HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-ATM-STM-CEC-rpt
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Apr 2)
CEC
APITAL XPENDITURES OMMITTEE
TL
OWN OF EXINGTON
REPORT TO THE
2012 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
&
2012 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING, April 2, 2012
Released March 23, 2012
Submitted by:
Charles Lamb, Chairman
Ted Edson, Vice-Chairman
William Hurley
David G. Kanter
Shirley Stolz
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Summary of Warrant Article Recommendations
has been moved to the end of the report
2
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................5
The Mission of the Capital Expenditures Committee .................................................................................6
How to Read This Report ...........................................................................................................................6
Summary of FY2013 Capital-Budget Requests ..........................................................................................7
Capital Budget ............................................................................................................................................8
Big-Ticket Projects ........................................................................................................................... 8
The Community Preservation Act (CPA) ...................................................................................... 10
Enterprise-Fund Projects ................................................................................................................ 12
Revolving-Fund Projects ................................................................................................................ 13
Small-Ticket Projects ..................................................................................................................... 13
Five-Year Capital Plan .............................................................................................................................. 14
Programs ................................................................................................................................................... 18
Conservation and Open Space ....................................................................................................... 18
Senior/Community Center ............................................................................................................. 18
Fire ................................................................................................................................................. 19
Police .............................................................................................................................................. 21
Library ............................................................................................................................................ 22
Public Works .................................................................................................................................. 22
Public Facilities .............................................................................................................................. 27
Recreation ...................................................................................................................................... 28
Schools ........................................................................................................................................... 29
Information Technology (IT) Infrastructure (Town-wide) ............................................................ 30
Warrant Article Analysis and Recommendations ..................................................................................... 31
2012 Special Town Meeting, April 2, 2012 .............................................................................................. 31
STM Article 2: Appropriate For New Estabrook School ............................................................... 31
2012 Annual Town Meeting ..................................................................................................................... 32
rd
Article 7 (3 Fund Only): Establish and Continue Departmental Revolving FundsÄ
DPW Compost Operations ............................................................................................................. 32
Article 8: Appropriate the FY2013 Community Preservation Committee Operating
Budget and CPA Projects (Multiple Categories) ........................................................................... 32
Article 9: Land PurchaseÄOff Grove Street (Purposes TBD) ...................................................... 38
Article 10: Land PurchaseÄOff Grove Street (Conservation) ...................................................... 39
3
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Article 11: Appropriate for Recreation Capital ProjectÄ .............................................................. 39
Article 12: Appropriate for Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment ........................................ 41
Article 13: Appropriate for Water System Improvements ............................................................. 47
Article 14: Appropriate for Wastewater System Improvements .................................................... 47
Article 15: Appropriate for School Capital Projects and Equipmen ............................................. 48
Article 16: Appropriate for Public Facilities Capital Projects ........................................................ 49
Article 19: Rescind Prior Borrowing Authorizations ..................................................................... 54
Article 20: Authorize The Establishment of a Minuteman Stabilizaon Fund .............................. 54
Article 21: Establish And Appropriate To Specified Stabilization ...................................... 54
Article 22: Appropriate to Stabilization Fund ................................................................................ 55
Article 23: Appropriate from Debt Service Stabilization Fund ...................................................... 55
Article 26: Appropriate for Authorized Capital Improvements ..................................................... 56
Article 31: Amend General BylawsÄTown Meeting Warrant ...................................................... 56
Summary of Warrant Article Recommendations ...................................................................................... 58
4
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Executive Summary
Over the past several months, the Capital Expenditures Committee
the municipal departments and school administration as well as vzens groups. We have fully
vetted all the capital requests, except those listed as Åpending
in the Warrant Article Recommendations. Elimination, refinement,-tuning of these requests have
taken place during this process; therefore, even though not all of the origin
Capital motions,
Town Meeting will generally observe consensus among the boards a
.
relative to capital articles
On January 24, 2012, voters approvedÄvia a Proposition-2 Debt ExclusionÄrenovations to the Bridge
and Bowman elementary schools and reconstruction of the Estabrook elementary school. An
appropriation for the former project was approved at the Special
due to procedural issues involved with MSBA funding, the appropriation forect comes after
the referendum. This appropriation will be voted on by a Special Town Meeting (STM) on April 2, 2012.
As Town Meeting had supported putting both the renovation and the reconstruction funding to the voters
for approval as a debt exclusion, the Board of Selectmen (BoS) took that action, and the voters have
already approved that exclusion, it is anticipated that the STM deliberation will be short and its vote a
formality.
The Committee applauds the voters, the Town Meeting Members, thethe BoS, and the
School and Town staffs for their leadership in advancing these t
The Community Preservation Act (CPA) in Lexington is now six years old.The last of the only debt-
service payments that are currently an obligation of the Community Preservation Fund will be
appropriated at this Annual Town Meeting. The elimination of those payments will create nearly
$2 million of CPA capacity in FY2014 for new or continuing projects.
The Town continues to confront many "big ticket" projects (i.e., million), including (in no
particular order and not meant to be all inclusive):
Roads and SidewalksÄa continuing need
¥
Stone Building (previously the East Lexington Library) post-stabilization renovation
¥
Police Station renovation
¥
Fire Headquarters renovation
¥
Town Office Building renovation (substantially complete; elevator upgrade this summer)
¥
Senior/Community Center
¥
Use of the ÅWhite HouseÆ Site (1557 Massachusetts Avenue; last used by the School
¥
Administration; previously the Barnes property; historic core building is the Hammond A.
Hosmer House)
Traffic MitigationÄa continuing need
¥
Community (Affordable) Housing
¥
Conservation/Open Space Land
¥
Recreation FacilitiesÄa continuing need
¥
West Lexington Greenway Corridor Implementation
¥
School Buildings Renovation & Reconstruction
¥
Minuteman Career & Technical High School renovation
¥
Continued leadership and cooperation by the BoS, School Committee, Community Preservation
Committee, and Permanent Building Committee are needed to ration
these projects for the next several yearsÄwith realistic numbers put forth in the 5-year projectionsÄas it
is certain that we cannot afford to do all of them within the foreseeable future. We note that Article 16(i)
proposes a Town-wide Facility Master Plan, which will help in making some headway in prioritizing this
list.
5
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
The Mission of the Capital Expenditures Committee
From the Code of the Town of Lexington (¤29-13):
A. Each year the Capital Expenditures Committee shall request and r
Town boards and departments a list of all capital expenditures t
within the ensuing five-year period. The Committee shall consider the relative need,
timing and cost of these projects, the adequacy thereof and the
expenditures might have on the financial position of the Town.
B. The Committee shall prior to each annual meeting for the transac
prepare, publish and distribute by making copies available at the offic
Clerk and at Cary Memorial Library, and by mailing or otherwise
each town meeting member, a report of its findings, setting fort
capital expenditures together with the committeeÈs recommendations as to the
projects that should be undertaken within the five-year period and the approximate
date on which each recommended project should be started. This p
combined with and distributed at the same time as the Appropriation Committee
Report.
From the Code of the Town of Lexington (¤29-26):
¼the Capital Expenditures Committeeshall state whether it endorses each
recommendation of the Community PreservationCommittee.
How to Read This Report
Our report is divided into four sections:
An overview of capital projects in Lexington;
Presentation of a five-year capital budget;
Spending history and general capital plan for each department an
This yearÈs capital articles.
Where our narrative includes a ÅSee Article __Æ, it is referring you to thÄ
ÆWarrant Article Analysis and RecommendationsÆ. In that section
We have quoted from the TownÈs or a Town CommitteeÈs documentati
Articles on which we are reporting. If we believe that quote has
described the proposed work and satisfactorily made the case for
least for the purpose of your deliberationsÄwhich is often the caseÄyou will not find us
paraphrasing or otherwise reiterating either of those matters in
additional narrative is included if we donÈt feel that is the ca
Our CommitteeÈs recommendations and how we voted are shown only
header for each Article and, if applicable, in any sub-elements unless there are further
comments on our recommendation. If there are such comments, they at
in italics
the end of the text below the boxed header.
Our oral report on Town Meeting floor will verify our written report and present any new information not
available as of this writing. When we report on a capital articl
deliberations, a committee member will provide the committeeÈs r
comments related to that recommendation.
6
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Summary of FY2013 Capital-Budget Requests
Requests
CEC
Recommended
Tax Levy
Enterprise State Chap. 90 Approp. & Difference from
1
Art.Debt
Cash
Funds(Roads)Auth. OtherTotalTotal
Community/Economic Development
8(b)Paint Mine Barn Preservation$34,770 $34,770
9 & 10Land AcquisitionsTBDTBD
Public Safety
12(a)Public Safety Radio Connectivity$50,000 $50,000
Culture and Recreation
11(a)Pine Meadows Equipment$46,000 $46,000
11(b)Park ImproveÄHard Court Resurface$120,000 $120,000
11(c)Park and Playground Improvements$65,000 $65,000
11(d)Park Improvements - Athletic Fields$60,000 $60,000
Public Facilities Department
STM2Estabrook School Reconstruct $39,742,248$39,742,248
16(e)White House Stabilization$381,000
16(a)School Building Envelope & Sys$215,000 $215,000
16(b)Middle School Science Labs & $35,000 $35,000
Performing Art Spaces
16(c)Diamond Energy Improvements$25,000 $25,000
16(d)Municipal Building Envelope & Sys$169,711 $169,711
8(c)Muzzey Senior Ctr. Upgrade-Phase I$561,518 $561,518
2
8(d)$75,000 $75,000
Cary Mem. Bldg Upgrades Design I
16(f)Extraordinary School Repair Projects$287,685 $322,315 $610,000
16(g)DPF Bid Documents$75,000 $75,000
16(h)Hastings Natural Gas Conversion$45,000 $45,000
16(i)Town Wide Facility Master Plan$65,000 $65,000
16(j)Grounds Vehicle Replacement$80,000 $80,000
16(k)LHS Overcrowding Phase II Renovate$400,000 $400,000
16(l)School Paving Program$100,000 $100,000
Public Works Department
12(b)Hydrant Replacement Program$25,000 $25,000 $50,000
12(c)Street Improvements$1,025,586 $930,607 $1,956,193
12(o)CBD Streetscape à D&E$240,000 $240,000
7 & Town-Wide Culvert replacement $65,000 $325,000 $390,000
12(d)
12(e)DPW Equipment $358,610 $155,390 $81,000 $595,000
12(f)Comp. Watershed Storm Water Mgmt.$65,000 $100,000 $165,000
8(e)Center Playfields Drainage - Phase III$605,718 $605,718
12(n)Off-Site Street ImproveÄEstabrook$170,000$170,000
12(g)Dam Repair$260,000 $260,000
12(h)Storm Drainage Improve & NPDES$340,000 $340,000
8(f)Battle Green Area Master Plan $143,845 $143,845
Implementation - Phase II
12(i)Battle Green Area Master Plan - $60,000 $60,000
Parking Phase 1: Conceptual Plan
12(j)Townwide Signalization Improvements$119,532 $5,468 $125,000
12(k)Sidewalk Improvements$300,000 $300,000
12(l)Concord Avenue Sidewalk $250,000 $250,000
13Water Distribution Sys Improvements$900,000 $900,000
14(a)Wastewater System Improvements$1,200,000 $1,200,000
14(b)Pump Station Upgrades$100,000 $100,000
Lexington Public Schools
15(a)SystemwideTechnology $833,676 $168,324 $1,002,000
15(b)Classroom & Administrative Furniture$83,000 $83,000
General Government
8(a)Archives & Records Mgmnt/Conserve$150,000 $150,000
12(p)Town-wide Telephone Sys Replace$591,000 $591,000
12(q)Town-wide Electronic Doc Mgmt. Sys$145,000 $145,000
3
Community-Wide (CPA Funded)
8(g)LexHab Set-Aside Funds$450,000 $450,000 ($450,000)
8(h)Buckman Tavern Historic Structure $65,000 $65,000
Report/Restoration Plans
8(i)Historical Society Historic Records $77,268 $77,268
Preservation
8(j)Greeley Village Accessible Housing$810,673 $810,673
Totals$44,045,751 $5,895,586 $2,352,000 $930,607 $575,000 $53,798,944 ($69,000)
1
All types (including set-aside for roads from FY2001 Override);
for the specific types.
2
Recommended by the CPC at $550,000.
3
Not shown are $150,000 for the CPCÈs Administrative Budget (Art
of the Busa-Farm land (Article 8(k)), $1,000,000 to cover the la
and $124,057 for debt service using State reimbursement for scho
7
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Capital Budget
Lexington allocates appropriate resources to needed capital proj
categories:
Big-ticket projects (greater than $1,000,000);
Small-ticket projects (between $25,000 and $1,000,000);
Enterprise & Revolving Funds projects (greater than $25,000); an
Community Preservation Fund projects (any dollar amount).
The Capital Expenditures Committee:
Assesses capital needs brought forward by each department (municipal and schools) as well as the
Community Preservation Committee (CPC) through the annual budget
Works with those departments and the CPC to identify their antic
five years; and
Independently examines public facilities(including infrastructure systems)and prospective longer-
term needs, as well as issues and such facilities not being addressed within any department.
Through this report and in presentations, this Committee advisesout the necessary
and prudent investments to maintain, improve, and create new fac
citizens safely, effectively, and efficiently. During the year,
advise staff members in various departments, consult with other public committees, and make our
views known to the Selectmen and School Committee, in an effort
budget for Lexington residents.
Please note these important caveats:
All cost figures are estimates. The degree of accuracy varies by project. Those projected several
years into the future are the most uncertain. They are subject t
bid, and built. Even relatively near-term work is subject to cost uncertainties until projects are bid
and contracts signed as material, labor, and contract-management costs are often highly variableÄ
even over a period of just a few months.
The scope of future projects is often highly uncertain. Accordin
significant revision as the work is defined through the political a
Dates for appropriations and taxpayer impact of financing projec
beginning July 1, unless otherwise specified.
Big-Ticket Projects
Big-ticket capital projects typically cost at least $1 million; for financing purposes, they satisfy the
conditions under which the Town is permitted to borrow funds for years (their expected service
life is at least that long). Such projects obviously require both careful analysis and budgeting, and broad
support.
The Town Manager and SelectmenÈs capital policy has generally ma-ticket projects
(but not necessarily including those proposed for funding under through
borrowing, consistent with their expected life and with responsi
Further, this borrowing is generally done through voter-approved Ådebt-exclusionÆ overrides, which place
the costs of financing these projects outside the Proposition 2 tax-levy limit. The latter goal has not
always been satisfied. The TownÈs share of the costs to renovate
was absorbed within the operating budget; so were certain additiith the renovation
of the secondary schools (this project was originally approved b-exclusion override). In
each case, it was imperative to proceed within the time availabl
State funding; accordingly, debt-exclusion overrides could not be scheduled. At the 2008 Annual T
Meeting, the Woburn Street reconstruction ($1.4 million, including $700,000 of the StateÈs Chapter 90
funding) was funded without a debt-exclusion, largely because it would be too much to ask voters to
approve debt-exclusions in consecutive years. The authorization at the 2009 May Special Town Meeting
8
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
to purchase the Busa property (total cost $4.197 million) did not require a debt-exclusion vote as it uses
CPA funds. Similarly, at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting, the Town Office Building RenovaÄa
$1.825 million appropriation, of which $1.500 million was funded under the CPAÄwas funded without a
debt-exclusion vote. It is important to bear these cases in mind in tajor capital
investments. Thus, not every big-ticket project, or element of an existing project, is subjected -
exclusion vote. When they are notÄith the exception of those using CPA fundsÄthe costs are absorbed
w
within the operating budget, which has significant implications for the financing of other Town nee
Further, the existence of the Community Preservation Fund (CPF)
serious debate as to whether, and if so, when CPA-funded Big-Ticket items should be funded with debt.
The 2009 Annual Town Meeting approved the purchase of the Busa property u
the CPC, BoS, CEC, Appropriation Committee, and Town staff held discussions
and debt-versus-cash financing policies and concluded that reserves of $2 million in the CPF are
appropriate. Further discussions recommended short-term bonding for the Busa property, consistent with
those policies. This Committee endorsed the policies and the speThe
2010 Annual Town Meeting approved the purchase of the Cotton Farm proÄonce again with short-
term financing.
The Projects Agenda
Among the big-ticket items Lexington is currently undertaking or may undertake
we note and provide an update here on these from our last-yearÈs report:
Renovation or reconstruction of the White House. Its future use is uncertain, but given its current
¥
state of deterioration, under normal circumstances it will need
future. (For the time being, we have been told that a total demolition or moving off the current
site would not be allowed by the TownÈs Historic District Commission
the property to a commercial entity is not planned.) The propertontrol of the BoS and,
as of this report, it has not designated any use for the site. T
to demolish one part of the house and stabilize the remaining, historic, portion.
Renovation or replacement of three elementary schools and renovation at the high school. The
¥
January 24, 2012, voter referendum approved funds to advance the elementary school projects.
The Special Town Meeting on April 2, 2012, will provide final approval of funds for the
Estabrook School replacement. Annual Town Meeting Article 16(k) addresses the high school.
Renovation of the Stone Building at 735 Massachusetts Avenue. No funds are being requested for
¥
this project at this Town Meeting.
Reconstruction of several major arterial roads. There are severa arterial roads that need
¥
reconstructing, probably through a debt exclusion. There is also
work that is needed on our sidewalksÄboth in the Central Business District (CBD) and elsewhere
in Town. While we are not aware, as of this report, of any plans for a debt exclusion for roads or
sidewalks, see Article 12(c) for the FY2013 funding.
Police Station renovations to accommodate improved working effic
¥
requested at this Town Meeting.
Fire station headquarters redesign and renovations. No funds are being requested at this Town
¥
Meeting.
West Lexington Greenway. This is the proposed trail system west 128 to connect the
¥
Minuteman Bikeway and the Minuteman National Historic Park. No funds are being requested at
this Town Meeting.
