|
Lexington Home Page
|
Help
|
About
|
Browse
Search
2014-11-13-CPC-min
Breadcrumb Navigation:
TownOfLexington-Public
>
WEB PUBLISHED-PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
>
MINUTES-REPORTS-COMMITTEES ARCHIVE
>
Community Preservation Committee-CPC
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
2014-11-13-CPC-min
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/10/2019 11:20:18 AM
Creation date
12/12/2014 12:07:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Archives
Keywords or Subject
Minutes - CPC - Community Preservation Committee
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
application requested CPA funds for interpretive materials that would be installed and/or <br />used after land clearing and archeological excavations had been completed. The CPA <br />request included exhibit panels and stands, cases, interpretive painting and a mobile phone <br />tour. <br />Members discussed the application in light of Town Counsels opinion that the hard costs <br />associated with the project were defensible, but that the soft costs of interpretation were <br />harder to justify under the CPA statute. Ms. Fenollosa reported that she had put in a call to <br />Mr. Batt, but had not yet had an opportunity to talk with him about the project. Ms. Krieger <br />explained that certain aspects of the project with hard costs had already been completed, <br />such as land clearing. She said future hard costs were difficult to define, since they were <br />dependent upon as yet uncompleted work. Given Mr. Batts opinion, members agreed that <br />Ms. Krieger should discuss the project with Mr. Batt and resubmit the application for <br />funding of hard costs only. Members of the CPC stated that they were generally very <br />supportive of the project, but felt that a straw vote on the application was premature. Ms. <br />Krieger will contact Mr. Batt and resubmit an amended project application to the CPC in <br />the coming weeks. <br /> <br /> <br />4.Town-Wide Culvert Replacement (Minuteman Bikeway), $290,000 <br /> Mr. John Livsey <br />presented this project to the CPC, noting that the location of the culvert to be replaced was <br />on the Minuteman Bikeway, north of Camellia Place off Bedford Street. Ms. Fenollosa <br />commented that the project title seemed inappropriate for a CPA project since it gave the <br />impression that the culvert replacement was on municipal roadways. Mr. Livsey explained <br />that the culvert was an old granite box culvert, which had fallen into disrepair. It measured <br />20x4x4 and had been identified in an inspection of the macadam surface of the Bikeway, <br />which had begun to sink. Investigation of the area under the bikeway revealed that a large <br />supporting section of granite had shifted out of place and could likely fall. Mr. Livsey <br />proposed replacing the failing granite culvert with a concrete box culvert, the base of which <br />would be depressed two feet to eliminate scouring. Mr. Livsey described the stream (North <br />Lexington Brook) and its watershed. He noted that the $290,000 requested would be used <br />exclusively for the culvert replacement on the Bikeway. After a motion duly made and <br />seconded, the CPC voted in a straw vote (9-0) to approve the culvert restoration project on <br />the Minuteman Bikeway. <br />5.First Parish Church Exterior Preservation and Restoration, Mr. Russell Tanner and <br />Mr. Erik Svenson, $195.000 <br /> Russell Tanner and Erik Svenson of the First Parish <br />Building Committee met with the CPC and described their request to use CPA funds to <br />replace the Churchs exterior windows, rehabilitate the existing entrance steps, landscape <br />the front of the Church, conduct exterior siding and trim repairs and add exterior up- <br />lighting to the lower levels of the sanctuary. Two members of the church were in <br />attendance. Mr. Tanner and Mr. Svenson explained the details of the project and reviewed <br />the timing of their request. They explained that they had not yet met with the HDC, and <br />that preliminary specs and plans would not be expected until March. Members discussed <br />the projects timeline, and stated that they felt HDC approval was critical prior to CPC <br />review, since HDC exterior design standards might well determine the project costs. <br />Members also questioned the timing of not having definite cost estimates until March, <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.