ATT A
CONCORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS CONCORD-CARLISLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 120 MERIAM ROAD CONCORD, MA 01742 PHONE: 978.318.1500 FAX: 978.318.1537 www.concordpublicschools.net
TO: Concord-Carlisle Regional School Committee
FROM: Diana Rigby, Superintendent
DATE: April 9, 2013
SUBJECT: Concord Education Fund Grant Awards
Motion: That the Concord-Carlisle Regional School Committee vote to accept the Concord Education Fund Grant Awards for 2013-14 totaling $202,434.07. ATT B
CONCORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS CONCORD-CARLISLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 120 MERIAM ROAD CONCORD, MA 01742 PHONE: 978.318.1500 FAX: 978.318.1537 www.concordpublicschools.net
TO: Concord-Carlisle Regional School Committee
FROM: Diana Rigby, Superintendent
DATE: April 9, 2013
SUBJECT: Permission to Plan Exchange Trip to Ecuador 2014
Eric Pohl, Spanish teacher at CCHS, is requesting permission to plan another exchange trip to Quito, Ecuador to take place from February 8 through February 22, 2014.
Attached please find the backup information on the exchange. Eric Pohl and Peter Badalament will be in attendance to talk about the proposed trip and answer any questions.
Motion: That the Concord-Carlisle School Committee vote to approve the request to plan an exchange trip to Ecuador. ATT C
CONCORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS CONCORD-CARLISLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 120 MERIAM ROAD CONCORD, MA 01742 PHONE: 978.318.1500 FAX: 978.318.1537 www.concordpublicschools.net
TO: Concord-Carlisle Regional School Committee
FROM: Diana Rigby, Superintendent
DATE: April 9, 2013
SUBJECT: Vote to appoint School Committee member as an observer to the CCHS Recreation Facilities Project meetings
Motion: That the Concord-Carlisle Regional School Committee vote to appoint School Committee member as an observer to the CCHs Recreation Facilities project meetings.
CCHS/Ecuador Exchange 2014
Program Coordinator: Spanish teacher Eric Pohl
The Foreign Language Department hopes to repeat its successful exchange program with Ludoteca High School in Quito, Ecuador. The purpose is to provide a unique opportunity for language and cultural enrichment whereby students live with their Ecuadorian host families, attend Ludoteca High School, and travel to the Galápagos Islands on a tour organized by our hosts in Quito. This trip is planned for February 8 through February 22, 2014. CCHS students would miss five regular school days to participate in the exchange. The following is a abbreviated version of our itinerary while in Ecuador:
Days 1 and 2 – Arrival in Quito. Students spend time with their host families. Group/family excursion to Mindo park in the cloud forest. Days 3,4, and 5 – Students attend Ludoteca High School, visit historic downtown Quito,La mitad del mundo, receive salsa dance lessons, attend social events with host students. CCHS students make cultural presentations on different aspects of U.S. culture to Ludoteca classes. Day 6 – Travel to Cotopaxi province, visit indigenous market and provide community service in local elementary schools. Spend two days and nights at La Victoria, a rural village in Cotopaxi province . Day 7 – Visit either Baños or ride the Nariz del Diablo railway weather permitting. Day 8 – Day hike to the volcanic crater lake of Quilotoa. Lunch with host students and families at historic Hacienda La Ciénaga and return to Quito. Days 9-13 – Flight to Galápagos Islands, tour of Darwin Station, Santa Cruz Island, Tortuga Bay, Baltra Island, Seymour Island and Floreana Island Days 13- – Students return to Quito from Galápagos. Closing ceremony and dinner with host families and school administration at Ludoteca High School Day 14 – Return to Boston
We in turn reciprocate by hosting our Ecuadorian friends during the week prior to, and the week of April vacation (4/12/14-4/26/14). Ecuadorian students will present aspects of their culture (dance, music, traditional games) to CCHS students, attend classes with their host students, tour Boston, visit Washington D.C. (at their own expense), travel to Plymoth Plantation, and tour historic Concord.
Estimated cost: $3,250 (Includes roundtrip airfare Boston/Quito, five day trip to the Galápagos Islands, all meals and accommodations, tips, guide fees, and all expenses related to hosting the Ecuadoran students and teachers.
Concord-Carlisle School District Adult & Community Education April 1, 2013 Director’s Report
Distribution: Advisory Committee, School Committee Liaison, Superintendent, Director of Teaching & Learning, CCHS Principal, Office Staff.
Courses and Enrollment activity Community Education (extended day continuing ed) Winter 576 Community Education Spring-Summer 146 Instrumental Music (semester-long series) 268 New Driver Education (new students joined, 268+ active) 1
The 2012-2013 FY revenue/expense year-to-date for the period July 1, 2012-March 31, 2012: Revenue $526,931.46 Expense $538,595.02 YTD Balance (11,663.56) Fiscal Year Starting Balance $84,300.00 Current Revolving fund balance $72,636.44 Encumbered
March 2013 Notes
We started to bring the winter semester to a close, and finished planning for the spring and summer semesters. I was out March 18 and 20 for health reasons, and worked mostly from outside the office for the remainder of the month. Debbie Levine worked an additional 2 hours each morning to handle student visits and calls, and programs and services were uninterrupted. The course bulletin went to the printer on March 31 and should be received by homes in the school district this weekend. We have received a grant from the Concord Education Fund for $4700 to produce a safety video that relates to distracted driving hazards. The idea was inspired by Gary Garafola’s tragic death last fall. Phyllis Hughes, a beloved art teacher now retired, will return to Concord on April 18 and hold an “appreciative critique” of student works. Her past students will be invited to bring up to 3 of their works to the event, to be held at Concord Park. Donations will be encouraged, and will be devoted to maintaining continuing education for mature adults in town. We will proceed with the family film event, and a showing of “Buck” on June 14. Sue Cannon and I prepared on an exhibit that’s now in the Concord Book Shop; it highlights the Village University’s 10th anniversary and certain upcoming programs. The website was down for several weeks, and is now functioning fine. I conducted a special “emergency action” and first aid class for Carlisle Cub Scouts at CCHS in March. The Village University will host a special event on May 10, 3 PM at Harvey Wheeler Community Center. Fall semester planning is underway in earnest.
Respectfully submitted, Court Booth
4.4.13
Feasibility Estimate
Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot
Concord, MA
Prepared for:
Nitsch Engineering
April 1, 2013 Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot 01-Apr-13 Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
MAIN CONSTRUCTION COST SUMMARY GSF Estimated Construction Cost
SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
SITEWORK $1,152,041
FUELING STATION $98,569
PRE-FABRICATED MAINTENANCE BUILDING 3,900 $102.82 $401,000 ADDED COST FOR OFFICE AREA 1,200 $150.00 $180,000
SUB-TOTAL $1,831,610 DESIGN AND PRICING CONTINGENCY 10% $183,161
SUB-TOTAL with Contingency $2,014,771
GENERAL CONDITIONS 6.00% $120,886 BONDS 1.50% $30,222 INSURANCE 1.00% $20,148 PERMIT NIC $0
OVERHEAD AND FEE 5% $100,739 ESCALATION TO START (assumed 12 4.0% $91,471 months at 4% PA)
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $2,378,237
ALTERNATES ALT 1 E&B for new gas service $34,311
This Feasibility cost estimate was produced from drawing and specifications prepared by Nitsch Engineering and their design team dated March 25th 2013. Design and engineering changes occurring subsequent to the issue of these documents have not been incorporated in this estimate.
This estimate includes all direct construction costs, general contractor’s overhead and profit and design contingency. Cost escalation assumes start dates indicated above.
We have assumed procurement will utilize a public bid under C.149 of the MGL with public bidding to pre-qualified subcontractors, open specifications for materials and manufacturers.
The estimate is based on prevailing wage rates for construction in this market and represents a reasonable opinion of cost. It is not a prediction of the successful bid from a contractor as bids will vary due to fluctuating market conditions, errors and omissions, proprietary specifications, lack or surplus of bidders, perception of risk, etc. Consequently the estimate is expected to fall within the range of bids from a number of competitive contractors or subcontractors, however we do not warrant that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the final construction cost estimate.
Executive Summary Page 2 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot 01-Apr-13 Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED IN THIS ESTIMATE
Items not included in this estimate are: Land acquisition, feasibility, and financing costs All professional fees and insurance Site or existing conditions surveys investigations costs, including to determine subsoil conditions All Furnishings, Fixtures and Equipment Items identified in the design as Not In Contract (NIC) Items identified in the design as by others Owner supplied and/or installed items as indicated in the estimate Utility company back charges, including work required off-site Construction contingency
Executive Summary Page 3 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST SITEWORK
1 2 G SITEWORK 3 4 G10 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION 5 02100 Site construction fence/barricades 1,300 lf 8.00 10,400 6 02700 Security sliding gate, double 1 ea 2,500.00 2,500 7 02100 Clear and grub site 1 ls 15,000.00 15,000 8 Site Earthwork 9 02200 Silt fence 1,300 lf 12.00 15,600 10 02200 Strip topsoil, store on site 4,240 cy 6.00 25,440 11 02200 Cut/Fill 8,756 cy 6.00 52,536 12 02200 Store on site 2,182 cy 2.00 4,364 13 02200 Fine grading 12,614 sy 1.00 12,614 14 Hazardous Waste Remediation 15 Dispose/treat contaminated soils/water; assumed none required 16 SUBTOTAL $138,454 17 18 G20 SITE IMPROVEMENTS 19 Roadways and Parking lots 20 Asphalt concrete paving 108,957 sf - 21 312000 Gravel base; 12" thick 4,035 cy 28.00 112,980 22 321200 bituminous concrete; 4" thick 12,712 sy 22.00 279,664 23 321200 Single solid lines, 4" thick 86 space 25.00 2,150 24 321200 Wheelchair Parking 2 space 75.00 150 25 321200 Other road markings 1 ls 500.00 500 26 321200 Bollards 10 ea 600.00 6,000 27 321200 Cape cod berm 3,100 lf 7.00 21,700 28 Pedestrian Paving 29 Paving 30 02200 gravel base; 8" thick 61 cy 30.00 1,830 31 03300 Concrete 2,477 sf 6.00 14,862 32 02700 Guardrail 1,000 lf 50.00 50,000 33 03300 Retaining wall; assumed versalok or equal 2,400 sf 35.00 84,000 34 Landscaping 35 02830 Landscaping allowance 1 ls 10,000.00 10,000 36 SUBTOTAL 583,836 37 38 G30 CIVIL MECHANICAL UTILITIES 39 Water supply 40 02550 New water line 1,481 lf 70.00 103,670 41 02550 Fire service 4" DI 50 lf 55.00 2,750 42 02550 Domestic service 2" copper 50 lf 40.00 2,000 43 331000 New fire hydrant 2 loc 2,600.00 5,200 44 02550 Gate valves 6 loc 750.00 4,500 45 02550 Connection to existing 1 ea 3,000.00 3,000 46 Sanitary sewer 47 333100 6" PVC Sanitary sewer 80 lf 35.00 2,800 48 02500 1,500 gal tight tank 1 ls 4,000.00 4,000 49 02500 1,500 gal septic tank 1 ls 4,000.00 4,000 50 02500 Septic field - no sewer gravel needed 1 ls 3,000.00 3,000 51 02500 D-box 1 ls 500.00 500 52 Storm Sewer 53 334000 Infiltration system 2,500 sf 22.00 55,000 54 334000 24" CPP 111 lf 45.00 4,995 55 334000 18" CPP 1,571 lf 40.00 62,840 56 334000 New drainage catch basins 12 loc 3,000.00 36,000
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 4 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST SITEWORK
57 02500 WQCB 1 ea 6,000.00 6,000 58 02500 New drainage manholes 9 loc 3,200.00 28,800 59 334000 New flared end structures 1 loc 850.00 850 60 334000 Rip-rap to bottom of FES 50 sf 8.00 400 61 334000 OCS 1 loc 5,000.00 5,000 62 02500 WQS structures 2 ea 15,000.00 30,000 63 Gas 64 312000 E&B trench for new lines, pipe and install by utilities 65 02500 New gas service 1,057 lf 25.00 Alt #1 66 SUBTOTAL $365,305 67 68 G40 ELECTRICAL UTILITIES 69 Power 70 16000 Riser 1 ea 1,200.00 1,200 71 16000 Overhead electrical service and poles 983 lf 40.00 39,320 72 Site Security 73 16000 Site security allowance 1 ls 15,000.00 Use Existing 74 Site Lighting 74 16000 Site lighting 5 loc 2,800.00 14,000 75 16000 Site lighting circuitry 709 lf 14.00 9,926 76 SUBTOTAL 64,446 77 78 TOTAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT $1,152,041
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 5 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST FUELING STATION
1 2 G SITEWORK 3 4 5 G30 CIVIL MECHANICAL UTILITIES 6 Quote from Northeastern Petroleum Service and Supply Inc. 7 02700 Diesel storage tank 1 ls 25,894.00 25,894 8 02700 Diesel tank top accessories 1 ls 5,756.21 5,756 9 02700 Veeder root in tank level monitoring system 1 ls 5,438.00 5,438 10 02700 Diesel dispenser with accessories 1 ls 6,736.00 6,736 11 02700 Diesel tank and accessories installation 1 ls 23,152.50 23,153 12 02700 Assisting electrician in final connection 1 ls 1,454.00 1,454 13 02700 Assisting in lifting and putting tank and pump in 1 ls 1,500.00 1,500 position 14 02700 Fuel management system 1 ls 16,984.00 16,984 15 02700 Assisting electrician in final connection 1 ls 1,454.00 1,454 16 02700 Crane to set tank 1 ls 3,000.00 3,000 17 SUBTOTAL $91,369 18 19 G40 ELECTRICAL UTILITIES 20 16000 Electrical connections for fuel service system 1 ls 7,200.00 7,200 21 SUBTOTAL 7,200 22 23 TOTAL FUELING STATION $98,569
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 6 PMC - Project Management Cost
Draft for review and comment March 6, 2013
Town of Concord Concord Public Schools
Request for Proposal for Consolidation Study Consulting Services
I. Purpose and General Statement. The Town of Concord and the Concord Public Schools (grades k-8) are seeking proposals for consulting services to assess the potential for improvement in the efficiency, quality and cost-effectiveness of functions currently performed by both the Town and the Schools through consolidation, and the potential costs of consolidation. The Town of Concord operates under a Town Charter, with a town manager appointed by the elected five-member Board of Selectmen to supervise and direct all officers, boards and committees appointed by him and their respective departments. The elected School Committee appoints a Superintendent of Schools. The five-member elected Concord School Committee is responsible for the Concord Public Schools (CPS), grades k-8. The Concord School Committee also comprises the Concord members of the seven-member Concord-Carlisle Regional School District (CCRSD) Committee which operates the Concord- Carlisle High School (CCHS), grades 9-12. The Regional School District Committee appoints a CCRSD Superintendent. The current organization of the CPS and CCRSD administration is a Joint Superintendency, with central staff administering both CPS and CCRSD The Consultant will provide its services under contract to the Town of Concord but with the joint direction of the Town Manager and the Superintendent of Schools. The Town of Concord and the CPS will fund the project in equal shares. The Consultant will provide a draft report of its findings and identified opportunities for action to the Town Manager and the Superintendent of Schools, and will present the final report of its findings and identified opportunities for action at a joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen and the Concord Public School Committee.
