Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-11-04 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 1 O, 1996 - 4:00 P.M. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY - MEETING ROOM B MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Footnet, Martin Haynes, Karyl Larson, Gary Nagle, Randy Rohovit, and Daryl Woodson. MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Nowysz, Clara Swan and Phil Reisetter. STAFF PRESENT: Jeffrey McKinney, David Schoon OTHERS PRESENT: David'Brost Jr. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 4:05 p.m. FINAL DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS TO SUITE 160, OLD CAPITOL MALL. LOCATED NORTH OF THE CLINTON STREET ENTRANCE David Brost Jr. of Brost Architects and Planners, the applicant, provided a brief summary of the proposed restaurant dimensions, focusing on the design of the extension of the restaurant from the current mall exterior. Some of the main points of his presentation included: · The proposed solarium which will extend out from the existing exterior Clinton Street wall and will be located on top of the existing planter bed. · The straight eve design of the solarium · The "Kalwall" solarium construction, featuring transparent side walls and a translucent roof · '- that-will provide a source of natural light. In response to a question from Haynes, Brost indicated that the windows on the solarium would be fixed windows. In response to another question from Haynes, Brost stated that he has not presented this design proposal to the Old Capitol Mall office and he does not know if his client has either. Nagle asked how the ~Kalwall" will tie in with the current exterior mall design, since "Kalwall" is not a material that is already used on the building. He added his concern regarding the fact that too many subtle changes to the mall exterior could eventually pose a design problem. Brost responded that the "Kalwall" will provide a soft light to the restaurant's interior and that the solarium's trim will match that of the mall. In regards to a question posed by Rohovit regarding the existing sign panels located next to the proposed solarium, Brost stated that he understands that the mall may be making some proposed changes to the exterior wall along Clinton Street, including removing those sign panels. He said he is unaware of what those changes might be. Rohovit and others ex- pressed the concern that it was difficult to make a recommendation regarding the proposed change, when the Committee does not know what other changes may occur on this face of the building. It was expressed that it would be helpful to know what other changes may be occurring. Design Review Commi~se Meeting September 16, 1996 Page 2 In response to a'question asked by Larson, Brost said that the restaurant will have only one level. He added that there will be three steps to the dining area. Nagle asked what the height of the solarlure will be and why it cannot be extended higher to avoid the use of the ~Kalwall". Brost responded that the solarium will extend 9 feet above the level of the current planters. Nagle pointed out that the window panels in the proposed solarium are not the same width as the window panels in the adjacent display windows. Nagle also suggested that they consider a tinted glass rather than the ~Kalwall" and attempt to match the horizontal lines of the "Kalwa!l" roof with the horizontal lines of the adjacent sign panels. Larson agreed that they should try to match the lines of the proposed addition with those of the existing struc- ture. Brost mentioned that he will look into this possibility. He said that their options may be limited by the available dimensions of "Kalwall". In response to a question by Woodson, Brost responded that the restaurant will have no exterior signs, but there will be a sign on the interior stair wall that will be visible from the exterior. He added that there will be dining along the stair wall. In fielding a question from Larson, Brost said that the after hours entrance will be between the set of double doors located at the mall entrance. Haynes stated that he will speak with the mall office regarding their plans for future changes to the Clinton Street side of the mall. He then asked Brost if the location of the proposed restroom will have to be flipped to the other side of the existing restroom in order to allow for a second means of egress for emergencies. Brost responded that if needed the restroom location will be flipped. Brost stated they have no plans to have an entrance directly from the solarium. In response to a question from a number of Committee members, Schoon stated that if the Committee approved a design and then the applicant decided to have an entrance directly off of the solarium, the applicant would need to bring that design change back before the Committee. Schoon reminded the Committee that if it is unable to make a recommendation to the City Council at this time, it will need to defer the item to a future meeting. He then asked them what information they will need in order to make a recommendation. The Committee request- ed information regarding the malls future plans for the east side of the building and that the applicant find out if he can make the height of the roof on the solarium the same height as the sign panels on the adjacent display windows. Brost assured the Committee that he will return for next week's meeting with more information on building profile options. A motion to defer this item to Monday, September 23, 1996, was made by Nagle and seconded by Larson. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0. Nagle noted that he would vote against the proposal as presented. However, he believes that the restaurant could be a very nice addition if it is designed differently. Haynes stated that the proposed change would help the face of the building. 4:30 - Nancy Footnet left the meeting. UPDATE REGARDING THE DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY ZONE ORDINANCE AND AMEND- MENTS TO THE COMMITTEE BY-LAWS: Haynes noted that the ordinance and amendments were adopted with the Committee's recommendations. Schoon added that this has been divisive issue for the City Council as Design Review Committee Meeting September 16, 1996 Page 3 some members see the ordinance as more government regulation and bureaucracy. Schoon encouraged Committee members to keep this mine as they begin to work on designating a district. Schoon then reviewed the process of designating a design review district, which is a rezoning process. DESIGNATION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW DISTRICT: The Committee discussed how it should go about determining which area(s) to propose as design review districts. Schoon reminded the Committee that the Design Review Overlay Zone Ordinance only allows the designation of design review districts within the CB-1 0 Zone area and the Near Southside. Woodson suggested that the Committee should start out with a large area that can be condensed later. Nagle suggested that the Committee should be careful to avoid including areas within the same design review district that are zoned different- Iy. Schoon stated that the CB-10 Zone and CB-5 Zone maybe be similar enough to include certain areas of the CB-5 Zone in the same design review district as the CB-10 Zone. Woodson suggested that the Commit-tee keep the Near Southside Design Plan in mind as they consider design districts. Schoon suggested that the Committee begin by surveying the area to determine the basic architectural features in the overall area. From there the Committee can begin to decide appropriate boundaries for design review districts. Nagle suggested that aerial photos could be used to gain a better perspective of potential districts, and that he could arrange to have some by the next meeting. Woodson asked if there is any pressure or deadline.for designating a district. Haynes said no; the Committee will operate as before until a district is designated and guidelines are adopted. Haynes prol~0sed that a group be designated to create the inventory report. Schoon volun- teered to organize materials [o a~i~[ [he Committee in defining districts. EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS AND SPONSORING A DESIGN COMPETITION: Haynes volunteered to work on refining the brochure that outlines the design review process and defining the purpose of design review. This brochure could also provide some tips to help future applicants, Haynes said that the Committee could then work with the Chamber of Commerce in terms of getting this information out. Larson suggested that the brochures could also be placed on the Library information wall. Schoon pointed out that the chamber holds an annual awards ceremony, and that some of the awards deal with design issues. The Committee may want to consider working with the Chamber on their awards program. Woodson suggested that the Committee identify a sponsor that would support a series of design clinics to educate the public and business owners about the process and issues related to good design. These clinics could include maintenance issues and would add a non-regulato- ry function to the Committee's agenda, Schoon stated that the Downtown Association may be willing to act as a co-sponsor of such clinics. Rohovit added that these clinics would be non-proprietary and simply be technical and educational in nature. He also volunteered to look into developing such a program. Design Review Committee Meeting September 16. 199~ Page 4 Woodson asserted that a competition would give some incentive to improve downtown designs. He also questioned the fact that there is not one piece of municipally owned art in the downtown area. He suggested that the city invest in some to perpetuate its reputation as "the Athens of the Prairie". Haynes informed the commit'tee that he will review the existing brochures and modify them. He also suggested that action on the competition ideas be delayed for right now given all of the other work the Committee has. plSCUSSION REGARDlinG COMMITTEE PROCEDURES Weekly M~etings. Haynes stated that the Committee needs to decide on a mechanism to communicate the scheduling of meetings. Nagle proposed that the Committee meet the third Monday of every month whether there are applications or not. The Committee would meet all other Mondays as long as there is an application to consider, otherwise the Committee will not meet. The staff will inform the Committee the week before as to whether there will be a meeting the next Monday. The general consensus was to follow Nagle's suggested process. Assigning Committee Members to Membership Categories. Each committee member assigned themselves as either a licensed architect, a design professional, involved in the building trades, property or business owner in the Downtown or the Near Southside, or an at-large member of the community.. CONSIDERATION OF AUGUST 12. 1996 DRC MEETING MINUTES: Nagle moved and Rohovit seconded that the minutes~aTapproved. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. ' ' ADJOURNMENT: The ~otion to adjourn was made by Rohovit and seconded by Woodson at 5:35 p.m. motion passed ~y.