2013-01-10-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

this project 8 -1 noting that the project could be postponed by the Selectmen if a decision is made to purchase 33 Marrett Road. e.) Muzzey Senior Center Upgrade — Phase 3, $526,818 — 7 -2 This project received support of the CPC, but with the understanding that it would be put on hold should the Town move to acquire 33 Marrett Road. L) Visitor Center Design Phase, $68,950 — 7 -2 Dawn McKenna, Chair of the Tourism Committee, was present for discussion of this project. Ms. McKenna noted that as a result of Selectmen review, the Tourism Committee will be holding public meetings in the upcoming weeks to educate the public and elicit further comment on design and project scope. g.) Installed Wall Units - Air Conditioners, Central Administration Building, $56,000 — 0 -8 -1 This project will not be recommended to Town Meeting for CPA funding. h.) Human Resources Office Renovation, Central Administration Building, $29,500 — 0 -8 -1 This project will not be recommended to Town Meeting for CPA funding. i.) Print Shop Renovation, Central Administration Building, $430,835 — 1 -8 This project will not be recommended to Town Meeting for CPA funding. j.) Park and Playground Improvements, $147,500 — 9 -0 k.) Park Improvements, $65,000 — 9 -0 1.) Lincoln Park Field Improvements, $150,000 — 9 -0 m.) Lexington Pocket Park and Alley Design, $15,000 — 8 -0 -1 This project had been previously discussed under "Updates" and received support of the CPC pending further legal work. n.) Merriam Hill Preservation Project, $3,000 — 6 -3 Ms. Fenollosa described the public notification policy of the Historical Commission regarding addition of homes to the Comprehensive Cultural Resources Survey (the Inventory). In response to a question from Mr. Pressman, Ms. Fenollosa explained that all homeowners in the Merriam Hill neighborhood would be notified of the commencement of the project, and would be invited to a public hearing if their home had subsequently been selected for placement on the Inventory. She explained that while homeowner input is welcomed as part of the decision to include houses on the Inventory, homeowners do not have an avenue for appeal to the Superior Court since a previous court decision had determined that listing on the Lexington Inventory alone did not necessarily result in a loss of property value. However, properties could subsequently be taken off the Inventory if a homeowner presented satisfactory evidence that they had lost their architectural or historic integrity, were unsaleable after good faith evidence to market them or were so 3