Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-05-TFMP-min77S TOWN OF LEXINGTON a Ad hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee k_ APRIL IT � k1 NG'V Minutes Town of Lexington Ad hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee (AhTFMPC) June 5, 2013 Place and time: Public Services Building, 9:00 a.m. Members Present: Richard Pagett, Acting Chair; John P. Carroll; Peter Kelley, Selectman; Jeanne Krieger; Joe Pato, Selectman; Jessie Steigerwald, School Committee Members Absent: Bill Kennedy, Chair Liaisons Present: Laura Hussong, Community Center Task Force (CCTF); David Kanter, Capital Expenditures Committee; Alan Levine, Appropriation Committee; Linda Vine, Town Manager's Office; Mark Corr, Chief, Police Department; Liaisons Absent: James Goell, CCTF; Joseph McWeeney, Permanent Building Committee (PBC); Paul Lapointe, Council on Aging (COA); John Wilson, Chief, Fire Department; Louise Lipsitz, School Department Also present: Ken Buckland, The Cecil Group; Pat Goddard, Department of Public Facilities; Bob Pressman, Community Preservation Committee; Fred Johnson, Center Committee & Cary Memorial Building Committee Recording Secretary: Sara Arnold The meeting was called to order at 9:05 a.m. 1. Comments: There were no general comments. 2. Draft Interim Report: Mr. Buckland reported that he met with Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kanter and Mr. Goddard on June 3 to review the draft Interim Report, 28 May 2013 and subsequently made edits to reflect comments. The draft Interim Report of the Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee, June 3, 2013, which had been previously emailed, was distributed. Mr. Kanter distributed a list of suggestions that he recommends be incorporated into the report. Mr. Pagett facilitated a review of each page of the report to address Mr. Kanter's written comments and verbal comments made by others. Many of these comments addressed the sequencing of information and verbiage that informs a reader who does not have a background understanding of the issues. Additionally, Mr. Buckland was asked to incorporate and /or clarify some points that had been discussed during previous meetings. Mr. Buckland will incorporate the recommendations identified during the meeting and plans to distribute the updated report to this Committee tomorrow. The goal is to have the report to Ms. Vine by June 7. 3. Review of Financial Scenarios: Mr. Buckland distributed and briefly reviewed a spreadsheet, FINANCIAL SCENARIO, June 4, 2013, prepared by The Cecil Group. It was noted that previous financial commitments involving Cary Memorial Building and the Community Center need to be added to more accurately demonstrate the financial implications of the projects being considered. The spreadsheet will be reviewed by Rob Addelson, Finance Director, and discussed in more detail at a future meeting. 4. Next Meetings: It was agreed to meet on Monday, June 10 at 9 a.m. and Tuesday, June 18 at 8:30 a.m. 5. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 11:02 a.m. Materials used at the meeting: ➢ Agenda for June S, 2013 ➢ Interim Report of the Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee, June 3, 2013: draft prepared by The Cecil Group ➢ FINANCIAL SCENARIO, June 4, 2013, draft spreadsheet prepared by The Cecil Group ➢ Email from David Kanter to Bill Kennedy, Tuesday June 4, 2013; Subject: Re: Updated Interim Report of the AhTWFMPC INTERIM REPORT OF THE AD HOC TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLANNING COMMITTEE June 3, 2013 The Townwide Facilities Master Plan The Town wideFacilitiesMasterPlan is under developmentto evaluate the town's facility needs and develop a plan of recommendations to be considered over a ten-year-period. The charge of the Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee (Committee) is to evaluate the various facility needs for the Town and develop a plan of recommendations to be considered over a 10 year period. This interim report covers the work of the Committee that has been completed to date, next steps to be taken, a summary of the conditions of the townwide facilities, and preliminary recommendations. The work of the Committee has to date encompassed: • Selection of The Cecil Group, Inc. as the consultant for Townwide Facilities Master Planning. • Review of the completed studies for the Fire Station, Police Station, Visitors Center, Senior Center, Community Center, Cary Memorial Building, Hosmer House (previously the "White House "), Stone Building, and schools, including the Final Report of the 2009 School Ad hoc Facility Committee. The complete results of this review will be in the Final