of which $300,000 was paid by a State grant.
4
Total project cost was $190,734 of which $18,000 was paid by a State Grant.
5
Reconcilled with entries in the CPA Summary in the Brown Book, Appendix C.
35
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
As noted above, the housing units administered by the LHA are subsidized by the State (Greeley Village
and Vynebrooke Village) or the Federal government (Countryside Village). However, in recent years
State contributions toward the maintenance and improvement of these developments have been
inadequate, despite the LHA's annual application for state grants. (For construction of new accessible
units in FY 2013, the LHA secured $300,000 in State funds, and for replacement of Greeley Village doors
in FY 2014. $18,000 in State funds.) CPA funds may be used for the creation and support of housing,
including capital improvements. Sums those fund allocated to the LHA have been for capital
improvements to keep existing units functional and in compliance with legal standards. The 2012
allocation for the construction of four accessible units in Greeley Village brought it into compliance with
statutory accessibility requirements, as well as adding to Lexington's SHI.
Funds allocated to LexHAB have been the primary means of adding affordable units to Lexington's
inventory.
In keeping with its original practice of acquiring scattered units throughout town, LexHAB has requested
CPA allocations to purchase and rehabilitate individual attached and detached homes, which are then
deed-restricted and rented to eligible households.
The CPC has established guidelines with regard to housing purchases with CPA funds, and has capped
the amount available for any one purchase and rehabilitation at $525,000. For FY2012 and again for
FY2013, LexHAB requested CPA allocations of $450,000, in order to have funds on hand to purchase
properties when they became available, and not to lose a chance because of the annual Town Meeting
appropriation cycle. However, as housing prices in Lexington continue to rise, the opportunities to
purchase and rehabilitate properties within the guidelines have become fewer. LexHAB underspent its
allocation from FY2012 by $85,000 and has not yet spent the FY2013 allocation. For FY2014, the CPC
voted to recommend another annual allocation of $450,000, but specified that it should be used for the
creation of new units on Town-owned land already designated for affordable housing, rather than for
purchase of an additional existing home. Town Meeting rejected LexHAB's application, heeding
arguments that the number and style of units on Town-owned land had not yet been determined by the
BoS, leaving the project insufficiently specific for funding.
There are two parcels of land purchased by the Town in 2009 with Community Preservation funds that
include portions specifically designated for affordable housing: the Leary property on Vine Street and the
Busa Farm property on Lowell Street.
The 14.2-acres Leary property was purchased in 2009 with 13.5 acres as open space with 30,022
square feet (0.7 acres) on Vine Street designated for affordable housing—paid for with CPA open-space
and housing funds. A committee appointed by the BoS investigated the potential of the parcel and
recommended that six attached units be built there. In 2011, the Annual Town Meeting rejected a
LexHAB application for design funds for this project, and no action is currently pending, although the
designated land remains deed restricted for housing.
The 7.93-acres Busa Farm property also was purchased in 2009 with both CPA open-space and
housing funds. In response to community demand, about 7.4 acres has been designated as open space,
available for farming, and currently leased to the Lexington Community Farm, Inc., for development as a
community farm, The remaining about 0.5 acre (about 20,000 square feet) on Lowell Street has been
designated by the BoS for affordable housing. LexHAB's FY2015 application is for $750,000, which,
when added to the CPA funds it already has on hand, is intended to fund the creation of six housing units,
in two buildings, on Lowell Street. (See Article 8(g)) At its meeting on March 10, 2014, the BoS
approved LexHAB’s proposal, as presented.
LexHAB has one other current project involving the purchase and rehabilitation of an existing home on
Fairview Street and the addition of two more units on the same parcel. This project is being funded out of
LexHAB's reserve (non-CPA) funds.
Projected Need for Affordable Housing Units
. The Lexington Planning Department and the LHP
assisted the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) in preparing a draft Housing Production Plan
36
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
(Note: The Plan has not been
for Lexington, which is currently before the Board of Selectmen.
presented to this Committee and, therefore, this Committee has not vetted it.)
While allocations for affordable housing have been made each year since Lexington's adoption of the
CPA in 2006, the number of new housing units actually produced or in process over that time has
averaged less than 2.5 units per year: three at Parker Manor, four at Greeley Village, three on Fairview
Street, and seven more at scattered sites. As the data in the Housing Production Plan receives more
analysis, it should help the Town to determine what the actual housing needs of its residents are and
where the greatest demand for housing will lie, for example, among down-sizing seniors, young families
with children, professional couples, etc. With the Plan's preparation, the Town has begun to look more
closely at its housing needs, whether funding should continue to come almost exclusively from the CPF,
and how to provide the necessary amount of housing while realizing economies of scale and greener
building methods. Unless totally funded outside of Town resources, including the CPF, this Committee
expects to participate in the evaluation of the housing program and housing projects.
37
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Warrant-Article Explanations and Recommendations
Cites of the “Town Warrant” refer to the “Town of Lexington Warrant for the 2014 Annual
Town Meeting”, January 27, 2014. Cites of the “Brown Book” refer to the “Town of Lexington
Fiscal Year 2015 Recommended Budget & Financing Plan”, March 3, 2014.
2014 Special Town Meeting, March 24, 2014
Funding
STM Article 2: Cary Fund
Authorization Committee Recommends
Memorial Building
Source
Requested
Upgrades
$8,677,400 $8,241,350 CPF + Approval (5–0)
$235,230 GF (Cash)
+ $200,820 PEG
Access RF
“The Cary Memorial Building is a significant and historical building in Lexington. Since its dedication in
1928, it has hosted a range of community events including Town Meeting, Town Elections, Cary Lecture
Series and many performances. An authorization of $60,000 in Community Preservation funds was
approved at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting to perform a comprehensive review of the building systems,
building and life safety codes, and theatrical and functional capabilities. This Building Evaluation
concluded that though the building is well maintained, improvements are needed in several areas:
accessibility, support spaces, structural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, stage, and acoustical and audio
visual improvements. The Ad Hoc Cary Memorial Building Program Committee (AHCMBPC) reviewed
the recommended scope of work and issued its report to the Selectmen on January 14, 2013. At the 2013
annual town meeting, $550,000 was appropriated to continue the design process and begin the
development of construction documents. In June, 2013, the Selectmen appointed the Ad hoc Cary
Memorial Building Renovation Design Committee (ahCMBRDC) to oversee the development of design
and construction documents and to oversee the implementation of the recommended design. This FY15
funding request is for the estimated cost of construction for improvements to the Cary Memorial
Building.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-14\]
See Appendix A for a multi-year, pro-forma financial model prepared by the Town’s Assistant Town
Manager for Finance that shows a projection of the revenues and expenditures of the CPF. It was prepared
at this time in order to show the effects of approving this project as well as providing the increased
funding for the Community Center Renovations (STM Article 3) along with other anticipated big-ticket
funding already likely to be presented to the CPC. Within the parameters chosen for the model, projects
included in the model, reserves designated, and allocations for projects not included, the model finds that
there would be a substantial “Net Balance Available” after all uses in the fiscal year’s consider (i.e., from
a minimum of over $1.8 million in FY2015, then over $2 million for FY2016, over $4 million in each of
FY2017–FY2020, and over $5 million in FY2021.
While there has been discussion of deferring this project until after the Community Center is open so as
not to deprive the Recreation Department of the space it uses in this building for programming and a
small amount of storage, this Committee fully supports completing the multi-year preparation for these
upgrades with this construction funding. Further, we endorsed having it presented in this STM so that:
(1) earlier contract award and commencement should be feasible, thereby, have the building off-line for
two summers and one winter—rather than one summer and two winters—in recognition that the buildings
use is lower in the summer than in the winter; and (2) the project doesn’t face what has recently been
cited as a 6-6.5% escalation for each year of delay.
38
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
With regard to the competing, very-large, Capital demands that the Town faces in the next decade (e.g.,
public-safety buildings and school reconstruction/replacement), it is highly unlikely that any significant
portion, if any, of those demands would be eligible for use of the CPF; therefore, the two fund streams
(CPA surcharge & the Tax Levy—exempt or not from the restrictions in Proposition 2½), are not
fungible.
This Committee unanimously recommends this request be approved and that the project proceed on the
expedited schedule established for it.
Funding
STM Article 3: Amend Fund
Committee Recommends
Authorization
Article 5 of
Source
Requested
November 4, 2013
Special Town Meeting,
$6,220,000 \[an $5,797,184 CPF Approval (5–0)
Renovation to
increase of ($5,346,184 Cash
$3,051,000 from and $451,000 Debt)
Community Center
fall STM\] \[an increase of
$2,951,000\] +
$422,816 GF (Free
Cash) \[an increase
of $100,000\]
“Funds were appropriated at the November 2013 special town meeting for the new Community Center.
These funds were for design and construction of Phase I improvements to facilitate occupancy of the
building, the design of a sidewalk from Marrett Road to the Community Center, and to add the Carriage
House to the study of long-term Phase II building improvements needed to support proposed community
center services in the process of being identified by the Selectmen-appointed Ad Hoc Community Center
Advisory Committee (CACC). The total FY15 funding request will be submitted to the Board of
Selectmen on March 10, 2014. At this time, it is known that $125,000 will be requested for furniture,
fixtures and equipment (FF&E) that will be financed from general fund revenue, specifically free cash.