II. Scope of Services The Consultant shall produce within ninety (90) days of its appointment a written report including the following components: 1. Survey. The Consultant will conduct a survey of other similarly situated Massachusetts towns that have consolidated school and town functions. The summary of survey results shall include: a. delineation of functions consolidated b. process employed to consolidate c. benefits achieved by consolidation d. problems encountered during and after consolidation
e. prerequisites and obstacles to success of consolidation efforts
2. Baseline Description. The Consultant will assemble a baseline description of current school and town functions in areas to be considered for consolidation. It is expected that this task will be performed with the assistance of the Town of Concord Finance Director and the CPS/CCRSD Deputy Superintendent of Finance and Operations, and that it will require interviews with Town and School staff, visits to key locations, and review of audited financials, budgets, capital inventories, capital plans, and other relevant documentation. Areas to be considered shall include: a. Facilities (cleaning, security, maintenance, capital improvements) b. Grounds (maintenance, snow removal, capital improvements) c. Vehicles, not including school buses (fueling, garaging, maintenance, capital acquisitions) d. Risk Management e. Procurement (supplies, equipment, services) f. Accounting (general ledger, accounts payable, budgeting) g. Information Technology (hardware, software, internet, websites, electronic communication) h. Human Resources (payroll, contract & benefit administration)
Baseline description shall include: a. Narrative description of function b. Inventory of capital assets c. Current personnel requirements d. Employment structure (e.g., collective bargaining agreement) e. Standard of service
3. Comparative Assessment. The Consultant will make a comparative assessment of current town and school functions in areas considered, including: a. Similarity or disparity of function needs of schools and town b. Similarity or disparity of level of service between schools and town c. Over or under capacity d. Over or under utilization of capital resources e. Over or under utilization of personnel f. Comparison of cost to provide function, schools vs. town g. Benchmarking of cost to provide function, taking into account level of service, vis-à-vis other communities
4. Analysis of Potential Benefits. The Consultant will conduct an analysis of the benefits that could be realized from consolidation of school and town functions in each area considered. The analysis shall include all such potential benefits as are identified by the Consultant, but shall include at least the potential for improvement in: a. Quality of service b. Efficiency c. Cost Effectiveness d. Sustainability e. Budgeting f. Financial Reporting g. Equity
5. Preliminary Assessment of Implementation Issues. For each area in which potential benefit from consolidation has been identified, the Consultant shall make a preliminary assessment of likely implementation issues, including: a. Reorganization or structural change necessary b. Capital cost c. Personnel time requirements d. Training requirements e. Transitional disruption and inefficiency f. Institutional resistance g. Impact on other services h. Other unintended consequences
III. Qualifications
The ideal consultant will have demonstrated experience in collection of data and analysis of operations in the context of schools and municipal government in Massachusetts. Proposals shall include a statement of qualifications including:
a. Project Team b. Relevant experience of Project Team c. References
CONCORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS CONCORD-CARLISLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 120 MERIAM ROAD CONCORD, MA 01742 PHONE: 978.318.1500 FAX: 978.318.1537 www.concordpublicschools.net
March 26, 2013
TO: School Committees FROM: Diana F. Rigby, Superintendent RE: Mid-Cycle FY13 Goals Review
A. PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE GOAL
GOAL: By June 2013, communication strategies will be increased and varied for responding to disagreement and dissent, constructively resolving conflict, and building consensus throughout the school community.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Lead principals and faculties to discuss TELL Mass data and implement site actions to improve teacher and school leadership conditions.
K8 Principals and faculties have met monthly in faculty meetings to analyze TELL Mass data. The principals and their data team leaders teams are participating in the RBT Data Coach training to develop their skills in assisting teachers with data analysis. The principals are using protocols from the School Reform Initiative – A Community of Learners to build the skills and culture necessary for reflective dialogue and collaborative work. Using these protocols help build trust as they engage in faculty conversations characterized by reflection, participation equity, quality analysis and inquiry. At each school, principals and the faculties are working together to build a common understanding of the survey results and the factors associated with the conditions. However, faculty-meeting time is limited and the data analysis, recommendations, and implementation of site actions will not be completed until the end of the year. It is more reasonable to expect a report of recommendations for site actions from each school by the end of the year.
The CCHS principal, department chairs, and faculty have met once to discuss the TELL Mass data. Monthly faculty meetings have been devoted to the NEASC accreditation process and the new educator evaluation system which are not exclusive of teacher and school leadership conditions identified in the TELL Mass survey. However, the focus has not been on the TELL Mass survey data analysis and solutions which needs to occur. The principal and department chairs will facilitate the TELL Mass data discussions with the entire faculty for the remainder of faculty and department chair meetings to develop recommendations for site actions by June 2013.
The ESE reported in February that the TELL Mass survey will not be administered in Spring 2013. We have contacted ESE for permission to use the TELL Mass survey questions in school site surveys for Spring 2013. The ESE
1 will provide districts with student and staff model surveys in July 2013 as part of the new educator evaluation process.
2. Meet monthly with CCHS administration and CCTA to discuss and resolve labor issues using conflict resolution strategies.
The CCHS Principal and myself have met monthly with the CCTA leaders to facilitate communication and resolve labor/ contractual issues. The labor union filed a grievance against the implementation of the Advisory program and we were able to collaboratively resolve the grievance by implementing a memo of agreement. Currently, there are no grievances.
During the monthly CCTA/Admin. meetings the following items were discussed: Advisory program, teacher duties, the FY14 budget, FY 14 calendar, student ratios and class loads, the new Rivers and Revolutions program, NEASC accreditation process, use of protocols, building project, parking, educator evaluation, and school improvement goals.
The administration and CCTA continue to meet regularly to monitor the progress of the implementation of the new educator evaluation system. This evaluation committee works with the department chairs to design and implement the evaluation system trainings for the CCHS faculty. The department chairs and teachers provide feedback and the joint evaluation committee discusses the feedback and collaboratively makes adjustments in real time.
3. Meet monthly with SC members, District Administration, and CTA to discuss TELL Mass data and implement district actions to improve teacher and school leadership conditions.
The CPS TELL Mass committee has met three times to discuss two of the seven topics identified in the CTA side letter of agreement. The remainder of the meetings will be spent addressing the topics of decision-making process, school and teacher leadership, and professional development. Consensus findings and recommendations will be identified by the end of May 2013.
The principals meet monthly with the CTA representatives at each school site to facilitate communication and resolve labor/ contractual issues. At Willard and Alcott, the CTA Building Representatives prefer to replace the monthly meetings with ad hoc meetings. Currently, we are working with two CPS grievances from one teacher.
Two CPS employee discipline cases were settled through last chance and separation agreements to resolve further conflict.
Teacher leadership opportunities were continued at each school site through the school leadership team, grade level teams, data teams, mental health teams, and teacher committees. At the district level, elementary teacher feedback was solicited to restructure the elementary district-wide grade level meetings. 58/70 K5 classroom teachers responded to the survey, and the meetings were
2 restructured according to the results. The Elementary Steering Committee is also undergoing restructuring as a result of teacher/principal feedback.
At the middle school, teacher leadership opportunities are available in the department chairs, house leaders, mental health teams, and teacher committees.
The district administrative team meets 2x monthly to discuss feedback from teachers, grade level teams, department chairs, specialists, and curriculum specialists regarding student learning and teaching, school improvement, and district actions related to improvement goals.
A joint labor management committee comprised of CTA and Administration has been formed and will begin meeting in March to negotiate the new educator evaluation process that will be concluded by May 31, 2013.
Two employee discipline matters were settled to resolve further conflict.
4. Consult with RBT to hire an external evaluator to assess school culture and adult interactions at Thoreau and identify actions to improve school culture.
Meg Anderson, Director of the Principal Residency Program, Center for Collaborative Education, Northeastern University, was hired to evaluate the decision-making processes, collaborative processes and the norms of behaviors and patterns of interaction among the faculty and staff at Thoreau. From October – February, Meg gathered qualitative data taken from 92 interviews, 25 observations, and a parent survey. All faculty and staff were given the opportunity to participate in an interview, and parents were given the opportunity to participate in interview groups or through a parent survey. Meg prepared a report that identified strengths, issues and challenges, evaluator commentary, and 14 recommendations for collaboration, decision-making, and communication. Meg presented the report to Thoreau faculty, parents, and the CPS School Committee in February. The Thoreau principal, her RBT coach, and Meg have continued to meet to implement the 14 recommendations to build a school culture of constant improvement of practice and a culture that produces optimal student growth both academically and socially. The Thoreau principal has been working with the RBT coach to improve communication with parents and with faculty/staff.
The Thoreau principal is using discussion protocols to analyze TELL Mass data and Meg’s report with the faculty during the monthly faculty meetings. The following questions will be addressed in the March and April faculty meetings; “How can we address these patterns and themes?” and “If there were a step that we could take this spring to strengthen our school culture, what would that be?”
At the March faculty meeting, most of the Thoreau faculty agreed that holding facilitated small group discussions while using a discussion protocol was helpful and successful, and they are eager and ready to continue the work.
3 To increase more leadership opportunities for Thoreau teachers, the principal invited additional faculty members to join the School Leadership Team. She has also formed teacher committees to discuss and plan the master schedule and Response to Intervention (RTI) implementation for next year.
The principal is working with the RBT coach to develop the decision matrix, hold facilitated discussions with CTA representatives and PTG presidents, and to reintroduce a weekly parent newsletter in addition to the monthly blog.
Monthly Parent coffees will continue this spring and both a Literacy and Math night will be held for families.
At the next SAC meeting, the responsibilities and roles of the SAC and the School Leadership team will be clearly defined to inform the process for the development of the FY14 School Improvement Plan.
5. Hire a Communications Manager for the CCHS Building project.
In December 2012, the Building Project’s Communication Manager was hired to work with the Building Committee Chair and Building Committee to keep the Concord and Carlisle communities informed about the building project. The Communications Manager has extensive experience serving as a communications manager for development and building projects that have multiple and diverse stakeholder groups.
Monthly Project Manager and Building Committee Chair Reports are distributed to both Building and School committee members and are posted on both the Building Project and School Committee websites. The Building Committee meetings were restructured to include a citizen question/answer agenda item. Building project updates are provided in bimonthly Building Committee meetings and in monthly Regional School Committee meetings that are televised.
The Communications Manager produces a weekly update on the building project in the local newspapers.
The building project website has been upgraded to improve the navigation of the menu of information.
The MSBA reinstated the state project funding in January 2013, and the project is on scope, budget, and timeline. The 90% construction documents have been completed, and site preparation has begun with the contractor mobilization. Building construction will begin in Spring 2013-March 2015, students will move in April 2015, building abatement, demo, and final site work will be completed Summer-December 2015, and the final project completion date is December 2015.
B. STUDENT LEARNING GOAL
GOAL: By June 2013, students in grades K-12 will master critical end of year grade level standards.
4
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Implement district K12 core curriculum incorporating Common Core Standards in ELA, Math, Social Studies, and Science.
At the elementary level, Math Curriculum Specialists collaborated with grade level teacher representatives to incorporate the Common Core Standards into the K5 curriculum and Progress Reports. Some elementary grade levels included the new common core standards in math in their annual SMART goals. The ELA Curriculum Specialists have been working to revise the Progress Report to align with the Common Core Standards and will need to collaborate with grade level teacher representatives during the summer 2013 to finalize the standards. The ELA Curriculum Specialists worked with grade level teams to incorporate the Common Core Standards in K5 writing and piloted a new writing curriculum and rubrics for K5.
At CMS, Department chairs and teachers reviewed the standards and curriculum to affirm the alignment with the Common Core Standards. Curriculum revisions over the past two years, and the recent purchase of new math materials have completed the alignment. Department Chairs have identified two CCSS which will be mapped across English, social studies, and science for interdisciplinary alignment. A common humanities writing rubric has been drafted and will be piloted. With teacher input, the Tuesday meeting schedule was revised for the 2012-13 school year to add grade level department time for all content areas once per month in addition to previously scheduled weekly meetings for English, math, science, and social studies.
