HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-10 Park Board PacketDraft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date: Click here to enter a date.
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Park Board
Edina City Hall, Community Room
October 13, 2015, 7 p.m.
I. Call To Order
Chair Gieseke called the Oct. 13, 2015 Park Board meeting to order at 7 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call were Chair Gieseke, Members Cella, Greene, Nelson, Jones, Segreto,
Strother, Crist and Lohani. Absent were Members Good and McCormick. Staff present were
Ann Kattreh, Susan Faus, Janet Canton, Amanda Clarke, Eric Boettcher, Patty McGrath, Susie
Miller, Joe Abood, Donna Tilsner, Tom Shirley, MJ Lamon
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion made by Member Segreto to approve the agenda. Motion seconded by Member
Strother. Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion made by Member Strother to approve the Sept. 8, 2015 minutes. Motion seconded
by Member Cella. Motion carried.
V. Special Recognitions and Presentations
None
VI. Community Comment
None
VII. Reports/Recommendations
A. Novus Board View Presentation
MJ Lamon, Project Coordinator, made a presentation to the Park Board regarding the new
agenda management software program that the city is now using for City Council, boards
and commissions meetings.
B. 2016 Parks & Recreation Fees and Charges
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date: Click here to enter a date.
Susan Faus, Assistant Parks & Recreation Director, presented the fees and charges to the
Park Board. Staff members were present to answer Park Board’s questions and the Park
Board discussed the proposed 2016 fees and charges. No changes were made to the
proposed 2016 Parks & Recreation fees and charges.
VIII. Chair and Member Comments
Chair Gieseke thanked Member Jones for meeting with the resident who was at last month’s
meeting concerned about buckthorn. Member Jones stated that after meeting with the
resident she thinks the resident feels better about the situation. Ms. Kattreh added that staff
also met with the resident.
IX. Staff Comments
Director Kattreh gave the following updates:
• Construction at Braemar Golf Course is going great and added a lot of buckthorn has
been eliminated and the Driving Range is going to be spectacular
• Richard Mandell will be in Edina in early November to give a public presentation of
the final version of the master plan
• Tin Fish will be open all winter at Braemar Golf Course
• Braemar Field has been rented out through the end of October, and the dome will be
going up the first week of November
• Recently there were two grand openings; one for the Promenade Phase IV and one for
Pamela Park
• There were two bidders that came in for the Pickleball courts at Rosland Park and
both were high; they will be re-bidding the project in January
• Director Kattreh stated she feels confident that by the end of the year the City of
Edina will own 2/3 of Weber Woods; they are close to reaching an agreement with the
City of Minneapolis
• Last week the city received a grant for $6,000 for bike racks
• There will be a work session with the City Council on Oct. 20 regarding the Strategic
Plan; all of the information is the same but has been reformatted
X. Adjournment
Chair Gieseke made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:18 p.m. Member Greene
seconded. Meeting adjourned.
November 10, 2015
Edina Park Board
Ann Kattreh, Parks & Recreation Director
Grandview Facility Operational and Feasibility Study
Information / Background:
In November 2014 the city entered into a partnership with Frauenshuh to collaboratively
plan the potential redevelopment of the city’s former Public Works site at 5146 Eden
Avenue. Six scenarios were prepared after input from the community and real estate
market. Four of the scenarios included combinations of public and private uses on the site.
All public and all private scenarios were also modeled. These scenarios were discussed by
the City Council in May 2015. Since the City Council provided preliminary direction in June
2015 and expressed a preference for scenario #3, staff has prepared additional material to
better understand the feasibility of pursuing a large-scale mixed-use development on the
site. ESG Architects was engaged to refine scenario #3 and to conduct a preliminary
architectural study to ensure that the civic program elements were feasible for the site and
to begin to imagine the look and feel for a potential Grandview Community Center. The
preliminary architectural conceptual site plan which was presented to the City Council Work
Session on Sept. 1, 2015 is included in this report as Attachment A.
At the Sept. 1, 2015 Work Session the City Council provided feedback to staff on the status
and possible future direction of the Grandview project. The City Council was generally in
agreement on the following key points regarding a new “Grandview Center”:
1) Continue in the direction of a mixed-use, public/private development
2) Continue pursuit of a flexible community building that can be used for multiple
community purposes and be welcoming and inviting for multiple generations
3) Continue to combine Arts Center and Senior Center operations at this site with the
intention of closing the two existing facilities. These uses would be supplemented by
additional multi-generational community programming by the Parks & Recreation
Department
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2
4) Continue to include Frauenshuh as potential development partner
5) Philanthropic contribution(s) are desired
6) Lease partnerships should be considered
7) Voter approval via referendum is highly likely
8) A limited operating subsidy may be acceptable for a new community facility
9) Continue to refine the concept and report back in late spring 2016 to determine how
to proceed
With this information, in order to continue to further refine the concept of a “Community
Facility”, Parks & Recreation Department staff suggested that the Park Board include a
feasibility study as part of the Park Board’s 2016 Work Plan and department staff included
in the Parks & Recreation Department 2016 Work Plan. The preliminary work that has been
done needs further study, research and refinement before the Parks & Recreation
Department and Park Board are able to make a recommendation to the City Council on
facility and programmatic components of a Grandview community facility. Staff was
directed to select a consulting team to assist with the facility operational feasibility study.
Staff began to identify possible partners and funding sources for a thorough and detailed
study and ultimately is recommending the following experts in the areas of planning,
design and estimating operational analysis and arts programming.
Planning, Design & Estimating
Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc (HGA) came very highly recommended as a potential
partner and Project Lead for the feasibility study. HGA recently completed feasibility studies
for the cities of Minnetonka, Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Eden Prairie and Bloomington for
new community centers or community center additions/renovations. HGA has an impressive
resume of community center and performing and visual arts facilities including the Janet
Wallace Fine Arts Center at Macalester College, Nelson Cultural Center at the American
Swedish Institute, Saint Paul Academy, College of Saint Benedict, and Longwood University,
to name a few. The scope of HGA’s work will include four phases: Visioning and
Programming; Site Analysis and Conceptual Design; Cost Estimating; and Final Report. HGA
has a staff of 40 and specializes in the evaluation, planning and design of community,
recreation and cultural facilities.
Feasibility, Operational Analysis & Pro Forma
Pros Consulting was selected to complete the operational analysis of the feasibility study,
including a business plan. The Park Board and Parks & Recreation Department staff recently
worked with Pros on the Park, Recreation and Trails Strategic Plan. Pros Consulting scope of
work contains six stages: Data Collection and Market Analysis; Community and Stakeholder
Public Input; Program Identification; Facility Building Program; Operational Plan; Draft
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3
Report, Presentation and Final Report. The Operational Plan will include revenue and
expense details, financial modeling and pro formas. Pros will work with HGA and an Edina
team to study programmatic needs and interests and determine the operational feasibility
of each programmatic component.
