Workshops focus on three main school project options

The Lincoln School today.

The SBC has narrowed the Lincoln School project options down to three, and architects presented them to residents at community workshops on January 23.

Attendees also heard detailed price estimates from another firm, as well as information on taxation and borrowing scenarios from Finance Committee Vice Chair Andrew Paine, who recapped some of the information from the presentation by FinCom Chair Jim Hutchinson at a multi-board meeting on January 9.

The first set of options considered by the SBC was for an “optimal program” of 178,041 square feet, as shown on pages 7-8 of SMMA architect Joel Seeley’s presentation. (The current building is 148,464 square feet.) Those options ranged in price from $115.6 million to $120.3 million, so the committee asked SMMA to return with some less expensive concepts. The resulting four “A” options retained the L-shaped school on the north and west sides of the ballfield, while the “B” options concentrated just on the north and “C” on the west.

The next round, the “essential program” (pg. 9-10) consisted of eight “A” and “B” concepts calling for 158,171 square feet and ranging from $73.6 million to $100.4 million. The SBC and the architects then added back some of the space cut from the “optimal” concepts to come up with five “essential–refined” options (pg. 11-12) of 160,971 square feet. At this week’s meeting, they presented three options (A1.1, A3.4, and B6) as well as estimates for repair-only and repair-and-renovation options.

• Repair only – $48.7 million

Install new HVAC, plumbing and electrical systems, add a fire sprinkler system, do accessibility and building code upgrades, replace the roof and the older uninsulated windows, do minimal roadway improvement.

• Repair plus basic renovation only – $59.2 million

Make the repairs above but replace all windows, do moderate roadway improvements, install new interior finishes (cabinetry, doors, etc), and replace the Smith boiler room.

The three newest options call for:

• Demolishing some or all of the older Smith building (and more, for Option B6)
• Adding central administration offices
• Adding three pre-K classrooms currently located in the Hartwell building
• Adding a central kitchen and a dining commons area that would also be used for grade-level gatherings, project-based learning or extra art/drama space as needed
• Adding a connector between the Brooks building and the Reed gym

Two of those options (A3.4 and B6) include hubs for grades 3-8—“neighborhoods” with classrooms as well as breakout, small group, special education, and resource rooms surrounding “a collaboration space providing for flexible, differentiated learning,” SMMA architect Joel Seeley explained. Option B6 calls for demolishing everything except the two gyms, the auditorium section, and the 1994 media center portion. It would consolidate the footprint on the north side of campus, adding a second floor on the east side for grades 7 and 8.

• Option A1.1 – $75 million (15,538 SF demolition, 29,700 SF new construction) – pg. 27-30 of the presentation
• Option A3.4 – $88.3 million (10,937 SF demolition, 37,550 SF new construction) – pg. 32-36
• Option B6 – $89.8 million (72,497 SF demolition, 77,125 SF new construction) – pg. 38-43

The latter three options are not optimal in terms of the number and size of classrooms and hubs—”this is a compromise as we think about the budgetary impact,” said Superintendent of Schools Becky McFall. However, they all represent an upgrade educationally, and Option B6 in particular “offers us a huge improvement in the way we can teach and the way in which kids have the opportunity to learn,” she said.

As teachers in the new Hanscom Middle School have discovered, hubs and spaces of varying sizes “have been a catalyst for thinking about the ways we teach,” McFall said. “We need spaces like this to give students the opportunity to work in teams, foster social and emotional interactions, be curious and problem-solve and debate. This allows us that flexibility to be creative.”

Option B6 may also offer the most flexibility for a future addition if there should be a spike in school enrollment, and Seeley said future refinements might indicate ground-level or vertical expansion possibilities. One resident worried that the town could outgrow the school more quickly than expected if 60 new units of mixed-income housing are approved.

Repair estimates have gone up

The estimated cost of a repair-only project has jumped from Dore and Whittier’s $29.2 million in 2015 to $48.9 million for a project beginning in the second quarter of 2020. However, the 2015 figure did not include any improvements to roads and parking, landscaping, stormwater management, or utility infrastructure, nor did it take into account the cost of phasing or temporary accommodations for students during construction.

The latest cost estimates were prepared by owner’s project manager Daedalus Projects using data from the Massachusetts School Building Authority, which tracks all school construction spending in the state. The cost of new construction has climbed from an average of $367 per square foot in 2015 to a projected $471 in 2019, said Shane Nolan, senior project manager at Daedalus. Contributing factors include a building boom in Boston’s Seaport district and construction of the casino in Everett, which are leading to labor shortages and high demand for materials and equipment, he said.

Borrowing limits

Echoing Finance Committee Chair Jim Hutchinson’s statements at a multi-board meeting on January 9, FinCom Vice Chair Andrew Payne said that Lincoln’s bond advisors have indicated that the town could borrow $100 million for the school and community center projects and perhaps more while still maintaining its AAA bond rating.

State guidelines set a bond debt limit for Lincoln of $106 million (the town currently has about $9 million in outstanding debt), but since the bonding would go toward a school and a community center, getting approval to go over that limit should be “straightforward,” he added.

Property tax impacts

What will this mean for property tax bills? If the town borrowed $100 million over a 30-year period, property tax bills could go up by as much as 20 percent, with the average single-family tax bill climbing from $15,185 in fiscal 2017 to $17,702, assuming a bond interest rate of 4 percent (pgs. 13 and 15 of the FinCom’s presentation). The committee’s scenarios use bond interest rates of 4 and 5 percent, though the current rate is just below 3 percent (pg. 18).

To cushion the blow, the FinCom recommends using some of the town’s debt stabilization fund (currently $4.7 million) to pay down some of the balance for the first two or three years of debt service, so a 15 percent tax hike could be “smoothed” to three years of 5 percent increases.

Comments from several residents indicated mixed feelings. While many cringed at the potential tax hike, most also dismissed the repair-only or repair-and-renovation options, and some even wondered whether classrooms could be added.

On Tuesday, Jan. 30, residents will hear about possible designs and costs for another major construction project: the community center. There will be identical sessions from 8–10 a.m. and 7–9 p.m in Hartwell pod B.