At CCHS, the Principal and his leadership team are working with teacher-led NEASC committees to complete the accreditation self-review process that includes the development of CCHS Learning Outcomes and rubrics to evaluate student learning. Departments are completing the curriculum maps and parents/public can access the maps to understand the course content and expectations. During the January Professional Development day, teacher leaders facilitated small group work on the school wide rubrics.
2. Implement common assessments in K5 ELA and Math and all content areas in grades 6-12.
At the elementary level, common assessments have been implemented in reading, writing, and math. Principals and their leadership teams are participating in Research for Better Teaching (RBT) 36 hour course, “ Unleashing the Power of Collaborative Inquiry” to learn the structured process of collaborative inquiry and effective uses of data to increase professional community and student achievement. During grade level meetings, faculty meetings, and building based meetings, principals and leadership team members are now practicing with teachers this collaborative process for examining student work. Principals, curriculum specialists, and teachers are regularly meeting in grade level and data teams to analyze data to revise their instructional practices to improve student learning for all students. Pre- assessment data in math has
5 been used to inform instruction and create flexible grouping for instruction across some grade levels. Post assessment data is used to identify those students who need reteaching or Response to Intervention (RTI) instruction. Principals and ELA curriculum specialists are working with grade level teams to implement the new writing standards and to calibrate scoring of the writing samples using the grade level rubrics. Both the ELA and Reading Specialists work closely with grade level teams to analyze the common reading assessment data to identify students in need of literacy intervention. The RTI structure is implemented at all the elementary schools.
The district purchased a software program, Baseline Edge, to assist teachers and school sites with the collection of common assessment data to monitor student progress.
Principals report that 80% of K5 students are on track for mastering critical grade level standards in ELA and math, and 90% of fifth grade students are expected to achieve advanced/proficient on ELA MCAS and 80% of fifth grade students are expected to achieve advanced/proficient on Math MCAS.
At CMS, common assessments are currently piloted in the five content areas, and are in development in the specials classes. Department chairs work with grade level content teachers to analyze student work on the common summative assessments, and intervention is provided before/after school.
CMS Principal reports that more than 80% of the students are on track for earning more than a B- average for final course grades, and 90% of the eighth grade students will achieve advanced/proficient on the ELA MCAS, and 80% of the eighth grade students will achieve advanced/proficient on Math MCAS.
At CCHS, formative and summative common assessments have been implemented, and the Assistant Principal provided training in the School Reform Initiative (SRI) protocols to analyze student work. During the department chair meetings, the Principal and Assistant Principals model a variety of SRI protocols for analyzing student work and student data.
CCHS Principal reports that more than 85% of the students are on track for earning more than 2.0 GPA, and 100% of the graduating class will achieve competency determination.
3. Identify appropriate intervention and adjust instructional practice.
At the elementary level, Response to Intervention (RTI) has been implemented to support students who need intervention to maintain progress for achieving grade level standards. At Alcott the RTI block for ELA and math is scheduled for each grade level K-5 with a minimum of two blocks. The principal meets with the Data team to move students in/out of RTI support based on the common assessments. The Level Literacy Program is piloted in the ELA RTI programs at first through third grade levels. Students are reassessed in math RTI using the math posttest to determine unit mastery. At Willard, the principal and data team are refining the RTI process and procedures. During a faculty meeting, the data team shared a
6 Willard RTI handbook that included flowcharts, grade level liaisons, core curriculum expectations, RTI accommodations checklist, and an RTI FAQ. RTI discussions will continue during the spring faculty meetings. Willard students who perform below the benchmark receive RTI intervention in ELA and math. Grade Level Literacy Teams, working with the principal, ELA specialist, and/or reading specialist identify the students who will receive RTI intervention. Similarly, Grade Level Teams meet with the principal and math specialist as part of the regular math meetings to identify students in need of math support. Additionally, the Willard faculty participated in job-embedded professional development and coaching for Executive Functioning strategies by Sarah Ward, a highly regarded expert on Executive Functioning. Classroom teachers adjusted their instruction to incorporate many of these new strategies to benefit struggling students. At Thoreau, each grade level uses the RTI model to provide reading, writing, and math intervention for struggling students based on student achievement data on the common assessments. The ELA specialist, reading specialist, and reading tutors provide targeted reading intervention using the new programs, Fundations or Leveled Literacy Intervention. The math specialist provides small group instruction to students who are not making progress in achieving the math benchmarks based on the common unit assessments. The Thoreau principal is forming a teacher committee to evaluate the RTI process and procedures to make adjustments for next year.
At CMS and CCHS, teachers provide individual and personalized student academic support before/after school or during lunch (CMS) or in the resource centers (CCHS). CMS Directed Language Arts and Focus math courses provide targeted instruction for struggling students at CMS. CMS teachers use student data from common assessments to identify those students in need of intervention and additional instruction.
The Director of Special Education reports that special education students are on track for achieving 90% of their IEP goals and benchmarks by their annual review. At the preschool level, special education teachers are revising the social language curriculum to increase students’ social language skills. Elementary schools are piloting the online math and reading intervention programs iReady by Curriculum Associates to increase special education student achievement. CMS and CCHS special education teachers are participating in professional development for understanding Executive Functioning (EF) deficits and instructional strategies to build EF skills. The special education teachers will be attending the Learning Differences Conference at Harvard University in March and in April Dr. Gatti, another expert in EF, will work with the CMS faculty to present new approaches to assessment and teaching for flexible thinking and executive functioning.
The Director of METCO reports that Freshmen Boston students are on track for increasing their GPA’s by .2. METCO support at CCHS focuses on freshmen orientation, 1:1 laptops, freshmen and sophomore study skills courses, and college admission support. A part-time teacher has been hired to support student learning, and this year more METCO students participate in CCHS Honors classes.
7
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT GOALS
GOAL: During the 2012-13 school year, administrators and teacher leaders will lead all educators and teams to use student assessment data, research, and best practices in instruction, assessment and technology to improve student learning.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Provide professional development for administrators, department chairs, and curriculum specialists in developing and implementing protocols for looking at student work, analyzing data, and adjusting instructional practices.
CPS administrators, CMS department chairs, and data team members participate in the RBT 36 hour course, “Unleashing the Power of Collaborative Inquiry”.
CPS administrators and CCHS Assistant Principal attend national training in protocols by the School Reform Initiative (SRI).
District, CPS, and CCHS administrators model SRI protocols for analyzing student work or data during administrative team meetings, department chair meetings, and faculty meetings.
CCHS Assistant Principal (SRI trainer) models SRI protocols for CPS administrators, leadership teams, and CCHS department chairs.
CCHS Principal, Assistant Principals, and Department Chairs model SRI protocols for analyzing student work and student data during faculty and department meetings.
2. Technology Specialists collaborate with teachers to integrate use of digital tools in daily classroom instruction and assessment.
Teachers in grades 3, 4, and 5 participated in professional development focused on using online writing tools during their Tech Tuesdays. Teachers are interested in using Kidblog for blogging and have started online writing activities in their classrooms. Some have just started; others have been using Kidblog or other online writing tools such as Evernote, Google Apps for Education, and Wordpress. We anticipate that 100% of students in grades 3-5 will have had experiences with online writing by June 2013. Teachers in grade 2 participated in professional development focused on using digital writing tools during their Tech Tuesday. Teachers have upcoming digital writing projects that include research slideshows and All-About books about bears and Henry Thoreau. Teachers in grades K and 1, as well as special educators, participated in professional development focused on exploring the use of iPads in the classroom during their Tech Tuesdays. Several of these teachers also attended a workshop in February called "Tell Me a Story: Digital Storytelling with the iPad” and learned new ways to use the iPad for writing activities. Teachers in grades K and 1, as
8 well as special educators, have also been invited to join an iPad User Group to explore and practice ways to use the iPad for digital writing experiences. Upcoming digital writing projects for grade 1 include All-About Books, Butterfly Poems, and Little Bird Tales. We anticipate that 100% of students in grades 1-2 will have had experiences with digital writing by June 2013. All students in grades 1-5 have been participating in lessons on Digital Citizenship during their library classes.
EdTECH Teacher provided a full-year professional development program with face-to-face workshops and online learning for CMS and CCHS teachers to develop their technology integration skills in preparation for the implementation of 1:1 laptops.
At CMS, every 6th grader received a MacBook Air for school/home use, and next year, every 6th and 7th grader will be using the MacBook Air. Every CMS student uses Moodle to share book reviews, take quizzes, submit assignments, access Science forums, or review math. Noodle tools help students organize online research in all their subject areas while teachers monitor student progress in real time. Students use Sketch-Up to design city buildings for their Foreign Language class and West Point Bridge to learn elements of digital design in Applied Tech class. CMS students use digital cameras and iMovie to plan, create, and edit anti-bullying videos. All students have Goggle Apps for Education accounts and Google Docs is used for enhancing collaboration, sharing documents, and writing blogs and wikis.
At CCHS, 1:1 laptop program was piloted in the Rivers and Revolutions program and for Freshmen METCO students. CCHS is planning to move to 1:1 laptops for all students in Fall 2015 when they move to the new building. Students are using Google Apps to collaborate with classmates on projects, submit work to teachers for online review and comment, create web sites to present information, and to participate in class blogs. Many teachers are using Moodle to provide students with an environment where they can access resources, ask and answer questions, and participate in online discussions. Foreign Language students are using Voicethread to create slideshows, insert audio and video comments, and to comment on each other's slideshows. Students in many social studies classes are creating video projects using video cameras and iMovie. iPads are being used in the SPED Pathways program to create multimedia digital stories, practice math skills, and work on organizational skills. iPads are also being used in the freshman Network World Cultures class to create video projects and to organize class resources in Evernote.
GOAL: Increase K12 students’ social and emotional well-being.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. K5 Mental Health Team provides coaching to teachers for consistent implementation of Open Circle and Bully Proofing Curricula.
9 School site mental health teams meet on a weekly basis to monitor progress of social skill development. Open Circle curriculum is consistently taught in grades K-5 and the Bullying Proofing Curriculum is taught in grades 3-5.
Principals report referrals to Mental Health team have declined from 2012.
2. CMS implements year 2 of CMS Stands Together and CCHS implements Advisory Program.
All CMS students participated in CMS Stands Together curriculum in November 2012. All students read “Bystander” and Up With People facilitated interactive work with the book and students in September 2012.
In addition to their annual work on Maroon and Gold day, spirit weeks, spaghetti suppers, etc., student leaders are devising a green initiative in coordination with SAC with the goal of building positive life habits in the school and Concord communities.
The Advisory program was implemented at CCHS to create an adult connection for each student.
CCHS clinical team meets weekly to monitor progress of the social/emotional well-being of struggling students.
2012 YRBS data showed that bullying incidents decreased between 2010 and 2012: Grade 6 by 13%; Grade 8 by 7%, and Grades 9-12 by 8%.
GOAL: By June 2013, implement 100% of the new supervision and evaluation system at CCHS and begin the process at CPS in alignment with state regulations and contract provisions.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Implement training for district leadership team.
District and CCHS leadership teams have completed training on the five step cycle, rubrics, self-assessment, goal setting, and gathering evidence.
All aspects of the new evaluation system to date have been completed by CCHS educators.
2. Assist CCHS Principal in implementation of evaluation system.
Support through regular meetings, My Learning Plan (MLP), and multiple conversations have taken place to review progress and improvements.
The joint labor management committee has met monthly to continue planning for implementation of the new evaluation system.
10
3. Collaborate with CTA to develop a new supervision and evaluation system based on state regulations.
Meeting dates for labor management committee are scheduled for March 28th, May 2nd, and May 30th.
More than 30 CPS educators attended the ESE Getting Started Workshop on March 5th.
4. Utilize MyLearningPlan to complement the implementation of the new supervision and evaluation system.
All supervision & evaluation forms and processes are accessible and tracked electronically.
All CCHS educators have been trained on the use of MLP for implementation of the new supervision & evaluation system.
School and district goals have been integrated into MLP forms.
GOAL: By June 2013, FY14 CPS and CCRSD budgets will be approved at both Concord and Carlisle Town Meetings.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Work with Administrative team to identify FY14 student learning needs, cost drivers, and additional resources.
Met with Admin team 2x month to identify cost drivers for CPS FY14: increased enrollment, sped costs, and interim transportation costs and for CCRSD FY14: salary, OPEB, retirement, interim transportation, legal, and technology costs.
2. Work with Concord and Carlisle Finance Committees and School Committees to develop budgets that support FY 14 district goals and are within the levy limits.
Prepare and present FY14 budget proposals to Finance Committees and attend Finance Committee meetings.
3. Present proposed FY 14 budgets to School Committees and faculties at each school site.
School Committees adopted FY14 budgets in December.
4. Present School Committee Adopted FY14 budgets and school district warrant articles at Finance Committee Hearing in February 2013.
11 GOAL: Support the CCHS Building Committee and Building Project Team to complete Construction Documents and maintain construction schedule.
Key Actions and Progress:
1. Meet weekly with Project Team and monthly with CCHS Building Committee to review and inform project scope, budget, and schedule.
The MSBA reinstated the state project funding in January 2013, and the project is on scope, budget, and schedule.
The project is maintaining the updated schedule as outlined in previous Chair Reports. The 90% CD MSBA submission was delivered to the MSBA on March 4, 2013 and the design team is progressing within schedule towards cost estimates of those documents (to be submitted to the MSBA with the Final CD submission).
Additionally, February saw the mobilization of Turner Construction to begin site enabling work. During the middle weeks of the month Turner established a presence on site and began installation of the construction fence. Upon receipt of a demolition permit from the Town of Concord, demolition of the bus depot complex got underway. Construction fencing and site mobilization continue, and Turner is working towards the commencement of major earthwork in March.