Report. • Assessment of the impact of the deficiencies identified in these studies on the delivery of services and prioritization of the recommendations for improvements. The departments were asked to provide updated information on needs and service delivery impacts to incorporate into the plan. • Consideration of available prospective sites for the proposed facilities projects. • Identification of alternatives for sequencing the facilities construction /renovation for addressing the facility deficiencies. The alternatives are presented in the preliminary recommendations. The next steps to be taken by the Committee are: * Financial consideration of alternatives for addressing the facility needs of the Town. * Creation of a Final Report that includes the priorities, timing of projects, and proposed financing of the projects. TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN MEN Preliminary Facilities Recommendations The following is a summary of the Committee's most recent discussion on recommendations and alternatives for the town facilities considered in this study. These recommendations will be further refined in the next steps of the Committee's work after the financials and phasing plan are reviewed. Refer to the following section, Lexington Townwide Buildings Summary, for tabulated results. At this time, the Committee considers the Hastings School as the highest importance school project, and the Fire and Police Stations as the highest importance municipal building projects CENTRAL FIRE STATION AND POLICE STATION The Committee has spent much of its meeting time discussing the needs and alternatives for public - safety service facilities, including consideration of the 33 Marrett Road property for individual and combined facilities. The reasons are that Committee places the Police and Fire facilities projects in the highest importance for implementation. The following alternatives for public - safety services should be considered (in order of the CENTRAL EIRE STATION majority of the Committee preference). A minority of the Committee recommended this order of preference be reversed: 1. Consideration for a combined facility on an appropriate new site location; 2. Sequentially phased projects that first puts Central Fire Station on a new site and then the Police Station on the existing Central Fire Station site, thereby opening up the Police Station for alternative uses such as School Administration; 3. Build new facilities in place, in accordance with the previous planning reports, but noting that additional property is required to accommodate the full building program for both projects. POLICE STATION MEN LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS The pros and cons for these alternatives which have been identified during the process to date are summarized in the following table: Decide on best alternative for Fire and Police, including future expansion ALTERNATIVE PROS CONS COMMENTS Combined Fire and Police facility Sequentially Phased Facilities Possible reduction in multiple spaces used for same function Reduction in size of mechanical/ HVAC when buildings combined All emergency and other department services in one location Does not require temporary (swing) space during construction Allows full program to be constructed May be minimal reduction in total Only opportunity to explore a space with more complexity in combined emergency services design, utilization and operations facility All emergency services would be in Current chiefs of Police and Fire are one location at risk for an event amenable to discussion Build In Situ (includes adjacent space) May require an eminent - domain taking Disruption of services during construction; will require swing spaces Requires purchase of private Liberty Mutual site is one option, property suitable for expansion to but the site bounds could create meet future demands as no current restricted project design town land is suitable May require an eminent - domain taking Must review and mitigate neighborhood impacts Requires purchase of private property as no current town land is suitable May require an eminent - domain taking Must review and mitigate neighborhood impacts Allows sale of Central Fire Station property as fiscal benefit Police building requires visibility on the street Traffic on Bedford St. is becoming more difficult and may require roadway improvements Liberty Mutual site is one option Allows sale of Central Fire Station property as fiscal benefit Traffic on Bedford St. is becoming more difficult and may require roadway improvements Allows use of previous initial study Requires design considerations to fit Does not allow a combined facility results as