Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-16 SB Packet - ReleasedPlanning Board, Select Board, School Committee, Appropriation Committee, Capital Expenditures Committee June 16, 2025 6:30 PM Estabrook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington, MA 02420 AGENDA Summit ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1.Residential Impact Study Debrief 6:30pm ADJOURN 1.Anticipated Adjournment 8:00pm NEXT MEETING INFORMATION - LABELONLY Hearing Assistance Devices Available on Request All agenda time and the order of items are approximate and subject to change. AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Residential Impact Study Debrief PRESENTER: Steve Bartha, Town Manager ITEM NUMBER: I.1 SUMMARY: Category: Informing Staff will update attendees on the status of several MBTA projects and provide a high level review of the March 2025 residential development impact study prepared by Mark Fougere & Jeff Donahue, followed by a discussion of the report's findings and associated implications for future budget processes. SUGGESTED MOTION: FOLLOW-UP: DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 6/16/2025 6:30pm ATTACHMENTS: Description Type MBTA Study Follow Up (June 2025 Cover Memo Lexington Residential Impact Report (April 2025)Cover Memo Debrief: Residential Impact Study of Multifamily Housing Development Hosted by the Lexington Select Board June 16, 2025 Agenda 1. Why we are here 2. Projects proposed & in the pipeline 3. A demo of the impact analysis tool 4. Revenue projections / assumptions 5. Town projections / assumptions 6. School projections / assumptions 7. Discussion, thoughts, and questions Why we are here •MBTA Zoning passed in 2023 – first in the Commonwealth; zoning approved by town meeting far exceeded minimums set forth in the law. •Concerns raised in 2024 about pace and scale of project proposals. •Call for Special Town Meeting in December 2024 to consider scaling back the new zoning. •Professionals (Fougere & Donahue) were hired in January 2025 to help community understand the incremental impact on town services (including schools) and revenue as new multifamily housing projects were proposed, approved, and eventually built. •The study was not intended to be a build out analysis, i.e. projected units over time. •Special Town Meeting opened in February 3, 2025 and was dissolved on March 17, 2025: town meeting members voted to scale back the MBTA zoning. •Preliminary impact study report presented to Select Board on March 24, 2025. Projects proposed & in the pipeline •1,096 dwelling units approved by the Planning Board (since 2023) •Mix of apartments, garden style, and townhouse units •No new applications since March •3 building permits issued •Meriam St. – in construction – 10 owner occupied units (+/- 2026-27) •93 Bedford – in construction – 30 owner occupied units ( +/- 2026-27) •17 Hartwell – mobilizing for construction – 312 rental units (+/- 2027-28) •Typically 2-3 years from Planning Board approval to occupancy •Financing, permitting, demolition, site work, construction, lease up Planning Board “MBTA zoning developments” www.LexingtonMA.gov/MBTAZoning Meriam St. – 10 units, under construction. Developed under different zoning An impact analysis tool Revenue projections / assumptions •Initial property valuations for new development (at certificate of occupancy) are based on the total construction cost of the project—apartments and condos. •Estimated property valuations (construction cost) in the report are based on per SF values of existing apartment and condo buildings in Lexington. Large apartment values are primarily comparable to Avalon; there are many recent sale points to compare for condominium estimates. •After the initial valuation year, apartments are valued using the income approach, and condos (after the master deed is filed) are valued using the sales approach. •Staff believe the net revenue projections in the report are reasonable and conservative—property taxes, motor vehicle excise tax and ambulance fees. •There may be other small incremental amounts of local receipts. •Are there other factors or questions that should be considered for valuation, property tax and other revenue estimates? Town projections / assumptions 1. Key takeaway: emergency services are likely to see the most significant impacts (p. 32); the public safety staffing study approved by town meeting in November 2024 will provide insight. 2. Key question: how do development related capital needs get addressed, i.e. utilities, intersections, roadwork – private vs. public? MBTA Zoning v. traditional zoning? Upfront vs. long-term? 3. Broad question: how do members of staff, Select Board, School Committee, Appropriations, and Capital Expenditures feel this report will influence their approach to budget development moving forward (if at all)? School projections / assumptions 1. Student enrollment: using different methodologies, LPS and the consultants project similar enrollment growth. The “Mid+” column is consensus for planning. 2. Key observation (p. 26): “That headcount grew during a period (coming out of the pandemic) of declining student enrollment may require further analysis as to what the drivers were. In conversations with school administration, it does sound like their ability to maintain/grow headcount to address student need during this challenging period should position LPS relatively well to absorb some level of growth as enrollment begins to grow again (the peak in 2019-2020 was 7,259).” 3. Key question: If development patterns occur disproportionately, is the School Committee confident that the elementary and middle school zones can be adjusted to accommodate the net projected growth? Discussion The eventual tipping point (if there is one) will be a hurricane, not a tornado – we will have time to prepare. Prepared for The Town of Lexington 1625 Massachusetts Avenue Lexington, MA 02420 Prepared by Fougere Planning & Development Milford, NH 03055 In Association with Jeffrey Donohoe Associates Contoocook, NH 03229 IMPACT ANALYSIS OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS April 2, 2025 2 Executive Summary In April 2023, the Town of Lexington passed zoning to encourage multi-family housing development, consistent with State legislation requiring MBTA communities to provide multi- family housing as of right. Lexington zoned more than 250 acres of property for as of right multi- family housing. The zoning change had the desired effect – by February 2025, the Town had received proposals for 1,117 apartment, townhouse and garden condominium units. The Project Team1 was retained to evaluate impacts to Lexington Public Schools resulting from the additional residential development. In addition, the Project Team was also charged with identifying potential impacts to emergency services, including police, fire and emergency medical services (EMS), along with other town departments including planning, building/inspectional services, conservation, public works, public health & human services and recreation/community programs. Schools and emergency services (Police, Fire, EMS) are likely to see the most significant impacts associated with the development of these projects. Although some of the proposed projects may not be developed, this analysis evaluates impacts associated with all 1,117 units. The Project Team interviewed leadership at the Lexington Public Schools (LPS), the Lexington Police Department (LPD) and the Lexington Fire Department (LFD), which provides EMS services for the Town. In addition, these departments provided data to support the Project Team’s analysis. LPS provided detailed enrollment information and budget information, while LPD and LFD provided call history, staffing and budgetary data. Methodology In order to estimate the impacts associated with new multi-family development in Lexington, the Project Team identified comparable apartment, townhome and garden-style condominium properties in Lexington. These include: ➢ Apartments – Avalon at Lexington Hills, Avalon at Lexington Ridge and 186 Bedford St; ➢ Townhomes – Lexington Meadows/Lily Pond and Lexington Courtyard; and ➢ Garden-Style Condominiums – Jefferson Union, Lexington Place and Manor Terrace. LPS provided enrollment information, which was cross-referenced with the comparable properties, to identify student density by grade level for each property type. Enrollment data was further delineated by market-rate versus affordable units and bedroom count to calculate more specific multipliers. 