~ vote of 5-0. The Minutes submitted by Jeffrey McKinney. MINUTES IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1996 - 5:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM PREUNIIt AR¥ Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty Kelly, Mike Pugh, Doug Russell, John Shaw, Ginalie Swaim MEMBERS ABSENT: Rueall Kuenzli, Sue Licht, Dods Ma',kmus STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Howard Hotart, Jan Nash CALLTO ORDER: Chairperson Russell called the meeting to order at 5:42 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AIRPORT COMMISSION: The Airport Commission chair, Howard Horan, was present to discuss the Airport Master Plan and its implications on three structures: the light beacon, the terminal building, and the United hangar. Horan stated that the light tower is not under consideration for any change. With reference to the United hangar, Horan stated that the building restriction line on the map of the master plan designates part of the building as an obstruction to the use of existing runway 06-24..For this reason, the Airport Master Plan calls for moving or demolishing it. Shaw asked whether an existing building could be "grandfathered in." Horan replied that it could not because 1) the PAA is paying 90% of costs, and 2) safety is the priority. Horan said the Airport Commis- sion is fine with changes to the hangar if they are on the other side of the building restriction line. Homn also said there is an encroachment issue, with the possibliity that the building restriction line could advance in the future. Shaw asked if the FPoA ever granted exceptions or waivers. Horan said he thinks it rarely happens, but a group can file for amendments to the airport layout plan. Russell asked if the Ai~3ort Commission would remove the building anyway, even if the FAA granted an exception. Horan stated that they would not necessarily remove it. Horan said that, most importantly, they want to stay on the good side of the FAA. Without compliance the Airport would receive no FAA funding for any plans. Russell asked about the timeline for removal or demolition of the hangar. Horan responded that, assuming the FAA funds the plan and the City Council gives full support for the next phase, the work, which includes hangar demolition, would be started in 24 months at the soonest. Homn said the building is functional but unheated. He said the roof has had significant damage. Aircraft are stored in the building and SEATS has office space there. Horan stated that the building was erected to solve a problem but without regard to future planning. There are doors and both sides of the building for planes to taxi in and out. Historic Preservation Commission October 8, 1996 Page 2 Shaw asked if it was economics forcing removal or if it was physically viable to move the building. Horan said the hangar would be very expensive to move, less expensive to replace. Shaw asked Jan Nash of Tall Grass Historians if the building retains its historical significance if moved. Nash said that if not reoriented, and depending on how far it is moved, it could still be National Register eligible. Horan said if the hangar were moved 100 feet south it would interfere with use of the existing T- hangars. He said that the FAA will pay to demolish the hangar and that it still has to be removed even if there is no runway expansion. He also stated that the City owns the building. Russell noted that in cases where structures are eliglble for the National Register, 106 Review states that any plans to alter or demolish them using federal money require Commission review. Nash said 106 Review is a federal law that requires federal agencies to consider the impact on historic structures in expenditure of funds. Russell asked Horan about plans for the terminal building. Hotart said some work had been done with City funding to comply with the Amedcan with Disabilities Act (ADA). Russell asked if a 106 Review had been done with regard to the terminal. Kugler did not know but said that the Historic Preservation Commission is not always involved in the 106 Review process. Horan stated that the terminal building is small, with a radiant heating system and questionable boilers. He said the Airport Commission has not decided whether or not to keep it. Nash said that ADA requirements drop dramatically for historic structures eligible for the National Register and that previous work done on the front entrance might not have been needed for ADA. Russell said the Commission would like to study the issue and would probably inquire about an exception from the FAA. Horan distributed the master plan brochure to the Commission. Kelly suggested sending a letter to the Airport Commission to place concerns on the record. Hotart stated that the airport manager, Ron O'Neil, should be contacted to get on the meeting agenda. He also confirmed that the planning stage for the airport expansion is over. Russell asked about plans for Old Jet. Horan said there are no plans to move it. Russell directed Kugler to put the issue on the November agenda to discuss and also to send a letter to the Airport Commission expressing concerns and requesting being kept up-to-date. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED COLLEGE GREEN AND EAST COLLEGE STREET HISTORIC DISTRICTS: Russell said he and Kuenzli have recruited four volunteers to hold neighborhood meetings the last two weeks of October - two in each area, one each week. There will be presentations, maps, discussion of rules and schedules and volunteers will be solicited to survey households in these areas. The November regular meeting will be a public hearing on nominating the two areas as historic districts. Additional written notice will be sent to property owners. Russell hopes to have the districts discussed at a December Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and have the issue on the agenda of a January City Council meeting. Russell said a booklet will be prepared as for other areas considered in the past. He urged commissioners to attend the neighborhood meetings when possible. Historic Preservation Commission October 8, 1996 Page 3 .DISCUSSION OF GRANT PROJECTS: Dubuque Street/Linn Street Corridor. Kugler stated that the Dubuque/Linn Street report has been submitted to the state. Since he has not heard from or been paid by the state, he assumes they are still reviewing it. Kugler said the project is done and was $ 2,000 under budget. (Pugh arrived at 6:26 p.m.) Original Town Plat Survey, Phase I. Kugler referred to the memo from Jan Nash regarding the progress of the survey. Longfellow Neighborhood survey. Kugler noted the letter from the State Historical Society denying funding for the exlension of the Longfellow survey. Russell said that Molly Naumann suggests somehow funding an additional complete area survey before designat- ing it an historic district. The Commission discussed pros and cons of seeking funding for the Longfellow area vs. . the Northside. Russell remarked that the Longfellow Neighborhood Association was strongly behind the idea of making it an historic district. Kelly said that the Northside area seems more in jeopardy. Kugler said that the denial was for an HRDP grant and there is a December 1 deadline for a CLG grant application. Russell questioned whether other funding sources should be considered. He also stated that a CLG grant allows only one year to spend the funds, while an HRDP allows two years. He also stated that the two areas would be considered separately and that there is not advantage in requesting a pdodty for one over the other. Shaw said he considered the strong organization in Longfellow a great plus. He suggest- ed applying for survey funding and then raising private funds for a National Register nomination, which could cost less than $ 2,500. MOTION: Russell moved to apply for a December 1996 cycle CLG grant to complete the Longfellow survey. Pugh seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0, Russell said he will write the grant proposal. DISCUSSION Of HISTORIC LANDMARK PLAQUES: Russell said that a letter and certificate for owners will be going out this week. He is sending a' rough design for the plaques to the company to get pdces. When pricing and design have been decided, another letler will be sent to the owners with the price. He said the City should consider sending someone to install the plaques to ensure consistency. Kelly suggested reviewing rules from similar programs on the east coast. DISCUSSION OF PRESERVATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION FY97/98 REPORT: It was a consensus of the Commission to change the language in the third to last line of the first page from 'tighten the regulations' to "close existing loopholes." Historic Preservation Commission October 8, 1996 Page 4 UPDATE ON HISTORIC PROPERTIES TAX EXEMPTION: Russell stated he would like the tax abatement resolution to make sure properties are eligible whether or not they're on the National Register as long as they are designated locally. He said the Iowa Code allows counties and cities to designate properties to receive a tax exemption for improvements to historic properties. SECTION 106 REVIEW: 933 E. DAVENPORT STREET: Kugler said this house was included in the Goosetown Historic District that was nominated for the National Register but was never listed. He stated that the house is probably not individually eligible. Kugler said the Housing Rehabilitation staff propose removing the stucco chimney in the rear and doing a few other exterior alterations. He said the chimney is no longer needed for the furnace or water heater and is not visible from the front. The owners would also patch the metal roof over the chimney. Kugler noted two questions that the Commission needed to answer. 1) Is the building eligible for the National Register?. 2) Is the work proposed consistent with Secretary of the Interior's Stan- dards? He confirmed that it was listed as a contributing structure in the proposed Goosetown Historic District that never made it as far as the National Register. Kugler also said he has worked with the State on other projects involving buildings deemed eligible, and the State has okayed removal of chimneys in the rear of the buildings. MOTION: Russell moved to find the 933 E. Daveni3ort house National Re,lister eliqible and a1313rove the work as 13ro13osed In the a131311oatlon. Swaim seconded the motion. Kelly discussed changes made to the porch and the rear that might make it ineligible, individually. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. UPDATE ON PARK HOUSE HOTEL: Shaw said he was not allowed on the Board of Appeals' inspection ostensibly because of a liability issue. Bill Meardon told Shaw he could not come on the tour, but that he would arrange a separate inspection for some members of the Historic Preservation Commission. Shaw did go to the Board of Appeals public hearing. He said the following were entered as exhibits and are therefore now a matter of public record: the Shive-Hattery report, all reports done, all rental inspections on the property. Included in the Shive report were recommendations about structural deficiencies and possible fire code requirements. Shaw said the cost estimate to address problems of Park House was $ 852,000, presumably including fire code needs as well. Shaw remarked that the building has a greater value for rental if repaired than if rebuilt because of changes in density requirements. He said the Board of Appeals would rescind any demolition order if the owner shows intent to repair and a time schedule to implement the Shive report recommendations. Shaw also said the hearing included discussion of why there is new soil on top of newly installed footings and whether or not this implies that the building is sinking. Historic Preservation Commission October 8, 1996 Page 5 Shaw quoted Meardon from the hearing as saying there is a strong possibility of litigation concerning the building. Meardon also said at the hearing that because it's on the National Register it will be enmeshed in federal requirements. He therefore requested a 90-day extension to permit the owners to explore funding and other options. Bob Carlson, an architect, confirmed to Shaw that the extension was granted and told Shaw that he felt that the building is probably beyond saving. Russell asked Shaw for suggestions at this point. Shaw said he prepared a letter naming potential sources for the owners but did not include the funds source for the old Press-Citizen building because he was unaware of it. Shaw said he intends to visit the building and send a second letter disclosing additional sources of funds. DISCUSSION OF BRICK STREET REPLACEMENT PROGRAM: Kugler said he asked if the money intended for the repair program could be saved for restoring Summit Street, and was told that this should be a separate issue to be considered by the City Council as part of the City's Capital Improvements Program. He said some areas of patches are not complete and some completed areas are sinking. He suggested making the repair of sinking areas a priority. The annual amount allocated to repair is $ 25,000. The increase suggested has not been specified. If the Commission is interested in pursuing the restoration of Summit Street as a brick street, a recommendation to Council suggesting that it be added to the CIP would be appropriate. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: 1. Minutes from the August 20, 1996, meeting. MOTION: Kelly moved to approve the minutes from the August 20, 1996, meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, as corrected at tonight's meeting. Shaw seconded the motion. Page 4, paragraph 3, the last line should say "imminent danger", not "eminent danger." Page 5, under the Commission Information section, paragraph 1, line 5, Russell asked to change "joint commission' to 'joint committee". The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. 2. Minutes from the September 10, 1996, meeting. MOTION: Pugh moved to approve the minutes from the September 10, 1996, meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, as written. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION/DISCUSSION: Draft of letter to Mary Sue Coleman from Ginalie Swaim regarding the Shambaugh House. Shaw suggested adding "and appreciation" after the word congratulations in the first sentence of the letter. Historic Preservation Commission October 8, 1996 Page 6 Russell suggested omitting the word campus in the last sentence of the letter. Kugler said he would redo the letter on stationery for Swaim to sign and send it out to President Coleman, State Historical Society Covenants. Russell remarked that the State Historical Society had placed covenants on a couple of National Register properties that they had lent money or sent funds. They had requested materials from the Commission regarding owners and property maintenance, 3. Jurors. Kelly requested suggestions for jurors for next ysar's awards program. Hitching Post. Kugler said Public Works agreed to pay for and repair the hitching post without moving it. Butler House. Kelly asked about the Press-Citizen article about the Butler House. Kugler said the Press Citizen opinion contained a number of errors, and the infonmation on the Butler House was wrong. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m, MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 1996 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jana Egeland, Liddell, Bruce Allen Stroh MEMBERS ABSENT: Ross Wilburn STAFF PRESENT: Terry Trueblood, Ken Fearing, Judith Klink, Deb Maurer, Matt Pacha, Rex Pruess, Mike Moran, Bob Howell, Jim Wonick FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Pruess, seconded by Klink, minutes as written. Unanimous. to approve the September ]8, ]996 CEMETERY ISSUE Trueblood reviewed the preliminary information compiled by staff as to various alternatives regarding the space issue at Oakland Cemetery. This document is attached and made a part of these minutes. With respect to the alternative of building a new cemetery, Stroh questioned the possibility of utilizing a portion of the property acquired for the new water plant. Trueblood indicated he would inquire to determine if this would be possible, noting it would address the issue of land but not the issues of additional operating costs, equipment and staff. Stroh referred to other private property on Church Street, west of the Reno Street property, as another possibility. Pruess asked if the area of Hickory Hill Park immediately adjacent to St. Joseph's Cemetery had been eliminated as a possibility, with Trueblood stating it had not been and it would be added to the list of alternatives. Stroh noted based on an assumption