The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020-03-00-SMPAC-rpt (Lexington Public Schools Master Plan)��Maste�r noon 6"„y . . . .. . .'tlkN9mowuo°°°°pgpu"uu+ll+llv a, ..... .. . .. .. . ............ n. .. . .......... . 0111 m 9 w "Man L.ACOINHA, 10 E3' T' IEE EE ......... ...... Qai jil,nwuNuvuNttnvuu ....... ....rcou° . // 14 NkNa7NtlUygpNp4 . ....... ..... . . ..... 4�r��"Wu . . . ... . .... . ....... . .... .. . ............. .. . ...... lost , . ......... . . gs % *pw �nall A!1`1`� f' 1114 I'm 1, will lvN. whwvo ttv "u urn�m U, %i„ , ,N �,. �9)N/grrA j111 A111J . ...... . . No, 13 W ..... . ... . . 13 1`1 A D G E .......... ....... , ,,a:,,a", o 2,Y I e �11................................gton, .. . MA awuu� .............................................................................................................................. .. . . . . . March 2020 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III III ......... ....... I ESIGNN aa. ir&hitects..ii- pIainu�ers 9 9 C U1 IN C Y S F F3 IE F SUI PE 901 1 F30STION, MA 021 1 1 1 617.426.2858 D � N1 lI S C 0. C 0 IM TA�3�1 ................ �NTS F CQNT�IIIIIIIIII �� IIIIII'"1111"III''t°IIIUf�"IIII"Illt°III' Goals & Objectives Master Planning Process Facilities Existing Conditions Educational Programming Enrollment Projections Evaluation of Strategies Land Acquisition Strategies Integrated Design Process & Construction Policy Sustainable Design Capital Improvement Plan Facilities Maintenance & Repair Log Communications Next Steps IEVAI U AT lI () 1',4 () IF IEX lISTI1i'"19IDlITlIc)1',4 Introduction Existing Conditions Reports, Site and Floor Plans - Bowman Elementary School - Bridge Elementary School - Estabrook Elementary School - Fiske Elementary School - Harrington Elementary School - Hastings Elementary School - Clarke Middle School - Diamond Middle School - Lexington High School Introduction Educational Program Requirements Universal Design for Learning 21 st Century Learning Environments Facility Design Capacities - Elementary School Educational Program - Middle School Educational Program - District -wide Special Educational Programs Facility Design Capacity Enrollment Adjustments 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliia schools s Il aster IPlan I Table of Contents March 2020 TA�3�1 ................ �NTS F CQNT�IIIIIIIIII DISTRICT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS id Introduction Historic Forecasting Current Overview of Enrollment Trends Enrollment Projections & Methods 10 -Year Enrollment Projections 5 EVALUATION i i Introduction Educational Goals Current Facility Planning Facility Strategies - Elementary School Strategies - Middle School Strategies - High School Strategies 6 APPENDIX Enrollment Projections Updated Current Enrollment Redistricting Plan Lists of Strategies - Elementary Schools - Middle Schools - Lexington High School Integrated Building Design & Construction Policy Capital Improvement List Master Planning Committee Documentation - Agendas - Minutes - Presentations 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliia schools s Il aster IPlan I Table of Contents March 2020 "° III IIID "°' IIII IIIA I � IIIA III IIIA IIII 'T Since 2018, DiNisco Design has worked with representatives from Lexington Public Schools, Depart- ment of Public Facilities and the Master Planning Advisory Committee to develop a master plan for school capital projects. A master plan is necessary and prudent as Lexington continues to experience enrollment growth at all grade levels. The goal of the Plan is to develop and recommend a five to ten- year capital plan for school facilities, analyzing current facilities and enrollment forecasts, and develop- ing conceptual plans and timelines for needed additional educational spaces. DiNisco Design is indebted to the many people who participated in this process on behalf of the town. Master, PlWininM A dv� oir oirnirn tee Kate Colburn, School Committee Vice Chair Kathleen Lenihan, School Committee Member Julie Hackett, LIPS Superintendent of Schools Daniel Abramson, Capital Expenditures Committee Liaison Sandy Bebe, Capital Expenditures Committee Liaison David Coelho, Assistant Superintendent, Finance and Operations Michael Cronin, Director of Public Facilities Sara Cuthbertson, PTA Presidents Council, Chair Charles Hornig, Planning Board Maureen Kavanaugh, LIPS Director of Planning and Assessment Alan Levine, Appropriations Committee Liaison Marina Levit, SEPAC representative Joe Pato, Board of Selectmen Member Richard Perry, Permanent Building Committee Member Peter Rowe, LIPS Former Interim Assistant Superintendent, Finance and Operations Daniel Voss, Sustainable Lexington Committee Chair I,,,,,oxifingtoin IPubfic olhool� Julie Hackett, LIPS Superintendent of Schools Peter Rowe, LIPS Former Assistant Superintendent, Finance and Operations Maureen Kavanaugh, LIPS Director of Planning and Assessment Ellen Sugita, Director of Special Education Andrew Stevens, Lexington High School Principal Andrew Baker, Lexington High School Assistant Principal Kevin Kelly, Lexington High School Avon Lewis, Current LEA President Respectf ly submitted, Donna DiNisco, Principal DiNisco Design 1....exiington Pii,,blic schools Il aster IPlan I Adkrnowlleaigeirn ent s March 2020 lilil 1 INTRODUCTION Goals & Objectives Master Planning Process Facilities Existing Conditions Educational Programming Enrollment Projections Evaluation of Strategies Land Acquisition Strategies Integrated Design Process & Construction Policy Sustainable Design Capital Improvement Plan Facilities Maintenance & Repair Log Communications Next Steps 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools s Ilea tear IPlan I hn1irodaua;tiM1 March 2020 GOA11S ANE)I JEuIII IES The Lexington School Committee determined that developing a master plan for capital projects is necessary and prudent as Lexington continues to experience enrollment growth. The goal of the Master Plan Advisory Committee (MPAC) is to analyze current facilities and enrollment forecasts, develop and recommend a five to ten-year capital plan for school facilities, and develop conceptual plans and timelines for needed additional educational spaces. IIMAs"rIEIR R11,,,,,,A11TITHING PROCESS The Master Planning Advisory Committee (MPAC) has met monthly since October 2018. The process has been fluid, thought provoking, and insightful. There is a clear understanding and agreement that planning is essential to stay ahead of enrollment shifts, aging facilities, capital improvements, sustainable goals, and possible town acquisitions. The MPAC developed a series of options and strategies depending on enrollment shifts and the impact they have on the school facilities. It was agreed the Master Plan should be reviewed annually to ensure enrollment projections are on target and to make modifications to the Plan as required due to enrollment, educational program shifts, aging facilities, or capital improvement requirements. FAGE11,,,,,, IIITIII II S IEX11s"riiING CGIMENITIGNS Lexington recognizes the importance of maintaining and investing in its facilities. The Lexington Children's Place, the Town's Pre -kindergarten Program has a new, dedicated facility as of August 2019. The six elementary schools have all been updated within the past 15 years, with the most recent being Hastings Elementary School completed in February 2020. Both the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools have recently completed expansions and upgrades. The High School has been well maintained over the years, however, it does not support current and future enrollment nor programmatic requirements. In 2019, the Town submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) for the replacement of or a renovation and expansion to the High School. The SOI was not selected, however, the MSBA strongly encouraged the town to resubmit in 2020. It should not be a surprise to learn that school building performance is directly related to student performance. Thermal comfort, access to natural daylight, and acoustic separation are just a few of the components that affect students' attitude and focus in a learning environment. The physical conditions of the existing buildings outlined in this report identify the building performance, maintenance needs, capacity of existing systems, and the potential for future use. Schiool Building Performance `ftiden't I erf r°rnaun e u..arall Illight 44 i'e tc,ir a iln..ades conrnectlion to on..atdoors Aconasflc wears lion @ ieaiJ ng c;llaiJt Therrn6� corn�fort i31eller fr::,c;r. S i 8�� a� thy alir Bel alt t ii ndaii ice l:::rnc r y eff(i,Jenni:,y . i 4ian n(.,, 11 u c rc Uia &s c.;an.n Ir;c, fc.,c,;n asc,d 6l sc,wll..nc,re S p.- y i i n npowe ed Sl „c en�nts �.,c a 11 r� l,�,nn u�:�lilllit tdl4r.ng ac:;[ionn for tlh61 fr.lUre ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1....oxiington IPii,blliio school) s Il aster IPlan I ln1irodUa;tion1 March 2020 IIIr.mmIII IIS II1PROGIRAIM1WHING Lexington Public Schools (LIPS) provides a rigorous educational program for students from pre -kindergarten through grade twelve. A culturally, linguistically, academically, and economically diverse district, it honors its diversity through curriculum, arts, enrichment, and community opportunities. The English Language Learner Program (ELL) has increased in size over the past decade. In addition, LIPS participates in the METCO Program, welcoming students from Boston at all grade levels. The educational program and policy are pivotal to any facility driven decision. The following criteria must be taken into consideration when evaluating space needs at any level: • Grade & Sc hoop Coinf guiraflioir7 11==yolllic;li� s • Cllass &ze Polliicy • Schooll Sche(.Jullling Metho(J • II::::yirofessiionall Staff II.....oad & �bac;lr7iing II Nours • S�:)ecliallist ""Fe.acheirs Q TeacNing 18ouirs • TeacNing Metho(Jollogy & Structure • Teacheir Pllaruruiing & Roon o As§gnn pent Polliiciies • RexlUe Groupings / Protessiion4I......earniiing Con ...on...ounitlies • Support Spaces (Nuirse, A(Jn oinr istira-[Jon, PD) In addition, it is critical to recognize that any investment in a facility must be forward thinking to 21s' century learning environments and Universal Design for Learning (UDL). UDL is a way of thinking about teaching and learning that gives all students equal opportunity to learn. At its core, UDL means that a teacher designs learning experiences in flexible ways to meet the needs of individual learners. These environs provide a culture of reflection, conversation, collaboration, and commitment to continuous improvement. LIPS places a strong emphasis on collaborative environments for both learning and teaching. These environments foster the following: • "`ion on ou nr c,::flion & Col1aboiratiion • Cire,::f[.J lity & lnnov,:�tlion • Criitiica: FNnkiing & PiroUeno Sollviing LIPS educational programming and goals must remain in the forefront for strategies and solutions to be viable. IIIA IIS II,,,,,, III,,,,,, III I IIIA r IIP IIS JE " III IIIA LIPS has had unprecedented growth over an extended period of time. Many other Metro West communities are seeing a stable enrollment, or in some cases, a decrease in enrollment; however, LIPS continues to grow. Student enrollment is fundamental to master planning strategies and outcomes. LIPS reviews enrollment projections on an annual basis to inform planning; however, given the comprehensive nature of the master plan, the Enrollment Advisory Group (EAG) was re -convened in the fall of 2018 to evaluate the methodology that is in place based upon the recommendations of the EAG in 2014. Five-year projections work well for LIPS for short- term planning; however, for master planning purposes it is important to establish enrollment projections for a ten-year period in order to plan, anticipate, and respond to the enrollment forecasts (growth or reduction) as they relate to facilities and space planning. It is understood that projecting out ten years is not an exact science; however, with sufficient data and planning, these projections will provide the District the means to forecast beyond a short-term window which does not allow for long range planning. To put it into perspective, it can take more than five years to plan and construct a school facility. For this purpose, the MPAC requested the Enrollment Advisory Group (EAG) to evaluate enrollment projection methods and establish an enrollment methodology for a ten-year enrollment projection for master planning purposes. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year and implement short-term solutions as required. Based upon the outcome and recommendations of the EAG, ten-year enrollment projections were prepared for the benefit of the Master Plan. 1....oxiington IPii3011iio school) s Il aster IPlan I hn1irodUa;tiM1 March 2020 M The 2018 enrollment projections demonstrate a continued increase in enrollment for all grade levels through 2028-29. The updated 2019 enrollment projections and confidence levels suggest: • The ellen oent.airy eni olllln dents wlillll ren 4n sty: Ue thi ough 2029--30. When arua: yzling the acts. a eni olllln pent for 2019 to the 2018 pi oJectlions for 2019, the acts. aeni olllln pent for 2019 lis 3, .t 00 sty. (Jents, wNch lis orally 40 sty. (Jents bellow the 2018 hou§ng n oo(.16el pi ojectlions an(..1 33 sty. (Jents above ttue 2018 cohoi i �,-A.jivlivan oo(.16l. • The n oli(J(J: e school) eni olllln pent wlillll ren oan sty: Ue for ttue next fouir years an(..1 (Jecllline slllightlly for ttue secon(.1 hay: if of the pi ojectlion Q.: ui atlion. When arua: yzling the 2018 pi ojectlions to the acts. aeni olllln pent lira 2019, the acts. aeni olllln pent is orally 34 sty. (Jents (less than the CSM pi oJectlions. The Ngh school) crus olllln ent conflinues to lnci ease -ffvough 2024--2,15" arxI then (Jeci eases §l ghtlly thi ough the pi ojectlion Q.: ui atlion. 18owevei , oven as the oni ollIr ent (Jeci eases after 2024-- 2,15", lit stlillll ren oans above ttue current eni olllln pent an(.1 well)) beyon(.1 the caf)a6ty of the Ngh school). When arua: yzling the 2018 pi oJectlions to ttue acts. a 2019 eni olllln dent., the acts. aeni olllln pent lis orally 72 sty. (Jents (less than the CSM pi ojectlion. This table summarizes the most recent annual enrollment (as of October 1 for 2019-2020 school year). Prior to the latest round of redistricting approved in 2019, Bridge, Bowman and Estabrook were Lexington's largest elementary schools. Enrollment was roughly even across the district's two middle schools. We currently have relatively large cohorts, all in secondary grades, including grade 6 (year of graduation, 2026), 7 (year of graduation, 2025), 9 (year of graduation, 2023) and 10 (year of graduation, 2022). Conversely the current kindergarten (year of graduation, 2032) entered at a relatively small size. E II OII,,,,,II,,,,,IISIEIST BY GRADE I AS OF 10/01/2019 W 111111111111111=4 Bowman Bridge Estabrook Fiske Harrington Hastings Clarke Diamond Lex. HS Total 61 79 97 93 100 101 62 74 79 90 109 111 82 87 102 94 108 101 61 69 82 74 89 106 57 78 83 94 81 78 59 66 64 93 76 79 315 304 307 300 321 281 607 591 526 551 68 382 453 507 538 563 576 615 625 588 607 591 526 551 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic schools s Ilea tear IPlan I hnIirodaua;tiMI 68 531 525 574 481 471 437 926 902 2,275 7,190 March 2020 0 I III,,,,,, II III II IIIA -A IIT SCIA001,,,,,, II II J IIS T III IIIA These tables summarize the elementary enrollment forecasts in 2018 and are revised to reflect updated enrollment in 2019-20 with forecasts through 2029-30. 2018 19 El EIMENTARY FORECASTS 1 901,,Yo CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... 2019 20 El EIMENTARY FORECASTS 1 901,Yo CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... 1 Year Elementary (Linear forecast of K 3,100 3,011 2,997 2,987 2,982 3,009 3,065 3,075 3,085 3,086 3,096 based on prior 30 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/-70 +/- 75 +/- 75 +/- 75 +/- 80 +/- 80 vears) * 2019-20 actual K-5 enrollment @ 3,100 is below the 2018 projections generated by the housing model (-40 students) and above 2018 projections produced by the cohort survival models (+33 students) I....ex ngR.on Public Schools IMas..er 1Plan I IntrodUud:fOin March 2020 1 .4 5 Year Elementary - 3,094 3,140 3,154 3,168 3,182 3,196 Housing Demo. Model +/- 142 +/- 182 +/- 224 +/- 266 +/- 309 5 Year Elementary 3,094 3,067 3,061 3,036 3,026 3,034 (5 year average K) +/- 65 +/- 105 +/- 150 +/- 190 +/- 235 1 Year Elementary (Linear forecast of K 3,094 3,067 3,063 3,042 3,039 3,056 3,095 3,108 3,121 3,134 3,147 based on prior 30 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 65 +/- 60 +/- 55 +/- 50 +/- 45 +/- 40 +/- 35 +/- 30 ears 2019 20 El EIMENTARY FORECASTS 1 901,Yo CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... 1 Year Elementary (Linear forecast of K 3,100 3,011 2,997 2,987 2,982 3,009 3,065 3,075 3,085 3,086 3,096 based on prior 30 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/-70 +/- 75 +/- 75 +/- 75 +/- 80 +/- 80 vears) * 2019-20 actual K-5 enrollment @ 3,100 is below the 2018 projections generated by the housing model (-40 students) and above 2018 projections produced by the cohort survival models (+33 students) I....ex ngR.on Public Schools IMas..er 1Plan I IntrodUud:fOin March 2020 1 .4 The tables below represent how the elementary school enrollment may shift once the new Hastings Elementary School is complete, based upon the redistricting plan. Each school shall have the appropriate enrollment to meet the program requirements to provide more equitable and appropriate spaces to accommodate the enrollment at each school. Based upon the updated 2019 enrollment forecasts, the design capacity for the six elementary schools is barely sufficient through FY 2029-30. Therefore, it is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any enrollment shifts that may occur from year to year. EDUCATIUNAII,,,,, IRROGRAIM I C.:.J.......C.:.:MC.:.:f TAF -Y SCSI iOOI....... "RGI -i -F a,bEC...:tl9 SCSI iOOI.......S I NFA = Net Floor Area w) Harrington uses LCP spaces 0) New Hastings School 14) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating ® 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (8) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cgpl i dy jo. # Cl.i „i rt a,3 x , 1 ., I, w3. 31'o m (A-r.i((n:) EIDUCA "UNAI,,,,, IRROGRAIM (f::J.......f:: ME ARA SCI--iOOI....... CAFIA II FY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uf T 24 Spaces NFA(1) Spaces NFA ON Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 20,288 NFA 24 20,370 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 19 19,907 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 872 NFA 2 830 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 700 NFA 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support(4) 6 3,070 NFA 10 2,936 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 12 1,861 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 1 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 5,018 NFA 10 3,397 NFA 15 3,779 NFA 17 8,223 NFA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,494 NFA 3 2,786 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,381 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE(5) 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical / Admin(7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 911 NFA 859 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,819 NFA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 1 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(9) 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,144 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments GSm harp-qh Dr t Dara r'me" nromnnm,admaonaifnrcnnrnni nand nr mnrsenndnrsmnd GSm harp-qh Dr t d-ara eme" nromnnm,admaonaifnrcnnrnni send orSPED omer ELL, mnrsenndnrsmnd Facility designed to y g accommodate enrollment # of classrooms reduced to accommodate ILP Program Facilitydesigned to Facility designed to g y g accommodate accommodate enrollment without LCP enrollment I NFA = Net Floor Area w) Harrington uses LCP spaces 0) New Hastings School 14) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating ® 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (8) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cgpl i dy jo. # Cl.i „i rt a,3 x , 1 ., I, w3. 31'o m (A-r.i((n:) EIDUCA "UNAI,,,,, IRROGRAIM (f::J.......f:: ME ARA SCI--iOOI....... CAFIA II FY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uf T 24 516 ' 24 516 27 581 19 409 24 516 MEN 30 645 148 3,182 3,011 2,997 2,987 2,982 3,009 3,096 j +/-70 +/-70 +/-70 +/-70 +/- 70 +/-80 3,081 3,067 3,057 3,052 3,079 3,176 (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) 2019 LPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School 1....ex ngton Public Schools (Master IPlan I lirntiroe UlGt:i°°lOinl March 2020 1 -5 II II IIDlEXII 1E SCIA001,,,,,, IIP IIS JIS T III IIIA These tables summarize the secondary enrollment forecasts in 2018 and are revised to reflect updated enrollment in 2019-20 with forecasts through 2029-30. 2018 19 IM IlID �DII,,,,,I : SCH001,,,,, 1FORECASTS 1901% CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... 2019 20 I IU IDDI[,,,,,IE SCH001,,,,, 1FORECASTS 190(/o CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... Based upon the updated enrollment forecasts, both middle schools are currently at capacity based upon the team size policy of an average of 86 students per team. The 2019 enrollment forecasts demonstrate the schools will be slightly over capacity based upon this team size average within the next ten years. Adjustments to the average team size of 86 students may be required to accommodate the anticipated enrollment. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year. I....ex r�gR.o � Public Schools IMas..er Plan I IntrodUud:ibir) Marc,ri 2020 IM iMEMO 5 Year MS -CSM 1,833 1,862 1,921 1,938 1,918 1,903 (5 year average) +/- 35 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/-70 +/-85 10 Year Middle School (Linear forecast of K '1,833 1,862 1,921 1,938 1,918 1,903 1,848 1,838 1,851 1,887 1,895 based on prior 30 +/- 25 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 90 +/- 100 +/- 115 +/- 125 ears 2019 20 I IU IDDI[,,,,,IE SCH001,,,,, 1FORECASTS 190(/o CONf==11Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... Based upon the updated enrollment forecasts, both middle schools are currently at capacity based upon the team size policy of an average of 86 students per team. The 2019 enrollment forecasts demonstrate the schools will be slightly over capacity based upon this team size average within the next ten years. Adjustments to the average team size of 86 students may be required to accommodate the anticipated enrollment. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year. I....ex r�gR.o � Public Schools IMas..er Plan I IntrodUud:ibir) Marc,ri 2020 IM EIDU AT"U AIIPROGRAIM I MODI SCI--iC_ OI....... SFIACE AI.......I.......00XFIONS (2) Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch EIDU AT"U AIIPROGRAIM I MODI SCI--iC_ OI....... CAFIACIluFY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uNT Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 1 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA j 1,828 11,783 NFA Library 1,876 4,800 NFA 1,873 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 50 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage +/- 65 5,950 NFA +/- 100 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space (3) 3,328 NFA 1,907 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF (2) Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch EIDU AT"U AIIPROGRAIM I MODI SCI--iC_ OI....... CAFIACIluFY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uNT (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (86 students ideal number of students) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11.5 teams = 989 students (2) 2019 LIPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years I....ex n ton 1Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I lirnt:irodr.ud:ibin March 2020 1 .7 926 86 903 10.5 Teams 86 902 989 11.5 Teams j 1,828 1,892 1,874 1,876 1,870 1,873 1,837 1,849 50 +/- 55 +/- 60 +/- 65 +/- 70 +/- 100 ;I 1,924 1,931 1,930 1,938 1,907 1,949 (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (86 students ideal number of students) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11.5 teams = 989 students (2) 2019 LIPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years I....ex n ton 1Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I lirnt:irodr.ud:ibin March 2020 1 .7 III III III SCIA001,,,,,, IIII JIS "III IIIA The high school is currently over capacity and, as the enrollment forecasts suggest, the overcrowding will continue for the next ten years. Temporary measures are underway to address the overcrowding for the next few years; however, additional measures will be required, anticipating the enrollment peak in 2025-26 of approximately 21578 students, based upon the updated forecasts. 2018 ,'19 IMIGH SCH001,,,,, IFORECASTS 190(% COW1Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... 2019 20 IM IGH SCH001,,,,, IFORECASTS 190`% COW1Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... M M1 iiE i 10 Year High School 7`5 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K based on prior 30 +/-40 +/-50 +/-50 +/-60 +/-60 +/-70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 R +/- 90 ears 5 Year HS - CSM 21263 2,347 2,362 2,468 2,527 2,536 (LPS) +/-30 +/-50 +/-65 +/-80 +/-100 10 Year High School (Linear forecast of K 2,263 2,347 2,362 2,468 2,527 2,536 2,614 2,614 2,576 2,539 2,513 ° based on prior 30 +/-25 +/-25 +/-30 +/-30 +/-35 +/- 40 +/- 40 +/- 45 +/- 45 +/- 50 k ears 2019 20 IM IGH SCH001,,,,, IFORECASTS 190`% COW1Df: NCE IINTf: RVAI....... I....ex ngR.on Public Schools IMas..er Plan I IntrodUud:ibin Marc,ri 2020 1 .3 M M1 iiE i 10 Year High School 7`5 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K based on prior 30 +/-40 +/-50 +/-50 +/-60 +/-60 +/-70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 R +/- 90 ears I....ex ngR.on Public Schools IMas..er Plan I IntrodUud:ibin Marc,ri 2020 1 .3 The current high school educational program spaces compared to MSBA space standards demonstrate that overall, the high school has adequate square footage. However, this comparison is not accurate as the critical program components fall below MSBA guidelines. Spaces such as the field house should be carefully taken into consideration when evaluating overall square footage. The field house structure is not constructed to be easily converted for re -use. EIDUCATIUNAII,,,,, IPROGRAIM 11--i GI --i SCI --1001....... SFIACE NEEDS MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms /Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces I....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I lir trodUlCt:ibin March 2020 1 .9 we Spaces WOM NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 NFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,735 NFA Science CIrms (w/ prep NFA) 21 24,,"'718 IN F 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10, 174 N II!�!�!A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 44 17, 142 IN F 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 SF 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 4 3, 10 II\J[" 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9,797 INF -A 13,656 NFA -3,859 NFA Auditorium 12,592 IINII 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,"7 2 IN F 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 1,"769 \J[�A 9,231 NFA 4,538 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 1 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA 246,260 NFA -2,271 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 NFA MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms /Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces I....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I lir trodUlCt:ibin March 2020 1 .9 EDUOAT"D AII,,,,, IPI( OOII AIM 11--i GI --i SC1--iOO1....... CAFIACIIuFY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uNT (1) 2019-20 actual HS enrollment C 2,275 is below the 2018 CSM projections (2,347) (-72 students) (2) 2019 LPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years Long-term solutions are underway at the High School. In 2019 LIPS submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) to partner with them for a new or expanded high school. Unfortunately, the high school was not selected, however, it was strongly encouraged to re -submit in 2020. In the meantime, enrollment projections should be evaluated annually to ensure the temporary measures will meetthe anticipated forecast. 1....ex ngton (Public Schools (Master IPlan I lntiro iUl dJOn March 2020 1 _10 2,275 2,508 233 2,508 2,407 132 +/-70 +/-70 +/-90 2,578 2,5 78 2,497 (1) 2019-20 actual HS enrollment C 2,275 is below the 2018 CSM projections (2,347) (-72 students) (2) 2019 LPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years Long-term solutions are underway at the High School. In 2019 LIPS submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) to partner with them for a new or expanded high school. Unfortunately, the high school was not selected, however, it was strongly encouraged to re -submit in 2020. In the meantime, enrollment projections should be evaluated annually to ensure the temporary measures will meetthe anticipated forecast. 1....ex ngton (Public Schools (Master IPlan I lntiro iUl dJOn March 2020 1 _10 5 Year HS - CSM 2,275 2,347 2,362 2,468 2,527 2,536 (LIPS) +/- 30 +/- 50 +/- 65 +/- 80 +/- 100 10 Year High School (Linear forecast of K 2,275 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 based on prior 30 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 +/- 90 ears (1) 2019-20 actual HS enrollment C 2,275 is below the 2018 CSM projections (2,347) (-72 students) (2) 2019 LPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years Long-term solutions are underway at the High School. In 2019 LIPS submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) to partner with them for a new or expanded high school. Unfortunately, the high school was not selected, however, it was strongly encouraged to re -submit in 2020. In the meantime, enrollment projections should be evaluated annually to ensure the temporary measures will meetthe anticipated forecast. 1....ex ngton (Public Schools (Master IPlan I lntiro iUl dJOn March 2020 1 _10 1EVA11,,,,,,umIII IIIA OF s"r1RA:r1EG[1ES The MPAC spent months brainstorming strategies to address program, capacity, and facility needs within LIPS. The Evaluation of Strategies section outlines the strategies through this brainstorming process. It was important to explore all strategies and ideas. Many of the strategies may appear valid on the surface; however, when taking educational impacts into consideration, a solution may become less desirable, impractical, or not possible. It is critical to ensure that every child continues to have equal access to a high-quality educational experience. This section provides strategies to accommodate enrollment shifts, aging facilities, capital improvements, sustainable goals, and possible town acquisitions with the advantages and disadvantages of each strategy. There are numerous viable solutions depending on the need. To further expand upon this, hypothetical scenarios are created to demonstrate how LIPS may respond to enrollment shifts in the future. It was agreed the Master Plan should be reviewed annually to ensure enrollment projections are on target and to make modifications to the plan as required due to enrollment, aging facilities, or capital improvement requirements. However, keeping in mind the immediate need and priority is the replacement of the high school. II,,,,,, ANE.) III IIITIO IIS "rI :r II II II Expansion at every school level is challenging due to existing infrastructure, site constraints, and size of the existing sites. Alternative appropriately sized sites would provide flexibility for future planning. It is recognized that the Laconia Street site has access and topographic challenges to be used as a school site. Therefore, the site should be considered for a land swap or exchange should an opportunity become available. The MPAC agreed it is important that the School Committee be kept apprised of any land acquisition opportunities as they become known. Due to the individual programmatic requirements of each school, the size of the facility and site requirements will differ accordingly. Recognizing that opportunities may present themselves when there is no identified need, it is prudent to develop a minimum criteria list outlining access, infrastructure, and buildable area required for possible consideration of a school site. IIIIIq"rII I :rII IID I11YIESll IIS PROCESS IHSS The Town has established an Integrated Building Design and Construction Policy, which is included in the Appendix to this report. The goal of the policy is to maximize the health and well-being of building occupants and the public at large by providing resilient and maintainable buildings. This will be achieved by using the policy to guide the overall project delivery of a town facility from a scope, schedule, and cost standpoint while maximizing sustainability objectives, including onsite renewable energy production. SUSTAIIHIMAIR11,,,,,,II I[XIESll IIS Sustainable design remains a fundamental component of the integrated design process. The goals will be incorporated into capital projects as appropriate. 1....exiington IPii3011iia schools s M aster IPlan I l trardUCIJiMI March 2020 1 -11 P III T III,,,,,, III III IP IIS I III II IIIq "r R11 IIS The Town currently has a capital improvement list that addresses facility improvements for five years. The Town is developing a 20 -year facilities capital plan that will incorporate not only major capital repairs and improvements but also includes items such as building equipment that requires replacement (HVAC, roofs, windows, etc.) as well as significant building construction projects that are not currently considered but have a significant impact on the Town's overall financial capacity. Refer to the Appendix for the FY 2021-25 Capital Improvement Program Summary. IFAIR,,,, [1 `11 I , A II IN'1TE I A INC I , D IPI , PAI IP L,,,,OG The Department of Facilities (DPF) maintains a capital improvement list that is more comprehensive than a maintenance and repair log, which is included in the Appendix. However, as stated in the Capital Improvement Plan, the Town is developing a Capital Improvement Plan. caiwimumicmiams It is extremely important to maintain open and transparent communication with the community. Although social media has become the norm for communications and outreach, it is important to recognize this is not the only forum to communicate the message. A Communication Plan must be developed so information can reach as many community members as possible. IITErrs"rIEIPS Based upon the enrollment forecasts, the elementary schools barely have the capacity to accommodate the enrollment for the next ten years. The middle schools will be slightly over capacity within the next ten years based upon the team size policy. However, it appears the middle schools are able to accommodate the enrollment forecasts by implementing short-term strategies. Due to the existing and anticipated further overcrowding at the high school, immediate attention and financial resources are focused on the replacement of the high school. However, it is important to have strategies in place for the other facilities as enrollment shifts, building repairs and improvements are required as well as the Town's desire to address aging facilities and the sustainability, resiliency, and longevity of its assets. 1....oxiington IPii3011iio school) s Il aster IPlan I l trodUCIJiMI March 2020 1.12. lmiiumllllll''''9''� ulA�lm✓�dl�d I�1/ANDu� �N/�Jy�d�muuu��luuilu ll�,��ylkyDjJYym,YamaNne�l� IIp�Gu1 0JJ'uiRN,, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ff QQ luuin�»�uinl /�/��j�p/�q`��" � ""DNuuv ��y�mJ�� lililililu �linnlii IIp��G ,J J e�Nul�Dvvn�Nypn�p�'..... ,yy�ymamm,��,��1,,' ,yy�ymaann IIp��G ulililluu»/�,�i�,/'D�Ip� lililililu �linnlii G�JJS ntroduction Existing Conditions Reports, Site & Floor Plans - Bowman Elementary School - Bridge Elementary School - Estabrook Elementary School - Fiske Elementary School Harrington Elementary Schoo Hastings Elementary School Clarke Middle School Diamond Middle School Lexington High School 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s IMa ter Plan an I v4,lUatkonn r,r E islJnq C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2(.)20 II IIIq"rII I[n "rIII IIIq It should not be a surprise to learn that school building performance is directly related to student performance. Thermal comfort, access to natural daylight, and acoustic separation are just a few of the components that affect students' attitude and focus in a learning environment. Schiool Building Performance `ftiden't IPerf r°rnaun e u..arall Illiglht 44 Better a iln..ades conrne tlion to on.atdoors Ac,;on.astlic,; separa lion @ ieairilnig c;llaiJt Ti� errn6� �� orr��nfort i �tc�,t�c,r tr:.,c;r.a n i 8�� a� tiny alir Bel alt t ii ndaii ice I:::rnc r y eff (i,Jenni:,y i 4ian n(.,, 11 r ;c U'( &s c.;an.n Ir;c, fc.,c,rasc,d r,llsc,rrvli.nc,o,r„,, �.� ,,.. y i i n n�nc.�,�r e e k Sl „c dents �, ocunll r�� spon nsu��.�lilllit taki°iir nct ac:;tilc.,n n for Ali nc,uu fr.Ararc,, The purpose of this Section is to report the physical conditions of the existing buildings in order to identify the building performance, maintenance needs, capacity of existing systems, and the potential for future use. Information has been obtained from historic drawings, previous reports, and on-site inspections in collaboration with the Department of Public Facilities. The existing conditions of each facility should be updated on an annual basis with any required repairs to be included in the Town's Capital Improvement Plan. Each facility is identified on the following pages. The Hastings School reflects the new school that opened in February 2020. The LCP is the new facility on Pelham Road. Bridge and Bowman Elementary Schools are the oldest and most outdated elementary schools in the district. These facilities should be the focus following the completion of the High School project. l..cxiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJnq r., (.on ,fionr s March 2(.)20 BOWMAN II III,,,,,, II III I III4 "r II li( III II,,,,,, Property �Data Address 9 Philip Road, Lexington, MA 02421 Use Elementary School, Grades K-5 Date IBuilillt 1964 —Original Building Affiflions 1999 —Two -classroom modular addition, Flloors updated in 2013 2016 — Pre -fabricated modular building Renovaflions 2013 — HVAC, lighting renovations Occupancy Group E — Educational ConsfrucUon Dass Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/ unprotected BLIfldirig I at No, Flloors Gross Area Foundaflion/1Frai mo Exterior WWis Roofing One-story classroom and administration wings. Two-story existing gym, library, cafeteria. 63,809 GSF — Including additions, renovated areas, and existing building Original 1964 Building: Concrete foundations with spread footings, exterior load bearing masonry walls, concrete floor slabs (slab -on -grade and rib slab), and perimeter crawl space. 2016 Pre -fabricated Modular: Concrete foundations with piers Brick with concrete masonry unit backup Existing Roofs: EPDM 71,000 square feet; under warranty until 2032 New Roofs, Pre -fabricated Modular Building: Adhered PVC Wundow Systems Aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing New rooftop equipment in 2013, gas fired with DX cooling HW perimeter radiation Corridor Fan Coil Units (FCU) Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480V, 3 phase 800 AMP l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an I v4,11.mtkonl r,r E islJnq C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2013 Building: Double hung operable windows, low e double pane Exterior (Doors Aluminum with double pane glass lites in aluminum frames with ADA openers. IlnteNor (Doors Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames. IlnteNor WWis Typical: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB), CMU painted, ceramic tile, quarry the (kitchen) Flloors Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Epoxy resin in kitchen, concrete in mechanical area, toilet rooms. Carpet in offices and library. Composite flooring in gymnasium. C61llungs Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) Painted exposed steel and decking in gymnasium HazJMaf Asbestos (ACM): 2013 renovation work removed ACM as required to interface with existing conditions only. Existing ACM. SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Hot water distribution Condensing boilers New rooftop equipment in 2013, gas fired with DX cooling HW perimeter radiation Corridor Fan Coil Units (FCU) Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480V, 3 phase 800 AMP l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an I v4,11.mtkonl r,r E islJnq C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 The Bowman Elementary School is located between Philip Road and Worthern Road East. Site is bounded by wetlands to the west and north and residential neighborhoods to the east and south. A large playfield separates the building from Philip Road. The original building was built in 1964 with a single -story classroom and administration wing. The gymnasium, library, and cafeteria are two-story. In 1999 a modular building was added. In 2016 a one-story pre -fabricated modular building was built, which added two classrooms to this building. MM Site Access ......,,,,,, VeHCLflair The site has two entries and parking, all from Philip Road. The main parking lot was re -paved in 2016, which did not include the sidewalks or the small side parking lot. Pairkiing There are (96) striped parking spaces which are in three locations across the property. The main parking area is to the west/northwest, with two other parking areas to the east and south. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Pedestrian paving materials are bituminous paving, most of which is in poor condition. !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields, including the baseball field, are in good condition. MisceHairieOLJS Site lighting was upgraded to LED technology in 2017 within every parking area. There is existing utility pole lighting to the southwest corner of the main parking area. Water SLJPPSy t irn The site is served by an existing 6 -inch water main from Middleby Road northeast of the building and enters the mechanical room near the emergency generator. Saiz itairy Sewer Building connects to an existing 10 -inch sewer Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Middleby Road, continues east of the building, and enters the mechanical room by the emergency generator l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 2-3 IIS II I IIITII "ru IIm(s"rIMIMS Ext doir Waft 1964 Building: Exterior walls consist of brick veneer and unreinforced concrete masonry units on all elevations. 2016 Addition: 2 x 4 wood stud construction with T1-11 siding is:loofl ing EPDM was installed in 2012. The roof is in good condition 2016 Addition: Adhered PVC material in good condition. Windows 2012 Renovation: Insulated aluminum (double - hung, fixed, and awning windows). Condition of windows is good. 2016 Addition: Aluminum, pre -finished windows projecting vent and fixed. Condition of windows is new. Ext idoir Il coir 2012 Renovation: Exterior entry doors have been replaced with aluminum doors in aluminum frames. Doors are weather stripped and have insulated glazed vision panels. Ent doir Waft 1964 Building: Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically thick unreinforced concrete block (CMU), painted. The existing interior walls are in good condition. 2016 Addition: Interior walls are typically wood studs with gypsum wallboard, painted. Ent dair Il coir The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in generally good condition. Room Lobby, corridors, and cafeteria floors are 12 x 12 inch vinyl composite flooring (VCT) which is in fair condition. The composite gymnasium floor is in new condition. C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymnasium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) I,,,,,o k it Lockers are surface mounted, single tier with sloped top. Installed in 2012, the condition of the lockers is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Il Master lPlan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 2.°� FUd SOUirce Di tirnl Ut Olrl Systern Natural gas for all HVAC components. Electric • New piping through corridors cooling. • New ductwork in all areas • New VAV boxes in administration IHeafing Maint (2) high efficiency hydronic boilers. Typical Systerns • Two-pipe heat in all classrooms ClWHeir • VAV in administration offices N/A • Rooftop equipment DX conditioning with gas fired heat Ueh 'rr" Raaf "Top Units IERU) (7 • FCU in corridors • Classrooms (6) • Administration (1) IF idirn t ir IRa oatioin e�os HW baseboard radiation in perimeter classrooms Heafing aind V irmtolatoain Units (IHV) () • Gymnasium ALitaui'i'mati "Teii'i'mp iratLliir Caintird (ATC) • Library New Tridium Niagra N4 ATC system for 2012 • Cafeteria renovations. The condition of the system is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,kmt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2(.)20 2. 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, Eitiriai Service The building has an 800 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. BectiricW IDi tiril utoOlrl Many branch panels are located in electrical closets and were installed in 2012. Eirneirgeiricy Generator aind Ei tiri ai Painds The Bowman Elementary School is served by one gas generator, Cummins Onan GGHE-1209134, rated at 60 KW, 277/480V, 3-phase which was installed in the 2013 renovation. The generator visually appears to be in new condition. I ighfing aind Receptade Sy t irn Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors, and other areas is new LED direct/indirect fixtures. All lighting is controlled by an automated lighting system, which is not integrated into the Building Management System (BMS). Rre Ahirirn Sy t irn The building is equipped with an addressable fire alarm system (Notifier) consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia shoo rn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell system (date unknown). SOLlind R iinfairirneirit Sy t irn 2016 Addition: Classrooms have a speech reinforcement system consisting of amplifier, IR sensor, and speakers. Speakers are compatible with the existing system. Ilatir Crack An existing Sapling master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas is Tyco Simplex Grinnell (date unknown). The 2016 addition system is compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice CaMin Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. Classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector. Smlirity Sy t irn The building currently has security systems installed in 2012 consisting of the following: • lntiruslion (Jetectlion torr the exteirlioir (Jooirs • Cair(J access contiroll molts torr exteirlioir (Jooirs • CCTV su irv6llllance systen o Aiphone model is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors and door contacts. 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers Unknown l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., (.ow' 1J(orrrz March 2020 2. Dornestic Cain Water Service Building connects to an existing 6" cold water main. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Existing gas fired domestic water heaters (2) and master mixing valve (date unknown). New Domestic Hot Water heater was installed in 2019 after AO Smith DHW failed. Soo Waste aind Vent Sanitary line connects to an existing 10" sewer line. Raiin Water Dischairge Roof drain system collects rain water from primary roof drains. I aftlirai Gas Existing 3 -inch main enters the existing building at the mechanical room. Fixtuir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low flow (1.6 ga), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories are electronic sensor activated. • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are precast mop basin type. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. Acid NeUtirahzatioin Sy t urn System in place for condensing boilers. IFI IR IE IP IR 1i°'IE '1i I IIS Spiri -Weir 2013 Renovation: 6" standpipe system and wet automatic fire suppression system. Staindpipes Standpipes include a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 1'/2" reducer. Mire Protection Sy t urn An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs through the building. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,. at, ,.,n, r,r E islJnq r., (.on ,fionr s March 2(.)20 2..7 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 II II IIIAFacidkities BowIIS III ,-i 67,905 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 13.3 Acres sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , �, ; , ) �, , 'J", 2-8 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor R<orv� R<orv� LEGEND ,F] t ❑ �_ ❑ f '4RY Tl 4 l H D Pd tsx a nc noe � <r 'm �' czn 1 l 5l OJ ' 7 51 1 5, c ws�szmm kr °r v':.c us�`, co ❑, ouue zmm cwsszmm rvo1A, 111 ❑,;l .( ;` �. ❑ L�.l 4l.ON m usr� Oo asE o ' o fi,Rc -RAR. oRrv< rvrvRse , °" All e m 0 e 0 m«<o w < s<M1 �RAOE s<M1 �RAOE s<M1 �RAOE s<M1 �RAOE s<M1 �RAOE aM1 �RAOE s.a�RAOE F a spm <ws �m <ws �m rvoE R.E Total Existing 67,940 GSF lo 20 IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO "DESIGN Lex,igiori 4 uE ..atshererls Ma',ee.r filar' J", I .'20 2-9 IRRIEDGE I III,,,,,,II III II INT IIT SGI11001,,,,,, Address Use Date IBuilillt Affiflions Renovaflions Occupancy Group Consfrucfuon Cwlass BLIfldirig I at No, Flloors Gross Area Foundation/Frame Exterior Walllls Roofing Wundow Systems Exterior (Doors Interior Doors Interior Walls Floors Ceilings HazMat SpriiriMers HVAC Sewerage Blectdc 55 Middleby Road, Lexington, MA 02421 Elementary School, Grades K-5 1965 —Original Building 2016 — Pre -fabricated modular building 2013 — HVAC, lighting renovations E — Educational Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/unprotected One-story classroom and administration wings. Two-story existing gym, library, cafeteria. 61,511 GSF — Including additions, renovated areas and existing building Original 1965 Building: Concrete foundations with spread footings, exterior load bearing masonry walls, concrete floor slabs (slab on grade and rib slab) and perimeter crawl space. 2016 Pre -fabricated modular: Concrete foundations with piers Brick with concrete masonry unit backup Existing Roofs: Modified bitumen roofing, 68,000 square feet; under warranty until 2019 New Roofs, Pre -fabricated Modular Building: Adhered PVC Aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing 2013 Building: Double hung operable windows, low e double pane Aluminum with double pane glass lites in aluminum frames with ADA openers Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames Typical: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB), CMU painted, ceramic tile, quarry the (kitchen) Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Epoxy resin in kitchen, concrete in mechanical area, toilet rooms; carpet in offices and library; composite flooring in gymnasium. Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) Painted exposed steel and decking in gymnasium Asbestos (ACM): 2013 renovation work removed ACM as required to interface with existing conditions only. Existing ACM. Fully sprinklered building Hot water distribution Condensing boilers New rooftop equipment in 2013, gas fired with DX cooling HW perimeter radiation Corridor Fan Coil Units (FCU) Town Sewerage 277/480V, 3 phase 800 AMP l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2 10 RMINNSIM The Bridge Elementary School is located between Middleby Road and The Old Reservoir. The site is bounded by wetlands to the west and south and residential neighborhoods to the east and north. A large playfield separates the building from Lincoln Street. The original building was built in 1965 with a single -story classroom and administration wing. The gymnasium, library, and cafeteria are two- story. In 2016 a one-story pre -fabricated modular building was built, which added two classrooms to this building. MM Site Access ......,,,,,, VeHCLflair The site has two entries and parking, all from Middleby Road. The parking lot was re -paved in 2018, which did not include the sidewalks. Pairkiing There are (120) striped parking spaces which are in three locations across the property. The main parking area is to the north, with two other parking areas to the east and south. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving, most of which is in good to fair condition. !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields, including the baseball field, are in good condition. MisceHairieOLJS Site lighting was upgraded to LED technology in 2017 within every parking area. There is existing utility pole lighting in the northeast corner of the main parking area. Water SLJPP�y Systeirn The site is served by an existing 6" water main from Middleby Road northeast of the building and enters the mechanical room near the emergency generator air itairy Seweir Building connects to an existing 10" sewer. Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Middleby Road, continues east of the building, and enters the mechanical room by the emergency generator. l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master lPlan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 II C H I1'1I°'IEC'1TU I A L,,,, S"T E IMS Ext doir Waft 1965 Building: Exterior walls consist of brick veneer and unreinforced concrete masonry units on all elevations. 2016 Addition: 2 x 4 wood stud construction with T1-11 siding. is:loofl ing Modified bitumen roof was installed in 1994. It is at the end of its useful life -cycle and should be changed out in 2020. Roof slope is poor with standing water. Roofing condition is poor. 2016 Addition: Adhered PVC material is in good condition. Windows 2013 Renovation: Insulated aluminum (double - hung, fixed and awning windows). Condition of windows is good. 2016 Addition: Aluminum, pre -finished windows projecting vent and fixed. Condition of windows is new. Ext idoir Il coir 2013 Renovation: Exterior entry doors have been replaced with aluminum doors in aluminum frames. Doors are weather stripped and have insulated glazed vision panels. Ent doir Waft 1965 Building: Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically thick unreinforced concrete block (CMU), painted. The existing interior walls are in good condition. 2016 Addition: Interior walls are typically wood studs with gypsum wallboard, painted. Ent idoir Il coir The interior doors are solid core flush wood; some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in generally good condition. Room 2013 Renovation: Lobby, corridors, and cafeteria floors are 12 x 12 inch vinyl composite flooring (VCT), which is in fair condition. The composite gymnasium floor is in new condition. C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymnasium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) I,,,,,ock ir Lockers are surface mounted, single tier with sloped top. Installed in 2012, the condition of the lockers is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl (.o E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 2 12. FUd SOUirce Di tirnl Ut Olrl Systern Natural gas for all HVAC components. Electric • New piping through corridors cooling. • New ductwork in all areas • New VAV boxes in administration IHeafing Maint (2) high efficiency hydronic boilers. Typical Systerns • Two-pipe heat in all classrooms ClWHeir • VAV in administration offices N/A • Rooftop equipment DX conditioning with gas fired heat Ueh 'rr" Raaf "Top Units IERU) (7 • FCU in corridors • Classrooms (6) • Administration (1) IF idirn t ir IRa oatioin e�os HW baseboard radiation in perimeter classrooms. Heafing aind V irmtolatoain Units (IHV) () • Gymnasium ALitaui'i'mati "Teii'i'mp iratLliir Caintird (ATC) • Library New Tridium Niagra N4 ATC system for 2013 • Cafeteria renovations. The condition of the system is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,kmt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2020 2 13 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, BectiricW Service The building has an 800 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. BectiricW IDi tIlril uto101rl Many branch panels are located in electrical closets and were installed in 2013. Eirneirgeiricy Generator alnd BectiricW Painds The Bridge Elementary School is served by one gas generator, Cummins Onan GGHE-1209134, rated at 60 KW, 277/480V, 3-phase which was installed in the 2013 renovation. The generator visually appears to be in new condition. I ighfing aind Receptade Sy t irn Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors, and other areas is new LED direct/indirect fixtures. All lighting is controlled by an automated lighting system, which is not integrated into the Building Management System (BMS). Rre Aiallrirn Sy t irn The building is equipped with an addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllroo rn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell system (date unknown). SOLlind R iInfallr irneirmt Sy t irn 2016 Addition: Classrooms have a speech reinforcement system consisting of amplifier, IR sensor, and speakers. Speakers are compatible with existing system. Ilatllr Crack An existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas is Tyco Simplex Grinnell (date unknown). The 2016 addition system is compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice Cal i in Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. Classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector. Sa ullrity Sy t llrn The building currently has security systems installed in 2013 consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors • Card access control points for exterior doors • CCTV surveillance system Aiphone model is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors and door contacts. 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers Unknown l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 2-14 Dornestic Cain Water Service Building connects to an existing 6" cold water main. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Existing gas fired domestic water heaters (2) and master mixing valve (date unknown). New domestic hot water heater was installed in 2019 after AO Smith DHW failed. Soo Waste aind Vent Sanitary line connects to an existing 10" sewer line. Raiin Water Dischairge Roof drain system collects rain water from primary roof drains. Iattlirai Gas Existing 3" main enters the existing building at the mechanical room. FixtUire • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low flow (1.6 ga), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories are electronic sensor activated. • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are precast mop basin type. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. Acid I eUtirah atioin Sy team System in place for condensing boilers. IFI IR IE IR 1i°'IE '1i I IIS Spirk-Weir 2013 Renovation: A new system extends the existing 4 -inch standpipe system and wet automatic fire suppression system. Stainpipe Standpipes include a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 1'/2" reducer. Mire Pirotecfion SysterTl An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs through the building. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,. at, ,.,n, r,r E islJnq r., (.on ,fionr s March 2020 2 1 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 III � II IIIA Facidlities Bridge 659425 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 29.5 Acres sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , �, ; , ) �, , J,,, 2 16 4 <E ------------------------------ --------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E.czn czn a Au czn czn c n czn n czn czn n 1' Y e nzrery cwss�zmm cwsszmm c u cws mm cws's�zmm cws Al wAll mm wAll cwsA' �mm EL", o rs.<A All ©r oRSE © o SRA c ,G3 rvRE <�sr rvr OrB , -ERY- 4 q -- Lex,igiori fltjbk. Schools Master fi lar' ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor Total Existing 65,464 GSF N 10 20 4) 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO .DESIGN m,c 1. cu 2-'1'7 LEGEND 1 —,,i 1'J021 GF DYAl3ON t R ❑ :,�acE ❑(,A T7 1 5 1 17, NET! - D ii1Tj . 1 . S1 0, �© .�.»_T]O. Total Existing 65,464 GSF N 10 20 4) 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO .DESIGN m,c 1. cu 2-'1'7 IESTAIRROOK I101 IIIII IE INT IIT SC III II,,,,,, Address Use &lite Area late IBuilillt Occupancy Group Construction Dass BLIfldiing I at No. Flloors Gross Area Foundaflion/1Frairne Exfedor Walllls 117 Grove Street, Lexington, MA 02420 Elementary School, Grades K-5 13.3 Acres 2014 E — Educational Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/protected Roofing Adhered PVC roofing Wuridow Sysfeirns Aluminum with projecting vents and insulated glazing Exfedor IDoors Aluminum with insulated safety glass IlnfeNor IDoors Flush solid core wood, natural finish, in hollow metal frames. Glazed at corridors and stairs. Automatic l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2 18 hold -open doors at corridor and stairs. IlnfeNor Walllls Painted GWB, natural finish wood paneling (wainscot)/trim at corridors with clerestory windows Recessed metal lockers and natural finish wood cabinets at project areas Note: Some wood veneer paneling at corridors and library was defective and replaced under warranty in 2018. Flloors Linoleum (sheet) in corridors and cafetorium. Linoleum the in classrooms and other teaching areas. Rubber floor tiles and treads at stairs/landings. Carpet in administration and library. Epoxy resin in kitchen and toilets. Painted concrete in mechanical areas. Celillungs Suspended lay -in acoustical the in corridors, classrooms and all teaching areas. Painted exposed metal ceiling and roof structure in gymnasium and cafetorium. HazJMaf None Blevafors Three level passenger (1); Two level freight elevator (1) SpNnkllers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Heat/cooling induction system (4 -pipe) at classrooms Sewerage Town Sewerage BlectNc 277/480 volts, 3 phase, 4 wire 1600 AMP Photo Vollfalic Roof panels installed circa 2015 l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2 18 RMINNSIM The Estabrook School was built on the original school's playfields at the northeast corner of the 13.3 acre site which is nestled between Hennessey Land (north) and Paint Mine Area (east). The relatively flat site is defined by mature trees in a secluded setting with few surrounding houses visible from the school. MW Site Access ......,,,,,, VeNCLflalr Main vehicular and pedestrian access is from Grove Street with limited secondary access from Robinson Road. Vehicles drop off and pick up via a loop at the main entrance. The bus lane is separated by an aluminum picket fence. The service area at the rear of the site is accessed from Robinson Road. Pairkiin There are approximately (79) striped parking spaces to the north. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. All curbing is in very good condition with occasional damage from snow plows. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving. All paving is in good to very good condition. BasebaH IFid The baseball infield and backstop are in new condition. RaygmUirid The extensive playground equipment and surfacing are in good condition. IloHairmau Driveway, parking, and walkway lighting throughout the site are in new condition. Water Supply Sy t irn A 6 -inch water line connects to the existing 6 -inch service from Grove Street and loops around the entire building. The condition of the existing service is not known. Saiz itairy Saw ir A 6" sanitary sewer (including a grease -trap connection) exits near the kitchen through the parking area and driveway to an 8" sewer in Grove Street. Gas Utfloty An existing 6" gas service extends from Grove Street to the upper third of the parking area where it connects to a gas line which enters the building at the loading dock. The condition of the existing gas service is unknown. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan �� v4,lUatir,ll r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 2 19 IIC II I III T II "r u IIm(s"nEIMS Ext doir Waft Room Exterior walls consist of 4" CMU veneer, stone Lobby, Corridors and Cafetorium: Linoleum veneer, and metal panels on metal studs, sheet goods (LSG) with linoleum modular tile rigid insulation and interior gypsum wallboard. (LMT) color accents Condition of exterior walls is new. Cafetorium Stage: Maple flooring, natural finish is:loofiiirng PVC adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is new. Windows Aluminum, pre -finished windows (2" projecting vent and fixed). Prefinished aluminum curtainwall at larger openings. Prefinished aluminum sunshades at south, west and east elevations. Ext idoir Il coir Exterior entry doors at stair exits and vestibules are aluminum curtainwall. Doors are insulated glass and weather stripped. Condition of entry doors is new. Ent irioir Waft Interior walls are typically metal studs with gypsum wallboard (GWB), painted. Corridors: Painted GWB, clerestory glass, plywood wainscot and hardwood trim (natural finish). Gymnasium: Ground face CMU lower walls and painted acoustical panel upper walls. Cafetorium: Painted GWB, painted hollow metal frames and glass. Ceiling mounted, sliding wall panels divide the cafetorium into two sections. Ent irioir IDooir Typical interior doors are solid core flush wood; some with vision panels, in painted hollow metal frames. Classrooms: Linoleum modular tile (LMT) Toilet Rooms and Kitchen: Poured epoxy resin Gymnasium: Maple flooring, natural finish Offices and Library: Adhered carpet Stairs: Rubber treads and rubber tile at landings C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical ceiling tile (ACT) and grid. Corridors: ACT and aluminum ceiling panels Project Areas and Cafetorium Clouds: ACT aluminum tile and grid Gymnasium and Cafetorium Ceilings: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) I ockeirs/CUbbies Half height lockers in project areas outside of typical classrooms. Ei vatoir Passenger: Hole -less hydraulic passenger elevator, 3,500 Ib., three floor stops, 100 fpm. Stainless steel doors, frame, and cab interior. Shaft is 2 -hour reinforced CMU. Freight: Hydraulic elevator, 3,500 Ib., two floor stops (basement and first floor). Steel doors, frame, and cab interior with full wall pads. Shaft is 2 -hour reinforced CMU. 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 FUd SOUirce Natural gas connected to existing gas service. Date and condition of existing gas lines from Grove Street are unknown. IHeafing Raint Two natural gas fired hot water boilers at 2/3 capacity each. The boilers provide hot water for heating to energy recovery units (ERU), roof mounted air handling units, and various terminal units. The boilers are fired at the lowest possible hot water temperature based on outdoor temperature. Hot water is distributed throughout the building by two base mounted end suction pumps (one is a full size spare), each controlled by a variable frequency drive. Cooking One 100 -ton air cooled chiller. Chilled water is pumped in a primary -secondary system separated by a plate heat exchanger. The chiller uses the "green" refrigerant R-41 Oa. Di tiribUb ism Systerns 1. The classrooms are heated, cooled and ventilated by ceiling recessed active induction units, (4 -pipe) with ventilation air provided by three roof mounted energy recovery units (ERU). DX cooling provides dehumidification. 2. Corridors are heated, cooled and ventilated the same as classrooms. 3. The cafetorium, gymnasium, and library each have roof top units (RTU) for heating, cooling, and ventilation. 4. The kitchen has a roof mounted exhaust fan and a make-up air fan. 5. The administrative area has a separate RTU with economizer capability. Spaces are controlled for heating and cooling by individual VAVs. IMisceHairieOLJS Spaces 1. Miscellaneous spaces have convectors, cabinet unit heaters, and fin tube radiation for heating. 2. Entrance vestibules and stairways have cabinet unit heaters. Aut ir'i'mati °Turi'm iratuiir Cointird (ATC) A direct digital control system controls all points for building systems (boilers, chillers, ERU, RTU, etc.). l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2-21 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, Eitllriai Service The primary electric service voltage for a pad mounted transformer is 1600 ampere and secondary service voltage is 277/480 volts, 3-phase, 4 -wire. There are four meters in the switchboard (main, lighting, HVAC and receptacle). BectiricW IDi tllribUbOlrm Normal lighting and power distribution is 480/277 volt and 208/120 volt. Eirneirgeiricy Generator A natural gas emergency generator is adjacent to the service area. I ighfing aind Receptade Systeirns 1. Classrooms and Offices: Pendant mounted indirect light fixtures T5 lamps (dimmable) 2. Corridors: Linear up -light LED fixtures 3. Gymnasium: Surface mounted 4 lamp T8 fluorescent fixtures 4. Cafetorium and Library: pendant mounted one lamp PAR16 LED dimmable fixture Mire Aiallrir'm Systeirn The building is equipped with an addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllroorn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the main administrative console located in the main office. SOLUnd Reiinfoirceirneirit Systeirn Classrooms have a speech reinforcement system consisting of amplifier, IR sensor and speakers. Ilatllr Crack Master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas. Data/Voice Cal Uin 1. Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms (8 data drops), and occupiable areas. All classrooms, library and conference rooms are equipped with a short throw projector. 2. Gymnasium, Music Room, and Cafetorium: Sound system including amplifier, compact disc player, iPod dock station, wireless microphone transmitter, microphone outlets, and an assistive listening system. a ullrity Systeirns 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors in the corridors and door contacts in exterior doors. 2. Door Access The Door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. The DSX system is still serviceable and expandable. 3. CCTV The original analogue CCTV system has been converted to an IP based system using Axis video encoders. The encoder coverts the analogue signals from the original coax cables into a digital video stream providing an IP based network connection. Existing cameras are a combination of original analogue and IP type. Otllh llr BectiricW Systeirns 1. Emergency Light and Power: Emergency standby power system connected to a gas driven emergency generator 2. Lighting Occupancy Sensors: Dual technology (sound and heat) sensors located in all occupiable spaces 3. Emergency Radio Communication System: A bi-directional amplifier (BDA) system to amplify police and fire department systems within the building l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 Dornestic CoM Water Service: The 4" domestic water service enters the building at the mechanical room. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated).Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Two high efficiency (94%) gas fired water heaters of 390 MBH heating capacity and 130 gallon storage tank. A manifold diverts hot water distribution to classroom fixtures and kitchen appliances. The kitchen dishwasher system operates at 140°F and other kitchen systems operate at 120°F. Other systems throughout the building operate at 110°F (lavatories) and 105°F (toilet rooms and classroom sinks). off Waste aind Vent A single 6" sanitary line is gravity flow and connects to an existing sewer line from Grove Street. A dedicated 4" grease waste line collects waste from kitchen appliances and fixtures and connects to an exterior grease trap. Above ground sanitary drainage is piped in cast iron with "no -hub" joints (3" or larger). Piping smaller than 3" is piped in copper. Piping below floor is weight cast iron hub and spigot. l aoin at itIDisc hairg The roof drain system collects rain water from conventional primary roof drains and dual level promenade drains. Piping is cast iron with horizontal piping insulated. The storm system exits the southside of the building and connects to a rain garden collection system. I aftlira� Gas The 6" gas service (5,000 CFH) enters the boiler room and is regulated to low pressure (11 " WC) inside the building and serves heating boilers, water heater, and food service. A separate 3 -inch gas line feeds the emergency generator. Foxtuir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low flow (1.6 gal), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories have metered faucets. • The majority of drinking fountains are china fountains. • Typical classrooms have one sink for hand washing. • Janitor closets have a corner mop service basin. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. l..axiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,. at, ,.,n, (.o E islJ q C(.o 6,fionr s March 2020 � 2.3 iFIRIE iPIR "I"IE °TI i piril -Weir The building is served from a 6" fire service line to the building from Grove Street. Cross connection control uses a supervised double check valve assembly backflow preventer on the fire service as it enters the building through the basement mechanical room. The entire building has a wet automatic fire suppression system. A fire department Storz connection is located near the parking lot. Sprinklers are supplied from the standpipes. Floor control valve stations are provided at each floor from the standpipe system. Sprinkler heads in electrical and mechanical rooms are standard response, 212°F temperature listing. Sprinklers in all other areas are response heads. Staindpipes Standpipes are located in egress stairs and adjacent to the stage. Each standpipe has a 2'/2" fire department hose valve with 11/2" reducer at the stair floor landings. At the stage, fire department valves are provided on each side of the stage in recessed cabinets. Mire Pirat toain Systern A dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers enters the building at the boiler room and runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe. Piping is schedule 40 piping with threaded fittings for piping sized 2" and less. For sizes over 2", piping is schedule 10 with roll grooved fittings and couplings. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the fire alarm system. Kitchen hood is protected with a dry agent "Ansul R-102" packaged hood suppression system. Hydrant flow test information from hydrant at 51 Robinson Road shows: Static Pressure at 95 psi and Residual Pressure at 77 psi Flow: 1116 GPM. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Dow61J(orrrz March 2020 2•-2.4 2014 Facidlities �� E"Stabrook 91,840 GSF sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , �, ; , ) �, , J,,, 2-25 JOSEPH ESTABROOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Basement Total Existing 91,840 GSF IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO DESIGN Lex,igiori4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Ma',ee.r fi lar' ., , .., ,c .'20 2 26 JOSEPH ESTABROOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor Total Existing 91,840 GSF IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO VDESIGN e. 5;7Bcrr 4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Ma',ee.r filar' , . ,. 2-2t �e�v cws�szmm cwu� s�szmm cws�szmm cw� cws�szmm cws�szmm cws�szmm yy *'-'-� cusr evwer 94 94 Pp 94 94 UP q R A .��. JnE � cEry A os �vmrvas�IXm JVJtYFI tJ I..KVVR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Second Floor Total Existing 91,840 GSF IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO VDESIGN Lex, giori f uE ..ac.hcrcrls Master f lar' ., , ..,J,c 1 ,c 1.'20 2-28 JVJtYFI tJ I..KVVR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Third Floor LEGEND ❑( 1 ;tl 1i1. 1'-''iYx'1 ❑.' JFt 7 .J.4l,ON ❑ 1 U;:;r; ❑ Slh(ic ❑ GYYi'l" j'i ❑ RDliifrll.'-.TRF130N ❑ G2GJLFnON Total Existing 91,840 GSF IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO --DESIGN Lex, giori 4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Master filar' ., , ..,J,c 1 ,c 1.'20 2-29 IFISKIE IS III,,,,,, IIS III II IIIA TA IIRY SGIII001,,,,,, Address Use Date IBuilillt Affiflions Renovaflions Occupancy Group Consfrucfuon Cwlass BLIfldirig I at No, Flloors Gross Area Foundaflion/1Frai mo Exterior Walllls Roofing Wuridow Systems 55 Adams Street, Lexington, MA 02420 Elementary School, Grades K-5 2006 — Original Building 2016 — Pre -fabricated Modular Addition N/A E — Educational Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/unprotected Double -hung operable, double pane, low e Exterior (Doors Aluminum with double pane glass lites in aluminum frames IlnteNor (Doors Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames IlnteNor Walllls Typical: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB) in occupied spaces CMU painted in corridors, hallways, and vestibules Ceramic tile (CT) in toilet rooms Some natural finish wood in classrooms Flloors Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Rubber floor tiles at stairs. 2019 installed waxless LVT flooring system in first floor hallways. Quarry the in kitchen, concrete in mechanical area, toilet rooms. Carpet in administrative areas, offices, teacher planning, and library. Gymnasium/auditorium floor is hardwood with polyurethane coating. C61llungs Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) Painted exposed steel and decking in gymnasium HazMaf Asbestos (ACM): None SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Geo -thermal heat pump system Domestic Hot Water, gas fired units VRF system in pre -fabricated modular building Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480V, 3 phase 2000 AMP l..exington IPii,blloc Schools Master Plan an � I v4,11.mtkonl (,r E islJ q C(.o 6ltkonr s March 2020 2.30 RMINNSIM The Fiske Elementary School is located between Colony Road, Porter Lane, and Adams Street. The site is bounded by Ada Govan Bird Sanctuary to the southwest and surrounded by residential neighborhoods to west, northeast and south. A large playfield separates the building from Adams Street. The original two-story building was built in 2006. In addition to the classrooms and administrative spaces, there is acafeteria, library, and gymatorium. In 2016, due to growing enrollment, a one-story pre -fabricated modular building was constructed, which added four classrooms to the building. MM Site Access ......,,,,,, VeHCLflair The site has two entries and parking, one from Adams Street and the other from Colony Road. All bituminous concrete was replaced in 2019. Pairkiing There are (105) striped parking spaces: (20) parking spaces in the parking area off of Adams Street and (85) parking spaces in the parking area off of Colony Road. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain New hardscape, pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving, most of which is new after being replaced between 2017 and 2019. !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields, including two baseball diamonds, are in good condition. IloHairmu New LED lighting was installed in both parking areas. An existing utility pole is located on the southeast corner of the property by the loading dock. Water SLJPPysteirn The site is served by an existing 10" water main from Adams Street south of the building, and enters the mechanical room near the loading dock. air itairy Sewer The building connects to an existing 24" sewer line. Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Adams Street, continues south of the building, and enters the mechanical room. The service is 6" — 1646' high pressure plastic. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 IIC II I III T II "r u IIm(s"nEIMS Ext doir Waft Exterior walls consist of brick veneer and unreinforced concrete masonry units on all elevations. Exterior walls are in good condition. Brick was repointed and sealed in 2019. is:loofl ing Original Building: Roof material in Areas A -H is EPDM. This section is 46,300 SF and under warranty through 2031. There is an additional roof area, Area I, which is 3,500 SF of shingled roofing material. This section is under warranty until 2031. 2016 Pre -fabricated Modular Addition: PVC adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is new. Windows Insulated aluminum, double -hung, fixed and awning windows. Installed in 2006 original construction. Condition of windows is good. Ext ldoir Il coir Exterior entry doors are aluminum doors in aluminum frames. Doors are weather stripped and have insulated glazed vision panels. Ent doir Waft Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically unreinforced concrete block (CMU) or GWB, painted. The existing interior walls are in good condition. Ent dalr Il coir The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in good condition. Foo Lobby, corridors, classrooms, offices, and cafeteria floors are 12" x 12" vinyl composite flooring (VCT) which is in good condition. The wood gymatorium floor is in good condition. Rubber flooring in stairwells. LVF in first floor corridor. C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymatorium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) i,,,,,o k lir N/A Science Cia siroorn Casework N/A l..axiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 � �2. Rid SOUirce Natural gas backup for geo-thermal heat pump system. IH afing IRaint (2) Burnham gas fired boilers for backup heating. ClWHeir N/A Raaf "Top Units (RTU) N/A Eineirgy Recoveiry Units (ERU) () • (7) ERU for makeup air to multiple zones • (2) ERU for pre -fabricated modular building Di tirnl Ut Olrl Systeirn • Piping through corridors • Ductwork • (65) Heat pumps to provide cooling and heating to individual spaces "Typical Systeirns • Geo -thermal heat pump • Electric cabinet unit heaters • Unit heaters for mechanical spaces P idirn t ir IRa oatoain N/A ALitoir'i'mati °Turi'mp iratLliir Cointird (ATC) ATC system is Tridium Niagra N4 and is integrated into the Virtual Net Server. The condition of the system is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2.33 EL EC'"I"lI I C A li,,,, BectiricW Service The building has a 2000 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. BectiricW IDi tIlril uto101rl Branch panels are located in electrical closets Eirneirgeiricy Generator alnBectiricW Painds The Fiske Elementary School is served by one diesel generator with day tank, rated at 150 KW, 277/480V, 3-phase. I ighfing aind l pta i Sy t irn Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors, and other areas is new LED direct/ indirect fixtures. All lighting is controlled by an automated Douglas lighting system. Mire Aiallrirn Sy t irn The building is equipped with an Edwards addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllroo rn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell system (date unknown). SOLlind l ilnfallr irneirmt Sy t irn Unknown Ilatllr Crack Existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas. The 2017 addition system is compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice Cal iiln Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. All classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector. Sa ullrity Sy t lin The building currently has security systems (dates unknown) consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors • Card access control points for exterior doors • CCTV surveillance system Aiphone model is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors. 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers Unknown l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,kmt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 2_34 Dornestic Cain Water Service Supplied via 10" water main. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Existing gas fired domestic water heaters (2) and master mixing valve (date unknown). Soo Waste aind Vent 2016 Addition: A new 6" sanitary line connects to an existing line east of the new cafeteria. A dedicated 4" grease waste line connects west from appliances and fixtures and connects to an exterior grease trap and the new 6 -inch sanitary line. A new 6" sanitary line connects to an existing 30" line north of the classroom addition. Raiin Water Dischairge Roof drain system collects rain water from primary roof drains. Iattlirai Gas 6" main enters the existing building at the mechanical room. FixtUir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low flow (1.6 gal.), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories are electronic sensor activated. • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are precast mop basin type. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. Acid NeUtiraiizatioin Sy t urn 2016 Addition: Acid waste and vent piping connects to an acid neutralization system under casework in new science classrooms. I III 11011E IIC IIC rE "rIII IIIq Spiri -Weir 4" main Staindpipes Standpipes are located in egress stairs and include a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 11/2" reducer at stair floor landings. Mire Protection Sy t urn An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. I exiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 �...�� 2007,2017 III VII III Facidlities Fiske 78,405 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 11.7 Acres sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , �, ; , ) �, , J,,, 2-3p FISKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor LEGEND 1 .l UM "—J' J021 ❑ 5 DU LF730N ❑ Slh(ic ❑ GYYiNlvIJM h 171 A" 17-N ❑ RDliifrll.'-.TRF730N ❑ G2GJLFnON Total Existing 77,542 GSF lo 20 N� 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCOpDESIGN e. 5;7Bcrr 4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Ma',ee.r filar' .; , . ,. ,.,, IJ,c 1,'20 2 37 FISKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Second Floor LEGEND 1 .l UM "—J' J021 ❑ 5 DU LF730N ❑ Slh(ic ❑ GYYiNlvIJM ,h 1 x'A I17 -N ❑ RDliifrll.'-.TRF730N ❑ G2GJLFnON Total Existing 77,542 GSF lo 20 N� 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO VDESIGN 2-38 II1I III III IIIA "r IIIA II III,,,,,, II III I III4 "r II li( III II,,,,,, Piropeirty Data Address Use Date IBuilillt Affiflions Renovaflions Occupancy Group Consfrucfuon Cwlass BLIfldirig I at No, Flloors Gross Area Foundaflion/1Frai mo Exterior Walllls Roofing Wuridow Systems Exterior (Doors IInteNor (Doors IInteNor Walllls HazJMaf SpriiriMers HVAC Sewerage Blectdc 328 Lowell Street, Lexington, MA 02420 Elementary School, Grades K-5 2004 N/A N/A E — Educational Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/unprotected Two-story 76,422 GSF Concrete foundations with spread footings, concrete slab -on -grade (no crawl space). Structure consists of steel columns and beams (slab -on -deck), and bar joist (metal deck) roof framing. Brick with concrete masonry unit backup Existing Roofs: Adhered EPDM 43,600 square feet; under warranty until 2031 Shingled Roof 7,400 square feet; under warranty until 2031 Aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing Double hung operable, double pane, low e Aluminum with double pane glass lites in aluminum frames Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames Typical: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB) in occupied spaces CMU painted in corridors, hallways, and vestibules Ceramic tile (CT) in toilet rooms Some natural finish wood in classrooms Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Rubber floor tiles at stairs. Quarry the in kitchen, concrete in mechanical area, and toilet rooms. Carpet in administrative areas, offices, teacher planning, and library. Gymnasium/auditorium floor is hardwood with polyurethane coating. Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) Painted exposed steel and decking in gymatorium Asbestos (ACM): None Fully sprinklered building Geo -thermal heat pump system Domestic Hot Water, gas fired units Town Sewerage 277/480V, 3 phase 2000 AMP 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2.39 RMINNSIM The Harrington Elementary School is located between Lowell Street and Maple Street. The site is bounded by a wooded area to the west, the Lexington Public Schools Central Administration Building to the southwest, and residential neighborhoods to the north, east, and south. A large playfield is on the northern -most portion of the parcel. The original two-story building was built in 2004. In addition to the classrooms and administrative spaces, there is acafeteria, library, and gymatorium. mm Site Access ......,,,,,, VeNCLflair The site has one entry from Lowell Street and one exit to Maple Street. All bituminous concrete was replaced in 2018. Pairkiing There are (94) striped parking spaces. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving, most of which is new after being replaced in 2018. !:::'Illaytlii 111 Existing playfields, including one softball and one baseball diamond, are in good condition. IloHairmu New LED lighting was installed in parking areas in 2017. An existing utility pole is located on the northeast corner of the property. Water SLJPPp Sy t irn The site is served by an existing 4" water main from Adams Street south of the building, and enters the mechanical room near the loading dock. Saiz itairy Saw ir Building connects to an existing 8" sewer line. Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Lowell Street, continues north of the building and enters the mechanical room. The service is 4" — 1646' high pressure plastic. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 IIC II I IIITII "ru IIm( "rI III Ext doir Waft Exterior walls consist of brick veneer and unreinforced concrete masonry units on all elevations. Exterior walls are in good condition. Brick was repointed and sealed in 2019. is:loofiilrng Roof material in Areas A -D is EPDM. This section is 43,600 SF and under warranty through 2031. There is an additional roof area at Areas E -F, which is 3,500 SF of shingled roofing material. This section is under warranty until 2031. Windows Insulated aluminum, double -hung, fixed and awning windows installed in 2004 original construction. Condition of windows is good. Ext ldoir Il coir Exterior entry doors are aluminum doors in aluminum frames. Doors are weather stripped and have insulated glazed vision panels. Ent lir oir Waft Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically unreinforced concrete block (CMU) or GWB, painted. The existing interior walls are in good condition. Ent dalr Il coir The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in good condition. Foo Lobby, corridors, classrooms, offices, and cafeteria floors are 12" x 12" vinyl composite flooring (VCT) which is in good condition. The wood gymatorium floor is in good condition. There is rubber flooring in stairwells. C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymatorium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) i,,,,,o k lir N/A Science Cia siroorn Casework N/A l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., (.on klfiionr s March 2020 Rid SOUirce Natural gas backup for geo-thermal heat pump system. IH afing IRaint (2) Burnham gas fired boilers for backup heating. ClWHeir N/A Raaf "Top Units (RTU) N/A Eineirgy Recoveiry Units (EIRU) () • (8) ERUs for makeup air to multiple zones Di tirnl Ut Olrl Systeirn • Piping through corridors • Ductwork • (59) Heat pumps to provide cooling and heating to individual spaces "Typical Systeirns • Geo -thermal heat pump • Electric cabinet unit heaters • Unit heaters for mechanical spaces P idirn t ir IRa oatoain N/A ALitoir'i'mati °Turi'mp iratLliir Cointird (ATC) ATC system is Tridium Niagra N4 and is integrated into the Virtual Net Server. The condition of the system is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� (.o E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2.•-42. 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, BectiricW Service The building has a 2000 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. BectiricW IDi tIlril uto101rl Branch panels are located in electrical closets Eirneirgeiricy Generator alnBectiricW Painds The Harrington Elementary School is served by one diesel generator with day tank, rated at 150 KW, 277/480V, 3-phase. I ighfing aind l pta i Sy t irn Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors, and other areas is new LED direct/indirect fixtures. All lighting is controlled by an automated Douglas lighting system. Mire Aiallrirn Sy t irn The building is equipped with an Edwards addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllroo rn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell system (date unknown). SOLlind l ilnfallr irneirmt Sy t irn Unknown Ilatllr Crack Existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas. Data/Voice Cal i in Typical: Voice/data outlets are located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. All classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector. Sa ullrity Sy t llrn The building currently has security systems (dates unknown) consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors • Card access control points for exterior doors • CCTV surveillance system Aiphone model is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors. 