MINUTES
JOINT MEETING
TOWN COU=
NCIL/
PUBLIC
BUILDINGS COMMITTEE/
HISTORIC
DISTRICT COMMISSION/
TOWN HALL
PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
WEDNESDA=
Y, MAY
24, 2006 - 7:00 PM
PRESENT: Town Council
=
M=
r.
Robert Kane
=
M=
r.
Carl Mancini
=
M=
r.
Joseph Pawlak
=
M=
s.
Suzan Plowman
=
M=
r.
Raymond Primini
=
M=
r.
Paul Rinaldi
=
M=
r.
Jack Walton
=
; &n=
bsp; Public
Buildings Committee
=
M=
r.
Brian Bellagamba
=
M=
r.
Remo Ceniccola, Vice Chairman
=
M=
r.
John Chipko
=
M=
r.
Peter Dzioba
=
M=
r.
Karl Kuegler, Secretary
=
M=
r.
Robert LeBlanc
=
M=
r.
Robert Porter, Chairman
=
; &n=
bsp; Town
Hall Preservation Committee
=
M=
r.
William Barrante
=
M=
r.
Bernard Beauchamp
=
M=
s.
Tess Beauchamp
=
M=
r.
Henry Long
=
M=
s.
Kelly Maguire
=
M=
r.
Paul Rinaldi
=
M=
r.
Norm Stephen
Public Buildings Committee/
Historic District Commission/
Town Hall Preservation Committee
Joint Me=
eting
May 24, =
2006
Page 2
=
Historic District Commission
=
M=
s.
Carol Gilbert
=
M=
s.
Patricia Kropp (arrived at 7:12 p.m.)
=
M=
r.
Robert McCarthy
=
M=
r.
Paul Rinaldi
ABSENT: =
; Town Council
=
M=
s.
Elaine Adams
=
M=
r.
Antonio Guerrera
=
M=
r.
Anthony Fusco
=
Town Hall Preservation Committee
=
M=
r.
Jerry DiPolo
=
M=
r.
Joseph Masi
= <= o:p>
=
; &n=
bsp; Historic
District Commission
=
M=
s.
Jean King
=
M=
s.
Nancy Kinsella
=
M=
r.
Ron Mayne
=
M=
r.
Gary Swingle
OTHERS: =
; Mr.
Frank Nardelli,
1. =
Convene
Joint Meeting - 7:00 P.M.
Mr.
Pawlak, Chairman, Town Council, Called the Joint Meeting to Order at 7:07 p=
.m.
Mr.
Pawlak, Chairman, Town Council, led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. =
Roll
Call
Ms.
LaForme, Clerk, executed the Roll Call for all 4 groups. 3. &nb=
sp; Public
Participation None Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 3 4. &nb=
sp; Discussion
Regarding =
; Mr.
Pawlak: This is intended to be sort of a f=
ree
forum for an exchange of ideas and suggestions, so I'll just open the floor=
to
anyone who chooses to speak. Mr. Long: I'm on the Preservation Committee =
and
the first thing I saw on the Agenda was there seems to be $24,500 somewhere=
in
the Town funds that's possibly available for this, and the use would indica=
te
that it would be to hire a consultant.&nbs=
p;
I'd just like to put a few words in for your consideration. If you hire a consultant you'll pr=
obably
spend the $24,000 and all you'll have is the plans, whereas if you take that
$24,000 and you fix the roof, and the way you can fix the roof is to get a
variety of contractors, people who specialize in roofs, get some input from
them which will be the same as getting a consultant, if you get that for no=
thing. Then see what they propose. They could propose anything from a=
few
thousand dollars to half a million, but at that point we will have the
opportunity to evaluate these things, and the Purchasing Agent of the Town =
can
ask a variety of people to bid on this, not to bid on it, but to make propo=
sals
as to what should be done and I'd like to say that's the way it should
start. We can always hire a
consultant later on if you don't like what these guys give us for nothing.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> There are people that do all kinds=
of
work, from sheeting it with regular household shingles to restoring the
slate. As an example, Taft Sc=
hool
has a company that works on their roofs continually so he would be one that
would be available to look at the roof, give some ideas as to what might be
done and proceed from that. T=
his is
a Town responsibility, it's not something the Pr=
eservation
Committee should be doing. The
Town, not you people, but the Town Councils for the last 20 years have
neglected everything in Town so it's about time somebody took the initiative
and started to remedy it. When
you're building the new school over at Swift, I think the idea that the Town
has was to build a new one, let the old one fall down and that's what happe=
ned
to a lot of our property here. The
Town Hall is an opportunity to turn that around and see what we can do with=
out
spending some money to start with.