basis for planning and current site and building, if building design is reused Maintains facades of existing Requires decision on Hosmer House older and historic buildings, which for Police Station expansion either may expand the allowable use of within the building or after building Community Preservation Funds is moved Eliminates need for additional land Requires decision on additional land purchase for space at Police Station acquisition for Central Fire Station - OWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN O ■ Two prior actions should be taken prior to the decision on alternatives: 1. Review sites, including the Liberty Mutual site, as potential location(s) for siting emergency services, for either or both the Fire and Police facilities, while considering the following: • Facilitate the review of sites and initiate a RFP process; • Maintain emergency response time and service presence; • Ensure flexibility in facility design and potential for future expansion on the chosen site; * Understand that there are design options (see 2. below); * If the facilities are to be combined, consider sale of Central Fire Station property as fiscal benefit. 2. Analyze the design options for a combined facility, while considering the following: • Identify the shared facility elements to determine cost savings; • Consider multi -story and below grade facility design to fit the program with the chosen site. HOSMER HOUSE Regardless of other facilities actions, the Hosmer House should be relocated; preferably within the Historic District. This will allow for program options within the relocated building and within the existing footprint when combined with the adjacent town open space. ALTERNATIVE Incorporate into Police Station expansion Move Hosmer House Determine option for relocating the building PROS CONS COMMENTS Maintains building on the current site Provides function for building Allows building to be incorporated into a different context Allows vacated space to be part of larger public programs Requires compromises in program and spaces for Police Need to find appropriate location for the building LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS MUNROE SCHOOL The activities provided under the Munroe School license address some, but not all, creative arts and education needs in the town. Currently, the building requires extraordinary maintenance. The Committee recommends completion of current maintenance needs. ALTERNATIVE Disposition of the property Complete maintenance Decide on whether to complete extraordinary maintenance PROS CONS One -time financial gain and reduces Lose public building capital maintenance Maintain building Expense without direct municipal use COMMENTS FI STONE BUILDING The town needs to seek a viable program. Once a viable use is determined, complete the suggested historic restoration with a rear `el' building addition which will allow ADA accessibility to the 2nd floor lyceum for public activities. , Determine financially - viable program of use ALTERNATIVE PROS CONS Restoration of Expand programming options for the Cost of renovation building and building addition for use of 2nd floor TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 0 1 ■ CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING The Committee encourages proceeding apace with the renovation of Cary Memorial Building. This building is in need of improvements to support townwide space needs. Action on financing the project will hopefully be timely to open opportunities for other projects with later starts. Continue currently planned and already initially funded renovation project VISITORS CENTER The Visitors Center is in the correct location and the facility should be improved for basic services — providing information and public toilets. However, while the facility is considered inadequate for proposed visitor programs, there must be further vetting to address overlapping of townwide visitor needs before expanding beyond the recommended improvements for basic information and public toilets. Open review of proposed program COMMUNITY CENTER The Committee presented its position on the Community Center at 39 Marrett Road to the Board of Selectmen. The Committee supports that the Board of Selectmen has created an Ad hoc Community Center Advisory Committee to assist with the definition of what is to be accomplished at that recently purchased property. Once a program is defined, the Selectmen should proceed with the project. No further action by the Committee will be taken on this subject. Proceed with the project at 39 Marrett Road for a Community Center E■ N LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS