Laserfiche WebLink
NOV 14 1984 BOOK; 875 <br />Discussion ensued re the maintenance required, and Mr. Bail <br />noted that you don't paint the block; eventually it may require <br />another silicone treatment. <br />Chairman Scurlock inquired as to the cost differential be- <br />tween impregnating the block with color and actually painting it. <br />Mr. Bail did not know offhand; stucco very likely would be <br />cheaper, but it is more of a maintenance problem. This could be <br />considered as an alternate, but he felt the way it is designed is <br />the most economical from the life cycle point of view. <br />The Board inquired what specific authorization the architect <br />needed at this point, and Mr. Bail stated that basically the <br />Board has to approve the final plans and authorize the architect <br />to submit them to the state and to receive bids. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously <br />(4-0) approved the final plans of the Jail; <br />authorized the Architect to submit them to <br />the D.O.C. for approval; and authorized them <br />to go to bid in December or January. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously <br />authorized staff to advertise for a represen- <br />tative to be mutually agreed on by the architect <br />and the owner. <br />Commissioner Wodtke had one final question as to whether the <br />architect still felt confident the staffing levels will remain as <br />predicted with the modifications made. <br />Mr. Bail stated that they have no reason to change the <br />staffing levels, and he does not anticipate the state making any <br />changes at this point since they have seen the plan before. <br />flK <br />