The remaining costs, to be determined, will supplement construction funding approved at the November
2013 special town meeting, and will include the costs of additional renovation needs including required
improvements to heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) and the construction of a sidewalk
from Marrett Road to the Community Center.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
See Appendix A for a multi-year, pro-forma financial model prepared by the Town’s Assistant Town
Manager for Finance that shows a projection of the revenues and expenditures of the CPF. It was prepared
at this time in order to show the effects of approving the increased funding for the Community Center
Renovations under this Article as well as the Cary Memorial Building Upgrades (STM Article 3) along
with other anticipated big-ticket funding already likely to be presented to the CPC. Within the parameters
chosen for the model, projects included in the model, reserves designated, and allocations for projects not
included, the model finds that there would be a substantial “Net Balance Available” after all uses in the
fiscal year’s consider (i.e., from a minimum of over $1.8 million in FY2015, then over $2 million for
FY2016, over $4 million in each of FY2017–FY2020, and over $5 million in FY2021.
Also see the narrative starting on Page 18 for background leading to this request to increase the
authorized funding.
The changes driving the delay and request for additional funding for an increased scope include:
Comprehensive upgrade the HVAC systems to meet the augmented use and occupancy requirement of
Phase 1—enhancing ventilation, improving air quality, and increasing energy efficiency
Structural changes (e.g., additional reinforcements to address further-increased loads, moving the
bathrooms; and accommodating removal of the sheer wall) necessary to permit a revised layout of the
multi-purpose room. The revised design is for a rectangular floor plan to allow increased seating capacity
39
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
from 80 to 100 in a banquet-style seating arrangement, which will also accommodate large assemblies or
activities like light, senior exercise or dancing;
Cost increases revealed during the further refinement of the plans
Additional furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) as required to be able to deliver the desired
program and a uniformly quality appearance;
Other items that are the basis for the requested increase in funding under this Article are:
An accessible entrance into the Mansion from the patio and replacement of the patio stones with an
accessibility compliant surface;
Building envelope extraordinary repairs unknown when cost estimate was approved at the fall
2013 STM (e.g., separation and delaminating of the metal panel system installed around the windows in
the 2000 addition).
Also see Article 8(a) for the companion construction, as needed, to have a sidewalk from Marrett Road up
to the Community Center.
2014 Annual Town Meeting
th
Article 7 (4 Fund Only): Establish Funds Authorization Departmental Committee
RequestedReceiptsRecommends
and Continue Departmental
Revolving Funds—PEG Access
License Fees
Fund
$671,000from Cable-TV Approval (5–0)
Providers
“To see if the Town will vote, pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 53E½, of the Massachusetts General Laws,
to re-authorize the use of existing revolving fund accounts in FY2015…and to determine whether the
maximum amounts that may be expended from such revolving fund accounts in FY2015 shall be the
following amounts…
DESCRIPTION: …The fund is credited with only the departmental receipts received in connection
with the programs supported by such revolving fund, and expenditures may be made from the
revolving fund without further appropriation.”
\[Town Warrant\]
As this annual Article only provides the required authorization for revolving funds, this Committee
normally would not comment on it; however, as the Town intends to pay, in part, for a capital project
using $200,820 from the PEG Access Revolving Fund (see Cary Memorial Building Upgrades,
STM Article 2), this authorization is being handled by this Committee as it does with other capital-related
matters—which includes our review and recommendation to Town Meeting.
Funding
Article 8: Appropriate the FY2015
FundsCommittee
RequestedRecommends
Community Preservation
Source
Committee Operating Budget
$3,563,190 CPF (Cash) +
and CPA Projects (Multiple
$258,000 GF (Free Cash)
Categories)
$4,171,466+ $161,276 GF (Cash) +Approval (5–0)
$189,000 Recreation EF
(RE)
40
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(a) 39 Marrett Road—Community
Indefinite Postponement
N/A
Center Renovation—Sidewalk N/A
(5–0)
Construction (Historic Resources)
“…the construction of a sidewalk from Marrett Road to the Community Center.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
This was to be sidewalk construction, as needed, so there would be sidewalk access from Marrett Road to
the Community Center; however, a proposed design which entailed an easement from the neighboring
Scottish Rite of Freemasons was not acceptable to that organization. At this time, the Town’s Engineering
Department is looking into an alternate design or routing of the sidewalk, but none is ready for
.
presentation to this Town Meeting
AmountFunding
Committee Recommends
Project Description (CPA Category)
Requested Source
$59,332 CPF
(b) Visitor Center—Design Phase (Cash) +
$220,608Approval (5–0)
(Historic Resources)$161,276 GF
(Cash)
“The Tourism Committee, working in conjunction with the Public Facilities Department, requests funding
to redesign and possibly expand the Visitors' Center to accommodate visitors to Historic Lexington.
Originally opened in 1970 in anticipation of the nation's bicentennial, the Visitor Center has served as an
information hub to Lexingtonians as well as millions of guests from around the world. Today' s visitors
seek a different kind of service than they did over five decades ago when this building was built. The
programmatic changes being considered include visitor education, space for tour groups, a self-service
kiosk, counter space for assisting visitors, veterans' display with visual connection to exterior memorials,
retail space, food vending area, new rest rooms, and office space. To realize these goals, a custom exhibit
will be designed and constructed that captures Lexington's unique place in American History. The
building will be made fully handicapped accessible and provide community meeting space. The last
upgrade to the building was when the restrooms were made handicapped accessible 10 years ago, and
these facilities suffer from overuse. FY2015 funding is requested for design development and
construction documents and represents costs for the scope of work described above. At this time, the
If funding is approved, it
Board of Selectmen is still in discussion on whether this scope is warranted.
will not authorize design to begin before it receives and reviews program recommendations for the
facility
.”
emphasis
\[Brown Book, Page XI-16, added\]
This Committee supports that some renovation, and possibly some expansion, is needed to upgrade the
Visitor Center so it can properly fulfill some of the needs of the visitors to, and the residents of, our Town.
We share, however, with the BoS, that the scope of that work should be on a scope that the BoS has
agreed is appropriate. This Committee does not normally support funding one phase of a Capital project
unless the results of the prior phase have been vetted—which, in this case, we consider that includes a
BoS recommendation on scope. This Committee is willing to recommend approval with the explicit
condition (as noted above) that no use of these funds will be authorized until the BoS recommends doing
so after the receipt and review of the program recommendations for the facility.
41
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Funding
AmountCommittee Recommends
Project Description (CPA Category)
Source
Requested
(c) Hastings Park Gazebo
$120,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
Renovations (Historic Resources)
“This request is for funding for repairs to the Gazebo at Hastings Park, a well-used park that is used for
community and private events such as concerts, weddings, picnics, and school and recreation activities.
The Gazebo’s railings, stairs and electrical system have been deteriorating over the past few years
creating unsafe conditions. Funding will be used to repair and replace the rails, bollards, stairs and
electrical system and include painting and caulking as needed. It will also be used for improvements to
make the structure handicapped accessible.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-19\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(d) Historical Commission
Inventory Forms for Listed Buildings $35,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
(Historic Resources)
“This request is for funding to hire a professional preservationist consultant to complete the
Massachusetts Historical Commission inventory forms for 157 properties that are listed as "priority" on
the Lexington Historical Commission's master inventory of buildings. These properties are listed by the
Lexington Historical Commission as significant based on visual review but are provisional since research
and documentation have not been done. Under the general oversight of the Historical Commission,
detailed research will be conducted and documentation prepared to verify that the structures are indeed
historically significant and should be retained on the inventory, or in some cases to determine that a
provisionally listed structure should be removed. This project will benefit property owners and/or
potential buyers of buildings currently listed on the inventory by providing detailed documentation of the
architectural and historical significance of the building and the importance of its preservation. For
buildings that are eventually demolished, a permanent, detailed record of architectural and historical
significant buildings in the Town will be preserved.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-21\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
$63,000 CPF
(e) Battle Green Streetscape (Cash) +
$90,000Approval (5–0)
Improvements (Historic Resources) $27,000 GF
(Free Cash)
“
The 2012 annual town meeting approved $60,000 to undertake a parking, pedestrian and traffic study for
the area around the Battle Green. The FY15 request is for engineering services to develop plans and
specifications at the 25% design level for improvements in parking, pedestrian flow and traffic flow
around the Battle Green. One engineer will be selected for the integrated design for Center Streetscape
and Battle Green improvements. Funding for 100% design and construction will be requested in FY2016
to address traffic and pedestrian improvements. This is consistent with recommendation #7 of the Battle
Green Master Plan”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-19\]
42
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(f) Vynebrooke Village
)
$300,551 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0
Renovations (Community Housing)
“The Lexington Housing Authority is requesting funding for the replacement of roofing, siding and
exterior doors at Vynebrooke Village. The requested CPA grant is one third of the entire project cost of
$901,653. The remaining $601,102 will be funded through a grant from the Department of Housing and
Community Development. The project will preserve the deteriorating building envelope, improve energy
costs and help create a safe and sustainable home for Lexington’s low income residents.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-21\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(g) LexHAB Set-Aside Funds for
Development of Community Housing
$750,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
at the Busa Property (Community
Housing)
“LexHAB is requesting FY15 funding for the construction of affordable housing on a designated section
of the Busa property on Lowell Street. In FY12 and FY13, Town Meeting approved set-aside funds for
LexHAB for affordable housing. The organization currently has access to $535,000 from these two
appropriations, and with its FY15 request of $750,000 plans to build two separate houses, with 2-3
affordable units in each. The houses will face on Lowell Street and will each contain an accessible unit.