1 Fougere Planning + Development and Jeffrey Donohoe Associates 3 LPD and LFD provided address-based call data for each of the comparable properties, to allow for the development of call ratios for each type of property. These multipliers for school-age children and calls for service were utilized to estimate the impact of new multi-family projects in Lexington. School Impacts The review of comparable projects indicates that an additional 499 students may be enrolled at LPS if all 1,117 units are constructed and occupied. Full occupancy is anticipated for the 2030/2031 school year. It is estimated that 480 of these students will be generated in apartment complexes, 14 at the garden condominiums and 5 from the townhome projects. It is estimated that approximately 217 new students will be generated at the K – 5 level,130 new students will be generated at the 6 – 8 level, and 152 new students at the 9 – 12 level as a result of the proposed and approved multi-family projects in Lexington. The most significant impact at the elementary school level is the Estabrook Elementary School, which would see an estimated 98 new students, assuming all of the new multi-family projects are approved, constructed and occupied. The Diamond Middle School would see an estimated 102 new students once all of the new multi-family projects are approved, constructed and occupied. The addition of 499 students at LPS is projected to result in $7.9 million in incremental Education costs based on a net increase to existing enrollment of 6,678. However, since LPS enrollments have been declining, the students from the new multi-family projects could replace enrollment declines projected by LPS. The LPS mid-range enrollment projection anticipates a loss of 312 students by FY30, such that the addition of 499 new students from the multi-family projects would result in a new enrollment increase for LPS of 177 students by FY30. The LPS Business Administrator estimated the cost for these new students to be $2.9 million. Police Department Impacts LPD provided call data for each of the comparable properties. The call data was used to develop ratios of the number of calls per unit for each type of property – apartments, townhomes and garden-style condominiums. These ratios were used to estimate the total number of calls for service to the LPD. Total annual calls are estimated to be 481. The current staffing at the LPD is equivalent to 1.4 officers per 1,000 population in Lexington. The population increase from the 1,117 multi-family units is estimated to be 2,670, which based purely on an officer per capita metric would indicate a delta of 3.9 officers to maintain current service levels. The FPD Team notes that the Town recently appropriated $120,000 to conduct a public safety (police and fire) staffing study. It is expected that the staffing study will examine not only current staffing levels to ensure that existing resources are being deployed efficiently and effectively but also whether changing demographics and/or increased population calls for changes to current staffing levels. In terms of cost, police officer with benefits costs 4 approximately $115,000 annually. A new hire will also initially cost $10,000 for equipment and uniforms. Chief McLean also suggested the addition of one cruiser to support new staffing, at an estimated cost of $60,000. Based on these assumptions (and prior to the staffing study), the data would indicate a potential annual cost of $497,000 and one-time cost of $497,000 and one-time costs of $100,000 (cruiser and equipment for four new officers). Fire Department Impacts LFD provided call data for each of the comparable properties. The call data was used to develop ratios of the number of calls per unit for each type of property – apartments, townhomes and garden-style condominiums. These ratios were used to estimate the total number of calls for service to the LFD. It is estimated that the 1,117 new multi-family units will generate 119 fire calls and 131 EMS calls annually. The LFD EMS has two ambulances that provide response 24/7. The Townwide increase in calls over the past several years has resulted in discussions of a third full-time ambulance. A third ambulance would require the addition of 8 EMTs/firefighters, adding two per shift for a total annual cost of $800,000. A new ambulance costs approximately $500,000. To allocate cost to proposed MBTA projects, 4% (131 new calls / 3,257 existing EMS calls) of the new EMT cost is accounted for which totals $32,000 in annual costs. One-time costs for the new ambulance total $20,000 (4% x $500,000). LFD EMS calls generate an average of $1,105 in revenue per call, with potential annual revenue from MBTA projects totaling $143,000. Other Departmental Impacts The Project Team met with key Lexington department heads to gain an understanding of current conditions for each department, and to determine whether and to what extent each department anticipates impacts associated with multi-family projects proposed and/or approved under the Town’s MBTA Zoning. Building and Inspectional Services The timing of future MBTA projects will influence the need for added staff. The Department often uses per-diem personnel when demand for services increases. This cost is borne by the town with an annual cost ranging from $40,000 to $50,000. To address future growth, the Commissioner believes the per-diem budget should be increased. Public Works When applications are proposed, the department does review all plans to ensure consistency with town requirements, including reviewing water and sewer department impacts. If a utility is impacted because of increased demand, the applicant is required to upgrade systems to ensure that service is not degraded. If new sidewalks are constructed with public streets, the department would then be required to maintain these areas. To date all MBTA projects have included private trash disposal, removing that impact. Impact on the department may be seen in the future depending on the site’s location and size. 5 Conservation Two positions exist in this Department, with one vacant land management position. The Department also has a per-diem inspection position of 10 hours a week which is funded but not filled. They are attempting to fill the position currently. The Director believes a new full-time position was needed before the MBTA zoning was in place, and the MBTA projects will only add to the demand for this position. The Director believes an annual salary of $60,000 to $70,000 is appropriate. Revenue from NOI applications may be a source for some of this cost, possibly $20,000 annually. Planning The Planning department has four full-time positions. The Director noted that a request was made in the budget this year to add another position to the department to assist in meeting the demands placed on the department from MBTA project oversight. The new position is anticipated to cost as much as $100,00 annually for salary and benefits. Lexington has a complicated and comprehensive regulatory framework which mandates significant oversight of all new construction activities. The Planning Board’s application fees have a ceiling of $10,000, regardless of the size of a project, however, fees are set (and can be adjusted) by the Planning Board. Recreation The Director noted that residents of Lexington are very active and take full advantage of programs offered by the department. As an Enterprise Fund, the department is funded through public assets (the golf course is the largest source of funding) and user fees. Their top 10 programs all have waiting lists, and indoor space is utilized 80-90% of the time (town and school building spaces are used). Some field space will be impacted by the planned construction of the high school and will not be returned to service until 2030 once the high school project commences. Depending on the level of increased demand from new MBTA residents, user fees may have to be increased to fund additional staff and activities, impacting affordability. Human Services The Director noted that the Department assists residents who have challenging financial needs which may include those who occupy the affordable housing units in MBTA developments. Older residents often need more services including transportation. Assisting veterans is also a prime responsibility of the Department. The Department plans on monitoring the progress of the projects as they are constructed to properly evaluate potential increased service demands. 6 Potential Revenues The proposed multi-family projects will create incremental revenues for the Town of Lexington, both from property taxes and from excise taxes. Based upon discussions with Lexington Assessing Staff and development professionals, the proposed MBTA developments will likely generate an estimated net increase in property tax revenue of $4,644,800. Additional annual revenue will be realized from vehicle excise taxes. The MBTA multi-family development projects would generate an estimated $326,667 in annual excise tax revenue to the community, in addition ambulance revenue will be generated. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of one-time revenue will also be generated from building permit related fees. 7 Introduction and Overview Fougere Planning & Development (FPD) was retained by the Town of Lexington, together with Jeffrey Donohoe Associates (JDA), referred to as “the Project Team” in this document, to evaluate potential impacts associated with residential development proposals related to the Town’s MBTA2 zoning. Under Massachusetts General Law (MGL) Chapter 161A and Chapter 40A, Section 3A: “An MBTA community shall have a zoning ordinance or by-law that provides for at least 1 district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right; provided, however, that such multi-family housing shall be without age restrictions and shall be suitable for families with children. For the purposes of this section, a district of reasonable size shall: (i) have a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre, subject to any further limitations imposed by section 40 of chapter 131 and title 5 of the state environmental code established pursuant to section 13 of chapter 21A; and (ii) be located not more than 0.5 miles from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station, if applicable.”3 The Project Team was retained to evaluate anticipated service impacts to the Town of Lexington and Lexington Public Schools (including enrollment driven marginal cost increases) resulting from the additional residential development, including identifying potential impacts to emergency services (police, fire and emergency medical services (EMS)), along with other town departments, including planning, building/inspectional services, conservation, public works, public health & human services and recreation/community programs. The Project team was also asked to work with school staff to estimate marginal cost increases that may occur based on the projected enrollment increases for elementary, middle and high school students. The Town of Lexington was an early-adopter of zoning intended to meet the requirements of the State’s MBTA zoning requirements. On April 12, 2023, the Town approved 253.9 acres intended to support multi-family housing under the State’s MBTA-related multi-family zoning requirement. The map below identifies where these zones are located. 