The following dates remain unchanged:
60% Documents delivered to MSBA February 1, 2013 (complete) 90% Documents delivered to MSBA March 4, 2013 (complete) 100% Documents delivered to MSBA End of March/Early April ‘13 Contractor mobilization (trailers, fencing, etc.) February 11, 2013 Early construction (enabling work) March 2013 Building Construction Spring 2013 – March 2015 Student Move April 2015 Building abatement/demo and sitework Summer – December 2015 Project completion December 2015
GOAL: By June 2013, assist the School Committee in determining long -term solution for Transportation services in FY14.
Key Actions and Progress:
Work with SC Transportation Advisory Committee to identify viable options for Transportation services for CPS and CCRSD.
The Deputy Superintendent met bimonthly with the TAC to complete the following tasks: development of a series of options that allow the School Committees to assess comparative costs and benefits between owner-operated student transportation services and contracted student transportation services; development of timelines for land acquisition, financing, construction, and other
12 anticipated aspects of the development of an owner-operated student transportation facility; development of accurate estimates for the cost of land acquisition, construction, permitting fees, bus fleet acquisition, maintenance expenses, personnel expenses, and other anticipated expenses associated with owner-operated student transportation services and facilities; investigation of sources of funding other than the CPS and CCRSD operating budgets for both the development of the transportation facility and the ongoing capital and other associated expenses for owner-operated student transportation services; reviewing safety standards for student transportation, including driver training, driver certification, and incident reports, where it does not violate employee confidentiality; and considering scenarios for providing transportation for Concord Public Schools and the Concord-Carlisle Regional School District together and providing transportation for the Concord Public Schools and the Concord-Carlisle Regional School District separately.
Submitted a warrant article for the Spring 2013 Town Meeting to request use of CPS stabilization funds to support transportation infrastructure development at the former Town landfill.
13 Advisory Board Kathi Anderson, Executive Director, Walden Woods Project &Thoreau Institute Representative Cory Atkins (honorary) Ed Begley, Jr., Actor, Environmentalist Douglas Brinkley, Author, Professor of History, Rice University Richard D. Brown, Professor of History, Emeritus University of Connecticut Ken Burns, Director, Producer, Historical Documentarian To: Board of Selectmen Edward Countryman, Professor of History, Southern Methodist University From: Save Our Heritage Robbie Cox, Former President, Date: March 25, 2013 National Sierra Club RE: Support for Article 12 Joan Cusack, Actress Michael S. Dukakis, Professor, UCLA & Northeastern University, Dear Concord Board of Selectmen, Former Governor of Massachusetts Senator Susan Fargo (honorary) Eric Foner, Professor of History, Save Our Heritage would like to convey its strong support for Article 12, and its Columbia University opposition to Article 13, and asks that the Selectmen vote to support Article 12, William M. Fowler, Jr., Professor of History, which would help facilitate its passage at April Town Meeting. Northeastern University Doris Kearns Goodwin, Historian, Author Don Henley, Recording Artist, Founder, While Article 12 would authorize the Town to sell a Conservation Restriction over Walden Woods Project the former Concord town landfill to The Walden Woods Project -- which would James O. Horton, Professor of History, George Washington University ensure the permanent preservation of the former landfill site -- Article 13 would Laura Johnson, President, develop a school bus depot at the landfill property and would prevent the Massachusetts Audubon Society Conservation Restriction from going forward. Representative Jay Kaufman (honorary) Michael Kellett, Executive Director, Thoreau Country Conservation Alliance & RESTORE: Article 12, if passed at April Town Meeting, would achieve a major conservation The North Woods milestone for the Town of Concord, preserving one of the largest open space Marty Meehan, Chancellor, UMass/Lowell parcels remaining in town – importantly, one that serves as the gateway to, and Congressman Edward J. Markey (honorary) David McCullough, Historian, Author abuts, a National Historic Landmark, Walden Pond State Reservation. John Hanson Mitchell, Author, Editor of Sanctuary Magazine The Selectmen’s vote to support Article 12 would help pave the way to achieve Richard Moe, former President, National Trust for Historic Preservation this historic preservation objective. Wesley T. Mott, President, Ralph Waldo Emerson Society, Professor, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Under the terms of Article 12: Representative Charles Murphy (honorary) The Walden Woods Project pays the town $2.8 million dollars (three times Congressman John F. Tierney (honorary) the appraised value) for a Conservation Restriction on the entire 35.4 acre Congresswoman Nicola S. Tsongas (honorary) former landfill parcel. Edward O. Wilson, Naturalist, Professor Emeritus, Harvard University The Town retains all current Concord Public Works functions in the Joanne Woodward, Actress, Humanitarian “bowl” area of the landfill (including composting, snow storage, tree and Alfred F. Young, Professor Emeritus of limb chipping, etc.) for as long as the town continues to conduct those History, Northern Illinois University operations (but does not have the ability to expand the footprint of those In Memoriam: Shelby Foote, Historian, Author operations). Paul Newman, Actor, Humanitarian The Town can develop and maintain a solar installation at the landfill site Gregory Peck, Actor, Environmentalist Christopher Reeve, Actor, Humanitarian in any configuration that is desired and permitted. Stewards of Sites Despite these substantial benefits of Article 12 for the Town and for preservation Nancy Nelson, Superintendent, Minute Man National Historical Park efforts, an argument is being made that either Concord school buses will be parked Libby Herland, Project Leader, at the landfill, or they’ll be parked out of town and driven much further – and that Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service these are the only two available choices since the School Committee has flatly Jan Turnquist, Executive Director, refused to store buses on school-controlled property. Confusion, and some Orchard House misinformation, has devolved the school bus depot issue to this “either/or” Executive Director, Anna West Winter 57 Main Street Concord MA 01742 phone: 978-369-6662 fax: 978-369-6712 President, Neil Rasmussen e-mail: [email protected] web: www.saveourheritage.com
position. While little publicized, the recommendation of the Citizens Transportation Committee was to locate the bus depot at the high school. Perhaps a clear and simple observation should be our guide as we consider the decisions before us: school buses are relevant to school facilities and have historically been accommodated on their premises – while a conserved and open landscape is essential to preserve the dignity and sanctity of Walden. Our actions, at Town Meeting, should set an example for Concord’s youth to both value and protect what is irreplaceable and unique about the town we are so privileged to steward.
History of Preservation Efforts for Walden Pond and Walden Woods Building a new school bus depot in the midst of Walden territory would be both unwise and unfeasible. A hundred years ago, Concordians were understandably unaware of the magnitude of influence and inspiration the Thoreau/Walden legacy would engender worldwide. As a result, they made inappropriate development decisions, encroaching on the Walden landscape with 20th century expediencies: a concession stand in 1920, a trailer park in 1940, and a landfill in 1958. In 2012, now abundantly well aware of the national and international influence of Thoreau’s Walden, it would be unimaginable to repeat the despoiling of this iconic historic site that defines the very heart and soul of Concord.
For decades, many thoughtful, forward-thinking individuals have worked diligently and patiently to reverse the ill-informed mistakes of the past – in the effort to restore dignity to the site that draws millions in pilgrimage from near and far. Visitors in the past were consistently stunned and shocked with disappointment and disbelief when they encountered a dump and a trailer park in the midst of their once envisaged refuge of natural beauty. In turn, Concordians made apologies for their predecessor’s shortsightedness, in having permitted the degradation, and vowed to work to restore sanctity to the very land that spawned the American Environmental Movement. In 1993, The Walden Woods Project purchased and protected the land at Brister’s Hill, in 1994 the town voted to close and cap the landfill, in 2006 Brister’s Hill was opened to the public, and in 2008 the last trailer was removed from Walden.
We owe it to ourselves, to our town, to the country, and to the world to see the Walden restoration and permanent preservation through to completion. Likewise, we need to establish an appropriate home for the buses.
A Rare Opportunity to make a Difference and Preserve a Historic Treasure In 2004 the Town of Concord acted proactively by forming a public/private partnership with Save Our Heritage and Minute Man National Historical Park to protect a national resource that would have been lost forever – Barrett’s Farm; and working together, we succeeded. Article 12 illuminates a similar historic crossroads for the Selectmen and the Town.
A vote for Article 12 would open the opportunity to invest in and enter into a productive public/private partnership with The Walden Woods Project to preserve a local, national, and international historic resource: Walden Pond and Walden Woods and its environs.
At their meeting on 3/21/13, the Concord Historical Commission voted unanimously (5-0) to support Article 12 for a Conservation Restriction over the landfill. It is our hope that as
57 Main Street Concord MA 01742 phone: 978-369-6662 fax: 978-369-6712 e-mail: [email protected] web: www.saveourheritage.com
members of the Board of Selectmen vote on the future use of the former landfill abutting Walden
Pond State Reservation, they will in their wisdom find – and insist on -- a way to fulfill both the long-term and short-term needs pressing against them: i.e., the long-term goal of protecting the integrity of the internationally significant historic icon, Walden Pond, from unnecessary modern build-out of its gateway, and the short-term goal of finding an appropriate location for a school bus depot. We believe a win-win solution is possible, given sufficient time, creative thinking, and good will and foresight among relevant parties.
Sincerely,
Anna West Winter Executive Director
Neil Rasmussen President cc: Carmin Reiss, Chair, Concord Board of Selectmen
Chris Whelan, Concord Town Manager
Lynn Salinger, Chair, Concord Finance Committee
Delia Kaye, Director, Division of Natural Resources
Congresswoman Niki Tsongas
State Representative Cory Atkins - Chair, Tourism and Cultural Affairs Committee
Brona Simon, Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer
Diana Rigby, Superintendent Concord Schools
Kathi Anderson, Executive Director, Walden Woods Project
57 Main Street Concord MA 01742 phone: 978-369-6662 fax: 978-369-6712 e-mail: [email protected] web: www.saveourheritage.com
2012 Actuals 2012 Baseline Baseline as reported expenses Operating Operating Outsourcin
to Fincom (non- Cost Cost (notes on Interim operating g Cost (notes on additional outsourcing (Town appropriatio (2012$) (notes on 2012 baseline cost) (2013$) cost) (2013$) costs)
Bus Expensep (@ 60 es, y s 8 buses/yr $95,000) $269,167 p us CO ess ot e $269,167 0 es $0 6 pa ts / vehicle maintenance (m/s) $115,773 $30,533 $128,864 vehicles $132,730 mile vehicle inspections
transportation fees $6,090 $6,090 $6,273 e ca ga age, cto leases $1,455 $1,455 $1,499 parking comp equip $3,275 $3,275 $3,373
insurance $8,554 $8,554 $8,810 0 es/y / 6 pg fuel (inflate 5%/yr) $196,199 $94,993 $291,192 includes METCO $305,751 $/gal utilities (inflate 5%/yr) $13,901 $13,901 $14,596 contracted busing service $7,460 $7,460 $7,684 Subtotal Bus Expense $352,706 $729,958 $749,883 Personnel Expenses (inflate drivers regular school $800,417 $197,791 $998,207 plus METCO $1,020,667 4093 hours * $22.38 / hour
drivers other trips $93,457 $93,457 $95,560 0 es $0 3 abo / removed "other" vehicles mx mile mechanics (repair labor) $179,440 $134,580 $137,608 6 s @ acto 5 garage ( g shuttling coord) $164,623 $164,623 $168,327 $90,000 1.3 staff: contract mgmt, monitoring, event scheduling, driver OT $6,590 $6,590 $6,738 route planning, … mechanic OTg ( $7,148 $7,148 $7,308 development) ( g $7,571 $7,571 $7,798 testing) ( $3,962 $3,962 $4,081 healthcare) $273,075 $279,219 4% retirement only $17,670 19.63% benefits factor for retirement & Subtotal Personnel Expenses $1,263,207 $1,689,212 $1,727,306 $107,670 healthcare
First Student bid (TAC Option 5) $2,446,802
Total annual cost of school $2,419,170 $2,477,189 $2,554,472
Concord Recreation Dept $15,495 $15,495 $15,960 $30,324 1.9 * Baseline 2013$ Other non-appropriation accounts $21,736 $21,736 $22,388 $44,776 2 * Baseline 2013$ Maintenance for "other" vehicles $62,301 mechanic labor+parts $63,833 155,572 (3 * Cost of mechanic labor) + parts
Total annual cost $1,615,913 $2,518,702 $2,579,371 $2,785,144
Versus Outsourcing: Net $205,773 cost/day/bus $407 $417 $430 T1+T2 2012 Actual T1+T2 2011 Actual Two year average actual field trip drivers salary $8,174.41 $8,481.87 $8,328.14 ms field trip sal $11,311.00 $8,950.00 $10,130.50 tran mgr sal $90,272.80 $83,166.34 $86,719.57 drivers sal $733,876.54 $639,649.60 $686,763.07 driver OT $6,589.83 $21,067.35 $13,828.59 mech. sal $179,440.21 $153,354.37 $166,397.29 mech. OT $7,147.64 $14,005.46 $10,576.55 trans coor sal $74,350.00 $59,503.61 $66,926.81 trans contracted service $7,459.84 $28,970.00 $18,214.92 trans S/M $115,272.53 $116,308.04 $115,790.29 Accident repairs $500.00 $1,225.00 $862.50 gas/diesel fuel $196,198.52 $151,722.74 $173,960.63 veh ins $8,553.88 $8,864.20 $8,709.04 comp equip $3,275.00 $5,750.00 $4,512.50 alch&drug testing $3,962.03 $3,758.33 $3,860.18 staff devel $7,570.52 $7,670.87 $7,620.70 trans fees $6,090.00 $1,430.00 $3,760.00 trans leases $1,455.37 $0.00 $727.69 athletics driver sal $73,971.91 $74,011.59 $73,991.75 repair heating $6,949.64 $4,904.74 $5,927.19 repair electric $6,951.52 $6,707.54 $6,829.53 private school trans sal $66,540.00 $45,925.00 $56,232.50 water/sewer $0.00 $370.50 $185.25 veh replace $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 total $1,615,913.19 $1,445,797.15 $1,530,855.17 $102,372.53 $120,413.46 $800,416.54 0.132
$80,561.74
$0.00
-$94,993.08 Other MA Concord town Buses 21 36 School Vehicle $43,000.00 $115,772.53 Maintenance S/M S/M per bus $2,047.62 $3,215.90 Bus only S/M Concord $84,513.95 2012 Mechanic cost $179,440.21 regular Revised Bus only $134,580.16 Mechanic labor Concord 2012 Mechanic cost OT $7,147.64 Revised Bus only $5,360.73 Mechanic labor Concord mechanic’s bus 0.75 proportion s/m bus share 0.73 mileage/yr 444667 buses less spare whlch and van 34 avg / regular bus 13078.441 avg for 13 yrs 170019.74 cps cchs total drivers 30 3 mechanics 3 2 routes 29 subs lev buses 36 Question 1 What is the name of your district?