Advertising and selection of renters for the units will be in compliance with current State requirements,
and all units will be included on the Town’s SHI (Subsidized Housing Inventory).”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-22\]
As noted earlier, the Board of Selectmen at its meeting on March 10, 2014, approved LexHAB’s proposal
for two buildings, each containing 3 units.
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
$200,000 CPF
(Cash) +
$189,000
(h) Lincoln Park Field
$620,000Recreation EFApproval (5–0)
Improvements (Recreation)
(RE) +
$231,000 GF
(Free Cash)
“This request is the second of three phases for the reconditioning of fields at Lincoln Park necessitated by
heavy use by the Lexington Public School athletic teams and physical education programs, youth leagues,
adult leagues, and residents. Phase I funding was used to replace the synthetic turf field at Lincoln Park
#1 which has reached the end of it useful life after having been installed in 2003 as part of the Lincoln
Park reconstruction project. This FY15 funding request is for the replacement of the synthetic turf and in-
fill materials at Lincoln Park Field #2. Phase III, the replacement of Field #3 is planned for FY2016.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-20\]
43
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(i) Park and Playground
$65,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
Improvements (Recreation)
“This project is part of an annual program to update and replace playground equipment at parks
throughout Lexington. The goal is to renovate and rehabilitate existing safety surfacing and deteriorating
equipment so that all sites will be in compliance with Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-19\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(j) Park Improvements—Athletic
$100,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
Fields (Recreation)
“This is an ongoing multi-year capital program to provide adequate and safe field conditions. Town
athletic fields are constantly used by neighborhood families, youth and adult groups, and recreation and
school programs. Athletic fields see excessive use, and there are safety issues with faulty backstops,
uneven turf, uneven infield areas, and drainage. Continued deterioration can lead to injuries and
cancellation of games. Safety for all participants is the major concern and improving upon field safety,
playability, and ease of maintenance of the fields is the major benefit to all users. This FY2015 funding
request is for the multipurpose field at the Clarke Middle School, which was last renovated in 2000. The
field will be laser graded and crowned for proper drainage, and site amenities such as signage, trash
barrels and benches will be installed.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-20\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(k) Park Improvements—Hard
$85,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
Court Resurfacing (Recreation)
“The FY 2015 request is to resurface, paint and restripe the tennis courts at Gallagher and the Clarke
Middle School. It will also replace some tennis equipment such as net posts and center anchors. If the
Gallagher tennis courts continue to deteriorate, the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association
(MIAA) could deem them to be unplayable, and the Lexington Public Schools athletic program would
have to schedule matches away.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-20\]
AmountFunding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(l) Parker Meadow Accessible Trail
$34,500 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
D&E (Recreation)
“This request is for funding the design for a barrier-free access via a passive recreational trail system for
members of the public with physical, vision and auditory limitations. This project will meet a goal of
Lexington's Open Space and Recreation Plan to make open space accessible to all. The project is a
collaborative initiative of private citizens, land stewards, a representative of the Commission on
Disability, Conservation, and Recreation. It is expected that the design will yield a project cost estimate
which will be the basis for a request for construction funding at a subsequent town meeting.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-20\]
44
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
AmountFundingCommittee Recommends
Project Description (CPA Category)
Requested Source
(m) CPA Debt Service $1,600,807 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
\[Town Warrant\]
a. Wight Farm Purchase: $434,633. The Wright Farm purchase, approved at the 2012 ATM under
Article 9, provided for the $2,950,000 purchase price plus incidental costs. Last month a 10-year bond in
the amount of $2,950,000 was issued. This request is for what will be the first principle & interest (P&I)
payment due on that bond next February.
b. Community Center Acquisition: $1,089,774. The purchase of the property off Marrett Road,
approved at the March 18, 2013, STM, provided for the $10,950,000 purchase price plus incidental costs.
Of that, $7,390,000 was attributed to the CPF. Last month a 10-year bond was issued for $10,950,000
with, once again, $7,390,000 attributed to the CPF. This is request is for what will be the CPF portion of
the first P&I payment due on that bond next February.
c. Community Center Construction (Phase 1): $9,300. At the November 4, 2013, STM, the initial
appropriation for that work was estimated at $3,169,000 of which $2,846,184 was attributed to the CPF—
which was fully funded by CPF cash. At this STM & ATM, an additional $3,151,000 will be requested
(STM Article 3 & ATM Article 8(a)) to complete the funding of the latest estimate of that work. Of that,
$3,051,000 is attributed to the CPF. It is proposed that $2,600,000 of that be funded by CPF cash and that
the $451,000 be debt financed—with the expectation that would initially be with a BAN. This request is
for the anticipated interest-only expense that will be due next February when the BAN matures.
d. Cary Memorial Building Upgrades: $67,100. At this STM, $8,677,400 will be requested
(STM Article 2) to fund that construction. Of that, $8,241,350 is attributed to the CPF and proposed to be
debt financed—with the expectation that would initially be with a BAN. This request is for the anticipated
interest-only expense that will be due next February when the BAN matures.
Project Description (CPA Category) Amount RequestedFunding SourceCommittee Recommends
(n) Administrative Budget $150,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
\[Town Warrant\]
Of the request:
$50,000 is for the planning, legal, survey and appraisal work associated with the acquisition of open
space.Such funds will enable the Conservation Commission to complete the due diligence required to
prepare for a land acquisition. While other Town projects use “study monies” to investigate the benefits
of a particular project, the Conservation Commission does not have the advantage of this type of lead-
time. It must often act quickly to evaluate a property through legal, survey and appraisal work. Without
designating these funds for open space planning, the CPC’s charge of allocating a portion of its revenues
to open-space preservation would be hindered.
The remaining $100,000funds administrative, legal, membership, and advertising expenses. Included
are funds for a year-round, 3 days/week administrative assistant (the Town’s GF covers the other 2 days)
and $7,900for membership in the Community Preservation Coalition, a State-wide, non-profit,
organization working on behalf of communities who have adopted the CPA.
If any of these appropriated Administrative Budget funds are not required by the end of the fiscal year,
then that balance will become part of the Undesignated Fund Balance and, thus part of the CPF’s total
amount available for later appropriation.
45
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Funding Source
Article 9: Appropriate for
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
Recreation Capital
$51,000 Recreation EF (RE)Approval (5–0)
Projects
“This request is for funding to purchase two new pieces of equipment for the Pine Meadows Golf Course.
One would replace a 1990 three-wheeled Cushman Utility vehicle which can be unstable carrying heavy
loads over certain terrain. The vehicle is used on a daily basis for all golf course maintenance projects
including top dressing of the greens, tees, collars and aprons, spraying the greens, tees, collars and aprons
and fairways, fertilizing the golf course fairways and rough, hauling material for bunker repair. The
second would replace a turf aerator purchased in 2000 that is used to aerate the tees, greens, collars and
aprons during the season.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-20\]
Funding
Article 10: Appropriate for
Funds RequestedCommittee Recommends
Municipal Capital
Source
Projects and Equipment
$3,137,353 GF (Debt)
+ $266,500 Water EF
(RE) + $40,500
Wastewater EF (RE)
+ $2,447,155 GF
$7,749,029(Cash) +281,856 GFSee Below
(Free Cash) +
$961,105 Chap. 90 +
$14,560 Unused Bal
Prior Capital
Approp.
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(a) Center Streetscape
$600,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Improvements and Easements
“At the 2012 Town Meeting, funding was approved to bring the center streetscape design from conceptual
design to the 25% design stage. The 25% design plans are currently in production and included numerous
stakeholder meetings to help mold the plan. This FY15 request is for detailed design and the development
of plans and specifications necessary for bidding. The construction phase is likely to include the
restoration, removal and replacement of the forty-year-old brick sidewalk along the northerly side of
Massachusetts Avenue from Depot Square to the Town Office Building, streetscape improvements, and
improved lighting.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-6\]
46
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(b) DPW Equipment$428,440 GF
(Debt) +
$216,500
Water EF (RE)
+ $40,500
Wastewater
$700,000Approval (5–0)
EF (RE) +
$14,560
Unused
Balance from
Prior Capital
Appropriation
“This is an annual request to replace equipment that is beyond its useful life and whose mechanical
condition no longer meets work requirements. The Department of Public Works has an inventory of 146
pieces of equipment including sedans, hybrid SUVs, construction vehicles and specialized equipment
used to mow parks, plow snow, repair streets and complete a variety of other projects. Without regular
equipment replacement, the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the DPW's operations would be
handicapped due to equipment down time and excessive repair costs. The FY2015 request, broken down
by funding sources, is shown in the following table.
”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-6\]
The original authorization of the debt financing of which there is an unused $14,560 balance in the bond
proceeds which are proposed for appropriation under this Article was the 2011 ATM, Article 10(b), DPW
Equipment.