MARIA HASTINGS SCHOOL This school is different from the other elementary schools in program expansion and deferred maintenance. The modular classroom additions have outlived their useful life. The School Committee intends to submit a Statement of Interest to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) in January, 2014. The recommendation is to address the School as soon as it is practical for rebuild. In the feasibility phase, consider options for alternate footprints, spaces, and programs. Proceed with facility improvement including consideration for possible replacement ALTERNATIVE PROS CONS COMMENTS Renovate the Reduces the total project cost building THE HIGH SCHOOL Maintain the High School in 10 -year capital planning The High School will be a significant fiscal burden that should be addressed within a 10 -year planning horizon to prepare for the project and ensure it is completed. Move on other projects prior to the High School to smooth the financial burden to the town when the project starts. 0 ALTERNATIVE Phased construction Full rebuild Does not provide spaces for education comparable with other town schools Swing space is required Building requires extraordinary maintenance PROS Allows on site construction during other uses of the site Reduces period of disruption Increases time of disturbance and increases the total cost of the project Swing space is required New footprint of the building has to be determined New footprint of the building has to be determined TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN ■ � ■ E SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION Prioritize the Administration offices for later phases, as a lower priority. Prepare for consideration of alternatives; adjunct to the High School project, inclusion in a vacated f Police Station, or renovation in place. Maintain existing building until decision on future of program and space AL PROS Adjunct to Links school construction with High School other needs Links administration with major school property In vacated Centralizes the core school Police Station administrative functions within the municipal building complex Renovation in Maintains existing programs and place spaces C ONS i COMMENTS Existing building requires extraordinary maintenance Would require other non -core functions to be housed separately Existing space is larger than necessary for program of uses MUZZEY SENIOR CENTER The facility may have a purpose for some other function, such as Meals -on- Wheels, but otherwise is appropriate for disposition. b Dispose of space ALTERNATIVE PROS CONS COMMENTS Disposition of One -time financial gain and reduces space the town's operating and capital expenses, along with reducing its liabilities Maintain Maintains current portfolio of ownership municipal spaces Lose town asset Requires finding a function for the space LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS WALDORF SCHOOL Under the agreement which is understood by the Committee to be long term (up to year 2063), the use will continue on the site beyond a phase contemplated by the Committee planning horizon. However, the town should consider allowing expansion of the Waldorf School's programming into the adjacent Stone Building to further justify the improvements to Stone Building, and add another source of revenue. This action should include a discussion of responsibilities for maintenance of the building. Approach Waldorf School about extension into Stone Building TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 0 1 ■ Lexington Townwide Buildings Summary Recommendations and alternatives for buildings and program needs are summarized in the following section. The Committee and consultant team conducted building tours and reviewed previous studies and reports to better understand the existing conditions of municipal facilities in Lexington. These documents largely focused on the physical condition of Lexington's municipal buildings as well as the space needs of Town departments. Many of the documents described structural, mechanical and other deficiencies of the buildings; the key issues and needs have been summarized below. Shown on the map below and in the summary chart on the following page are the 12 town buildings and three school buildings considered in this facilities review and addressed in this report. For each building, the amount of floor space is listed in square feet and whether or not the particular program space demands are met. Furthermore, each building's condition is listed as either Sound (in good condition), Needs Building Renewal (lack in maintenance), or Unsound (building is structurally insufficient). M■ N LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING A Town Office Building B Cary Memorial Building C Police Station D Hosmer House E Senior Center F Munroe School G Cary Memorial Library H Visitors Center I Stone Building East Lexington Fire Station K Central Fire Station L Public Services 1 Maria Hasting School 2 High School 3 School Administration LOT ASSESSED BUILDING PROGRAM BUILDING RECOMMENDATIONS AND (ACRES) VALUE (SQF) NEEDS MET CONDITION ALTERNATIVES 3.4' a. Repair and expand in place 22,900 Yes Sound No change 3.4' $8.1m 31,000 Yes Needs building renewal Proceed with building renewal renewal Needs building Rebuild renewal a. Repair and expand in place 3.4' $8.1 m 13,060 No Sound b. Rebuild on another site Police Station c. Rebuild on another site with Central Fire Station 1.8 $1.Om 2,325 Unknown Needs building Define program renewal Move historical building $2.8m 9,236 No Needs building Move to 39 Marrett Road renewal 1.6 $3.3m 22,500 Yes Needs building Continue use as arts center renewal 62,500 Yes Sound No change 2.5 $1.7m 2,591 Unknown 0.4 $1.Om 3,500 Unknown 5,250 Yes 1.4 $3.Om 11,841 No 82,227 Yes 50,400 +9,453 No modular 56.5 $36.4m 328,500 No 8.7 $24.1 m 46,637 Yes Sound Define program Improve in place Needs building Define program renewal Expand restoration to add ADA access Sound No change a. Repair and expand in place Sound, b. Rebuild on another site c. Rebuild on another site with Police Station Sound No change Needs building Rebuild renewal Needs building Rebuild renewal a. Repair in place Needs building b. Rebuild with High School renewal c. Move core functions to vacated Police Station 'This lot includes the Town Office Building, Cary Memorial Building, and the Police Station. , Slab repair extended building life for +5 years. TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Next steps The Committee expects to complete this Final Report by June 30, 2013. The Committee has agreed to the following report outline to submit to the Selectmen. FINAL REPORT OUTLINE Introduction A. Existing Conditions 1. Assessments of Properties and Buildings 2. Building Programs and Plans a. Schools: Ad hoc Facility Committee report (2009) 1. High School 2. Old Harrington School /School Administration Offices 3. Hastings School b. Fire Station c. Police Station d. Visitors Center e. Senior Center f. Community Center g. Cary Memorial Building h. Hosmer House i. Munroe School j. Stone Building k. Waldorf School B. Program and Project Policies and Goals 1. Planning a. Master Planning b. Scoping and Program Planning c. Sustainability d. Validation 2. Service Delivery a. Basic Services b. Collaboration c. Technology d. Shared Space e. Scalability f. Location g. Feedback 3. Project Phases a. Study /Feasibility b. Design and Engineering c. Construction (Commissioning) 4. Facility Maintenance a. Yearly Maintenance b. Building Renewal c. Building Renovation and Replacement MEN LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS 5. Facility Use and Reuse a. Design for Use and Reuse b. Lifecycle Design 6. Building and Land Preservation a. Interim Preservation b. Disposal C. Alternatives 1. Scenarios and Alternatives 2. Building Design Concepts 3. Alternative Project Costs a. Projected Design, Development, and Construction Costs b. Projected Capital and Operating Costs 4. Benefits and Impacts a. Service Impacts 1. Department Improvements 2. Potential Customer Benefits and Demands b. Considerations of Health, Safety, and Environment 1. Public Accessibility 2. Effect on Town Infrastructure 3. Legal Issues 5. Phasing a. Phasing and timelines for projects D. Financial Model 1. Relative Financial Demands and Risks 2. Projected Town Budgeting E. Planning Options 1. Public - Private Partnerships 2. Options for Master Plan Project Phasing and Delivery of Services Bird's eye view images ©2013 Google, Map data and ©2013 MDA Geospatial Services Inc. TOWNWIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 0 0 Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee Members: 7 Members Appointed by: Board of Selectmen Length of Term: Preliminary recommendations to Board of Selectmen Dec 15, 2012 Final Report by March 1, 2013 Meeting Times: One evening every other week (day to be determined) Description: To evaluate the various facility needs for the Town and develop a plan of recommendations to be considered over a 10 year period. The work of the Ad Hoc Facility Master Plan Committee will include, but not be limited to: Review the completed studies for Schools, Fire Station, Police Station, Visitors Center, Senior Center, Community Center, Cary Memorial Building, White House, Stone Building, and the Final Report of the 2009 