Traffic Mitigation. Minor funds are being requested at this Town Meeting. (See Article 12(l))
¥
9
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
The Community Preservation Act (CPA)
On March 6, 2006, Lexington voters approved adopting the CPA for our Town atl of a
3% surcharge on property taxes. The proceeds under the CPA may be u
within the categories of Community Housing, Historic Resources,
(There are limitations in the Act regarding which projects within those categories can be funded under the
Act.) According to the CPCÈs ÅCPF Account BalancesÆ & ÅFY2013 Commitments, Projects and
Administrative CostsÆ, both updated March 9, 2012, as of July 1, 2011, Town Meeting approved
$25,336,810 of projects that the CPC has recommended to Town Meeting. Of that, $5,552,441 (21.9%)
was for Community Housing, $6,232,678 (24.6%) for Historic Resources, $6,483,017 (25.6%) for Open
Space, $2,749,674 (10.9%) for Recreational Use, and $4,319,000 (17.0%) for pending purpose(s) (i.e., the
full approval for the Busa Farm purchase and related expenses). Also, a yearly amount (now $150,000Ä
and$580,000to that date) is for the Administrative BudgetÄwith unneeded funds returned, yearly.
At this time, if all of the CPC-recommended project & debt appropriations (See Article 8) (but excluding
the $150,000 Administrative Budget)Äwhich total $5,379,092Äare approved by this Town Meeting, this
would add (with percentages of that projects & debt total) $1,260,673 (23.4.5%) for Community Housing,
$1,582,401 (29.4%) for Historic Resources, $1,000,000 (18.6%) for Open Space (i.e., the appropriation
rd
for the Cotton Farm purchaseÈs 3 of 3 debt-service payments), $605,718 (11.3%) for Recreational Use,
rd
and $930,300 (17.3%) for pending purpose(s) (i.e., the appropriation for the Busa-Farm purchaseÈs3 of
3 debt-service payments).
Note: At the time of writing this report, there is no agreement
the Wright Farm as to its sale to the TownÄwhich would be covered under either Article 9 or 10Äso the
CPC has not been asked to address whether it would recommend som
funded using the CPF; hence that matter cannot be included in this paragraph.
Our CPA-surcharge funding is eligible for supplemental State fundingÄwhich is always based on each
townÈs prior-fiscal-yearÈs property-tax surchargesÄalthough the percentage is not guaranteed. For those
communities that have adopted the maximum 3% surchargeÄas Lexington has doneÄwhen there arenÈt
ndrd
sufficient funds for a 100% match, the State does a 2-round, and potentially 3-round, calculation to
determine the final supplemental funding.
As the supplements are funded from the StateÈs CPA Trust FundedÄwhich gets its revenue from
surcharges on the fees on property transactions at the Registry of Deeds, the full extent of th
those fees because of the state of the recovery from the economi
uncertainty about the level of future State-supplement funding. A bill that made good progress in the last
session of the State Legislature has been re-filed in the current session. Along with addressing other
changes to the CPA, the bill would set the minimum, annual, supplemental percentage at 75%. The bill
has 25 co-sponsors in the state Senate and 89 in the state HouseÄa majority in each case. At the time of
writing this report, it was in the House Committee on Ways and Means; however, there is no assurance of
if and when it would be passed and signed by the Governor.
This has been the history of distributions at the State level under the CPA in the years relevant to
Lexington:
For Communities Having Adopted CPA (out of total of 351)
Total of all CPA
Total Supplement
Year in which Percentage of
Surcharges ($M)
supplement distributedNumberMassachusettsAmount ($M)Percentage
FY200811332.2%$68.1$68.1
FY200912736.2%$74.1$54.6
FY201013538.5%$78.2$31.6
FY201114240.5%$82.0$25.9
FY201214340.7%$84.8$26.2
Totals$387.2$206.4
Note:FivecommunitieswhichhavepreviouslyvotedtoaccepttheCPAwillbeeligibletoreceivetheirfirst
supplement in FY2013.
10
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
And here is the supplemental funding received by Lexington from the State, along with a projection fo
FY2013:
Prior-Year's CPAState Supplement Percentage
Year in whichTotal Suppl
supplement receivedSurcharge Collected1st Round2nd Round3rd RoundTotalAmount
FY2008 (Actual)$2,556,362100.0%N/AN/A100.0%$2,556,362
FY2009 (Actual)$2,777,88267.6%1.8%N/A69.4%$1,927,708
FY2010 (Actual)$2,931,67834.8%0.9%0.5%36.2%$1,060,390
FY2011 (Actual)$3,042,58727.2%0.6%0.4%28.2%$858,729
FY2012 (Actual)$3,206,11726.6%0.6%0.4%27.6%$885,463
Total Actual:$14,514,626Received to date:50.2%$7,288,652
FY2013 (Projected)$3,342,000TBDTBDTBD23.0%$768,000
Totals incuding projected:$17,856,62645.1%$8,056,652
The "actuals" are the net amounts as used by the State; the "pr
At this time, the latest estimate by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) with regard to t
st
potential supplement percentage for FY2013 is that the 1 Round should be 22%. (As shown above, our
ndrd
recent experience in the 2 & 3 rounds has been an additional 1.0%.) For the FY2013 projections in the
above table, weÈre using the same values as the Town is using(i.e., $23%)Äwhich are shown in the
Brown Book (Appendix C, Page CÃ3).
Although there are other factors that will reduce the size of th
supplements are made (e.g., its administrative expenses and interest earned
a year-to-year comparison of CPA Trust Fund collections at the Registry of
the first five months of this Trust-Fund yearÄthe latest data we have been given, so far.
CPA Trust Fund Collections at the Registry of Deeds ($M)
Month
FY2011FY2012ChangePercentage
Oct$2.479$2.045-$0.434-17.5%
Nov$2.442$2.187-$0.255-10.4%
Dec$2.530$2.364-$0.166-6.6%
Jan$2.756$2.512-$0.245-8.9%
Feb$2.303$2.174-$0.129-5.6%
Totals:$12.511$11.282-$1.229-9.8%
Source:MassachusettsDepartmentofRevenue's(DOR's)MonthlyReportsof
Collections & Refunds ("Blue Book")
ThemonthoftheDOR's"BlueBook".AlthoughfeesallocatabletotheCPA
TrustFundarecollectedineachmonth,theJulythroughAprilcollectionsare
reportedinthesubsequentmonth'sreport,andthentheMay&June
collections are combined and reported in the June report.
We believe the Town-projected supplement for this year is conservative. The 23% rate is 4.6% less than
last-yearÈs actual rate. That change represents a 17% reduction of last-yearÈs actual rateÄwhich is more
of a reduction than the collections so far for this Trust Year, as shown in the preceding table, would
suggest. The Town, however, will receive whatever amount is determined byÄwhether more or
less than the TownÈs projectionÄwhen the DOR uses the established formula to determine each
participating municipalityÈs share of the distribution that is made in October of each year.
As the projected balance in the CPF if all proposed projects and
were approved at the amounts in the Brown BookÄwhich differs only with the Cary Memorial Building
Project being proposed to be funded at $75,000 rather than $550,Äis presently calculated to be at
1
least $1,975,825 [Discussion, March 9, 2012, with the Assistant Town Manager for Finance], land-
acquisition funding, if any, would not be a significant impact in FY2013. Therefore, even a modest
reduction from the estimated supplement amount would not be a material consequence. So while the
1
If Town Meeting should accept this CommitteeÈs recommendation th-aside
(Article 8(g)) this year, the projected balance would increase by $450,00
11
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
supplement level has fallen substantially since our first year, we emphasize that even at the DORÈs
st
currently estimated 1 Round percentageÄwhich will be bolstered by some, small, increase from the
additional RoundsÄour Town will continue to receive significant help from the State toward the cost of
our CPA-funded projects.
2
With that estimated balance after all currently contemplated FY2013 actions, our projection
funding available for FY2014 would be as follows:
SourceAmount
Projected End-of-FY2013 Balance$1,975,825
Estimated FY2014 Surcharge at 3% Rate with ~3.5% $3,600,000
increase over FY2012 Budgeted Surcharge
Estimate State Supplement Received in FY2014 at ~23% $800,000
of FY2013 Budgeted Surcharge
Estimated FY2014 Interest Income on the CPF Balance $17,000
(same as FY2013)
$6,392,825
Estimated Total Available for FY2014
LessanyexistingobligationsTBD
(Atthetimeofwritingthis
report,thatlikelywouldonlybethedebtserviceifthe
WrightFarmhasbeenpurchasedusingsomeorall
fundingfromtheCPF.Currentlythatwouldbeunder2012
ATM Articles 9 or 10.)
Remaining,Estimated,DiscretionaryFundingAvailableinTBD
FY2014 with Surcharge at Current Percentage
Projects are put forth to Town Meeting for action by a Communityrvation Committee (CPC) whose
membership, in our Town, is prescribed in the Code of Lexington as follows:
. There is hereby established a Community Preservation Committee
¤ 29-23A
5 of Chapter 44B of the General Laws (the ÅActÆ) consisting of nine members. The Board of
Selectmen shall appoint three members of the Community Preservat
following bodies shall each select one of its members for member
Preservation Committee: the Conservation Commission, the Planning Board, the Recreation
Committee, the Historical Commission, the Housing Authority and
Town Meeting only has the options of approval, reduction, or dis
but Town Counsel has provided an opinion that Town Meeting can change the funding mechanis
or debt). As with any capital project, the CEC will give our rec
before the Town Meeting. (See Article 8)
The CPA provides an alternative funding mechanism for capital projects.
The CPA creates a separate
pool of money that can be used for a limited set of projects and
traditional capital needs. It is this dichotomy of funds and deb
See the CPA Summary in the Brown Book (Appendix C, Page CÃ3) for a summary of the CPF status as
nd
of its publication on March 2 of this year.
Enterprise-Fund Projects
The Town operates three enterprise funds for revenue-producing activities funded outside the tax levy by
user fees (water distribution, wastewater distribution [sanitary
such as the golf course, swimming pools, and tennis courts). (Re
contrast, is not fee generating, and capital investment for such equipment is therefore funded as
small-ticket program.) $100,000 per year is paid from the Recreation E
2
As footnoted on the previous page, without a LexHAB set-aside in FY2013, the end-of-FY2013
projected balance increases to $2,425,825 that, in turn, would increase the Estimated Total Available for
FY2014 to $6,842,825.
12
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
debt service (which is expected to continue until February 1, 2018, when that debt will be retired). Unlike
property-tax revenues, enterprise-fund fees are subject to a limit under Proposition 2.
not
Coming before this Town Meeting is one Recreation Enterprise-funded project (see Article (11(a)), one
project funded entirely with Water Enterprise funds (see Article 13), and two projects funded entirely
with Wastewater Enterprise funds (see Article 14). In addition, Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds
are sometimes used to buy heavy trucks and equipment, usually for joint by the respective Divisions. In
FY2013, an F450 truck will be purchased for such joint use by the Water and Wastewater Divisions using
both of their Enterprise Funds. (See Article 12(e))
From a capital standpoint, enterprise-funded projects are evaluated in terms of service and cost. For
example, Recreation-Enterprise Fund funds have been used to initiate renovations and
to the Irving H. Mabee Pool Complex. Approved at the 2010 ATM was Recreation-Enterprise funding for
the replacement of the hot-water, ventilation, and exhaust systems, and addressing compliance and safety
issues. Funding requested in FY2013 will complete the projectÄagain using Recreation-Enterprise funds.
Revolving-Fund Projects
Revolving funds established under the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44,
Section 53E, must be authorized annually by vote of the Town Meeting. The f
the departmental receipts received in connection with the progra
expenditures may be made from the revolving fund, without further appropriation
Revolving funds are usually expended to cover non-capital costs and, therefore, this Committee normally
doesnÈt report on their annual authorizations. However, as the Tn Manager is planning to expend up to
$325,000 in FY2013 under the DPW Compost Facility Revolving Fund for one Capital project, we are
including it in this report.
At the FY2011 ATM, under Article 7(a), the surveying, design, and permitting was funded in preparation
for the replacement of three deteriorated culverts under the access road to the Hartwell Aven
Facility. This year the construction funds are being requested. (See Article 7)
Small-Ticket Projects
Small-ticket capital projects are funded from the tax levy and do not qualify as big-ticket projects.
Generally, they cost between $25,000 (the minimum qualification
expenditureÄexcept for those funded by the CPF) and $1 million, and represent projects that should be
funded on a regular, timely basis to maintain Town infrastructur
Public Facilities as well as the Building Envelope Åset-asideÆ passed in the June 2006 operating override,
a new emphasis has been placed on continual infrastructure maintenanceÄa move that this Committee
naturally applauds. We continue to work closely with the stewards of our assets to p
project such work for a period of five years or more.
13
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Five-Year Capital Plan
The table onthe next three pages summarizes thefive-year capital plan that this Committee is submitting
for Town Meeting consideration. It reflects the FY2013 amounts w
requested at the 2012 ATMÄas addressed in this reportÄand the contemplated FY2014ÃFY2017
requests. We started with what is shown in the Brown Book, Pages XI-21 & 22. Those requests have been
updated based on any later information we received and we have m
the out years where this Committee feels funding might well be requested based on ea
& engineering work, or the existence of a multi-phase project; but where, to our knowledge, there is,
often no formal position taken by the Town. In that vein, there are important caveats to that table:
Please see the footnotes for some information on the status of many of the entries and how this
CommitteeÈs position differs from that presented by the Town in .
As noted earlier in the Executive Summary, there are a very-large number of Big-Ticket Projects
facing this Town in the near futureÄwhether for funding by the GF (either within levy or more
likely via excluded debt, if approved by the voters) or the CPFÄand not all of them are shown in
the out-years of this five-year plan (e.g., this Committee has the replacement of the Fire
DepartmentÈs aerial truck, estimated at $1 million, as being in FY2019, as just one example). Even
without the values of the TBD entriesÄwhich will inevitably total many millions of dollars once
determinedÄthe total of the now-cited out-year items in our table is $79.6 million. That total for
those 4 years is, on average per year, 42.3% more than the FY2013 request not including the
additional funding for the new Estabrook Elementary School. Even with some successful debt-
exclusion referendums, that will likely require major reprogramm-year projects.
While this Committee appreciates the TownÈs concern about citing preliminary estimate for
a project whose scope and timing are not at all well defined at this point in timeÄsuch that any
such number or timing may become contentious when later, better-defined, dollar values, execution
dates, and planned funding sources are developedÄthis Committee finds the current approach
untenable when thereÈs a prescribed need to present, evaluate, a
TownÈs five-year capital needs. This Committee, therefore, is very pleased to see there is fundi
FY2013 to begin the process for developing a formal, Town-wide, Facilities Master Plan for the
Municipal facilities. (See Article 16(i)) We continue to urge the Town to present a prioritized and
time-phased list of such Big-Ticket Projects and indicate the plan for funding of its currentbest
guess of the likely costs.