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$2,254,924 GF
(c) Street Improvements and (Cash) +
$3,216,029Approval (5–0)
Easements $961,105
Chapter 90
“This is an annual request for the street resurfacing and maintenance program. Funds will be used for
design, inspections, planning, repair, patching, crack sealing and construction of roadways as well as
repair and installation of sidewalks. Roadways are selected for work using a pavement management
system which is updated on a regular basis. Funding is included for data collection, analyses, traffic
calming requests, complete street evaluations, and developing plans for traffic mitigation and
improvements town-wide. $100,000 of the requested funding is specifically for a portion of the cost for a
trial program of traffic calming measures on Shade Street. The components of funding are shown in the
following table.
47
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-18\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$270,000 GF
(d) Storm Drainage Improvements (Debt) +
$340,000Approval (5–0)
and NPDES Compliance $70,000 GF
(Free Cash)
“This is an annual request to replace and supplement existing storm drain infrastructure. $70,000 of the
request is to fund the design of projects and programs that will meet requirements imposed on the Town
by the US Environmental Protection Agency’s NPDES illicit discharge detection and elimination
program, and implement best management practices (BMPs), e.g., installations and retrofits. The
remaining $270,000 of the request is for the repair/replacement of drainage structures encountered during
the road resurfacing program as well as repair of other drainage areas of concern in town including but
not limited to trouble spots in the watersheds of the Vine Brook, Mill Brook, Beaver Brook, and Kiln
Brook; and, other work identified during the NPDES investigation work.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7 & 18\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$50,000 GF
(Free Cash) +
(e) Hydrant Replacement Program $100,000 Approval (5–0)
$50,000 Water
EF (RE)
“This is an ongoing replacement program designed to maintain the integrity of the fire protection system
by replacing faulty hydrants throughout town. A list of hydrants needing replacement each year is
generated during the annual inspection and flushing of hydrants by the Water Department and the Fire
Department. The target goal is to replace approximately 40 hydrants per year. A total of 191 hydrants of
the total 1,500 in the system have been replaced to date. Hydrants typically have a 50 year life unless they
are damaged.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-19\]
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(f) Comprehensive Watershed
Storm Water Management Study and $390,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Implementation Measures
“This is an annual request to fund watershed stormwater management projects. It is a product of
collaboration between the Department of Public Works and the Conservation Commission Division in an
effort to prevent damage to private property and Town infrastructure. Watershed studies have been
completed for the three watersheds in the Town: Charles River, Shawsheen, and Mystic River. This
48
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
capital request is for design of priority projects identified in these studies which may include Clematis
Brook at Valleyfield Road and Whipple Brook areas. Design work is currently underway for construction
of the Willard Woods Improvements identified in the Shawsheen study.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(g) Massachusetts Avenue
Intersections’ Improvements and $500,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Easements
“At the 2010 annual town meeting, $125,000 was authorized to fund 25% design of improvements at
major intersections on Mass Ave at Marrett Road, Maple Street, and Pleasant Street to address traffic
congestion and associated safety concerns for vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians. In anticipation of state
construction funding through the Transportation Improvement Plan (the TIP) of the Mass. Department of
Transportation (DOT), $500,000 is being requested for the remaining design and development of bid
specifications as required by DOT for eligibility for state funding. In the absence of full or partial TIP
funding, these projects will be deferred or scaled back.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7\]
The Town has just been notified that this project is #6 on this year’s TIP list of accepted municipal
projects; however, as the MassDOT does not yet know what funding will be available, no commitment
has been made by the State to fund the project’s construction. The Town is asking Town Meeting to
appropriate this requested funding to bring us to final design so MassDOT knows the Town has already
made that financial commitment—where others on the list may not have yet done so—and to be able to
move ahead with the project as soon as practical.
This Committee supports the project and endorses the appropriation request now as a sign of the Town’s
commitment to the project.
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(h) Sidewalk Improvements and
$400,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Easements
“This is an annual request to rebuild and/or repave existing asphalt sidewalks that are deteriorated and to
construct new sidewalks. Sidewalk improvements will support and enhance pedestrian safety and the Safe
Routes to School Program. All work will be ADA compliant.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(i) Dam Repair $150,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
“Pursuant to dam inspection reports required by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and
Recreation’s Office of Dam Safety, repairs to the dam at the Old Res are needed to insure the long term
stability of the structure. Funds requested here are for design and cost estimates for these repairs.
Construction funding will be requested for FY16 based on design estimates.
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7\]
49
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(j) Town Wide Culvert
$390,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Replacement
“This is an annual program request. Ongoing culvert inspections indicate the need for a replacement
program for many of the older culverts in town. Locations have been identified in the Charles,
Shawsheen, and Mystic River watershed management plans. Replacing these culverts will allow for
continuous and safe road access as well as proper storm water flow to avoid flooding. This funding
request is for design, permitting, bidding, and construction.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-8\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(k) Town Wide Signalization
$125,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Improvements
“This annual request is for funds to update traffic and pedestrian signals identified through a signal
inventory and compliance study that was funded at the 2011 annual town meeting that included
assessments of ADA compliance, signal condition and signal timing. Possible improvements may include
the Brookside Avenue and Waltham Street intersection.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-8\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
GF (Free
Disapproval
(l) Traffic Island Renovation $83,000 (3–2)
Cash)
“The Board of Selectmen has identified the Hartwell Avenue commercial corridor as a key area of
economic development for the Town. Working with the Economic Development Advisory Committee
and the Town’s Economic Development Director, the Board has endorsed a number of initiatives to
improve the marketability of this commercial district including adding a pedestrian walkway, Alewife
Shuttle Service, a daily food truck program for area employees, and undertaking a comprehensive
engineering study to support future infrastructure improvements. This request is to upgrade the gateway
to the Hartwell commercial district, a high priority of the Hartwell property owners.
“The Town has been granted permission from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (which
owns the right of way) to upgrade and maintain the landscaping at the intersection of Bedford Street and
Hartwell Avenue. The island is in disrepair and needs renovation in order to improve functionality and
aesthetics. The proposed work will include re-grading and installing new pathways and landscaping.
Ongoing maintenance is expected to be performed by a combination of in-house staff and volunteers.
\[Brown Book, Page XI-21\]
The request is for $8,000 of D&E and $75,000 of contracted effort; however, not included is the imputed
cost of the significant work that will be done by the DPW staff. (Estimate cites Demolition, Site
Preparation, & Rough Grading of 19,825 sq ft and Placement of Planting Soil (12" depth) for Shrubs).
The work will be done on the large “jug-handle” island (17,075 sq ft) and three smaller island on Hartwell
Avenue (totaling 2,750 sq ft), all at the intersection with Bedford Street.
disapproves
A majority of this Committee of this request for several reasons. First, this is a signaled
intersection without signage related to the Hartwell Avenue commercial corridor (which is prohibited by
the Massachusetts Department of Revenue as the islands are in the State right of way). Enhancing the
islands beyond a simple clean-up is not considered key to the identification of the corridor as motorists
and walkers would not be focused on the islands, in any case, as the demands of trying to traverse that
50
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
intersection are what have their attention. Next, for the Town to spend even $83,000 is considered an
extravagance and, properly considering the true imputed cost of the DPW responsibility—which is not
insignificant (perhaps bringing the total at least closer to $100,000)—further exacerbates the concern.
Next, as we don’t question that DPW already has its hands full, any such diversion of effort from its
current workload is not viewed as a wise choice.
Given that the intent of this article is to improve the marketability of this commercial district, two
members of this Committee support the aesthetic improvements to an area that currently is notably
unattended. They believe this modest investment is worthy of support to enhance further development of
the Hartwell commercial district.
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$185,000 GF
(Debt) +
(m) Ambulance Replacement $250,000 Approval (5–0)
$65,000 GF
(Free Cash)
“The Fire Department maintains three (3) ambulances in its fleet. Each ambulance is rotated
approximately every three years. The newest ambulance is run as the primary ambulance, responding to
all calls from the Bedford Street Station. The second ambulance is used when the primary ambulance is
committed to a call or as the primary ambulance from the East Lexington Station during peak hours (M-F
8am-6pm). The third ambulance is used as a mechanical backup, and staffed during special events
(Patriots Day, July Fireworks, etc.). The oldest ambulance is typically replaced when it has accumulated
more than 100,000 miles and performed more then 9,000 emergency transports. The ambulance to be
retired from the Department is a 2006 model.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-5 & 21\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(n) Heart Monitors $105,000 GF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
“This request is to replace three current 12-lead EKG monitors/Defibrillators that are 5-7 years old (the
expected lifespan). The monitors have gone through a series of software updates over the last few months
to increase their reliability, but the patient care software the Department uses is not fully compatible with
the current monitors.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-21\]
Since last purchasing these devices, the Fire Department has changed the electronic patient-care report
(ePCR) software, and the interface between the monitors and the computers has not been seamless. These
monitors are a critical piece of life-saving equipment and, as an Advanced Life Support service, are
required.