School Ad Hoc Facility Committee; Assess the impact of the deficiencies identified in these studies on the delivery of services and then prioritize the recommendations; Consider various financial options for meeting the facility needs of the Town; Propose sequencing of facility construction /renovation options for addressing the facility deficiencies; Make a Final Report that includes the priorities, timing of projects, and proposed financing of the projects. An initial task of the Committee will be to utilize the Designer Selection Process, M.G.L Ch.7, to select a consultant experienced in Municipal Master Planning. The consultant will provide technical expertise to the Committee and provide additional information as required by the Committee. Consider available or prospective sites when considering proposed facility projects. Criteria for Membership: The Task Force members shall consist of members of other committees, town staff with and citizens with sufficient background to understand facility and operational management and impact on delivering services. Appointments to be made by the Board of Selectmen, who will also designate a Chairman. Representatives from the following boards will be considered for this committee: • Two members of the Board of Selectmen • One School Committee member or designee • Four members appointed by the Board of Selectmen Staff Support: The Director of Public Facilities will provide staff support to the committee. Ex Officio /Liaisons (non voting): • Capital Expenditure Committee • Appropriation Committee • Permanent Building Committee member or designee • Police Chief or designee • Fire Chief or designee • Superintendent of Schools or designee • Town Manager or designee • Council on Aging or designee • Community Center Task Force Prior to serving as a member of this Committee, appointees are required to: 1. Acknowledge receipt of the Summary of the Conflict of Interest Statute. Further, to continue to serve on the Committee the member must acknowledge annually receipt of the Summary of the Conflict of Interest Statute. Said summary will be provided by and acknowledged to the Town Clerk. 2. Provide evidence to the Town Clerk that the appointee has completed the on -line training requirement required by the Conflict of Interest statute. Further, to continue to serve on the Committee, the member must acknowledge every two years completion of the on -line training requirement. Ref: Adopted by the Board of Selectmen on June 4, 2012. Board of Selectmen voted to designate as Special Municipal Employees on Lexington Facilities Master Plan Phased Projects Option FINANCIAL SCENARIO Totals $308,641,366 Non - Excluded Debt Service Current Payments to Levy Supported Debt Service $5,856,865 $5,207,186 $4,477,024 $3,369,608 $3,251,672 $3,137,863 $3,028,038 $2,922,057 $2,819,785 $2,721,092 $2,625,854 $2,533,949 Remaining Capital Budget Capacity [5% Policy] $1,429,752 $2,334,462 $3,328,582 $4,709,194 $5,109,888 $5,516,351 $5,929,074 $6,348,554 $6,775,298 $7,209,818 $7,652,638 $8,104,290 Excluded Debt Service Total Currently Committed Excluded Debt $8,441,205 $8,202,369 $7,591,424 $7,353,125 $7,095,766 $6,847,414 $6,607,754 -------------------- $6,153,306 $5,937,940 $5,730,112 $5,529,558 Available Excluded Debt $238,836 $849,781 $1,088,080 $1,345,439 $1,593,791 $1,833,451 $2,064,722 $2,287,899 $2,503,265 $2,711,093 $2,911,647 Designated Debt Service Project Costs ,430 $6,322,696 $6,19. $6,066,444 $7,726,469 $7,547,253 ?5„�,+,R $15,889,842 $15,549,4 ,1 4,725,492 $14,400,962 Communitv Preservation Act Year-end Surplus Available for Appropriation $1,344,408 $3,003,725 $3,241,557 $2,441,100 $1,535,470 $874,203 $461,378 $301,213 $398,076 $756,486 $1,381,122 Designated CPA Project Costs 1,626 $2,9641 -------------------- $3,523 °, ;417,947 $3,397;: $4,122,122 $3,842,722 $1,714,571 Difference: Debt Service Available - Bonded Project Costs $787,931 ($216,132) ($2,144,333) ($397,296) $388,883 ($616,326) $215,271 ($7,816,911) ($6,826,646) ($5,836,414) ($4,361,761) ($3,385,025) Difference: CPA Available- CPA Project Costs $1,152,782 $38,912 ($159,323) ($1081959) ($1,882,477) ($2,523,744) ($2,829,024) ($4105959) ($3,866,571) ($3,365,636) ($2461600) ($1714571) Difference: Total Available- Total Project Costs $1,940,713 ($177,220) ($2,303,656) ($1,479,255) ($1,493,594) ($3,140,070) ($2,613,753) ($11,922,870) ($10,693,217) ($9,202,050) ($6,823,361) ($5,099,596) Assumptions: Notes: yearly Growth in Levy 3.5% Debt and Levy Figures to FY18 taken from Town Budget Report 2013TM Yearly Reduction in Excluded Debt 3.5% Total Excluded Debt FY14 reduced by $1.6 Million at 2013 TM Bond Interest Rate 4.0% MSBA reimbursement is