|
Lexington Home Page
|
Help
|
About
|
Browse
Search
2005-06-01-DAC-MIN
Breadcrumb Navigation:
TownOfLexington-Public
>
WEB PUBLISHED-PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
>
MINUTES-REPORTS-COMMITTEES ARCHIVE
>
Design Advisory Committee-DAC
>
Minutes
>
2005-2009
>
2005
>
2005-06-01-DAC-MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2009 10:55:23 AM
Creation date
3/27/2009 10:55:23 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
<br />DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE <br />TOWN OF LEXINGTON <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 1, 2005 <br />Present: <br />Members and associates: John Frey, Bahig Kaldas, Carl Oldenburg (Chair) <br />Scribe: <br />Carl Oldenburg <br />Call to Order: <br />The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM by Carl Oldenburg. <br />Approvals: <br />The Minutes of the April, 2005, meeting were reviewed and approved. <br />[Note: There was no meeting held in May, 2005.] <br />Presentations/Review: <br />1.177 Bedford Street/Wireless communications facility: <br /> Adam Braillard, representing T-Mobile, presented the proposal for a new 100-foot <br />“faux flagpole” tower housing and concealing wireless communications antenna arrays <br />for T-Mobile and two other future carriers. Submitted and presented information was not <br />complete enough for the DAC to evaluate the visual impact of the height of the proposed <br />tower. Applicant indicated that a balloon test would be conducted on June 8, 9, 10 and <br />11, 9AM to 1PM, and that photo simulations would be available following that. <br />Therefore, the DAC will postpone final recommendations until viewing the balloon test <br />and review and discussion of the photo simulations and any other materials at the next <br />DAC meeting. <br /> However, the DAC does have specific concerns which the applicant is invited to <br />address: <br /> a. Diameter of the tower is too great, creating a “fat” proportion to the pole. <br /> b. The finial “ball” at the top of the pole is superfluous and out of proportion <br />and should be deleted. <br /> c. DAC strongly objects to a flag being flown on this pole. <br /> d. DAC objects to the intent of designing a communications tower to be a <br />fake flagpole, and urges the applicant to design this as an elegant, tall, slender tower. <br /> e. DAC prefers a wood stockade fence rather than a chain link fence <br />surrounding equipment at the base of the tower, for aesthetic and acoustic advantages. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.