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(o) Replace Town Wide Phone
$260,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Systems – Phase III
“This is a request for Year 3 of a multi-year program to replace phone systems in town and school
buildings as the systems reach their end of useful life. At the 2008 Annual Town Meeting, $30,000 was
appropriated to fund an assessment of existing phone systems in town and school buildings. This
assessment, which was completed in the summer of 2011, recommended that upon reaching end of useful
51
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
life, existing systems be replaced with voice over internet protocol (VOIP) systems that will operate on
the Town’s wide area fiber network. The FY2013 Phase I request included funding “core devices” to
support all new VOIP systems proposed for replacement including Lexington High School, Cary
Memorial Building, Westview Cemetery, the sewer pump station, and the recycling building. (Included in
the capital requests for the Bridge, Bowman and Estabrook schools was funding for the installation of
VOIP systems that will be supported by the “core devices” referenced above.) The FY14 Phase II request
of $146,000 was approved to replace telephone systems that support the School Administration Building,
Fire Headquarters, the East Lexington Fire Station, and the Human Services Department. This request for
$260,000 is for the replacement of the phone systems at the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-6\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$38,913 GF
(Debt) +
(p) Network Redundancy and $13,856 GF
$140,000Approval (5–0)
Improvement Plan—Phase II (Free Cash) +
$87,231 GF
(Cash)
“This request is for funding of a multi-year program to improve the resiliency of the town wide fiber
network and provide better networked services. FY14 funding was approved to provide wireless access to
select municipal buildings (Town Hall, Police Dept. and the Public Services Building) including the
purchase and installation of the access points, security reprogramming of the network, and the addition of
network drops. This request of $140,000 is for the design, engineering and installation of alternative fiber
optic pathways and hardware needed to connect to the fiber.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-7 & 21\]
Funding Source
Article 11: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Water Distribution
$293,000 Water EF
System Improvements
$900,000(Debt) + $607,000Approval (5–0)
Water EF (RE)
“This is an annual request for funding of an on-going program to replace unlined or inadequate water
mains and deteriorated service connections, and to eliminate dead ends in water mains and includes
funding for design/engineering and construction. Unlined water mains are subject to corrosion which
results in restricted flow and degradation of drinking water quality. Possible locations of water main
repair and replacement include Massachusetts Avenue from the Arlington Town Line to Oak Street or the
Prospect Hill Road area. Part of these project costs may be eligible for financing through an MWRA
grant/loan program.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-10\]
52
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Funding Source
Article 12: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Wastewater System
$900,000
Improvements
Wastewater EF
$1,800,000Debt) + $900,000 Approval (5–0)
Wastewater EF
(RE)
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$900,000
Wastewater EF
(a) Sanitary Sewer System
(Debt) +
$1,200,000Approval (5–0)
Investigation and Improvements $300,000
Wastewater EF
(RE)
“This is an annual request for rehabilitation of sanitary sewer infrastructure. Engineering investigation
and evaluation will be done on sewers in various watersheds. Work will include replacement or repair of
deteriorated sewers and manholes identified throughout Town. Sewage leaks and overflows present a
direct danger to the health of the community through transmission of waterborne diseases. In addition, the
Town’s assessment by the MWRA for sewage treatment is based on total flow through the meter at the
Arlington town line, so excessive flow of storm water in the sewer results in unnecessarily higher sewage
bills. Projects may be eligible for MWRA grant/loan program funding. Further identification,
prioritization, and repair of sanitary sewer lines in the town to reduce inflow and infiltration into the
system has been ongoing in several sewer basins in town that include, but are not limited, to the Kiln
Brook Basin/Tophet Swamp area, the Stimson Ave./Grandview Ave. area, the Parker Street/downtown
area, and the Saddle Club area. Possible future areas of investigation and removal are the Bow Street area,
the Maple Street area, the Woburn Street area, the Bloomfield Street area, Waltham Street / Concord Ave
area, and Adams Street area.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-11 & 19\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
Wastewater EF
(b) Pump Station Upgrades $600,000 Approval (5–0)
(RE)
“Lexington has ten sewer pumping stations valued at over $6 million. This is an ongoing program for
upgrade of the stations including bringing them in compliance with federal (OSHA) regulations,
equipment replacement and generator installations. The pump stations are evaluated every year to ensure
they are operating within design parameters. As the system ages, motors and valves need to be replaced
and entryways need to be brought up to current OSHA Standards. Pump failure results in sewer
surcharges and overflows, which create a public health risk and environmental damage. This year’s
funding may include a full replacement of the pump station at Brigham Road.
\[Brown Book, Page XI-19\]
As noted earlier, this Committee commends that in addition to other infrastructure work, additional
stations will be getting back-up power capability.
53
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Funding Source
Article 13: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for School Capital
Projects and
$322,094 GF (Free
Equipment
$1,432,094Cash) + $1,110,000Approval (5–0)
GF (Debt)
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
)
(a) System Wide School Furniture $261,594 Approval (5–0)
GF (Free Cash)
“This is an annual request for replacement of furniture that has reached the end of its useful life. Many
buildings have not been renovated and need to have classroom furnishings replaced. The schools need
workstations, office furniture, folding chairs/tables, conference room furniture, bookshelves, storage units
and cabinets, kidney tables, library furniture, staff room mailboxes, carts, corkboard and partitions.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-13\]
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(b) School Technology Capital
)
$1,110,000Approval (5–0)
GF (Debt)
Request
“This is an annual request for technology equipment to support the District’s Strategic Goal of utilizing
technology as an instructional and administrative tool. Technology equipment includes technology
workstations (desktop computers, laptops, mobile devices), printers/peripherals, projection systems,
network head-end equipment, and wireless network delivery systems. This capital request would provide
the funding for:
Technology Workstations (Desktops, Laptops, Mobile Devices) - $575,000: $485,000 to replace
approximately 520 aging computers that will be 5-6 years old during FY15 with up-to-date technology
workstations, and $90,000 allocated as part of a three year plan to equalize the allocation of technology in
all six elementary schools.
Individualized iPad initiatives in Grades 8 and 9 - $170,000: During the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school
thth
years, LPS piloted the use of iPads in the 9 and 10 grade. During each of these two years, a group of
approximately 50 Grade 10 students and their teachers were provided iPads for use at school and at home.
th
During the current year, 100 9 graders and their teachers were provided iPads for every day classroom
use in history and English classrooms. In addition in the summer and fall of 2013, LPS purchased and
deployed iPads for all of our Grade 9 teachers. The funding was provided both through the local budget
and through an extensive LEF grant for professional development on the use of iPads in educational
environments. The $170,000 requested here is for the continuation of these pilot programs including as
th
follows: (1) providing iPads to a second set of 100 9 graders and their teachers for every day classroom
th
use in history and English classrooms, (2) providing a classroom set of iPads to every 8 grade team at
Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools, and (3) providing two classroom sets of iPads for strategic use by
two of our high school departments. These pilot programs will be subject to ongoing evaluation to
determine their effectiveness and to guide decisions about expansion of the program in future years.
Technology Peripherals - $35,000: To purchase and replace old printers, document readers, and
projection systems throughout the district.
Maintenance and Updating of local area networks (LAN) - $170,000: to replace end of life switches,
upgrade server storage capacity; to provide additional backup and recovery hardware for the District’s
54
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
computer/network system; to upgrade the wireless network at the high school and middle schools through
an additional controller and access points to address the increased use of the mobile devices (laptops,
iPads, etc) in these schools.
Interactive Projector/Whiteboards Units - $160,000: the FY15 request represents the third stage of
four stages that will allow the Lexington School District to accomplish its goal by FY16 of having every
Grade 3-12 classroom equipped with interactive projector/whiteboard units. Specifically, this request will
allow the District to purchase and install interactive whiteboards/projection units in 50 classrooms in
Grades 3-12.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-9\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(c) School Traffic Mitigation for
$30,000Approval (5–0)
GF (Free Cash)
Safety—Analysis
“An initial Traffic Safety and Mitigation study of school sites commissioned by the School Committee on
February 26, 2013. This study identified the need for more detailed analyses including GIS mapping and
inventory of topology, signs, crosswalks, and parking spaces at each site as it relates to School Committee
policies and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for schools. This request is
year 1 of a three-year program to conduct these analyses and identify mitigation measures that may result
in future requests for construction funding. The school sites to be reviewed include Bowman Elementary
School, Bridge Elementary School, Estabrook Elementary School, Fiske Elementary School, Harrington
Elementary School, Hastings Elementary School, Clarke Middle School, Diamond Middle School,
Lexington High School and Central Administration.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-14\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(d) School AED Replacement $30,500 Approval (5–0)
GF (Free Cash)
“Fourteen Automatic External Defibrillators (AEDs) purchased in the year 2000 are beginning to show
their age. Funding is requested to replace the 14 AEDs plus install one in the LHS Science building and
equip the high and middle school coaches with portable AEDs for sports.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-14\]
Funding Source
Article 14: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Public Facilities
$1,013,050 GF
Capital Projects
(Free Cash) +
$339,568 GF (Cash)
+ $148,406 GF
$1,541,352See Below
(Debt) + $40,328
Unused Bal from
Prior Capital
Approp.