2 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 3 https://www.mass.gov/info-details/multi-family-zoning-requirement-for-mbta-communities#what-is-the-law?- 8 Figure 1 Lexington Village and Muli-Family Overlay Districts The zoning change to allow more dense multi-family housing was successful in generating proposals for multi-family housing – as of February 1, 2025 (the date of this analysis), the Town had received ten applications (the basis of this analysis) to develop more than 1,100 units. Six of these applications have been approved, while the remaining four applications are still pending. The six approved projects represent 611 total units – 55% of the 1,117 units proposed. The approved projects include three apartment developments (525 units), two garden-style condominium projects (76 units) and one townhouse condominium project (10 units). A list of the proposed and approved projects is presented in Table 1 below. 9 Table 1 One-bedroom and studio units account for the majority of the units (60%). Two- bedroom units account for 29% of the total, and three-bedroom units account for 11% of the units. In total, 15% of the proposed and approved units are affordable. It is important to note that as part of this assignment, the Project Team interviewed a number of developers with projects in Lexington and surrounding communities. Multiple developers expressed their belief that one or more of the projects referenced in Table 1 may not actually be built, due to cost issues of developing multi-family housing, particularly rental housing. However, this analysis evaluates impacts assuming that all 1,117 units identified in Table 1 are actually permitted, constructed and occupied. Apartments Approved Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 331 Concord Ave.200 10 2 115 19 28 6 17 3 17 Hartwell Ave.312 14 2 141 25 82 15 28 5 186 Bedford St.13 9 4 Apartments Pending 3-5 Militia Drive 300 46 9 113 20 70 12 26 4 7 Hartwell Ave. 130 8 2 68 12 22 4 12 2 185, 187-189 Bedford St.25 13 1 7 2 2 Condominiums Approved 5-7 Piper Rd. 46 15 2 22 2 3 2 89 Bedford Rd.30 24 5 1 28 Meriam St.10 4 5 1 Condominium Pending 217-241 Mass. Ave.44 15 2 20 3 3 1 231 Bedford Rd.7 1 2 4 Totals 1,117 78 15 490 85 281 49 101 18 Approved and Pending Multi-family Projects in Lexington 10 Department Overviews The Project Team met with key Lexington department heads to gain an understanding of current conditions for each department, and to determine whether and to what extent each department anticipates impacts associated with multi-family projects proposed and/or approved under the Town’s MBTA Zoning. Though not included in this analysis, the Project Team notes that several additional town offices, notably Finance and Town Clerk, may also be impacted by residential development in the form of election and mailing expenses and other foot traffic for the clerk. This will also add to the volume and processing of tax bills, utility bills and motor vehicle excise processing. The Assessing Department may also see impacts as more complex properties are developed. As with other departments, there may be the need for additional staff to manage the increase in volume. Building and Inspectional Services The Project Team met with Mr. Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner. At this time, Mr. Kelly oversees five full-time staff and one part-time inspector. The department’s staff includes a full-time building inspector as well as electric and plumbing inspectors. The mechanical inspector is a newer part-time position which has been an issue recently and additional hours are needed for this position. The timing of future MBTA projects will influence the need for added staff. The Department often uses per-diem personnel when demand for services increases. This cost is borne by the town with a cost ranging from $40,000 to $50,000 annually. To address future growth, the Commissioner believes the per-diem budget should be increased. The town charges fees of $15 per $1,000 of construction costs that generate revenue for the Department. The Commissioner also noted that an additional vehicle may be needed for the Department to accommodate increased inspections. Public Works The Project Team met with Mr. David Pinsonneault, Lexington’s Public Works Director. The Director noted that most of the MBTA projects involve private streets and sidewalks, limiting new service demands on the department. When applications are proposed, the department reviews all plans to ensure consistency with town requirements, including reviewing water and sewer department impacts. If a utility is impacted because of increased demand, the applicant is required to upgrade systems to ensure that service is not degraded. If new sidewalks are constructed with public streets, the department would then be required to maintain these areas. To date all MBTA projects have included private trash disposal, removing that impact. Impact on the department may be seen in the future depending on a site’s location and size. Conservation The Project Team met with Ms. Karen Mullins, Conservation Director. Two positions exist in this Department, with one vacant land management position. The Department also has a per-diem 11 inspection position of 10 hours a week which is funded but not filled. They are attempting to fill the position currently. The Department is involved in all aspects of development projects, from application phase through construction including inspections. If wetlands are present on a site, their involvement increases significantly. In addition, the Department oversees tree protection. The Director believes a new full-time position was needed before the MBTA zoning was in place, and the MBTA projects have only added to the demand for this position. The Director believes an annual salary of $60,000 to $70,000 is appropriate for this position. Revenue from NOI applications may be a source for some of this cost, possibly $20,000 annually. Planning The Project Team met with Ms. Abby McCabe, Director of Planning for Lexington. The Planning department has four full-time positions. The Director noted that a request was made but not funded in the budget this year to add another position (salary estimated at $72,000) to the department to assist in meeting the demands placed on the department from MBTA project oversight and ongoing development-related activity. Lexington has a complicated and comprehensive regulatory framework which mandates significant oversight of all new construction activities. The Director noted the department has many oversight responsibilities from initial project submission, processing, reviewing, public interaction throughout the review process, Planning Board interactions, staff reports, approval letters, regulatory agreements, stipulation drafting and after approval oversight and inspections. The Department was under strain prior to the adoption of the MBTA zoning and the workload has only increased since its adoption. The Planning Board’s application fees have a ceiling of $10,000, regardless of the size of a project, however, fees are set (and can be adjusted) by the Planning Board. Recreation The Project Team met with the Town’s Director of Recreation and Community Programs, Ms. Melissa Battite. The Director noted that residents of Lexington are very active and take full advantage of programs offered by the department. As an Enterprise Fund, the department is funded through public assets (the golf course is the largest source of funding) and user fees. Their top 10 programs all have waiting lists, and indoor space is utilized 80-90% of the time (town and school building spaces are used). Some field space will be impacted by the planned construction of the high school and will not be returned to service until 2030 once the high school project commences. As the community continues to grow, space needs and user fees will require continued evaluation. Human Services The Project Team met with Ms. Dana Bickelman, Lexington’s Director of Human Services. The Director noted that the Department assists residents who have challenging financial needs, which may include those who occupy the affordable housing units in MBTA developments. 