Number Response Date Response Text Categories
Mar 11, 2013 5:04 1 PM Carlisle Public School Feb 28, 2013 4:13 2 PM Needham Public Schools Feb 19, 2013 6:31 3 PM Lexington Public Schools Feb 19, 2013 2:30 4 PM LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS Feb 19, 2013 2:27 5 PM Bedford Public Schools Feb 19, 2013 12:18 6 PM Wellesley Public Schools Question 2 How many school sites does the transportation company service?
Answer Options Response Count
2 1 0 2 0 3 1 4 0 5 1 6 0 7
More than 7 answered question 4 skipped question 3
Number Response Date More than 7 Categories Needham 1 11 2 Lexington 9 3 Wellesley 9 Question 3 What company do you use for transportation services?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count
1. First Student 14.3% 1 2. Eastern Bus Company 14.3% 1 3. Bedford Charter 28.6% 2 4. Doherty Garage 14.3% 1 5. C & W Transportation 14.3% 1 6. Connolly 14.3% 1 Other (please specify) 1 answered question 7 skipped question 0
Other (please Number Response Date Categories specify)
we also use ycn for out of district and we have 3 buses of our own and 7 vans for special ed in 1 Feb 28, 2013 4:13 PM district Question 4 How long have you contracted with a transportation company?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count
0.0% 0 1-3 years
0.0% 0 4-6 years
0.0% 0 7-9 years
14.3% 1 10-12 years
0.0% 0 13-15 years
85.7% 6 More than 15 years
answered question 7
skipped question 0 Question 5 In your current contract, what is the annual escalation cost?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count under 1% 33.3% 1 1% 0.0% 0 2% 0.0% 0 3% 66.7% 2 4% 0.0% 0 5% 0.0% 0 6% 0.0% 0 more than 6% 0.0% 0 Other (please specify) 3 answered question 3 skipped question 4
Number Response Date Other (please specify) Categories
FY 13 $395
FY 14 $405
FY 15 $418
FY 16 $439
1 Lexington Public Schools FY 17 $461
Usually we have done three year contracts where year 1 is the big increase and year 2 and 3 are flat. For example year 1 may be a 14% increase, but year 2 and 3 are at the 2 Bedford Public Schools same rates as year 1.
1.60% in years 2 through 4. 3.0% + in year 5.
($315 year 1, $320, $325, $330 years 2,3,4, $340 year 5 which is last year of this 3 Wellesley Public Schools contract) Question 6 What is the length in years of your current contract? For example 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, or other.
answered question 6
skipped question 1
Number Response Date Response Text
1 Mar 7, 2013 3:49 PM 3 yrs
2 Needham 3 years with an option for 2 additional
3 Lexington We are in the fist year of a 5 year contract.
3 YEARS WITH A TWO YEAR OPTION CLAUSE AT DISCRETION OF 4 Lincoln LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Until the last contract we had done them as three year but in the last one we 5 Bedford tried a 3 year with two one year options
6 Wellesley Five Question 7 When did you last renew your contract with your transportation company?
Answer Options Response Count
6 answered question 6 skipped question 1
Number Response Date Response Text
1 Mar 7, 2013 3:49 PM 2011 2 Feb 28, 2013 4:13 PM FY12 3 Feb 19, 2013 6:31 PM Spring 2012
WENT OUT TO BID IN DECEMBER FOR EFFECTIVE DATE OF 8/1/2013. WON 4 Feb 19, 2013 2:30 PM BY DOHERTY'S GARAGE.
it was for the start of FY2010 (May of 5 Feb 19, 2013 2:27 PM 2009) 6 Feb 19, 2013 12:18 PM Current contract started 7/1/2012. Question 8 The last time you renewed your contract, did the costs increase, decrease, or remain the same?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count
83.3% 5 Increased 16.7% 1 Decreased 0.0% 0 Remained the same
answered question 6
skipped question 1 Question 9 . Did you make a significant change in the terms of your most recently renewed contract that resulted in a cost adjustment? Please specify the type of change you requested.
Answer Options Response Count
5 answered question 5 skipped question 2
Number Response Date Response Text 1 Feb 28, 2013 4:13 PM no
No we did not make significant changes but we did change the way we asked them to price the tiers. We wanted pricing on a 1 tier "shuttle" route for some large apt. complexes. We were being charged $195 for this last year. The new price for this is $250. We have 21 3-tier buses and the additional 3 shuttle buses for our elementary students at the apartment complexes. The shuttle price increases $10/year through the end of the 2 Feb 19, 2013 6:31 PM contract.
3 Feb 19, 2013 2:30 PM NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES For the FY12 school year we combined our middle school and high school 4 Feb 19, 2013 2:27 PM transportation routes.
5 Feb 19, 2013 12:18 PM Vehicle spec changed to include cameras and tracking GPS. Question 10 Did you add or deduct routes/buses?
Response Answer Options Response Count Percent added routes/buses 40.0% 2 deducted routes/buses 0.0% 0 routes/buses remained the same 60.0% 3 answered question 5 skipped question 2
Question 11 If the cost of the contract decreased, what was the % amount of the decrease?
Answer Options Response Count
1 answered question 1 skipped question 6
Number Response Date Response Text We paid $409 for a 3 tier route last 1 Feb 19, 2013 6:31 PM year. Question 12. If the contract increased, what was the % amount of the increase?
Response Answer Options Response Count Percent 1% 25.0% 1 2% 0.0% 0 3% 25.0% 1 4% 0.0% 0 5% 0.0% 0 6% 0.0% 0 More than 6% 50.0% 2 answered question 4 skipped question 3
Question 13 Overall, how satisfied are you with the company that provides transportation services?
Answer Options Response Percent Response Count
1. Very satisfied 100.0% 6 2. Somewhat satisfied 0.0% 0 3. Not Satisfied 0.0% 0 answered question 6 skipped question 1 Question 14 Why?
Answer Options Response Count
5 answered question 5 skipped question 2
Number Response Date Response Text
their drivers are very professional, take their responsibilities very seriously, are on 1 Feb 28, 2013 4:13 PM time, dependable and truly care about their kids on the route.
We have worked with C & W for several years. They are knowledgeable and understand the demands of the school department as well as parents in the town. They have worked with us on an after school pilot program for elementary students. This pilot allows students with a bus pass to ride a different bus in the afternoon to various after school programs around town. The drivers have been very helpful in 2 Feb 19, 2013 6:31 PM making this work.
GOOD SERVICE, COMMUNITY SUPPORT, LOCAL GARAGING, GREAT LINES OF 3 Feb 19, 2013 2:30 PM COMMUNICATION BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND BUS COMPANY.
4 Feb 19, 2013 2:27 PM They know the routes and roads in town, they are reliable, and pretty efficient overall.
Dedicated Wellesley drivers and dispatchers are great to work with. Communication 5 Feb 19, 2013 12:18 PM with office personnel is very good. DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 3, 2013
April 5, 2013
SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility
For
CONCORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS 129 Meriam Road Concord, Massachusetts 01742
Prepared by:
NITSCH ENGINEERING, INC. 2 Center Plaza, Suite 430 Boston, MA 02108
Nitsch Project #9569
DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 3, 2013
PROJECT NARRATIVE CONTENTS
1.0 REPORT OVERVIEW ...... 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 3 2.1 Existing Site Description ...... 3 2.2 Existing Utility Infrastructure ...... 6 Sanitary Sewer ...... 6 Water (Domestic and Fire Protection) ...... 6 Stormwater Management ...... 6 Natural Gas ...... 6 Electrical Service ...... 6 2.3 Soils ...... 6 2.4 Potential Permitting Requirements ...... 6 Wetlands Protection Act (310 CMR 10.00)...... 6 US EPA National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ...... 7 Septic System Permit (310 CMR 15.00 Title 5) ...... 7 Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program ...... 7 Floodplain ...... 7 Water Conservancy District ...... 7 DEP Solid Waste Management ...... 7 3.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS ...... 8 3.1 The New Transportation Facility ...... 8 3.2 Zoning ...... 10 3.3 Utilities ...... 10 Sanitary Sewer ...... 10 Water (Domestic and Fire Protection) ...... 10 Stormwater Management ...... 10 Gas ...... 11 Electric and Telecommunications ...... 11 3.4 Lighting and Security ...... 11 4.0 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT ...... 12 5.0 CONCEPTUAL PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST ...... 12 6.0 CONCLUSION ...... 13
DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
1.0 REPORT OVERVIEW
The Concord School Department (CSD) retained Nitsch Engineering to prepare a Feasibility Study for a new Concord School Department Transportation Facility (Transportation Facility) on a portion of the closed Concord Landfill parcel located at the southeast corner of intersection of Route 2 and Walden Road (Route 126). The Landfill was officially closed by DEP in 2001.
The intent of the feasibility study is to demonstrate that a New Transportation Facility could be constructed on the Landfill parcel and investigate the following:
1. Safe access to site from public road; 2. Secure paved parking for 36 full-size school buses each with independent maneuverability and electric feed for heater blocks; 3. Paved parking for 48 (staff and visitors); 4. Modular office space for up to three (3) administrators including restrooms capable of serving 42 staff; 5. Three (3) bay repair building to service full-size buses; 6. Trade-off comparison combination building for items 3 and 4; 7. Utilities for site; and 8. Diesel fuel tanks and pumps to service 36 full-size school buses
The New Transportation Facility will replace the former facility at Concord Carlisle High School on Walden Street, Cambridge. The New Transportation Facility will provide secure parking for 36 buses, 48 parking spaces for staff and school bus drivers, 3-bay maintenance garage, office/meeting space, and fueling station for the buses. The site would be access by a driveway from Walden Street (Route 126) along an existing gravel/pave drive.
Nitsch Engineering has reviewed the proposed program for the Transportation Facility, performed research of the existing site conditions, prepared preliminary grading and layout of the Facility, and investigated the potential site permitting requirements for the Transportation Facility at the Town Landfill parcel.
Nitsch Engineering’s research included the following:
Site visits on February 26, 2013 and March 27, 2013; Compiling information from Concord Geographical Information System (GIS) and, plans and documents obtained from the Town of Concord Public Works, the Concord Public Schools, and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Agency; Meeting with Town Departments on March 21, 2013, including: o Natural Resources Commission; o Town Engineering Department; o Town Building Commissioner; o Concord Municipal Light Plant; o Senior Town Planner; o Fire Department; and
Page | 1 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
o Police Department. Meetings with the Concord Public School Administrators.
Currently the wetlands resource areas are being delineated and a survey is being performed to confirm the compiled GIS information.
This report provides a review of the existing conditions, a conceptual layout of the Transportation Facility on the site, the probable permitting requirements for a new Transportation Facility at the Landfill parcel, and a preliminary probable construction cost estimate.
Page | 2 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Existing Site Description The Landfill parcel is approximately 35 acres; the majority of the site contains the closed landfill. In addition to the closed landfill, there are two connected drainage basins that collect runoff from the Landfill surface, the Concord Public Works (CPW) landscape stockpile area, and wooded areas on the south and east sides of the parcel.
The Landfill parcel is bounded by Route 2 to the north, Walden Street (Route 126) to the west and, State-owned land to the east and south, which includes a former trailer park site (now abandoned) and Walden Woods. Goose Neck Pond is located to the southeast of the site, adjacent to the proposed Transportation Facility site.
Historical aerial photographs indicate that portions of the Landfill parcel were wooded prior to the Town using the site as a landfill. Concord’s landfill was previously located at the current Concord- Carlisle Regional High School (CCHS) site, which was subsequently abandoned and moved to the current landfill site (previously a gravel pit) after 1960. Google Earth images show the progression of the parcel from 1960 when activity first began, to 1995 as the landfill was beginning to cease operations, to 2001 when the landfill liner installation was underway.
Goose Neck Pond
Landfill
Walden Pond
1960 Aerial of Landfill
Page | 3 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
Goose Neck Pond
Proposed Bus Depot Location
Walden Pond
1995 Aerial of Landfill
Landfill Parcel
Goose Neck Pond
Proposed Bus Depot Location
2001 Aerial of Landfill
Page | 4 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
The New Transportation Facility would be located on approximately 2.2 acres, situated at the mid- point of the parcel’s southern property line just east of the abandoned trailer park and north of Goose Neck Pond. The proposed site is located on top of a hill on a gently sloping area that is mostly wooded. A portion of the Transportation Facility site is cleared and contains two trailers on the site along with concrete barriers, rolled chain-link fence, wire recycle bins, old soccer goals, and steel barrels. A portion of a six-foot chain-link fence is installed around the trailers and the abandoned electrical and telecommunications meter boxes and underground conduit. A cell tower was proposed for the area of the trailers but was not constructed. According to record documents, there is a buried stump pile on a portion of the Transportation Facility site.
