2022-04-14-SBFRC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

RECEIVED Ad Hoc Stone Building Feasibility/Reuse Committee 2022 27 Apir, d Ipim Town of Lexington, MA TOWN CLERK April 14, 2022 8:00 AM LEXINGTON nn MINUTES Attending: Cristina Burwell,Jeff Howry, Mark Manasas (left 9:00), Meg Muckenhoupt (Appropriations Comm. Liaison), Melinda Nasardinov, Paul Smyke(left at (9:00),Anne Grady,Carolyn Goldstein, Lester Savage,Jaclyn Anderson, Doug Lucente (Select Board Liaison-left 8:25) Absent:Suzie Barry(Cary Library Trustees Liaison) Guests: Janel Showalter, Elaine Ashton,Sabine Clark, Kathleen Dalton (arrived 8:25) Recording Secretary: Cristina Burwell The meeting began at 8:07 with an online Roll Call & Reading of the Statement on Use of Virtual Meetings. Minutes for March 24, and March 31 were approved unanimously with the exception of Melinda who abstained (unable to read them) as motioned by Anne and seconded by Jeff. Jeff had comments for April 7 that in the interest of time said he will email to the group before voting No general announcements or public comments. Final report editorial review update- Cristina The committee has expressed interest that the document remain at a high level, and not get into details. The report shared with the committee was structured to be about 10 pages in length, so most submissions were streamlined and communicated through bullet points for quick review by readers. To use committee time effectively,the goals for today's review were described as: • Does the table of contents look right? • Does anyone want to put on the table things that they do not agree with? • What are we missing? • Descriptions and write-ups can continue to be modified outside of this meeting. The general consensus was that we do want to stay on a high level, but folks did not have enough time to review the document before discussing it today. The Table of Contents was reviewed. Some observations: • All of our highlights should be on the Executive Summary page, including our vision • The Conclusions and Next Steps seem to have some overlap, and SBFRC members would read the report with that in mind to discuss next time (i.e., should we have one or two sections here, and if two how to keep them unique) • Next Steps should be a roadmap for bringing about recommendations in the report • It is a good idea to have a timeline to relate tasks ahead to the 250th anniversary celebrations in 2025 • Disagreement was had in if the ell was a worker's cottage • There was general consensus that an updated Historic Structures Report is critical to any path forward, and that we would leave those details for whoever comes after this committee- including further discussion about the ell (motioned by Carolyn, seconded by Anne). 1