55
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(a) School Building Envelope and GF (Free
$230,000Approval (5–0)
Systems Cash)
This project involves performing annual prioritized design, repairs and modifications to prevent
deterioration of school building exteriors and building systems. Proper maintenance of school buildings
requires continual investment in the building envelope and building systems. This includes but is not
limited to repair of damaged panels and siding, re-caulking and weatherproofing windows and doors,
repainting the wood exterior and extraordinary repairs to mechanical systems. Small, individual items
such as failure of a specific door or window or small painting projects will continue to be funded through
the operating budget. FY 2015 priorities include making extraordinary repairs as required to school
buildings including acoustic treatments to meet the needs of students with hearing impairments,
educational space modifications from enrollment changes, modifications to the School Finance Offices
and moisture/insulation barrier at Clarke Middle School and improved moisture barrier for Diamond
Middle School Library. Engineering design and preparation of bid documents are included in the project.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-14\]
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(b) LHS Heating Systems
)
$75,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5–0)
Upgrade—Phases 2 and 3
“In 2009, the need for a major upgrade to the High School Heating systems was identified by the
Facilities Department at projected cost of $3.65 million. Funds were appropriated at the 2009 annual town
meeting to begin limited repairs, which have been completed. Given the shift in capital priorities brought
on by the unanticipated need to replace the Estabrook School, the School Committee’s stated priority to
move the Hastings School reconstruction forward, and the pending need for the replacement of the High
School in approximately 10 years, the recommended scope of the heating system upgrade at the High
School has been reduced from initial estimates. This request for $75,000 is for design and development of
bid documents for the revised scope of work which will include improve system reliability and control
through the replacement of unreliable pneumatic controls and unit ventilator valve and damper operators.
Construction funding to be requested at the 2015 annual town meeting is preliminarily estimated at
approximately $900,000.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-8\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(c) Municipal Building Envelope
$178,302 GF (Cash) Approval (5–0)
and Systems
“This ongoing capital request, originally approved for funding in the 2006 operating budget override,
includes repair/replacement projects for the maintenance and upgrade of municipal buildings and systems.
Repairs to roofs, windows, mechanical and electrical systems, and interior finishes are required on a
continual basis to maintain town facilities for their intended function. The public building infrastructure
will always need to be maintained, repaired, and upgraded to prevent structural deterioration and avoid
safety hazards. The projects within this program do not increase the size of the public building stock and
therefore do not result in increased utility usage or maintenance costs. One project already identified for
funding in FY2015 is for extraordinary repairs to Cary Memorial Library, including ceiling system
replacements and interior painting.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-15\]
56
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(d) Extraordinary GF (Free
$423,750Approval (4–1)
Repairs/Replacements/Upgrades Cash)
School Building Flooring Program ($125,000)
“This is a multi-year project that will replace carpet, vinyl tile, and ceramic tile flooring systems
are beyond their useful life. Flooring systems must be replaced periodically to insure the surfaces
are safe and cleanable. Worn or broken flooring creates a tripping hazard, can provide harborage
for bacteria and water, and is difficult to clean. Smaller repairs of flooring components are
funded through the operating budget.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-15\]
School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair ($50,000)
“This request is for the final year of a four year program to make extraordinary repairs to
unreliable, high maintenance horizontal blinds or replace them with low maintenance solar
shades to improve energy efficiency and also control sun glare in the educational space. Smaller
repairs of window treatments components are funded through the operating budget.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-15\]
School Interior Painting Program ($153,750)
“This is a multi-year project for a school building interior painting program with the intent of
systematically repainting interior surfaces on a 7 to 10 year schedule. Elementary school interiors are
occasionally painted through PTA planning of community volunteers. The Middle Schools and High
School have not had interior painting done for many years. This painting program will enable DPF to plan
for and implement annual summer painting projects that will improve maintenance and cleanliness of
building interiors. Projects will be identified annually with input from school administrators. Small
”
painting projects are funded through the operating budget.
\[Brown Book, Page XI-15\]
Middle School Nurses Stations ($45,000)
“This request is for funds to modify the spaces allocated for nurses at both Middle Schools to better align
them with the kinds of services provided. Both nurses’ stations need to have an area for nurses to meet
privately with students, but also allow the nurse to monitor other areas where students may be resting or
waiting for parents. Additional sinks are required for hand washing and routine hygiene.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
Renovation and Update of Diamond Kitchen and Cafeteria ($25,000)
“The Diamond Middle School cafeteria and kitchen need to be redesigned and renovated to accommodate
the number of students now attending the school. Funding for design documents is requested for FY2015,
”
with construction funding anticipated in FY2016.
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
Clarke School Gymnasium Dividing Curtain ($25,000)
“A dividing wall in the Clarke School gymnasium - intended to create two separate activity spaces - had
long been inoperable and was removed during the summer of 2012. In the absence of the dividing wall,
physical education staff place gym mats and rolls down the center-line, creating a imperfect barrier when
needed. The pseudo-wall keeps student activity and equipment (balls, pucks, etc.) isolated to one half of
the gymnasium, while students in the other half are engaged in an alternate or mirror activity. With the
student population at Clarke having grown from 750 students to 870 students over the past 3-4 years, there
is a heightened need to install an operable dividing curtain. This request is for funding to purchase and
install that curtain.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
As this is aggregation of program and discrete projects and none of the “programs” (flooring, window
treatments, and especially interior painting) have a statement that any single job would have a cost of at
least $25,000 (the Capital threshold), one member of this Committee is opposed to the whole sub-Article.
(The member supports the other three elements as they are viewed as being discrete projects.)
57
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
GF (Free
(e) School Paving Program $100,000 Approval (5–0)
Cash)
“This project requests funds for design and construction to maintain school parking and paved pedestrian
surfaces in a condition suitable for public use. In the last seven years paving improvements have been
implemented at Estabrook, Bridge, Bowman, Fiske, Hastings, Diamond, and Central Administration
buildings. In addition, improvements were made to various school buildings to remove access barriers
identified in the ADA Survey completed in 2011. In the absence of as yet identified needs, the FY15
request is likely to be used to perform extraordinary repairs to sidewalks on school grounds. Locations
considered for work to be performed include the Harrington and Fiske Schools. This project also includes
engineering design and development of construction bid documents. The Department of Public Facilities
and the Department of Public Works Engineering partner on these projects to utilize the DPW paving
bids.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-15\]
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
(f) East Lexington Fire Station GF (Free
$75,000Approval (5–0)
Physical Fitness Room Cash)
“This project is to build a room on the apparatus floor of the East Lexington Fire Station that is
atmospherically controlled so firefighters can exercise in the station close to their emergency equipment
for rapid response to calls. Physical fitness equipment presently is located on the apparatus floor, shared
with trucks and the firefighting gear. This space is hot in the summer, cold in the winter and smells of
diesel exhaust and remnants of fire particulates off the members' protective gear after working fires.
There needs to be an atmospherically-controlled space for firefighters to use to stay physically fit.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-16\]
Project Description Amount Funding Committee Recommends
Requested Source
GF (Free
)
(g) Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000Approval (5–0)
Cash)
“This is an annual request for funding of professional services to produce design development,
construction documents, and/or bid administration services for smaller school projects in anticipation of
requests for construction funding at town meeting that that have a high probability of approval. This will
insure that the projects can be completed in the then-current construction season, which is particularly
important for the timely completion of such projects given the short window between the end of school in
June and the beginning of school the following August.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-16\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(h) Middle School Science,
GF (Free
)
Performing Arts and General $40,000Approval (5–0)
Cash)
Education Space
“This request is for funding to evaluate the use of existing educational space in both middle schools to
determine what opportunities exist for improving space utilization to better deliver educational programs
58
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
and accommodate increasing enrollments. The two middle schools were renovated approximately 11
years ago. Currently there are concerns from the school administrators that the laboratories and
auditoriums no longer adequately support the middle school science and performing arts programs, and
that the systems, equipment, and space plan should be evaluated for alignment with the educational
program. In addition, increasing enrollment in elementary schools indicate increased middle school
enrollments in FY 2017. This request is for funding in FY 2015 to study space utilization and make a
recommendation for FY 2016 funding to address identified space needs.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-16\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
$73,406 GF
(Debt) +
$161,266 GF
(Cash)
(i) Clarke School Elevator Upgrade$275,000+$40,328Approval (5–0)
Unused
Balances from
Prior Capital
Appropriations
“This project would increase the interior dimensions of the Clarke Middle School elevator to make it
compliant with current handicapped access codes. The elevator does not have the minimum dimensions
that allow for a mobility-impaired individual to maneuver inside the cab. As a result, impaired individuals
may require assistance to operate the elevator. The Lexington Commission on Disability has made the
upgrade a priority.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-8\]
The original authorizations of the debt financing of which there is an unused $40,328 balance in the bond
proceeds which are proposed for appropriation under this Article were the following:
Original Debt AuthorityDescriptionUnused Amount
2009 ATM Article 19(c)LHS Heating System Upgrade$371.00
2011 ATM Article 13(e)Clarke Middle School Paving Improvements$10,295.00
2010 ATM Article 8(l)Repairs, Remodeling to Town Office Building$1,438.00
2008 ATM Article 14(b)Park Improvements—Athletic Fields$358.00
2003 ATM Article 8(i)Landfill Closure$11,862.00
$180.00
2009 ATM Article 15(c)Comprehensive Stormwater Mgmt Watershed Study
2011 ATM Article 13(b)(ii)Estabrook School Street Related Improvements$121.00
2011 ATM Article 13(k)Repair of Fire Station Floor$1,130.00
2011 ATM Article 14Street Betterment (Frances Road)$14,573.00
$40,328.00
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(j) Clarke School Auditorium GF (Free
$69,300Approval (5–0)
Audio Visual System Cash)
“The Clarke School auditorium is heavily used by students, staff and community members, including
School Committee meetings. The current sound system that serves this space is original to the building
and has significant reliability problems. Given the condition of the system, there are concerns that the
entire system may fail. Staff has been advised by contractors to avoid adjustments to the outdated wires
and parts. A new sound system will enable meetings, performances, and presentations to be heard without
59
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
excessive static, feedback and knocking. This funding request is for the replacement of the entire sound
system and plus the addition of a projection system to facilitate visual presentations.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-18\]
Project Description Amount FundingCommittee Recommends
Requested Source
(k) Fire Station Headquarters Indefinite Postponement
N/A N/A
Design (5–0)
“The Board of Selectmen is evaluating a privately owned parcel as a potential site for a fire headquarters
to replace the main station. While this evaluation is not anticipated to be completed for the Annual Town
Meeting, it may be presented at a special town meeting this Spring. The existing station was built in 1947
and is too small to house the apparatus and all the functions that are required to be staffed in the building.
