Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-10-CEC-min LL n Minutes of the Y 4 j Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting March 10, 2015 APRIL 19' Location and Time Town Office Building, Reed Room, 8.00 A M Members Present Jill Hai, Chair, David Kanter, Vice-Chair & Clerk, Elizabeth Barnett, Rod Cole, Wendy Manz Members Absent None Others Present Joe Pato, Chair, Board of Selectmen (BoS), Carl Valente, Town Manager, Bill Hadley, Director, Department of Public Works (DPW), John Livsey, Town Engineer, DPW, Dave Pinsonneault, Manager of Operations, DPW, Rob Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance, Sara Arnold, Recording Secretary Documents Presented • Notice of Public Meeting/Agenda for March 10, 2015 • Draft #3 Minutes of the CEC Meeting February 24, 2015 (Distributed by Mr Kanter's e-mail, March 3, 2015 7.24 P M to the other CEC Members and Ms Arnold) • BoS List of Articles that Might be Considered for Consent-Agenda Concept at Town Meeting (Distributed by Mr Kanter's e-mail, March 5, 2015 11 .09 A m to the other CEC members, Ms Arnold, and Glenn Parker, Chair, Lexington Appropriation Committee) • Material Prepared by Ms Manz for the Programs Section of the CEC Report to 2015 Annual Town Meeting (ATM) & 2015 Special Town Meetings (STMs) (March 23rd) "Conservation and Open Space"and "Recreation" • Draft #3 CEC report to 2015 ATM & 2015 STMs (Mar 23th) (Distributed by Mr Kanter's e-mail, March 3, 2015 7.24 P M to the other CEC Members and Ms Arnold) Call to Order Ms Hai called the meeting to order at 8.00 A.M Capital Projects in the Town's FY2016—FY2020 Capital Program Mr Valente noted that the CEC is currently not supporting a number of Capital Articles that are being supported by the BoS and Appropriation Committee He wanted to understand this Committee's reasoning for its positions and provide additional information, as appropriate Those Articles were discussed as follows • ATM Article 11 Appropriate for Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment (a) Center Streetscape Improvements and Easements—Phase 1 Ms Barnett explained that, according to her analysis, only $500,000 of the $2 7 funding request is for safety-related components, i e , a traffic signal and crosswalks Given the Town's other financial pressures for new buildings and expanded school capacity, this does not appear to be an appropriate time to fund the aesthetic enhancements that are part of the project. Ms Barnett also expressed concern about doing work that might be disrupted by future projects associated with a new police headquarters and/or use of the Hammond A. Hosmer House Mr Livsey made several points, including the following Page 1 of 5 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting March 10, 2015 ■ This phase of the Center-Streetscape plans address the area from the Massachusetts Avenue/Winthrop Road/Woburn Street intersection to the Cary Memorial Building ■ Only 10-20% of the requested funding is for aesthetic-only elements ■ Appropriately placed lighting is a safety measure, the recommended ornamental lights are consistent with plans for the entire Lexington Center area. ■ The sidewalks in the project area are in poor condition and Americans with Disability Act curb cuts need to be added, the sidewalk plan includes a cement center with brick banding that has been selected as the standard design for Lexington Center ■ Massachusetts Avenue reconstruction is needed irrespective of this project. ■ The rebuilding of infrastructure and safety components represents $2 3 million of the $2 7 million request. Mr Valente noted that this 1St phase of the project started out being approximately $4 0 million, the scope has already been reduced He added that there is about one pedestrian accident a year in this area. Mr Pato noted that safety is the BoS' highest priority and doing this project in its entirety "makes sense" as the Town moves toward a cohesive Center district. He added that addressing the Center Streetscape is the BoS' highest priority after the schools and the public-safety buildings for the Fire and Police Headquarters, there won't be a better time in the next 10 years During discussion, Committee member comments included the following ■ Most of the elements are "all or nothing" ■ Eliminating the aesthetic-only elements does not result in a substantial savings ■ This is only Phase 1 , the estimate for implementation of all the phases remains $8 0 million ■ Subsequent phases do not need to be done immediately, although they should be anticipated over the next five years A motion was made and seconded to support ATM Article 11(a) Vote 4-1 (Ms. Barnett in opposition) (k) Hastings Park Undergrounding Wires In response to this Committee's questions about whether the above-ground wires and associated poles are a safety hazard or whether they prevent use of the space, Mr Pinsonneault said that the groups that use Hastings Park have been able to work around the wires and poles He added that NStar has quoted $300,000 for their work. A quote is coming from Verizon It is anticipated that there will be a definitive price for ATM A Motion was made and seconded to reaffirm this Committee's opposition to ATM Article 11(k) Vote 5-0 Page 2 of 5 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting March 10, 2015 • ATM, Article 8, Appropriate the FY2016 Community Preservation Committee Operating Budget and CPA Projects• (e) Battle Green Streetscape Improvements In response to this Committee's concerns about the need for a project that is cohesive with the Center-Streetscape plans and that addresses the Bedford Street/Harrington