HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-01-16-CEC-min-001.pdf i
BrQ&f
MEETING OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMM. WITH SCHOOL BUILDING COMM.
January 16, 1958
A meeting of the members of the Capital Expenditures Committee was
held with members of the School Building Committee on Thursday,
January 16, 1958 at 9:30 p.m. in the superintendent 's office. Those
present for the C.E.Comm. were Sanborn C. Brown, chairman, Dan H. Fenn,
Rosemary Fitzgerald, Irving H. Mabee and Norman Royle, with Mabelle
Tucker acting as secretary. The chairman of the School Building
Committee was absent. The acting chairman stated that the committee
will come in with actual bids on the renovation xa1 as ausiax
Nigh of the old Junior High before town meeting and, hopeto on the
new Junior High, for which the figure is still $2,000,720. They
now have an estimate from the architect and on the equipment for the
renovation, and the total figure is now $567,610.97. They discovered
just that evening that neither the architect or the equipment esti-
mator included lockers, which could run as high as $20,000; they
were expecting a call from Mr. Smith about this.
Relative to financing, he said that the bonding bill had passed the
House and had gone to the Senate. The authorized figure is $600,000
for not more than 10 years time; it was thought that the town ought
to make more than an ordinary effort to pay it off quickly. $40,000
has already been appropriated. Mr. Brown asked if in its article
in the warrant the Building Committee would recommend the method of
bonding. The acting chairman said that the committee hadn 't discussed
it - but that they have no objection to its going on the tax rate
but feel that this will diminish its chances and that it would be
better to bond it than not get it at all. Mr. Brown asked if they
would bond half, put half on the tax rate. He replied that they had
no preconceived notion regarding financing.
Mr. Fenn asked why the renovation was costing more than last year 's.
ae�er�KG had n estimateschair dfromtthenovations engineers,re andlthecult to architectice -had goneyasave
far as he could, so they have figured it high. They have added only
a folding door in the gym, for $5000. Plan I last year was $565,000,
and this one is on the same order, although there are many differences.
Last year they were relocating stairways - this year they are doing
extensive heating and electrical work and are also doing over the
superintendents suite. The present plans do not include renovation
of the 3rd floor, since now they plan to use it only as long as necess-
ary, until the new Junior High is built.
Mr. Brown asked if the renovation of the Barnes Property came under
this committee, and if the prospects of getting it were favorable.
Chair replied that the selectmen haven't said whether they would turn
the property over to the School committee, or lease it to them. Also
there were varied opinions as to whether the fixing of the Barnes
Property would be the sort of job a building committee would be appointed
for; so far they had had nothing to do with it, although they had
heard that its renovation would cost $10,000. (IMr. Brown slid it was
to cost $15,000 for three years or $45,000.) Chair thoght the logical
thing would be to have article in warrant turning Barnes Property
over to the school department.
Mrs. Fitzgerald asked if this committee planned to do more work on
the basic wiring than was planned last year, when they were going
to add to wiring only enough to have fluorecents. Chan. anwerd
Page 2
MEETING OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMM. WITH SCHOOL BUILDING COMM. cont.
January 16, 1958
that it was his understanding that the wiring is more this time, al-
thogh they are still using fluorescents.
Mr. Brown asked how each school get turned over to this committee.
Chair answered, by vote of the town meeting - there was nothing auto-
matic about it.
Mr. Brown said that the C.E.Comm. wanted to get their report to the
printer early so that it could be distributed a couple of weeks before
town meeting. It was the committee's custom to submit to each
committee the figures which would go in the report before printing.
Would this committee be willing to approve figures as best estimates
before the bids are opened. Chair answered yes. Also, he thoght
that the job ought to be done right or not at all; the committee
would not offer any step alternates or half price jobs - they wanted
a good job done so that the building would be usable for a number of
years. Mr. Brown asked, if the town meeting turned down the renova-
tion, would the plans still be good, say, in 1960? Chair answered
yes; if the renovation were not voted the school committee would just
buy new window shades and let it go at that.
Mr. Fenn asked why the third floor was substandard. Chair answered
that it is a 5 level school now, and it is hard to go from lowest
to highest between periods. Also there are no toilets on the third
floor, and there is a fire problem - and fire escapes are very expensive.