A structure is needed that is large enough to safely house 5 pieces of fire apparatus, two ambulances and
several auxiliary vehicles; living quarters for twelve personnel; areas to conduct interviews, plan reviews,
meetings and training; office space for nine staff; and room for supplies and records. There is currently
insufficient parking for staff and the public who come to the Fire Department for service or emergencies.
The station is not energy efficient with leaking windows, doors and apparatus bay doors. Water leaks into
the 2nd floor through the cornices at the roofline, and mold is growing in the basement from water
infiltration. A water cleansing system was installed behind the station to filter contaminants from ground
water leaching in from the old gas station that was located across the street.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-17\]
At the time of this report, no site has been selected.
Article 16: Rescind Original Funding
Amount for RescissionCommittee Recommends
Source
Prior Borrowing
Authorizations
Approval (5–0)
$318,673 Debt Authorization
“To see if the Town will vote to rescind the unused borrowing authority voted under previous Town
Meeting articles; or act in any other manner in relation thereto.
(Inserted by the Board of Selectmen)
DESCRIPTION: State law requires that Town Meeting vote to rescind authorized and unissued
debt which is no longer required for its intended purpose.”
\[Town Warrant\]
At the time of this report, we had been advised that the following rescissions are expected:
ReasonOriginal AppropriationDescriptionsAmount
Unneeded at Project Completion
2010 ATM Article 13(b)Rehabilitating Standpipes$20,000.00
2011 ATM Article 14Street Betterment—Frances Road$33,000.00
2012 ATM Article 11(d)Park Improvements—Athletic Fields$7,173.00
2012 ATM Article 12(e)DPW Equipment$12,307.00
Subtotal$72,480.00
Replaced by Premium on Bonds2011 STM (Nov 14) Article 2Bridge/Bowman Reconstruction$98,378.00
†
Sold on February 5, 20142012 STM (Apr 2) Article 3Estabrook School Construction$147,815.00
Subtotal$246,193.00
Total$318,673.00
†
See Article 22 for where these amounts are appropriated as a supplement to the original appropriations; thereby, there is no
change to the total funding authority for each project.
60
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Note: No-longer-needed cash balances from issued debt are not a subject for rescission. Those are
normally proposed to Town Meeting for appropriation to later Capital Articles.
Funding
Article 17: Establish and
FundsCommittee
RequestedRecommends
Appropriate To and From
Source
Specified Stabilization
Capital Projects/Debt Service Reserve/Building Renewal SF
Funds (SFs)
Capital Projects/Debt
Withdraw
Service Reserve/Building
$950,000;
Renewal SF
Approval (5–0)
Deposit
$2,974,417 GF (Cash) +
$6,160,726
$3,186,309 GF (Free Cash)
Traffic Mitigation SF
Deposit Traffic Mitigation Special
Approval (5–0)
$40,000Revenue Account
“To see if the Town will vote to create and/or appropriate sums of money to and from Stabilization Funds
in accordance with Section 5B of Chapter 40 of the Massachusetts General Laws for the purposes of: (a)
Section 135 Zoning By-Law, (b) Traffic Mitigation, (c) Transportation Demand Management, (d) School
Bus Transportation, (e) Special Education, (f) Center Improvement District; (g) Debt Service, (h)
Transportation Management Overlay District (TMO-1), (i) Avalon Bay School Enrollment Mitigation
Fund, and (j) Capital Projects/Debt Service Reserve/Building Renewal Fund; and determine whether the
money shall be provided by the tax levy, by transfer from available funds, or by any combination of these
methods; or act in any other manner in relation thereto.
\[Town Warrant\]
Note: All of the Town’s Specified Stabilization Funds are in addition to the Town’s General
Stabilization Fund. See Appendix B for a table with information on all the current Specified
Stabilization Funds.
The only two of the funds identified in the Warrant under this Article with capital implications and for
which actions are contemplated at this Annual Town Meeting are as follows:
a. The Capital Projects/Debt Service Reserve/Building Renewal SF—whose balance as of
February 28, 2014, is $3,988,416.72:
rd
(1) The first action is to withdraw from that fund, with a 2/3 vote, $950,000 to be used to
mitigate the increase to the taxpayers from the exempt-debt service for the Bridge/Bowman, and
Estabrook Schools projects. (An additional $919,000 will be withdrawn as an appropriation under
Article 4 (Appropriate FY2015 Operating Budget) to provide similar mitigation from the
non-exempt-debt service for the 2-year High School Modulars Project that was authorized at the
November 4, 2013 STM under its Article 4.).
(2) The second action is to deposit into that fund $6,160,726 that are not designated for use
toward FY2015 expenses.
(3) The projected balance after those actions (including the additional $919,000 withdrawal
under Article 4) would be $8,280,143—which continues to accrue interest earned. That balance would
rd
remain in this Fund and be available later in FY2014 and thereafter to be applied, with a 2/3 vote by a
future Town Meeting, toward any of the purposes in the full title of the Fund. Although not yet obligated
by any action of a Town Meeting, there are three more debt-mitigation-related draws contemplated from
this Fund. Those are simply projections at this point, but include using in FY2016 about $350,000 for an
61
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
additional mitigation of the exempt-debt service related to the same elementary-schools projects and
about $1,078,000 additional mitigation of the non-exempt-debt service related to the Modulars Project;
and in FY2017, about $805,500 of additional mitigation related to the Modulars Project.
b. The Traffic Mitigation SF—whose balance as of February 28, 2014, is $29,067.24. The deposit
into this Fund is available as a result of a $40,000 payment received from Cubist Pharmaceuticals in
connection with approval of a property-development project in Town.
Funding Source
Article 18: Appropriate to
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
Stabilization Fund
Indefinite Postponement
Not applicable Not applicable
(5–0)
“To see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money to the previously created Stabilization
Fund.…”
\[Town Warrant\]
At this time, there is not any planned action under this Article.
Funding Source
Article 19: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
from Debt Service
$124,057 Debt Service SFApproval (5–0)
Stabilization Fund
“To see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money from the Debt Service Stabilization Fund to
offset the FY2014 debt service of the bond dated February 1, 2003 issued for additions and renovations to
the Lexington High School, Clarke Middle School and Diamond Middle School, as refunded with bonds
dated December 8, 2011;…
DESCRIPTION: This article would allow the Town to pay the debt service on the 2003 School
Bonds from the Capital Debt Service Stabilization Fund set up for that specific purpose.”
\[Town Warrant\]
In August 2006, the Town received over $14 million from the Massachusetts School Building Authority
as reimbursement toward the Town’s secondary-schools renovation project. After using over $11 million
of those funds to retire short-term debt taken on in anticipation of that reimbursement, there was
$2,143,079 excess reimbursement that needed to be applied toward the project’s long-term exempt debt.
By Department of Revenue \[DOR\] regulations, these funds must be used only to offset debt service on
the outstanding bond for that exempt debt.
With the prior-year appropriations from this fund and, over the same period interest being earned on the
amount in the fund, the balance is now $1,136,963. With continued, yearly, appropriation of this same
amount ($124,057), all the excess reimbursement will have been applied with the payment in FY2023.
With the present balance, that would still leave $20,450 in the fund, but the residual balance will be
higher in FY2023 as a result of interest that will be earned over the next 9 years. It is the Town’s position
that the residual balance should be applied against other exempt debt in FY2024 as the requirement to
reserve these funds was to “return” the funds to the taxpayer through the mitigation of exempt-debt
service.
62
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Funding Source
Article 22: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Authorized Capital
$495,000 GF (Cash)
Improvements
$741,193+ $246,193 Bond-Approval (5–0)
Issuance Premium
“To see if the Town will vote to make supplementary appropriations to be used in conjunction with
money appropriated in prior years for the installation or construction of water mains, sewers and sewerage
systems, drains, streets, buildings, recreational facilities or other capital improvements and equipment that
have heretofore been authorized.…”
\[Town Warrant\]
“
The low bid for Phase I of the Modular Buildings construction project, to be completed in the summer of
2014, exceeded the original cost estimate by $372,221. Extrapolating this bid price results in an increase
to the original estimate for Phase II, to be completed in the summer of 2015, by $122,514. These revised
estimates result in this request for funding to supplement the $7.7 million authorization approved at the
November 2013 special town meeting in the amount of $495,000.”
\[Brown Book, Page XI-8\]
As shown in the following table, in addition to the above for a non-exempt project, cash from the
exempt-debt allocation of a Premium paid on Town bonds sold on February 5, 2014, is being applied to
the funding of two schools projects that were approved for exemption from the provisions of
Proposition 2½ by a referendum passed by the Town’s voters. (See Article 16 for where the debt
financing authorities of those exempted projects was reduced by the same amounts so there is no change
to the total funding authority for each project.)
