Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-07-01-SBFRC-min Ad Hoc Stone Building Feasibility/Reuse Committee (SBFRC) Town of Lexington, MA RECEIVED MEETING MINUTES 2021 29 �� ', 1�5 1pii7"i TOWN CLERK July 1, 2021 • 8:00am LEXINGTON MA Attending: Jaclyn Anderson, Cristina Burwell, Jeff Howry, Carolyn Goldstein, Doug Lucente (Select Board Liaison), Melinda Nasardinov, Lester Savage Absent: Claire Feingold Thoryn (Cary Library Trustees Liaison), Anne Grady, Mark Manasas, Meg Muckenhoupt (Appropriations Comm. Liaison), Paul Smyke Community Observers: Elaine Ashton Recording Secretary: Cristina Burwell This meeting was held in the Estabrook Room of Cary Hall, as well as hosted online, and began at 8:09am. The minutes were approved as motioned by Carolyn, seconded by Melinda, and approved by all. There were no public comments at this time. The meeting began with a brief discussion about how committee members have internalized "what success might look like" after listening to public comments, and merging that with their own thoughts (including potential users, programming, and revenue). Some member observations included: • The SB can be an institution for both Lexingtonians as well as neighboring towns via its proximity to the bike path. Access to the play area directly off the bike path en route to the SB, with the potential to have public restrooms would be a draw. • It would be nice to have foot traffic for one purpose with the secondary purpose of interacting with the building to grow appreciation of its, and related, history. • Our considerations are multifunctional: building occupancy that makes the most use of the space, programming that benefits the community, and budgeting that provides for ongoing maintenance of the building. • Whatever entity takes control must have an endowment (also discussed, that this is not the case with similar examples). • Interest in having the building open to multiple users for a variety of programming, and that we will need to perhaps frame the programming a bit better so that appropriate groups can be selected. 1 • Interest in enhancing the historic quality of the building with 21st century dynamism of uses to provide a real change. • We want people to come multiple times, not a visit once and done. Concern raised that we ensure there is not a limited audience. • People would like a destination to go without having to buy something (like a food destination); something that has a purpose • Interest in having the SB be a destination to meet with others to congregate and learn, such as with a focus on social justice • Interest in having this fit into the best of what we already offer, such as learning about the various Lexington walking trails • If partnerships are the core of the building usage, there will need to be a lead partner to take on the responsibility of building management. • No interest in the SB just being a satellite meeting space • Interest in innovative programming ideas for the building's foundation • Users will want to be confident that they have reliable access to restrooms, parking - and we will need to accommodate people who want to get there The full SBFRC met yesterday to review outlined criteria to be used in evaluating building reuse concepts. It was decided that, following receipt of updated criteria spreadsheet, responses to rankings should be sent back to Mark by the following Friday, July 9. This will allow him to process the information and have it available for the next committee meeting. Melinda referenced the Community Needs Assessment that the group should further explore regarding the intersection of expressed needs with Stone Building services. Jeff proposed sending the public a .... ,�,a�,irn, ,l u,�.i.L '„ii„irn„g �;Iir„a�„p,a�, , ,�.that would provide the committee with more focused detail about how the space might be used, etc (designed to be for information gathering and not as a RFP). The committee liked this idea but wanted to make changes to what information is gathered. It was decided that changes should be received by Jeff by the following Friday, July 9. Carolyn volunteered to work with Jeff in providing a brief precis to begin the document. One item that was discussed was the committee's identification of perhaps needing a lead organization to run the building and/or groups that want to partner with that organization (akin to how the Lexington Friends of the Arts manages the Munroe Center for the Arts). 2 It was suggested that these proposals are to be received back to the committee between the second and third forums. Doug indicated that the demand is still questionable, and that the Select Board will be Looking to fully understand why the Town should put in effort and funds in restoring the building. Members of the committee were concerned about not being ready for a second forum by the end of July. Given this concern and summer vacation schedules of committee members, Thursday, August 19 was put forth for the next forum. As the committee had already gone its 75 minutes, Old Business items (of a proposed table of contents for the final report, and outreach group List) will be shared with the group offline, discussed at the following meeting, and included in those minutes. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 as motioned by Carolyn, seconded by Les, and approved by a LL. References F"reservadon as a Freatirnent (JH) .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ...............et of � fistoijc Structures (JH) .. 3