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers Unknown l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,kmt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 2.•-43 Dornestic CoMWater Service Supplied via 4" water main. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Existing gas fired domestic water heaters (2) and master mixing valve (date unknown). SoH Waste aind Vent 8" sanitary line Raoin at itIDisc hairg Roof drain system collects rain water from primary roof drains. I attlira� Gas 6" main enters the existing building at the mechanical room. FiXtUir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low flow (1.6 ga), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories are electronic sensor activated. • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are precast mop basin type. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. Acid NeUtirahzatioin Sy t urn Neutralization for condensing boilers. IFEIRIE I IIR rE "rIII IIIq Spurn -Weir 4" main Staindpipes Standpipes are located in egress stairs and include a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 11/2" reducer at stair floor landings. Mire Protection Sy t urn An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 �. �� g,,t 0 2005 Facidkities Harri 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , ; , ) ,, , m Lex,igiori 4 uE ..atshcrcrls Master filar' .; , . ,. 4 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor LEGEND 1 'j—Ai "—J' J021 ,5 _DJ J,A]0N ❑ GYMNlvIJM vi 1'i(F730N 1 ❑ '.l 41J0N Total Existing 80,572 GSF lo 20 01 NOVEMBER 2018 111111111 DINISCO DESIGN -r— NEW HARRINGTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Second Floor Total Existing 80,572 GSF lo 20 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCOpDESIGN e. 5;7Bcrr 4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Ma',ee.r filar' , . ,. 2 4 II III( IIAAs"riiI4GS I III,,,,,, II III I III4 "r II li( III II,,,,,, Site and building data is based upon the new building currently under construction, with an occupancy date scheduled for February 2020 and project completion scheduled for the Fall of 2020. lirirty IDt Address 7 Crosby Road, Lexington, MA 02420 Use Elementary School, Grades K-5 &lite Area 14.3 Acres Date IBUillt 2020 Occupancy Group E — Educational ConstrucUon Dass Type IIB Non-combustible/protected BLIHdirig IData No.IFlloors Three-story Gross Area 110,000 GSF Foundaflion/1Frairne Concrete foundations with spread footings. Steel frame with wide flange sections or steel tubes generally contained within walls or exposed in the cafetorium and entry lobby corridor, exterior masonry veneer/rainscreen walls with metal stud back up, concrete floor slabs (slab -on -grade and composite decks), metal roof deck. ExteNor ftHs Brick, ground face CMU veneer over steel stud backup cavity wall, porcelain panel rainscreen/ composite metal panel over metal stud cavity wall construction. Roofing Mechanically fastened PVC membrane Wuridow Systems Thermally broken aluminum curtainwall, storefront and windows with insulated, Low E (argon gas) 1..exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 glazing Exterior (Doors Thermally broken aluminum with insulated glass lites in aluminum frames IlnteNor (Doors Flush solid core wood, natural finish, in hollow metal frames. Glazed sidelites and transoms at corridors and stairs. Automatic hold -open doors at corridor and stairs. IlnteNor ftHs Painted GWB, natural finish wood paneling and trim at corridors with porcelain and ceramic the wainscot. Recessed metal lockers and natural finish wood cabinets at project areas. Flloors Linoleum tile in corridors, classrooms, staff work spaces and cafetorium. Rubber floor tiles and treads at stairs/landings. Carpet in administration and library. Quarry the in kitchen and ceramic the in toilets. Sealed concrete in mechanical/utility areas. C61llungs Suspended lay -in acoustical the in corridors, classrooms, library, cafetorium, and all teaching areas. Painted exposed metal ceiling and roof structure in gymnasium. HazJMat None Blevators Three level passenger (1) SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC All electric heat/cooling induction system (4 pipe) at classrooms. Closed loop geothermal (ground source) system. Gas fired backup boilers (2) Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480 volts, 3 phase, 4 wire 2,000 AMP Photo Volltalic Roof panels installed circa 2020 (TBD) 1..exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 RMINNSIM The Maria Hastings School is located on the northerly edge of a 14.3 acre site and abuts the Route 128/Marrett Road interchange to the west, Massachusetts Avenue to the north, and Crosby Road to the east. The site is surrounded on three sides by a densely settled residential neighborhood. The topography slopes from east to west and north to south. The three-story building was completed in 2020, and the original school building (circa 1955) was demolished once the new school was occupied. MW Site Access ......,,,,,, VeNCLflair Vehicle drop-off and pick-up is via a loop at the main entrance. The bus lane is separated by an aluminum picket fence. The service drive at the rear of the building is accessed by Crosby Road. Pairkiing There are approximately (124) striped parking spaces on the eastern side of the site with approximately (30) parallel parking spaces along the entry drive available for overflow use except during school arrival and dismissal hours. The parking lot is constructed of porous pavement. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. All curbing is in new condition. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving. All paving is in new condition. BasebaH IFid The baseball infield and backstop are in new condition. An accessible walkway is provided, connecting the backstop areas to the parking lot. IloHairmau Driveway, parking, and walkway lighting throughout the site are in new condition. Bike racks and benches are in new condition Water a �y Systeirn The site is served by a 6" water main in Crosby Road, and the service enters the building on the easterly side. air itairy Seweir A 6" sanitary sewer (including a grease -trap connection) exits near the kitchen along the south side of the building and ties to an existing sewer line at the northwestern corner of the site, adjacent to Massachusetts Avenue. Gas Utfloty The existing building is served by a 4" gas service from Massachusetts Avenue via a utility corridor on the northwestern corner of the site. The service feeds a meter at the gas fired emergency generator to the west of the school and at a meter for the emergency boilers in the mechanical room on the north side of the school. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2. � IIC II I III T II "r u IIm(s"nEIMS Ext doir Waft Exterior walls consist of 4" brick and CMU veneer, metal panels, and porcelain rainscreen on metal studs, rigid insulation and interior gypsum wallboard. Condition of exterior walls is new. is:loofl ing Mechanically fastened PVC roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is new. Windows Aluminum, prefinished, thermally broken windows (2" projecting vent and fixed). Prefinished aluminum, thermally broken curtainwall and storefront at larger openings. Ext idoir Doors Exterior entry doors at stair exits and vestibules are prefinished aluminum curtainwall. Doors are thermally broken, insulated glass, and weather stripped. Condition of entry doors is new. Ent irioir Waft Interior walls are typically metal studs with gypsum wallboard (GWB), painted. Corridors: Painted GWB with porcelain and ceramic tile wainscot and hardwood trim (natural finish). Gymnasium: Ground face CMU lower walls and painted acoustical panel upper walls. Cafetorium: Painted GWB with ceramic tile, painted hollow metal frames, and glass. Ent irioir Door Typical interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in painted hollow metal frames with sidelights and transoms at corridor locations. Room Lobby, Corridors, and Cafetorium: Linoleum modular tile (LMT) with color accent. The performance platform in the cafetorium is red oak, natural finish. Classrooms: Linoleum modular tile (LMT) Toilet Rooms: Ceramic tile Kitchen: Quarry tile Gymnasium: Maple flooring, natural finish Offices and Library: Modular carpet tile Stairs: Rubber treads and rubber tile at landings C Ming Classrooms, Project Areas, Corridors, Offices, Staff Workrooms, Library, Cafetorium, and Toilet Rooms: Suspended acoustical ceiling tile (ACT) and grid Cafetorium Above Platform: Suspended acoustical ceiling tiles and suspended wood panel clouds Gymnasium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) I ockeirs/CUbbies Half height lockers in project areas outside of typical classrooms. Ei vatoir Passenger: Gearless, machine room -less (MRL) passenger elevator, 3,500 Ib., three floor stops, 200 fpm. Stainless steel doors, frame, with plastic laminate cab interior. Shaft is 1 -hour reinforced CMU. 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 �. �� FUd SOUirce Natural gas connected to existing gas service. Date and condition of existing gas lines from Grove Street are unknown. IHeafing Raint Two natural gas fired hot water boilers at 2/3 capacity each. The boilers provide hot water for heating to energy recovery units (ERU), roof mounted air handling units, and various terminal units. The boilers fired at the lowest possible hot water temperature based on outdoor temperature. Hot water is distributed throughout the building by two base mounted end suction pumps (one is a full size spare), each controlled by a variable frequency drive. Cooking One 100 -ton air cooled chiller. Chilled water is pumped in a primary -secondary system separated by a plate heat exchanger. The chiller uses the "green" refrigerant R-41 Oa. Di tiribUbairm Systerns 1. The classrooms are heated, cooled, and ventilated by ceiling recessed active induction units, (4 -pipe) with ventilation air provided by three roof mounted energy recovery units (ERU). DX cooling provides dehumidification. 2. Corridors are heated, cooled, and ventilated the same as classrooms. 3. The cafetorium, gymnasium, and library each have roof top units (RTU) for heating, cooling, and ventilation. 4. The kitchen has a roof mounted exhaust fan and a make-up air fan. 5. The administrative area has a separate RTU with economizer capability. Spaces are controlled for heating and cooling by individual VAVs. Ctlheir Systerns 1. Miscellaneous spaces have convectors, cabinet unit heaters, and fin tube radiation for heating. 2. Entrance vestibules and stairways have cabinet unit heaters. Autoir'i'mati °Turi'm iratuiir Cointird (ATC) A direct digital control system controls all points for building systems (boilers, chillers, ERU, RTU, etc.). l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., (.ow' 1J(orrrz March 2020 2-51 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, Eitiriai Service The primary electric service voltage for a pad mounted transformer is 2000 ampere and secondary service voltage is 277/480 volts, 3-phase, 4 -wire. There are six meters in the switchboard (receptacles, kitchen, lighting, HVAC ventilation, HVAC cooling and HVAC geothermal). BectiricW IDi tiril utoOlrl Normal lighting and power distribution is 480/277 volt and 208/120 volt. Erneirgeiricy Generator A 250 kW natural gas emergency generator is located to the west of the building. I ighfing aind Receptade Systerns 1. Classrooms and Offices: Pendant mounted indirect/direct light fixtures LED lamps (dimmable) 2. Corridors: Linear direct LED fixtures 3. Gymnasium: Surface mounted 4 lamp LED fixtures 4. Cafetorium: Linear direct LED fixtures 5. Library: Pendant mounted LED dimmable fixtures Mire Ahirrn Systern An addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sirs oro C0117111 Wini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms, and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the main administrative console located in the main office. SOLlind R iinfoir rneirit Systern Classrooms have a speech reinforcement system consisting of amplifier, IR sensor, and speakers. Ilatir Crack Master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas. Data/Voice CaMin 1. Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms (8 data drops), and occupiable areas. All classrooms, library and conference rooms are equipped with a short throw projector. 2. Gymnasium, Music Rooms and Cafetorium: Local sound system including amplifier, compact disc player, iPod dock station, wireless microphone transmitter, microphone outlets, and an assistive listening system. mlirity Systerns 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors in the corridors and door contacts on exterior doors. 2. Door Access The Door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. The DSX system is new. 3. CCTV The CCTV system is an IP based system including server, color IP cameras, interior 360 degree cameras, with Category 6A distribution cabling. Surveillance system head end egiupment is located in the main network room with a dedicated rack for all video surveillance head end equipment including the NVR, rack - mounted monitor, and UPS system. Otllh ir BectiricW Systerns 1. Emergency Light and Power: Emergency standby power system connected to a gas powered emergency generator. 2. Lighting Occupancy Sensors: Dual technology (sound and heat) sensors located in all occupiable spaces. 3. Emergency Radio Communication System: A bi-directional amplifier (BDA) system to amplify police and fire department systems within the building. I exiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, (.o E islJ q C(.o 6,fionr s March 2020 2-52 Dornestic CoU Water Service: The 4 -inch domestic water service enters the building at the mechanical room. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Domestic hot water is provided by an electric 200 -gallon water heater. A heat pump from the geothermal system circulates through a heat exchanger which preheats the water supplying the water heater. The backup gas boilers also run to the exchanger and supply the water heater in case of emergency. The hot water heating system is on the Building Management System (BMS). A manifold supplies hot water distribution to classroom fixtures and kitchen appliances. The domestic hot water distribution system is a re- circulating system. The hot water is stored at 140°F, passes through a thermostatic mixing valve and distributes through the building at 120°F. Kitchen sinks and appliances, as well as custodian rooms, operate at 120°F. At the lavatories and classroom sinks, the faucets reduce the temperature to 110°F. SoH Waste aind Vent A single 6" sanitary line is gravity flow and connects to a sewer line near Massachusetts Avenue. A dedicated 4" grease waste line collects waste from kitchen appliances and fixtures and connects to an exterior grease trap. Above ground sanitary drainage is piped in cast iron with "no -hub" joints (3" or larger). Piping smaller than 3" is piped in copper. Piping below floor is weight cast iron hub and spigot. l aoin at itIDisc mair The roof drain system collects rain water from conventional primary roof and overflow drains. Piping is cast iron with horizontal piping insulated. The storm system exits the southside of the building and connects to a recharge collection system. I attlira� Gas Two gas meters are installed on the site. One meter serving the emergency generator, and one meter serving the main building. The gas supply inside the building is piped to the backup heating boilers. The gas pressure is regulated to low pressure (11 " WC) inside the building. The exterior pressure regulator is provided by the gas utility company. FoxtUir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low -flow (1.1 gal), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories have metered faucets. • Drinking fountains are dual height, stainless steel, with bottle fillers. • Typical classrooms have one sink for hand washing. • Janitor closets have a corner mop service basin. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. l..axiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11. at, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 �. IFEIRIE I II rE "rIII IIIq Spiril -Weirs The building is served from a 6" fire service line to the building from Crosby Road. Cross connection control uses a supervised double check valve assembly backflow preventer on the fire service as it enters the building to a dedicated sprinkler room. A sprinkler riser with alarm check valve is provided to meet the pressure and flow requirements of the sprinkler system. The entire building has a wet automatic fire suppression system except at the interior and exterior of the loading dock area and at the exterior canopy adjacent to the cafetorium. A fire department siamese connection is located near the entry vestibule adjacent to the entry drive. Sprinklers are supplied from the standpipes. Floor control valve stations are provided at each floor from the standpipe system. Sprinkler heads in electrical and mechanical rooms are standard response, 212°F temperature listing. Sprinklers in all other areas shall be response heads. Stainpops Standpipes are located in egress stairs and adjacent to the cafetorium platform. Each standpipe has a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 11/2" reducer at the stair floor landings. At the platform, fire department valves are provided on each side of the platform in recessed cabinets. l..axiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2-54 2020 ISI � ISI IIID Facidkities Hasth�,-igs 110,000 GSF 14.3 Acres RE 2-55 c 5;7Bcrr 4 'k sc.h-Is masse, Mar , .., NEW HASTINGS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA 60% Construction Documents - MSBA First Floor Plan LEGEND CLASSROOM SPECIAL EDUCATION LIBRARY ART/MUSIC STAGE ® GYMNASIUM KITCHEN/CAFETERIA ADMIN/EXTENDED DAY BUILDING SERVICES GROSS AREA CALCULATIONS FIRST FLOOR 46,108 SF SECOND FLOOR 40, 885 SF THIRD FLOOR 22,727 SF ROOF 280 SF TOTAL 110,000 SF 15 30 04 JUNE 2018 UUUUW C)IIIN IISCC:x C)f:_:.S 1, ( SIN c 5;7Bcrr 4 'k sc.h-Is masse, Mar , .., NEW HASTINGS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA 60% Construction Documents - MSBA Second Floor Plan LEGEND CLASSROOM SPECIAL EDUCATION LIBRARY ART/MUSIC STAGE ® GYMNASIUM KITCHEN/CAFETERIA ADMIN/EXTENDED DAY BUILDING SERVICES GROSS AREA CALCULATIONS FIRST FLOOR 46,108 SF SECOND FLOOR 40, 885 SF THIRD FLOOR 22,727 SF ROOF 280 SF TOTAL 110,000 SF 15 30 04 JUNE 2018 UUUUW C7111N IISCC:x 13E::_SIC41N c 5;7Bcrr 4 'k sc.h-Is masse, Mar , .., NEW HASTINGS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA 60% Construction Documents - MSBA Third Floor Plan LEGEND CLASSROOM SPECIAL EDUCATION LIBRARY ART/MUSIC STAGE ® GYMNASIUM KITCHEN/CAFETERIA ADMIN/EXTENDED DAY BUILDING SERVICES GROSS AREA CALCULATIONS FIRST FLOOR 46,108 SF SECOND FLOOR 40, 885 SF THIRD FLOOR 22,727 SF ROOF 280 SF TOTAL 110,000 SF 15 30 04 JUNE 2018 UUUUW C)IIIN IISCC:x C)f:_:.S 1, ( SIN III,,,,,, I IIIA IIS III II IIDIE III1E SGI11001,,,,,, Address 17 Stedman Road, Lexington, MA 02421 Use Date IBulillf Affiflions Renovaflions Occupancy Group Consfrucfuon Cwlass No, Flloors Middle School, Grades 6-8 1972 — Original Building. Typical 3 stories except two-story gymnasium. 2000 — 3rd Floor Classroom Addition 2017 —Two -Story Classroom Addition 2017 —1 st, 2nd and 3rd Floors (minor renovations) E — Educational Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/protected Original building is three floors (built into side of hill) 2000 Addition — One floor 2017 Addition —Two floors Gross Area 147,126 GSF — Including addition, renovated areas and existing building Foundaflion/1Frair e Original 1972 Building: Concrete foundations with spread footings, concrete slab -on -grade (no crawl space). Structure consists of steel columns and beams (slab -on -deck), and bar joist (metal deck) roof framing. 2000 Addition: Presumed to be concrete foundations with spread footings, concrete slab -on -grade. Structure consists of steel columns, bar joists and metal roof decking. 2017 Addition: Concrete foundations with spread footings on geopiers (Rammed Aggregate Piers) and slab on grade. Structure consists of steel columns and beams, with concrete slab on deck floor and roof. New exterior steel framed canopy at main entrance. Exterior Walls Original building: The first floor (and full height main stair) is concrete masonry (CMU) with no cavity or insulation. The face CMU is 4 -inch (vertical grooved split faced) with standard 8 inch backup CMU. The second and third floor are precast fibrous material (asbestos containing material) ACM with CMU back up. 2017 Addition: Brick faced cavity with exterior insulation, sheathing, metal stud framing, and interior gypsum wall board Roofing 1972 Building: Adhered EPDM 2000 Addition: Adhered EPDM 2000 Addition and Entrance Canopy: Adhered PVC Date unknown: PV panels on original building roof VJuridow Systeir ns 1972 Building: Aluminum, non -thermally broken with insulated glass 2000 Addition: Aluminum, non -thermally broken window system with insulated glass. 2017 Addition: Aluminum thermal -break curtainwall with inset windows (projecting vents), all with insulated glazing l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 �. Buiill in este (Cont..) Extedor IDoors 1972 Building: Painted hollow metal (HM) frame and doors 2000 Addition: Aluminum and hollow metal doors, painted hollow metal (HM) frame and doors 2017 Addition: Aluminum doors in curtainwall frame. IlnteNor IDoors Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames 1972 Building: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames 2000 Addition: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames 2017 Addition: HM frame and sidelight, painted wood, automatic hold -open doors at stairs and building separation IlnteNor Walllls 1972 Building: Vertical grooved CMU walls, painted 2000 Addition: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB) 2017 Addition: Painted GWB, some natural finish wood at corridor. Flloors Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Rubber floor tiles at stairs. Epoxy resin in toilet rooms and locker rooms. Carpet in administrative areas, offices, teacher planning and library. 1972 Building: Gymnasium wood floor 2000 Addition: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors 2017 Addition: Vinyl composite the (VCT) in classrooms and corridors. Rubber flooring in stairs and I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master Plan an ��all.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2-60 landings. Ceramic the in toilet rooms. Celillungs Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) 1972 Building: Painted exposed steel and decking in gymnasium 2000 Addition: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) 2017 Addition: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) HazMat 1972 Building: Asbestos (ACM) in exterior wall panels Presumed ACM pipe insulation in wet walls, piping throughout 2000 Addition: None 2017 Addition: None 2017 Renovation: PCB sealant in 1972 building at exterior windows/doors fully remediated SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Hot water distribution 1972 Building: Ceiling mounted unit ventilation (UV) 2000 Addition: Ceiling mounted unit ventilation (UV) 2017 Addition: New induction system — Heating and cooling (two pipe system) and HW perimeter radiation. Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480V, 3 phase 2000 AMP I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master Plan an ��all.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2-60 RMINNSIM The Clarke Middle School is located between Waltham Street and Allen Street with a steep hill to the south. The building overlooks Clematis Brook (perennial stream and associated wetlands) to tennis courts and large playfields to the north. Two pedestrian bridges connect the school building with the playfields. The original three-story building was built into the hill with a two-story gymnasium. In 2000, one-story classroom additions at the upper level created two wings of three classrooms each. In 2017, a two-story classroom addition was built abutting the gymnasium, creating a first - floor entrance to complement the main entrance on the second floor. Minor renovations on each of the three floors were completed during 2017 construction. ffim Site Access ......,,,,,, VeHCLflair The site has one main entrance from a signalized intersection on Waltham Street. A secondary entrance from Allen Street/Stedman Road provides service access to the upper level and a small parking lot. One-way bus access from Stedman Road provides queuing for afternoon bus pick-up. l airkiing There are two new parking lots, one adjacent to the tennis courts with (39) spaces and the main parking lot with (97) spaces. An existing upper parking lot has (22) spaces. Total parking equals (158) spaces. All bituminous paving and curbing and vertical granite curbing are new (2017). The only exception is the existing bituminous paving at the upper parking lot, service area, and loading dock. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain New hardscape and pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving. A new bituminous walkway from tennis court parking to first floor entrance includes a pedestrian bridge. All of the above are new (2017). "Teininis COullrf () The bituminous coated tennis courts and fencing are new (2017). !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields are in good condition. The only work performed in 2017 was new bituminous walkway, dugout benches, and bike rack at the existing baseball field. MisceHairieOLJS New site lighting (2017) begins at Brookside Road and includes the tennis parking and main parking lot. Water SLJPPysteirn The site is served by an existing 6" water main from Waltham Street. air itairy Seweir Existing 8" sewer line Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Waltham Street. l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJnq Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2.... �� IIS II I III T II "r u IIm(s"nEIMS Ext idoir Systerns 1972 Building: Exterior walls consist of 4" concrete masonry unit (CMU) veneer, 2" rigid insulation, and 6" unreinforced concrete masonry units at the first floor and stairs. The exterior walls at the 2nd and 3rd floors consist of 4" cement asbestos panels, 2" rigid insulation, and 6" unreinforced CMU. ACM panels are in fair to poor condition with some damaged panels at grade on the east elevation near the service area. No exterior envelope work was done in 2017 except for connecting new to existing. Condition of exterior walls is fair. 2000 Addition: Exterior walls consist of 4" CMU veneer on metal studs, sheathing, rigid insulation, and interior gypsum wallboard. Condition of exterior walls is good. 2017 Addition: Exterior walls consist of 4" brick veneer on metal studs, rigid insulation and interior gypsum wallboard. Condition of exterior walls is new. is:loofl ing 1972 Building: EPDM adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Date of roofing is unknown. Roof slope is good with minimal standing water. Condition of roofing is good. 2000 Addition: EPDM adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is good. 2017 Addition: PVC adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is new. Windows 1972 Building: Condition of original insulated aluminum (fixed, casement, and projecting) windows is fair. 2000 Addition: Condition of original (fixed, casement, and projecting) insulated aluminum windows is good. 2017 Addition: Pre -finished aluminum curtainwall with insert projecting insulated windows. Condition of windows is new. Ext idoir Door 1972 Building: Existing main entrance door frames are original hollow metal, field painted. Both doors and frames were replaced in 2000. 2000 Addition: Original exterior entry doors. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Exterior entry doors at stair exits and vestibule are aluminum curtainwall. Doors are insulated glass and weather stripped. Condition of curtainwall is new. Ent doir Waft 1972 Building: Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically 6" thick unreinforced CMU painted. The existing interior walls are in fair condition. 2000 Addition: Interior partitions are painted GWB. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Interior walls are typically metal studs with gypsum wallboard (GWB), painted. Certain corridors feature hardwood panels and benches. Condition is new. 2017 Renovations: Movable partitions at 3rd floor triangulated classrooms were removed and replaced with GWB partitions. Ent dair Doors 1972 Building: The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in generally fair condition. 2000 Addition: Original interior doors are solid core flush wood with natural finish in hollow metal frames. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Interior doors are solid core flush wood with natural finish in hollow metal frames. Condition is new. I exiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, (.o E islJ q C(.o '61Jrarrrz March 2020 2. 2. IIS II I IITI "r uI II,,,,,, si,(s"rI III S (cawn) Room 1972 Building: Lobby, corridors, and cafeteria floors are 12 x 12 inch vinyl composite flooring (VCT) which is in fair to poor condition. The wood gymnasium floor is in fair to good condition. 2000 Addition: VCT flooring in corridors and classrooms are in good condition. 2017 Addition: VCT flooring in classrooms, corridors and cafeteria. Rubber flooring on stairs and landings. Epoxy resin flooring in kitchen and toilet rooms. 2017 Renovation: Renovated locker room floors are epoxy resin. Condition is new. C Ming 2000 Addition: Typical classrooms and corridors suspended lay -in acoustical tile 2 x 2 (ATC) 2017 Addition: Typical classrooms and corridors suspended lay -in acoustical tile 2 x 2 (ATC) I,,,,,ockeirs 1972 Building: Surface mounted metal lockers 2000 Addition: Recessed metal lockers. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Recessed full height corridor lockers. Condition is new. 2017 Renovation: Surface mounted, double tier, sloped top lockers in locker rooms. Condition is new. t" Science Ua siroorn Casework 1972 Building: Science classroom casework is original and in fair condition. 2017 Addition: New laboratory stations, base and wall hung casework at new science classrooms. 2017 Renovation: New laboratory stations, base and wall hung casework at Classroom 137. I exiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2020 2-63 Fuji SOUirce Natural gas for all HVAC components. Electric cooling. IH afing IPiaint (2) existing hydronic boilers CWHeirs Hier (2) 52 -ton air cooled chillers Raaf "Top Units (RTU) • Gymnasium (2) • Teacher Planning • Cafeteria • Auditorium • Administration (DX/HW system) Eineirgy IRecoveiry Units (EIRU) (5) • 1972 classrooms • 2000 classrooms • 2017 classrooms Di tiril utolairm Systern • New piping through corridors in 2017 addition and at locker area renovations. • New ductwork (except administration area) • Existing ductwork in auditorium Typical Systerns • 1972 Building: Ceiling mounted unit ventilators in classrooms. FCU in corridors and toilets. VAV in administration offices and teacher° Ue�h mrr;A;' planning. RTU in gymnasium. Ceiling mounted unit ventilators U Condition variable(poor to good). r r • 2000 Addition: FCU in corridors. Ceiling mounted unit ventilators (UV). Condition is good. Note: Construction documents for 2000 addition show a number of DX rooftop units that do not exist. • 2017 Addition: Two -pipe induction in all classrooms. Autoir'i'mati °Turi'mp iratuiir Cointird (ATC) New automatic temperature controls (ATC) for 2017 addition and locker room renovation area. Condition is new. Existing ATC controls for 1972 building and 2000 Addition. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��ali.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Dow61J(orrrz March 2020 2. � 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, Note: Unless otherwise noted, electrical systems are new or were replaced in 2017. Eitllriai Service The building has a 2000 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. Eitllriai IDitIlrilutolalrm 1972/2000 Existing: Many branch panels are located in corridors and some are original to the building. Some panels have been replaced or retrofitted in place where upgraded during previous renovations. Condition is unknown. 2017 Addition / Renovation: New branch panels Eirneirgeiricy Generator aind Ei tllri ai Painds Existing: Unknown I ighfing aind l pta i y t irn 1972/2000 Addition and Renovations: 2 x 4 recessed lighting throughout. Most lighting is a combination of T5 and T8 fluorescent lighting. 2017 Addition: New LED direct / indirect light 2017 Renovations: New LED direct / indirect lighting in renovated areas All lighting is controlled by new building management system (BMS). Mire Aiallrirn Systeirn The building is equipped with an addressable fire alarm system consists of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllraalll'n C0III7111'"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system consists of individual speakers in corridors and panel mounted speakers in the classrooms. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the main administrative console located in the main office. Equipment installed in addition and renovations is compatible with existing systems. Condition is new. Ilatllr Ciak Existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and other occupied spaces. The 2017 addition and renovations system is connected to and compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice Cal i in Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. All new classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector a ullrity Systeirns The building currently has security systems consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors and first floor windows. • Card access control points for exterior doors • CCTV surveillance system. The 2017 addition system is an Aiphone model which is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion devices consist of motion detectors 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers A new bi-directional amplifier (BDA) system was installed in August of 2019. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., (.on klfiionr s March 2020 2-65 Doirnestic CoU Water Service 1972 Building: The existing 4" water enters the building at the service area and continues to the mechanical toom. Water service is presumed to be original. Condition is unknown. Water piping is copper, with soldered joints. Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball. Most of the piping is insulated. Doirnestic IHot Water Service 2000 Addition: Two new gas fired domestic water heaters and one main mixing located in the 2nd floor mechanical room provide hot water for general building use. There are no known problems with pressure, quality, or hot water temperature. Condition is presumed to be good. Sail Waste aind Vent 1972 Building: The existing (presumed original) sewer system is gravity feed. A single 6" sanitary line exits the building on the north side adjacent to Room A102 and connects to the municipal sewer system at Waltham Street. 2000 Addition: A 6" sanitary line from each of the two classroom wings connects to an 8" asbestos cement sanitary line in Stedman Road. 2017 Addition: A 6" sanitary line from the new addition connects to an existing 6" line east and north of the addition. Note: The gas, sewer, and water service pass under the new vehicular bridge at Clematis Brook to connections in Waltham Street. All sanitary piping inside the building is located below slab on grade floors. One grease trap is located under the 3 -compartment pot sink. There is no dedicated kitchen waste line or outdoor grease interceptor. Iatuirai Gas The existing 4" gas line enters the site from Waltham Street and connects to the 2nd floor mechanical room from the service driveway. Raaf Diraiinage There are multiple drains collecting roof water. 1972 Building: Three main roof drains discharge to the existing on-site stormwater system. 2000 Addition: Roof water from two classroom wings discharge into an underground drainage structure from which an overflow connects to the existing stormwater system. 2017 Addition: Three dual -overflow roof drains discharge to a drainage swale north of the addition. Condition is new. Based upon run-off and lack of ponding, roof drains all seem to be in good condition. Fixtuir 2000 Renovation: Newfixtures installed in existing spaces include toilet rooms, locker and shower areas, and science room laboratory fixtures. 2000 Addition: New fixtures and piping were installed in the 3rd floor addition. 2017 Renovation: New fixtures were installed in renovated locker and shower areas. 2017 Addition: New fixtures and piping were installed in the 2017 addition. Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are typically wall hung water closets with flush valves, wall hung lavatories with center set faucets, and wall hung urinals with flush valves. All fixtures are in good to new condition. Flush valves for water closets are 1.28 gallon per flush capability sensor activated. The lavatories in the toilet rooms are sensor activated. Science classroom sinks are stainless steel with hands free handles. The majority of drinking fountains observed are original china fountains. Janitor closets have 24" x 24" terrazzo floor mounted utility sinks. Acid NeUtirahzatioin Systeirn 2000 Addition: A 275 -gallon neutralization tank and 30 gallon monitoring tank were replaced in the existing buried vault located north of the building. 2017 Addition: Acid neutralization system under casework for two new science classrooms connects to the existing system in the buried vault. l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2-66 puri -Weir 2017 Addition: A new system extends the existing 4 -inch standpipe system and wet automatic fire suppression system. Staindpipes New standpipes are located in the egress stair and include a 2'/2" hose valve with 1'/2" reducer at stair floor landings. Mire Protection Systern An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe. All valves controlling flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. iH A I A l" 1972 Building: Precast fibrous panels (2nd and 3rd floors) contain ACM. Two panels were damaged and repaired during 2017 construction. ACM panels are in fair to poor condition with some damaged panels at grade on the east elevation near the service area. Window sealant contains PCBs. 2000 Addition: None. PCB material at window/ door sealant was remediated during 2017 addition. 2017 Addition: None. PCB material at window/ door sealant was remediated during 2017 addition. 2017 Renovations: None I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2-67 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 IIII II � II III Facidlities �� G�arke MS 145,000 SF sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , ; , ) ,, , J,,, 2-618 Lex,igiori 4 uE ..ac.hcrcrlJ Master filar' , . ,. JONAS CLARKE MIDDLE SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor LEGEND 1 -,,i 1'-''iYx'1 JFt 7 .1.41,ON ❑ Slh(ic GYYi'l" j'i ❑,A 1715•1-N RDl iifrll.'-.TRF130N G2GJLFnON Total Existing 144,999GSF lo 20 N� 01 NOVEMBER 2018 ME DINISCO DESIGN MIDDLE SCHOOL I Fylmr;TnN AAA LEGEND 1 ' ,D1� U 41 : 1' 202T ❑ .A-c,,l,AT30N ❑ :-1 A(ic ❑ (-,Y1hN!A,, iv h 1_z"A*1, 1E ❑ ADM1rLSTRAT]0N ❑ C'x'r 0, Total Existirg 144,999 GSF io u N� -------- — ----- — — J 01 NOVEMBER 2018,.aa ,x"'{;78— f uE ..ac:.hcrcrD Ma',ee.r f lar ., , .., i c ,'20 2—'70 MIDDLE SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Second Floor DINISCOpDESIGN e.T yl8err 4 uE ..;c.hererl� Nia',ee.r filar' ., , ..,J,c 1 ,c 1,'20 2-'7'1 LEGEND 1 .1-141. 1'J021 ❑ .' JFt 7 .1.F13ON ❑ Slh(ic © 1 I III 11A III LOE 11 11A11 1111 11A11 III 11A11 °s © E ❑ 5 1 1 4 17, 1_N sc E jf sc F jf ❑ 1 .:l 5l0 g eu ❑ .,(-J-A] ON vAt•v ema ' . azs o P, �cE R aery o«s q w« esti ease 3 0 0 0 o ., ,n„ ' q eaeee�M ce ARa I Iw ,F4 11A11 ILI M as� ary©� III ea11A11 e�M1,��M1�RaeE ��M1,B�M1 �RaeE eaeee�M eaeee�M e�M1,��M1�RaeE ��M1 �RaeE eaeee�M eaeee�M carv��a�E Q easeM„R All 1111-1 as©AlM cas©-M as ©= �arvoa�E M ems rvuex Total Existing 144,999 GSF o 6�M1 �RaeE R ,, cas� M �M1� �usszmm N5�°�Nc rvEER ca�s��M o10 20 N� 01 N0�2018 DINISCOpDESIGN e.T yl8err 4 uE ..;c.hererl� Nia',ee.r filar' ., , ..,J,c 1 ,c 1,'20 2-'7'1 Ian III II IIS IE III II IIDIE III1E SGI11001,,,,,, Property (leets Address 99 Hancock Street, Lexington, MA 02420 Use Middle School, Grades 6-8 Date IBuilillt 1958 —Original Building Add (ions 1989 — Library Addition 2000 — Classroom wing, expansion of library addition, portable classroom addition (6 units) in courtyard Exterior VJalllls 2017 — Classroom wing, kitchen Roofing expansion, removal of portable classrooms Renovatlions 2017 — HVAC renovations to 1958 building except auditorium and VJuridow Systeirns gymnasium (87,400 SF) 2017 — Building renovations — Former cafeteria and kitchen (36,700 SF) Occupancy Group E — Educational Constructlion Cllass Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/unprotected l LIfl oirm (leets No, Flloors Two-story classroom wings. One-story existing gymnasium, teacher workroom (former cafeteria), new cafeteria, renovated kitchen, library and administration. Gross Area 170,000 GSF — Including additions, renovated areas and existing building Foundatlion/1Frair e Original 1958 Building +Addition: Concrete foundations with spread footings, exterior load bearing masonry walls, concrete floor slabs (slab -on -grade and rib slab), and perimeter crawl space 1989 Addition: Concrete foundations with spread footings, exterior load bearing masonry walls steel framed roof with metal decking Exterior VJalllls Brick with concrete masonry unit backup Roofing Existing Roofs: Adhered EPDM Existing kitchen, low roofs at auditorium, locker rooms, teacher work rooms: Adhered PVC New Roofs: Adhered PVC VJuridow Systeirns Aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing 1958 Building: Double hung operable 1989 Building: Double hung operable 2000 Building: Double hung operable 2017 Building: Projecting vents 2017 Building: HM frame and sidelight, painted wood automatic hold -open doors at stairs and building separation Exterior (Doors Aluminum with single pane glass lites in aluminum frames IlnteNor (Doors Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q C(.o '61Jrarrrz March 2020 2.•-72. Buiill in Data (Cont) IlnteNor Walllls Typical: Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB) 1958 Building: Glazed brick at auditorium corridor / CMU painted 1989 Building: GWB painted 2000 Building: Ceramic the (CT) at administration corridors. 2017 Building: Painted GWB, some natural finish wood at corridors. CT corridor walls in cafeteria corridor. CT wainscot in cafeteria. Flloors Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Rubber floor tiles at stairs and fitness room. Epoxy resin in kitchen, concrete in mechanical area, toilet rooms, and locker rooms. Carpet in administrative areas, offices, teacher planning, and library. 1958: Gymnasium —Wood floor y 2000: Administration and library — Carpet Celillungs Typical: Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) 1958: Painted exposed steel and decking in gymnasium 2017: Painted exposed concrete in locker rooms and teacher planning (partial ATC). Metal 2 x 2 ATC I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools IM aster Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2.73 in fitness room. Suspended 2 x 2 ATC. HazJMat Asbestos (ACM): 2017 renovation work removed ACM as required to interface with existing conditions only. 1958: Pipe insulation in wet walls, piping throughout and crawl spaces 2017: None SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Hot water distribution 1958: New induction system (2 -pipe) and HW perimeter radiation (2017) 2000: Existing Unit ventilators 2017: New induction system (2 -pipe) Sewerage Town Sewerage Blectdc 277/480V, 3 phase 800 AMP I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools IM aster Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2.73 RMINNSIM The Diamond Middle School is located between Hancock Street and Hathaway Road. The site is bounded by extensive wetlands to the north and residential neighborhoods to the east and west. Steep conservation land rises to the south. A large playfield separates the building from Hathaway Road. The original building was built in 1958 with a two- story classroom wing, gymnasium, locker rooms, auditorium, and cafeteria/kitchen. In 1989 a one- story library was built to close in the open walk way between the classrooms and the gymnasium. In 2000 a classroom wing was added adjacent to the gymnasium including a new administration area and expansion of the library. At some point after the 2000 addition, a six portable classroom cluster was added west of the library. In 2017 a two-story classroom addition was added to the northeast including a new entry, new cafeteria, and retrofitted teacher planning (in the former cafeteria). With the exception of the 2000 addition, gymnasium, and auditorium the rest of the building received HVAC renovations, new corridor ceilings, and lighting. Portable classrooms were removed. mm Site Access ......,,,,,, VeNCLflair The site has two entries and parking, one from Hancock Street and the other from Sedge Road. With the exception of the Hancock driveway and pedestrian walkway (fair to poor condition) all other bituminous concrete is new. Pairkiing There are (97) striped parking spaces to the east and (42) spaces to the west. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain New hardscape, pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous paving most of which is new in 2017 (including bicycle racks). !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields, including the baseball field, are in good condition. The existing softball field was replaced in 2017. IloHairmu New site lighting was added along driveway to Sedge Road and the west entry plaza. Existing utility pole lighting to the west is unsightly and in poor condition. Water SLJPPysteirn The site is served by an existing 6" water main from Hancock Street south of the building, and enters the mechanical room near the loading dock. air itairy Seweir 2017 classroom additions and kitchen connect to an existing 30" sewer. Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Hancock Street, continues south of the building, and enters the mechanical room at the loading dock. The service is 4"-1646" high pressure plastic. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2._74 IRC H I1'1I°'IE '1TU I A L„,, S"T E IMS Ext doir Waft 1958 Building: Exterior walls consist of 4" brick veneer and 8” unreinforced concrete masonry units (no cavity) on all elevations. No work was done in 2017 addition except for connecting new to existing. Condition of exterior walls is fair to good. 2000 Addition: Exterior walls consist of 4" brick veneer and 8" unreinforced concrete masonry cavity walls. No work was done during 2017 addition. Condition of exterior walls is good. 2017 Addition: Exterior walls consist of 4" brick veneer on metal studs, rigid insulation and interior gypsum wallboard. Condition of exterior walls is new. is:loofl ing 1958 Addition: EPDM adhered roofing, rigid insulation over concrete roof or steel roof deck. Date of current roofing is unknown. Roof slope is good with minimal standing water. Roofing condition is good. Existing kitchen, low roofs at auditorium, locker rooms, teacher work rooms — adhered PVC in 2017. Condition is new. 2000 Addition: EPDM adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Date of roofing is presumed to be 2000. Condition of roofing is good. 2017 Addition: PVC adhered roofing, rigid insulation over steel roof deck. Condition of roofing is new. Windows 1958 Building: Insulated aluminum (double - hung, fixed and awning windows) date unknown. Condition of windows is fair. 2000 Addition: Condition of original double -hung and fixed insulated aluminum windows is fair to good. 2017 Addition: Aluminum, pre -finished windows (2" projecting vent and fixed). Condition of windows is new. Ext idoir Il coir 1958 Building: Exterior entry doors have been replaced with aluminum doors in aluminum frames. Doors are weather stripped and have insulated glazed vision panels. 2000 Addition: Original exterior entry doors are in good condition. 2017 Addition: Exterior entry doors at stair exits and vestibule are aluminum curtainwall. Doors are insulated glass and weather stripped. Condition of curtainwall is new. Ent doir Waft 1958 Building: Interior partitions (classroom demising walls, corridors, etc.) are typically unreinforced concrete block (CMU), painted. The existing interior walls are in fair condition. 2000 Addition: Interior partitions are gypsum wallboard. 2017 Addition: Interior walls are typically metal studs with gypsum wallboard, painted. Certain corridors feature hardwood panels and benches. Condition is new. Ent idoir Il coir 1958 Building: The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in generally fair condition. 2000 Addition: Original interior doors are solid core flush wood with natural finish in hollow metal frames. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Interior doors are solid core flush wood with natural finish in hollow metal frames. Condition is new. l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., (.ow' 1J(orrrz March 2020 2.•-75 II C H I1'1i°'IEC'1i°U I Ali,,,, S 'S'"T E IMS (C IN''T"I Room 1958 Building: Lobby, corridor, and cafeteria floors are 12" x 12" vinyl composite flooring (VCT) which is in fair condition. The wood gymnasium floor is in fair to good condition. Renovated locker room floors are epoxy resin (2017). Condition is new. Rubber floor tiles in fitness room in 2017. Condition is new. 1989 Addition: Library was re -carpeted in 2018. Condition is new. 2000 Addition: VCT flooring in corridors and classrooms is in good condition. 2017 Addition: VCT flooring in classrooms, corridors and cafeteria. Rubber flooring on stairs and landings. Epoxy resin flooring in kitchen and toilet rooms. Condition is new. C Ming Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymnasium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) Locker Rooms: Exposed concrete ceiling (painted) Teacher Workroom: Exposed concrete ceiling (painted) and ATC I ,,,,,ockeirs 1958 Building: Locker room renovation 2017. Lockers are surface mounted, double tier with sloped top. Condition is new. 2000 Addition: Recessed full height corridor lockers. Condition is good. 2017 Addition: Recessed full height corridor lockers. Condition is new. Science Uassiroorn Casework 2017 Addition: New laboratory stations, base and wall hung casework at new science classrooms. 2017 Renovation: New laboratory stations, base and wall hung casework at Classroom 233. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2020 2._76 Note: Unless otherwise noted, the HVAC system and components are new or were replaced in 2017. Rid SOUirce Natural gas for all HVAC components. Electric cooling. IH afing IMalnt (4) high efficiency hydronic boilers ClWHeilr (2) 250 -ton air cooled chillers Raaf "T p Units (RTU) () • Gymnasium (2) • Teacher Planning • Cafeteria • Auditorium • Administration (DX/HW system) Eli eirgy Recoveiry Units (EIRU) (5) • 1958 classrooms (2) • 2000 classrooms (1) • 2017 classrooms (2) Di tlrnl Ut Olrl Systern • New piping through corridors • New ductwork (except administration area) • New VAV boxes in administration • Existing ductwork in auditorium "Typical Systerns • Two -pipe induction in all classrooms • VAV in administration offices and teacher planning • FCU in corridors P Idirn t lir IRa oatioin Radiant ceiling panels or HW baseboard radiation in 1958, 1989, and 2000 buildings. ALitoir'i'mati "Teii'i'mp lratLliir Cointlrd (ATC) New ATC system for 2017 addition and existing systems. Condition is new. l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6tkonr s March 2020 2.•-77 101 IE "r IIC III II,,,,,, Note: Unless otherwise noted, electrical systems are new or were replaced in 2017. Eietiriai Service The building has an 800 ampere, 277/480V, 3-phase service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. Eie tiri ai IDi tiril UbOlrm Many branch panels are located in corridors and some are original to the building. Some panels have been replaced or retrofitted in place where upgraded during previous renovations. Eirnellrgelrm y Generator aind Eie tiri ai Painds The Diamond Middle School is served by one diesel generator with day tank, rated at 50 KW, 120/208V, 3-phase which is presumed to have been installed in the 1980's. The generator visually appears to be in fair condition which is downgraded to poor condition due to reports that the generator has previously failed to start during testing. A new generator was installed in 2019 1,,,,,liglhfing and Receptacie Systems Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors, and other areas is new LED direct/ indirect fixtures. Exception: Lighting systems in the administration offices, library, gymnasium, and auditorium was not replaced. The administration offices and library were built in 1989. The gymnasium and auditorium are original (1958) but presumed to have been upgraded since then. Condition is fair. All lighting is controlled by the building management system (BMS). Fillre Aiallrirn Systeirn The building is equipped with an addressable fire alarm system consisting of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllraairn C0117111'"m'M ini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell system (date unknown). SOLlind Reilnfallr eirnelrmt Systeirn 2017 Addition: Classrooms have a speech reinforcement system consisting of amplifier, IR sensor, and speakers. Speakers are compatible with the existing system. Ilatellr Crack Existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas is Tyco Simplex Grinnell (date unknown). The 2017 addition system is compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice Cal i ing Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. All classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q C(.o 6lfiionr s March 2020 2.•-78 EL lE C'"I" I I C A li,,,, (C IN''T"I Sa uirity Sy t ern The building currently has security systems (dates unknown) consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors • Card access control points for exterior doors • CCTV surveillance system The 2017 addition Aiphone model is compatible with the main system. Dornestic CoM Water Service 2017 Addition: Including the cafeteria, connects to an existing domestic water service. Water piping is type "L" copper (insulated). Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Dornestic IHot Water Service Existing gas fired domestic water heaters (2) and master mixing valve (date unknown). 1. Intrusion Detection Sail Waste aind Vent Intrusion detection devices consist of motion 2017 Addition: A 6" sanitary line connects to an detectors existing line east of the cafeteria. 2. Door Access A dedicated 4" grease waste line connects west The door access system consists of DSX from appliances and fixtures and connects to an control panel and card readers at exterior exterior grease trap and the 6 -inch sanitary line. doors. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers A new bi-directional amplifier (BDA) system was installed in August of 2019. A 6" sanitary line connects to an existing 30" line north of the classroom addition. l aiin Water Dischairge 2017 Addition: A new roof drain system collects rain water and primary roof drains and dual level promenade drains extend as scuppers through the roof parapet. I aftlirai Gas Existing 4" main enters the existing building at the mechanical room. Fixtuir • Plumbing fixtures in toilet rooms are low -flow (1.6 ga), wall -hung water closets with flush valves. Lavatories are electronic sensor activated. • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are precast terrazzo mop basin type. • All fixtures are ultra-low (30%) water conserving type. Acid NeUtirahzatioin Sy t urn 2017 Addition: Acid waste and vent piping connects to an acid neutralization system under casework in new science classrooms. I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 2._79 I III 11011E IIC IIC r "rIII IIIq pirk-W it 2017 Addition: A new system extends the existing 4 -inch standpipe system and wet automatic fire suppression system. Staindpipes New standpipes are located in egress stairs and include a 21/2" fire department hose valve with 11/2" reducer at stair floor landings. Mire l irat tion Systeirn An existing dedicated water service for standpipes and sprinklers runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe. All valves controlling the flow of water have supervisory devices that report to the existing fire alarm system. The kitchen hood is protected with a dry agent "Ansul R-102" package hood suppression system. l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2.•-80 II II II Facili58, Reno 2000, 2018 a�i 1559300 SF dtes �� I )iam,-d MS " sch.ds maste, Plw, � j , ; � , 1, j , , ; , ) ,, , J,,, 2-8'I cw. mm cw mm of o of c e d � RR a— - uuu+e mtvnm o _ r Q m I s� 5;7Bcrr 4 uE I ..ac.hcrcrlJ Ma',ee.r filar' � ., , .., 11 tLtMtNIHKl JI.KVVL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor q Total Existing 155,357 GSF 10 20 IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 ME DINISCO DESIGN m,c 1, cu 2.-82.. 0 I] r cwmm LEGEND 1–J–Ai. J' 0a1 v94 usr 1—(,A- 1 .F1301 r 5dY �v (,Y11 v h'.0 11s �E�v•1,1„rc .'IJ -Al 10N I.� t �cE �cE �cE ca �acE s� 4 0 0 0 9 0 l tLtMtNIHKl JI.KVVL LEXINGTON, MA Existing First Floor q Total Existing 155,357 GSF 10 20 IN 01 NOVEMBER 2018 ME DINISCO DESIGN m,c 1, cu 2.-82.. ❑ LJ 0 �cE I I'T- imimimia I� m noe no zno a«n znoe 0 0 0 ex y1&m 4 L Schools Master fi lar' Js , o ero cnrvr ero o- y L s co �a D D i OPoom LEGEND a 1 ,l!li1 1'i0x'1 �aew0 .4- DY -Al ON z z z _ !_',IA Y Slh(ic ( YU v h5 141 5 l R 5• 17, 1EN nDM1rll."'I"Al301 1'l-x� l A] Fl O P I oe oe oe ec e E �I{ azmm zmm m cw zmm �1v I L I I '� °� °'� °� ❑ A"ce ILI ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEXINGTON, MA Existing Second Floor Total Existing 155,357 GSF 10 20 N 01 NOVEMBER 2018 DINISCO DESIGN i , �u 2-83 II,,,,,, II III IIIA "r IIIA 11411GH SGI11001,,,,,, lirirty IDt Address 251 Waltham Street, Lexington, MA 02421 High School, Grades 9-12 l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2014 —Addition of pre -fabricated modular classrooms (presently termed K Building) 2015 —Addition of pre -fabricated modular classrooms (presently termed L Building) Renovafions 2000 — Renovation to all buildings, HVAC renovations 2009 — HVAC renovations to Science, Math, and World Language Buildings Occupancy Group E — Educational Construicflion Dass Original Building —Type IIB Non-combustible/unprotected BUHdirig IData No, Flloors Main Building: Two-story classroom wings. One-story gymnasium, cafeteria (Commons II) and music classrooms; one-story field house and locker room. One-story pre -fabricated modular building. Science Building: Two-story classroom World Language Building: Two-story classroom Math Building: Two-story classroom Gross Area 359,600 GSF — Including additions, renovated areas, pre -fabricated classrooms, and existing building Fouindaflion/1Frairne Concrete foundations with spread footings, exterior load bearing masonry walls, concrete floor slabs (slab -on -grade and rib slab), and perimeter crawl space. Steel framed roof with metal decking. Exterior Walllls Brick with concrete masonry unit backup Roofing Existing Roofs: Adhered EPDM — Areas A, B1-B2,C, D1- D10, E1 -E2, F2 -F3, G, H, J Adhered PVC — Field House Areas F1, walkway bridge roofs 1, 2, and 3, pre -fabricated modular buildings K and L Wuridow Systems Main Building: Aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing installed in 2000 Renovation Windows in the Science Building, World Language Building, Math Building, and Field House are original (1960's). Single pane aluminum with operable vents. Exterior (Doors Aluminum, some with single pane glass lites in aluminum frames IlnteNor (Doors Typical: Flush solid core wood, natural finish with HM frames l..cxiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJ q r.,r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 Buiilliiin Data (Cont„) IInteNor Walllls Painted gypsum wallboard (GWB) Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) Brick Ceramic tile (CT) Glazed block Flloors Typical: Vinyl composite the (VCT) typical at classrooms and corridors. Rubber floor tiles at stairs. Underlocking resilient sport rubber tiles in fitness center Synthetic athletic rubber track surface in field house installed over painted bituminous concrete surrounding rubberized basketball court in the center� Wood floor with polyurethane coating in gymnasium 2 - Epoxy resin and quarry in kitchen � Concrete in boiler rooms, mechanical area, electrical rooms Carpet in administrative areas, offices, conference rooms, "hearing impaired classrooms", and library media center. C61llungs Suspended, lay -in acoustical the 2 x 2 (ATC) Painted exposed steel and decking Painted exposed concrete Plaster ceilings HaNat Pipe insulation in crawl spaces Science building doors SpOnMers Fully sprinklered building HVAC Main Building: The existing steam piping system, pneumatic controls system and unit ventilators were installed in 1960 and are approximately 50 years old, well beyond their life expectancy (20-25 years*). Boilers, rooftop air handling units (RTU's), heating and ventilating units (HV's), and split system cooling units were installed during the 2000 building renovation and are approaching the end of their life expectancy (15 years*). Typical classrooms in the Main Building are served by wall mounted classroom unit ventilators (UV's). The unit ventilators are original to the building installed in the 50's. Each unit ventilator has a wall mounted intake louver for the introduction of outside air to the space. Units have filters, supply air fan, and a steam heating coil and pneumatic steam control valve. It is controlled by the pneumatic control system and is energized by a space mounted thermostat. The pneumatic control system is extremely antiquated and unreliable. Occupants often report that units are extremely loud and the air temperature is uncomfortable. In addition to the unit ventilators, some windows not utilizing a unit ventilator have perimeter steam radiation. Heating for the Main Building is provided via two steam boiler located in the basement of Building D. Boilers are the following: H.B. Smith, 650, cast iron sectional boilers (B -D1 and B -D2). Generate L.P. steam tie into central distribution system. These boilers replaced the original steam boilers when they were installed in 1998. Each boiler is rated for 6638 MBH, and the attached burner is a Power Flame burner rated for 3000-9000 MBH. The two steam boilers serve fin tube radiation throughout the main building, unit ventilators in the classrooms, offices, and five rooftop units. I exiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools IM aster Plan an ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJnq Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2....85 Buiill in Data (Cont..) HVAC (Cont,,) In 2008, new Viessmann CT -3-57 condensing boilers replaced the existing hot water boiler. Condensate is returned to the power plant via a duplex condensate return pump set.The Viessmann condensing hot water boiler creates hot water for domestic hot water, VAV reheat coils, and the AAON rooftop units in the main building. The system is a hybrid pneumatic/DDC control system. Valves, sensors, and end points of the system are monitored and operated pneumatically. The signals from the pneumatic system tie onto the DDC backbone. The DDC backbone then sends contro signals back out to the pneumatic system to control various parts of the building. The pneumatic controls have been problematic due to various maintenance issues. The building was converted to a hybrid system to gain some remote control and monitoring of the building without having to go through the time, trouble, and expense of a full DDC conversion. Installation of a full DDC system is recommended. Portions of the building have basement service tunnels. These tunnels carry a significant amount of the buildings existing infrastructure (water, sewer, electric, telecom, AN, networking, etc.). Any discussion of installing a large piece of equipment in one of these tunnels would require careful coordination with the existing infrastructure. Access to the service tunnels is available through standard man doors. Throughout the basement level there are a number of crawl spaces full of steam, hot water, and sprinkler piping as well as ductwork and other miscellaneous equipment. In the 2000 renovation several pieces of rooftop equipment were added to supply large spaces and office spaces. These include steam, hot water, and gas fired HV or BTU units. BTU units equipped with cooling are DX. In 2003 additional HVAC rooftop units were installed for sound reduction in classrooms spaces that serve students with hearing impairments. These units are typically gas fired with DX for cooling. In 2009 the 40+ year old unit ventilators in the Science, World Language, and Math Buildings were replaced. The unit ventilators in the Main Building remain original, over 60 years old. The pre -fabricated modular buildings are served by heat pumps. Heat pumps and ductless split units have been added in various locations throughout the years including computer rooms, offices, and classrooms. Sewerage Town Sewerage Electriio 277/480V, 3 phase 2500 AMP I exiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools IM aster Plan an ��vr,l,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Dow'61Jrarrrz March 2020 2-86 RMINNSIM The Lexington High School is located between Worthern Road, Waltham Street, and Park Drive. The site is bounded by wetlands to the east, residential neighborhoods to the south, playing fields the north, and Worthern Road to the west. The school building opened in 1953 and the last major renovation occurred in 2000. The building is approximately 359,600 GSF. Modular buildings were added in 2014 and 2015. In 2014, Lexington participated in the Green Repair Project, which assisted in replacing a portion of the aging and damaged roof over the cafeteria. The MSBA contributed $360,547 or approximately 34% of the funding for this project. The original California -style school building is now close to 70 years old and is in desperate need of renovations. Lexington High School consists of four distinct buildings which were built in stages. The main building, which houses all of the humanities except for world languages, is the oldest, having been constructed in 1949 and expanded in 1955. The math, world language, and science buildings were built in 1964 to complete the current LHS campus. In the late 1990s, a proposal to build a new high school was rejected by the Town's voters, who instead opted for a renovation of space and a modest addition for the library. This construction was completed in 2000 and included reconfiguration of space with hopes that it would be adequate to serve no more than 11850 students. In 2014, a total of 17,000 square feet of modular space was added to accommodate our growing population. In 2015, an additional 8,000 square feet was added, most of which is dedicated to educate high needs students with Autism Spectrum disorders. mm Site Access ......,,,,,, VeNCLflair The site has three entries and parking, one from Waltham Street, one from Worthern Road, and the other from Park Drive. The majority of bituminous concrete was installed during the 2000 renovation and is in poor condition. Pairkiin There are (150) striped parking spaces and (6) striped handicap parking spaces in the parking lot off of Worthern Road. There are (292) striped parking spaces and (7) handicap parking spaces in the parking lot off of Waltham Street. Curbing is a combination of vertical granite, concrete, and bituminous concrete. Site Access ......,,,,,,. Pedestiriain Hardscape and pedestrian paving materials are a combination of concrete and bituminous concrete, most of which was installed in the 2000 repairs. New bicycle racks were installed in 2015. !:::'Illaytlii 111 The existing playfields, including the football, baseball, and softball fields, are in good condition. The fields were redone when drainage improvements were made in 2010. IloHairmu New site lighting was installed during the 2000 renovation. Water SLJPPysteirn The site is served by an existing 8" water main from Waltham Street on the south end of the property, and enters the boiler room. air itairy Seweir Connected to 18" sewer. Gas Utfloty Natural Gas The existing gas service originates from Waltham Street, continues south of the building and enters the mechanical room at the loading dock. 1..exiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 6Gfionr s March 2020 2-87 IIC II I III T II "r u II,,,,,, m(s"nE II S Ext doir Waft Exterior walls consist of brick veneer and concrete masonry units on all elevations. is:3oof1i lrn Adhered EPDM: Areas A, 131-132,C, D1- D10, E1 -E2, F2 -F3, G, H, J Adhered PVC: Field House Areas F1, walkway bridge roofs 1, 2, and 3, pre -fabricated modular buildings K and L. Top Field House Roof Area F1 surpassed its life cycle in 2016 and its repair has been deferred. Estimated replacement cost is $344,208. Windows Windows in the Main Building are aluminum with operable vents and insulated glazing which was installed in the 2000 Renovation. Windows are in good to fair condition. Windows in the Science Building, World Language Building, Math Building, and Field House are original (1960's). Single pane aluminum with operable vents. Windows are in fair to poor condition. Ext ldoir Il coir • Fiberglass doors with steel frame • Steel door with steel frame • Continuous hinges, full surface mount and flush mount • Pin and barrel and geared hinges • Butt hinges • Ball bearing hinges • New weatherstipping installed in 2019 • Fixed mullion • Removable mullion Ent lir oir Waft • Unreinforced concrete block (CMU), painted. The existing interior walls are in fair condition. • Interior partitions are gypsum wallboard and CMU. • Brick veneer Ent lir oir IDooir The interior doors are solid core flush wood, some with vision panels, in hollow metal frames. All are in generally fair condition. Foo • Typical classrooms and hallways are 12" x 12" vinyl composite flooring (VCT), which is in fair condition. • Carpet • Carpet squares • Rubber flooring on stairs and landings • Underlocking resilient sport rubber tiles in fitness center. • Synthetic athletic rubber track surface in field house installed over painted bituminous concrete surrounding rubberized basketball court in the center • Wood floor with polyurethane coating in gymnasium is in fair condition • Locker room floors are epoxy resin • Epoxy resin and quarry tile in kitchen. • Concrete in boiler rooms, mechanical area, and electrical rooms. • Carpet in administrative areas, offices, conference rooms, "hearing impaired classrooms", and library media center. CeMings Classrooms: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Corridors: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Cafeteria: Suspended acoustical tile (ATC) and grid 2 x 2 Gymnasium: Exposed steel structure and perforated steel decking (painted) Locker Rooms: Exposed concrete ceiling (painted) i,,,,,a klr Main Building, Math Building, and World Language Building: Recessed full height corridor lockers. Condition is fair. Science Cia siroorn Casework 2000 Renovation: Laboratory stations, base and wall hung casework at science classrooms. 1..exiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1U at, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2020 2-88 Ful SOUirce Natural gas. Electric cooling. IH afing IRaint Main Building Plant (2) H.B. Smith, 650, cast iron sectional steam boilers with Power Flame -C5 -G-30 burners [1998]. Item Tags: BD -1 and BD -2 Viessman CT -3-57 condensing boiler with Reillo- RS50/M burner [2008] — DHW and VAV Reheat. Item tag: BD -3 Outer Buildings Plant (Science Building) (3) Hydronic boilers; (2) Burnham-KV1123WML [2010 and 2016] and (1) Burnham -V1123 [2000] — Item tags: BG -1, BG -2, BG -3 (2) PVI Turbopower — 500P 250A -TP with PVI Firepower-BG400 burners [2000], Item tags: WHG-1, WHG-2 Cllhoflir N/A Rooftop Units (RTU) • RTU -A1 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor A Building; IT Offices and 1 st Floor Offices. Heating and DX. Supplies VAV Boxes. • RTU -A2 — Serves Main Building 2nd Floor A Building, `Hearing Impaired' Classrooms. Rms. 240-244. Heating and DX. Supplies VAV Boxes • RTU -131 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor B Building, Offices and A/V Classroom. Heating and DX. Supplies VAV Boxes • RTU -132 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor B Building, Offices and Guidance Offices. Heating and DX. Supplies VAV Boxes • RTU -133 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor B Building, Offices and Library Media Center. Heating and DX. Supplies Fan powered boxes. • RTU -C1 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor C Building Music Practice Rooms (Rms. 126- 129). Heat, DX cooling. • RTU -D1 — Serves Main Building, D Building, Main Offices. Heating and DX Cooling. Supplies VAV Boxes • RTU -D2 — Serves Main Building, D Building, Art Classroom (Rm. 212). Heating and DX Cooling • RTU -D3 — Serves Main Building, D Building, Black Box Theatre and Performing/Visual Art Offices • RTU -E1 — Serves Main Building, E Building, 2nd Floor, Special Education Offices. Heating and DX Cooling. Supplies VAV Boxes. • RTU -G1 — Serves Science Building, G Building, Rm. 418. Heating and DX Cooling • RTU -G3 — Serves Science Building, G Building, Offices (Rms. 304-309). Heating and DX Cooling • RTU -G4 — Serves Science Building, G Building, Classrooms (Rms. 414, 416). Heating and DX Cooling • RTU -G5 — Serves Science Building, G Building, `Hearing Impaired' Classrooms, 405, 407, 408, 410. Gas -Fired Heating and DX Cooling • RTU -H1 — Serves World Language Building, Building H, Offices (502, 502A, 505, 511). Heating and DX cooling. • RTU -H2 — Serves World Language Building, Building H, Classrooms 608, 609. Heating and DX cooling. • RTU -H3 — Serves World Language Building, Building H, Classrooms 613, 614. Heating and DX cooling. aA c"a rfc.,i l..axiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q Don6fionr s March 2020 2-89 Rooftop Units (RTU) • RTU -H4 — Serves World Language Building, Building H, `Hearing Impaired' Classrooms. Heating and DX cooling. • RTU -J1 — Serves Math Building, J Building, Offices (702, 702A, 705, 711, 711 A). Gas Fired Heating and DX Cooling. • RTU -J1 — Serves Math Building, J Building, `Hearing Impaired' Classrooms (Rms. 808 and 809). Gas Fired Heating and DX Cooling. • RTU -J2 — Serves Math Building, J Building, LABBB Offices (714 Suite). Gas Fired Heating and DX cooling. Heating and Ventilating Units (HV) • HV -131 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor B Building Library. Steam heat, no cooling. • HV -C1 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor C Building, Cafeteria Commons I. Heat, no cooling. • HV -C2 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor C Building, Cafeteria Commons II. Heat, no cooling. • HV -C3 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor C Building, Rm 133 Music (Orchestra) Classroom. Heat, no cooling. • HV -C4 — Serves Main Building 1 st Floor C Building, Rm 131 Music (Band) Classroom. Heat, no cooling. • HV -D1 — Serves Main Building Auditorium, D Building, McQuay, Steam Heating, DX Cooling • HV -D2 — Serves Main Building D Building Corridor • HV -E1 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Gymnasium, Heating only, no cooling. • HV -E2 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Boys Locker Room, Heating only, no cooling. • HV -E3 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Fitness Center, Heating only, no cooling. • HV -F1 — Serves Field House, F Building, Heating only, no cooling. • HV -G1 — Serves Science Building, G Building, Boiler Room. Heating only, no cooling. Air Handling Units (AHU) • AHU-D1 — Serves Main Building D Building Art Classroom (Rm. 215). Heating and DX Cooling • AHU-D2— Serves Main Building D Building Art Classroom/Dark Room. Heating and DX Cooling • AHU-E1 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Physical Education Office (Girl's), Heating and DX Cooling. • AHU-E2 — Serves Main Building, E Building, a� Physical Education Office (Boy's), Heating and a" DX Cooling. • AHU-E3 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Athletic Trainer's Room, Heating and DX Cooling. • AHU-E4 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Health Suite, Heating and DX Cooling. • AHU-G1— Serves Science Building, G Building, Science Lecture Hall. Heating only, no cooling. Energy Recovery Ventilation Unit (ERV) • ERV -E1 — Serves Main Building, E Building, Girl's Locker Room, Heating only, no cooling Di tiribUbOlrm Systern • Main Building: Steam and hydronic piping from boiler room through crawlspaces. Wall chases up to 2nd floor and roof. Ductwork above ceiling and in chases. VAV boxes in ceilings • Outer Buildings: Hydronic fed from central plant boilers to outer buildings via underground polypropylene pipe. Domestic hot water fed from central plant to outer buildings via underground pipe. After entering building piping runs through crawlspaces. Wall chases up to 2nd floor and roof. Ductwork above ceiling and in chases. VAV boxes in ceilings. Typical Systerns • Unit ventilators • RTU with VAV in offices and some classrooms • Heat pumps in modular buildings P idirn t ir IRa iati ism HW or steam baseboard radiation in some offices and classrooms. 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, r,r E islJ q C(.o 6,fionr s March 2020 2.•-90 III (cawn) Litoiu'i'mati °Turi'mp iratLliir Cointird (ATC) Niagra N4. JCI Controls. The Main Building is a hybrid pneumatic/DDC control system. Valves, sensors and end points of the system are monitored and operated pneumatically. The signals from the pneumatic system tie onto the DDC backbone. The DDC backbone then sends control signals back out to the pneumatic system to control various parts of the building. The pneumatic controls have been problematic due to various maintenance issues. The building was converted to a hybrid system to gain some remote control and monitoring of the building without having to go through the time, trouble and expense of a full DDC conversion. Outer buildings are fully automated with no pneumatics. l..axiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master (Plan ��v4,11.mt, ,.,nl r,r E islJnq r., r,l61J(orrrz March 2020 2.-91 101 EuRICAII,,,,,, Note: Unless otherwise noted, electrical systems were replaced in 2000. BectiricW Service The building has a 277/480V, 3 phase 2500 AMP service. Primary cabling from an exterior utility pole extends underground to utility owned exterior transformer. BectiricW IDi tIlril uto101rl Many branch panels are located in corridors and some are original to the building. Some panels have been replaced or retrofitted in place where upgraded during previous renovations. Eirneirgeiricy Generator alnd BectiricW Painds The Lexington High School School is served by one diesel generator with day tank. I ighfing aind l tai Sy t irn Lighting throughout existing classrooms, corridors and other areas is new or retrofitted LED direct/ indirect fixtures. Rre Aiallrirn Sy t irn Simplex 8100 addressable fire alarm system consists of a control panel, annunciator, manual pull stations, heat detectors, smoke detectors, and horn/strobe notification devices. Fire department notification is provided through a master box located inside the building. Cia sllroo rn C0117111r"I'Mini atioin An integrated administrative and classroom communication system includes Voice over IP. The system consists of individual speakers in corridors, classrooms and all occupiable spaces. All classrooms are equipped with telephone sets for initiating and receiving calls to/from the existing main administrative console located in the main office. The existing system is Tyco Simplex Grinnell/Valcomm system which was updated in 2019. SOLlind l ilnfoir irneirmt Sy t irn N/A Ilatllr Crack An existing master clock system with secondary clocks in classrooms and all occupiable areas is Tyco Simplex Grin nell/Valcomm, which was upgraded in 2019. The 2017 addition system is compatible with the existing system. Data/Voice Cal i in Typical: Voice/data outlets located in all offices, classrooms, and occupiable areas. Classrooms are equipped with a short throw projector. Sa ullrity Sy t llrn The building currently has security systems (dates unknown) consisting of the following: • Intrusion detection for the exterior doors and corridor motion detectors (Bosch) • Card access control points for exterior doors (DSX) • CCTV surveillance system (Exacgvision) Aiphone model which is compatible with the main system. 1. Intrusion Detection Intrusion detection devices consist of motion detectors and door magnets. Bosch DS7400Xi Version 3+ Control/Communicator. 2. Door Access The door access system consists of DSX control panel and card readers at exterior doors. The electronic door access controls are tied into the Public Announcement, Clock and Bell system so doors automatically unlock during passing times. 3. Bi -Directional Amplifiers N/A l..axiiirtgton IPii3011iic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1,.mt, ,.,n, (.o E islJ q C(.o '61Jrarrrz March 2020 2....92. IC III,,,,,,U II IB III IIIA G IFI I IEIFIL "I" IF C'"I" 11 I Doi,nestic CoU Water Service Spirk-Weirs Valves are gate, butterfly, and ball types. Sprinklered Doi,nestic IHot Water Service Staindpipes Gas fired Viessman CT -3-57 condensing boiler N/A (Main Building) installed in 2008. 4 storage tanks. Rre Protectionytinm (2) Gas fired PVI Turbopower — 500P 250A -TP with An existing dedicated water service for standpipes PVI Firepower-BG400 burners installed in 2000 and sprinklers runs to each stairway and through each stairway as a standpipe.o°° Sail Waste aind Veint N/A All valves controlling the flow of water have^� supervisory devices that report to the existing fire fl l aiin Water Dischairge alarm system. N/A I aftlirai Gas Existing 12 -inch main enters the existing building, main building, at the mechanical room. Fixtuir • Drinking fountains are stainless steel. • Janitor closet service sinks are mop basin type. Acid NeUtirahzatioin y t ii'n (2) pH Neutralization Systems: One located in the Science Building and another located in Commons I from the dark room. l..axiirtgton IPii,blliic schools Master (Plan ��v4,1i.mt, ,.,n� r,r E islJ q C(.o 61J(orrrz March 2020 2.•-93 IIx'sfling FacHl"fies III 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 20005 2014 Hgl,-i Scl,-iod 360,000 SF 56.5 Acres e.* {;78crr 4 uE ..atshcrcrls Nia',Be.r 4 iwt t .'20 2-9A SPACE LEGEND X ARTS & HUMANITIES BUILDING HIGH SCHOOL PLANNING 251 WALTHAM STREET FIRST FLOOR PLAN TOWN OF LEXINGTON LEXINGTON, MA CURRENT SPACE USES Lex,igiori flijbk. Schods NI Plaii I I � ; ,c 1 2-95 KI -E BUILDING qq iia. ..o LANGUAGES BUILDING SPACE LEGEND I IS ARTS & HUMANITIES BUILDING HIGH SCHOOL PLANNING 251 WALTHAMSTREET.1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN TOWN OF LEXINGTON LEXINGTON, MA CURRENT SPACE USES C, Lex, qLari flijbk..;c.hcrcrls Nia',Be.r 4 iar' ., , ..,J,c 1 ,c 1.'20 2-96 ntroduction Educational Program Requirements Universal Design for Learning 21 st Century Learning Environments Facility Design Capacities — Elementary School Educational Program — Middle School Educational Program — District -wide Special Educational Programs Facility Design Capacity Enrollment Adjustments 1..exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools s Ilea ter IPlan I March 2020 II IIIq"rII I[n "rIII IIIq Lexington Public Schools (LIPS) provides a rigorous educational program for students from pre -kindergarten through grade twelve. A culturally, linguistically, academically, and economically diverse district, it honors its diversity through curriculum, arts, enrichment, and community opportunities. The English Language Learner Program (ELL) has increased in size over the past decade. In addition, LIPS participates in the METCO Program, welcoming students from Boston at all grade levels. As of October 1, 2018 there are 7,190 students (kindergarten through grade twelve) enrolled in the Lexington Public Schools. Since the original writing of the Master Plan, the district -wide enrollment as of October 1, 2019 is 7,122. The six elementary schools educate students from kindergarten through grade five, the two middle schools serve students in grades six through eight, and the high school serves grades nine through twelve. For the most part, students attend the elementary and middle schools in their geographical neighborhoods with the exception of the district -wide special education programs. The district has adopted a re -districting plan that will take into effect the 2020-21 school year. For the most part, students at the Fiske, Estabrook, and Hastings Schools proceed to grade six at the Diamond Middle School. Students from the Bowman, Bridge, and Harrington Schools proceed to grade six at the Clarke Middle School. All students are served in grades nine through twelve at the Lexington High School. Additionally, Lexington Public Schools offers an integrated preschool program for children with identified special needs and typically developing peers located in one central location on Pelham Road. The educational program narrative for the elementary school level is outlined on the following pages. It has determined the basis of design for both the new Estabrook and Hastings Elementary Schools. It determines the number and size of spaces based upon educational requirements and contractual arrangements with the Lexington Education Association. The educational program narrative for the middle schools is also provided in the following pages. The program has also aided in the recent expansions at both the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools. The high school continues to have significant enrollment growth. The current focus is two -fold: 1. To utilize every existing space at its maximum capacity. Spaces are evaluated on an annual basis as the needs and student population shift. 2. The high school facility is over capacity and requires an expansion or new facility. In 2019, LIPS submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the MSBA to be invited into their core program. The high school was not selected, however, LIPS was strongly encouraged to reapply in 2020. A full assessment of the ideal high school educational program to meet 21 s' Century Learning will be a part of the MSBA process. 1..exiiirtgton IPii,blliia schools s Il aster IPlan I March 2020 3 1 Eir.mmIII GIIS A11 PROGRAM IRIS QIII REIII MIIID "rs When evaluating the enrollment capacity for each of the schools, the following criteria are taken into consideration: • Grade & Sc hoop Configuiraflon • "glass &ze Polliicy • Schooll Sche(.Julling Metho(J • 1::::Iirofes§onall Staff I oad & �baching II Nouirs • S:)ecliallis-I.""Fe.acheirs &TeacNng I 8ouirs • TeacNng Metho(.Jology & Structure • Teacheir Fanning & Roon o As§gnn pent Polli6es • PeAUe Gir(-)n,j�:)iirugs/Pir(-)fessiioruaI earniing Con on oun�tes • Support Spaces (Nuirse, A(Jrnlnstira-[Jon, etc.) IIIA III VIEIIS SAII I[XIESIGIIS IISOR 11 IIS IIIA Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a way of teaching and learning that provides all students equal opportunity to learn. There are three UDL principles : UDL is an investment by the District and teachers. It creates multiple learning experiences with flexible means, methods, and materials to realize every student's potential. Representation provides information in multiple formats: • V(Jeo • Text • Au(.Jio • I Ban(.Js-on • Mu[H--sensoiry Expression provides multiple means of interaction • Vsua� • Group • Oirall • Wiritten Engagement provides multiple means of motivation: • Ch6ces • MaArnzes lintelrest • Suppoirts irlisk--tak'ung • Encourages autonorny The 3 U11D11 Principles 0" Expression Engagement Mleettf-ie rieeds of every studerit The key benefits of UDL are: • Engagement • lnclu§on • Seff-confidence 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I March 2020 3-2 1 s"r C IIID "r u I Y III1EARITHINlEI11llIIR114IIIlEIiiq"rs 21s' century learning environments provide a culture of reflection, conversation, collaboration, and commitment to continuous improvement. Lexington Public Schools has placed a strong emphasis on collaborative environments for both learning and teaching. These environments foster the following: 1. Communication and Collaboration 2. Creativity and Innovation 3. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving To further demonstrate these skills, the following considerations are incorporated at every grade and at every level throughout the District to the best physical ability of each of the schools: • Vairliety lira I......earnu ng Spaces • RexlUe Spaces • STEM / Makeir Spaces • Technology Integiratlion • Out(Joor I......earnu ng Environments • Srn oalll Group Instiructlion • lnclln. §on • Col1aboira-Hon I exiington Pii,,Olic schools Il aster IPlan I March 2020 3.3 1FAGE11,,,,,,IIITICIDESll IIS CAPACITIES Based upon the educational programming criteria set forth by Lexington Public Schools, each school within the district has gone through a thorough review of how it physically meets the educational program based upon the site and building layout, square footage, net floor area, and today's standards using the Massachusetts School Building Authority's space guidelines where appropriate. I,,,,, xiin torn CllhUdir lam's Race (II,,,,,GP) The LCP occupied its new facility on Pelham Road in August 2019. The new facility is designed to accommodate the current and future enrollment into the foreseeable future. It now has the appropriate spaces to provide the required services to all families in the Town of Lexington. In addition, the site design and building layout have carefully taken expansion possibilities into consideration should the need arise in the future. N 0 50 100 1..exiiirtgton IPii3011iia schools s Il aster IPlan I March 2020 3.4 Ellerneiritairy S Ilhoolls Each of the six elementary schools are compared to each other for equity and parity. It is noted that several schools currently have a larger enrollment than the design capacity. The design capacity is determined by the educational program including core subjects, specials, and enrichment programs; special education program requirements; instructional time allocations; class size policy; and teaching methodology and structure. Upon completion of the new Hastings Elementary School, a redistricting plan shall be in place to accommodate the increased size of the new Hastings Elementary School and reduce the enrollment at other schools. The goal of which is to bring the enrollment in line with the design capacity at each of the six schools. 