2006-01-04-DAC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DAC ESIGN DVISORY OMMITTEE TOWN OF LEXINGTON Meeting Minutes: January 4, 2006 Present: Colin Smith (Chair), Betsy Whitman, Bruce Creager, Greg Zurlo, Ginna Johnson, Alenka Slezak, Eric Brown Scribe: Colin Smith Call to Order: The Meeting was Called to Order at 7:30PM by Colin Smith Approvals: Minutes of the December Ò05 meeting were approved with minor corrections. Presentations/Review: Captain Parker Arms Sign Design Review postponed until the next DAC meeting on 2/1/06. Gulf Station (324 Marrett Road) The Committee feels that several improvements have been made to the project since the last DAC review; which include reducing the quantity of pumping stations from 9 to 8, increasing the height of the proposed fence from 6Ó to 10Ó along the abutting r of plants at the perimeter planting beds. The removal of one pumping station allowed the proposed canopy to be located approximately 10Ó further from the the residential lot line than what was previously proposed. A cross section drawing of the pr canopy showed that the underside of the canopy (specifically the not visible from a 5Ó sight line within the residence. A photometric site plan was presented which showed zero light spill from the service station lights to the a The proposal shows a canopy with an underside at a minimum of 14Ó-4Ñ and once the canopy structure is included the overall height would be in excess of 17Ó. The current Gulf service station height varies from 12Ó-4Ñ to 14Ó-6Ñ to the canopy underside due to grade variations, which suggests the new canopy would be in excess of 19Ó as currently d expresses concern that this proposal is better suited to the scale of highway service stations rather than its neighborhood setting. The Committee recommends the total height of the canopy be reduced from the proposed 17Ó-4Ñ (3Ó canopy structure) to a total height of 16Ó, which will help reduce the visual impact of the canopy and remove it from the re shown on the Sight Line Diagram. In addition, the proposed serv of 19Ó which we do not believe is justifiable. The proposed roof element acts solely as a roof screening element. We believe this roof could be lowered by 3Ó across its entire length. A step in the roof structure was discussed to accommodate the height requirement for the service bays. We feel the logo on the proposed sign (on the existing sign stru not the dollar cost of gas as shown (the size of the numbers should be reduced as well). It was