So that's my thought, thank you. Mr. Pawlak: We have an architectural,
engineering study that was done back in May of 02 regarding the Town Hall, =
many
of us have copies of that, I'm not sure if everybody does, Mr. Nardelli can
pass that around, and it did address several areas of concern with respect =
to
the Town Hall, the roof, floor elements, foundation, masonry, brick veneer,
conclusions and recommendations.
One of the areas that has been publicly
discussed, as I'm sure everybody here is aware, is the concern with respect=
to
the brick wall. I suspect it's
probably the rear wall, but I'm not sure of that specifically,. The concern is the damage that's b=
een
done to it as a result of leaks in the roof, water penetrating the brick (i=
naudible)
cycles. And that to me would =
be one
of the major concerns with respect to anything that would happen to the Town
Hall. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 4 I
understand the immediate urgency with respect to the roof repair to stop the
incursion of the water, but I'm as concerned, if not more concerned about t=
he
structural integrity of the walls because if I remember correctly, one of t=
he
concerns of this particular study was that without repairs being made quick=
ly a
significant rupture of the wall was possible and not predictable, at this t=
ime this
goes back to May of 02 and the apparent damage is repairable and within
reasonable cost. Should addit=
ional
damage to the brick occur the cost would significantly =
escalate. Obviously we have not done anythin=
g with
respect to repairing or remedying the situation so with respect to what Mr.
Long said, I concur regarding the roof situation, however the structural
integrity of the Town Hall is of paramount importance also, because if we
repair the roof and we find after we've done that there is a significant
possibility of failure with respect to the structure, then my question woul=
d be
why did we spend that "x" amount of money on the roof, so I just =
want
to make sure we keep all of these things in front of us before we reach any
conclusions. Ms. Kropp: I'm on the Historic District Commis=
sion,
but I was on the Council in 95 and 97 and we did do the study and I know th=
ere
are people even at this table that are aware of this, we took slate off the
roof, or it was on the ground, I don't know which, but it was sent to a lab=
up
in Massachusetts and it was determined at that point that the slate had 100
years of use in it, and it had 100 years of use left in it. Now it's the nails from what I
understand, the Public Buildings Committee would know more about this, that=
are
giving out, it's not the slate that's giving out. So I've heard figures of $52,000 t=
o put
on a regular house shingle roof, asbestos, whatever, but that's for the
shingles and the labor. Nobody
knows what's going to be found once the slate is removed from the top of th=
at
building, so I would like for this group to take into consideration salvagi=
ng
that slate and we've got to put a lot of wood underneath there anyhow, I'm
sure, and my bet is that when the slate starts getting removed, it's not go=
ing
to be only the nails that have given out, that there's no wood left for the
nails to stay stuck into, so why can't we consider putting a roof on that's
going to last 100 years instead of a house shingle roof that's guaranteed f=
or
25 or 35 years, when we've already got the materials. Cause I=
don't
think it would be $52,000 in labor to remove them. Mr. Pawlak: We did get, correct me if I'm wron=
g,
Frank, I think we have at least 3 quotes on the roof. One is with a regular house asphalt
shingle, another one was for slate, which was about $97,000 or $98,000. Ms. Kropp: So that would be (inaudible). Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 5 =
; Mr.