1113owirnain IIG ,Ill lirneinta. ity Schooli 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 67,905 GSF (including modulars) 13.3 Acres 11@F`isllke IIG ,Ill lirneintairy Schooli 2007, 2017 78,405 GSF (including modulars) 11.7 Acres 1111ridge 111E.E. le lirneinta. ity Schooli 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 65,425 GSF (Including modulars) 29.5 Acres Ill unrfi -tslim le lirneinta. ity Schooli 2005 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres Mmmdl�ZV��IiIINi�I�i�iNlyl'V�r�oroi 111'.E.Sta brooIlk IIG ,Ill lirneinta. iry Schooli 2014 91,840 GSF 13.4 Acres 1111astfings le lirneinta. ity Schooli 2020 110,000 GSF 14.3 Acres 1..exiiirigtoiri Pii,,Olic schools Il aster IPllairt I March 2020 3 Exisfing FY 20,19 Fa i ti Space AlnWy o Elementary Schools The chart below represents the current spaces allocated to each of the educational programs for all six elementary schools. The core programs are consistent across all six elementary schools. The special education program space needs are different at each school. Each school provides moderate special needs services for the students within their school. In addition, each school hosts one of the district -wide special education programs. The district -wide programs host students with the same needs from the entire district regardless of the student's elementary school district. Each of these programs requires different space and staffing needs. The elementary school educational program, special educational program, floor plans, and space usage are provided on the following pages. In addition, the comprehensive, district - wide special education program is included in this section. The red Net Floor Area (NFA) in the chart below identifies that the space for that particular program is undersized based upon the current enrollment. EDUCAT�UN I II II AIM I f:: llSui-ZING El Mf:: NTARY SC 1--iOOI.......S FY 2019 (1)N FA = Net Floor Area ))Harrington uses LCP spaces, current enrollment )')New Hastings School, current enrollment MMath/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers )s)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes )s)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7)Medical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA O)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I March 2020 3.. Quo NZ Spaces NFAM 0 is' Spaces NFA NOWNWINERSOPM Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 26 21,962 NFA 27 22,862 NFA 26 26,446 NFA 20 20,684 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 2 1,727 NF/A 1 541 NF/A 4 2,380 NFA 2 700 NF/A 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Supporta) 5 1,671 NFA 7 1,649 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 11 1,821 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 4,051 NF/h 10 2,469 NF/h 15 3,779 NFA 18 6,944 NF/h 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,469 NFA 3 2,798 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,928 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PES) 3,337 NF/h 3,337 NF/h 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,1:180 NFA 2,1:180 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only)(6) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical /Admin(7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Maint. 848 NF/h 859 NF/h 2,832 NFA 1,819 NF/h 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(9) 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,219 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments Gen Ed Support size & qty undersized Gym undersized Art/Music should have a based upon population Gen Ed Support sizes qty undersized Gym undersized Art/Music should have a based upon population Facility designed to y 9 accommodate enrollment ELL qty undersized Gen Ed Support size undersized, ILP Undersized Facility designed to y 9 accommodate enrollment without LCP Facility designed to y 9 accommodate enrollment (1)N FA = Net Floor Area ))Harrington uses LCP spaces, current enrollment )')New Hastings School, current enrollment MMath/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers )s)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes )s)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7)Medical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA O)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I March 2020 3.. LEXINGTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Jew Y EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM i m November 13 2019 APRIL I9", INTRODUCTION Lexington Public Schools provides a rigorous educational program for elementary students kindergarten through grade five. A culturally, linguistically, academically, and economically diverse district, it honors its diversity through curriculum, arts, enrichment, and community opportunities. The English Language Learner Program (ELL) has increased in size over the past decade. The Lexington Public Schools participate in the METCO Program, welcoming students from Boston at all grade levels. GRADE AND SCHOOL CONFIGURATION POLICIES The Lexington Public Schools provides educational programs for students in grades preschool through grade 12. As of October 1, 2018, there are 7,190 students enrolled in the Lexington Public Schools. The six elementary schools in Lexington educate students from Kindergarten through Grade Five with the Integrated Preschool housed in one building; the two middle schools serve students in grade 6 through 8; and the high school serves grades 9 through 12. For the most part, students attend the Lexington elementary and middle schools in their geographical neighborhoods with the exception of the district wide special education programs However, given the recent increased enrollment redistricting has created pockets of residencies across town where new families are transported to other schools in order to best utilize classroom spaces and decompress the overcrowding in some large buildings. The students at the Fiske, Estabrook and Hastings School proceed to grade 6 at the Diamond Middle School. Students from Bowman, Bridge and Harrington Schools proceed to grade 6 at the Clarke Middle School. Students are served in grades 9 through twelve by Lexington High School. Additionally, the Lexington Public Schools offers an integrated preschool program for children with identified special needs and typically developing peers. CLASS SIZE POLICIES The Lexington School Committee and the Lexington Education Association recognize that class size is an important factor in quality education. Teacher/pupil ratios are stated in the collective bargaining agreement between the Lexington Education Association: Unit A and the Lexington School Committee. The language with regard to the elementary school states, "The School Committee will make every effort to maintain the following building -wide teacher/pupil ratios for the duration of the Agreement:"All classrooms across grades provide inclusion for students with special needs. It is critical to provide small quiet working areas within these classrooms to meet the educational needs of the inclusion and integrated students. Therefore, the class size will ideally be slightly less than the typical classes in order to best accommodate the students with special needs in the regular classrooms. The Historic Past Meets the Progressive Future Class Size Policy • Kindergarten: 1-18 • Grade 1: 1-20 • Grade 2: 1-22 • Grades 3-5: 1-24 The average class size of 21.5 is used for planning purposes when looking at elementary schools as a whole. SCHOOL SCHEDULING METHOD The Lexington Public Schools has articulated specific instructional time allocations for elementary core subjects, which include reading, writing, mathematics, science, social studies and social curriculum. These time allotments are as follows: • Reading • Writing • Mathematics • Science 60 minutes daily 60 minutes daily 60 minutes daily (300 minutes/week) (300 minutes/week) (300 minutes/week) 90 minutes/week (K-2) and 90 minutes/week* (3-5) *must integrate 60 minutes with reading and writing • Social Studies 60 minutes/week (K-2) and 90 minutes/week* (3-5) *must integrate 60 minutes with reading and writing • Social Curriculum 30 minutes/week (150 min/week) Under Article 13: "Professional Staff Load and Teaching Hours" of the collective bargaining agreement, elementary teachers are entitled to a 45 minute duty free and meeting free lunch period. In addition, elementary teachers have discretionary professional time totaling no fewer than 180 minutes per week for teachers in grades 1-5 and no fewer than 120 minutes per week for kindergarten teachers. Lexington Public Schools as well as the community, values opportunities to expose young learners to visual and performing arts, physical education, and library. Under Article 15: "Specials Teachers, Support Personnel and Special Positions" of the collective bargaining agreement, the Lexington School Committee recognizes the importance of providing adequate numbers of special teachers in both elementary and secondary schools. Elementary specials teachers are defined as Art, Music, Physical Education, Library -Media and Foreign Language (Planning for 2017-18 school year). Pupil Services are defined as counselors, social workers, psychologists, speech/language pathologists and nurses. Under Article 13, N. of the collective bargaining agreement, a full-time elementary specialist teacher as defined in Article 15, shall not be scheduled for more than 20 student contact hours per week. The Library/Media specialist hours includes regularly scheduled classes and other instruction when the Librarian is required to teach students. Based upon the student contact hours per week the following specialist section allocation is to determine the number of specialists required in an elementary school as well as when a second room would be required for space planning initiatives: no Art (1) Art Room up to 24 section K-5 elementary school: (20) 60 minute blocks are taught by one Art teacher; up to (4) 60 minute block are taught by a second Art teacher in the same classroom. (2) Art Rooms required beyond a 24 section K-5 elementary school: (20) 60 minute blocks are taught by one Art teacher; up to (4) 60 minute block are taught by a second Art teacher in the same classroom. Up to (24) 60 minute block are taught by a second Art teacher in a second classroom. Music (1) Music Room up to 24 section K-5 elementary school: (40) 30 minute blocks are taught by one Music teacher, including grade five chorus; up to (8) 30 minute block are taught by a second Music teacher in the same classroom. (2) Music Rooms required beyond a 24 section K-5 elementary school: Up to (80) 30 minute block are taught by a second Music teacher in a second classroom. Physical Education (1) Station (half size gym) up to 24 section K-5 elementary school: (40) 30 minute blocks are taught by one Physical Education teacher; up to (8) 30 minute blocks are taught by a second Physical Education teacher in the same "station". (2) Stations (other half of full size gym) required beyond a 24 section K-5 elementary school: Up to (80) 30 minute block are taught by a second Physical Education teacher in a second Station. Library/Media The size of the Library / Media Center should be determined by the number of sections in a school. The size of the Library / Media Center should accommodate all sections. The number of Media Specialists are determined as follows: (80) 30 minute blocks are taught by one Library/Media teacher. An additional Library / Media Specialist would be required beyond (80) 30 minute blocks. All remaining blocks are open research blocks to enable teachers to sign-up for additional time in the Library/Media space. Specialist blocks are organized to allow teachers opportunities to collaborate inside the school day. Teachers have one 30 or two 30 minute specialist blocks within each full school day. By placing two consecutive, 30 minute blocks in the master schedule, teachers are afforded 60 minutes of contiguous time to prepare and collaborate within the school day. Ideally each school will schedule each grade level to have an equitable 60 minutes of professional learning community (PLC) time and at least 30 minutes of additional common grade level time each week. Teachers use this time to meet in professional learning communities to analyze and improve student performance, as well as to conduct team common planning with curriculum coaches/specialists in English/Language Arts and Mathematics. Students are dismissed at half day on Thursdays each week, providing time for professional learning and collaboration among staff members. In addition to General Classroom Music, students in Grades 4 and 5 may elect to take a band or string instrument. In the first half of the school year, instrumental lessons are small group, BE pull-out lessons during the school day. The second half of the school year, instrumental lessons are larger, ensemble, pull-out lessons during the school day. Each instrumental teacher instructs band or string lessons in groups of students ranging from 6-10 students. Chorus is part of the music program for all Grade 5 students. The class runs for 60 minutes, once per week, in addition to the Grade 5 thirty minute General Music class. Chorus is scheduled within the school day. Instructional technology is integrated into the classrooms. The school is wireless and all classrooms have access to desktop, laptop and/or tablet devices. All classrooms have document cameras and projectors. Grade 3, 4, and 5 classrooms are equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Currently there are no substantially separate computer/technology spaces identified in any of the elementary schools. All kindergarten through grade 5 students have two recesses each full school day. The morning recess is 15 minutes and the lunch recess is 20 minutes in length. This is consistent with all elementary schools in Lexington. The students' 20 minute recess and subsequent 25 minute lunch total the teachers' 45 minute duty free lunch time. TEACHING METHODOLOGY AND STRUCTURE (E.G., ACADEMIES, DEPARTMENTS, HOUSES, TEAMS, ETC.) Every elementary school engages in professional learning communities (PLC). The school is organized in six teams kindergarten through grade five. These teams are comprised of general education, special education, literacy, math, and ELL teachers. They conduct the data cycle as a collaborative team to improve learning for all students in the grade level. The weekly 60 minute PLC blocks and 30 minute grade level blocks support their ability to collaborate within the school day. The teachers implement the Common Core standards and the rigorous curriculum and assessment expectations set forth by the Lexington Public Schools. Below is an overview of the general elementary curriculum, methods and assessments used by teachers: LITERACY There is explicit reading instruction in a variety of modes in every grade, continually engaging students at several distinct levels of challenge: an instructional level, just at the edge of the student's ability at that point in time, a challenge level offering harder material and an independent level using easier material to work on fluency and expression and to practice comprehension strategies. Specific instructional components at each grade level include: • Primary: interactive read aloud, shared reading, guided reading, independent reading, phonemic awareness and phonics / word study. • Intermediate: interactive read aloud, shared reading, guided reading (including strategy lessons, book clubs and literature circles), independent reading, and word study. There is an emphasis in all grades Kindergarten through Grade 5 on independent reading and the development of a lifelong reading habit; this includes nightly reading by all students in grades 1-5 and accountability by teachers through reading logs and folders. Although most of the reading and writing instruction takes place within the classroom environment, smaller work areas are necessary to facilitate individualized instruction, both in 1:1 and small group settings. Areas designed inside and outside the classroom are preferred. In addition, literacy staff are provided at each school. These staff collaborate together and with the Math Specialist. They support the entire school. In support of literacy, each school should house a Literacy Professional Center which would serve many purposes. The collection used for literacy instruction would be housed in the shared literacy library space in order to facilitate sharing the texts and technology devices across classes and grade levels. The space would be the location of professional learning for teachers, assistants, and parents. The specialized materials used for literacy intervention would also be stored in a centralized location to increase their use by teachers providing RTI (Response to Intervention) services to students in classrooms and small breakout spaces. MATH Students learn mathematics in whole class, small group, and partner configurations. The curriculum includes a variety of hands-on activities and many materials that require space to store in each classroom. There is a math specialist working with classroom teachers who utilizes a small office space as most time is spent coaching teachers in their classrooms. Math instruction includes a wealth of materials and technology. The math specialist will have a space for planning, consulting with teachers, work with small groups of students, and material storage and would ideally be located in the same space with the literacy specialists. The math specialist models instruction in the classroom that includes hands-on materials and project learning. The general classrooms will have the flexible workspaces for children to spread out and complete projects connected with all curriculum areas. In addition, the math specialist also utilizes small group or break out rooms. SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY/ENGINEERING Teachers implement a hands-on science and engineering curriculum that requires the use of kit materials and student science notebooks. Each grade level uses water as a material in their curriculum, so sinks are required. Additionally, space for storage of science materials, for set-up and use of the materials for investigation or experimentation, are required. Storage for the science kits when not in use is needed. SOCIAL STUDIES Students engage in a history/social sciences curriculum that wherever possible integrates with the informational skills components of the new Mass Frameworks for English Language Arts (incorporating the Common Core Standards). SOCIAVEMOTIONAL The Responsive Classroom program is used in classrooms K-5 to promote pro -social learning and problem -solving. Classroom teachers present Responsive Classroom methodology daily in a 10-15 minute "Morning Meeting". An area of the classroom will be zoned for morning meeting, mini -lessons in Readers and Writers Workshop and other like functions. Regular education teachers engage in flexible grouping methods to meet the instructional needs of their students and as determined by the professional learning communities. Grouping and regrouping methods take place frequently within classrooms and across grade level classrooms. Regular education, special education, literacy, math, special education, and ELL teachers collaborate seamlessly to provide tier one (general curriculum), tier two (strategic intervention) and tier three (intensive intervention) in the inclusive environment. Grade level classrooms should be organized within common hallways and adjacent locations. Close proximity is critical in order to achieve the requisite communication and collaboration for flexible grouping methods in a grade level PLC team. Pull-out instruction is provided for students who require it, based on their personalized instructional needs within tier two and tier three programming. There is shared responsibility among the faculty for all students' success. Students meet with literacy, ELL, special education, speech and language, occupational and physical therapy, adaptive physical education, counselors and social workers in small spaces that are often used by multiple providers. In addition to classroom instruction, school counselors and social workers provide small group and individual sessions. Counseling offices should be located near each other with space for small groups of students to gather in a private setting. TEACHER PLANNING AND ROOM ASSIGNMENT POLICIES Below is a description of the ideal planning and room assignment policies: The ideal grade level classroom formation would neighbor one another to offer close proximity for collaboration, communication and flexible grouping. Other core academic spaces such as art, music and library would ideally be within close proximity to the general classrooms to provide ease of transition from space to space as well as limit the transition time between classes to maximize the time spent in the classrooms. Other core spaces such as the gymnasium and cafeteria are also used by the community therefore ease of access for the public is preferred. The cafetorium would ideally be located on the first floor with direct access to the play spaces for time before or after lunch. Much of the support services (literacy, math and special education) instruction occurs within the general education classrooms, however some small group instruction takes place outside the classrooms, and spaces for small group instruction are required. These spaces should be easily accessible from the general classrooms. Most of the special education instruction occurs within the regular education classrooms. However, Resource Room(s) available for pullout instruction. Resource Room teachers, who work alongside one another with groups of children who benefit from minimal distractions to learn effectively. The Occupational Therapist, Physical Therapist, APE provider and ILP Assistants, where appropriate, should share a large motor space with the OT requiring additional space for testing and small group learning. Adjacency to the gym for shared use of equipment and a larger space is ideal. Speech/Language Pathologists bridge both the Resource Room and Intensive Learning Programs. Their spaces should provide for teacher planning and consultation, testing, small group instruction. Evaluation Team Supervisors (ETS) lead special education team meetings, supervise special education staff and organize all mandated documentation associated with special education services. They require office space for Team Meetings of staff and parents in a confidential location near administrative offices. The Lexington Public Schools employ school psychologists to evaluate students. A school psychologist requires a private office for testing and meeting with families and should be adjacent to the administration and team meeting conference space. The ELL teaching model is push in and pull out depending on a student's English proficiency. Students at the entering and developing stage need a designated ELL learning classroom in which to meet with the ELL teacher four times a week. ELL instruction is provided in several locations: general education classroom and ELL space. Each ELL teacher will require space for up to 15 students. The teachers complete district and state assessments, provide instruction for children newly arrived in the United States and offer consultation to colleagues and families. Ideally each school would provide separate offices for the following staff to support the school: Mental Health Providers • Counselor • Psychologist • Social Worker • Metco Social Worker • Evaluation Team Supervisors (ETS) FLEXIBLE GROUPING Regular education teachers engage in flexible grouping methods to meet the instructional needs of their students and as determined by the professional learning communities. Grouping and regrouping methods take place weekly within classrooms and among grade level classrooms. Regular education, special education and ELL teachers collaborate seamlessly to provide tier one (general curriculum), tier two (strategic intervention) and tier three (intensive intervention) in the inclusive environment. Pullout instruction is provided for students who require it, based on their personalized instructional needs within tier two and tier three programming. There is shared responsibility among the faculty for all students' success. LUNCH PROGRAMS Breakfast and lunch are provided by Whitson's Culinary Group. Parents set up online lunch accounts and pre -pay meals. All students have a PIN code. Each Elementary School has a staff of cooks that work in a full service kitchen. Typically 3-5 lunch seatings are served every day but Thursday, when the students are dismissed at 12:15 and eat lunch at home. Lunch service begins on average at 11:25 a.m., and the last lunch concludes at 1:15 p.m. The number of students within each lunch seating ranges from 75 to 140 students depending on the school. Lunches are organized by individual grade level due to space and noise level constraints. Typically, the lunches have complex, overlapping transitions with one grade level finishing lunch, cleaning up and lining up as the next arrives and enters the cafeteria to reach the serving area. The cafeteria staff also prepare lunch orders for staff members. NURSE / MEDICAL Each Lexington elementary school provides a full time nurse on site. Each Elementary School will require at least one person in this role with adequate space for children who are ill, health screenings completed on an annual basis, storage of health supplies and equipment, and a professional space for the nurse to consult, complete documents and communicate with parents and colleagues. ART/ MUSIC / PERFORMING ARTS The Lexington Public Schools has a vibrant visual and performing arts program. Over the course of the week, students take one, 60 minute visual art class and two 30 minute general music classes. Additional music instruction through Band / strings classes are available for grades 4 and 5 in 30 minute lessons each week. Students play a band instrument and another group plays a string instruments. Grade 5 chorus is scheduled in one 60 minute / week block. All fifth graders participate in chorus. Schools host K-5 choral and band performances throughout the school year. PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES All students participate in physical education twice a week, for 30 minute sessions. Teachers employ the Lexington Public School physical education curriculum. The district has a wellness policy, which requires that all elementary students participate in recess. In addition to the Physical Education teachers, schools have an Adaptive Physical Education teacher. The gymnasium is typically used for physical education, however if another significant event needs to take place (i.e. town voting or a PTA arts enrichment opportunity that needs the space of the gymnasium), then physical education is typically held outdoors, in the cafeteria or in classrooms. Typically, two Physical Education classes will be scheduled at the same time in a 30 section school, necessitating a full-sized gym capable of being divided. Storage for both large and small equipment is required, including equipment for gymnastics units. A small office for the PE teacher is needed for teaching planning and storage for small equipment. SPECIAL EDUCATION Inclusion is a core belief and practice in the Lexington Public Schools. This educational model challenges schools to meet the needs of all students by educating learners with disabilities alongside their non -disabled peers. The environment necessary to nurture and foster inclusion is built upon a shared belief system between general and special education, and a willingness to merge the talents and resources of teachers. The mission of all of the schools in Lexington is to maximize the potential and independence of each student. An inclusive education helps prepare students with disabilities for an integrated adult life and builds understanding and acceptance within the broader community. Staff members meet weekly in professional learning communities (PLCs) to develop shared instructional plans for all students. General education and special education teachers provide instruction in general education classrooms with all educators teaching from common instructional plans and tools developed within the PLC. Teachers employ co -teaching, team teaching, flexible grouping, small group instruction, and individualized instruction in order to proactively support each student. LPS educators believe that all learners should be provided differentiated forms of instruction. Staff recognize that all students learn in different ways, and at different paces. To meet student needs, the Staff continually adapt its staffing support, instructional methodologies and assessment practices based upon the student data and personalized student needs. Response to Intervention (RTI) provides the regular education foundation of each School's continuum of service model. Staff provide tiered levels of support to all students (tier one — the general classroom curriculum; tier two — strategic levels of instruction; tier three — intensive levels of instruction usually at the individualized level.) Authentic, classroom -based assessments help the teachers drive daily instructional decision making, select instructional materials, and monitor academic progress. If a student demonstrates academic and/or pro -social performance issues despite thorough RTI procedures, the team or individual teacher may request the Child Study Team process. These teams provide student case review, and support the teacher to implement additional strategies or suggest an in-depth evaluation to identify additional student needs. The special education staff are important team members in the professional learning communities. They meet with their PLC teams weekly to plan instruction and seamless supports in concert with the IEP and the general curriculum. Special educators are skillful at providing behavior plans, social skills instruction and modified lessons coordinated with classroom teachers and all education specialists who work with the students. The district -wide special education programs are offered at each of the elementary schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level, (i.e. the ILP Program). Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. The most intense district -wide program, ILP, is served at both the Fiske School for students with the most needs and at the Hastings School where students are more likely to be more incorporated into the general classrooms. The ILP students are served by special educators with intensive certification. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. Lexington Elementary District -Wide Programs District -wide special education programs are offered at each of the elementary schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level. Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. At the elementary level, district -wide programs exist to service low incidence disability areas by offering more intensive supports. Each elementary school houses at least one district -wide program. The majority of special education students are included and receive support in the general education classrooms as well as in resource classrooms with their special education liaison. Students in all of the programs receive related services (e.g. speech/language, occupational therapy, physical therapy) as needed. There are four district -wide programs and a reading program in each building that provides direct systematic, multi -sensory instruction. 1. Developmental Learning Program (DLP) — Harrington: The Developmental Learning Program (DLP) services students with significant developmental delays or intellectual/neurological impairments. Modified curricula are offered within a small group format in all subject areas. Typically, students receive direct instruction in content areas from special educators, while they join general education classes (art, music, lunch) to build relationships with typically -developing peers. Instruction may include activities of daily living and development of social skills. Enrollment: The number of students enrolled in the DLP program has remained relatively steady over the past 10 years (ranging from 9-15 students per year). However, the enrollment is anticipated to decrease slightly in the next five years. Refer to the enrollment charts at the end of the section. Space Needs: Based upon the current DLP population, two full size classrooms are sufficient. One classroom including a toilet room and is located with the lower grade classrooms (grades K-2) and another classroom located with the upper grade classrooms (grades 3-5). The overall current dedicated spaces for this program include: (2) full size classrooms (900-1,100 NFA) 2. Intensive Learning Programs (ILP): a. Substantially Separate Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Fiske: The Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Fiske provides services for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities with intensive needs including deficits in language, social communication, play skills, abstract thinking, and behavior. The Intensive Learning Programs provide highly individualized services involving behavioral approaches (typically based on Applied Behavior Analysis principles) to learning. Instruction includes social skill development and daily living skill development. Special educators modify content and methodology to teach to mastery, based on academic and behavioral data. Small -group and/or individualized instruction can be provided for the entire school day when necessary and appropriate. Consultation to parents and structured home components are provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The number of students enrolled in the substantially separate ILP has been relatively stable in the recent past (approximately 26 students annually) however, it is seeing a slight uptick in the population in FY18 and the foreseeable future to approximately 31-34 students per year. Refer to the enrollment charts at the end of the section. Space Needs: Based upon the existing and anticipated substantially separate ILP population four full size classrooms are sufficient. A full-size classroom includes a toilet room. In addition to the full-size classrooms, two dedicated speech and language spaces and one dedicated BCBA space also support the program. The overall current dedicated space requirements are: • (4) full size classrooms (900-1100 NFA/each) mm • (2) speech and language spaces (750 NFA/each) • (1) BCBA space (-150 NFA) b. Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Hastings: The Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Hastings also services students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities. Through this integrated approach students are included, often with support, for the majority of their school day within the general education setting. Special educators provide direct instruction within the general education setting and within special education settings. Special educators modify content and methodology to meet the needs of students and use data collection and behavior analysis in their work with students. Coordination between special education staff and general educators is essential within this inclusion model. Consultation to parents is provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the integrated ILP has remained relatively consistent in the recent past, ranging from 29-35 students. The enrollment forecast suggests a slightly lower enrollment forecast, however it is sometimes difficult to anticipate this student population as families move into the District just prior to the school year. Therefore it is prudent to plan for an enrollment of 30-35 students. Space Needs: Although the focus of this program is inclusion, these students require dedicated spaces for direct instruction. The new Hastings School has been designed with these students in mind. There are three dedicated full-size classrooms that are integrated with the general classrooms. In addition to the dedicated classrooms, other support spaces are required. The overall spaces for this program include: • (3) Full size classrooms (900-1150 NFA/each) • (3) Calming spaces (-150 NFA/each) • (1) BCBA space (-150 NFA) • (1) Break out space (-250 NFA) • (1) Dedicated ETS office (-175 NFA) 3. Language Learning Program (LLP) — Bowman: The Language Learning Program (LLP) services students who have significant, language -based learning disabilities. These students typically have at least average cognitive abilities, but they are not acquiring reading, writing and/or language usage skills at the same pace/level as their peers. Many of the students in the program require explicit phonetic -alphabetic instruction beyond that offered through general education. Instruction in literacy is a focus, with emphasis on developing reading and written language skills using specialized curricula. Math instruction may also be provided within the Language Learning Program, as determined by the student's needs. Support is available within the general education setting for science and social studies. This support, which is determined by individual student need, may include substantial modifications. The goal of the Language Learning Program is to build students' literacy skills in a structured and supportive environment that fosters students' confidence while increasing their skills in becoming active learners. Enrollment: The enrollment for the integrated LLP has decreased from its peak enrollment of 24 in FY2015 to approximately 10 students at the elementary school level. It is prudent for space planning purposes to anticipate approximately 20 students in this program annually. Space Needs: The existing space needs for the LLP include: • (2) Full size classrooms (-900 NFA) • (4-5) Small, individual instruction spaces (-75 NFA/each) 4. Therapeutic Learning Programs (TLP) — Bridge and Estabrook: The Therapeutic Learning Programs at Bridge and Estabrook service students with significant emotional impairment or other disabilities that may manifest themselves through difficulties with self- regulation. These students may or may not have associated learning difficulties. The programs provide instruction in developing social/emotional regulation within a structured, caring, and therapeutic classroom environment. Students within these programs access the general education classrooms for varied amounts of time as specified within their Individual Education Programs. Special education services may also be provided within the general education setting. In addition, content area instruction is available on an individualized and/or small group basis when deemed necessary by the student's Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the overall program has remained steady in recent years. The program at Bridge School has consistently been 9-11 students for the past five years and it is anticipated to remain the same. The enrollment at Estabrook has also been very consistent, with 10-13 students in the program annually. Space Needs: The existing space needs for this program include: • (2) Half size classrooms (-500 NFA) with an area for a calming space • (1) Smaller breakout room (-200 NFA) 5. Special Education Reading: Special education reading teachers provide individual and small group instruction to students in need of a systematic, rules -based approach to reading. There is a half-time Special Education Reading Teacher at each of the six elementary schools. MM �Qi C LEXINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM November 13, 2019 APRIL 191 , INTRODUCTION Inclusion is a core belief and practice in the Lexington Public Schools. This educational model challenges schools to meet the needs of all students by educating learners with disabilities alongside their non -disabled peers. The environment necessary to nurture and foster inclusion is built upon a shared belief system between general and special education, and a willingness to merge the talents and resources of teachers. The mission of all of the schools in Lexington is to maximize the potential and independence of each student. An inclusive education helps prepare students with disabilities for an integrated adult life and builds understanding and acceptance within the broader community. Staff members meet weekly in professional learning communities (PLCs) to develop shared instructional plans for all students. General education and special education teachers provide instruction in general education classrooms with all educators teaching from common instructional plans and tools developed within the PLC. Teachers employ co -teaching, team teaching, flexible grouping, small group instruction, and individualized instruction in order to proactively support each student. LPS educators believe that all learners should be provided differentiated forms of instruction. Staff recognize that all students learn in different ways, and at different paces. To meet student needs, the staff continually adapt its staffing support, instructional methodologies and assessment practices based upon the student data and personalized student needs. Response to Intervention (RTI) provides the regular education foundation of each school's continuum of service model. Staff provide tiered levels of support to all students (tier one — the general classroom curriculum; tier two — strategic levels of instruction; tier three — intensive levels of instruction usually at the individualized level.) Authentic, classroom -based assessments help the teachers drive daily instructional decision making, select instructional materials, and monitor academic progress. If a student demonstrates academic and/or pro -social performance issues despite thorough RTI procedures, the team or individual teacher may request the Child Study Team process. These teams provide student case review, and support the teacher to implement additional strategies or suggest an in-depth evaluation to identify additional student needs. The special education staff are important team members in the professional learning communities. They meet with their PLC teams weekly to plan instruction and seamless supports in concert with the IEP and the general curriculum. Special educators are skillful at providing behavior plans, social skills instruction and modified lessons coordinated with classroom teachers and all education specialists who work with the students. The district -wide special education programs are offered at each of the elementary schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive The Historic Past Meets the Progressive Future district -wide placement level, (i.e. the ILP Program). Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. The most intense district -wide program, ILP, is served at both the Fiske School for students with the most needs and at the Hastings School where students are more likely to be more incorporated into the general classrooms. The ILP students are served by special educators with intensive certification. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. Lexington Elementary District -Wide Programs District -wide special education programs are offered at each of the elementary schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level. Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. At the elementary level, district -wide programs exist to service low incidence disability areas by offering more intensive supports. Each elementary school houses at least one district -wide program. The majority of special education students are included and receive support in the general education classrooms as well as in resource classrooms with their special education liaison. Students in all of the programs receive related services (e.g. speech/language, occupational therapy, physical therapy) as needed. There are four district -wide programs and a reading program in each building that provides direct systematic, multi -sensory instruction. 1. Developmental Learning Program (DLP) — Harrington: The Developmental Learning Program (DLP) services students with significant developmental delays or intellectual/neurological impairments. Modified curricula are offered within a small group format in all subject areas. Typically, students receive direct instruction in content areas from special educators, while they join general education classes (art, music, lunch) to build relationships with typically -developing peers. Instruction may include activities of daily living and development of social skills. Enrollment: The number of students enrolled in the DLP program has remained relatively steady over the past 10 years (ranging from 9-15 students per year). However, the enrollment is anticipated to decrease slightly in the next five years. Refer to the enrollment charts at the end of the section. Space Needs: Based upon the current DLP population, two full size classrooms are sufficient. One classroom including a toilet room is located with the lower grade classrooms (grades K-2) and another classroom located with the upper grade classrooms (grades 3- 5). The overall current dedicated spaces for this program include: (2) full size classrooms (900-1,100 NFA) 2. Intensive Learning Programs (ILP): a. Substantially Separate Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Fiske: The Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Fiske provides services for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities with intensive needs including deficits mm in language, social communication, play skills, abstract thinking, and behavior. The Intensive Learning Programs provide highly individualized services involving behavioral approaches (typically based on Applied Behavior Analysis principles) to learning. Instruction includes social skill development and daily living skill development. Special educators modify content and methodology to teach to mastery, based on academic and behavioral data. Small -group and/or individualized instruction can be provided for the entire school day when necessary and appropriate. Consultation to parents and structured home components are provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The number of students enrolled in the substantially separate ILP has been relatively stable in the recent past (approximately 26 students annually) however it is seeing a slight uptick in the population in FY18 and the foreseeable future to approximately 31-34 students per year. Refer to the enrollment charts at the end of the section. Space Needs: Based upon the existing substantially separate ILP population four full size classrooms are sufficient. One full-size classroom would include a toilet room. In addition to the full-size classrooms, two dedicated speech and language spaces and one dedicated BCBA space also support the program. The overall current dedicated space requirements are: (4) full size classrooms (900-1100 NFA/each) (2) speech and language spaces (750 NFA/each) (1) BCBA space (-150 NFA) b. Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Hastings: The Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Hastings also services students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities. Through this integrated approach students are included, often with support, for the majority of their school day within the general education setting. Special educators provide direct instruction within the general education setting and within special education settings. Special educators modify content and methodology to meet the needs of students and use data collection and behavior analysis in their work with students. Coordination between special education staff and general educators is essential within this inclusion model. Consultation to parents is provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the integrated ILP has remained relatively consistent in the recent past, ranging from 29-35 students. The enrollment forecast suggests a slightly lower enrollment forecast, however it is sometimes difficult to anticipate this student population as families move into the District just prior to the school year. Therefore it is prudent to plan for an enrollment of 30-35 students. Space Needs: Although the focus of this program is inclusion, these students require dedicated spaces for direct instruction. The new Hastings School has been designed with these students in mind. There are three dedicated full-size classrooms that are integrated with the general classrooms. In addition to the dedicated classrooms, other support spaces are required. The overall spaces for this program include: (3) Full size classrooms (900-1150 NFA/each) (3) Calming spaces (-150 NFA/each) • (1) BCBA space (-150 NFA) • (1) Break out space (-250 NFA) • (1) Dedicated ETS office (-175 NFA) 3. Language Learning Program (LLP) — Bowman: The Language Learning Program (LLP) services students who have significant, language -based learning disabilities. These students typically have at least average cognitive abilities, but they are not acquiring reading, writing and/or language usage skills at the same pace/level as their peers. Many of the students in the program require explicit phonetic -alphabetic instruction beyond that offered through general education. Instruction in literacy is a focus, with emphasis on developing reading and written language skills using specialized curricula. Math instruction may also be provided within the Language Learning Program, as determined by the student's needs. Support is available within the general education setting for science and social studies. This support, which is determined by individual student need, may include substantial modifications. The goal of the Language Learning Program is to build students' literacy skills in a structured and supportive environment that fosters students' confidence while increasing their skills in becoming active learners. Enrollment: The enrollment for the integrated LLP has decreased from its peak enrollment of 24 in FY2015 to approximately 10 students at the elementary school level. It is prudent for space planning purposes to anticipate approximately 20 students in this program annually. Space Needs: The current space needs for the LLP include: • (2) Full size classrooms (-900 NFA) • (4-5) Small, individual instruction spaces (-75 NFA/each) 4. Therapeutic Learning Programs (TLP) — Bridge and Estabrook: The Therapeutic Learning Programs at Bridge and Estabrook service students with significant emotional impairment or other disabilities that may manifest themselves through difficulties with self- regulation. These students may or may not have associated learning difficulties. The programs provide instruction in developing social/emotional regulation within a structured, caring, and therapeutic classroom environment. Students within these programs access the general education classrooms for varied amounts of time as specified within their Individual Education Programs. Special education services may also be provided within the general education setting. In addition, content area instruction is available on an individualized and/or small group basis when deemed necessary by the student's Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the overall program has remained steady in recent years. The program at Bridge School has consistently been 9-11 students for the past five years and it is anticipated to remain the same. The enrollment at Estabrook has also been very consistent, with 10-13 students in the program annually. Space Needs: The existing space needs for this program include: • (2) Half size classrooms (-500 NFA) with an area for a calming space • (1) Smaller breakout room (-200 NFA) mm 5. Special Education Reading: Special education reading teachers provide individual and small group instruction to students in need of a systematic, rules -based approach to reading. There is a half-time Special Education Reading Teacher at each of the six elementary schools. Lexington Middle School District -Wide Programs District -wide special education programs are shared between the middle schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level. Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. At the middle school level, district -wide programs exist to service low incidence disability areas by offering more intensive supports. The majority of special education students are included and receive support in the general education classrooms as well as in resource classrooms with their special education liaison. Students in all of the programs receive related services (e.g. speech/language, occupational therapy, physical therapy) as needed. There are four district - wide programs and a reading program in each building that provides direct systematic, multi - sensory instruction. 1. Developmental Learning Program (DLP) — Clarke: The Developmental Learning Program (DLP) services students with significant developmental delays or intellectual/neurological impairments. Modified curricula are offered within a small group format in all subject areas. Typically, students receive direct instruction in content areas from special educators, while they join general education classes (art, music, lunch) to build relationships with typically -developing peers. Instruction may include activities of daily living and development of social skills. Enrollment: The enrollment for the DLP has ranged from as low as five students to as many as 13 students in recent years. For space planning purposes it is prudent to anticipate an enrollment of approximately 15 students for this program. Space Needs: Based upon the current DLP population, the current requirements are: • (1) life skills classrooms (1,000 NFA) • (1) general classroom (-800 NFA) 2. Intensive Learning Programs (ILP): a. Substantially Separate Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Diamond: The Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Diamond provides services for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities with intensive needs including deficits in language, social communication, play skills, abstract thinking, and behavior. The Intensive Learning Programs provide highly individualized services involving behavioral approaches (typically based on Applied Behavior Analysis principles) to learning. Instruction includes social skill development and daily living skill development. Special educators modify content and methodology to teach to mastery, based on academic and behavioral data. Small -group and/or individualized instruction can be provided for the NN entire school day when necessary and appropriate. Consultation to parents and structured home components are provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the Substantially Separate ILP has been consistent for the recent past and anticipated future of approximately eight students annually. Space Needs: Although the number of students for this program is relatively low, the spatial requirements do not directly corelate to the low enrollment. The current space requirements are: • (4) small group classrooms (-400 NFA/each) • (1) small life skills classroom (-300 NFA) • (1) ILP office (-125-150 NFA) b. Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Clarke: The Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Clarke also services students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities. Through this integrated approach students are included, often with support, for the majority of their school day within the general education setting. Special educators provide direct instruction within the general education setting and within special education settings. Special educators modify content and methodology to meet the needs of students and use data collection and behavior analysis in their work with students. Coordination between special education staff and general educators is essential within this inclusion model. Consultation to parents is provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The integrated ILP has a larger cohort than the Substantially Separate ILP at Diamond Middle School. The enrollment for this program has fluctuated from 17 students to as many as 24 students annually. However the trend for enrollment is increasing. Therefore it is prudent to anticipate approximately 25-30 students in this program annually. Space Needs: The space requirements for this program are less than the Substantially Separate ILP at the Diamond Middle School as it is an integration model. The current space needs are: (2) full size classrooms (-800 NFA/each) (1) ILP office (-125-150 NFA) 3. Language Learning Program (LLP) — Diamond: The Language Learning Program (LLP) services students who have significant, language -based learning disabilities. These students typically have at least average cognitive abilities, but they are not acquiring reading, writing and/or language usage skills at the same pace/level as their peers. Many of the students in the program require explicit phonetic -alphabetic instruction beyond that offered through general education. Instruction in literacy is a focus, with emphasis on developing reading and written language skills using specialized curricula. Math instruction may also be provided within the Language Learning Program, as determined by the student's needs. Support is available within the general education setting for science and social studies. This support, which is determined by individual student need, may include substantial modifications. The goal of the Language Learning Program is to build students' literacy skills in a structured and supportive environment that fosters students' confidence while increasing their skills in am becoming active learners. Enrollment: The enrollment for the LLP has been and is anticipated to be stable in the future. The enrollment has had an average of 16-22 students annually. It is appropriate to anticipate the same enrollment for future planning purposes. Space Needs: The current space requirements are: • (1) full size classroom (-900 NFA) • (1) break-out classroom (-400 NFA) • (1) ILP office (-125-150 NFA) 4. Therapeutic Learning Programs (TLP): The Therapeutic Learning Program is offered at both Clarke and Diamond Schools servicing students with significant emotional impairment or other disabilities that may manifest themselves through difficulties with self-regulation. These students may or may not have associated learning difficulties. The programs provide instruction in developing social/emotional regulation within a structured, caring, and therapeutic classroom environment. Students within these programs access the general education classrooms for varied amounts of time as specified within their Individual Education Programs. Special education services may also be provided within the general education setting. In addition, content area instruction is available on an individualized and/or small group basis when deemed necessary by the student's Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the TLP has remained and is anticipated to be stable in the future. The enrollment at Clarke MS averages between 10-15 students annually. The program enrollment at Diamond averages 6-9 students annually. Space Needs: The current space usage at each school is: • (2) half size classrooms (-400 NFA) 5. Special Education Reading: Special education reading teachers provide individual and small group instruction to students in need of a systematic, rules -based approach to reading. There is a half-time Special Education Reading Teacher at both of the middle schools. MM mm e„e,,,ee,,,e°e,,,,,,,e„see,,,,,,ee,,,o ------------------------------------ mm 0 00 O _4 s o �n 4 E m L^ b w bA O O N a m m D� mm ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------ =-4-4 =NN N N N N en en en N en en en N en en N N -4 N N i N N -4 ILL —j m6� mm 011011011Oil 011011011011-411-411011Oil 011011011011011011011Oil 011011011011011011011Oil 011011011011011011-411-4110110110110 N 00 n IIII co co cn a -I N -4 -4 O lf1 M a -I IIII M a�—I a�-I a�—I aw—I O O n IIII N N aw—I aw—I epi a -I r4 w M III N N N M M -* -* � IIII ' cn r4 en -* -* -* N 00 n IIII a -I N -4 -4 a�-I l0 M `� IIII M ami a�-I a—I aw—I O O ^ IIII N N aw—I a -I a�—I a -I M III N N N M M - � IIII 'cn r4 en -* -* -* rj " IIII IIII IIII III'c$ 00 1 r- r- 0) o 0)IIII rj 11 rjIIII IIII IIII III N 00 00 m C) 0) u:�IIII " IIII IIII IIII IIIIt M007e00)11' WIIII rq ,x.i rW Ln . i m m u^ w o) am �-e e Ln Ln r, N iI rn rq o em Ln r, w ,* rq e —1 r� �9 r� N Ln rn cw cw car Ln w w cw -i °O _4 N N m Ln bA O O N a e m N m m w 0 p N N car Ln zt ' IIII ' ° IIII ' ' IIII ' ' III ' ' IIII ' t Ln t ' 'IIII °IIII 'IIII 'III 'IIII m m r� oo m O ''-1 1 v 1n w r` oo m O -1 1 v 1n w r` oo m O -1 1 v Ln w r` oo m O -1 1 v n w r` oo m O r1 1 v 1n w r` r-1 r-1 N '.... N r-1 r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I N N r -I r -I r -I ci ci ci N N ci ci ci ci ci r-1 N N r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r -I N N r -I r -I r -I r -I LL LL LL '. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL m c o c E a, ° E = m U D = m mm NIC411mil -411011011011011011011011 Oil 011011011011011011011 C411 011011011011-illenlicnii -*Il OIIOIIOIIOIIOIIOIIOIIOil OIIOI1OI1O * M N N IIII ' m m -* -* M M N IIII ' in Ln Ln n b0 b0 n IIII ' N N b0 b0 (n b0 (n IIII ' Ln Ln Ln -* M en IIII ' Ln r4 o -* Ln Ln r4 -i r4 Ln cn r4 Ln vmNN rArA -* -*MMN Ln Ln Ln r, co co r, r,Nbobo(,(n�, vrnrnrnvmm vrnrn oo ''.... Ol O .-i 1 -zt Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O .-i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O -i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O .-i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O r -i Ln w n ci .--I N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I ',, r -I N N r -I r -I r -I ci ci ',, ci N N ci ci ci ci ci ',, r -I N N ci r -I r -I r -I r -I ',. r -I N N ci r -I r -I r -I LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' m r-1 r-1 W ko 0) ko ' N 0) r, m r -I r -I 11',. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' am .--e .--e N .--1 rq rq rq N .--1 N N M M M w .--e r, w o) aero o) m Ln .--e j u- ,* b N .--1 N rq rq rq N N N m rn rn rq 0 0 Y m .--1 rs aero 0) rn r, r, .--1 .--1 II^,,, ',* ,I. D w w N .--1 N N rq rq rq N N m m rn rq ch O _4 t 000 W III, III, ' r" 0) r.--1 0) 0) ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 00 m 00 m W0 0 ' 00 00 m N-1 .--1 .--1 a\ -I m Ln 00111,111, 4' 1 0) m C'.7 0) 111,w --'N II^", m 00m 00 0 0111,r" 0)C'.7 bA O O N O. m r„ u,,,, aero rn m a) a) r, -i ir, rq ' ' ' ' ' ' . . . . . . . . 0M1 —i ctib 0 4: p u^,,, ko rs e e m �--1 - o m 0 4 r, o) rn rq .--1 car Ln .--1 ir, rq rq e--1 r-1 rs car car O ir, aero rq e--1 .--1 car a) r-1 cr rn rq Ln Ln r� r� rq rq rq ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' t �t car r, aero rq rn Ln r, O �-e m rq 11 car m m N rq rq .--1 car w w rq rn rq Ln C e ' t oo ''.... Ol O .-i 1 -zt Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O .-i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O -i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O .-i � Ln w n oo ''.... Ol O r -i Ln w n ci .--I N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I ',, r -I N N r -I r -I r -I ci ci ',, ci N N ci ci ci ci ci ',, r -I N N ci r -I r -I r -I r -I ',. r -I N N ci r -I r -I r -I LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C Y O 3 b 0 0 CO U D w w a rA IIMII-* II M II O II O II O II O II- II` 1I-1�I- II O II O II O II O II M II N II ,� II ,� II O II O II O II O II ,� II-* II O II O II O II O II O II O 1I -1I- II M II N II O II O II O 1I R*en b0 wO ' to b0 m cor4 N rn' b0 woo Ln Ln w rf1 ' c i a i w a i cn N ' ' b0 cn a i N N w rf1 O cn O -i M N lf1 lf1 lf1 M N lf1 lf1 M N M M N M w O M -*-* w M -q -4 _j l0 N O t ' Ln b0 Ln cnM M ' 00 l0 00 00 M Ln ' a -I a -I w O M N ' by (n a q Mn M (n N O m O -4 LnN lf1 lf1 lf1 M N lf1 lf1 M N M M N M a -I l0 O M l0 Ol a -I a—I a -I IIII IIII IIII IIII 't�'" Mrn 4IIII 'IIII' ' ' ' ' ' IIII' ' ' ' ' ' ' 'IIII' IIII', "It m —i (n MI'll-r'IIII' i i ii IIII i i i i i i IIII i 1 IIII 1 i i i i i i i IIII ' m It m m ',* M' ILG"k IIII i i i i It m m It M ILG) kP O _4 t O e --I ko rn w --i ' 'ci'm a) a) rq o) GXD ' 00 m 0) m 0 w --G Gw;D ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . . . 'c$' N Ln ev m r Gw w''.... m O r1 � Ln w n w ''.... m O r1 � Ln w n m ''.... m O r1 Ln W M r -I kP W 0 0) PV 0) W ILG) 0 0) r" 0 r -'N 6..;D kP r -I ci ci r -I r -I cN N ci ci r -I r -I r -I r -I N N PV PV 'C$' PV m r1 r -I r -I r -I bA O LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL O C a m m �--I kP II^°,• 0) 0) m 0) W ILG) kP 0) W 0 .--e �';g kP ILG"k N —1-� m kP II' , M e 0 m 0 00 ILG) kP M —I —I —I r' 0 0 0 kP ILG) I —I —I —I cry Ir,. rn G w cn cr r, Ln kP rn G w r' 0 r, car ILG) T -i G w —I ' � e m r, rn G w rp t r� t� aw G w r, oo Ln oo T -i G w m ev W 0) car 7-e c w —1I —1I � Ln ev m r Gw w''.... m O r1 � Ln w n w ''.... m O r1 � Ln w n m ''.... m O r1 � Ln w n w ''.... m O r1 � Ln w n w ''.... Ol O r1 � Ln W n r -I r -I N N r -I ci ci r -I r -I cN N ci ci r -I r -I r -I r -I N N r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I ci N N ci ci ci ci ci ci N N r1 r -I r -I r -I LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C 0 N bjD LL = = J CD O _4 s o �n 4 E m Ln i 4 - ba bA O O N a m m o � ME a,°eee,oaeeee„eese„a,eeee„seee..a ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- aam�.,.=_q_q ..eme....eee._�.e�n�...e ..eme....eee__�me�n�..._ ME l ll Ln N N i i i i i i N N (Y9 N i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 00 V 00 Ol 0 Ln M c -I ' m N M O R* Ln O' c -I O Ln vl W c -I V O Ol O c -I Ol Ol Ol Ol N O T Ln I, O M n N l N rV M l V V N N u1 V1 M M N N rrl c -I N N N N N -zt Ln to I, W Ol 0 c ` � Ln to Il W Ol 0 c ` � Ln to I� W pl 0 c t Ln to I� W Ol 0 c t Ln to I- W Ol 0 c N N N N N N N N N �--� �--� �--� �--� N N N N N �--� �--� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL dK K H D ME 00 V 00 m N w M c -I ' Ol N M N l0 00 c -I L tw co m a 0 r r r S Ln V W N 0 'a_ C31 .-1 4� 4CY tv7 rr'r n CO co r, r, m .ti {a 10 V Q i+ r-1 r-1 M N M r -i N CO Uo I, r, m m 0 ® rH rH ,. •. � � � � � � � � � cp LfY cp 61 CY'Y N � -zt Ln to I, W Ol 0 c ` � Ln to Il W Ol 0 c ` � Ln to I� W pl 0 c t Ln to I� W Ol 0 c t Ln to I- W Ol 0 c N N N N N N N N N �--� �--� �--� �--� N N N N N �--� �--� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL dK K H D ME N 0 l ll. N i i i i 00 V0) N Il w w 00 r -I V 0l V woo n ' M O 0l rl rl V w z O V1 V N O n N n 00 w n n w V 00 N N N r -I N r -I N N N M r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I N l!1 Ln Ln Il 00 00 n " N " N r -I N N 00 V m N Il w w 00 N V M V woo n ' M O m 14 14 V w w O V1 V N O n N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N Ln Ln Ln Il 00 00 Il N N N N N N m 00 rl 00 It Ol w„y' M M M h M 0) N ILrY C'Y'M M r-1 r-1 CD 0 0, 4D 4C! M M M It �ILrY N ,-i r-1 r-1 r-1 N r-1 N N N ` N N N N N N N N 0/} } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 00 00 00 It 0) 1-11 C'Y'M Ol rH M M rl N ILrY C'Y'M N 4S3 1- rl 0 K)"Y 0 (;1 M It M 0 M ILrY N ' ,-i r-1 r-1 N r-1 N N N N m 00 -'P 0 It m Ol 0 h It h N m m N N 00 r -I 0) 0 0, M m m m cel m N r-1 r -i N r-1 N N N N N M N ' N "-1' r-1 r-1 CD M N r-1 N cp r -i r -i N 0 rH N r-1 M M r-1 r -i N ILrY CD -zt Ln to I, W m O c -I -zt Ln to I, 00 Ol O c -I -zt Ln lD I- 00 Ol O c -I -zt Ln to I, W Ol O c -I t Ln to I, W Ol O c -I N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� ` N N N N N N N N 0/} } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 0/ ME 0 V N N r -I N M M V N w w 00 N w M ' N r -I N V w m N w I, w m 00 w w zT O r -I V M 00 O M O O D r -I N Il M ID ID N ri N r -I r -I Il n 00 00 m 00 m V Ln Ln Ln V M M r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I r -I N N N w w 00 N w M ' N r -I N 1n1 M N Ln w Il w m 00 w w 00 ' V0 N V M 00 O M O O D r -I r -I n M w w N N N N N I� n 00 00 m m m V Ln Ln Ln V M M N N N N N N N N c0 m cn c0 CLF w„y' N CV 01 h cel r -i -i r, In ' CV It CV N N r-1 N N CY'Y �'Y CY'Y 0) Ln h co w„y' N m Lft cp -1 r -i f"•, w„y' rH CO M CV cp N w -I' N N N (n M M N Ln CO CO It N r -i I'"a I'"a r-1 r-1 r, 1-1, w-1' rJ r-1 r-1 cry CV i i i i i i i N N In In M N m c0 cn c0 cn co CD CD N .- cn cn r-1 r-1 r -i r -i cn CO cn CO 0 0 r, M M N ' cp ,�. �:-i -i cp fe rH rH r -i r -i O1 r-1 c0 O c) r, o cp N N cp r -i r -i r -i 40 N H H r -i O1 c0 c0 O r, o N cn r-1 cn r-1 r -i r -i c(} cp .ti c0 Il 0 N CY'Y r-1 cf} r-1 r-1 r -i CO m ,. .-I 4C5 4G 4C5 N M N .-I cn .-I .-I .-I U5 -1 Illlu T. V1 0 Il 00 Ol O c -I > rt Ln 0 I, 00 Ol O c -I rt Ln o I, W Ol O rt Ln o I- W Ol O c -I rt Ln 0 Il 00 Ol O c -I rt Ln II } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N } } } } } } } } i� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL } } LL LL N i N LL pW pW I 3,.34 l0 I, W Ol O V1 l0 I� W Ol O c -I V1 l0 I� W Ol O -zt Ln V1 l0 I- W Ol O c -I oo a) -zt Ln V1 l0 I- W Ol O c -I oo a) Ln ` V1 l0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ro r -I N N ro r -I N N N ro LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL l0 Il V V ri W ' V1 N O Ol M 00 W V Ol V n Ln N O m ' Ln 00 Ln 00 N N M V N N m m N Il N ' 00 l0 N N M M M N V V1 V1 V V (Y) N N ri N N N r -I V1 Ln V1 R* V (y9 N M M M N M M N N V V1 l0 Il V V NW ' V1 N O V W N Ol ,. V Ol V n V1 N O Ol ' vl 00 V1 Ol M M V V N N Ol V1 O W N ' 00 l0 N N M M M N V V1 V1 V1 V V N N N N N N N V1 V1 Ln R* V (Y9 N M M M N M M N N V u1 tw co m a` o rl rH cP' lC) ILrY y-1' 00 00 lD M N r-1 N 4CF Cf} M 1-1 1-1 cp - - N K)Y IX5 C� LfY 4C5 LfY C� ILrl 10 N CO C4 0 H rH e-1 H H Ln V W N 0 d N It 0 ILrY w -j, f'"" hl 0) 0 0 Me lLF r-1 1- cp In In 1-1 1-1 M ' 4f� I 61 � K)Y IX5 ILrl - - - - - - N ILrl ice+ r r -1 r r r r i, 10 V Q i+ In OF m 1-1' r, 00 0) N It ('/7 r -i lCF f'„, (Y} C'P' r-1 N r-1 r -i CY'Y w;y' 61 61 ('/7 61 IX7 I.fS lLF 'n CO ” OF N I.fS f'^•• m 'D V1 m * f'„, oo ”-j' rH OF 61 r-1 o f'^•• m lft N r-1 r-1 m w Ci M Ci 00 ILrY lD M In - OF - N Ln r', ILrl ' f`~ C7 rH rH rH rH rH rH V1 M rl 00 '-1' M m r, O o r, m N N N r-1 N m y r -i 61 61 rl M lD M N M M 0 1- M r', ILrY 1-1 I"`' O rH rH It 0 00 " ' M m O C'P' rl M N ,. • r-1 1- cp In M N ,. • cp m N m - ILrY r -i r -i r, 00 rH l0 I, W Ol O V1 l0 I� W Ol O c -I V1 l0 I� W Ol O -zt Ln V1 l0 I- W Ol O c -I oo a) -zt Ln V1 l0 I- W Ol O c -I oo a) Ln ` V1 l0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ro r -I N N ro r -I N N N ro LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� LL LL LL No I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln lD I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln to I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln to I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln lD I- W Ol O c -I Ln to Il N N N N N } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 3 ` N N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� ` N N N N N } } } } LL LL LL LL v III v v �I oo Ln Lne ....... _. say D _ ..�� 11 .. .... ...e... .... ... s. a..>.� ag_ sa...aa ... �... 11 ...,..a. .IIIrj txo co Se =a o CD Lr� . III I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln lD I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln to I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln to I, W Ol O c -I -zt Ln lD I- W Ol O c -I Ln to Il N N N N N } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL ` N N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } Ln LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N N N N N N N N } } } } } } } } LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL� ` N N N N N } } } } LL LL LL LL v v v � D No mm }�\I ON °<f� � �� __�•. .. .. . }� } }� � }Is ) }� : }� }� }� }� }� }\ ,\ } ' � }/ }/ }� \ � ( . (� � ... . ... y\ �}� }� }�{\ /. � mm BowmanI'laryESchool 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 67,905 GSIF (Alrnc luudi nug ir7ioduullairs) 13.3 Ac fres LEGEND j,r Spacesa Core Academic 26 21,962 NFA ELL 2 '1, 727 NiA oGEN EV/ Special Education 15 4 051 NI=A Art & Music 3 2.,A69 NFA Health & PE LI,FFCIAILM SUPPORT Library 2.,030 NFA R 3,292 NFA Medical/Admin SFECI L EDUCATION Custod / Maint. 343 NiA Other(Lextended) 1 66 NFA L16KAKY 2,692 NFA Total Program NFA 47,219 NFA A A 9 A A Comments ARI MI151C R _ CJ,A E GYIdN II,M n f f 0 CAFE IEFIAIN TCHENFL u J �„; A A ADMIN AI RA110it A 0 61,ILVINC»LFVICFS o c R R R CIKCIILAI 10it / j,r Spacesa Core Academic 26 21,962 NFA ELL 2 '1, 727 NiA Gen. Ed Support 5 1,671 NFA Special Education 15 4 051 NI=A Art & Music 3 2.,A69 NFA Health & PE 3.337 NiA Library 2.,030 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,292 NFA Medical/Admin 3,002 NFA Custod / Maint. 343 NiA Other(Lextended) 1 66 NFA Misc. Support Space 2,692 NFA Total Program NFA 47,219 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SP Comments Go ar NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment Kindergarten Classrooms < 1,000 NFA Gen. Ed. Classrooms < 840 NFA Ifdecrn I>uv' .hcrcrls M'.ear I'I'an i20 3-39 Bridge Elementary School 1966, If3ell'no 2014, 2017 65,425 GSIF (Alrnc luudi nug ir7ioduullairs) 29.5 Ac fres LEGEND o EN EV! LLKKILIAIIM SUPPORT SFECI L EDUCATION LI6KAKY A 9 B d4 A A ,9 9 4 A A A 9 AFI"'L1CIC rq A ei STAGE Gj 0 � GYMNASIUM 4 � � R .,.... .. CAFE ILKIA/KITCHEN E] AVMINAIRA110it • 0 5 O 6LILPINC EF'ICFS CIF�I,LAIIOJ l� / 1001 Spaces NFA Core Academic 27 22,862 NFA ELL 1 bol NiA Gen. Ed Support 7 1,63,1 NFA Special Education 10 2,369 NI=A Art & Music 3 2.,798 NFA Health & PE 3,337 Ni A Library 2.,080 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,192 NFA Medical/Admin 2,827 NFA Custod / Maint. 859 Ni A Other(Lextended) CI NFA Misc. Support Space 2,732 NFA Total Program NFA 45,346 NFA Gross SF 65,464 SF Comments Go ar NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment Kindergarten Classrooms < 1,000 NFA Gen. Ed. Classrooms < 840 NFA igton l'uEI cho6s Master PI'an I I i20 3-39 . ........................... 0C'� „t� ,. � ................ w, m ,,,n w, m , „,� ,. "EL la rd �F 111. oir 2014 91,840 GSIF13.4 Agile, NFA —Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment LEGEND o GEN LD/ LI,FFCIAILM SIFFOKI CFECI L EDuamON LIDRARY AKI!MI,"iIL SI,,A E. GYMN/�SII1M 0 CAFE ILKIAIN ILHEN ADMINAIRAHON DIALDINC 'LKVILES CIRCILAAHON xa` Baseil ", gion flub l :.hoots Master PlarI � i2o 3-40 Spaces NFA Core Academic 26 26,446 NFA ELL 4 2,380 NFA Gen. Ed Support 8 2,405 NFA Special Education 15 3,779 NFA Art & Music 4 4,705 NFA Health & PE 6,235 NFA Library 3,012 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,919 NFA Medical Armin 2,071 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,632 NFA Other(Lextended) 1 133 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,569 NFA Total Program NFA 1 60,506 NFA Gross SF 91,840 SF Comments Femrty dsslgnsd to moaa,e omllmem xa` Baseil ", gion flub l :.hoots Master PlarI � i2o 3-40 .............. s,�e ................ ................ . .. I I �&r-ner-i tary Sd�'Ioo 2007, 2017 76,405 GSIF (Alrnc luudi nug ir7ioduullairs) 11.7 Ac fres NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized nt Lexlrl{; ion fltjb c. Schcrcrl'a Master Plar'i Spaces NFA Core Academic 20 20,684 NFA ELL 2 700 NiA Gen. Ed Support 11 1,821 NFA Special Education 18 6944 NI=A Art & Music 2 2.,923 NFA Health & PE 6,334 NFA Library 2,548 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,120 NFA Medical Armin 2,678 NFA Custod / Maint. 1,819 NFA Other(Lextended) 1 1151 NFA Misc. Support Space 2,721 NFA Total Program NFA 51,443 NFA Gross SF 75,511 SF Comments Et_� qry undersized Gen Ed support size undersized, IIP undersized Lexlrl{; ion fltjb c. Schcrcrl'a Master Plar'i ................ I a.. r r i r,",i g............. tor-�'i I'lary Sd�,ioo ma.0Y15 76,867 GSIF 19.0 Aclre NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment and Flooir "Lex,g ion 4>uE Schools Master Plan � /20 3-42 Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 25,052 NFA ELL 1 987 NFA Gen. Ed Support 11 2,517 NFA Special Education 11 4,257 NFA Art & Music 3 3,691 NFA Health & PE 4,543 NFA Library 2,867 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,385 NFA Medical Armin 2,709 NFA Custod / Maint. 1,978 NFA Other(Lextended) 1 352 NFA Misc. Support Space 2,617 NFA Total Program NFA 53,955 NFA Gross SF 89,015 SF commentsmoaa,e Femrty dsslgnsd to nroomem wimom LOP "Lex,g ion 4>uE Schools Master Plan � /20 3-42 I ................ las[-J'r.�,Igs Sd�,ioo 2020 110,000 GSIF14.3 Ac ire s, NFA —Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment LEGEND CLASSROOM SPECtALEDUCATION ❑ LIBRARY ❑ ART/MUSIC STAGE ® GYMNASIUM ❑ KITCHENTCAFETERIA ADMINTEXTENDED DAV BUILDING SERVICES / � I. Spaces NFA Core Academic 30 29,642 NFA ELL3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE 6,300 NFA Library 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 4,445 NFA Medical Armin 3,401 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,340 NFA Other(Lextended) 1 550 NFA Total Program NFA 1 66,772 NFA Gross SF110,000 SF Comments Facility, designed to om modate enrollment M and F {; ion flub :.hoofs Master Phil I /2U 3-43 Clarke II Middle hool 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 145,000 GSF 20.0 Acres Middle Schools The chart below represents the current spaces allocated to each of the educational programs for both middle schools. The core programs are consistent across both schools. The special education program space needs are slightly different at each school. Each school provides moderate special needs services for the students within their school. In addition, each school IlDiairnaind Middle School 1958, Reno 2000, 2017 155,300 GSF 34.6 Acres provides similar duplicative, district -wide special education programs with slight differentials in the programs. The middle school educational program, floor plans, and space usage are provided on the following pages. In addition, the comprehensive, district -wide special education program is included in this section. EDUCAT�UN I IR IRAIM I EMSTIING MOD .......E SCI --1001.......S FY 2019 O)Net Floor Area of program (z)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3)Kitchen, staff lunch 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I March 2020 3-44 No MOSMI/O%% Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support(2) 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space(3) 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF O)Net Floor Area of program (z)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3)Kitchen, staff lunch 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I March 2020 3-44 LEXINGTON MIDDLE SCHOOLS Jew Y EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM i m November 13 2019 APRIL I9", INTRODUCTION Lexington Public School's vision for the middle school program is to provide students with a challenging, innovative, and engaging academic program while also ensuring that they are safe, supported, and connected to the larger community around them. One of the goals that supports this vision is to use tenets of Project Based Learning (PBL), Universal Design for Learning, and other experiential learning approaches to provide an engaging, challenging, and relevant educational experience for all students. CLASS SIZE POLICIES The Lexington School Committee and the Lexington Education Association recognize that class size is an important factor in quality education. Teacher/pupil ratios are stated in the collective bargaining agreement between the Lexington Education Association: Unit A and the Lexington School Committee. The language with regard to the middle school states that "each middle school team, as presently constituted, shall not exceed 96 students, including special education and bilingual students, computed upon full-time equivalency attendance." With four classrooms per team, this essentially caps the class size at 24 students. Although no specific language exists regarding the class size of Exploratory classes, these programs have been limited to 24 students per class as well. SCHOOL SCHEDULING METHOD Both middle schools operate on a five-day rotating schedule (days are numbered one through five) and each grade level has two schedules associated with it. The method is as follows: Students in each grade level are scheduled into teams. Each student is then assigned a homeroom within that team. For example, a sixth -grade student that is assigned to the Atlantis team would have either room one, two, three or four as his/her homeroom. Students are hand scheduled by their team teachers for each of their core academic classes (math, science, ELA, social studies) and all students within a team share the same core academic teachers. They have each of their core classes one time per day. These team teachers meet daily to discuss students' current and future learning needs. They help shape the students' academic and emotional experiences in conjunction with the administration and parents as needed. The Historic Past Meets the Progressive Future am Every student is assigned to four non-core, or exploratory, classes per semester. For these classes students are scheduled by administration. Students are assigned to exploratory classes by grade level rather than by team—therefore each exploratory class can have students from all teams. These classes, which include: world language, art, engineering, physical education / health, drama, music (chorus and music), technology, and reading enrichment; meet two times per five-day rotation. Teachers of core classes are assigned four instructional blocks and one "academic support" block per day. In addition, they have a homeroom at the beginning and end of the day. Each core teacher has one prep period and one lunch period per day along with three collaborative periods (with cluster and department) per five days. Exploratory teachers can be assigned up to five instructional blocks per day. Each exploratory teacher has one prep period and one lunch period per day along with one collaborative period per five days. TEACHING METHODOLOGY AND STRUCTURE (E.G., ACADEMIES, DEPARTMENTS, HOUSES, TEAMS, ETC.) Both middle schools have each of the three grades divided into teams — each team is comprised of no more than 96 students. Each team has four core academic teachers that also serve as homeroom teachers. Both middle schools operate as a professional learning community providing dedicated time for teachers to collaborate with their team colleagues (two times per five day rotation to discuss student progress and interdisciplinary projects, etc.) and other members of their department (one time per five days by grade level). Teachers take pride in their hands-on collaborative approach to instruction that is beneficial to students at all grade levels. In order to facilitate this collaborative, cross -curricular approach, team classrooms within each grade level are situated as close to each other as possible. TEACHER PLANNING AND ROOM ASSIGNMENT POLICIES As stated above, each teacher is provided with one forty minute planning period per day (contractual requirement). Rooms are assigned in the following manner: Grade levels and teams are configured to best promote the "small school" feel, with proximity being the key factor. Team classrooms are kept—for the most part— adjacent or across from each other. Grade levels are contained as much as possible. Ideally, each grade would have its own wing/hallway. Team teachers are each assigned their classrooms which are utilized five or six periods a day (of the available seven) by the primary teacher. However, teachers do not have dedicated classrooms. Both schools operate with a teacher planning room which provides a dedicated space for each teacher when they are not in their classroom allowing the classrooms to be utilized by other teachers. This maximizes the efficiency of the spaces at both schools. am LUNCH PROGRAMS Breakfast and lunch are provided by Whitson's Culinary Group. Parents set up online lunch accounts and pre -pay meals. All students have a PIN code. Each middle school has a staff of cooks that work in a full service kitchen. Typically 3-5 lunch seatings are served every day. Lunch service begins on average at 11:25 a.m., and the last lunch concludes at 1:15 p.m. The number of students within each lunch seating is approximately 315 students. There is additional capacity at the Diamond Middle School to accommodate an additional 70 students per seating for future expansion. Lunches are organized by individual grade level. The cafeteria staff also prepare lunch orders for staff members. NURSE/ MEDICAL Both middle schools provide a full time nurse on site. Both middle schools require at least one person in this role with adequate space for children who are ill, health screenings completed on an annual basis, storage of health supplies and equipment, and a professional space for the nurse to consult, complete documents and communicate with parents and colleagues. ART/ MUSIC / PERFORMING ARTS The Lexington Public Schools has a vibrant visual and performing arts program. Students in sixth and eighth grade who do not choose to perform in an ensemble (band, chorus, or strings) have general music twice per week. All students in seventh grade, regardless if they are in a performing ensemble or not, participate in general music where the focus is on guitar two times per week for one semester. Schools host K-5 choral and band performances throughout the school year. PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND WELLNESS The physical education program provides students with an educational experience that uses movement as a medium of learning and expression. A correlation exists between the development of a sound body and a person's ability to experience a fuller, more satisfying life at school, home and in the community environment. Students are encouraged to obtain a level of fitness appropriate to their own capabilities. Health 7th Grade Health is divided into three modules: Module 1: Circle of Wellness Module 2: Healthy Relationships SPECIAL EDUCATION Inclusion is a core belief and practice in the Lexington Public Schools. This educational model challenges schools to meet the needs of all students by educating learners with disabilities alongside their non -disabled peers. The environment necessary to nurture and foster inclusion is built upon a shared belief system between general and special education, and a willingness to merge the talents and resources of teachers. am The mission of all of the schools in Lexington is to maximize the potential and independence of each student. An inclusive education helps prepare students with disabilities for an integrated adult life and builds understanding and acceptance within the broader community. Staff members meet weekly in professional learning communities (PLCs) to develop shared instructional plans for all students. General education and special education teachers provide instruction in general education classrooms with all educators teaching from common instructional plans and tools developed within the PLC. Teachers employ co -teaching, team teaching, flexible grouping, small group instruction, and individualized instruction in order to proactively support each student. LPS educators believe that all learners should be provided differentiated forms of instruction. Staff recognize that all students learn in different ways, and at different paces. To meet student needs, the staff continually adapt its staffing support, instructional methodologies and assessment practices based upon the student data and personalized student needs. Response to Intervention (RTI) provides the regular education foundation of each school's continuum of service model. Staff provide tiered levels of support to all students (tier one — the general classroom curriculum; tier two — strategic levels of instruction; tier three — intensive levels of instruction usually at the individualized level.) Authentic, classroom -based assessments help the teachers drive daily instructional decision making, select instructional materials, and monitor academic progress. If a student demonstrates academic and/or pro -social performance issues despite thorough RTI procedures, the team or individual teacher may request the Child Study Team process. These teams provide student case review, and support the teacher to implement additional strategies or suggest an in-depth evaluation to identify additional student needs. The special education staff are important team members in the professional learning communities. They meet with their PLC teams weekly to plan instruction and seamless supports in concert with the IEP and the general curriculum. Special educators are skillful at providing behavior plans, social skills instruction and modified lessons coordinated with classroom teachers and all education specialists who work with the students. The district -wide special education programs are shared between the middle schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level, (i.e. the ILP Program). Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. The most intense district -wide program, ILP, is served at both the Diamond Middle School for students with the most needs and at the Clarke Middle School where students are more likely to be more incorporated into the general classrooms. The ILP students are served by special educators with intensive certification. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. Lexington Middle School District -Wide Programs District -wide special education programs are shared between the middle schools. Special education services range from a least restrictive consultative level to a more restrictive district wide placement level. Each school offers academic resource room services that are available for pull-out instruction. Related professionals include speech/language pathologists, am occupational therapist, itinerant physical therapist and adaptive physical education teachers, psychologist, and evaluation team supervisors (ETS), who chair all IEP meetings. At the middle school level, district -wide programs exist to service low incidence disability areas by offering more intensive supports. The majority of special education students are included and receive support in the general education classrooms as well as in resource classrooms with their special education liaison. Students in all of the programs receive related services (e.g. speech/language, occupational therapy, physical therapy) as needed. There are four district - wide programs and a reading program in each building that provides direct systematic, multi - sensory instruction. 1. Developmental Learning Program (DLP) — Clarke: The Developmental Learning Program (DLP) services students with significant developmental delays or intellectual/neurological impairments. Modified curricula are offered within a small group format in all subject areas. Typically, students receive direct instruction in content areas from special educators, while they join general education classes (art, music, lunch) to build relationships with typically -developing peers. Instruction may include activities of daily living and development of social skills. Enrollment: The enrollment for the DLP has ranged from as low as five students to as many as 13 students in recent years. For space planning purposes it is prudent to anticipate an enrollment of approximately 15 students for this program. Space Needs: Based upon the current DLP population, the current requirements are: • (1) life skills classrooms (1,000 NFA) • (1) general classroom (-800 NFA) 2. Intensive Learning Programs (ILP): a. Substantially Separate Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Diamond: The Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Diamond provides services for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities with intensive needs including deficits in language, social communication, play skills, abstract thinking, and behavior. The Intensive Learning Programs provide highly individualized services involving behavioral approaches (typically based on Applied Behavior Analysis principles) to learning. Instruction includes social skill development and daily living skill development. Special educators modify content and methodology to teach to mastery, based on academic and behavioral data. Small -group and/or individualized instruction can be provided for the entire school day when necessary and appropriate. Consultation to parents and structured home components are provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the Substantially Separate ILP has been consistent for the recent past and anticipated future of approximately eight students annually. Space Needs: Although the number of students for this program is relatively low, the spatial requirements do not directly corelate to the low enrollment. The current space requirements are: (4) small group classrooms (-400 NFA/each) (1) small life skills classroom (-300 NFA) • (1) ILP office (-125-150 NFA) b. Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) — Clarke: The Integrated Intensive Learning Program (ILP) at Clarke also services students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other related disabilities. Through this integrated approach students are included, often with support, for the majority of their school day within the general education setting. Special educators provide direct instruction within the general education setting and within special education settings. Special educators modify content and methodology to meet the needs of students and use data collection and behavior analysis in their work with students. Coordination between special education staff and general educators is essential within this inclusion model. Consultation to parents is provided as deemed necessary by the Team. Enrollment: The integrated ILP has a larger cohort than the Substantially Separate ILP at Diamond Middle School. The enrollment for this program has fluctuated from 17 students to as many as 24 students annually. However the trend for enrollment is increasing. Therefore it is prudent to anticipate approximately 25-30 students in this program annually. Space Needs: The space requirements for this program are less than the Substantially Separate ILP at the Diamond Middle School as it is an integration model. The current space needs are: (2) full size classrooms (-800 NFA/each) (1) ILP office (-125-150 NFA) 3. Language Learning Program (LLP) — Diamond: The Language Learning Program (LLP) services students who have significant, language -based learning disabilities. These students typically have at least average cognitive abilities, but they are not acquiring reading, writing and/or language usage skills at the same pace/level as their peers. Many of the students in the program require explicit phonetic -alphabetic instruction beyond that offered through general education. Instruction in literacy is a focus, with emphasis on developing reading and written language skills using specialized curricula. Math instruction may also be provided within the Language Learning Program, as determined by the student's needs. Support is available within the general education setting for science and social studies. This support, which is determined by individual student need, may include substantial modifications. The goal of the Language Learning Program is to build students' literacy skills in a structured and supportive environment that fosters students' confidence while increasing their skills in becoming active learners. Enrollment: The enrollment for the LLP has been and is anticipated to be stable in the future. The enrollment has had an average of 16-22 students annually. It is appropriate to anticipate the same enrollment for future planning purposes. Space Needs: The current space requirements are: (1) full size classroom (-900 NFA) (1) break-out classroom (-400 NFA) (1) 1LP office (-125-150 NFA) no 4. Therapeutic Learning Programs (TLP): The Therapeutic Learning Program is offered at both Clarke and Diamond Schools servicing students with significant emotional impairment or other disabilities that may manifest themselves through difficulties with self-regulation. These students may or may not have associated learning difficulties. The programs provide instruction in developing social/emotional regulation within a structured, caring, and therapeutic classroom environment. Students within these programs access the general education classrooms for varied amounts of time as specified within their Individual Education Programs. Special education services may also be provided within the general education setting. In addition, content area instruction is available on an individualized and/or small group basis when deemed necessary by the student's Team. Enrollment: The enrollment for the TLP has remained and is anticipated to be stable in the future. The enrollment at Clarke MS averages between 10-15 students annually. The program enrollment at Diamond averages 6-9 students annually. Space Needs: The current space usage at each school is: • (2) half size classrooms (-400 NFA) 5. Special Education Reading: Special education reading teachers provide individual and small group instruction to students in need of a systematic, rules -based approach to reading. There is a half-time Special Education Reading Teacher at both of the middle schools. ME Clarke Middle School 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 145,000 GSIF 20.0 Acires VI Flooir " IgW'I Pub I :.hoofs master PI w, LEGEND o,EN ED I CI:FFICLLLM SLFFOFI SFECIAL EDI1CAHON LIDRARY AFI!MI, IC SJACiE. GYMN/�SII1M / FE:IEFI.AW ICHEN ADMINISTF HON DI ILDINC, SEFVICES CIFCIILAHON 2nd 11=110 01, ''`" IF 11 o oir NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment IIIIVIIIIIIIIfIIIIIIIVIIIIII 3 52 Spaces NFAil) Core Academic 33 25, 479 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA Gen. Ed Support ] 962 NFA Teacher Planning 1 1 2, 224 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA M & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA Health & PE 12,5]5 NFA Library 4,800 NFA Oining only 4, 147 NFA Auditorium/Stage 5,950 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA Cuslod / Maint. 2,433 NFA Misc. Support Space 3, 328 NFA Total Program NFA 9],91] NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF ''`" IF 11 o oir NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment IIIIVIIIIIIIIfIIIIIIIVIIIIII 3 52 Diamond Middle S c o 1958, Reno 2000, 2018 155,300 GSIF 34.6 Acire NFA = Net Floor Area Red NFA = Space undersized based upon current enrollment ifdecrn f>uE .hcrcrl'a Ni'.ear f>i'an i 20 3-53 Core Academic 38 29, 052 NFA Science Clrms 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 3, 695 NFA V.d, Tech 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 26 8, 513 NFA Ad & Music 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE 11,]83 NFA Library 4,938 NFA Dining only 5, 695 NFA Auditorium/Stage 5,554 NFA Medical / Admin. 2,922NFA Custod/Maift 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Spec. 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 195,994 NFA Gross SF 155,399 SF ifdecrn f>uE .hcrcrl'a Ni'.ear f>i'an i 20 3-53 Lexington High School The chart below represents the current spaces allocated at the high school. The high school program spaces are compared to MSBA space guidelines. However, it should be noted that although the existing high school gross square footage is adequate based upon MSBA guidelines, the critical program components are under the guidelines in both size and quantity. Further, until a full educational program is agreed to with MSBA, the MSBA space requirements are only guidelines. The high school floor plans are provided on the following pages. The high school educational program is not included as this will be a part of the process once it is accepted into the MSBA program. Ill,,,,,, xin-twin 111li h School 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 67,905 GSF (including modulars) 13.3 Acres The red Net Floor Area (NFA) identifies space for a particular program is undersized based upon the current enrollment and MSBA space guidelines. The green NFA identifies that the space for a particular program is oversized based upon MSBA guidelines. ED U AT" ION II II II AIM I EXISTING I --i G l --i SC I--iC_ OI....... FY 2019 MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 11..ex ngton1PL� bkc Schools Master 1Plan I Mamh 2020 3-54 Spaces Kv "Mn mellill NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 NFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,735 NFA Science Clrms (W/ prep NFA) 21 24,718 INFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 nib, n.%4 IINII A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 44 17,142 INFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 S 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 40,510 IlN[�A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9„797 INFA 13,656 NFA -3,859 NFA Auditorium 12,502 IlN[�A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dininq onlv 10„752 INFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 10,760 IlN[�A 9,231 NFA 4,538 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA 246,260 NFA -2,271 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 1 14,043 NFA MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 11..ex ngton1PL� bkc Schools Master 1Plan I Mamh 2020 3-54 High School � 1967, Ineino 2014, 2017 67,905 GSIF (fincluding irnodullairs) . . . . . . . . . . . . M SPACE LEGEND 1st IF 11 o o ir 3-55 High School � 1967, Ineino 2014, 2017 67,905 GSIF (fincluding irnodullairs) 13.3 Acires SPACELEGEND Right Siziing IFacifties Right sizing the facilities means each school will house the appropriate enrollment based upon the physical limitations of each school. The High School was not included in the right sizing exercise as it has been determined the existing and future enrollment at the High School exceeds the current facility design capacity and requires an expansion to meet the educational programming requirements. The following criteria is used to determine the design capacity of each school: lass Size IPoky Elementary School Class Size: Kindergarten: 1-18 Grade 1: 1-20 Grade 2: 1-22 Grades 3-5: 1-24 Average 21.5 students per grade Middle School Team Size: Team Size: 80-92 Students Average 86 students per team Pirogirarn EqUity Elementary School Equity: • Spedalllsts (airs, rnu§c, phy§cae(JucatJon (PE)) re(.:julire a 21,11 teacheir afteir 20 sectJons of teacNng • A(J(.tfior4spaces for airt, n u,j§c, an(.1 lira son oe nstances, PE, airere.(.ju'lire(.J for schoolls that have over 24 genera: e(JucatJon dassiroon os • Cafeteirlaslze shouk.J accornmo(Jate the enirolIrnent Middle School Equity: • Teacheirs (Jo not have (Je(.tcate(J dassiroon os, ratheir, ateacheir fJannlng Iroon o lis f)irovkJe(J for teacheirsto use when they are not teacNng a class to n oaAn olize dassiroon o utlllzaton. • Cafeteirlaslze shouk.J accornmo(Jate the enirolIrnent I exington IPii3011iia schools Il aster Plan I March 2020 3-57 IFAGIII,,,,,, III TICID E S 11 IIS CAPACITICIE11TROI,,,,,, III,,,,,, III 100 1DJ " "III II IIIq "r EinirioHirneirit AdjUstirneirits Elementary Schools: The chart below represents how the enrollment shall shift after the new Hastings Elementary School is complete and the redistricting plan is implemented. Each school will have the appropriate enrollment based upon the design capacity to provide equitable learning environments and spaces among all six elementary schools. IDUCA " IRROGRAIM I C.:.:I.......C.:.:MC.: N ARA SCSI 1001....... "RGI -IT a,bEC...:tl9 SCI -1001 S (1)NFA =Net Floor Area hlHarrington uses LCP spaces (3)New Hastings School (4)Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (it)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings hlMedical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA (t)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cqp, i u y g. H C l „i rtrmex, 1., „Gir(n:nt, por dw ;,rnomi (Av Inli ?) 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools Master Plan I March 2020 3-58 Spaces NFAM A , , Spaces NFA '1 jloop Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Effil;Y/m/ Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 20,288 NFA 24 20,370 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 19 19,907 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 872 NFA 2 830 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 700 NFA 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support(4) 6 3,070 NFA 10 2,936 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 12 1,861 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 5,018 NFA 10 3,397 NFA 15 3,779 NFA 17 8,223 NFA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,494 NFA 3 2,786 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,381 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PEN 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only)(6) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical /Admin(7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Maint. 911 NFA 859 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,819 NFA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(') 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,144 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments Gym large enough for 1 class Gym large enough for 1 class at a time. Art/Music 1 at a time. Art/Music 1 additional for Chorus/Band or additionaltorChorus/Band or other ELL, SPED Omer eLL, SPED Nurse undersized Nurse undersized Facilitydesigned to g accommodate enrollment # of classrooms reduced to accommodate ILP Program Facility designed to y g accommodate enrollment without LCP Facility designed to y g accommodate enrollment (1)NFA =Net Floor Area hlHarrington uses LCP spaces (3)New Hastings School (4)Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (it)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings hlMedical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA (t)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cqp, i u y g. H C l „i rtrmex, 1., „Gir(n:nt, por dw ;,rnomi (Av Inli ?) 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools Master Plan I March 2020 3-58 Ell it Hirneirmt AdjU tirneirmt Middle Schools: It has been determined that with the recent expansions at both the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools, the facilities have the design capacity to accommodate the enrollment based upon the forecasts with a slight modification to the team size. Right sizing these facilities is not an option as this exercise occurred during the recent expansions. EDUCAT�UN I IR IRAIM I EXSTING MOD .......E SCI--100I.......S FY 2019 O)Net Floor Area of program (z)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3)Kitchen, staff lunch 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I March 2020 3-59 NFAM Spaces WWII /jSpaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support(2) 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space(3) 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF O)Net Floor Area of program (z)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3)Kitchen, staff lunch 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I March 2020 3-59 EirvrRrneirmt AdjUstirneirits Lexington High School: The high school is experiencing significant enrollment growth and the focus is to utilize every space to maximize its utilization rate. Spaces are being evaluated on a yearly basis as the needs and student population shift, therefore there is no educational program for the high school included within this report. It has been recognized that the current high school facility is over capacity and requires an expansion or new facility. LIPS has submitted a Statement of Interest to the MSBA to be invited into their core program. The high school was not invited into the MSBA Core Program in 2019, but LIPS has been strongly encouraged to re -apply in 2020. A full assessment of the ideal educational program to meet 21 sl century learning will be part of the MSBA process. EDUCAT�UN PIIPC IIP IM I EXSui- NG 1--iIICI--1 SCI --100I....... FY 2019 MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I March 2020 3...50 ffiri "mmo m/n/i/l/l//Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 NFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,735 NFA Science Clrms (W/ prep NFA) 21 24,718 INFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 i0,'i 74 IINII°°A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 44 17,142 INFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 S 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 40,510 IlN[�A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9„797 INFA 13,656 NFA -3,859 NFA Auditorium 12,502 II4[�A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10„752 INFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 10,760 IlN[�A 9,231 NFA 4,538 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA 246,260 NFA -2,271 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 NFA MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I March 2020 3...50 DISTRICT 4 PROJECTIGNS ntroduction Historic Forecasting Current Overview of Enrollment Trends Enrollment Projections & Methods 10 -Year Enrollment Projections 1....exiiirngto n Pii,,blic Schools s Ilea tear IPlan I District Enrollment IF rojectiion s March 2020 II IIIq"rII Ian "rIII IIIq Lexington Public Schools has had unprecedented growth over an extended period of time. Many other Metro West communities are seeing a stable enrollment, or in some cases, a decrease in enrollment; however, Lexington Public Schools continues to grow. Factors likely impacting LPS enrollment, but have not lent themselves to statistical models include: • Perceived quality of public schools • Perceived quality of life within the community • Public safety • Local housing market • Local & regional economy • Proximity to Boston; access to major highways and transportation options; ability for families to commute Student enrollment is fundamental to master planning strategies and outcomes. LPS reviews enrollment projections on an annual basis to inform planning. However, given the comprehensive nature of the Master Plan, the Enrollment Advisory Group (EAG) was re -convened in the fall of 2018 to evaluate the methodology that is in place based upon the recommendations of the EAG in 2014. I,,,,,IPS I --i IISTORIICAI....... f:: NROI.......I.......MENT FY 1990 FY 2019 3500 Em 2500 c- 73 2000 �� r 1500 .. 1000 - 50.10 X % Q3'� ,.�y ,�, ,�,y ,�„ C C.i� C,. C.i,�„ C.i�y,2w;• .�,.� K-5 ... ,..,..,..,...6 8 ................ 9-12 Linear (K-5) Linear (6 8) ----- L near (9-12) Iiiis"raIRIC I III "rIII IIN Reviewing historic enrollment is helpful as trends shift and patterns may repeat themselves. The chart above provides historic enrollment for the past thirty years. Highlights of how enrollment has changed over the past thirty years: 3094 2263 1833 • Rate and direction of enrollment change have varied in LPS history • Not depicted: A peak of just over 9,600 students in 1969, when Lexington had 11 elementary schools, three middle schools and one high school, after which enrollment dropped precipitously over the next 2 decades. 1....exiiirngto n IPii3011iic schools s IMaster IPlan I District Enrollment F-Irojectiia~ n s March 2020 4.1 Looking at the most recent ten-year historic enrollment, the following table provides a more recent, detailed analysis of LIPS growth over the past ten years. The overall enrollment has increased 17.8% or 1,090 students over the past 10 years (2009-2019) with the majority of the growth occurring over the past 5 years (2015-2019). The most recent data demonstrates there is a shift in increased enrollment from the elementary school level working through the middle and high schools. This is a normal trend as the student population migrates in the same fashion. FY 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 20191 K-5 2,675 2,825 2,815 2,846 2,924 3,024 3,053 3,066 3,150 3,094 6-8 1,484 1,506 1,608 1,641 1,656 1,616 1,642 1,743 1,813 1,833 9-12 1,955 1,983 1,951 1,991 2,002 2,093 2,154 2,185 2,212 2,263 Total 6,114 6,314 6,374 6,478 6,582 6,733 6,849 6,994 7,175 7,190 M Source: LPS October 1, 2018 CURRIEim"r OVERVIEWII IIIA IIS II,,,,,, III,,,,,, III II IIIq "r "rI II IIIA I D Looking at a snapshot of the enrollment trends, • Current enrollment at the middle school level is the table below demonstrates that at this point in roughly even between Diamond and Clarke time (October 2019): • Relatively large cohorts at grades 6, 7, 9, and 10 • The largest elementary schools based on enrollment are Bridge, Bowman, and Estabrook Understanding a snapshot in time is helpful for planning forthe upcoming school yearto anticipate additional space and staffing needs. IIII u film ufllm Ilu uuu uu luu fiiii uu � iii °' i in Illi um Illi a Illi uuu �i�mi a mm i LCP 68 68 Bowman 61 79 97 93 100 101 531 Bridge 62 74 79 90 109 111 525 Estabrook 82 87 102 94 108 101 574 Fiske 61 69 82 74 89 106 481 Harrington 57 78 83 94 81 78 471 Hastings 59 66 64 93 76 79 437 Clarke 315 304 307 926 Diamond 300 321 281 902 Lex. HS 607 591 526 551 2,275 Total 68 382 453 507 538 563 576 615 62 5 588 607 591 526 551 7,190 1....exiiirngto n IPu,bliia schools s Ilia ter IPlan I Ilii triiet Enrollment IF rojeetiia~ n s March 2020 4.2. 1EITROI I 11WEim"r IIIIROJEc"III IIIA s & III WE"nilIID s Understanding Cohort Progression IRates The Cohort Progression Rates (also known as the Cohort Survival Method) is a helpful tool when evaluating short-term enrollment rates. K • Captures how many students in a given cohort progress to the next grade • Useful summary of the net impact of in- and out -migration • Expressed as a ratio: — Values greater than 1 indicate a net 2 increase as a result of in- and out -migration (increasing cohort size) — Values less than 1 indicate a net decrease as 3 a result of in- and out -migration (decreasing cohort size) 4 The chart below demonstrates the net impact of in- and out -migration based upon Cohort Progression Rates. 691 K to 1 Progression Rate: 77/69=1.115 77 "THE NET IHMPACT OF IW � ANID CUT- IWGRAT�DN I A I OOK XT RVE-YEAR AVERAGE C01--iORT PROGRESSON RNFES 1.1500 Prog rates ... >1 indicate net in - migration W 92 100 1.0579 1.0562 1.0534 1.0500 1.0457 1.0447 1.0243 1.0283 1.0175 1 0.9980 1.0003 1.0000 0.9779 Prog rates <1 indicate net in- 0.9500 migration 0.91,00 B >K K->1 1->2 2->3 3 >4 4->5 5 >6 6 >7 7->8 8->9 9->10 10 >11 11->12 I exington IPii..rblliia schools Iliaster IPllan I Iliistrict Enrollment IFrojections March 2020 4-3 AlrilrM i Review of IElrmlroRrnmint Data Each year student enrollment projections are updated incorporating the latest October 1 enrollments to inform future planning. Following recommendations from the Enrollment Working Group (2014), LIPS typically uses two methods to produce five-year projections: Beirneiritalry IProjootiolns: IHOLIShIg De rno lrapllhio Il o of • Housing stock (# of housing units) • Percentage of housing units occupied by students • Average number of students residing in a housing unit with one or more students • To account for non-residential students (i.e. METCO), a constant is added based on expected elementary program size. S000lnalry IProjootiolns: Valriatioln of Cohort Sulrvivai IMethod • Historical enrollments by grade to determine cohort progression rates • Uses five-year average of progression rates by grade to predict future enrollments • Uses five-year average enrollment for Kindergarten Data for analyses are obtained from the following sources: • Annual October 1 student census reported to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (i.e. SIMS data collection) by Lexington Public Schools • Other locally maintained data by Lexington Public Schools stored in the district's student information system, ASPEN (e.g. student physical address) • Annual Lexington Assessors' property records extracted from the Vision database • Future housing developments provided by the Town Planning Department Additional data for 2019 enrollment was also obtained from: • Female population projections from the UMass Donahue Institute • Birth data from the Massachusetts Registry of Vital Records and Statistics Expioldin "Tei m Year IProjootioln The five-year projections work well for LPS for short-term planning; however, for master planning purposes it is important to establish enrollment projections for a ten-year period in order to plan, anticipate, and respond to the enrollment forecasts (growth or reduction) within Lexington Public Schools as they relate to facilities and space planning. It is understood that projecting out ten years is not an exact science; however, with sufficient data and planning, these projections will provide the District the means to forecast beyond a short-term window which does not allow for long range planning. To put it into perspective, it can take more than five years to plan and construct a school facility. For this purpose, the MPAC requested the Enrollment Advisory Group (EAG) to evaluate enrollment projection methods and establish an enrollment methodology for a ten-year enrollment projection for master planning purposes. IMetllho do io n LIPS recently explored producing a ten-year projection based on another version of the Cohort Survival Method that uses birth to Kindergarten progression rates. This model is based on: • Historical birth and Kindergarten enrollment to determine birth to Kindergarten progression rates • Historical birth and female population data to calculate fertility rates; fertility rates are applied to projected female populations to project future birth counts • Historical enrollment for all grades to determine cohort progression rates • Use five-year average of progression rates by grade to predict future enrollments The corresponding Kindergarten enrollment five years after birth year demonstrated: • Weak to small negative correlation (-.20) between births & Kindergarten enrollment five years later. Births are not a good predictor of LIPS Kindergarten enrollment. • With declining Lexington births, model will underestimate Kindergarten enrollments. • Underestimated Kindergarten enrollments will have a negative ripple effect on the rest of the grade level projections, resulting in an inaccurate projection. 1....exiiirngto n IPii,blliia schools s Il aster IPlan I District Enrollment IF rojeetiia~ n s March 2020 � � I ILII TINS & KNDERGARTEN ENROI GII,,,,,II,,,,,IMIEI T 500 2 ul@PiVii 450 00 .._� �. ,„d rl� n A. d ��,,.� k d 350 300 LU 2 ul@PiVii �. � „ pp yy �„� 50 � L.0 200 q'y LU .150 0 100 Or. z V1Ji :1 so 0 J Ln CO r- 00 0) N�*� J C+F Y CV U1"i ('0 C77 Ci"5 C&"5 C;'S C7"5 T T T :1") 07 C.J 1-'1 '::' 1'.1 1? c':) 0 c—t 14 r'Ct 'C4' Ln 4D C^w, W Cil C.") C* CD Ci? CT)M 'S`5 CSA (3) 0) Cil 0 ("D ("D CD CD ¢::a 0 c'.) r -i �✓� m... y,... C'ia Csi Cil Ci CD M 0) M C}! Q`7 a) C7 0C:3 CD rI4 CV 6::'U CW C,':) C.D 0 C+J C) CV Q CV (D P'W 4'_) tN 0 +0 CV' r,4 C] BIRTH H YEAR zI0'iww After applying this application using local The EAG continuedto evaluate alternative IM enrollment data and evaluation of results, approaches to a ten-year enrollment projection LU this model was ruled out as a viable tool for and other ways to improve LIPS projections. Lexington. LU� • Use linear forecast based on previous 10 or 30 years of Kindergarten enrollments to produce 10 years of future Kindergarten enrollments. • Apply traditional Cohort Survival Method (based on average five-year progression rates) to the rest of the grades. I....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecdons March 2020 4. The chart below highlights the use of linear forecasting based on the previous 30 years of Kindergarten enrollments to produce 10 years of future Kindergarten enrollments: I HEAR FORECAST OF IFUTURE MUDERGARTEN E I GII,,,,,II,,,,,II' IEI T BASED ON 00 YEARS OF f:: NROI.......I.......Mf: NT 500 450 400 It mIN,ryG�mO� mhs " ¢ 350 ."....m�� '...... X00 z ' �.a m..a 250 cc 200 150 100 50 0 4.:1 C"J C7 "T L0 (D P", t%7 0) 4'Y✓ �V rrY wtf' ifM I'D r- IX) IM t:J �.rH r" €r, ^rl Lo 4C:) f•".. C✓5 C.7 0S CTX CY7 (C? M C7 (n 0) M CTX C ) <:,7 r,,;3 CY C,:l. C'Y CJ CC, r0 0 � +- - r 4..) 4—I CV M ftY Al 4£5 I^• C(1 ", C;) 00 C r-� C"J Cl)M IM 0) CCS M CXi (71 r^ TJ" fQ1 C4! 7LY C7? CTS rC) C55 f7i Ci) CTS rTJ f77 fa7 r'X _ 1 r;3 Ca CJ r7 �.J C7 tJ5 C7) t7') CY's Cd) t:i7 C11 1:55 tJ'S CJ7 CJS CJ C"Y C:: f:J CV Y"+d YDS f'•1 Y'N Y'ek C"+d YJ (V Y'eS P'•1 Y'N Y'eF t''N Y'e! fll: Initial review of projections using a linear forecast based on 30 years of previous Kindergarten enrollments suggests this may be a reasonable tool to use for immediate longer-term planning needs. It is prudent that results be evaluated alongside LIPS HDM projections. The EAG should continue to explore ways to improve LIPS projections. As new enrollment data is received, LIPS must also continue to re-evaluate projections and related plans, making adjustments whenever necessary. I....ex ngton Public c chc ols IMaster Plan I IfSisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecdons March 2020 4.. "rIEN-YEAIR I IIIT IR II,,,,,, III,,,,,, III II IIIA T II IR JE "III IIIA Based upon the outcome and recommendations DrneirmtalryIElniroHir eirit IPlraj tialnn of the EAG, ten-year enrollment projections were Following the work of the MPAC, preliminary prepared for the benefit of the Master Plan. The enrollment projections for 2019-20 indicate the resulting projections are as follows: enrollment is trending as planned. Refer to the Appendix for the updated projections. EIl,,,,,IEIMIEI TAIR° I f==11Vf::-Y AR 1 --IDM ENROI.......I.......Mf::uNT PROJECTIONS History -_- Forcecast -w-- Lower 90th - -,w Upper 90Th lOo? 200 -'0. -'0, -'0 201 201 2O1 �O7 `,�i 201 `��i 2O1 -�O -OO 102 -0O �8 "9 10 1.l 1? 'T3 'lsr X16 S76 67] 'T8 X79 9�0 " FISCAL YEAR EIl,,,,,IEIMIEI TAIR° I TEN-YEAR AR f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uf 1- PROJECui-TIONS Year 2019-20 3067 2020-21 3063 2021-22 3042 2022-23 3039 2023-24 3056 2024-25 3095 2025-26 3108 2026-27 3121 2027-28 3134 2028-29 3147 ± 70 ± 70 ± 65 +60 ± 55 +50 +45 +40 +35 +30 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 z 0 3400 '^ 3300 O w 3200 z 3100 3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 History - -- Forcecast — —Lower 90th - --Upper 90th ,OO, 2'O, 1'O, ?O -'0 2O 20 -'0 -0r -Oy �1'O, -OO j9-�O2O -'0 -'0 202 O�Q 1O 2O -'0 8O9 ,O11 17ss �O� FISCAL YEAR I....ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ IProjecdons March 2020 3900 3800 3700 3600 h 3500 z Z G 3400 D f- 3300 O w 3200 m ----------------------------------------------------- z 3100 Year 3000 2019-20 3140 +142 2900 2020-21 3154 +182 2021-22 3168 +224 2800 2022-23 3182 +266 2700 2023-24 3196 ......... +309 ......... 2600 History -_- Forcecast -w-- Lower 90th - -,w Upper 90Th lOo? 200 -'0. -'0, -'0 201 201 2O1 �O7 `,�i 201 `��i 2O1 -�O -OO 102 -0O �8 "9 10 1.l 1? 'T3 'lsr X16 S76 67] 'T8 X79 9�0 " FISCAL YEAR EIl,,,,,IEIMIEI TAIR° I TEN-YEAR AR f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uf 1- PROJECui-TIONS Year 2019-20 3067 2020-21 3063 2021-22 3042 2022-23 3039 2023-24 3056 2024-25 3095 2025-26 3108 2026-27 3121 2027-28 3134 2028-29 3147 ± 70 ± 70 ± 65 +60 ± 55 +50 +45 +40 +35 +30 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 z 0 3400 '^ 3300 O w 3200 z 3100 3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 History - -- Forcecast — —Lower 90th - --Upper 90th ,OO, 2'O, 1'O, ?O -'0 2O 20 -'0 -0r -Oy �1'O, -OO j9-�O2O -'0 -'0 202 O�Q 1O 2O -'0 8O9 ,O11 17ss �O� FISCAL YEAR I....ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ IProjecdons March 2020 El EIMENTARY I RVE & TEN --YEAR f:: MENT PROJECTONS OVERI AD 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 P z 3400 3300 0 w 3200 :) 3100 z 3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 ........... History Forcecast - CSM ......... Lower 90th - CSM Upper 90th - CSM Forcecast -HDM Lower 90th - HDM - -Upper 90th - HDM -10' --'0 '�Ol -10 -�O' -'0 "'0 'zo, 'zo, -'0' 'P 0 '> 0 '�O' -10 -�O' -'0 '�O ''O cO ''O '.'0 'z" > O'P 00 �?O /1 16,' /'S' / �>O 'Q '0 '0& '9 _"O '/5' '16' FISCAL YEAR 11 exing�.on 11= ublic Schools IMas..er 11= lan I DisfficQ IEnrollmenIfrojecdons March 020 I UPDATED IE I II,,,,, II,,,,, I MENT T The tables below summarize the elementary enrollment forecasts in 2018 and is revised to reflect updated enrollment in 2019-20 with forecasts through 2029-30. 2018-19 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 2019-20 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval * 2019-20 actual K-5 enrollment @ 3,100 is below the 2018 projections generated by the housing model (-40 students) and above 2018 projections produced by the cohort survival models (+33 students) 1....ex ng�.on Public Schools IMas..er 1Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecUons March 2020 4.. o 5 Year Elementary - 3,094 3,140 3,154 3,168 3,182 3,196 Housing Demo. Model +/- 142 +/- 182 +/- 224 +/- 266 +/- 309 5 Year Elementary 3,094 3,067 3,061 3,036 3,026 3,034 (5 year average K) +/- 65 +/- 105 +/- 150 +/- 190 +/- 235 1 Year Elementary (Linear forecast of K 3,094 3,067 3,063 3,042 3,039 3,056 3,095 3,108 3,121 3,134 3,147 based on prior 30 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 65 +/- 60 +/- 55 +/-50 +/- 45 +/- 40 +/- 35 +/- 30 ears 2019-20 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval * 2019-20 actual K-5 enrollment @ 3,100 is below the 2018 projections generated by the housing model (-40 students) and above 2018 projections produced by the cohort survival models (+33 students) 1....ex ng�.on Public Schools IMas..er 1Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecUons March 2020 4.. EDUCATIPROGRAIM I F:uI.......F: MF: NTARY SCI--iC_ OI....... CAF'AGl-FY/:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uNT 2018-19 Capacity/Enrollment 26 546 24 516 27 541 24 516 ' 27 26 580 27 581 19 409 20 480 19 409 24 516 24 493 24 516 30 645 30 454 30 645 148 3,182 3,011 2,997 2,987 153 3,094 148 3,182 3,067 3,063 3,042 3,039 3,056 3,1411 +/-70 +/-80 ' +/-70 +/-70 +/-65 +/(-60 +/-55 +/-30 3,1116 3,137 3,133 3,107 3,099 3,111 3,"1717 (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) LPS Enrollment projections 12/06/18 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School 2019-20 Capacity/Enrollment j 24 516 24 516 ' 27 581 19 409 24 516 30 645 148 3,182 3,011 2,997 2,987 2,982 3,009 3,096 j +/-70 +/-70 +/-70 +/-70 +/-70 +/-80 ' 3,081 3,067 3,057 3,052 3,079 3,1116 (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) 2019 LIPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School Based upon the updated enrollment forecasts, the design capacity for the six elementary schools is barely sufficient through FY 2029-30. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year. I....ex ngton (Public Schools (t aster IPlan I IDistricQ IEnrollmenQ Projections March 2020 4°-10 Secoindairy EirvrRlneirit IPir j ti lns: Midde Schods IM IlID �Dli,,,,,1 : Il li,,,,, I TEN-YEAR f:: NROI.......I.......Mf: NT PROJECTIONS UPDATED IE I li,,,,, li,,,,, l MENT T History - - - Forcecast--- Lower 90th ,, - -Upper 90th �'O °'O °'O �O °'O -'O �O ? r' � -''01> O) r ?0 °'O -'O '10 "O -'O �O "O r' O> 08 Oy 10 11 12 13 O/, O/,5, O) O) ?0 •09 0y TO zJ J2 J� T4 S�6>> •T8 ��9 9�0 FISCAL YEAR The following tables summarize the secondary enrollment forecasts in 2018 and revised to reflect updated enrollment in 2019-20 with forecasts through 2029-30. 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval I 2150 2050 1950 1850 ----------------------------------------------------- Year 1750 2019-20 1862 ± 25 W 1650 a 2020-21 1921 ± 40 w 1550 2021-22 1938 ± 50 ° 1450 2022-23 1919 ± 60 t° (5 year average) 1350 2023-24 1903 +70 z 1250 2024-25 1848 +80 +/- 50 2025-26 1838 +90 1150 2026-27 1851 +100 1050 2027-28 1887 +115 950 2028 29 ., .. ........, 1895 ......... + 125 ........, 850 UPDATED IE I li,,,,, li,,,,, l MENT T History - - - Forcecast--- Lower 90th ,, - -Upper 90th �'O °'O °'O �O °'O -'O �O ? r' � -''01> O) r ?0 °'O -'O '10 "O -'O �O "O r' O> 08 Oy 10 11 12 13 O/, O/,5, O) O) ?0 •09 0y TO zJ J2 J� T4 S�6>> •T8 ��9 9�0 FISCAL YEAR The following tables summarize the secondary enrollment forecasts in 2018 and revised to reflect updated enrollment in 2019-20 with forecasts through 2029-30. 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval I....ex ngR.on Public c 3chc ols IMas..er Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecdons Marc,ri 2020 4.11 I 5 Year MS -CSM 1,833 1,862 1,921 1,938 1,918 1,903 (5 year average) +/- 35 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/-70 +/-85 10 Year Middle School (Linear forecast of K '1,833 1,862 1,921 1,938 1,918 1,903 1,848 1,838 1,851 1,887 1,895 based on prior 30 +/- 25 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 90 +/- 100 +/- 115 +/- 125 ears 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval I....ex ngR.on Public c 3chc ols IMas..er Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ If rojecdons Marc,ri 2020 4.11 EDU AT"U AIIRROGRAIM I MS CAf='AG -FY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf: NT (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x# teams (86 students ideal number of students) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11.5 teams = 989 students (2) 2019 LIPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years Based upon the updated enrollment forecasts, the design capacity for the two middle schools is currently at capacity based upon the Team Size Policy of 86 students per team. The enrollment forecasts demonstrate the schools will be slightly over capacity over the next ten years. Adjustments to the Team Size may be required to accommodate the anticipated enrollment. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year. 1....ex ngton (Public Schools Il aster IPlan I DistricQ IEnrollmenQ Projections March 2020 4°-12 ME 926 86 10.5 Teams 903 902 86 11.5 Teams 989 1,828 1,892 1,874 1,876 1,870 1,873 1,837 1,849 +/- 50 +/- 55 +/- 60 +/- 65 +/- 70 +/- 100 I„ 1,924 1,931 1,930 1,938 1,907 1,949 (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x# teams (86 students ideal number of students) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11.5 teams = 989 students (2) 2019 LIPS Enrollment projections based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years Based upon the updated enrollment forecasts, the design capacity for the two middle schools is currently at capacity based upon the Team Size Policy of 86 students per team. The enrollment forecasts demonstrate the schools will be slightly over capacity over the next ten years. Adjustments to the Team Size may be required to accommodate the anticipated enrollment. It is critical to update and monitor the enrollment on an annual basis to address any shifts that may occur from year to year. 1....ex ngton (Public Schools Il aster IPlan I DistricQ IEnrollmenQ Projections March 2020 4°-12 Secoindary lEiniroRrneint li rojectioins: IHigh Schod IfflGH SCHOO! I TEN --YEAR f:: MENT PROJECTONS 2700 2600 2500 2400 ------------------------------------------------- 2300 Year P z 2200 2019-20 2347 ± 20 ONE(= Em 2100 2020-21 2362 +20 5 Year HS -CSM 2,263 2,347 2,362 2021-22 2468 ± 25 2000 (LPS) 2022-23 2527 ± 25 1900 2023-24 2536 +30 z +/-30 +/-50 +/-65 +/-80 1800 2024-25 2614 +30 10 Year High School2, 2 3r)E 3 1700 2025-26 2614 +30 2,614 2,614 2,576 2,539 1600 2026-27 2576 +35 2027-28 2539 +35 1500 2513 +...4.0 based on prior 30 .2.0.2.8.-.2.9 ........... ................... .......... 1400 UPDATED lENlid OI I MENT ,--- H i story — — — Forcecast — Lower 90th 11 - - Upper 90th 01 O�POR -'0 qO/qO qO -'0, qO 20y "'0 qO , 10 Iis is IQ K�, FISCAL YEAR 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 10 Year High School 2,275 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K based on prior 30 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 k +/_ 90 I 11 exing�.on 1Public Schools IMas..er 11= lan I DisfficQEnrollmen� Projecdons Mar(.,ri 2020 4 -13 ONE(= Em 5 Year HS -CSM 2,263 2,347 2,362 2,4 8 2,536 (LPS) +/-30 +/-50 +/-65 +/-80 +/-100 10 Year High School2, 2 3r)E 3 2,347 2,362 2,468 2,527 2,536 2,614 2,614 2,576 2,539 2,513 (Linear forecast of K based on prior 30 +/-25 +/-25 +/-30 +/-30 +/-35 +/- 40 +/- 40 +/- 45 +/- 45 +/- 50 R years) ............. 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 10 Year High School 2,275 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K based on prior 30 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 k +/_ 90 I 11 exing�.on 1Public Schools IMas..er 11= lan I DisfficQEnrollmen� Projecdons Mar(.,ri 2020 4 -13 EDUCA °IUNAII,,,,, II II O II AIM 11--i GI --i SC 1--iOOI....... CAFIACIIuFY/2019 f:: NROI.......I.......Mf::uNT The High School is currently over capacity and, as the enrollment forecasts suggest, the overcrowding will continue for the next ten years. Temporary measures are underway to address the overcrowding for the next few years; however, additional measures will be required should the enrollment peak in 2024-25 to approximately 21650 students. Uulnirnalry It is apparent that enrollment projections should be evaluated annually to ensure the temporary measures will meetthe anticipated forecast. Long-term solutions are also underway with the Statement of Interest (SOI) submitted to the MSBA to partner with them for a new or expanded high school. I....ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster Plan I IDisfficQ IEnrollmenQ IProjecdons March 2020 4.14 P!, � ntroduction Educational Goals Current Facility Planning Facility Strategies - Elementary School Strategies - Middle School Strategies - High School Strategies I exington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 II IIIq"rII I[n "rIII IIIq The master planning process has been fluid, thought provoking, and insightful. There is a clear understanding and agreement that planning is essential to stay ahead of enrollment shifts, aging facilities, capital improvements, sustainable goals, and possible town acquisitions. Student enrollment plays a significant factor in the decision-making process. The Master Planning Advisory Committee (MPAC) developed a series of strategies depending on enrollment shifts and the impact they have on the school facilities. It was agreed the Master Plan should be reviewed annually to ensure enrollment projections are on target and to make modifications to the plan as required due to enrollment, educational program shifts, aging facilities, and capital improvement requirements. This section will focus on the multitude of strategies that have been suggested and discussed as part of the master planning process. The strategies represent all possible options that have been discussed, which were then weighed with the educational goals, physical building constraints, and appropriateness of each of the strategies. The merits of each strategy are also included. lir.mm III IIS 11 GOA11,,,,,, The Lexington Public Schools' educational programming and goals must remain in the forefront for strategies and solutions to be viable. Many of the strategies may appear valid on the surface; however, when taking educational impacts into consideration, a solution may become less desirable, impractical, or not possible. It was important to explore all strategies and ideas, however, they must be weighed against the educational implications of each strategy. It is critical to ensure that every child continues to have equal access to a high-quality educational experience. IIR IIR I IIIA"r IIFAC 11 11 IIITY VIII,,,,,, IIS IIIA III IIIA I,,,,, xiin torn CllhUdir lam's Race (II,,,,,GP) A new, dedicated LCP facility was completed in August 2019. The existing program moved from the Harrington Elementary School and the School Administration Building into one dedicated facility to serve its unique requirements. This move allowed the Harrington Elementary School to occupy the spaces used by the LCP, which increased its design capacity to 516 students. New Hasfings BB rneiritalry Schod The new Hastings School is a 110,000 SF facility constructed on the existing site with a design capacity of 645 students. The new Hastings School opened in February 2020. The current Hastings students moved into the new building in February 2020. The demolition of the existing school, remaining site work, and substantial completion for the entire project will be in the fall of 2020. LPS's redistricting plan will be in place for the 2021-21 school year, and it is anticipated that the new Hastings school will house approximately 645 students. With these new facilities, the District will have just enough space to accommodate the projected elementary enrollment through FY 2029-30 based upon the current forecasts. These new facilities will allow LIPS to implement the redistricting plan to "right size" all elementary schools that are currently over capacity, whereby each elementary school will have the appropriate enrollment based upon the design capacity. The redistricting plan was finalized in December 2019, and is included in the Appendix. These newfacilities allowan alignment in enrollment to create better equity and parity between the six elementary schools as it relates to programming spaces. A few spaces within a couple of the older schools (Bridge and Bowman) will remain slightly undersized; however, reducing the number of students allows for more appropriate spaces for special education needs, art, and music. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 51 The following table identifies each elementary school with the anticipated enrollment, the district - wide special education program, quantity, and areas (NFA) of programmatic spaces as well as overall gross square footage once the redistricting plan is implemented for the 2020-21 school year. I,,,,,IEISN TON 1EDUCATIUNAII,,,,, IPII O II AIM I C.:..I.......C.:.uMC.: N 1 -AF -Y SCI -d,001....... "RGI -d -F SEC.:.." SCI -d,001 S (1)NFA =Net Floor Area (2)Harrington uses LCP spaces PNew Hastings School (a)Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (s)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (s)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7)Medical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA (s)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cqp, i u y g. fl CCl „i rtrmex, 1., „Gir(n:nt, por dw ;,rnomi (Av Inir(p:) I,,,,, xiin t llcfi High Schod The high school is currently over capacity, and as the enrollment forecasts suggest, the overcrowding will continue for the next 10 years. Temporary measures are underway to address the overcrowding for the next few years. However, significant additional measures will be required with the anticipated enrollment peak in 2024-25 of approximately 2,650 students. In the meantime, Lexington Public Schools, through the Lexington School Committee, submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) for the replacement of or a renovation and expansion to the Lexington High School. The high school was not selected into the MSBA program in 2019, however, MSBA has strongly suggested to resubmit the SOI in 2020. The high school project is the capital priority of the District. This project will undoubtedly be the largest capital project the District will have, and it must be taken into consideration when evaluating other brick & mortar solutions. This is important to recognize as some facility strategies have been prefaced with the anticipation of the high school project as the priority and it may not be feasible to anticipate another capital project simultaneously with the high school project. 1....ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-2. Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces Mimi NFA Spaces NFA Spaces N= NFA Core Academic 24 20,288 NFA 24 20,370 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 19 19,907 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 872 NFA 2 830 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 700 NFA 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support(4) 6 3,070 NFA 10 2,936 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 12 1,861 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 5,018 NFA 10 3,397 NFA 15 3,779 NFA 17 8,223 NFA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,494 NFA 3 2,786 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,381 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE(5) 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only)(6) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical /Admin(7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Maint. 911 NFA 859 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,819 NFA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(') 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,144 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments Gym large enough for 1 class Gym large enough for 1 class at a time. Art/Music 1 at a time. Art/Music 1 additional for Chorus/Band or additional for Chorus/Band or omen LLL, sPLD other LLL, sPrD Nurse undersized Nurse undersized Facility designed to Y 9 accommodate enrollment # of classrooms reduced to accommodate ILP Program Facility designed to Y 9 accommodate enrollment without LCP Facility designed to Y 9 accommodate enrollment (1)NFA =Net Floor Area (2)Harrington uses LCP spaces PNew Hastings School (a)Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (s)Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (s)Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7)Medical should be min. 500 NFA MCustodial should be 2,500 NFA (s)Stage, kitchen, cafe storage cqp, i u y g. fl CCl „i rtrmex, 1., „Gir(n:nt, por dw ;,rnomi (Av Inir(p:) I,,,,, xiin t llcfi High Schod The high school is currently over capacity, and as the enrollment forecasts suggest, the overcrowding will continue for the next 10 years. Temporary measures are underway to address the overcrowding for the next few years. However, significant additional measures will be required with the anticipated enrollment peak in 2024-25 of approximately 2,650 students. In the meantime, Lexington Public Schools, through the Lexington School Committee, submitted a Statement of Interest (SOI) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) for the replacement of or a renovation and expansion to the Lexington High School. The high school was not selected into the MSBA program in 2019, however, MSBA has strongly suggested to resubmit the SOI in 2020. The high school project is the capital priority of the District. This project will undoubtedly be the largest capital project the District will have, and it must be taken into consideration when evaluating other brick & mortar solutions. This is important to recognize as some facility strategies have been prefaced with the anticipation of the high school project as the priority and it may not be feasible to anticipate another capital project simultaneously with the high school project. 1....ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-2. 1FAGE11„,,,, III TY s"rIRMEGII IIES Through the master planning process and as demonstrated in the Enrollment section of this report, the enrollment forecasts for the next 10 years suggest the elementary schools will have just enough capacity to accommodate the enrollment, as will the middle schools. The high school is already overcrowded, and short-term space mining is underway until there is a clearer understanding of when a "new” high school will be completed. However, it is important to recognize planning strategies for enrollment shifts that may occur. There are several strategies that address facility capacities: 9 Non birick an(..1 rn...00i1air • Temporary constiructlion, irenovatlions, an(..1 space rn oliruling • Permanent constiructlion 9 Ctheir consi(Jeiratlions Each strategy addresses how to respond if future enrollment is lower than anticipated, if enrollment is as expected and how to plan if enrollment exceeds projections. IEll EMEN"11"AIRY SCl°°100II,,,,, S11"BA11"'M11IES IN Ism lBiri k alnd IMoirtalr Strategies Non -brick and mortar strategies are best applied to short-term enrollment shifts that are projected to be one to five years. Given the short time frame and more immediate needs, construction solutions should be considered for longer-term needs or permanent facility driven solutions. Lower than Anticipated Enrollment If future enrollment is lower than projected, this would allow for all class sizes to be within School Committee guidelines. The challenge in planning for any increase or decrease in enrollment is not knowing where the population shift is coming from. 18 22 24 24 24 24 Strategy: School Consoliidabon This strategy is only applicable if the enrollment decreases significantly. The benefit of this strategy is to remove one of the older facilities (Bridge or Bowman) from service, saving the town further repairs and improvements that are required for the school to remain in service. Alternatively, if the capacity decreases sufficiently so that one school is no longer required, it could be used as swing space if another school is being considered for replacement. In order for school consolidation to occur there must be sufficient capacity at the other five elementary schools to accommodate the residual enrollment at a particular school including the district -wide special education program that is housed at that school. As an example, the overall elementary school enrollment must decline at a minimum of the enrollment size of the Fiske School (409 students) or other strategies would need to be introduced such as larger class sizes at the remaining five elementary schools. In addition, there must be sufficient space at one of the remaining five schools to include the district -wide intensive ILP at Fiske. Alternatively, the Bowman School does not require a significant amount of space for the district -wide LLP; however, the enrollment at the Bowman School is higher than Fiske (516 students). There are many iterations of how to address a school consolidation, but it remains unlikely that the district would have such a reduction in enrollment in the foreseeable future based upon the current enrollment forecasts and trends. Assuming there is an even distribution in enrollment across all six elementary school districts, the benefit of a decrease in enrollment will be received by all schools, especially Bridge and Bowman as spaces such as cafeteria and gymnasium are slightly undersized. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-3 °mrEGY I El.......f:: Mf:: NTARY SCI--iC_ OI....... CONSOI.......IIDXFION (') # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (2) Harrington uses LCP spaces (3) New Hastings School (4) FY29-30 Projected Enrollment Advantages Ren Doves an oIIcler fa(-Jil ty tiron o seiviice or n Day be used for ten q)oirairy sW ng space Anticipated Enrollment Based upon the design enrollment for each of the six elementary schools, there is just enough space for the anticipated enrollment for the next ten years. Strategy: ReAble Assignrrrient If the enrollment is as anticipated, there is sufficient capacity within the existing facilities to accommodate the enrollment. However, this strategy should be considered in order to balance enrollment among the schools. Advantages • No new constructlion irecjuirecl • Rex'uUe ""F en Disadvantages 9 W1 irecjuire re.(Jistriic-[Jng Disadvantages Moves students tirono "n6ghborhoocl" school) to anotheir school) 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5.4 LPS Class Size Policy School Consolidation School Consolidation (21.5 Students) (') (as of Sept. 2020) Fiske School Decommissioned Bowman School Decommissioned School # Gen Ed Capacity District -Wide # Gen Ed Capacity District -Wide # Gen Ed Capacity District -Wide Clrms SPED Program Clrms SPED Program Clrms SPED Program Bowman 24 516 LLP 24 516 LLP Bridge 24 516 TLP 24 516 TLP 24 516 TLP Estabrook 27 581 TLP 27 581 TLP 27 581 TLP Fiske 19 409 ILP 19 409 ILP Harrington (2) 24 516 DLP 24 516 DLP 24 516 DLP Hastings(') 30 645 ILP 30 645 ILP 30 645 ILP Fiske ILP must Bowman Grand Total 148 3,183 129 2,774 be placed 124 2,667 LLP must be placed Projected Enrol 1(4) 3,176 3,176 3,176 Delta +7 -402. 509 (') # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (2) Harrington uses LCP spaces (3) New Hastings School (4) FY29-30 Projected Enrollment Advantages Ren Doves an oIIcler fa(-Jil ty tiron o seiviice or n Day be used for ten q)oirairy sW ng space Anticipated Enrollment Based upon the design enrollment for each of the six elementary schools, there is just enough space for the anticipated enrollment for the next ten years. Strategy: ReAble Assignrrrient If the enrollment is as anticipated, there is sufficient capacity within the existing facilities to accommodate the enrollment. However, this strategy should be considered in order to balance enrollment among the schools. Advantages • No new constructlion irecjuirecl • Rex'uUe ""F en Disadvantages 9 W1 irecjuire re.(Jistriic-[Jng Disadvantages Moves students tirono "n6ghborhoocl" school) to anotheir school) 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5.4 Higher than Anticipated Enrollment The capacity at the existing schools satisfies the anticipated enrollment with little to no additional space at any of the facilities utilizing the class size policy. If future enrollment is higher than expected, strategies other than redistricting or flexible assignment must be considered. There are varying strategies on how to address higher than anticipated enrollment. Redistricting without increasing space would not be a viable solution for non brick and mortar strategies. Furthermore, School Committee policy prevents students from being redistricted more than once in five years. The soonest this strategy could be considered is 2025. Strategy: FieAble Assignffient This is a strategy that should be considered first if necessary to balance enrollment among the schools. The larger, newer schools may be prioritized to receive a larger enrollment due to the size of the general classrooms and core spaces, including art, music, gymnasium, and cafeteria. However, it should be noted some schools may exceed class size policy. Disadvantages 9 No new constructlionire.(.jj. ire.(J ' 9 E(..:juty an...00ngst schools for day ,-s slue Fllex'uUe ien.q)oirairy Moves stu(Jents tirono "n6ghborhoo(J" school) to anotheir school) 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5• Strategy: increase Number of Students Per ClassrOOM (Class Size) It is clear that increasing class size is not desirable, As a short-term strategy, should the enrollment however, there are few options to address increase beyond the current forecast, increasing increased enrollment, should it exceed current class size as a temporary, short-term solution forecasts in a non -brick and mortar approach. would increase capacity within each school. The The current capacity at the elementary schools is following tables are examples of how increasing 3,183 in grades K-5 as of September 2020. The class size from class size policy would increase anticipated peak enrollment over the next ten the capacity at each school. There are many years is 3,176 (2029-30). Any additional growth other iterations that may be considered, but the will require strategies beyond redistricting or examples are to provide an order of magnitude flexible assignment. impact with this strategy. The current school committee class size policy for kindergarten through grade 5 is an average of 21.5 students per classroom. All classrooms across grades provide inclusion for students with special needs. It is critical to provide small, quiet working areas within classrooms to meet the educational needs and inclusion of all students. Adjusting class sizes will have an impact on learning; however, providing additional staff in each classroom to improve the teacher to student ratio can reduce the impact on learning. Class Size Policy — Elementary Schools LPS Class Size Policy Grade GurrentPolicy, Alternative 1 Alternative 2 K 18 20 20 1 st 20 22 24 2nd 22 24 25 3rd 23 24 25 4th 23 24 26 5th 23 24 26 Average 21.5 23.0 24.3 The resulting capacity at each school is demonstrated in the following table: ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (3) New Hastings School (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5.6 LPS Class Size Policy Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Capacity (21.5 Students) "' Capacity (23.0 Students)(') Capacity (24.3 Students)(') School (as of Sept. 2020) # Gen Ed Capacity Comments # Gen Ed Capacity Comments # Gen Ed Capacity Comments Clrms Cirms Clrms Bowman 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 552 3 Art / Music 24 583 3 Art / Music Bridge 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 552 3 Art / Music 24 583 3 Art / Music 2 Art/ 2 Music 2 Art / 2 Music 2 Art / 2 Music Estabrook 27 581 4.5 classroom 27 621 4.5 classroom 27 656 4.5 classroom / / grade / grade grade 1 Art/ 1 Music 1 Art/ 1 Music 1 Art/ 1 Music Fiske 19 409 3.1 classroom 19 437 3.1 classroom 19 461 3.1 classroom / / grade / grade grade 3 Art / Music 3 Art / Music Harrington z 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 552 Cafe / Gym 24 583 small Cafe / Gym small HastingSQ 30 645 2 Art/ 2 Music 30 690 2 Art / 2 Music 30 729 2 Art / 2 Music Grand Total 148 3,183 148 3,404 148 3,595 Projected 3,176 3,176 3,176 Enrollment4 Delta +7 1 1 +228 1 1 +419 ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (3) New Hastings School (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5.6 It is unlikely that an increase in student enrollment would shift so quickly to require an adjustment to an average class size of 24 students (an additional 418 students). It is more realistic to have an increase of 1-2 students per class, and not necessarily at every school. It should be noted that both the Bowman and Bridge Schools have functioned with 545 students each in recent years. Fiske has had up to 480 students in recent years. It is clear this enrollment size is not preferred or suggested, therefore the initial schools that should receive additional students are the larger schools such as Hastings and Estabrook, whereby there is built in flexibility as well as core spaces that are able to accommodate the increased student populations. Flexible assignments would likely be required to achieve a balance in student enrollments. Below is a table demonstrating the overall capacity with Hastings, Estabrook, and Harrington receiving additional students: ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP P New Hastings School (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-.7 LPS Class Size Policy Alternative 3 School Capacity (21.5 Students) �'> (as of Sept. Students) 020) at Hastings, Estabrook, and Harrington # Gen Ed Clrms Capacity Comments # Gen Ed Clrms # Stu./Clrm Capacity Comments Bowman 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 21.5 516 3 Art / Music Bridge 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 21.5 516 3 Art / Music 2 Art/ 2 Music 2 Art / 2 Music Estabrook 27 581 4.5 classroom / 27 23 621 4.5 classroom / grade grade 1 Art/ 1 Music 1 Art/ 1 Music Fiske 19 409 3.1 classroom / 19 21.5 409 3.1 classroom / grade grade 3 Art / Music Harrington (2) 24 516 3 Art / Music 24 23 552 Cafe / Gym small Hastings(') 30 645 2 Art/ 2 Music 30 23 690 2 Art / 2 Music Grand Total 148 3,183 148 3,304 Projected Enrollment') 3,176 3,176 Delta +7 +128 ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP P New Hastings School (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-.7 It is important to recognize the programmatic impacts on increasing the class size and the overall student population in each of the elementary schools: • Core spaces such as the cafeteirla an(J gyinrina§uinn innay Ibe insuffi(Jent foir the ncirease(.1 nun obeli of stu(Jents at the ok.Jeir fadlli-[Jes (Bowman an(J Birk.Jge) (.1epem.tng on the ncirease(.1 nun obeli of stu(Jents. • Suppoirt. spaces such as sf)e6ae(JucatJon (MSN), a(.Jrnlnstirat.Jve, rne(.tca, etc. rn,�,iy �be insuffi(Jent foir the increased inuinribeir of stu(Jents (Jepem.tng on the ncirease(J nurnbeir of stu(Jents. • The stu(Jent. pofx,flat.Jon beton oes a conceirn jven the phy§ca§ze of son oe of the ok.Jeir schoolls (Bowman an(.1 Birk.Jge). Estabirook, I Nairirington, and II Nasflngs Ihave innoire fiekblilH.y jven the §ze of the schoolls as w61 as the (.tstirlct--W(Je sf)e6ae(JucatJon pirogiran re(.:juirernents lira each of these fa6lli-[Jes. • The stu(Jent. pofx,flat.Jon beton oes a conceirn jven the nurnbeir of stu(.Jent.s at. the I 8ast.Jngs SchooL The (Je§gn caf)a6ty lis 64,15" stu(Jents, wNch lis the(largest den oentairy school) lira the )stirkt. II No\/\/eveir, fiekblilRy \r\/as IbUillt lilnto the (Je§gn to aI1ow for sNfts lira enirol1n pent. • lncirea�,-,�ng the cllass §ze as n(.tcate(J above has an iirn opact on Ilearnung. Sou k.J cllass §ze narease to 2 7 students, adduflonall staff for each classiroorn wouk.J be re.(.:juire.(J. The advantages and disadvantages to increasing class size will ultimately be weighed against the number of additional students that must be accommodated. Advantages • I 8astngs an(J Estabirook have a(.1(.ttJor4core capadtyncoirpoiral.e(.1 Tinto the (Je§gn (cafeteirla, gyn n, airt, an(.1 n nn. §c) • IIMay ufllllze dqpending on -ftue enirol1n pent iincrease I airgeir c�assiroorns at I Nast.Jngs an(.1 Estabirook suppoirt a(J(J: tJonW staff to accornmo(Jate a(.1(.1lfionW stu(Jents Does not re(.:juire any new constiructJon Suppoirts short-I.eirm enirolHrnent sf)Hkes Disadvantages • E(.:juty an �ongst aI1 schoolls • Pos§Ue a(.J(Jifior4opeirat.Jng cost for addiflonall staff • Stu(Jents may not. atten(..1 "n6ghboirhoo(J" school) I exington IPii3011iio Schools Master Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-8 Strategy: Out of District Rlacerrrient of Special Fducaflion Students Each of the six elementary schools hosts one of the The strategy of transferring one or more of the district -wide special education programs. These district -wide special education programs from programs provide dedicated and specialized within the school system to placement out of services for students within the entire district who district is not a consideration. These students require similar services. Students from across the require stability and should not be relocated. district attend a particular school for the district- Given the significant implications to this strategy, wide program which may be outside of their the strategy was dismissed prior to calculating "neighborhood"/ district school. Each program any increased enrollment capacities at a particular has a different set of dedicated space parameters school. to meet the requirements of a particular program. Advantages Firees up 1_-4 cllasslroono spaces, (.1epem..:f'ling on tfue school) an(..1 progirarn Disadvantages • Each pirogiran o has varyling (Degrees of space Ire(.:juiiren dents aru(J therefore a(..J(..ttllonal capi: dty IIs not con§stent aclross a: II slix schoolls; -[.Ns approach (Does not sligln7 flic;anflly allteir the c;alpac Ry at any gliven school) Wth the exceptlion of the Fslke School) (--4 dassroorns) • Stu(Jents have folrn oe(.J sodaIrellatlionsN ps Wth th61r c al ,—sn dates • �baC'yl"1eirs and staff kno\/\/ these students ntlin oatdy an(..1 have folrn oe(.J Professliona�l I......earruling "`porn orn ou nr -[lies to su npolrf tfiern o � Ir7eire us a sogln7 foc;ant cost to the dllstirlk t folr out f)Iacen pent. of stu(Jents I......PS has a Ilega�1, n oolra, an(..1 e(.:f ucatlional obllligatlion to Ikeef) ellen oent.alry stu(..Jent.s n I......exington Wth th61r peeirs whenever possliblle. Specliae(::fucatlion stu(Jents belong at th61r schoolsjust as n ouch as th61r none specliae(::f ucatlion peers an(..1 shouk..J not be tlreate(J othelrWse. 1....exiington IPii,blliic Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5_9 Stirategy, tirade Ileconfiiguiratiion This strategy, as it applies to a non -brick and mortar strategy, might be considered to alleviate overcrowding at one school level (elementary, middle or high) by shifting a grade to a different level. Another reason to consider a grade shift might be if there is an aging facility that should be retired but there is not sufficient space at that level to absorb the enrollment at that particular school. There are many factors and implications that must be considered when evaluating this strategy: Wth the assunq)"[Jon that no new constiructlion wouIk.J occu it for -[Ns non buiilk.J: ing stn,: tegy, enirollllinnent innust Ibe sufflic:;lientlly reduced in oirdeir for a ffllll giro: (Je to nn Dove tironn o the current Revell to anotfueir Revell W-fff out Ji nnq)actling the capadty at true otheir Revell. As lit cu irirentlly stamis the den oentairy an(..1 nn oli(J(Jlle schods wlil1 be at capadty an(..1 the Ngh school) lis oven capadty. It the Ngh school) buiilk.J: ing i project rnnoves fonwair(.1, lit lis concdvablle that tfue 811, giro: (Je couII(J rn Dove u p to true Ngh schod an(.1 be ncoirpoirate(.1 as i airt. of the bui (.::ung i niroJect. i lh7 s \r\/odd allllo\r\r suffic;lient space at the innliddlle schods for the possliblilllity of nn ooviing the W"51"' giro: (Je to the nn oik.J(Jlle schods. The sNft nn u,jst cairefflllly eva: u. ate appiropiriiate giro: (Je stiructu fres an(.1 nellalJonsNps. CURRENT II( AIDE CONFIGURATIONIFY 2019 IE URGII,,,, II,,,,, I MENT O) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY2020 Elementary School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is sufficient in FY 2019. Middle School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is sufficient in FY 2019. High School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is overcrowded for the core spaces; academic spaces are at capacity in FY 2019. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.10 K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 2019 Total Enrollment Capacity Delta Elementary(') 401 467 509 552 560 605 3,094 3,183 +89 Middle Clarke 308 286 319 913 1,833 1,849 +16 Diamond 311 288 321 920 High 598 542 572 551 2,263 2,250 -13 Total 401 467 509 552 560 605 619 574 640 598 542 572 551 7,190 7,281 O) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY2020 Elementary School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is sufficient in FY 2019. Middle School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is sufficient in FY 2019. High School—The current grade configuration with the current design capacity is overcrowded for the core spaces; academic spaces are at capacity in FY 2019. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.10 CURRENT I IDE COURGURATIREAK ENROI,,,,, II,,,,, I IE T 2029,,,,,,,,30 O) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY2020 (2) Middle Schools assume 49% / 51 % split (3) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be sufficient at the peak year of FY 2029-30. Middle School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be slightly over design capacity at the peak year of FY 2029-30. High School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity at the year of FY2029-30. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.1I K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2029-30 CapacityDelta TotalEnrollment Elementary(') 441 496 523 549 572 595 3,176 3,182 +6 Clarke 318 318 319 955 Middle(2) 1,949 1,892 -.57 Diamond 331 331 332 994 High 625 625 625 622 2,497 2,250(3) 27 Total 441 496 523 549 572 595 649 649 651 625 625 625 622 7,622 7,324 O) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY2020 (2) Middle Schools assume 49% / 51 % split (3) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be sufficient at the peak year of FY 2029-30. Middle School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be slightly over design capacity at the peak year of FY 2029-30. High School—The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity at the year of FY2029-30. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.1I The following are examples of how a grade reconfiguration could occur, recognizing the focus is on a non -brick and mortar solution. There are other options for this strategy as it relates to construction solutions. OPTUN 1 ( MOVE 5TI--i GRADE TO MIIDDI.......E:u SCI--iC_ OI....... (C: RE:XP NG 8 --- 7 MIIDDI.......E:u SCI--iOOI.......S) MOVE 8TI--i GRADE:: TO NEW I--iIIGI--i SCI--iOOI....... (CRE XPNCS 8---12 I--iIIGI--i SCI--iOOI.......) Elementary School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly less than design capacity in FY 2028-29. Should this shift occur, an older school could be taken off-line. Middle School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be slightly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. This enrollment is slightly under the enrollment if the middle schools remain grades 6-8. High School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. The only realistic approach to accommodating this shift in grade structure would be to incorporate the 8t' grade into a new high school project. Given the realization that the viable solutions for this non -building strategy are: (1) there is a significant reduction in student enrollment; or (2) it is tied to the High School construction project. Advantages Oppolrturulity to chose one dklelr den oentairy school) II :::Irulrolllllnnr lru�. (K 4I) lis under calpaclRy \r\rli h five den oentary schools Iisadvalntages • IVIII(J(..Te schods Irern oa n §l ghtlly ovelrclrow(Je(J • A Ngh school) piroject wonull(J be Ire(.:I uliire(.J to Iirucllnu(Je ttue 811, glra(Je, rnoakling lit an extlrerno6y Marge faclilllity • The Ngh school) won.ulk.l beIre.(.II .uuire(.J to clreate an "aci: (Jelrn ny" %or the 811, � n(..1 lnos§Uy 011' glra(Je'to n4lntan separ,:,T[Jlon W th the oII(Jelr glra(Jes 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.12. K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 20129-30 Total Enrollment CapacityDelta Elementary 441 496 523 549 572 0 2,581 3,182 +601 Middle Clarke 292 318 318 0 928 1,893 1,892 Diamond 303 331 331 0 965 High 651 625 625 625 622 3,148 2,250 -.89 Total 441 496 523 549 572 595 649 649 651 625 625 625 622 7,622 7,281 Elementary School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly less than design capacity in FY 2028-29. Should this shift occur, an older school could be taken off-line. Middle School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be slightly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. This enrollment is slightly under the enrollment if the middle schools remain grades 6-8. High School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. The only realistic approach to accommodating this shift in grade structure would be to incorporate the 8t' grade into a new high school project. Given the realization that the viable solutions for this non -building strategy are: (1) there is a significant reduction in student enrollment; or (2) it is tied to the High School construction project. Advantages Oppolrturulity to chose one dklelr den oentairy school) II :::Irulrolllllnnr lru�. (K 4I) lis under calpaclRy \r\rli h five den oentary schools Iisadvalntages • IVIII(J(..Te schods Irern oa n §l ghtlly ovelrclrow(Je(J • A Ngh school) piroject wonull(J be Ire(.:I uliire(.J to Iirucllnu(Je ttue 811, glra(Je, rnoakling lit an extlrerno6y Marge faclilllity • The Ngh school) won.ulk.l beIre.(.II .uuire(.J to clreate an "aci: (Jelrn ny" %or the 811, � n(..1 lnos§Uy 011' glra(Je'to n4lntan separ,:,T[Jlon W th the oII(Jelr glra(Jes 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.12. OPTUN 2 1 MOVI...0 8TI--i GRADE TO -iGI--i SCI--iOOI....... Elementary School -The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be sufficient at the peak year of FY 2028-29. No change to elementary school grade structure in the Option. Middle School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly under the design capacity in FY 2028-29. High School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. The only realistic approach to accommodating this shift in grade structure would be to incorporate the 8th grade into a new high school project. Advantages &glnliflic;alnt c;alpac Ry added to the Innliddlle school) lisadvalntages • INo Ibeineflit to the (Jlennenitalry sc ,00hs • A Ngh school) l project won.ull(J be Ire(.:I uliire(.J to Iiruclln.u(Je tfue 811, glra(Je, nn oakling lit an extlrenn Dally Marge taclilllity • The Ngh school) won.ulk.J beIre.(.II.ulilre(.J to clreate an "acs: (Jennoy" torr the fit" ar�xI lnos§Uy 911, glra(Je to nn4ntan selnaralJon With the oII(Jelr glra(Jes 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.13 K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 2029-30 Total Enrollment CapacityDelta Elementary 441 496 523 549 572 595 3,176 3,182 +6 Middle Clarke 318 318 0 636 1,298 1,892 +594 Diamond 331 331 0 662 High 651 625 625 625 622 3,148 2,250 -.89 Total 441 496 523 549 572 595 649 649 651 IIIII625 625 625 622 7,622 7,281 Elementary School -The current grade configuration with the projected capacity will be sufficient at the peak year of FY 2028-29. No change to elementary school grade structure in the Option. Middle School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly under the design capacity in FY 2028-29. High School -The modified grade configuration with the projected capacity will be significantly over design capacity in FY 2028-29. The only realistic approach to accommodating this shift in grade structure would be to incorporate the 8th grade into a new high school project. Advantages &glnliflic;alnt c;alpac Ry added to the Innliddlle school) lisadvalntages • INo Ibeineflit to the (Jlennenitalry sc ,00hs • A Ngh school) l project won.ull(J be Ire(.:I uliire(.J to Iiruclln.u(Je tfue 811, glra(Je, nn oakling lit an extlrenn Dally Marge taclilllity • The Ngh school) won.ulk.J beIre.(.II.ulilre(.J to clreate an "acs: (Jennoy" torr the fit" ar�xI lnos§Uy 911, glra(Je to nn4ntan selnaralJon With the oII(Jelr glra(Jes 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.13 "Teirnpoiralry Coin tlru tialfm, IReinovatioin, aind Space IMir-AnStrategies Any construction strategy requires thoughtful planning and the financial capacity to support the solution. There are different construction methods that may serve temporary construction, renovation, and space mining rather than permanent construction approaches. Space Mining Space mining is a term used whereby interior spaces are re -purposed for uses other than what they were intended for or are currently used for. There are varying degrees of space mining that have implied costs and time associated with them. A generic space such as a general classroom can be re -purposed for another classroom type space such as a special education space, art room, or music room. There is no associated cost to this type of space mining and it can be done extremely efficiently. Other space mining endeavors such as converting one standard size classroom into two smaller spaces requires minor construction to ensure HVAC and electrical are provided in each new space as well as proper door widths and clearances. A significant space mining undertaking would be a space such as a locker room and converting it into general education space. Portable Construction Portable construction typically has a useful life of approximately ten years. Portable spaces can be leased or purchased. They are quick to market and are typically less expensive than other "long- term" solutions; however, they offer a less permanent solution. In addition, in order to fully benefit from the expediency and cost of this type of construction, using the standard portable sizes limits the flexibility in their use (approximately 750- 850 square feet). Portable construction is typically used to add a few classrooms to an existing facility. Prefabricated Construction Prefabricated construction can be construed similarly to portable construction; however, it has a longer life span of approximately 20 years and is more permanent in nature. Prefabricated construction is an attractive alternative to brick & mortar solutions when there is a more immediate need as they can get to market quicker. However, this method of construction is not inexpensive due to current market trends. Lower than Anticipated Enrollment If future enrollment is lower than predicted, there is sufficient capacity with the existing facilities to accommodate the enrollment. Therefore no temporary construction, renovation, or space mining strategies are necessary. 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5 14 Future Enrollment as Expected Strategy: Updafung Bridge and BOWMan Sclhoolls A replacement of the Bridge and/or Bowman School(s) will not occur until after the high school project, however, it is important to recognize that they are the oldest of the elementary schools. Aesthetic improvements could be considered prior to a replacement to help the schools feel somewhat updated. While this consideration addresses possible inequities among the facilities, it should be recognized that the Bridge and Bowman Schools had upgrades in early 2010s that included some aesthetic improvements. This strategy does not address enrollment capacity issues and therefore should not be considered if it does not address overall capacity needs, repairs or other town mandates. Advantages I.,1pQJ,#.cs the two oII(Jes . den dentary schoolls n ttuc (.tstritt Disadvantages • Enirolllln pent. capad-ly tissues not conslk.1eire.(.1 • "'post an(..1 constiructlionire.(.II . ire.(J to aQ.: (Jiress orally aesthetlics at BrIiQ.Jge an(J Bown oan 1....exiington IPii3011iic Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 51 Future Enrollment Exceeds Forecasts Strategy: Space Il ilnliing / Re 1purlposiing Plrogran'l Space Each facility should undergo a space mining any school over 20 sections requires itinerant staff exercise to ensure spaces are being properly to supplement the additional sections. Due to used, based upon programmatic and individual complex school scheduling, it has been confirmed student needs. This evaluation could be a part of that any school over 24 sections will require a the annual master plan update. minimum of 3 art/music classrooms to allow for A specific approach to increasing capacity itinerant staff to teach simultaneously with school without expanding the facility is to repurpose staff. Schools with higher capacities such as spaces currently used for "specials" such as art Hastings will utilize 2 art and 2 music classrooms and music to general classrooms. This approach to accommodate the large number of classrooms. does not allow for sufficient space to increase Reducing the number of art and music classrooms each grade by one general classroom (i.e. five does not alter the programmatic requirements or classrooms per grade instead of four classrooms agreement with specialists. Should the number of per grade), however it would accommodate a art and music spaces be reduced, there would larger than typical grade by providing another need to be "art on a cart" and for music to be general classroom or two for a particular grade. taught in the general classrooms, on the stage, or in other unoccupied spaces during a particularperiod. However, there are compromises with this concept. 516 The agreement with specialists (art, music, PE 25 teachers) stipulates specialists have no more than The resulting capacity at each school is 20 contact hours aweek with students. This means demonstrated below: ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP (3) New Hastings School (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii,01liio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.16 LPS Class Size Policy 1 Art / 1 Music or Literacy Library 1 Art & Music Shared Capacity (21.5 Students) (') (21.5 Students) (21.5 Students) School (as of Sept. 2020) # Gen Ed Capacity Comments # Gen Ed Capacity Comments # Gen Ed Capacity Comments Clrms Clrms Clrms Bowman 24 516 3 Art / Music 25 538 Use of "carts" 26 559 Use of "carts" required required Bridge 24 516 3 Art / Music 25 538 Use of "carts" 26 559 Use of "carts" required required 2 Art/ 2 Music Use of "carts" Use of "carts" Estabrook 27 581 4.5 classroom 29 624 required or 30 645 required / grade convert LL Fiske 19 409 3.1 classroom 19 409 Only 1 Art & 1 I 20 430 Use of "carts" / grade Music required Harrington (2) 24 516 3 Art / Music 25 538 Use of "carts" 26 559 Use of "carts" required required Use of "carts" 1 Art/ 1 Music HastingSQ 30 645 2 Art/ 2 Music 32 688 required or 33 710 Use of "carts" convert LL required Grand Total 148 3,183 155 3,333 161 3,462 Projected 3,176 3,176 3,176 Enrollment4 Delta +7 +157 +286 ") # of classrooms determined by appropriate support spaces (Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed,1 DLP (3) New Hastings School (^)FY29-30 Projected Enrollment 1....exiington IPii,01liio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.16 It is unlikely that an increase in student enrollment would shift so quickly to require only one shared art and music classroom at each school (an additional 279 students). Nonetheless, it is important to recognize there are other programmatic impacts to increasing the quantity of classrooms and reducing dedicated art and music rooms in each of the elementary schools. Reducing art and music by one space is not as impactful as having only one space to be shared between both art and music. Advantages Increases capa6ty Wthout lincurrling expenses for constiructlion There is a literacy library equal to the size of a general classroom at both Estabrook and Hastings that could also be considered instead of reducing art or music classrooms at these facilities. The literacy library would need to be relocated into classrooms, storage rooms or possibly the library. Furthermore, flexible assignment would most likely be required to ensure the correct number of students are allocated to each school. Disadvantages E(..:juity an(..1 pairiity are con opiron as son oe stn. (Dents wiillll rec6ve linstiructlion lira an airt. or n ou §c croon o wtulille otheirs Willll rec6ve nstiructlion lira (less than Ii(Jeaenvirons. 9 Nouse lis a conceirn for n...ou §c instiructlion. • The stn. (Dent. pofx.flatlion beton oes a conceirn jven the physlicaslue of son oe of the schoolls (gown oan, BrIi(Jge, Rslke, 18airirlington) for the shaire.(J airt. / n ou §c space of) -[Jon. • The stn. (Dent. pofx.flatlion becon oes a conceirn jven the nurn obeir of stu(..Jent.s at. the 18astlings >chooll for the st aire(J airt / n on. §c space optlion. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 � n'� Strategy: Repurposing 1 C at Old Hairirington This strategy would apply only to the Harrington School. The spaces at Old Harrington (Central Administration Building) that were used for the LCP could be used for overflow classrooms at the Harrington School. There are the equivalent of five classrooms in the lower level of Old Harrington that were previously used for the LCP. With minor modifications, and assuming these spaces are available, this would increase the capacity at Harrington as follows: Advantages 9 Increases capa6ty Disadvantages • A giracle wouIk.J be irer::juirer::l to dross the parlk'ung Ilot for a: II otheir pirogiran os, IiruclluQ.:ting art, rnor.§c, PL, hunch, ancl nuirse • RexlUe as§gnnoent or peirfuapsirerts,,tiriic-[Jn g rn ought be irer::ju. irer::l • Safety of the stn. dents cress,, rn g the parlkling of wouIk.J neer::l to be carefuIy conslk.1ere.cl • lner::jual ty of W"th giracle stn. dents at. 18arrlington con oparer::l to the otheir schoolls • I.....ost tiro oe on Ilearruling, traversling between bulilk.tngs 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.18 LPS Class Size Policy Capacity (21.5 Students)(') School (as of Sept. 2020) # Gen Ed Capacity Classrooms Harrington 24 516 Old Harrington (LCP spaces) 5 107 Total 29 623 Delta +5 +107 Advantages 9 Increases capa6ty Disadvantages • A giracle wouIk.J be irer::juirer::l to dross the parlk'ung Ilot for a: II otheir pirogiran os, IiruclluQ.:ting art, rnor.§c, PL, hunch, ancl nuirse • RexlUe as§gnnoent or peirfuapsirerts,,tiriic-[Jn g rn ought be irer::ju. irer::l • Safety of the stn. dents cress,, rn g the parlkling of wouIk.J neer::l to be carefuIy conslk.1ere.cl • lner::jual ty of W"th giracle stn. dents at. 18arrlington con oparer::l to the otheir schoolls • I.....ost tiro oe on Ilearruling, traversling between bulilk.tngs 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.18 l errnalnelrmt C Ism tlru ti lam Similar to the temporary construction options, there are various types of permanent construction that could be considered. Brick & Mortar Construction Brick & mortar construction is a viable solution when there is a long-term need. This is a permanent solution which will have at least a 50 -year life span. This solution requires a longer planning phase with a typically higher cost. In addition, this solution requires thoughtful planning, the financial capacity, and broad community support. The duration of construction depends on whether the construction is for a small addition to an existing facility, a renovation and addition to an entire facility, or if it is a new facility. Implications to brick & mortar solutions include disruption to existing occupants whether it be an addition or if construction will occur on a site of an existing occupied facility. New construction on a vacant site is the least disruptive, has the least amount of phasing, and typically allows for best placement of a facility as well as accommodation of site requirements (i.e. outdoor programmatic needs, parking, separation of vehicles, sustainability, etc.). However, there are few opportunities for available land within the Town of Lexington. The Town continues to explore site opportunities as they arise. Lower than Anticipated Enrollment If future enrollment is lower than predicted, it may be possible to consolidate and replace either Bridge or Bowman (or both). Strategy: Consolidation Ifthe enrollment is lowerthan anticipated, it maybe preferable to consolidate the Bridge and Bowman schools, potentially replacing one or both of them, given that they are the oldest elementary schools in the district. Advantages • Mo(.Jeirnu zes the oII(Jest schoolls lira the (.fstirlict (Brii(Jge an(.1 Bowman) • Potenflialllly n Oakes elite of one of these schoolls availlaUe to otfueir use Disadvantages 9 Sligin7 flic:;aint fliinanc:;lial c:;oinninnitinneint Future Enrollment as Expected If future enrollment remains as predicted, the district has sufficient capacity within the existing facilities to accommodate the enrollment. Therefore no strategies are necessary. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 51 Future Enrollment Exceeds Forecasts Strategy: Fxpansiion ConsWerafuons Recognizing there are not many opportunities for new construction on vacant sites, concepts for expansions at all six elementary schools were explored in addition to the Old Harrington School where Central Administration is currently located. It is important to recognize that although expansions might be possible at particular schools, it does not mean it is necessarily a viable solution. The enrollment for each expansion must be carefully evaluated as well as equity and parity for all students. Site constraints should be evaluated in conjunction with the programmatic value of each expansion. • The follllowiing concepts Ire. nlresent. n oaAn oiiziing each eAstiing elite an(J faclilllity base(J upon the e(:: ucatiior4ll re(.:juiirenoents set follh by I......PS. • Theire rern oan space corn prorn oiises such as n"'ne(.tcal an(.1 a(..1n''nllrullstlratllve space an(.1 custoQ;tlill an(.1 n oanteruance spaces in the oIk..Jelr faciilliitiies. • Lxpan§on at Brik..Jge an(.1 Bown oan wouIk.J re(.:j dire the schoolls to be vacant Q:: uriing constructiion. Cairefn.fl lJlaruruiing an(.1 l nhase(J, occn. pl e(.J constructiion wouIk.J be Ire(.:julilre.(J for Fslke an(.1 1 larriington. • Cairefn.fl conslk.Jelratlion shouIk.J be Jven to renovate or replace OII(J 1 larriington for an ellen oentairy schooll wNille n 4ntaiiruiing the current. I larriington Elementary School. • Schooll A(Jrn oiinu stratiion must be rdocate(.1 to elithelr anotheir town owne(J faclilllity oir Ilease(J off lic e space \/\Jflr7liin Il.....exiiington. • The concepts are prograrn orn atiic (:tiagrarn os orally. • Coshing for these concepts has not been coni(:: ucte(J. Advantages Oppolrf n. nr ty to n oo(.Jelrnu ze oIk..Jelr schoolls in the (.tstlrlict Disadvantages • SIIte C' yorlstirallrlts i llinn0. opt ons at dIIfIeirerllt schoolls • OII(Jelr faciilliitiies n oay be n oolre Illin olite(.J an(.1 reqUIre i sllglnl fllc:;alnt soIWJons • Occn. pl e(.J constlructlion wouIk.J be (J: slruptlive and r1111C 1llt req IIIre I1rllo`WClllr g students and staff • I lashings schooll couIk.J conceiivaUe house 774 stn. (Dents AII,,,,,°1[°'ERNA11"IMC;;; S111`1= OP°111ONS At the time of this report there is one site that has been identified as a possible option for LPS use, the "Laconia Street Site." However, the MPAC agreed that it is important to continue to explore other opportunities as they arise (purchase or land swap) within the town. 1....exiington ii lliio School) s M aster Ili I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-20 �BOWIMAN SCH001 I RENOVXFON AND ADDFFON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS L—j 77 L LLP FIRST FLOOR PLAN • Expancis pirogiran o to 30 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon os (+6 dassiroon os) oir an acict-[Jona�l 129 stuclents • Appiropirbte SPED dassiroorns iirudlucing I I P til rog ran • 2 airt. ancl 2 rnu§c Iroorn os, • New gyn na§un • New cafetoiriun o • Den odi-Hon of Asting poirtade dassiroon os • [:.3ased upoin the [:.)o\/\/rnan §te, theire s111suffickant space to construct a IC11evv schod \/\/N�e the current schod lis occufJecl clue to wetlancl constiraints on the life I 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-21 BRUDGE SCH001 I RENOVXFON AND ADDFFON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS FIRST FLOOR PLAN • Expancis pirogiran o to 30 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon os (+6 dassiroon os) oir an acict-[Jona�l 129 stuclents • Appiropirbte SPED Cbssiroorns iirudlucting "T-1 P til rogiran • 2 airt. ancl 2 rnu§c Iroorn os, • New gyn na§un • New cafetoo riun o • Buik.tng a new schod aciJacent to the eAsting schod lis extirBrno dy chalbnjng base upon the current Conseirvaton Con m ds§on requl,#Jons that. the buik.Tng n u.jst Iren oan out§cle of the 100' vvefland Ibuffeir zone 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-22 ESTARROOK SCH001 I ADD -FON 1 645 ST(,,JDENTS SECOND FLOOR PLAN CL LL. LU • Expancis pirogiran � to 30 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon �s (+3 dassiroon �s) oir an acicftbna�� 64 stuclents 1;4 w • Al eAsfing coire spaces air aclecluate foir the ac1cf-I.Jond (3) geneira�� eclucalJon dassiroorns LU 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-23 FIS KE SCH001 I RENOVXFON AND ADDFFON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS ART ART SECOND FLOOR PLAN 0 40 80 * Expancis pirogiran o to 30 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon os (+ 11 dassiroo nos,) oir an acJ(.T-1Jor4 236 stuclents * Appiropirbte SPED Cbssiroorns Iirudlucfing II......P pirog ran * 2 airt. ancl 2 rnu§c Iroorn os, * Expancl cafetoirlurn ancl Ikltchen 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-24 HARRM"TON SCH001 I RENOVXFON & ADD -FON 1645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS 5p ARI -11 EV ........... SP 11 EV ART LL SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0 40 80 ( LL. LU • Expancis pirogiran � to 30 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon �s (+6 dassiroon �s) oir an acicftbna�� 129 stuclents 1;4 W • Appiropirbte SPED Cbssiroorns nducfng DI P pirogiran LU • 2 airt. ancl 2 rnu§c Iroorn os, • Expancl cafetoirlurn ancl IMtchen • New gyn na§un o 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-25 01 ID IHARRNGTON SCH001 I RENOVXFON & ADD -FON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS FIRST FLOOR PLAN GROUND FLOOR PLAN 040 80 (1)Z • Th� ju � s concept can be con �Unecl Wth expancfng the New I �airir�ngton Schod (30 geneira�� ec , calJon dassiroon os), oir the New I Bairirington Schod can be Ileft as lis (24 geneiraeclucatJon dassiroon os). • Renovale ancl expancl Oki I Bairirington buIk.fng fear 30 geneiraclucatJon dassiroon os oir an ac1cf-I.Jond 64,15" stuclents • Shairecl new cafetoirlurn ancl IMtchen Wth -ffue New I Bairirington Schod • Shairecl new gyn na§un o Wth the New I Bairirington Schod • Centird aclndnstirallon Wll b Irecjuirecl to be irdocatecl I 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-26 01 ID IHARMNGTON SCH001 I NEW CONSTR(JCTON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS CL - CL - C . L .. C . L S1 - LL CL CL STAFF I 5T 11 --- - ------ __. . ....... 