Looking northerly toward trailers
Looking easterly toward Goose Neck Pond
Page | 5 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
2.2 Existing Utility Infrastructure Sanitary Sewer There is no municipal sewer available to connect or existing Title 5 septic systems on the site.
Water (Domestic and Fire Protection) According to the Concord Water Division, there is an 8-inch water service that stubs into the site.
Stormwater Management Record plans indicate a catch basin near the site access road and two drainage basins which are connected to a 24-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP). The drainage basins were constructed as part of the Landfill closing.
Natural Gas There is no gas service to the site.
Electrical Service Overhead wires enter the Landfill parcel from Walden Street. The overhead wire connects to the existing DPW building on the site.
Single Phase electric service is brought into the site via an overhead wire from Route 126 to the DPW garage. There was an overhead electric service from Route 126 into the abandoned trailer park that connects to the abandoned electric meter and telecom at the existing building at the Transportation Facility site.
2.3 Soils Based on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (2013), the majority of the Landfill property is classified as sandy soil. The soils are classified as Hinckley loamy sand and Windsor loamy sand. The rest of the site (Landfill area) is classified as Udorthents (unclassified). The Hinckley and Windsor soils are generally well-drained material and are classified as hydraulic soil group A (HSG A). Based on the record information available, the soil is a sandy material with groundwater generally 30 feet or greater below grade.
2.4 Potential Permitting Requirements Wetlands Protection Act (310 CMR 10.00) The Wetlands Protection Act ensures the protection of Massachusetts' inland and coastal wetlands, tidelands, great ponds, rivers, and floodplains. It regulates activities in coastal and wetlands areas, and contributes to the protection of ground and surface water quality, the prevention of flooding and storm damage, and the protection of wildlife and aquatic habitat.
A review of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) wetland layers available on the Massachusetts Geographic Information System (MassGIS), dated April 2013, appear to indicate that site has a wetland associated with Goose Neck Pond. The New Transportation Facility appears to fall outside of the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act and its Regulations. The wetland resources areas are currently being delineated and surveyed to confirm this initial determination.
Page | 6 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
US EPA National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Construction activities that disturb more than one acre are regulated under the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. In Massachusetts, the USEPA issues NPDES permits to operators of regulated construction sites. Regulated projects are required to develop and implement stormwater pollution prevention plans in order to obtain permit coverage.
Septic System Permit (310 CMR 15.00 Title 5) A new septic system to service the office area will be required. The system will need to meet Title 5 requirements for office space. The septic system is anticipated to be a small system that will be gravity and not dosed.
The maintenance building would require a tight tank to capture oil waste and grease from bus maintenance. The tight tank would be alarmed to prevent overflows, and would require pumping as necessary based on usage.
Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program A review of the 13th Edition of the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas, prepared by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) and dated October 1, 2008, indicates that the High School site is not located within a Priority Habitat of Rare Species or an Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife (Figure 3).
Floodplain Based on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Community Panel Number 25017C0379E, dated June 4, 2010 the site is not located within a flood zone.
Water Conservancy District Based on information from Concord GIS, the site is not within the Water Conservancy District.
DEP Solid Waste Management Based on conversations with David Adams, DEP, Solid Waste Management Division, the project would require a review by DEP to determine any impacts to the closed Landfill. Preliminary conversations with DEP indicate that the New Transportation Facility will not impact the Landfill liner. David Adams indicated that the project would need to file a Minor Post Closure Review Permit with DEP.
Page | 7 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
3.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS 3.1 The New Transportation Facility
The New Transportation Facility site proposes a maintenance building, office, and parking spaces for staff and buses. The parking area would be approximately 2.2 acres with additional area required for the site access drive. This site access drive from Walden Street (Route 126) would be 24 feet wide with guardrail and retaining walls as needed.
The New Transportation Facility program includes an above-ground fuel dispensing system with two 25-foot nozzles to refuel two busses at once. The fuel tank would be approximately 2,000 – 3,000 gallons with required fire suppression and bollards surrounding the system. The Fire Chief is required to approve the installation of the refueling system.
A concrete pad would be installed at the fuel dispensing system with an isolated catch basin with a valve and water quality treatment on the drain line from the concrete pad to contain potential spills.
Page | 8 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
The new Transportation Facility building will consist of a 3-bay maintenance garage, two offices, a meeting room, reception area, and two bathrooms. The building footprint will be approximately 80 feet by 65 feet.
The cut and fill for the site is anticipated to be a balanced site with no material leaving the site.
Nitsch Engineering contacted the Massachusetts DEP to discuss locating a bus depot on the Landfill parcel. David Adams, DEP, Solid Waste Management Division indicated that the buried stumps could be excavated, chipped and stored at the CPW stockpile area to be used for mulch. Additionally, David Adams indicated that DEP would allow the project to use the existing drainage basin for stormwater capture and infiltration as long as the project meets the Stormwater Handbook Standards (latest edition).
Page | 9 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
Table 1. Approximate land use change for the New Transportation Facility Site (acres ±) Land Use Existing Proposed Change
Buildings 0.04 0.1 + 0.06
Site Impervious Area 0.0 2.2 +2.2
Gravel 0.0 0.0 ---
Woods/Vegetated Areas 2.1 0.0 - 2.1
Total 2.2 2.2 ---
3.2 Zoning The project site is located in the Residence A District. The project is classified as Municipal Use and is allowed By-Right. The project would be reviewed through a public process with the Planning Board and would be able to satisfy the dimension requirements under Zoning for a 40-foot front-yard setback and a 15-foot side-yard setback. The conceptual layouts for the project exceed these requirements.
3.3 Utilities Sanitary Sewer A new Title 5 system would be constructed to service the new Transportation Facility. The soils on the site are sandy with high percolation rates and the depth to ground is relatively deep. Based on record plan information, the depth to groundwater is greater than 30 feet.
The size of the new septic system would be relatively small. Based on the preliminary program for the facility, the septic system would be sized to accept 495 gpd – similar to a five-bedroom sized house.
Water (Domestic and Fire Protection) A new 6-inch cement-lined ductile iron (CLDI) water service would be installed and would connect to the existing 8-inch stub on the site. The new 6-inch CLDI water service would be extended up the driveway to the site and service the new building and site fire hydrants.
The water main will provide both domestic service and fire protection services to the office and maintenance building.
Stormwater Management
There are no known drainage systems on the site other than the existing catch basin off the access road that connects to the 24-inch concrete pipe and discharges into the large drainage basin. The storm runoff collects in the basins and infiltrates into the ground. The closest closed drainage system is located in Route 126. The project does not propose to connect to the Route 126 closed drainage system.
The project will capture the 1-inch storm (water quality volume) from the proposed parking lot and driveway. This runoff will be treated and infiltrated into the ground as required by the Stormwater Handbook.
Page | 10 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
Catch basins, drain manholes, and water quality structures will be used to direct and pre-treat the stormwater prior to infiltration into an underground chamber system.
The project would also direct larger storm events up to the 100-year storm event into the existing on- site drainage basin. Nitsch Engineering discussed using the drainage basin with DEP for the bus depot project. DEP requested that a drainage report be prepared that indicates the pre- and post- development runoff on the landfill to determine stormwater impacts the project may have on the basin. DEP also indicated that the project must meet the DEP Stormwater Handbook (latest edition) requirements for the Bus Depot project.
The proposed re-fueling area would have a concrete pad that directs any fuel spills to a water quality structure that connects to the underground chambers. The project will place a valve between the water quality structure and the underground chambers to prevent fuel from reaching the chambers in case a spill occurs.
Gas There is no gas service to the site based on current record information. There may be gas service in the Route 126 right-of-way. If gas service is located in Route 126, the project may install a natural gas line for future use.
Electric and Telecommunications There is no electric service to the new Transportation Facility site. The maintenance and office building(s) will require electrical service to be brought in from utility poles located within the Route 126 right-of-way.
3.4 Lighting and Security Site lighting would consist of light poles approximately 20 feet high with cut off fixtures to minimize light pollution. Fencing and security cameras are required. The project proposes to put the lights on a timer or dimmer to reduce the light output after daily operations. The Concord Police Department will review the security for the project and provide comments as necessary.
Page | 11 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
4.0 TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT Nitsch Engineering conducted a traffic assessment and evaluation of the Route 2 and Route 126 (Walden Street) intersection and the Route 126 (Walden Street) and Site driveway.
The proposed project would generate roughly 84 passenger vehicle trips (42 in/42 out) and 72 school bus trips (36 in/36 out) from the Site, twice a day, during a school week. The additional trips are anticipated to mostly occur during off-peak hours, when queues and delay are already at a minimum.
The intersection of Walden Street / Site Driveway is anticipated to handle the additional vehicle and bus trips traveling in and out of the site with little queue and delay on Walden Street. The bus trips out of the site will occur in groups; however, the site should be able to accommodate the queue of buses lined up to exit. The bus trips into the site will occur in a staggered manner, and only minor queues or delays should be expected on Walden Street as a result. The impact of the project to the intersection of Concord Street (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street should be minimal, as the intersection currently services 5,005 vehicles during the morning peak hour and 4,870 vehicles during the evening peak hour. Bus queuing on the Walden Street northbound approach should not back up to the Site Driveway.
The majority of the vehicle crashes that occur at the intersection of Concord Street (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street are rear-end crashes on the mainline, likely caused by high vehicle speeds and vehicles stopping quickly. The additional vehicle and bus trips to the intersection are not anticipated to increase the crash rate currently experienced.
Based upon the evaluation completed for the proposed Transportation Facility, Nitsch Engineering anticipates that traffic at the study area intersections will experience minimal impact from the additional vehicle and bus trips traveling through the area.
Additional traffic assessment, sight distance information, queue information, crash data, and bus route times can be found in the Traffic Memo under Appendix A.
5.0 CONCEPTUAL PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST Nitsch Engineering contracted with PM&C, a firm specializing in construction cost estimating. PM&C prepared a conceptual estimate of conceptual probable construction costs for the proposed New Transportation Facility, based on a conceptual plan prepared by Nitsch Engineering along with other information provided by the Concord Public Schools.
PM&C’s April 1, 2013 (revised April 5, 2013) feasibility estimate for the Transportation Facility indicates the following:
Approximately $1.1 million for site work (earth moving, site preparation, utilities, pavement); Approximately $98,500 for the re-fueling station; and Approximately $401,000 for the maintenance and office structure.
The total project feasibility estimate after contingencies and insurance brings the total project estimate to approximately $2.37 million dollars. An itemized construction list is provided under Appendix B.
Page | 12 DRAFT SITE FEASIBILITY REPORT Concord Transportation Facility April 5, 2013
6.0 CONCLUSION Nitsch Engineering’s investigation for a New Transportation Facility indicates that the Facility as conceptually proposed is technically feasible.
The project is considered a Municipal Use and is allowed By-Right, and will be able to meet current Zoning setbacks.
Favorable soil conditions and the ability to use the existing drainage basin would allow the New Facility to meet the Stormwater Handbook Standards for runoff and Title 5 for a septic system.
DEP has indicated that there appears to be no restrictions to placing the New Transportation Facility at the Landfill parcel. DEP recommended that the stumps should be removed and chipped for re- use as mulch. The New Transportation Facility would not impact the current Landfill liner.
The Traffic Assessment indicates minimal impacts at the site entrance and Route 2 intersection during both morning and evening routes. The bus routes would occur during off-peak hours and would have minimal impact to the traffic patterns in the area. The Traffic Assessment also indicates that there is sufficient sight distance at the site entrance.
Nitsch Engineering anticipates a review of the New Transportation Facility by the Concord Planning Board.
Page | 13 New Transportation Facility April 3, 2013
APPENDIX A TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT
MEMORANDUM
John Flaherty, Deputy Superintendent of Finance & Operations TO: Concord Public Schools
Stephen Farr, PE, LEED Green Associate FROM: Christine Keches, PE, LEED Green Associate DATE: March 29, 2013 RE: Concord Transportation Hub Nitsch Project #9569
INTRODUCTION
Nitsch Engineering has been retained by the Town of Concord (the Town) / Concord Public Schools to provide traffic engineering, assessment and evaluation of the traffic operations, sight distance and potential impacts of the proposed Transportation Hub to be located at 759 Walden Street, in Concord. The proposed project location is currently the site of the Town’s Public Works recycling and composting operation located at 755 Walden Street, just south of the Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) and Walden Street intersection, located in the southern portion of the Town. A locus map is provided in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Locus Map
= Site = School Location
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 2 of 9 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Nitsch Engineering conducted a field reconnaissance at the intersections of Walden Street at the Site Driveway (proposed site location) and Concord Turnpike and Walden Street on February 26, 2013. We reviewed site access and egress conditions, sight distance at the proposed Site Driveway, and traffic operations at the two intersections. The posted speed limit on Concord Turnpike is 45 miles per hour (mph), and the posted speed limit on Walden Street is 35 mph.
Intersections
Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) at Walden Street
The intersection of Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) and Walden Street is a four legged signalized intersection with Concord Turnpike approaching from the east and west, and Walden Street approaching from the north and south. The eastbound and westbound Concord Turnpike approaches each consist of a left-turn lane, two through lanes, and a right-turn lane. Each side of the Concord Turnpike has two receiving lanes, with a median separating the approach lanes from the receiving lanes. The northbound Walden Street approach consists of a left-turn lane, a through lane and a channelized right turn lane that begins 35-feet prior to the northbound stop line. The southbound Walden Street approach consists of an exclusive left-turn lane, a shared left-turn/through lane and a channelized right-turn lane, which begins 100-feet from the southbound stop line. Neither of the channelized right-turn lanes are controlled by the traffic signal; the southbound right- turn lane is controlled by a Yield sign, while the northbound right-turn lane does not have any posted signage control and is a free movement.