14
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
1
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2013ÃFY2017
)
Capital Project RequestsFY2013 Non-TBD
(by executing department)RequestFY2014 PlanFY2015 PlanFY2016 PlanFY2017 PlanTotal
Fire
Software (Police & Fire/EMS)
See joint entry below under Police
Ambulance Replacement$250,000$250,000
Fire Pumper Replacement$495,000$495,000
2
$0
Aerial (Ladder) Truck Replacement
Portable Radio Replacement$50,000$50,000
Public Safety Radio Connectivty$50,000TBDTBD
$50,000$0$300,000$0$495,000$795,000
SubtotalÄFire
Information Technology (IT)/Management Information Systems (MIS)
Head-End Equipment Replacement$60,000$125,000$250,000$435,000
MIS Technology Improvement Program$140,000$64,000$204,000
Replace Town-wide Phone Systems$591,000$146,000$255,000$52,000$204,000$1,248,000
Town-wide Electronic Document Managment System$145,000$60,000$205,000
$736,000$406,000$380,000$366,000$204,000$2,092,000
SubtotalÄIT/MIS
Police
3
$10,000$400,000$410,000
Software (Police & Fire/EMS)
(Joint Entry)
$0$0$10,000$400,000$0$410,000
SubtotalÄPolice
Public Facilities
Town-wide Facilities Master Plan$65,000$65,000
Public Facilities Grounds Vehicle$80,000$50,000$130,000
Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$375,000
Energy Saving Projects$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$400,000
4
TBDTBD
East Lexington Fire Station Physical Fitness Room
5
$250,000$250,000
Fire Station Interim Improvements
6
TBDTBD
Fire Headquarters Replacement/Renovation
Police Station; Renovation and Add-on D&ETBDTBD
Municipal Building Envelope and Systems$169,711$173,954$178,302$182,760$187,329$892,056
7
$75,000$500,000$7,200,000$7,775,000
Cary Memorial Building Upgrade
Muzzey Senior Ctr Upgrade-Phase II Construction$561,518$478,926$1,040,444
Community CenterTBDTBD
Restoration of the Stone BuildingTBDTBD
8
$381,000TBDTBD
White House Stabilization
Visitor Center Renovations and Expansion$255,000$1,402,500$1,657,500
School Building Roofing Program$157,930$396,162$554,092
School Building Envelope Program$215,000$200,000$200,000$200,000$200,000$1,015,000
School Building Flooring Program$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$625,000
School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair$50,000$50,000$50,000$25,000$175,000
School Paving Program$100,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$325,000
School Interior Painting Program$150,000$150,000$150,000$150,000$600,000
9
TBDTBD
Student Svc Rm Mod for Hearing Impaired Students
10
$435,000$450,000$475,000$500,000$525,000$2,385,000
Extraordinary School Repairs
Estabrook Elementary School$39,742,248$39,742,248
LHS Overcrowding$400,000$250,000$250,000$250,000$1,150,000
11
TBDTBD
Hastings Elementary School Rebuild/Restore D&E
LHS Heating Systems Upgrade Phases 2, 3 & 4$250,000$1,150,000$2,250,000$3,650,000
Hastings Natural Gas Conversion$45,000$45,000
Diamond Energy Improvements$25,000$200,000$200,000$200,000$200,000$825,000
Clarke & Diamond Auditorium UpgradesTBDTBD
Middle School Science and Performing Arts Spaces$35,000$465,000$175,000$675,000
Library Material Handling and Workflow System$75,000$75,000
$42,579,477$4,330,810$11,805,802$4,528,922$1,562,329$64,426,340
SubtotalÄPublic Facilities
Public Works
Center Playfields Drainage - Implementation Phase$605,718$605,718
Mass Ave - Three Intersections Improvement$212,500$262,500$40,000$6,000,000$6,515,000
Dam Repair$260,000$10,000$100,000$400,000$770,000
Street Improvements$1,956,193$1,820,068$1,842,305$1,865,097$1,888,459$9,372,122
12
$170,000$1,600,000$1,770,000
Estabrook School Off-Site Street Improvements
Water Distribution System Improvements$900,000$900,000$900,000$900,000$900,000$4,500,000
Wastewater System Improvements$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$6,000,000
Town-wide Culvert Replacement$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$390,000$1,950,000
Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES compliance$340,000$500,000$500,000$500,000$500,000$2,340,000
DPW Equipment$595,000$861,900$623,376$604,200$691,200$3,375,676
Hastings Park Irrigation$70,000$70,000
Continued on next page
15
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
1
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2013ÃFY2017
) (continued)
Capital Project RequestsFY2013 Non-TBD
(by executing department)RequestFY2014 PlanFY2015 PlanFY2016 PlanFY2017 PlanTotal
Hydrant Replacement Program$50,000$50,000$50,000$50,000$50,000$250,000
Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water Management
$165,000 $390,000 $390,000 $390,000 $390,000 $1,725,000
Study and Implementation
Town-wide Signalization Improvements$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$125,000$625,000
13
$707,250$546,000$546,000$1,799,250
Automatic Meter Reading System
14
$100,000$100,000$100,000$300,000
Pump Station Upgrade Program
15
$100,000$100,000$100,000$300,000
Pump Station Emergency Power Program
16
$143,845$469,755$613,600
Battle Green Area Master PlanÄImplementation
17
$60,000$130,000$190,000
Battle Green Area Master PlanÄTraffic-Related
18
$240,000$1,300,000$1,300,000$1,400,000$4,240,000
CBD Sidewalk/Street Improvement/Landscaping
Traffic Mitigation$50,000$50,000$50,000$50,000$200,000
Sidewalk Improvement$300,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$400,000$1,900,000
Park Improvements - Athletic Fields$60,000$250,000$310,000$320,000$200,000$1,140,000
Concord Avenue Sidewalks$250,000$2,000,000$2,250,000
$7,910,756$13,636,473$9,189,181$9,280,297$12,784,659$52,801,366
SubtotalÄPublic Works
Library
RFID Conversion Project$150,000$150,000
$0$150,000$150,000
SubtotalÄLibrary
Recreation
Park ImprovementsÄHard Court Resurfacing$120,000$85,000$50,000$50,000$305,000
Center Track Area Reconstruction$3,000,000$3,000,000
19
$0
Busa Recreation Use
Town Pool Renovation$1,153,600$1,153,600
Pine Meadows Equipment$46,000$52,000$45,000$143,000
Athletic Facility Lighting$269,469$459,370$728,839
Pine Meadows Improvements$267,000$267,000
Park and Playground Improvements$65,000$80,000$65,000$65,000$65,000$340,000
ADA Accessibility Study$50,000$50,000
$231,000$349,469$519,000$619,370$4,268,600$5,987,439
SubtotalÄRecreation
Schools
Technology Capital Request$1,002,000$1,050,000$900,000$800,000$800,000$4,552,000
20
TBDTBD
Systemwide Replacement of Clock and Bell System
21
TBDTBD
Food Service Equipment
Classroom and Administrative Furniture$83,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$483,000
$1,085,000$1,150,000$1,000,000$900,000$900,000$5,035,000
SubtotalÄSchools
Miscellaneous Municipal
22
TBDTBDTBD
Community Housing on the Leary Property
23
TBDTBDTBD
Community Housing on the Busa Property
24
TBDTBD
Antony Park
Archives & Records Management / Records
$150,000$20,000$20,000$20,000$20,000$230,000
Conservation & Preservation
$150,000$20,000$20,000$20,000$20,000$230,000
SubtotalÄMiscellaneous Municipal
25
Community-Wide (CPF Funded)
Paint Mine Barn Preservation$34,770$34,770
26
TBDTBD
LexHAB Set-Aside Housing Acquisition
Buckman Tavern Historic Structures Report/Restore$65,000$65,000
Historical Society Historic Records Preservation$77,268$77,268
Lexington Housing Authority Projects$810,673TBDTBD
27
TBDTBDTBD
Land Purchases
West Lexington Greenway CorridorTBDTBD
$987,711$0$0$0$0$177,038
SubtotalÄCommunity-Wide (CPF Funded)
Totals (No Allowance for TBDs)$53,729,944$20,042,752$23,223,983$16,114,589$20,234,588$132,104,183
Note: "TBD" indicates undefined at present, but there is a recog
1
All fund sources; individual amounts may be below the $25,000 c
2
Townhadshown$1,000,000forreplacementinFY2015,butlaterinformationthisCommitteehasrecommendsitbein
FY2019.
3
Town had proposed $410,000 for FY2017, but while this Committee
earlier,itbelievesthepurchaseshouldn'tslipfurtherthanwhereithadbeeninlastyear'sPlan,FY2016;therefore,
$10,000 is shown for a study in FY2015 with the balance in FY201
4
TownhadproposedthisforFY2016at$75,000,butbasedonthejustificationandwhatisthoughtwouldbethemodest
cost, this Committee believes earliest implementation is warrant
5
ThisCommitteehasintroducedthisplacekeeperforanyyet-to-be-determinedimprovementsneededbeforethe
Headquarters is replaced or renovated.
6
Townhadproposed$300,000D&EinFY2014and$12,700,000constructioninFY2015,butthisCommitteebelieves
that is a premature timeline.
Continued on next page
16
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
CEC FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN (FY2013ÃFY2017
) (continued)
7
TheCPChadrecommendat$550,000.Thebudget,however,wasforjustinitialfundingat$75,000($50,000forinitial
D&E;$25,000forsupportoffurtherpublicoutreachanddiscussion).Therefore,thebalanceoftheD&Efundingin
FY2014 is $500,000 rather than just $475,000.
8
Not included in the Town's budget, but supported by this Commit
9
TheTownhadthisas$1,790,800inFY2014,butit'sourunderstandingthisyet-to-be-definedprogramwilllikelybe
executed over multiple yearsÄpossibly 5.
10
Ashasbeendoneoverthelast2fiscalyears,therehasbeenfundingforindividual,extraordinary,projectsthatwere
notforeseen.ThisCommitteebelievestherewillcontinuetobesuchurgentprojectsandhasindicatedfundingforthem
in the out years.
11
Added by this Committee.
12
The construction estimate is very preliminary as the D&E has no
13
Thestartofthis3-phaseprogramwasdeferredfromFY2013pendingfurtherreviewofthejustificationandpay-back
period.
14
TheTownhadthisprogram'sfundingcontinuingtoFY2017,butitisthisCommittee'sunderstandingthattheoriginally
planned scope would be completed with funding in FY2015.
15
This has been added by this Committee and is a program which we
funding from the Operating fund.
16
TheFY2014amountisaplacekeeperfromthePlansubmittedtotheBoardofSelectmen,butdon'trepresentany
decisionsbythatBoardregardingimplementation.ItisbasedonthePlan's3rd-yeartotalestimateof$599,755lessthe
burdened cost projection being shown in the next line for the co
17
TheFY2014amountisaplacekeeperfortheburdenedcostprojectionfortheconstructionofTrafficIslands&
PedestrianCrossingfromthePlansubmittedtotheBoardofSelectmen,butdon'trepresentanydecisionsbythatBoard
regarding implementation.
18
Asthepre-D&Econstructionestimateis$3.6to$4.0million,tobeconservative,thethreeamountsforconstruction
havebeenincreasedsotheirsumistheupperendofthatrange.(Thislinealsoencompasseswhathadpreviouslybeen
identified separately as "Lexington Center Connectivity".)
19
ThisCommitteehaszeroedthislineastheBoardofSelectmenhasdecidedtoproceed,atthistime,withoutrecreation
on the Busa Farm property.
20
WhilethereplacementoftheTown-widePhoneSystemmaywellaccommodatetheSchoolsclock-and-bellneeds,this
entry is this Committee's recognition that it may take a separat
21
Whilemostofthefood-serviceequipmentisfundedfromitsrevolvingfund,thisentryisthisCommittee's
acknowledgementthatsomelargeequipment(refrigeration,freezers,ovenbanks,andlinereconfiguration)wouldlikely
need assistance from the GF.
22
TheTownhaddesignfundingplannedforFY2014;thisCommitteehasaddedaplacekeeperfortheconstruction
funding in FY2015
23
This Committee added this placekeeper line for the design and t
24
Whilethisproject'sfundingisanticipatedtobebypublicdonations,thisentryisaplacekeeperincasetax-levysupport
is needed to complete the funding.
25
Therearecurrentlynoout-yearcommitmentsbytheCPCastheoutstandingCPF-fundeddebtserviceendswiththe
FY2013payments.(Seethe3rdfootnoteinthetableonPage7forthoseFY2013debt-serviceamountsandreferenceto
that year's Administrative-Budget request.)
26
CPC approved, and the budgeted. at $450,000; not supported by t
27
Atthetimeofwritingthisreport,negotiationsareunderwayforpurchaseoftheWrightFarm,butthereisnoagreement
yet.Article 9providesforpotentialuseoftheCPFiftheCPCshouldapproveanyagreementthatisreached,and
Article 10 provides for purchase solely for conservation if the
17
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Programs
Conservation and Open Space
The 8-acre Busa Farm off of Lowell Street was authorized by the May 6, 2009 STM using $4,197,000
from the CPF. The third and final debt payment on the ensuing purchase is this year with funds from the
CPF. (See Article 8(k)) The BoS-appointed Busa Land Use Proposal Committee (BLUPC) has studied the
potential use of that land. After hearing presentations from advocates for recreation, affor
and community farming, the BLUPC recommended to the BoS (March 14, 2011, report available on the
Town website) that the best use would be continued farming with ordable housing along Lowell
Street.
On March 19, 2012, the BoS endorsed the BLUPC recommendation by directing the Town Manager to
issue an RFP for farming and to request LexHAB develop a proposal to use approximately -acre of land
along Lowell Street for affordable housing. (The option to build a full sized soccer field for Recreation
was overruled as it was considered too large for the site.)
It has been presumed that the farm proposal will not ask for additional Town funds, but the LexHAB
proposals will request funds at a later date, most likely from the CPF. Since the TownÈs purchase, the
property has remained under lease for farming with the original owner.
The third and final debt payment for the purchase of the Cotton Farm authorized by the 2010 ATM,
Article 9, is also being made this year from the CPF. (See Article 8(l))
Conservation is requesting funds from the CPF to restore a historic horse barn that probably housed
operations on the adjacent 10-acre Hennessey-field horse ring. That field is under the auspices of the
Conservation Commission and is now incorporated into the Paint Mill
be used for storage of supplies and equipment for conservation projects. Restoration work will be done
by students in the Minuteman Vocational and Technical School. (See Article 8(b))
Articles before this Town Meeting request funding for purchase of all or part of the 14-acre Wright Farm
on Grove Street. Article 9 was submitted by the Selectmen for the Community Preservation Committee;
Article 10 submitted by the Selectmen on behalf of the Conservation Commiss
potential use might vary depending on which Article Town Meeting approves. Negotia
with the owners so no purchase price is available for this repor
CommitteeÈs list of desirable properties for many years and abuta strip of conservation land at its rear
connecting it to the Paint Mine area. Acquiring this property woaccess land-
locked forested tracts in Burlington. This Committee will issue a separate report with recommendations if
the negotiations are completed such that the purchase can be considerMeeting.
Continuing the prior practice, funds are included in the Adminisudget of the CPC to enable the
Conservation Commission to do preliminary appraisals and land surveys. (See Article 8(m))
With regard to the West Lexington Greenway Corridor, Åthe 2007 ATM voted $125,000 from the CPF to
hire an engineering firm to create a Master Plan for the entire West Lexington Greenway Corridor with a
focus on creating a new pedestrian and bicycle trail through conservation land by connectin
Minuteman Bikeway with the Battle Road Trail. The planning and engineering
Brustlin, Inc. (VHB) was hired and, to date, VHB has completed a Draft Mast
Preliminary 25% Design Drawings for the proposed Minuteman Bikeway and Battle Road connector trail.
The Final Master Plan and 25% Design Plans are pending incorpora the West
Lexington Greenway Task Force by VHB.Æ (Source: CPC, March 19, 2012)
Senior/Community Center
The current Senior Center is located at the Muzzey Condominiums. In addition to senior activities, the
Center houses the TownÈs Human Services Director and the Veterans Services AgentÇs office.
18
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
A DPF-directed study by Bargman, Henrie and Archetype ($45,100 under 2010 ATM, Article 8(o))
produced a report in May 2011 entitled "Muzzey Senior Center Life Safety Improvements" which noted
areas of concern in the present Senior Center and recommended seimprovements,
which will proceed in two phases. Phase 1, funded from the CPF, is to do the D&EÄincluding
construction documents for both phasesÄand to fund a new stairway to the Center, install the limited
use/limited access(LULA) elevator, and upgrade the lighting. (See Article8(c)). It is anticipated that
there will be an FY2014 request, also from the CPF, for Phase 2 that will upgrade HVAC, improve space
utilization, and modify hardware and toilets to conform to Massachusetts Archy
Board (MAAB) standards.
There is some community interest in having a larger space that icorporates a multi-generational-focused
community center, but as yet, neither the true level of interesthas been
determined.
Fire
The Fire Department uses industry standards and its own experien
for its capital equipment. Unlike many pieces of Town equipment,-
ambulances) trucks are partially custom-made and equipped, require very detailed specifications, and
typically require many months between placing the order and the and acceptance of a piece of
equipment.
st
The mission of the Fire Department in the 21 century has shifted beyond traditional firefighting to
emergency services, homeland security, and community educationÄwith our firefighters now being
trained for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Advanced Life S
perform these missions has changed with new technologies for firefighting and communications, yet the
basic pumper truck, ladder truck, and rescue-ambulance are still essential to the mission.
Lexington must continue to replace its aging equipment and retai-up capacity. The table below
includes the forecasted need for replacing major capital vehicles in the current inventory.
The TownÈs 5-Year Capital Budget for FY2013-FY2017 contains only one fund request for the Fire
Department in FY2013Äand itÈs one that also will be looking at the same needs of the and Public
Works Departments:To engage a communications consultant to assess the current communi
and make recommendations for solutions to address those needs. (
That Budget indicates funding for D&E of a replacement for the existing Headquarters Fire Station,
located at 45 Bedford Street, will be requested in FY2014Äwith funding for construction following in
FY2015. (YouÈll see in this CommitteeÈs Five-Year Capital Plan that we find that timing is premature.)
Whether the replacement will be renovation and expansion of the existing buildin, a teardown and
completely new construction, or construction of a new building at a different location, will be decided by
the BoS later this year. The BoS commissioned a study, using FY2012 operating funds, of the Fire
Department which will review Fire Department operations, staffin
operations-and-staffing segment of the study is expected to be completed next month; the review of
facility needs will not be available until this fall. (As youÈll see in our Five-Year Capital Plan, this
Committee has moved the Fire Headquarters capital funding under Public Facilities, rather than remaining
under the Fire Department, to be consistent with our belief that projects should be grouped with the entity
that will execute themÄrather than the entity that might be the ÅcustomerÆ. We encourag
use the same philosophy in its future Capital Budgets.)
The 2011 ATM approved funding (under Article 13(k)) for interim repairs to the main equipment floor,
which included pressure treated timber cribbing to support the f
coating. The cribbing and new slab are in place; the epoxy coating will be applied later this year.
19
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Major Capital Equipment
1
Following is the current inventory of the Fire DepartmentÈs major, capital-equipment, vehiclesÄordered
by the year of the currently-projected replacement funding:
Originally
Projected Projected
Replacement Model Year Put-in-Service Useful Life
FundingIDTypeMakePurchasedDate(Years)Original Cost
2 S-1Bucket International19841984Likely on the
Not Applicable
truckorder of
$63,000; but not
confirmed
FY2015M-2AmbulanceChevrolet/2006Apr 200610$165,000
Lifeline
FY2017E-4PumperFerrara/2003Jul 2003 3$210,000
20
International
FY2018F-1Brush TruckChevrolet 2008Oct 200810Ã12$80,000
Kodiac
FY2018F-2Brush Truck Chevrolet 2008Nov 200810Ã12$60,557 (truck
with Skid 3500$31,058; skid
4 unit $29,499)
Unit
FY2018M-1AmbulanceChevrolet/2009Jul 200910$204,000
Lifeline
FY2019L-1AerialEmergency 2000Jun 200120$588,000
One/Cyclone
FY2020E-3PumperEmergency 2004Jan 2005$345,000
3
20
One/Typhoon
FY2021M-3AmbulanceFord/Horton2012Mar 201210 5
$251,199
FY2027E-1PumperFerrara/2007Apr 2008 3$389,000
20
Intruder II
FY2030E-2PumperFerrara/2010Aug 2010 36
20$544,034
Inferno
1
IncludesIDseriesÅEÆ(pumpers),ÅFÆ(Forestry),ÅLÆ(ladder),&ÅMÆ(Medic)(alsoknownasRescue).NotincludedareID
series ÅCÆ (cars), ÅHÆ (trailer), ÅSÆ (service vehicles, includi
budgetwithoneexception:SÃ1isacapital-equipmentitem,butseefootnote2forwhyitisnotinthecapital-replacement
schedule.
2
Thistruckisusedtoservicetheremainingwiredfire-alarmcircuits.(Itsbucketwastransferredoverfroma1969model-
yeartruckthathadbeenintheinventory.)ItisnotincludedinthereplacementscheduleastheDepartmentisinthe
processofdecommissioning(andremoving)thosewiredcircuits.WhenthatiscompletedÄwhichisnowhopedtobe
completedthiscalendaryearÄitwillberemovedfromservice,soldfollowingthesurplus-equipmentprocedures,andnot
replaced. (The delay in the decommissioning and removal reflects
and also is weather dependent.)
3
Of the 20 years, it is expected that 10 will be spent as a fron
4
The"skidunit"(containingatankandpumpassembly)mayoutlastthetruck.Ifitdoes,itwouldbetransferredtothe
replacementtruckwith,mostlikely,justtheneedtooverhaulorreplacethepumpÄwhichthisCommitteeexpectswould
befundedintheoperatingbudget.Ifitdoesn'tandthere'saneedtoreplaceboththetruckandtheentire"skidunit",this
Committee expects the combination would be requested as a packag
5
Netcostwas$241,199($251,199less$10,000forthetrade-inforoldM-3),butgrosscostbeinglistedasfuturestatus
of a trade-in is unknownÄplus it's expected any purchase ~8 year
a much higher cost.
6
Netcostwas$499,034($544,034less$45,000forthetrade-inforoldE-3),butgrosscostbeinglistedasfuturestatus
ofatrade-inisunknownÄplusit'sexpectedanypurchase~17yearsoutwill,aswithalltheotherout-yearpurchases,be
at a much higher cost.