Arts Analysis
Sutton + Associates was selected to complete the arts analysis portion of the study. Sutton
+ Associates has been involved with the Edina Art Center since 2012 when they completed
an analysis of the operations of the current Art Center. The Sutton + Associates scope
includes: Market and Comparative Analysis; Programming Plan; Operational Plan; and
Recommendations. The data provided by Sutton + Associates will be included in the overall
feasibility study and business plan completed by Pros Consulting. Sutton will study the Twin
Cities arts market, in addition to the Edina market to determine which arts components are
needed and desired in Edina and which will be supported and successful components at
Grandview.
Staff believes that the team of HGA, Pros and Sutton + Associates provides an exceptional
compliment to the Edina team of city staff, Park Board, Arts & Culture Commission, School
District staff and Edina resident resources. Val Burke, Director of Community Education for
Edina Public Schools has generously offered her time and expertise to assist with the study.
Edina Parks & Recreation and Community Education staff believe that significant
consideration and study should go into how Parks & Recreation and Community Education
can best partner on programming, facilities and staffing initiatives at a new Grandview
community facility and in general. Director Burke is also contributing $10,000 to the
Operational and Feasibility Study project budget. The challenge of this study will be to
recommend a multi-generational community facility that meets the current and future
needs of all Edina residents, adds significant community value, combines resources, and
replaces aging and dated facilities and/or programs.
Operational and Feasibility Study Project Costs:
HGA $52,100
Pros Consulting $27,500
Sutton + Associates $12,500
Total $92,100
Funding Sources
REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4
$72,100 of this project will be funded by the Parks & Recreation Department budget with
funding from 2015 and 2016. $10,000 will be funded by Edina Community Education and
$10,000 will be funded by the 2016 Art Center budget.
At the completion of this analysis, staff will be confident in recommending a proposal to
the Park Board and City Council and will provide a detailed programmatic recommendation
with corresponding facility components and also pro formas to support the proposal. HGA
will also provide an exterior and interior image of the final product, including cost estimates
for construction.
Staff will present the Grandview Facility Operational and Feasibility Study proposal to the
City Council for their review at the Tuesday, Nov. 17 City Council meeting. If approved, the
study will start at the beginning of December and will take four months to complete. The
City Council has requested the next Grandview facility update to take place by May 2016.
1=- THE OPUS GROUP
Reynolds
urban
Design
Sutton +
Associates
Cultural Facility Oevo•Inpm..nt.
DJR
ARCHITECTURC INC COnFLUEnCE
Schuler Shook
esc
architects
WSB
Ill
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
G RAN DVIEW
Former Public Works Site
• .• -Conceptual_ Site-
• City council
ecternber St
These materials are
preliminary in nature.
They are prepared for
discussion purposes only.
• _rt....MinIrribionadaillilftilill141ER1160111:14111011011011•11Mil
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
ESG Architects was engaged to refine Scenario #3 and to
conduct a preliminary architectural study to
(1) ensure that the civic program elements are feasible
for the site and
architects (2) to begin to imagine the look and feel for a potential
Grandview Community Center
WSB Associates was engaged to conduct a traffic impact
1't/SB study of the mixed-use program identified in Scenario #3.
ANNEn
& Associates.
September 1st, 2015 2
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
While preliminary in nature, these studies confirm that the
mixed-use / public-private scenario is realistic for the site.
COMMUNITY
CENTER
c. Streetscaping ofEden & Arcadia
Widening of Arcadia
•
1LN
. .
' —' nNar AN •sor ... ,•limme .. 'w,
!MI liirt RI IIMMII
lawassomammonar=
/
_.... .
Formerir Public Works Site
ID
.• • •
sir . -'' , •
! AI A ilk ' ' A
Ate,lric - -IC_ 9 n c ept s
IMMINi.4--^:.11MBIIIIEN- i.:-...1k1. -'.--.SE-M10
HARED STREET iiiiiimmaii
...immonimmommil-,F,5,4 .p.,..-
falEAUFII _
-
um=
oloommer,
IRON:
11,'W 4;1°11" 1'1
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING Preliminary Program
60,000 + SF community center
8,000 SF restaurant/cafe
New east-west shared street
outdoor civic plaza
170-unit apartment building
e 4
If
fttiP f7"..=;V•
N4_44.A -
_147,aeft,
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
Avr
September 1st, 2015 3
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
4
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group September 1st, 2015
Engaging the steep
hill along Arcadia to
create a strong civic
presence
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
8fir
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
5 September 1st, 2015 r FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
-
Creating a lively outdoor
space that is welcoming
and inviting
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction. slir
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
Creating drama and visual
interest that is timeless not
trendy ty/f
6
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group September 1st, 2015
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
7
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group September 1st, 2015
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
A notable roofline that is
visible from all directions
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
A grand and welcoming entrance
September 1st, 2015 8
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts
Former Public Works Site
Architectural Concepts — main floor
0, C.n
1
September 1st, 2015
-cr
Traditional floor
plan overlaid with
openness and
pedestrian appeal
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
1ff FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Architectural Concepts — second floor
Comfortable destinations
on upper level with
memorable stairway
and outdoor terrace
05 0
I Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
September 1st, 2015
FRAUENSHUH
10 Commercial Real Estate Group
cu
0
4-I u fa -%
(fl 4-1 1/1 c
=0
U
C 4-1 00
Z
0-
W U ectem•er 1st, 201
f,
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts — residential building
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
I!a 0 ON 11111 1
- smog!' 1201 g n Eg . ,. so 21._ .....,,
-1:4 11 pi
A _A _ Nt: ..rign 5: Eli 11 n 9 mg
11_2
II It := ' mot! Wilf19-1111
,1 all II ll I : '-- AMIll
.,,,... ._._ . ..,......„ ........ . .....
i !Ai . ii i 4;r. '
I A 4,1:Lw*.. V g 5 II ,-,g, 141 7-;,,, - w. II" ,r,„:4
t„ei , 01 as .4.E"7
" ! Non nu a LW — '7z:••=4 g-- — 4.'7,;',71.;,-;:";:',::' ,,,',' .0 , ^•"' . , . I I ;1111. I I A' II
.
........2,..
I till , II i 'kite
ir
---•._--, ...„..„.........,„,...;,,...„.„. „ ,...„,_ .-. w_
....._ ,.„..„,,,,w. ,..,.,,.4„;,,,,..,.......,
Rendering of a potential apartment building facing Eden Ave,, ,s ,
September 1st, 2015 12
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
BOH EXTRA LARGE
COMMUNITY ROOM
'71,1111WW/"4:- 4M141111r 111r171,13.111111,14 - _
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
RESIDENTIAL U NITS
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
RESIDENTIAL U NITS
RESIDENTIAL U NITS
AMENITY LEVEL RESIDENTIAL UNITS
TOWN PARKING ..
------- "nikriiv'E
PARKING
ART STUDIOS BOH RESTAURANT
ED IU M M MU N ITY RM.S_ SERVIG, ----- ' ------------
---
------- -------
PARKING
PARKING
•n••1,
SHARED STREET
EDEN AVENUE
RESIDENTIAL ENTRY
The hilly terrain presents challenges and opportunities. The existing
excavation can be used to mask the public parking below the new
1 community building.