The traffic signal is a four phase signal. The eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes have a protected left- turn phase, then the eastbound and westbound through and right movements receive a green. Following the main line the southbound Walden Street approach has a green light, and the westbound right-turn has an overlap. Finally the northbound Walden Street approach has a green light, and the eastbound right-turn has an overlap during this phase.
Looking north on Walden St. Looking south on Walden St.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 3 of 9
Looking east on Concord Turnpike Looking west on Concord Turnpike
The only sidewalk at the intersection is made up of two small sections of sidewalk on the west side of Walden Street. The sections extend from the intersection to approximately 125-feet north of the intersection and from the intersection to approximately 125-feet south of the intersection. Since Nitsch Engineering’s field observations took place in February, the ground was covered with snow, and no sidewalks had been plowed at that time. There is a pedestrian crosswalk across the eastbound Concord Turnpike approach connecting the Walden Street sidewalk. No pedestrians were observed at the intersection during our site visit. Cyclists were observed traveling northbound and southbound on Walden Street through the intersection during our site visit.
The pedestrian crossing is push-button activated and runs concurrently with the southbound Walden Street phase. The pedestrian phase is only long enough to get pedestrians to the median, where they must wait a full cycle to finish crossing to the other side. The southerly pedestrian light appears to be malfunctioning and shows both the walk and do not walk indications at the same time.
Walden Street at the Site Driveway
The intersection of Walden Street and the Site Driveway is a three-legged unsignalized intersection, with Walden Street approaching from the north and south and the Site Driveway approaching from the east. The Site Driveway serves as the minor approach and operates as a STOP controlled approach, even though there is no STOP sign present. The northbound and southbound Walden Street approaches each consist of one 12 foot shared use lane and a shoulder of varying width. There is a centerline separating the approach lane from the receiving lane. The Site Driveway approach is a shared use lane with no pavement markings present. There are no sidewalks on either side of Walden Street at the Site Driveway.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 4 of 9
Looking north on Walden St. towards Site Dwy Looking south on Walden St. towards Site Dwy
Operations
During Nitsch Engineering’s site visit, the delay, queue, and general traffic operations were observed during the hours of 6:00-9:00 AM and 1:30-4:00 PM. The following section describes the traffic operations that were observed.
Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) at Walden Street
The intersection appears to operate in an acceptable manner. The intersection carries extremely high volumes, particularly on the mainline. During Nitsch Engineering’s site visit, extremely high delays and queues were observed on Concord Turnpike. Most of the approaches’ vehicle queues were cleared within one signal cycle. Only on the Walden Street southbound approach were vehicles observed having to wait through multiple signal cycles to get through the intersection.
Vehicle queues as high as 30 vehicles were observed on the mainline Concord Turnpike through lanes, in both the eastbound and westbound directions. While these vehicle queues are extremely high, the vehicles cleared within one cycle. The eastbound and westbound left-turn lanes were observed to have a maximum queue of 6 vehicles, all of which passed through the intersection within one signal cycle. One westbound left turning vehicle was observed sitting through three cycles before they backed up onto the loop detector and received a green arrow. This may be because the vehicle detector is inoperable or the stop line is positioned too far in front of the first detector.
During the morning peak period, the Walden Street northbound queue was observed to be a maximum of 14 vehicles, which equates to 350 feet of queue. In order for the northbound queue to impede the Site Driveway operations, the queue would have to extend for over 750 feet, or 30 vehicles, which is very unlikely given that the maximum observed queue is less than half of this distance. The southbound queue was observed to be as high as 15 vehicles in each lane; however, the tree line blocked the view of the queue at this point. It is possible that the queue extended beyond 15 vehicles.
The southbound Walden Street approach became very backed up during the morning peak hour. Vehicles were observed having to wait through two full cycles (170 seconds each) to get through the intersection. Multiple times in the morning peak periods the through and left-turning vehicles blocked access to the right- turn lane, forcing right-turning vehicles to wait for the through and left-turning vehicle queue to reduce before being able to turn onto Concord Turnpike.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 5 of 9
Walden Street at the Site Driveway
The intersection of Walden Street and the Site Driveway appears to operate at acceptable levels of service at this time. During Nitsch Engineering’s site visit, only a handful of Concord Department of Public Works (DPW) vehicles were observed going in and out of the site. These vehicles did not appear to have any problems turning into or out of the Site Driveway. There appear to be sufficient gaps in the Walden Street traffic to allow for vehicles to turn into and out of the Site Driveway without long delays or any queuing issues.
Count Data
In addition to Nitsch Engineering’s observations, traffic count data at the intersection of Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) at Walden Street was obtained from the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS). These Turning Movement Counts (TMC) were performed in December 2012 and include passenger vehicle, truck, and bicycle counts for the commuter morning peak period (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and the commuter evening peak period (4:00 – 6:00 PM). The morning peak hour was found to be 7:30 – 8:30 AM and the evening peak hour was 5:00 – 6:00 PM. This puts the peak commuting hours to be outside of the peak school bus route hours. There should be little to no overlap between the proposed transportation hub activity and commuting peak hours.
Sight Distance
Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) is the minimum visibility required for a vehicle on the major street to observe the presence, and safely stop the vehicle to prevent collision with an object/vehicle from the minor street. Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) is the minimum visibility for a vehicle stopped on the minor street to observe and assess the major street traffic to enter the intersection. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Project Development and Design Guide1 was used to establish the required minimum SSD and ISD. It should be noted that while the SSD is a required metric, the ISD is a recommended metric for maneuvering at an intersection. Although Nitsch Engineering’s site visit was completed during the winter, the sight distances were measured assuming that visibility through adjacent roadside vegetation would not be possible. The measured sight distances are as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 – Sight Distance Evaluation Intersection Speed Stopping Sight Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) Limit Distance (SSD) Speed Required1 Available2 Recommended Looking Looking (in mph) (in Feet) (in Feet) South North (in Feet) (in Feet) Site Driveway/Walden St. Walden Street, northbound 35 250 >500 Walden Street, southbound 35 250 425 Left turn from Site Dwy. 35 390 >500 425 Right turn from Site Dwy. 35 335 >500 N/A 1,Required in feet (ft) - Project Development and Design Guide, Massachusetts Highway Department; Chapter 3 – Basic Design; 2 Measured in feet (ft), rounded to the nearest five feet.
The posted speed limit on Walden Street is 35 mph for which the required SSD is 250 feet for level ground. As seen from Table 2, the SSD on Walden Street exceeds the required minimum looking for vehicles approaching the Site Driveway from both directions. The recommended ISD was established based on the
1 Project Development and Design Guide, Massachusetts Highway Department, 2006
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 6 of 9 posted 35 mph speed limit. The ISD in both directions, at the Site Driveway, exceeds the recommended minimums of 390 feet for a left-turn and 335 feet for a right-turn.
Crash Data
Nitsch Engineering reviewed the crash data available from the MassDOT/Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) for the three (3) year period of 2008 to 2010. The compiled crash data includes crashes within 300 feet of the intersection. There were no accidents reported at the intersection of Walden Street/Site Driveway. A summary of the crashes, the severity, and the manner of collision at the intersection of Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A)/Walden Street are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 – Crash Data
Number of Severity Manner of Collision Percent During Crashes
Location Year Ped- Peak Wet/Icy Total Avg PDa PIb NRj Fc Ad REe HOf Otherh Bikeg Hours* Condition
Concord Turnpike 2010 7 5 2 - - - 6 - - 1 14% 14% (Route 2/2A) & 2009 12 15.7 8 4 - - - 12 - - - 42% 8% Walden Street 2008 28 16 10 2 - 2 19 - - 7 36% 18% Total ALL 47 29 16 2 2 37 - - 8 - - aProperty Damage Only; bPersonal Injury; cFatality; dAngle; eRear end; fHead on; gPedestrian or Cyclist; jNot reported or unknown in term of severity; hSideswipe, opposite direction; sideswipe, same direction, single vehicle crash, rear-to-rear, not reported, unknown etc. *Peak hours refers to the bus schedule peak hours (6:00-9:00 AM & 2:00-4:00 PM).
As seen from Table 2, a total of 47 crashes were reported at the intersection of Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) and Walden Street from 2008 to 2010. Approximately 62% of the crashes involved property damage, while 34% of the crashes involved injuries, and 4% of the crashes had no reporting for severity. No fatalities were reported. None of the crashes involved pedestrians or bicyclists.
Based on the manner of collision, rear-end crashes had the highest incidence (nearly 79% of the crashes), followed by angle crashes. Further evaluation of the manner of collision indicated that over 50% of the rear- end crashes over the three (3) years involved vehicles traveling in the westbound direction on Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A). The large number of rear-end crashes on Concord Turnpike is likely due to the high speeds (45 mph posted speed limit), and motorists trying to stop suddenly for a yellow or red light.
The Town is located in MassDOT’s District 3 region. Per the 2008-2010 crash data available from MassDOT, the average crash rate for signalized intersections in District 3 is 0.89 crashes per million vehicles, and the statewide average crash rate for signalized intersections is 0.80 crashes per million vehicles. The crash rate at the intersection of Concord Turnpike and Walden Street is calculated to be 0.79 crashes per million vehicles, which is just lower than the district average and statewide averages. The crash rate was based upon the TMC counts done in December 2012 and provided by CTPS.
Nitsch Engineering attempted, but was unable to contact the Concord Police Department’s Safety Office to discuss issues or vehicle crashes regarding the intersection.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 7 of 9 PROPOSED CONDITIONS
The proposed project includes the construction of a school transportation facility, to be located at 755 Walden Street. The proposed facility plan includes paved parking for 36 full size school buses, paved parking for a minimum of 48 staff and visitor vehicles, a modular office space for up to 3 administrators and a restroom capable of serving 42 staff members, and a 3 bay repair building to service full size buses. A preliminary concept of the proposed site is provided in Figure 2.
Figure 2 – Site Plan
The proposed facility will operate as the school bus terminal for the Town, with bus drivers leaving their personal vehicles at the site while operating their buses. Table 3 shows an overview of the scheduled bus route times for the Town. The times given for each school are generally the earliest time that a single bus route for the school begins till time when the last bus route ends; however, each individual route varies, and bus routes are staggered over the course of the timeframe. As the table indicates there are 71 morning bus routes and 79 afternoon bus routes; however in general each bus does two routes. For example, many of the buses that pick-up the high school students between 6:10 and 7:10 AM, also do a middle school route between 7:10 and 8:00 AM.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 8 of 9 Table 3 – Bus Routes School Morning Bus Routes Afternoon Bus Routes # of Buses Route Times # of Buses Route Times Concord-Carlisle High School 21 6:10 – 7:10 AM 22 2:15 – 3:25 PM Concord Middle School 18 7:10 – 8:00 AM 18 2:30 – 3:50 PM Alcott Elementary School 8 8:00 – 8:45 AM 8 3:25 – 4:00 PM Thoreau Elementary School 8 8:00 – 8:45 AM 6 3:25 – 4:20 PM Willard Elementary School 9 8:00 – 8:45 8 3:25 – 4:01 PM Kindergarten Dismissal n/a n/a 12 12:00- 1:05 PM (All Elementary Schools) Private Schools 7 7:10 – 8:10 AM 5 3:35 – 4:55 PM
In addition to the routes listed above, the Concord School website did indicate that there are approximately eight (8) bus routes that do late runs in the spring. These late buses depart the schools anytime between 3:45 and 5:15 PM. The Town of Concord also runs five (5) morning bus routes and five (5) afternoon bus routes between Concord and Boston for the Metropolitan Council for Educational Opportunity, Inc. (METCO) program. The afternoon buses vary in departure times depending on the day of the week, but in general the morning buses leave Concord prior to 6:00 AM and the afternoon buses depart Concord anywhere between 1:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The impact of these additional buses is anticipated to be minimal as the majority of the METCO routes take place on the highway traveling to and from Boston.
Based upon the current bus schedule and information from the Town, the proposed site can anticipate 13 buses leaving the site prior to 6:30 AM, 13 buses leaving prior to 7:00 AM, with the remaining 3 the buses leaving by 7:30 AM. 18 of the buses should return after 9:00 AM, 10 buses will return between 8:45 and 9:00 AM, and 1 bus will return prior to 8:45 AM. In the afternoon, the kindergarten buses will leave at 12:00 PM, and the rest of the buses will leave during staggered times. The buses are anticipated to return to the Site after their afternoon routes in the order of 13 buses between 3:45 and 4:15 PM, 11 buses between 4:15 and 4:59 PM, and 5 buses returning between 5:00 and 7:00 PM.
The majority of the bus trips through the intersections of Walden Street / Site Driveway and Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street will take place at off-peak hours. As a result, the peak hour volumes at these intersections will not be affected by the increased number of school bus trips.
Since the Site is located in the southern part of Town, most of the added school bus trips through the intersection of Concord Turnpike (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street would most likely be northbound or southbound through movements. During off-peak hours, when buses will be traveling through the intersection, the queues and delays observed at the study area intersection were minimal. The study area intersections are expected to handle the additional school bus trips with minimal impact to the intersection. Field observations indicated that many of the existing school bus routes already travel through this intersection from 2:30 – 4:30 PM, and the intersection can accommodate the bus movements at this location without any changes to the geometry.
Concord Transportation Hub, Nitsch Project #9569 March 29, 2013 Page 9 of 9 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
The proposed project site will generate roughly 84 passenger vehicle trips (42 in/42 out) and 72 school bus trips (36 in/36 out) from the Site, twice a day, during a school week. The additional trips are anticipated to mostly occur during off peak hours, when queues and delay are already at a minimum.
