Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-02-02-CEC-minMinutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 2, 2016 Location and Time: Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room (221); 7:30 A.M. Members Present: Jill Hai, Chair; David Kanter, Vice -Chair & Clerk; Elizabeth Barnett; Wendy Manz Member Absent: Rod Cole Others Present: Joe Pato, Chair, Board of Selectmen (BoS); Jon Himmel, Chair, Permanent Building Committee; Elaine Ashton, Town Meeting Member; Carl Valente, Town Manager; Bill Hadley, Director, Department of Public Works (DPW), John Livsey, Town Engineer, DPW; Sara Arnold, Recording Secretary Documents Presented: • Notice of Public Meeting for CEC Meeting, Revised Agenda, February 2, 2016 • Capital Expenditures Committee Report to the February 8, 2016, Special Town Meetings (STMs) 2016 -1 and 2016 -2, released February 1, 2016 Call to Order: Ms. Hai called the meeting to order at 7:32 A.M. Member Concerns and Liaison Reports: Ms. Hai reported that Mr. Valente, staff from the DPW, and Mr. Pato would be attending to answer questions that had been raised by this Committee about the proposed Center Streetscape capital project. There was a review of how to present the issues. Update on the Multiple School Construction Projects: Ms. Hai discussed continued efforts, as discussed at the last meeting, to develop a memo from the finance committees' chairs in the Chairs - plus -One group to the School Committee that could serve as a framework for evaluating building proposals from a system -level view and could be adjusted as specific proposals move forward. She reviewed her current plan to identify eight critical elements, without related questions, to change wording, and to eliminate sections included in an earlier version that could have sounded confrontational. The Committee endorsed the initiate, but wanted the related questions to be included, perhaps as an attachment to the cover memo. A Motion was made and seconded to authorize the Chair to release the memo on behalf of this Committee, with permission to make non - substantive changes as she sees fit. Vote: 4 -0 Projects for the March 2016 Annual Town Meeting: With the arrival of Mr. Pato, Mr. Valente, and staff from the DPW, the CEC concerns relating to the Center Streetscape project were identified. These included a request for value engineering, additional police presence in the center to reduce the need for some of the infrastructure plans, identification of aesthetic elements versus infrastructure and safety components, clarification about the timing of implementation, and an understanding of community consensus regarding the project. During the discussion, staff provided the following information: • The project includes three phases; the third phase could incorporate plans for improving the Battle Green. Page 1 of 3 NjovLf t !pdri f !IVf yjohLpo!DbgjLbrtfygf oeju✓sf t !Dpn n juf f !)DFD *!Nf f yoh! GI csvbsz!3- !3127! • TLbggx bt !jot Ls✓dLf e!I.p!n bjoLbjoki f P/3 /8!n jrrkno!sf r of t Lljef oLjgf e!g)s!Qi bt f !2!b!zf bs! bhp -!f wf o!jd Li jt !sc r vjsc e!di bohjoh!ri f !t dpgf !pcjx pd /!JJx bt !qpt tjcrfi!rp!gvst of !Li f ! t bn f ! gspit of t gjif ! Li jt ! Li sF t i pm! cf dbvt f ! djv■rh f ohjof f doh! dpt d ! boe! Li f ! qsF AbjrjIDh!x bhf !i buvf !opiijodsc bt f e!sf df oun/! • B! scvytfe! ftLjnbd! xbt! lvt tvcnjufe! rp! rif! Upxo ! boe! xjrnccf!tibsce!xjri!rijt! Con in Diu' art €r',rbrr'r€ viw." R' orir' ovrviw' or' ir' inaidbra 'r��br'ir'i'donirnr'wir��' current estimates. • Value engineering is likely to identify elements that would save money, but do not meet the Town's criteria for improvements, such as standard street lights and asphalt sidewalks. • The Historic District Commission (HDC) has selected street -light fixtures for the center; sidewalk plans are reviewed by the HDC and the Commission on Disability. • The utility companies do not currently have scheduled work for the center that would "undo" the work envisioned for this project. Most utility work is triggered by an emergency. National Grid has completed recent upgrades, and Eversource mostly works above ground or in existing vaults. • The project does not include traffic -lane reductions, e.g., traffic turning lanes, comparable to those in Arlington. Lexington's downtown area has more traffic than Arlington, resulting in low traffic speeds. • Although this is a three -phase project, each set of specifications will specifically identify the same materials and performance standards to ensure continuity. Every road project has multiple contractors. • The project incorporates gathering points for those using the center, but the project never had an economic development goal. Mr. Pato added the following comments: • It is unlikely the BoS would support a single Article for approximately $8.0 million to fund the entire project partially because it is anticipated that there will be continued discussion about the elements to be included in the later phases. Details that don't impact Phase 1 can be decided later. • The BoS anticipate funding each phase of the project from the standard tax levy for capital projects. They do not want to increase the tax levy for this project by requesting a debt exclusion vote. • It is unlikely the BoS would support spending additional funds for value engineering by an outside consultant for this project. Mr. Himmel indicated that value engineering is more commonly used for building projects than for roadway projects. In response to requests, staff agreed to provide additional information regarding the aspects of the project that are driven by infrastructure needs and safety versus aesthetics. There will also be an effort to identify the critical timing for the infrastructure needs. The latter would inform the Town about the urgency of pursuing the project. Ms. Barnett went on Page 2 of 3 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 2, 2016 record as continuing to support value engineering for this project and expressed concern about the impact the project could have on operating costs. CEC Report to the February 8, 2016 STMs: Copies of the report that yesterday had been printed and made available, both on -line and as printed copies, were given to the Committee members. Adjourn: A Motion was made and seconded at 9:02 A.M. to adjourn. Vote: 4 -0 These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on February 23, 2016. Page 3 of 3