13 September 1st, 2015
JERRY'S ENTERPRISE
BUILDING BEYOND
COMMUNITY CENTER
MAIN ENTRY
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts — cross section
14
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts — first floor
E -cra,
I 1-'11
a
_
8 a 3 3 3
cn 2 3 B a 3
g • 8 a g' 3 a o g c
cn4 -2 -
• LLi1rJ 1,"77-1 40, 41 ,
I
70-
On Street Parking (.0
DRAFT j-or-discusion onrci
co/ C.0
cra
,Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
\
September 1st, 2015
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction. spun u!llamG -6•-.
Former Public Works Site
Preliminary Architectural Concepts — second floor
DRAFT for discussion only
,/
1 September 1st, 2015 15
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
a • a •
•
• a I.' . .
Public Parking
• u•i• •
•
•
•
•
• •
a
a
DRAFT for discussion only
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
I
September 1st, 2015
sConcppt Illustration only.
Not forciinstruction.
( 1/
•
•
,,-.4.111111111n 111111110•1 111111111111 MIN
• MU
•
•
a, rn 0 0 On Street Parking - 13 -, 0 CD CO CO IQ t° G3 P x 0 0 Ca Ca
•
16
Former Public Works Site
Architectural Concepts — parking levels
.11 • 41.2 • •.• 4 ••• • B •II II ••• • •,•• s ••• • •
•II • tog II gall a • . to ii ant • ••• 11. Ass s X •n •* • 0
I
September 1st, 2015
/—
DRAFT for discussion only
•
"<11:
CO
CCLI
CD 1‘)
Service
a
a
•
•
•••85•911,111110
• II its II S•1t 1_ 11....
•
•
17
• —L
• • • • S • •
11-1----• • • • • W • • • • • • a • 11
9.
9.
CD CD
-13 Os
Cn
Public Parking / Park-n-Ride
-11—
▪
*
•
W • • • • • • • • • 555 77 • • • • •
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Concept illustration only.
Not for construction.
Nei
•
Use
Residential (170 units)
Community Center (60k SF)
Retail (6k SF)
Restaurant (8k SF)
Total New Trips
Former Public Works Site
Traffic Impact Study
The WSB Traffic Study notes that traffic volume in the Grandview area has
remained about the same or has reduced in recent years. Some reduction
could be attributed to the relocation of the Public Works operations.
The Study indicates that the conceived public/private project will result in a
slight to modest increase to traffic in the Grandview area. It also indicates that
adequate capacity is available for a park-n-ride facility.
Trip Generation Parking
Daily
Trips
AM PM
Peak Peak
Trips Trips
Parking
Demand
(ITE)
Peak Periods
(ITE)
Code
Require-
ment
Proposed
Parking
988 75 88 235 11 PM to 6 AM 170 253
2,029 123 164 192 6 to 8 PM 300
507 266 6 22
20
25
22
11 AM to 8 PM
11 AM to 2 PM,
& 6 to 8 PM
38
13 254 22
3,537 226 295 474 521 760
September 1st, 2015 18
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Traffic Impact Study
The WSB Traffic Study suggests five improvements
to address traffic concerns related to the
redevelopment of this site.
1) Add new shared street from Arcadia to Vernon
2) Widen Arcadia to include a center turn lane,
bike lane & sidewalk
3) Add signal or roundabout to Eden & Arcadia
intersection
4) Add west bound turn lane on Vernon at
Interlachen (along with signal changes)
5) Change signal timing at Vernon & Link
At this time, only 1 & 2 are included in the
1 preliminary cost estimates.
September 1st1 2015 19
,
•
I -
•
-
•
0
Former Public Works Site
Background — 5146 Eden Avenue
3.3 acres
Tax-free since 1963
Vacant since 2010
.1*-511,7
Sei te erlst, 20
•.0.1.1'0.0% -a-7•-t7,:
,,•;., ...-;;;--- --. ... ,,.., N.., ..,„
z
- .... .. , lot ,--,_;,,,- • ',t. ,- --,-, .... _ ,.-- ,,,,..'
V • . , ill 0 to • 4{ ii , . • '1_114 fr,
Located in mixed-use commercial district
Centrally located in northern half of Edina
Adjacent to railroad right-of-way
Easy access to Highway 100
I.
21
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group September 1st, 2015
Former Public Works Site
Background Images
Preferred Images from
Exploration Sessions
010
I
4VIIIIK,4-49 • . . • .• A ill
s. L4.
History Display
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Background Images
Multi-Generational /Flexible
Community Spaces from
Discovery Session
September 1", 2015 22
Program Elements for Multi-Generational, Multi-
Pur • ose Communit Facilit 60,000+ SF in area
1
September
• Arts education, training production
• Visual media (painting, pottery, glass, metals)
• Public galleries & event space
• History display/exhibit
• Multi-generational flexible spaces (large, medium
and small community rooms)
• Meeting space for community members and
groups
• Oversized lobby/lounges for community events
• Largest community room designed as flexible,
multi-purpose space
o Up to 300 movable seats
o Full variety of performances and events
o Supported by lobby & back-of-house areas
• Restaurant / café
• Park-and Ride
• Future transit connection to rail
• 340 total parking stalls, minimum
_
Former Public Works Site
Background — for Reference
Preferred Programming from
May 2015 Work Session
Sits OP
Scenario #3 North Civic with South Residential
(from May 2015 Work Session)
1st, 2015 23
FRAUENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
Former Public Works Site
Background — Conceptual Civic Program from May 2015
Net Area Gross Area (SF) Primary Use Description Net Area Gross Area (SF)
20,453 X-Large Community / Performance Space 7,846
1,700 seating for 300 4,000
700 control rooms 220
1,300 storage 160
800 cross-over 1,024
300
3,500 Front of House / Community Lounge 7,855
200 lobby 3,000
1,000 catering kitchen 800
1,000 rest rooms 800
1,000 coat room 200
1,000 concessions 220
810 Back of House 7,540
600 storage
green room 500
Primary Use Description
Studio Arts
1 Gallery
1 Large studio
4 small studios
2 specialized
gift shop
1 pottery studio
1 metal arts
1 glass
1 photo/jewelry
rental studio
storage
Edina History Center
display, exhibit
Multi-Generational Flexible Space
2 medium rooms 3,000
4 small rooms 800
1 lounge 800
Staff Offices
9,450 make-up / dressing 1,600
maintenance room 600
trash room 200
Mechanical room2200
control rooms 720
2,126 storage rooms 1,300
staff offices 600
open office 600 Total Program Gross SF 56,080
conference room 225 USE 60,000 SF
Exterior spaces
entry plaza 1,200
September 1st, 2015 24
kiln 6,500
PROPOSAL PREPARED FOR
EDINA PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
GRANDVIEW SITE FEASIBILITY STUDY
LONGWOOD UNIVERSITY | DEPARTMENT OF ART EXPANSION | Farmville, Virginia
TABLE OF CONTENTS
01 HGA OVERVIEW
02 PROPOSED TEAM
04 PROJECT EXPERTISE
25 REFERENCES
26 PROJECT APPROACH
29 PROPOSED FEE
Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc.
