Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
30 June 2009 <br />Meeting Minutes <br />Lexington Permanent Building Committee (PBC) <br />Location: 146 Maple St. Conference Room <br />Date & Time: 24 June 2009, 5:00PM <br />3.0 K-12 Master Plan <br />3.1 Preliminary Review of Master Plan <br /> <br />01/13/09 <br />Representatives of the Design Partnership of Cambridge presented an overview of the K-12 Master Plan <br />findings to date. <br /> PBC advised DPC verify setbacks with zoning for any construction. <br /> PBC requested full disclosure of footnotes on any and all cost documents and estimates showing <br />escalation provisions and terms. <br /> PBC requested town expenses be added to project cost sheet. <br /> Scheduling discussions involved estimates on MSBA review schedules and funding cycles. <br />3/10/09 <br />DPF reported that the K-12 Master Plan was being finalized and is scheduled for a presentation to the <br />School Committee in March of 2009. <br />3.2 Adhoc Committee <br />6-24-09 <br />The Superintendent of Schools has asked for an adhoc Committee to review the K-12 Master Plan. <br />Committee members are being requested from several different areas including two <br />representatives form the PBC. <br />John Himmel and Eric Brown volunteered to serve the Adhoc K-12 Committee in representation of <br />the PBC <br />4.0 Stone Building <br />4.1 Continued development / next steps for Stone Building Project <br />1-20-09 <br />The Purpose of the meeting was to provide an opportunity for interested parties to discuss with the PBC the <br />concern they may have with regard to the continued or further development of the Stone Building Project. <br />Representatives were in attendance from the Historical Society, Historic Commission, CPC, and CEC in <br />informal or un-official capacities to engage in a dialogue on the best course of action for this project. <br />Discussion points included: <br />1. Historic Restoration vs. Preservation <br />2. The intended use of the building not as a dedicated library but as a Heritage Center <br />3. Scope of the prior study and satisfactory completion of the work <br />4. Renovation of the building without more detailed knowledge of the intended use <br />5. Costs proposed for continued work versus those of other projects of historic character <br />a. The budgets proposed to CPC were clarified as budget figures only and did not indicate <br />plans to contract exactly at those dollars. <br />b. Completion of a Historic Structures report for the Stone Building, costs were discussed <br />between $25,000 and 50,0000. <br />6. The engagement of a qualified historic specialist for future work relative to the historic details <br />Page 11 of 12 11 <br /> <br />