5T SPED LL CL CL CL CL SPED I LIBRARYT THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN 0 F'=f FIRST FLOOR PLAN LU Den odish the eAsting Oki I Bairirington buik.fng ancl constiruct a new schod foie 30 geneiraclucatJon 1;4 w dassiroon os oir an acictfiond 64,15" stuclents LU � he existing II hridington Schod innust Ireinn6in at 24 geneiral educaflon dassiroornis (nsuffclent Iroorn on s,lte to expancl coir e spaces) Centird aclndnistirabon will b Irecjuiirecl to be irdocatecl 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5 - 27 HASTNIGS SCH001 I ADD -FON 1 774 S-F(,,JDEN-FS THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0 40 80 LL. LU • Expancis pirogiran � to 36 geneird eclucatJon dassiroon �s (+6 dassiroon �s) oir an acicftbna�� 129 stuclents 1;4 w • Wouk.l recju�ire a fouirth unch peirbcl (currently accon m �oclates 224 stuclents peir s',eating) LU 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-28 Laconia Street Site The following concept demonstrates the possibility of utilizing the Laconia Street site. It is located in the residential neighborhood of Laconia Street, Young Street, and Webb Street. The site is approximately 12 acres, has steep topography and it surrounds privately owned parcels. In addition, it abuts Lower Vine Brook, which is conservation land, and has trails running through the property. Existhig I acoNa Street site 11 exington 1Public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-29 Access to the site is challenging as it is nestled in a residential neighborhood with narrow roads and limited street frontage. Below is a diagram identifying the potential location of a school on the site with possible entry locations. Pc)teiitial site access locatims 11 exington 11= ublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-30 Based upon LIPS educational program requirements, an elementary school to support 30 general classrooms including all other program requirements has the potential to be located at this site. The new Hastings School program and site requirements are the basis for the concept below. I ACOMA STREET SffE I NEW CONSTR(JCTON 1 645 S-F(,,JDEN-FS SECOND FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN 41 FIRST FLOOR PLAN U 4U 80 0 9 30 generae(JucatJon c�assiroon os of 64,15" st.u(Jents I 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 -31 31 MIIIDIDII,,,IE SCI°°100II,,,, S11"RAIIIEGIIIE S The Town just completed renovations and additions to both the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools to increase the overall capacity at the middle school level. The chart below lists both middle schools with the educational program, district -wide special education programs, quantity and areas (NFA) of programmatic spaces, as well as overall gross square footage for both schools. EIDUCAT"U AII,,,,, II IRCGIRAIM I MS EAST NG 2019 O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch 1....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5..32. Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Supporl'2) 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 N FA 3 2,624 N FA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dininq onlv 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space (3) 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch 1....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5..32. Noir lBiri k aind Il alrtalr Strategies Lower than Anticipated Enrollment Although the middle school enrollment population is predicted to be at or slightly over capacity for the next ten years, it was important to identify strategies should enrollment decrease over time. Strategy: Moving 51h or. 91h Grade One strategy that should be considered should there be a significant decrease in enrollment at the middle school level would be to move the 51" grade up from the elementary schools or to move the 9th grade down from the high school to alleviate overcrowding. In order for this strategy to be implemented there would need to be a reduction of students equivalent to an entire grade. Projected forecasts suggest one grade level is approximately 600 students. • 11==1iro\Jde fllexliUle space at the dIerrientairy school) Revell • Couk..:J pirovlkJe irellliet : t the Nigh school) Revell Disadvantages I[:.3irliings the fifth girade to the innliddlle sc hoop Revell 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5-33 Future Enrollment as Expected The middle school enrollment is forecasted to remain steady for the next ten years and will continue to be at the peak capacity based upon an average team size of 86 students. Strategy: Rexi Ale Assugnrrrient Assuming the enrollment forecasts hold true, it is recommended to continue to utilize flexible assignment for the middle schools. However, rather than assigning on a rolling basis, possibly hold summer enrollments for 411/511-8t" grade, until a cutoff date and/or critical mass before making assignment decisions. This would allow for more informed decision making and allow for some mitigation of busing costs. Advantages • No new constiructlion nee(Je(J • RexlUe • Temporary Disadvantages 9 E(..:juty an...00ngst schools for day ,-s slue 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5•-34 Future Enrollment Higher than Expected Strategy: increase Number of Students peer Tealm (Class maize) The current school committee team size policy for As a short-term strategy, should the enrollment grades 6-8 has a range of 80-92 students per team with an average team size of 86 students which, in turn, is reduced by the four core subjects taught on each team to 21.5 students per core subject. Class size has an impact on learning. All classrooms across grades provide inclusion fo students with special needs. Adjusting class sizes will have an impact on learning. r increase including the confidence level based upon the current forecast, increasing team size as a temporary, short-term solution would increase capacity within each school. Refer to the tables below as examples of how increasing team size would increase the capacity at each school. There are many other iterations that may be considered, r but the examples are to provide an order of magnitude impact with this strategy. The resulting capacity at each school is demonstrated below: (') FY29-30 Projected Enrollment Advantages 9 No aQ.lcl: fliorud constructoon lis recjur rer::l Disadvantages • Core spaces such as the cafetelrlla %fit the Cllairlke MIiQ.:iQ.te >chod becornoe unclerslizer::l • Exi nlloratolry spaces such as pelrtolrrn oing aims, Vllsu SII %iris, eruJneerling, etc. wllllll have ruclreaser::l nun obeli of stn. dents, wNch rn oay clreate extra Ilarge classes. 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5•..35 LPS Class Size Policy Capacity Alternative 1 Capacity Alternative 2 Capacity (86 Students /Team) (90 Students /Team) (91 Students/ Team) School Capacity Comments Capacity Comments Capacity Comments teams teams teams Clarke 10.5 903 10.5 945 10.5 955 teams Average teams Average teams Average 11.5 11.5 11.5 Diamond 989 class size 1,035 class size 1,047 class size teams _ 21.5 teams _ 22 5 teams _ 22.75 Grand Total 22 1,892 22 teams 1,980 22 2,002 teams teams Projected 1,949 Includes 1,949 1,949 Includes Enrollment ' confidence level confidence level Delta 57 +31 +52 (') FY29-30 Projected Enrollment Advantages 9 No aQ.lcl: fliorud constructoon lis recjur rer::l Disadvantages • Core spaces such as the cafetelrlla %fit the Cllairlke MIiQ.:iQ.te >chod becornoe unclerslizer::l • Exi nlloratolry spaces such as pelrtolrrn oing aims, Vllsu SII %iris, eruJneerling, etc. wllllll have ruclreaser::l nun obeli of stn. dents, wNch rn oay clreate extra Ilarge classes. 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of strategies March 2020 5•..35 Strategy: Out of District Rlacerrient of Special Fducabon Students Each middle school hosts district -wide special education programs. The strategy of transferring one or more district -wide programs out of the school system to placement out of the district, offers the following advantages and disadvantages: Advantages Firees up appiroAn oat6y fouir cbsiroon os (.1epem.tng upon school) arxI pirogirarn Disadvantages • Must rneet oUlgat.Jonsto st.u(Jents lira the east irestirlictlive erMironrnent • Cos -is the (.tstirlct for eveiry stu(Jent f)bce(J out of (.tstirict • In q)en oent.Jng n ok.J(Jle school) out pbcen pent. n oay lin qJy 6ln olnat.Jon of coirire.spon(.tng Nigh school) pirogiran o, lincreasling the nun bear of yeairs to pay for stn (.Jents out of (J: stirict I I exington IPii,blliic Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-36 "Ternpoiralry Calan tru tialrm, II( elr ovatioin, aind Space Il ilrAng Lower than Anticipated Enrollment If the middle school enrollment is lower than expected, there will not be a need to utilize temporary measures to address enrollment. However, similar to the non -brick and mortar strategies, if the enrollment is significantly reduced, considerations for bringing the 51" grade up to the middle school level or moving the 91" grade down may be considered. Advantages Cudkeir tlin oe to n oairlket I......ess expen§ve than peirn oanent constiructlion I ess (.fsiruptlion to st.u(Jents an(..1 staffs Future Enrollment as Expected Strategy: Ciarke Middlle School TeMporary. Fxlpainsion The recent addition to the Clarke School has maximized the expansion capabilities due to the existing conditions of the facility and, more importantly, the constraints of the site. Therefore, any considerations for expansion are related to the Diamond Middle School only. Strategy: Dian'lond Middle School TeMporary Fxlpainsion If enrollment is on the high end of the projections, portable classrooms could be considered. Diamond Middle School has expansion opportunities, either in the parking lot and/or fields (with concessions/impacts) or by creating an addition to create a 2nd courtyard. This would apply to either temporary or permanent construction. Costs for temporary vs. permanent should be weighed as well as site implications and disruption to staff and students. Should this option be utilized, care should be taken to ensure that placement of portables will not interfere with future permanent brick & mortar expansions if future enrollment needs require additional space. Disadvantages Ten opoirary sollutlion (pori: Ue or pirefabiriicate(.J) ---. Illife span 10--20 years 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5•-3 Future Enrollment Higher than Expected Strategy: Dian'lond Middlle School TeMporary Fxlpainsion This strategy is the same as the strategy for future enrollment is as expected. If enrollment is higher than the projections, portable classrooms could be considered. Diamond Middle School has expansion opportunities, either in the parking lot and/or fields (with concessions/impacts) or by creating an addition to create a 2nd courtyard. This would apply to either temporary or permanent construction. Costs for temporary vs. permanent should be weighed as well as site implications and disruption to staff and students. Should this option be utilized, care should be taken to ensure that placement of portables will not interfere with future permanent brick & mortar expansions if future enrollment needs require additional space. Advantages 9 Qukeir tlin...oe to n...oairket I......ess expen§ve than peirn oanent constiructlion I......ess (.fsiruptlion to sty (.Jents an(..1 staffs Disadvantages Ten opoirary sollu-[Jon (pori: Ue or pirefabiriicate(.J) ---. Illife span 10--20 years 1....exiington IPii3011iic Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5•-38 l errim irielrit Calm tlru tiall"m Strategies Lower than Anticipated Enrollment If enrollment is lower than anticipated, then no permanent construction strategies are warranted Anticipated Enrollment Similar to if the enrollment is lower than anticipated, no permanent construction is required if the enrollment is as anticipated. Future Enrollment Higher than Expected All construction strategies require thoughtful planning and the financial capacity to support the solution. There are different construction methods that may serve as solutions to various needs. Strategy: Dian'lond Middlle School Expansion As previously mentioned, there are no expansion opportunities at Clarke Middle School. However, there are expansion opportunities at Diamond Middle School. The expansion of the Diamond School took into consideration the possibility of future growth by strategically locating the addition as well as creating a cafeteria that can accommodate additional enrollment. From an educational perspective it is important to recognize both middle schools are nearing 1,000 students. The sizes of the Clarke and Diamond Middle Schools are very large and this should be taken into consideration when contemplating further expansion at the Diamond School. In addition, the feeder elementary schools will need to be evaluated as there may be an imbalance of the total number of students from the three schools feeding into Diamond verses Clarke. (') FY 29-30 Projected Enrollment Disadvantages Pearn oanent W"50 -f- year sollu-[Jon Exi. an §on oi. poilunr[oes orally at Uan ooncl, not at Clarke, ttueretore den oentairy feeder schoolls rn u.jst be corusli(Jerecl 9 DIian...00ncl becon...oes a lairge n...oi(Jc lle school 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5•..39 LPS Class Size Policy Capacity Diamond Expansion School (86 Students /Team) LPS Class Size PolicyCapacity (86 Students / Team) # of teams Capacity Comments # of teams Capacity Comments Clarke 10.5 teams 903 10.5 teams 903 Addition provides 2 teams + Diamond 11.5 teams 989 13.5 teams 1,161 2 exploratory classrooms, cafeteria has capacity to accommodate growth Grand Total 22 teams 1,892 24 teams 2,064 Projected Enrollment (1) 1,949 Includes confidence level 1,949 Includes confidence level Delta w-57 +115 (') FY 29-30 Projected Enrollment Disadvantages Pearn oanent W"50 -f- year sollu-[Jon Exi. an §on oi. poilunr[oes orally at Uan ooncl, not at Clarke, ttueretore den oentairy feeder schoolls rn u.jst be corusli(Jerecl 9 DIian...00ncl becon...oes a lairge n...oi(Jc lle school 1....exiington IPii3011iio schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5•..39 DAIMONIDI UDD[ IE SCHOO! EXPANSON This expansion creates: * (2) a(.J(Ji-[J&4Lean os of 3 geneirae(:: ucatJon dassiroon os + 1 science Ilab (t.ota8); + 2 exfJoiratoiry spaces Total added capaciity @ 86 students per teairn or approxiiirnatOy '172 students * Current cafeteirIa can accon m �o(.Jale -- 200 n �oire stu(Jents � heire \/\JlI be Moss of Ipalrkiilr g. � heire is a Ipossliblilllity to add Ipalrlking to the east lilr7ito the fidds. Conseirvaton Con m ois§on Irevliew WlI be re(.:julire.(J (Jue to st.oirn ova ateir n oanagen oent., etc. Advantages • Peirn oanent constiructon Ilufe span 5 I 0-f. years • IIMolre fiekblilllty lilr7 sipace §zes Disadvantages • Moire costly than ten q)oirary constiructJon • IIMolre dsirupflve to students and staff • I ongeir constiructJon (JuiratJon I 11 exington 11i Schools Ili 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-40 i,,,,,olrmg,,,,,Telririm IExpalrm iolrm Strategies Strategy: Construct a Third Wddlle School As stated in the elementary school section, there are limited opportunities for new construction on vacant sites within town. Concepts have been explored at both the Old Harrington School where Central Administration is currently located as well as the Laconia Street site as possibilities for a third middle school. The following concepts represent a third middle school based upon the educational requirements set forth by LPS. It should be noted: Cairefr.fl corusli(Jeiratlion shouII(J be Jven to replace OIIcl 18airirlington torr a n oli(Jc lle school) wNille n 4 ntaiiruling the current 18airirlington Ben oentairy School). • The concepts are pirogirarnrnatlic r::lliagiraru os orally. • Costlirug torr these concepts have not been con ops eter::l. (') FY 29-30 Projected Enrollment Providing a third middle school will exceed enrollment forecasts; however, this will allow both Clarke and Diamond the opportunity to reduce enrollment and provide additional educational spaces for exploratory classes, flexible small group instruction, etc. It is the recommendation of the MPAC not to pursue a third middle school based upon the enrollment projections. If enrollment projections begin to approach 2,200 students and stretches the maximum capacities utilizing strategies at the existing middle schools, a third middle school could be reconsidered. 1....exiington IPii,blliio schools Master IPllart I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.41 LPS Class Size Policy Capacity New Middle School (86 Students /Team) LPS Class Size Policy School Capacity (86 Students / Team) # of teams Capacity Comments # of teams Capacity Comments Clarke 10.5 teams 903 10.5 teams 903 Diamond 11.5 teams 989 11.5 teams 989 New MS at Ud Harruirualtl:on or (Laconia Street. Site Q. � teams �� Grand Total 22 teams 1,892 31 teams 2,666 Projected Enrollment ' 1,949 Includes confidence level 1,949 Includes confidence level Delta -57 +717 (') FY 29-30 Projected Enrollment Providing a third middle school will exceed enrollment forecasts; however, this will allow both Clarke and Diamond the opportunity to reduce enrollment and provide additional educational spaces for exploratory classes, flexible small group instruction, etc. It is the recommendation of the MPAC not to pursue a third middle school based upon the enrollment projections. If enrollment projections begin to approach 2,200 students and stretches the maximum capacities utilizing strategies at the existing middle schools, a third middle school could be reconsidered. 1....exiington IPii,blliio schools Master IPllart I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.41 STRATEGY I TI -+RD MUD .......E SC1--i001 XT 0I.......D 1--iARRNGTON SC1--i001 THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0 1 oc This option provides: • (3)""Fearns of 86 sty. dents / giro: cle x 3 giro: cies 9t.earns @ 774 Students • lncire.asecl pairklng for I Bairirington ES to appirc*n o,#.6y 100 veNdes • Pairk�ng for the new n ok.Jcfle schoo�� for appirc*n al.dy 200 veNc�es LL 0 W • Reciuire.s a 'Iancl swaf)" Wth Conseir,/at.Jon Con m s§on to cireate a Iloota airouncl the ent.Jire can qx.js cz LU LU 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-42 STRATEGY I -F1-+RD MUD .......E SC1--i001 XT I ACOMA STREET THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN lo loo '10 This option provides: • (3)""Fearns of 86 st.u(Jents / giro: (Je x 3 gira(Jes:= 9t.earns @ 774 Stu(Jents • Pairklng for appiroAn oat6y 1,15-0 veNbes • Re(.:jufires cairefuexarnln,#Jon of access onto the elite 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Evaluation of Strategies March 020 5-43 Afternative Site Optioins At the time of this report there is one site that has been identified as a possible option for LPS use, the Laconia Street Site. However, the MPAC agreed it is important to continue to explore other opportunities as they arise (purchase or land swap) for other possible sites within the town. Sites to consider, specifically as it relates to the middle schools: • Con§(Jeir buying piropeirfles near eAsting schoolls to have space to grow. • Potenfiapiropeirties on Buirllington Stireett.hat. n oay a�Iow torr a(J(.TtJor4pairking. • Rent pairking at piropeirties (.1jacent.to Dan oon(.J. I I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-44 I -11I -1 SC*°100II,,,,, S11"'RAll"EGIIIE S The Lexington High School (LHS) is an open campus plan with several individual buildings whereby the students must exit one building to go to another class in another building. LIPS added two (2) prefabricated buildings in 2014/2015 to address the increased enrollment for core academics as well as space mined to increase science labs where possible. However, core spaces such as the field house and both cafeterias are undersized to accommodate the increased enrollment. It was understood when the prefabricated buildings were constructed that core spaces would remain overcrowded. Further, the average classroom size is significantly smaller than today's standards based upon 21s' century learning environments and Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) guidelines. The charts below demonstrate that the existing academic spaces compared with today's guidelines are significantly undersized. There are several areas that exceed the guidelines such as the field house however given the existing layout of these spaces there is little that can be done to re- purposethese spaces. It should also be recognized that there is redundancy of certain spaces (i.e. teacher planning) due to the campus layout. Lastly, it is important to note Lexington belongs to the LABBB Collaborative. LHS provides program space for several LABBB programs. LABBB has been a part of the Lexington community for many years, providing the appropriate educational program to Lexington families. I,,,,, IHS IEM ST NG SIP CIE NEEDS IBASED UPON 2018 ,'1IIT IP II,,,,, II,,,,, I MENT T O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 1....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5..45 OWN21141 N Ila Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,885 ITA 76 64,600 NFA -6,735 NFA Science Clrms (w/ prep NFA) 21 24,718 NIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 19,174 II4 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 44 17,142 NIFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 SF 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 49,5"19 11\J[" A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9,797 NIFA 13,656 NFA -3,859 NFA Auditorium "12,592 II\VII'A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,752 NIFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 19,799 II\VII'A 9,231 NFA 4,538 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA 246,260 NFA -2,271 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 NFA O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces 1....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5..45 The enrollment forecasts demonstrate the peak enrollment year for LHS will be in 2024-25 with a total of 2,654 students including the confidence level. This is almost 400 more students than the current enrollment. UPDATED IENROI I MENT This will create a significant strain on the facility to continue to deliver the rigorous educational program. Based upon today's guidelines, the LHS program will be further compromised. 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval Spaces M ES M1 0 Spaces Immulu WOME NFA NONE 10 Year High School 75 ............. 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K 18,635 NFA Science Clrms (w/ Prep NFA) W ON based on prior 30 23 +/-40 +/-50 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 R +/- 90 years) 1 2,882 NFA 6 5 Year HS - CSM 2033 2,347 2,362 2,468 ........... 2,527 2,536 9,000 NFA 1,174 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA (LPS) 28,800 NFA -28,800 NFA S ecial Ed 44 17,142 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA +/-30 +/-50 +/-65 +/-80 +/-100 12,882 NFA 27 11,425 NFA 1,457 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness) (3) 10 Year High School (Linear forecast of K 2,263 2,347 2,362 2,468 2,527 2,536 2,614 2,614 2,576 2,539 2,513 based on prior 30 +/-25 +/-25 +/-30 +/-30 +/-35 +/- 40 +/- 40 +/- 45 +/- 45 50 ear y ) I I 13,769 NIF`A 10,585 NFA 3,184 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 2019-20 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval l IH IFUTURE I IIID 1BASED UPON 2024 25 IENROI I II' TIF ORECASTS Spaces M ES M1 0 Spaces Immulu WOME NFA NONE 10 Year High School 75 ............. 2,295 2,396 2,444 2,455 2,509 2,508 2,499 2,471 2,471 2,407 (Linear forecast of K 18,635 NFA Science Clrms (w/ Prep NFA) 21 based on prior 30 23 +/-40 +/-50 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 70 +/- 80 +/- 80 R +/- 90 years) 1 2,882 NFA 6 l IH IFUTURE I IIID 1BASED UPON 2024 25 IENROI I II' TIF ORECASTS O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces I 11 exington Public Schools Il aster IPla.n I Evaluation of Strategies Mar(.,ri 2020 5-46 Spaces No "LMOM ME NFA(t) 0 Spaces Immulu WOME NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 NFA 90 76,500 NFA 18,635 NFA Science Clrms (w/ Prep NFA) 21 24,718 NFA 23 37,920 NFA 13,202 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 6 3,000 NFA -118 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 IN FA 90 9,000 NFA 1,174 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 18 28,800 NFA -28,800 NFA S ecial Ed 44 17,142 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 SF 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 27 11,425 NFA 1,457 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness) (3) 4 43,510 N F�A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9,797 NFA 16,400 NFA -6,603 NFA Auditorium 12,592 NIF`A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,752 NFA 13,200 NFA -2,448 NFA Medical /Admin. 13,769 NIF`A 10,585 NFA 3,184 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,605 NFA -191 NFA Misc. Support Space (4) 18,275 NFA 22,244 SF -3,969 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA- 284,259 NFA -40,270 NFA Gross SIP 359,600 SIP 1 414,480 SIP -54,880 NFA O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spaces I 11 exington Public Schools Il aster IPla.n I Evaluation of Strategies Mar(.,ri 2020 5-46 Based upon the existing LHS facility deficiencies and significant overcrowding, the School Committee submitted a Statement Of Interest (SOI) to the MSBA in the spring of 2019. The MSBA partners with Massachusetts communities to support the design and construction of educationally -appropriate, flexible, sustainable, and cost-effective public school facilities. In addition, MSBA provides financial support to districts, which assists in reducing the overall financial burden to the town and taxpayers. Unfortunately LHS was not selected to enter the MSBA program in 2019, however, MSBA has strongly encouraged LIPS to resubmit an SOI for LHS in 2020. Once LHS has been accepted into the MSBA program it will be years before a "new" high school will be complete. Therefore, the focus of the MPAC has been to develop "short- term" strategies to address the current and future overcrowding at LHS until such time a "new" LHS facility will be completed. Although the Town is anticipating to partner with MSBA, the 2015 SMMA Master Plan provided an insight to a solution for a new high school as shown on the following pages. 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-47 Ulptions Discussion 1by School. 4 High School 41 Introduction 4.2 High School Options Explored I exington IPii,blliic Schools Il aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-48 High Schools Options .. ... . . . . C, C, .. ..... . . C)C)�s 4.1 Introduction—High School Two discussions need to be addressed as part of the Master Plan study: 1. The quantity of spaces, contributes to the determination of capacity are there enough classroorns and other leaching spaces to serve the current population; 5 years frorn now and 10 years frorn naw? 2. Quality of spaces trios( of the classroorns, SPED roorns, science lecture / labs and other leaching spaces across the school are undersized when compared to the MSBA space guidelines for new construction. Can significant changes be made to the floor plan The high school has been increasing in size since the original building was constructed in 1953 with additions in 1955,1902, 2000, and 2014. The approach to the site has been to construct additions wherever possible on a site constrained by proximity to wetlands. The site as it stands currently is largely built out. New additions would be best accomplished by removing a portion or portions of the existing building to build new to accommodate growth and additional area needed for reconfiguration of undersized spaces. Core acadernic space is the conventional gage for population capacity. The prefabricated addition of 10 general education classroorns constructed (luring the summer of 2014 and the additional 2 general education classroorns scheduled to be constructed (luring the summer of 2015 are expected to accommodate astudent population of approximately 2,325 students. This was calculated using the MSBA Summary of Spaces process. As indicated in the Phase I Capacity Report, the existing classroorns at the high school as compared with MSBA standards are almost all undersized. 30% of the classroorns are 25% or more smaller than the MSBA standard of 850 SF for a classroorn. Additionally, all of the science classroorns are undersized. Any large scale project at the high school should address the undersized classroorns. A detailed review should determine which are too small for educational delivery regardless of MSBA standards. Note, the MSBA does not require all spaces rneet their guidelines in the context of a Capital Project. Using the current population projections (Survival Cohort Method), it is anticipated that this population will match available classroorns in the 2021 2022 school year, approximately 7 years. Variables for population and capacity The above calculations are based on an assumption of an average of 23 students per class and a classroom utilization rate of 85% Modest increases in class size can allow for increased capacity An increased utilization rate can allow for increased capacity. The higher the utilization rate, the more difficulty to schedule classes though many schools do operate with utilization rates higher than 85%. Since High School projects take approximately 5-6 years to advance through the MSBA process, it is recommended that the S01 process begin in approximately 2 years. I skington rPubIllic SchoolLs I Master Plan I exington IPit.tblliio Schools Ileaster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies 41 p.3 March 2020 The increased population will also put pressure on other areas of the school facilities, same of which are also undersized. These include: Library / rnedia center; cafeteria; some SPED programs; science roorns - enough in number but most undersized. Because any high school capital project would likely be expensive, it is anticipated that the Town will approach the project as an MSBA Capital project The MSBA process will require a Feasibility Study to explore multiple options ranging frorn: no work to comprehensive renovations to new cons Ir uc (ion. Therefore, the nature of a high school project cannot be determined at this tirne. For Planning purposes, we put forward a ballpark project cost for new construction in 2015 dollars. 2,500 students (projected) using the MSBA Surynnary of Spaces format yield s building size of approximately 392,500 gross square feel. At a project cost rate of $500 per square feet, $190,000,000 (2015 cost) could be used for long term planning purposes. Discussions with the AhSMPC have indicated the town might approach the high school frorn a phased, non -MSBA funding approach. With the time for decisions being a number of years in the future, no recommendations have corne out of the committee. 41 p. 4 Symmes Mahn & McKee Associates I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-50 4.2 High School Options explored include: Option I Includes (Phase 1) the construction of prefabricated classroorns north of A building and east of B building, constructed in the sururner of 1014. This building addition includes 10 general education classroorns and a 5 classroorn suite serving the 11,11, special education prograrn recently started at the high school. (Phase 2) includes the construction of 2 general education classroorns and an 11,11 suite located between the science building and math building. This phase is planned to be constructed (luring the sururner of 201 S. The addition of these classroorns is anticipated to satisfy the general education classroorn needs until approximately 2021 2022 school year. (Exhibit 4.1) High Schools Options Exhibit 4.1 Lexington High Sehool Site Ptah with modular additions V Summer 2015 2 Ge, eraL FdCIC xxn5 Diarriand R,P S Lira aw r 20'14 ...... 10 Genera0 Ed COassrmms Darke II -P ................... ........................................ . .... Vk I,VVAMYW SULU 10 CLASSROOM+ CLARKE ILP 0' 16,500GSF AA X, P� ply A[II,w�,,,,,,,,,>, M� R �) N� NNA Al CAMPUS PLAN I skington FOubIllic Schoolls I Master Plan 4 1 p. 5 I I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5- 1 Option 2A 3 story STEAM Academy (Exhibit 4.2) Build new STEAM wing east of langurtge building Renovate science building labs to full size classroorns Renovate math building 'fear down langurtges building — Lang ur.tges building includes 33 classroorn s, adrn inis I ration, and teacher workroorn spaces Renovate Existing Buildlog- Full Site Vassrooms L Exhibit 4.2 Lexington High School Site Plan tkfith STEM additions V 2015 Modlidars Entrance Axis AR3 & HUMANITIES BUItINNG 4 1 p. 6 Symmes MauniI & McKee Associates I exington IPII,OIliio Schools Il astelr Plan I Evaluation of Strategies I March 2020 5-52 Sechori d High Schools Options Option 213 Freshman Academy classroorn building (3 story) (Exhibit 4.3) Option 213 Freshman Academy classroom building (3 story) (Exhibit 4.3) Build new Fresh rn an wing east of Lang u�.tge building frees up upperclassman space throughout Renovate science building Renovate math building Exhibit 4.3 — fear down Langu�.tges building fcxir�gtm High School Site Plan with Freshman Academy — Lange tges building inLudes 33 classrooms, adrn inis I ration, and teacher workroom spaces '00 IA e" % ARTS 9 NUMAMMS BUILDING MATH BUILDING ------------------ - - AMANDS WETLANDS . ... ....... .................................................................. ugly __ . .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ............... . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - Renovate Existing Building- FILIN S12O Classrooms 7 L r3 2015 Modulars wP Entrance Axis, . . . ........... Courtyard, Demolish Existing Building I exiington rr"ubIllic Schoolls I Master Plan 4 1 p. 7 I I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-53 Option 2/3 STEAM Acadern y & Field House (Exhibit 4.4) Renovate science building labs to full size classroorns New Entrance New administration Reconfiguration of the gyryinasiurn into an enlarged student connnons student (lining Tear down Langu�.tges building — Lang riages building includes 33 classroorn s, adrn inis I ration, and teacher workroorn spaces new k1mintalrattom " A� araVbm New Whii Eiibmnve — - --I Relmonte E)d5fing Administratim AWT$ & HOMMITIESSUILMMIr 4 1 p. 8 Symmes Maunii & McKee Associates Exhibit 4.4 Lexington High School Additions with Academy and Field House V ........................... .. . .. . ------ - Renovate Existing Buildin - Fuili Size Classrooms 'WRANIDS L .II A 2015 Mo ulnas m Demolish Existing Building I exington IPil,011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-54 Option.3 -Field House Commons l Maker space (Exhibit 4.5) Tear down old field house and build new field house and lockers to west Renovate old Byrn as expanded commons (rernove SPED room to link to existing caf(,} Renovate old Byrn as black box and multipurpose space Renovate old cafeteria by music as additional classroorns and maker space Move administration to supervise new secure main entrance Renovate old administration spaces 'Tear down Langur.tges building - Languages building includes 33 classroorns, administration, and teacher workroorn spaces Nevi Asdrrasrr%etreviora .... SAD New Mam Entrance Renovate Existing Locker Rooms Sechou d High Schools Options Exhibit 4.5 Lexington High School Additions with Field House Commons / Maker Space V i (o "rues L T, Pryx4 �y . 20115 Modllaulars L {{ ra6hA�tl lnu'.I�i.®i � ...»........ ...m ...gym ii ...:«.«. .........»�.. e...y Demofish Existing Ice SPED SPI � 1 h L fl. H 4 �•�1 �� i$ loyaaW E isaulan, ,, M Adrrn nIRn'Silon 1 r para � I...exlington GPubIllic, zchooll, I Master Plan 4 1 p. 9 1- I exingtIPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-55 5 Option 4 New (9-11} high school for 2,500 students (Exhibit 4.0) could be located on sorne of the sports fields: baseball, softball, track and soccer field between the tennis courts and Worthen Road. Following demolition of the existing school, the site would be developed for replacement fields and parking. Exhibit 4.6 Lexington High School Site Plan with New Building V [1 200 111011 IMI) uuuu I �xl 41 p. 10 Symmes Mauni & McKee Associates I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-56 I mallrt T lruiim Strategies LHS short-term strategies that have been reviewed include: • Fuirtheir space rnolinu ng Wttu n the eAsfing faclilllity • I......ABBB Collllaboiralt ve irellocaflion to anottueir I......ABBB (.:tlistirlict • Out of Ustrlict pllacernoent of si)ecliae(.Juc,:.T[Jon • Crealt ve sche(::tulling • Shod-teirm expan§on possliblilllitlies • Exi nan(..1 (.:tn. aenirollllrn pent i)irogirarn o/i))ail.rueirshulii) by Iincllu(.:tng Mlinutern oan recta • Exi nan(..J Open Can gx.js toIincllnx.Je Sophorn noires • Change sche(::tue lira 3--5 years to a: llow for rnooire -ft an thiree hunches • lncirease cllass slues by one a(J(..:tlitlior4: stn. (Jent i ner class • Work W-ftn6ghborling towns to utlilllze extra capadty lira th61r schoolls • i..,Jflilllze avalillaUe corn m oeircliaspaces lira I......eAngton an(..1 n6ghboriing towns • Re(:: ace one giro: (De`s woilh of stn. (Dents : t I 8S finer (Jay of the school) year by utlilllizling the sun o rn oeir Refer to the strategies listed in the Appendix for the comprehensive list. SUMMARY AIR° IE ANNUAI &PAGE I IEIED A significant amount of effort was spent reviewing the appropriateness of every space use, the efficiency factor of each space, a thorough review of the scheduling, and the quality of each space from an educational perspective. The District Special Education Director was also consulted to ensure the space needs for the special education programs were not overlooked or compromised as part of this process. The process was broken down year by year based upon the anticipated enrollment to arrive at the annual required space needs until 2024-25 with an anticipated enrollment of 2,569 students. The outcome of the process resulted in the following modifications to the existing spaces. (') Includes confidence factor 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.57 Educational Program I High School Capacity / Enrollment 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Enrollment (1) 2,367 2,382 2,493 2,552 2,566 2,644 2,644 2,611 Increase from 104 15 111 59 14 78 0 -33 Previous + Gen Ed Classrooms +5 0 +6 +2-3 0 +4 0 0 Required + Science Classrooms 0 0 0 +1 0 0 0 0 Required +Other Space +1 Art +Testing, Required 0 0 +1 Counselor 0 0 Resource 0 0 +Counselor Cafe Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Admin +1 0 0 0 0 +1 Dean 0 0 Counselor +1 Support Comments Parking 0 Parking 0 0 Parking 0 Parking (') Includes confidence factor 1....exiington IPii,blliio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5.57 LUIS STiFPATEC IIIGS , 2010 20 SPACF MIINIING I ONSIDFRAI ONS TEMPORARY RE -USE OF SPACE NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor I..axingi- P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios 1 #162 District Central Health WL +1 WL (12/1) IT Admin (was#606) #606 Clrm 2 #164 District Central Health WL +1 WL IT Admin (was #610) #610 Clrm 3 #186 ILP -2 Consol. Gen. _ +Gen w (3) Human. Clrm 4 #339 Vacant _ Math — + Math in ILP -3 Clrm 5 #168A LEA Central Health WL/ +1 WL/M Admin Prev. Off. Math Clrm Total Gain 2019-20 1 +5 Clrm TEMPORARY RE -USE OF SPACE NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor I..axingi- P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios LUIS STiFNATEC IIIGS , 2010 20 SPACF MIINIING I ONSIDFRAI ONS 1 in 111110i IIIIIh - — � .k.� i. • - VIII - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE -NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor {;78crn ruE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear rIar'i Evaluation ofStrategics .flu 5 59 1 #162 District Central Health WL +1 WL (12/1) IT Admin (was#606) #606 Clrm 2 #164 District Central Health WL +1 WL IT Admin (was #610) #610 Clrm 3 #186 ILP -2 Consol. Gen. _ +Gen w (3) Human. Clrm 4 #339 Vacant _ Math — + Math in ILP -3 Clrm 5 #168A LEA Central Health WL/ +1 WL/M Admin Prev. Off. Math Clrm Total Gain 2019-20 1 +5 Clrm 1 in 111110i IIIIIh - — � .k.� i. • - VIII - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE -NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor {;78crn ruE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear rIar'i Evaluation ofStrategics .flu 5 59 ILIHS S' iFPA' EGIIIGS , 20')0 ) I SII1ACF MIINIINGl ONSIDFIRAI ONS No additional space required Total Gain 2020-21 0 TEMPORARY RE -USE OF SPACE NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor I..axingi- P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, tela' I Evaluation of Stratogios LIHSS'riFPA' EGIIIIGS , 20)l '�9SF'A(;FMIIVIIVUI C)IV;;II)FFifVf1QIVS III�III ®I I..axingt7 P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor //i°,�NINON #Wwr- M14 #326 ELF / Subs. Study— +2 Gen 1 2 (LH) Sub. stay in Halls Ed. Clrm location clrm IA's + Math +1 Art 3 #143 Subs. Teach Art — Room 4 #189 ILP -2 Consol Gen. Ed. — +1 Gen w 2 Clrm Ed. Clrm 5 #500 ILP -1 Consol WL/ +1 w ILP -1 Math WL/ Math 6 #610 WLCIrm Divide 2 WL/ — +1 1 300S room in Math WL/Math #513 Teach. Divide Teach WR+ #516 +1 7 (split) Work 3/4+1/4 2Resource moves WL/Math 0 (larger — #185 ELL #167 Resource — ELL) Total Gain 2021-22 +7 Clrm NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor LIHSS'riFPA' EGIIIIGS , 20)l '�9SF'A(;FMIIVIIVUI C)IV;;II)FFifVf1QIVS ------------ VIII _i - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor {;78crn ruE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear rIar'i Evaluation of Strategics J,c 1ice. 5 62 N We / or #326 ELF / Subs. Study— +2 Gen 1 2 (LH) Sub. stay in Halls Ed. Clrm location clrm IA's + Math +1 Art 3 #143 Subs. Teach Art — Room 4 #189 ILP -2 Consol w Gen. Ed. — +1 Gen 2 ILP -2 Clrm Ed. Clrm 5 #500 ILP -1 Consolw WL/ +1 ILP -1 Math WL/Math 6 #610 WLCIrm Divide 2 WL/_ +1 1 300S room in Math WL/Math 7 #513 Teach. Divide Teach wR+ #516 +1 (split) Work 3/4+1/4 2Resource moves WL/Math 0 (larger — #185 ELL #167 Resource — ELL) Total Gain 2021-22 +7 Clrm ------------ VIII _i - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor {;78crn ruE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear rIar'i Evaluation of Strategics J,c 1ice. 5 62 LIIISSTiFPATEGIIIGS, 20>)),3SI''ACFMIINIINGCONSIDFIRAIONS NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE I..exingt7 P,,bki scl c is Master Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios T GAIN CLASSROOMS Floor %•� i #149 CAS,, No Gen. Ed. +1 Gen 1 (IMC) Ielock,MC space Clrm Ed. Clrm arm avail #333 ILP -3 Consol Science +1 Science (.5rm) (Leisure) w#334 Rm _ clrm 2 F#33r4A ILP -3 Consol Science Merge w Pre-Voch w #334 Rm _ #333 One Gen. Ed. +1 Gen 3 #617 WL Lab cart Clrm Ed. Clrm Total Gain 2022-23 +3 Clrm NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE I..exingt7 P,,bki scl c is Master Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios T GAIN CLASSROOMS Floor LIIISSTiFNATEGIIIGS, 20>)>•3SII1ACFMIINIINGCONSIDFIRAIONS I - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE F-1 - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor I{, Wn P,, :.boobs master rtIan I Evaluation of Strategies .,)u 15 CA o I #149 MCAS, Testing, No Gen. Ed. +1 Gen 1 (IMC) Ielock,MC space Clrm Ed. Clrm C". avail #333 ILP -3 Consol Science +1 Science (.5rm) (Leisure) w#334 Rm _ clrn 2 F#33r4A ILP -3 Consol Science Merge w Pre-Voch w #334 Rm #333 One Gen. Ed. +1 Gen 3 #617 WL Lab cart Clrm Ed. Clrm Total Gain 2022-23 +3 Clrm - NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE F-1 - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor I{, Wn P,, :.boobs master rtIan I Evaluation of Strategies .,)u 15 CA ILIHS S' iFPA' EGIIIGS , ')0,'),3 Yd SI''ACF MIINIINGl ONSIDFIRAI ONS `I No additional space required Total Gain 2020-21 0 NO NET GAIN. RE -USE OF SPACE I..axingi- P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, tela, I Evaluation of Stratogios GAIN CLASSROOMS Floor 2024 25/202 26 Space IMir-An Coinsi alratioin It became clear that all space mining will be exhausted by 2023-24 and it is not possible to accommodate the anticipated additional students in 2024-25. In addition, it was clear that the existing cafeterias cannot support the current enrollment will be required to be expanded or LHS will be required to modify the schedule to accommodate additional lunch periods. Therefore, the following diagrams identify an expansion of Cafeteria #2 as part of the solution for the FY 2024-25 school year. The Town shall explore options for temporary or permanent expansions of the cafeteria to accommodate the enrollment until a new high school is complete. Based upon the exhaustive effort of space mining, the focus shifted looking at other possibilities to accommodate 2,650 students in 2024-25. The options include: • I......ABBB Col1aboiralt ve irellocatling to anotheir I......ABBB corn on u.jnu ty faclilllity untlill such tlirn oe the enirollllrn pent (Decreases, or a new I......I 0 faclilllity lis corn of)lete.THs optlion wouII(J pirovli(Je the severe (l) a(..:JQJ:-[lior4spacesire.(.jj . ire.(J to accorn orn oo(:: ate the anfli6ipate(.1 enirollllrnoent for 2024-- 2,15", • Constiructlion of poir: Ue cllassiroorn os. The ocatlion of the poir: Ue cllassiroorn os rn oust be stratejc so that. they (Jo not lintel feire Wth the antliclif)ate(J new or reruov,:TI.lioru/ex�)aruslioru of I 8S. The suggeste(.1 Ilocatlions of the poilaUe cllassiroorn os take hulls unto corusli(Jeiratlion as wellll as b6ng rn olirx fn.fl of the sn.urron.un(.Jling wetllan(Js an(.1 otheir exlistling elite constirants. • I......ABB Col1aboiratlive to pairt.li6f),: to lira the cost of the poir: Ue cllassiroorn os 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-66 LII1S S'IEIFPA'IEIE C IIIGS 20')d Y > / 20Y > )6 SPACF MIINIINGC ONSII )FRA I ONS I..axingt- P,,bki Sch-is Ma:ste, Plan I Evaluation of Stratogics MW I No more re -purpose options available Requires 4 Gen Ed Spaces Requires Counseling, Testing, Administrative Spaces OPTION 1: Remove LABBB from Gen Ed Space OPTION 2: Portable Classrooms Total Gain 2024-25 4--7 Floor LII1S S'IEIFPA'IEIE C IIIGS 20')d Y > / 20Y > )6 SPAGh MIINIINGC ONSII )FRA I ONS MW I No more re -purpose options available Requires 4 Gen Ed Spaces Requires Counseling, Testing, Administrative Spaces OPTION 1: Remove LABBB from Gen Ed Space OPTION 2: Portable Classrooms Total Gain 2024-25 4--7 I VIII - ; 5 a.��i � S•� '"•1 - .VIII Second Floor iqt- P,, :.boobs master Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios .,)u 15 68 ILIUS S'OIFP@,'OIGC IIIGS 2010 2O / 20241 > > SPACF MIINIING C ONSII )FRAf1GIVS I..axingt- P,,blic:achc is Ma:ste, Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios 2019-20 2,367, Increase 104 students 5 2020-21 2,352, Increase 15 students 0 2021-22 2,493, Increase 111 students 7 2022-23 2,552, Increase 59 students 3 2023-24 2,566, Increase 14 students 0 Total Increase in existing space 15 2024-25 2,644, Increase 76 students -4-7 €I ■EN Floor uids s"rimr-EGIIIES 2010 ')O/,')O,')d > > SPACF MIINIING C ONSII )FRAf1GIVS 19 20 21 22, 2019-20 2,367, Increase 104 students 5 2020-21 2,382, Increase 15 students 0 2021-22 2,493, Increase 111 students 7 2022-23 2,552, Increase 59 students 3 2023-24 2,566, Increase 14 students 0 Total Increase in existing space 15 2024-25 12,644, Increase 78 students .4-7 Second Floor I ,." I qt- P,, O—is master Plan I Evaluation of Stratogios j,,, I .,)u :i-'70 Cafeteria. Expansion Below is a detailed sketch of the expansion of Cafeteria #2. ILIHS S'IEIFP@,'IEIEC IIIGS AFF IF IRIA EXI'AINSIQIV KITCHEN 0 o � {;78crn f�uE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear f�Iar'i Evaluation of Stratoflios T )u 15 7'1 2,367 2,493 2,644 2,249 2,368 2,512 25 25 25 2,274 2,393 2,537 ISIMMORWR/m/c/. 758 798 846 266 266 266 392 392 392 0 276 276 WON 01 I. 658 934 934 KITCHEN 0 o � {;78crn f�uE .hcrcrla Ni '.ear f�Iar'i Evaluation of Stratoflios T )u 15 7'1 Below are the modifications based upon space use, using 2018 enrollment predictions: (,,,,,IHS STRATEGUES I CONS Df::uRNPIONS ONet Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall(3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/staff dining/IT Spaces 1....ex ngton (Public Schools ((Mater IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5°-72. 0 Qty NFA() Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 86 59,737 91 63,118 97 63,658 97 63,658 97 63,658 97 63,658 Science Clrms (w/ prep 21 1 24,718 23 1 26,416 23 1 26,416 23 1 26,416 23 1 26,416 23 1 26,416 23 26,416 Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 Teacher Planning 14 10,174 13 9,249 13 9,249 13 8,709 13 8,709 13 8,70913 8,709 Voc. Tech 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Special Ed 44 17,142 44 17,142 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 LABBB 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 Art & Music 20 12,882 20 12,882 20 12,88221 13,331 21 13,551 21 13,551 21 13,551 Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)3 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 Library 7 9,797 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 Auditorium 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 Dining only 10,752 10,752 10,752 12,952 12,952 12,952 12,952 Medical /Admin. 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 Custod / Maint. 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 Misc. Support Space (4) 18,275 16,647 16,64715,978 15,978 15,978 15,978 Total Program NFA 243,989 243,989 243,989 246,189 246,189 246,189 246,189 Gross SF 359,600 359,600 1 359,6001 361,800 361,800 361,800 1 361,800 ONet Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall(3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/staff dining/IT Spaces 1....ex ngton (Public Schools ((Mater IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5°-72. Cast IErnpa t Order of magnitude pricing was prepared based upon the short-term needs as outlined based upon the moves on an annual basis. (1) Construction costs based upon construction start Spring / Summer 2020 if delayed escalation would be applied. (2) Enrollment based upon 2018 projections It was determined that although the needs are real, the cost implications for the cafeteria expansion as well as the portable classrooms and higher than expected. Therefore, other considerations were explored as alternatives to these solutions. The location for an expanded cafeteria has been identified. The Town shall explore options for temporary and permanent structures until a new high school is complete. PoirtaWe Cia sllraaurn Space/Ii,,,,,ARM CoHaboirativ It was discussed that an alternative to the Town financing the portable classroom spaces, the discussion should occur with LABBB Collaborative under the premise that if LABBB was not utilizing space, this space would be available for LHS students and portable classroom space would not be required. Several meetings occurred with LABBB to discuss the programs currently housed at LHS. In summary, the outcomes of the meetings are: • I......PS & 1......ABBB valln.je the lin opol1ance of I......ABBB at 1......1......& • helve are appiroAnoatelly 80--90 I......ABBB stu(Jents that cuirirentlly att.en(..1 I 8S. • I ABBB (.:foes not anf 6 nate a Ire(.fuctlion lira enirolllln pent. ors ace nee(Js. • I ABBB operates year Iroun(..J. • I......ABBB cllasslroolrns must (ren 4un (Je(.:f'lic,#e(J spaces. • The con on on. nr ty base(J work piroglran a §ginliflic;aint ainnouint of velr7lic;lkr�� to Ibe staged at I......I 0 to bring the stu(Jents to th61rjob�s. I....ex ngton (Public Schools (Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5°-73 2019-20 2,367; Increase 104 students Minor construction, FIFE & Tech $70,000 2020-21 2,382; Increase 15 students None $0 2021-22 2,493; Increase 111 students Reconfigure teacher work room, 225,000 FIFE & Tech 2022-23 2,552; Increase 59 students Minor construction, FIFE & Tech, WL Lab on 120,000 Cart 2023-24 2,566; Increase 14 students None $0 Total Increase in existing space 15 spaces $415,000 /// Wo 2020-21 2,382 students Cafeteria Expansion $2,500,000 276 stu/seating x 3 = 828 seats Actual need 2024-25. Prudent to 2020-21 expedite to maximize return on (6) Portable Classrooms + Toilets, site work, $4,600,000 investment & alleviate current issues FIFE & Tech (1) Construction costs based upon construction start Spring / Summer 2020 if delayed escalation would be applied. (2) Enrollment based upon 2018 projections It was determined that although the needs are real, the cost implications for the cafeteria expansion as well as the portable classrooms and higher than expected. Therefore, other considerations were explored as alternatives to these solutions. The location for an expanded cafeteria has been identified. The Town shall explore options for temporary and permanent structures until a new high school is complete. PoirtaWe Cia sllraaurn Space/Ii,,,,,ARM CoHaboirativ It was discussed that an alternative to the Town financing the portable classroom spaces, the discussion should occur with LABBB Collaborative under the premise that if LABBB was not utilizing space, this space would be available for LHS students and portable classroom space would not be required. Several meetings occurred with LABBB to discuss the programs currently housed at LHS. In summary, the outcomes of the meetings are: • I......PS & 1......ABBB valln.je the lin opol1ance of I......ABBB at 1......1......& • helve are appiroAnoatelly 80--90 I......ABBB stu(Jents that cuirirentlly att.en(..1 I 8S. • I ABBB (.:foes not anf 6 nate a Ire(.fuctlion lira enirolllln pent. ors ace nee(Js. • I ABBB operates year Iroun(..J. • I......ABBB cllasslroolrns must (ren 4un (Je(.:f'lic,#e(J spaces. • The con on on. nr ty base(J work piroglran a §ginliflic;aint ainnouint of velr7lic;lkr�� to Ibe staged at I......I 0 to bring the stu(Jents to th61rjob�s. I....ex ngton (Public Schools (Master IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5°-73 Short-term options and considerations: • PirefeiraUe that I ABBB Iron4n at I......1 0 lif at al1 pos§Ue. • I ABBB agiree(.1to pairt6pate lirat.he cost of poirtaUe classiroon os. • I ABBB suggeste(J to Ilocate classiroorns lira the "south" pairk'ung Ilot. • The con on ounty base(J work pirogiran o can aso be r6ocate(.1totrue south pairklng Ilot, al1evat.Jng the congestJon at I......1 0 ent.iry. I ABBB Wl1 aso con§(Jeir Ilookling at anotheir ocaton for the con on ounty base(J work pirogirarn rneet.Jng Ilocatlion. Follow up meetings must occur with LABBB to determine the following: he finan(Jall capacRy foirI A[:.3'[:.3'[:.3' to Ipay foir the poirtaUe classiroon The pirefeirire(.1 IlocaJon for the portaUe cIassirooinns due to the IpiroAnnlity of th6ir offflic es ocate(J lira -ftue Ma-ftBuI (.tng. Str-ategy: Cireafive Scheduhing In an attempt to look at all possible solutions to address the overcrowding until a new LHS is complete the following strategies have been discussed: • Expan(.1 Open Can qx.js to nclu(.Je Sophon ooires • Change sche(.Jue lira 3--,15" yea irs to al1ow for rnoire -ftuan 3 hunches • Sche(.t.fle a(JJustn oent.s A(J(J an extra: block lira the I......1 0 (Jay ---. a Ilate irdease arra(.:)' an extra: free block (Judng the (Jay for stu(Jents. DouUe ses§ons per (Jay, oirstagger school) stars formes sothat the entire I 18S pofx.flat.Jon os at the school) for the n olnln oun o an ount of oveirlaf). While these concepts are creative, the concepts create another set of scheduling challenges that have a domino effect. Otheir Strategies"To Ike Considered • L,Jfilllze avalilaUe corn rneir6aspaces lira I eAngton an(.1 n6ghboiring towns for 1--,15" years unfill the enirol1n oent bubble (.ts§pates or use as s\/\Jng space ([.e. innove specflog pirogirainnS, a[leirnafive schooll). Mille lis a cireatve strategy, ha vng the Ngh school) pofx.jlat.Jon (.Tstiribute(.J arnong n ou[[Jf)le can qx.jses lis not a fea§Ue solut.Jon base(J upon the e(.Jucat.Jonaappiropiri,�.T[eness, cost effecflvene,s, and the best II nteire',t of the stu(Jents. • [:.3UU a second INglh schoop on a d0eirent §te -1 hat Wl1 hoI(J the san oe nun obeli of stu(Jents as I......1 0 (e.g. §n olillair to the Newton Noirth an(.1 Newton South concept.). • BuIiI(J a secon(.1, sn oal1eir Ngh school) on a secon(.1 §te. Con§(Jeir a house appiroach oir a sf)e6al ze(.J focus, such as the Arts or a co -of) rno(.16l or PB1 school). Perrnaineirit CoinstrUCti011") Strategies New building strategies begin when LHS is accepted into the IVISBA program. I exington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPllan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 I EvaWatialn of Strategies SUIr"I'lirnairy Based upon the updated 2019 enrollment forecasts, the elementary schools currently have the capacity to accommodate the enrollment forecasts for the next ten years. However, the schools are at their peak capacities. Any additional increase in enrollment will require implementation of short-term strategies. The middle schools will be slightly over capacity within the next ten years based upon the team size policy. However, it appears the middle schools are able to accommodate the enrollment forecasts by applying short-term strategies. Due to the existing and anticipated further overcrowding at the high school, immediate attention and financial resources should be focused on the high school. Nonetheless, it is important to have strategies in place as enrollment shifts, building repairs and improvements are required, as well as the Town's desire to address aging facilities and the sustainability, resiliency and longevity of its assets. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools M aster IPlan I Evaluation of Strategies March 2020 5-75 mmmmi mmmioi uumouuouuoi� ouu mmmmi mmmmi Enrollment Projections Updated Current Enrollment Redistricting Plan Lists of Strategies - Elementary Schools - Middle Schools - Lexington High School Integrated Building Design & Construction Policy Capital Improvement List Master Planning Committee Documentation - Agendas - Minutes - Presentations 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools s Ilea ter IPlan I Appendx March 2020 I IIIA IIS II,,,,,, III,,,,,, III II IIIA "r IIP IIS JIS " III IIIA W N W a m m 0 C cw G 0 C W v O 1j ■■ N M a1 In m V M 00 M V I- M V m m O 0, V M M 00 N In 0 In In In a1 W W In In M OD In a1 N O M Cl) V In N M M V V V to to 0 r r 0 O G O O O O G 0 0 0 0 V 0 Y c ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui (D ( ro ( ( ( ( ro (D (D N N N O O O O 0 0N O M O W I 0 O00 W r N M M V 0 M I- Q (D to N M V M 0 (D 0 (0 N op N I- N N I- N r M 00 M O M O V 00 V N In N In O In In 0 In to In m V 0 V O Ln O M(0 V to M(0 V V (Q O (D (D OD MVO W r (O N N N N N M ONO r (O O (D O MMM M M (O I— N O O N D) V O O to M to (D Q Q M N V to CO N I� N r O r 0 M 0 (O r O r (O r O r O CO In (O V (O O I� I- (O NV 0 0 0 N 0) N O In O Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M ■■ N (1)LQ O V N O O O 0 O [- 0 N O V (D V V V 0 N c` ) d) N M d) I� O N V V I- to r O 0 W 0 (O d) OD d) M N_ W d) 0 M I� Cl V OD to M r V 0 Y c ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui ui (D ( ro ( ( ( ( ro (D (D (D (D (D N O O O 0 0N O M O W I LO W r d) d) W (A M I� d) 0 O O (O V O (D I- CA Q N N M M M M M M o07 m V V V V V to M V V l� M V V IN O (D (D OD MVO W r (O N N N N N M ONO r (O O (D O MMM M M (O I— N O O N o oVI LoM Lr) I NMM M I- to O M CO N (O to M to O N (O V O d) r d) 0 N O M M M M M o V V V V V V IM In V V LO LO V V IN In U) r- M 000 (O d) N V M V (O 00 M r O N O 000 M M ON 0 V Ci 0i n m M V V V V V V In LO V In In In V V In In In In O N O O O N co 7-"-o o O N I- O (O d) V 0 00 M N 0 d) In O 0 0 I- O r r M M M M V V V V V V V LO In V In 0 IN 0 V 0 IN � In 0 00 O co N O O O (O LD N(D O oDIn V O O (O O N D) N r O N N M o In 0 V In OD N I- 0 0 M d) M O V V V to V r V to V (O V 0 V V In In 0 V LO M In N In O In to V N LO In I- In to In M In In O M N O N co N O o o I- rn ch L(7 V (D I- r- 0 In LO V I- N N M W In In N a1 N M CO N W M O M M V V V V V V lM V V ll0 IN In V V In Ln LO LO 0 LO LO O O O N O Lo N O N N T CO O m OV 0V0 OI 0 n 0ll0 AV Woll aV OMI N T V V VVVMVVo N In ch r, -,, T 0nLO cO 000 V l Lo N 0 0 0 LD 1- ch O Lo 0 I� O N In (O M I- 0 O V O In (O M In N 00 N V V I- M O M M OD M M M M 0 M N N In O d) a V V V V V V Ln V V V In V V V V V V V V V In In V 00 I� In N In N O M N M V M M In 1 V M V V CA (D O V V M V M V 0 V 0 V V In 0 V (O V m V O In r V 0 V V V 00 V to V r V 0 V (O V 0 V O In M In 00 V V In Cl) m y V O V N O N V M O M V V p O( N N N M V H O CA D) M d) In OD M In O CO In N O N d) (D N V V V Lr) V V V V V V V cq V co V V LO V V V V In V In LO N M M N 000 0 V 007 V N V 000 V 0 V M V M V M V (00 V M V V to V V M V V V M V V 00 V V 000 V 00 V V OM r V M V N M to V n V M 0 I� M r N 00 M 1_ V V M V 0 o0M 000 M 0 o0M 0 000 M 000 M N co V V V V Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M OD N 00 O N (O V M LO OI In 0 0 N N N n 1- Y a Vd) Idn) D I- 00 M O M I D I 00 CF) ( I0n C06 QLLQQLLr']] 0)d)M 0 0 0 0 00000d) vS V n O 0 0 M MIT (O I 00 a) N NM0 MV0 4 M M0000 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N NO ■■ N O O O (O 0 O N 0 O N N N O O O (O V O M M O co N O N O O I— r O r N V O N N O O O 0 0N O M O W I O N N 77 O — r W N O O N O 0 0 0 V (O I— O O N W r N N N O N r O O 0 O N (O I— N O O N O O N N O O O W I— o co O O r I— N O O N V O O r N N O N O N N O O (o W O O N N O N N O O O N co 7-"-o o O N I- O N N N O O ((7 V((7 N (O I- N O co N co N No O O O I -N O N co O O co N O O O (O LD N(D O O V T N co o o o r� m o m OM N O N O N O r 0 0 0 ((7 V o V (O O M N O N co N O o o I- rn ch L(7 I- v O N N W N N T N O O O co co O T co N T O O N O Lo N O N N T O O (D V r N Lo N T N O O N N cO ch (D T (N cO N T 0 0 0 LD 1- ch O Lo 0 O N T O O (O N ((7 O O M T O N O m rn O O O I- V ((D N r- 00 (V N T m cD C m y V O V N O N V M O M V V p O( N N N M V H V-1 1....:exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I Appendx March 2020 7.1 m 4w m 0 _C 4w m Q. O a fcC G w W /I bD O N V I- V V 00 I- i J 00 M 0 O N V 0 In 00 O M N Q f6 d O O �+ 7 I M I- N M 0 N .= O O N M In MO � O O N M In r -I � � 6L N M M M 1 N N N In N i N M m O N V I- V V 00 I- O J 00 M 0 O N V 0 In 00 O M N M d O O �+ 7 I M I- N M N N In N N 0 O N M In In N M M M 1 N 00 N N In N i N M O N O In M O O 0 O O M 0 00 ON r N 00 N N M Q N 7 O t I- M M r 0 to N N 00 M O N i G 00 W O (00 N In In In 00 M 00 r I- V In 0 V W 0 N N (0 CA O O N CAm O O I- M O O r C a CO O M 0 CO M CO m 0 N NO M V V (0 (0 0 M M O I- In N M In 0) M C-4 O N M M V M In N V O O I- (O YC N (O 000 N N N M m m N O N 0 O O to M to N M O 00 N W OM M N 0 - O O N O co (00 V N C I- V V 00 In 00 N i N N N 00 N 0 N d O O 1-0 U W In M 0 01 N00 W O O co 00 I� I� N I` O 0) N M M M N C1 O O I- N N N M 0 00 N 00 M N O N 01 N O Q M 0 W O r N O N O g�g E N N 0 N N M M V mO 0 NCF) 6 I- � N to O N OM M LL.H m 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..�bllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I AppendIx tD 0 N E Q a O O M uuu C J N M 0') N V M Q N O O m (0 M I- N M N N In N N 0 O N O O M 00 N N In N N N M O N O O M 0 00 ON r N 00 N N M Q N O O I- M M r 0 to N N V M O N O O M V V W 0 N N V O O N O O I- M O O r 0 a N V 0 0 NO N N O O I- In O V I� 0 N N O2 O N O N O O I- (O 000 N N N M m N O N O O I- V 00 00 00 N N N 0 - co O N O O I- V V 00 In 00 N N N 00 N 0 N O O 1-0 W In M 0 01 N00 V O N N O O I- N N N 0 00 N 00 M N O N O O M 0 W O r N O N O N O O (O 0 NCF) I- � N O N N O O w Oto 0 (11 M O N N O O (O 0 OO M_ � N O N N N tm 0 V 0N V mo EV N M M V N O to O to O to O 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..�bllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I AppendIx tD 0 N E Q a March 2020 '7 2 C 0 uuu J March 2020 '7 2 CIE. 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons M c 0 :1:2 IA X (D i qiv I 1) 0 W) 0 0 0 WD 0) m cm N T- T- 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons M March 2020 7-3 c 0 b.0 IA X (D i March 2020 7-3 ►W 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master Plan I AIDIDendx II°;umurtollllinumt 1:)irojecflons �o 0 N E Q Q R* March 2020 '7 4 .. .. ... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... 9 4, z �40Z £40Z 40Z 4402 O40Z 60OZ 80OZ m LOOZ 9002 m SON L VON 8002 0 ZOOZ LOOZ OOOZ 666 4 -8664 L66 4 966 4 966 4 tr66 4 W� 0 uy cr 0 N 04 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master Plan I AIDIDendx II°;umurtollllinumt 1:)irojecflons �o 0 N E Q Q R* March 2020 '7 4 m N cq %- %- 0 0 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons Ln March 2020 '7 5 co CN 0 %— LO T - co MIA um C� 00 LO Mmsw///// OEMkQ co CD 00 W? ICwJ CA LO (0 cq C1 T- T - C) LO N cq %- %- 0 0 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons Ln March 2020 '7 5 r_ O .X N J � 0 � v C �O � a �O C a °c' G 0 r W w 0 Nm m W Q m N ►I ''.... O O O O d) V (`) to MM:O oVm rW 0r r r r (C (C (C r (O 0WP O O NN N M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M O M O O O O o O toN VVMW MoMN NNo "l. MVM rOto M '',..(Oto M (D Q 00 Q M O O V M W to to to to W to M V 00 N M V I- 00 to V O d) (0 d) 00 d) N O O M M r V d) to (O d) M N N r to d) 00 to 00 to O O d) to r (O d) M r (D O d) 00 O r M_ M_ V V V to to (Q r r 00 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) a1 0) 0) 0) O O 0 0 N N 0')"t 0')"t to Ht N N N N N N N N N N N N N W O O 00 N M M V 0 M r V 0 0 N M V (D W (D (D (D N 00 00 r M O to O r V O 00.... M r N N _ I- N _ I- M _ 00 M _ O M _ O V _ 00 V _ N to _ N to _ O to _ to _ M to _ to to _ M V _ 00 V _ O to _ O M _ V M _ to (O _ (O _ V (O _ r _ V r _ r r _ W r _ to 00 _ M 00 _ W 00 _ r W _ O _ d) _ to (D (D 0D M V O (O N N N l0 O N O V (D O (p 0 0 I- 00 V N O . r , V M V M to M M V M r to N V V V M (`M O t t O to r V VV M to V to M to 0) O M V M r 0 V o M N r N r O r M M W (OM r O(OO I-- r r O (O o (O V (O O r r (O NV W 00 W O o O M O M —— M rO — N o C\l V M m M O to Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M MdVd J M (D V(\I O d) d) 00 � I- W N O V (D V V V 00 N M d) I- (D (D O V d) O r (D M I- O [- N V V to r O W d) 00 (O d) OD d) N d) d) 00 ,- M M - V 00m to r V. 00 0) V O V N N N ') l0 V M to N (C m r N 0) Fd) V to to to to to to to to to 0 (O (O (O (O (O (O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ht LO O r d) M M d) M r d) OD O O (D V O A (D r d) V M M O 0 0 a) r O M N r r M M M M M M M M M V V V V V to M V V tO0 tO0 V V tN IN M M M IN M (D t� (NO (NO (D (D 0D M V O (O N N N l0 O N O V (D O (p 0 0 I- 00 V N O . r , V M V M to M M M r M 0 M 00 M O V N V V V V V (O V r V to to (O V d) V O to O to r V r V M to N to M to V to M to to W to M to M M M M r to M M N M to M to M V O d) r d) W N d) O O d) W (O d) to N to O r Lf) M 00 M V M M 00 M O V N V N V t0 V V V (D V r- V 0') to to V 0) V O to to [ V V N to to (D to V to V to N to 00 to , M V to � . N M � M M M (OM (O (O I- r M O d) N M M N to 00 O to 00 d) W 00 (O to W Q O M d) '. r M M M 00 M M M d) M N V V V to V V V (D V 00 V V In In r V O In N In O In 00 V M V M In N In to In V In M In In 00 In Lfl V In Lfl N Lfl Lfl M Lfl M Lfl � (D M Q M 00 0 r N M d) to r 0 0 r O r r M O Or N 00 V 00 'IT O '.. V M 00 M m M V V V to V M V to V M V 00 V V to In r V In M to N to O to r V V to N to r to r to to to M to O M M M to to M M M M N M V M to M N M co 00to O O M O N m N r O N N m to 00 Q to 00 N r W r (O V r M O M 00 M '.. 00 M m M O V V V to V r V to V 0 V 00 V V to to 00 V to M to N to O to to V N to to r to to to M to to 00 to M V to (D N (D (D M (D M (D O (D r (D "TF(D I- 1- O t0 t0 V I- N M d) t0 t0 N d) N M M 00 M N 00 t0 M to 00 co M 00 M N V N V r V to V r V 00 V M In M V r V O to N to In M V M V In to V to M to to O to r to O M M to O M O M d) to M N M d) to to (D Lfl Co O- W 0 r M 0 00 0M 0 LO 00 lM0 M V N V (00 V M V V V to to 00 V to V to to O to V V to V In O In In 00 V 0 In r In 0[ In In W to (D In M In M In M In N M O In In N I� O 1-0 1- O V 1- O M t0 N N V r- O M 00 M M M N O (O d) d) to to V M V N T t0 V M V (D V 1_ V V to r- V t0 V M V � In 00 V r- V V V M V r- V d) V d) V d) V (D V N to t0 to d) V t0 to (O to V to 0 to [- In V In O M � In 0 to m to ,e t0N l0 N O M N M V M M l0 1- V M V V M M O V 0 V V M CO l0 N0 V V M V M V M V V In 0 V 0 V m V O In r V 0 V V V 00 V to V r V M V M V M V O In M In 00 V V In V In M In to In to In M In 00 In to In to In � to O Lfl M O d) d) M W to W M to d) M V r to N O N d) (O N O V I- N 00to W ''... V V O V V V to V N l0 M V l0 V 00 V 00 V M V V V 04 V 0 V M V to V to V V V l0 V W V � l0 to V � to N l0 � l0 m l0 M l0 O l0 0 l0 M l0 NM l0 l0 � to M to N 0D W 00 0 V 00 V I- N M � � N M S M � (D N M l0 (D 00 0 O l0 M r V (O 00 O N '... r r "T V V V V V V V V V V V V V V M V V V V V V V V too V tN V V t0 tM M M O d) N d o Q M Q d M r d r N W N d o d M M M M M (D M M V V M V �MMM�M� M M M M M VVVVVVVO V V V V t0 tN M M d) Q d) l0 d) (O d) r- d) 00 d) M d) ON 0 0 0 M 0 V 0 t0 0 (D 0 r- 0 0D 0 W 0 O N M V l0 (O 00 d) O N N N N M N V N l0 N *�.. d) d) d) d) d) d) d) O N OO N N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..�bllii clriooll s Il ya tear Il'�ll airs I AppendIx N W O W G O N N N M M M r 00 V M I V 04 O O N V? N N N N N (D M M 0104 I- M N 1- M to 0 0 r 00 M M V V W O O N N N M M M N tN (O M l0 t0 t0 l0 t0 M lM (O M V M M M M M V O 00 00 In N V N m 00 to ow ON M V W O LO to to to M 0 04 0 0 1- In In In In In 04 m ON M M V to to to to 00 0 M V l (00 V In In In In r M 0 N V 'IT 'IT to to to M iz N M 00 V r 00 d) c c c c to (D m O O 00 O N V 0 [- 'IT V V V V V tD 0 N E Q a lG m0)m 'oO N N Q b � LO N l0UO, )( uu J March 2020 7-6 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons N m March 2020 7-7 szoz Vzoz Izzoz Zzoz Mz ozoz UOZ SLOZ LLOZ Roz 5402 VLOZ CLOZ Z 40 LLOZ OLOZ 6002 LM 8002 a ui LOOZ 9002 Booz vooz cooz zooz LOOZ 000z 6664 8664 1664 9664 9664 V66L 0664 Ct C; Ct Ct C Ct CC� Ct (D 00 r- w WI) It m N W- 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons N m March 2020 7-7 W? Ct W? Ct WI) m CV) 04 04 Ir- T- 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I Appendx ll°iiiiirollllirneiilt 1:)irojecflons szoz Vzoz Ezoz ZZIOZ Mz ozoz 6402 8402 1402 9402 9 M 1402 CLOZ U0Z 4402 OLOZ 60OZ sooz LOOZ 90oz Booz vooz cooz zooz LOOZ 000z 6664 8664 1664 9664 9'664 V664 8664 0 March 2020 7-8 COru March 2020 7-8 IIIIwrIIIID II IIS IIS IIIA"r IIIIITS II,,,,,, III,,,,,, III IIIIm"r ENROLLMENT (PLACEHOLDER) �Imc 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�a..abllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I Appendx March 2020 7.9 III IIr.n 111 "r ll 111 "r III IIIA IIIb,,,,, IIS LEXINGTON II %I, J II 1.0 ,r II.(c,0Il, Julie L. Hackett, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools December 4, 2019 Dear Lexington School Community: (781) 861-2580, ext. 68040 jhackett@lexingtonma.org Fax: (781) 861-256o The purpose of this communication is to provide you with an update concerning the outcome of the Lexington School Committee's redistricting vote, along with some essential implementation details and resources that you may find useful. On Tuesday, December 3, 2019, after a thorough and inclusive Phase II Redistricting process, the School Committee voted on a final redistricting plan. The plan selected is Redistricting Plan C (Alternative Minimal Impact Plan), which will go into effect in the 2020-2021 school year. Plan C effectively uses our existing and newly available school capacity to ensure equitable and appropriate learning environments for students across the district. A visual summary of Plan C can be accessedIheire The district is in the process of updating searchable maps based on new elementary and middle school assignments, to be made available through the district's website soon. Summary of Plan C - Alternative Minimal Impact Plan The "Alternative Minimal Impact Plan" or "Plan U involves the movement of components from Fiske to Harrington and Hastings Elementary Schools, and it achieves planned operating capacities in our schools. Plan C makes no changes to southern components, and there are approximately 254 students assigned to new schools. Plan C also maintains the possibility of walking to school for some families in areas around Fiske and Harrington Elementary Schools. Further, it achieves the alignment of the elementary with the middle school boundaries, which has been an ongoing challenge for the district. Students in the Estabrook 2 or Katandin component will attend Hastings Elementary School, which will help us achieve a better balance among schools. A summary of the additional components that are impacted by Plan C follows: • To create a better balance between Hastings and Estabrook Elementary Schools, Estabrook 3 and Estabrook 4 (Reed Street) will stay in Estabrook Elementary School This area is currently split between Hastings and Estabrook. • Bowman 3 (Monroe Hill) will attend Hastings Elementary School. Students in this component currently attend Bowman Elementary School. • Hastings 6 (April Lane) will attend Bowman. This area is currently split between Hastings and Bowman. • Bridge 4 will attend Hastings Elementary School. Students residing outside of assignment areas due to Phase I grandfathering or flexible assignment also will be moved to newly assigned schools. Plan C allows current Hastings 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I Alippendx lledshlcflirng Ili:)Ia n March 2020 '7.10 Elementary School students living in areas designated to other schools (i.e., Estabrook 3 and 4 located along Reed Street) to stay in their current school. Plan C does not entirely address middle school proximity for areas south of Route 2 assigned to Diamond. Moving forward, we will strategically use "flexible assignment" within these areas (and elsewhere) to assign new students to more proximal schools whenever possible. The degree to which we can do so depends on future enrollments and available capacity. Students in these areas can attend their closest school whenever possible. We will likely assign new students living in Main Campus/Lexington Hills to either Bridge or Bowman Elementary Schools (to then attend Clarke Middle School). One approach we are considering is clustering school assignments based on apartment buildings in complexes, rather than by random assignment. New students from Lexington Ridge will be assigned to either Bridge or Hastings (to then attend Clarke from Bridge or Diamond from Hastings). Given these future assignment plans, all current students residing at either Lexington Ridge or Main Campus will remain at their existing schools. Implementation Updates I am pleased to announce that I have appointed Ms. Anna Monaco, former Principal of Clarke Middle School, to lead our redistricting implementation efforts. Anna is a Lexington resident, a Lexington High School graduate, and the mother of four terrific children who attend Lexington Public Schools. She knows our neighborhoods well, and she will be an asset as we work to develop positive transition experiences for all involved. Any member of our school community (students, parents, or staff members) with questions, suggestions, or concerns about redistricting can contact Anna via email ata. m, nac..0 ingj ,3, , ,[g. We are thrilled to have Anna back, and she is excited to be working with Lexington students, families, and staff to ensure a smooth and positive transition for all involved. We are in the process of assembling a District Transition Team (DTT), which Anna will lead, comprising an administrator from each K-8 school in the system. Also, we hope to engage members of the Redistricting Advisory Council and the President's PTA/PTO Council in the DTT to ensure that redistricting is a positive experience for all involved. We have discussed several possibilities for easing the transitions that will (directly and indirectly) impact all families. These ideas include student buddies, student panels, student videos, family and educator "dine and discuss" opportunities to build a sense of community, soon-to-be scheduled school tours, school spirit wear, principal coffees, a monthly newsletter, and more! Resources and News You Can Use Many of you have questions about when and how to tell your children about redistricting. You also have questions about grandfathering, transportation, and next steps. Her.. is a helpful resource for you that attempts to address some of your most pressing questions and concerns. • How do I know if I have been assigned to a new school? • How do I talk to my child about redistricting? • Will I have access to the names of other students who will be redistricted and when? • When will I know if transportation will be provided if I elect to grandfather my child? • What supports are in place and who can I talk to if I am struggling with the redistricting °�'y°1 Y Y 9 IIIUWIiuuu decision or m child is extreme) anxious about attending another schools 1....exiiirig�Kiri Il'�ii..rblliic clIi oll s IIMa tear II'�ll airs �� Appendx March 2020 7.11 • What is a Special Transfer Request and how does it get processed? We know redistricting is not easy for anyone, and we are so grateful for our community's thoughtful participation and partnership in this process throughout the past several months. Please know that we will continue to work tirelessly to ensure that no matter which school your child attends, they will experience what is at the heart of an education in the Lexington Public Schools—"joy in learning, curiosity in life, and compassion in all we do." Sincerely, Julie L. Hackett, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools �Ixc 1....exiiirig�Kiri Il'�ii..rblliic clIi oll s IIMa tear II'�ll airs �� Appendx March 2020 '7 12. MMUMM Approved assignment maps to be ir for the 2020-21 school year Note: We are in the process of updating our search through the district website Plari C Ahcmafivc Miriimal Impact shortly Notes:: * I rimohies Rs Ike moves 1.() 11 a rdng I.(:) n a nd I I as I. ngs * Offier6l"eirences ncIude:: ES TA3 & 4 (Reed 3t.) stays In Estabroolk, BOVV3 (Morlroe I fiII) asslgned 1.(:) 1.(:) 11 as Ungs W iAS T6 (A prfl Lane) asslgned 1.(:) Bovvrnan * III::: 1W updab,D !III mludes� III::: STA2 asMgnnDnttiu 111hastlings, fijp6im %Pvsi�im lki,Dp� asMgnnmt to III::: stab: nx:A) * No changes 1.(:) soulfierni COmilaorients; does nol. se I.(:) ffdarn Ino effect * Lovvers number of students a 'Fected * Capacfl.y aclkeared * Students vvflV be assigned 1.(:) a sin& sclkooa In severaV areas wflhi students currenHy al.I.en6ng rnuflJpIe schooIs * Considers II Iposs6flflLy of(airi-eril. I iasUngs students Ih4ng In areas assigned 1.(:) (AherschooIs (e g Est abroolk 3 & 4 Iocal.ed aIong Reed SI.) Irernaining * AIso consHers students frorn LeAngton RHge & LeAngton I fifls/klalrli Campus sl. aying; In h6r curreril. sdkooIs Students Assigned School to New Schools Bowman 35 Bridge 49 Estabrook 46 1 89 Harrington 35 Hastings 0 � otall 254 M 11 exington 11I Schools III 11= lan I II'DIDerndll Illcdshlcflilrng 11°)Ian March 2020 '7°-13 Na,n U Mterwa.tive Minhyli"'d hylirolart 111"Acirlientaxy lotalls 8; q]:Illaillgias 113Y 43,11'adill, W� l 11 p , ltlu lfiv l lo p1 tlg 6 p a� lON '5 Cug o li� 1 ia!oiJigs) District Grade I Grade I Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Bowman 62 75 88 90 92 101 .............. ..............I ......... .... Bridge 60 69 74 77 94 112 I to a to Hastings in 1 73 81 95 86 101 101 Fiske 51 50 68 50 72 106 Harrington 57 82 80 101 80 78 Hastings 82 97 102 135 126 79 Fiske to Harrington District I Change lChange, 2 Change 3 Change4 Change 5 Change ... ... ... ... Bowman 0 -5 -9 -3 -8 0 .................... "j- Bridge -3 -5 -5 -13 -14 0 Fisk 11" Bowman to 1 -9 -6 -7 -9 -8 0 to k!(2 ,L Hastings Fiske -10 -19 -14 -24 -17 0 .................... Harrington 0 +4 -3 +7 -2 0 10Hastings +22 +31 +38 +42 +49 0 Bridge to Bo Hastings 5. "o, lotalls by Schooll Assigniment Area .................... Hasting to wman Total % ow District I Thru 5 Capacity % Capacity Income % ELL Bowman 508 516 98% 5% 17% Bridge 486 516 94% 5% 11% Student may re Student may remain 1 537 581 92% 4% 15% in current schools in current schools (generally Fiske 397 409 97% 4% 14% (generally .... ...... Bridge/Bowman) Hastings/Bowman) ..... ...... Harrington 478 516 93% 6% 13% T— Hastings 621 645 96% 4% 15% �?Iain(` lteil-Illi Mikiiiiiii-nal Illhirnpact. Mikidle School IlDetaiiiiils III::::: Stl III iated lotalls 8; q]dllaillgias 113Y 43,11'alb, (2020 21 ScIl ooll Ammar) School Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Clarke 313 306 306 Diamond 301 322 281 School 6 Change 7 Change 8 Change Clarke 0 0 0 Diamond 0 0 0 III::::: Stl III iated lotalls 113Y ScIllooll Asd gill III ie It Area Total District 6 Thru 8 Capacity % Capacity Clarke 925 903 102% Diamond 904 989 91% 4 M 11 exington III Schools III 11= lan I II'pIlp lrndll IIledishricting 11°lllan March 2020 '7.14 Longer Term • Like other minimal plans, this plan does not completely address middle school proximity for areas south of Route 2 assigned to Diamond. Moving forward we will strategically use flexible assignment within these areas to assign new students to more proximal school whenever possible. The degree to which we are able to do so will be dependent on future enrollments and available capacity. • Our aim would be to give students in these areas the opportunity to attend the closest school whenever possible. We would likely assign new students living in Main Campus/Lexington Hills to either Bridge or Bowman (to then attend Clarke Middle School). New students from Lexington Ridge would be assigned to either Bridge or Hastings (to then attend Clarke from Bridge or Diamond from Hastings). • Given these future assignment plans, all current students residing at either Lexington Ridge or Main Campus will remain at their current schools. • Given the density of these areas and current enrollment conditions, it is not possible to assign all students to a single closer school without setting off the "domino effect." If enrollment were to go down and capacity allowed it, we could begin to assign all new students within these areas to a single school. Currently enrolled students will attend schools based on the newly revised maps during the 2020-21 school year (except for students who will be in 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grade during this school year). This includes students residing outside of assignment areas due to Phase I grandfathering or flexible assignment. Students who will be in the 5th, 6th or 7th or 8th grade and live in newly assigned areas during the 2020-21 school year will have the option to remain in their current school. Grandfathering of students in these grades does not apply to other siblings enrolled in the same school. For example, if a family has a 3rd and 5th grade student, the 5th grader would be eligible for grandfathering. The 3rd grade student would not. This family would have the option to move both students to a newly assigned school. 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan IRippe ndu I111ed°ishJi ffing Ili:)Ia n March 2020 '7.15 We are not considering changes to the middle school feeder pattern. Students attending the Bridge, Bowman or Harrington elementary schools would continue to feed into Clarke Middle School. Students attending the Fiske, Estabrook or Hastings elementary schools would continue to feed into Diamond Middle School. However, grandfathered 5th grade students will attend middle school based on new assignment maps. For example, if a 5th grade student enrolled at Bowman is located in an area re -assigned to Diamond middle school, the family would have the option to complete 5th grade at Bowman. Upon completion of 5th grade, the student would go onto the Diamond middle school. Per School Committee policy, all families with an approved request to transfer a student to a LPS school outside of their school assignment area must re -apply. In the case of redistricting, students must revert to their "home" schools and then re -apply fortransfers (See School Committee policy: JCAC STUDENT TRANSFER POLICY). I Grade in Grade in Overview of Implementation Details by Grade 2019-20 2020-21 K-3 K-4 Beginning with the 2020-21 school year, all students living in newly assigned areas will attend schools based on newly revised school assignment maps. 4 5 Students who will be in the 5th grade and live in newly assigned areas during the 2020-21 school year will have the option to remain in their current school. Grandfathered 5th grade students will attend middle school based on new assignment maps. For example, if a 5th grade student enrolled at Bowman is located in an area re -assigned to Diamond Middle School, the family would have the option to complete 5th grade at Bowman. Upon completion of 5th grade, the student would go onto the Diamond Middle School. Grandfathering of 5th and 8th grade does not apply to other siblings enrolled in the same school. 5 6 Students who will be in the 6th grade and live in newly assigned areas during the 2020-21 school year will have the option to remain in their current school. Grandfathering of 5th, 6th, 7th & 8th grade students does not apply to other siblings enrolled in the same school. 6 7 Students who will be in the 7th grade and live in newly assigned areas during the 2020-21 school year will have the option to remain in their current school. Grandfathering of 5th, 6th, 7th & 8th grade students does not apply to other siblings enrolled in the same school. 7 8 Students who will be in the 8th grade and live in newly assigned areas during the 2020-21 school year will have the option to remain in their current school. Grandfathering of 5th, 6th, 7th & 8th grade students does not apply to other siblings enrolled in the same school. 11..ex ngton Public Schools Master (Plan I Alippendux I111edl°IshJi flung I11))Iarn March 2020 '7°-1 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx IIlledsh1cflirng Ili:)ll um March 2020 7-17 2018-19 Master Plannine Committees Elementary & Lexineton Children's Place (Pre -K) uu luuul p u II I I II I I Bridge (24 Sections) Flex ble assign ment may still be necessa ry to balance en roll ment Flexible assign ment is the strategy that she uld be em ployed fi rst, Mortar Bring al l class sizes within School Committee guidelines: mong schools. if necessary to ba la nce en rollment amo ng schools, though our K: 18 max preference isto maintain neighborhood schools as much as 1:22 max possible. We hope flexible assignment won't be needed as much 2-5: 24 max after 2020 redistrict! ng, but it should always be available to the Superintendent. Redistricting is very painful fora community, though occasionally necessary and unavoidable. School Committee policy prevents students from being redistricted morethan once n five years, so we expect that afterthe 2020 redistricting, we will not redistrict again until at least 2025. We do not recommend raising class sizes. Class size has a significant impact on learning and should not be compromised. The School Committee's policy on class size should be followed. Ma i ntai n i ng reco mmended class sizes is very i mporta nt to the school community. We recognize that for community members who are not di rectly impacted, raising class sizes seems to be an easy a nd affordable soIutlon to space shortages, so there may be public pressure to do so, but we bel leve other sol utio ns are preferable for students. We have concerns about moving district -wide special education programs because ofthe social relationships students have formed and the knowledge general education teachers and specialists have acquired about the sped students intheir schools and how best to help their student access the curriculum. Redistricting should ensure adequate space for the Estabook (27 Sections) learning whether there are benefits to students that could result from being located in a different school. In the spirit ofdiscussing all capacity -building options — even bad options —the elementary group discussed the concept of in si ng out of di strict placements of special education cr students in orderto increase in -district capacity. The group vehemently rejects this strategy and recommends thatthe strategy not be considered by the Master Planning Advisory Committee. LPS has a legal, moral, and educational obligation to keep elementary students in Lexington with their peers whenever possible. Our special education students belong at their schools just as much as their non -special education peers Fiske (19 Sections) ®®®®®®®®®® Harringto n (24 Sections) Hastings (30 Sections) Total 148 Sections Your Task: usl: of sl:rate es �i Reviewdraft............................................... * Rule out any strategies that should NOT be considered * Place the remaining strategies in the grid below Add in any strategies you believe are missing and should be considered Later on,,, J We will layer on more specific criteria/conditions that would prompt the use of each strategy Non -Br ick& Flex ble assign ment may still be necessa ry to balance en roll ment Flexible assign ment is the strategy that she uld be em ployed fi rst, Mortar Bring al l class sizes within School Committee guidelines: mong schools. if necessary to ba la nce en rollment amo ng schools, though our K: 18 max preference isto maintain neighborhood schools as much as 1:22 max possible. We hope flexible assignment won't be needed as much 2-5: 24 max after 2020 redistrict! ng, but it should always be available to the Superintendent. Redistricting is very painful fora community, though occasionally necessary and unavoidable. School Committee policy prevents students from being redistricted morethan once n five years, so we expect that afterthe 2020 redistricting, we will not redistrict again until at least 2025. We do not recommend raising class sizes. Class size has a significant impact on learning and should not be compromised. The School Committee's policy on class size should be followed. Ma i ntai n i ng reco mmended class sizes is very i mporta nt to the school community. We recognize that for community members who are not di rectly impacted, raising class sizes seems to be an easy a nd affordable soIutlon to space shortages, so there may be public pressure to do so, but we bel leve other sol utio ns are preferable for students. We have concerns about moving district -wide special education programs because ofthe social relationships students have formed and the knowledge general education teachers and specialists have acquired about the sped students intheir schools and how best to help their student access the curriculum. Redistricting should ensure adequate space for the programs to remain where they are, though we are open to learning whether there are benefits to students that could result from being located in a different school. In the spirit ofdiscussing all capacity -building options — even bad options —the elementary group discussed the concept of in si ng out of di strict placements of special education cr students in orderto increase in -district capacity. The group vehemently rejects this strategy and recommends thatthe strategy not be considered by the Master Planning Advisory Committee. LPS has a legal, moral, and educational obligation to keep elementary students in Lexington with their peers whenever possible. Our special education students belong at their schools just as much as their non -special education peers Im 0 A'A h% I....ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Appendix.......Strategies March 2020 'x..18 Permanent Though !twill not be necessaryto add more elementary space.f Though!twill not be necessaryto add more elementary space.f If we determine that we must add space, we recommend and should not be treated otherwise. We further bell eve that there is no financial advantageto increasing out ofdistrict placements and, even if there were, we would not recommend the strategy. Moving fffh grade to the m.dd le schoo is is something to consider only if we are building new middle school space. Assuming we re building nothing but a high school over the next ten years, and that the high school will contain grades 9-12, changing elementary grade co nfguration is not necessary or helpful. Temporary oerma nent construclip n on o r newer bulIdi ngs fol lowed by Given that replacement of Bridge and Bowma n wil l not occur We recommend that each building leader engage in an annual, Construction, Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we until after the high school project, and recognizing that the public space -mining exercise with comm unicatio n to the Renovations,& years. Within 5years, assuming a high school project is schools arethe oldest in the elementary system, consider commumtyof howspacewill be used. Perhaps this could be Space Mining Estabrook has large core spaces that could accommodate more aesthetic improvements to helpthe schools feel somewhat done in conjunction with yearly update ofthe masterplan. classrooms. We believe that we should maximize our existing updated. school sites before building new schools on new sites, assuming sivestigating tes while school remains in session in the old buildings. Ifthis is larger schools are determined to be educationally -sound. Artand Music spaces should be a last resortfor space mining. Art not possible due to site constraints, as our architect suspects, we and music are important parts ofour curriculum, and key If our newer buildings are maxed out and we still need more land acq u.sition, or acquire a building that can be used as swing pathways for learning for some students. Eliminating appropriate space. We are not aware that any such buildings exist:. schools,.fwe determinethat larger schools have been space or teaching those subjects in regular classrooms limits educationally sound at Hastings and Estabrook. what can be taught and diminishes our program. Public needed in the future. It is not an ideal site, dueto access discussions around reducing art and music are very damaging challenges a nd topography, but it is not impossible to build a ten years, it is essential to maintain communication with the forthe commu nity. This group does believe, however, that if school there or use part of a land swap. Planning Board on ANY new development. With full schools, school isfacing a finite space shortage (oneyear), principals en the addition of a small number of students could cause We recommend thattheSuperintendent be nottled by the Town should still have the option to neon rpose an art or music room Ma nager,the Planning Board, or others ofany large parcels (8+ for one year rather than raising a class size above School res) that may be ava.lable for purchase. Town staff should pay Committee guidelines. It must not beco me the norm. property. We recommend considering the use of current LCPspaceat Old Other We believe any future school buildings should be bu.ltto at least Harr. ngton for overflow from Harrington. It seems feasible to three stories. Because our school sites are tight, taller buildings house 5th grade classrooms there, as older children could walk expans.on if necessary. Taller bu.ldi ngs are also more back and forth easily. We question what we would need to do to en vi ro n mentally friendly, red uc.ng 1m permeable surfaces and maintain 7000 sq If exemption to usethebuilding for creasi ng green space. educational purposes. Wedo not know what, Lany, portion of the LCP space might be used fortech. We would not ruleout converting literacy librariesto classrooms, but would needto understand whatthe educational impact would be before recommending this strategy. We recognizethat most schools do not have these rooms available. We generally bel.eve that permanent construction on our newer buildings is oreferableto building oortableor modular classrooms. Permanent Though !twill not be necessaryto add more elementary space.f Though!twill not be necessaryto add more elementary space.f If we determine that we must add space, we recommend Inn Construction nrollment is less than expected, it is.portantto keep in mind enrollment is as expected and redistricting occurs to return oerma nent construclip n on o r newer bulIdi ngs fol lowed by the need to rep lace Bridge a nd Bow ma n. n a bout 10 yea rs. schools to their appropriate enrollments, itisimportantto keep redistricting, rather than add. ng to older buildings or using Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we mind the need to replace Bridge and Bowman in about 10 portables and modulars. We have drawings for additions to should start the planning process, including preparing an SOL If years. Within 5years, assuming a high school project is Harrington, the new Hastings has room for expansion, and nrollmentdro os significantly, we maybe ableto plan to use one underway, we should startthe planning process, including Estabrook has large core spaces that could accommodate more school as swing space while we replace the other. preparing an SOL Part ofthis process should include classrooms. We believe that we should maximize our existing whether new schools can be built on the current school sites before building new schools on new sites, assuming sivestigating tes while school remains in session in the old buildings. Ifthis is larger schools are determined to be educationally -sound. not possible due to site constraints, as our architect suspects, we must build one ofthe schools on a new site, which will require If our newer buildings are maxed out and we still need more land acq u.sition, or acquire a building that can be used as swing space, we should rebuild Bridge and Bowman as 30 -section space. We are not aware that any such buildings exist:. schools,.fwe determinethat larger schools have been educationally sound at Hastings and Estabrook. We recommend thatLIPS keep the Laconia parcel in case it is needed in the future. It is not an ideal site, dueto access Though we do not expect an Avalon -like development in the next challenges a nd topography, but it is not impossible to build a ten years, it is essential to maintain communication with the school there or use part of a land swap. Planning Board on ANY new development. With full schools, en the addition of a small number of students could cause We recommend thattheSuperintendent be nottled by the Town certain classrooms to become overcrowded. Ma nager,the Planning Board, or others ofany large parcels (8+ res) that may be ava.lable for purchase. Town staff should pay special attention to any parcels that adjoin town -owned property. Other We believe any future school buildings should be bu.ltto at least three stories. Because our school sites are tight, taller buildings req ul re a smaller footori nt a nd, therefore, leave more room for expans.on if necessary. Taller bu.ldi ngs are also more en vi ro n mentally friendly, red uc.ng 1m permeable surfaces and creasi ng green space. uc 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 '7 1 II,,,,,, III "r "rI :r II IVIS S �Bridge (24 Sections) II➢ !l Mortar Bring all class sizes within School Committee guidelines: among schools. if necessary to balance enrollment among schools, thoughour K: 18 max preference isto maintain neighborhood schools as much as 1:22 max I111N Agreed.. possible. We hope flexible assignment won't be needed as much 2-5: 24 max after 2020 redistricting, but it should always be available to the Superintendent. 1I1N 11'N. 0nvdrMY r id, ' ,1: ,I ,,,dre nd2 iL,,d� II v: d, lai V „y r, do Redistricting is very painful for a community, though ),I" ,, "d, JJ ,c. .V i', occasionally necessaryand unavoidable. School Committee � i 11 i < < , 1 1 "Y i'll, d • Bowman(24Section) erY <"'I'MWI : .101111dto infveyears,so we expect that after the 2020 redistricting, we �I �rcYY „ I d, I' 11 ad> r.. will not redistrict again until atleast2025. IPIV11 I,, hm ::<<, nilH, I d, I,... Wedo notrecommend raising class sizes Class size has significant impact on learn! ngand should not be compromised. The School Committee's policy on class size should be followed. Mal ntal n ng reco mmen ded class sizes is very! mnortant to the school community. We recognize that for community members who are not dl rectlyl mpacted, ral sl ng class sizes seems to be an easy and affordable so lute on to space shortages, so there may be • Fstabook(27 Sections) public pressure to do so, but we believe other sol utions are preferable for students. We have concerns about moving district -wide special education programs because ofthe social relationships students have formed and the knowledge general education teachers and specialists have acquired about the sped students in their • Fiske (19 Sections) 3094 3067 3063 3042 3039 3056 3095 3108 3121 3134 3147 • Harrington (24 Sections) bad options —the elementary group discussed the concept of ' si ng out ofdlstnct placements of special education students i n o rder to ! ncrease in -district capacity. The group vehemently rejects this strategy and recommends thatthe strategy not be considered by the Master Planning Advisory Committee. LPS has a legal, moral, and educational obligation to • HaAl ngs(30 Sections) 144 Sections 170 ±70 ±65 ±60 ±55 ±50 ±45 ±40 ±35 ±30 Total: 148 Sections Your Task: • IIISt of sl:rate 1es Reviewdraft............................................... • Rule out any strategies that should NOT be considered [.J Place the remaining strategies in the grid below J Add in any strategies you believe are missing and should be considered Later on,,, U We will layer on more specific criteria/conditions that would prompt the use of each strategy Non -Brick Flexible assignment may still be necessary to balance enrollment Flexible assignment is the strategy that should be employed first, Mortar Bring all class sizes within School Committee guidelines: among schools. if necessary to balance enrollment among schools, thoughour K: 18 max preference isto maintain neighborhood schools as much as 1:22 max I111N Agreed.. possible. We hope flexible assignment won't be needed as much 2-5: 24 max after 2020 redistricting, but it should always be available to the Superintendent. 1I1N 11'N. 0nvdrMY r id, ' ,1: ,I ,,,dre nd2 iL,,d� II v: d, lai V „y r, do Redistricting is very painful for a community, though ),I" ,, "d, JJ ,c. .V i', occasionally necessaryand unavoidable. School Committee � i 11 i < < , 1 1 "Y i'll, d policy prevents students from being redistricted morethan once erY <"'I'MWI : .101111dto infveyears,so we expect that after the 2020 redistricting, we �I �rcYY „ I d, I' 11 ad> r.. will not redistrict again until atleast2025. IPIV11 I,, hm ::<<, nilH, I d, I,... Wedo notrecommend raising class sizes Class size has significant impact on learn! ngand should not be compromised. The School Committee's policy on class size should be followed. Mal ntal n ng reco mmen ded class sizes is very! mnortant to the school community. We recognize that for community members who are not dl rectlyl mpacted, ral sl ng class sizes seems to be an easy and affordable so lute on to space shortages, so there may be public pressure to do so, but we believe other sol utions are preferable for students. We have concerns about moving district -wide special education programs because ofthe social relationships students have formed and the knowledge general education teachers and specialists have acquired about the sped students in their schools and how best to help their student access the c u I um. Redistricting should ensure adequate space for the plogra ms to rem a! n where they are, though we a re open to learn! ng whether there a re benefits to students that could resu It from being located in a different school. In the sp! rit of d iscuss! ng a II capadty-but Id! ng opt! ons — even bad options —the elementary group discussed the concept of ' si ng out ofdlstnct placements of special education students i n o rder to ! ncrease in -district capacity. The group vehemently rejects this strategy and recommends thatthe strategy not be considered by the Master Planning Advisory Committee. LPS has a legal, moral, and educational obligation to keep elementary students in Lexington with their peers whenever possible. Our special education students belong at 0 lim M' h% I....ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipendx Shrateg°es March 2020 7..2.0 Permanent Construction Though it will not be necessary to add more elementary space if enrol lment is less than expected, it is importantto keep in mind the need to replace Bridge and Bowman in about 10 years. Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we should start the planning process, including preparing an SOI. If nrollment the significantly, we may be ableto plan to use one school as swing space while we replace the other. IN:.I d,;r,r,d ld,"I '11' '11 vo I dr"d5,drrr I1 i -tr,rh„ d� id ,hr, il a4Vl d„ kadgr V P, Though it will not be necessary to add more elementary space if enrollment is as expected and redistricting occurs to return schools to their appropriate enroll ments, itisimportantto keep in mind the need to replace Bridge and Bowman in about 10 years. Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we should startthe planning process, including preparing an SOI. Part ofthis process should include vestigating whether new schools can be built on the current sites while school remains in session in the old buildings. Ifthis is not possible due to site constraints, as our architect suspects, we must build one ofthe schools on a new site, which will require land acquisition, or acquire building that can be used as swing space. Weare not aware that any such buildings exist. ISIh _< < d<<V ntn re r, l h rrr r,l I l r e. I r h, - 11 d 1, Y 101r„ We generally believe that permanent construction on our newer buildings is preferableto building portable or modular classrooms. If we determinethat we must add space, we recommend permanent construction on our newer buildings followed by redistricting, ratherthan adding to older buildings or using portables and modulars. We have drawings for additions to Harrington, the new Hastings has room for expansion, and Estabrook has large core spaces that could accommodate more classrooms. We believethat we should maximize our existing school sites before building new schools on new sites, assuming larger schools are determined to be educationally -sound. If our newer buildings are maxed out and we still need more space, we should rebuild Bridge and Bowman as 30 -section schools, i f we determine that larger schools have been educationally sound at Hastings and Estabrook. )IN „,I,,I0m 0 < dknd„ VI 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch r:}(,),::'(,) � I.n their schools just as much as their non -special education peers and should not be treated otherwise. We further bel ievethat there is no fnancial advantage to increasing out of district placements and, even if there were, we would not recommend the strategy. Moving fffh grade to the middle schools is something to consider only if we are building new middle school space. Assuming we • re building nothing but a high school over the next ten years, and that the high school will contain grades 9-12, changing elementary grade configuration is not necessary or helpful. 1lN I Ir 10 vd dh„+ldr» r '11 1) �WI I,ii 'l, i') , r,. r.rl Yr"I I Rr r. Y r, i a,a, 1011 din lid, i1old i,,i ,I'll , do, ,nit , ” wl 1,r 1 '1" riu r' i 'd r i, i<, iorl d r „hr"ll 1", ll ren.. To Given that replacement of Bridgeand Bowman will notoccur We recommend thateach building leaderen gagein an annual, Construction, until afferthe high school project, and recognizing that the public space -mining exercise with comm unicationto the Renovations,& schools arethe oldest in the elementary system, consider communityof howspacewill be used. Perhaps this could be Space Mining a esthetic improvementsto help the schools feel somewhat done in conjunction with yearly updateofthe master plan. updated. Artand Musicspaces should be a last resort for space mining. Art I SI ri mai sl "i ae,Y i 1 ,'i 1, 1d?e= a nd music are important parts ofour curriculum, and key d� Mrd?r�,l'i' ,'i 11" <<V� J(, Lr, I' pathways for learning for some students Eliminating appropriate 1,1 an l 01 11.0 '11, 'll i lo" <a t.. space or teaching those subjects in regular classrooms limits whatcan betaught and diminishes our program. Public discussionsa round reducing art and musicarevery damaging for the community. This group does believe, however, that if a school isfacinga finite space shortage (oneyear)I principals should still havethe optionto repurposean artor music room for one year ratherthan raising a class size above School Committee guidelines. It must not becomethe norm. We recommend considering the use of current LCPspaceat Old Harrington for overflow from Harrington. It seems feasible to house 5th grade classrooms there, as older children could walk back and forth easily. We question what we would need to do to maintain 7000 sq If exemption to usethe building for educational purposes. We do not know what, ifany, portion of the LCE space might be used fortech. [:)IN IIII 1, 1,,I /,I ) LI -I, Y„ !;h; il r, his Permanent Construction Though it will not be necessary to add more elementary space if enrol lment is less than expected, it is importantto keep in mind the need to replace Bridge and Bowman in about 10 years. Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we should start the planning process, including preparing an SOI. If nrollment the significantly, we may be ableto plan to use one school as swing space while we replace the other. IN:.I d,;r,r,d ld,"I '11' '11 vo I dr"d5,drrr I1 i -tr,rh„ d� id ,hr, il a4Vl d„ kadgr V P, Though it will not be necessary to add more elementary space if enrollment is as expected and redistricting occurs to return schools to their appropriate enroll ments, itisimportantto keep in mind the need to replace Bridge and Bowman in about 10 years. Within 5 years, assuming a high school project is underway, we should startthe planning process, including preparing an SOI. Part ofthis process should include vestigating whether new schools can be built on the current sites while school remains in session in the old buildings. Ifthis is not possible due to site constraints, as our architect suspects, we must build one ofthe schools on a new site, which will require land acquisition, or acquire building that can be used as swing space. Weare not aware that any such buildings exist. ISIh _< < d<<V ntn re r, l h rrr r,l I l r e. I r h, - 11 d 1, Y 101r„ We generally believe that permanent construction on our newer buildings is preferableto building portable or modular classrooms. If we determinethat we must add space, we recommend permanent construction on our newer buildings followed by redistricting, ratherthan adding to older buildings or using portables and modulars. We have drawings for additions to Harrington, the new Hastings has room for expansion, and Estabrook has large core spaces that could accommodate more classrooms. We believethat we should maximize our existing school sites before building new schools on new sites, assuming larger schools are determined to be educationally -sound. If our newer buildings are maxed out and we still need more space, we should rebuild Bridge and Bowman as 30 -section schools, i f we determine that larger schools have been educationally sound at Hastings and Estabrook. )IN „,I,,I0m 0 < dknd„ VI 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch r:}(,),::'(,) � I.n c I exington IPii,blliic Schools Ileaster IPllan I Appendx Strateg'�es March 2020 i'l, 10'r '0" "'d H'd,r I' 'I'" il '11, " Id 1 11 10'r "I I "l "i i'l, ,I -I i i'IM i'l, d 'I , I "d, 'A i'l, (dU 10 1111' -T, I l 'm I d, 'I 10'1"I "11, d I ww i le I 11) Id I ld'lddio i'll Y 10'r i''I'd0) ,'I wid - d' :'d 1 n,. , , I _'I''Id I 'I I l 0 I, id'd I ti, "'ort.. Though we do not expect an Avalon -like development in the next 1 0,11111 '10 'VId '� ')" 0' " I', d", 0 i'll "MI , 1)) d I Id ten years, it is essential to maintain communication with the 'I i'll '11) 'Id, , -1 1 (,l , "o", 'i Planning Board on ANY new development. With full schools, even the addition of small number of students could cause We recommend that LPS keep the Laconia parcel in case it is certain classrooms to become overcrowded. needed in the future. It is not an ideal site, dueto access challenges and topography, but it is not impossible to build a school there or use part of land swap. We recommend thatthe Superintendent be notified bythe Town Manager, the Planning Board, or others of any large parcels (81 acres) that may be available for purchase. Town staff should pay special attention to any parcels that adjoin town -owned property. Other We believe any future school buildings should be bulltto at least three stories. Because our school sites are tight, taller buildings require a smaller footprint and, therefore, leave more room for expansion if necessary. Taller buildings are also more en v! ro n mentally fruendly, reducing impermeable suraces and 1 n crea sl ng green space. c I exington IPii,blliic Schools Ileaster IPllan I Appendx Strateg'�es March 2020 2018-19 Master Planning Committees Middle school p lump VII I I Null ui I IV a lip Ilillllllllli M,N,�� C'arko (10.5 Teams) Iffuture enrollment is significantly lower than Continue to utilize flexible assignment. if possible, If enrollment is only higher temporarily,then Increasing out -of -district special education Mortar expected, available extra space atthe middle rather than assigning on a rolling basis, utilizing flexible assignments and Increasing team placements due to ellminationof in -district special schools could be considered asmeans of nrollments 4th/5th-8th grade until size would be recommended. education programsls not recommended. alleviatingovercrowding at either high school or cutoff date and/or critical mass before making elementary school levels. assignment decisions would allow for more If enrollment beyond projections is temporary, • Need programsto meet obligations to uu uu 1ppul uu Er hd(11Teams) mitigation of bu,sing costs. larger class sizes could be considered. Fiscally more prudent to bring on additional space than to pay costs for out Increasing team size would be recommended prior Your Task: IASL of 5tlfale 'Ies Gi Review draft ............................................... �i Rule out any strategies that should NOT be considered • Place the remaining strategies in the grid below • Add in any strategies you believe are missing and should be considered Later on,,, j.J We will layer on more specific criteria/conditions that would prompt the use of each strategy Non -Brick& Iffuture enrollment is significantly lower than Continue to utilize flexible assignment. if possible, If enrollment is only higher temporarily,then Increasing out -of -district special education Mortar expected, available extra space atthe middle rather than assigning on a rolling basis, utilizing flexible assignments and Increasing team placements due to ellminationof in -district special schools could be considered asmeans of nrollments 4th/5th-8th grade until size would be recommended. education programsls not recommended. alleviatingovercrowding at either high school or cutoff date and/or critical mass before making elementary school levels. assignment decisions would allow for more If enrollment beyond projections is temporary, • Need programsto meet obligations to nformed decision making and allow for some then addl ng licensed co -teachers for classes with students In least restrictive environment. mitigation of bu,sing costs. larger class sizes could be considered. Fiscally more prudent to bring on additional space than to pay costs for out Increasing team size would be recommended prior of district placements. toconsidering other options. • Eliminating Middle School program mplles ell mination of corresponding High Samples of Current Team Sizes and Corresponding School program, Increasingthe number Class Sizes: of years faml Iles may seek out of district • Team Size 9l: Class size range 22-23(avg placement and l ncreas ing costs to the 22.75) dl stri ct. • Team Size 86: Class size range 19-24 (avg 21.5) Grade reconfiguration with a move of 8th grade to • Team size 86: Class size range 16-26* (avg HS level (when new high school Is available) Is not 20.2) ended. LHS Is already one of the largest In • Team Size 90: Class size range 19-24 (avg the state. 22.5) Grade reconfiguration - moving single grade (6th, *Larger class sizes are typically seen In the honors or 8th grade to new location (e.g. Old asses. Harrington). This option Is not recommended due to cost of bussing to a single location for an entire 2028-2029 Enrollment Is projected to be 1895 f grade, and SPED Implications of having to 125 for a total of 2020 students, which would be duplicate all In -district programs at a single increasean of 187 students over current location. 01 82 0 19 middle school enrollment. If projected 20 1 ment Increase was evenly distributed across both middle schools, all grades, and all teams, this would mean a maximum projected Increase of 8.7 students/team based on current number of teams (21.5). Given the current team and class sizes, increa sing team sizes would be a commended strategy. Contractual and/or school committee Implications regarding Increase Io team/class size? uuu I....ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Appendix Strategies March 2020 � I.3 Temporary If enroll ment is lower than expected, there wi II If enrollment is on the high end of the Portables or mod ula rs should be considered as Construction not be a need to utilizetemporary construction, projections, portables could be considered. possibility, though site constraints might make renovations, mining to address middle Should this option be utilized, careshould be brick and mortar expansion more feasible if Renovations, school enroll ment. However, these sol utions taken to ensurethat placementof portables will enroII mentgrowth is projected to be sustained in & may want to be considered if the middle not interfere with future brick and mortar the longterm. Space Mining schools, particularly Diamond, areto be used to expansions iffuture enrollment needs require with the following additional considerations: alleviate space concerns atthe elementary and additional space. high school levels. 1) Should permanent construction options Permanent Ifenrollment is lowerthan expected, there will If future enrollment is in line with projections, Iffuture enrollment is higherthan expected and Use of Laconia as part of land swap to create new Construction not be a need to utilize permanent construction permanent constructio n will not be needed to projected to be sustained over the long term, space for third middle school of equal or smaller to address middle school enrollment. However, address middle school enrollment. permanent construction options should be utilized size. Do not foresee enough enrollment growth at will have ao Impact on scheduling, shared thesesolutions may wantto be considered ifthe at Diamond. MS level, even if higher than expected, to warrant middle schools, particularly Diamond, are to be project. used to alleviate space concerns at the • Preferred potential Identified elementary and high school levels. onstruction option would be to close off Use of Old Harrington (current central office) for the "H`, which would allow for the third middle school of equal or smaller size. Do designedto accommodate enrollment addition of 2 full teams of 3 general not foresee enough enrollment growth at MS education classrooms, plus 2 related arts level, even if higher than expected, to warrant spaces. This would add atotal additional project. 2) Additional staff exacerbates existing capacity of approximately 172 students (86 per team). —if enrollment projections begin to approach parking shortage. Overflow parking for 2200 that stretches the existing recommended • However,the current cafeteria can only strategies to their limit and requires mod ate an ad difonal 200 students consideration of a third middle school. fire station?) with shuttle service; This beyond current enrollment. Iffuture enrolment is high enough to trigger uc uuu 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 7-I.4 sing the "H;' we would need to consexpansion ofthe current cafeteria and potentially other shared spaces such asthe gym. There Is a potential land parcel adjace of to Clarke that should be carefully considered as a site of additional permanent construction. Other Any brick and mortar strategy thataddresses significant growth at the middle schools comes with the following additional considerations: 1) Should permanent construction options at Diamond and/or Clarke be utilized, this will have ao Impact on scheduling, shared spaces such as cafeteria, gym and athletic fields. Current shared spaces are not designedto accommodate enrollment beyond the upper bound projections. 2) Additional staff exacerbates existing parking shortage. Overflow parking for Diamond at offsite locations (temporary fire station?) with shuttle service; This ould allow for expansion at Diamond property. Consider Buying properties near existing schools so as to have space to grow. • Potential properties on Burlington St that may allow for additional parking. • Property adjacent to Clarke for additional building construction. Rent parking at properties adjacent to Diamond. uc uuu 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 7-I.4 2018-19 Master Plannine Committees Middle school �uml! V 19II 1Vul I IVV uu II IV a III pCl arke (10.5 Teams) Continue to utilize7assig—entsignment. if possible, SEES If enrollment is only higher temporarily,thenIncreasing out -of -district special educationMortar I rather than assignilling basis,holding utilizing flexible assignments and Increasing team II could be considered asa means of nrollme-8th grade untila ze would be recommended. education programsls not recommended.alleviating overcrowding ateither high school cutoffdate and/orss before makingrelementary I I I I Diamond (11 Teams) "'r �V�, anr.� rV?r- Total: 21.5 Teams (Avg 86Stndent,) then adding licensed co -teachers for classes with students' n least restrictve environment. ®®®®®®®®®® Your Task: usl: of sl:rate 1es Gi Reviewdraft............................................... �i Rule out any strategies that should NOT be considered • Place the remaining strategies in the grid below • Add in any strategies you believe are missing and should be considered Later on,,, j.J We will layer on more specific criteria/conditions that would prompt the use of each strategy Non -Brick Iffuture enrollment is significantly lowerthan Continue to utilize7assig—entsignment. if possible, SEES If enrollment is only higher temporarily,thenIncreasing out -of -district special educationMortar expected, available extra space atthe middle rather than assignilling basis,holding utilizing flexible assignments and Increasing team placements due to elimination ofln-district specialschools could be considered asa means of nrollme-8th grade untila ze would be recommended. education programsls not recommended.alleviating overcrowding ateither high school cutoffdate and/orss before makingrelementary school levels. assignment decisiollow for mo re Ifenrollment beyond projections is temporary, • Need programs to meet obligations too1J "'r �V�, anr.� rV?r- Informed decision d allow for some then adding licensed co -teachers for classes with students' n least restrictve environment. I' V I , Y , n�str 1 , 110", i , ,th mitigation of busing costs. larger class sizes could be considered. Fiscally more prudentto bring on Y' , ' i , '10, do),i io i'l, 1, dd ry additional space thanto pay costs for out i'll id', Fd io,r III ,I Increasingteamsizewould be recommended prior of district placements. +e} r r,r.�ai r I� �,�arVe toons Bering other options. • Eliminating Middle School program y y n ,r�np }r, yie Implies elimination of corresponding High dd. .. by Samples of Current Team Sizes and Corresponding rea School program,' nc si ng the nu m her n w11 V io i,I II I Ip , l Y Class Sizes: of years fam' I'es may see k out of district . � 1 "i' V „ u�t I „'101 rc, l:r ref • Team Size 91. Class size range 22-23 (avg placement and increasing costs to the t_.. 22.75) district. • Team Size 86: Class size range 19-24 (avg 21.5) Grade reconfiguration with a move of 8th grade to • Team size 86: Class size range 16-26* (avg HS level (when new high school Is available) Is not 20.2) ended. LHS Is already one of the largest In • Team Size 90: Class size range 19-24 (avg the state. 22.5) 91A \""lnut r SII vt 18 mr„iryr *Larger class sizes are typically seen in the honors Il �IY �/Y a �Y nio rt int asses. t �r tutn i? 2028-2029 Enrollment Is projected to be 1895 f Grade reconfiguration - moving single grade (6th, 125 for a total of 2020 students, which would be or 8th grade to new location (e.g. Old increasean of 187 students over current Harrington). This option Is not recommended due 20 1 01 82 0 19 middle school enrollment. If projected to cost of bussing to a single location for an entire ment Increase was evenly distributed across grade, and SPED Implications of having to both middle schools, all grades, and all teams, duplicate all In -district programs at a single this would mean a maximum projected Increase of location. 8.7 students/team based on current number of teams (21.5). Given the current team and class sizes, increa sing tea m sizes would be commended strategy. DIN kr, , ,r.., ! for .ref r... Stu Jenls 1) n .. I l W," _ n', vu/1r i46 I....ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Appendix.......Strategies March 2020 �...I.� Permanent Construction Ifenrollment', lowerthan expected,there If future enrollment is in line with projections, siudei'i is �,rl;�y Yr 1 i r rrriillJ permanent construction willnot be neededto onstruction to address m cd le school address middle school enroll ment. enrollment. However, these solutions may .0 tY ,fu it , I�^rrl'Y � rt�Ue wa ntto be considered if the m cd le schools, I)IIIr a, w,0 mHw dy H1-,k,4k "u, u; -H" particu[arlyDia mend,aretobeused to II, fl.v r �i Ifl Yea � 1 ('tr I ggi3 dlw �,Hn,„.nHlpn k+�8 �rx"ub rHwkw+www and high school levels.��u d n w H,a�E' qHw o�uHl+kh:Hwmctry add itoft full teams of3 general d H4eeHJI4 mo -.n tlryaueaf pie;, i'Yn , ddr, r i i,M thr r,I,,. Hvewa,,w a u daHH'd w e k w nary a r a.o,i I I . rsal, WI "I ,, uHtl—c-+,(wk w wt*e ^�+w� a utwooH.mo@ C� I r ;n 110 i� r .els (86 perteam). —If enrollment projections beginto approach Contractual and/or school committee Implications • However,the current cafeteria can only strategies to their limit and requires mod ate an additional 200 students nsideration of a third middle school, regarding Increase Inteam/class size? r , � DIA \1 F �.., rt tr enrollme ofis hlghenoughto trigger IF. v v rva �, v tin fi fJl ),v, irifJ closing the "H we wou Id need to UIII II .,u I -„ consider expansion ofthe current TemporaryIfenrollment is lowerthan expected, there If enrollment is on the high end ofthe Portables or modulars should be considered as Construction, will not be a need to utilize temporary projections, portables could be considered. possibility, though site constraints might make Renovations,& onstruction,renovations,&space miningto Should this option be uti Hzed, ca re sheu Id be brick and mortar expansion more feasible if Space Mining address midd leschoolenrollmentHowever, taken to ensure that placement of po rip bles will enrollment growth is projectedto besustained in these solutions maywantto beconsidered if not interfere with future brick and mortar the long term. the middle schools, particularly Diamond, are expansions iffuture enrollment needs require to be used to alleviate space concerns atthe additional space ISI I'll 10" ar I"i Y t<<<,nstr, nts. elementary and high school levels. I,I �"1', ' n, r �thtrr: ,Y�. ,'d "i'l, io ,i, r Y, nts. I, and 0,I , f. I'll,I h, I, �V �, f I ,I r, " +IdV '10 1, '", ,1 "'aI ,t), r hhirrn io I)h rV '� wI Ir,r I r^.n thr r,lnrirrIr I t 0 Y r<,<l , Y-arca.ridlptrt) Y r I ) s b, , ,ti', h1' r, I' rV ;.r hwr i n.a,rid ),1') Y'1, rirr)i s a)'rI:n rIV rnt D r, rr1" I'll ,ire. r,.I, a rLla a1 ruull a -iI.. r I' rY r, Insl I, Y . rnt i, V r „ e. V OT' Permanent Construction Ifenrollment', lowerthan expected,there If future enrollment is in line with projections, will not be a needto utilize permanent permanent construction willnot be neededto onstruction to address m cd le school address middle school enroll ment. enrollment. However, these solutions may MS level, even if higherthan expected, to warrant wa ntto be considered if the m cd le schools, I)IIIr a, w,0 mHw dy H1-,k,4k "u, u; -H" particu[arlyDia mend,aretobeused to II, alleviate space concerns at the elementary dlw �,Hn,„.nHlpn k+�8 �rx"ub rHwkw+www and high school levels.��u d n w H,a�E' qHw o�uHl+kh:Hwmctry add itoft full teams of3 general d H4eeHJI4 mo -.n tlryaueaf pie;, i'Yn , ddr, r i i,M thr r,I,,. Hvewa,,w a u daHH'd w e k w nary a r a.o,i I I . rsal, WI "I ,, uHtl—c-+,(wk w wt*e ^�+w� a utwooH.mo@ rrV r, I'11 �, iI Ili, Ii i,IM h r O"uu oa*HH o+.u,ymr WI r rir, r at WI I I„ •rV I YI r.n1 , "d Iffuture enrollment Is hlgherthan expected and Use of Laconia as part of land swap to create new projected to be sustained over the long term, space for third middle school of equal or smaller per construction options should be utilized size. Do not foresee enough enrollment growth at at Diamond. MS level, even if higherthan expected, to warrant project. • Preferred potential Identified construction option would be to close off Use of Old Harrington (current central office) for the "W', which would allow for the third midd le school ofequal or smaller sze.Do add itoft full teams of3 general not foresee enough enrollment growth at MS education classrooms, plus 2 related arts level, even if h'gherthan expected, to warrant spaces This would add atotal additional project. capacity of approximately 172 students (86 perteam). —If enrollment projections beginto approach 2200 that stretches the existing recommended • However,the current cafeteria can only strategies to their limit and requires mod ate an additional 200 students nsideration of a third middle school, beyond current enrollment. iffuture r , � DIA \1 F �.., rt tr enrollme ofis hlghenoughto trigger IF. v v rva �, v tin fi fJl ),v, irifJ closing the "H we wou Id need to I.� consider expansion ofthe current cafeteria and potentially other shared spaces such asthe gym. I]I'I iMewma ^�, Frvaw hrMw �^�m�w3�mnw^^9rs v.rvb rvireo°µH x 7 a� h,+ TM -0 M f i II ori t. I 1=.na;:c prt 1 (J ;lYul It hee Hrllb Inge rtlr eth I rfl Gu41 �� ChIG �rAAi�:inn. I ULt rd: I rltlea U;"nr lu 'L san There Is apotential land parcel adjace of to Clarke that should be carefully considered as a site of additional permanent construction. uuw 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 7-I. uc uum 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 7.2 Other Any brick and mortar strategy that addresses significant growth at the middle schools comes with the following additional considerations: 1) Should permanent construction options at Diamond and/or Clarke be utillred, this will have an Impact on scheduling, shared spaces such as cafeteria, gym and athletic fields. Current shared spaces are not designed to accommodate enrollment beyond the upper bound projections. 2) Additional staff exacerbates existing parking shortage. Overflow parking for Diamond at offsite locations (temporary fire station?) with shuttle service; This would allow for expansion at Diamond property. Consider Buying properties near existing schools so as to have space to grow. • Potential properties on Burlington St that may allow for additional parking. • Property adjacent to Clarke for additional building construction. Rent parking at properties adjacent to Diamond. uc uum 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 7.2 LEXINGTON ;, it ',(,H00J ", 2018-19 Master Plannine Committees Hieh school 2,250 2,263 2341 I 2362 I 2461 2521 I 2536 2614 I 2614 I 2116 2531 I 2513 ±20 ±20 ±25 ±25 ±30 ±30 ±30 ±35 ±35 ±40 Your Task: -,, ,,, ,; ,,,,,,,,,,, P ,,,,,,,' ,,,,,,,z,,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. draft. I u sl of sl:ra tef; ii „s.f o im J a n -.1a. y GI See NI ..Ira;,,, f3r..., NIF (:: F rerelnteatiir}In an,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, • Rule out any strategies that should NOT be considered • Place the remaining strategies in the grid below • Add in any strategies you believe are missing and should be considered Later on,,, U We will layer on more specific criteria/conditions that would prompt the use of each strategy MENEM Note Will be at or above building capacity of 2250 or up to 2450 Will be over building capacity by 10%-20% - enrollment of 2450-2650 Will be over building capacity by more than 20%- enrollment over 2650 sisal= These are possibilities that should remain on the table ble. These shou7drivees�ffarttmLlSr.! 1!recruitment Non -Br • • Relocate specific departments • Increase class sizes at • Utilize available commercial • Encoivate ick & and/or services housed at LHS Lexington High School by 1 spaces in Lexington and high s Mortar to central office or other additional student per class. neighboring towns for 1-5 S. locations. (specifically IT) (K) (A) years until our enrollment Require minimum number of • Expand dual enrollment • Consider alternative bubble dissipates or use as admissions offers from each program/partnership (M) by locations for sub -separate swing space? (move specific school for that privilege. include Minuteman Tech. programs such as ILP3 (J) programs, alternative school) Similar "recruitment” effort for • Expand Open Campus to • Work with neighboring towns to (L) Minuteman Tech? (N) include Sophomores (W) utilize extra capacity in their • Consider temporarily relocating • Require Minuteman Tech to • Change schedule in 3-5 years schools. (P) the LABBB Collaborative to 'host' some of our students. (0) to allow for more than 3 • Schedule adjustments one ofthe other partner • Withdraw from LABBB lunches (X) Q Add an extra block in districts. (0) agreement and no longer be a • Creative Scheduling for LHS day- a late • Consider LABBB relocation member of the Lexington, Physics classes (Z) release and an extra within the Town of Lexington Arlington, Bedford, Belmont, free block during the and determine what specific Burlington). (S) day for students (T) locations are available.(R) • Increase SPED Double sessions per • Reduce one grade's worth of outplacements day, or stagger school students at LHS per day of start times so that the the school year by utilizing entire LHS population the summer. (V) is at the school for the minimum amount of overlap. (U) Tempo • • Plan for occupancy of • • Explore spa—mining options rary portable additions for LHS with LHS spaces that are more Const r by the 22-23 school year (C) generous than the MSBA ucti on, ? Pursue LABBB guidelines to determine Renov Collaboration whether they can be ati ons, cost -share option repurposed. (I) & ? Portables meet both ? Field house not Space capacity and recommended Mining programming needs and provide flexibility • Space mining(As per recommendations from the LHS Strategies presentation) Engage in more spac—ning activities to determine if it is I....ex rlgton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipeiijidx...... hir teg°es March 2020 �...I.£� uc 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 � I. possible to repurpose any ofthe athletics space for classes temporarily. (D) Space Mine for officelmeeting spaces (E) Reconfigure current planning spaces for efficiency (F) Space mining for general classrooms (G) • Provide additional cafeteria space (Y) • Consider range of temporary structures from tent through construction -style mobile options Perma • Expand and renovate • Expand and renovate • Expand and renovate • Build second high school on a • Include more modular nent existing high school existing high school existing high school different site that will hold the additions for LHS and/or Constr buildings. (AA) buildings. (AA) buildings. (AA) same number of students as consider putting them on uction • Fully replace existing facility • Fully replace existing facility • Fully replace existing facility LHS (e.g. similar to the Newton another site, such as Laconia. • Buy buildings/properties near • Buy buildings/properties near • Buy buildings/properties near North and Newton South (B) existing schools to ensure existing schools to ensure existing schools to ensure concept). (BB) • Build Modulars (H) there is space to grow. there is space to grow there is space to grow. • Build a second, smaller high Consider moving specialized Consider moving specialized Consider moving specialized school on a second site. programs into a building near programs into a building near programs into a building near Consider a house approach or the high school. (DD) the high school. (DD) the high school. (DD) a specialized focus, such as • Explore the possibility of the Arts or a co-op model or acquiring land by eminent PBL school. (CC) domain. Identify possible land • Grade reconfiguration - acquisitions and determine expand facilities to allow how they can be used and for movement of grades what purpose (EE) between facilities (FF) • Explore multi -site solutions m Permanently cap part of the including those listed in the quad for cafeteria use if next column (BB, CC) more economic than temporary options. Cap courtyard next to freshmen mods for student lunches. (Y) Other • Conduct an annual review of the school master plan Building performance and outcomes uc 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 � I. ([Vext 12 months] • Establishing a working group on health and high performance building outcomes • Complete baseline health/building performance assessment. • Establish ongoing monitoring of health and building performance - semi-annual report to School Committee • Investigate high health, net zero, all electric resilient buildingdesign for new facilities and present to the Select Board and School Committee uc 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx Strateg'�esMarch 2020 � I. II IIIq"rII I :rII IID IIB III III,,,,,, II1n III IIIA [[IES 11 IIS IIS II n IIIA "r "VIII IIIA ipai„,,,, III SII( BOARD OF SELECTMEN & SCHOOL COMMITTEE POLICY INTEGRATED BUILDING DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION POLICY Date Approved by BOS: October 7, 2019 Signature of Chair: Vmg&d, W.Craw-a Date Approved by SC: October 7, 2019 Signature of Chair: E s,�” Supersedes: BOS Sustainable Design Policy, September 19, 2005 I. Purpose of Policy 1. To maximize the health and well-being of building occupants and the public at large. 2. To ensure the Town will design and construct its buildings to meet programmatic requirements while enabling operations to achieve the highest reasonably attainable and economically viable performance standards for health, energy and resilience. 3. To guide the overall project delivery of a Town facility from a scope, schedule and cost standpoint while maximizing sustainability objectives. 4. To evaluate and select optimal designs which (1) address the building's intended programmed use and which (2) minimize and mitigate the negative impacts of development, construction and building operations on the natural environment. 5. To maximize onsite renewable energy production given each building's respective site and site use, while minimizing energy use and operational costs of Town buildings. 6. To provide resilient and maintainable buildings. II. Responsibility The Board of Selectmen (BOS) and School Committee (SC) are responsible for adopting this policy and goals for school buildings. The Board of Selectmen is responsible for adopting this policy and goals for all other Town buildings. The term "Elected Boards" is used to identify these two bodies throughout this policy and goals. The Town Manager, Superintendent of Schools, Director of Public Facilities and Permanent Building Committee (PBC) shall be responsible for the adherence to this Policy and the Town Manager is authorized to adopt additional guidelines, objectives and supplemental materials to effectuate this policy and goals. The project "stakeholder" group referred to in this policy and goals shall be determined by the Town Manager and Superintendent of Schools, when appropriate, in consultation with the Elected Boards, but should include but not be limited to, representatives of the Department of Public Facilities, Permanent Building Committee, the building occupants, Sustainable Lexington Committee and an invitation for a liaison from the Capital Expenditures Committee. III. Scope 1. This policy and attached goals apply to all Town funded building projects. 2. To the extent possible, all renovation and new projects, undertaken by the Town should achieve, the attached "LEED Lexington" Integrated Building Design and Construction Goals Checklist and strive iiZ�il o to achieve the LEED Silver standards, at a minimum. The application for LEEDTM certification is a,,,,,, optional, subject to available funding and the discretion of the Elected Boards prior to schematic " 1....exiiirigtoiri Il'�ii..rblliic clrioolls Il aster Il'�ll airs Igaes id Iloitaa unrated II':)es�gi II': oll'�cy March 2020 7.30 Integrated Building Design Policy Revised through 10-7-19 designs. The Elected Boards may choose to exempt certain building projects under their respective purview from these standards. IV. Policy The Department of Public Facilities and Elected Boards will strive to achieve the highest reasonably attainable and economically viable performance standards for health, energy, and resilience for Town building projects in accordance with the policy of the Elected Boards as follows: 1. Prior to initiating building design activities or selection of the design team, the project stakeholders shall establish specific targets for the project that consider each of the Integrated Building Design and Construction Goals Checklist as defined in Attachment A. The targets for School Department Buildings shall be approved by the School Committee and the Board of Selectmen. The targets for all other Town buildings shall be approved by the Board of Selectmen. 2. Design teams selected for all facility projects that are subject to this policy shall at a minimum include LEEDTM accredited professionals with demonstrated experience in designing buildings that would meet the requirements of this policy and goals. 3. Prior to design, the project stakeholder group will make a recommendation to the Elected Boards whether to pursue the optional application for formal LEEDTM Silver certification. 4. The Integrated Building Design and Construction Goals Checklist shall be monitored by the Department of Public Facilities and the Permanent Building Committee throughout the project to ensure that requirements of this policy and the agreed upon, attainable goals are met. 5. At the end of every project phase (feasibility, schematic design, design development, construction documents and construction), the project design team will prepare an end of Project Phase Report that addresses the design's adherence to or departure from approved scope, cost, schedule and the Integrated Building Construction Goals Checklist as attached. Project success requires that the design approval at the end of the schematic phase and design development phase meet the approved scope, cost and schedule requirements. The Director of Public Facilities will submit these reports to the Elected Board(s). It is recommended that Elected Board liaisons give regular updates to their respective Boards outside of the project phase reporting. 6. The Town shall implement a post occupancy commissioning process when roughly 20% of the one year warranty period remains. 7. Projects must commence with and maintain sufficient overall project budget and schedule. V. Policy Revisions and Updates 1. No changes to this policy and goals or appendix may be made without the formal approval of both Elected Boards. 2. This policy and Integrated Building Design and Construction Goals Checklist as defined in Attachment A, shall be reviewed and updated by a Committee jointly appointed by the Elected Boards every three years or sooner as required to reflect current, best practices and performance standards for health, energy, and resilience and any updates to applicable codes and reference materials.' This policy is to meet the goals set out in Article 33 of 2013. c 1....exiiirigtoirt Il'�ii..rblliic clrtoolls Il laster Il'�ll airs I Appen6x Iloitegii,ated II':)es'tlgi II''° oll'�cy March 2020 7-31 Attachment A Integrated Building Design and Construction Goals Checklist X I exiiirig��oiriIl�ii,,rblliicSclrioollsIlMasterIl�llairi I AppendIIoitegii,ated II�)estlgoiII'': II'�cy March 2020 7-32 r. I_= c w o O) U C Q � N m � c0 O co H C N O �j yp ca N 0) C i X (D0 J O •O N .G O ca a O ,G O UU i Q N N O O C j CL O U CL G � O N o •� Z N O:3U N U d) a� Q) o � o co s o O a Q) CO am N N - N c o a W N J U .G N N :03 a ca Q) (CO L O O N U a m _O i c6 U c N N a) o D 0) C.) o m m N N MQ N a� .r-7) a) Q) o c ai 0 � � o C U J ~ � Q) w O O U o W C O .lc� rn c � •rn c 0 LL O N > ID c � w O c c ~ V O Ey 'Q c C E OUJ (6 - - in C Im C O p C a- W W O rn c a N L d d w w rn Im CL 0 O c a)i w E � y a a o6 w o w r C ` y •- fn in O O N O L 0 C y W da In = O d Q- 16 7 O N a2 C W d in C U E O- ow W 0)2Lw) cd C i c O C 7 LL3 Z aca W CCa o V C 7 = 3 o 0 �- W r V C 0 O a Oa V d LL C�C -o_ W .` C > V CO 0 > LL w i a C N V O C O LL ` O O d 0 _ w � Y y Q , W y d c - a 3c in UIL 0Q > J J J J J N U c N .N (D E c 0 w E E O zk C N m ❑ W W � J OI O v v ❑ ❑q 9 W W X J J J - N M m y w d E E U 0 0 J E 0 O m d E CLd V y O -T' C j* w co V �m m xw W C uw O O z m d O U y � Z o Q d N WU C W d .- Cl. o W O 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..�bllii clriooll s II a tear Il'�ll airs I Appendx IIoitegiim ted II)estlgoi II''° oall c O 0 d N C Q 4 C V �m m Q uw 4 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbllii clriooll s II a tear II' Ilairi I Appendx IIoit a um t II':)es�goi II''° oll'�cy March 2020 7..34 rrr rrrrrrrr rrrr rw O Q O Oo Q Q N N 0 0 Q Q 0 0 Q Q 0 0 Q Q 0 0 Q Q N N O N Q O O Q Q O Q N N N -rrr N -rrr -rrr -rrr 41J 711-rrr 41J 4IJ O L 41J 9J N Q m m N N °� °� °� °� °� °� °� °� m m N N m N °� °� °� °� N N N N IJ 4 4 IJ 4 IJ 4 IJ 4 W IJ 4 IJ W °� 4 U 4 'IA pu > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W c U OO O >. W Q N > Q C Q of w X E m C UJ C N m N UJ UJ O E C � 0 N O N N m N O ` Q p m— _ a 3 N N C jp C m N C C O f0 () .� 21 O 6 E X N O VO C O U UJ C C C O N O V UJ C N C �p>. E >. m c O C N N C m C UJ C N N O E N E> m O O N 'O E O O J 'o m= E c Lu U .r, m n V- N O E O O C O C m C .0 m lm O N E O N V d >. O p N m 0 O 2 E w O w C= UJ V V .O V .O UwJ 'C O N E w C Q % C E o C C p- ^ d E` N 'O ON d -O C C L C N C O N— C N O. O UJ O C O__ N N UJ p C = m (0 O w p C O O N O Q O O O Wo d Q '� d w E E p C 'o N d' d' N N d' «� N E N m N N m N 'O 'O d VI N O UJ d Q T O L m E UJ m V U c m N m d' C V m UJ m UJ > E O c` E N O O T m p).0 N� T m p m rn c O m rn N m d VI O `m` o m e N O N C N E QN Cp m m d W O N O N m .0 U W N N E w wo O z C C m o. C C O a c w p c W N w ur >. O m N fl- o o m N p d L C O N UJ p 'O= O f0 d> 8 (0 N N d O N YO d C C> W N YO U C "O W W V "O V d E N m N N N N 3 C N N W m E °� °� > w o. m O o w UJ m J m , > m d E m C O O m m U .- N O m 3^ N N C C O m— U O N i .o m C C d c .- N C O d O f0 V >. C 'O N N il) p` C> Q N N C N .0 m N L N C O 'O 00 'O C O 'O 'O m O O 'O N Q O 'O C .C_ 'O C C C 'O L .O .O E O N Z w C L f0 ❑ i p C W W lE 'O E p N ; .0 C p) L_ .N L_ C C L N N N O C O m�C� N °=U O C W .� �_ cncn0o=Jcn Q N N m !� C O �m0 >> O �U� > E W >> �m C Q Q W WOO d C O�"� N C Q m� d N L w d ��° 3 — 3 C W CD > W¢ m y y Q co J r m J J d a N N N N N w w w w w w w G ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a s to w w w w w W R w w w w w w w 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 o T o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W W W W W N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W R '� W W W W W W W W W W W W W W c W W W W W W W W w w W W w W w W w W w W X W W W W W X W X W J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J of of of of of of of of of ''..O C III III O I G t I H+i lill"A 11 O } } O } } } O } } } } Q 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbllii clriooll s II a tear II' Ilairi I Appendx IIoit a um t II':)es�goi II''° oll'�cy March 2020 7..34 Q Q 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I Appendx IIoit a um t II':)es�goi II''° oll'�cy March 2020 7..35 'p 'p O O O O O 'p 'p 'p 1"1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r O O O O O O O- _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > j > > > > > > W W W W W W W W W W W W W - W W W W W W O N C N L N O N E E O o E 00N N (0 Q N M N N >. O O E O- ❑ � N O C .� N L m .0 (0 O N w o. c C O C (per m O c O E'O L O O C EC O (0 d O W N 'O N .E O m O O O N m N "- O E m > O UJ V O_ O C N N N C '. d y >. .M E w I K N m Q L N E E E o � n o) m o E O E Y E m O U U U U (p UJ .�0 B in 7 N N ('J UJ O Z L N w w w w O E O 0 0 O O E �❑ N ❑ ❑❑❑ O. V Q O � N O Q � N d�� d U U U U Q O O ` O U N N 'o .�' 0. E ECN O O o m C=O NE C d d d d O SGJ E C c) im m m m m` R c C 0 .O ❑ E` Q (0 J L ). '.� L= O (0 UJ 'O 'O 'O 'O VI G E E S .0 .0 C lE (0 C 'O W N O E O N O m .� = N yl .O V .� N V .4 E E >❑ O O O O O y O d c -_ O> > >> O � E c L L d C c w N O C O O 'O L N >` O V X N- N> O O .- O C O W C W m m N m m N N fn U 0] 0] 0] 0] U W w W L 'o J U H-❑ ) C7 Q F_ w W U J i [w d' d' d' d' O O O G Nl O O O O O O O O O O R v ❑ v v ❑ ❑ v ❑ v v ❑ ❑ v ❑ O v v v O ❑ ❑ ❑ c o v v ❑ ❑ v v ❑ ❑ v v ❑ ❑ v v ❑ ❑ of > O v v ❑ ❑ O �� v v ❑ ❑ v v ❑ ❑ is w w w w w w w w w w w w w w 'O w w w Ell, w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w x w G O w w w w y ar w w w w w w w w r N N N N N N N N C) �- N �- N C) �- [ f0 N �- [ <t �- w of [Y [w [w [w o..c o a7 fl- O •�- V p_ O a7 � YO ET SII„�} . . } I O O Q Q 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbllii clriooll s Ilea stag Il'�ll airs I Appendx IIoit a um t II':)es�goi II''° oll'�cy March 2020 7..35 CAPITAII,,,,,, III III IIS I III II IIIA "r III,,,,,, III "r FY2021-2025 Capital Improvement Program Summary One -Time Capital Projects that Will be Subject to Rankine Department Project# Project Name FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Total hire 735 Ambulance Replacement $ 325,000 $ - $ - $ 325,000 $ - $ 650,000 Fire 1052 Replace 2004 Pumper $ $ $ 625,000 $ $ $ 625,000 Land Use 983 Parking Lot Consolidation and Repaving $ 105,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,605,000 Library 1051 Cary Library Children's Room Renovation Project $ - $ 5,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,000,000 Police 967 Police Outdoor/Indoor Firing Range - Hartwell Avenue $ 125,000 $ - $ 4,900,000 $ - $ - $ 5,025,000 Public Faedifres 306 Lexington Police Station Rebuild $ 25,651,792 $ $ $ $ $ 25,651,792 Publie Faedifres 1044 Lexington High School Feasibility $ 1,825,000 $ $ $ $ $ 1,825,000 Publie Faedifres 1050 LHS Science Classroom Space Mining $ 150,000 $ $ 200,000 $ $ $ 350,000 Publie Works 554 Street Acceptance $ $ $ $ $ $ Publie Works 881 Municipal Parking Lot improvements $ $ 40,000 $ 480,000 $ $ $ 520,000 Publie Works 915 Hartwell Avenue Compost Site Improvements $ $ 200,000 $ $ $ $ 200,000 Publie Works 922 Battle Green Streetscape Improvements $ $ 3,000,000 $ $ $ $ 3,000,000 Publie Works 940 iWestview Cemetery Building $ 2,800,000 $ $ $ $ $ 2,800,000 Publie Works 941 Public Parking Lot Improvement Program $ - $ 100,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ 1,100,000 Publie Works 1056 Public Grounds Irrigation Improvements $ $ $ $ 200,000 $ $ 200,000 Publie Works 1081 Staging for Special Events $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 Publie Works 1083 Bedford and Hartwell Ave Long Range Transportation improvements $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ 1,580,000 $ - $ 3,080,000 Publie Works 1086 New sidewalk installations $ 280,000 $ 650,000 $ 940,000 $ $ 3,250,000 $ 5,120,000 Publie Works 1090 Cemetery Projects $ - $ 413,250 $ - $ - $ - $ 413,250 Ree & Comm Programs 1048 1 Community Center Campus Expansion $ $ $ 250,000 $ 210,000 $ 22,550,000 $ 23,010,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1049 Pine Meadows Clubhouse Renovation $ 100,000 $ 750,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 850,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1082 Lincoln Park Field Improvements $ $ $ $ $ 1,200,000 $ 1,200,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1085 Center Recreation Complex Bathrooms & Maintenance Building Renovation $ 100,000 $ 750,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 850,000 Total, One -Time Capital Projects $ 33,036,792 $ 12,403,250 $ 7,595,000 $ 2,515,000 $ 27,000,000 $ 53,150,042 Project Requests for CPA Funding Department Project# Project Name FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Total Land Use 882 Parker Meadow Accessible Trail Construction $ $ $ $ $ $ Land Use 1062 Willard's Woods Site Improvements $ 597,114 $ $ $ $ $ 597,114 Land Use 1068 Daisy Wilson Meadow Restoration $ 22,425 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 22,425 Land Use 1069 West Farm Meadow Preservation $ $ 22,425 $ $ $ $ 22,425 Land Use 1089 Wright Farm Site Plan & Design $ 69,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 69,000 Publie Works 672 Battle Green Master Plan - Phase 3 $ 317,044 $ $ $ $ $ 317,044 Ree & Comm Programs 278 lAthletic Facility Lighting $ 450,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 450,000 Ree & Comm Programs 282 Park and Playground Improvements $ 95,000 $ 105,000 $ 70,000 $ 95,000 $ 755,000 $ 1,120,000 Ree & Comm Programs 518 Park Improvements - Athletic Fields $ 370,000 $ 128,750 $ 195,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ 893,750 Ree & Comm Programs 532 Park Improvements - Hard Court Resurfacing $ 100,000 $ $ 1,730,000 $ $ $ 1,830,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1013 Outdoor Plckleball Court Construction $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ 100,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1014 Cricket Field Construction $ $ $ $ 200,000 $ $ 200,000 Town Clerk 307 Archives & Records Management/Records Conservation & Preservation $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 100,000 Town Manager 1087 Restoration of Margaret Lady of Lexington Painting $ $ $ $ $ $ Total, CPA Projects $ 2,040,553 $ 276,175 $ 2,015,000 $ 615,000 $ 775,000 $ 5,721,755 Capital Pm -ram Requests Department Project# Project Name FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 Total IT 553 Phone Systems & Unified Communication $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 90,000 $ 80,000 $ 60,000 $ 480,000 IT 556 Network Core Equipment Replacement $ $ 80,000 $ 190,000 $ $ 260,000 $ 530,000 IT 708 Municipal Technology Improvement Program $ 100,000 $ 85,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 485,000 IT 855 Network Redundancy & Improvement Plan $ $ 330,000 $ 220,000 $ 110,000 $ 110,000 $ 770,000 17 1054 1 Application Implementation $ 425,000 $ 150,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000$ 75,000 $ 800,000 Land Use 981 Transportation Mitigation $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 500,000 Publie Faedifres 561 Townwide Roofing Program $ 2,010,152 $ 200,934 $ 5,626,693 $ 2,196,029 $ 2,480,159 $ 10,033,808 Publie Faedifres 562 School Building Envelopes and Associated Systems $ 239,285 $ 245,199 $ 251,400 $ 257,684 $ 264,127 $ 993,568 Publie Faedifres 647 Municipal Building Envelopes and Associated Systems $ 208,962 $ 214,186 $ 219,540 $ 225,030 $ 230,655 $ 888,174 Publie Faedifres 653 Building Flooring Program $125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 500,000 Publie Faedifres 698 School Paving and Sidewalk Program $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 500,000 Publie Facdifles 749 Public Facilities Bid Documents $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 400,000 Publie Faedifres 939 Public Facilities Mechanical/Electrical System Replacements $ 672,000 $ 728,000 $ 788,500 $ 850,000 $ 919,706 $ 3,038,500 Publie Works 520 Equipment Replacement $ 1,358,000 $ 1,320,000 $ 1,432,000 $ 1,220,000 $ 1,205,000 $ 6,535,000 Publie Works 522 Street Improvements $ 2,634,022 $ 2,651,674 $ 2,669,767 $ 2,688,312 $ $ 10,643,775 Publie Works 523 Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES compliance $ 385,000 $ 385,000 $ 385,000 $ 385,000 $ 385,000 $ 1,925,000 Publie Works 528 1 Hydrant Replacement Program $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 750,000 Public Works 557 Comprehensive Watershed Stormwatater Management Study and Implemention $ _ $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 1,560,000 Publie Works 644 Sidewalk Improvement $ 800,000 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 $ 4,000,000 Publie Works 683 Townwide Culvert Replacement $ - $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 390,000 $ 1,560,000 Publie Works 688 Townwide Signalization Improvements $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 50,000 $ 55,000 $ $ 355,000 Schools 945 LPS Technology Capital Request $ 1,599 246 $ 1 777 046 $ 1 335 186 $ 1 397 810 $ 1,297,846 $ 7,107,134 Total, Capital Program Requests $ 11,006,667 $ 10,572,039 $ 15,613,086 $ 11,819,865 $ 9,567,493 $ 54,354,959 Page 1 of 2 c 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,blic Schools Il Master IPlan I ppend Capp td Illi Prov ment IFlan March 2020 7-36 Page 2 of 2 10/21/2019 c 1....:exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..ibllii clriooll s Il ya tear Il'�ll airs I Appendx Cay a't II II''mrr aiiii,ove ea it II'''° Il of March 2020 7-3 Retained Earnines/Enterorise Fund Reauests Department Project# Project Name FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 'Total Pubhe Works 524 Sanitary Sewer System Investigation and Improvements $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 5,000,000 Publie Works 529 Pump Station Upgrades $ 602,000 $ 520,000 $ 50,000 $ $ $ 1,172,000 Publie Works 560 Water Distribution System Improvements $ 2,200,000 $ 2,200,000 $ 2,200,000 $ 2,530,000 $ 3,040,000 $ 12,170,000 Ree &Comm Programs 280 Pine Meadows Improvements $ $ $ 60,000 $ $ 100,000 $ 160,000 Ree & Comm Programs 519 Pine Meadows Equipment $ 80,000 $ - $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 50,000 $ 280,000 Ree & Comm Programs1066 Recreation Software Upgrade $ 50,000 $ $ $ $ $ 50,000 Ree & Comm Programs 1084 17hletic Fields Feasibility Study $ 100,000 $ $ $ $ $ 100,000 Total, Enterprise Fund Requests $ 4,032,000 $ 3,720,000 $ 3,355,000 $ 3,605,000 $ 4,190,000 $ 15,932,000 Page 2 of 2 10/21/2019 c 1....:exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..ibllii clriooll s Il ya tear Il'�ll airs I Appendx Cay a't II II''mrr aiiii,ove ea it II'''° Il of March 2020 7-3 IIMAs"rIEIR R11,,,,,,A11TITHING C01WIMIT"1 r E E I IID IE DIHINIISCO urn asrcIh...plit:ects ..ii.. r..)IIa.nir...perf Memorandum Date: 02 October 2018 To: Lexington Master Planning Committee (MPC) From: DiNisco Design, Inc. Subject: MPC October 12 Meeting Agenda A. MSBA / SOI for LHS. Provide examples of previous / other SOI's B. Enrollment Projections 1. Quick overview of past 10 years 2. Current trends based upon preliminary numbers / enrollment 3. Next steps / methodology C. Educational Program requirements relating to space needs D. Community involvement / outreach �Ixc 17541 LEX/ES Study / Memorandum / 18-10-02 10/12 Agenda DOINNA �: W SC'O I R11CHIARD RSCE I GARY AIINS� E 1 11 ENS µ- TI....�If P11 99 CHALINCx STREET F)UuriE 901 iBos�rOin MA 02H � 1 617 426 2858 1 D111MIscO.a;01v 1....exiington IPii,blliia Schools s (Master (Phan I Appen6x 1v111''IC Agendas March 2020 7.38 IIC;;;; III IIIA III „ CIlf;;;;• III ............... III IIIA archlite cts r)IIanineirs TO: Lexington Master Planning Committee DATE: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 TIME: 8:30 AM LOCATION: 201 Bedford Street, Training Room 1. Master Planning History 2. Existing Facilities Review - Site - Space / Program Review - Building Layout 3. Available Town -Owned Sites 4. Facilities Capacity Based Upon: - Class Size Policy - Program & Equity - District -Wide SPED Programs 5. Review of enrollment projections to existing capacity 6. Discussion on possible solutions for shortfall in capacity 17541 Memorandum/ 18-11-20 Agenda fi C IN IN A 1'.) II IN II S C 0 1 R 11 CII II A IR ID IR II C II::::I 1 GARY II IIS &I..... II IE 99 C11HAUINCY STREET SulITIIE 901 I osT011"1 ISA 02111 1 6117.426.2858 1 DIIINllSCO.Coll c 1....exiiirig�oiri Il'�ii..rbIliia Calrioolls Il aster II'Ilairi I Appendx I II''IC genda March 2020 7-39 I DIHINIISCO I" arc Htects r.flainneirs TO: Lexington Master Planning Committee DATE: Friday, December 14, 2018 TIME: 8:30 AM LOCATION: 201 Bedford Street, Training Room 1. Update Enrollment Projections 2. Capacity Strategies - Strategy I - Non -building alternatives - Strategy 2 - Expansion of existing facilities 3. Other Town -owned land �Ixc �D 0 IN IN A1'.) 1 IN I S C 0 1 RIIC�l I A R �D IR I C I GARY XIN&I AE I VIVIXIN II.....OW 99 C11HAUINCY STREET SUITIE 901 IBOST0111 IMA 02111 1 61 17.426.2858 1 11111NIISCO'Zoilm I exiiirig��oiriIl�ii,,rblliicSclrioollsMMasterIl�llairi I Appendx KFICAgendas March 2020 7-40 School Master Planning Advisory Committee January 04, 2019 8:3o a.m. —10:go a.m. Location: Department of Public Works - 201 Bedford Street - Lexington, MA Anticipated Outcomes: 1. Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity at LHS 2. A shared understanding of short-term space challenges at LHS and consideration of possible solutions and implications; Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) Review/Calibrate • Approval of the Minutes of December 14, 2018 • Quick review of secondary enrollment projections When enrollment outpaces capacity, which strategies should we consider? • Step 1: Review brainstorming options • Step 2: Justify their value; discuss pros and cons • Step 3: Add new ideas to the list • Step 4: Rank order individually • Step 5: Tally as a group III. Short -Term Space Needs at LHS • How we (temporarily) solved the science lab space crunch • What's on the horizon? What do increasing LHS enrollments mean for the Science Department and other disciplines? • What creative strategies do we need to explore to address increasing enrollment pressures? IV. Closing Thoughts/Next Steps Our Charge: The School Master Planning Advisory Committee (`Advisory Committee') is being established pursuant to School Committee Policy BDF. The School Committee has determined that developing a master plan for school capital projects is necessary and prudent as Lexington continues to experience enrollment growth at all grade levels. The Advisory Committee will develop and recommend a 5-10 year capital plan for school facilities, analyzing current facilities and enrollment forecasts, and developing conceptual plans and timelines for needed additional educational spaces. DiNisco Design will provide professional support for this effort pursuant to an existing contract. The work of the School Master Planning Advisory Committee will include, but not be limited to: (1) Assess current capacity findings and identify options to align future school capacities with enrollment projections and educational program requirements; (2) Develop recommendations for addressing capacity, including costs and timelines; and (3) Prepare a Final Report and Recommendations to the School Committee. 1....exiirta ton Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II','IC Agendas March 2020 7.41 TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, January 11, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM - 10:30 AM LOCATION: 201 Bedford Street, Lexington MA, Training Room Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) Anticipated Outcomes: Prioritize / Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity at LHS. Prior to the meeting, please review the attached, updated Strategies options and have an idea of prioritization, (including combination of ideas - e.g. spacing mining + modulars) 1. Updated LHS Space Summary based upon future enrollment of 2,640 compared to MSBA Space Guidelines 2. Discuss final "strategies" and rankings 3. Alan L. to provide a brief presentation of tax/financial impacts 4. LHS draft MSBA Statement of Interest 5. Closing Thoughts/Next Steps Enclosures: • January 4, 2019 meeting minutes • Updated Strategies list • Existing LHS floor and site plans • Summit II Debt Service Projections • Finance Capital Plan �Ixc 17541 Meeting Reports/Z9-OZ-ZZ Agenda 1....exiington Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7.4I. IIC;;;;YINISCOIlf;;;;• IIE;;;;;;;;;;;;;; III IIIA arcv,Ihlite.,cv is a pII nir eir TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, February 8, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM —10:30 AM LOCATION: Central Office Building, 146 Maple Street, Lexington MA, Upper-level conference room Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) Anticipated Outcomes: Prioritize / Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity at LHS. 1. LHS SOI update 2. Discuss LHS short-term "strategies" 3. Closing thoughts/next steps Enclosures: • January 11, 2019 meeting minutes c 17541 Meeting Reports/ 19-02-01 Agenda C.0 0 IN IN A ID II IN II S t": 0 1 IR II C II N A IR 1'.) IR I Cl IE I G A IIR Y A II IN S II..... II ICU I VII VII A IN II..... O 99 C11HAUINCY STREET SU.UII'TIE 901 BOST0114 ISA 02111 1 611TA26,, 858 1 DIIINII SQal:&X011M 1....exiington Pii,,blic Schools s Ilea ster IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7..43 Ilf;;;;D III VI II III „ IIC;;;•••;•, III ............... III � IIIA TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, March 8, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM —10:30 AM LOCATION: Lexington High School Library Media Center Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) Anticipated Outcomes: Prioritize / Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity at LHS. 1. Tour of Lexington High School 2. LHS short-term "strategies" presentation / discussion 3. LHS SOI update 4. Closing thoughts/next steps 17541 Meeting Reports/ 19-03-08 Agenda c I: 0INIIVIA I1'.)1IINIISC0 1 IICIIIIA RD IR I C I SA18 Y AIIIINSII.....IIIE I VIVIAIIN II.....OW 99 C11HAU1Nc'1t' STREET SUITIE 901 Ii GDs'T011^1 ISA 02111 1 6117.426.2858 1 DMI 11SC6&,,Z011V 1....exiiirtgton IPii,bIliia Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7..44 Ilf;;;;D III IIIA III „ IIC;;;•••;•, TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, March 8, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM —10:30 AM LOCATION: Lexington High School Library Media Center Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) Anticipated Outcomes: Prioritize / Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity at LHS. 1. Tour of Lexington High School 2. LHS short-term "strategies" presentation / discussion 3. LHS SOI update 4. Closing thoughts/next steps 17541 Meeting Reports/ 19-03-08 Agenda c D0IINIIVIA I1'.)IIIINIIS00 1 II CII IIA RID I.II4•®II::::: I G AIIRY AIIIINSII.....IIIE I VIIVIIAIIN II.....Ow 99 C11HAUIU' CY STREET SUITIE 901 IBos'T011^1 ISA 02111 1 6'1'x',4.26,2858 1 D111N11SC0,Z011V 1....exiiirtgUon IPii,bIliia Schools s Ilia ter IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7..45 IIC;;;;D III VI II III „ Ilf;;;•••;•, <aircWhitec is C:::allannc.,r. TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, April 12, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM -10:30 AM LOCATION: Central Office Building, 146 Maple Street, Lexington, MA Upper -Level Conference Room Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) 1. Next Steps a. Prioritize / Consensus on strategies to employ when enrollment outpaces capacity for short-term growth and long-term growth (i.e. Soft Solutions vs. Brick & Mortar) for each grade level (Elementary, Middle and High Schools). 2. HS short-term "strategies" sequencing a. LABBB Collaborative update b. Re -purposing / Portable space costing C. Implementation / Schedule 3. Upcoming potential meetings and agendas a. May 10 - Review short term and long term strategies for various grade levels b. May 15 - Summit - Update on Master Plan C. June 14 - Final review of strategies & implementation (if any) d. July 12 - Tentative hold e. August 9 - Final meeting / report 4. Closing thoughts c 17541 Meeting Reports/ 19-04-12 Agenda 1D 0 N IN A ID II IN II S CI 0 1 R II CI II II A IIR l0 IIR II CI If:::I I ,R Y A I IN S II..... II If:::I I V II V II A IN Il..... 0 w 99 clul ulr CY STREET SUITE 901 I osTolN ISA 02111 1 6117,�426.2858 1 DIIINll CO'ZollA IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1....cxiiirtgton IPii,bIliic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7..46 IIC;;;;D III VI II III S Ilf;;;•••;•, III ............... „ ,,, IIIA architects F.11arnner. TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, May 10, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM —10:30 AM LOCATION: Central Office Building, 146 Maple Street, Lexington, MA Upper -Level Conference Room Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) 1. Groups to report on findings 2. LABBB space requirements update c 17541 Meeting Reports/ 19-05-10 Agenda 1'.) 0 IN IN A ID II IN II S C' 0 1 R II CII II A IIR ID IIR II CI If:::I I G A 1R Y A II IN S II..... II If:::I I V II V II A IN Il..... 0 w 99 clulAulNcY STREET l T sUlr E 901 I osTolN ISA 02111 1 6117,426.2 5 1 DIllNll CO'Zollv IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1....exiiirngto n IPii,bIliic Schools (Master (Plan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7.4 IIC;;;;•••;� III VIII III Ilf;;;;• IIE;;;;;;;;;;;;;; III VIII ar'chlitects w pllanneirs TO: School Master Planning Advisory Committee DATE: Friday, June 14, 2019 TIME: 8:30 AM —10:30 AM LOCATION: Central Office Building, 146 Maple Street, LeAngton, MA Upper -Level Conference Room Members: Maureen Kavanaugh; Kate Colburn; Kathleen Lenihan; Julie Hackett; Peter Rowe; Michael Cronin; Donna DiNisco; Joe Pato; Marina Levit; Sara Cuthbertson; Charles Hornig; Daniel Voss; Daniel Abramson; Richard Perry; Alan Levine (Liaison) 1. Final review of group recommendations c 17541 Meeting Reports / 19-06-14 Agenda DONNA IDIINIISCO I IRI C I I A IR I:.) IIRIIC' I GkIRY AIIIN&I....IIIE I VIVIAIN II.....Ow 99 c11HAtUlr CY STREET su.ulITE 901 I osT011^4 ISA 02111 1 6'117,�426,�2858 1 r. IIINllsco.collv IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1....exiiirngto n Pii,,blic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Agendas March 2020 7-48 IIMAs"rIEIR R11,,,,,,A11TITHING C01MIMIT IrEE II II Iii "rI Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, September 14, 2018 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present Dr. Julie Hackett, Superintendent Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment Peter Rowe, Interim Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Operations Michael Cronin, Director of Public Facilities Donna Disnisco, DiNisco Design Kathleen Colburn, School Committee Kathleen Lenihan, School Committee Joe Pato, Board of Selectmen The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools Welcome and Introductions II. Review of the MPC Charge: Why are we here (the Problem) & what do we hope to accomplish? A. The current planning effort is viewed as a continuation of the last round of master planning. Although we have a number of projects completed or already in progress, enrollment continues to grow. It is essential that the Town has direction on where to go next. The committee came to consensus that it should be a 10 -year plan, acknowledging the accuracy of longer term enrollment projections is as a possible challenge. Members proposed looking back at the last master plan to determine what successes we can learn from. The goal is to arrive at a plan that anticipates solutions, knowing that this will have to be reviewed annually and adjustments made as needed. III. Reconvening the Enrollment Advisory Group: Maureen Kavanaugh and Joe Pato described the previous work of the Enrollment Advisory Group (formerly the Enrollment Working Group). The Enrollment Advisory Group will be reconvened again to continue evaluation of enrollment projection methods and determine what complementary analyses would help inform planning. This effort would be separate, but is expected to contribute to the Master Planning process. IV. Back of the Napkin - What kind of Master Plan do you envision? After discussion in smaller groups, the following was discussed as preferred elements/features: A. The tone should be objective, explicit, transparent and accessible (e.g. we should use simple, clear language, effectively incorporate and use visuals to present ideas). B. Include a thorough problem identification and needs assessment. We should be clear about what was reviewed/considered, and ultimately how decisions were made (e.g. include the pros & cons of different options, why options were and were not included). This could include: 1. Education vision & programmatic assessment (inclusion philosophy) 2. Special education analysis 3. Analysis of enrollment and enrollment drivers 4. Space analysis LSC Meeting 8/28/18 c 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C IM'nutes March 2020 7.49 5. Financial modeling (including predictable maintenance) C. Include a space inventory and timeline (see Montgomery county example) D. We should be should be explicit about intended outcomes and what is planned to get us there E. With respect to solutions, we should present a range of solutions/options for the longer term (i.e. in addition to space expansions, what other strategies will be used to manage growth, such as redistricting, grade re -configurations, etc.? ) What efficiencies do we plan to pursue? We should aim to be explicit about the criteria/thresholds that will be used to determine when solutions would be employed. F. Plans should include some built in flexibility. Plan should be nimble and anticipate different scenarios (e.g. lower, higher, mid-range enrollment growth). We need to be clear about parameters/assumptions that were used (and why) to play out scenarios. G. We should acknowledge the broader community implications of plans. H. Enrollment is a critical factor, but there are components that are "immune" to enrollment changes (HVAC, a roof, windows, mortar, etc. have an expected life span and course of maintenance). What can and should we account for? I. The plan must be revisited regularly after completion. We should plan for this and be very specific how this will happen — Who? When? J. Connecting our work with the town comprehensive plan? V. The Architecture of the LIPS Master Plan: Reviewed several examples, including a national model from the Montgomery County Public Schools, a local sample from Burlington, MA and also ones from UMASS, Palo -Alto and London VI. Brainstorm Possible Future Agenda Items A. Community Involvement? How can we: 1. Communicate a plan is happening and send out specific updates (e.g. formal update in December? Continuous updates through website, such as posted minutes and agendas? Standing item on SC meeting agenda? Lexington minuteman?) 2. Build momentum around the plan? 3. Gather information and input? From staff? From families and community members? Discussed possible in person formats (an "open house" or forums) 4. Use the website or other digital means to communicate and collect input (e.g. forms/survey placed on district website, posted google doc where community members can leave feedback and ideas)? 5. Reach out and include civic organizations? B. Next Time: we will continue discussion of community involvement, discuss LHS SOI and review examples �Ixc LSC Meeting 8/28/18 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II'':IC IM'nutes March 2020 7..50 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, March 8, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Lexington High School, Library Media Room, 251 Waltham Street Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr. Julie Hackett Daniel Voss Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Daniel Abramson Michael Cronin Mark Sandeen Donna DiNisco Marina Levit Kate Colburn Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liaison) Sara Cuthbertson Sandy Beebee (Liaison) Charles Hornig Other Staff Present: Avon Lewis (current LEA President) Materials: • Master Planning Committee Overview • Presentation from Donna DiNisco: "Master Planning Committee Meeting April 12, 2019" The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. Next Steps: Walked members through an overview of the next steps in the Master Planning Process (See "Master Planning Committee Overview") A. Committee will break into three working groups to identify and prioritize strategies to employ when/if enrollment outpaces capacity for short-term growth and long-term growth (i.e. Soft Solutions vs. Brick & Mortar) for each grade level (Elementary, Middle and High Schools) or falls lower than expected. B. Concurrent planning activities (e.g. Facilities capital planning & Town Comprehensive Plan): How do we weave this information in? Important to consider the big picture and other Town needs. 1. Capital/Infrastructure planning: Facilities is working towards updating and creating a longer term capital plan. Although there are key differences between the capital plan and the LPS master plan, there is also some overlap. a) This is a good time to talk holistically. Previous MPC conversations included what kind of outcomes we want. This goes beyond enrollment and class size. Our facilities are a means to an end, but not the end itself. It should allow us to have enough space to avoid overcrowding, but that is not our primary goal in education or facilities management. b) When we consider the capital/systems perspective, we should keep in mind what we want to get out of these systems and what is our standards for performance. We need to constantly consider how our facilities and systems are performing. This would be a way to refine our existing facilities inventory. (1) This group of individuals will not be able to get into all these details, but we can build the framework for it. m r I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan IIlipp rnd 11" Ili:)C IIWi nut s March 2020 7-51 (2) Could help us answer: How much do we put into an older school, keeping in mind when we might need to replace or otherwise take the building off line? (3) Master Plan report will include an existing conditions sections; this would be one place to incorporate this kind of information. c) Members requested materials/information that would describe facilities conditions (as we know them right now) for each of the working groups; Facilities staff can provide the information we have compiled to date. C. Part of the plan is to periodically review our Master Plan and make adjustments as needed. While facilities completes their capital plan, we can review and make adjustments to the LPS Master Plan, if needed 1. Town is also building a Comprehensive Plan. We might engage in a similar activity. D. Members were assigned to smaller working groups (element, middle and high school) and provided planning templates. Members will meet in their smaller groups before our next meeting to complete templates. The current template focuses on enrollment, but as discussed there may be other lens/criteria for us to consider (e.g. financial impact/context of new high school). II. High School short-term "strategies" sequencing A. LABBB Collaborative Update: Met with LABBB who was very appreciative and supportive of the partnership with Lexington. They do want to stay in Lexington and are willing to participate in the cost of portable classrooms (See slides 8 & 9 for "LABBB Considerations"). Q: Would we move the entire LABBB program to portables? A: Not certain at this time. Currently plan is that they would keep their space in the Math building. Q: What is HUB? A: Community-based work program; students arrive at LHS and take vans into the community to participate in work experiences. With the switch to the later start time, the rest of the student population will arrive at the same time. LABBB is suggesting they can change the pick up location at the high school. This can be revisited/refined as we get close to the start time change Q: Do HUB students spend any of their day at LHS (in classrooms)? A: Need to clarify and gather more information from LABBB to answer this. Q: Is there any talk about moving the LABBB 18-22 program out of the high school? A: Yes, the Superintendent had a conversation with the LABBB Director and they are exploring this possibility. X 1. Conducting another review of space utilization for LABBB to better understand their needs. B. Re -purposing/ Portable space costing & Implementation /Schedule I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I Aipipendx 11" Ili:)C IIWi nut s March 2020 7-52 1. MPC members noted there are benefits to making these changes sooner rather than later so we can get full use of these portables. 2. Based on the current plan, we can gain 15 classrooms through a variety of space renovations/mining to accommodate growth; this is still short 4-7 classrooms we might need, based on current enrollment projections. a) This does not include LABBB leaving LHS This change could potentially add +5 classrooms. Some of these spaces are small, but do currently have other general education classes this size. 3. LHS Strategies "final considerations" slide 10 displays two possible locations where portables might go (off the science/math buildings and in the back parking lot). This is an either or, not both. These could be used for LABBB or some other purposes. a) Placement of portables should keep in mind space future construction needs for a renovated or new high school, but we won't necessarily have all the information we need to guide this decisions. (1) Portables can be moved. They do not require a deep or permanent foundation. There is a relatively small cost to moving them. 4. Donna DiNisco also talked members through an expansion of commons II. a) Today we are already 100 seats shorts. To make up for this, additional tables are set up in the hallway or eat in the outside in the quad on nicer days. In addition to lunch, breakfast is also a challenge. The proposed expansion would alleviate some of that b) This would be permanent construction. If there was a renovation at some later point (vs. a new high school), this addition would stay. c) Construction would start summer 2020. d) The general concern about the expansion is that we would build something that could be knocked down in 5 to 7 years. However it is difficult to arrive at certainty about what is going to happen (e.g. that we will get MSBA approval or whether there will be a new building or a renovated building or the exact timeline for a new or renovated high school, etc.) Q: Is there any way to make it less permanent? A: The current proposal is as cost effective as it can possible be and would allow for year round use. Q: Could we investigate less permanent, out of the box solutions (e.g. Tent)? A: Superintendent Julie Hackett did use a less permanent tent -like structure in Taunton. This could be a 1 year solution, not a seven year solution. We could take a next step of exploring this further. Slide 15 provides potential cost considerations over the 5 year planning period. It is important to acknowledge these are planning numbers. These are project costs (vs. construction costs). a) Costs associated with commons II expansion includes an assumption that some HVAC infrastructure is needed. b) Projects can packaged separately or bundled; if we do the work simultaneously, we should consider a single contractor. �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC II 'notes March 2020 7-53 c) Also need to consider the cost of replacing current LHS HVAC system. d) We might not need all 6 portables if we reduce the number of students who attend the Lexington LABBB program (i.e. could go to other sites) or through cost sharing with LABBB. We also want to gather more data about LABBB space needs/utilization. We need to revisit this number (might be high). 6. Regarding decision making, members felt they need more time to refine the proposal, but recognized we can't push off the decision too long. We have some on call architect budget funds (up to $100,000). 