Pawlak: Yea, but the problem with that is =
I’m
not sure of the specifics, I don't know if they were talking about salvaging
everything they could and then replacing what couldn't with new, so let's s=
ay
$100,000 for round figures, and then there was a third option which was in =
the
middle, about $75,000 which was I think artificial slate, a look alike
composite material. Ms. Kropp: Right, which weighed more actu=
ally
per square than slate does. I=
mean it's great looking stuff from a distance and nobody wo=
uld,
but it is heavier than actual slate is so if that is a consideration then m=
aybe
it shouldn't be, and I'm not actually saying this because I'm on the Histor=
ic
Commission, I just want to see slate stay on that building. Mr. Pawlak: One of the things that this 02=
study
was that the main timber trusses appeared to be in good condition with only
minor cracking but they did go on to say that unless and until they get
everything off the roof and get a chance to look at the sub roof, would they
then be able to give an adequate estimation of what would be required to (i=
naudible). Ms. Kropp: I was late getting to the meet=
ing,
but I heard Mr. Long saying there was a company that services the roofs at =
Taft;
I know there's another company down in Mr. Pawlak: If you would pass that information =
on to Chuck, that would be acceptable. Ms. Kropp: Yea, cause they were very reasonabl=
e coming
up and having the work in =
; Mr.
Kuegler: There are a couple of points, yes, the question was the nails holding the slate shin=
gles
were failing. That's the reas=
on why
they're slipping off. I don't=
know,
normally when they use slate all they do is put a wood strip across the
rafters, it's not usually completely deck.=
I don't know if you could get into the attic, or if anybody has been=
up
in the attic to look at it from the other side, but usually you can tell if
that little stripping is cracking. =
; Mr.
Pawlak: It's a thought though that those wo=
od
(inaudible) strips or something similar to that is what's failing, a
combination of that and the nails. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 6 =
; Mr.
Kuegler: My only thought on the whole thing=
about
the use of it, once it's repaired, and the parking is almost non-existent a=
nd
I've always thought, and I've mentioned to people over the last 10 years or=
so
if the building next door ever came on the market and it was not a historic=
al
building, if that building was purchased and raised, then you could probably
put in a 30 car parking lot. Mr. Pawlak: You're talking about the old drug =
store? =
; Mr.
Kuegler: Yes, and make the area more usable=
. Mr. Pawlak: I don't think, I know in all the
discussions that I've been a part o, that there is any feeling or direction=
to
use the Town Hall as a town building per say for our offices, it's more an =
effort
to preserve the building as the Town Hall, but it may have other uses. For example the Watertown Historic=
al
Society may use it for, work out some arrangement with the Town for a nomin=
al
rent or whatever or some other town facility may use it, but not the Town
Hall. Its=
too small, it's impractical and the goal I think at this point is to
consolidate all the Town functions under one roof if it's practical and not
have them spread out all over. =
; Mr.
Kuegler: But finding a use for the building,=
I don't
know how the zoning here in Mr. Pawlak: Good thought, although I can think =
of at
least one situation in Town where there's some construction with I think
inadequate parking which creates a (inaudible). Ms. Beauchamp: I just feel it's about time we step=
ped up
to the plate. This has been g=
oing
on much, much too long. We re=
alize
that we have to address the structural wall that supports that roof, we rea=
lize
that, but time is of the essence.
We asked for a cover for that roof almost 6 months ago so that the w=
ater
would not seep in and continue to do damage. That cover is not up there. That cover could also serve the pu=
rpose
to alert the public to what's going on at the Town Hall. Did you see the roof? It's got a cover on it. What's going to happen? The questions could have been (ina=
udible). Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 7 I
again repeat myself, I just feel we have been la=
boring
under the previous findings that told us that the wall was not near collaps=
e,
that the bricks needed attention.
It is the south wall, Mr. Pawlak, the one that looks at =
; Mr.