20
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Fire Department 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
Fire Trucks$80,000$500,000$240,000
Rescue-Ambulances$200,000
1
Fire-Department HQ$35,000$40,000$100,000
2
Fire-Hydrant Replacement$50,000$50,000
East Lexington Fire Station$47,500
Wireless Fire Alarms$142,000
Munroe Center Evaluation$35,000
3
Munroe Fire-Protection System$579,550
Fire-Monitoring of Historic Houses$18,120
Police & Fire/EMS Mobile $156,000
4
Computerization
Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
$260,000
Fire HQ Alarm Receiver
$30,000
Firefighter Protection Turnout Gear$88,000
$360,120$1,073,050$600,000$290,000$328,000
1
WomenÈs Shower (FY2008); Redesign Study (FY2009 & 2010 [include
2
Includes $25,000 each year from Water Enterprise Fund
3
CPF (Ultimately completed for $345,325)
4
Joint with Police (shown in both departments)
Police
The Lexington Police Department, which provides public safety se
police officers, detectives, dispatchers and support staff, is s
the areas of communication systems, computer systems, and improvements to the facility in which it is
housed.
The FY2013 Capital Budget contains no funding for Police Departm
We note that the TownÈs proposed 5-Year Capital Plan contains a project for the D&E related to a
renovation and add-on to the existing Police Station located at 1575 Massachusetts Avenue, although the
funding year and cost are not included in the Brown Book. (As discussed above with the Fire
Headquarters Building Replacement, our Five-Year Capital Plan has this line under the Public Facilities
Department.)
Both the Police and Fire Departments have explained to our Committee the burdens they face with the
current, primitive, software used to track and report on their activities. The results are inefficient use of
personnel because of the need for extensive manual tabulation and reporting
that is essential in todayÈs environment. The project proposal was originally draf
September 15, 2008Äbased on the 2004 Public Safety Staffing Review which recommended replacing
the software with one that would better meet the current needs oA
software-improvement project is included by the Town for funding in FY2017; however, this Committee
is concerned that this project is being continually slipped. It was projected to have study funding in
FY2014 ($10,000) with purchase in FY2015 ($400,000) in the TownÈs FY2011ÃFY2015 Capital Plan.
Last year the Town projected a single funding of $410,000 (presumably study and purchase) for FY2016,
and this year the same single funding has been slipped to FY2017. Therefore, it appears that a long-
standing Public-Safety communications problem would not be addressed for at least five more years.
While this Committee appreciates the TownÈs position that their on-going coordination with those same
departments in other municipalities will identify when there is
available, this Committee considers that a more-aggressive, formal, approach should be taken. To that
end, our Plan shows $10,000 in FY2015 and $400,000 in FY2016.
21
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Police Department 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
Police & Fire/EMS Mobile $156,000
1
Computerization
Police Station Space Preservation & $45,000
Needs Study
$31,700
2
Police Station Ventilation System
$0$156,000$45,000$31,700$0
1
Joint with Fire (shown in both departments)
2
CPF
Library
Restoration work to, and updating the Massachusetts Historical Commission Inventory on, the Stone
Building (former East Lexington Library Branch), including a new
removal, painting, and window glazing, were completed in 2010 using $202,933 from the CPF under
2010 ATM, Article 8(q). Although the Historic Structures Report on which this work was based
recommended a small addition to the rear, those plans were not acted upon as the Town has not yet
determined a new use for the building. The building continues to be maintained by the DPF under the
oversight of the Cary Library Board of Trustees.
In December 2010, architects Adams and Smith were hired to study
could be improved ($25,000 under 2010 ATM, Article 12(q)). Funding of $100,000 for recommended
changes was approved under 2011 ATM, Article 13(l). The recommendations include changes to the
workflow and ergonomics. The Library also aspires to use a system of radio-frequency identification
(RFID) tags for material check-in/out. Neither project has a funding request before this Town Meeting.
Public Works
The Department of Public Works (DPW) is the maintenance agent fo
exception of buildingsÄwhich are assigned to the Department of Public Facilities (DPF)Äand is
responsible for the execution (i.e., design, bidding, construction, an
projects. To accomplish its mission, the DPW is organized around,
Engineering, Highway Division, Public Grounds Division, Environmtal Services Division, Water
Division, and Sewer Division.
Major components of DPWÈs FY2013ÃFY2017 capital projects include:
Road and sidewalk construction
Water distribution and wastewater systems improvements
Traffic control and mitigation
Storm-water control and management
Public-grounds improvements
Trucks and heavy equipment necessary to accomplish the DPW mission
DPWÈs capital needsÄexcept CPA, Revolving-Fund, or Enterprise-Fund projectsÄmust be funded by
the general tax levy and/or voter-approved debt exclusions. Almost all construction projects for the
wastewater (sanitary sewer) system and for the water-distribution system are funded from Enterprise
Funds. Likewise, large trucks and heavy equipment used in suppor-
distribution systems are funded by Enterprise Funds.
Engineering
Engineering for all DPW projects is either done Åin houseÆ or contracted to outside consulting and/or
design firms. In addition to supporting on-going DPW work, Engineering will oversee the design of three
Åhigh-visibilityÆ projects. (See Articles 12(i), (n), and (o))
22
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Roads
Lexington has a total of 201 miles of roads, including State and unaccepted roads. That total
138 miles of public roadways, 17 miles of unaccepted roadway and 46 State highway milesÄall numbers
approximate. DPW maintains the public roadways; the remainder being maintained by the private owners
or the State. The estimated replacement cost of the 138 miles of public roadways is in excess of
$85 million, in FY2011 dollars.
Funding for roads is a combination of State Chapter 90 funds and Town funds. (See Article 12(c))
In April 2010, the Town retained Fay, Spofford & Thorndike (FST), a civil-engineering consulting firm,
to develop and implement a Pavement Management System (PMS) for its public roadways and its bike
trail (approximately 5.5 miles). The study was completed in November 2010. The comprehensive study
developed an extensive roadway database describing actual paveme
characteristics in order to better understand future roadway-funding requirement (A more detailed
analysis of the report is contained in this CommitteeÈs report to the 2011 ATM.) This Committee was
extremely pleased to see the study as it provides a quantitative basis for determining the condition of the
pavements that the DPW maintains. That information, along with r
impacts on our pavements (e.g., cuts for utilities work, constru-water and wastewater
system improvements, sidewalk-related projects, etc.) offers the promise of an even-more productive and
cost-effective program going forward. The majority of this committee is pleased that additional tax levy
funding will be provided in FY2013, as it was in FY2012.
Sidewalks
Currently the town has approximately 63 miles of sidewalks. Because the upgrading and extension of
many of these sidewalks was long overdue, the BoS appointed a Sidewalk Advisory Committee in spring
2005. Maintenance of sidewalks is expensive, and issues of obstrons, easements, and objections from
residents burden construction of new sidewalks. That committeeÈs
prioritized sidewalk construction plan focusing on the Safe Rout-
pedestrian-traffic routes, and high-walking-hazard streets.
The FY2013 funding request will allow the accomplishment of proj outside the CBD, chosen through
the cooperation between the Sidewalk Committee and the DPW. Work under that plan includes
constructing new sidewalks and rebuilding/repaving existing sidewalks; all work will be ADA Compliant.
(See Article 12(k))
Currently, there are no sidewalks along Concord Avenue from Spri
is requestedfor the survey and design of such a sidewalk. (See Article 12(l))
Town-wide Signal Improvements
Many of the TownÈs signals are outdated and sometimes malfunctio
study, funded with Traffic Mitigation funds, has identified thos
after assessment of condition, signal timing, delays, ADA requirements, 12(j))
Water Distribution System
Many of the TownÈs water mains were installed in the early 1900s
lined. For a number of years, the Town has been systematically improving the system in order to impro
water quality, pressure, and fire-protection capabilities, and to reduce frequency and severity of-
main breaks.
At the time of the 2011 ATM, DPW had available funding for two or three year of construction work;
therefore, no funds were requested in the FY2012 budget. The backlog of d
has now been reduced to the point where funding is appropriate i
anticipated each year during the balance of the 5-Year Capital Plan. (See Article 13)
23
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Heavy equipment and trucks used by the Water Division are procur
Where equipment is shared with the Sewer Division, the costs are shared. In FY2013, the Water Division
will cover half the cost of a new dump truck that will be shared with the Sewer Division. (See
Article 12(e))
This Committee is concerned that out-years funding is not based on a more quantitative basis where the
remaining useful life of all components of the system are taken into consideration; weunderstand that
Engineering is in the process of augmenting their facility data
age, etc.) that will enhance the ability to be proactive in thei quantitative,
predictive, basisÄwhich will replace the current, level-funding, approach. We recognize that capital
expenditures for the water system do not impact property taxes,
business through the water rates.
To improve meter-reading efficiencies, the Town is considering installing an Auto-Meter
Reading System based on the results of a study funded by the 200 Annual Town Meeting (described in
our report to that Meeting under Articles 16(b) & 17(c), and as noted there, funded there under Article 5).
Funding for Phase 1 of a 3-phase implementation plan was included in the proposed FY2011 capital
budget (described in our report to that Meeting under Article 13(c)), but as that study had not been fully
vetted, Town Meeting Indefinitely Postponed that action. No funds were requested in the FY2012 budget.
No funding is being requested in FY2013, but the TownÈs 5-Year Capital Requests indicate funding may
be requested in FY2014.
Hydrant System
The FY2013 funding for hydrant replacement is evenly divided between Tax Levy funds-
Enterprise Fund retained earnings. (See Article 12(b))
Wastewater System
The wastewater (sanitary-sewer) system, like the water-distribution system, has sections that date back to
the early 1900s. Due to age-related deterioration, some sections are susceptible to storm-water infiltration
which increases the total flow to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) treatment
system, resulting in increased charges to the Town, and causing overloading of parts of the system. There
is an ongoing program of investigating, evaluating, replacing an(See
Article 14(a))
The wastewater-system funding request every year was developed in a manner similar to that done for the
water-distribution. (See comment above under Water Distribution.)
The wastewater system has 10 pumping stations that need continual maintenance and periodic updating
and which the Sewer Division has been upgrading. Six stations have been upgraded with funding
appropriated through FY2012. With the requested FY2013 funding,
upgraded, leaving two larger stations to be completed in FY2014 (See Article 14(b)) (As this
upgrade program has no need for the $100,000 shown for FY2016 & FY2017 in the TownÈs 5-Year
Capital Plan, that funding has been removed from our Five-Year Capital Plan.)
This Committee has been advised that only one pumping station (the main station) has backup electrical-
power-generation capability and that during the 2011 ÅHalloween dayÆ snow storm, several of the
pumping stations were without power so even using portable generators, it wasnÈt possible to keep fo
them from overflowing. Therefore, this Committee considers the funding and installation of emergency
generators at other pump stations should be funded and executed as soon as possible. We are pleased to
report that DPW has made plans to accomplish that. They have ide
with a combination of available Capital funds and their Operating Budget
can begin in FY2013.
Heavy equipment and trucks used by the Sewer Division are procur
Where equipment is shared with Water Division, the costs are shared. (See Article 12(e))
24
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Dam Repair
The State Department of Conservation and Recreation mandates insfive years of dams that
are rated significant hazard dams. An engineering study in 2010 eet
revealed significant potential problems with the dam. The 2011 ATM funded the Phase I engineering and
construction and partial Phase II engineering. (Funded there under Article 10(a).) FY2013 funding is
requested for continued Phase II engineering, construction services and the construction of Phase II
improvements. (See Article 12(g))
Storm-Water Drainage and National Pollution Discharge Elimination
Systems (NPDES)
Storm drains which line the TownÈs streets occasionally fail duepassing over them and/or
loss of supporting soil around them, creating holes in the stree
repaved, it is frequently discovered that the storm-drainage system is seriously deteriorated. Concurrent
drainage system repairs are required to prevent further deterioration of a failing condition and to protect
newly paved secondary streets. It is also necessary to study and
develop and/or complaints are received.(See Article12(h))
Culvert Repair
The 2011 ATM appropriated $65,000 for the review, design, and permitting for repairs to the three
culverts under the access road to the Hartwell Avenue Compost Fa funds the
replacement of those three culverts and for repairs to culverts identified in storm drainage studies. (S
Articles 7 & 12(d), respectively)
Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water Management Systems
The Town must maintain its 18 brooks, three watersheds, and its numerous wetlands in a conditih
that they do not reduce the volume of water that can be handled -drainage systems. Sediment
and broken tree limbs impede the flow of water and cause floodin
creating liabilities for the Town.
The FY2013 request is, first, for funding to complete the third of three studies partially funded in FY201
(described in our report to that Meeting under Article 15(c)) and, again, in FY2012 (described in our
report to that Meeting under Article 10(l)) by developing the plan for the Mystic River Watershed, and
then to begin the design of non-culvert projects that DPW has already identified. (See Article 12(f))
Public Grounds
The Town has approximately 630 acres of land in a total of 110 parks, playgrounds, conservation areas,
athletic facilities, school grounds, and historical sites. In addition, Town staff administers and ma
four cemeteries with a combined area of a little over 30 acres.
10,000 trees along roadways and an indeterminate number of trees, shrubs, and plantings on Town-owned
land.
There is no FY2013 funding requested for Public Grounds. A $70,000 project for a sprinkler system at
Hastings Park was deferredÄas it had been in the FY2012 budget.
Minuteman Bikeway
The 11-mile Minuteman Bikeway, which was opened in 1993, runs from the
the railroad Freight House in Bedford. About half the total leng
DPWÈs Public Grounds Division maintains the Lexington segment.
The TownÈs 5-Year Capital Plan carries no capital projects related to the Bik
25
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
DPW Equipment
DPW has approximately 160 pieces of equipment, of which 100 pieces had an individual acquisition cost
in excess of $25,000; therefore, their replacement would normally be subject to this CommitteeÈs review.
The total acquisition cost of the 160 pieces was approximately $ million. To replace the fleet today
would cost an estimated $11 million.
DPW has developed a well-conceived program of replacing the older, less fuel-efficient and high-
maintenance-cost equipment with standard, off-the-shelf vehicles and equipment that will last longer and
cost less to maintain and operate. Replacement of equipment with acquisition costs under $25,000, and all
automobiles, is funded with operating funds. The current 5-year equipment-replacement schedule projects
annual costs of about $600,000 per year, in FY2012 dollars. FY2013 requested procurements are
consistent with that replacement schedule. (See Articles 12(e), 13, & 14)
DPW 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
FY2008FY2009FY2010FY2011FY2012
Capital from Tax Levy & Chapter 90 Funds
DPW Equipment$523,300$510,000$520,923$400,384$365,000
DPW Facility$25,480,000
Street resurfacing & reconstruction$1,320,000$1,925,000$1,238,125$1,376,578$1,546,602
Street light/traffic mitigation$50,000$50,000$50,000$217,000$87,000
Drains/dams/brook cleaning$460,000$160,000$160,000$270,000$770,000
Town Building Envelope$150,000
Sidewalk/bikeway improvements$350,000$275,000$340,000$200,000
Geographic Information System$84,000
Street AcceptanceÄPitcairn Place$125,000
Comprehensive Watershed Study$110,000$110,000$50,000
Hydrant Replacement$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000
Public Grounds$35,000
$28,358,300$2,945,000$2,313,048$2,738,962$3,078,602
Totals
FY2009wasthefirstyearthatCapitalProjectsforbothMunicipalandSchoolfacilitiesweresubmittedbythethen-new
DepartmentofPublicFacilities.SeethePublicFacilitiesAppropriationHistorylaterinthisreportforitsFY2009and
following-years appropriationsÄwhich includes items for the Muni
Capital from Enterprise Funds
Wastewater
Sewer System$1,300,000$1,200,000$1,200,000$1,200,000
DPW Equipment$263,500$45,000
Geographic Information System$102,300$22,122$14,400
Automatic Water-Meter Reading System$25,000
Pump station upgrades$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000
$1,502,300$1,322,122$1,602,900$145,000$1,300,000
Sewer Totals
Water
Water Mains Relining$1,800,000$1,800,000$900,000$900,000
DPW Equipment$119,000$57,420
Automatic Water-Meter Reading System$25,000
Geographic Information System$31,210$33,183$21,600
Hydrant Replacement$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000$25,000
Rehabilitate Standpipes$160,000
$1,856,210$1,858,183$1,090,600$1,142,420$25,000
Water Totals
Capital from DPW Compost Operating Revolving Fund
Culvert Replacement$65,000
$0$0$0$0$65,000
Revolving Fund Totals
26
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Public Facilities
The Department of Public Facilities (DPF) is responsible for the-owned
buildings inclusive of those under the control of the BoS, Town Manager, Library Trustees, and School
Committee. Expenses associated with the DPF staffing, maintenance (including prevent
maintenance), custodial services, capital-project management, utilities, landscaping and grounds (at
schools only), and building rentals are the responsibility of this department.
The DPF is organized around four areas of responsibility: Administration, Project Management, Facility
Maintenance and Repair, and Custodial Services. Administration is responsible for the adn of
the Department. Project Management is responsible for major capital renovations
support to the TownÈs Permanent Building Committee for new construction. Facility Main
Repair is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all the facilities listed below. Custodial Services is
responsible for custodial services in all those facilities.
DPF is responsible for buildings at 22 locations: Town Office Building, Cary Memorial Building, Police
Station, Fire Department Headquarters, East Lexington Fire Station, Samuel Hadley Public Services
Building, Stone Building (previously used as the East Lexington Library)
Visitors Center, Council on Aging Facility (Senior Center in the
Massachusetts Avenue), Westview Cemetery, the White House, 9 schools, and the Schools Central
Administration (in the old Harrington School).
DPF has taken a systematic approach to solving problems that aff
buildings, including roofs, flooring, building envelope, and school paved parking and sidewalk areas.
During FY2012, DPF refined its estimates for these programs, which in somÄfrom this
CommitteeÈs perspectiveÄshould be more on-going maintenance than capital expenditures. However, as
the needs exist and the work will be funded by Tax Levy dollars,we support these projects being in the
FY2013 Capital BudgetÄalthough we would look for them to eventually transition into thOperating
Budget. (See Articles 16(a), (d), (f), and (l))
Funds are also requested for an evaluation of the Middle Schoolsrts spaces.