The intersection of Walden Street / Site Driveway is anticipated to handle the additional vehicle and bus trips traveling in and out of the site with little queue and delay on Walden Street. The bus trips out of the Site will occur in groups; however, the site should be able to accommodate the queue of buses lined up to exit. The bus trips into the site will occur in a staggered manner, and only minor queues or delays should be expected on Walden Street as a result. The impact of the Site to the intersection of Concord Street (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street should be minimal, as the intersection currently services 5,005 vehicles during the morning peak hour and 4,870 vehicles during the evening peak hour. Bus queuing on the Walden Street northbound approach should not back up to the Site Driveway.
The majority of the vehicle crashes that occur at the intersection of Concord Street (Route 2/2A) / Walden Street are rear-end crashes on the mainline, likely caused by high vehicle speeds and vehicles stopping quickly. The additional vehicle and bus trips to the intersection are not anticipated to increase the crash rate currently experienced.
Based upon the evaluation completed for the proposed school transportation facility, Nitsch Engineering anticipates that traffic at the study area intersections will experience minimal impact from the additional vehicle and bus trips traveling through the area.
New Transportation Facility April 3, 2013
APPENDIX B CONCEPTUAL PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Feasibility Estimate
Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot
Concord, MA
Prepared for:
Nitsch Engineering
April 1, 2013 Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot 01-Apr-13 Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
MAIN CONSTRUCTION COST SUMMARY GSF Estimated Construction Cost
SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
SITEWORK $1,152,041
FUELING STATION $98,569
PRE-FABRICATED MAINTENANCE BUILDING 3,900 $102.82 $401,000 ADDED COST FOR OFFICE AREA 1,200 $150.00 $180,000
SUB-TOTAL $1,831,610 DESIGN AND PRICING CONTINGENCY 10% $183,161
SUB-TOTAL with Contingency $2,014,771
GENERAL CONDITIONS 6.00% $120,886 BONDS 1.50% $30,222 INSURANCE 1.00% $20,148 PERMIT NIC $0
OVERHEAD AND FEE 5% $100,739 ESCALATION TO START (assumed 12 4.0% $91,471 months at 4% PA)
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $2,378,237
ALTERNATES ALT 1 E&B for new gas service $34,311
This Feasibility cost estimate was produced from drawing and specifications prepared by Nitsch Engineering and their design team dated March 25th 2013. Design and engineering changes occurring subsequent to the issue of these documents have not been incorporated in this estimate.
This estimate includes all direct construction costs, general contractor’s overhead and profit and design contingency. Cost escalation assumes start dates indicated above.
We have assumed procurement will utilize a public bid under C.149 of the MGL with public bidding to pre-qualified subcontractors, open specifications for materials and manufacturers.
The estimate is based on prevailing wage rates for construction in this market and represents a reasonable opinion of cost. It is not a prediction of the successful bid from a contractor as bids will vary due to fluctuating market conditions, errors and omissions, proprietary specifications, lack or surplus of bidders, perception of risk, etc. Consequently the estimate is expected to fall within the range of bids from a number of competitive contractors or subcontractors, however we do not warrant that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the final construction cost estimate.
Executive Summary Page 2 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility Bus Depot 01-Apr-13 Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED IN THIS ESTIMATE
Items not included in this estimate are: Land acquisition, feasibility, and financing costs All professional fees and insurance Site or existing conditions surveys investigations costs, including to determine subsoil conditions All Furnishings, Fixtures and Equipment Items identified in the design as Not In Contract (NIC) Items identified in the design as by others Owner supplied and/or installed items as indicated in the estimate Utility company back charges, including work required off-site Construction contingency
Executive Summary Page 3 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST SITEWORK
1 2 G SITEWORK 3 4 G10 SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION 5 02100 Site construction fence/barricades 1,300 lf 8.00 10,400 6 02700 Security sliding gate, double 1 ea 2,500.00 2,500 7 02100 Clear and grub site 1 ls 15,000.00 15,000 8 Site Earthwork 9 02200 Silt fence 1,300 lf 12.00 15,600 10 02200 Strip topsoil, store on site 4,240 cy 6.00 25,440 11 02200 Cut/Fill 8,756 cy 6.00 52,536 12 02200 Store on site 2,182 cy 2.00 4,364 13 02200 Fine grading 12,614 sy 1.00 12,614 14 Hazardous Waste Remediation 15 Dispose/treat contaminated soils/water; assumed none required 16 SUBTOTAL $138,454 17 18 G20 SITE IMPROVEMENTS 19 Roadways and Parking lots 20 Asphalt concrete paving 108,957 sf - 21 312000 Gravel base; 12" thick 4,035 cy 28.00 112,980 22 321200 bituminous concrete; 4" thick 12,712 sy 22.00 279,664 23 321200 Single solid lines, 4" thick 86 space 25.00 2,150 24 321200 Wheelchair Parking 2 space 75.00 150 25 321200 Other road markings 1 ls 500.00 500 26 321200 Bollards 10 ea 600.00 6,000 27 321200 Cape cod berm 3,100 lf 7.00 21,700 28 Pedestrian Paving 29 Paving 30 02200 gravel base; 8" thick 61 cy 30.00 1,830 31 03300 Concrete 2,477 sf 6.00 14,862 32 02700 Guardrail 1,000 lf 50.00 50,000 33 03300 Retaining wall; assumed versalok or equal 2,400 sf 35.00 84,000 34 Landscaping 35 02830 Landscaping allowance 1 ls 10,000.00 10,000 36 SUBTOTAL 583,836 37 38 G30 CIVIL MECHANICAL UTILITIES 39 Water supply 40 02550 New water line 1,481 lf 70.00 103,670 41 02550 Fire service 4" DI 50 lf 55.00 2,750 42 02550 Domestic service 2" copper 50 lf 40.00 2,000 43 331000 New fire hydrant 2 loc 2,600.00 5,200 44 02550 Gate valves 6 loc 750.00 4,500 45 02550 Connection to existing 1 ea 3,000.00 3,000 46 Sanitary sewer 47 333100 6" PVC Sanitary sewer 80 lf 35.00 2,800 48 02500 1,500 gal tight tank 1 ls 4,000.00 4,000 49 02500 1,500 gal septic tank 1 ls 4,000.00 4,000 50 02500 Septic field - no sewer gravel needed 1 ls 3,000.00 3,000 51 02500 D-box 1 ls 500.00 500 52 Storm Sewer 53 334000 Infiltration system 2,500 sf 22.00 55,000 54 334000 24" CPP 111 lf 45.00 4,995 55 334000 18" CPP 1,571 lf 40.00 62,840 56 334000 New drainage catch basins 12 loc 3,000.00 36,000
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 4 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST SITEWORK
57 02500 WQCB 1 ea 6,000.00 6,000 58 02500 New drainage manholes 9 loc 3,200.00 28,800 59 334000 New flared end structures 1 loc 850.00 850 60 334000 Rip-rap to bottom of FES 50 sf 8.00 400 61 334000 OCS 1 loc 5,000.00 5,000 62 02500 WQS structures 2 ea 15,000.00 30,000 63 Gas 64 312000 E&B trench for new lines, pipe and install by utilities 65 02500 New gas service 1,057 lf 25.00 Alt #1 66 SUBTOTAL $365,305 67 68 G40 ELECTRICAL UTILITIES 69 Power 70 16000 Riser 1 ea 1,200.00 1,200 71 16000 Overhead electrical service and poles 983 lf 40.00 39,320 72 Site Security 73 16000 Site security allowance 1 ls 15,000.00 Use Existing 74 Site Lighting 74 16000 Site lighting 5 loc 2,800.00 14,000 75 16000 Site lighting circuitry 709 lf 14.00 9,926 76 SUBTOTAL 64,446 77 78 TOTAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT $1,152,041
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 5 PMC - Project Management Cost Concord School Transport Facility 01-Apr-13 Bus Depot Concord, MA
Feasibility Estimate
CSI UNIT EST'D SUB TOTAL CODE DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT COST COST TOTAL COST FUELING STATION
1 2 G SITEWORK 3 4 5 G30 CIVIL MECHANICAL UTILITIES 6 Quote from Northeastern Petroleum Service and Supply Inc. 7 02700 Diesel storage tank 1 ls 25,894.00 25,894 8 02700 Diesel tank top accessories 1 ls 5,756.21 5,756 9 02700 Veeder root in tank level monitoring system 1 ls 5,438.00 5,438 10 02700 Diesel dispenser with accessories 1 ls 6,736.00 6,736 11 02700 Diesel tank and accessories installation 1 ls 23,152.50 23,153 12 02700 Assisting electrician in final connection 1 ls 1,454.00 1,454 13 02700 Assisting in lifting and putting tank and pump in 1 ls 1,500.00 1,500 position 14 02700 Fuel management system 1 ls 16,984.00 16,984 15 02700 Assisting electrician in final connection 1 ls 1,454.00 1,454 16 02700 Crane to set tank 1 ls 3,000.00 3,000 17 SUBTOTAL $91,369 18 19 G40 ELECTRICAL UTILITIES 20 16000 Electrical connections for fuel service system 1 ls 7,200.00 7,200 21 SUBTOTAL 7,200 22 23 TOTAL FUELING STATION $98,569
Concord Bus Depot 4.1.13 .xlsxRev1 Page 6 PMC - Project Management Cost New Transportation Facility April 3, 2013
FIGURES
Figure 1 – 2 Mile Locus Map Figure 2 – Locus Map Figure 3 – USGS Map Figure 4 – Massachusetts DEP Wetland Map Figure 5 – Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Map Figure 6 – NRCS Soils Map Figure 7 – FEMA Floodplain Map Figure 8 – Water Conservancy District
jk
jkjk jk jk jk jk
d oa R d BEDFORD r o k f j jk d e jk B ® ld O jk
L o w e ll R o ad (!62 eet Str rd dfo jk Be jk jk jk k Elm j Stre et on Road et exingt Main Stre L
Th N or CONCORD orth Gr jk ea jk eat Road u St jk re C (!2A et ambr W idge Tur Co a np n l ik cor d ke e d e npi T n ur urn jk d T p S or ik t c e r on e C e t (!2 (!2A (!2 jk
jk (!2 jk
jk
d jk a o R jk jk d r k o j
f LINCOLN d e
B
d
a
o
R T d rap r elo Road o
c
n
o
C UV126 Fitchbur g Turnpike jk Legend d a o Openspace R n ol Wetlands Conservancy District S c outh Great in Ro L NHESP Certified Vernal Pools a jk d
0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet SUDBURY New Transportation jkFacility 2 Mile Locus Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 1
jk jk jk jk jk jk
jk jk jk jk ®
jk jk jk jk jk
jk jk jk CONCORD jk
0.66 0 mi jk .4 les 3
m s Goose e i l le i s Pond jk m
jk 6 1 .
0
Walden Pond jk Flints Pond
jk LINCOLN jk jk jk
Legend
Openspace Wetlands Conservancy District jk NHESP Certified Vernal Pools jk
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet
New Transportation Facility Locus Map Concord, Massachusetts jk Figure 2 BEDF®ORD
CONCORD
LINCOLN
0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet SUDBURY New Transportation Facility USGS Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 3 jk jk jk
jk
jk jk jk ®
Cambr idge Tu rnpike
T ho 2A re (! au S tr ee t k (!2A j (!2 (!2 e pik urn d T cor W Con a l d e Site (!2 n 2A S (! t r e ike e rnp t d Tu cor Con CONCORD jk
jk jk
d
a
o
R
d r o c n o C LINCOLN
Legend jk NHESP Certified Vernal Pools Hydrologic Connections UV126 BOG DEEP MARSH OPEN WATER SHALLOW MARSH MEADOW OR FEN SHRUB SWAMP WOODED SWAMP CONIFEROUS WOODED SWAMP DECIDUOUS WOODED SWAMP MIXED TREES
0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet
New Transportation Facility Massachusetts DEP Wetland Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 4
jk jk jk jk
jk
jk jk jk ®
Cambr idge Tu rnpike
T ho 2A re (! au S tr ee t k (!2A j (!2 (!2 e pik urn d T cor W Con a l d e Site (!2 n 2A S (! t r e ike e rnp t d Tu cor Con CONCORD jk
jk jk
d
a
o
R
d r o c n o C LINCOLN
UV126
Legend jk NHESP Certified Vernal Pools NHESP Priority Habitats of Rare Species
0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet
New Transportation Facility National Heritage and Endangered Species Program Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 5
jk 420C 253C 255C 1 253D ®223A 52A 254B
653 253E 253D
255B (!2 (!2A Site 255C
W a l d e 653 ike 253C n rnp S Tu t rd r co e on e C t
652 255B
253D 1
253D
253B 254B 253C UV126
300C
1 300D Legend d
a MUSYM o R
d 253B - Hinckley loamy sand r 302B o c 253D - Hinckley loamy sand n o 652 - Udorthents C 253E 253C 654 0 250 500 1,000 104D Feet 254B 253C 302B 420B New Transportation Facility NRCS Soils Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 6 ®
Cambr idge Tu rnpike
T ho 2A re (! au S tr ee t (!2A (!2 (!2 e pik urn d T cor W Con a l d e Site (!2 n 2A S (! t r e ike e rnp t d Tu cor CONCORD Con
d
a
o
R
d r o c n o C LINCOLN
UV126
Legend
AE 100 yr BFE AE Floodway 0.2 % Chance (500 yr)
0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet
New Transportation Facility FEMA Floodplain Map Concord, Massachusetts Figure 7 ®
Cambr idge Tu rnpike
T ho 2A re (! au S tr ee t (!2A (!2 (!2 e pik urn d T cor W Con a l d e Site (!2 n 2A S (! t r e ike e rnp t d Tu cor CONCORD Con
d
a
o
R
d r o c n o C LINCOLN
UV126
Legend
Water Conservancy District
0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet
New Transportation Facility Water Conservancy District Concord, Massachusetts Figure 8