The plans call for moving the principal into the superintendent's office.
The library will go into the present principal's office, and will have
an office and a conference room. A room in the basement will go into
the boys locker room, the kitchen will be enlarged and improved, but
not moved. The present home edonomics room will enlarge the cafeteria,
and these will be a teachers dining room in the corner. The home ec
rooms will move to where the old shop is now. The kitchen will be
enlarged by the 20 by 20 foot area where the stairs come down. The
airshaft by the auditorium will be used. All engineering is being donw
by Cleverdon, Varney and Pike. It will go out to bid on Deb. 15,
and they hope to have bids back in two weeks. Mr. Fenn asked if they
would have a tour for town meeting members. Chair answered that they
hadn't considered it but could do it. Mr. Smith phoned and the lockers
will cost about $20,000.
Mrs . Fitzgerald said that the town faced a long range problem, in that
its debt ratio would be unfavorable if it built all the schools thought
to be needed; a high debt ratio would make it more difficult to borrow
money. What about more economical methods of building? Mr. Brown said
that some people think that if you don't build up to the requirements
for state aid, and don't take the state aid, you will save money even
without the aid. Someone answered that you must weigh the cost of
original construction against the cost of maintenance. Chair said
that this question is relevant; he thought the committee would have to
justify the cost of the new Junior High. There were two problems to
consider: (1) Could you build economically in terms of maintenance;
(2) Do people in Lexington wa^,nt this cheaper school. Mr. Brown said
that it has been shown that educational policies change every 20 years;
the school you build now may be completely inadequate 20 years from
now for the then existing philosophy. Perhaps schools which would
Page 3
MEETING OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMM. WITH SCHOOL BUILDING COMM., cont.
January 16, 1958
wear out in 20 years should be built; you could tear down the old
school and build a new one to fit your educational needs at that time.
Mr. Brown said that he was not decessarily defending or espousing this
philopophy, but was merely bringing it up as a point of view which
should be considered. Mrs. ? (Palmer ?) answered that the committee
did not feel that the JuNior High was completely inadequate; it needed
a great deal of plumbing and heating work. However she felt that it
was reasonable to spend money on renovating the building, since you
could not build a building of this size for anywhere near the amount
which the renovation would cost. Another member said that the com-
mittee felt that the School Building Assistance Committee had saved
their committee money by their suggestions, Lather than adding to the
cost.
Mr. Fenn asked how much of the renovation is due to changed educational
approach? How much to repairs? How much to growth? The chair answered
that $181=000 of the total cost was for heating, plumbing, ventilating,
and lighting, all of which were substandard. This would have to be
done whether your educational policy had changed or not. (Mr. Smith
feels that the building has been properly maintained through the
years, but the heating probably never was adequate. Lighting stan-
dards have changed in this period) . $169,000 is going for refur-
bishing the classrooms, doing over floors, etc. Also, the building
was not constructed as a Junior High - it was built in two phases,
in 1908 and 1920, and was used as the High Schbol for many years.
Classroom size today is different, but they aren't changing these
much:'
Mrs. Fitzgerald asked if the new Junior High building would have
conduits for closed circuit TV. Chair answered that the conduits
are not in the building, but can be put in very easily wibhott
ripping everything apart. He said that Mr. Smith has been very
anxious that the committee be aware of changes in educational practices
and plan for them in the new school.
Mrs. Fitzgerald asked if the walk between the gym and the main part
of the school would make the cost higher. The chair answeredthat
a swwer runs through the school site, which made it necessary to
either (1) Construct the school up on the hill; or (2) Put the
school on two sides of the sewer. If it were all put on one side
of the sewer, the land best suited for playfields would be destroyed.
He said that the architect says that the cost of the gym being
separate from the rest of the school is not of great magnitude.
The new sbhool will accomodate ideally 900, and up% to 1000 students.
The old Junior High will hold 800. The ideal size for a $hree grade
Junior High is 850 students.
The chair asked what the latest date would be for giving the„C.E.Comm.
the estimated figures; Mr. Brown answered, February 15th. ' he
Schbol Building Comm. agreed to keep the C.E.Comm. informed of any
changes in estimates.
The meeting was adjourned at 10 15 p.m.