(See Article 16(b)) Lexington High School Overcrowding Phase II Renovations will som
the overcrowding condition. (See Article 16(k))
Two projects address energy improvements at Diamond Middle School an Hastings School. (See
Articles 16(c) and (h)) Funds are requested to replace two vehicles that are beyond their useful life with
two trucks more appropriate to their use in grounds maintenance. (See Article 16(j))
The FY2013 Capital Budget includes funding for a long-overdue Town-wide Facility Master Plan and
funds that will allow the DPF to prepare bid documents for smallthat may be
funded in FY2014. This advance preparation is necessary in order to permit construction to take
the 2013 summer-vacation period. (See Articles 16(g) and (i))
With regard to the While House Stabilization project prepared by the Warrant includes a
sub-Article for it, the project does notÄat the time of this reportÄhave a proposed funding. (The Brown
Book cites its funding as ÅTBDÆ; there is no narrative of the project.) This Committee, however,
understands the proposed scope and projected cost, and supports the work being funded (and we
understand to be done) in FY2013Äeven using the GF, rather than the CPF, as the CPC did not support it
for this Town Meeting. (See Article 16(e))
27
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
1
Public Facilities 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
Municipal
Library Material Handling System $100,000
Design
Building Envelope$153,750$157,594$161,534$165,573
Munroe School Fire Protection$579,550
Fire Headquarters$40,000$70,300$450,000
East Lexington Fire Station
Kitchen Upgrade$75,000
Town Office Building Renovation$325,000
Schools
Building Envelope$265,000$376,500$272,400$1,298,000
Mechanical/Elec/Plumbing$1,340,000$390,000$50,000
Landscaping/Paving$65,000$120,000$175,000$250,000
Interior Renovations$365,000$305,000$174,000$75,000
Bridge/Bownman D&E$750,000$280,000
School Improvements$378,000$645,000
$2,808,300$1,494,394$2,285,934$3,263,573
1
FY2009wasthefirstyearthatCapitalProjectsforbothMunicipalandSchoolfacilitiesweresubmitted
bythethen-newDepartmentofPublicFacilities.PreviousfacilitiesÈCapitalProjectswerepresented
separately by the DPW and the SchoolsÄand are still shown in the
2
FY2009 & FY2010 fundings were for D&E; FY2012 funding was for r
Recreation
Recreation Department programs are funded from three sources:
Tax Levy (e.g., used for neighborhood playgrounds, athletic fields, and basketball courts
¥
improvements)
Recreation Enterprise Fund (e.g., used for fee-based activities such as Pine Meadows Golf
¥
Course, Irving H. Mabee Pool, Old Reservoir, and tennis courts)
Community Preservation Funds (e.g., preservation of recreation facilities, including those for fee-
¥
based activities)
Fee collections for Enterprise Fund-based activities are weather dependent and can vary from year to
year. The Recreation Enterprise Fund makes annual debt-service payments of $100,000 per year for
Lincoln Fields (ending in February 2018) and $30,000 for the Val (ending in February
2013), and an annual indirect payment to the Town ($223,600 in FY2013).
Community Preservation Fund monies have enabled some large proje
might not have been financially viable. Most significant in terms of funding is the Center Playfields
Drainage Project that, with the last funding thatÈs before this Town Meeting will have been authorized
approximately $2.39 million over 3 years.
At this town meeting, Recreation-related funding requests include the last funding for that Center
Playfields Drainage (see Article 8(e)); and for a fairway mower to be used at the Pine Meadows Golf
Course, resurfacing and striping the center track, the Adams School pl-ground
irrigation at several places to complete coverage of those areas 11).
28
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Recreation 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
Athletic Fields$50,000$177,000$70,000$50,000
Playgrounds & Tot Lots$75,000
Golf Course$200,000
Swimming (Old Res & Center)$60,000$569,000$25,000
Tennis & Basketball$235,000$60,000
Center Playfields Drainage$875,173$911,863
Town Pool Renovations$165,000
$285,000$372,000$839,000$950,173$1,076,863
$20,000oftheFY2009appropriationwasnotusedastheFY2010appropriationincorporatedthat
same scope.
Schools
Overview
The Lexington Public Schools provide educational, athletic, and 75 students in
grades KÃ12. (A year earlier, the total was 6,340.) Pre-school programs are also offered at the elementary
st
schools. Enrollment figures are those as of October 1 as required by the StateÈs Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education for each academic year. For O 1, 2011, in the six elementary
schools there were 2,816 students (versus 2,830 the year before), in the two middle schools the total was
1,608 (versus 1,515 the year before), and the high-school number was 1,951 (versus 1,995 the year
before). So, itÈs the increase in the middle schools that drives this yearÈs overall total to have a net
increase of 35 students.
In addition to the six elementary-school buildings, and two middle-school buildings, the high school is a
complex of four, freestanding, academic buildings and a field house. Central Office (ÅAdministrationÆ)
personnel and services are located in what had been the old HarrThe maintenance of those
fourteen buildings is overseen by the DPF.
School Technology Program
There is a long-term plan to upgrade technology throughout the schools by replacing the oldest
computers, peripherals, projection systems, network-delivery systems, and other associated hardware and
software. This yearÈs requestÄwhich continues the annual requests in support of that planÄincludes, as
one of several improvements, the first year in a three-year program to provide interactive whiteboards
with integrated projection systems for enhanced educational instruction in the 213 of the 294 Grades 3Ã12
classrooms that donÈt already have that capability. (ItÈs expected about 65 of the 213 classrooms would
get the capability within the FY2013 funding; the rest in FY2014 (See Article 15(a))
Classroom and Administrative Furniture
On an annual basis the school department replaces and/or repairsd or outdated furniture such as student
and teacher desks, chairs, tables, filing cabinets and other basic furnishings. This yearÈs request will
address a portion of these items system-wide based on prioritized needs determined by school staff. (See
Article 15(b))
Equipment
Food-service operations in all schools serve hot and cold meals to th
It is essential to purchase and maintain equipment for preparing
provides for safe distribution. The food-service operations are contracted to a private vendor, but the
purchase of equipment is the responsibility of the school system.
29
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
1
School 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
Technology$400,000$600,000$600,000$696,000$737,000
Classroom Furniture$50,000$25,000$50,000$58,571$150,000
Miscellaneous$230,000
Pre-KÃ12 Master Plan$155,000
Food Service Equipment$55,000$75,000$99,500$64,000
Secondary Schools$1,885,000
Elementary Schools$445,000
Time Clock/Time Reporting System$97,000
$3,010,000$835,000$725,000$951,071$951,000
1
FY2009wasthefirstyearthatCapitalProjectsforbothMunicipalandSchoolfacilitieswere
submittedbythethen-newDepartmentofPublicFacilities.SeethePublicFacilitiesAppropriation
History earlier in this report for its FY2009 and following-year
for the School Facilities.
2
In FY2012, includes $30,000 from the Food Services RF.
Information Technology (IT) Infrastructure (Town-wide)
The IT infrastructureÄwhich supports Municipal and Schools functions and includes Management
Information Systems (MIS)Äincludes both physical and software elements, and is crucial to
operations of the Town. There are three requests for capital upgrades to that infrastructure. (See
Articles 12(a), (p), & (q))
IT 5-Year Capital Appropriation History (All Sources)
$165,000
MIS Technology Improvement Program
Town-wide Electronic Documentation $410,000
Management System
$0$0$0$0$575,000
30
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Warrant Article Analysis and Recommendations
Cites of the ÅBrown BookÆ refer to the ÅTown of Lexington Fiscal Year 201
Budget & Financing PlanÆ, March 2, 2012.
2012 Special Town Meeting, April 2, 2012
Funding Source
Fund
STM Article 2: Appropriate
Committee Recommends
Authorization
For New Estabrook
Requested
School
$39,742,248 (to GF (Excluded Approval (5Ã0)
complete the Debt)
funding of the
currently
estimated total
project cost of
$40,792,248)
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money to demolish the existing Es
and construct originally equip and furnish a new Estabrook Schoo
expended under the direction of the Permanent Building Committee¼and for which the Town may be
eligible for a school construction grant from the Massachusetts ol Building Authority
(ÅMSBAÆ)¼and any project costs the Town incurs in excess of any grant app
the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. Any grant that the Town may receive from the
MSBA for the project shall not exceed the lesser of (1) thirty-three and ninety-six hundredths percent
(33.96%), which may potentially increase if, at the discretion ony
incentive reimbursement points, of eligible, approved project co
the total maximum grant amount determined by the MSBA.Æ [Town of Lexington Special Town Meeting
(April 2, 2012) Warrant]
ÅSubsequent to the discovery of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBÈs) at the Estabrook School, an
Emergency Statement of Interest (SOI) was submitted to the Massa
(MSBA) to determine if the replacement of the Estabrook School qied for support from the MSBA.
The MSBA invited Lexington to participate in a Feasibility Study
solution to meet the educational requirements of the school. The
funded by the 2011 Annual Town Meeting, is in progress. The Feasibility Study, completed in December,
determined that a new three-story school is the Lexington preferred design that satisfies
educational/programmatic needs. The estimated project cost for trom $38,894,133 -
$42,783,456. The Schematic Design was submitted to MSBA in February, after voter approval
on January 24th to fund the project outside the limits of Proposition 2. It is anticipated that the MSBA
will agree to a reimbursement of approximately 32% of the project and will vote the project scope
th
and budget agreement at its March 28 Board meeting. Site work would begin in the summer of 2012
with construction beginning in the fall 2012 and the new school Æ [Brown Book,
Page XI-12]
The 2011 ATM appropriated, under Article 13(b), funding which included the $1,050,000 for the
Feasibility Study that, along with this request, funds the currently estimated total p
presented to the MSBA for approval. The total project funding will be excluded debt.
31
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
2012 Annual Town Meeting
rd
Funding Source
Fund
Article 7 (3 Fund Only):
Authorization Committee Recommends
Establish and Continue
Requested
Departmental Revolving
FundsÄDPW Compost
$325,000 (out of DPW Compost Approval (5Ã0)
Operations
total of $499,000) Operations RF
Funding Source
Authorization
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Amount
Requested
DPW Compost
Culvert Replacement $325,000 Approval (5Ã0)
Operations RF
ÅThe 2011 Annual Town Meeting appropriated $65,000 for thesurvey, design and permitting for repairs
to three corrugated metal pipe arch culverts under the access ro
Facility that have failed due to rust and separation at the pipe connection joints¼this request is for the
replacement of these culverts.¼ [Brown Book, Page XI-13]
(See Article 12(d) for the balance of the funding for this $390,000 effort using Fr
As this annual Article only provides the required authorization mittee
normally would not comment on it; however, as the Town intends tthis capital project from a
revolving fund, we believe this project should be handled like other capital projectsÄwhich includes our
review and recommendation to Town MeetingÄand be subject to explicit Town Meeting review and
approval. Therefore, we recommend this project be explicitly described to Town Meeting so, if needed,
they can be further discussed before a vote is takenÄeither on the whole Article or on this one RF, if
separated-out.
Funding Source
Funds Committee
Article 8: Appropriate the FY2013
Requested Recommends
Community Preservation
Committee Operating Budget
$5,529,092 CPF (Cash) $4,604,092
and CPA Projects (Multiple
($5,054,092 (See below)
Categories)
budgeted)
Committee Recommends
Project Description (CPA Category) Amount Requested Funding Source
(a) Archives & Records
Management/Conservation (Historic $150,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
Resources)
ÅThis is the 5th of a 5-year request for funding of conservation & preservation of historic municipal
documents and records to secure the permanent and vital records
proper retention, archiving and perpetual access¼Efforts for year 5 will complete microfilming and
digitization of some of the conserved/preserved records and target early 2
requiring conservation, preservation, microfilming and digitization for ready access voter registers,
records of the Selectmen, Cemetery records, registers of vital records, and deed and agreement files.
Development of the Archives portal for a virtual exhibit in cele
32
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
will be completed through the processing and indexing of digitiz
exhibit will draw.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-18]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(b) Paint Mine Barn Preservation (Historic
$34,770 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Resources)
ÅThe Paint Mine Barn is a structure located in Paint Mine Conservation Area, between the end of
Mountain Road and Hennessey Field. The Historical Commission hasure as a
significant building. It was acquired by the Town in 1961 and transferred to the Conse
Commission in 2000. In the distant past, it served as a horse barn to stabl
meadow that is now Hennessey Field, but has since sat unused. The building is 80 feet long by 20 feet
wide. Seven old stalls, a space that apparently was used as an office, and a hallway space make up the
interior of the barn. Funds are being requested to preserve the barn so that it can be
tools, lumber, supplies, and equipment for the Conservation Division. The Town Building Commissioner
has inspected the structure and it is his opinion that it can be restored. Funds requested are for materials
only as project labor will be provided by students through the M
School.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-18]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(c) Muzzey Senior Center UpgradeÄ
$561,518 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Phase I Construction (Historic Resources)
ÅThis request for funding addresses critical building improvements needed in the area of accessibility,
safety, and energy efficiency at the Lexington Senior Center, loium at
1475 Massachusetts Ave. Schematic level drawings have been completed for these improveme
funds are now requested for design development and construction documents for the s
recommended as well as construction funding for phase I to inclu
communicating stair, a limited use/limited access elevator (LULAr Center and to
upgrade lighting. It is anticipated that a subsequent request wi
remainder of the recommended scope of work preliminarily estimatd at approximately $480,000 to
upgrade the HVAC system, improve space utilization, and implement work needed to comply with the
requirements of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-15]
Amount Funding
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested Source
$550,000
(d) Cary Memorial Building Upgrade $75,000
($75,000
CPF (Cash)
(Historic Resources) Approval (5Ã0)
budgeted)
ÅThis request is for funding a 30% design development process, an
recommended improvements identified in the building evaluation report, so that the project scope of work
can be more thoroughly reviewed by the Town.
ÅMills Whitaker Architects LLC completed a building evaluation re
included a comprehensive evaluation of the building and summarized improvements in several areas:
accessibility, support spaces, structural, electrical, mechanicaand audio
visual improvements. A single project to implement all improvements is estimated at $
33
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
ÅA subsequent request to complete design development and construction do
future Town Meeting. Approximately $50,000 of this $75,000 reque
design development and construction documents effort, which was originally budget at $550,000 for a
$7.7M total project budget.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-16]
This Committee fully appreciates the importance of this building to our TownÄboth architecturally and
functionally; however, we were not yet satisfied that all of theoriginallyproposed scope is a prudent use
of our taxpayersÈ fundsÄwhether from the CPF, which brings with it the benefit of supple
from the State, or the general fund. We believe that when a project is contemplated to have a construction
cost in the millions-of-dollars range, there should be a better, explicit, Åbuy-inÆ to the scope before
appropriating the full Design & Engineering (D&E) funding, to inWe acknowledge
that the Department of Public Facilities made a good faith effort to gain that Åbuy-inÆ with an extensive
public-outreach effort, but this Committee found during that process there were many unresol
questions concerning the scope, including the relative prioritie.
We, therefore, originally recommended a delay in funding any D&E until there was more agreement on
the answers to those questionsÄappreciating that would likely entail a full-yearÈs delay in this project,
but we didnÈt feel there was any material deficiency with the building that would jeopardize its continued
use if there were that delay; however, we were unable to gain suBoS to that
approach.
With that being the case, this Committee now supports the alternative process being proposed whereby
further definition of all elements of the full scope, with more-specific cost estimates, is undertaken before
committing to the full D&E. ItÈs our understanding that this initial D&E will look at all the elements of
what had been proposed as the full scope, recommend a prioritization of those elements, ande for
further public outreach. At that stage, there also would be a far-better understanding of the range of
construction funding that would likely be needed to execute that-upon scope.
Once the results of those efforts have been evaluated and a position taken by the Town on the scope to be
pursuedÄwhich could conceivably be the original full scopeÄthen this Committee would be ready to
provide our advice regarding the scope that should be included in the continuation of the D&E.
This Committee unanimously supports the alternative process described above as being the appropriate
approach for this effort at this Town Meeting.
Amount
Funding Source
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(e) Center Playfields DrainageÄPhase III
$605,718 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
(Open Space)
ÅThe Center Playfields Complex is the most heavily used Recreatio
the schools, adult and youth leagues and the general public. The entire 23-acre area has very poor
drainage conditions resulting in standing water, soft field area
leads to unsafe and unplayable conditions. Funds requested for F are the third phase of a three-year
project costing $2.39 million at completion. Work to be done in
improvements on the practice field area along Worthen Road, the
the parking area and the Center Track area. The work will involve installing new drain systems and
grading in an effort to move water off of the fields and collectwater
conditions do not occur. This will allow the fields to dry faster and improve playability and safety. This
project will be overseen by the Town Engineer.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-18]
34
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Committee Recommends
Project Description (CPA
Funding Source
Amount Requested
Category)
(f) Battle Green Area Master
Plan ImplementationÄPhase 2 $143,845 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
(Historic Resources)
The Selectmen authorized the Tourism Committee to conduct a mast
Å
Green. The Battle Green [Area] Master Plan completed by the firm Past Designs was accepted by the
Board of Selectmen in March 2010. The Master Plan implementation is broken out into multiple phase
Phase 1, which deals with monument restoration and treatment to
2011 annual town meeting and will begin in the spring. This FY 2013 request for funding is for Phase 2
which will address the paths around the Battle Green and Belfry
at Ye Olde Burying Ground.¼Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-17]
When the BoS accepted the Plan, they stipulated that they would with, among other things, determine
what implementation measures, if any, would be recommended. The measures described above represent
that BoardÈs recommendation.
(See Article 12(i) for another element of the Phase 2 work that Board has
recommended.)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(g) LexHABÄSet Aside for
Housing Acquisition (Community $450,000 CPF (Cash) Disapproval (5Ã0
)
Housing)
ÅThis request is made by LexHAB¼set-aside funds for the acquisition and/or creation of
affordable housing units in Lexington. These CPA funds would be
year for the purchase of affordable units. Units will be consist
2011 by the CPC, including affordable housing deed restrictions,
Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI). The goal of this project is
which LexHAB acquires and creates affordable housing units and rate approval for
them.Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-20]
While this Committee supports this alternate approach to providing CPF ,
when warranted, to further LexingtonÈs community (affordable) housing objective under the
CPA, we do not believe additional funds are warranted at this time and, therefore, should n
bankrolled with LexHAB.