12 Older residents often need more services including transportation. Assisting veterans is also a prime responsibility of the Department. The Department plans on monitoring the progress of the projects as they are constructed to properly evaluate potential increased service demands. School Impacts The Project Team met with Dr. Julie Hackett, Superintendent, Mr. David Coelho, Assistant Superintendent of Finance and Operations and Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Data and Strategy for the Lexington Public Schools (LPS). Dr. Kavanaugh provided extensive data on LPS enrollments, including address information by grade level K – 12 for the 6,678 students enrolled on October 1, 2024. In order to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed projects on Lexington Public Schools, the Project Team used a variety of data sources. These included: ➢ Adjusting Enrollment Projections Based on Known Housing Development: A Preliminary Analysis, Lexington Public Schools Research, Planning & Data Services, October 2024; ➢ Adjusting Enrollment Projections Based on Historic Student Density & Known Housing Development, Lexington Public Schools Research, Planning & Data Services, January 2025; ➢ Lexington Public Schools 2020-2030 Master Planning Compendium (May 2021) ➢ Detailed enrollment data provided by Lexington Public Schools, including student addresses and grade level; ➢ Town of Lexington property records provided by the Lexington Assessor’s Office; ➢ Data on affordable housing units in Lexington administered by the Regional Housing Services Office; and ➢ Interviews with developers, owners and managers of multi-family housing properties. The Project Team’s approach used a multi-step process to estimate the likely number of school- aged children which could result from the proposed multi-family housing developments in Lexington. First, existing housing developments in Lexington which were considered comparable to the ten proposed MBTA projects were identified for analysis. In general, these were selected from data included in the Lexington Public Schools (LPS) October 1, 2024, K – 12 enrollment data file, provides data on property type (condo or apartment), property age, a property’s school assignment area (elementary and middle), number of bedrooms by type and enrollment for each bedroom type. A sample LPS property summary is provided in Tabe 2 below. 13 Table 2 – Example Property Data Summary From the universe of available data, specific apartment properties, garden-style condominium properties, and townhouse-style condominiums were selected for analysis. These Lexington properties are considered similar to projects which are proposed under the Lexington MBTA multi-family zoning. The Lexington Public Schools data does not distinguish between market-rate and affordable units. Since student density (enrollment per unit) is frequently different between market rate and affordable units, the Project Team acquired data on affordable housing units from the Regional Housing Services Office (RHSO). The RHSO data identified which units within specific developments were affordable. Addresses for these affordable housing units were cross- referenced against student enrollment addresses from LPS to identify student density in affordable units. This data was used to develop ratios for grade groupings (K-5, 6-8, 9-12) identifying the number of students per unit in specific unit types, including: ➢ Market rate studio and one-bedroom units; ➢ Affordable studio and one-bedroom units; ➢ Market rate two-bedroom units; ➢ Affordable two-bedroom units; ➢ Market rate three+-bedroom units; and ➢ Affordable three+-bedroom units. Once these student enrollment ratios were developed, they were applied to the proposed multi-family projects in Lexington, based on the type of property proposed (apartments, garden-style condos and townhomes), the distribution of the number of bedrooms in each project, and the number of affordable versus market rate homes in each property. Comparable Properties The Project Team reviewed information on multi-family properties in Lexington, including apartments and condominiums. LPS provided detailed enrollment data on seven apartment communities and eighteen condominium projects. A subset of apartment and condominium projects were ultimately identified and used for analysis. This subset was selected based on Year Comp.Type Elm Assign. Area MS Assign. Area Developme nt Name Location Unit/ Bedroom Count K-12 Enroll Oct 1, 2024 Stud. Density Oct 1, 2024 1978 Condos Bowman Clarke April Ln 5-35 April Ln 46 20 0.435 1 BR 12 5 0.417 2 BR 23 11 0.478 3 BR 9 3 0.333 4+BR 2 1 0.500 14 development age, housing type (apartment, garden condo, townhome), and those properties which were considered most similar to the new developments planned in Lexington. Among the apartment communities, two (Emerson Gardens and Battle Green) were eliminated as being too old as they were built in the 1960s. Another was eliminated (Franklin School Apartments) because it is a 100% affordable project, which is substantially different from the proposed multi-family apartments in Lexington. Another property (Katahdin Woods) was eliminated due to a lack of detailed data in terms of specific addresses for units within the development which limited the ability to distinguish between bedroom types and affordable versus market units. The remaining three comparable apartment projects are summarized in Table 3 below. Table 3 As shown above, the two larger apartment projects had overall student densities of 0.65 and 0.76 respectively, while the smaller project had a student density of just 0.07. This is attributed to the fact that the property has just one student in its thirteen one-bedroom units, as compared to the student density of 0.25 and 0.21 in one-bedroom units for the two larger properties. A similar approach was used to identify comparable townhome projects. Using property and enrollment data provided by LPS, two newer townhome projects were identified as being comparable to the townhome projects proposed as a result of the MBTA zoning in Lexington. Year Comp.Development Name Location Unit/ Bedroom Count K-12 Enroll Oct 2024 Student Density Oct 2024 2006 Avalon at Lexington Hills 1000 Main Campus Dr 387 253 0.654 1 BR/Studio 109 27 0.248 2 BR 254 197 0.776 3 BR 24 29 1.208 4+BR 0 0 0.000 1994 Avalon Lexington Ridge Lexington Ridge Dr 198 152 0.768 1 BR/Studio 28 6 0.214 2 BR 114 89 0.781 3 BR 56 57 1.018 4+BR 0 0 0.000 2024 186 Bedford 186 Bedford 13 1 0.077 1 BR/Studio 13 1 0.077 2 BR 0 0 0.000 3 BR 0 0 0.000 4+BR 0 0 0.000 Comparable Lexington Apartment Properties 15 Table 4 These townhome projects have an overall student density of 0.62 and 0.64 respectively, which is slightly lower than the student density for the large apartment complexes discussed above. A similar process was used to identify comparable garden-style condominium projects in Lexington. Although garden-style condominiums are most similar to apartment projects, their student densities are generally lower. Table 5 Year Comp.Development Name Location Unit/ Bedroom Count K-12 Enroll Oct 2024 Student Density Oct 2024 2020 Lexington Meadows/Lily Pond 840 Emerson Gardens Rd/Lily Pond Ln 21 13 0.619 1 BR 0 0 0.000 2 BR 10 4 0.400 3 BR 11 9 0.818 4+BR 0 0 0.000 2011 Lexington Courtyard 536 Lowell St/1-49 Courtyard Pl 36 23 0.639 1 BR 0 0 0.000 2 BR 1 0 0.000 3 BR 24 16 0.667 4+BR 11 7 0.636 Comparable Lexington Townhome Projects Year Comp.Development Name Location Unit/ Bedroom Count K-12 Enroll Oct 2024 Student Density Oct 2024 2007 Jefferson Union 31 Fletcher Ave 13 6 0.462 1 BR 0 0 0.000 2 BR 10 5 0.500 3 BR 3 1 0.333 4+BR 0 0 0.000 2009 Lexington Place 50 Waltham Str 30 2 0.067 1 BR 2 0 0.000 2 BR 26 2 0.077 3 BR 2 0 0.000 4+BR 0 0 0.000 2017 Manor Terrace 509 Woburn St/2 Manor Ter 50 4 0.080 1 BR 2 0 0.000 2 BR 48 4 0.083 3 BR 0 0 0.000 4+BR 0 0 0.000 Comparable Lexington Garden-Style Condominium Projects 16 The 13-unit project had a student density of 0.46 students, while the two larger projects had student densities below 0.10. Student Densities by Bedroom Type Once the comparable communities had been identified, unit information by bedroom type and whether units were classified as market rate or affordable was used in conjunction with student address data to determine enrollments for each property. The apartment communities provided some interesting information. In particular, market rate studio/one-bedroom units had 34 students living in 113 units – a student density for these units of 0.30. Comparatively, affordable studio/one-bedroom units had no school-age children living in them. Many greater Boston communities see higher student densities in affordable units than in market-rate units. For example, in the city of Newton, a two-bedroom market rate unit has a student density ratio of .214, while an affordable unit’s density ratio is 1.028. Table 6 Similarly, student densities in market-rate two- and three-plus bedroom units were higher than student densities in affordable units. Overall, student density in the comparable apartments was 0.68 students per unit. Student density data from townhome communities provided different results. Student density in market-rate two-bedroom units was lower than student density rates in the affordable two- bedroom units. In the case of two-bedroom units, student density in affordable units was more than double the student density in market-rate units as outlined in Table 7. Development Name Studio/ 1BR Market Studio/ 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable Total Market Total Affordable Total Units Avalon at Lexington Hills 83 26 193 61 18 6 294 93 387 Units 27 0 174 23 25 4 226 27 253 Students 0.325 - 0.902 0.377 1.389 0.667 0.769 0.290 0.654 Students/Unit Avalon Lexington Ridge 18 10 85 29 39 17 142 56 198 Units 6 0 80 9 44 13 130 22 152 Students 0.333 - 0.941 0.310 1.128 0.765 0.915 0.393 0.768 Students/Unit 186 Bedford 12 1 0 0 0 0 12 12 13 Units 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Students 0.0833 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0833 0.0000 0.0769 Students/Unit Student Density Rates Comparable Lexington Apartments 17 Table 7 Overall, garden-stye condominiums, had the lowest student density at just 0.13 per unit. However, overall student density in affordable units was six times higher than in market rate units (0.50 vs. 0.08). Table 