Laserfiche WebLink
<br />October 28, 2005 - Recessed Meeting <br /> <br />Page <br /> <br />382 <br /> <br />Mr. Cayado pointed out the decision to preserve a portion of the <br />Tribune Building would eliminate the need for some of the faux windows on a <br />section of the Annex. He stated the Annex would be 12 to 15 feet from the <br />back of the Tribune Building and a portion of it would not be seen if the <br />Tribune Building is allowed to remain. <br /> <br />Commissioner Juba withdrew her motion, and Vice Chairman Carruth <br />withdrew the second. <br /> <br />There was general consensus to consider the union Street fa9ade of the <br />Annex after a decision is made concerning the Tribune Building. <br /> <br />Selection of Exterior Treatment of Jail Housing Unit Facade <br /> <br />Pete Cayado, Architect, reviewed plans to use precast concrete cells in <br />the Jail housing unit. He outlined the following options for the fa<;:ade, (1) <br />Dye or stain the precast concrete cells the same color as the brickj (2) Clad <br />the outside of the concrete cells with brick and put in recessed panels; (3) <br />Clad the outside with brick and add faux windows such as those to be used on <br />the Annex. <br /> <br />There was discussion regarding the options for the housing units, the <br />need for direction at this time in choosing the fa<;:ade, "rethinking" the <br />location of the housing units as discussed during the Open House and the need <br />for the planning process to continue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Privette made a motion that the Chairman be authorized to <br />appoint a subcommittee to "rethink" the location of the housing units of the <br />proposed jail and report back to the Board as soon as possible. Commissioner <br />Freeman seconded the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Day stated staff would work to find another location for <br />housing units if that was the Board's decision. However, he questioned <br />feasibility of constructing the office building and Annex at the planned <br />and locating the housing units elsewhere. He pointed out the facilities <br />designed to function together and questioned how the relocation of <br />housing units would impact that operation. <br /> <br />the <br />the <br />site <br />were <br />the <br /> <br />There was lengthy discussion regarding the following: (1) Time line of <br />discussions/actions by the Board concerning the Jail project and acquisition <br />of land; (2) Commitment at the Open House to "rethink" the location of the <br />housing units versus an agreement at the Open House to add discussion of the <br />housing units to the Agenda; (3) Need to allow the architects to move forward <br />with the project; and (4) Opportunity for any Board member to bring forward <br />alternative housing unit sites for consideration during the time the <br />construction drawings are being completed. <br /> <br />The motion by Commissioner Privette failed with Commissioners Privette <br />and Freeman voting for and Chairman Carpenter, Vice Chairman Carruth and <br />Commissioner Juba voting against. <br /> <br />Mr. Cayado reviewed Options 2 and 3 <br />housing units. He discussed the increasing <br />windows and the brick work. <br /> <br />for the <br />concrete <br /> <br />exterior fa<;:ade <br />costs, the cost <br /> <br />of the <br />of the <br /> <br />There was discussion regarding the appearance of the housing units, <br />location of planned buffers, the brick indentations versus the faux windows, <br />the cost of brick, visibility of the units from the homes on Washington Lane <br />and efforts to make the buildings as appealing as possible. <br /> <br />UPON MOTION of Vice Chairman Carruth, seconded by Commissioner Juba and <br />unanimously carried, the Board selected Option 3, which included the faux <br />windows, for the exterior treatment of the Jail housing unit as presented by <br />Ware Bonsall Architects. <br /> <br />Discussion of Including the Demolition of the Existing Jail and Construction <br />of a Parking Lot in its Place in the Scope of the Project <br /> <br />John Day, County Manager, stated the existing Jail will no longer be <br />needed when the new facilities are completed. He suggested that the Board <br />consider the demolition of that facility and use the area to address the need <br />for additional parking. Also, he stated the 50-year plan approved by the <br />Board includes future expansion of the Courthouse at the site of the existing <br />Jail. Mr. Day proposed that the Board include the following in the scope of <br />the Jail project and as a part of the contract with Turner Construction <br />