included in net bonded debt Design as %of Project Costs 6.50% Ten -year debt for all design costs, except as noted Totals $308,641,366 Non - Excluded Debt Service Current Payments to Levy Supported Debt Service $5,856,865 $5,207,186 $4,477,024 $3,369,608 $3,251,672 $3,137,863 $3,028,038 $2,922,057 $2,819,785 $2,721,092 $2,625,854 $2,533,949 Remaining Capital Budget Capacity [5% Policy] $1,429,752 $2,334,462 $3,328,582 $4,709,194 $5,109,888 $5,516,351 $5,929,074 $6,348,554 $6,775,298 $7,209,818 $7,652,638 $8,104,290 Excluded Debt Service Total Currently Committed Excluded Debt $8,441,205 $8,202,369 $7,591,424 $7,353,125 $7,095,766 $6,847,414 $6,607,754 $6,376,483 $6,153,306 $5,937,940 $5,730,112 $5,529,558 Available Excluded Debt $238,836 $849,781 $1,088,080 $1,345,439 $1,593,791 $1,833,451 $2,064,722 $2,287,899 $2,503,265 $2,711,093 $2,911,647 Designated Debt Service Project Costs ,430 $6,322,696 $6,19. $6,066,444 $7,726,469 $7,547,253 ?5„�,+,R $15,889,842 $15,549,4 ,1 4,725,492 $14,400,962 Communitv Preservation Act Year-end Surplus Available for Appropriation $1,344,408 $3,003,725 $3,241,557 $2,441,100 $1,535,470 $874,203 $461,378 $301,213 $398,076 $756,486 $1,381,122 Designated CPA Project Costs 1,626 $2,9641 :3;400,881 $3,523 °, ;417,947 $3,397;: $4,122,122 $3,842,722 $1,714,571 Difference: Debt Service Available - Bonded Project Costs $787,931 ($216,132) ($2,144,333) ($397,296) $388,883 ($616,326) $215,271 ($7,816,911) ($6,826,646) ($5,836,414) ($4,361,761) ($3,385,025) Difference: CPA Available- CPA Project Costs $1,152,782 $38,912 ($159,323) ($1081959) ($1,882,477) ($2,523,744) ($2,829,024) ($4105959) ($3,866,571) ($3,365,636) ($2461600) ($1714571) Difference: Total Available- Total Project Costs $1,940,713 ($177,220) ($2,303,656) ($1,479,255) ($1,493,594) ($3,140,070) ($2,613,753) ($11,922,870) ($10,693,217) ($9,202,050) ($6,823,361) ($5,099,596) Assumptions: Notes: yearly Growth in Levy 3.5% Debt and Levy Figures to FY18 taken from Town Budget Report 2013TM Yearly Reduction in Excluded Debt 3.5% Total Excluded Debt FY14 reduced by $1.6 Million at 2013 TM Bond Interest Rate 4.0% MSBA reimbursement is included in net bonded debt Design as %of Project Costs 6.50% Ten -year debt for all design costs, except as noted Prepared by The Cecil Group, Inc. June 4, 2012 Page 1 of 3 Patrick Goddard From: David G. Kanter [david @kanters.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 2:28 PM To: Bill Kennedy Cc: Patrick Goddard Subject: Re: Updated Interim Report of the AhTWFMPC Attachments: FacilityMasterPlanCommitteeFinal- 092412.pdf Bill (and Pat), On Jun 3, 2013, at 15:55 , Kenneth Buckland < buckland&cecil •° r�oup.corn > wrote: Attached please find the updated interim report for discussion on Wednesday, June 5, starting at 9am. < LexFacPlan _InterimReport_2013 -06 -03 v2.pdf> I've reviewed that version and offer the following comments. All of these reflect just my opinion and, therefore, you may well decide there's no need for a change - -or may feel an alternative change is better. I have a rationale for each- - which I'd be happy to share - -but will save time by not explicitly citing each in this e -mail. If my rationale is not clear from the change proposed, I'd welcome your call so I can explain. Please note that I have not included Ken on this e -mail; however, you are welcome to forward it to him, if you consider it appropriate to do so, as it's not my intend to direct a contractor to do anything. I'll be prepared to speak to any of the changes I'm proposing at the meeting tomorrow morning if you wish me to do so. I intend to bring hardcopies of this e- mail for all of your committee members in case you wish me to distribute it to the members. After you've had a chance to review the proposed changes, if you find most are consistent with what you'd want done, you might consider whether it would be helpful to provide this e -mail now to the rest of your committee so they would have a limited opportunity to have seen them, too, in advance of the meeting. 