That belief is based on:
(1) The Town being, for at least the next few years even without any
housing stock, well over the 10% threshold in Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B that
protects the Town from developments that arenÈt subject to all of the TownÈs zoning By-Laws;
(2) There is already a request before this Town Meeting for funding 4-accessible, community-
housing, units at Greeley Village (with a State grant supplementing support by the CPF) wh
will further enhance our position with regard to that Chapter 40bsection j
under this Article);
(3) There is additional community housing already planned on the 0.5-acre portion that was
divided out for that purpose from the 14.2-acre parcel of the Leary Land off Vine Street
funded by the 2009 ATM, Article 12Äand funding for that housing should require a separate
vote at a Town Meeting;
(4) Still under discussion is whether one or more units of community housing will be built
along Lowell Street frontage of the 7.93 acres of Busa Land funded by the 2009 STM
35
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
(May 6, 2009), Article 6Äand funding for that housing should require a separate vote at a
Town Meeting;
(5) LexHAB is committed to managing the production of the units on the Lear
any, on the Busa Land; and
(6) The Town is only just beginning to develop a land-use policy that should establish our
responsibilities for community housing and govern how we spend our taxpayersÈ funds to
meet our definition of our responsibilities.
This Committee recognizes that the demand for community housing
capability to prudently fund such housing stock. We believe Lexington has already taken
significant steps to provide such housing in our Town. While we do not b
just those previous efforts, we also emphasize that further step
those needing such housing and protection of our TownÈs ambiance., the Chapter 40B
threshold) against the burden placed on our taxpayers to fund su
unmet, demands exist for other Town services and infrastructure.
Based on the above, this Committee sees no compelling justificatng this year another
set-aside to LexHAB and recommends Town Meeting reject this request without prejudice against
the submission by LexHAB of another such request in a future yeaÄwhich would be judged at
that time in the light of the circumstances at that time.
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(h) Buckman Tavern Historic Structures
$65,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
Report/Restore Plan (Historic Resources)
ÅThis request¼in CPA funds is made on behalf of the Historical Society and is for the commissi
a Historic Structure Report and a building needs assessment for
building has been studied on a number of occasions, a definitivectural and human
history is needed before further work on the Tavern is undertakeome of this project will be
(1) a report on the human and architectural history of the Tavern, (2) definitive dating of the building,
(3) a building needs assessment report, and (4) construction plans and specifications for an FY14
restoration project.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-20]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(i) Historical Society Historic Records
$77,268 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Preservation (Historic Resources)
th
ÅIn anticipation of the TownÈs 300 anniversary, and in collaboration with the Town, the Historical
Society has requested¼CPA funds to conserve and digitize some of its most important historic records.
These include the bound church records of the First Parish Churc
of early Lexington (such as military service, slave ownership, etc.), and two Paul Revere engravings.
These important records would be preserved and digitized, and would ultimately be available through the
TownÈs historic records ÇportalÈ.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-20]
36
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description (CPA Category)
Committee Recommends
Requested
(j) Greeley Village Accessible
$810,673 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Housing Project (Community Housing)
ÅThis project, sponsored by the Lexington Housing Authority, seeks¼CPA funds for the design and
construction of four accessible housing units at Greeley Village housing development does
not meet the StateÈs mandated 5% requirement for accessible unit
constructing four new units, and has received an initial commitm
Housing and Community Development for a $300,000 grant and a commitment for the Minuteman Career
and Technology High School for construction assistance.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-20]
This project originally had requested $300,000 more to fully fun
the diligence of Stephen Keane, Executive Director of the Lexington Housi
formal commitment on January 9, 12012, from the StateÈs Department of Housing & Community
Development (DHCD) to award a grant of state funds in that amounhe now-lower request from
the CPF.
Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
Project Description (CPA Category)
(k) Busa Farm Debt Service
$930,300 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
(Potentially Multiple)
The May 6, 2009 Special Town Meeting, under Article 6 (Land PurchaseÄOff Lowell Street), authorized
$4,197,000 for the purchase of the Busa land. The purchase closed on December 4, 2009, and the initial
funding was provided from the TownÈs available cash (rather than interest-only
Bond Anticipation Note (BAN)). On February 25, 2010, as part of the TownÈs issuing of a total of
$10,447,000 in bonds, a 3-year bond was issued to cover the purchase of the land. Payments
st
service are due, in accordance with the usual practice, semi-annually with the 1 being only part of the
thnd
interest for the year (in this case, due on each August 15) and the 2 being principal & the balance of the
th
interest for the year (in this case, due on each February 15).
At the 2010 ATM, CPF in the amount of $2,562,100 were appropriated for the firs-yearÈs full principal
($2,425,000) and full interest ($137,100) payment on that bond. At last-yearÈs ATM, $974,600 was
appropriated for the second-yearÈs $886,000 in principal and $88,600 in interest. That appropriation
consisted of CPF in the amount $757,715 and $216,885 of GF (Cash)Äthe latter representing the CPFÈs
proportional share, net of its share of the bond-issuing cost, of the premium and accrued interest received,
and deposited into the GF, when the bond was issued.
This yearÈs request for $930,300 ($886,000 in principal and $44,300 in interest) is required in order to
retire the bond on schedule on February 15, 2013.
Amount Requested
Funding Source
Project Description (CPA Category) Committee Recommends
(l) Cotton Farm Debt Service
$1,000,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
(Open Space)
This is the last of 3 payments to the seller for the $3,800,000 purchase authorized at the 2010 ATM under
its Article 9 of a portion of the 121 Marrett Road property known as the Cotton Farm by the Town t
preserve open space. (An additional $57,000 was included in the
associated with the closing on the purchase.)
st
The 1 payment to the seller, made at closing, was $1,500,000 from the CPF and the seller agreed to no-
nd
interest financing of the balance over two years. The 2 payment of $1,300,000, due to the seller in
FY2012, was accelerated to FY2011Äand, therefore, discounted to $1,297,400 to offset financing costs
37
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
to be borne by the Town that were not originally contemplated. On February 16, 2011, a Bond
Anticipation Note (BAN) was issued at an interest rate of 0.70% was due on July 1, 2011. Last-yearÈs
request of $1,300,604 was for the FY2012 payoff on July 1, 2011, in full, of that BAN.
Last-yearÈs ATM approved its Article 33 so the $500,000 from that Commonwealth of Massachusetts
grant, which was received by July 1, 2011, was used along with just $800,604 from the CPF for that
FY2012 payoff. (As a grant, that $500,000 didnÈthave to be appropriated so no action wasneeded by
Town Meeting to permit their use.) The then-unused $500,000 of CPF funds that had been appropriated
for the Cotton Farm Debt Service became available for appropriation at this, or any future, Town Meeting
for any permitted CPA purpose.
This yearÈs request for $1,000,000 is for making the final payme
Project Description (CPA Category) Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(m) Administrative Budget $150,000 CPF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Of the request, $50,000 is for the planning, legal, survey and a
acquisition of open space.Such funds will enable the Conservation Commission to act in a t
to complete the due diligence required to prepare for a land acquisit
Åstudy moniesÆ to investigate the benefits of a particular proje
have the advantage of this type of lead-time. It must often act quickly to evaluate a property through legal,
survey and appraisal work. Without designating these funds for o
allocating a portion of its revenues to open-space preservation would be hindered.
The remaining $100,000 funds the administrative, legal, membership, and adv
are funds for a year-round, 3 days/week (the TownÈs GF covers the other 2 days), admi
and $7,500 for membership in the Community Preservation CoalitionÄa State-wide, non-profit,
organization working on behalf of communities who have adopted t
[Communications, February 23, 2012, from the Administrative Assistant to the CPC]
If any of these funds appropriated for the Administrative Budget not required for such administrative
expenses by the end of the fiscal year, that balance will becomee Undesignated Fund Balance.
The Undesignated Fund Balance becomes part of the CPFÈs total that is available for appropriation.
Funding Source
Article 9: Land PurchaseÄ
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
Off Grove Street
TBD CPF (Cash and/or TBD
(Purposes TBD)
Debt)
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to authorize the Selectmen or the C
otherwise acquire, or authorize the Selectmen to take by eminent domain, upon the writt
Conservation Commission, for conservation purposes including out
8C of Chapter 40 of the Massachusetts General Laws, as amended, orize the Selectmen to purchase
or otherwise acquire, or to take by eminent domain for municipal
conservation restriction as defined in Section 31 of Chapter 184
other interest in all or any part of land shown as lot 1 on AssessorsÈ Property Map 91, n
Wright; and appropriate a sum of money therefor and determine wh
the tax levy, by transfer from available funds, including the C Preservation Fund, or by
borrowing, or by any combination of these methods; or act in anyÆ
[Town of Lexington Annual Town Meeting Warrant]
ÅThis proposal initiated by the Board of Selectmen is for the potf the Wright Farm on
Grove Street. This parcel has long been of conservation interest
commissioning of two appraisals for the property, and negotiatioon going. There is no current
estimate of the cost for this acquisition.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-19]
38
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
At the time this report was prepared, this Committee was not aware that a
between the sellers and the Town. If there were an agreement, pu
allows for the CPC to recommend the purchase to Town Meeting for one or more Municipal purposesÄ
which, we feel, would likely include Open Space, but if it did, might not necess
conservation land.
(See also Article 10 for alternate approach to the purchase.)
Funding Source
Article 10: Land PurchaseÄ
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
Off Grove Street
TBD GF (Debt) TBD
(Conservation)
To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Conservation Commi
and authorize the Selectmen to take by eminent domain, upon the writt
Commission, for conservation purposes including outdoor recreati
Chapter 40 of the Massachusetts General Laws, as amended, any fe, easement, or conservation
restriction as defined in Section 31 of Chapter 184 of the Massa
all or any part of land shown as lot 1 on AssessorsÈ Property Ma
appropriate a sum of money therefor and determine whether the money shall be provid
by transfer from available funds, including the Community Preser
combination of these methods; or act in any other manner in rela thereto. . [Town of Lexington
Annual Town Meeting Warrant]
This Article was requested by the Conservation Commission to provide, if an agreement were reached
between the sellers and the TownÄof which, at the time this report was printed, this Committee was not
awareÄfor purchase of the property as conservation land using the GF, if the CPCÈs recommendation
was for any other use(s).
(See also Article 9 for alternate approach to the purchase.)
Funding Source
Article 11: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Recreation Capital
$291,000 $245,000 GF (Debt) + Approval (5Ã0)
ProjectÄ
$46,000 Recreation
EF (RE)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
Recreation EF
(a)Pine Meadows Equipment $46,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
RE
ÅThe FY2013 funding request is to replace the fairway mower at Pine Meadows Golf Course. The
existing fairway mower, which is used three times a week to mow
throughout the golf season, is 8 years old and is beyond its useful life. As equipment comes closer to its
life expectancy, it does not operate efficiently and effectively
repairs, the golf course is not being groomed properly. The over is
very important to its financial success. The quality of the turfal to the
overall operation.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-18]
39
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(b)Park ImprovementsÄHard
$120,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Court Resurfacing
ÅThis is a request for funding to begin a multi-year program of hard court resurfacing including
neighborhood Basketball Courts, the Center Track and the Tennis plex and
Clarke Middle School. The FY2013 request¼is for the resurfacing and striping of the Center Track. The
track is made of an all weather resilient track surface that was installed in 1982. The track was resurfaced
in 2000, but is beginning to show significant signs of wear. This is the last resurfacing that the track can
undergo and should give the track 5 to 6 more years of life befoeds to be totally reconstructed.Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-6]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(c)Park and Playground
$65,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Improvements
ÅThis is a request for funding of a multi-year program to renovate playground equipment at various parks
around town.As the equipment continues to age and deteriorate, more frequent inspections, repairs and
equipment removal will be needed to ensure that the users are safe. This is neither cost effective nor
efficient. Renovation of the current equipment, use zones, and s
generally accepted safety and accessibility standards. The FY2013 request¼is for the renovation of the
playground equipment at Adams Playground, located behind the Wal
Avenue. The improvements will include construction of a new ADA compliant play structure for children
ages 5 to 12, a new swing set and installation of appropriate sa
playground structure and swings. The Town will work with the Waldorf School to partner resources or
the playground renovations.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-6]
In the event the Waldorf School does not provide financial suppo-scale version
would be installed.
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(d)Park ImprovementsÄ
$60,000 GF (Debt)
Approval (5Ã0
)
Athletic Fields
ÅThe Recreation Department and the Public Works Department overse
and town athletic facilities. The Town of Lexington athletic fields see excessive use and irri
improvements are critical to maintaining turf grass and providing a quality facility. This is a request for
funding of a multi-year project of improvements to town athletic fields. The FY2013 request¼is for the
installation of a new in-ground irrigation system at Garfield Park for the baseball field area, and
additional irrigation lines at the Clarke and Diamond School pla
to provide complete coverage of these areas.Æ[Brown Book, Page XI-6]
40
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding
Article 12: Appropriate for
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
MunicipalCapital
Source
Projects and Equipment
$4,431,586 (plus $2,274,142 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0)
$930,607Chap. + $660,000GF (Free
90 State Aid for a Cash) + $1,135,976
total of GF (Cash) + $5,468
$5,362,193) 2008 ATM Art. 15(a)
+ $40,500 Water EF
(Debt) + $25,000
Water EF (RE) +
$40,500 Wastewater
EF (Debt)+ $250,000
Traffic Mitigation SF
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(a)Public Safety Radio
$50,000GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Connectivity
ÅAt the Special Town Meeting held in November 2011, $180,000 was
stabilize the existing fire radio communications system. In presenting the request for funding in
November, it was disclosed that it was the recommendation Fire D
communications specialists, that in addition to stabilizing the m, there was a need to explore
the installation of a redundant system that would back up the pr
during a severe weather event or other disaster. The need to explore a back-up system also extends to the
Police and Public Works Departments. This request is for funds to engage a communications consultant
to assess our current communication needs and make recommendatio
needs in all three Departments.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-19]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
$25,000 GF
(b) Hydrant Replacement (Cash) +
$50,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
Project $25,000 Water
EF (RE)
ÅThere are 1,500 hydrants in LexingtonÈs fire protection system.
project to replace older fire hydrants with new and more efficieequirements.
The new hydrants will increase fire-fighting capacity thus reducing property damage and increasing
safety. The new hydrant will be of a break-away design which will cost less to replace when damaged.
$50,000 will fund approximately 25 replacements.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-17]
Amount
Committee Recommends
Funding Source
Project Description
Requested
$1,025,586 GF (Cash) +
(c) Street Improvements $1,956,193 $930,607 Chapter 90 State Approval (5Ã0
)
Aid
ÅThis request for the annual street resurfacing program is comprised of $1,025,586 of tax levy dollars of
which $579,502 derives from a 2001 operating budget override, an
41
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
[$930,607] of Chapter 90 funds. Over and above the $579,502 in tax levy dol
an additional $281,234 of tax levy support has been recommended for
amount of supplemental funding that was approved in FY12. An add
has been added that represents the residual balance of the revenue allocated to municipal operations per
the FY13 Revenue Allocation model. Funds will be used for design engineering, repair,
reconstruction, and resurfacing. It is anticipated that a portiobe
determined will be repaired within this appropriation.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-17]
This Committee reaffirms its belief that a significant increase
through a debt exclusion, is needed to bring the roads infrastructure to an acceptable level which could
reasonably be expected to be maintained with the level of fundin
before this Town Meeting.
Amount
Committee Recommends
Funding Source
Project Description
Requested
(d) Culvert Replacement $65,000 $65,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
żthis request is for the design of repairs to culverts identified
by the Town with likely locations being Valleyfield Road and RevÆ [Brown Book, Page XI-13]
(See Article 7 [third fund] for the balance of the funding for this $390,000
Operations Revolving Fund.)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
$358,610 GF
(Debt) +
$70,000 GF
(Free Cash) +
$85,390 GF
(e)DPW Equipment $595,000 (Cash) + Approval (5Ã0
)
$40,500 Water
EF (Debt) +
$40,500
Wastewater EF
(Debt)
ÅThis is an annual request to replace equipment that is beyond it
condition no longer meets the work requirements. The Department of Public Works has an i
160 pieces of equipment including sedans, hybrid SUVs, construct
used to mow parks, plow snow, repair streets and complete a variety of other projects. Without regular
equipment replacement, the efficiency and cost effectiveness of
handicapped due to equipment down time and excessive repair costs. FY13 requests are for 1 3-Yard
Rubber Tire Front End Loader - Highway Division ($185,000); 1 F450 with utility body, lift gate and
plowÄWater and Wastewater Divisions ($90,000) with $40,500 from water
wastewater debt and $9,000 for the plow setup from the general f
Crane - Forestry Division ($180,000); 1 John Deere Tractor with Attachments - Park Division ($60,000);
and 1 F450 Dump Truck with Plow - Park Division ($80,000).Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-5]
42
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
$65,000 GF
(f) Comprehensive Watershed (Debt) +
$165,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
Storm Water Management System $100,000 GF
(Free Cash)
rd
ÅThis request is to complete the 3 of three watershed studies to identify impediments to drainage t
can result in neighborhood flooding including sediment buildup in brooks and wetlands, culv
deterioration and blockages that reduce the volume of water handled by the drainage system. To date, the
Charles River watershed management plan has been completed and tshed
management plan is in process. $100,000 of this request is to develop the plan for the Mystic River
Watershed. An additional $65,000 is being requested to begin design of non-culvert projects already
identified. Future funding requests will be for projects identified by the studies in process or proposed.Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-6]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(g)Dam Repair $260,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
ÅThe March 2010 storms magnified some concerns with the Butterfield Dam including conditions of both
the inlet and outlet control structures. At present, the conditi
Town staff prior to and during storm events. At the 2011 annual town meeting, funding was authorized
for Phase I engineering and construction and partial Phase II engineering. Phase I construction, which
includes the physical repairs to the inlet and outlet structure egin in late winter 2012.