Porter: The Buildings Committe=
e was
asked by the Council to look into this a couple of months ago. It was our recommendation at that =
time
to have the structural (inaudible), roofing system, wall system and that was
the purpose of doing that was before getting any repair work, i.e., roofing,
(inaudible) the brick or whatever, we need to look at the structural
integrity. Once that's been
determined that it's okay, then we can move forward, but if we don't do that
and something were to happen, we're going to look very foolish, that's the
reason for the analysis. And =
it
only made good sense to the Buildings Committee to do such a thing. Ms. Beauchamp: When you did come and speak to=
us
and did give us that information, why wasn't anything done by the Building
Committee since you gave us that information? We've waited for your answer. =
; Mr.
Porter: We need to be charged by the Town
Council. Ms. Beauchamp: I didn't know that. =
; Mr.
Porter: We don't act on our own volition =
; Mr.
Pawlak: I think what's happened, Tess, to b=
e very
honest, I remember getting the letter from the Public Buildings Committee w=
ith
I think there were at least 3 specific recommendations, courses of action t=
hat
were outlined, and during that time we were also trying to get the Preserva=
tion
Committee on board and set up, and quite frankly I think I can admit that we
probably lost sight of the blue tarps in our zeal to get you people organiz=
ed
and set up under the auspices of the Town Council so you can operate under =
our
insurance umbrella, but I'll double-check with Chuck Frigon. I know we had costs, if I'm not mi=
staken,
Frank, in somewhere in the neighborhood of $2,000 to $3,000 to put the tarp=
up
there, or tarps, just to prevent any future damage, but I'll double-check t=
hat,
talk to Frank more. Ms. Beauchamp: We appreciate your indulgence, we r=
eally
do, but we just feel, we can't go out and get the money until we know this =
is
our job. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 8 Mr. Kane: First to the Preservation Committe=
e, I give
you all the credit cause it was you guys who got the ball rolling, so thank
you, and I attended a number of their meetings at the beginning, but In sure
you'll agree that it's a Town Hall Preservation Committee, not just a roof
preservation committee, so I agree with Bob that we should really look at t=
he
whole building and to fix a roof when there may be other underlying things =
that
we just don’t see with the naked eye, that might be getting ahead of =
ourselves.
I think this appropriation, i=
f this
will do what we hope it's going to do, to look at the entire building and t=
hen
know where we have to go from there to salvage this building, to save it, t=
hen
of course we can do fundraising and we get a move on with this project, but=
I agree
that the whole structure needs to be looked at, not just the roof. Mr. Pawlak: Bob, do you have any idea of h=
ow
long this study would take to look at the integrity of the building itself?=
Mr. Porter: I would say maybe a month or so, if=
that
long. Ms. Beauchamp: You mean from the time you contact =
him
until they give you the options? Mr. Porter: Well what we anticipate doing is go=
ing
out for requests for proposals for professional services (inaudible). Turnaround tim=
e,
review process, interview process, and then a recommendation to the Council=
on
(inaudible). A couple =
of
weeks for turnaround time for proposals I think would be more than sufficie=
nt. Mr. Kane: Bob, who does =
something
like this? =
; Mr.
Porter: Architectural firms, engineering f=
irms. Mr. Kane: And they can get right down to the=
nitty
gritty of the building? Mr. Porter: We would put the request out and t=
his is
what we're looking for and then also put an item in there that says if you =
feel
you should be doing something else, then tell us. =
; Ms.
Beauchamp: (Inaudible) two firms =
have
called me. What's going on in=
Mr. Kane: This is what we need to do the=
n. Mr. Pawlak: Do you have that information Tess?<=
o:p> Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 9 =
; Ms.
Beauchamp: Not with me. =
; Mr.
Pawlak: Could you pass that along to Frank=
? =
; Ms.
Beauchamp: I'd be happy to. =
; Mr.
Pawlak: Take a look at it and get it to Bo=
b Porter. Mr. Chipko: I have been a structural engineer f=
or 27 years
and I'd say that you are going to need both an architect and an engineer. Ms. Gilbert: I'm a member of the Historic Distri=
ct and
I'm delighted about this conversation this evening. But there's so=
mething
at the heart of this (inaudible) important to the Town Hall to the core of =
Mr. Primini: The structural, one of the problems=
I
remember hearing about several years ago was water infiltrating the bricks,=
but
nobody knew exactly where it was infiltrating the brick. Would that be the structural engin=
eer's
responsibility? =
; Mr.