7. Keep in mind: Conservation moved set back to 100 feet III. Next Steps: A. Consulting with LABBB regarding utilization of their current space; this would inform any plans for future LABBB space. B. Working groups (elementary, middle and high) will meet before our next meeting. �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC II 'kiutes March 2020 7-54 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, May 10, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Lexington Public Schools Central Office, 146 Maple Street Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr. Julie Hackett Daniel Voss Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Daniel Abramson Peter Rowe Mark Sandeen Michael Cronin Marina Levit Donna DiNisco Rick Perry? Kate Colburn Charles Hornig Joe Pato Kathleen L. Sara Cuthbertson Alan Levine (Liaison) Sandy Beebee (Liaison) Other Staff Present: Avon Lewis (current LEA President) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. I. Elementary, middle and high school groups report findings by grade level: Members presented potential strategies by level; Below are highlights from the discussion by level. A. Purpose is a brainstorming exercise: we want to sort out the viability of ideas B. High School Strategy Notes: 1. Some ideas may offer space relief and may also offer better or alternative learning opportunities and pathways for students (e.g. enhancing our partnership with Minuteman) 2. Regarding special education spaces, we need to keep our educational philosophy of inclusion in the forefront and be mindful of our obligation and responsibility to provide all students with the least restrictive learning environment. Q. What are the space needs of the high school programs? Do we have programs that are underutilizing their current space? A. This may be the case in some instances; we will provide the space that the students and the program needs; there is a little too much space much now for ILP at the high school. a) Some parents may be anxious that we are eliminating the program when examining these spaces. One way to better communicate might be to indicate the prioritization or the order in which strategies would be considered, if we include them at all (e.g. we would put portables on LHS before we consider any displacement of students or programs) 3. Space mining at LHS: not very many unexplored options left that I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I AIDIDendx 11" II'i:)CII" in ut s March 2020 7-55 5 a) Black box or the field house might be the only spaces left to consider, if we found ourselves in a dire position. 4. Disagreement among members about how and if a second high school would ever be considered a) Size of one very large high school is a concern, but cost and space are real variables. b) New high school had the potential for being the 3rd largest in the state "Investigate high health, net zero, all electric resilient building design for new facilities and present to the Select Board and School Committee" goal should be acknowledged and acted upon in our plan. C. Middle Strategy Notes: 1. The group received additional information just prior to the meet and will incorporate/revised accordingly after this meeting. The ideas presented represented do not current factor this information in. D. Elementary Strategy Notes: 1. Regarding relocation of special education programs, members acknowledged that it is valuable to have both expertise general education and special education within a school. a) Question to consider: under what conditions would we move a program? How could we make such a move correctly (if we needed to)? E. Strategy Notes Applicable to All or Multiple Levels: 1. Clarity of terms: We need to perhaps specify what we mean by permanent., What do we mean by short term (how long)? When we say over projected, what do mean? What specific enrollment and/or other conditions would trigger this? 2. Should we be taking proactive step of talking with conservation commission (especially related to LHS)? They may not be able to weigh in on hypothetical instances, but could advise on the law and requirements. How we mitigate these issues is important. 3. May need to follow up with middle and high school about athletic participation. We believe participation is about 25% now. If this is to increase with enrollment increases, we would need to increase staff and increase offerings. This would apply to other extracurricular activities. a) Members acknowledged that athletic offerings and facilities (or the lack of) impacts athletics participation. It may also have educational impacts (e.g. students getting up at 4 am to make a practice somewhere outside of town). 4. Group also pointed out the ongoing Town strategy to actively look for and be aware of land acquisition opportunities. 5. Future building on smaller sites could impact playgrounds, fields and other aspects just outside the physical building. Regarding Cafeteria expansion/portables at LHS: Superintendent recommendations that we plan for a smaller number of portables (e.g. at a cost closer to the 2 million range) and abandon 0 more permanent expansion of the cafeteria. We should instead explore scheduling options and "' temporary structures (Facilities current researching our options.) I....ex ngR.on Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I Aipipendx 11" Ili:)C IIWinut s March 2020 7-56 III. LABBB update: Donna DiNisco met with LABBB staff to better understand the needs of students and programs. They stated their preference is to stay in Lexington, but they have other partner school districts. Some of our students already attend programs in these schools. LABBB said they are flexible and is taking a look at current programs housed in LHS. They are thinking about whether the space could be reconfigured and/or are the programs better housed in other partner schools. We will continue discussion at the next meeting. IV. Discussion about the next summit meeting: What do we need to know for this next meeting? Master planning is not currently on the agenda. This could be included as an informational item. It would be helpful to provide this to other participants, but there are other pressing matters V. Joe Pato motioned to approve School Master Planning Advisory Committee minutes of March 8, 2019 - Daniel Voss seconded the motion (Unanimously Approved) VI. Joe Pato motioned to continue investigation of cafeteria expansion, starting with non -permanent and low cost options - Daniel Voss seconded the motion (Unanimously Approved) VII. Next Steps: A. June 14 - final review of strategies and implementation; all groups will refine between meetings B. Tentative hold July 12 date C. We will plan to take up motion related to reducing the number of portables that we would purchase & decision on temporary approach to cafeteria expansion. m r I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I AIDIDendx 11" II'i:)C II'Wi nut s March 2020 7-57 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, October 12, 2018 from 9:00 -11:00 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present Dr. Julie Hackett Sandy Bebe Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Dan Voss Peter Rowe Marina Levit Michael Cronin Sara Cuthbertson Donna DiNisco Charles Horning Kathleen Colburn Daniel Abromson Kathleen Lenihan Dick Perry Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liason) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. I. Approval of last meeting's minutes II. MSBA / SOI for LHS. Provide examples of previous / other SOI's. Dr. Hackett (Superintendent) and Donna DiNisco reviewed what a Statement of Interest (SOI) entails and shared an example from the Tauton Public Schools. A. They pointed out that there can be confusion between SOI and other components of MSBA application. SOI is the statement of the problem. SOI is the first step of the MSBA process. This submission includes gathering relatively straight -forward technical information. The Director of Public Facility inputs this information and would submit in January (when the process opens next). This goes to MSBA for consideration, among many other SOls submitted across the state. One new aspect is that they now ask districts to indicate which project is of most priority (if submitting more than one project). B. If MSBA thinks the project ranks high enough to be included in their capital pipeline, they send an invite to enter an eligibility period. MSBA has indicated they generally do not reject projects once entered into the eligibility process, but there is not guarantee. C. The next step is a feasibility study, through which we would explore a variety of options related to this specific project. D. The educational program comes much later (about a year into the process), but should always be thinking of this in the back of our minds. E. Dr. Hackett is going to do a walkthrough of LHS with MSBA staff today. This is an opportunity to give them a visual and tactile experience of the current conditions. F. Detailed enrollment is not part of the discussion this early in the process (other than to state that this is one of reasons we are submitting a SOI). If we are invited to continue, the MSBA would provide us a set of enrollment projections based on their methodology We would also have an opportunity to submit additional information if we felt their projection wasn't accurate or described the whole picture. G. If we are not invited in this year, we would have to re -apply next year. I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I Aipipendx 11" Ili:)C IIWi nut s March 2020 7-58 H. Accelerated repair is another MSBA program (for a "mini capital project"). We would consider this for replacing the Bridge roof when the time comes. I. Question: Does our participation in other projects (Hastings) impact our next submission? A: It depends on who else submits in a given year. Currently there are a few districts that have multiple projects funded. Another component is capacity of the community and whether there appears to be community support for the projects. J. Question: If we are invited in, does the clock start ticking on any debt exclusion and when would this have to occur? A: Yes, but the timeline is relative lengthy (within 3 or 4 years). K. Question: How much input does the town have on the timeline? A. There are MSBA requirements that dictate timeline. The eligibility period is a maximum of 270 days. Once we get into feasibility, we have a maximum of 30 months to complete the feasibility study and schematic design. After the MSBA votes to approve, we have 120 days to obtain local funding. L. Question: What is the Master Planning Committee's (MPC) role in statement of interest? 1. A. The committee does have input, particularly how members feel about this project and prioritization against other needs we might have. The high school was impetus for revisiting the master plan and determining how this project would impact our other school needs. We want to comprehensively consider our needs. MPC would continue regardless of MSBA process. It is important to remain fluid. MSBA involvement would give us options. Enrollment will be a major driver of plans. There have been a number of projects at the elementary and middle school level and the town has been delaying LHS for a while. The SOI does not lock us in. We have opportunities to change our plans. III. Enrollment Projections. Maureen Kavanaugh presented historical enrollments, preliminary projections and projection methodology and next steps. A. Based on the presentation, the group discussed the need for short and long term solutions and to complete current projects in process (LCP and Hastings). B. In terms of additional analysis, we would like to apply capacity numbers for each school to enrollment numbers to determine the shortfalls/surplus in the existing facilities. C. Important to keep in mind that projections are not destiny and may change. IV. Educational Program requirements relating to space needs. Presentation from Donna DiNisco. Group discussions followed. Highlights included: A. When thinking of 21S` century learning environments, we should think of a variety of learning spaces, flexible spaces, STEM needs, technology integration need, etc. B. When we review educational program requirements we will look at special education. Important to understanding the capacity of the buildings. C. Updating the existing program will help us know where we are to today and what adjustments remain to "right size" schools. D. MPC members liked the Montgomery county model for the master plan. X E. Other models for larger districts focused on facilities. Assessment of facilities needs/capital improvements would include predictable maintenance (e.g. roof, HVAC). Should we conduct a similar inventory of education program, laying out major maintenance projects, including the expected life spans of those elements? I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I Aipipendx 11" Ili:)C IIWi nut s March 2020 7-59 1. In doing so, we have an opportunity to apply a lens towards environmental impacts and energy efficiency. How do we define the lifespan of these physical facilities in relation to the outcomes we want? If we know a certain system will fall below our expected outcomes in X years, that would be when we want to replace it. F. General question posed by members for future consideration: 1. What information has already been collected and can be weaved into our planning. 2. What real estate do we have? If we need more, we should be clear about that in the master plan. 3. What is the buildable outdoor space on each of our existing facilities (i.e. how much room do we have to expand)? V. Community involvement / outreach. Superintendent added new blog to the district website and will add in MPC materials, including agendas and meeting materials. She has also provided updates at school committee meetings and will continue to do so. Next Meeting (November 20th at 8:30 am): we will review existing site capacity, existing building capacity, available town owned sites, enrollment projections compared to existing capacity and possible solutions for shortfall in capacity. m r I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan I Aipipendx 11" Ili:)C II'Wi nut s March 2020 7..60 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Tuesday, November 20, 2018 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present Dr. Julie Hackett Kathleen Lenihan Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Joe Pato Peter Rowe Marina Levit Michael Cronin Sara Cuthbertson Donna DiNisco Charles Hornig Kathleen Colburn The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. I. Presentation from Donna DiNisco (see powerpoint for more details): included A. History of previous planning decisions (e.g. 2015 consensus plan, prior building projects) B. Existing facilities review: provided a detailed breakdown of space within each school building and layout of school sites 1. Elementary highlights: a) On slide 15 Harrington specifications assume LPC relocation and Hastings is based on new school specifications; Red text indicates a space is undersized given current enrollment; Most elementary facilities have been updated fairly recently; The space needs related to special education and other supports within the educational program may not be well understood by all members of the community; Previous challenges with art & music space have fluctuated by building and enrollment year to year 2. Middle school highlights: a) Almost the same size building footprints, but sites are different; Previous use of scheduling and space use had varied between the two schools; both buildings now take the same approach to classroom sharing among teachers, maximizing space use at both schools; Some spaces are specialized and cannot be easily shared (e.g. science labs, vocational tech, music and art spaces) High school highlights: a) Series of additions over time, open campus design (i.e. several buildings on one site, students/staff must walk outside to move between buildings); Provided comparison of existing facility against MSBA guidelines (slide 35) �Ixc 4. Expansion to buildings may be limited by site topography, flood plains and conservation requirements (i.e. wetlands); Any expansion should also consider location of sewer lines, storm drains, gas lines, etc. (these can be moved, but should be considered during planning especially when an existing building must 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I IP,'IC II 'notes March 2020 7-61 remain occupied); Some sites have geothermal wells (Fiske, Harrington, new Hastings) which will impact expansions. Additional available sites owned by school department: a) Old Harrington School (current central office) b) Laconia Street (challenges include no major access roads; have to use smaller neighborhood roads to access site; extremely steep topography, includes existing walking trails, and privately owned parcels within the site) c) 173 Bedford St (old Liberty mutual; currently designed as office space) C. Facilities capacity based upon class size policy, program & equity and district -wide special education programs 1. When determining a building's capacity (or what we have been referring to as a building's "right size"), we must take into account the full educational program (e.g. ELL & special education needs, gym & cafeteria size, art and music spaces) 2. Previously we have used an average elementary class size of 21.5 students for longer term planning 3. At the middle school level we have planned based on team size; we have used an average team size of 86 for longer term planning 4. It is believed special education is approximately 14% of the general education population and grows proportionately with enrollment. When discussing opportunities to introduce other special education programs into the district it was determined the are no other programs that could currently be brought back into the district (as opposed to being serviced out of district) D. Review of elementary enrollment projections to existing capacity 1. Used preliminary enrollment projections for review; It is important to note LPS is still refining these; We currently do not have confidence in the 10 year projections based on the MSBA method a) Enrollment Advisory Group met on Friday (11/16/18); The group came up with ideas for alternative approaches and new numbers are expected for the next Master Planning Committee meeting in December Slide 41 includes the optimal "right size" for each elementary building (with the goal of enhanced space equity across buildings): a) Bowman - 24 general education rooms or 516 students, b) Bridge - 24 general education rooms or 516 students C) Estabrook - 27 general education rooms or 581 students d) Fiske - 19 general education rooms or 409 students e) Harrington (after LCP relocation) - 24 general education rooms or 516 students f) Hastings (new) - 30 general education rooms or 645 students 3. Review of enrollment against capacity points to current overcrowding at Bowman, Bridge and Fiske (slide 45) 4. High school: current projections suggest significant future increases (about 267 students over the next 5 years); still refining longer term projections n� Q: How much cushion should we include in our planning? 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7.62 A: A decision for the community to consider - Previous planning efforts have included 10-15% cushions (e.g. previous redistricting from 2006 was based on a 90% capacity for each building) Q: Trends among special education and ELL populations? A: Special education has remained relatively steady and we are generally looking for opportunities to create more inclusive programs for these students; ELL population growing; Both are important to take into account Q:(Directed to LEA president) Thoughts about class size from a teacher perspective at the high school level? A: Talked about experience as a high school science teacher - AP class sizes are often very large and physically crowded; CPI & 2 classes smaller, but these may include additional adults in the room (e.g. aides, classes co -taught by multiple teachers); layout of cafeterias are inefficient, lunches are very crowded and students eating in the hallway; fieldhouse may appear large as far as specifications, but there are often many classes being run at the same time in this space Q: (Directed to members of Town boards) Are there any other parcels we should aware of? A: Town owns a number of parcels, but some may be currently used for other purposes or otherwise restricted; We can look at this more closely; Land swaps might be possible. II. Discussion on possible solutions given low, medium and high future enrollments A. Options to consider: short and long term, build and no build options and any other ideas (e.g. re-purposing/mining space within the buildings, continued use of flexible school assignment policies, redistricting) Group brainstorm of all possible solutions: 1. Within the existing buildings, if there were very short term enrollment increases, temporary re -purposing or mining of elementary spaces (e.g. Literacy rooms, art or music rooms); wouldn't want to rely on these to deal with more "permanent" or longer term changes in enrollment 2. If there is future enrollment declines at the elementary level - taking Bridge or Bowman (the older of the elementary school buildings) out of service for replacement and/or using as a swing space a) How large of school could we build here? b) The Bridge site has the least restrictions Change in grade configurations a) Ex: Third middle school + add 5th grade to all middle schools (creating 5 - 8 middle schools) b) Move 8th grade to high school 4. For any large school, we can think about how we structure the experience to create smaller communities within schools (e.g. Teams at the middle school a^°° consider "house" structure at high school) 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':IC II 'notes March 2020 7.63 5. Regarding a third middle school (All similarly sized schools or varying in size (e.g. two larger and one smaller) 6. Build a second high school (two similarly sized high schools or one larger and one smaller high school - perhaps with specialized programing (e.g. focus on the arts)) 7. Using old Harrington for a new school 8. Laconia as a possible school site? a) Additional notes about this site: About 10 acres of land; challenges include topography, poor access to the site, heavily used by recreation, nearby neighborhood may opposed the idea of a large school there; wondering if there is any private/public partnership opportunities with adjacent landowners and/or possible land swap? 9. Other land swap opportunities? Wondering about other Town landholdings (though this process may be slow and time consuming); a few examples: a) Meagerville (between Cedar and Reed St; currently unbuilt conservation land previously owned by school department): b) Sutherland (near Arlington land) Q: When is the last time Lexington completed this kind of land swap? A: Members could not recall. Potential future items: I. Brief update on enrollment and projections II. Continue brainstorming solutions/responses to enrollment changes III. Review of old school sites and/or available Town owned land? �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II''IC II 'notes March 2020 7.64 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, December 14, 2018 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present Dr. Julie Hackett Marina Levit Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Sara Cuthbertson Peter Rowe Charles Hornig Michael Cronin Daniel Voss Donna DiNisco Daniel Abramson Kathleen Colburn Richard Perry Kathleen Lenihan Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liason) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. Corresponding powerpoint presentation available and referenced below I. Approval of last meeting's minutes II. Update Enrollment Projections (Maureen Kavanaugh, LPS): presented enrollment projection update including official October 1 numbers, historical enrollments, review of enrollment projection methods and final 10 year enrollment projections that will be used for Master Planning process A. Some members of the group expressed skepticism about projected elementary enrollment trends. Given recent history, LPS suggests exercising caution, but acknowledges that we have to react to the data we have available to us today. Members further pointed out that during LPS enrollment history, there have been declines that were not necessarily predicted by enrollment projection models. B. Donna DiNisco pointed out possible peaks in projected enrollment in the short and long term at each level that we need to consider during our planning (based both on mid line projection and the upper level confidence interval). III. Capacity Strategies (Donna DiNisco, DiNisco Design): reviewed right size criteria (slides 7 & 8) & capacity for elementary schools (slide 9) A. Elementary Capacity (Slide 10 -comparison of capacity against enrollment) 1. When interpreting capacity, what kind of buffer do we want to incorporate into our planning (e.g. use the upper confidence interval,+10 students on top of the upper confidence interval, plan to leave at least 10% capacity)? No decision made on this. 2. Question: Is there a standard used? a) No, depends on what we are trying to accomplish. Given projected growth at the middle school, capacity will be a challenge in the longer term. C. At the high school level, core spaces currently undersized. Future enrollment increases are projected, which will exacerbate this problem. �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'kiutes March 2020 7..65 1. Question: Are the current facilities able to handle to current projected peaks? a) Answer: Not well—core spaces already under pressure and also not enough science labs. In the short term, we are adding more science labs to get us to 2021-22, but enrollment growth projected to continue. D. There is and should be flexibility within the buildings in what rooms are being used for what grades and/or purposes; this is necessary to accommodate especially large cohorts or bubbles. IV. Strategy 1– Non -Building Alternatives (slide 17) A. Suggestion: Consider district -wide special education program locations –are they located in the right school (in terms of space)? For example, Fiske's ILP program has the largest space needs in the district. Would it be better situated at one of our larger schools (e.g. Estabrook or Hastings)? a) But, we should keep in mind size of core spaces: might be advantageous to keep in schools with smaller cores spaces (e.g. gym, cafeteria) as a way to keep overall student population size smaller in these schools and minimize pressures on these spaces b) Also opening a new Hastings can have ripple effects on the enrollment in the rest of the system (e.g. families attracted to the new school). C) Some questions for special education: (1) Are we sending out a significant number of students we want to bring back? And should be planning for? (2) Concerning LCP, with new facilities, we have the ability to bring back students from out of district - how many might that apply to? (3) What does special education program enrollment/growth look like? Regarding elementary space mining: (e.g. re -purpose art, music and other spaces as general education classrooms) 1. Some members felt this should be taken off the table as an option. They believe this divides the Town, diminishes what schools are able to accomplish, and suggests we do not value all subjects (although students generally spend less time in art and music spaces, for some students this might be the most important hour of their day) 2. Others acknowledged that although they agree this issue can be divisive, they were not sure any thing could be taken off the table. What are the alternatives costs (particularly in cases of short-term enrollment growth)? 3. Also need to think about core spaces; For example, we would run into scheduling challenges related to gym at some schools if student population becomes too large. C. Regarding grade level re -configurations f 1. Some grade level configurations at the elementary and middle schools would iii l o have an impact on the high school; therefore, they are important to discuss. 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7..66 2. Moving 5th grade to middle school or 8th grade to high school has the potential to provide relief, but not until we could expand space at the secondary level; not necessarily a viable short-term solution. 3. Discussion on how decisions will be made. For example, if we were to ask the MSBA about including the 8th grade into a high school project, what is the MPC's role in this decision? Do we get a recommendation from MPC and present to school committee, with interaction with other boards? (*Note from JH: if invited into the capital pipeline, MSBA works with the school system on possible creative solutions as part of the process, so doesn't need to be decided for SOI). a) SC members would definitely want to weigh in, after a discussion at MPC first. b) We should consider the social -emotional environment of a much larger high school. C) Do we have the space to expand LHS enough to include 8th grade? We would need to plan for a high school well over 3,000. D. Modulars/Portables 1. Question: Are these considered a short- or medium-term solutions? a) Answer: Depends on the type. The modulars we have used recently are meant as a longer-term solution. b) Note: Costs of modulars have been rising and starting to catch up with brick and mortar solutions, which last longer; however, modulars can be put up faster. E. Program Relocation 1. Question: Could we move the high school LABBB program to another high school? Would this help? a) Yes, but not enough to solve the problem completely. 2. Question: How much space would this open up? a) Need to research to provide an accurate answer. 3. Could we relocate the LABBB program to Central Office? a) Answer: Not enough space at the central office; Also a high school is a more ideal and an inclusive learning environment for these students. 4. Suggestion: Building at Hartwell Ave. for LABBB? V. Strategy 2 — Expansion of existing facilities A. "What if's" at the other grade levels have to be done within the context of the cost of the new high school. Should we focus on no build or low cost at the elementary and middle school level? VI. Other Town -Owned Land (slide 22) VII. Other Planning Note/Considerations/Questions m u� A. Costs across all grade levels must be kept in mind. Specifically, we have the very likely a^°° cost of a new or expanded high school looming. Financially, we are not going to be able 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':IC II 'notes March 2020 7.6 to justify a new high school, a new middle school, and a new elementary. We need to make other choices and consider other options. Somehow it seems the high school is always overlooked. B. Wondering about what level of enrollment triggers various options? VIII. Possible Future Agenda Items: A. Added January 4th meeting (focus on high school level) B. What do we have to do at the high school to accommodate projected enrollment in the short term? C. What land is available (related to high school solutions)? �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7-68 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, January 4, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr. Julie Hackett Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Marina Levit Peter Rowe Sara Cuthbertson Michael Cronin Charles Hornig Donna DiNisco Daniel Voss Kathleen Colburn Daniel Abramson Kathleen Lenihan Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liason) Lexington High School Staff Present: Andrew Stephens, Kevin Kelly, Chris Bouchard, Avon Lewis (current LEA President) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. Corresponding powerpoint presentation and word document available and referenced below I. Minutes approved for December 14, 2018 II. Brief review of secondary enrollment projections from LPS (see powerpoint) III. Considered the question, "When enrollment outpaces capacity, which strategies should we consider?" A. Group reviewed and added ideas to "School Master Planning Advisory Committee (SMPAC) Strategies to Employ if Enrollment Outpaces Capacity at Lexington High School" document. New edits are highlighted in blue. LHS staff, including Andrew Stephens (principal), Kevin Kelley (Math Dept Head & HS scheduler), Chris Bouchard (Facilities) and Avon Lewis (former science department faculty member, now LEA president) also participated in the discussion. B. Some questions that came up during this discussion included: Q: How do we determine how short on space we are at LHS? A: We will revisit this, but a review conducted by LPS staff planned around a 300 students increase over present enrollment (based on current projections) and identified a need for 7-9 more general classrooms per block to hold 25 students each (this would be a minimum); This would not address core space or special program needs (special education, ELL, etc.). • A few members noted that 300 seemed too conservative to plan for and suggested we plan closer to 400 (based on recent enrollment falling slightly above projections) • High school staff clarified these numbers did not include the 2 new science �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':IC II 'kiutes March 2020 7-69 rooms we're already planned on and also stated they were trying to identify the minimum number of rooms they would need, keeping in mind the potential fiscal impacts to the community. Q: What is the difference between NFA and GSF? A: Net Square Footage (NFA) = floor area within a space; Gross square is the entire building (stair cases, hallways, etc) Q: How would temporary solutions fit in with longer term plans to rebuild? A: Agreed we need to think about this. For example, we should keep in mind future building plans if we are going to place any modular or portable solutions on the current site. We also need to think about what we mean by the word, "temporary' (i.e. how many years does this refer to?). A. Do all Lexington students attend LABBB at LHS? B. No, where a student attends depends on their specific educational needs. Students may attend another LABBB site. C. Other general concerns and observations included: 1. Cafeteria/lunches: would need to expand from 3 to 4 as cafeteria space becomes even more of an issue due to growing enrollments a) Members also wondered about the current food services capacity; as enrollment increases, we may outpace the current food prep areas; LPS has considered preparing food at satellite locations 2. Already have plans in place to address Biology and Chemistry space needs; still need to address Earth Science and Physics in 2022-2023 3. Staff anticipate that other specialized spaces will face pressure during enrollment increases (e.g. Art & Music spaces) 4. With increases, there will be no wiggle room for special activities a) Example: AP testing. At times this requires 9 rooms simultaneously, with varying needs over 10 days in May; This would not be possible with peak projected enrollment ; may have to move AP testing off site 5. Impact on iBlock? 6. Need to think about the logistics of building on the same LHS site - what swing space is needed and available? a) Answering this question would be part of the feasibility study b) However, if we are thinking of modulars or portables, we should consider what sites/locations might be needed for future construction in determining their location C) Previous planning work might help inform us (i.e. 2014 SMMA report) �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools IMaster IPlan I Appendx I II'':IC II 'notes March 2020 7-70 D. Superintendent mentioned that LPS has a draft Statement of interest (SIO) prepared for the high school. This could be reviewed during a future meeting. From start to finish, building a high school with MSBA is a 5-6 year process IV. Possible Future Agenda Items: A. Continued review list of options (ask that each MPC member does this before the meeting and have an idea of prioritization, including which combination of ideas might work together); our goal next week would be to rank order these B. Donna DiNisco and facilities can provide LHS floor and site plans (including the location of wetlands) C. Alan Levine, Appropriation Committee Liaison, could provide a brief presentation of tax/fiscal impacts D. Review of draft Massachusetts Building Association (MSBA) Statement of Interest (SOI) for Lexington High E. Report on short-term space needs at LHS and how LPS (temporarily) solved the science lab space crunch �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools IMaster IPlan I Appendx I IP,':'C II 'notes March 2020 7-71 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, January 11, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, Training Room #221, 201 Bedford Street Master Planning Committee Members Present Dr. Julie Hackett Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Marina Levit Peter Rowe Sara Cuthbertson Michael Cronin Charles Hornig Donna DiNisco Daniel Voss Kathleen Colburn Daniel Abramson Kathleen Lenihan Richard Perry Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liason Lexington High School Staff Present: Andrew Stephens, Kevin Kelly, Chris Bouchard, Avon Lewis (current LEA President) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. Enclosures: • January 4, 2019 meeting minutes • Updated Strategies list • Existing LHS floor and site plans • Summit II Debt Service & Budget Summitt II Slide Show Corresponding powerpoint presentation available and referenced below I. Updated LHS Space Summary based upon max future enrollment of 2,640 compared to MSBA Space Guidelines (Slide 4 of powerpoint) A. This provides an analysis of what the program is today, not necessarily our future plans for high school programing B. Max enrollment based on 10 year projection C. Although these numbers suggests there is a shortage of special education space, this has not been major of topic of discussion to date; something to look into and think about for the future D. Although the field house is large, the physical layout (e.g. its round, has multiple floors) might limit how we could repurpose this space E. This analysis and our enrollment projections suggest we need a larger building in the future F. Word of caution: MSBA provides formula to begin analysis of our space needs; This will give us an estimate of approximate size, but this needs to be refined with more detail that includes specific related to LHS programming 1. MSBA is also in the process of revising their formulas for middle and high schools with a more modern secondary education in mind (e.g. project based learning); we think they will discuss this during their February board meeting. �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'kiutes March 2020 7.72 G. Growth possibilities: Working with MSBA, we cannot just build 10% more above the projections; we need to justify the space we build with specific program plans; as we think through these details, we could design these spaces for flexible use H. In terms of planning, suggest we focus first on what our HS program might look like in the future; Based on this consider what kind of spaces do we need, how flexible can these space be and then work Continued discussion of LHS space "strategies" A. Starting with impressions from LHS staff: Thinking of the 7-9 classrooms we need (this does not include the science rooms we have already planned for, but still acknowledge these numbers are minimum we would need); we believe we can get a portion of these rooms through space mining, but also need to employ another strategy (e.g. portables) a) To keep in mind: as enrollment increases, other aspects of our population also generally increases (e.g. staff, who need planning and work spaces, ELL population); space needs do not just equate to general education classrooms b) Also need to keep in mind existing time on learning challenge; need to address this; could potentially mean that we need to reduce open campus allowances; this means more students on campus at a time (1) If we were asked to fully comply with these requirements, LHS faculty estimate this could mean 8-10% increase in students in our classroom at all times C) Specific science disciplines need access to water; portable sinks were not an adequate solution for this in the past d) MPC members expressed a preference for portable (Life span not more than 10 years) over modular construction (life span — 25 years)and will be thinking about future plans for a new or renovated high school in their placement, if needed 2. To address teacher planning needs, thinking about adopting a Clarke approach with a teacher work room, but will need to talk to teachers about any further plans for their work spaces 3. Rm 713 (current math office space) could perhaps also accommodate some faculty from other departments with better furniture a) Not certain this space is big enough to accommodate both departments; maybe some, but not a complete solution (1) How many staff presently using? 25 - pretty full already (2) Physics teachers have closet -size offices; moving them out of these would not necessarily help as these spaces are not easy to re -purpose to address our other needs 4. Modulars for ILP3 (between science and math buildings): this is another very small program and underutilized space; logical area to take a closer look at for possible consolidation of program space or space swaps to open up space for other LHS needs a) Very difficult to predict how big the future cohort might be. However, for the short term this might be a possibility m u� b Program is relatively new(only 3-4 years old) a^°° 1....exiIirigkoiri Il'�ii..tblloc Sclliooll a Il d a aker IIFlIairi � a'"Pppends`c.......IlPfllllFIC Mnu es March 2020 7-73 3 C) Some inclusion, but far less than ILP1 or I1-132; the program being situated in the high school provides some inclusive experience (arriving, walking through the halls with their peers) d) Not all students stay in the program for the all 4 years; MPC member reported feedback from one family suggested program was not working for them and preferred an out -of -district program; (1) The outplacements are expensive, so not necessarily a fiscal advantage to this outcome (2) What is the outplacement alternative? Specialized care (3) Could we create an "out placement" in town if these students are generally being placed out? Would need to find space and better understand other costs associated with doing so e) Do other high schools have this kind of program? Yes 5. LABBB space: currently a number of smaller spaces, but could remove the walls to create larger classroom 6. Current IT rooms (which we are moving to CO) could become office space and then other office space could then be converted to a classroom a) Could we take the partition out of these rooms and make this a classroom? Yes this is a possibility. 7. Another large teacher prep room in the main building could also be repurposed into a classroom 8. ILP2 (main building): judged to be an underutilized space; 5 spaces total; 4 out of the 5 are currently used for ILP2 for a very small program; students in the program are also mainstreamed for much of the day, leaving the space empty for significant portions of the day 9. Also ILP1 in world language building (intended to be mainstreamed for all of their classes throughout the day); currently using this space for resource instruction, students are more often included in the general education classes; only using this space approximately 25% of time; could we engage in better room sharing to use this? B. New suggestion: could we add portables for office space? And then repurpose the former offices for classroom space? 1. Depends on the location; if they are too far, this space will not be as functional as we hope 2. Also must consider two different construction expenses in this scenario - to repurpose existing offices into classrooms and adding the portables for new office space 3. Some teachers have carts they have to move around; if the distance it has to be moved is too far, it will be difficult for staff to get to their classes on time C. Strategy suggestion: think about opening space in each building; to prevent spreading departments across too much of the campus? 1. There isn't necessarily the same opportunities for space in all the buildings (e.g. science) D. If we have to add portable/modulars, we may not need to take all these spaces, especially if doing so is going to cause undue hardship or seriously compromise to our programming; if spaces aren't being used, we should use them, but if we cause new mui challenges or make complicated changes, we add little value a^°° 8 p 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II''IC II 'notes March 2020 7-74 E. More discussion is needed on how to manage pressure on core spaces (e.g. cafeteria, gym); LHS faculty thinking of this and have some ideas 1. Four lunches vs 3 lunches? 3 out of the 4 scheduling options developed by the LHS scheduling committee make it impossible to have 4 lunches; the only option that did allow this is very unlikely to be selected F. Worthern Rd triangle? Is this usable for anything? 1. DiNisco will look into it, but not promising G. When thinking about special education spaces, we need more consultation with special education (why were these space created in the first place? How are the programs currently functioning) 1. Generally not thinking we would move programs out, but seems reasonable to revisit what the space needs of the program based upon current and short term needs 2. Agreement that an inclusive environment with peers is the goal for these students H. High school staff will take another pass at the list of potential short term strategies and share their recommendations next meeting III. Alan Levine, appropriation liaison, provided a brief presentation of tax/financial impacts A. See corresponding powerpoint; highlights include: 1. Property taxes main source of revenue for towns 2. When a project is approved, the impact lasts for the term of the bonds used to pay for the project (typically 30 years; this means the debt service would go for 30 years) 3. Project costs can also come at the cost of other projects and town needs 4. Very large projects (over 20 million dollars) almost always done via debt exclusions 5. Cost of building has increased significantly since the late 1990s; (e.g. new Hastings is $65 million versus new Fiske was $13 million); also reimbursements were more generous then 6. Other projects to keep in mind: police station in the pipeline; there had been talk of community center addition on Pelham property, which has since been dropped, but this may come up again; this would be on top of a high school replacement or renovation 7. When repaying, interest is very high in the beginning and then near 0 at the end; inflation another factor; this means the payment is much higher the first 5- 10 years (not like a home mortgage); if the town did structure the debt more like a home mortgage, the overall interest paid would be higher 8. Provided a sketch of the kind of impact on median residential tax bill (with caveats related to the assumptions that had to be made, such as approximate project costs and assumptions about borrowing); intended to help MPC think about how project proposals and Town spending decisions could impact taxpayers; 9. Need to think of the whole picture when we make our recommendations; not too early to think about high school m u� 10. Slide 4 from Budget Summitt II - includes a graph as a useful summary of overall a^°° 8 8 p Y debt service picture 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7-75 B. MPC reactions: 1. With the picture in mind, Lexington limited on what other big projects can be put on the table (i.e. those requiring a debt exclusion) a) Expecting a debt exclusion for police station this December 2. Wondering with the current projects on the table, how are we doing to build up the capital stabilization fund? a) When we make relatively small draws of the stabilization fun (e.g. $8 million), are we keeping this bigger picture in mind? b) Currently projecting this fund to be exhausted with the projects that are already underway; won't be available for high school, but this is not set in stone (1) See History of Capital Stabilization Fund Slide from Budget Summit II 3. Challenge we always have is to accommodate the broad range of interests in town 4. MPC seeking to give conscious consideration of costs 5. MPC members expressed a need to start publicizing with the issues/needs are as it is going to take time for the community to internalize this 6. The Master Plan we are developing is also a communication device a) As such it should acknowledge the anticipated public objections/concerns and how we've attempted to address these b) Should also be transparent about the full range of alternatives that were considered and why these were ruled out C. With the respect to the high school - new high school replacement vs. renovation/build out of existing building? 1. This would be evaluated during the feasibility study; we won't be able to determine this up front 2. Need to revisit LHS heating system IV. LHS Draft MSBA Statement of Interest: Dr. Hackett walked MPC members through elements of the SOI and our draft response (available in enclosure) A. Includes list of MSBA priorities; all important; we believe 7 out of the 8 apply to us 1. Our application emphasizes both overcrowding and condition of building B. The application does limit how much explanation/text we can provide; we must be succinct in our narratives C. Submitting at the end of the month; Dr. Hackett will share final submission when available D. On the radar of the Town boards and Town Manager (who have to vote and sign off on this) V. Approval of last meeting's minutes (January 4) VI. Possible Future Agenda Items: A. LHS SOI update 01 B. Discuss LHS short-term "strategies": Recommendations from staff 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7-76 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, February 8, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Lexington Public Schools Central Office, Upper Level Conference, 146 Maple Street Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr. Julie Hackett Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Marina Levit Peter Rowe Sara Cuthbertson Michael Cronin Charles Hornig Donna DiNisco Daniel Voss Kate Colburn Daniel Abramson Kathleen Lenihan Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liaison) Sandy Bebe (Liaison) Lexington High School Staff Present: Andrew Stephens, Avon Lewis (current LEA President) The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. Corresponding powerpoint presentation and word documents available and referenced below I. Discuss LHS short-term "strategies": Principal Andrew Stephen and Donna DiNisco, DiNisco Design, walked members through LHS spacing mining options and recommendations (see corresponding powerpoint & document) A. Goal to space mine as much as possible within the building; also recommending that we use scheduling and furniture choices to improve space use With increase in total population, expecting increases in other areas (e.g. English Language Learners); need to make sure there is enough space to provide appropriate supports for students 1. Similarly as enrollment increases, staffing will likely increase in some way; need to keep in mind when thinking of the budget 2. Must provide for academic spaces, space for administrative needs (planning spaces, offices, conference rooms, etc,.) and student support services (e.g. counseling, social workers); Parking is also a need C. LHS Space Mining Options & Recommendations document summarizes areas that could be "mined'/repurposed; Principal Stephens provided descriptions and answer questions about each space (e.g. where they were located, what they could be used for and noted challenges) 1. Remaining challenge: how to relieve pressure on core spaces, including cafeteria space? Briefly discussed 3 vs 4 lunches 2. Recommend that we phase space mining options over time as we need them 3. Next year: have opportunities to create more classrooms in space that is currently used by IT, ILP (need to consult with Special education first), for faculty planning/prep space; also plan already in place to expand science Q: Space needs for the general special education population? �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'kiutes March 2020 7.7 A: When thinking about space mining, first identifying areas that are available. And then thinking about how that space needs to be used. This would include any need to expand resource room space or other special education programming. We believe we can absorb special education population increases in our current space. Q: Space needs for a future transition program? A: Would like to host this kind of program, but space at LHS constrains our ability to do this right now. Q: Would hosting this type of program at LHS save money (compared to sending students to an outside program)? A: Very little; costs are comparable Q: Are LABBB enrollments taken into account in LHS enrollments & enrollment projections? A: Need to verify this; If not, will update enrollment information to include and/or re- calculate D. Next Steps: 1. Meet with Special Education regarding space needs and ILP program; Also need to meet with LABBB staff to discuss space needs (including ways in which current space is or is not working); looking for logical opportunities to consolidate where future program numbers are expected to be low and space underutilized, but need to be sure program and services are not compromised in any way 2. Suggestion to conduct a tour of LHS to experience the space (more compelling than floor layouts) II. Draft Statement of Interest (SOI) for LHS A. Walked members through the document and gave an overview of the content; SOI incorporates information from many sources (previous LHS NEASC reports; used Hasting SOI as one model, numbers from the Enrollment Advisory Group, etc.), plus new content to clearly make our case 1. We don't yet know whether there will be anew high school or a renovation of the existing building; this will be determined when we go through the process MPC member formed small groups to closely review sections of the SOI and then provided feedback & edits; members may also email comments & suggestions; highlights of discussion included: 1. Background & History: had some corrections, but basic structure is correct 2. Priority 1: suggest highlighting the security issues; are there other instances where the building design impedes evacuation? Suggest adding in more examples of accessibility challenges and take out reference to town crime statistics 3. Priority 2: needed a better understanding of time on learning issues; suggesting that we underscore the current time on learning and be more explicit; suggest a^°° adding climate control & noise issues; suggesting more explicit definition of 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools IMaster IPlan I Appendx I II''IC II 'notes March 2020 7-78 what the outcomes/benchmarks we want to get out of the building and where we are; perhaps making notes of the fact that students must carry around all their books & belongings throughout the day 4. Priority 7: offering a lot of programs currently, but would like to include a transition program for special education students, expand science offerings (e.g. robotics, engineering), expand/improve vocational connections, do more project -based learning (which can require larger, more flexible spaces) and improve our PE spaces; ability to address time on learning is linked to space 5. Member note: design capacity definitions have changed over time; earlier design capacity definitions did not include the specialized spaces that have become standard aspects of educational programming; 1850 design capacity mentioned in SOI is based on updated standards C. Next Step: Board of Selectmen will review draft SOI on February 11 III. Minutes approved for January 11, 2018 IV. Possible Future Agenda Items: A. Tour of space at LHS �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii3011iic Schools s Ilea steer IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7-79 Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Friday, March 8, 2019 from 8:30 -10:30 a.m. Lexington High School, Library Media Room, 251 Waltham Street Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr. Julie Hackett Sara Cuthbertson Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Charles Hornig Michael Cronin Daniel Voss Donna DiNisco Daniel Abramson Kate Colburn Richard Perry Kathleen Lenihan Joe Pato Alan Levine (Liaison) Sandy Beebee (Liaison) Lexington High School and other Staff Present: Andrew Stephens, Avon Lewis (current LEA President) Powerpoi nts: • Aerial photos of LHS Site • LHS short term strategies The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington Public Schools. I. LHS Statement of Interest (SOI) update: Superintendent Julie Hackett summarized key revisions provided by members during and after our last meeting and described how these were incorporated into the SOI; this will be reviewed by school committee members and shared again with members. II. Review of LHS site over the years starting in 1939 (Presentation prepared by Charles Hornig): Charles Hornig walked members through a number of aerial photos of the LHS site and described notable changes that occured over the years (see attached powerpoint). III. LHS short-term "strategies" presentation and discussion (LHS Principal, Andrew Stephens and Donna DiNisco) A. While we plan toward a new or renovated high school, increases in enrollment are expected to continue; we need to adapt within the current facility. It was suggested that the proposed strategies could be implemented in phases, instead of a wholesale change all at once. B. Since our last meeting, LHS Principal, Andrew Stephens and Donna DiNisco also met with the Director of Special Education. She is in support of the proposed space changes that relate to special education programs. C. In general, LHS currently has a high utilization of spaces (above the typical 85% of use). D. Staff from LHS and from DiNisco Design have reviewed the spaces in question, physically examining them and also met with staff who use these space. 1. Included in these discussions was a reminder from staff that we keep focused on the needs of our students and the high quality program we strive to deliver; there are instances where space can be mined or found, but we must be sure it I....ex ngR.on 1Public Schc olsII' as. .er Plan IIlipp rnd 11" Ili:)C IIWi nut s March 2020 7..80 does not unduly compromise the program and our ability to service and support students. E. The presentation included a summary of considerations that were in mind when coming up and reviewing short term strategies (slide 4); review of enrollment numbers (current & projected) against capacity definitions (slide 5) and walked members through a phased approach to modifying existing spaces within the current facilities to accommodate the growing enrollment. 1. Need to update slide 7 to include +1 in the science lab row for the first two years of the expansion (e.g. portable additions)/mining plan 2. In closer evaluation of space mining ideas proposed in an earlier meeting, some were deemed impractical; for example some changes would mean staff would have multiple assigned classrooms on opposite ends of the school throughout a given day ("would have to outrun students to their next class") 3. Timing of implementation is somewhat flexible; projects can be executed in smaller or larger groupings a) From a student perspective, it might not be ideal to have changes every year (unless the benefits outweigh the disruptions); is it possible to group the construction projects to avoid this? 4. By :2�O2,4...2,5, we will have to begin to make some very difficult choices (e.g. LABBB program participation or those that have more significant financial implications) 5. Suggesting we use portables, not modulars, for any additions; the latter is a more permanent solution, which we wouldn't necessary need/want, given a new or renovated high school on the horizon a) The current plan calls for these additions later on, but it might make more sense to add them sooner rather than later so that we have the opportunity to use them for more years (prior to a new or renovated high school) b) Utility lines are a very important consideration when choosing placement of any portables; slides showed the location of gas and sewer lines (though this needs to verified/finalized) 6. Also included discussion of cafeteria expansion - current commons c:runnO M'CMIIMar&O e the Caon°a CIII 1301-MLff1011, �(,l sdarnc the sur dfflarmd enroMmenL When an exj-dansoul was odl(��OmMy�ar4ed rub a sma&r sddfflon "could accommodate the population on paper, but in practice, the space would be extremely tight and unlikely that students would actually choose to eat there; �hcr(,°d` )rc s Lu"(Iv r CXJD MIS 0a1 i'iu W thE� s Uad a,s 1-ur j-wsed, F. Next steps: Q: Would these come from the capital budget? 1. Pricing okt1D46t0exgattseDw&s needFtorgtdher more information to answer this 2. Will also re-examine the timeline G. Observations and notes from members: a) Regarding moving LEA out of current space in high school: agreement that central office is not appropriate (members need a setting where they feel comfortable to meet with president), but open to placement in any other school b) Current facility is structured with a department focus; this is not in total m u� alignment with interdisciplinary or project based learning approaches,,,,,,, n� 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II',':'C II 'notes March 2020 7.81 c) Over the course of the plan, we will lose the very few large spaces LHS has for large group and/or collaborative instruction and also for large staff or community meetings d) Longer term: the decision between a new high school vs renovated high school has implications for what we do in the short term; if we are talking about renovation, some of these changes can be considered an early investment in a renovation e) We are trying to manage under very tight conditions; what if something unanticipated occurs (i.e. major HVAC system failure)? Would like this as a consideration when planning for the next few years f) Implementation of short term strategies will take time and money to plan and execute; this is on top of the resources needed to formulate and execute the longer term strategy for a new or renovated high school; need to think about what kind of investment we want to make in the short term with the bigger picture in mind IV. Tour of Lexington High School V. Approval of minutes from February 8, 2019 VI. Closing thoughts/next steps �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton IPii,blliic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II'':'C II 'notes March 2020 7.82 IIMAs"rIEIVIII,,,,,, A11TITHING C01MIMIIS "11x 11 IRRIESIIIA "wriIIIA s Agenda e MSBA Statement of Interest Process • Enrollment Projections -1-0- Year History • Current tread's," • Next step$,,/,F"Method logy • Educatiop'al Program equir mi • Community on, nity Involveme- t / Outre Illlllllllllllllllllllllllll of M 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Aliplipendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-83 Statement f Interest Samples Massachusetts School Building Authority Schaal oixe� Taw Outn�t Learner Sa1ie]L ckett TFi_ISfIH1821-1201 Namn oCSahoot lames 1. Mvl�ahev Sabvdssinv-, f 1191- 1 SM CERTIFICATION To be eligible m,nb- s Smmvrnt .1 E,—, (Sol), a Naiad meat certify Iho following C The dl—th—by acknowledges and ol—that 1 -Sol la NOT mapphcrve, fm f—S, and lhatsobmis- offt, SO- .y OL in way—=die MSHA W —PI ' afflilgion app—. ppl,.-, p—id, e gait y�4her typeuffw g. of slaves any oda nbhg.t— oo die ODA * The d'anc hl b, acknowledge, flat to d sMrx shall have wy a,—to Ioode from theMSHA, p—t to 11,01.. c'I0H or the pro f161 CMR200 C Th dsln he by b dg. lh h p f961 CMR 200:h11 ly h d l pr d I', I htch the dtsmrxixs_k gavdot filo, fa ' prti- If mloiopally— d r e�ov 11 d school folly trorn the MSBA pn, w M0 T, o 70B_ F The 1shi h by,--,,dg,,,1h h,I S)I- t 'tg 'pl re d ,imully owned puhiic vchml f-hty . o, d,sln'et thvtiv°vrteuly used —11 —d t,, cd—,publicPreKl2aty- 1: Af the d,,Uil ompOtes �ad ,,b- tl Sol vlu ll} be di- f y txI f 4as and It— sipped hard mpy of the SOI m the M5 k. lith d11 of the! ft,,d dounatwtntion des b d d ate tnh on or before the dead l- C The dial x will schedule end hold a.r g at -A t1,1 School Cowai-1v-, wv vg Ne 1pe11Ctc I—cordninrd in Iho vote "bb roavrhome thceab vofthl,SOL G Thedi,trtd wll xchcduE and hold a mcethtg at tahloh the City Cuvn�ilNoard of Ndutacq Board nCaeJecvne�Jeyuivelwt ming body voted, using We spcabc lavgangec�nrained i¢thc Vox eb. ulhnr'�ethe subtvissioa of tuts SOL On -- do SOldcedllaa the dt,m ull vbmit lh—.—of the eaivg—hloh tltc 6chool Conunrttee tvten lv nuthor-1h Sp d it th'SOL, MSA,, temp! h'h f vce to the,chooland 0, —1- h'hN SOI b'rb b ud wl[be M 1M1 llt ...d b, b, 6 Oe Cheir F She dish hs arranged wi4L the Cd}/Cowa(,Ink —ofy he voeofthe tt} an�ll—Ol of Id—of Bovcdaf Massachusetts School Building Authority School DiStncx L.erin°tnn D,St-t Contact Patrick GtAl.d TBL.(SNI) 961-257 Na—ASI—I Maria lIaztin.S Submission Date 320!2)15 S()1 CEN'I'IFICA'I'ION To bed ,bl :obmita S= tltt—et(SO]l Istria mo: - he lollotvi,, ° Rhe by G - SOI NOT 111 - C f I= b — f f: SOI n } -: I MS61 "4 111 .t rt :pp -r .ppl c:f sip I._ tr-: t} Ic t}g. rt fu tdinL, rr pl c:t}rthc.-rbl rt the MSBA, ° The dm -t h -,by i. 'I hrt rod tihrll ht ve.r ty eit tle Welt to Cords Grn the. MSBA 1 xo.tt to MOL. SOB U p--,,,, ,f X3 CIAR 21R ° The!tit-ct he vby tot 'I sthrtthel rt is ri 963 CMR_DO,hall apply Icdst-ttrtd IIP-t,—it- reti Einirddhrneint I Overview �Eliii iii ddiii eiii t [:1iii ojectiii oiii s I Next Steps • Reconvene Enrollment Advisory Group • Evaluate enrollment projection methods E'8tablish methodology for future projections Provide enrollment trends to MPC by M 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Aipipendx 11011:)C 11:)resentaflons March 2020 7-85 Centurnniii ng ow hrom Educafiaina�rogiram Requiiii eme 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C ll:)iireseiiitafloiiis Im 0 March 2020 7-86 �Elducafioii[� iirogiiraiim I Exisfing Community Oiir Next St e p 0 rw 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C II;:)urtGsGumtafloums March 2020 '7.87 Spaces NFA (1) Spaces NFAM Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA (1) Spaces NFAM Spaces NFAM Core Academic 28 23,850 NFA 26 21,947 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 22 22,067 NFA 24 24,590 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 151 NFA 2 1,727 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 1,067 NFA 2 707 NFA 3 1,430 NFA; Special Ed+Support 16 4334 19 4,874 NFA 23 6,181 NFA 27 7,265 NFA 27 7,712 NFA 36 12,100 NFA 'Art & Music 2 1,961 NFA 3 2,473 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 1 1,748 NFA 3 3,709 NFA 4 4,950 NFA; Health & PE 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,336 NFA 4,572 NFA 6,300 NFA. Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,550 NFA 2,958 NFA 3,600 NFA; Dining 6,122 NFA 5,984 NFA 6,508 NFA 4,883 NFA 5,512 NFA 8,790 NFA. 'Medical /Admin 2,827 NFA 3,002 NFA 2,163 NFA 2,475 NFA 2,240 NFA 3,353 NFA; Custod / Maint. 763 NFA 901 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,607 NFA 1,674 NFA 2,750 NFA 'Other (Lextended) N.P,,gram 0 NFA 1 88 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA; Total Program NFA 45,425 NFA 46,413 NFA 60,595 NFA 50,149 NFA 54,026 NFA 73,465 NFA Gross SF 65,464 SF 67,940 SF 91,840 SF 75,644 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments # of classrooms determined Support spaces Support spaces Support spaces Support spaces undersized undersized adequate undersized q by appropriate support spaces )Z) Harrington uses LCP spaces 2 Gen Ed, 1 DLP )3) g New Hasten s School Review LCP spaceSupport usage Cafe / Gym small spaces adequate q I��I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II Community Oiir Next St e p 0 rw 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C II;:)urtGsGumtafloums March 2020 '7.87 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx 111011°)C II°)Ir s llmtaflollms March 2020 7°.88 Agenda • Historic Planning Decisions • Current Facilities Review Site Space/ Program Building Layout • Existing Available Sites • Right Size Facilities Based Upon: Class Size Policy Program + Equity District -wide SPED Programs 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 � £� y. r ri t t R' �� 13m.nin 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 � £� 11 exington Public Schools Master Plan AIDIDendx 110PC Piireseiiitafloiiis m March 2020 7-90 .......... I [s, ric P�anning Decisions ,R 2015 Mrnit"MeOi/tings result(V in "Q ,onsensus Plan' 111�/ 8-600/�/ otbhltial c 1�vlmzel M171111 0,rrr/ /, 01 I'lude, ,"Sch, I ,btary 61erne t ii lair a &I boW 131"fil"KI Fiskq,,, a r c a & �iiiiii, /viii .. ....... . 1,70/1- 8ri & Y ��dd FiskeH BrionMbrtar new in/ cti,on// H /F Middle/,.,Sp/b, ies- Singl,/e large addition @ Diamond; and Addition at Clarke if Diamond site, too smdtl & Fiske �p uy'vapaciiie./sr- peiiaciii — 7 PKI ,,- Brick -'& Mortar additions at both Clark nd M 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan � Appendx 11011:)C 11:)resentaflons March 2020 M AF/ - March 2020 M H III IIr III : � Ilii Ilii III Ilii III III IIS 2017 School Committee requested further study to increase capacity[ due to further increase in enrollment (thru 2022). Space needs to be reviewed: • Pre -K (LCP) • Elementary Schools • Middle Schools • High School • Central Administration I':'i¢fli Y 6C'in�l i� i v4i ar fvirr rlhn� rii. I < 1 11 1 " Y, H III IIr III [:I�lailqilq III II III III IIS LCP: Expansion opportunities exist at new facility Elementary Schools: PI Evaluate impact to existing space (curriculum, class size, use of core spaces) PI Expansion @ existing facilities PI New construction @. available town owned land Middle Schools: Evaluate impact to existing space (curriculum, class size, use of core spaces) ,Expansion @ existing facilities �w New construction @ available town owned land 0 �1 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-92 High School Planning: 1, Intend to submit IVISBA Statement of Interest Spring 2019 * 2017 interim review of existing space to be used differently * Identify if modular classrooms can be added without interference of future plans * Impact of increasing enrollment without new space (curriculum, class size, use of core spaces) * Review how to accommodate increased enrollment within existing footprint Identify projects for 2019 capital plan (short & long term) in advance of the SOI submission lip 1111 11 1 * Central Administration �v Previous studies identified ~ 20,000 SF as core space required �v Identify space needs at Old Harrington, adjacencies, etc. �v If Old Harrington to be used for educational use, identify options for leased space or use 173 Bedford Street M 0 �rw 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Aipipendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-93 IIS IIS [:I�Ilii IIS III 'IIS g Review existing facilities �v Site �v Space / program �v Building layout Review existing available sites �v Laconia Street �v Old Harrington �v 173 Bedford Street 11 acoinla &ireeSite 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AjDjDendx 11011:)C 11))resentaflons N 12 0 Acires M 0 March 2020 7-94 Elementary Schools (Overview Bowman Elementary School Bridge Elementary School 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 67,905 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 65,425 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 13.3 Acres 29.5 Acres 2014 91,840 GSF 3.4 Acres 2005 76,667 GSF 19.0 Acres 2007, 2017 76,405 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 11.7 Acres Hastings Elementary 2020 110,000 GSF 14.3 Acres 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C Il:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7..95 viii ii [� iirogiiraiim I ES Existing (�) NFA= Net Floor Area (2) Harrington uses LCP spaces, current enrollment (3) New Hastings School, current enrollment (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers II (s) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA II I (3)Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 E ;;;;;; nISI 67,905 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 13.3 Acres 0 81I I� 11..ex ngton 11I Schools III 1Plan I AlippendIx 111011°)C II°)Ir s llmt floiims March 2020 7°.96 Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 26 21,962 NFA 27 22,862 NFA 26 26,446 NFA 20 20,684 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 2 1,727 IN FA 1 541 INFA 4 2,380 NFA 2 7001N1 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support 5 1,671 NFA 7 1,649 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 11 1,321 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 4,051 NFA 10 2,469 IN FA 15 3,779 NFA 18 6,944 IN FA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,469 NFA 3 2,798 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,923 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE :3,:337 NFA :3,:337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,030 NFA 2,030 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only)(6) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical Admin (7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 848 IN FA 859 IN FA 2,832 NFA 1,819 IN FA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 33 NFA 0 NFA 1 1:3:3 NFA 1 1.51 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(9) 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,219 INFA 45,346 INFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 6'7,940 SII= 65,464 SII= 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments seveasndersized dd-da,eagw sevEd G,d-52eaeagw svm ,vddr d svm dvddr-d nrvmsk snob na"debased Poo nrvm�sk snob nam e based Poo PoP�iar;od PoP�iar;o� Facility designed to accommodate enrollment ELL cry Gen Ed Support size enEdupportsiz undersized, ILP undersized Facility designed to Facility designed to accommodate accommodate enrollment without LCP enrollment (�) NFA= Net Floor Area (2) Harrington uses LCP spaces, current enrollment (3) New Hastings School, current enrollment (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers II (s) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA II I (3)Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 E ;;;;;; nISI 67,905 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 13.3 Acres 0 81I I� 11..ex ngton 11I Schools III 1Plan I AlippendIx 111011°)C II°)Ir s llmt floiims March 2020 7°.96 Existing Facilities I Bowman NFA - NetFloor Area Red NFA -apace undersized based upon current enrollment Kindergarten Cla8srooms , 1,000 NFA Gen. Ed. Classrooms <840 NFA 1967, Reno 2014, 2017 67,905 GSF (Ind. Modulars) 13.3 Acres 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 �ElxisIII IIS g FaIII hIII es 3ridge 65,425 GSF (Ind. Modulars) 29.5 Acres M 0 Im 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011:)C 11:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-97 Spaces NFA Core Academic 26 21,962 NFA ELL 2 1, 727 IN FA Gen. Ed Support 5 1,671 NFA Special Education 15 4,051 NII Art & Music 3 2,469 NFA Health & PIE 3,337 NII Library 2,080 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,292 NFA Medical Admin 3,002 NFA Custod Maint. 848 IN II Other (Lextended) 1 88 NII Misc. Support Space 2,692 NFA Total Program NFA 47,219 INFA Gross SF 6-7,940 S1I= Comments Gen Ed Support site & qty —dd- G , ddddr, A-- shouldh— 4 based d,dd PdP -I'dd 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 �ElxisIII IIS g FaIII hIII es 3ridge 65,425 GSF (Ind. Modulars) 29.5 Acres M 0 Im 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011:)C 11:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-97 Existing Facilities I Bridge NFA - NetFloor Area Red NFA -apace undersized based upon current enrollment Kindergarten Cla8srooms , 1,000 NFA Gen. Ed. Classrooms <840 NFA 1966, Reno 2014, 2017 65,425 GSF (Ind. Modulars) 29.5 Acres 2014 �Elxisfiina F adhfies I Estabrook 91,840 GSF M 0 Irw 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011:)C 11:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-98 Spaces NFA Core Academic 27 22,862 NFA ELL 1 541 IN IFA Gen. Ed Support 7 1,649 NFA Special Education 10 2,469 IN FA Art & Music 3 2,798 NFA Health & PIE 3,337 NIFA Library 2,080 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,192 NFA Medical Admin 2,827 NFA Custod Maint. 859 IN I Other (Lextended) 0 NII Misc. Support Space 2,732 NFA Total Program NFA 45,346 NFA Gross SF 65,464 S1I= Comments Gen Ed Support site & qty —dd- Gym d1d,11 A-- shouldh— 4 based d,dd PdP -I'dd 2014 �Elxisfiina F adhfies I Estabrook 91,840 GSF M 0 Irw 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011:)C 11:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-98 i91,840 IIS III V J II 91,8 91,840 GSF 13.4 Acres El o Q ❑ .. El A ❑ El❑ A 0, o al First Floor Basement IIIIIIIIIIIIIII lii I o� III 2007, 2017 . III IISg Fadhfies I Fiske 78,405 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 11.7 Acres 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili)C Il;l'iresentadiio ns March 2020 7..99 Spaces NFA Core Academic 26 26,446 NFA ELL 4 2,380 NFA Gen. Ed Support 8 2,405 NFA Special Education 15 3,779 NFA Art & Music 4 4,705 NFA Health & PE 6,235 NFA Library 3,012 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,919 NFA Medical Admin 2,071 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 2,832 NFA Other (Lextended) 1 1:3:3 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,589 NFA Total Program NFA 60,506 NFA Gross SF 91,840 SF Comments Facility designed to accommodate enrollment IIIIIIIIIIIIIII lii I o� III 2007, 2017 . III IISg Fadhfies I Fiske 78,405 GSF (Incl. Modulars) 11.7 Acres 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili)C Il;l'iresentadiio ns March 2020 7..99 et tFloor Area N = space undersized based upon current enrollment 2007, 2017 78,405 GSF (Ind. Modulars) 11.7 Acres 2005 �Elxisfiing Fadhfies I I ............ larrington 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres M 0 Irw 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011°)C 11°)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-100 Spaces NFA Core Academic 20 20,684 NFA ELL 2 700 IN I Gen. Ed Support 11 1,821 NFA Special Education 18 6,944 IN FA Art & Music 2 2,923 NFA Health & PE 6,334 NFA Library 2,548 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,120 NFA Medical Admin 2,678 NFA Custod Maint. 1,819 NII Other (Lextended) 1 151 NII Misc. Support Space 2,721 NFA Total Program NFA 51,443 NFA Gross SF 75,511 SF Comments ELL qty undersized Gen Ed Support size undersized, ILP undersized 2005 �Elxisfiing Fadhfies I I ............ larrington 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres M 0 Irw 11 exington 11I Schools III III I AIDIDendIx 11011°)C 11°)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-100 ' IIjIN INI I ............ l rrIiIIry II ,E�ENo 0 NFA = Net Floor Area First Floor Red NFA= space undersized based upon anticipated enrollment E of of � of of of III IIII III III ITIN 2005 1 full occupancy 2019 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres 11 1 411, Ins, Y "' rri a, ELL 1 987 NFA 2005 1 full occupancy 2019 78,867 GSF 19.0 Acres I„„„„„„l i220 1100,000 GSF 14.3 Acres I..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili)» Il;l'ir se ntaflons March 2020 7-101 Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 25,052 NFA ELL 1 987 NFA Gen. Ed Support 11 2,517 NFA Special Education 11 4,257 NFA Art & Music 3 3,691 NFA Health & PE 4,543 NFA Library 2,867 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 2,385 NFA Medical / Admin 2,709 NFA Custod / Maint. 1,978 NFA Other (Lextended) 1 352 NFA Misc. Support Space 2,617 NFA Total Program NFA 53,955 NFA Gross SF 89,015 SF Comments Facility designed to accommodate enrollment without LCP I„„„„„„l i220 1100,000 GSF 14.3 Acres I..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili)» Il;l'ir se ntaflons March 2020 7-101 E o� o� � o� o� o� u III , III IIS III III III I[ Ii ❑ �, G�EwU��EAti �oM1,N,E�ENOEo IIIOverview Clarke Middle School 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 145,000 GSF 20.0 Acres 2020 110,000 GSF 14.3 Acres NFA=NetrloorArea111111111111111111111111111111.�1 Red NFA= space undersized based lllllllllllll IIII upon anticipated enrollment Diamond Middle School 1958, Reno 2000, 2017 155,300 GSF 34.6 Acres 0 it IA'A IC lllllllllllll III I 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Ajlpjlpeiindllx I11011:)C II;:)Ir s llmt floiims March 2020 7-102. Spaces NFA Core Academic 30 29,642 NFA ELL 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE 6,300 NFA Library 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 4,445 NFA Medical Admin 3,401 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended) 1 550 NFA Total Program NFA 68,772 NFA Gross SF 110,000 SF Comments Facility designed to accommodate enrollment NFA=NetrloorArea111111111111111111111111111111.�1 Red NFA= space undersized based lllllllllllll IIII upon anticipated enrollment Diamond Middle School 1958, Reno 2000, 2017 155,300 GSF 34.6 Acres 0 it IA'A IC lllllllllllll III I 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Ajlpjlpeiindllx I11011:)C II;:)Ir s llmt floiims March 2020 7-102. E IIu I IIS IIS IIr II ,,,,,,,,i I� O)Net Floor Area of program (2)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 IIIxsfiina adhfies[ r 145,000 SF 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II011i:)C Il;:)r senta to ns March 2020 7-103 Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Su orf2) 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space (3) 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF O)Net Floor Area of program (2)Small Group, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (3) Kitchen, staff lunch 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 IIIxsfiina adhfies[ r 145,000 SF 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II011i:)C Il;:)r senta to ns March 2020 7-103 Existing Facilities I Clarke MS 1972, Reno 2000, 2017 145,000 SF 20 Acres 1958, Reno 2000, 2018 III III IIS III III III 155,300 SF 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C Il:)ir s umtafloums March 2020 7-104 Spaces NFAM Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA Gen. Ed Support 7 962 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA Health & PE 12,575 NFA Library 4,800 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,328 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 1958, Reno 2000, 2018 III III IIS III III III 155,300 SF 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master 1Plan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C Il:)ir s umtafloums March 2020 7-104 FaIII hfies Diamand �MS 1958, Reno 2000, 2018 155,300 SF 34.6 Acres 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 'xisfing adhfies I I ............ ligh SC �� 0 0 1 360,000 SF 56.5 Acres 1111111111111111111�� INNER 4 Iii m 0 11 exing�.on 1Public SchoolsMas�.er 11= lan I Allplipendux 11011:)C ll;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-105 viii ii [� iirogiiraiim I I ............ I ii ii ,,, O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac 1 ii f 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 o°� lighSchool360,000 SF 56.5 Acres - BUILDING K,ENUEaUILoING ,; 1 m F 4�x 180 A' »i; �rM�io'�ll uNoUAGESaUILDNG 01 %dr�Vs „ XZ), �IVn " :PAGE LE GEND First Floor aarE& H-rEEBUILDING llllllll �if�hhhhhhhhhl 11..ex ngton Public c Schools IMaster 1Plan � AllDIDendu II011i:)C I11;:)irose nt tiio ns March 2020 7-106 Spaces NFA(t) Spaces NFA Core Academic 84 57,793 INFA 76 64,600 NFA Science Clrms w prep 22 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 11214 A 76 7,600 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA Special Ed 47 17,947 NFA 44 22,150 NFA Art & Music 19 13,661 NFA 23 9,925 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 23,510 11111 /X 2 15,000 NFA Library 19,050 FIFA 13,656 NFA Auditorium 12,392 11211 A 10,400 NFA Dining only 19,752 FIFA 11,005 NFA Medical /Admin. 11,106 11211 A 9,231 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA Misc. Support Space (4) 17,559 NFA 19,127 SF Total Program NFA 236,068 NFA 242,230 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac 1 ii f 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 o°� lighSchool360,000 SF 56.5 Acres - BUILDING K,ENUEaUILoING ,; 1 m F 4�x 180 A' »i; �rM�io'�ll uNoUAGESaUILDNG 01 %dr�Vs „ XZ), �IVn " :PAGE LE GEND First Floor aarE& H-rEEBUILDING llllllll �if�hhhhhhhhhl 11..ex ngton Public c Schools IMaster 1Plan � AllDIDendu II011i:)C I11;:)irose nt tiio ns March 2020 7-106 'xisfiIISI [ 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 0 ILL 0 I............l i 1 360,000 SF 56.5 Acres — BUILDING Second Floor KIENUE BUILDING I III �Stes I e�iZI LANGUAGES BUILDING SPAGE LEGEND . IIIIIUIII� Irl/// w ,� , , IIIIIIII III �� `Illhhhhhhhhhli �� Harrington Elementary Schools M05 ® Laconia Street Site ]8,86] GSIF 19.0 Acres 173 Bedtord Street a® ® 1968 -17,000 GSIF 12.0 Acres z.n Acres 11..ex ngRcnn Public SchoolsII asl..er Plan I Alippendux II' Ili)C Il;l'urteserntaflorns March 2020 7-107 "'Right Size" Fadhfies m 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Aliplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)iireseiiitafloiiis March 2020 7-108 "'Right Size" Fadhfies I Class Size Policy Elementary School Class Size Kindergarten: 1-18 Grade 1: 1-20 Grade 2: 1-22 Grades 3-5: 1-24 Average 21.5 students per grade Middle School Team Size Team Size 80 - 92 Students Average 86 students per team "Right Size" Faiii hfies I Program Eqtjity Elementary School Equity - Teachers remain in homeroom for prep / planning • Specialists (Art, Music, PE) require 2nd teacher after 20 sections of teaching. • Schools require another teaching space after 24 sections - Cafeteria size to accommodate en Middle School Equity • Teacher planning spaces • Cafeteria size to accommodate en M 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-109 III IIS IIS IIS IIS �.......... � ` � II hSiz p � h � - NFA = Net Floor Area ili Harrington uses 1 -CP spaces (3) New Hastings School (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (s) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage f C„q„i Iy jo YCl �i„i oaIG x. 1., ,,G idf?nt 31, �I�I; 3 roo aI(Av?n I(If?) Updated Enrollment (11/14/18) 2018-19 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminary) 5 Year Elementary - Spaces NFA(1) Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 20,288 NFA 24 20,370 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 19 19,907 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 872 NFA 2 830 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 700 NFA 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support (4) 6 3,070 NFA 10 2,936 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 12 1,861 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 5,018 NFA 10 3,397 NFA 15 3,779 NFA 17 8,223 NFA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,494 NFA 3 2,786 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,381 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE(5) 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical Admin (7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 911 NFA 859 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,819 NFA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(9) 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,144 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments evm iaree eno.eh 10"`ssbara nrom�skIadu, a�mrcnomsi oaod or omer Ems, SPED N-rs oder -d ovm iaree e"�oBh for 1 class ata NroMvskiaddaanaDrch-ml -d or omer Ems, SPED N_rs vd-,nd Facilitydesigned to 9 accommodate enrollment # of classrooms reduced to accommodate ILP Program Facilitydesigned to 9 accommodate enrollment without LCP Facility designed to Y 9 accommodate enrollment - NFA = Net Floor Area ili Harrington uses 1 -CP spaces (3) New Hastings School (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (s) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (9) Stage, kitchen, cafe storage f C„q„i Iy jo YCl �i„i oaIG x. 1., ,,G idf?nt 31, �I�I; 3 roo aI(Av?n I(If?) Updated Enrollment (11/14/18) 2018-19 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminary) 5 Year Elementary - Housing Model (2017-18 Projections - 3096 3140 3154 3168 3182 3196 Not Yet Updated) ± 142 ± 182 ± 224 ± 266 ± 309 2096 3069 3065 3039 3029 3036 5 Year Elementary (CSM LPS) ±65 ± 105 ± 150 ± 191 ± 235 10 Year Elementary - 3096 3086 2998 2891 2835 2804 2801 2754 2863 2969 3034 CSM (Based on MSBA Method) ± 125 ± 205 ± 290 ± 370 ± 455 ± 535 ± 615 ± 700 ± 780 ± 865 0 1rw i1 I Illlllfllllllllllllllllllll 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools Master Plan I Aipipeiindlx 11011:)C Il:)ir s umtafloums March 2020 7-110 . ......... "Right Size" Schods �Educafioiiriiriiraiim 4� [��Iog�� E.S (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) LPS Enrollment is preliminary (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School ........... "Right Size" Schods �Educafioiiriiriiraiim 4� [��Iog�� E.S M 0 11 exington IPublic Schools II aster IPla.n I AIDIDendux 11011l)C Ill'iresentaflons March 2020 7-111 N N 26 547 24 516 27 545 24 516 O 26 579 27 581 20 481 19 409 24 497 24 516 30 457 30 645 153 1 3,106 1 148 3,182 1 3,140 1 3,154 3,168 3,182 3,196 3,034 (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) LPS Enrollment is preliminary (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School ........... "Right Size" Schods �Educafioiiriiriiraiim 4� [��Iog�� E.S M 0 11 exington IPublic Schools II aster IPla.n I AIDIDendux 11011l)C Ill'iresentaflons March 2020 7-111 E .iiExisting i iii iii iii ii ,,,,,,,, ii ii it "'Nez Noor Area or program - ZIMaii urouP, i,WrlSeiors, roiezco, aociai vvorKers wi NRCrlen, stair iuncn 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminary) 5Year MS -CSM 1333 1862 1920 1938 1919 1907 (LPS) ±35 ± 50 ± 60 ± 70 ± 85 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111II e -CSM (Based on MSBA 1833 1862 1920 1938 1919 1907 1851 1865 1749 1674 1596 (Bas Method) ± 120 ± 165 ± 210 ± 255 ± 300 ± 345 ± 390 ± 435 ± 480 ± 525 Illlllfllllllllllllllllllll SII NONNI Ilml 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster (Plan I AIDIDendx II011i:)C II°)rxsxrntaflorns March 2020 7°-112. Spaces NFAO) Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF "'Nez Noor Area or program - ZIMaii urouP, i,WrlSeiors, roiezco, aociai vvorKers wi NRCrlen, stair iuncn 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminary) 5Year MS -CSM 1333 1862 1920 1938 1919 1907 (LPS) ±35 ± 50 ± 60 ± 70 ± 85 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111II e -CSM (Based on MSBA 1833 1862 1920 1938 1919 1907 1851 1865 1749 1674 1596 (Bas Method) ± 120 ± 165 ± 210 ± 255 ± 300 ± 345 ± 390 ± 435 ± 480 ± 525 Illlllfllllllllllllllllllll SII NONNI Ilml 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster (Plan I AIDIDendx II011i:)C II°)rxsxrntaflorns March 2020 7°-112. a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS � ` IISize" Schods (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11 teams = 946 students (2) LIPS Enrollment is preliminary a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS � ` IISize" Schods Options to consider: 0 11..ex n ton Public Schools II aster IPlan I AIDIDendux II' Ili:)C II°)rescrntaflo ns March 2020 7.113 86 914 903 10.5 Teams 86 922 946 11.0 Teams 1,836 1,849 1,862 1,920 1,938 1,919 1,907 1,596 (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11 teams = 946 students (2) LIPS Enrollment is preliminary a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS � ` IISize" Schods Options to consider: 0 11..ex n ton Public Schools II aster IPlan I AIDIDendux II' Ili:)C II°)rescrntaflo ns March 2020 7.113 �Elducafioii[� iirogiiraiim I I ............ IExisting 201 7 O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac ii i a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS i "Right RII h IIz p 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminarv) 5 Yr HS -CSM (LIPS) 2275 2359 2374 2475 2534 2542 ± 30 ± 50 ± 65 ± 80 ± 100 10 -Year High School - 2275 2359 2374 2475 2534 2542 2621 2622 2586 2550 2548 CSM (Based on± 25 ± 40 ± 60 ± 80 ± 100 ± 120 ± 135 ± 155 ± 175 ± 195 ''' MSBA Method) 611 (1) LPS Enrollment is preliminary Illlllfllllllllllllllllllll I00000000000001 Diol 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIDe ndu II011i:)C I11;:)r senta to ns March 2020 7-114 Spaces NFA(t) Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,703 FIFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,897 NFA Science Clrms w prep 22 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 11414 A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 47 17,947 NFA 44 22,150 NFA -4,203 NFA Art & Music 19 13,661 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 3,736 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 43,510 1114 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 19,050 FIFA 13,656 NFA -3,606 NFA Auditorium 12,492 11411 A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,752 FIFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 11,106 11411 A 9,231 NFA 1,875 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space (4) 17,559 NFA 19,127 SF -1,568 NFA Total Program NFA 236,068 NFA 242,230 NFA -69162 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 NFA O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac ii i a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS i "Right RII h IIz p 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval (Preliminarv) 5 Yr HS -CSM (LIPS) 2275 2359 2374 2475 2534 2542 ± 30 ± 50 ± 65 ± 80 ± 100 10 -Year High School - 2275 2359 2374 2475 2534 2542 2621 2622 2586 2550 2548 CSM (Based on± 25 ± 40 ± 60 ± 80 ± 100 ± 120 ± 135 ± 155 ± 175 ± 195 ''' MSBA Method) 611 (1) LPS Enrollment is preliminary Illlllfllllllllllllllllllll I00000000000001 Diol 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIDe ndu II011i:)C I11;:)r senta to ns March 2020 7-114 a ,III IIS °° IIS IIr IIS "Right RII h IIz p Options to consider: o. Short-term Solutions? Long-term Solutions? Non -Building Solutions? o. Brick & Mortar Solutions? 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master Plan I AjDjDendx 11011:)C Il:)resentaflons March 2020 0 Agenda Strategy 2 - Expansion of existing facilities Other existing town -owned sites m Illlllllllllllllllllllllllll of 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s umtafloums March 2020 7-117 W II .Y a Yr ii s c u ii ii �,.. ii r Yr try ii ' ,111 II t ;, ii r Yr II ; ° s c II i ,,1' ,,111 a ii d grade? Highlights: PK w. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ K _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ z _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 6 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. 7 8 9 io ii iz Total _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. enrollment change have Lex. varied in LPS history 250 • Largest elementary schools Children's 69 2263 over 9,600 students in 833 1969, when Lexington had.11 2000 69 based on enrollment are Place three middle schools and I500 one high school. After Bridge, Bowman and Bowman 69 83 87 100 99 108 546 Estabrook 500 a Bridge 62 77 90 101 104 107 ''.. 541 • Current enrollment at the Estabrook Source: SIMS October 1, 2018 middle school level is roughly 76 99 86 102 98 119 580 even across Diamond and Fiske 60 68 64 92 106 90 480 Clarke Harrington 71 73 94 82 74 99 493 • Relatively large cohorts at grades 5, 6 , 8 and 9 g Hastings 63 67 88 75 79 82 454 Clarke 306 296 312 914 Diamond 313 278 328 919 Lex. HS 598 542 572 551 2263 Total69 401 467 509 552 560 574 598 542 572 551 7259 ......... .......... ...... 605 619 640.... ry ........ ......... ............... Source: SIMS October 1, 2018 19 II Pr ,1 n 11 "Y a ,l ,r.. Highlights: ao 3094 • Rate and direction of ..., -, —a enrollment change have varied in LPS history 250 Not depicted: a peak of just 2263 over 9,600 students in 833 1969, when Lexington had.11 2000 11 elementary schools, 3 three middle schools and I500 one high school. After which enrollment dropped precipitously over the next 2 1000 decades. 500 a .... 5 . .... �, a-.� linen (9-1..1) K r ... (i-8 I) Linear (It ,} luwrdr (F-3) I Illi Source: SIMS October 1, 2018 11..ex rngto n11=1 blit Schools (Master Plan I Aipipeiindx II' Ili:)C Il;:)ir s untafloiins March 2020 7.118 II iousiing )eimogirai:Ahic IlAodO for e�ementary projecUons Ulousing stock (# of housing units) Flercentage of housing units occur led by students Average number of students residing in a housing unit with one or more students. To account for non-residentiai students (i.e. ME f CO), a constant is added based on expected eiementary prograrn size Vairiat,ioin oli Coihorft Siuirviva�� Aet,ihod for secondary projecbons UllstorlcalI enroHments by grade to determine cohort progression rates; -.,,-.iJes w gi,,,,-I.de reg )i,edk,,,J l5uture enrvHi,nents Uses 5 year avenage enroHment for K 11 exingtonPublic Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendix 11011:)C ll:)resentaflons m March 2020 7-119 LII:' S had recently expiored producing a 10 year projection based on another version of the Cohort Surniivall Method that uses birth to K progression rates. This rnodei is based on: �::: or K U listorioall birth and K enroOUment to determine' Illlolil ti'n to 4", -�Ir�11rolirn bates U listorioall Ilalilr ll'n arW feryoallo data to caicuiate' fertility rates; V:ertillity rates are «xppiled to projected fernalle popuiations to project future birth counts U listorioall enroOUment for «illi grade to determine cohort progression rates Use 5 year average of progression rates by grade to predict future enroOUments Outcorlrf A tell a1l,',fq,',fliicatiorl uslrl g IIocJrll ernlroiirlr"oellnt data arW evalluatiorn of resuits, tunic Irlr"oon'M wa ri"I'll Allo,'d as a viai'fly too foir Il.exirl gtolrv. I`,i� Years a 6 e year coo Highlights: 450 I Hr mn, , • ative correlation Weak to small negative g 400' cru ra ,, `r�r. �nr� .. sur . � t °utu arra (-.20) between births & K una;..�rw.,. ar "rurr_.._ u�r aiV� enrollment five years later; Births �50 "ager are not a good predictor of LPS K��"uir enrollment U r -'r • With declining Lexington births, z 2'0 model lnderestimate K R ��.., enrollments „ • Underestimated K enrollments will x a have a negative ripple effect on the rest of the grade level 0 7b0 projections, resulting in an inaccurate projection C) cv �r uJ an rte. a'i - ir7 T Q) +Jl C. C1'f Q'i fJ'r S'X 11 CSI In IT {f710 I'"� tXA 0, ^q 1.11 1.7f Q) 0 47 T17, :I' Qa CYY tS1 OJ C.) ".1 ' i , a' fCl �U% 'T r .E' BIR -1 i—I YEAR 11..ex ng'ton Public c ohools Master (Plan I Appendix II' IIi:')C II°')Irosornt thorns March 2020 7.120 In the Pali of 2018, LIFIS reconvened the Enroflment Advisory Group (EAG) to continue expioring alternative approaches to a 10 year enroHment projection and other ways to improve our projections Ise liiir.,cr ,.,)n M,n 3'0 L' crirulli, n e i, i t s d i.), e lid v 15 15 i.), t c i i, e � c;rirvl4i, n e i, i t s Appiy traditional) cohort skmiivall method (based on average 5 year progression rates) on the rest of the grades OutcorywIlrflitiWire "iron w of firojectiorm ,u girl g a Ilnrmair foirecast Ilmsed orn 30 yeaiire°"iriou I C, eri iroiirrfeii,As suggests tihis irlray m a reasormi,,,fle toM to use fair ouir nryfiyfedia te orngeir teirry fliarn'dirg meds 1"rwilever /DN"'O" fc) vive re,,,��E)Jved r(�, gn/- I Iear forecast of future or""i "),f) of 500 Highlights: 450 Uses a knear forecast based on previous 30 years of K enrollments 4c> N to produce 10 years of future K enrollments 350 300 z5f) 200 I Um m . . . . . . . . Forecasi.ed K Enrollmeni. E, 93 11 m 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Appendix 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-121 \,/ldi:.ii Scfi'l'l 0 (ia r r-frollflfi lfl.kwrloj,I",cttoIf. -°History --- Forcecast ° Lower 90th — Upper 90th 20, 20, 2009 0 20,20TT 2OT2 -'0 "0 -0 -0� 20/0 20, 20, 2O, 20r0 200 -'0 -'0 -'0 "0 ?Ors -'0 202 08 0. 10 1J 1r 10 1p u7S S76' 6.2 1 8 d'r9 920 `f r`'2 �',P 2c 2s. 26. 2j 2�p 829 FISCAL YEAR mmNI 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan III'pIlpe nd II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7-12.I. 2150 2050 1950 1850 ----------------------------------------------- Year 1750 2019-20 1862 ± 25 0z 1650 2020-21 1921 ± 401 1550 2021-22 1938 ± 50 0 z 1450 2022-23 1919 ± 60 13§0 2023-24 1903 +70 z 1250 2024-25 1848 +80 2025-26 1838 +90 1150 2026-27 1851 +100 1050 2027-28 1887 ± 115 950 2028-29 1895 + 125 -°History --- Forcecast ° Lower 90th — Upper 90th 20, 20, 2009 0 20,20TT 2OT2 -'0 "0 -0 -0� 20/0 20, 20, 2O, 20r0 200 -'0 -'0 -'0 "0 ?Ors -'0 202 08 0. 10 1J 1r 10 1p u7S S76' 6.2 1 8 d'r9 920 `f r`'2 �',P 2c 2s. 26. 2j 2�p 829 FISCAL YEAR mmNI 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan III'pIlpe nd II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7-12.I. I l g S c [ 0 0I 0 ""6"', aI �r-f r o � 1"-f t I'Gc tI01"-f S 2700 2600 2500 2400 --------------------------------------------- 2300 Year 3500 2019-20 P ± 70 z a 2200 2019-20 2347 ± 20 c 2020-21 2362 ± 20 2100 3300 2021-22 0 2021-22 2468 +25 w 2000 2022-23 2527 ± 25 m E 1900 2023-24 2536 +30 z ± 55 2 3100 2024-25 1800 2024-25 2614 +30 3108 +45 2900 2026-27 1700 2025-26 2614 +30 3134 2026-27 2576 +35 1600 2027-28 2539 +35 1500 2028-29 251,8,,,,,,,,, +40......... 1400 —History ^-— Forcecast -Lower 90th --- Upper 90th 200) 2008 2009 20'10 207j 20x2 2073 ?07 X07 '-07 20'rJ 2,7 '-0 20`'0 -'0 20`2 202 ?02� 2025. 2026, 202, 202 '08 00 70 '17 72 'r,9 lv Q%, S%s S%? 78 8iy 9i.0 27 FISCAL YEAR �i l Cl. al y lbs a r -f r o � I f c1.I0I-fS 3900 3800 3700 3600 YearN 3500 2019-20 3067 ± 70 z 0 3400 2020-21 3063 ± 70 3300 2021-22 3042 ± 65 0 2022-23 3039 ± 60 m 3200 � 2023-24 3056 ± 55 2 3100 2024-25 3095 +50 3000 2025-26 3108 +45 2900 2026-27 3121 +40 2800 2027-28 3134 +35 2700 2028-29 ................. 3147 ........., +30 ............, 2600 --History---Forcecast °ww ,-Lower 90th — —Upper 90th 200 2019&, 200 207 207 207 207 20 DC7 20 207 20 20 202 "0 "0 20a 20c " .,02 20c c,02 -0 >0 p '9,r O7. 77 2l 21 jA, jS j6, �7 j8, 7 02 12 2`' ''�`' 92 S2 G2 2�2 b 9 O 7 ? 3 F 7S 76 JJ 8 "'0" FISCAL YEAR mmM'I 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I Allplipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s umtafloums March 2020 i"-rtr 5 air i,, -f r o 1"-f t rl" c t� 01 c S --History --- Forcecast - - - Lower 90th - - - Upper 90th 20 0 ,-,-9 " 207 0 '-, "', 20, "0 "0 �,O , "0 20 �202022"0 " d" /0 1 t 0 "9?b 0" 22 23 2Q FISCAL YEAR i" -f 1. a r y 5 a i,, -f d 10 a r �� i,, -f r o ICI r oji c tI o i -f s Ov,"� r I a Id —History — Forcecast - CS M Lower 90th - CSM Upper 90th - CSM 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 Z 3400 LL 3300 0 3200 Z 3100 3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 0, 200 -, 20, '0, '0, '0, 20 " 2a'6,'0 /6,5 "�P /1 0 '0, "0 , / q, e 16' 2j 28 d:29 FISCAL YEAR 0 In 11 exington 11= ublic Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 m 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 Z 3400 3300 0 3200 -----------------------------------------------z 3100 Year 3000 2019-20 3140 +142 2900 2020-21 3154 +182 2021-22 3168 +224 2800 2022-23 3182 +266 2700 2023-24 ........................................... 3196 +309 .................... 2600 20 0 ,-,-9 " 207 0 '-, "', 20, "0 "0 �,O , "0 20 �202022"0 " d" /0 1 t 0 "9?b 0" 22 23 2Q FISCAL YEAR i" -f 1. a r y 5 a i,, -f d 10 a r �� i,, -f r o ICI r oji c tI o i -f s Ov,"� r I a Id —History — Forcecast - CS M Lower 90th - CSM Upper 90th - CSM 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 Z 3400 LL 3300 0 3200 Z 3100 3000 2900 2800 2700 2600 0, 200 -, 20, '0, '0, '0, 20 " 2a'6,'0 /6,5 "�P /1 0 '0, "0 , / q, e 16' 2j 28 d:29 FISCAL YEAR 0 In 11 exington 11= ublic Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 m Updated �Einiirdhimeint (12/06/2018) 2018-19 Elementary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 5 Year Elementary - 3093 3140 3154 3168 3182 3196 Housing Demo. Model ±142 ± 182 ± 224 ± 266 ± 309 9; 3067 3061 3036 3026 3034 5 Year Elementary ±65 ± 105 ± 150 ± 190 ± 235 (5 year average K) 10 Year Elementary 3093 3067 3063 3042 3039 3056 3095 3108 3121 3134 314 (linear forecast K based on prior 300 ±70 ± 70 ± 65 ± 60 ± 55 ± 50 ± 45 ± 40 ± 35 ± 30 years) • Recent enrollments have fallen slightly BELOW the projections generated by the housing model and ABOVE projections produced by cohort survival models Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllm Updated iii iir d hii ii 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 5 Year MS - CSM (5 1833 1862 1921 1938 1918 1903 year average) +35 ± 50 ± 60 ± 70 ± 85 10 Year Middle (linear forecast of K 1 333 1862 1921 1938 1918 1903 1848 1838 1851 1887 1895 based on prior 30 ±25 ± 40 ± 50 ± 60 ± 70 ± 80 ± 90 ± 100 ± 115 ± 125 years) YrrSH)S — CSM 2347 2362 2468 2527 2536 ( );° ± 30 ± 50 ± 65 ± 80 ± 100 10 Year High School 2233 2347 2362 2468 2527 2536 2614 2614 2576 2539';; 2513 (linear forecast of K ±25 ± 25 ± 30 ± 30 ± 35 ± 40 ± 40 ± 45 ± 45 "' ± 50 based on prior 30 years) • Recent enrollments atthe high school level have fallen ABOVE projections produced by cohort survival models. PON Illllllllllllllllllllllllllliii I..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AII'pIlpernd II' Ili:)C Il;:)resernfaffo ns March 2020 7-12.5 "'Right Size" Faiii hfies Right Size Facilities Based Upon: SIONYMM ) I (Ei4,n7m SnIW) rnmn • Size "folic y ,IM,W JIB IV liv Elementary: Average 21.5 Students/classroom H ,,l lffi„, 1,11 A liv Middle: Average 86 students per team ................ ..................... ............................... • Capacity Fdm�joi I liv Capacity for planning purposes is defined by usin/'j,' lave ecass size stated above • Program+ Equity )IJIlliq 0111y) liv ES: Additional program spaces required > 24 cla§sf66'rhs (i.e. additional Art, Music) �)Ilhoi (I oxioijOodi \�i<�(, Soppoil S'Ipm,( I livrcmai MS: Shared classrooms, Teacher Planning Prorjnarn 1`41FA . .............. • District -wide SPED Programs SIF. liv Ensure proper space to accommodate District -wide ED Programs IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIC M 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AlippendIx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-126 "'Right Sii ze" Fadhfies I Program Eqtjity Elementary School Equity • Teachers remain in homeroom for prep / planning • Specialists (Art, Music, PE) require 2nd teacher after 20 sections of teaching • Schools require another teaching space after 24 sections for specialists Cafeteria size to accommodate en Middle School Equity • Teacher planning spaces • Cafeteria size to accommodate en III IIS IIS IIS IIS �.......... � ` � II hSiz p � h � S NFA= Net Floor Area"' ' Harrington uses LCP spaces N) New Hastings School (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (s) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (s) Stage, kitchen, cafe storageUn (.,IlIldy.-,#/Clel„iooa,,x,1., p rOkI;31'oom(A-rnll,)r:) 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendlx II' Ili:)C II;:)urt s umt floiins March 2020 7-127 Spaces NFA(1) Spaces NFA Spaces IN NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 24 20,288 NFA 24 20,370 NFA 27 27,601 NFA 19 19,907 NFA 24 25,052 NFA 30 29,642 NFA ELL 1 872 NFA 2 830 NFA 3 1,225 NFA 2 700 NFA 1 987 NFA 3 1,430 NFA Gen. Ed Support (4) 6 3,070 NFA 10 2,936 NFA 8 2,405 NFA 12 1,861 NFA 11 2,517 NFA 12 3,922 NFA Special Education 15 5,018 NFA 10 3,397 NFA 15 3,779 NFA 17 8,223 NFA 11 4,257 NFA 24 8,176 NFA Art & Music 3 2,494 NFA 3 2,786 NFA 4 4,705 NFA 2 2,381 NFA 3 3,691 NFA 4 4,966 NFA Health & PE(5) 3,337 NFA 3,337 NFA 6,235 NFA 6,334 NFA 4,543 NFA 6,300 NFA Library 2,080 NFA 2,080 NFA 3,012 NFA 2,548 NFA 2,867 NFA 3,600 NFA Dining (Cafe only) 3,292 NFA 3,192 NFA 2,919 NFA 2,120 NFA 2,385 NFA 4,445 NFA Medical Admin (7) 3,002 NFA 2,827 NFA 2,071 NFA 2,678 NFA 2,709 NFA 3,401 NFA Custod / Mai nt. 911 NFA 859 NFA 2,832 NFA 1,819 NFA 1,978 NFA 2,340 NFA Other (Lextended)(8) 1 88 NFA 0 NFA 1 133 NFA 1 151 NFA 1 352 NFA 1 550 NFA Misc. Support Space(9) 2,692 NFA 2,732 NFA 3,589 NFA 2,721 NFA 2,617 NFA 4,366 NFA Total Program NFA 47,144 NFA 45,346 NFA 60,506 NFA 51,443 NFA 53,955 NFA 73,138 NFA Gross SF 67,940 SF 65,464 SF 91,840 SF 75,511 SF 89,015 SF 110,000 SF Comments evm carp-.qh I�r t ola5bara AroMv-It dHa I,rch-,/ oaod orol=rl SPED murseu�ders��d evm carp-.qh I�r t ofa5bara A--dHa I,rch-,/ oaodor"'r e', saeo murseu�d-,;� Facilitydesigned to 9 accommodateI enrollment I # of classrooms reduced to accommodate ILP Program I Facilitydesigned to 9 accommodate enrollment without LCP Facility designed to Y 9 accommodate enrollment NFA= Net Floor Area"' ' Harrington uses LCP spaces N) New Hastings School (4) Math/ Lit Specialists, Counselors, Metco, Social Workers (5) Gym should be - 6,000 SF for 2 simultaneous classes (6) Dining should be 15 NFA per occupant/seating @ 3 seatings (7) Medical should be min. 500 NFA (s) Custodial should be 2,500 NFA (s) Stage, kitchen, cafe storageUn (.,IlIldy.-,#/Clel„iooa,,x,1., p rOkI;31'oom(A-rnll,)r:) 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendlx II' Ili:)C II;:)urt s umt floiins March 2020 7-127 NOW Spaces NFAM Spaces ; NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA j 26 547 24 516 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA 27 545 24 516 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA / 2.6 579 27 581 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA 20 481 19 409 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA �� '✓' 24 497 24 516 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA 30 457 30 645 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA 153 3,106 148 3,182 3,067 3,063 3,042 3,039 3,056 3,147 70 +/- 70 +/- 65 +/- 60 +/- 55 +/- 30 j - 3,137 3,133 3,107 3,099 3,111 3,177 (1) Capacity @ # Classrooms x 21.5 Students per classroom (Average) (2) LIPS Enrollment projections 12/06/18 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (3) Harrington uses LCP Spaces (4) New Hastings School E .iiExisting i iii iii iir ii ,,,,,,,, ii ii IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIInPi "INI&r ruur rvea ui Pruyram -aman uruuP, i,uunseurs, iwercu, auciai wurrcers wi NRUIlen, wail iuncn RM 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster IPlan I AII'pIlpe ndux II011i:)C II°)rsse ntafio ns March 2020 7°-1228 Spaces NFAM Spaces ; NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA Gen. Ed Support 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA Health & PE incl. Fitness Rm 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA Dining only 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF "INI&r ruur rvea ui Pruyram -aman uruuP, i,uunseurs, iwercu, auciai wurrcers wi NRUIlen, wail iuncn RM 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster IPlan I AII'pIlpe ndux II011i:)C II°)rsse ntafio ns March 2020 7°-1228 (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11 teams = 946 students (2) LIPS Enrollment projections 12/06/18 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years viii ii [� iirogiiraiim J I ............ I ii ii ,,, PON IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1 iii MENNEWO/WoMs ,ME Elm ,F/////// NFA(t) Spaces NFA / / �wm NFA Core Academic 84 57,703 FIFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,897 NFA Science Clrms w prep 22 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA 86 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 914 903 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA j 10.5 Teams -22,400 NFA Special Ed 47 17,947 NFA 44 22,150 NFA 922 86 946 13,661 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 3,736 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 11.0 Teams ` 1,836 2 1,849 1,862 1,921 '1,938 1,918 1,903 1,895 13,656 NFA -3,606 NFA Auditorium +/-25 +/- 40 +/- 50 +/- 60 +/- 70 +/- 125 Dining only 10,752 FIFA 1,897 1,971 1,998 1,988 1,988 2,020 (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 Clarke: 86 students per team x 10.5 teams = 903 students Diamond: 86 students per team x 11 teams = 946 students (2) LIPS Enrollment projections 12/06/18 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years viii ii [� iirogiiraiim J I ............ I ii ii ,,, PON IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1 iii O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac 1 0 11..ex ngton Public Schools II aster IPlan I AII'pIlpe ndu II011i:)C I11))rese ntafio ns March 2020 7.129 Spaces ,ME Elm ,F/////// NFA(t) Spaces NFA / / �wm NFA Core Academic 84 57,703 FIFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,897 NFA Science Clrms w prep 22 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 11414 A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 47 17,947 NFA 44 22,150 NFA -4,203 NFA Art & Music 19 13,661 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 3,736 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 43,510 1114 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 10,050 FIFA 13,656 NFA -3,606 NFA Auditorium 12,492 11411 A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,752 FIFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 11,102 11411 A 9,231 NFA 1,875 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space (4) 17,559 NFA 19,127 SF -1,568 NFA Total Program NFA 236,068 NFA 242,230 NFA -6,162 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 NFA O)Net Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac 1 0 11..ex ngton Public Schools II aster IPlan I AII'pIlpe ndu II011i:)C I11))rese ntafio ns March 2020 7.129 �� i�im I,,,,,,,,,,,, ii l,,,,,,,,. in fteint 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 5 Yr HS — CSM 2347 2362 2468 2527 2536 11 (LPS) 63 2,275 2,527 252 2,614 2,513 238 +/-100 +/-40 +/-50 ± 50 2,627 ± 80 2,654 2,563 2018-19 Secondary Forecasts with 90% Confidence Interval 5 Yr HS — CSM 2347 2362 2468 2527 2536 11 (LPS) 63 ± 30 ± 50 ± 65 ± 80 ± 100 10 Year High School 2263 2347 2362 2468 2527 2536 2614 2614 2576 2539 2513 (linear forecast K ±25 ± 25 ± 30 ± 30 ± 35 ± 40 ± 40 ± 45 ± 45 ± 50 based on prior 300 years) • Recent enrollments at the high school level have fallen ABOVE projections produced by cohort survival models. (1) LPS Enrollment projections 12/06/18 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII n 11..ex ngton (Public Schools II aster IPlan I AII'pIlperndu II' Ili:)C II°)rescrnfafio ns March 2020 7.130 Capacity Strategies Options to consider: o, Short-term Solutions Long-term Solutions Non -Building Solutions o, Brick & Mortar Solutions P,, Other Capacity Strategies � So Short-term Solutions Re -purposing or space mining of elementary, spaces (e.g. Literacy rooms, art or music rooms) Long-term Solutions If ES enrollment decreases, demolish &'r6place Bridge or'B& and/or use as swing space , 1, A E3 Brick & Mortar Solutions Create a new, third middle school (equal Use of Old Harrington Use of Laconia / Land Swap with othert, naw Build a second high school Equal in size or; 1 larger + 1 smaller w/ special 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C 11:)resentaflons March 2020 M Capacity Strategies � So i17 (( � , Long-term Solutions t„ Other Solutions (Grade configurations) �I Use Old Harrington for one grade �I Create a new, third middle school plu,s,add 5th grade to all n �. schools (creating 5 - 8 middle schools) �I Move 8th grade to "new" high school Capacity Strategies 0 Re -purposing or space mining of elementary spaces (e.g. Literacy rooms, art or music rooms) School Space Available Resulting Capacity "Right Sized" Gen. Ed. Classrooms Current Student size Capacity (21.5 Stu/Clrm) Art (1) MusicLibrary, Literacy, "Prof Dev." Total Possible Clrm Units Possible Student Capacity (21.5 Stu/Clrm) Gym Cafeteria capacity �! Bowman 24 516 1 1(2) 0 26 559 /2 size gym / 1 class at a time 215 per seating / @ 3 seat = 645 Brid/f e y 24 516 1 1(2) 0 26 559 1/2 size gym / 1 class at a time 213 per seating / L& 3 seat = 638 Estabrook 27 581 2 1(3) 1 (4) 31 667 Full gym / 2 classes simultaneous 195 per seating / C& 4 seaL:::.778 Fiske 19 409 1 1(5) 0 21 452 Full gym / 2 classes simultaneous 141 per seating/ @ 3seat =565 Harrington 24 516 1 2 (5) 0 27 581 2/3 gym / 2 classes simultaneous? 159 per seating / @ 3seat=636 Hastings 30 645 2 2 (5) 1 (4) 35 753 Full gym / 2 classes simultaneous 296 per seating / @ 3seat =889 Grand Total 148 1 3,182 166 3,569 3,147 Confidence Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, +/-30 Total Capacity 3,177 0 (1) Requires Art of a Cart Challen e is to consistent) allocate students where em t classrooms are located 2 1 small classroom remains for Music g Y empty 11 O : # of classrooms in each school does not equal the same # of classrooms / grade (K-5) H^^^ (5) No music room remaining C Fiske, Harrington and Hastings 111111111111111111111111111111119, 3 Music shared with Cafeteria L. (4) 1 Professional Development Room available O 9 9 9 11..ex nglc.on Public Schc olsII asl..er Plan � AIDIDendx 111011°)C II°)Ireseiiitaflollms March 2020 7-132 Capacity If ES enrollment decreases, demolish & replace Bridge or Bowman and/or use as swing space 25 547 24 516 516 26 559 27 545 24 516 0 0 0 23 579 27 581 581 31 667 20 481 19 409 409 21 452 24 497 24 516 516 27 581 �30 457 30 645 645 35 753 153 3,106 148 3,182 3,111 3,177 2,666 140 3,010 * Deploy the Short -Term solution to disperse Bridge enrollment * Challenge is to consistently allocate students where empty classrooms are located * # of classrooms in each school does not equal the same # of classrooms / grade (K-5) * Would only deploy this option if the enrollment forecasts remain consistent IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII iii Pi Capacity Strategies 0 Brick & Mortar Solutions IPI Create a new, third middle school (equal in size or smaller) Use of Old Harrington Use of Laconia / Land Swap? New Middle School at Old Harrington 7.5 acres 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx II011i:)C I11;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7.133 Capacity Land swap with Laconia for improved access, topography? ...,m..a � , .. Illlllllllllllllllllllllllll oio Capacity . r i 0 Brick & Mortar Solutions 01 Create a new, third middle school (equal in size or smaller) (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 students / team III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII iii o 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIDerndu II' Ili:)C Il;:)reserntafio ns March 2020 7.134 Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Spaces NFA Core Academic 33 25,479 NFA 38 29,052 NFA 27 25,650 NFA Science Clrms 10 10,645 NFA 12 12,649 NFA 9 11,250 NFA ELL 1 968 NFA 1 491 NFA 2 900 NFA Gen. Ed Support 7 962 NFA 3,126 NFA 6 1,175 NFA Teacher Planning 1 2,224 NFA 1 3,695 NFA 1 2,000 NFA Voc. Tech 3 2,931 NFA 3 2,624 NFA 3 3,600 NFA Special Ed 18 8,221 NFA 26 8,513 NFA 6,275 NFA Art & Music 4+3 9,360 NFA 3+3 7,958 NFA 2+3 6,790 NFA Health & PE (incl. Fit. Rm) 12,575 NFA 11,783 NFA 10,300 NFA Library 4,800 NFA 4,938 NFA 4,800 NFA Dininq onIv 4,147 NFA 5,695 NFA 4,500 NFA Auditorium / Stage 5,950 NFA 5,554 NFA 7,000 NFA Medical /Admin. 3,894 NFA 2,922 NFA 5,900 NFA Custod / Maint. 2,433 NFA 2,943 NFA 3,450 NFA Misc. Support Space 3,328 NFA 3,151 NFA 3,185 NFA Total Program NFA 97,917 NFA 105,094 NFA 96,775 NFA Gross SF 145,000 SF 155,300 SF 145,000 SF (1) Capacity = # of students per team (86) x # teams (Average) Team size range 80 - 92; average = 86 students / team III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII iii o 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIDerndu II' Ili:)C Il;:)reserntafio ns March 2020 7.134 Capacity Brick & Mortar Solutions 01 Create a new, third middle school (equal in size or smaller) / 914 86 903 49% 82 861 34% 10.5 Teams 10.5 Teams 922 86 946 0 51 /0 82 902 36% 11.0 Teams 11.0 Teams 1,849 3rd Middle 86 774 82 738 30% 9 Teams 9 Teams 1,836 2,623 2,501 1,938 1,895 +/-50 +/-125 1,988 2,020 Capacity Strategies 0 i7- - - T THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN J FIRST FLOOR PLAN 01 (3) Teams/ grade x 3 grades = 774 Stu. Increased parking for Harrington ES — 100 cars Parking for MS 200 Cars Requires "land swap" moun IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III II 0 i i 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I Aliplipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)reselrntaflo ns March 2020 '7.135 Capacity Capacity Strategies N �DL I) W WUNPONIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII FIRST FLOOR PLAN ? (3) Teams/ grade x 3 grades = 774 Stu. Parking for — 150 Cars I, Access concerns Miuul III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan III'pIlpe nd II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7-13 Capacity Current Grade Configuration & FY 2019 Enrollment (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III II CapacityStrategies Current Grade Configuration & Peak Enrollment Elementary 401 467 509 552 560 605 3,094 3,182 Clarke 308 286 319 913 Middle 1,833 1,849 Diamond 311 288 321 920 High 598 542 572 551 2,263 (2) 2,250 Total 401 467 509 552 560 605 619 574 640 598 542 572 551 7,190 7,281 (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III II CapacityStrategies Current Grade Configuration & Peak Enrollment (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students in FY 2028-29; Schools Split 49% / 51% High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 0 811 ilk I 11..ex ngton Public c 3chc ols IMaster 1Plan I II'pIipeumdu II011i:)C Il;:)urteseumtafloiims March 2020 7-137 Elementary 442 496 523 549 572 595 3,177 (1) 3,182 Clarke 323 329 337 990 Middle 2,020 1,849 Diamond 337 343 351 1,030 High 641 622 640 660 2,563 (2) 2,250 Total 442 496 523 549 572 595 660 672 688 641 622 640 660 7,760 7,281 (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students in FY 2028-29; Schools Split 49% / 51% High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 0 811 ilk I 11..ex ngton Public c 3chc ols IMaster 1Plan I II'pIipeumdu II011i:)C Il;:)urteseumtafloiims March 2020 7-137 Capacity Create a new, third middle school �:fllu s add 5th grade to all middle schools (creating 5 - 8 middle schools) (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 - Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students less5th grade in FY 2028-29 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students plus 5th grade in FY 2028-29 Middle School program would need to be confirmed / "fit" to site(s) High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII m o Capacity Strategies 0 Move 8th grade to New High School (creating 8-12 high school) Elementary 442 496 523 549 572 595 3,177 3,182 Clarke 323 329 0 653 Elementary 442 496 523 549 572 0 2,582 3,182 Clarke 202 224 228 234 888 934% 1,332 1,849 Diamond 337 343 0 Middle Diamond 936% 214 238 242 248 942 2,615 2,623 3rd MS High 179 198 202 206 688 641 622 640 785 3,251 2,250 Total 930% 496 523 549 572 595 660 672 688 641 622 640 660 7,760 7,281 (2 High 641 622 640 660 2,563 2,250 Total 442 496 523 549 572 595 660 672 688 641 622 640 660 7,760 8,055 (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 - Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students less5th grade in FY 2028-29 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students plus 5th grade in FY 2028-29 Middle School program would need to be confirmed / "fit" to site(s) High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII m o Capacity Strategies 0 Move 8th grade to New High School (creating 8-12 high school) (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students less 8th grade in FY 2028-29 High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 plus 8th grade in 2028-29 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendux II011i:)C Il;:)reseumtafoiins March 2020 7-138 Elementary 442 496 523 549 572 595 3,177 3,182 Clarke 323 329 0 653 Middle 1,332 1,849 Diamond 337 343 0 679 2 High 688 641 622 640 660 3,251 2,250 Total 442 496 523 549 572 595 660 672 688 641 622 640 660 7,760 7,281 (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students less 8th grade in FY 2028-29 High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 plus 8th grade in 2028-29 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendux II011i:)C Il;:)reseumtafoiins March 2020 7-138 Capacity Move 8th grade to New High School (creating 8-12 high school) Move 5th grade to Middle School (creating 5-7 middle schools) (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students less 5th grade in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students less 8th gradeIlus 5th grade in FY 2028-29 High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 Ius 8th grade in FY 2028-29 Capacity f, r III 0 0- Build a second high school Equal in size or; 1 larger + 1 smaller w/ specialized programming (focus on arts) o�te.�i_� I'nrtc� f 1ro¢z1 41 ; dry ? raj t dry z sr�, i �r�, I,of, MS4a r� e�, i .Items to consider: 111 �� _ r J`4 FA Z,,r,1<.., rl<: gr,�r�,IIA ., ................................................................................................................ �!r,, gram �'�' ; ;r() N1 /., Elementary 442 496 523 549 572 0 ; (;) 1I A, �� jI ��) 1 %� � iconomy of sc(Ie 2,582 3,182 1 i1 wlpj pgM,pusesl - Clarke _ ��; IIIA Ho�I 292 323 329 0 1�r,�r,I�IA Aodilorioni 944 Ir� �� ,<, �I� , I�I7�1 fl1�glcu; l Ad rlr'�, ;� ; i II ! i Gwio rc,iu r _ 1%IjI/ .._ _ ��;'71,IiiA I✓II`;, ';,Upporl �;w1 o _ _ - 1 N1 /, - - �rrr 1',J, l ek �, rlrf( ill ,k 242,,.,r! ill Middle If 601`F .a4 Ft 1,927 1,849 Diamond 303 337 343 0 983 High 688 641 622 640 660 3,251 2,256 Total 442 496 523 549 572 595 660 672 688 641 622 640 660 7,760 7,281 (1) Assumes Harrington and Hastings capacity increases by FY 2020 (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity Elementary Enrollment @ 3,177 students less 5th grade in FY 2028-29 Middle School Enrollment @ 2,020 students less 8th gradeIlus 5th grade in FY 2028-29 High School Enrollment @ 2,563 students in FY 2028-29 Ius 8th grade in FY 2028-29 Capacity f, r III 0 0- Build a second high school Equal in size or; 1 larger + 1 smaller w/ specialized programming (focus on arts) o�te.�i_� I'nrtc� f 1ro¢z1 41 ; dry ? raj t dry z sr�, i �r�, I,of, MS4a r� e�, i .Items to consider: 111 �� _ r J`4 FA Z,,r,1<.., rl<: gr,�r�,IIA ., ................................................................................................................ �!r,, gram �'�' ; ;r() N1 /., �, q y ; (;) 1I A, �� jI ��) 1 %� � iconomy of sc(Ie �� )IIIA; 1 i1 wlpj pgM,pusesl - 1';r,t,I�I/ - _ ��; IIIA Ho�I — — — — - - — — 1�r,�r,I�IA Aodilorioni 10"100 N1 A Ir� �� ,<, �I� , I�I7�1 fl1�glcu; l Ad rlr'�, ;� ; i II ! i Gwio rc,iu r _ 1%IjI/ .._ _ ��;'71,IiiA I✓II`;, ';,Upporl �;w1 o _ _ - 1 N1 /, - - �rrr 1',J, l ek �, rlrf( ill ,k 242,,.,r! ill If 601`F .a4 Ft PON IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I Alippendllx 11011°)C II°)Iresellmtafloiilms March 2020 7-13 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx 111011°)C II°)Ir s llmtaflollms March 2020 7-140 Agenda 9 Updated LHS Space Summary (2,640 st 4, Discuss final "strategies" and rankings Tax/financial impacts LHS draft IVISBA Statement of Interest 9 Closing Thoughts/Next Steps / ............... I,.-- .- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiii 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-141 �Elduca;iii oiiiii ogiiraiii I I ............ IS Updated 2,201 S,ti..j ri, �Elduca;iii oiiiii ogiiraiii I I ............ IS Projected 2,,640 S,ti..j Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 "18,"191 IN FA 76 64,600 NFA -6,009 NFA Science CIrms w prep 32 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 II14 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 47 "18,284 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -7,896 NFA LABBB 20 5,272 NFA 0 SF 5,272 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness) (3) 4 43,510 N 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library "10,050 NFA 13,656 NFA -3,606 NFA Auditorium 12,592 N 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dininq on1V "10,752 NFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 12,595 N 9,231 NFA 3,364 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,991 NFA 246,260 NFA! -2,269 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SFJ 14,043, O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spacmiii ri, �Elduca;iii oiiiii ogiiraiii I I ............ IS Projected 2,,640 S,ti..j I M 11 exington 11= ublic Schools Master 1Plan I AiDiDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)iireseiiitafloiiis March 2020 7-142 Spaces NFAM o Spaces OWN I I NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,703 FIFA 90 76,500 NFA -18,797 NFA Science CIrms w prep 22 24,718 NFA 23 37,920 NFA -13,202 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 6 3,000 NFA -118 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 II14 90 9,000 NFA 1,174 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 18 28,800 NFA -28,800 NFA Special Ed 47 "17,94.7 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -8,233 NFA LABBB 20 5,272 NFA 0 SF 5,272 NFA Art & Music 19 13,661 NFA 27 11,425 NFA 2,236 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness) (3) 4 43,510 N 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library "10,050 NFA 16,400 NFA -6,350 NFA Auditorium 12,592 N 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dininq on1V "10,752 NFA 13,200 NFA -2,448 NFA Medical /Admin. 06 N 10,585 NFA 521 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,605 NFA -191 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 16,490 NFA 22,244 SF -5,754 NFA Total Program NFA 223,781 NFA 284,259 NFA -60,478 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 414,480 SF, -54,88 O)Net Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac I M 11 exington 11= ublic Schools Master 1Plan I AiDiDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)iireseiiitafloiiis March 2020 7-142 �Elxisfiing Fadhfies 1953, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 ............ g �� S C � 00 1 360,000 SIF 56.5 Acres �Elxisfiing Fadhfies First Floor MI, 01 1 1153, Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 ............ ljg� SC�O 360,000 SIF 56.5 Acres . . . .. . . .. . . . "y ............ SPACE EGEND m 11 exington 1Public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendux II' 11l)CIll'iresentaflons March 2020 7-143 III .III IIS Second Floor 1953 Additions 1955,1962, 2000, 2014 adhO ligh 360,000 SF 56.5 Acres SWFIAC Strategies r °r 61� __ �_ I -CE LEGEND .�TM ..TM � m..� IIIIIIIIII J% ®llllllll� .Na ��, � � � �� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII C School Master Planning Advisory Committee (SMPAC) Strategies to Employ if Enrollment Outpaces Capacity at Lexington High School LETTER STRATEGYNVHAT IF WE... SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS PROS CONS SOLUTION RANK ORDER TYPE (ST, MT, LT) A Increase class sizes at Lexington Donna D. has the data on this. +adding one student on average -current educational philosophy Long -Tenn High School by 1 additional student would free up the equivalent of a suggests a personalized approach per class. small elementary school. to looming; teachers already express concern about the higher class sizes and the range of needs B Include more modular additions for Two modular units added to LHS +modular units are an attractive -there is no available land at LHS Short- to LHS and consider putting them on in 2014 (17,000 sf) and 2015 temporary solution for additional modules, unless we Medium -Term another site, such as Laconia. (8,000 sf for Special Education). used some of the field space -modulars are becoming as costly as permanent builds C Engage in more space -mining According to the data DO +if we have significantly more -athletic participation rates that Short -Term activities to determine if it is possible presented previously, the athletic space than is typical, are already lower than average at to repurpose any of the athletics NSF space at LHS is significantly approximately 25% may decrease space for classes temporarily. above what the MSBA with less space recommends. -LABBB Collaborative students share part of this space; need to determine how much. D Relocate specific departments and/or A plan is in the works to relocate +temporarily freeing up space, -space at CO is limited; would Short -to services housed at LHS to central two IT rooms to Central Office even a classroom or two at LHS need to add modular units to CO Medium -Term office or other locations. when LC Pmoves into their new will help alleviate enrollment -it is difficult to select which space and out of CO. Two full- pressure departments or services should sized classrooms will be freed up relocate at LHS, which we will use to alleviate the Science lab space - crunch. E Consider temporarily relocating the From MK: Arington and Belmont +temporarily relocating LABBB -partner districts are experiencing Short -to LABBB Collaborative to one of the both have a new high school in with the intention of reintegrating enrollment increases similar to Medium -Term other partner districts. the works - space there? them into a new or renovated LHS ours, so space is not available Burlington has a high school built would send an important signal to for —2K with an enrollment of —1 K students and families about the to r c't yr importance of inclusion 11..ex ngRcnn Public SchoolsII asl..er Plan I Alippendllx I' II°)C II°l'Ireselrnta llo ns March 2020 7-144 SWFIAC Strategies SWFIAC Strategies enrnlln. i.rnt)-from the enrollment classroom or two -out-of-district placements are numbers it appears there should very costly; in -district costs be space to move the program typically are around $50K per there, is that a possibility? student; out -of -district costs can FROM JH: Arlington, Bedford, be as much as $200K per student and Belmont all have new high -it would be impossible to free up schools/additions in the works. space unless all students in a sub - The MSBA is funding Arlington separate in -district program went and Belmont; Bedford is self - out -of -district; it is highly unlikely funding their project. JH checked that all parents or team members with superintendents at Dec. would agree through the IEP LABBB Board of Directors process that this would be the meeting, and projects are well - best plan for their child. I (Schedule Change) Implement a underway. Burlington just added +a creative scheduling option - is this doable with the union, Short -Term schedule change at LHS. For LABBB headquarters into BHS. such as the one proposed could after-school and busing impacts? example, add an extra block in LHS Discussed the possibility of free up space at LHS day. There could be a late release moving LABBB temporarily to the and an extra free block during the day Burlington Mall, as significant sf for students. will be available within 18 months. Next LABBB BOD meeting will be J (Schedule Change) Implement a focused on space. +double sessions per day could -cost prohibitive? Short -Term F Consider LABBB relocation within the LABBB bought a respite house in +the health and well-being of a -the availability of suitable Medium- to Town of Lexington and determine Lexington recently after years of Town or school community largely property is highly limited Long -Term what specific locations are available. searching for a location. The depends on its diversity; it would more teachers to make this work population is at the school for the facility is used to provide respite be wonderful to keep LABBB For example, sessions could run minimum amount of overlap. care and life skill training to students in Lexington from 8:30 — 12:30 p.m. and 1:00 — LABBB students. Given the 5:00 p.m. challenge and expense of finding -how would we manage a new location, it is difficult to transportation and what kind of imagine that any suitable space cost increase would there ti K (Schedule Change) Reduce one will be found. On the other hand, +the proposal would free up -cost prohibitive? Short -Term grade's worth of students at L.HS per LABBB Collaborative may be in a approximately 20% of the existing -would need to consider time on day of the school year by utilizing the position to make such a purchase space, assuming 8'h grade was learning to determine if the hours G Withdraw from LABBB agreement Lexington has been part of the +we would free up space at LHS -we would likely pay much higher Long -Term and no longer be a member of the LABBB Collaborative for over 50 rates for students who attend the Lexington, Arlington, Bedford, years. Withdrawal from the LABBB c Belmont, Burlington). agreement is, of course, possible, -would need to cost out summer over 6 weeks of summer. The time but not preferable. instructional time (teachers, H Increase out -of -district special When we move to the new LCP, +if the district was able to -need to consider least restrictive Short- to education placements to free up we will be able to bring students cutplace an entire sub -separate environment; sending students out Medium -Term additional space. back to Lexington who were program, you might free up space of district is the most restrictive grade wise. (Monday - no 8th outplaced for two reasons. (1) its that is the equivalent of a setting SWFIAC Strategies my IN 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master Plan I Aipipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:glr se ntafloIrns March 2020 � n�� better for the child in most cases classroom or two -out-of-district placements are tobe closer to his/her home and very costly; in -district costs fid ends; and (2) its less costly. typically are around $50K per This recommendation is at odds student; out -of -district costs can with our philosophy. be as much as $200K per student -it would be impossible to free up space unless all students in a sub - separate in -district program went out -of -district; it is highly unlikely that all parents or team members would agree through the IEP process that this would be the best plan for their child. I (Schedule Change) Implement a Schedule changes are currently +a creative scheduling option - is this doable with the union, Short -Term schedule change at LHS. For under review at LHS. A such as the one proposed could after-school and busing impacts? example, add an extra block in LHS committee has been working on free up space at LHS day. There could be a late release the possibility forthe last 18 and an extra free block during the day months. It would be difficult to for students. radically alter the process at this Point. J (Schedule Change) Implement a The School Committee recently +double sessions per day could -cost prohibitive? Short -Term schedule change that includes double voted on a later school start at give some students a much -later -would either need to shorten the sessions per day, or stagger school LHS of 8:30 a.m. to be start time that actually may be school day or add significantly start times so that the entire LHS implemented in 2020. more conducive to learning. more teachers to make this work population is at the school for the For example, sessions could run minimum amount of overlap. from 8:30 — 12:30 p.m. and 1:00 — 5:00 p.m. -how would we manage transportation and what kind of cost increase would there ti K (Schedule Change) Reduce one +the proposal would free up -cost prohibitive? Short -Term grade's worth of students at L.HS per approximately 20% of the existing -would need to consider time on day of the school year by utilizing the space, assuming 8'h grade was learning to determine if the hours summer. We would offset school part of LHS added up to the required 990 'instruction time by taking up two hours of student learning time per months of school time. That would be MA laws and regulations. about 180 hours of instruction if done -would need to cost out summer over 6 weeks of summer. The time instructional time (teachers, saved could be worked Into the transportation, lunches, etc.). regular Sept -June schedule by giving a mid -week day off to L iTS students grade wise. (Monday - no 8th graders; Tuesday- no 9th, my IN 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools Master Plan I Aipipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:glr se ntafloIrns March 2020 � n�� SWFIAC Strategies uuo Strategies Wednesday - no 10th, and so on). P Thus, effectively reducing one whole There has been some talk about a +this seems like a very real -how would we relocate students Long -Term grade level's presence in the school at a time. new build on the existing track, as possibility; especially if there is no on the same campus when space L. Utilize available commercial spaces space is extremely limited. + Brookline worked out a similar -not sure whether exploring Short -to 'm neighboring towns for 1-5 years arrangement with an office options in towns otherthan Medium -Term until our enrollment bubble dissipates building located close to a school, Lexington is viable. or use as swing space9 so it is a possibility. while renovations occur (e. g., 9t" M Encourage neighboring private high -would there be unintended Short -to schools to hold recruitment drives at consequence for the reputation of Medium -Term L.HS. Require minimum number of the Lexington Public Schools if we admissions offers from each school were promoting private R for that privilege. Similar The idea that was discussed in a +it would be great to have a education? Long -Term "recruitment" effort for Minuteman previous meeting about swapping smaller, more manageable high -a decrease of a handful of Tech? land with the Town to find a more school size students doesn't necessarily similar to the Newton North and buildable site would be useful as create more space N Require Minuteman Tech to 'host` It has been stated that Minuteman +it would be terrific to work out an -not sure we can require MT to Short -Term S some of our students. Tech will be at 70% capacity after arrangement with MT to develop partner with us as described Long -Term on a second site. Consider a house the new build. They are programming for our students in -could work out a formal approach or a specialized focus, such considering no longer offering the LLD Program and/or for those agreement with MT as part of our as the Arts. LABBB the one classroom used students in the middle. partnership with them T Buy buildings/properties near existing for a vocational technical program +approximately 50+ LHS students -difficult to find properties, and Medium- to schools to ensure there is space to for students. (and likely many more) could once they're found, Town must be Long -Term grow. Consider moving specialized them know about the problems we benefit from real-world, hands-on, ready to move on a purchase, programs into a building near the high are trying to solve and see what authentic learning experiences. which is difficult to coordinate C Work with neighboring towns to utilize Arlington tried to find swing space +if we built a new high school and -would need to develop a proposal Short -Term their extra capacity, If any, In their so they could go with a preferred could use the existing Minuteman and a monetary offer for MT, well schools, plan for a new high school, but Tech as swing space, it would be in advance of any U Explore the possibility of acquiring they were unsuccessful. They ideal acknowledgement from the MSBA Long -Term land by eminent domain. Identify looked everywhere, including becomes more difficult to obtain about the possibility of a new possible land acquisitions and Minuteman Tech. At the time, school construction project. determine how they can be used and they were told MT was going to for what purpose. demolish the old school building. V Explore space -mining options with They are now hearing that MT is +there is approximately 35,000 -it would be very difficult to carve Short- to LHS spaces that are more generous interested in leasing space to NFA over the Ml out space in open areas, such as Medium -Term than the MSBA guidelines to Higher Education to generate recommended NFA an auditorium determine whether there they can be revenue. Could we use the -to what extent do LABBB repurpdsed. $20MM public-private partnership students use the Health/PE for the MT athletic complex as space? leverage to use MT as swing -how does the NFA and GSF space while a new ITS is being differ? What else do we need to built? uuo Strategies 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflolrns March 2020 � n� P Expand and/or renovate existing high There has been some talk about a +this seems like a very real -how would we relocate students Long -Term school buildings. new build on the existing track, as possibility; especially if there is no on the same campus when space space is extremely limited. other land for a new build is already at a premium? +adding stories may be an option - Would need to consider a temporary move by grade level while renovations occur (e. g., 9t" grade is temporarily relocated to Minuteman Tech or temporary police station while wing under construction during LHS rend). R Build second high school on a The idea that was discussed in a +it would be great to have a -where would we find the land? Long -Term different site that will hold the same previous meeting about swapping smaller, more manageable high number of students as LHS (e.g. land with the Town to find a more school size similar to the Newton North and buildable site would be useful as Newton South concept). we explore this option. S Build a second, smaller high school See above. +it would be a reasonable way to -the high percentage of students Long -Term on a second site. Consider a house free up space at LHS and could in specialized programs like the approach or a specialized focus, such lead to a very creative, inventive Arts would make this a difficult as the Arts. solution choice T Buy buildings/properties near existing Would it be worthwhile to reach -difficult to find properties, and Medium- to schools to ensure there is space to out to a real estate agent to let once they're found, Town must be Long -Term grow. Consider moving specialized them know about the problems we ready to move on a purchase, programs into a building near the high are trying to solve and see what which is difficult to coordinate school. ideas, if any, they may have? -it's hard to dismantle a school community; how would we identify which programs would leave? U Explore the possibility of acquiring Has anyone ever developed a list +important to consider as land -very difficult on residents when Long -Term land by eminent domain. Identify of possibilities? What municipal becomes more difficult to obtain this is enacted possible land acquisitions and department would have this determine how they can be used and informai for what purpose. V Explore space -mining options with At last MPC meeting, we learned +there is approximately 35,000 -it would be very difficult to carve Short- to LHS spaces that are more generous the following: NFA over the Ml out space in open areas, such as Medium -Term than the MSBA guidelines to • Teacher Planning = 10,174 recommended NFA an auditorium determine whether there they can be NFA (7,600 — MSBA) -to what extent do LABBB repurpdsed. • Health/PE=43,510 students use the Health/PE (15,000 — MSBA) space? • Auditorium = 12,592 -how does the NFA and GSF (10,400 — MSBA) differ? What else do we need to 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflolrns March 2020 � n� SWFIAC Strategies iii iii iii iii l iii hi ;iii iii Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllnll Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllnl 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 � n�� • Medical/Admin=11,106 know? NFA (9,231 — MSBA) W Grade reconfguration - move 8th In 2010, the Supt. oversaw a plan +could work if students were -LHS would be enormous with Long -Term grade to ITS level (when new high to integrated 650 eighth graders separated by houses, which is close to 3,000 students school is available). into a ITS in former distract. Not consistent with the direction LHS easy, but can be done has considered in the past successfully. iii iii iii iii l iii hi ;iii iii Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllnll Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllnl 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 � n�� A Few Financial Considerations for Capital Planning Alan M. Levine Appropriation Committee January 6, 2019 This presentation represents my perspective and has not been seen or vetted by the Appropriation Committee. Background • This presentation concerns potential impacts on property taxes of capital projects. • Capital projects that are generally financed through Prop. 2.5 debt exclusions result in tax increases that last for the term of the project - related bonds. • Projects that are not financed via debt exclusions have financial implications but do not directly lead to tax increases. • Large capital projects are almost always done via debt exclusions, while mid-size pro ects are sometimes done via debt exclusions. Small projects are done w/�o any exclusion. • A quantitative understanding of the cumulative impact on taxes of excluded project costs is important for capital planning. 1....exiington IPii3011iio Schools Master IPlan I Appen6x I IP,'IC Fresentaflons (March 2020 7.148 Debt Exclusions for Capital Projects ( FY1999 - 2008) High School and middle schools (2000) $52,235,000 Schools, roads, Lincoln Park (2003) $42,550,000 Public Services Bldg. (2008) $25,180,000 10 -year total $119,965,000 Less reimbursements from MSBA, Recreation Lincoln Park $1,500,000 School projects ? 10 -year net ? Debt Exclusions for Capital Projects ( FY2009 - 2018) Bridge, Bowman, Estabrook (2012) $51,800,000 Middle Schools & Elementary Modulars (2017) $71,663,200 Hastings, new LCP, Fire Station (2018) $92,398,760 10 -year total $215,861,960 Less reimbursements from MSBA Estabrook School $11,984,641 Middle Schools ? Hastings School (approx.) $16,900,000 10 -year net ? �Ixc 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,Olic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I IP,'ICIP, rese taflo nMarch 2020 7-14 Some Proposed Capital Projects that are Candidates for Debt Exclusions ( FY2019 - 2028) Police Station (2019?) $25,000,000 High School Replacement (2025?) $300,000,000 Community Center addition (??) $15,000,000 10 -year total $340,000,000 Less reimbursements from MSBA, CPF ? 10 -year net ? Approximate impact on a typical (median) residential tax bill • Caveats apply to this sketch (project costs, reimbursements, times, interest rates, mitigation potential, etc.) • Assume borrowing under a debt exclusion(s) of $300,000,000 for 30 years at 5% with no mitigation by use of monies in the Capital Stabilization Fund • Debt service: $10,000,000 per year for 30 years - principal payments, and $15,000,000 in interest declining to zero over 30 years First full year involves about $25,000,000 in debt service • For comparison - for FY 2019 the non -excluded tax levy will raise about $176,000 000. The tax impact of $25,000,000 on top of this (and on top of the excluded debt service for previously approved projects) would be roughly 12% to 15% or about $2000/year for a median -assessed residential property. 1....exiiirtgton Pii,,Olic Schools Master IPlan I Appendx I II''IC Fresentaflons March 2020 A Few More Thoughts • The replacement of Lexington High School is a singularly large project • Approval of a debt exclusion for that project is not assured • Debt exclusions for other capital projects could affect the chances of approval of a high school project • Other projects should only be pushed after consideration of the entire financial picture • It is not too early to begin planning for a high school project • Planning should consider all aspects - educational, administrative, financial, etc. • Financial aspects that should be discussed: Ramp up balance in Capital Stab. Fund? Fund H.S. project only through debt exclusion? s° APRI 191" Budget Summit 11 I Debt Service .t rojectr.°ons Deceir . er 6,2018 0 r 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-151 Town, of Lexington Budget Summit I/ General Fund, Within Levy Debt Service Projected Debt Service: General Fund Within Levy $18,000,000 $16 000 000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $ FY 19 FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 21 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 1Y 21 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30 FY 31 FY 32 FY 33 FY14 FY 35 FY 36 FY 11 FY 38 FY 39 FY 40 uuuuuuu�eneal wn a li—ell msanea l was l Lana Pu(u nis 1) wwzoa eras wnd Plq wcure 1e lovas Pmlecr,----11F g,— Authorized g nAuthorized General Fund Debt General Fund (Issued) $ 7,580,077 $ 5,890,988 $ 4,929,932 $ 3,699,184 $ 2,393,018 $ 1,944,858 $ 1,200,058 $ 872,632 $ 428,962 $ 175,480 General Fund (Land Purchases)') $ 3,050,000 $ 2,234,614 $ 2,403,450 $ 2,403,450 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - General Fund (Unissued) $ - $ 1,542,615 $ 5,203,495 $ 4,900,374 $ 4,638,111 $ 3,925,952 $ 3,056,202 $ 1,367,302 $ 1,308,523 $ 1,258,156 Subtotal Authorized Debt $10,630,077 $ 9,668,216 $12,536,876 $11,003,007 $ 7,031,129 $ 5,870,810 $ 4,256,260 $ 2,239,934 $ 1,737,485 $ 1,433,636 Unauthorized General Fund Projects: 2% $ 919 $ 621 $ 710 $ 325 $ 574 1% --------------------------------------------------------------mr.-..Within Levy-Deb[SeMceas-%.ofRevenue(Before .Mitigation).......................................................... S 'bo D FY2020 General Fund Projects (2) $ - $ 440,839 $ 2,497,704 $ 2,732,184 $ 2,657,660 $ 2,583,135 $ 2,471,473 $ 2,391,750 $ 2,312,026 $ 2,232,303 Total Projected GF Debt Service $10,630,077 $10,109,056 $15,034,580 $13,735,191 $ 9,688,789 $ 8,453,945 $ 6,727,734 $ 4,631,684 $ 4,049,512 $ 3,665,938 CSF Mitigation $ 573,500 $ 225,000 $ 4,400,000 $ 3,800,000 $ 500,000 $ $ $ $ $ Net Project Debt Service $10,056,577 $ 9,884,056 $10,634,580 $ 9,935,191 $ 9,188,789 $ 8,453,945 1 $ 6,727,7341 $ 4,631,6841 $ 4,049,512 1 $ 3,665,938 (1) Principal paydown of Bond Anticipation Notes for 173 Bedford St. and 20 Pelham Rd. land purchases (2) Includes $17.3M of capital projects that were submitted for the FY2020 budget that may be funded with general fund, within levy debt (Minuteman Athletic Complex $5M, Center Streetscape $8.2M, Equipment Replacement $900K, Sidewalk Improvement $BOOK, LPS Technology $1.75M, DPF Mechanical Systems $600K) * Future General Fund projects assume a 5% increase in debt funded cap ital projects in each subsequent budget year and an 8 -year average maturity Summit 11 2 Debt as a percentage of Gross Revenues Within Levy Debt Service as a % of Gross General Fund Revenue 7% 2014 6.45% 2016 2017 2018 2019 2120 6.18% 1011 2011 6% Within Levy Debt Service- Authorized Issued & Unissued olu,, ...... e ^„ $ 6,525 $ 6,730 $ 5%480% 9,388 $ 10,630 e * 483/ 467%. IS 7,17 f IS b V I 4.38% 4417d' Al "'.+ M—Ijl 4% - $ - $ -S 463% 467% ._ 3,9/r S '1.17'x, a 33+6% 3311/ Less: Land Purchase Note Pay -Down $ - 3% 30 r .n"""353o.e 356% 362%`... _.._ ................................... 2,351 $ 3,050 IS 2 2 3b IS 2.^I)3 IS 3,06% 3113% 3170. 3.34% 3.03 %_ Less: Within Levy Debt Mitigation 2% $ 919 $ 621 $ 710 $ 325 $ 574 1% --------------------------------------------------------------mr.-..Within Levy-Deb[SeMceas-%.ofRevenue(Before .Mitigation).......................................................... S 'bo D L Net Within Levy Debt (A+B-C-D) $ 5,417 -o-Within Levy Debt Service as % of Revenue (After Mitigation) 6,110 $ 6,328 $ 0% $ "d 9 $ U" $ 9,7 f"1 0. 11,"':'4119 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Fiscal Year 4oduars m000sl 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2120 2011 1011 2011 202d1 Within Levy Debt Service- Authorized Issued & Unissued $ 5,417 $ 6,525 $ 6,730 $ 7,038 $ 9,388 $ 10,630 IS 9 hh9 `; 12.03/ IS 11,OD3 IS 7,17 f IS b V I Within Levy Debt Service- Future Projects* $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -S W E 2.h '2 S 3,9/r S '1.17'x, 1' y`,,121 Less: Land Purchase Note Pay -Down $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,351 $ 3,050 IS 2 2 3b IS 2.^I)3 IS 2,41)3 S Less: Within Levy Debt Mitigation $ - $ 919 $ 621 $ 710 $ 325 $ 574 22 "M r 3.fW S 'bo D L Net Within Levy Debt (A+B-C-D) $ 5,417 $ 5,606 $ 6,110 $ 6,328 $ 6,712 $ 7,006 $ "d 9 $ U" $ 9,7 f"1 0. 11,"':'4119 $ 1 t,991 Gross General Fund Revenue $ 177,272 $ 184,930 $ 193,583 $ 203,261 $ 214,544 $221 321 0119 11" $ 1`4":4,1r74i $ 2424 `V $ 2d 91 (911 $ 2Lf,r1&1 WINO Levy Debt Seivice as 11. of, fiteversue 4tlel�rre.l�fjtlstltjAni 3.061 3.53°/a 13,48°l0 3,*tt*°� 4.38°1a 4,84°l0 4, 1°l0 6AS°/a 6.18%4.63%a 4,#11A, Wthitl Levy Debt Sei'vicees 11 of ' Reverfue After Mitigation) IN% 3.83°/a..13,16`-4 ..3,11°l 3;13°/a 3,.17"I 3,3441 156%1621%4:03%a 4,8fi°fa, In rllu tlss p,.c rt.d tle bt for FY2020 General Fund r. pit.I requests entl future General Fund projects assuming en ennuel5%inoses. in tle1 fund.d capital projects entl en 8-yserevere gs maturity 3 1..ex nglc.on 1PLtbl c Schools IMaslP. ar Plan I AIDIDeiijidx II' Ili:)C Il;:)u* S umtafloumS March 2020 7-152 'Tozvn of Lexington Projected Debt Service: Exempt Debt General Fund, Exempt Debt Service Exempt Debt pssued) $13888,493 $12,779022 $11949962 $11,527,773 $10935822 $ 9083870 $ 8827,499 $ 8563,978 $ 8,152,483 $ 7,606,354 Exempt Debt(Unissued) $ $ 2763317 $ 6517,213 $ 6,379916 $ 6,242619 $ 6,105322 $ 5968024 $ 5609,450 $ 5483,216 $ 5356,983 Unauthorized Exem $ 3,777,229 $ 7,606,944 $ 7,303,823 $ 2,163,317 $ 6,517,213 $ 6,379,916 $ 4,638,111 $ 3,925,952 $ 6,242,619 $ 6,105,322 $ 3,056,202 $ 1,367,302 $ 1,308,523 $ 1,258,156 $ 5,968,024 $ 5,609,450 $ 5,483,216 $ 5,356,983 Unauthorized Pro' cts: rots: Police Statiom5wing Space $ $ $ 2,198909 $ 2,154931 $ 2,110953 $ 2066975 $ 2022996 $ 1979018 $ 1935040 $ 1891062 Total Projected Exempt Debi Service $13,888,493 $14,942,339 $20,666,085 $20862,620 $19,289,393 $17,256,166 $16818,519 $16,152,446 $15,570,739 $14854,399 Theoretical debt service on a Lexington High School mcombuction pmject assuming design ault-tion at 2021 Annual Town Meeting Town o Le'xTdli��➢�1 Bud,get Summit 1.1. Projected Debt Service: Within Levy 8 Exempt 4 as Total General Fund Debt Service $500oa,000 $45,000,000 $40.000,000 M00a.a00 $30000.000 $25.000.010 $20.000,010 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 E- FYt9 FY2] FY2t FYT1 FY23 FY24 FYZS FY26 FY9 FY2B FY21 FY?O FY3t FY32 FY33 FY34 FY35 FYaS FY3] FY38 FY3U F1'40 FY41 FY42 F1'93 FY44 FY45 FYI FY4] FY48 FY49 FY50 uos....,ir.,.n0•=.,+nl •r r n�(iro,.M ix. w.oar .n V�� .nl ex.,. n..uo.M1��F.�T F m n�{u..K..n/ nnnn �..,�r.,m � rn.,.. �...i r.�n � ixs Pv.nmwrxm Authorized Funded Debt FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 General Fund(Issued) $10,630,077 $ 5,890,988 $ 4,929,932 $ 3,699,184 $ 2,393,018 $ 1,944,858 $ 1,200,058 $ 872,632 $ 428,962 $ 175,480 Exempt Debt (Issued) $13,359,169 $12,779,022 $11,949,962 $11,527,773 $10,935,822 $ 9,083,870 $ 8,827,499 $ 8,563,978 $ 8,152,483 $ 7,606,354 Authorized Unfunded Debt General Fund (Unissued) Exempt Debt(Unssued) $ - $ $ 3,777,229 $ 7,606,944 $ 7,303,823 $ 2,163,317 $ 6,517,213 $ 6,379,916 $ 4,638,111 $ 3,925,952 $ 6,242,619 $ 6,105,322 $ 3,056,202 $ 1,367,302 $ 1,308,523 $ 1,258,156 $ 5,968,024 $ 5,609,450 $ 5,483,216 $ 5,356,983 Unauthorized Pro' cts: FY2020 General Fund Projects $ $ 440,839 $ 2,497,704 $ 2,732,184 $ 2,657,660 $ 2,583,135 $ 2,471,473 $ 2,391,750 $ 2,312,026 $ 2,232,303 Police Stahon(Swmg Space $ $ $ 2,198909 $ 2,154931 $ 2,110953 $ 2,066,975 $ 2022996 $ 1979018 $ 1935040 $ 1891062 Total Proected GF Debt Service $23,999,247 $25 $25,051,395 $35,700,665 $33,797,912 $28,979,192 $25,7110,11 11 25710111$23546253 $20,784131 $19,620,251 $19,520,338 Future General Fund Projects projects a 5% increase in debt funded capital pmjects in each subsequert budget yearassu ring an 8 -year average matixity " Theoretical debt service on a Lexington High School reconshuction project assunning design authodzaton at 2021 Annual Town Meeting 5 1..ex ngR.on 11= Llbl c Schools IMas, . ar Plan I AIDIDeiiidx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s umtafloums March 2020 7-153 r j Capital Stabilization Fund Budget Summit 11 Next Steps in the Budget Process... I..ex r�gR.o � 1PL�bk w Schools IMas,. ar Plan I AjDjDeiidx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s iitafloiis 0 r March 2020 7-154 History of Capital Stabilization Fund Appropriations and Interest into the Capital Stabilization Fund Anticipated Use of Capital Stabilization Fund Ending Balance FY2013 $1,601,835 $1,601,835 FY2014 $2,388,868 $3,990,703 FY2015 $4,057,762 $8,048,465 FY2016 $8,677,481 $16,725,946 FY2017 $7,187,263 ($710,000) $23,203,209 FY2018 $8,119,224 ($2,724,500) $28,597,933 FY2019 $3,604,745 ($5,073,500) $27,129,178 FY2020 (est.) $1,600,000 ($3,725,000) $25,004,178 FY2021 (est.) ($11,407,000) $13,597,178 FY2022 (est.) ($6,315,000) $7,282,178 FY2023 (est.) ($499,000) $6,783,178 FY2024 (est.) $6,783,178 Budget Summit 11 Next Steps in the Budget Process... I..ex r�gR.o � 1PL�bk w Schools IMas,. ar Plan I AjDjDeiidx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s iitafloiis 0 r March 2020 7-154 Ali IIIIIIII� Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllno 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IIi Plan I Alippendix II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-155 AgendaI LHS SOI Update Discuss final HS "strategies" and rankings Closing Thoughts/Next Steps 0 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-156 m 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Aliplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)iireseiiitafloiiis March 2020 7-157 LHS Strategies � Considerations • All suggested re -use strategies are short-term (until new HS complete) • ILP Program has not been reviewed with District SPED Director • Commons #2 expansion concept has not be priced • Suggested re -use of spaces may or may not require FF&E or physical modifications • Other needs not reflected in space summaries: Additional administration & counseling needs (New Dean(s), conference rooms, PLC space, office spaces) Additional staff parking (currently 25 student spaces) Prograce 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II011,:)C I11))r se ntaflons March 2020 7.153 Spaces NFAM Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 INFA 76 64,600 NFA -6,735 NFA Science Clrms (w/ prep NFA) 21 24,718 FIFA 19 31,360 NFA -6,642 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 5 2,500 NFA 382 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 11914 A 76 7,600 NFA 2,574 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 14 22,400 NFA -22,400 NFA Special Ed 44 17,142 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 0 SF 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 23 9,925 NFA 2,957 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 43,510 i911��'�'A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9,'797 NFA 13,656 NFA -3,859 NFA Auditorium 12,1:92 i911��'�'A 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 10,752 NFA 11,005 NFA -253 NFA Medical /Admin. 13,799 C91i A 9,231 NFA 4,538 NFA Custod / Maint. 3,414 NFA 3,276 NFA 138 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 18,275 NFA 19,127 SF -852 NFA Total Program NFA 243,989 NFA 246,260 NFA -2,271 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SF 345,557 SF 14,043 MNet Floor Area of program (2) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac I MM 0 11..ex ngton Public c Schc ols IMaster 1Plan I AIDIDendx II011,:)C I11))r se ntaflons March 2020 7.153 III � iProgram �� Space Needs LHS Strategies � Considerations I Spaces NFAO) Spaces NFA NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 INFA 90 76,500 NFA -18,635 NFA Science Clrms (w/ prep NFA) 21 24,718 FIFA 23 37,920 NFA -13,202 NFA Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 NFA 6 3,000 NFA -118 NFA Teacher Planning 14 10,174 11914 A 90 9,000 NFA 1,174 NFA Voc. Tech 0 0 NFA 18 28,800 NFA -28,800 NFA Special Ed 44 17,142 NFA 34 26,180 NFA -9,038 NFA LABBB 22 6,217 NFA 1 0 SF 6,217 NFA Art & Music 20 12,882 NFA 27 11,425 NFA 1,457 NFA Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)(3) 4 43,510 i911��'�'A 2 15,000 NFA 28,510 NFA Library 7 9,'797 NFA 9,249 16,400 NFA -6,603 NFA Auditorium 8,709 12,1:92 i911��'�'A 8,709 10,400 NFA 2,192 NFA Dining only 8,709 10,752 NFA 0 13,200 NFA -2,448 NFA Medical /Admin. 0 13,799 C91i A 0 10,585 NFA 3,184 NFA Custod / Maint. 0 3,414 NFA 0 3,605 NFA -191 NFA Misc. Support Space(4) 17,142 18,275 NFA 17,142 22,244 SF -3,969 NFA Total Program NFA 13,761 243,989 NFA 13,761 284,259 NFA -40,270 NFA Gross SF 359,600 SFJ 414,480 SF -54,880 ONet Floor Area of program (Z) Lecture Hall (3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storage (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/IT Spac LHS Strategies � Considerations I 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIlDendu II011,:)C I11))resentaflo ns March 2020 7-15 Qty NFAM Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty IBM NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Qty NFA Core Academic 84 57,865 33 59,737 91 33,113 97 33,658 97 63,658 97 63,658 97 63,658 Science Clrms (w/ prep 21 24,718 23 26,416 23 26,416 23 26,416 23 26,416 23 26,416 23 26,416 Gen. Ed Support (2) 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 1 2,882 Teacher Planning 14 10,174 13 9,249 13 9,249 13 8,709 13 8,709 13 8,709 13 8,709 Voc. Tech 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Special Ed 44 17,142 44 17,142 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 39 13,761 LABBB 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 22 6,217 Art & Music 20 12,882 20 12,882 20 12,88231 13,331 21 13,551 21 13,551 21 13,551 Health & PE (Inc. Fitness)3 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 4 43,510 Library 7 9,797 5 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 6 8,780 Auditorium 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 12,592 Dining only 10,752 10,752 10,752 12,952 12,952 12,952 12,952 Medical /Admin. 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 13,769 Custod / Maint. 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 3,414 Misc. Support Space (4) 18,275 16,647 16,647 15,978 15,978 15,978 15,978 Total Program NFA 243,989 243,989 243,989 246,1189 246,189 246,189 246,189 Gross SF 1 1359,6001359,6001 1359,600136 1,8001 1 361,8001 1361,80010 ONet Floor Area of Droaram (2) Lecture Hall(3) Excludes Locker Rooms / Team Rooms / Storaae (4) Lockers/Team Rooms/Kitchen/staff dinina/1711 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I AII'DIlDendu II011,:)C I11))resentaflo ns March 2020 7-15 First Floor Plan: 2019-20 Considerations Second Floor Plan: 201 mmi R 0111 0 81Yrr I� IP 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s lrntaflolrns March 2020 7-160 IS Stratedeiderations First Floor Plan: LHS Strategies Considerations First Floor Plan: 2021-22 log. IP. 11..ex ngton Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s lrntaflolrns March 2020 7-161 ............ ........... IS Stirated First Floor Plan: Final Considerations 77Z 11 exing�.onll:'L�blicSclioolsIlMas.erll:llan I AIDIDendx II' ll�:)CII�:)ii,eseiiitat°oiiis m March 2020 7-162 Agenda - LHS facility tour a, Discuss final HS "strategies" , LHS SOI Update a, Closing Thoughts/Next Steps m 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-163 LHS Strategies � Considerations * All suggested re -use strategies are short-term, (until new HS complete) * ILP Program reviewed with District SPED Director (high level,) * Commons #2 expansion concept has not be priced * Suggested re -use of spaces may or may not require FF&E or physical imodifications * Other needs not reflected in space summaries: lo. Additional administration & counseling needs (New Dean(s), conference rooms, PLC space, office spaces) Additional staff parking (currently 25 student spaces) mWe NMI 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011I)C I)resentaflons March 2020 7-164 Educational Program � HS Capadty/Enrdlment 'Elmi 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2417-18 2018-19 2019.20 2VO.21 MI -22 2022.23 2023-24 202'4 25 20213.26 2026.27 202726 2028-29 9 555 548 2,275 2,536 261 2,614 2,539 254 656 635 +/-30 637 +/-30 +/-35 629 10 518 2,565 555 2,544 2,574 608 IN, NO 2 250 2,254 66H 2,250 21250 648 09 111.25 -31 531 4 -32 554 (1) LIPS Enrollment projections updated 1/03/19 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity @ 2,250 EmIII Educational Program � pa off: / . rods t 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2417-18 2018-19 2019.20 2VO.21 MI -22 2022.23 2023-24 202'4 25 20213.26 2026.27 202726 2028-29 9 555 548 552 530 598 6261 [W, 61,38 656 635 654 637 618 598 629 10 518 562 555 576 542 608 6.17 587 649 66H 646 666 648 09 60 11 531 520 557 554 572 541' 607 636 511(5 441 665 645 6914 841 628 12 489 524 521 552 551 572 541 607 6135 586 648 rt667 645 665 647 9-12 0 +Testing, Resource 0 0 4!' 62 "4681 i r7 536 1'694 26'14 ?5' 6 5,'.12 2513 Total 2093 2154 2185 2212 2263 e. 14,6 w ';,?CJ 12ki e ,ti".5 1 431:% I L 30 k. 317 ?, ;d,, a :S a q1! (1) LIPS Enrollment projections updated 1/03/19 based upon 10 year linear forecast of K based on prior 30 years (2) Core spaces remain overcrowded but academic at capacity @ 2,250 EmIII Educational Program � pa off: / . rods t (1) Includes confidence factor lime NMI 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools II aster 1Plan I Aliplipendlx II' II,)C Il;)reserntaflorns March 2020 7-165 2,367 2,382 2, 493 2,552 2,566 2,644 2,644 2,611 o 104 15 111 59 14 78 0 -33 M, +5 0 +6 +2 - 3 Q +4 0 0 0 0 0 +1 0 0 0 0 -, Q Q +1 Art + 1 Counselor Q 0 +Testing, Resource 0 0 + Counselor Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand Expand / +U counselor Q 0 0 Q +11 Dean Support Q Q Parking Q Parking 0 0 Parking 0 Parking (1) Includes confidence factor lime NMI 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools II aster 1Plan I Aliplipendlx II' II,)C Il;)reserntaflorns March 2020 7-165 LHS Strategies 120-19-20 C,'plisdera.eons mlm�' COWIN' 00A M= MEMIMMEMBE 1 #162 District Central Health WL#606 +1 WL ±2/L IT Admin (was Cirm 2 #164 District Central Health WE #610 +1 WL IT Admin (was Cirm 3 #1B6 ILP -2 Consol. Gen. +Gen W (3) Human. Cirm 4 #339 Vacant Math + Math in ILP -3 Clirm 5 #168 LEA Central Health WUMath +1 WL/M A Admin Prev. #626 Clirm Total Gain 2019-21) +5 Cirm TEMPORARY RE -USE OF SPACE NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor LH 0 trategies I -1 _- isdera,fions NO NET- GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I AlippendIx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 M "I"NAW N M= MEMIMMEMBE #162 District Central Health WL#606 +1 WL ±2/L IT Admin (was Cirm 2 #164 District Central Health WE #610 +1 WL IT Admin (was Cirm 3 #186 ILP -2 Consol. Gen. + Gen W (3) Human. Cirm 4 #339 Vacant Math + Math in ILP -3 Clirm 5 #168 LEA Central Health WUMath +1 WL/M A Admin Prev. #626 Clirm Total Gain 2019-21) +5 Cirm NO NET- GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE - NET GAIN CLASSROOMS Second Floor 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I AlippendIx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 M LHS Strategies 12020-21 G'q de.eons MINOR, W" I No additional space required Total Gain 2020-21 TEMPORARY RE -USE OF SPACE NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor LHS !3-3'trategies I 2021_22-7,�,,'3o sdera,fions il C I NO NET GAIN, RE USE Or SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor M 0 r% 11 exingtonPublic SchoolsMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-167 NINNIN W Iffill /04 'uh5 Study +2 Gen 1,2#326 (L m �" Hall& Ed. Cirm location clmn 3 #143 IA's +math Art +1 Art Subs. Teach Room Consol Gen +1 Gen 4 #189 ILP -2 w (2) -Ed Clrm Ed. Clrm Consul WLI +1 5 #500 ILP -1 Vv ILP -1 Math WL Math #6r0 61 "1 WL Divide 2WL/ + 1 6 room in Math fl- i Math 7 #513 Teach Divide T. -h WR + #516 + 1 (split) Work 314+1/4 2R.—r- moves Wl_iMath - #185 ELL #167 Resource - 0 (larger 1� ELL) Total Gain 2021-22 +7 Cirm NO NET GAIN, RE USE Or SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor M 0 r% 11 exingtonPublic SchoolsMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-167 LHS Strategies 12021-22 ,moo nsdera,fions I M NO NET CAIN, PE -USE OB SPACE NEr GAIN nLA' SSROWS Second Floor LHS Strtitlegies I 202L_ 23r Iiisdera,fions "Iffiffi0 ll 10 -7 #326 ELF Subs. Study +2 Gen 1 2 , (LH) Sub. stay in Hall& Ed. Clrm Gen- Ed. location clmn "MG) 3 #143IA's + Math Art +1 Art . Subs. Teach ml Room Consol Gen- Ed. +1 Gen 4 #189 ILP -2 w (2) Clrm Ed. Clrm fm) (Leisure) Consul WILI +1 5 #500 ILP -1 vv ILP -1 Math WIL i Math #61() WL Divide 2WIL/ +1 6 1,300SF Clrm room in Math WIL i Math 7 #513 Teach. Divide T. -h wR + #516 + 1 (split) Work 314+1/4 2 Rnsnu moves WIL i Math - #185 ELL #167 Resource - 0 (larger I I I ELL) Ed. Cirm Total Gain 321-22 +7 Cirm NO NET CAIN, PE -USE OB SPACE NEr GAIN nLA' SSROWS Second Floor LHS Strtitlegies I 202L_ 23r Iiisdera,fions M NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011;:)C 11;:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-168 -7 4, #149 MCAS Tr'g' No Gen- Ed. +1 Gen "MG) space Oran 1 Ed. CImn 1,011, ml #3$3 ILP -3 M NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011;:)C 11;:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-168 #149 MCAS Tr'g' No Gen- Ed. +1 Gen "MG) space Oran Ed. CImn ml #3$3 ILP -3 Consol Science +1 Science fm) (Leisure) w #334 Him Cir. 2 — #334A ILP -3 Consol Science Merge w (.5 rm) Pro Voch w #334 RIM 3 #697 WL Lab On aGen. Ed. +1 Gen cart Cirm Ed. Cirm Total Gain 2022-23 +3 Clrm M NO NET GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS First Floor 11 exingtonPublic Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011;:)C 11;:)iireseiintafloiins March 2020 7-168 LHS Strategies 12022-23 11Q';'? isdera,fions :j mm WIN% I @ a mmmmmm 6 A\ #149 MCAS Ta 'g' No Gen- Ed. +1 Gen (IMC) , space Cirm Ed. CIrm avad #3$3 ILP -3 Consol Science .1 96.- (.5 rm) I (Leisure} w #334 1 Hm Cir. *-Al' ILP -3 C= I Science Merge w 'm' #331 3 a, d en_ E: G: +1 Gen rt Ed. CIrm Total Gain 2022. +3 Cirm 73 7 NO NEI GAIN, RE -USE OF SPACE NI., F GMN CLASSROOMS Second Floor G'qIii sdera,fions I ' I 1� I'M, 11 0111, SM"W"r I No additional space required Total Gain 2020-21 _m�' 7 . 4- -NONE[ GAIN, RE -USC OF' SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS J, First Floor m 0 r% 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-169 6 A\ G'qIii sdera,fions I ' I 1� I'M, 11 0111, SM"W"r I No additional space required Total Gain 2020-21 _m�' 7 . 4- -NONE[ GAIN, RE -USC OF' SPACE NET GAIN CLASSROOMS J, First Floor m 0 r% 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I Alippendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-169 LHS to 12024-251,-,2-1� . ....... Considerations jM MZ, i ,S No more re -purpose options available Requires 4 Gen Ed Spaces Requires Counseling, Testing, Administrative Spaces OPTION 1: Remove LABBB from Gen Ed Space OPTION 2: Portable Classrooms Total Gain 2024-25 4-7 2 888888 ;;¢ i r PFi4?F'OSEL7 ROOM Fi[.'-0ESIGNA'i'IC7N =s PROPOSED MODULAR CLASSROOMS Fey PROPOSED FUTURE MODUILARS First Fluor LH OO- 01- trategies 12024-25, . Considerations No more re -purpose options available Requires 4 Gen Ed Spaces Requires Counseling, Testing, Administrative Spaces OPTION 1: Remove LABBB from Gen Ed Space OPTION 2: Portable Classrooms Total Gain 2024-25 4-7 e � i PROPOSED ROOM RE—DESIGNATION Second Floor 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Alippendlx II' Ili:)C Il;:)reseintafloins March 2020 7-170 1,77776 4 'T First Floor LHOO- 01--trategies I Rna� Consderatigpc Second Floor IMM" m 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-171 3, , Y N111, 1,77776 4 'T First Floor LHOO- 01--trategies I Rna� Consderatigpc Second Floor IMM" m 0 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-171 LHS Strategies, FJ-onsderations E V iw �l 14- ggj 2.17ow, V V v-I'mm v , j z bod,-A' '44 NdS �w 0 4 0� V "All V All r sm LHS Strategies Cafeteria Expansion Iii' iii -�MMTI ri 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-172 "T 2,367 'Vol\ 2,644 2,249 F,IA(,f 2,512 --- 25 25 25 2,274 2,393 2,537 758 798 846 266 266 266 W(� 392 392 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-172 2,367 2,493 2,644 2,249 2,368 2,512 --- 25 25 25 2,274 2,393 2,537 758 798 846 266 266 266 392 392 392 180 180 180 .RVI -2'L 838 838 830 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-172 H i i i i -A RAN RGGM --- ..... lu .RVI -2'L 0-H—MI111. 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan IAllplipendx 11011i:)C ll;:)resentaflons March 2020 7-172 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)urt s umtafloums March 2020 7-173 Agenda Enrollment Strategies Consensus Short-term & Long-term solutions for ES, MS & HS IM HS short-term "strategies" sequencing LABBB Collaborative update Re -purposing / Portable space costing Implementation / Schedule • Upcoming Potential Meetings • Closing Thoughts/Next Steps Illlllllllllllllllllllllllll of 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 pp rallon" ffig,W rp? Capacity Strategies Options to consider: o, Short-term Solutions Long-term Solutions Non -Building Solutions o, Brick & Mortar Solutions P,, Other 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011i:)C 11;:)resentaflons March 2020 M 0 Capacity Strategies � So Short-term Solutions Re -purposing or space mining of elementary, paces (e.g. Literacy rooms, art or music rooms) Long-term Solutions If ES enrollment decreases, demolish &"replace Bridge or' .... . . . . .I . and/or use as swing space In Brick & Mortar Solutions Create a new, third middle school (equal In,'We"111 Use of Old Harrington Use of Laconia Land Swap with otherlll'�,p n4ow Build a second high school Equal in size or; 01 -go 1 larger + 1 smaller w/ special iN/,�', A 9� Capacity Strategies �� S61 U Long-term Solutions Other Solutions(Grade configurations) Y, 'j Use Old Harrington for one grade Create a new, third middle school plus add 5th'grade"O ! all n schools (creating 5 - 8 middle schools), Move 8th grade to "new" high school 11 exington 11=public Schools IMaster 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C 11:)resentaflons March 2020 M 0 LHS Strategies I LABBB Considerations LIPS & LABBB value the importance of LABBB at LHS. There are N 80-90 LABBB students that currently go to LHS. LABBB does not anticipate a reduction in enroll or space needs. LABBB operates year round. LABBB classrooms must remain dedicated spaces. LABBB provides students with a community based work experience (HUB). The HUB "program" requires a significant amount of vehicles to be staged at LHS to bring the students to their jobs. LABBB Ed -ti...] coll.ab_tiue w WWWWWW IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aipipendx 11011:)C Il:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-177 LHS Strategies I LABBB Considerations Short-term Options 4, Preferable that LABBB remain at LHS if at all possible. • LABBB agreed to participate in the cost of portable classrooms. • LABBB suggested to locate classrooms in the "south" parking lot 4, HUB can also be in same area, alleviate the congestion at entry. 4, LABBB will also consider looking at another location for HUB. LABBB E du tion.] C.D b.- i— w NOR IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 2019-20,::__r 2,367; Increase 104 students 5 2020-21 2,382; Increase 15 students 0 2021-22 2,493; Increase 111 students 7 2022-23 2,552; Increase 59 students 3 2023-24 2,566; Increase 14 students 0 Total Increase in existing space 15 2024-25 2,644; Increase 78 students ..4..7 First Floor IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIInPI 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I AIDIDendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r s rntaflorns March 2020 7-178 Strategies W ,_ o� Strategies i WE KITCHEN 2019-20,::__r 2,367; Increase %ffl /ffi / 2,382; Increase 2,367 2,493 2,644 2,493; Increase 2,249 2,368 2,512 2,552; Increase 25 25 25 2,566; Increase 2,274 2,393 2,537 15 758 798 846 ..4..7 266 266 266 392 392 392 y 0 276 276 658 934 934 KITCHEN 2019-20,::__r 2,367; Increase 104 students 5 2020-21 2,382; Increase 15 students 0 2021-22 2,493; Increase 111 students 7 2022-23 2,552; Increase 59 students 3 2023-24 2,566; Increase 14 students 0 Total Increase in existing space 15 2024-25 2,644; Increase 78 students ..4..7 Second Floor PON Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllnl Cafeteria, �0 w AUUITOHIUM STAGE Do Do ODD 4 4 °o UU. BAN ROOM UNAMASHOP V o €0UI U STONAGE U "' CO oN E-US'�-130 olsrlwasrl U MUSIC N OFFICE o �� ry❑❑ rypp�[py7 rpp��❑p} Fitt t D �A A U A SEHVINGk2 ONCt ILSTWFi00M • �.,� 136 ?�� F� 13 F 0 uu u% 11..ex ngton11=1 blit Schools IMaster Plan I Alippendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7-179 Strategies Fina] . u deratioins "_o u u --------- u D u--------0 0 0 - DEA S OFF CE iIIIIIIIV L DEP ILP 1 or 6074 502 B CLASS" OM OFA EILP1 ILP1 619 10SF 320SF 04 .,.;,,:F 11A �(�jjb 0 513A 5138 310SF 430,E WL DEPT- ',, IE'AD ............ F-1 S S �t r p 1t' t 4 er, N . 1 CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 513 520 570SF 623SF CLASSROOM 517 570SF __0 ------------- -- ' I I I I 5I I 3 4. 6-0", 14•-0^ a 28.0' 192' 6" Total — 6,800 SF Classrooms: 28'x28'= 784 NFA P 477- GAS EM .. - WATER F 0 -SEWER `T ®-STORM DRAIN .y ;�- PROPOSED BUILDINGS Wq4 Mny..s I S '" Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllnll 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Alippendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7.180 e w ;�<:q LJ ILP -1 IL 1 500 COMPUTER LAB ILE1 516 630SF 515 640SF 503 n OM L6S40IRSF CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 640SF 4 564SF 66ASF t_U------------- Il -------------- ------------- 0 --------- 0 ------------- Il -------------- ------------- Il -------- 0-_ ............ F-1 S S �t r p 1t' t 4 er, N . 1 CLASSROOM CLASSROOM 513 520 570SF 623SF CLASSROOM 517 570SF __0 ------------- -- ' I I I I 5I I 3 4. 6-0", 14•-0^ a 28.0' 192' 6" Total — 6,800 SF Classrooms: 28'x28'= 784 NFA P 477- GAS EM .. - WATER F 0 -SEWER `T ®-STORM DRAIN .y ;�- PROPOSED BUILDINGS Wq4 Mny..s I S '" Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllnll 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Alippendx II' Ili:)C Il;:)r se ntaflons March 2020 7.180 LHS Strategies I Cost Considerations (1) Construction costs based upon construction start Spring / Summer 2020. If delayed escalation would be applied. NOR Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllno Strategies r ,,,,,,,term m meinta.tiioin ('m Assuming that funds are readily available through Design am Construction method based upon Design / Build LHS Portable Classrooms Study/TOL Review 2019 2020 2021 Apr May UM Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2019-20 ! 2,367; Increase 104 students Minor construction, FFE & Tech $70,000 2020-21 2,382; Increase 15 students None $0 2021-22 2,493; Increase 111 students Reconfigure teacher work room, 225,000 IIIIIIIIIIII FFE & Tech 2022-23 2,552; Increase 59 students Minor construction, Cart & Tech, WL Lab on 120,000 2023-24 2,566; Increase 14 students None $0 Total Increase in existing space 15 spaces $415,000 77 /0 ROME IIIIIIIIIIII OW g(('111 MR r./g, A N V 2020-21 2,382 students Cafeteria Expansion $2,500,000 276 stu/seating x 3 = 828 seats RFP of Actual need 2024-25. Prudent to 2020-21 expedite to maximize return on (6) Portable Classrooms + Toilets, site work, $4,600,000 investment &alleviate current issues FFE & Tech (1) Construction costs based upon construction start Spring / Summer 2020. If delayed escalation would be applied. NOR Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllno Strategies r ,,,,,,,term m meinta.tiioin ('m Assuming that funds are readily available through Design am Construction method based upon Design / Build LHS Portable Classrooms Study/TOL Review 2019 2020 2021 Apr May UM Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Design m'm IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII Project Funding IIIIIIIIIIII RFP of Diddith Bid / Award HIM Submittals (including permitting) Portables Fabrication Portables Delivery Portables Installation 111111 IIIIIIIIIIII i Site, Foundation & Utilities Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan nm Assuming that funds are readily available through Design am Construction method based upon Modular Construction 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster 1Plan I Alippendx 11011:)C I11))rese ntafl Arne March 2020 7-181 E Upcoming Meetings I GoaJs & Objectives r iiri°i ,III ti I &II IIS III fiirig: Review short & long term strategies for various grade levels Wed��r,iesday,III ay 15ti ISurr°irrflt \Aeefiirlg:� Update on Master Plan Ir iiri°idayJuiir,ie 14ti I &II IIS III fiirig:� Final review of strategies & Implementation (as needed) Ir iiri°idayJuly 12ti I &II IIS III fiirig: Tentative hold Fri°iday, August 9ti I &I IISIII eefiirig: Final Meeting / Report 11 exington 11=public Schools Master 11= lan I AIDIDendx 11011:)C 11:)resentaflons M Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllnfi March 2020 7-182 11..ex ngton 1Public Schools IMaster Plan I Aliplipendx 111011°)C II°)Ir s llmtaflollms March 2020 7-183 99 CHAUNCY SFFIEEI SW�E 9611 lI BOSTON, MA 0211 n 1 611.7.426.; 858 DSI SCO.COM