8 This information was used to develop average multipliers by bedroom type, affordability and housing unit style as shown in Table 9 below. Table 9 Development Name Studio/ 1BR Market Studio/ 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable Total Market Total Affordable Total Units Lexington Meadows/Lily Pond 0 0 9 1 11 0 20 1 21 Units 0 0 3 1 9 0 12 1 13 Students - - 0.333 1.000 0.818 - 0.600 1.000 0.619 Students/Unit Lexington Courtyard 0 0 1 0 26 9 27 9 36 Units 0 0 0 0 16 7 16 7 23 Students - - - - 0.615 0.778 0.593 0.778 0.639 Students/Unit Student Density Rates Comparable Lexington Townhome Projects Development Name Studio/ 1BR Market Studio/ 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable Total Market Total Affordable Total Units Jefferson Union 0 0 9 1 3 0 12 1 13 Units 0 0 5 0 1 0 6 0 6 Students - - 0.556 - 0.333 - 0.500 - 0.462 Students/Unit Lexington Place 1 1 24 2 2 0 27 3 30 Units 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 Students - - 0.042 0.500 - - 0.037 0.333 0.067 Students/Unit Manor Terrace 1 1 43 5 0 0 44 6 50 Units 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 4 Students - - - 0.800 - - - 0.667 0.080 Students/Unit Student Density Rates Comparable Lexington Garden Condo Projects Studio/ 1BR Market Studio/ 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable Total Units Apartments 113 37 278 90 57 23 598 Units 34 0 255 31 69 17 406 Students 0.301 - 0.917 0.344 1.211 0.739 0.679 Students/Unit Townhomes 0 0 10 1 37 9 57 Units 0 0 3 1 24 8 36 Students - - 0.300 1.000 0.649 0.889 0.632 Students/Unit Garden Style 2 2 76 8 5 0 93 Units 0 0 6 5 1 0 12 Students - - 0.079 0.625 0.200 - 0.129 Students/Unit Multipliers by Bedroom Type, Affordability and Property Type 18 These multipliers were used to estimate the number of students that could result from the proposed multi-family projects in Lexington. As shown below in Table 10, the apartment projects that have been approved are expected to generate 255 students, and the pending apartment projects are expected to add an additional 224 students. The approved garden-style and townhouse condominium projects are expected to generate 14 students, while the pending garden-style condominium projects are anticipated to generate an additional 5 students. Table 10 In total, the ten new multi-family projects used as the basis for this analysis are expected to create an additional 499 students in the Lexington Public Schools, as summarized in Table 11 below. Apartments Approved Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 331 Concord Ave.200 10 2 115 19 28 6 17 3 17 Hartwell Ave.312 14 2 141 25 82 15 28 5 186 Bedford St.13 9 4 Total 525 24 4 265 48 110 21 45 8 Multiplier 0.486 0.301 - 0.301 - 0.914 0.356 1.211 0.739 School-Age Children 255.31 7.22 - 79.73 - 100.50 7.47 54.47 5.91 Apartments Pending Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 3-5 Militia Drive 300 46 9 113 20 70 12 26 4 7 Hartwell Ave. 130 8 2 68 12 22 4 12 2 185, 187-189 Bedford St.25 13 1 7 2 2 Total 455 54 11 194 33 99 18 40 6 Multiplier 0.493 0.301 - 0.301 - 0.914 0.356 1.211 0.739 School-Age Children 224.33 16.25 - 58.37 - 90.45 6.40 48.42 4.43 Garden Condominiums Approved Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 5-7 Piper Rd. 46 15 2 22 2 3 2 89 Bedford Rd.30 24 5 1 Total 76 15 2 46 7 4 2 Multiplier 0.116 - - - - 0.079 0.625 0.200 - School-Age Children 8.81 - - - - 3.632 4.375 0.800 - Garden Condominiums Pending Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 217-241 Mass. Ave.44 15 2 20 3 3 1 231 Bedford Rd.7 1 2 4 Total 51 16 2 22 3 7 1 Multiplier 0.098 - - - - 0.079 0.625 0.200 - School-Age Children 5.01 - - - - 1.737 1.875 1.400 - Townhouse Condominium Approved Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable 28 Meriam St.10 4 5 1 Multiplier 0.533 - - - - 0.300 1.000 0.649 0.889 School-Age Children 5.33 - - - - 1.200 - 3.243 0.889 From Proposed Multi-Family Projects in Lexington Generation of Additional Students 19 Table 11 Using enrollment and address data from LPS, a distribution of students by grade cohort (K-5, 6– 8, 9-12) was developed for the comparable properties. These figures were used to create a percentage distribution of students for each property type. As detailed in Table 12, all property types had a similar percentage of students in grades 6 to 8, 22% to 25%. The percentage of elementary school students was lower in the townhomes (35%) than either the apartments (45%) or the garden-style condominiums (50%). Table 12 Using these percentage distributions with the proposed multi-family projects, it is estimated that approximately 217 new students will be generated at the K – 5 level,130 new students will be generated at the 6 – 8 level, and 152 new students at the 9 – 12 level as a result of the proposed and approved multi-family projects in Lexington. One of the concerns for LPS is where students from these new multi-family developments might attend elementary and middle school. In order to estimate the impacts on individual schools, the Project Team obtained school assignment areas for each of the new multi-family projects. Based on current School Assignment maps, LPS provided specific elementary schools (Bowman, Estabrook, Fiske, Hastings, Harrington) and middle schools (Diamond, Clarke) for each development. Using the enrollment multipliers defined earlier in this analysis for each property Development Category Units Studio Market Studio Affordable 1BR Market 1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3+ BR Market 3+ BR Affordable Totals Approved Apartments 525 7.2 - 79.7 - 100.5 7.5 54.5 5.9 255.3 Pending Apartments 455 16.2 - 58.4 - 90.5 6.4 48.4 4.4 224.3 Approved Garden Condominiums 76 - - - - 3.6 4.4 0.8 - 8.8 Pending Garden Condominiums 51 - - - - 1.7 1.9 1.4 - 5.0 Approved Townhouse Condominium 10 - - - - 1.2 - 3.2 0.9 5.3 Totals 1,117 23.5 - 138.1 - 197.5 20.1 108.3 11.2 498.8 Total School Age Children 498.8 Average Multiplier 0.45 Total Estimated Students From New Multi-Family Projects Apartments Percentage MBTA Projects K - 5 43%207.9 6 - 8 26%125.2 9 - 12 31%146.5 Total 100%479.6 Garden Condos Percentage K - 5 50%6.9 6 - 8 25%3.5 9 - 12 25%3.5 Total 100%13.8 Townhomes Percentage K - 5 33%1.8 6 - 8 23%1.2 9 - 12 44%2.3 Total 100%5.3 Distribution of New Students by Grade Groupings 20 type, the elementary school and middle school students for each new multi-family project were estimated as summarized in Table 13. Table 13 The most significant impact at the elementary school level is to the Estabrook Elementary School, which could see an estimated 98 new students, assuming all of the new multi-family projects are approved, constructed and occupied. The Diamond Middle School could also see an estimated 102 new students once all of the new multi-family projects are approved, constructed and occupied. In total, there could be 217 new students at the elementary schools and 130 new students at the middle schools. The high school would absorb the remaining 152 new students. It should be noted that the Project Team reviewed a sample of newly built homes in Lexington to determine the impact on school enrollments. While single-family homes are not part of the multi-family zoning required by the State in support of the MBTA, understanding the extent to which single-family homes contribute to the generation of new students could be helpful to LPS. Cross-referencing building permit data for new homes for new homes permitted between 2019 and 2022 against enrollment data provided by LPS, a total of 23 students were identified in 38 newly built homes. This equates to a student density of 0.61 students per new single-family home. This is above the student density rate of 0.447 for the new multi-family projects discussed in this report. Implications for LPS Enrollments Since the Town of Lexington created zoning to support multi-family development (as required by the State to support housing development in MBTA communities), ten proposed projects totaling 1,117 units have been received as of February 1, 2025. This analysis estimates that if all of these projects are permitted, constructed and occupied, 499 new K – 12 students may be Bowman Estabrook Fiske Hastings Harrington Diamond Clarke Totals Apartments Approved 331 Concord Ave.38.2 23.0 61.2 17 Hartwell Ave.71.3 42.9 114.2 186 Bedford St.1.2 0.8 2.0 Apartments Pending 3-5 Militia Drive 65.2 39.3 104.5 7 Hartwell Ave. 26.2 15.8 41.9 185, 187-189 Bedford St.5.8 3.5 9.3 Garden Condominiums Approved 5-7 Piper Rd. 1.8 0.9 2.7 89 Bedford Rd.2.6 1.3 3.9 Garden Condominiums Pending 217-241 Mass. Ave.2.0 1.0 3.0 231 Bedford Rd.0.5 0.2 0.7 Townhouse Approved 28 Meriam St.1.5 1.1 2.6 Totals by School 40.0 98.0 1.5 74.8 2.0 104.9 24.9 346.2 New Student Impacts on Elementary and Middle Schools Elementary Schools Middle Schools 21 enrolled in Lexington Public Schools. This equates to a student density of 0.447 students per unit. Overall, the projects reviewed for this analysis are expected to add 217 students at the K – 5 level, 130 students at the 6 – 8 level, and 152 students at the 9 – 12 level. The Estabrook Elementary School and Diamond Middle School are expected to see the largest number of new students, 102 for each school. It is important to note that total enrollment at LPS has fallen from 7,122 in 2019 to 6,678 in 2024, a loss of 444 students or 6.2%. While the addition of 499 new students is significant, it is anticipated that new student enrollments will be spread over the next five years as projects are approved, built-out and sold or leased. Since this analysis does not account for completion dates associated with each project, it