Road intersection, Mr Livsey's comments included the following ■ The Town is using the same consultant for both projects ■ The Bedford Street/Harrington Road intersection is a challenge The designer has created over 10 possible re-configuration alternatives and every one results in degraded conditions at this intersection or at other nearby intersections ■ The 25% design will be completed in the late summer or early fall, and the requested funding would support continuing the project in a timely manner Mr Pato added that the BoS is supporting this article unanimously He noted that the 250th anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord will be celebrated in ten years, and this provides an impetus for moving forward on plans to improve the Battle Green area. A Motion was made and seconded to reaffirm this Committee's previously voted opposition to ATM Article 8 (e) Vote 5-0 . (o) Grain Mill Alley Design Funds Mr Pato reported that the BoS is conflicted about this Article and is interested in getting more information This Committee shared its reservations about the Article, which included the following ■ The project does not have a safety component, it only improves aesthetics ■ There are questions about spending Town funds to enhance private property, particularly because it might enhance the value of that property ■ This should be privately funded A Motion was made and seconded to reaffirm this Committee's opposition to ATM Article 8(p) Vote 4-1 (Ms. Manz in opposition to the Motion) . (p) Minuteman Bikeway Wayfinding Signs—Design Funds In response to this Committee's questions about this project's coordination with efforts in the Towns of Arlington and Bedford and at the State level, comments made by Mr Pato and Mr Livsey included the following ■ The Toole Design Report recommended signage plans for the Minuteman Bikeway, which runs through the towns of Lexington, Arlington, and Bedford The three towns generally agreed on the signage plans, although the plans for etiquette signs were not unanimously endorsed o The Town of Arlington already has some signage and is not planning to move forward on plans for its portion of the bikeway at this time Page 3 of 5 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting March 10, 2015 o Only about one mile of the bikeway is in Bedford, and there is no particular incentive for that town to pursue the plans ■ This project would include the development of signage using the fewest words possible and would determine optimal locations for the signage ■ Ideas for State-wide consistency for bikeways relates to branding efforts, not wayfinding signage, and currently there is no funding available at the State level for pursing this concept. A Motion was made and seconded to reaffirm this Committee's opposition to ATM Article 8(p) Vote 3-2 (Mr Cole and Ms. Manz in opposition to the Motion) Committee's Report to the 2015 Annual and Accompanying Special Town Meetings (including Continued Development and Approval) There was a brief review of aspects of the report that needed additional clarifying edits Ms Barnett asked to reverse her abstaining vote on ATM, Article 9, Property Purchase- 241 Grove Street, making the support for this Article unanimous Individual Motions were then made, seconded, and votes were taken as noted, except where explained as otherwise, for the approval of specific Articles as follows (The one disapproval vote is bolded ) • ATM Article 30 Amend FY2015 Operating, Enterprise and CPA Budgets Vote 5-0 • ATM Article 31 Appropriate for Authorized Capital Improvements It continues that no actions are currently known to be presented under this Article N/A Vote 5-0 • ATM Article 35, Accept MGL Chapter 90-I, Section 1 Complete Streets Program It was reiterated that this Article does not entail a financial obligation, it provides the Town with an option to seek grant funding Vote 5-0 • ATM Article 41 , Amend General Bylaws—Contracts and Deeds This Committee is voting on this because it impacts the use of assets Vote 5-0 • ATM Article 42 Commission on Disability Request Although this Committee supports the concept, there is concern that the language lacks precision and could cause confusion with State or Federal mandates Disapproval Vote:5-0 • ATM Article 45 Townwide Process for Safety (Citizen Article) The Committee discussed whether this Article has a direct Capital implication and, therefore, warrant inclusion in our report. Remove from Report Vote 5-0 • ATM Article 46 Acquisition of Land Shown on Assessors' Property Map 22, Lot 51B Vote 5-0 Mr Kanter asked that everyone review the table illustrating the Committee's Five-Year Capital Plan in the draft report and submit comments Of particular importance is a review of the footnotes to determine whether there should be additions, deletions, or edits The table will be reviewed at this Friday's meeting Other Maters Related to the Committee's Role in Those Town Meetings Consent Agenda Ms Hai asked that each member review the Articles that are being considered for the Consent Agenda, as identified in the e-mail from Mr Kanter, and submit Page 4 of 5 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting March 10, 2015 any objections to her If there isn't unanimous support for an Article to be included, it will be removed Member Concerns and Liaison Reports None Approval of Minutes Action on the Draft #3 Minutes of the Committee's meeting on February 24, 2015, was deferred until a future meeting Adjourn A Motion was made and seconded at 10.26 A.M to adjourn Vote 5-0 These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on March 25, 2015 Page 5 of 5