The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection gave Lexington the ‘go-ahead’ to build the new high school as planned. The decision followed a review of wetlands on the LHS property prompted by a resident appeal.
“Based on review of the information and plans provided and observations made at the site visit, MassDEP has determined that the project meets performance standards pursuant to [the law] for [the wetlands on the property].
Therefore, based upon the above findings, MassDEP is issuing the attached [superseding order of conditions] affirming the Commission’s [order of conditions] approving proposed work in the areas of interest subject to protection under the Act and Wetlands Regulations pursuant to [the law],” MassDEP’s superseding order, which it issued on Sept. 30, states.
That means there do not need to be changes made to the new school’s design, but the project must comply with the conditions the Conservation Commission issued in June.
“From the project team’s perspective, this decision was certainly a relief but not a surprise given all of the approvals in place already for the high school building project,” Town Manager Steve Bartha said during the Select Board meeting on Monday.
This order from MassDEP came after a group of 12 residents signed an appeal calling for MassDEP to reconsider the Conservation Commission’s conditions, arguing it did not adequately protect the wetlands on the property. The concerned residents argued that by law, the SBC must evaluate, and, if feasible, adopt a design for the new high school that avoids on-site wetlands.
As a result, MassDEP sent Jill Provencal, a representative from the department, to Lexington on Aug. 27 to survey the wetlands on the property. That visit led to the department’s decision to allow Lexington to continue constructing the new school as it is currently designed.
The project’s price tag has been affected, however.
Due to the appeal, construction on or near the wetlands on the LHS property had to halt from July until Sept. 30, which is when MassDEP issued its decision.
The delay will likely add between $1 million and $2 million to the total project costs, Bartha said during Monday’s meeting. Those costs come from construction-cost escalation, resequencing, schedule compression, premium time, and shifting more work into winter months. The funding will be taken from the existing contingency budget.
Bartha added that there will be more opportunities for residents to appeal.
If no further appeal is filed, the construction team will get back to work on the property’s wetlands later this month, he said. And at this rate, the new high school is still scheduled to open for the 2029 to 2030 school year.
But if there are further delays, the move-in date for the new school could be pushed back. If it’s moved to Dec. 2029 (during the week-plus winter break that LPS students and staff get for the holidays), about $20 million could be added to the project. Pushing the opening to summer 2030 or later could add at least $30 million and potentially exhaust the existing contingency budget.
“Should an appeal be filed, we would certainly look to get that adjudicated quickly,” Bartha said.
Frustrating that a tiny group of 12 residents were able to derail such an essential project, even if only temporarily. The added cost of $1-2M is a surcharge of roughly $30-$60 for every one of the 34,000 town residents, on top of the already huge project cost of $660M for the new high school. As a result of this delay, students will have to suffer through blasting and tree clearing that was originally scheduled for the summer. They should know who to thank for that.
Frustrating that our Town leaders, who have been working on a new High School for over a decade, did not find it prudent to apply (and obtain) all necessary permits AND wait for all appeals periods to have elapsed months ago, and BEFORE starting construction of Bloom, as some of us asked them to do.
Frustrating that our Town leaders wasted a decade waiting for the MSBA’s meager 16% contribution to the $660 million cost of Bloom, when starting say 8 years ago with NO MSBA subsidy would have cost us less (at say 4% annual cost escalation, over 8 years in wasted time, Bloom’s costs increased by 38%, well MORE than the MSBA’s 16% contribution).
Frustrating that our Town leaders were so eager for that 16% contribution from the MSBA that they followed the MSBA’s requirement that Bloom be sized for today’s enrollment (2,395 students) when our housing stock post-MBTA zoning may increase Lexington’s population by 40% in the next 8-10 years, and Lexington is the strongest magnet for families with kids in Massachusetts (as measured by # kids in the schools per taxable lot in the community). This is all detailed in https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19PoLaC2yWP6tJ4WFt8CGnEhfI_62iSL1/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116971253884586510151&rtpof=true&sd=true.
Frustrating that our Town leaders do not really listen to those of us with creative ideas, and instead our School Building Committee ran “public meetings” where a resident had only 2 minutes to explain such complex issues, the purpose of which really was to convey the message “Bloom is the only and best possible design for a new high school in Lexington”, instead of seeking better ways to proceed.
Frustrating that our Town leaders waste time on budget Summit meetings instead of implementing suggestions made decades ago, e.g. save $3 million EACH year in our school budget by no longer having classrooms not filled to “preferred” levels in our 6 elementary schools (per https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JiIMtzKMew1jutuhqLFgNM8SOdZpm_d8/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116971253884586510151&rtpof=true&sd=true).
I am grateful the state returned its judgment so quickly, without a single follow-up question or change request. This strongly signals that the appeal had little to no merit. After hearing so many claims that “this is not legal” or “the process was not followed,” I half expected the state to ask for something. But there was nothing.
It is deeply unfortunate that this delay has cost the town $1M–$2M and shifted loud blasting directly into the school year. That money could have funded 15 teacher salaries and benefits. It could have purchased a new fire truck, resurfaced our town hard courts, or replaced an athletic turf field. Instead, we had to burn through a chunk of the high school project’s contingency budget because a small group of residents refused to accept what the majority of the town voted for.
My only hope now is that this group does not file another appeal. Taking this to actual court would significantly delay the project and add $20M–$30M to the cost. I hope the state’s decisive response makes it clear: just because you have the legal right to appeal doesn’t mean the result will be anything other than a massive waste of taxpayer funds.