does not estimate when specific projects housing might impact LPS enrollments. The arrival of students to these housing developments will likely happen over time and not all at once. The addition of approximately 499 new students represents an increase of 7.4% over the 6,678 students (K-12) enrolled in LPS as of October 1, 2024. This addition on top of LPS’ current enrollment would put total enrollment at just under 7,200, just under the recent peak experienced in 2019-2020 (7,259 K-12). However, this analysis does not account for broader enrollment changes based on existing projections. Based on current three-year projections, before accounting for new housing development, LPS is expecting: K-5 enrollment around 2500-2550, declining 6-8 enrollment and either stable or slightly declining 9-12 enrollment. In total, LPS estimates its mid-range enrollment in FY30 to be 6,359, more than 300 students less than the FY25 enrollment of 6,678, before including enrollments from the MBTA multi-family projects. Projecting further out and incorporating the incremental enrollment from the MBTA multi- family projects for each grade cohort span, which specifically assumes all current proposed MBTA multi-family are constructed, LPS could see: ➢ Increasing elementary enrollment, though projected enrollment would still be below the 2017-18 recent peak elementary enrollment of 3,150; ➢ Flat middle school enrollment relative to current enrollment; and ➢ Relatively flat high school enrollment compared to current enrollment. Projected FY30 high school enrollment that factors in an adjustment for increased enrollment associated with MBTA-related multi-family housing would be similar or slightly higher than current enrollment. 22 Implications for Space Use and Capacity LPS reviewed the Project Team’s estimates of potential student enrollments associated with the proposed MBTA multi-family projects and provided the remainder of this section on Implications for Space Use and Capacity. As noted in the LPS Master Planning Compendium (May 2021), elementary school enrollments in Lexington were on the rise from 2008 through 2015. Overcrowding was particularly acute at Bowman, Bridge, and Fiske Elementary Schools and Clarke Middle School. Three of these schools are situated in the south easterly portions of Town. Elementary and middle school building projects during this period of time addressed deteriorating facilities and environmental issues, while expanding district capacity to match the growth that had already occurred. Even after a new larger 27-section Estabrook Elementary School was completed in 2014 following the detection of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the old school, K-8 student enrollments still outpaced classroom space. Shortly thereafter, modular additions were approved for the Fiske, Bridge, and Bowman Elementary Schools, and they were completed for use in the 2016-2017 school year. In 2017, the Town of Lexington completed additional brick and mortar expansions on Diamond and Clarke Middle Schools. In the fall of 2019, a new stand-alone facility, Lexington Children’s Place (LCP), was opened to house the district’s pre-kindergarten students. The new LCP provides sufficient space for the district’s preschool program, and it frees up space at Harrington Elementary School and central administrative offices. Finally, in February 2020, the new 30-section Hastings Elementary School opened, replacing a much smaller (21 section) deteriorating elementary school building. Table 14 and 15 summarize the resulting estimated facilities capacity at the elementary and middle school level. An additional note regarding these capacities is that spaces across LPS’ K-8 buildings have or will be temporarily repurposed in some cases. For example, while the central office is being moved to a smaller facility, a number of individual staff and/or departments have been temporarily relocated to spaces across LPS elementary and middle schools. Should this space be needed for rising student enrollment, these staff and/or departments would need to be relocated. IMPLICATIONS FOR SPACE USE AND CAPACITY 23 With that caveat in mind, given the information available regarding projected enrollments and housing development, existing elementary and middle school facilities should be able to accommodate the adjusted midline projected enrollment for FY30 noted above (approximately 2,700 at K-5 and 1,725). Table 14 Table 15 Should enrollment exceed the capacity of LPS’ elementary and middle school buildings, LPS has identified other strategies that can be used to accommodate increasing enrollment as part of their last Master Facilities Plans (see LPS Master Planning Compendium). These include: ➢Redistricting or flexible assignment; given the disproportionate enrollment impacts estimated for Estabrook Elementary School and Diamond Middle School (around 100 additional students for each school), some amount of redistricting may be needed to balance enrollments; IMPLICATIONS FOR SPACE USE AND CAPACITY (CONTINUED) 24 ➢Space-mining exercises, where existing spaces are re-purposed within schools (e.g. conference rooms or other non-teacher spaces are converted to classrooms and other needed instructional spaces; with more extreme enrollment changes, temporarily re- purposes elementary art and music spaces to general education classroom and deliver art and music in the general education classrooms); ➢Increase class sizes; ➢Changing the grade levels serviced by elementary and middle schools (e.g., moving fifth grade to the middle schools); this would be dependent on enrollment at other grade spans and might have to be used along with other strategies (e.g. temporary or permanent building additions); and ➢Portable or modular construction and/or the addition of permanent classroom space. At the high school level, current enrollment (2,405 as of October 1, 2024) continues to far exceed the existing building’s core capacity of approximately 1,850. As described in a recent memo from LPS, the new high school’s “Bloom” design enrollment is 2,395. The Bloom design can also accommodate an additional 850 or more students in three ways. ➢Space Utilization—By increasing class sizes from 23 to 25 and not impacting the 85% classroom utilization rates, LPS could accommodate an additional +192 students. By increasing the class size to 25 and the utilization to 90%, LPS could accommodate an additional 343 students. ➢Repurposed Central Office Space—By converting the 11 classrooms reserved for the central office until students need the space, LPS could free up space for an additional 244 students. ➢Additional Expansion—By adding on to the new high school, LPS could add enough space to accommodate an additional 256 students. These three strategies yield enough space to accommodate just under 850 additional students at Lexington High School and would be able to accommodate the adjusted enrollment projection for FY30 of approximately 2,430 to 2,480. This section provided by LPS IMPLICATIONS FOR SPACE USE AND CAPACITY (CONTINUED) 25 Cost Implications of New Students Estimating the marginal or incremental cost of new students at Lexington Public Schools (LPS) is a complex task that must take into consideration whether and to what extent additional students will generate additional costs for LPS. This analysis estimates that 499 students will be generated when the proposed 1,117 multi-family units are constructed and occupied. However, since the COVID pandemic, LPS indicates that enrollment fell by 444, while staffing increased by almost 200 over the same period. This indicates that the proposed MBTA projects would result in a net increase in enrollment of just 55 students when compared to COVID enrollments. However, as noted elsewhere in this report, LPS data indicates that FY25 total enrollment is 6,678. LPS also developed enrollment projections through FY30. The in-house enrollment estimates for FY30 include a high, mid-range and low enrollment projection. In total, enrollment for FY 30, excluding MBTA multi-family projects, is estimated to be: ➢ Low estimate - 5,456 students (1,222 fewer students than FY25); ➢ Mid-Range estimate – 6,356 students (322 fewer students than FY25); and ➢ High estimate – 6,513 students (165 fewer students than FY25). Based upon extensive discussions with school staff, three cost metrics were developed to estimate potential increased school costs: non-special ed general educational costs based upon DESE data4, average per pupil In-District Special Education5 cost and average Out of District Special Educational cost calculated by LPS. It should be noted here that these are gross cost projections, which do not include any estimate of potential Chapter 70 aid to LPS. Table 16 summarizes potential increases in school costs of $7,913,517 assuming the estimated 499 new students are added to the current enrollment of 6,678 and no decrease in future enrollments occur (6,678 + 499 = 7,177). Table 16 – Incremental New Student Costs of MBTA Multi-family Projects As noted above, LPS has developed three future enrollment projections for FY30: Low estimate, Mid-Range estimate and High estimate. If the Mid-Range enrollment of 6,356 is applied, a net 4 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Base Foundation Components, elementary- middle-high school costs. 