The current request for FY13 funding is for continued engineering of Phase II, construction services, and
the construction of the Phase II improvements. The Phase II improvements include physical
improvements to the upstream and downstream face of the dam incl
the damÈs structural integrity.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-5]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(h) Storm Drainage
Improvements & (NPDES) $340,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Compliance
Å$70,000 of this request is to fund the design of projects and programs that will meet requirements
imposed on the Town by the EPAÈs NPDES [National Pollution Discharge Elimination System] illicit
discharge detection and elimination program, and BMP (best manag, installations
and retrofits. The remaining $270,000 the request is for the repair/replacement
encountered during the road resurfacing program; repair of other
including but not limited to trouble spots in the watersheds of the Vine Brook, Cambridge Reservoir,
Beaver Brook, and Kiln Brook; and, other work identified during the NPDES investigation work.Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-5]
43
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(i) Battle Green Area Master
Plan à Parking, Traffic Calming
$60,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
and Safe Pedestrian Access Study
à Phase 1: Conceptual Plan
ÅOff-site/off-street parking is currently difficult for visitors to find and cneeds of
the Center commercial and retail businesses. The current crosswalk system is dangerous and does not
reflect the travel paths most frequently used by tourists/visitors. Tour buses also require a safe area to
allow visitors to disembark and then park safely. Consistent with Recommendation 7 from the Battle
Green Area Master Plan, this request is to undertake a parking a
analysis of parking for autos along Massachusetts Ave. and Bedfo for
parking if these spaces were eliminated, and options for bus drop-off and parking. This study would be
coordinated with the traffic study for the Center commercial are
Development Office budget. The purpose of this study will be to develop conceptual plans for review by
Town boards and committees. Once a plan is agreed to, Phase 2 will involve engineering docum
sufficient for bidding any necessary work.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-17]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
$119,532 GF
(j) Town-wide Signalization (Debt) + $5,468
$125,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
Improvements from 2008 ATM
Article 15(a)
ÅThis request is for funds to update traffic and pedestrian signagnal inventory and
compliance study that was funded last fiscal year that included
condition, signal timing, delays, and a prioritization of the signals needing attention. It is proposed that
the funding requested will be applied to improvements at the intersection of Waltham Street and Worthen
Road.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-6]
Amount
Committee Recommends
Funding Source
Project Description
Requested
(k) Sidewalk Improvements and
$300,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Easements
ÅThis is an annual request to rebuild and/or repave existing asphalt
construct new sidewalks with bituminous and granite or asphalt c
support and enhance pedestrian safety and the Safe Routes to School Program. Sidewalk projects will be
chosen from the Sidewalk CommitteeÈs Master Plan and all work wiÆ [Brown Book,
Page XI-6]
This funding is for sidewalks outside the CBD.
Two members of this Committee feel strongly this is an inadequate annual investment in the non-CBD
sidewalks and deserves receiving additional fundingÄespecially when it has been decided to provide
some additional funding from available revenue toward the street
44
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Amount
Committee Recommends
Funding Source
Project Description
Requested
(l) Concord Avenue Sidewalk
$250,000 Traffic Mitigation SF Approval (5Ã0
)
Engineering and Easements
ÅThis request is for funding of a survey and design for sidewalks Spring
Street to Waltham Street. Currently there are no sidewalks along Concord Avenue in this section. The
installation would be for an approximate total length of 1.1 mil
limited to, retaining walls, drainage improvements, tree removal, and pedestrian crossings. The current
estimate for construction is roughly $2,000,000. [Brown Book, Page XI-19]
One or more future requests would be to fund the construction an
Traffic Mitigation SF, but itÈs likely that would need to be supplemented from the
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(m) Street Betterment
GF (Debt)
N/A Indefinite Postponement (5Ã0)
Improvements and Easements
This was included in the Warrant as the Department of Public Works had received two petitions from
residents of Park Street and Grandview Avenue for street improve
standards so they can be accepted as Town ways. The estimated coements, which includes
the repair of the roadways and the installation of proper drainawas $200,000. Given that these
improvements would directly benefit the abutters, it was proposed that they be assessed a betterment
charge to cover the cost to bring the street up to Town standards. However, as there was no final
agreement by the abutters accepting the betterment assessment, t-element
will be indefinitely postponed.
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(n) Off-Site Street Improvements
$170,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
Related to the Estabrook School
ÅThis request is for funding design, engineering and possibly con
reduce queuing on Grove Street resulting from pick-ups/drop-offs at the Estabrook School. The work
proposed is likely to include sight distance improvements and si
School driveway, and intersection realignment and sight distancentersection of
Grove Street and Robinson Road. Improvements along Robinson Road include minor widening, sight
distance improvements, drainage installation related to increasetential sidewalk
installation. These improvements are based on recommendations from the Estabrook School access
ad-hoc task force, and public safety Departments.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-19]
This request is for the D&E for establishing an 18-foot width of Robinson Road, with one sidewalk;
improving the intersection of Robinson Road with Grove Street; and making improvements to G
Street near the intersection with the roadway leading to the Est
45
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(o) CBD Sidewalk/Street
Improvements/LandscapingÄ$240,000 Approval (4Ã1
)
GF (Debt)
D&E
ÅThis project is to restore and improve the center sidewalks, roand street trees and furniture.
Proposed funding in FY13¼would be used to provide 25% stage design (survey design) leadin
construction of the plan expected to begin in FY 14. The construction is estimated at $3.6 to $4.0 million.
The construction phase is likely to include reconstruction of Ma
to Harrington Road, the restoration, removal and replacement of the forty-year-old brick sidewalk along
the northerly side of Massachusetts Avenue from Depot Square to
aspects developed in the Master Plan. In addition to the restoration of these areas, all of the existing
pedestrian corridors and ramps will be brought into ADA complian-1775
Massachusetts Avenue (Bank of America) will be closed to vehiculraffic.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-7]
To clarify the timing described above, following the initial D&E funded with this FY2013 request, it is
contemplated there would be a request in the FY2014 budget to co
recommendations for a phased implementation) with bid documents,
budget for at least the initial construction funding. (The cost to reconstruct Massachusetts AvenueÄ
which needs to be done, anywayÄis not part of this project and we would expect that to be inclu
future-year request for Street Improvements under the usual annual requestÄsuch as is sub-Article (c)
above.)
This Committee appreciates that the CBD is the heart of our Town
enhanced, without destroying the character of Lexington, but expects the Town to limit its course of
action until the identified issues have been adequately addresse (e.g., Woburn Street intersection,
number of travel lanes, and sidewalk materials). We are very familiar with the public outreach that has
been done to date, but it is with an understanding of the issues left on the table at the end of that process
that raised concerns.
The majority of this Committee supports moving forward at this t
design being proposed; (2) the commitment that has been made to include, up front, the traffic-
engineering services to address the open issues; and (3) continued public discussions regarding the
proposed resolution of the open issues.
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(p) Telephone System
$591,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0)
Replacements Town-wide
ÅThis is a request for Year 1 of a multi-year program to replace phone systems in town and school
buildings as the systems reach their end of useful life. At the 2008 Annual Town Meeting, $30,000 was
appropriated to fund an assessment of existing phone systems in town and school buildings. This
assessment, which was completed in the summer of 2011, recommend
life, existing systems be replaced with voice over internet protocol (VOIP) systems that will operate on
the TownÈs wide area fiber network connected to each town and school building. The FY2013 request
includes funding for the deployment of Çcore devicesÈ that will support all new VOIP systems proposed
for replacement in this year and in future years. Systems proposed for replacement in FY2013 include
Lexington High School, Cary Memorial Building, Westview Cemetery
recycling building. Included in the capital requests for the Bridge, Bowman and Estabrook schools is
funding for the installation of VOIP systems in calendar year 20
year 2014 (Estabrook) that will be supported by the Çcore devicesÈ referenced above.Æ [Brown Book,
Page XI-5]
46
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(q) Town-wide Electronic
$145,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Document Management System
ÅAt the 2011 annual town meeting, an appropriation was approved ticipal
departments and the school department to expand both the capabil
document management system (Laserfiche) to include school docume
expand archive storage capacity. This FY2013 request is for additional funding for scanning of
documents in the ongoing effort to populate the document managem create the baseline
database. Additionally, FY2013 includes some funding to maximize the utili
modules and apply them to School and Municipal department needs. It includes
programming and additional training funding. It is anticipated t
FY2014 for additional scanning services.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-19]
Funding Source
Article 13: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Water System
$900,000 Water EF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0)
Improvements
ÅThis is an annual request for funding of an on-going program to replace unlined or inadequate water
mains and deteriorated service connections, and to eliminate dead ends in water mains. Unlined water
mains are subject to corrosion which results in restricted flow ion of drinking water quality.
Possible locations of water main repair and replacement are Downing Road, Prospect Hill Road,
Wachusett Drive and Forest Court. Part of these project costs may be eligible for financing throug
MWRA grant/loan program.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-10]
Funding Source
Article 14: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Wastewater System
$1,300,000 Wastewater EF Approval (5Ã0)
Improvements
(Debt)
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(a) Wastewater System Wastewater EF
$1,200,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
Improvements (Debt)
ÅThis is an annual request for rehabilitation of sanitary sewer infrastructure. Engineering investigation
and evaluation will be done on sewers in remote, inaccessible ar
poor soil conditions lead to storm water infiltration. Work will include replacement or repair of
deteriorated sewers and manholes in easements. Sewage leaks and
the health of the community through transmission of waterborne diseases. In addition, the TownÈs
assessment by the MWRA for sewage treatment is based on total flow t
town line, so excessive flow of stormwater in the sewer results
Projects may be eligible for MWRA grant/loan program funding if additional funding is made available.
Further identification, prioritization, and repair of sanitary s
infiltration into the system has been ongoing in several sewer bt
limited, to the Kiln Brook Basin/Tophet Swamp area, the Stimson
Street/downtown area, and the Saddle Club area. Possible future areas of investigation and removal are
the Waltham Street/Concord Avenue area and Adams Street area.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-10]
47
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
Wastewater EF
(b) Pump Station Upgrades $100,000 Approval (5Ã0
)
(Debt)
ÅLexington has ten sewer pumping stations valued at over $6 milliis is an ongoing program for
upgrade of the stations including bringing them in compliance wins, and
equipment replacement. The pump stations are evaluated every year to ensure they are op
design parameters. As the system ages, motors and valves need to be replaced and entryways
brought up to current OSHA Standards. Pump failure results in sewer surcharges and overflows, which
create a public health risk and environmental damage. This yearÈs funding is requested for the
Constitution Road Pump Station and the Worthen Road Pump Station.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-11]
Six of the 10 pump stations have already been addressed; two more, smaller, stations will be addressed
with this funding, It is planned that funding for the last two stationsÄwhich are large stationsÄwill be
requested in FY2014 & FY2015; thereby ending this cycle of stati.
Funding Source
Article 15: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for School Capital
$1,085,000 $916,676 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0)
Projects and
+ $168,324 GF
Equipment
(Cash)
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
$833,676 GF (Debt)
(a) School Technology $1,002,000 + $168,324 GF Approval (5Ã0
)
(Cash)
ÅThis request supports the Lexington Public SchoolÈs Strategic Goal of enhancing the
technology as an instructional and administrative tool. Funding is requested for:
replacement of the oldest desktop and laptop ($430,000):
increasing the number of student workstations at the High School and the two middle schools to meet
different instructional needs in our general education and speci
replacement of printers and peripherals ($22,000);
maintaining and updating the LPS local area networks ($82,000);
installing a managed wireless network in two elementary schools
providing interactive whiteboards with integrated projection sys-five of the Grade 3-12
classrooms ($233,400).
Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-9]
Funding Source
Amount
Project Description
Committee Recommends
Requested
(b) Classroom and
$83,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Administrative Furniture
ÅThis is an annual request for replacement of furniture that has
buildings have not been renovated and need to have classroom fur
cafeteria tables, desks, age appropriate chairs, and teacher des
48
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
swing and fitness center equipment as well as funds to dispose of the old furniture.Æ [Brown Book,
Page XI-9]
Funding Source
Article 16: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Public Facilities
$1,819,711 $867,685 GF (Debt) $2,200,711
Capital Projects
+ $782,315 GF (See Below)
(Free Cash) +
$169,711 GF (Cash)
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(a) School Building Envelope and
$215,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Systems
ÅThis project involves performing annual prioritized design, repa modifications to prevent
deterioration of school building exteriors and building systems.
requires continual investment in the building envelope and build
damaged panels and siding, re-caulking and weatherproofing windows and doors, repainting the w
exterior, and extraordinary repairs to mechanical systems. Small
specific door or window or small painting projects will continue through the operating
budget. FY 2013 priorities may include making extraordinary repairs as r
including educational space modifications from enrollment change
at the Diamond roofline, and construction of a loading dock at the Central Office building. Engineering
design and preparation of bid documents are included in the request for funding.Æ [Brown Book,
Page XI-14]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(b) Evaluation of Middle
Schools Science Labs and $35,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0)
Performing Art Spaces
ÅThe two middle schools were renovated approximately 10 years ago
administrators that science labs and performing arts spaces no longer adequately support these programs,
and that the systems, equipment, and the space plan should be ev
educational program. This request is for funding to evaluate theatories,
performing arts spaces and associated systems and equipment to m
recommendations for enhancements to meet those needs.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-15]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(c) Diamond Energy
$25,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Improvements
ÅThe Diamond Middle School is second to the High School with the t energy use per square foot.
Low cost energy audits have been conducted by the Massachusetts ergy Resources and
National GRID, without realizing identifiable projects to improv
funds to perform a more in depth audit of major mechanical syste
Master Plan anticipated to be implemented over a five-year period.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-15]
49
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(d) Municipal Building
$169,711 GF (Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Envelope and Systems
ÅThis ongoing capital request includes design and construction repair/replacement projects for the
maintenance and upgrade of municipal buildings and systems. Repairs to roofs, windows, mechanical and
electrical systems, and interior finishes are required on a contacilities for
their intended function. The public building infrastructure will
and upgraded to prevent structural deterioration and avoid safet
program do not increase the size of the public building stock and therefore do not result in increase
utility usage or maintenance costs. Projects already identified for FY2013 include the replacement o
Cary Library sidewalks and the addition of ventilation to the Camproved servicing
and maintenance.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-15]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
None (To Be
Approval (4Ã1) of
(e) White House Stabilization Indefinitely
$381,000, GF (Cash)
Postponed)
As noted earlier in this report (Page 27), while this project is in the Warrant, it is shown in the Brown
Book (Page XI-3) with recommended funding as ÅTBDÆ and without a description.
Based on the ÅFiscal Year 2013 Town ManagerÈs Preliminary BudgetJanuary 9, 2012
(the ÅWhite Book), it is known that:
ÅThis request is for funds to create bid documents for the stabil
House) and for actual work to be performed. The building has bee
years as the Town considers possible future uses of the site. Tw
majority of the building should be demolished as the structure is not suitable for Town needs. An
Historic Structures Report completed in November 2010 examined five stabilization strategies. The
lowest cost strategy is being proposed for funding because it re
priorities, and it is compatible with a number of proposed future uses of the structure¼The
stabilization work includes the resetting of stones in rubble foundation; stripping p
trim and repairing or replacing as appropriate; replacing soffit; priming and repainting the
exterior; replacing shutters, wooden storm windows, gutters and rain leaders; and repairing chimney
brickwork.Æ [White Book, Page XI-21]
Although this $381,000 project was originally contemplated to have its demolition portion ($148,590)
funded by the GF and its stabilization portion ($232,410) funded by the CPF, the CPC did not support the
project for this Town MeetingÄa position that this Committee took to be without prejudice agai
re-submission for consideration to be presented to a subsequent Town Meeting.
Meeting with the option to support this project if funding for it can be found within th-CPF funds
available to the Town.
As the Historic Districts Commission has ruled that the historic
must be preserved and canÈt be moved off the site, this Committee agrees that the demolition portion of
the project will need to be done whatever eventual use of the building may be deemed appropriate
BoSÄand most likely using the GF, whether now or later. That leaves the question about whether the GF
should be used now for the stabilization portion even though the
Hosmer-House portion.
This Committee recognizes the case made by the DPF with regard t
the TownÈs assets for which it is the steward and its plan to accomplish this entire project before the end
of this calendar year. At the same timeÄand notwithstanding the aesthetic concerns with the buildingÈs
50
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
dilapidated conditionÄthere was hesitation in spending the additional $232,410 from the GF without
understanding just how the stabilized portion would be used and
stabilization funds would have been wasted by having already don before the build-out is done
for a potential user.
The majority of this Committee concluded it is in the TownÈs best interest to proceed now with the project
as presentedÄfunding it entirely from the GF(Cash).As the BoS did not support this project and,
therefore, said it will move to Indefinitely Postpone this sub-Article, this Committee will oppose that
Motion and offer a substitute Motion to fund the project.
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
287,685 GF
(f) Extraordinary School Repair
$610,000 Approval (5Ã0
(Debt)$322,315 )
+
Projects
GF (Free Cash)
ÅThis request is to fund multiple projects that are characterized as extraordinary repairs. They include:
Å(i) School Building Flooring Program ($125,000): This is a multi-year project that will
replace carpet, vinyl tile, and ceramic tile flooring systems th
useful life and exceed $25,000 in cost. Flooring systems must be
the surfaces are safe and cleanable. Worn or broken flooring creates a tripping hazard, can
provide harborage for bacteria and water, and is difficult to cl
components are funded through the operating budget.
Å(ii) School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair ($50,000): The majority of LexingtonÈs
school buildings have inoperable horizontal blinds that were ins
constructed. This multi-year project will replace these window treatments with low maint
solar shades to increase energy efficiency, control sun glare, and improve overall lighting control
in the educational space.
Å(iii) School Locker Replacement Program ($150,000):Student and athletic lockers provide a
safe and secure means for students to protect their personal belschool. Due to
constant use they are subject to wear and tear. This project wil
Diamond Middle School that cannot be repaired because replacemen
available. These lockers are the original lockers from the last school construction project. Once
replaced, they will be maintained though the Public Facilities annual operating budget. This is the
last year of a multi-year project as the need for school lockers has been addressed.
Å(iv) Hastings Elementary School Improvements ($87,000): This request is for design and
construction funds for various improvements to the Hastings Elementary School. At present, the
lower level of the school does not have adult restrooms, which is a problem for staff. In addition,
the upper level corridorÈs suspended ceiling experiences significant so
mounted skylights that bring daylight into the corridor, which m
conditions due to overheating. This project will construct two adult restrooms. This will also have
the ancillary benefit of creating improved circulation into the
for the construction of two needed offices in the lower entrance area. To address the overheating
in the upper level corridor, exhaust fans and controls will be installed in the ceiling plenum
allowing the venting of excess heat to the outside.
Å(v) Clarke Gymnasium Storage Area ($28,000)This request is for funds to remove the
:
gymnasium sliding wall system at Clarke and construct a storage area in the vacated space. The
sliding wall system has not been used for several years and is n
addition, bleachers and ductwork have been installed that prevenwall from being fully
utilized. The gymnasium has built in storage that does not meet the needs for the program.
Removing the wall system and constructing a storage area will ma
51
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Å(vi) Convert Space for Pre-Kindergarten Occupational Therapy ($60,000): This request is for
funding for the renovation of existing space at Harrington School so that the Pre-Kindergarten
Occupational Therapy program can return from temporary space at
The renovation includes removing the computer lab and relocatingcialist and
Çleveled literacyÈ library.