HGA Architects and Engineers, LLC
HGA Architects and Engineers, LLP
HGA Mid Atlantic, Inc.
420 North 5th Street, Suite 100 | Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
Telephone 612.758.4000 | Facsimile 612.758.4199
www.hga.com
October 9, 2015
Ann Kattreh, Parks and Recreation Director
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Re: Grandview Site Feasibility Study
Dear Ms. Kattreh:
It is with great pleasure that we submit our proposal to provide programming and concept development
for the City of Edina Grandview site. For your project, we have assembled a high-performance team
of design professionals who bring proven experience in facilitation, fine and performing arts design,
community center design and cost estimating. Our proposal highlights several distinguishing factors
that position HGA as the best choice to realize your project goals.
DESIGN EXCELLENCE: Community facilities serve as vibrant, interactive hubs to inspire healthy
lifestyles, support community engagement and reflect a sense of place. Excellent design begins with
a rigorous feasibility study. Our ability to assess the program and study your site, combined with our
proven expertise, artful approach to design and commitment to innovation, allows us to bring beautiful
and inspiring possibilities to reality.
SPECIALIZED EXPERTISE: We have extensive experience and knowledge in the programmatic and
technical requirements for community gathering, recreation and fine and performing arts spaces. These
attributes are further supplemented by our in-house cost estimating department, ensuring an accurate
cost assessment for our clients.
TRADITION OF COLLABORATION: The nature of community facilities is to solicit input from a broad
base of stakeholders, apply focused listening skills to fully understand the community’s aspirations and
facilitate an organized process that will lead to consensus and informed decision making. Our design
process and engagement with clients and communities encourages collaboration, imagination and
visioning even on the tightest of timetables.
HGA would be delighted to partner with the City of Edina to explore the possibilities and options for the
Grandview site. If you should have any questions regarding our firm, our work, or if you need additional
information, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Nancy Blankfard, AIA, LEED AP BD+C
Vice President
612.758.4390 | nblankfard@hga.com
MACALESTER COLLEGE | JANET WALLACE FINE ARTS CENTER | St. Paul, Minnesota
1
HGA OVERVIEWHGA Architects and Engineers
COMMITMENT TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Founded in 1953, HGA is an integrated architecture,
engineering and planning firm that provides comprehensive
solutions that reflect the unique philosophy, culture and vision
of each client. HGA’s commitment to non-profit facilities led
to the formation of the Arts, Community and Education (ACE)
practice studio. With a staff of 40, this studio specializes in the
evaluation, planning and design of community, recreation and
cultural facilities.
COMMUNITY AND RECREATION
Public gathering spaces are among the most challenging and
exciting opportunities. Given our experience, it is our intent to
provide leadership and assistance to help you create a facility
that symbolizes and reinforces community identity—a place
where people come together as a community for work and
health. HGA excels in the collaborative process and encourages
participation by various groups in the development process to
plan, program and design a facility that captures the collective
vision.
Community recreation facilities are important to individual
and collective health and wellness and provide places of
respite in our fast-paced world. Whether enjoying educational
classes, fitness programs, community events or recreational
activities, our sense of spirit is uplifted when we can enjoy and
celebrate life together with friends, family and members of our
community. At HGA, we have the knowledge and experience
to work with you in developing the type of facility that can
offer the greatest versatility to respond to the needs of the
community now and well into the future.
ARTS FACILITY SPECIALISTS
HGA’s nationally recognized fine and performing arts studio
offers the advantage of a specialized team of architects,
engineers and planners able to draw upon the substantial
resources of a larger firm. The studio specializes in the
evaluation, planning and design of fine arts education,
practice and performance facilities and creating exceptional
environments to cultivate creativity, welcome the community
and foster excellence. We understand the highly specialized
technical requirements for fine and performing arts buildings,
such as the need for superb acoustics and sound isolation,
as well as the unique requirements for student learning and
performance. We have gone through the learning curve on
many projects and bring expertise in the highly technical
requirements of art, music, film, theatre and dance education,
practice and performance facility design.
FULL SERVICE
While most architecture firms subcontract all disciplines, being
part of a larger organization allows us to offer our clients
complete support. Our full-service architecture, engineering and
planning team strives to incorporate the most innovative and
appropriate technical solutions to create lasting, protective and
cost-effective environments. Clients achieve success through
responsive, innovative and sustainable solutions resulting from
a strong partnership with HGA’s interdisciplinary team.
1
FORD CENTER | HGA OFFICES | Minneapolis, Minnesota
LEADERSHIP AND PERSONALIZED SERVICE
The team leadership for this project consists of highly qualified
individuals who have experience working with cities on similar
projects. This leadership team represents the core leadership
of HGA’s specialized practice in community center facilities.
Nancy Blankfard, Victor Pechaty and Mark McDonald have
the right set of complimentary abilities combined with a deep
level of experience and expertise on this project type and a
successful history of collaborations on similar projects.
Our team will give you the personalized service you deserve
coupled with highly specialized staff and resources that
a large full-service firm offers. We know the unique and
specialized needs of community center clients and understand
the importance of energy efficiency, ease of maintenance,
accessibility and security.
Nancy Blankfard
PRINCIPAL/PROJECT MANAGER | AIA, LEED AP BD+C
Known for her expertise and commitment to design
excellence, Nancy is a skillful collaborator who brings
together diverse project teams and complex client structures
while guiding the project clearly and effectively. As project
manager, Nancy plays a dual role providing contract
administration and supporting the internal HGA team with
proper staffing and resources along with stakeholder and
community facilitation. Nancy’s achievements have been
recognized with numerous prestigious awards. She is the
recipient of the Ralph Rapson Travel/Study Fellowship and
the AIA Minnesota Young Architects Award.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER AQUATICS
PROGRAMS CONCEPT DESIGN AND AQUATICS ADDITION
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER
ASSESSMENT AND CONCEPT DESIGN Golden Valley, Minnesota
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY AND RECREATION
CENTER CONCEPT DESIGN AND EXPANSION
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
CITY OF BLOOMINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER NEEDS
ASSESSMENT Bloomington, Minnesota
ST. PAUL ACADEMY | HUSS CENTER FOR PERFORMING ARTS
St. Paul, Minnesota
AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE NELSON CULTURAL
CENTER Minneapolis, Minnesota
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA THE NEW NORTHROP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
MACALESTER COLLEGE JANET WALLACE FINE ARTS
CENTER Saint Paul, Minnesota
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CENTER FOR DANCE
Minneapolis, Minnesota
EDUCATION / AFFILIATIONS
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE DEGREE
Tulane University, 1993
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL Minnesota
Proposed Team
3
PROPOSED TEAMVictor Pechaty
PROJECT DESIGNER | AIA
A senior project designer with 25 years of experience working
through all phases of the design and construction process,
Victor will be responsible for leading the design team and
ensuring that your project vision is fully realized in planning
and design. His background includes extensive experience
in community and recreational facilities spanning a diverse
range of community center programs including fitness,
athletics, meeting/banquet facilities, studio arts, performing
arts and other park and recreation needs. He will guide the
team through the programming, concept development and cost
estimating phases.