5 In District special educational students account for 13.1% of the total school enrollment, while Out of District Special Educational students account for 1% of total student enrollment. Special education costs are extremely complex involving many variables that are student specific. These estimated costs take into account DESE circuit breaker funding, Out of District placement can cost upwards of $400,000. Estimated Enrollment 217 130 152 Elementary Cost Total Middle Cost Total High School Cost Total Total Cost General 186 $10,455 $1,944,630 112 $10,042 $1,124,704 131 $12,093 $1,584,183 SPED 28 $44,000 $1,232,000 17 $44,000 $748,000 20 $44,000 $880,000 SPED Out/District 2 $80,000 $160,000 1 $80,000 $80,000 2 $80,000 $160,000 Total Estimated Cost $3,336,630 $1,952,704 $2,624,183 $7,913,517 26 increase of 177 students will be realized (6,356 +499 = 6,855). Applying the costs outlined in Table 17 generates an estimated cost of $2,889,946. Table 17 – Incremental New Student Costs of MBTA Multi-Family Project Plus LPS Enrollment Projections The level of excess capacity moving forward will influence potential new school costs. As noted above, school cost variables are extremely complex and until students are actually enrolled detailed costs will not be known. Nevertheless, the Table below summarizes district enrollment vs. building capacity (including the new LHS) against each of the three LPS enrollment models as well as current enrollment and appears to indicate that building capacity is adequate to absorb some level of anticipated growth based on this report’s analysis: Table 18 – LPS Enrollment Projection Furthermore, based on the Mid+ and Current+ enrollment projections discussed above, it appears that the incremental school cost (above base) may range from $2.9 million to $7.9 million over the next five years. That headcount grew during a period (coming out of the pandemic) of declining student enrollment may require further analysis as to what the drivers were. In conversations with school administration, it does sound like their ability to maintain/grow headcount to address student need during this challenging period should position LPS relatively well to absorb some level of growth as enrollment begins to grow again (the peak in 2019-2020 was 7,259). Estimated Enrollment 77 46 54 Elementary Cost Total Middle Cost Total High School Cost Total Total Cost General 66 $10,455 $690,030 39 $10,042 $391,638 46 $12,093 $556,278 SPED 10 $44,000 $440,000 6 $44,000 $264,000 7 $44,000 $308,000 SPED Out/District 1 $80,000 $80,000 1 $80,000 $80,000 1 $80,000 $80,000 Total Estimated Cost $1,210,030 $735,638 $944,278 $2,889,946 27 Emergency Services Impacts As part of the MBTA project review, the Project Team also reviewed potential increased demand on services from the Police and Fire Departments. To assess the degree of impact these projects may have on emergency departments, comparable emergency call data from similar housing communities was analyzed. Working with the police and fire department staff, call data was collected for each noted housing community. These calls were then totaled to derive an average call volume ratio per unit, which was then used to generate projected emergency calls for each Department. Extrapolating from the comparable call data, increases are projected in the Town’s Police and Fire Department call volume. The Police Department responded to approximately 15,390 Calls for Service in 2023 (average 296 calls per week). The Fire Department reported a total of 5,207 calls in 2024 (average 93 calls per week); the total includes 1,815 fire-related calls and 3,257 EMS calls. It should be noted that the Fire Department generates revenue from EMS billing and in 2023 collected $1,728,905, which equates to an average of $1,105 in revenue per call. As detailed in Table 19 below, calls to 777 apartment units were analyzed, along with 110 garden style condominiums and 57 townhome units. Calls to all these property types were averaged to generate a per unit call ratio for each housing type. Although MBTA projects will not include single family homes, the Project Team also collected data from 38 newly constructed single-family homes. The average call volume per residence is summarized in Table 19 below. 28 Table 19 Apartments # Units Fire Calls Call/Unit EMS Calls Call/Unit Police Calls Call/Unit Avalon 1000 Main Campus 387 50.60 0.13 58.00 0.15 156.00 0.40 Avalon at Lex. 987 Waltham 198 24.95 0.13 35.00 0.18 82.00 0.41 Countryside Manor 425 Woburn 51 0.33 0.01 3.00 0.06 16.00 0.31 Katahdin Woods 128 3.00 0.02 - - 74.00 0.58 186 Bedford Street 13 3.00 0.23 1.00 0.08 19.00 1.46 Total Average/Calls per Unit 777 81.88 0.11 97.00 0.12 347.00 0.45 Condo - Garden # Units Fire Calls Call/Unit EMS Calls Call/Unit Police Calls Call/Unit 31 Fletcher Avenue 30 2.30 0.08 1.00 0.03 4.00 0.13 50 Waltham Street 30 4.30 0.14 6.00 0.20 10.00 0.33 250 Manor Terrace 50 6.60 0.13 8.00 0.16 21.00 0.42 Total Average/Calls per Unit 110 13.20 0.12 8.00 0.07 35.00 0.32 Condo - Townhome # Units Fire Calls Call/Unit EMS Calls Call/Unit Police Calls Call/Unit Lexington Meadows- Lily Pond 21 2.00 0.10 3.00 0.14 6.00 0.29 Courtyard Place 36 3.30 0.09 2.00 0.06 9.00 0.25 Total Average/Calls per Unit 57 5.30 0.09 5.00 0.09 15.00 0.26 Single Family/Duplex Condo # Units Fire Calls Call/Unit EMS Calls Call/Unit Police Calls Call/Unit Jefferson Drive 30 2.60 0.09 3.00 0.10 7.00 0.23 Single Family # Units Fire Calls Call/Unit EMS Calls Call/Unit Police Calls Call/Unit Newly Constructed 38 7.00 0.18 - - 10.00 0.26 Apartments, Townhouses and Garden-Style Condominiums Police, Fire and EMS Calls 29 Applying these emergency call ratios to the noted MBTA developments, as outlined in Table 20, generates a set of findings noting that fire calls may increase by 119 annually, 130 EMS calls may be generated, and 481 police calls can be expected. The estimated EMS calls may generate $143,650 in local revenue. Table 20 The projected increase in call volume from the 1,117-units in the proposed multi-family housing projects represents an increase of 3.1% in calls for service for the Lexington Police Department over 2023 call volume. Fire Department calls for service are projected to increase by 7.6% over 2023 call volume, while EMS calls for service are estimated to increase by 4.1% over 2023 call volume. Police The Project Team met with Police Chief Michael McLean and Captain John Mazerall to discuss police operations and the planned MBTA development projects. Currently, the department has 50 sworn officers with a few open positions they are actively trying to fill. In total, the department has 66 full-time employees and 6 part-time positions; only 3 officers live in the community. In 1995, there were 54 officers and due to budget cuts in 2005, nine positions were eliminated. Calls for service can vary greatly, from minor issues to incidents that require significant time for an officer. Some calls for service require multiple officers to be present. For apartment complexes, the quality of management is very important and can play a crucial role in addressing issues. The Chief noted that the addition of new housing, along with the associated increase in population, will increase demands on the department. Chief McLean appreciated the estimated call data provided and believes the total of 481 calls is a reasonable estimate of what may occur, as discussed later in this report. Apartments Approved # Units Fire Calls Per Unit Total Fire Calls EMS Calls Per Unit Total EMS Calls Police Calls Per Unit Total Police Calls 331 Concord Ave.200 0.1 21.0 0.1 24.6 0.4 89.4 17 Hartwell Ave.312 0.1 32.8 0.1 38.4 0.4 139.5 186 Bedford St.13 0.1 1.4 0.1 1.6 0.4 5.8 Apartments Pending 3-5 Militia Drive 300 0.1 31.5 0.1 36.9 0.4 134.1 7 Hartwell Ave. 130 0.1 13.7 0.1 16.0 0.4 58.1 185, 187-189 Bedford St.25 0.1 2.6 0.1 3.1 0.4 11.2 Condominiums Approved 5-7 Piper Rd. 46 0.1 5.5 0.1 3.4 0.3 14.6 89 Bedford Rd.30 0.1 3.6 0.1 2.2 0.3 9.5 Townhome 28 Meriam St. 32 Edgewood 10 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.7 0.3 2.6 Condominium Pending 217-241 Mass. Ave.44 0.1 5.3 0.1 3.2 0.3 14.0 231 Bedford Rd.7 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.3 2.2 Total Annual Emergency Calls 119.1 130.5 481.1 Projected Police, Fire and EMS Calls Proposed/Approved Apartments, Townhouses and Garden-Style Condominiums 30 Currently, Lexington has a ratio of 1.45 officers per 1,000 residents. If all of the proposed 1,117 MBTA-related housing units are constructed, the town’s population6 may increase by 2,670 which, based purely on an officer per capita metric, would indicate a delta of 3.9 officers to maintain current service levels. The Project Team notes that the Town recently appropriated $120,000 to conduct a public safety (police and fire) staffing study. It is expected that the staffing study will examine not only current staffing levels to ensure that existing resources are being deployed efficiently and effectively but also whether changing demographics and/or increased population calls for changes to current staffing levels. In terms of cost, a police officer with benefits costs approximately $115,000 annually. A new hire will also initially cost $10,000 for equipment and uniforms. Chief McLean also suggested the addition of one cruiser be necessary to support any new staffing, at an estimated cost of $60,000. Based on these assumptions (and prior to the staffing study), the data would indicate a potential annual cost of $497,000 and a one-time cost of $100,000 (cruiser and equipment for four new officers). Fire The Project Team met with Chief Derek Sencabaugh and Assistant Chief Don Chisholm to review current operations and the anticipated impacts of the planned MBTA projects. The department is presently served by 60 firefighters, most of whom are also trained EMTs. The department runs four shifts of 15 fire fighters, with the average annual cost of a fire