The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-12-06 Battle Green Draft Master PlanLexington Battle Green Area Draft Master Plan Town of Lexington, Massachusetts Prepared by: Lucinda A. Brockway Past Designs LLC Draft: December 6, 2010 Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ì¿¾´» ±º Ý±²¬»²¬ Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5 Boundaries .......................................................................................................................... 8 Historic Background ......................................................................................................... 10 Character Defining Features ............................................................................................. 22 Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................ 26 Issues for the Master Plan ................................................................................................. 27 Recommendation #1: Comprehensive Planning and Advisory Council Recommendation #2: Comprehensive Interpretation and Signage Program Recommendation #3: Linking the Battle Green Recommendation #4: Statue and Monument Preservation Recommendation #5: Accommodating Multiple Uses Rules and Regulations Recommendation #6: Unified Design Standards Paving Site Furnishings Lighting Vegetation Focal Points and Views Recommendation #7: Parking, Traffic Calming and Safe Pedestrian Access Recommendation #8: Funding Budget Funding Sources Master Plan (Graphic) Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 75 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 80 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 84 Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» î Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Û¨»½«¬·ª» Í«³³¿®§ The Battle Green area is a complex landscape fabric of open space, buildings, graves, monuments, signs, streets, site furnishings, vegetation and archaeological resources shaped by our cultural values over three centuries. It serves as town Common and National Landmark, and as such, responds to the daily lives of Lexingtonians and the singular visits of people from around the world. The goal of this Master Plan is to provide the next important step in comprehensive planning for the Battle Green area. Based on the recommendations of previous reports and the data compiled from public hearings and citizen surveys, this report offers recommendations for defining the Battle Green area, unifying its design standards, and providing guidelines for its long-term stewardship. The boundaries of the Battle Green Area go beyond the street edges that define the Green itself. The Battle Green area boundaries encompass the town owned properties and historic sites that surround the Battle Green, including Belfry Hill, Ye Olde Burying Ground, the Buckman Tavern, Lexington Visitor Center and the streets and streetscapes that enframe the Green. The plan recognizes the importance of the Battle Green gateways those intersections where you catch your first glimpse the Battle Green. Most importantly, this plan seeks to understand the tools and techniques which can enhance the Battle Green as a special, hallowed ground, distinct and unique from all other public open spaces in Lexington. The historic overview includes images and photographs which inform the landscape vocabulary of the Battle Green area and offer site-specific historic references to inform our choices for design standards. From this historic overview, character-defining features are identified that help us to understand the features which are static (remain unchanged) and variable (could be changed) within the Battle Green area. Guiding principles define todays cultural values that shape the plans recommendations. To ensure comprehensive oversight of the Battle Green area, a Battle Green Area Advisory Committee is proposed whose charge is to facilitate communication and help to inform the Board of Selectmen on their decisions related to the Battle Green area. It is this Advisory Committee that will take the recommendations and action items identified in this report and move them forward, including the continued support of ongoing efforts such as the interpretation and signage program. The Plan analyzes the opportunities for linking the Battle Green to its surrounding historic resources and to its larger role within the Town of Lexington and the Battle Road corridor. Finally, the Plan analyzes existing site conditions, including paving materials, the condition of monuments and memorials, vegetation, site furnishings and signage. With an understanding of its past appearance and its evolution of landscape treatments, the Plan establishes design standards for these elements and the budgetary requirements for their implementation. Opportunities for linking private and public funding sources follow to support these implementation efforts follow. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» í Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Though many recommendations for specific changes within the Battle Green area are identified, the issue of parking, traffic calming and safe pedestrian access requires further study, and should be the next step in preservation planning for the Battle Green area. This study is crucial in creating a safe, accessible blending of people and vehicles in this busy village center. Accommodating multiple uses within a landscape that functions both as Lexingtons town common and a national shrine is a complex weaving of people and place. The Plan reviews the existing Rules and Regulations governing activities on the Battle Green and makes recommendations for revising these rules to recognize the expanded definition of the Battle Green area and to offer changes that clarify appropriate uses and their enforcement. All of the recommendations in this Master Plan will require the approval of the Board of Selectmen, the citizens of Lexington (through its adoption at Town Meeting), and the design approval of the Historic Districts Commission. By enhancing the beauty and meaning of this sacred space, reinforcing its symbolic and spiritual values, unifying its vocabulary, and enforcing its appropriate use, the Battle Green area can claim its rightful place as one of our most important national shrines where American ideals and our definition of freedom were created. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×²¬®±¼«½¬·±² Located at the physical and spiritual heart of Lexington, the Battle Green serves as both town common and national shrine. Events in 1775 transformed this meeting house green from commonly held pasture and muster ground to battleground and graveyard, catapulting its importance from a physical space to a national shrine. This green space is more than a public park, it is a landscape imbued with symbols of patriotism and the national ideals that were born here. As such, it is a sacred and spiritual space, reflecting the cultural values that shaped a nation. Residents of Lexington understand the special significance of the Battle Green. Each community member can relate the moment when they were moved by the symbolism of what happened here. Yet their daily lives move in and around this special space as casually as in any other Massachusetts community. The Battle Green continues its role as a town common, though its significance requires a higher standard of care and scrutiny to ensure respect for the events that occurred here. Lexington is founded on a call to community action. As such, its long tradition of an ommunity that cares deeply about its public spaces, and the rights of individuals to shape its policies and standards. To this end, this master plan has been developed as a product of its citizenry and their opinions about both the physical appearance of the Battle Green and its long-term governance. Today the Battle Green is a compilation of walks, plantings, greensward and monuments, blended in a complicated web of buildings and streets that define Lexington center. Monuments and memorial markers from 1799 to the present spring up through the greensward. The surrounding buildings serve as house museums, visitor center, family homes, local churches, town library and public hall. Tourist buses and visitor cars pulse along the streets which edge the Battle Green, slowing frustrated citizens driving the course of their daily lives. It is this ebb and flow of daily life in Lexington which remains consistent throughout its history, though its pace has quickened with its rising population. This was a New England community founded on farming, family and church not unlike other Massachusetts towns when the events of 1775 changed the course of history and brought Lexington from obscurity to national focus. As part of a state-wide town commons grant initiative, Walter Cudnohufsky Associates (2001) prepared a series of recommendations based on a charrette designed to gather and focus citizen opinions about the Battle Green. In the years that followed, citizen-led interest groups continued the process of developing a Master Plan for the Battle Green. New signs were proposed for the Battle Green and many extraneous street and safety signs were removed. Monuments in Ye Olde Burying Ground have been conserved, and conservation of monuments on the Battle Green is proposed for 2011. In 2009 and 2010 a citizen-led working group created a survey and gathered data and comments at multiple Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð public hearings held throughout the community. This data shaped the decisions presented in this Master Plan. Town meeting of 2010 voted to have the Tourism Committee hire a consultant to formalize the Master Planning process. Specifically, the Town voted to: 1.Create a Master Plan with immediate, intermediate and long-term visions based on broad community input. a.Define the Battle Green Area, what it should look like in 50 years and what uses should be allowed b.Develop guidelines for making informed decisions for design standards, traffic flow, and parking c.Update Rules and Regulations for approval 2.Put in place a stewardship structure/oversight committee to ensure the plan is followed. 3.Identify a public-private funding strategy to implement the plan 4.Develop an annotated bibliography of all prior reports/resources on the Battle Green The recommendations that follow were designed to create a unified vision for the Battle Green for the next 5-10 years and provide the framework for what the area should look like in 50 years. Its successful implementation, however, will require the approval of the Selectmen, Town Meeting, and the Historic Districts Commission, the funding support of its citizenry, and its implementation by There are numerous town committees responsible for discreet aspects of the Battle Green. The Board of Selectman governs its use, and enforces its rules and regulations. The Historic Districts Commission is responsible for maintaining its historic integrity. The Tourism Committee is responsible for managing and promoting its visitation. The Cary chives. The Tree Committee works with the Superintendent of Grounds to manage the tree program. Other town committees serve their individual roles. The Chamber of Commerce runs the Visitor Center. The Lexington Historical Society manages Buckman Tavern though a long-term care arrangement with the Town of Lexington. The Town staff is responsible for design, installation and maintenance of its landscape, its roads, and its infrastructure. Managed by committee, with policies shaped by its citizenry, this national shrine is a complex piece of real estate whose governance is almost as complicated as its physical features and its use. The Battle Green and its surrounding historic properties is a very special place, different from all other public parks and recreational fields in Lexington. As such, some activities and events might not be appropriate here. Building a cohesive and coordinated design standard for this area, based on its historic landscape vocabulary, can help to visually define this area and set it apart from other parks. Enforcing its rules and regulations will enforce its proper use and respect. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð This document is intended to serve as the next milestone in planning and stewardship of th the Battle Green as the town looks to celebrate its 300 anniversary. Based on the Cudnohufsky report and its subsequent citizen input, the report seeks to take its citizen- directed findings and turn them into a plan of action that can appropriately guide the management and governance of the Battle Green into the next decades. The plan seeks to create an effective vehicle for change, and for consistency in its stewardship, that recognizes that the Battle Green needs to continue to evolve to meet the needs of both its citizenry and its visitors while protecting its significance as a national landmark. Rather than creating a static preservation plan, this document is intended as a blueprint for stewardship that is as dynamic as its subject and as impassioned as its overseers. The chapters which follow guide the coordinated stewardship of this important resource, and the area that surrounds it, identifying specific improvements to sensitively furnish, interpret and protect the Battle Green and its users. Included are specific recommendations for site improvements, including proposed treatments for lighting, interpretation, path surfaces, parking, pedestrian access, monument preservation and vegetation management designed to meet the needs of the Battle Green area for the near future. This Master Plan is the first step in this comprehensive planning process, and will require additional study and recommendations in some areas as identified in this report (such as traffic and parking studies). To retain its vibrancy and its relevance over the long term, the chapters that follow also provide guidance for governance, and propose changes to the rules and regulations that correct inconsistencies and clarify rules and enforcement. This document is only a blueprint for change; its effectiveness will be measured by its implementation and its acceptance by the citizens of Lexington. Fence, Ye Olde Burying Ground, Lexington Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» é Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Þ±«²¼¿®·» One of the first tasks given to the Working Group was to define the limits and scope of the area to be covered by the Battle Green Master Plan. The Battle Green and the adjacent historic properties that contribute to its enhancement need protection. The Battle Green has been defined by several different boundaries in the past. The National Landmark designation (1962) included only the land found within the boundaries of Bedford Street, Massachusetts Avenue and Harrington Road. The Lexington Battle Green National Register District (1976) expanded the Landmark boundaries to include the properties immediately adjacent to the Battle Green, and did not include Belfry Hill. By 2008, the Town of Lexington Historic Districts had expanded the Battle Green Historic District to include properties from Worthen Road to Winthrop Road along the spine of Massachusetts Avenue and extending a short distance down Hancock Street, Bedford Road, and other adjacent streets, including Belfry Hill. Other historic districts were designated along Massachusetts Avenue, extending the historic district designations east to the vicinity of Hillside Avenue. Today visitors are encouraged to explore the Battle Green area from the Visitor Center to Ye Olde Burying Ground to Belfry Hill, to tour the property with the Battle Green Guides and with the Liberty Ride® and to visit the three historic houses operated by the Lexington Historical Society: Buckman Tavern, the Hancock-Clarke House (36 Hancock Street) and nearby Munroe Tavern (1332 Massachusetts Avenue). (Buckman Tavern is owned by the Town of Lexington and operated by the Lexington Historical Society; the other two properties are owned and operated by the Lexington Historical Society). Citizens of Lexington re-enact the April 19, 1775 Battle and hold other appropriate ceremonies and events here, all carefully monitored by the Selectmen to ensure respect for its national significance. As land held for the common good, the Battle Green continues to serve as the site where members of the community can voice their opinions about government policies and regulations, a sacred spot where the voice of the people is carried to those in charge. Today the Battle Green is a complex blend of history, sanctity and public voice. After careful deliberation and public comment, the boundaries of the Battle Green Area Master Plan are defined by historic context and visitor experience. Starting at the corner of Clarke Street and Massachusetts Avenue, the boundaries run as follows: Southwest down Clarke Street to the property boundary of Belfry Hill Encircling all of Belfry Hill, following the property line from Clarke Street back to its intersection with Massachusetts Avenue Northwest along the residential side of Massachusetts Avenue, including the street, sidewalk and right of way along Massachusetts Avenue Crossing Massachusetts Avenue and following the street, sidewalk and right of way at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Harrington Road Turning down the lane to Ye Olde Burying Ground Encircling all of Ye Olde Burying Ground, following the property line around the entire property and returning up the entrance lane to Harrington Road Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» è Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Northeast along the residential side of Harrington Road including the street, sidewalk and right of way along Harrington Road Crossing Bedford Street and Hancock Street, including the street, sidewalk and right of way at the intersection of Harrington Road, Bedford Street and Hancock Street Turning southeast off Hancock Street and following the western edge of the Bicycle Path from Hancock Street to Meriam Street, including all of the town- owned land between the Bicycle Path and Bedford Street Turning southwest along the Visitor Center side of Meriam Street to its intersection with Massachusetts Avenue and across Massachusetts Avenue to the corner of Clarke Street