Parks commission recommends full Boone House renovation, asks council to fund project

The Parks and Community Services Commission on Wednesday reviewed a consultant design study for the Forest Home Farms Boone House and voted to recommend that the City Council pursue the full, single‑phase renovation rather than a multi‑phase approach.

The commission was presented two delivery options: a single, comprehensive construction contract that would take about 12–14 months and an estimated cost of just under $5 million; or a phased approach that breaks the work into pieces over multiple years, which the consultant estimated could add roughly $1 million in total costs if the phases run consecutively and would extend the construction window substantially. Consultant Kim (Trainer) summarized the single‑project choice: “the building is, of course, completely offline during that time,” meaning archives and staff functions would be relocated for the duration of construction.

Why it matters: the Boone House is a historic resource that the city and the Forest Home Farms Historic Foundation identified as a priority in previous master plans and community outreach. Commissioners said they prioritized completing structural, life‑safety and accessibility upgrades at once to minimize repeated relocations, long periods of construction disturbance, and cost escalation.

Details of the proposal and the commission’s direction

Staff described a program that preserves the building’s historic character while upgrading its structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems and improving accessibility and program spaces. Trainer (the consultant team) explained the work would include extensive structural reinforcement and reroofing, MEP upgrades, a new accessible entry at the rear, archival storage accommodations and interior improvements for exhibits and office space.

Trainer presented two approaches: - Single‑phase (all at once): roughly 12–14 months of construction, complete shutdown of the building during that period, and a cost estimate just under $5 million. Archives and staff would be relocated during construction. - Phased approach: the work divided into multiple phases (front‑house foundation/structure, rear foundation tie‑ins, second‑floor build‑out, infill work and final restoration of the oldest portion). Each phase would have discrete duration and cost estimates; the phased sequence would allow partial re‑use between phases but would involve repeated mobilizations, repeated relocations of staff and archives if funding gaps occur, and higher total cost if phases are spread across years.

Commissioners and staff emphasized that structural work is the highest priority because it enables future preservation: “structural is kind of leading how we can do this phased approach,” the consultant said. Staff noted the city has not yet secured funding; the commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council as the commission’s preferred approach for inclusion in the CIP process.

Commission debate and public comment

Commissioners asked detailed questions about construction impacts, staging and public access during construction, contingency and escalation assumptions, and how archives and staff would be relocated. Commissioner Dorelick questioned how usable the facility would be during phased construction, asking how inviting it would be for the public with construction equipment and noise. The consultant and staff replied that partial use could be possible between phases but that the first structural phase would require temporary closure of exhibits and relocation of archives and some staff.

Cost and contingency: the consultant reported contingencies and escalation were built into the estimate, with design and estimating contingency and construction contingencies included; the staff cost estimator (LSA) used escalation assumptions for future phases. Staff repeatedly warned the commission that longer gaps between phases would increase escalation and change‑order risk.

A public commenter, Carol Rowley of the Forest Home Farms Historic Foundation, urged the commission to “get it done” with the full project and stressed the foundation’s fundraising support for the Boone House.

Action and next steps

Commissioner Dorelick moved and Commissioner Mitra seconded a motion that the commission receive the design study and recommend the single‑phase (non‑phased) approach to the City Council for funding consideration. The motion carried; the exact vote tally was not specified in the transcript.

Staff will forward the commission’s recommendation and the consultant study and cost estimate to the City Council for CIP consideration and continue to pursue grant and external funding opportunities. If the council directs a phased approach, staff said they will work with the consultant to sequence work and detail escalation and contingency implications.

What remains unresolved

Staff told commissioners the city has not yet allocated funding; whether the council will fund the single‑phase plan, select the phased approach, or alter the scope will be decided through the CIP and council budget process. Staff and consultant materials explain that a phased approach reduces immediate budget demand but increases total cost and elongates disruption; the commission endorsed the single‑phase option as the preferred approach to minimize that long‑term risk and to protect historic fabric.

Ending

The commission’s recommendation will be part of the city’s CIP submittals to the City Council. Staff said it will also continue to pursue grants and other funding, and the Forest Home Farms Historic Foundation plans fundraising activities in support of the project.