SELECTED EXPERIENCE
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER AQUATICS
PROGRAMS CONCEPT DESIGN AND AQUATICS ADDITION
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER
ASSESSMENT AND CONCEPT DESIGN Golden Valley, Minnesota
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY AND RECREATION
CENTER CONCEPT DESIGN AND EXPANSION
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
CITY OF MINNETONKA WILLISTON RECREATION CENTER
ADDITIONS AND REMODELING Minnetonka, Minnesota*
CITY OF ANDOVER AND ANDOVER YMCA COMMUNITY
CENTER AND YMCA Andover, Minnesota*
CITY OF MINNETONKA GLEN LAKE ACTIVITY CENTER
Minnetonka, Minnesota
CITY OF SAINT PAUL ARLINGTON HILLS COMMUNITY
CENTER Saint Paul, Minnesota
MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION BARRY FAMILY
CAMPUS-SPACE PLANNING ASSESSMENT AND CONCEPT
DEVELOPMENT Minneapolis, Minnesota
*Prior to joining HGA
EDUCATION / AFFILIATIONS
MASTER OF SCIENCE IN ADVANCED ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN (MSAAD) Columbia University Graduate School of
Architecture, Planning, and Preservation, 1996
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL Minnesota
Mark McDonald
LEAD COST ESTIMATOR
Mark has a proven track record of accurate estimating and
work on projects. Under Mark’s leadership, our average
percent of budget variance (over and under) is only 3.73%.
He brings 30 years of experience as a cost estimator and
project manager/field engineer to projects. Working closely
with all members of the project team, he uses his expertise in
the latest construction methods and practices to accurately
assess all related costs. Mark is particularly adept at
conceptual cost estimating and has many resources regarding
market trends and future outlooks
SELECTED EXPERIENCE
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER AQUATICS
PROGRAMS CONCEPT DESIGN AND AQUATICS ADDITION
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY AND RECREATION
CENTER CONCEPT DESIGN AND EXPANSION
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
CITY OF BLOOMINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER NEEDS
ASSESSMENT Bloomington, Minnesota
CITY OF SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY CENTER ADDITION AND
RENOVATION FEASIBILITY STUDY Shakopee, Minnesota
AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE NELSON CULTURAL
CENTER Minneapolis, Minnesota
CABRILLO COLLEGE PERFORMING AND VISUAL ARTS
CENTER AND STUDENT CENTER Aptos, California
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE VALLEY
PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Los Angeles, California
CHAFFEY COLLEGE VISUAL AND PERFORMING ARTS
VILLAGE Rancho Cucamonga, California
PURDUE UNIVERSITY VISUAL AND PERFORMING ARTS
CENTER West Lafayette, Indiana
EDUCATION / AFFILIATIONS
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
University of Wisconsin-Stout, 1984
MINNESOTA CONCRETE COUNCIL
Member
5
HGA-designed spaces
Inspire and Build Community
55
PROJECT EXPERTISEHGA brings a depth of expertise in all of the program areas in which Edina Park and Recreation Department is exploring. The
HGA team brings relevant and extensive experience in planning and designing cultural and recreation facilities. Our knowledge of
arts and performance spaces is nationally recognized and will be leveraged to program and plan highly functional solutions. Our
well conceived planning will result in beautiful and inspiring designs, inside and out, that will build excitement in your community.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK | COMMUNITY CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY | St. Louis Park, Minnesota
7
PROJECT EXPERTISECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK | COMMUNITY CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY | St. Louis Park, Minnesota
The St. Louis Park Community Center is a multi-generational
facility designed to build upon and complement existing
recreational amenities of Wolfe Park and in the community. The
new program proposed a double gymnasium and associated
track while expanding aquatics programming to include indoor
lap swimming, water slide and pool climbing wall. The proposed
building reaches beyond physical fitness alone and provides a
vibrant meeting point for both daily and special events in the
community. The feasibility study evaluated program square
footage relative to potential building sites in the neighborhood
and provided information for collaborative, next-steps visioning.
FEASIBILITY STUDIES
8Commission No.: 2065-004-00
BROOKVIEW
SITE PLAN
CONCEPT
New
Parking
Lot
Future Expansion
New
Mini Golf
Course
New Putting
Green
Hole 10 Tee
Driving Range
Hole 1 Tee
18th Green
9th Green
Main Entry
Garden
New
Two-Story
Building
Covered
Drop Off
Roof
Terrace
Lawn Bowling
Lawn Bowling
New Putting
Green
Golf Cart
Staging
Golf
Terrace
Below Garden
Garden
GardenService
Access
Pond
Pond
Pond ExistingGolf Maintenance Building
Pond
Lawn
Bowling
Courts
OVERALL SITE PLAN ENLARGED SITE PLAN N
9Commission No.: 2065-004-00
BUILDING FRAMEWORKS CONCEPT
LOWER LEVEL
AreaBelow Grade
Service
Access
MAIN LEVEL
Main Entry
Garden w/
Trellis Above
GardenSpaces
GardenSpaces
GardenSpaces
Dining Patio
Pro Shop
Access
Golf
Terrace
CoveredDrop Off
Lawn Bowling
Events
Terrace
w/ Trellis
Above
Lobby Terrace
Exterior Stair Access
UPPER LEVEL
Secondary Entry
Secondary Entry
Main
Entry
N
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY | COMMUNITY CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY | Golden Valley, Minnesota
The vision for the community center was to provide an
energized community attractor that would activate its site,
expand seasonal use, increase current program offerings for
all ages and demographics and help position Golden Valley
as a vibrant and attractive 21st Century city. Through the
Feasibility Study process, The city was able to inform and
clarify this vision through an open and inclusive community-
based process. HGA facilitated programming and design
workshops with the Community Center Task Force, sought
consensus among multiple stakeholders and presented design
ideas for community center facilities on three sites.
9Commission No.: 2065-004-00
BUILDING FRAMEWORKS CONCEPT
LOWER LEVEL
Area
Below Grade
ServiceAccess
MAIN LEVEL
Main Entry Garden w/
Trellis Above
Garden
Spaces
GardenSpaces
Garden
Spaces
Dining Patio
Pro ShopAccess
Golf Terrace
CoveredDrop Off
Lawn Bowling
Events
Terrace w/ TrellisAbove
Lobby Terrace
Exterior Stair Access
UPPER LEVEL
Secondary Entry
Secondary Entry
MainEntry
N
FEASIBILITY STUDIES
9
PROJECT EXPERTISECITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE | COMMUNITY AQUATICS CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY | Eden Prairie, Minnesota
The City of Eden Prairie owns and operates a vibrant
multipurpose community center facility in Eden Prairie,
Minnesota. The facility has grown with the community over the
years, and last expanded in 1997, to accommodate additional
fitness offerings. Currently, the city faces increasing and diverse
demands for aquatics programming and has embarked on an
exciting visioning, feasibility study and design process with
HGA.