Funding
Article 23: Amendments
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
to the District
Source
Agreement of the
Minuteman Regional
N/A N/A Approval (5–0)
Vocational School
District
“To see if the Town will vote, consistent with Section VII of the existing “Agreement With Respect to the
Establishment of a Technical and Vocational Regional School District” for the Minuteman Regional
Vocational School District, to accept the amendments to said Agreement which have been initiated and
approved by a majority of the Regional School Committee and which have been submitted to the Board
of Selectmen of each member town prior to its vote on this article.
(Inserted at the request of the Minuteman Regional Vocational School District)
DESCRIPTION: The School Committee for the Minuteman Regional School District is
recommending that the District's Regional Agreement be amended. Amending the current Regional
Agreement requires an affirmative vote from all 16 town meetings in the region.
In summary, the proposed amendments to the Regional Agreement provide for:
A four-year rolling average where student enrollment is a factor in determining the annual
operating and capital assessment;
A weighted voting methodology for most School Committee actions;
63
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
A provision to authorize the School Committee to negotiate terms of the capital assessment for
new member communities;
A revised procedure for withdrawing from the District;
A revision to the formula by which annual capital costs are assessed;
A requirement that any income received by non-member communities for capital costs be used
to offset the capital assessments of the member communities; and
A change in the method for authorizing debt, which would allow a community not supporting
the issuance of debt to withdraw from the District.”
\[Town Warrant\]
The Agreement addresses how member communities, and those non-members who send by-tuition
students, will provide for capital projects. Minuteman hopes to have a new high school built to meet
programmatic needs in our present-day economy for students.
The new Agreement addresses the needs of member and non-member communities as well as provide a
suitable mechanism for communities to either join the Minuteman collaborative or to withdraw from it
while equitably addressing the issue of managing Capital debt.
The Appropriation Committee report to this ATM provides a detailed explanation of this Agreement.
Our Committee joins the Appropriation Committee in recommending approval..
64
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Appendix A: CPA Fund—Project Revenues and
Expenditures
A-1
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Appendix B: Information on the Town’s Current Specific
Stabilization Funds
B-1
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Appendix C:
Summary of Warrant-Article Recommendations
Abbreviations: RF = Revolving Fund; CPF = Community Preservation Fund;
EF = Enterprise Fund; RE = Retained Earnings; GF = General Fund;
SF = Stabilization Fund; TBD = To Be Determined; ATM = Annual Town Meeting;
STM = Special Town Meeting
CEC
Art.DescriptionRequestFunding SourceDifference
STM 2Cary Memorial Building Upgrades
$8,677,400$8,241,350 CPF (Debt) + $235,230 GF (Cash) +
$200,820 PEG Access RF
STM 339 Marrett Road Community Center Renovation
$6,220,000$5,346,184 CPF Cash (Cash) + $451,000 CPF
(Debt) + $422,816 GF (Free Cash)
8Community Preservation Committee Operating Budget and CPA Projects
(To be
8(a)39 Marrett Road Community Center Sidewalk$0
Indefinitely Postponed)
8(b)Visitor Center$220,608$59,332 CPF (Cash) + $161,276 GF (Cash)
8(c)Hastings Park Gazebo Repairs$120,000CPF (Cash)
8(d)Historical Commission Inventory Forms for Listed $35,000CPF (Cash)
Buildings
8(e)Battle Green Streetscape Improvements$90,000$63,000 CPF (Cash) + $27,000 GF (Free Cash)
8(f)Vynebrooke Village Renovations
$300,551CPF (Cash)
8(g)LexHAB Set-Aside for Housing Acquisition $750,000CPF (Cash)
8(h)Lincoln Park Field Improvements$620,000$200,000 CPF (Cash) + $189,000 Recreation
EF (RE) + $231,000 GF (Free Cash)
8(i)Park and Playground Improvements$65,000CPF (Cash)
8(j)Park Improvements - Athletic Fields$100,000CPF (Cash)
8(k)Park Improvements- Hard Court Resurfacing$85,000CPF (Cash)
8(l)Parker Meadow Accessible Trail Design and $34,500CPF (Cash)
Construction
8(m)CPA Debt Service$1,600,807CPF (Cash)
8(n)Administrative Budget$150,000CPF (Cash)
9Recreation Capital: Pine Meadows Equipment
$51,000Recreation EF (RE)
10Municipal Capital
10(a)Center Streetscape Improvements and Easements$600,000GF (Debt)
10(b)DPW Equipment Replacement$700,000$428,440 GF (Debt) + $216,500 Water EF (RE)
+ $40,500 Wastewater EF (RE) + $14,560
Unused Balance from Prior Capital Approp.
10(c)Street Improvements$3,216,029$2,254,924 GF (Cash) + $961,105 Chap. 90
10(d)Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES $340,000$270,000 GF Debt + $70,000 GF (Free Cash)
Compliance
10(e)Hydrant Replacement Program$100,000$50,000 GF (Free Cash) + $50,000 Water EF
(RE)
10(f)Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water $390,000GF (Debt)
Management Implementation Measures
10(g)Massachusetts Ave. Intersections Improvements$500,000GF (Debt)
10(h)Sidewalk Improvements$400,000GF (Debt)
10(i)Dam Repair$150,000GF (Debt)
10(j)Town-wide Culverts$390,000GF (Debt)
10(k)Town-wide Signalization$125,000GF (Debt)
10(l)Traffic Island Renovation$83,000GF (Free Cash)($83,000)
10(m)Ambulance Replacement$250,000$185,000 GF (Debt) + $65,000 GF (Free Cash)
10(n)Heart Monitor$105,000GF (Cash)
10(o)Replace Town-wide Phone Systems—Phase III$260,000GF (Debt)
10(p)Network Redundancy & Improvement Plan - Phase II$140,000$38,913 GF (Debt) + $13,856 GF (Free Cash) +
$87,231 GF (Cash)
11Water Distribution System Improvements
$900,000$293,000 Water EF (Debt) + $607,000 Water EF
(RE)
12Wastewater System Improvements
12(a)Wastewater System Investigation and Improvements$1,200,000$900,000 Wastewater EF (Debt) +$300,000
Wastewater EF (RE)
12(b)Pump Station Upgrades$600,000Sewer EF (RE)
Coninued on next page
tt
C-1
th
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2014 ATM & 2014 STM (Mar 24)
Summary of Warrant-Article Recommendations (continued)
CEC
Art.DescriptionRequestFunding SourceDifference
13School Capital
13(a)Systemwide School Furniture$261,594$261,594 GF (Free Cash)
13(b)School Technology$1,110,000GF (Debt)
13(c)Design Funds for School Traffic Safety Mitigation$30,000GF (Free Cash)
13(d)School AED Replacement$30,500GF (Free Cash)
14Public Facilities
14(a)School Building Envelope and Systems Program$230,000GF (Free Cash)
14(b)LHS Heating Systems Upgrade—Phases 2 & 3$75,000GF (Debt)
14(c)Municipal Building Envelope and Systems$178,302GF (Cash)
14(d)Extraordinary Repairs/Replacement/Upgrades$423,750GF (Free Cash)
14(d)(1)School Building Flooring Program$125,000
14(d)(2)School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair$50,000
14(d)(3)Interior Painting Program$153,750
14(d)(4)Middle School Nurses Stations$45,000
14(d)(5)Renovation & Update of Diamond Kitchen and $25,000
Cafeteria
14(d)(6)Clarke School Gymnasium Dividing Curtain$25,000
14(e)School Paving Program$100,000GF (Free Cash)
14(f)East Lexington Fire Station Physical Fitness Room$75,000GF (Free Cash)
14(g)Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000GF (Free Cash)
14(h)Middle School Science , Performing Arts, and $40,000GF (Free Cash)
General Education Spaces
14(i)Clarke Elevator Upgrade$275,000$73,406 GF (Debt) + $161,266 GF (Cash) +
$40,328 Unused Balance from Prior Capital
Appropriation
14(j)Clarke School Auditorium Audio Visual System$69,300GF (Free Cash)
14(k)Fire Station Hq Replacement Design (To be $0
Indefinitely Postponed)
17See Page 61
Establish and Appropriate To and From
Specified Stabilization Funds
19$124,057
Appropriate from Debt Service Originally a State reimbursement for
Stabiiization Fundschool projects.
NovLexington High School Modular Buildings$7,700,000GF (Debt)
2013
STM
Appropriate for Authorized Capital
†
22Improvements: Lexington High School Modular $495,000GF (Debt)
Buildings—Supplement
Totals (excluding Article 17)$40,861,398($83,000)
†
Not included is the $246,193 of Bond Issuance Premium receivved that is being applied to exempt-debt Schools projects (Article 22)
concurrent with rescinding debt authorizations in the same amouunt for the same projects (Art. 16).
C-2