2012-01-09-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3. (Continued) l.) Greeley Village Accessible Housing Project, (8-0) m.) Land Acquisition – CC-sponsored, vote postponed until next meeting n.) Land Acquisition – Wright Farm, vote postponed until next meeting Regarding the Visitor Center Renovation/Expansion, the CPC noted that it had not received the details on Options 1 (renovations only) and 2 (renovations and limited expansion) as requested. The Committee felt such details would give them a better perspective on the alternatives to the project as presented. They generally agreed that the project should be vetted and sponsored by the Facilities Department, and that appropriate Town participation had not been sufficient. Mr. Adler expressed his views on the project and stated that he would not be voting to pass the project along to Town Meeting. In response to a question, Ms. Fenollosa noted that the Historic Districts Commission (HDC) had not yet taken a position on the project. Mr. Cohen said he felt the Visitor Center needed to be upgraded, but that the project was not yet “ready”. Ms. Weiss echoed this sentiment, stating that it would be irresponsible to vote on the project without reviewing the necessary financial information for the project. Mr. Kanter of the CEC stated his opinion that there is a need for enhancement of the Visitor Center, but that a year delay in the project might be appropriate. The CPC will take its final th vote on this project at its January 18 meeting. The Cary Memorial Upgrades project was also the topic of discussion. Mr. Kanter said he felt the project needed a more thorough review by Town Committees, to which Ms. Fenollosa replied that there had been extensive review by the Permanent Building Committee, the Town Facilities Department and various other stakeholders. She noted that the Historical Commission (HC) and Historic Districts Commission were both in full support of the project, and that this is arguably the most important historic building in Lexington. The renovations proposed are critical to the continued viability of the building, not a “wish list” of desired enhancements. Ms. Shaw stated that the total project cost was not unreasonable given a recent analysis of Hancock Church, which needed upgrades costing $15 million. Ms. Weiss expressed her opinion that the project should not be fragmented. There was a general discussion of the relationship between the D&E request of $550,000 and the subsequent FY14 application for $7.2M. Committee members noted the dilemma of passing the full D&E request for FY13, yet later deciding only to fund priority items in FY14. Regarding the White House Stabilization project, members further discussed the recent increase in the funding request, and the possibility of moving the structure. Ms. Fenollosa reported that the HDC will likely not allow the 2