HGA championed a grassroots process to gather information
from numerous community stakeholders. Consensus was
built around a project vision to carefully balance the needs
of swimmers just getting comfortable in the water to those
training competitively. The final project program and building
design for the aquatics expansion includes two competitive lap
pools; thoughtfully sized for maximum programming flexibility.
Diving, wet locker rooms and dryland training areas are
optimally sized and incorporated. Recreation and other special
needs are served by a zero depth entry pool. A water slide
connects to the recreational pool and is located on a prominent
building edge to increase facility visibility and generate
community excitement for the collective project vision.
FEASIBILITY STUDIES
MACALESTER COLLEGE | JANET WALLACE FINE ARTS CENTER | Saint Paul, Minnesota
11
PROJECT EXPERTISEMACALESTER COLLEGE | JANET WALLACE FINE ARTS CENTER | Saint Paul, Minnesota
HGA collaborated with Macalester College on the multi-
phase Janet Wallace Fine Arts Center to transform the music,
theatre and fine arts buildings into a state-of-the-art visual and
performing arts complex, anchored by a new light-filled, two-
story arts commons.
In Phase I (completed in 2012), the music building was
reconfigured and expanded to provide a 318-seat concert hall,
dedicated choral and instrument rehearsal spaces, individual
practice rooms and teaching studios. The arts commons creates
a front door to the arts that is connected to the campus.
The central gathering space serves all the arts disciplines
while providing a new art gallery, multimedia lab, classrooms
and meeting rooms. The exterior envelope creates a more
transparent and accessible identity for the arts.
Phase II (completed in 2014), transforms the Art Department
with new print making, drawing, pottery and sculpture studios.
The Art Department is designed to the highest standards of
art safety. HGA has been on the cutting edge of implementing
exhaust, filtration and protection standards against hazards
that exceed those in industrial and laboratory settings.
Phase III—programmed and planned for future development
of the theatre department—will include a theatre, rehearsal
spaces, classrooms and faculty offices.
FINE AND PERFORMING ARTS
The design for the Nelson Cultural Center for the American
Swedish Institute acknowledges the historic character of the
adjacent Turnblad Mansion while creating a distinct architectural
presence that considers contemporary and traditional Swedish
aesthetics. The new wing, which includes the main lobby, café,
gallery space, retail shop and event space, is light and airy, with
two-story windows visually aligning with the Mansion and the
original entrance. From the lobby, a glass corridor connects
with the main mansion and carriage house. The Mansion’s lower
level showcases a renovated gallery and provides much-needed
classrooms and a community hall.
AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE | NELSON CULTURAL CENTER | Minneapolis, Minnesota
FINE AND PERFORMING ARTS
13
An essential part of the mission of SPA’s Fine Arts Program is
to “provide a rich environment in which students can discover
and develop their own creative potential.” The addition of
the Performance Space and Great Hall to the campus will be
instrumental in strengthening this clarity of purpose and the
belief in community which is at the core of the SPA experience.
Each successive addition to the Randolph Campus has been
transformative in its impact—the next phase of expansion
is a tremendous opportunity to bring greater clarity to this
architectural history while setting a course for the future.
SAINT PAUL ACADEMY AND SUMMIT SCHOOL | PERFORMANCE SPACE AND GREAT HALL | Saint Paul, Minnesota PROJECT EXPERTISEFINE AND PERFORMING ARTS
The expansion of the Benedicta Art Center is composed of simple
rectangular volumes clad in velvety bronze and red metal panels
that draw their inspiration from the brick of the original 1963
center. The black box, music and dance building volumes are
punctuated by transparent glass windows that glow from the
activity within. An amphitheater has been created as an extension
of the black box theater to provide a venue for theatre, music and
dance performances.
COLLEGE OF SAINT BENEDICT | BENEDICTA ARTS CENTER | St. Joseph, Minnesota
FINE AND PERFORMING ARTS
15FINE AND PERFORMING ARTS
The revamped Bedford Hall at Longwood University enables the
Art Department to enhance academic performance in its growing
graphic design, art education, photography, painting/drawing,
crafts, art history and book arts/printmaking programs. The
project includes a three-story 47,000 SF addition and 26,240
SF renovation and updates mechanical, electrical, ventilation and
life-safety systems. Outside, the addition features a distinctive
glass-walled gallery with vertical glass fins overlooking a
reflecting pool. Inside, classrooms and lecture spaces vary from a
98-seat lecture hall to smaller flexible seminar rooms. Exhibition
spaces include a formal student gallery to informal spaces in
lobbies, circulation corridors and other gathering locations.
LONGWOOD UNIVERSITY | DEPARTMENT OF ART EXPANSION | Farmville, Virginia PROJECT EXPERTISE
CITY OF ANDOVER AND ANDOVER YMCA | COMMUNITY CENTER AND YMCA | Andover, Minnesota*
17
PROJECT EXPERTISECITY OF ANDOVER AND ANDOVER YMCA | COMMUNITY CENTER AND YMCA | Andover, Minnesota*
The Andover Community Center and YMCA is the result of
a collaborative venture between the City of Andover and the
Greater Twin Cities YMCA. The goal of the project was to
build community through an emphasis on an active lifestyle
and physical fitness. The 140,000 SF building program is built
around three major athletic venues: an NHL-sized ice arena
with spectator seating for 800, a fieldhouse with three 50’x84’
basketball courts, and an aquatics center with lap pool,
recreational pool, water slides and aquatic play features.
The architectural and engineering team worked collaboratively
with a construction manager throughout the process from pre-
planning and cost estimating through construction and final
completion. The architecture uses several utilitarian materials
in highly innovative ways to create a civic presence. The project
was awarded a 2005 American Institute of Architects Honor
Award for its innovative design.
The ice arena is designed for year-round operation and is
served by four team rooms; two of which have enhanced
facilities and are occupied solely by the Andover High School
varsity hockey team. The ice sheet is set 3’ below the ground
floor level. This simple design decision allows for excellent
views of all ice activities directly through the dasher board
glass. The arena and the entire facility has become a central
gathering place for Andover and surrounding communities.
* Project designed by Victor Pechaty prior to joining HGA.
COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTERS
CITY OF SAINT PAUL | ARLINGTON HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER | Saint Paul, Minnesota
This project is part of a transformational multi-block
development in Saint Paul, Minnesota. One portion of the
project which will consist of a replacement library for the
Arlington Hills Library and a new Saint Paul Recreation
Center. Lines between library and recreation center program
areas have been blurred in an effort to eliminate single purpose
spaces. Youth programs are planned to be more active and
youth program areas—library collection and gym—will be
co-located. Library and Rec Center Adult meeting rooms,
restrooms and support services will also be collocated.
Collocation allows for reduction in the overall building
square footage required and increased operational efficiency.
No room or area will be underutilized or vacant. Staff will
provide services to meet both the needs for the recreation
center as well as the library and excited for the programmatic
opportunities which this presents.
The library also incorporates such sustainable elements as
solar glazing, a “cool” roof, 100 percent recyclable carpet tile,
bioswales for site drainage, and durable materials that meet
the City’s longevity standards for public buildings. This new
community center, complete with soccer fields and community
gardens will serve the diverse culture of this neighborhood and
renew the community with respect to their unique history.
COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTERS
19
CITY OF MINNETONKA | WILLISTON RECREATION CENTER EXPANSION AND RENOVATION | Minnetonka, Minnesota*
The expansion and renovation to the City of Minnetonka
Williston Recreation Center began with a comprehensive
Feasibility Study. After multiple expansion and renovation
options were reviewed, the city conducted a best-value
analysis—cross referencing programmatic needs and financial
stewardship of city resources—which led to the construction of
two building additions and extensive interior renovation.
The existing building housed a failing aluminum shell lap pool.
The aquatics scope preserved the elegant wood-vaulted roof
structure over the existing pool while demolishing the existing
pool and outdated filtration systems. The existing pool liner was
left in place and served as form work for a new concrete pool
structure finished with a cementitious lining. A zero-depth entry
shallow water pool was added in a new building expansion to
the south providing a new amenity for families.
A second addition replaced the building’s lower level entry
with a new upper level lobby overlooking the existing tennis
structure. Underutilized racquetball courts were repurposed
with a new children’s climbing and fitness area and new fitness
areas were added to the north.
* Project designed by Victor Pechaty prior to joining HGA.PROJECT EXPERTISECOMMUNITY RECREATION CENTERS
COLUMBUS STATE UNIVERSITY | CORN CENTER FOR THE VISUAL ARTS AND RIVERSIDE THEATRE | Columbus, Georgia
21
REFERENCESReferences
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Jay Lotthammer, Director, Parks And Recreation
City of Eden Prairie
952.949.8440 | jlotthammer@edenprairie.org
AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE
Bruce Karstadt, President and CEO
American Swedish Institute
612.871.4907 | Brucek@ASImn.org
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
City of St. Louis Park
952.924.2541 | cwalsh@stlouispark.org
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Rick Birno, Director Of Parks and Recreation
City of Golden Valley
763.512.2342 | rbirno@goldenvalleymn.gov
21
We define success solely through the success of our clients. After the project is fully realized, does it meet and exceed the vision of
the communities it serves? We believe there is no better endorsement of our work than the objective recommendation of our clients.
We nurture long-term client relationships long after a project is complete and encourage you to contact our references who have
recent experience working with our HGA team.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK | COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTER CONCEPT DESIGN | St. Louis Park, Minnesota
VISIONING AND PROGRAMMING
HGA proposes a kick-off workshop to initiate the visioning
and program development phase. We use the term workshop to
describe an intensive and inclusive working session with core
stakeholders. This process will first define guiding principles
and qualitative program needs and then transition to the
quantitative metrics of occupant capacity and square footage
requirements.
The programming process will introduce questions based on
the HGA team’s expertise in planning and design of arts and
community center facilities and our ongoing review of emerging
trends in multi-use facilities. This process of inquiry is intended
to ensure that the functional potential of each program
element is maximized and made specific to your needs.
All results are tabulated and detailed graphic illustrations/
diagrams are created to accurately quantify and record
each programmatic element. Specific area sizes, finishes
and configurations are assigned to program areas and later
cross-referenced with a cost estimate. The program is a
living document subject to continued review and refinement
throughout the process. The program developed by the team
will serve as the foundation for concept plans on the site.
SITE ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
The Grandview site has unique characteristics that will affect
optimal building layout. The HGA team will study and assess
the technical opportunities and limitations of the site. The
concept planning process begins with an analysis of key site
characteristics such as planning/zoning criteria, topography,
access and views.
Project Approach
Plan diagrams are developed based on the site analysis
and desired internal building relationships. HGA utilizes a
comparative method in conceptual design. Several design
options may present themselves on the site. Committed to
a transparent open book process, each feasible option is
presented to the Edina Parks and Recreation Department
during scheduled design team meetings. Together, architect
and client will critique and evaluate the merits of each option
en route to the optimal solution. Illustrative site plan, plan
diagrams and 3D images are provided.
COST ESTIMATING
HGA offers in-house cost estimating to maintain a direct
flow of accurate information between design professional
and our cost estimators. HGA cost estimators utilize several
comparative metrics to generate final cost estimates. Data
is gathered from national and local databases of community
center projects recently bid, HGA’s internal database of
recently bid projects and ongoing communication with local
contractor and sub-contractor entities. Anomalies are reviewed
and reconciled to create an accurate cost estimate complete
with construction cost escalation projections and project soft
costs.
FINAL REPORT
The entire process, described above, will be aggregated into a
final report. A successful product will provide comprehensive
data for use by the Edina Parks and Recreation Department in
a best value analysis of design options.
23
PROJECT APPROACHSCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE
Design is a core value of HGA’s business. HGA implements leading-edge design concepts while meeting the needs of our clients
with projects that range in cost, complexity and size. You receive the best of both worlds—the personalized service that a small
firm provides coupled with access to highly specialized staff and resources that a full-service firm offers. The following information
is based on our current understanding of the project.
Establish guiding
principals and project
goals
Develop a list of spaces
needs and provide graphic
illustrations
Review existing reports
and data from client
VISIONING
AND
PROGRAMMING
SITE ANALYSIS
AND
CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN
Conduct a site analysis
Explore options that test
fit program on project site
Refine preferred building
plan diagram
Develop an exterior
and interior image of
preferred option
FINAL
REPORT
Document process and
findings in a clearly
written final report
Will include executive
summary, space needs, site
analysis, concept diagrams
and cost estimate
COST
ESTIMATING
Develop construction
cost estimates based on
preferred option
Provide estimated project
soft cost
NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY
LOUDOUN COUNTY | CLAUDE MOORE RECREATION CENTER | Sterling, Virginia
25Proposed Fee
Based on the project scope described in this proposal, HGA is pleased to offer our fee proposal for space planning and concept
design for the City of Edina Grandview site. Our goal is to match the proposed services and fees with your precise needs. The
following information is based on our current understanding of the scope of services.PROPOSED FEEVISIONING AND PROGRAMMING
ESTIMATED TEAM HOURS 88
ESTIMATED COST $12,000
SITE ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
ESTIMATED TEAM HOURS 200
ESTIMATED COST $27,000
COST ESTIMATE
ESTIMATED TEAM HOURS 40
ESTIMATED COST $6,000
FINAL REPORT
ESTIMATED TEAM HOURS 40
ESTIMATED COST $4,800
TOTALS
TOTAL TEAM HOURS 368
TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT $49,800
ESTIMATED REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
In addition to the lump sum fee for professional services, we
anticipate reimbursable expenses for the project to include:
Mileage Expenses: $300 (includes in-town travel only)
Printing Expenses: $2,000 (includes printing costs for
meetings, two printed copies and one electronic copy of final
document)
ESTIMATED REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $2,300
“We selected HGA because of their great talent and their expressed passion for creating something very
special for us that carefully complements the architectural landmark status of the Turnblad mansion.”