Chipko: That would be a combination of both=
the
architect and the structural engineer. =
; Mr.
Primini: I think that would be one of the mo=
st
important things is where that water is entering and where it's coming out.=
Mr. Chipko: I mean certainly now (inaudible) pu=
shing
out and water is getting in that way but it may have started at the roof and
worked its way in. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 10<=
o:p> =
; Mr.
Kuegler: One other item that concerns me is=
the
second floor of the building hasn't been occupied in about 40 years and I
believe it was due to the accessibility or the means of egress, not the wei=
ght
or the load, live or dead loads that would be on the floor, so once we pres=
erve
the building, and you don't want to really use the word post carding the
building which means the exterior and roof looks nice, everybody drives by =
and
looks at the building, but just no use.&nb=
sp;
If we're going to use the building we have to remember when this
Preservation Committee or the Town Council or the Town in general brings the
building shell, the frame up to where it's supposed to be, then the second
phase is going to be not only the use of the interior but the cost of bring=
ing
the building up to par for whatever use it is, plumbing, heating, air condi=
tioning,
wiring, elevator, it's going to take a tool, so you have to basically take =
this
into the picture, you can't just look at the roof and walls and structure a=
nd
then go away. Mr. Pawlak: If I remember correctly at some of =
the
meetings that I participated in with the Preservation Committee when they w=
ere in
their embryonic stages, their first concern was to preserve the building, it
wasn't to revamp it or bring it back, it was to prevent any further damage,
stop it, make the necessary repairs. Once that's done, then we have to =
go to
Phase B, C, D, or whatever else might be down the road. First things, you're absolutely ri=
ght
though, there is a lot of work that would have to be done inside to make it
usable, and again I would add that I don't think from a Town's perspective,=
at
least in all of the discussions I've had, I know I’m repeating myself,
nobody ever said we were going to go back and use it for a Town building per
say, but it may be used for some other function, but as long as it's preser=
ved,
let's say as you said postcard style first, get that done, and then look at=
the
future use and what has to be done.
I suspect then that perhaps the Town Hall Preservation Committee wou=
ld
continue working to raise funds.
You asked for it . . can (inaudible) or b=
ring up
the interior to a usable condition. Mr. Rinaldi: I just want to say that I agre=
e with
Rob, and you won't hear that very often.&n=
bsp;
It was our intent, and I have to agree that I think we need this stu=
dy,
and I think it has to go to the Council, the Public Buildings Committee and=
all
of the groups here have to take a look at this thing. The roof seems to be the most imme=
diate
concern obviously, and I agree with Mr. Long that we should get all the free
advice that we can get from whatever, the people who do Taft School is a go=
od
idea, but I think we need to see the whole picture so we can kind of priori=
tize
what has to be done and set some sort of a timeframe so we're all going in =
the
same direction here instead of . . . . so I think it's a good idea and I wo=
uld
be very favorable to taking that approach. Ms. Beauchamp: I couldn't agree more. The faster we do it the better and=
then
that gives us some leverage let's say to go out to the public for their
support. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 11<=
o:p> Mr. Ceniccola: If it's the intention to making the
building weather tight and then proceed from there, I would advise you to do
the study. Once we can identi=
fy
where the water migration is actually occurring, attacking the roof may put=
a band
aid on part of the water infiltration but it may not be all of the water
infiltration so the study is necessary. Mr. LeBlanc: Well I can't see putting the roof o=
n it
until we know if it's structurally sound.&=
nbsp;
We don't want to put a roof on a sand castle. We need the study. I'd like to agree with Mr. Long on=
ce in
awhile, but this time I think we need the study. =
; Mr.