Å(vii)Convert Computer Lab to ClassroomÄFiske School ($60,000):This request is to convert
the computer lab at Fiske School into a general classroom. Proje
indicate the need for an additional classroom. The computer-related educational requirements at
the school can be met with laptop computers in carts utilizing t.
Å(viii) Sound Proofing of Classroom Spaces for Hearing Impaired ProgramÄDiamond Middle
School ($50,000): The Diamond Middle School currently has one set of classrooms engine
address the needs of hearing impaired students. With hearing imp
level there is the need to soundproof a second set of classrooms to meet program demands. This
request is for funding to install soundproofing systems within 4
adjustments, ceiling and wall treatments, and other related modifications.Æ
[Brown Book, Page XI-7]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(g) Public Facilities Bid
$75,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Documents
ÅThis request is for funds for professional services to produce d
documents, and/or bid administration services for smaller schoolects in anticipation of requests for
construction funding at town meeting that that have a high probability of approval. This will insure that
the projects can be completed in the then-current construction season, which is particularly important for
the timely completion of such projects given the short window between
beginning of school the following August.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-16]
This fund will allow the DPF to perform D&E on small projects prior to Town Meeting and thereby be
better prepared for starting construction on these projects as soon as Town Meeting dissolves. Such
"streamlining" will help make the DPF more efficient.
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(h) Hastings School Natural Gas
$45,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Conversion
ÅThis request is for funding to convert the boiler at the Hasting
remove the existing buried oil tank. It is projected that this conversion will save an estimated $9,400 per
year in fuel costs.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-16]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(i) Town-wide Facilities Master
$65,000 GF (Free Cash) Approval (5Ã0
)
Plan
ÅThis is a request for funds for consulting services to assist the Board of Selectmen in developing a
Wide Facility Master Plan. Over the last three years, facility s
Headquarters, Police Headquarters, Human Services, the Stone Bui Town Office
Building and Cary Memorial Building. The various studies have pr
52
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
renovations and/or facility replacements to meet the needs of th
and/or to preserve Town assets. The selected consultant would assist the Town in developing an
integrated Facilities Master Plan taking into consideration the
the priorities of the Town; the need for efficient sequencing oflable
swing space; the relocation of services to improve adjacencies;
implement the projects.Æ [BrownBook, Page XI-16]
This plan will help provide consolidated information on the many municipal big-ticket
projects, thereby providing more information for prioritizing thÄ
similar to the Schools KÃ12 Master Plan.
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(j) Grounds Vehicle $80,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
ÅThis request is to fund the replacement of one of two existing v
around school buildings and transport items among the schools. The vehicles have been used beyond their
useful lives and require increasingly expensive repairs that result in excessive downtime affecting
operations. It is proposed to replace the 2000 GMC Sierra in FY 2013 and a r
2014 to replace the 2000 Chevy GMT400. The vehicles will be replaced with Ford F350 4x4 trucks
equipped with plows, spreaders, lift gates, and heavy duty platf.Æ [Brown
Book, Page XI-7]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(k) Lexington High School
(LHS) OvercrowdingÄPhase II $400,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
Renovations
ÅThis project is the continuation of $175,000 of funding authorized at the 2011 Annual Town Meeting for
designer services and renovation costs to improve space utilizatg,
where feasible. The PreK - 12 Master Plan identified overcrowding at LHS as an issue that astudent
and faculty programs. Phase II will consolidate information technology staff at the ce
return LHS space to educational use. In addition, the 2012-2013 school year will require additional
classrooms. Opportunities for relocating functions not critical
reviewed for relocation in order to free up additional space forÆ [Brown Book,
Page XI-8]
Project Description Amount Requested Funding Source Committee Recommends
(l) School Paving Program $100,000 GF (Debt) Approval (5Ã0
)
ÅThis project requests funds for design and construction to maintrian
surfaces in a condition suitable for public use. In the last fou
implemented at Estabrook, Bridge, Bowman, Hastings and Diamond.
and the Department of Public Works Engineering partner on these projects to utilize the DPW paving
bids.Æ [Brown Book, Page XI-9]
53
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Original Funding
Article 19: Rescind
Amount for Rescission Committee Recommends
Source
Prior Borrowing
Authorizations
$46,475 Debt Approval (5Ã0)
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to rescind the unused borrowing authority voted under previ
Meeting articles¼
ÅDESCRIPTION: State law requires that Town Meeting vote to resc
which is no longer required for its intended purpose.Æ
[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 16]
This Committee has been advised that the following borrowing aut
associated projects have been completed and no additional funds need to be
2009 ATM11(i)Fire Department Headquarters $19,164.00
Preservation & Renovation Study
2010 ATM12(d)DPW Equipment Replacement$3,375.00
2010 ATM16(b)Clarke Middle School Auditorium $15,790.00
Safety and Technology Upgrade
2011 ATM13(g)Hastings School Playground $8,146.00
Expansion
Total$46,475.00
Note: No-longer-needed cash balances from issued debt are not a subject for rescission. Those are
normally proposed to Town Meeting for appropriation to later Cap
Funding Source
Funds
Article 20: Authorize The
Committee Recommends
Requested
Establishment of a
Minuteman Stabilization
Not Applicable Not Applicable Indefinite Postponement
Fund
(5Ã0)
ÅTo see if the Town will approve the establishment of a Stabiliz
Vocational School District to pay costs of capital repairs, reno and improvements to the regional
district school and its associated facilities¼.[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 17]
The approval by the 2009 ATM, under its Article 27, to Establish
Regional Vocational School District has been deemed by Town Counsel already to provide f
fund to pay capital expenses of that School District; therefore,
Postponed.
Funding Source
Funds
Article 21: Establish And
Committee Recommends
Requested
Appropriate To Specified
Stabilization Funds
Unknown Pending Pending
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to create and/or appropriate sums
accordance with Section 5B of Chapter 40 of the Massachusetts Ge Laws for the purposes of: (a)
Section 135 Zoning By-Law, (b) Traffic Mitigation, (c) Transportation Demand Managemen
Transportation, (e) Special Education, (f) Center Improvement Di
Management Overlay District (TMO-1), (i) Avalon Bay School Enrollment Mitigation Fund and (j) Cap
Projects Fund¼
54
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
DESCRIPTION: This article proposes to establish and/or fund Stab
purposes.¼The use of these funds may be appropriated for the specific designated purpose by a two-
thirds vote of an Annual or Special Town Meeting.Æ
[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 17]
At the time of writing this report there are pending suggestions and fund a "Capital
Projects/DebtService Stabilization Fund" to hold a portion of the revenue mad
downward adjustment in the FY2013 Health Benefits expenses. This
participating in the discussions regarding any transfers into thas other uses of the newly
available revenue.
Funding Source
Article 22: Appropriate to
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
Stabilization Fund
N/A Indefinite Postponement
(5Ã0)
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money to the previously created Stabilization
Fund¼
ÅDESCRIPTION: ¼These funds may later be appropriated, by a two-thirds vote of an Annual or
Special Town Meeting, for any lawful purpose.Æ
[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 17]
At this time, there is not any planned action under this Article.
Funding Source
Article 23: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
from Debt Service
$124,057 Debt Service SF Approval (5Ã0)
Stabilization Fund
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to appropriate a sum of money from the Debt Service Stabilization Fund to
offset the FY2013 debt service of the bond dated February 1, 200
the Lexington High School, Clarke Middle School and Diamond Midd
dated December 8, 2011.
ÅDESCRIPTION: This article would allow the Town to pay the debt
Bonds from the Capital Debt Service Stabilization Fund set up fo
[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 18]
In August 2006, the Town received over $14 million from the Massachusetts School Building Authority
as reimbursement toward the TownÈs secondary-schools renovation project. After using over $11million
of those funds to retire short-term debt taken on in anticipation of that reimbursement, there were
$2,143,079 of excess reimbursement which needed to be applied to-term exempt
debt. (By Department of Revenue [DOR] regulations, these funds m
on the outstanding bond for that exempt debt.)
With the prior-year appropriations from this fund and, over the same period int
amount in the fund, the balance is now $1,379,001. With continued, yearly, appropriation of this same
amount ($124,057), all the excess reimbursement will have been applied wFY2023.
With present balance, that would still leave $14,374 in the fund, but the residual balance will be higher in
FY2023 as a result of interest that will be earned over the next 11 years. It is the TownÈs position that the
residual balance should be applied against other exempt debt in FY2024 as the requirement to reserve
these funds was to ÅreturnÆ the funds to the taxpayer through th
55
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Funding Source
Article 26: Appropriate
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
for Authorized Capital
$200,000 Insurance Proceeds Approval (5Ã0)
Improvements
ÅTo see if the Town will vote to make supplementary appropriatioth
money appropriated in prior years for the installation or constr
systems, drains, streets, buildings, recreational facilities or
have heretofore been authorized¼
ÅDESCRIPTION: This is an annual article to request funds for capita
expenditures that exceed the level of appropriation.Æ
[Town of Lexington Warrant for 2012 Annual Town Meeting, Page 19]
At the time of writing this report, this Committee expects a single request under this Article for Town
Meeting to appropriate all the funds received in settlement of a claim moriginal
design firm based on deficiencies in the wash bay in what has been named the Samuel Hadley Public
Services Building (201 Bedford Street). The rest of the funds that will be needed to design and execut
the corrections, as well as some betterments in the wash bay that experience with the building has shown
as being warranted, would come from the balance existing in previous authorizations for the construction
of that buildingÄwhich do not require a new appropriation. (The overall building
$2.2 million under the previous authorizations.) The exact amount of the supplement to the appropriation
being requested will depend on the final design and the aggressiveness of the biis not anticipated
at this time to be more than $100,000.
Funding Source
Article 31: Amend
Funds Requested Committee Recommends
General BylawsÄ
None Not Applicable Approval (5Ã0) only if
Town Meeting
additional requirement
Warrant
included for an all-
residence mailing of a
notice before each
Warrant
To see if the Town will vote to amend Section 118-2 of the Code of the Town of Lexington (ÅPosting and
Mailing of WarrantÆ) by deleting the requirement that the warran
town and substituting therefor requirements that the warrant be
and, upon request to other residents; (b) posted on the Town of Lexington website; and (c) publicly
posted in designated municipal buildings in addition to the Town
limited to, the Cary Memorial Library, the Samuel Hadley Public he Lexington Senior
Center and the Lexington Police Station¼
DESCRIPTION: With changes taking place in the operation of the U
and expectation of reduced services and delays in bulk mailings,
alternate way for making warrants available to residents and Town Meeti
[Town of Lexington Warrant to the 2012 ATM, Page 20]
This Committee can unanimously agree to substituting an opt-in approach with regarding to mailing of a
Town-Meeting Warrant only if there were an explicit heads-up to all of the TownÈs residents before each
Warrant reminding them of an upcoming Warrant(s), how the Warran
right to opt-in to getting a copy by mailÄwith advice of the means by which they can opt-in.
To that end, we have proposed to the Town Clerk and the BoSÄwith prior advice to the Town-Meeting
ModeratorÄthat something along the lines of the followingÄbut reformatted as needed to be consistent
with the format of the subject Motion and review by Town CounselÄbe added as a 4th condition in the
56
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
MotionÈs substitute language, in addition to those listed as (a)
"and" before the "(c)" would need to be removed.)
and (d) a notice shall be sent annually by mail to each residence
in the Town (which notice may be combined in another mailing to
residence), before each Warrant is available, providing advice o
the upcoming Warrant and where it shall be posted (including
electronically) once published, and providing a means for opting-in
to the mailed distribution of that specific Warrant if there is
a Town Meeting Member at that residence.
While we had thought the annual mailing of the Town Census form -all-
residences mailing that the Town is already doing--and would seem timely for the purpose of the "(d)"
above at least for the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting, it's
amended Bylaw would specify the means by which such notice wouldprovided, only that the Town
bear the burden of providing each residence with such a notice.
If the additional condition is not included in the Motion presen
offer an amendment to add it. If neither means succeeds, this Committee is unanimously opposed to the
elimination of the to-all-residences mailing of the Town-Meeting Warrants.
57
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Summary of Warrant Article Recommendations
Abbreviations: RF = Revolving Fund; CPF = Community Preservation Fund;
EF = Enterprise Fund; RE = Retained Earnings; GF = General Fund;
SF = Stabilization Fund; TBD = To Be Determined; ATM = Annual Town Meeting;
STM = Special Town Meeting
CEC
Recommended
Difference from
ArticleDescriptionRequestRequestFunding Source
$39,742,248 GF (Excluded Debt)
STM 2Appropriate for New Estabrook School
7Establish and Continue Departmental RFs
7Culvert Replacement$325,000 DPW Compost Operations RF (Cash)
8Community Preservation Committee Operating Budget and CPA Projec
8(a)Archives & Records Management/Conservation$150,000 CPF (Cash)
8(b)Paint Mine Barn$34,770 CPF (Cash)
8(c) Muzzey Senior Center Upgrade Phase I$561,518 CPF (Cash)
8(d)Cary Memorial Building Upgrade$75,000 CPF (Cash)
8(e)Center Playfields Drainage à Phase III$605,718 CPF (Cash)
8(f)Battle Green Area Master Plan Implementation Phase 2$143,845 CPF (Cash)
8(g)LexHab Set Aside for Housing Acquisition$450,000 ($450,000)CPF (Cash)
8(h)Buckman Tavern Historic Structions Report & Restore Plan$65,000 CPF (Cash)
8(i)Historical Society Historic Records Preservation$77,268 CPF (Cash)
8(j)Greeley Village Accessible Housing Project$810,673 CPF (Cash)
8(k)Busa Farm Debt Service$930,300 CPF (Cash)
8(l)Cotton Farm Debt Service $1,000,000 CPF (Cash)
8(m)Administrative Budget $150,000 CPF (Cash)
CPF (Cash and/or Debt)
9
TBD
Land Purchase Off Grove Street
GF (Debt)
10
11Recreation Capital Projects
11(a)Pine Meadows Equipment$46,000Recreation EF (RE)
11(b)Park ImprovementsÄHard Court Resurfacing$120,000GF(Debt)
11(c)Park & Playground Improvement$65,000GF(Debt)
11(d)Park ImprovementsÄAthletic Fields$60,000GF(Debt)
12Municipal Capital Projects & Equipment
12(a)Public Safety Radio Connectivity$50,000 GF (Free Cash)
12(b)Hydrant Replacement Project $50,000 $25,000 GF Cash + $25,000 Water EF
(RE)
12(c)Street Improvements and Easements$1,956,193 $1,025,586 GF (Cash) + $930,607
Chapter 90 State Aid
12(d)Culvert Replacement$65,000 GF (Free Cash)
12(e)DPW Equipment$595,000 $358,610 GF (Debt) + $70,000 GF
(Free Cash) + $85,390 GF (Cash) +
$40,500 Water EF (Debt) + $40,500
(Wastewater EF (Debt)
12(f)Comprehensive Watershed Stormwater Management$165,000 $65,000 GF (Debt) +$100,000 GF (Free
Cash)
12(g)Dam Repair$260,000 GF (Debt)
12(h)Storm Drainage Improvements & NPDES Compliance$340,000 GF (Debt)
12(i)Battle Green Area Master PlanÄParking, Traffic Calming$60,000 GF (Free Cash)
12(j)Townwide Signalization Improvement$125,000 $119,532 GF (Debt) + $5,468 from 2008
ATM Article 15(a)
12(k)Sidewalk Improvements$300,000 GF (Debt)
12(l)Concord Avenue Sidewalk Engineering & Easements$250,000 Traffic Mitigation SF
12(m)Street Betterment Improvements & EasementsN/AN/A; to be Indefinitely Postponed
12(n)Off-Site Street ImprovementsÄEstabrook School$170,000 GF (Free Cash)
12(o)CBD Sidewalk/Street Improvements/LandscapingÄD&E$240,000 GF (Debt)
12(p)Telephone System Replacements Town-wide$591,000 GF (Debt)
12(q)Town-wide Electronic Document Management System$145,000 GF (Free Cash)
$900,000 Water EF (Debt)
13Water System Improvements
14Wastewater System Improvements
11(a)Wastewater System Improvements$1,200,000 Wastewater EF (Debt)
11(b)Pump Station Upgrades$100,000 Wastewater EF (Debt)
15School Capital Projects & Equipment
15(a)School Technology$1,002,000 $833,676 GF (Debt) + $168,324 GF
(Cash)
15(b)Classroom and Administrative Furniture$83,000 GF (Debt)
Continued on next page
58
nd
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE REPORT TO 2012 ATM & 2012 STM (Ap 2)
Continued from previous page
CEC
Recommended
Difference from
ArticleDescriptionRequestRequestFunding Source
16Public Facilities Capital Projects
16(a)School Building Envelope and Systems$215,000 GF (Free Cash)
16(b)Evaluation of Middle Schools Science Labs & Performing Art $35,000 GF (Free Cash)
Spaces
16(c)Diamond Middle School Energy Improvements$25,000 GF (Free Cash)
16(d)Municipal Building Envelope and Systems$169,711 GF (Cash)
16(e)White House StabilizationN/A$381,000GF (Cash)
16(f)Extraordinary School Repair Projects$610,000 $287,685 GF (Debt) + $322,315 GF
(Free Cash)
16(g)Public Facilities Bid Documents$75,000 GF (Free Cash)
16(h)Hastings Elementary School Natural Gas Conversion$45,000 GF (Free Cash)
16(i)Town-wide Facilities Master Plan$65,000 GF (Free Cash)
16(j)Grounds Vehicle$80,000 GF (Debt)
16(k)LHS OvercrowdingÄPhase 2 Renovations$400,000 GF (Debt)
16(l)School Paving Program$100,000 GF (Debt)
$46,475 Debt
19Rescind Prior Borrowing Authorizations
N/AN/A; to be Indefinitely Postponed
20Authorize the Establishment of Minuteman SF
21Establish and Appropriate to Specified Stabilization
UnknownPendingPending
N/AN/A; to be Indefinitely Postponed
22Appropriate to Stabilization Fund
$124,057 Debt Service SF
23Appropriate from Debt Service Stabilization Fund
$200,000 Insurance Proceeds
26Appropriate for Authorized Capital Improvements
Qualified
31Amend General BylawsÄTown Meeting Warrant
NoneNot Applicable
Approval
59