1. Page 1 a. First heading should be "The Townwide Facilities Master Planning" (i.e., changing "Plan" to "Planning "). b. First paragraph (in italics): Change to read "The Lexington Board of Selectmen (Board) wishes to have a Townwide Facilities Master Plan that will look out over a 10 -year period. The Board charged the Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee (Committee) to evaluate the various facility needs for the Town and to develop recommendations to be considered over that period. (The Charge is attached.) ". Or cite as appendix, if that's more appropriate. c. At this point (1) Reinstate the annotated map with the enhanced legend including the names that go with each identifier flag. Precede it with "The following map shows the 12 municipal and three school buildings addressed in this report. The Committee also addressed what, at the time, was a potential purchase of a portion of the property at 33 Marrett Road. Those results are contained in the Committee's presentation to the Board at its meeting on and are not repeated in this Interim Report. (The presentation can be found on the Town's Web site at .) Following approval by a Special Town Meeting on March 18, 2013, that property has been purchased by the Town (closing is still pending at the time of this Interim Report) and will have 39 Marrett Road as its address. ". If the presentation isn't on the Web site, it needs to be put there so the link /URL can be included. (2) In the legend, change the title to be "Lexington Town Buildings ". Question: Besides to support the proposed 7/18/2013 Page 2 of 3 language, as there is a mention of 39 Marrett Road in the summary table, why not include identify the Marrett Road location on the map and revise the proposed lead -in wording to reflect that? d. In the "The work of the Committee... ", 3rd bullet, 2nd line: Delete "prioritization of the ". 2. Page 2 a. First paragraph (in italics): Delete the last sentence. b. "Action ": Before "Hastings ", add "Maria ". c. Central Fire Station and Police Station, 1st paragraph, 2nd line: Change "the 33" to "what would become 39 ". 3. Page 3 a. "Action ": Before "future ", add "space to accommodate ". b. "Combined... ", Comments (1) 3rd entry: Change "is" to "appears to be ". (2) Last entry: Append "(including signalization) ". c. "Sequentially...:, Comments, Last entry: Append "(including signalization) ". 4. Page 4: "Two prior actions... ", sub - paragraph 1: Add an explicit mention of the Chapter 30B process following the "Review sites" (e.g., parenthetically or as a subordinate clause). 5. Page 5 a. Munroe School: (1) Text paragraph, Last sentence: That recommendation is secondary. I thought this was an instance where the Committee had already decided on the approach to take. If so, Change to "The Committee recommends the Town retain ownership and continue the current use of the building." (2) "Action": Change "extraordinary maintenance" to "building renewal "; however, the Committee needs to decide if it really want to leave as a decision yet to be made that the required capital work (i.e., the building renewal) would not be done if, indeed, the Town retains ownership and the relationship with the tenant doesn't include also doing the extraordinary maintenance. I wouldn't think the Committee would recommend we own an asset that we don't "maintain ". (3) Second Alternative: (a) Title: Change to "Retain Ownership" (b) Pros: Change to "Continues as a Town asset ". b. Stone Building: (1) "Action ": Delete "financially -" (2) Alternative: Change "for" to "to permit ". 6. Page 7, Maria Hastings School, Text paragraph, 1 st sentence: Change "program expansion and deferred maintenance." to "still needing accommodations for meeting program needs (including overcrowding) [if that 7/18/2013 Page 3 of 3 parenthetical is correct] and needing major building renewal. ". 7. Page 9, Waldorf School, Text paragraph, 1 st sentence: Replace the opening clause with "Under the existing long- term agreement (potentially until year 2063) ". 8. Page 10 a. Last paragraph: (1) 2nd line: Change "town" to "municipal ". (2) Last sentence: After "building's condition ", replace with "was considered for identification as "Sound (generally in good condition), Needs Building Renewal (major renovation or replacement), or Unsound (structurally insufficient). ". b. Repeat the map with the correction noted above in lc(2). 9. Page 11: Footnote 2: Change "Slab" to "Equipment -floor slab ". 10. Page 12: Final Report Outline, Para 133c: Before Commissioning, add "including ". 11. Page 13: Spaced down from the last entry in the Outline, add "Attachment: Charge of the Ad Hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee, Amended September 24, 2012 ". 12. Last page, the Charge: Replace with the latest version. I'd suggest it be slightly reduced in scale so the "Ref" which is currently on a 2nd page will, instead, be presented with the rest on a single page.) In case Ken doesn't have that version (which is the same as I had included in my 30 May 2013 commentary distributed on 31 May 2013), it's attached to this e -mail. David Member, Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee, and Liaison to the Ad hoc Townwide Facilities Master Planning Committee Tel: 1- 781 - 861 -6147; iPhone: 1- 617 - 966 -5669; Fax: 1- 781 - 674 -2477 7/18/2013