Pawlak: So Bob, we're looking at about a 1 =
month
timeline? Mr. Porter: Yes, if we get the approval tonigh=
t, we
can work with Chuck to put a R.F.P. out, but I think a 2 or 3 week timeframe
should suffice. This has been=
in
the paper for a long time, so a lot of these firms (inaudible) contact anyb=
ody
that has any potential, just like other projects, once the project is
announced, they come out of the woodwork, sending brochures, and cold calls,
etc. Ms. Beauchamp: Did you hear that Tommy? Make that a headline. Remo, I called you a long time ago=
, as your
former teacher, to come and serve on our committee but I never heard from
you. What happened? Mr. Ceniccola: We'll talk. Mr. Rinaldi: I think it's going to be very impo=
rtant
that after we get the study done this same group of people gets together ag=
ain
and we'll have something more concrete to discuss. Right now we're speculating. =
; Ms.
Beauchamp: Well we don't want to step on any
toes. You have to tell us go,=
and
that's what we're preparing for. =
; Mr.
Mancini: I was one that always heard that w=
e had
study after study after study for 40 years probably and I was kind of agree=
ing
that we should just go by the last study, but listening to the gentleman say
that there might be more deterioration since 4 years ago, I feel now that we
also need to have the study done. But
in the meantime, I think Tess brought up a good idea, let's get that tarp on
the roof right away, that will at least stop the water from the roof getting
in, maybe it will still get in on the sides, but let's at least get that do=
ne. Mr. Primini: I don't think we have to worry about
stepping on anybody's toes, I think we need to get somebody's foot in the o=
ther
location to get this moving. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 12<=
o:p> 5. &nb=
sp; Consider
an Appropriation of $24,500 from the General Fund for Expenditures Related =
to
the Town Hall for Engineering and other Corresponding Related Building Repa=
irs
or Services Mr. Pawlak: We don't have a motion. Mr. Nardelli: I put that on the Agenda thinking w=
e need
some money to get this going but you may want to wait on appropriating the
money until we actually get the quotes in, so we can do that at a later
date. We can just table this.=
6 &nbs=
p; Consider
Requesting the Public Buildings Committee to do a Request For
Proposal to Provide Structural Engineering Analysis and Related Services &=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Rinaldi, sec. Mr. Mancini) to request the Public Buildings Committee to do a
Request For Proposal to provide Structural Engin=
eering
Analysis and Related Services. &=
nbsp; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSD UNANIMOUSLY Mr. Porter: I'd like to have you consider appoi=
nting
a liaison to the Town Council to work with the Buildings Committee. We had one in the past and it worke=
d out
quite well. They were able to=
bring
back to the Council at their Regular Meetings our doings; it's worked out q=
uite
well. Mr. Pawlak: So this liaison would be from the C=
ouncil
to the P.B.C. for this item. Mr. Porter: Well actually it's a permanent liai=
son
for all projects. Mr. Pawlak: Let me take that into consideration=
. Bob and I have discussed this and I
think it's a good idea. I'm n=
ot
sure who would do that on the Council, but let me poll the Council Members =
and
see if I have a volunteer. Mr. Porter: We meet the third Wednesday of every
month and we do have special meetings, usually held on Wednesdays. Mr. Pawlak: I'll let you know. We'll designate one person, I'll g=
ive
you his name, and then you can work it out as far as the times are concerne=
d. Public Buildings Committee/ Historic District Commission/ Town Hall Preservation Committee Joint Me=
eting May 24, =
2006 Page 13<=
o:p> Ms. Beauchamp: Structural engineering analysi=
s and
related services. What are re=
lated
services? Mr. Pawlak: Other building repairs or services.=
Mr. Porter: It's a catch all. If we specifically state something
that's all we can do. Mr. Rinaldi: I think he said before that includes
architectural and engineering. 7. =
Adjournment &=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr. =
Primini,
sec. Mr. Walton) to Adjourn the Joint Meeting at 7:42 p.m. &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY &nbs=
p; Joint
Meeting Adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted=
, Robert Porter, Chairma=
n &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Lynn
M. LaForme, Clerk
Public Buildings Committee
Approved: =
_____________________________