at the place of beginning These boundaries include the Battle Green itself, the roads bordering the Battle Green (Harrington Road, Bedford Street and Massachusetts Avenue), Belfry Hill, Ye Olde Burying Ground and the land located between the bike path, and Bedford, Hancock and Meriam Streets including Buckman Tavern and the Visitor Center. The Battle Green Area boundaries do not include the private properties, but do include all town-owned property adjacent to the Battle Green. The boundaries were carefully drawn to include the intersections which mark the gateways to the Battle Green (Harrington Rd/ Massachusetts Ave; Harrington Rd/ Bedford Street; Massachusetts Ave/ Bedford Street). Master Plan Boundaries, Lexington Battle Green, 2010 Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ø·¬±®·½ Þ¿½µ¹®±«²¼ Land and Buildings Lexington When residents became frustrated with the long trip to Concord for Sunday meeting, the community petitioned the General Court for their own parish. A small meeting house was built at the junction of the roads to Bedford and Concord (on the present Battle Green) in 1692 and the Town of Lexington was incorporated in 1713. As the town grew, common land was purchased adjacent to the meeting house (1.5 acres in 1711, and 1 acre in 1722) to expand the building which served as public meeting house and worship space, to construct a school, and to use the Common for public purposes. In 1773 the Lexington Pledge was adopted in this expanded, C tavern, burial ground, and residential houses began to shape the town center. On April 19, 1775 the Common became the site of conflict between British soldiers and colonial th militia, launching the Revolutionary War. Throughout the 19 century land subdivision and residential and commercial development continued around the common, creating a dense, compact town center. th rendition, Battle of Lexington, from an early 20 century postcard A belfry was constructed on nearby Belfry Hill in 1761 and moved to a spot near the church in 1768 where it summoned the militia to the Common on April 19, 1775. In 1794 a new belfry was added to the church, and the entire building was destroyed by fire in 1846. The new church, constructed in 1847, was located on a new site overlooking the Common (First Parish Church). On April 18, 1891 a belfry was reconstructed on Belfry Hill, destroyed in a windstorm in 1909, and rebuilt the following year. In 1913 the Town purchased Belfry Hill and created a park-like space on its hilly terrain. As the town Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð evolved, other religious institutions were established here. Today five churches are visible from the Common and Belfry Hill. th Throughout much of the 19 century the battle site continued to function as a New England traditional town common an ill-organized public space of casual paths and pasture. In the early nineteenth century, it is described with a hollow oak stump in its Lexington Common, c. 1875 (Lexington Historical Society) In 1806 a new road to Bedford was laid out, separating a triangular piece of land off the Common to form a grassy island where the present Bedford Street and Hancock Street intersect. In January, 1840, the town voted to fence the Common with stone posts and wooden rails at a cost of $350. In 1847, when the First Parish Society built their new church and eighteenth and nineteenth century illustrate the Common as a tree-edged open pasture ringed by stone post and wooden rail fence. At the end of the century, the Common reverted from pasture to hayfield; the hay was auctioned off each year to a lucky town resident. The first photograph for the Common, an image dated 1865, shows the haying operation; the Common continued to be ringed by its granite post and wooden two-rail fence. Massive elms shaded the streets along the edge of the Common. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Lexington Town Common, c. 1865 (Lexington Historical Society Sarah Gould, whose family moved to Lexington in 1847, remembered the two-rail fence two-rail fence around the Common, and remembered the cellar hole of the meeting house wh (The c. 1875 image on page 9 illustrates these features). took on new meaning after 1875 when the significance of th the April 19 battle was cel spectators that came to see President Grant and other dignitaries recognized the hundredth anniversary of the Battle catapulted the Common into a new era of sacred park space. Monuments and memorials sprang up throughout the Common, beginning with the Parker Boulder, dedicated in 1884. The fence was removed, the grass manicured, and the massive American elms continued to ring the greensward, now shading the village green instead of the Common pasture. War I. The first documented date for this term is April 9, 1925 when an article in the th Christian Science Monitor described the events surrounding the 150 anniversary of the Battle. The intent of the Battle Green as a commemorative space rather than a pasture, however, was transformed fifty years earlier by the 1875 Centennial celebration and the installation of the commemorative monuments that followed. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð In 1905 Boston architect Willard Thomas Sears (1837-1920) visited the Lexington Common, took several photographs of the site, and developed a simple layout plan for the Common, but it is unclear for what purpose. The plan clearly indicates the layout of trees on the Common and its adjacent roads, and notes the location of flagpole, cannon and the sidewalk arrangement with its narrow tree belt along both sides of Massachusetts Avenue and Bedford Street. Sears took a series of photographs at the time he prepared this plan (pages 12 -14). His photographs, offer substantial documentation for the landscape details on the Common is significant in that Sears was the as well as other significant turn-of-the-century monuments and memorials in addition to -known late nineteenth century buildings. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Lexington Common, plan by Thomas Willard Sears, 1905 Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Lexington Common, 1905 (Thomas Willard Sears) Lexington Common, 1905 (Thomas Willard Sears) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Lexington Common, 1905 (Thomas Willard Sears) Lexington Common, Aerial, 1905 (Thomas Willard Sears) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð The photographs illustrate the park-like quality of the Common with its broad dirt streets rutted with streetcar rails and no visible traffic. A double row of American elms ring the Common. A green belt separates the sidewalks from the adjacent roadways. The Minute Man Statue, the flagpole, one iron cannon, the Battle Monument, Meeting House Monument and the Parker Boulder with its accompanying bench are the only furnishings. Recognizing the significance of the Common, in 1917 land-owners on Massachusetts Avenue and Elm Avenue (Harrington Road) adjacent to the Common accepted voluntary restrictions on their properties. Each homeowner and the two churches agreed to the dimensional frontages approved in the document, and agreed to neither subdivide nor build any other buildings on the lots surrounding the Common. They also agreed to a These restrictions formed the basis for later protective measures, including the Historic District which currently regulates architectural changes within the Battle Green Historic District. Roads and Traffic The roads to Bedford and Concord (now Bedford Street and Massachusetts Avenue) linked Lexington to its neighboring communities throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Harrington Road (formerly Elm Street), a private road, was constructed before 1794 and framed the northwest side of the Common. In 1807 the Bedford to replace the more circuitous route down (present) Hancock Street. In 1888, the Town voted to widen Massachusetts Avenue. In 1914-15, Bedford Street was widened. The road widening reduced the dimensions of the Common and, with Harrington Road, began to separate the Common from its surrounding structures. Continued subdivision and development created smaller roads off Bedford Street and highways. By the mid-nineteenth century Lexington was connected to Boston by a train rail that paralleled Bedford Street behind the town center. A station was constructed a short distance from the Common adding to the traffic congestion. As Lexington continued to suburbanize in the twentieth century, and a major connection to Route 128 was built off Bedford Road by mid century, the Common s. In the late twentieth century the out-of-service rail line was converted into a public bike path, forming its own recreational link between the town center and its surrounding residential neighborhoods. Traffic congestion and circulation around the Battle Green is chaotic at best. Cross walks and traffic islands attempt to protect Battle Green visitors from the bustle of busy roadways. In the 1two traffic islands and a series of pedestrian bump- outs were installed to protect visitors photographing the Minute Man Statue and crossing the roadways. These temporary measures are still in situ, awaiting a more thorough traffic and parking study and subsequent recommendations. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Harrington Road has been closed to traffic for periods of time and made one-way for through traffic at others in an effort to safely manage traffic and people at key intersections surrounding the Battle Green. Parking spaces for tour buses and family cars, which currently surround the Battle Green, are a continued source of discussion. It is the significance of the Battle Green which has created the popular tourist destination and its demand for public parking. How that parking is managed in a manner that meets demand and respects the significance of the Battle Green is a critical next step in the planning process. illage in th the 19 century. 1853 Map of Lexington Center (Walling) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð 1875 Map, Lexington Center (Beers) 1906 Map, Lexington Center (Geo. Walker & Co.) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ïç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Monuments and Memorials The Revolutionary War Monument (also known as the Battle Monument and the Obelisk) was erected in 1799 in memory of the Lexington men who fought and died in the Battle in 1775. This is the oldest war memorial in the country. When the remains of the slain were transferred from a common grave in Ye Olde Burying Ground to a tomb at the rear of the monument in 1835, the Common began its transition from common land to consecrated ground. The simple iron fence surrounding the monument was constructed at the same time (1835). The Battle Monument continued as the sole monument on the Battle Green until the turn of the twentieth century, when commemorative monuments and plaques erupted on the Battle Green, each memorializing some significant aspect of the Battle. In 1884, the Town appropriated $1500 to erect a series of monuments commemorating the Battle, including the Line of Battle boulder (also known as the Parker Boulder), which paid tribute to the undocumented quote by Captain Parker inspiring the militia to s and set on a firmly based concrete foundation. The Meetinghouses Marker was erected in 1884 as part of this same appropriation, commemorating the three meeting houses and their pastors. This marker was designed in the shape of a reading desk with a closed book upon it out of a single block of Jonesboro granite and set on a block of Fox Island granite. In 1898-1900, Boston sculptor H.H. Kitson created a bronze statue tribute to Capt. John Parker atop known as the Hayes Memorial Fountain. The fountain and statue were funded by a bequest from Francis B. Hayes. Nearby, a flagpole was erected mid-way down the Common. A flagpole was in place by 1906 when the Sears photographs were taken. In 1965, a U.S. Congressional Act was signed allowing the flag to fly under illumination 24 hours a day one of only eleven in the country so honored. The wooden flagpole was struck by lightning and burned in the A new metal flagpole with its own lighting system was installed in 1976. Plaques at the base of National Historic Landmark designation (1962), the U.S. Congressional act to fly the flag twenty-four hours a day (1965), and the flagpole as a memorial to the American Bicentennial (1976). In 1910 the Daughters of the American Revolution dedicated the monument marking the site of the old Belfry that rang to warn the militia of the approaching British. After 1919, trees were planted around the Battle Green and marked with plaques honoring the memory of fallen World War I soldiers. Every war and every centennial celebration marked another opportunity to commemorate lost heroes and significant anniversary celebrations of the Battle. In 1949 a Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð large stone memorial was erected across Bedford Street in tribute to the Lexington Minute Men, designed by artist Bashka Paeff. Nearby other monuments were erected in the late twentieth century: The World War II Monument pays tribute to those who served and the U.S.S. Lexington Memorial (1988) is dedicated to the five ships named after Lexington and those who served on board. In addition to these memorials, Ye Olde Burying Ground is filled with gravestones including a recently installed memorial garden behind First Parish Church dedicated to the memory of church members, some of whose ashes are buried in the garden. Name th An April 9, 1925 article in the Christian Science Monitor describing the 150 anniversary celebration of the Battle today as the preferred nomenclature for the property. As Battle Green, this acreage is first and foremost recognized for its role in the American Revolution, elevating its crucial element of this Master Plan. Town residents hope that any physical changes made to the Battle Green will reinforce its differences to other park spaces in Lexington. As the Battle Green, active recreation is inappropriate. As the Battle Green, the Selectmen carefully monitor activities and events, including demonstrations, to ensure that they respect the significance of this national shrine. The Battle Green IS a national shrine. As such, its appearance, its level of maintenance, and its stewardship program need to collectively set this property apart and above other public open spaces in Lexington. Symbolism Today the Battle Green includes busy roadways, on-street parking, historic structures, monuments, memorials, graves, vegetation, a variety of walkways, open lawns, rustic, ledge-strewn hilltops, fire hydrants, trash cans, flagpoles, interpretive signs, electrical boxes, underground sprinklers, and, most importantly, people. From the broadest sweep of lawn to the minutest of site furnishings, the Battle Green is a physical space that represents a national ideal the right for every individual to take a stand for what they believe is right. This gateway to freedom, however, is more than an important battlefield. It still serves as common ground for the citizens of Lexington. Balancing visitor and resident use is a delicate balance with Battle Green as its fulcrum. Developing a plan which provides appropriate stewardship for the landscape and its furnishings must respect the spirit of April 19, 1775 and the ideal that the battle represents. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Connections to Other Historic Sites Responsible planning is the first step in responsible stewardship. Though it is easy to focus solely on the Battle Green, we must recognize that this important space is linked to a larger area of adjacent historic buildings and sites, included within the boundaries of the Battle Green Area. This comprehensive planning effort can hopefully serve as a model, reaching beyond its boundaries to inform decisions concerning design standards and and its busy downtown district. The Town of Lexington is taking a lead role in planning for the corridor of historic interpretation that runs from Boston to Arlington, Lexington, Concord and Lincoln. In 2010 the Battle Road Scenic Byway Working Group was formed to create a larger, regional plan for tourism, land use and transportation recommendations, creating a scenic byway to preserve and promote the historic route marched by the British in 1775. This gement recommendations. Work proposed for the Battle Green area will work in concert with these regional design standards. As both efforts move forward, effective leadership by the Town of Lexington will help to guide both local and regional efforts toward a more cohesive goal. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ý¸¿®¿½¬»® Ü»º·²·²¹ Ú»¿¬«®» The Battle Green has two periods of significant change: the day of the Battle (April 19, th 1775), and the early 20 century movement to memorialize that historic day (1898-1949). Change can be dramatic, or consist of a slowly evolving series of little decisions. Surrounding these two key periods, the Battle Green has seen other changes as daily life within the community has evolved, but these two periods shaped the significance and the current appearance of the Battle Green more dramatically than other, smaller changes. Within these two periods, there are features or events that define their significance. These features can help us to identify the elements which should be preserved and those elements that might be altered landscape. Character defining elements are treated differently than features which may change their location, their design standards, and even their existence on the Battle Green. Character defining elements are those features that, if they were missing, would dramatically alter the significance of the Battle GreenBattle Green ese features allows us to put them in context, and to develop stewardship strategies that support their role within ed without affecting the integrity of the Battle Green. Cultural values give meaning and significance to the Battle Green far beyond its physical appearance. They give meaning to the Battle Green a definable space that is symbolic of a larger principle. These cultural values inform our decisions about appropriate or inappropriate uses for the Battle Green, and Battle Green as a national shrine. We can creatively inspire or reinforce this meaning in some of our planning choices. For instance, casting light on the Minute Man Statue, the flag, and the church steeple at night emphasize these elements as representative or symbolic of a larger ideal. The juxtaposition of these elements creates context and deeper meaning, linking disparate themes into a more thought-provoking experience. The following paragraphs attempt to categorize the Battle Green and begin to identify those elements which offer opportunities for change, and those elements which offer opportunities for enhancement. More than simply an exercise in planning, this list can help us to identify the static and the variable in our choices for the Battle Green. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Character Defining Features, April 19, 1775: The Common space shaped by the merging of Bedford Street and Concord Road (Massachusetts Avenue) Bedford Street Concord Road (Massachusetts Avenue) Harrington Road (originally a private way) Buckman Tavern Ye Olde Burying Ground (Some) lot subdivisions (Some) streets laid out by 1775 Revolutionary War Battle Monument (though this was erected in 1799 it is the first and oldest monument to the Battle and its victims) Topography Open space (this was not woodland at the time of the Battle) Archaeological (underground) remains The presence of a meeting house or public gathering space (though the meeting house is no longer extant, the role of church and family at the time of the Battle is still a theme represented by the houses and churches currently present on the Battle Green) Purpose place of assembly Purpose common land Character Defining Features, 1884-1949: Memorial trees with plaques Trees defining perimeter of Battle Green Mown lawn Post and rail fence (1847- Minute Man Statue and Hayes Memorial Fountain Belfry Boulder Old Belfry and Belfry Hill Parker Boulder Meeting Houses Memorial Lexington Minute Man Memorial th Churches and 19 century houses surrounding Battle Green (Some) lot subdivisions Voluntary property restrictions Normal School Rail line Fences surrounding some monuments (Some) paths Flagpole & Flag Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð View Minute Man Statue across Battle Green to Battle Monument and First Parish Church View - Minute Man Statue down Massachusetts Avenue View - Belfry Hill overlook to Battle Green, and surrounding community Other Character-Defining Features (post 1949) U.S.S. Lexington Memorial World War II Memorial Metal Flagpole and 24-hour light flag Features that could potentially be altered or changed: Width of Massachusetts Avenue and Bedford Street (but do not encroach any further into common) Height of lawns and frequency of mowing Species and number of trees surrounding the Battle Green (as long as Battle Green is predominantly open space in center) Shrubberies, annual plantings and other ornamental or decorative plantings Light fixtures Trash cans Benches Sidewalks and Paths (material, width, locations) Curbs and street edges Fencing (some) memorials or markers Interpretive signage Drinking fountain Directional signage Crosswalks Parking Re-opening of Hayes Fountain Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ù«·¼·²¹ Ð®·²½·°´» As part of the citizen input phase in developing this Master Plan, citizens were asked their view of the Battle Green. Most citizens saw the Battle Green as a singularly important historic site on par with Williamsburg, Valley Forge and Gettysburg. The responses were overwhelming in favor of: Recognizing the Battle Green as a town common that accommodates layers of history Recognizing that the Battle Green is a sacred place significant for the events of April 19, 1775. Governing the Battle Green as a space used for limited (appropriate) purposes Expanding the definition of the Battle Green area to include Ye Olde Burying Ground, Belfry Hill, Buckman Tavern, the Visitor Center, and the buildings, land and right of ways immediately adjacent to the Battle Green Managing parking and traffic, but not diverting traffic away from the Battle Green Retaining the current size and configuration of the Battle Green Continuing the use of memorial trees for war veterans only Maintaining the current number of monuments and memorials Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×«» º±® ¬¸» Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² The 2001 Cudnohufsky report recognized that the Battle Green was suffering from a lack of an overall, cohesive plan which addressed the preservation, management and maintenance of the site. The consulting team also recommended that though there were many committees and individuals responsible for specific aspects of the property, there was not an overall group which the community could entrust with stewarding a cohesive vision for the property. Battle Green in whom the larger community trusts, the character-defining features of the site will continue to deteriorate, the educational experience will be thwarted, and the impact of The consulting team identified a series of key issues and strategies which might help to resolve these issues and begin the process of building that collective vision. In summary, their recommendations were: 1.Create a comprehensive planning effort, including one oversight committee with the authority to coordinate all decisions, integrate community viewpoints, and develop a broad-based, coordinated stewardship of the Battle Green. 2.Develop an interpretive program that enforces the message about the Battle Green, including its history and its symbolism, including a comprehensive thematic logo, appropriate signage, and expanded interpretive program that does not obscure the key features of the Battle Green. 3.Link the Battle Green to surrounding historic resources and support the integrity of all the historic resources surrounding the Battle Green (and perhaps even within the larger historic district(s)). 4.Create an overall plan for the Minute Man Statue, including a safe plan for visitor photography, and standards and guidelines for plantings and/or preservation of the statue that are appropriate and fit within the historic context. 5.Work with a conservator to restore and maintain the burial site and its monument. 6.Develop a policy and program for the site to accommodate multiple uses by residents which respects the Battle Green as a national shrine, including guidelines for appropriate use. 7.Unify design of site furnishings to develop a coherent standard for benches, lighting and other features. 8.Design paving for walks to accommodate heavy use in an historically appropriate manner. 9.Locate off-site parking for buses and create an expanded tour for the Battle Green area including Belfry Hill, Ye Olde Burying Ground, and the historic buildings and visitor center. 10.Develop a plan for car parking on the streets surrounding the Battle Green. 11.Create safe pedestrian access between the Battle Green and its surrounding historic elements. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Since the publication of the report, some recommendations have been enacted: Monuments in the Burying Ground have been conserved. CPA fund appropriation has been requested to conserve the Minute Man Statue and other Battle Green monuments in 2011. A thematic logo and sign standard were developed to identify historic sites and buildings open to the public. The signage program is underway. The Selectmen appointed the Tourism Committee to work with all interested staff, committees and citizens to integrate community viewpoints into a comprehensive plan for the Battle Green area and its stewardship, including identifying an area. Efforts to continue these projects and to address the other recommendations are outlined in the pages that follow. The suggestions recommended in these pages attempt to form a collective vision for the future and create a blueprint for change in the Battle Green area. Design standards and other recommendations in this report will still require formal review, public hearings, and final approvals by the appropriate governing bodies. This Master Plan, if approved by the Selectmen and Town Meeting, provides the template against which future approvals should be measured. Continued consistency in building a a big picture constructed from small details. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #1: Comprehensive Planning and Advisory Council The ultimate authority for the Battle Green rests with the Town Selectmen. There was strong support for keeping the final authority for oversight with the Board of Selectmen for several reasons, but most importantly because the Battle Green belongs to the citizens of Lexington and the Selectmen are accountable to the citizens. Because their meetings are televised and well publicized, issues and decisions regarding the Battle Green will have the benefit of full disclosure and maximum exposure to the public. However, since the Board of Selectmen has little time to pro-actively plan for the Battle Green, the Battle Green Area Advisory Council appointment of a is recommended. A small council (5-7 members) will be appointed by the Selectmen who will be responsible for furthering the goals of this Master Plan and communicating information to all boards, committees and staff that holds some authority for aspects of the Battle Green area. All recommendations or decisions made by the Battle Green Area Advisory Council will be brought to the Board of Selectmen for public hearing and discussion prior to any action. The preliminary list (in alphabetical order) of committees and staff that hold some stake in aspects of the Battle Green area includes: Staff/Departments: Cary Memorial Library Planning Police Public Works Town Manager Town Boards and Committees: Design Advisory Committee Historic District Commission Lexington Center Committee Planning Board Selectmen Sidewalk Committee Town Celebrations Committee Tourism Committee Traffic Safety Advisory Committee Tree Committee Community Associations: Battle Road Scenic Byway Committee Belfry Hill Association Chamber of Commerce First Parish Church Hancock Congregational Church Lexington Field and Garden Club Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» îç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Lexington Historical Society Lexington Retailers Association Meriam Hill Association The Battle Green Area Advisory Council will meet a minimum of four (4) times per year. The Advisory Council will support the role and authority of each of its member committees, but will be responsible for coordination and oversight to ensure that implementation of comprehensive plan for the Battle Green area is well coordinated and unified. Nothing should be allowed to change on a temporary or permanent basis without being first vetted by the Advisory Council in consultation with the Selectmen. The council will serve as an information-sharing committee with the charge to make recommendations to the Board of Selectmen. Proposals and issues which impact the appearance, use or stewardship of features in the Battle Green area will come before the Council for endorsement before going to the Board of Selectmen. The Advisory Council will make funding recommendations to the Selectmen in the fall of each year for private and tax payer funding. A draft description of this committee, its charge, and its membership follows. Action Items: 1.Gather potential participant groups and individuals. 2.Review the draft description and finalize the details of the council structure, communication and reporting processes. 3.Selectmen approve council structure, charge and membership. 4.Council meets to review recommendations in this master plan and to frame a phased implementation program. 5.Council oversees implementation program, making sure the proper votes and approvals required by other boards and committees are obtained. 6.Council meets regularly to review work of other town committees as it relates to the Battle Green and to coordinate all efforts. 7.Council makes recommendations to the Board of Selectmen before any vote regarding the Battle Green. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð (draft description of the committee and its charge subject to further approvals) Battle Green Area Advisory Committee (BGAAC) Members: 6 full members and 4 associates Appointed by: Board of Seletmen Length of Term: 5 years (members and associates) Appointments made: September 30 Meeting Times: Four times per year (January, April, July, October) Description: The purpose of the Battle Green Area Advisory Council is to assist the Board of Selectmen in providing comprehensive, unified planning and stewardship for the Battle Green area. The council will serve as an information-sharing committee with the charge to make recommendations to the Board of Selectmen. Proposals and issues which impact the appearance, use or stewardship of features in the Battle Green area will come before the Council for endorsement before going to the Board of Selectmen. The Advisory Council will make funding recommendations to the Selectmen in the fall of each year for private and tax payer funding. All changes, temporary and permanent, will be first vetted by the Advisory Council in consultation with the Selectmen. Criteria for Membership: Members should be selected from each town committee, board and community association that has responsibility for some aspect of the Battle Green Area. One full member will be selected from each of the following areas: one Lexington center business representative, one Tourism Committee representative, one Lexington Historical Society representative, one traffic safety representative, one representative with knowledge of arboriculture or horticulture, one individual who is an abutter or a neighborhood association representative. The committee will be supported by a Lexington staff member of the Lexington Police Department and the Department of Public Works (Superintendent of Grounds). Ref: Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #2: Comprehensive Interpretation and Signage Program Interpretation Enhancing the tourist experience by guiding visitors to the Visitor Center, and offering a coordinated and cohesive interpretive program flexible enough to meet varied schedules is the charge of the Tourism Committee. The interpretive program was of great interest to the participants in the public hearings and in the public surveys. All of these ideas have been referred to the Tourism Committee. The proposed Battle Green Area Advisory Committee, once established, will support the work of the Tourism Committee to facilitate linkages in building a comprehensive interpretive program. -guided brochure, read the interpretive sign panels throughout the Battle Green, listen to a multi- media presentation at the Minute Man National Historical Park Visitor Center (Route 2A in Concord), or visit the dioramas at the Lexington Chamber of Commerce Visitor Center. New place markers have been installed which identify historic sites and buildings using an attractive red and white logo approved by the Historic Districts Commission. The Tourism Committee has just published a brochure-style guide to Lexington that links historic sites to restaurants, museums and retail shops of interest to visitors. A three-panel interpretive sign is being designed which combines a graphic illustration of the view the British soldiers saw at the start of the Battle with wording that relates the progress of events and the significance and symbolism of the Battle Green today. With additional grant funding, the entire interpretive program can continue to be enhanced in a manner that does not obscure its key features. Many interpretive panels exist throughout the Battle Green and the surrounding neighborhoods that were part of three walking tours developed for Lexington as part of the Bicentennial celebration. These panels are no longer situated in locations frequented by visitors, and should be removed or relocated as part of this more comprehensive interpretive program. As the plan for the comprehensive interpretive program unfolds, all of the signage (informational, identification and safety) will conform to the same standards and create a The design of the newest signs (top left following page) offers a good model from which to build this comprehensive sign program and has already been approved by the HDC as part of the signage program. Other Signs The Battle Green is located in the heart of busy downtown Lexington, at the confluence of several major roadways. As such, directional and safety signage, in additional to road signs, are an important necessity within the Battle Green area. Carefully monitoring the Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð number, purpose, size and location of these signs can eliminate clutter without compromising safety. Event signs and temporary signs installed for a few days also contribute to the clutter of information. Limiting the size, location and quantity of these signs (or perhaps prohibiting them from the Battle Green area and locating them elsewhere) is an important aspect of management and oversight. The message that the Battle Green is different from other park spaces in Lexington needs to be reinforced in every aspect of the Battle Signage in the Battle Green includes a diversity of styles and materials. The newest signs (red with white border) offer the best graphic integrity for a comprehensive signage program. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendations Use interpretive material to convey both historic and contemporary information. Develop an interpretive program that uses a variety of media. Integrate interpretive markers with other furnishings, such as groupings of benches or adjacent to monuments. Limit the number and purpose of all traffic signs, safety signs, and directional information to only those that are necessary. Develop rules and regulations for all temporary signs and event sign programs. Action Items: 1.Continue to fund comprehensive interpretation and signage program plan already approved. 2.Support ongoing work of Tourism Committee around interpretation. 3.Monitor quantity and placement of safety and traffic signs. 4.Develop and enforce rules for event and temporary signage. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #3: Linking the Battle Green Area The recognition that the Battle Green is part of a broader area puts in context the requirement for comprehensive treatment for connecting elements including the Visitor Center, Buckman Tavern, Belfry Hill, the other historic house museums, and Ye Olde Burying Ground to the monuments and memorials on the Battle Green. These connections include safe pedestrian cross walks, unified path surfaces, a unified signage program and other elements that collectively define the Battle Green area. important as well. History used to be experienced by going to a specific place that was generally fenced in and separated from contemporary life. Opening the door to a historic house museum encouraged the visitor to step back into history, but disconnected history the past and the present to create an unbroken chain joining contemporary life with the past and the future. The Battle Green offers untold opportunities for creating these links links that connect statements of personal freedom, of standing up for what is right, defining freedom of speech and the power of opinion - all philosophical links that can be made directly to the Battle Green area. These links are critical in reinforcing the special place the Battle Green area holds in defining our national ideals. When successful, every individual should understand the spiritual or symbolic significance of the Battle Green as a space set apart from others in Lexington and therefore requiring different and appropriate activities on this hallowed ground. Each historic feature plays its own important role in the visitor experience, relaying historic information, inspirational symbolism, and experiential exploration. Whether the visitor is led or is allowed to explore the Battle Green area and its features, each visitor deserves a well orchestrated, well presented experience, including the opportunity to sit, reflect, rest or observe daily life as a link in a long chain of history on the Common. Linking resources involves physical connections and emotive or intellectual connections. Some of these linkages can be made with a unified paving program, unified signage, and subtle consistent details in lighting, traffic calming and site furnishings. Creating a features for personal exploration, or simple at-grade brass markers can link options for interpreting each feature. The map on page 34 illustrates the elements within the Battle Green which can be linked, both physically and intellectually, into a comprehensive experience. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Action Items: 1.Support efforts to provide linkages including a marker system number or other identification system to link features within the Battle Green. 2.Investigate options for other linkages, including historic homes and sites outside the Battle Green area. 3.Explore creative ways of reinforcing the significance of the Battle Green to all residents and visitors. 4.Install markers and link to interpretation programs for all sites. Options for linking features might include a paved or painted line (such as the Boston Freedom Trail (above), a brass marker with a number linking the feature to an interpretive brochure or cell phone number (top right), or at-grade informational markers such as those used in Louisville, KY (bottom right) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Connecting Features * Battle Green 1 Lexington Visitors Center 2 Minute Man Statue 3 Belfry Hill 4 Meeting House Monument & Belfry Monument 5 Flagpole 6 Revolutionary War Monument (Obelisk) 7 First Parish Church 8 Ye Olde Burying Ground 9 Parker Boulder 10 Normal School 11 Minute Man Monument 12 Buckman Tavern 13 World War II Monument 14 USS Lexington Monument A Depot B Cary Memorial Library C Hancock-Clarke House Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #4: Statue and Monument Preservation The Battle Green monuments and memorials represent an impressive collection of public art. From the Minute Man Statue to the oldest gravestone in Ye Olde Burying Ground, each of these pieces deserves careful conservation, including a regular routine for cleaning and maintenance. The variety of materials and placement of each piece requires a knowledgeable conservator to oversee appropriate curatorial care. The 2001 Cudnohufsky report included an evaluation of the Battle Monument and the Minute Man Statue with detailed recommendations for cleaning and conservation of both monuments. Recently, many of the grave markers in Ye Olde Burying Ground have undergone cleaning and preservation under the guidance of a monument conservator. The FY 2012 CPA appropriation request includes funds to conserve the Minute Man Statue and the Revolutionary War Monument (also known as the Obelisk), and to evaluate and conserve the other monuments in the Battle Green. Based on this comprehensive evaluation, an ongoing program for curating all of these features should continue. Regular, systematic and consistent care will ensure their appropriate preservation. Preservation of every Battle Green monument should not be limited to the monument itself, but should include the assessment and treatment of its setting and surrounds. Each of the monument sites show the impact of heavy foot traffic as visitors stand and admire each feature. The Revolutionary War Monument, for example is protected by an iron picket fence and surrounded by a simple asphalt path. Two granite steps ascend the hilly terrain to the monument. Soil erosion, damage to fences, suitable path surfaces, and appropriate links to the larger Battle Green area and its walkway system should be considered in concert with the conservation plan for each monument. The Minute Man Statue was designed to sit atop a watering trough Funds for the Statue and its base were provided by the Hayes family, so the watering trough soon became known as the Hayes Fountain. When the Hayes Fountain stopped working, its cavities were filled with seasonal plant displays. Options for restoring the watering trough should be investigated. Thought should be given to removing or relocating the plantings within the Fountain to areas where they can highlight important features which are currently less visible to visitors (such as the Lexington Visitor Center and Belfry Park). offers a preliminary glimpse into the variety of types, sizes, ages and materials and settings for these features. The comprehensive conservation plan will prioritize care of these features based on their current condition assessment and establish a plan for conservation, cleaning and regular maintenance, including their landscaped settings. Some markers, which are not critical to the Battle Green experience, might be considered for relocation or removal. The plaques at the base of the Flagpole, for instance, might be better suited for removal or relocation to another spot, or amended with other interpretive signage which relates a greater depth of information to the visitor. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×³¿¹» Ò¿³» Ü¿¬» Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Í»¬¬·²¹ ¿²¼ ß±½·¿¬»¼ Ú»¿¬«®» ËòÍòÍò ïçèè Ù®¿²·¬» ©·¬¸ Ô±© ·®±² °·½µ»¬ º»²½»å ¸®«¾¾»®§ Ô»¨·²¹¬±² ¾®±²¦» ¾¿½µ¼®±°å º´¿¹°±´» ú º´¿¹å ¬®»» Ó±²«³»²¬ °´¿¯«» É±®´¼ É¿® ×× ïçìë Ù®¿²·¬» Ù®¿²·¬» ¬±²» ³¿®µ»® »¬ ¿¬ »¼¹» ±º Ó±²«³»²¬ °¿¬¸ ·² ´¿©² Ô»¨·²¹¬±² ïçìè Ù®¿²·¬» ¿²¼ Ý¿°°»¼ ·®±² °·½µ»¬ º»²½»å ½®«¸»¼ Ó·²«¬» Ó»² Þ®±²¦» ¬±²» °¿¬¸ »²½·®½´» º»²½»¼ ¿®»¿ ©·¬¸ ±º ïééë ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» °¿¬¸ ½±²²»½¬·±² ¬± Ó»³±®·¿´ ·¼»©¿´µ Î»ª±´«¬·±²¿®§ ïéççåÙ®¿²·¬» ©·¬¸ Í©±®¼ó¬±°°»¼ ·®±² °·½µ»¬ º»²½»å É¿® ïèíë ³¿®¾´» ¬¿¾´»¬ ¾´«»¬±²» ³¿®µ»® ¿¬ ¾¿»å Ó±²«³»²¬å ¹®±«²¼½±ª»® ©·¬¸·² º»²½»¼ ¿®»¿å ¬¸» Ñ¾»´·µ ¾·¬«³·²±« ¿°¸¿´¬ ©¿´µ «®®±«²¼·²¹ º»²½»¼ ¿®»¿ ¿²¼ ½±²²»½¬·²¹ ¬± Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» ·¼»©¿´µå ¹®¿²·¬» ¬»° Þ»´º®§ Í·¬» ïçïð Ù®¿²·¬» Ý®«¸»¼ ¬±²» °¿¬¸ «®®±«²¼å ´¿©² Ó¿®µ»® º·»´¼¬±²» ¾±«´¼»® ©·¬¸ ¾®±²¦» °´¿¯«» Ó»»¬·²¹ ïèèì Î»¼ Ý®«¸»¼ ¬±²» «®®±«²¼ Ø±«» Ö±²»¾±®± Ó±²«³»²¬ ¹®¿²·¬» ±² Ú±¨ ×´¿²¼ ¹®¿²·¬» ¾¿» Þ¿¬¬´» Ô·²» ïèèì Ù®¿²·¬» Ý®«¸»¼ ¬±²» «®®±«²¼å ¾»²½¸ Ó±²«³»²¬ º·»´¼¬±²» ¾±«´¼»® ©·¬¸ ½¿®ª»¼ º¿½» Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» íç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×³¿¹» Ò¿³» Ü¿¬» Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Í»¬¬·²¹ ¿²¼ ß±½·¿¬»¼ Ú»¿¬«®» Ó·²«¬» Ó¿² ïçðð Ù®¿²·¬» Ð±·¬·±²»¼ ¿¬ ¶«²½¬·±² ±º Í¬¿¬«» ¿²¼ º·»´¼¬±²»å Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» ú Þ»¼º±®¼ Ø¿§» ¾®¿ ¬¿¬«» Í¬®»»¬ º¿½·²¹ ¼·®»½¬·±² ±º Þ®·¬·¸ Ó»³±®·¿´ ±´¼·»®å ±®·¹·²¿´´§ ©±®µ·²¹ º±«²¬¿·² Ú±«²¬¿·² ²±© »¿±²¿´ °´¿²¬·²¹å ¸®«¾ ³¿·²¹ ¿¬ ¾¿»å ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» ¿²¼ ¬¿³°»¼ ¿°¸¿´¬ °¿ª·²¹ ¿¬ ¾¿» Ó»³±®·¿´ ½ò Ý±²½®»¬» ©·¬¸ Í»¬ ¿¬ ¾¿» ±º ¼»½·¼«±« ¬®»» ¿´±²¹ Ì®»» ïçïç ¾®¿ °´¿¯«» °»®·³»¬»® ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² Ô·¬ Ú´¿¹ ¿²¼ Þ§ Ó»¬¿´æ ø°®·±® Ó»¬¿´ º´¿¹°±´» ©·¬¸ ¼»¼·½¿¬»¼ Ú´¿¹°±´» ïçðëå º´¿¹°±´» ´·¹¸¬·²¹å í Þ®±²¦» °´¿¯«» ¿¬ ¾¿»å ïçéê ©±±¼»²÷ ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» Þ·½»²¬»²²·¿´ ïçéê Ý±²½®»¬» ©·¬¸ Í»¬ ¿¬ ¾¿» ±º º´¿¹°±´»å ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» Ð´¿¯«» Þ®±²¦» «®®±«²¼å °´¿½»¼ ©·¬¸ î ±¬¸»® °´¿¯«» ³¿®µ»® Ý±²¹®»·±²¿´ ïçêë Ý±²½®»¬» ©·¬¸ Í»¬ ¿¬ ¾¿» ±º º´¿¹°±´»å ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» ß½¬ Ð´¿¯«» Þ®±²¦» «®®±«²¼å °´¿½»¼ ©·¬¸ î ±¬¸»® °´¿¯«» ³¿®µ»® Ò¿¬·±²¿´ ïçêî Ý±²½®»¬» ©·¬¸ Í»¬ ¿¬ ¾¿» ±º º´¿¹°±´»å ½®«¸»¼ ¬±²» Ø·¬±®·½ Þ®±²¦» «®®±«²¼å °´¿½»¼ ©·¬¸ î ±¬¸»® Ô¿²¼³¿®µ °´¿¯«» ³¿®µ»® Ð´¿¯«» Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×³¿¹» Ò¿³» Ü¿¬» Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Í»¬¬·²¹ ¿²¼ ß±½·¿¬»¼ Ú»¿¬«®» Þ»´º®§ ïçïð É±±¼ ×®±² °·½µ»¬ º»²½» ©·¬¸ ·³°´» ¬±° »¬ ±² ¹®¿²·¬» º·»´¼¬±²» ©¿´´ ¿²¼ ´»¼¹»å ´»¼¹» ±«¬½®±° ¿¬±° Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´å ®«¬·½ º·»´¼¬±²» ¬»°å ²¿¬«®¿´·¬·½ °´¿²¬·²¹ ø¬®»» ¿²¼ ¸®«¾÷ Ù®¿ª»¬±²» ïêçðó Þ®·½µå Ù®¿²·¬» °±¬ ¿²¼ ®¿·´ º»²½» «®®±«²¼å ¾´«»¬±²»å ´¿©²å ½¿¬¬»¼ ¼»½·¼«±« ¬®»»å ¿²¼¬±²»ô ¿°¸¿´¬ »²¬®§ ¼®·ª»å ¹®¿ ¿²¼ ¬±²» ³¿®¾´»ô °¿¬¸ ©·¬¸·² ¾«®§·²¹ §¿®¼ ¹®¿²·¬»ô ±¬¸»® Action Items: 1.Prepare comprehensive evaluation of all monuments, memorials and markers including prioritized conservation recommendations and maintenance program including their landscaped settings 2.Consider removal of any markers or monuments not critical to the Battle Green which might be located in other areas or removed 3.Conserve all monuments and memorials working with professional conservator (underway) 4.Continue regular program of conservation, cleaning and routine maintenance Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ecommendation #5: Accommodating Multiple Uses R as important to its role as tourist Green should evoke the significance of the April 19, 1775 Battle, but should respect other layers of Lexington history. One resident commented that the Battle Green area should te felt that respect for those that died during the Battle might determine appropriate and inappropriate uses on the Battle Green and recognized that some activities might be more Those completing the survey felt that the Battle Green area should support multiple purposes, including historical tours, picnicking, meetings, and political rallies. Most felt that traffic did not need to be diverted away from the Battle Green and car parking was suitable along the roadsides, but that bus parking should be diverted to another, more appropriate, location. Recognizing that the Cs been reduced with road widening, most felt that its original size did not need to be restored, but that these changes recognized its historic layering. Memorial trees in honor of veterans were considered an appropriate feature of the Common, with appropriate plaques recognizing the honorees. Currently the number of monuments on the Battle Green Balancing the needs for tourists and residents is both delicate and powerful. Many discussed the spiritual and symbolic aspects of the Battle Green and felt that it is these ideals which should guide the governance of activities on the Battle Green. Light picnicking and other forms of passive activities were felt to be appropriate and respectful of the Battle Greenown common. Active games such as Frisbee, ball games and other more active forms of recreation were considered inappropriate and that there were nearby town parks and recreation fields for those purposes. Reinforcing the importance of the Revolutionary War Monument grave site, which is carefully tended and treated with respect could reinforce the significance of this aspect of the Battle Green. Other activities are carefully monitored by the Board of Selectmen, which allows the flexibility to appropriately govern rallies, town gatherings and other events and their locations on the Battle Green or across the street on the lawn of the Visitor Center. This plan includes a review of these rules and regulations, and suggests appropriate n ongoing evaluation of this governance is part of the charge given to the Battle Green Advisory Council. Understanding the rules for the use of the Battle Green area, tending the monument sites with respect, reinforcing the symbolism of the Battle Green, developing unified design standards, designing appropriate and adequate historic interpretation, establishing appropriate parking policies and safe pedestrian access to all areas of the Battle Green, and establishing coordinated oversight and communication can support the Battle Green arealy accommodate its continuing role as a space for other historic events to take place. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Action Items: 1.Review suggested changes (next page) to the Rules and Regulations for the Battle Green area. Submit revised Rules and Regulations to the Board of Selectmen for approval 2.Make recommendations for use of the open lawns near the Visitor Center, Buckman Tavern or on Belfry Hill which might be different than those allowed on the Battle Green 3.Review the policies for enforcement of the Rules and Regulations and make necessary changes to ensure uniform enforcement of all policies, rules and regulations 4.Make recommendations for enforcement policies and submit for Board of Selectmen approval 5.Regularly review the Rules and Regulations document and the enforcement policies and their effectiveness; make necessary recommendations and changes as required Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Î«´» ¿²¼ Î»¹«´¿¬·±² The following is a copy of the current Rules and Regulations for the Battle Green (Proposed changes will be presented in red; for purposes of the draft document, this is a copy of the existing rules and regulations proposed changes are still under review) 1.Definitions a. device that produces noise b. annoyance, or alarm, or which recklessly creates a risk thereof; fighting, threatening or violent behavior; unreasonable noise; abusive language directed toward any person present; wrestling in vicinity of others; throwing of breakable objects; malicious throwing of dangerous objects or stones; open fires, burning objects or spitting. c. air; for example, sailplanes, gliders, balloons, body kites, hang gliders. d. type of equipment permitted on the Battle Green at one time, as established by the Board of Selectmen e. holding of vigils, and all other similar forms of conduct which involve the active communication or expression of opinions or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent, or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers. f.Battle Green vulnerable to excessive damage by heavy war or use; for example, heavy rains, reseeding, and drought conditions g.- permit issued by the Board of Selectmen. 2.Non-Permit Activities Subject to the restrictions in these rules and regulations, permits shall not be required for: a.Conduct that does not cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm b.Picnicking restricted to groups of no more than seven people. Picnicking on the Battle Green by bus tours or similar groups is forbidden. c.The gathering of groups on the Battle Green for the sole purpose of exploring and enjoying its history, and which do not remain for more than four hours. d.Playing of audio devices at a reasonable volume. e.The playing of games that do not: i.Exceed three players; or ii.Damage the Battle Green Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð iii.Disturb or inconvenience those visiting the Battle Green for historic interests; or iv.Constitute any type of disorderly conduct. 3.Permit Required Activities a.The purpose for requiring permits for certain activities is to promote the use of the Battle Green in a manner consistent with its nature and history; to protect the Battle Green from harm; to ensure adequate notice of the event so that arrangements can be made to protect the public health and safety and to minimize interference with the event by the public. b.Permits are required for any of the following activities, singly or in combination: i.Any group activity reasonably likely to exceed the public use limit established by the Board of Selectmen ii.Special events, public meetings, assemblies, gatherings, demonstrations, parades, and other active public expressions of interest, not to exceed eight hours in duration. iii.Pageants, reenactments, regattas, entertainments, or other as public spectator attractions. iv.Displays of a ceremonial nature in connection with special events and limited in duration to the period required for such events. v.Use of public address systems, electrical lighting, or other electrical devices. vi.Distribution of non-commercial printed matter vii.Possession of firearms if unloaded or packed in such a way as to prevent their use viii.Possession of explosives, as long as individuals or groups conform to Federal, State and local laws governing such possession. ix.Use or possession of fireworks or firecrackers. 4.Impermissible Activities a.Any group activity that exceeds the public use limit established by the Board of Selectmen for the Battle Green. b.Possession, destruction, injury, defacement, removal, or disturbance of any building, sign, equipment, monument, statue, marker, animal or plant c.Distribution or display of commercial advertising; or soliciting of business; or any other commercial transactions. d.Remaining on the Battle Green for more than four hours. e.Abandonment of any vehicle or personal property. f.Unreasonably loud operation of audio devices g.Delivery of any person or thing by parachute or helicopter. h.Powerless flight activities. i.Begging. j.Disorderly conduct. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð k.Use of firearms. l.Use of metal detecting devices. m.Gambling of any form or operation of gambling devices. n.Picnicking except at provided above in 2b o.Consumption of alcoholic beverages or use of unlawful substances. p.Use of roller skates and skateboards q.Placement on the Battle Green of any unattended structure or planting of any trees/plants by a private party. 5.Permit Process a.Application for permits to conduct activities on the Battle Green, specified in 3, above, shall be filed no later than two weeks prior to the requested date. Late and/or incomplete applications will be considered at the discretion of the Board of Selectmen. b.Permit applications shall include the following information: i.Name and phone number of responsible contact. ii.Date and time of event iii.Nature of event. iv.Expected number of participants, spectators, and vehicles. v.Duration of event vi.Statement of equipment and facilities to be used vii.Section of the Battle Green desired. c.The responsible party is to keep the permit, which must be available for inspection upon request. The responsible party may be required by the Board of Selectmen, as a condition of issuing the permit, to pay for detail police officers if the Board determines that such officers are necessary for public safety d.Permits are issued upon express condition that the Battle Green is to be left in an orderly fashion. e.Permits are non-transferable; and are only valid for date and time specified. For cause the Police Chief or his designee may extend a permit for up to 2 hours. f.A permit shall be revoked if a sanctioned event engages in impermissible activities and may be revoked if the permit group engages in activities that are not within the specifications of the permit. g.The Board of Selectmen may alter a request by setting reasonable conditions and restrictions as to duration and area occupied, as are necessary for protection of the area and public use thereof. h.Compromised turf conditions may supersede the use of a granted permit at the discretion of the Board of Selectmen to protect the condition of the Battle Green. 6.Grounds for Denial of Permit Request a.Application creates a scheduling conflict with a previously filed application by another person or group. b.Event presents a clear and present danger to public health or safety Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð c.Event is of such nature or duration that it cannot reasonably be accommodated in the area applied for; or the expected number of participants exceeds the public use limit. d.Event will, in the opinion of the Board of Selectmen, cause unacceptable interference with use and enjoyment of the Battle Green by the general public e.Event is requested for a date that conflicts with official celebrations of the Town f.Event is more appropriately held at other available Town Facilities, such as recreational facilities. 7.Patriots Day Weekend Town-sponsored activity is permitted. Private usage, otherwise permitted, is prohibited throughout this period. 8.Penalties Penalties for violations of these regulations shall be in accordance with Chapter 10-4 and 10-6 of the Code of the Town of Lexington. Approved by the Board of Selectmen July 15, 1986 Amended July 24, 2000 Amended December 21, 2009 Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #6: Unified Design Standards is not just a battlefield; it is also a public common. As a historic site, we might have the option of letting the grass grow to pasture and re-establishing its appearance on April 19, 1775. Certainly that is the approach used by the Minute Man National Historical Park for its continued role in the history of Lexington, its commemorative monuments and memorials, and ommon require that this space not only evoke the Battle event, but support its role as public open space in the center of a bustling village. As such, muddy dirt paths fall short of our expectations for this national shrine. Instead, developing unified design standards that can enhance the symbolism and interpretation of historic events, show proper respect for its national significance, and purposefully fulfill its role as town common. These standards will allow the Battle Green area to continue to play an important role in the daily life of Lexington. One of the first charges for the Battle Green Advisory Council will be to review and implement the proposed design standards that are recommended in this document, including any additional approvals required by the Historic Districts Commission. The paragraphs that follow identify the current materials, design, concerns and suitability of current site furnishings and site issues and makes recommendations for standardized, comprehensive treatment. Where appropriate, a single design from existing design choices has been selected. In other cases, recommendations have been derived from public comment received during the master planning process or from other community examples. All recommendations will require further comment and approval (by the appropriate Lexington committees) before they can be implemented. 1. Paving There are several paving types used with the Battle Green area, some have proven more successful than others. Installation costs, durability, ADA compliancy, and maintenance costs are all factors that determine their success. In addition to materials already found in the Battle Green area, there are a number of other materials which have proven successful at other sites. The first table that follows identifies those materials which are already in use within the Battle Green area, their benefits, problems, and frequency of use. The second table identifies other materials that have proven successful in other historic sites. Following the tables are recommendations for design standards for paving within the Battle Green. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Existing Paving Options ×³¿¹» Ô±½¿¬·±² Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Þ»²»º·¬ Ð®±¾´»³ Í«®®±«²¼·²¹ Ý®«¸»¼ Ø·¬±®·½ ×®®»¹«´¿® »¼¹» ³±¬ ¬±²» ¿°°»¿®¿²½» ¹·ª» ³»§ ³±²«³»²¬å Ð»®³»¿¾´»å ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å Ð¿¬¸ ßÜß Ì»²¼»²½§ ¬± ¬¸®±«¹¸ ½±³°´·¿²¬ ¹»¬ ³«¼¼§å ½»²¬»® ±º ©¸»² Ó¿¬»®·¿´ ¬®¿½µ ´¿©²å °®±°»®´§ ·²¬± ¸·¬±®·½ Ð¿¬¸ ¬± ·²¬¿´´»¼ ¾«·´¼·²¹ ¿²¼ Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ ¼¿³¿¹» ¬¸» º´±±®·²¹ Û²¼ ±º ½®± Í¬¿³°»¼ Ý±¬ »ºº»½¬·ª» Ú¿µ» ¸·¬±®·½ ©¿´µå ¬®»»¬ ß°¸¿´¬ Ü«®¿¾´» ¿°°»¿®¿²½» ·²¬»®»½¬·±² ø±®·¹·²¿´´§ É·¬¸¬¿²¼ Ü·ºº·½«´¬ ¬± ·²¬¿´´»¼ ¸»¿ª§ ¬®¿ºº·½å ®»°¿·® «²´» ¿ ßÜß ®»¼± »²¬·®» ¬»³°±®¿®§ ½±³°´·¿²¬ °·»½»å ±´«¬·±²÷ ×³°»®³»¿¾´»å Í±³» ß°¸¿´¬ Ý±¬ »ºº»½¬·ª» Ý±²¬»³°±®¿®§ ·¼»©¿´µå Ü«®¿¾´» ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å Ð¿¬¸ ¿®±«²¼ É·¬¸¬¿²¼ ×³°»®³»¿¾´»å ±³» ¸»¿ª§ ¬®¿ºº·½å Ý±²·¼»®»¼ ³±²«³»²¬ ßÜß ²±¬ ¿ ½±³°´·¿²¬ ¸·¬±®·½¿´´§ ¿°°®±°®·¿¬» ¿ ±¬¸»® ³¿¬»®·¿´ Í±³» Ý±²½®»¬» Ü«®¿¾´»å ×³°»®³»¿¾´»å ·¼»©¿´µ É·¬¸¬¿²¼ Ý±²¬»³°±®¿®§ ¸»¿ª§ ¬®¿ºº·½å ¿°°»¿®¿²½» ßÜß ½±³°´·¿²¬å Ò»¿¬ô ¬®·³ ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å ´±²¹»® ´·º»°¿² ¬¸¿² ±¬¸»® ³¿¬»®·¿´ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ìç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×³¿¹» Ô±½¿¬·±² Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Þ»²»º·¬ Ð®±¾´»³ ú Ý±¬ ø°»® ¯ò º¬÷ Í·¼»©¿´µ Þ®·½µ Ü«®¿¾´»å Î»¯«·®» ·²¬± ©·¬¸¬¿²¼ ¿°°®±°®·¿¬» Þ«½µ³¿² ¸»¿ª§ ¬®¿ºº·½å »¼¹·²¹ ¿²¼ Ì¿ª»®² ¿²¼ ßÜß ¹±±¼ ¾¿» Ô»¨·²¹¬±² ½±³°´·¿²¬ °®»°¿®¿¬·±² Ê··¬±® ©¸»² °®±°»®´§ ¬± ©·¬¸¬¿²¼ Ý»²¬»® ·²¬¿´´»¼å ²»¿¬ô º®±¬å ³¿§ ¬®·³å ¸·¬±®·½ ¿´´±© ©»»¼ ¿°°»¿®¿²½» ¬± ¹®±© ¾»¬©»»² ¶±·²¬ ·º ²±¬ °®±°»®´§ ·²¬¿´´»¼å Ð¿¬¸ ¬± Ù®¿²·¬» Ü«®¿¾´»å ´±²¹ Ò± °®±¾´»³ Þ¿¬¬´» Í¬¿·® ¿²¼ ´·º» °¿²å ·¼»²¬·º·»¼ ¬¸ Ó±²«³»²¬ ½¸»»µ ¸·¬±®·½ øïç ©¿´´ ½»²¬«®§÷ ¿°°»¿®¿²½» Ð¿¬¸ ¬± Ý®«¸»¼ Ý±¬ »ºº»½¬·ª» Ô·³·¬»¼ ´·º» Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ ¬±²» ¿²¼ °¿²å ©±±¼ Ì»²¼»²½§ ¬± ¬·³¾»® ©¿¸ ±«¬å ¬»²¼»²½§ ¬± ³»§ ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å ¼·ºº·½«´¬ô «²»ª»² ©¿´µ·²¹ «®º¿½» Ð¿¬¸ ¬± Ù®¿²·¬» Ø·¬±®·½ Ë²»ª»² Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ Ú·»´¼¬±²» ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å «®º¿½» ¼«®¿¾´»å ¼·ºº·½«´¬ ¬± °»®³»¿¾´» ©¿´µå ¬»²¼»²½§ ¬± ¸»¿ª» ©·¬¸ º®±¬ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Other Paving Options ×³¿¹» Ó¿¬»®·¿´ ú Ý±¬ Þ»²»º·¬ ×«» ø°»® ¯ò º¬÷ ×®®»¹«´¿® Þ´«»¬±²» Þ®±©² ±® ¹®¿§ó¾´«» Ý±¬´§ ¬± ·²¬¿´´å ½±´±® ½¸±·½»å ·®®»¹«´¿® ¶±·²¬ ½¿² Ø·¬±®·½ ¿°°»¿®¿²½»å °®±«¬ ©»»¼å ßÜß ½±³°´·¿²¬ ©¸»² °®±°»®´§ ·²¬¿´´»¼ Ì«³¾´»¼ ¾´«»¬±²» Ûª»²ô ®»¹«´¿® Ý±¬´§ ¬± ·²¬¿´´å °¿¬¬»®²å ¬·¹¸¬ ¶±·²¬ ³¿´´»® ·¦» ¬±²» ¸¿ª» ´» ¬»²¼»²½§ ´»¿¼ ¿®» ³±®» ¬± ¾»½±³» «²»ª»²å «½»°¬·¾´» ¬± º®±¬ ßÜß ½±³°´·¿²¬ ©¸»² ³±ª»³»²¬ ø²±¬ ± °®±°»®´§ ·²¬¿´´»¼ ©·¬¸ ´¿®¹»® ·¦» ¬±²»÷å ³¿¬»®·¿´ · ²±¬ ·²¼·¹»²±« ¬± Ô»¨·²¹¬±² ®»¹·±² Ô¿®¹» ½«¬ ¹®¿²·¬» Ô¿®¹» ¬±²» ³»¿² Ý±¬´§ ¬± ·²¬¿´´å ´» º®±¬ ³±ª»³»²¬å ¸·¬±®·½ ¬®»¿¬³»²¬ ¸·¬±®·½ ·¼»©¿´µ º±«²¼ ·² ±¬¸»® ¬®»¿¬³»²¬ º±® ³¿²§ ½±´±²·¿´ Ò»© Ò»© Û²¹´¿²¼ Û²¹´¿²¼ ¬±©² ¾«¬ ª·´´¿¹»å ßÜß ²±¬ ¼±½«³»²¬»¼ ·² ½±³°´·¿²¬ ©¸»² Ô»¨·²¹¬±²å °®±°»®´§ ·²¬¿´´»¼ Î»¹«´¿® ½«¬ ¹®¿²·¬» ßª¿·´¿¾´» ·² ©·¼» Ý±¬´§ ¬± ·²¬¿´´å ª¿®·»¬§ ±º ·¦»å ¬¸»®³¿´ «®º¿½» ½¿² ¼«®¿¾´»å ßÜß ¾» ´·°°»®§ ·² ¸¿¼§ ½±³°´·¿²¬ ©¸»² ¿®»¿ °®±°»®´§ ·²¬¿´´»¼ Í»»¼»¼ »¨°±»¼ Ð»¾¾´»¼ ¿°°»¿®¿²½» Î»¯«·®» »¨°¿²·±² ¿¹¹®»¹¿¬» ½±²½®»¬» ·³·¬¿¬» °»¿ ¬±²» ¶±·²¬å ´·¹¸¬´§ ³±®» ±® ¹®¿ª»´å ¼«®¿¾´»å ½±¬´§ ¬¸¿² ßÜß ½±³°´·¿²¬ ¬®¿¼·¬·±²¿´ ½±²½®»¬» ©¿´µ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Þ´«»¬±²» ¿²¼ Ø·¬±®·½ ¬®»¿¬³»²¬ Ý±¬´§å ²±¬ ßÜß ½±¾¾´» Ý®± ©¿´µ ¼±½«³»²¬»¼ ¬± ½±³°´·¿²¬ ±¬¸»® Ò»© Û²¹´¿²¼ ½±³³«²·¬·»å ¼«®¿¾´»å ¬®¿ºº·½ ½¿´³·²¹ Ú·»´¼¬±²» ¬»° Ø·¬±®·½å ¼«®¿¾´»å Î»¯«·®» ½¿®»º«´ ´±²¹ ´¿¬·²¹å ½¿² ¾» »´»½¬·±² º±® »ª»² °«®½¸¿»¼ ·² ½«¬ ±® ¬®»¿¼ «®º¿½»ô ²¿¬«®¿´ º·»´¼¬±²» ±¬¸»®©·» ²± ¬§´»å »¿§ ¬± ·²¬¿´´ °»®½»·ª»¼ °®±¾´»³ Analysis The crushed stone, though perhaps the most historically sensitive, is messy, easily tracked, and has a tendency to get muddy or puddle under heavy wear. It is the most permeable of all paving solutions. Its use throughout the Battle Green area has resulted in mixed success. It has been most successful for informal paths through open lawns where there is little topographic change and limited foot traffic away from historic structures. An alternative to this material might be to use a stabilizer mixed with the crushed stone (as done in Minute Man crushed stone and creates an even, durable, well-packed walking surface which retains the historic a embeds crushed stone aggregate into bituminous asphalt. Brick offers another historically sensitive material withstands heavy foot traffic, and is consistent with ADA requirements when properly installed. It is, however, more costly than other options and requires adequate base preparation to limit frost upheaval. Some communities are applying brick over an asphalt base to limit the opportunities for frost upheaval and weeds between joints. Brick pavers and wire cut brick have been used throughout the downtown Lexington business district, so use of traditional brick within the Battle Green would conform to this village street design standard but would incorporate historic materials rather than a contemporary material. Large granite pavers offer another historic choice as a durable historic path material. This material might be a good option for heavily used areas surrounding monuments and memorials most frequented by visitors. If a color is selected that matches the crushed stone used in stabilized dirt paths, the path treatments would be unified in their overall color treatment. granite finished with a sand-blasted or other non-skid surface for safety and historic appearance. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð The concrete sidewalk along Bedford Street, though more contemporary in appearance, offers a durable surface that can withstand heavy foot traffic and is more cost effective than brick. If the concrete was acid- concrete surface of the current sidewalk. This option, however, is more labor intensive and therefore more costly than the brushed concrete surface. The granite stairs leading to the Battle Monument are the most successful treatment for stairs in the Battle Green. These stairs are durable, historically appropriate, and made from local materials. The rustic fieldstone steps leading to the top of Belfry Hill from Clarke Street are uneven and unsafe, though their rustic appearance is historically sensitive in appearance. The crushed stone and timber stairs leading up Belfry Hill are the least successful and least effective of any stair options within the district. Their tendency to wash out in heavy rains creates a maintenance hazard, and the gradual degradation of the risers caused by their natural weathering processes results in unsafe and uneven conditions. Paving Recommendations The Battle Green does not require a single paving treatment for all areas. There are four categories or levels of walkways in the Battle Green: 1.Town sidewalks (major walks adjacent to roadways) ks on both sides of Bedford Street, Massachusetts Avenue, and Harrington Road 2.Primary paths (heavily used walks connecting major features and/or forming important pedestrian routes) Tavern, etc. 3.Secondary paths (less frequently used walks) Examples: roads and paths within Ye Olde Burying Ground, path from Lexington 4.Paving surrounding monuments (usually heavily used and often serves as the base for the monument or memorial) Examples: path to the Revolutionary War Monument, path to the Parker Boulder, wider, designated areas surrounding the monument with no distinct edges at present 5.Paving under benches Examples: Area under all benches throughout Battle Green Area Recognizing the category of use and importance should define the paving material selection and offer opportunity for variety in paving throughout the Battle Green area. Final selection of any paving material should be based on its durability, its installation costs, its historic appearance, its ADA compliance and its maintenance requirements and Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð expenses. In all cases, proper installation, particularly proper base preparation, is the key to longevity. Regular, routine maintenance can prevent small problems from growing into major issues. Carefully delineating or retaining the width of all paths is critical to the historic appearance in the Battle Green area. Maintaining standards for path widths can help to guide their use and reinforce their purpose. Heavily traveled sidewalks which are part of st the 21 -hs into each monument requires single-file movement and generates the opportunities for quiet respect and contemplation. Narrower paths, by necessity, slow pedestrians. Wider paths encourage group conversation and quick movement through an area. Respecting these subtle opportunities for guiding appropriate use of the Battle Green area is critical to its long-term success and respectful of its historic significance. Carefully delineating the areas to be paved is another important consideration. Heavy foot traffic and compaction has discouraged grass from growing around most monuments. The crushed stone that has been applied around the monuments has eliminated muddy conditions, but has gradually spread to cover a much larger area than is necessary. Crisply defining an area large enough for visitors to stand and returning extraneous areas to grass will greatly improve the appearance of these areas and eliminate path spread. Edging crushed stone, or changing these areas to stabilized crushed stone, brick or granite will improve their overall appearance. Paths can guide and respond to visitor use. Paths should only be located in areas where they are most needed, and eliminated from areas where they are not useful. All paths which form the historic fabric of the Battle Green area should be retained, respecting their historic widths and historic materials. Based on an evaluation of existing paving materials and suggested alternatives as outlined in the tables, the following materials are recommended for use in each walkway category. Consistency of materials can help to unify the site, link features, direct people through the Battle Green, and ease maintenance considerations. Ý¿¬»¹±®§ñÔ»ª»´ Î»½±³³»²¼»¼ Ó¿¬»®·¿´ Ý±³³»²¬ Ì±©² Í·¼»©¿´µ ó ß Û¨°±»¼ ¿¹¹®»¹¿¬» ½±²½®»¬» ó ø³¿¶±® ©¿´µ ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ¬± ¼±©² ¿¬ ½®±©¿´µ ®±¿¼©¿§ ¿©¿§ º®±³ ¬¸» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ø·ò»ò Þ«½µ³¿² Ì¿ª»®² ·¼» ±º Þ»¼º±®¼ Í¬®»»¬ Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ð®·³¿®§ °¿¬¸ Í¬¿¾·´·¦»¼ ½®«¸»¼ ¹®¿²·¬» »¼¹» ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ´¿©² ø·ò» °¿¬¸ ¬± Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Ê··¬±® ¬±²» ±² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬»´§ó ¿®»¿ ¾·¿²²«¿´´§ ¬± ®»¬¿·² Ý»²¬»®ô Þ«½µ³¿² Ì¿ª»®²ô °®»°¿®»¼ ¾¿»å ¬®¿²·¬·±² ¬± ½®·° »¼¹» Í¬±²»ô ¾®¿ ±® »¬½ò÷ ´¿®¹»ó½«¬ ¿²¬·¯«» ±® ¾®±²¦» ³¿®µ»® ·²»¬ ¿¬ µ»§ ¿²¼¾´¿¬ «®º¿½» ´±½¿¬·±² ½¿² ´·²µ º»¿¬«®» ¿²¼ ½±²²»½¬ ¬± ·²¬»®°®»¬·ª» ®»³±ª» ¬±²» ¹®·¬ º®±³ ¸±» °®±¹®¿³ Í»½±²¼¿®§ °¿¬¸ Í¬¿¾·´·¦»¼ ½®«¸»¼ ¹®¿²·¬» ø·ò»ò °¿¬¸ ©·¬¸·² Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ô ¬±²» ±² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬»´§ó ¿®»¿ ¾·¿²²«¿´´§ ¬± ®»¬¿·² °¿¬¸ ©·¬¸·² §» Ñ´¼» Þ«®§·²¹ °®»°¿®»¼ ¾¿» ½®·° »¼¹» Ù®±«²¼ô °¿¬¸ º®±³ Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Ê··¬±® Ý»²¬»® ¬± Ø¿²½±½µ Í¬®»»¬÷ Ð¿¬¸ ¿²¼ °¿ª·²¹ Í¬¿¾·´·¦»¼ ½®«¸»¼ ¹®¿²·¬» «®®±«²¼·²¹ ³±²«³»²¬ ¬±²» ±² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬»´§ó ¿®»¿ ¾·¿²²«¿´´§ ¬± ®»¬¿·² °®»°¿®»¼ ¾¿»å ¬®¿²·¬·±² ¬± ½®·° »¼¹»å ±³» ´¿®¹»ó½«¬ ¿²¬·¯«» ±® ³±²«³»²¬ ¬± ·¬ ©·¬¸·² ½®·°´§ó¼»º·²»¼ ¿®»¿ ±ºº ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ·¼»©¿´µ ø²± «®®±«²¼ ±º ³±²«³»²¬ ¼·¬·²½¬ °¿¬¸÷ Í¬¿·® Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ º®±³ ß²¬·¯«» °´·¬ ¹®¿²·¬» Í»¬ ©·¬¸ »ª»² Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» ¬®»¿¼ ¿²¼ ®·»® º±® ½±²·¬»²½§ Í¬¿·® Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ º®±³ É·¼¬¸ ª¿®·» ©·¬¸·² »¨·¬·²¹ Ý´¿®µ» Í¬®»»¬ »¬ ¿¬±° »¨·¬·²¹ ø®»»¬÷ º·»´¼¬±²» ¾±«´¼»® »¼¹»å ®«¬·½ º·»´¼¬±²» ®·»®å Î»»¬ »¨·¬·²¹ º·»´¼¬±²» º±® ³¿¬½¸ ®·»® ·² ½±´±® ¿²¼ ½±²·¬»²¬ ¸»·¹¸¬å ³±®¬¿® ¬»¨¬«®» ¬± »¨·¬·²¹ ¬±²» º·»´¼¬±²» ¬®»¿¼ ¿¬±° »¨·¬·²¹ º·»´¼¬±²» ®·»® ©·¬¸ ¼»»°ó®¿µ»¼ ¶±·²¬ Ð¿ª·²¹ «²¼»® ¾»²½¸» Í¬¿¾·´·¦»¼ ½®«¸»¼ ¹®¿²·¬» Ô»²¹¬¸ ¿²¼ ©·¼¬¸ ¬±²» ±² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬»´§ó ¼»¬»®³·²»¼ ¾§ ·¦» ±º ¾»²½¸å °®»°¿®»¼ ¾¿» ±® ´¿®¹» ½«¬ ½±²²»½¬ ¬¸· °¿ª·²¹ ¬± ¹®¿²·¬» ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ·¼»©¿´µ ú »´»½¬ ³¿¬»®·¿´ ¬± ½±·²½·¼» ©·¬¸ ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ °¿¬¸ °¿ª·²¹å ¿²½¸±® °¿ª·²¹ Path selections should be consistent throughout the district and should be selected to unify the district and complement its historic integrity. Use of stabilized crushed bluestone or stone dust should be trimmed regularly to create a neat, uniform appearance. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð remove grit from shoes before entering buildings. Granite paving could be extended to cross walks to create safe, distinct pedestrian ways across major roads. surfacing. If a marker system is approved for labeling or linking historic features, it should be incorporated into the paving system (such as the markers found on the Freedom Trail). Action Items 1.Review all walks and determine width and style of paving. 2.Review walking patterns prior to determining location and routes for walks; also width of paths. 3.Submit for . 4.Develop schedule for walkway improvements for a 3- year period. 5.Develop a maintenance program to regularly maintain walkways as necessary, including the maintenance of crisp, well defined edges on all walks. Note: Traffic Islands and crosswalks will be improved subject to a comprehensive traffic and safety study (see Recommendation # 7) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð 2. Site Furnishings Site furnishings within the Battle Green area currently include benches, street and monument lighting, and trash cans. All of these are considered necessary and important to continue within the Battle Green, but as with the paving, a unified approach is preferred to the current haphazard design selections. All site features need to be historically sensitive, durable, cost effective, and require limited long term maintenance. needs of the Battle Green continue to evolve. However, they need to support and enhance the historic character of the site and serve the functional needs demanded by this busy public space. The following table inventories the existing site furnishings. Since most are functional and historically sensitive, a design standard for these features is recommended by selecting a specific bench, trash can and lighting standard from one of the existing. ×³¿¹» Ô±½¿¬·±² Ý±³³»²¬ Ê··¬±® Ý»²¬»® øì÷å Ì»¿µ ¾»²½¸ ©·¬¸ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ øì÷ ¿®³å Û¿½¸ ¾»²½¸ ·²½´«¼» ³»³±®·¿´ °´¿¯«» ·² ³·¼¼´» ±º ¾¿½µå »¬ ¿¬ »¼¹» ±º °¿¬¸å Ê··¬±® ½»²¬»® ¾»²½¸» ±² ¾®·½µ °¿¼å Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ ¾»²½¸» »¬ ±² ¹®¿ ±® ¬±²» ¼«¬ Í·¬«¿¬»¼ ·² »ª»²´§ °¿½»¼ Ý±²½®»¬» ·¼» ¿²¼ ©±±¼»² ´±½¿¬·±² ¿´±²¹ ¬¸» »¼¹» ´¿¬å É±±¼»² ´¿¬ ±º ¬¸» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² º¿½·²¹ ®»¹«´¿®´§ ®»¯«·®» °¿·²¬·²¹å ¿©¿§ º®±³ ¬¸» ¬®»»¬ øïð÷ ×²º±®³¿´ ³¿ ±º ¬±²» ¼«¬ «®®±«²¼ »¿½¸ ¾»²½¸ Ñ´¼ Þ«®§·²¹ Ù®±«²¼ ß²¬·¯«» ¹®¿²·¬» °±¬ ¿²¼ ¾±«²¼¿®·» ©±±¼»² ®¿·´ º»²½»å ·®±² ¸·²¹» ¿¬¬¿½¸ ®¿·´ ¬± °±¬å ¾±¿®¼ ø±¿µá÷å ½®»¿¬» ©»´´ó ¼»´·²»¿¬»¼ »¼¹» ¬± °®±°»®¬§ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ×³¿¹» Ô±½¿¬·±² Ý±³³»²¬ Û¼¹» ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² øê÷ Ó»¬¿´ º®¿³» ©·¬¸ ¾¿®®»´ ´·²»®å ²± ¬±°å ½«®´»¼ ·®±² ´¿¬ ¿´±²¹ ¬±° »¼¹» ±º ¾¿µ»¬ Ê··¬±® Ý»²¬»® øì÷ ¿²¼ Þ»´º®§ Ó»¬¿´ º®¿³» ©·¬¸ ¾¿®®»´ Ø·´´ øï÷ ´·²»®å ·²»®¬ ½±ª»®å ·³·´¿® ¾¿» ¼»·¹² ¬± ¿¾±ª»å ·³°´»® ¬±°ò ø±³» ·²»®¬ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ®»³±ª»¼ ¿²¼ ¸±«´¼ ¾» ®»°´¿½»¼÷ Ü®·²µ·²¹ º±«²¬¿·² ±² Í°«² ½±²½®»¬» ±² Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» øï÷å ¾®«¸»¼ ½±²½®»¬» ´¿¾ «²µ²±©² ¼¿¬» ¾¿» É®»¿¬¸ ¿²¼ ¬¿²¼ Ì»³°±®¿®§ ¬¿²¼ ©·¬¸ ø»¿±²¿´å ©®»¿¬¸ °´¿½»¼ ©®»¿¬¸å ³±ª»¿¾´» ©·®»ó ¿¬ »ª»®¿´ ³±²«³»²¬ ±² ¬¿²¼ º®¿³»å ²»© °»½·¿´ ¸±´·¼¿§÷ ©®»¿¬¸ °´¿½»¼ º±® »¿½¸ »ª»²¬ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Site Furnishing Recommendations Bench Naturally weathered teak bench. As they wear out, replace existing concrete and wooden benches with teak versions set on stabilized sand bases or large size granite paving. . Battle Green benches do not include memorial plaques; donations of memorial benches (with plaques) can be used at Belfry Hill and Lexington Visitor Center Fence The fence style used at Ye Olde Burying Ground is appropriate and functional. th Throughout the 19 century the Common was fenced with the same two-rail fence style. Adding the fence back to the Battle Green will so desired by town residents and would create a distinct and different treatment from other town parks. This fence should be based on the historic design but with removable rails in the event that the fencing is an obstacle for the reenactments or other large events. Some of the monuments (and the Old Belfry) are protected by iron picket fencing of varying heights and styles. These fences require regular repair and maintenance and should be replaced in kind when replacement is necessary. Research may indicate the date and reason for the placement of these fences. If installed at the time of monument installation, they should be considered as part of the monument and conserved under similar guidelines used for the monuments themselves. Trash Containers Both trash container designs are historically sensitive to the Battle Green landscape. The simple top and black powder-coated style of the newer trash container is easier to maintain. Consistency is important, so use of all powder-coated black style with the insert should be required as the older trash containers are replaced. Trash containers should be placed only in areas frequented by people and set adjacent to or in concert with benches and other site furnishings. Drinking Fountain This feature bears more investigation as to installation date and design selection. The first drinking fountain was part of the watering trough designed as the Hayes Fountain. If the Hayes Fountain is restored, then the current drinking fountain could be eliminated unless it is historically significant. A water fountain serves a necessary functional purpose for site visitors, and its design needs to be simple yet historically sensitive to the Battle Green area. Consider removal or relocation of this drinking fountain to another suitable spot near the Lexington Visitor Center or in the park at the base of Belfry Hill. Do not compromise underground archaeological resources when placing a new drinking fountain. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» ëç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Action Items: 1.Analyze bench locations and base materials; develop plan for bench placement (consider grouping 2-3 benches together in fewer locations). 2.Obtain approval for bench style and pad design. 3.Develop program for bench repair or replacement and policy for benches. 4.Implement bench plans and routine maintenance program. 5.Review number and placement of trash containers. Locate trash containers as needed throughout Battle Green area; regularly maintain and replace as necessary. 6.Investigate history of drinking fountain and evaluate condition and maintenance requirements. Restore Hayes Fountain and its use as a drinking fountain if appropriate. Relocate or remove existing drinking fountain if not historically significant. 7.Determine if other fountain locations are necessary in the Battle Green area (not on the Battle Green itself). Install in areas where they will not damage archaeological features. 3. Lighting There are four luminaires and four post styles used in the area. Each lighting standard style reflects its own era of lighting improvements. The glass acorn light on a concrete th century styles, some inspired by earlier (non-electric) lighting. The curved-top and platter style light is the only cut- classification of lighting style that does not reflect light up into the night sky. This lighting fixture currently offers the softest illumination of any existing luminaire. None illumination is visible to passersby. Careful selection of a dark-sky friendly fixture with a full cut-off light source would enhance the night-time experience of the Battle Green and would not compete with the special lighting dedicated to illuminating the Minute Man Statue and the flagpole. The closest existing light standard with these characteristics is the Victorian style curved top and platter light, though a new platter-style fixture is available now which nests the light source up into the shade, creating a full cut-off fixture. Many communities are experimenting with LED lights. This newly emerging, efficient lighting style is cost effective, but careful selection of a warm LED coloring (non-blue) and appropriate wattage can create the soft lighting and color tones more typical of historic lighting. Often LED light is bright and very blue-toned, creating an unwelcoming, harsh lighting environment that would compete with the aesthetic monument lighting. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Þ»¼º±®¼ Í¬®»»¬ øï÷ Þ»¼º±®¼ Í¬®»»¬ øë÷ Ø¿²½±½µ Í¬®»»¬ øí÷ Ý´¿®µ» Í¬®»»¬ øí÷ Ó»¬¿´ °±¬ ¿²¼ ½±´±²·¿´ Í°«² ½±²½®»¬» °±¬ ©·¬¸ Í°«² ½±²½®»¬» °±¬ É±±¼»² ¬»´»°¸±²» ´«³·²¿·®»å ×²¬¿´´»¼ ¾§ ³»¬¿´ ¬±° ¿²¼ ®«ºº´»¼ ©·¬¸ ¹´¿ ¿½±®²ó¬§´» °±´» °±¬ ©·¬¸ Þ±¬±² Û¼·±² ¿ ¿ ¿³°´» °´¿¬¬»®ó¬§´» ´«³·²¿·®» ´«³·²¿·®» ³»®½«®§ ª¿°±® ¿²¼ ²»ª»® ®»³±ª»¼ ø½ò ¹±±»ó²»½µ ´«³·²¿·®» Lighting Recommendation Continue to research the history of street lighting in the Battle Green area and determine the date and reasoning for each lighting campaign. (There are no light fixtures shown in th the 1905 photographs, so presumably any historic fixtures would be 20 century in design). Include both gas and electric options. The town of Stockbridge just re-cast their historic light fixtures and posts, and this may be an option for Lexington if a better historic light fixture is available. If a more historic fixture is not found, use the curved top platter light (preferably with full cut-off lighting) as a design template, as it is the most environmentally friendly option, and offers the softest illumination without glare of all existing styles. Investigate options for warm LED bulbs in wattage suitable for safety which does not compromise the monument and flagpole lighting. Obtain approval for selected post, luminiere and type of bulb selected. Develop a comprehensive lighting plan for the Battle Green which is sensitive to the aesthetic lighting of the monuments and creates a safe walking and driving condition using the minimum number of lights. If possible, locate the lights on the edges of the street across the road from the Battle Green with no lights on the Battle Green. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Action Items: 1.Research lighting history and historic design styles. 2.Select post, fixture and lighting type (gas versus electric) for use throughout the Battle Green. 3.Develop lighting plan showing number, type, and location of fixtures and their appropriate wattage. 4.Determine if additional monument lighting is appropriate or necessary. 5.Obtain approvals. 6.Implement lighting program over a 2 year period, including replacement of existing lights 7.Establish regular maintenance program for posts, luminaires and bulb replacements 4. Vegetation Trees Large deciduous shade trees are one of the key defining features of the Battle Green. A previous plan for the Battle Green in the late twentieth century recommended a double row of mixed species with similar growth habits around the Battle Green. This duplicates the historic rhythm and placement of trees in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. The large lawn areas between Bedford Street and the Bicycle Path feature scattered, less rhythmic placement of deciduous trees and smaller understory fruit trees and ornamentals. Most of the trees are less than fifty years old, replacements for the massive number of American Elms lost to Dutch elm disease The vegetation on Belfry Hill is more rustic featuring the remains of ornamental th shrubberies (rhododendrons, lilacs and other ornamental early 20 century species), mixed with stands of seedling oaks, pines and briar bushes. The dry, thin, ledge-strewn soils on the hilltop limit the opportunities for intentional plantings. One evergreen tree screens large electric utility boxes on the Massachusetts Avenue side of the Battle Green. This tree is lit during the holiday season; some feel that this type of tree is better suited to another location outside the heart of the Battle Green. Shrubs and Herbaceous Plants Massed plantings of arborvitae and yew hide the entrance to Belfry Hill. Yew hedges mixed with other ornamental shrubberies soften the back side of the USS Lexington memorial. The seemingly accidental nature of the rhododendron plantings on Belfry Hill are currently the most successful use of evergreens in the area. There are very limited occurrences of seasonal flower plantings currently in the Battle Green area. Masses of colorful annuals ornament the pockets of the Hayes Memorial Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Fountain and accent small planting beds near the buildings and interpretive signs on Massachusetts Avenue. Grass Recommendations for the height of the lawn areas were discussed in depth as part of the public hearing process. Some hoped that the lawns would be maintained as regularly mown meadows mown four times per year. Others suggested that the Battle Green, in its role as town common, was more appropriately maintained as a well kept lawn. All agreed that efforts to minimize compaction and encourage vigorous growth for the grass were important using organic and ecologically sensitive methods. The appropriate treatment of the grass should respect its historic precedents and the thth contemporary needs for the Battle Green today. Throughout the 18 and 19 century the Common was pasture. The grasses grazed by cows and sheep were kept irregularly clipped by the animals, so they were never very tall. After the Civil War, when animals no longer grazed the Battle Green, the grasses were allowed to grow and then cut as hay; the hay was auctioned off to a lucky Lexington resident. During this period, the grasses were cut 3-4 times annually. This period, however was very brief (c. 1860-1884). By 1884, when the first monuments were placed on the Battle Green (in addition to the Revolutionary War Monument from 1799), the grasses were clipped to a manicured lawn. The 1905 photographs illustrate a Common that had removed all evidence of its former agricultural roots the fence was removed, the grasses clipped, and the elms encouraged to shade the clipped lawn and trimmed sidewalks. use of taller, broader-leaf, drought-tolerant varieties or meadow grasses mown less frequently. Others encourage sound, organic-based, ecologically sensitive maintenance programs using native or hardy grass species with minimal watering demands. The thousands of tourists that visit the Battle Green area, the reenactment events and other programs suitable to the Battle Green have to be considered when determining a grass maintenance program. Recommendations Trees The Town should continue to plant large deciduous shade trees in a double row around the Battle Green. When the evergreen masking the utility boxes goes into decline, options for sinking or masking the utility boxes with smaller shrubs should be planned. (The existing evergreen masks one of the key views through the Battle Green). The areas surrounding the Lexington Visitor Center and Buckman Tavern should be planted with orchards and less formal arrangements of shade trees positioned so they do not mask the view to the Visitor Center and the other buildings. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Shrubs and Herbaceous Plants Shrub plantings that are part of the monument installations, such as the shrubs backing the USS Lexington Memorial, should be retained and regularly maintained according to their intent and relationship to the monument. Remove shrubs along Massachusetts Avenue that are blocking the view to the Lexington Visitor Center. Establish the view between the Lexington Visitor Center and the Battle Green by framing it with a few, appropriately placed trees, if necessary. The yews and arborvitae at the base of Belfry Hill should be removed to encourage visitors to enter Belfry Hill. The pines that line the property boundary between Belfry Hill and the neighboring residence should be under-planted with masses of rhododendrons or other native or hardy, historically appropriate evergreen shrubs to provide privacy and screening between the public and private spaces. Plantings on Belfry Hill should be evaluated for intent. Weedy species should be removed and a carefully designed arrangement of hardy, drought tolerant species added to the edges of the park to provide privacy to neighboring back yards but highlighting the expansive views of the Battle Green and village center viewed from the top of the Hill. Given the thin, ledge-strewn soils atop the hill, limit the occurrence of lawns and encourage the use of groundcovers, low shrubs and simple plant groupings tolerant of the difficult growing conditions. Review the location, size, and condition of trees within Ye Olde Burying Ground. As necessary, use native or historically appropriate plantings to screen or buffer views to surrounding properties that detract from the historic character of the burial ground and its boundary fence. Retain the casually clipped grasses at the base of the fence and retain the simple boundary created by the fence. The use of colorful annuals should be discouraged, with the possible exception of the Lexington Visitor Center and the base of Belfry Hill where the colorful plants might guide visitors to these under-utilized areas. Guidelines for seasonal plantings should encourage the use of hardy native or historic species and limit the maintenance and water demands for these displays. Grass The park-like treatment of the Battle Green during the late nineteenth century with its installation of so many monuments and memorials significantly changed the role of the grassy lawns from common pasture to public park. Given the predominance of monuments and memorials on the Battle Green today, the role of the grass as a greensward is a critical design element in the Battle Green. Its location at the heart of a bustling downtown surrounded by carefully manicured private residences must be carefully considered. If the Battle Green is fenced, there is better opportunity to maintain the grasses to a different standard than the surrounding residences. If a more historic aesthetic is Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð preferred, maintaining the lawns at a height and quality similar to Ye Olde Burying Ground is one option, with the goal of a fenced pasture rather than a hay meadow. Recognizing the needs of the Patriots Day re-enactment and the heavy visitation of the Battle Green area must be considered when selecting a grass height. Limiting heavy visitation to a few, carefully selected grass paths will force all visitors to use the same route and by necessity may require this path to be paved to prevent muddy, ill-kept conditions. Lower grass heights might encourage disbursement of foot traffic across the Battle Green and prevent heavy wear in one area. No matter the final decision on length of lawn, it should be maintained at a length that , and continue the organic maintenance program already in use by the Superintendent of Grounds. This standard should also apply to the lawns surrounding the Visitor Center and Buckman Tavern. Like the Battle Green, the change in maintenance standards to create thth lawns in the 19 century has dominated our mowing aesthetics throughout the 20 century. As part of the evolving history of the Battle Green, the lawn evolved out of the pasture when machines replaced sheep and cows. As such, maintaining a well tended, ecologically friendly maintenance program and regular (frequency to be determined) mowing is appropriate. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Action Items: 1.Continue tree planting program, being sensitive to keeping open feel of Battle Green. Use trees of similar size and habit to existing in a double row around the Battle Green. 2.Develop appropriate species and planting standards for trees surrounding Buckman Tavern and the Lexington Visitor Center, sited to retain views to both buildings and connecting views between the Lexington Visitor Center and the Battle Green. 3.Develop planting and maintenance standards for all plantings associated with monuments and memorials, including the fountain and traffic islands surrounding the Minute Man Statue. 4.Develop a planting plan for Belfry Hill, including the removal of evergreen shrubs that hide the entrance to this area from the public way and the careful management of species to provide privacy to neighboring yards but open views to the townscape. 5.Develop an eco-friendly, organic maintenance and mowing program for all grass areas. 6.Manage soils and watering programs to appropriately and adequately maintain all plantings in an ecologically sensitive manner. 7.Develop an appropriate maintenance budget for staff to adequately maintain the Battle Green area. 5. Focal Points and Views In order to appropriately manage plantings and to enhance the aesthetic and symbolic aspects of the Battle Green area, understanding and maintaining its focal points and its key views is critical to the Master Planning process. At present, the following list represents the primary views for the Battle Green: Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ü±©²¬±©² ¬± ¬¸» Ó·²«¬» Ó¿² Í¬¿¬«» Ó·²«¬» Ó¿² Í¬¿¬«» ¬± Ú´¿¹°±´» ¬± Ú·®¬ Ð¿®·¸ Ý¸«®½¸ Ú·®¬ Ð¿®·¸ Ý¸«®½¸ ¬± ª·»© ¿½®± ¬¸» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¬±©¿®¼ ¼±©²¬±©²ñÓ·²«¬» Ó¿² Í¬¿¬«» Ù¿¬»©¿§ Ê·»©æ º·®¬ ª·»© ¬± Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¿²¼ Þ«½µ³¿² Ì¿ª»®² º®±³ ·²¬»®»½¬·±² ±º Þ»¼º±®¼ Í¬®»»¬ ¿²¼ Ø¿²½±½µ Í¬®»»¬ Ù¿¬»©¿§ Ê·»©æ º·®¬ ª·»© ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² º®±³ Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» ¿ §±« ¿°°®±¿½¸ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º Ø¿®®·²¹¬±² Î±¿¼ Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ê·»© º®±³ Ê··¬±® Ý»²¬»® ¬± Ø¿²½±½µ Í¬®»»¬ Ê·»© º®±³ Ê··¬±® Ý»²¬»® ¬± Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ø½±«´¼ «» »²¸¿²½»³»²¬÷ Ê·»© ¿½®± Ç» Ñ´¼» Þ«®§·²¹ Ù®±«²¼ º®±³ »²¼ ±º »²¬®§ ®±¿¼ Ð¿²±®¿³·½ ª·»© º®±³ ¬±° ±º Þ»´º®§ Ø·´´ Í¬®»»¬½¿°» Ó¿¿½¸«»¬¬ ßª»²«» ª·½·²·¬§ ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Í¬®»»¬½¿°» Ø¿®®·²¹¬±² Î±¿¼ Features that serve as primary focal points for the Battle Green: 1.Minute Man Statue 2. 3.First Parish Church The following map illustrates the location of key views and focal points (focal points are marked with an asterisk *). Recommendations Preserve existing views and significance of key focal points. Test any proposed plans for plantings, pedestrian access and traffic management for their impact to these views. Consider enhancements which might create new views or establish new focal points. Action Items: 1.Review existing views and vistas. 2.Improve view from Lexington Visitor Center to Battle Green and from Bedford Street to the Lexington Visitor Center to draw visitors into the Center. 3.Improve views from top of Belfry Hill. 4.Enhance existing views and/or create new views within Battle Green that reinforce its role as a special place. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» êç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #7: Parking, Traffic Calming and Safe Pedestrian Access Parking In the public survey and in public hearings, parking was identified as a major topic of concern for the Battle Green. Those who responded indicated that they felt it was necessary and non-intrusive to allow automobile parking around the Battle Green. Others strongly supported the possibility of eliminating parking along the edges of the Battle Green as long as the number of parking spaces could be accommodated elsewhere within the vicinity. A few suggested limiting automobile parking to the sides of the street opposite the Battle Green. Parking on Harrington Road was not discussed. Cars parked along the major thoroughfares offer a small measure of buffer and protection from traffic. However cars in these locations limit the visibility of the Battle Green from the major gateways. A majority of citizens hoped to eliminate bus parking from the Battle Green because of their size and their continuously-running diesel motors. Everyone recognized, however, the importance of welcoming tourists and accommodating tour groups. Establishing a thriving double row of trees along the edge of the roadways throughout the Battle Green area would help to minimize the impact of vehicular noise and the visual distraction of parked cars. Carefully planning for safe cross walks in visible locations where pedestrians are not obscured by parked cars is equally important, particularly if connections are increased between features on both sides of Bedford Street and Massachusetts Avenue. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendations It is the recommendation of this report that a parking and traffic study be completed that includes an analysis of parking for automobiles along Bedford Street and Massachusetts Avenue, alternative locations for these spaces if they were eliminated from the Battle Green, and options for bus drop-off and parking. There is a significant amount of parking within the immediate vicinity of the Battle Green, located in large lots behind downtown businesses. This parking is difficult for visitors to find, and Battle Green visitors will compete with business traffic for the available spaces. A comprehensive parking study can analyze the current number, allowed duration, and location of parking spaces and develop a well considered plan for relocating the existing spaces around the Battle Green. In consultation with the Historic Districts Commission, develop plans to remove parking over a period of time around the Battle Green and relocating the parking spaces to other designated locations. Parking should be eliminated on Harrington Road except for Sunday mornings or specific times during regularly scheduled church services. A dedicated bus drop-off area should be designated in a spot away from cross walks or areas where buses dropping passengers might obscure pedestrian visibility. Once passengers disembark, buses should be required to leave the area and park in a designated lot away from the Battle Green, then return at the appropriate time to pick up passengers. A plan for tour buses and tour programs should be linked to the interpretation and signage program, and take into consideration getting visitors into local businesses. One possibility might include a bus drop-off in the Battle Green area and bus parking or pick up in the downtown area, encouraging visitors to explore downtown shops. Another option might include starting bus groups at the Depot or Museum of National Heritage and bringing them to the Battle Green via trolley or other, less intrusive, mode of mass transit. Traffic Calming and Safe Crossings A number of traffic calming techniques are already in place in the Battle Green area. The density of the village center, the number of turning and entering vehicles onto major thoroughfares in the area, and the congested roads all serve as speed-calming agents, though they increase the frustration and confusion of drivers. Short of installing pedestrian crossing lights, options for raised cross walks or the use of special paint highlighting the crossing opportunities for pedestrians are the best means of providing safe passage for vehicles, people and commercial traffic through the Battle Green area. Painted or raised granite crosswalks may be an option, though they will require special design consideration for plows in the winter season. Bump-outs are used throughout the downtown center, and the Battle Green area currently includes the use of traffic islands, bump-outs and changes in paving to mark crosswalk Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð locations. Where necessary, crosswalks that run perpendicular to the road edge are preferred to those set at angles. In all cases crosswalks should be located where pedestrians most often cross the roads. The existing traffic island in front of the Minute Man Statue has proved to be an effective means to allow visitors to photograph the monument. Its surface needs aesthetic improvements (such as changing the surface to stone or using grass or groundcover surrounding a central walk). Where possible, pedestrians should be encouraged to cross the road at intersections rather than in the middle of the street locations where vehicles tend to slow or stop for turning traffic. Carefully managing through traffic, turning traffic and pedestrian crossings in these areas is congested but preferable to crossing pedestrians in the middle of a road where they are not expected. However placing crosswalks where pedestrians WANT to cross the street will be most effective in controlling pedestrians and cars. Recommendation A professional study which analyzes the current parking, traffic and pedestrian crossing opportunities can offer the best options for solving these important problems. Solutions for these issues must be carefully studied and solved using appropriate materials and minimal signage so they do not intrude on the historic integrity of the Battle Green area. This study should address the overall improved safety for pedestrians to the Normal School, the Lexington Visitor Center, Buckman Tavern, the Battle Green, the Cary Library, and downtown businesses. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Where possible, enhancing the use and feel of the Battle Green area as a special place apart from other Lexington parks is an important goal of all traffic calming, crossing and parking recommendations. Working with the Battle Road corridor, coordinated and consistent treatment of these issues throughout the Battle Road may offer a comprehensive design solution and standards that are consistent, considerate of all users, and safe. Though necessary, safety signage should be carefully designed and limited to those locations and messages that are critical for the safety of all users. Selected materials and locations should take into consideration their (positive) visual impact of this sensitive area. Action Items 1.Analyze past traffic and parking studies and their recommendations. 2.Commission a comprehensive traffic, parking and pedestrian study of the Battle Green area and its relationship to downtown businesses. 3.Recommend improvements for parking (for all vehicles), traffic calming program, and pedestrian crossing locations that are sensitive to the Battle Green area. 4.Locate cross walks in the safest locations. 5.Develop design standards for cross walks and islands and use them consistently throughout the Battle Green area based on traffic calming techniques developed through the traffic study. Where possible use drought-tolerant groundcovers or historic paving materials for these islands (as opposed to asphalt). 6.Improve the aesthetics of the traffic island in front of the Minute Man Statue, (if it is to remain based on the traffic study) including alternative options for surface paving, use of landscape materials surrounding the Statue, etc. 7.Obtain approval for all plans. 8.Spearhead funding and implementation plan. 9.Maintain all implemented changes; monitor their success and alter as needed. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Recommendation #8: Funding The recommendations within this Master Plan cannot be implemented without proper funding. Another charge of the Battle Green Area Advisory Committee is to make recommendations for appropriate private and tax payer based funding strategies. As a highly significant, National Landmark property, the Battle Green has options for Treasures program). Individual features within the Battle Green area (monuments, markers, historic structures, vegetation) might qualify for funding from various public and private sources. Budget Based on the recommendations in this Master Plan, the following budget has been prepared based on a three-tier implementation strategy (immediate, mid-term and long- term improvements). Cost figures are based on 2010 pricing and will have to be adjusted for inflation as necessary. (costs will be prepared in late December based on review of this draft document) Ú«²¼·²¹ Í±«®½» The following is a preliminary list of available federal and state funding sources for the Battle Green area. Other sources, particularly private grants and foundations, may offer other funding opportunities, particularly for specific features or aspects of the Battle Green area (i.e. monument preservation, signage, interpretation, etc.) 1. Grant Name: Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation Agency: National Trust for Historic Preservation Amount: $2,500 10,000 Match: 1:1 Deadline: Feb 1 Eligible Activities: Consultant services for planning and education in preservation; Designing management capabilities; designing marketing materials; educational programs; web site development Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð 2. Grant Name: Agency: National Park Service, National Endowment for the Arts, Institute of Museum and Library Services, Presidential Committee on the Arts and Humanities Amount: $125,000-700,000 Match: 1:1 Deadline: late May Eligible Activities: Preservation and conservation work on National Landmark sites, structures, intellectual and cultural artifacts 3. Grant Name: Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund Agency: Massachusetts Historical Commission Amount: $6,000-10,000 Match: 60:40 Deadline: varies Eligible Activities: Master planning for historic preservation; feasibility study of financial, technical or economic alternatives to or advisability of a proposed preservation project; development of information related to historic preservation; heritage tourism, historic district design guidelines, training or educational programs for historic preservation 4. Grant Name: American Battlefield Protection Program Agency: National Park Service Amount: $18,000-95,000 Match: 1:1 Deadline: January Eligible Activities: Battlefield survey, site mapping, preservation planning, cultural landscape inventories, educational materials and interpretation 5. Grant Name: Interpreting American History Grant Agency: National Endowment for the Humanities Amount: $15,000 Match: outright funds but prefer 1:1 match Deadline: January Eligible Activities: Planning and implementation grants offered in two separate categories; visitor orientation, exhibitions, interpretive displays, revised tour scripts, docent materials, publications such as brochures and guidebooks, signage, website and other digital media Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð 6. Grant Name: Preserve America Grants Agency: National Park Service & Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Amount: $15,000-250,000 Match: 1:1 Deadline: February Eligible Activities: Heritage tourism, preservation planning, history education and economic development 7. Grant Name: Massachusetts Downtown Initiative Agency: Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development Amount: $10,000 Match: 1:1 Deadline: December Eligible Activities: Consulting services for business improvement districts; design; economic development; housing; parking; way-finding and branding Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² øÙ®¿°¸·½÷ (once the draft plan has been reviewed and revised, this page will contain a compilation graphic of recommendations for the Battle Green area) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ý±²½´«·±² The Battle Green is a complex layering of daily use and national shrine with intensely significant symbolism. Every effort, from site furnishings, to the length of grass, to the maintenance of its memorials should reflect and respect its significance. As such, standards for the Battle Green and the surrounding historic area are high. The citizens of Lexington care deeply about this property, and as its owner, proudly search for the appropriate choices to achieve these high standards. Community ownership, however, also requires multiple opinions and respect for differing attitudes about use, design standards, and interpretive programming. This respect for diverse opinion and the role of individual citizens to shape public policy is exactly what the Battle Green represents. Therefore, the implementation of its Master Plan will, by necessity, be laborious and riddled with passionate conversation. Instead of slowing or stopping the process, however, it should not prevent progress, but inform it. Eventually, the Board of Selectmen and Town Meeting have to cast a vote and move forward, under the guidance of the Battle Green Area Advisory Council. This steady, forward movement, coupled with sound budgeting and conscientious maintenance programs, will ensure that we for those visitors from around the world who view the land as a sacred reminder of American ideals. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» éç Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ß²²±¬¿¬»¼ Þ·¾´·±¹®¿°¸§ ---------. Renactment of the Battle of April 19, 1775. (Lexington MA: 1986) Source: Cary Memorial Library 1 videocassette Description: Video of battle re-enactment from 1986 Cary Memorial Library, comp. Articles and brochures about Lexington Battle Green. (continuously updated ). Source: Cary Memorial Library, Lex Room 974.44L Gr Description: Newspaper clippings from the Lexington Minute-Man, Boston Globe, Massachusetts Historical Commission, Centennial Legion Cary Memorial Library, comp. Articles and brochures, Minute Man Statue, Lexington MA (continuously updated). Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L L591hms Description: Story of the famous statue at Lexington Green by J. Robert Sherman the Minute Man Speaks; Norton Tuttle Hood. Newspaper clippings fromteh Lexington Minute-Man, Boston Globe about Minute Man Statue Cary Memorial Library, comp. Historic buildings, places and historic districts articles and brochures, Town of Lexington (continuously updated) Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L H 628hd Description: Newspaper clippings from the Lexington Minute-Man, Boston Globe Cary Memorial Library, comp. Historic descriptive brochures, Lexington Battle Green (continuously updated). Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L L59bhd Description: Guidebooks to Lexington, Lexington and natural history guide, story of famous statue at Lexington Green Fleming, Ronald Lee and Lauri A. Halderman. On Common Ground: Caring for Shared Land from Town Common to Urban Park. (Cambridge MA: The Townscape Institute and Harvard MA: Harvard Common Press: 1982). Source: - library loan program Description: Study and recommendations for managing, designing and interpreting town commons Hamilton, Lynn. The Master Plan for Recreation and Open Space. (Lexington MA: Department of Parks: 1970) Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L L591rg 1970 Description: Planning Board report for Lexington parks and open space Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Hudson, Charles. History of the Town of Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts: from its first settlement to 1868. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co: 1913) Source: Cary Memorial Library 974.44L H867h v1 and v2 Description: detailed history of Lexington from early settlement through 1912 Lexington Conservation, Planning and Recreation Departments. 1997 Lexington Open Space and Recreation Plan. (Lexington MA: 1997) Source: Cary Memorial Library REF 974.44L L5916m Description: Recreation plan for Lexington (report), 1997 Lexington Historic Districts Commission. Lexington Historic Districts Commission: applications, instructions and guidelines. (Lexington MA: 2001) Source: Cary Memorial Library, Lex Room 974.44L L5912a 2003 Description: Lexington historic districts application instructions and guidelines Lexington Oral History project. Democracy and Dissent (Lexington MA: 2007;1994) Source: Cary Memorial Library 66 videodiscs Description: Lexington Oral History project videorecordings Lexington, Town of. Rules and Specifications Regulating the Use of the Battle Green, 2004 Source: Lexington Description: Typewritten sheet; rules and regulations for use of Battle Green including application for event or activity Linenthal, Edward. Sacred Ground: Americans and Their Battlefields. (University of Illinois Press: 1991) Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 973 L Description: Book includes descriptions of Lexington and Concord Association. Inventory. (Boston MA: Massachusetts Heritage Landscape Inventory Program: 2006) Source: Cary Memorial Library REF 974.44L L Description: Landscape inventory including Lexington history, Battle Road Corridor, historic cemeteries, inventory of archaeological assets, planning documents and tools, preservation planning recommendations Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation. Historic Landscape Preservation Initiative. Terra Firma: Putting Historic Landscape Preservation on Solid Ground. Common Wealth: The Past and Future of Town Commons. (Boston MA: 2008) Source: available online at http://mass.gov/dcr/stewardship/histland/terra_firma6.pdf Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èï Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Description: General history of Massachusetts town commons, preservation planning considerations, case studies of some Massachusetts commons Pullen, Doris Luck. In the Shadow of the Minute Man: a guide to Lexington, Massachusetts. (Lexington MA Battle Green Publications: 1964) Source: Cary Memorial Library Description: travel guide to sites and locations in Lexington Sileo, Thoma P. Historical Guide to Open Space in Lexington. (1995) Source: Cary Memorial Library 974.44L S Description: Lexington Common Sileo, Thoma P. History of Lexington Battle Green. (1995) Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L S Description: History of Battle Green to 1995 Walter Cudnohufsky Associates. The Battle Green, Lexington, Massachusetts. Town Commons Preservation Initiative. Historic Preservation Grant Program. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management. (Ashfield MA: 2001). Source: Cary Memorial Library, Lex Room 974.44L Grp Description: Typewritten manuscript report; results of public charrette and consultants recommendations for Battle Green Worthen, Edwin B. A Calendar History of Lexington, Massachusetts, 1620-1946. th (Lexington MA: Lexington Savings Bank (in observance of its 75 anniversary 1871-1946: 1946). Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L W899c Description: Calendar including images of Lexington Battle Green Worthen, Edwin B. Historic Lexington published in the Times Minute-M Newspaper. (Lexington MA: Times Minute Man Newspaper: 1930) Source: Cary Memorial Library Lex Room 974.44L H629p Description: Historical events by the year in Lexington Worthen, Edwin B. Tracing the Past in Lexington, Massachusetts. (Vantage Press: 1998) Source: Cary Memorial Library 974.44L W899t Description: Book outlining the process of historic research and sources in Lexington Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èî Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Plans for Lexington Battle Green on File, Lexington Department of Engineering Proposed Work, May 24, 1928 [Public Grounds and Buildings 63; Vault 201 Bedford Street] As Built, March 1925. [Public Grounds and Buildings 53; Vault 201 Bedford Street] Land Around Common, January 1, 1917. [Public Grounds and Buildings 83; Vault 201 Bedford Street] As Built, n.d. [Public Grounds and Buildings 65; Vault 201 Bedford Street] Sprinkler System, 1974. [Public Grounds and Buildings 89; Vault 201 Bedford Street] Tree Map, June 1957 [Public Grounds and Buildings 53A; Vault 201 Bedford Street] Middlesex County Atlas. (Bound volume) 1906 [Vol. 2 Middlesex County Vault 201 Bedford Street] Map of Belmont, Watertown, Waltham and Lexington (bound volume) 1898. [Vault 201 Bedford Street] Lexington GIS. Base maps and mapped layers. 2010. [online] Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èí Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð ß°°»²¼·½» Guidelines for Greens 1. Case Studies from Other Communities 2. Public Forum Comments (October 20, 2010) 3. Survey data, 2010 4. Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èì Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð (Authors Note: This list of guidelines, and this publication, offer simple rules for proper management of town greens. Lexington has already adopted many of these goals; the others are part of the objective of this Master Plan) Guidelines for Greens By Thomas M. Paine, ASLA and Lauri A. Halderman Published in On Common Ground: Caring for Shared Land from Town Common to Urban Park (Harvard MA: Harvard Common Press, 1982) FOCUS 1.Maintain the dominance of an effective focal point 2.If the green has no focal point, consider creating one 3.If several embellishments compete for dominance, relocate or reorganize them 4.Provide additional focus by enclosing the green with a fence, rows of trees, or both LANDSCAPE 1.Maintain characteristic planting of the space 2.Locate trees according to historical, spatial, and environmental factors 3.Plant trees along the perimeter to provide a strong sense of enclosure 4.Plant trees and shrubs sparingly in other locations, for special design purposes 5.Restrict flowers to planters or other suitable containers 6.Preserve the existing topography of the green. FOOTPATHS 1.Provide paths to major points of destination and embellishments 2.Arrange paths in a pattern that is simple and functional 3.Keep footpaths uniformly narrow 4.Provide access for the handicapped to the major path 5.Pave off-path areas if necessary 6.Choose footpath and paved area materials that are attractive, compatible, and durable FURNISHINGS 1.Restrict the number of furnishings so that they do not overwhelm the green. 2.Select new furnishings to coordinate with the existing style, or replace the entire system 3.Provide lighting on the green as necessary 4.Choose furnishings that are well designed, durable, and in keeping with the character of the green. INTERPRETATION 1.Use interpretive material to convey historical and contemporary information. 2.Consider a variety of media. 3.Integrate interpretive markers with other green furnishings ENCROACHMENT 1.Defend the green against state highway encroachment. 2.Defend the green against local expropriation for traffic, recreation, and other purposes. 3.Define the edges of the green Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èë Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð 4.Choose furnishings that are well designed, durable, and in keeping with the character of the green. TRAFFIC 1.Enforce low speed limits around the green. 2.Provide adequate crosswalk access to the green. 3.Eliminate curbside parking along the perimeter of the green. 4.Restrict the number of signs on the green. TOWNSCAPE 1.Preserve the townscape enclosure of the green. 2.Preserve attractive views as well as the buildings themselves. 3.Preserve historic townscape details 4.Encourage rehabilitation and amenities projects in the area surrounding the green. 5.Defend solar access to the green. 6.Reduce the clutter of telephone poles and overhead wires. USE 1.Encourage regular, passive use of the green. 2.Use the green for both small- and large-scale community events 3.Involve the green in the observance of holidays, especially Arbor Day. 4.Prohibit permanent facilities that benefit only special-interest groups. 5.Establish a system of management for special events MAINTENANCE 1.Establish a system of routine maintenance 2.Establish a hierarchy of maintenance priorities 3.Supplement parks department staff with a private landscape maintenance firm if necessary 4.Encourage owners of properties adjacent to the green to adopt similar maintenance programs Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èê Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Case Studies Keene NH Too many embellishments (fountains, bandstands, etc.); pedestrian access Bridgewater MA Plantings confined to containers Salem MA Restored missing elements; rehab funding New Haven CT Path system and working green Lawrence MA Commemorative memorials Cambridge MA Treatment of paving at base of memorials to prevent erosion and wear; Planning and funding Little Compton RI Lighting standards and commemorative plaques at base Dedham MA Fencing Falmouth MA Fencing, embellishments, Seasonal displays; events issues Woodstock VT Inferior standards for light posts Middletown CT Highway encroachment Tallmadge OH Highway encroachment and green space Norwich CT Parking Waltham MA Paving, planning issues Madison CT Pulling the elements back together again Easthampton MA Gifts and legacies South Royalton VT Curbing Ipswich MA Construction of new buildings Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èé Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Other Massachusetts Communities with Town Commons: = national significance Amherst Edgartown Marshfield Sheffield East Amherst South Egremont Middleton Stow South Amherst Essex Milton Sturbridge North Andover Falmouth Natick Sudbury Ashby Framingham Needham Sutton Auburn Fitchburg Needham Taunton Barnstable Foxboro Heights Templeton Barre Framingham New Bedford Tewksbury Bedford South Newbury Tolland Belchertown Framingham New Topsfield Berlin Grafton Marlborough Townsend Billerica Granby New Salem Tyngsboro Bolton Greenfield Newton Wakefield Boston Groton Norfolk Waltham Boylston Hadley Northampton Warwick Boxford Hanover Northboro Wayland Braintree Hardwick North Carver Webster Brewster Harvard Northfield Wendell Bridgewater Haverhill North Reading Wenham Brimfield Hingham Norton Westborough Brookfield Holden Norwell West Boylston Brookline Holliston Oakham West Cambridge Hopkinton Pepperell Bridgewater Carlisle Huntington Petersham West Brookfield Carver Ipswich Pittsfield Westfield North Carver Lancaster Plymouth West Newbury Charlestown Lawrence (2) Prescott West Townsend Chelmsford Lee (Groton) Westford Chelsea Leominster Princeton Westhampton Cohasset Lexington Quincy Weston Concord Littleton Reading Westwood Conway Longmeadow Rehobeth Williamstown Dedham (2) Lowell Rochester Winchester Deerfield Ludlow Rowley Woburn Dennis Lynn Roxbury Worcester South Dennis Lynnfield Royalston Wrentham Dunstable Mansfield Rutland Duxbury Marlboro Salem Easthampton Village Sandwich Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» èè Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Public Forum Comments Lexington Battle Green October 20, 2010 Estabrook Hall Important considerations for Master Plan suggested by individual audience participants: Ø¿²¼·½¿°°»¼ Ð¿®µ·²¹ Û´·³·²¿¬» °¿®µ·²¹ ±²´§ ·º ¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» °¿½» ¿®» ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» Ø¿²¼·½¿°°»¼ ß½½»·¾´» «®º¿½» º±® ©¿´µ ¿²¼ °¿¬¸ Õ»»° ½»²¬»® ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ±°»² ¬®»» ±²´§ ±² °»®·³»¬»® Ú»¼»®¿´ ®»¹«´¿¬·±² ·³°±» ¿ ´»ª»´ ±º ®»ª·»© ¿²¼ ¬»©¿®¼¸·° Ô¿²¼³¿®µ ¬¿¬« ³¿µ» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² Ò±¬·º§ °»±°´» ¿¾±«¬ ¾«®§·²¹ ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ »²½±«®¿¹» ¬¸»³ ¬± ¹± ª··¬ Í°®«½» ¬®»» · ¿²²±§·²¹ º±® »»·²¹ ±¾»´·µ Ý«®®»²¬ ±¾»´·µ º»²½·²¹ »®ª» ²± °«®°±» ®»³±ª» ®¿·´·²¹ ¿²¼ ³¿·²¬¿·² ¿®»¿ Ñ²» ½±²·¬»²¬ ³¿¬»®·¿´ º±® ©¿´µ©¿§ «®º¿½» ¿´´ ©»¿¬¸»® ¿²¼ ¼«®¿¾´» Ì®»» Ý±³³·¬¬»» ³»³¾»®æ ¬®»» ¿®±«²¼ °»®·°¸»®§ ¼»½·¼«±« ¬¸»§ ¿®» ·³°±®¬¿²¬å ²±¬ º¿² ±º °®«½» ¬®»»å î ¬¿¹¹»®»¼ ®±© ±º ¼»½·¼«±« ¬®»» ³¿µ» ³±¬ »²» Ø¿²¼±«¬ñ·²¬»®°®»¬¿¬·±²æ Ø¿²¼±«¬ · ¾»¬¬»® ¬¸¿² ¬±± ³¿²§ ·¹² Ò»»¼ ¬± °®±ª·¼» ³¿° ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¿²¼ ¿¼¶¿½»²¬ ¿®»¿ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¸±© ¬± ¹»¬ ¬± Þ«®§·²¹ Ù®±«²¼ Ì®»» ®»³±ª¿´ñ°´¿²¬·²¹ °±´·½§ ø¬®»» ½±³³·¬¬»»÷ Î»¬«®² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¬± ±®·¹·²¿´ ª·»© ¿¬ ¬·³» ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ú·²¼ ©¿§ ¬± ·²¬»¹®¿¬» ¸·¬±®·½ ·¬» «®®±«²¼·²¹ Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ·²¬± ·²¬»®°®»¬¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ª··¬±® »¨°»®·»²½» Û¨¸·¾·¬ º±® »ª»®§¼¿§ ¹±±¼ ·¼»¿ º±® ½±°» ¸±«´¼ ²±¬ ¾» ¾±«²¼ ¾§ ¹»±¹®¿°¸§ ¾·²¼·²¹ ¬¸·²¹ × °¿½» º±® ¬±«®·¬ ±® ®»·¼»²¬á Ø±© ¼±» ¬¸¿¬ ¿ºº»½¬ ¿°°®±¿½¸á Ü·¬«®¾·²¹ ¬± ¬¸·²µ ¬¸¿¬ ±³» °»±°´» ¬¸·²µ ¬¸» Ý»²¬»® ¿²¼ Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¿®»¿ »°¿®¿¬» ¬¸ Í¬»©¿®¼¸·° º±® ß°®·´ ïç Ûª±½¿¬·ª» ±º ïééë ¾«¬ ²±¬ ¬¿¹²¿¬» É·¼»® ¼»º·²·¬·±² ±º Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² · ¾»¬¬»® ëóïð §»¿® °´¿² ¬± »´·³·²¿¬» °¿®µ·²¹ · ½®·¬·½¿´ Ü·ºº»®»²¬ «®º¿½» ¬®«½¬«®» · ·³°±®¬¿²¬ Í«¾¬´» ½±²²»½¬·±² ±º ®±¿¼©¿§ ¬± Ñ´¼» Þ«®§·²¹ Ù®±«²¼ »²½±«®¿¹» ª··¬±® ¬± ¹± »» ©¸¿¬ · ±ª»® ¬¸»®»ò Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² · ¬¸» ¿³» ¿ ±¬¸»® °¿®µ ¬¸»§ ª¿´«» ¬¸» ·³°±®¬¿²½» ±º ¬¸» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² Ø±© ¬± »²º±®½» ®»¹«´¿¬·±²á ß½¬·ª» ª»®« °¿·ª» ®»½®»¿¬·±²á Ò± ´±²¹»® ¹»¬ ¿ °»½·¿´ º»»´·²¹ ¬¸» ©¿§ ·¬ · ²±© ëí Ø·¹¸ Í¬®»»¬ Õ»²²»¾«²µ ÓÛ ðìðìí ½·²¼§à°¿¬¼»·¹²ò½±³ Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð Ì©± ·«»æ ®»½®»¿¬» ïééë ±® ³·²±® ³±¼·º·½¿¬·±² ¬± »¨·¬·²¹á Ì¸·²µ ·² ¬»®³ ±º °»®³¿²»²¬ ¼»½··±² ª»®« ®»ª»®·¾´» ¼»½··±² Ñª»®·¹¸¬ ¾»´±²¹ ©·¬¸ Í»´»½¬³»² ¼ ¬¸»·® ¼»½··±²ó³¿µ·²¹ · ·³°±®¬¿²¬ ¬± Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¹±ª»®²¿²½» Ý±³³··±² ¾®±²¦» ¬¿¬«» º±® ¬¸±» ¬¸¿¬ ¼·»¼ ±² ¬¸» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ¿²¼ °´¿½» ©¸»®» ¬¸»§ ´¿§ ×²½®»¿» Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² °±®¬·±² ±º Ý±³³±² Ý®»¿¬» ¿ º»»´·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ »ª±µ» ïééë ×²¬»®°®»¬ °´¿½» ¿ ³±®» »¼«½¿¬·±²¿´ Ø±© ¼±» ·¬ ¸±´¼ ¬¸» ·¼»¿´ ±º ©¸¿¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¼¿§á Ü·ºº»®»²¬ ·²¬»®°®»¬¿¬·±² ±º ·²º±®³¿¬·±² «½¸ ¿ º·´³·²¹ ®»»²¿½¬³»²¬ Ü·ºº»®»²¬ ®«´» º±® Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ª»®« ¿½®± ¬¸» ¬®»»¬ ¿´´±© ±³» ¿½¬·ª·¬·» ¬± ¸¿°°»² ¿½®± ¬¸» ¬®»»¬ ¬¸¿¬ ¿®» ²±¬ °»®³·¬¬»¼ ±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² É¸§ ²±¬ ¿² ¿°° ±² ¿² ×Ð¸±²» ¬¸¿¬ ¸±© ¾¿¬¬´»á ÙÐÍ ¹«·¼»¼ ¬±«®á ½±²·¼»®¿¬·±² Lots of discussion about spiritual aspect of Battle Green and what it represents. Plan needs to be guided by this ideal as much as it describes the physical changes to the space. Lots of discussion about interpretation techniques (signs/images/apps) that allow all visitors to experience the space on the day of the Battle Lots of discussion about tourism and economic development link between tourists and businesses of Lexington Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» çð Ô»¨·²¹¬±² Þ¿¬¬´» Ù®»»² ß®»¿ Ü®¿º¬ Ó¿¬»® Ð´¿² ïîñêñîðïð (insert excel spreadsheet of survey results) Ð¿¬ Ü»·¹² ÔÔÝ Ð¿¹» çï