that the city cannot stay in the cemetery business at its present location without some day running out of space, a policy should be developed if and when a second cemetery is established. The policy could possibly be to the effect that if a person cannot demonstrate any legitimate family ties to Oakland Cemetery they would need to purchase a plot in the new cemetery or pay a premium price for a plot in Oakland Cemetery. Trueblood stated he did not know if such a policy would be practical to administer, noting the age of Oakland Cemetery. The commission discussed the upcoming work session with the City Council regarding the cemetery issue. Stroh questioned what authority, if any, the commission has in this matter, noting he felt it was incumbent on the City Council to determine the future of the cemetery. Trueblood stated what authority the commission has is of an advisory nature. Pacha questioned whether the commission should be prepared to give the City Council a recommendation on whether the city should stay in the cemetery business. Trueblood felt this would be a good topic of discussion for the work session, noting the commission could make a determination at this meeting if it so desired. Liddell felt it would be to the commission's advantage to meet with the City Council to determine where they are with respect to this issue. Klink questioned whether the cemetery fell under the jurisdiction of the commission. Trueblood noted at a previous City Council meeting, the City Council had indicated that Oakland Cemetery is under the jurisdiction of the Parks and Recreation Department and is therefore an advisory responsibility of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Pacha indicated he would like the commission to take action at this meeting on whether it felt the city should stay in the cemetery business. Fearing stated the commission could indicate its feeling on the issue, noting the City Council will make the final decision. The commission decided to take a straw poll on the question as to whether or not the city should stay in the cemetery business (i.e., the sale of burial lots after Oakland Cemetery is sold out). Pacha and Maurer felt the city should stay in the cemetery business; Pruess, Klink, Fearing and Egeland felt the city should not; and Stroh and Liddell felt f~rther discussion was needed before making a decision. No vote was taken. Trueblood stated the tentative date and time for the work session with the City Council is November 13 at 4:30 p.m., immediately preceding the commission's regular monthly meeting; Commission members present indicated this was acceptable. NEIG~IBORROOD OPEN SPACE Trueblood stated a meeting date needed to be set for the Neighborhood Open Space Task Force to review public suggestions in order to finalize the proposed objectives and strategies. Liddell asked task force members present to stay after the commission meeting in order to set a meeting date. " BUDGET DISCUSSION Trueblood stated the department's operating budget requests needed to be submitted to the Finance Department by October 22, after which time revisions can be made. He stated a more detailed budget discussion with the commission will take place at next month's meeting. A summary of the department's capital improvement budget and trail projects as currently scheduled was reviewed. Trueblood noted the Federal minimum wage increase may have a dramatic affect on the Recreation Division's budget. At this time it is unknown if the State will increase the minimum wage also. Trueblood stated the division tries to stay ahead of minimum wage in order to help attract applicants. He noted if temporary wages were increased in an amount to stay ninety cents ahead of the Federal minimum wage, it would have a $50,000 impact. He stated the Recreation Division has a self-imposed guideline for the division to be 45% self-sufficient, noting it is becoming more and more difficult to achieve while keeping programs and activities affordable. Pacha questioned how many other city departments meet this guideline within the city and why the Recreation Division is doing it. Trueblood stated there are some city departments that operate on enterprise funds (such 2 as sewer, water and parking), and years ago the Recreation Division felt it needed a guideline for which to strive. Pacha encouraged keeping the division's low income policy, and keeping Special Populations Involvement programs affordable and free if possible. Stroh suggested including a capital project line item for the new water plant site, with Trueblood noting some park and recreation planning is presently underway in the form of a trail system being planned in conjunction with installation of the service road. PARKS & RECREATION FOUNDAT]ON REPORT Pacha reported there have been two task force meetings regarding the Mercer Park Aquatic Center Expansion Project. A draft copy of a case book to be used for smaller meetings was circulated among the commission. He stated the next step was to set six to eight informational meetings to be conducted by a host, to help gather more community input and reaction to the plan, and to help identify people who may eventually be contributors to the project. He stated the task force is on target to have the feasibility study completed by December, at which time the City Council will be informed as to whether the money can be raised to complete this expansion project. RIVERFRONT & NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION REPORT Pruess reported he was unable to attend last month's Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission meeting due to the fact that the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting was held at the same time. MONTGOMERY/BUTLER HOUSE REPORT Stroh reported he attended a tour of the Butler House. He stated the house is sited ideally and possibly could be made into a nice visitor center. He stated the task force is to be meet again October 29 to develop a recommendation to the City Council with respect to what should be done with the house and property. CO3{MISSION TIME Pacha noted the Human Rights Award received by Cindy Coffin for her work with special populations, and asked that a letter of congratulations be sent to her on the commission's behalf. Maurer asked if the Napoleon Park Softball Renovation Project was on schedule, with Trueblood indicating there is a 50-50 chance Iowa City Girls Softball will be playing on the fields next summer. He noted work on the parking area cannot begin as quickly as originally planned due to installation of a huge lift station not yet being completed. He also indicated that if the park is not ready for softball, the girls program will once again be held at the Hawkeye Softball Complex and City Park. 3 Liddell indicated she attended a technical fair at the University of Iowa and received information on a group called the Johnson County Community Network who is attempting to plan, design and implement a community network enabling citizens and organizations to access information on the Web. She encouraged the city to become a part of this network. Trueblood noted at this time the department does not have Internet access but is expected to some time next year. DIBR~W~OR' S B~.PORT Trueblood reported on the following: Walden Woods. Staff has been working with the neighborhood group that approached the commission asking the city_ t.o accept the small parcel of land instead of fees to plan what they want done with this parcel. Moved by Pacha, seconded by Egeland, to adjourn. Unanimous. 4 OA~(r-%ND SPACE CEMETERY ISSUE POSSI~IT.ITIES TO CONSID~: THE CEMETERY COULD BE EXPANDED: * By developing on a small portion of Hickory Hill Park (3-5 acres) - 3 acres of usable ground could extend the cemetery "life", in terms of lot sales, by 35-40 years. cost is unknowll at this time - an engineering report is being prepared to identify the impact, and provide us with a preliminary cost estimate. By purchasing a portion of the Turner property on Cedar Street - 1.5 to 2 acres could help greatly. The new owners indicated they did not want to sell any of their land at the time they purchased the property; however, a letter of inquiry was sent to t~em on 10/7/96. cemetery, located at $205,000; 1.2 acres). purchasing the other fairly large parcel adjacent to the 704 Reno Street (appraised value = This house is listed on the historic register, which would cause difficulties, and perhaps make it virtually impossible to convert this property into a cemetery. The Director has spoken with the owner, but answers are still needed with respect to the historic significance questions. By purchasing adjacent private property along Reno Street - perhaps portions of back yards or even entire lots. This doesn't appear to be a practical alternative - would be very expensive and would require cooperation from a number of property owners. BUILD A NEW CEMETERY: * One source suggests a minimum cost of $20,000 per acre in development costs (excluding land), with many variables. We feel it could be much more costly, especially if buildings are included. For example, a building similar to the existing cemetery shop/office (which may or may not be needed) would likely cost increase significantly; likely be necessary; $150,000-$200,000. Also, operating costs will additional equipment and staff will travel time will increase; other associated expenses will increase. The cost of land is also a consideration; less expensive property would likely be found outside the City. ABOVE GROUND BURIALS * Maus61eums are (MAUSOLEUMS): available for Very preliminary estimates basic, 216-crypt (full both full-body and cremation indicate we could build body) mausoleum for case, we could burials. a very approximately $200,000. If this is the probably charge enough to off-set the cost over a period of years. Potential problems .... they may not sell; there might not be enough space to build; public reaction could be negative (particularly by the neighborhood); it is a short- term solution unless more or larger mausoleums can be constructed (216 spaces will last approximately 5 years assuming mausoleum crypts sell at about the same rate as burial spaces). UNDERGROUND MAUSOLEUMS * (LAWN CRYPTS): Commonly referred to as "double depth" burials, this procedure could be cpnsidered as a space-saving measure, but only if an entire area of the cemetery is set aside specifically for this purpose. This would not save mausoleums. Some of the same -aot sell, ,and it is a short-term solution. are available at ~his time. as much space as above ground concerns exist; i.e. they may No cost estimates DISCONTINUE LOT SALES: * This is a possibility ~ if it is determined that the should remove itself from the cemetery business, other burials and maintenance. We could expand slightly into areas currently reserved for roadways. We "infringe" on adjacent wooded areas in modest City than some could possibly fashion (maybe 25-50 feet?). expectancy" point, but solution. We could possibly extend the cemetery's "life by selling only cremation spaces at a certain we don't feel this is an acceptable approach or Presented to Parks & Recreation Commission 10/9/96