fighter with benefits totaling approximately $100,000. The Bedford Street Headquarters is a new, four-bay facility which houses most of the department’s staff and equipment. The East Lexington station is a small, older facility that is presently being reviewed for replacement; a feasibility study is underway to find a new location to upgrade and enlarge the facility for that area of the community. In 2024, the department responded to over 5,000 calls, which is the first time they have reached that milestone. The department runs two Advanced Life Support (ALS) ambulances, which have come under increased strain from rising call demand from residents, as well as changes in the marketplace with private ambulance services less likely to provide non- emergency transport. Requests for EMS mutual aid have also been increasing. The increased calls to the department, in particular EMS, has led to calls from the Chief to community officials that a third ambulance may be necessary to maintain current service levels. This need will only increase with the addition of MBTA developments. It was also noted that multi-family fire responses generate increased time demands, especially if a building must be evacuated. A third ambulance would require the addition of 8 EMTs/firefighters, adding two per shift for a total annual cost of $800,000. A new ambulance costs approximately $500,000. As noted above, the Fire Department will also be part of the upcoming staffing study. For the purposes of this study, 4% (131 new calls / 3,257 existing EMS calls) of the new EMT cost is 6 US Census: Owner occupied: 2.83 persons per unit, Renter occupied: 2.33 persons per unit. 31 accounted for which totals $32,000 in annual costs. One-time costs for the new ambulance total $20,000 (4% x $500,000). As noted above, EMS calls generate an average of $1,105 in revenue per call, with potential annual revenue from MBTA projects totaling $143,000. Revenue Potential The proposed multi-family projects will also create incremental revenues for the Town of Lexington, both from property taxes and from excise taxes. Based upon discussions with Lexington Assessing Staff, as well as applicants involved with the proposed MBTA condominium developments, Tables 21 and 22 estimate a net increase in property tax revenue of $4,644,800. Table 21 - MBTA Apartments, Estimated Annual New Property Taxes Table 22 - MBTA Condominiums - Estimated Annual New Property Taxes Additional annual revenue will be realized from vehicle excise taxes, Lexington collected $6,145,424 from this local revenue source in FY2024 from 29,375 vehicles7. This translates into an average of $209 per vehicle. Census data reports8 that there are 12,672 housing units in the community which translate to an average of 2.3 vehicles per unit. Given the nature of the housing units proposed, an average of 1.4 vehicles per unit has been estimated for the proposed MBTA development which generates an estimated 1,563 vehicles. These vehicles would generate $326,667 in annual excise tax revenue to the community. In addition, revenues will be realized from ambulance services. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of one- time revenue will also be generated from building permit related fees. Conclusions The Project Team was retained to evaluate impacts to Lexington Public Schools resulting from additional MBTA related residential development. In addition, the Project Team was also charged with identifying potential impacts to emergency services, including police, fire and emergency Medical Services (EMS), 7 Assistant Town Manager for Finance. 8 2023 ACS 5-year average. Use Type Original Assessment Existing Taxes Apartments Approved # Units Estimated New Assessment Net Increase Annual Property Taxes Mixed use $1,247,000 $20,242 331 Concord Ave.200 $62,000,000 $738,018 Office $12,830,000 $310,486 17 Hartwell Ave.312 $96,720,000 $872,400 Commercial Existing 186 Bedford St.13 $1,972,400 $24,122 Apartments Pending Office $9,477,000 $229,343 3-5 Militia Drive 300 $93,000,000 $908,047 Office $1,834,000 $44,383 7 Hartwell Ave. 130 $40,300,000 $448,486 Commercial $1,575,000 $38,115 185, 187-189 Bedford St.25 $7,750,000 $56,668 Total Units 980 Total Est. Apart. Taxes $3,047,740 Use Type Original Assessment Existing Taxes Condominiums Approved Units Estimated New Assessment Net Increase Annual Property Taxes Residential $1,381,000 $16,890 5-7 Piper Rd. 46 $53,386,480 $636,027 Residential $1,256,000 $15,361 89 Bedford Rd.32 $31,335,500 $367,872 Residential $3,825,000 $46,780 28 Meriam St. 32 Edgewood 8 $13,377,000 $116,821 Condominium Pending Mixed use $3,468,000 $61,518 217-241 Mass. Ave.44 $40,323,080 $431,634 Commercial $728,000 $17,618 231 Bedford Rd.7 $5,096,000 $44,706 Total Units 137 Total Est. Condo Taxes $1,597,060 32 along with other town departments including planning, building/inspectional services, conservation, public works, public health & human services and recreation/community programs. Schools and Emergency Services (Police, Fire, EMS) are likely to see the most significant impacts associated with the development of these projects. Although some of the proposed projects may not be developed, this analysis evaluates impacts associated with all 1,117 units. The Project Team interviewed leadership at the Lexington Public Schools (LPS), the Lexington Police Department (LPD) and the Lexington Fire Department (LFD), which provides EMS services for the Town. In addition, these departments provided data to support the Project Team’s analysis. LPS provided detailed enrollment information and budget information, while LPD and LFD provided call history, staffing and budgetary data. Estimated Costs Based upon the Project Teams discussion with town and school staff members, Table 23 summarizes estimated costs should all MBTA development projects proceed and become occupied. Some departments were able to estimate costs at this time and impacts of additional demands for services will have to be monitored moving forward. Table 23 – Departmental Cost Impacts Department Cost One-time Costs Conservation $70,000 - Planning $100,000 - School Department $2,889,946 - $7,913,517 - Police Department $497,000 One-time cost $100,000 Fire Department $32,000 One-time cost $20,000 Total Estimated Cost Range $3,558,946 - $8,621,517 $120,000 Estimated Revenue The proposed multi-family projects will create incremental revenues for the Town of Lexington, both from property taxes, excise taxes and ambulance revenue which is summarized in Table 24 and totals an estimated $5,114,467. In addition, hundreds of thousands of dollars of one-time revenue will also be generated from building permit related fees. At this time planning board application fees are capped, which should be evaluated to assist in offsetting increased budget costs to the planning department. Table 24 – Projected Revenues Source Annual Revenue Net Increase in Property Taxes $4,644,800 Estimated Annual Excise Taxes $326,667 Estimated Annual Ambulance Fees $143,000 Total Estimated Annual Revenue $5,114,467 33 Demand for Service Metrics As new housing developments occur in the community, the following metrics may be applied to the varying development proposals to provide departments with insights into potential increased service demands. Table 25 - Emergency Services Metrics Fire Calls/Unit EMS Calls/Unit Police Calls/Unit Apartments 0.105 0.123 0.447 Garden Condominiums 0.12 0.073 0.318 Townhomes 0.093 0.067 0.263 New Single Family9 0.184 0.00 0.263 Table 26 - School Age Children Ratios Studio/1BR Market Studio/1BR Affordable 2BR Market 2BR Affordable 3BR Market 3BR Affordable Apartments 0.301 0.000 0.917 0.344 1.211 0.739 Garden Condominiums 0.000 0.000 0.079 0.625 0.200 0.000 Townhomes 0.000 0.000 0.300 1.000 0.649 0.632 New Single-Family Homes 0.610 9 This low rate of EMS calls is applicable to new units, over time such calls will increase to these homes. 34 Project Team Mr. Fougere is the President of Fougere Planning & Development, Inc. and is an AICP land use planner with over 30 years of public and private sector experience. He has an extensive background in project management dealing with a broad array of planning related issues including spearheading rezoning efforts, managing development teams, site and land use planning, impact fees, fiscal impact analysis, public presentations, expert witness testimony, land use law analysis and consensus building challenges. He has operated as a project manager overseeing development projects that required careful design to minimize neighboring impacts. He has managed numerous rewrites and amendments to zoning ordinances and site plan/subdivision regulations. Mr. Fougere has also served on a municipal planning board and as a Selectman. Mr. Donohoe has more than 30 years’ experience in the financial analysis of real estate development projects and small business operations. Mr. Donohoe has completed numerous real estate market studies, financial feasibility studies, redevelopment plans and real property appraisals. He has also specialized in the analysis of land, buildings and utility systems for several military base reuse projects undertaken by the firm. Prior to forming Jeffrey Donohoe Associates LLC, Mr. Donohoe was a Vice President and Principal for a national real estate, economics and planning firm. He was previously a self- employed management consultant specializing in financial analysis, business planning, loan proposal evaluation and market research. He is also a former Management Consultant for the New Hampshire Small Business Development Center and served as a Financial Marketing Analyst for Signal Capital.