HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-11-08-DAC-min.pdf DESIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE November 8, 1988
ATTENDEES John Frey, Norma Bogen, Tom Coffman, Jack Eddison (Selectman) ,
Anne Goodman, Albert Huang, Barbara Hulsrer, Don Olson, Walter
Pierson, John Vinton, Betsey Whitman
Lexington Garden Club (LGC)
John Frey reported his telephone conversation with LGC and noted their
impressive work around Town in the past LGC has expressed interest in
being involved in Design Guideline Jack Eddison recommended a liaison be
sent from LGC to participate in DAC's meeting concerned with Design Guide-
lines Walter suggested that there should be a letter from DAC addressed
to the Selectmen to the effect that LGC's prime interest is in planting and
landscaping around Town, and LGC should not be overburdened on design-
oriented decisions
Town' s Tree Warden
The concern was raised by member about the retirement of Paul Mezzeria
(long-time Town Tree Warden) and the job opening advertisement in the
newspaper to fill the vacancy It was felt that if it is helpful to the
Town, DAC would like to be involved in review of the new job description
and the selection of a replacement Jack Eddison will look into both areas
of concern
Lexington Design Guidelines
John Frey reported that the contract between the Town and David Dixon
had not been signed but that it would be , soon John had a conversation
with David Dixon about who should be the contact in Town and suggested the
lists of committee members listed on the last page of notes for the last
meeting
Questions were raised about who is the major client, who should be
prime coordinators, and the format of the final report Jack Eddison ex-
plained that the Town of Lexington is the client The discussion then was
centered around what was the most efficient way for David Dixon to work
with various committees and neighborhood associations Norma recommended,
and it was agreed by DAC members, that DAC and LCC should be the major co-
ordinators between David Dixon and the Town
Grace Chaple Proposal
Don Olson briefed the Committee on the Board of Appeals meeting last
night Grace Chaple has hired a new architectural firm and presented a
revised scheme The major disagreement between the neighborhood and the
{
Design Advisory Committee November 8, 1988
Page 2
church is the religious use The neighborhood argued that, although the
church is a religious organization, the prime use of the facility is
recreational
The Board of Appeals set November 17, 1988 as the public hearing date
for a Special Permit and asked for comments from DAC
After reviewing the submitted drawings, it was agreed that the revised
design shows great improvement architecturally from the last submission
However, DAC as a group cannot recommend approval on the present form based
on the reasoning listed below•
A. The bulk of building is not appropriate to the scale of a
residential neighborhood
B The building set-back from Forest Street is inadequate for the
bulk of the building
C The buffer zone requirement of 25 feet towards Massachusetts
Avenue should be retained
D The submission is incomplete in showing trash handling facilities
E DAC recommended a new traffic study based on the fact that traffic
consultant did not take into account that Mazzy Street is a
one-way street
F Inadequate landscaping along sideyard
Prepared by Albert Huang