—Bruce Karstadt, President/CEO, American Swedish Institute
AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE | NELSON CULTURAL CENTER | Minneapolis, Minnesota
27
MINNEAPOLIS | MILWAUKEE | ROCHESTER | SACRAMENTO | SAN FRANCISCO | SAN JOSE | LOS ANGELES | WASHINGTON, DC
REVISED Proposal:
Grandview Community Center
Feasibility Study & Business Plan
Presented to the:
City of Edina
October 19, 2015
Prepared By:
PROS CONSULTING
201 S. Capitol Avenue
Suite 505
Indianapolis, IN 46225
877.242.7760
www.prosconsulting.com
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
1
PROS Consulting Firm Profile
PROS Consulting is a small firm with a big presence in the field of
management consulting for public entities and non-profit organizations.
With a small team of highly professional and experienced consultants,
PROS is a flexible firm that is agile to the evolving dynamics of the
social, economic, and political environments our clients operate in.
PROS is among only a small handful of firms that have tremendous
experience in the field as practitioners and have become nationally
recognized for helping to shape and further transform the industry of
parks and recreation. The full name and location of the office that will
be working on this project are:
Full Legal Company Name: PROS Consulting, Inc. Years in Business: 20 (formed in 1995)
Contact Information: 201 S. Capitol Avenue, Suite 505
Indianapolis, Indiana 46225
P: 877.242.7760; F: 877.242.7761
Contact: Leon Younger, President; 317.679.5615 leon.younger@prosconsulting.com
Areas of Focus
Management consulting and planning services offered by PROS span the full
spectrum of planning needs for public agencies, and are grouped into the
following practice areas:
• Feasibility Studies and Business Planning – completed over 200 feasibility studies and business
plans, often counseling our clients on how they can shape their projects and their vision around the
reality of what is feasible and sustainable.
• Operations, Maintenance and Organizational Development – completed over 450 plans that
involved operations, programming, maintenance and
organizational development components.
• Financial Planning and Management – PROS is most renowned for
providing the most innovative and proven methods for financial
planning and management in the public sector with direct
experience with over 150 proven ways to fund public parks,
facilities and park systems.
• Strategic Planning – completed over 80 strategic plans for cities,
counties, park districts and state agencies to help them become established in their market or to
reposition themselves.
• Needs Assessment – completed over 250 needs assessments as a precursor of doing a Master Plan,
Strategic Plan or Feasibility Study. We will perform a comprehensive parks, facilities and program
needs assessment that helps identify importance and unmet needs for a variety of facilities /
amenities and programs.
• Master Planning – completed over 250 master plans for parks and park systems that have been
successfully implemented and driven over $5 billion worth of capital investment.
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
2
Project Experience
Orange Township, OH Community Center Needs Assessment (2012)
LEWIS CENTER, OHIO
In 2012, PROS Consulting completed a Community Center
Feasibility Study for the residents of Orange Township for a
90,000 square foot community center. As part of the plan,
analysis determined locations within the Township that would
be most advantages to gain community support and awareness
for such a facility. The process took five months to complete,
and the components of the study included the following:
• A demographic and Trend analysis of the current
population, forecasted population, per capita
income, age specific populations, household formations, trends analysis and the need for
recreation services in Orange Township
• Identification of the recreational programs and facilities that are offered to the public in the
study area that included public, not-for-profit, and private suppliers
• Analysis of the unmet needs in the area for recreation services
• Identification of strategic partners in the study area and subgroups who would have an interest
in a joint use facility such as seniors, athletic groups, healthcare organizations, educational
groups & advocacy groups
• Focus group meetings with key stakeholders in the Township
• Creation of an organizational structure for the facility and a management plan
• A statistically valid survey to determine community need and support for such a facility
• Evaluation of existing programs in the region and analysis of program needs
• Identification of the facility requirements for each of the programs needed in a comprehensive
building program for the entire facility by room format
• Evaluation of program needs for the park, as well as the location of the facility
• An operating & capital cost plan that includes an estimate of construction costs based upon the
building program
• The development of operating costs for the building and how it could operate via various revenue
sources
• Public presentations and recommendations
The proposed facility will feature an indoor family leisure pool, lap pool, gymnasiums,
handball/racquetball courts, health/fitness, general program and Hospitality / Multi-Use / Seniors
rooms. Additionally, the proposed site plan was designed to include a discovery garden, splash pad,
trails/paths, tennis courts, event area, and a future outdoor aquatic center. Through a public
participation process, it was determined that the desired programs included aquatics, sport introductory
programs, youth life skills programs and outdoor recreation programs, day-time programming for young
mothers, and competitive youth and adult leagues. Along with sport programs, there would be a balance
of art, theater, and music programs, senior center activities, social events, and family-based programs.
The goal of the feasibility study was to create a Center that was self-supporting, operating at a high cost
recovery percentage.
Project Reference: Mr. Scott Overturf, Project Manager; 3620 North High Street, Suite 306; Columbus, Ohio 43214; 614.204.1428; rpoturf@aol.com
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
3
Prince George’s County Southern Area Aquatics and Recreation Center Feasibility
Study & Business Plan (2013)
PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND
In 2013, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning
Commission (M-NCPPC) desired a Southern Area Aquatics and
Recreation Center (SAARC) feasibility study/business plan for
a proposed new multi-generational recreational center located
in the Brandywine area of Prince George’s County. The
proposed multi-generational recreational center was
developed jointly with the community through an agreement
with the M-NCPPC. It will be M-NCPPC’s first multi-
generational recreation center to be developed in accordance
with new design and operational guidelines for regional
community centers based on M-NCPPC’s Formula 2040: the
Functional Master Plan for Parks, Recreation and Open Space, which
was completed by PROS Consulting in 2013.
As envisioned, this new regional facility will have components that can
accommodate a range of leisure and recreational activities in one
setting as expressed by individuals and families from various
community input processes. The program spaces planned include an
indoor aquatics center, fitness area, gymnasium, senior services and
designated program spaces that can serve people of all ages.
PROS Consulting was hired by M-NCPPC to lead the process that
included developing the market assessment and the financial
feasibility component of the project. Williams Architects provided
the preliminary design concept plans, which included a footprint of
the proposed building, location, site assessment, site plan, and cost
estimates. ETC Institute provided the survey results that were used.
The SAARC Feasibility Study and Business Plan was developed under
the following guiding principles and desired outcomes:
• Build a shared vision for a signature multi-generational
recreation center facility in southern Prince George’s County
that includes three main program spaces that include an
aquatic center, gymnasium and fitness component, which
includes additional program space to serve all age groups.
• Utilize best practice means and trends to help meet the needs of current and future residents.
• Focus on promoting a collaborative approach toward future development with the community.
• Determine the optimal staffing structure and operational metrics to ensure maximum return on
investment for M-NCPPC and the taxpayers of the County.
Project Reference: Mr. Alvin McNeal, Prince George’s County Department of Parks and Recreation
Deputy Director; 6600 Kenilworth Avenue; Riverdale, MD 20737; 301.699.2533;
alvin.mcneal@pgparks.com
Pro Forma Revenues & ExpendituresM-NCPPC Southern Area Aquatics and Recreation CenterBASELINE: REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
Revenues 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$1,512,400.00 $1,557,772.00 $1,604,505.16 $1,652,640.31 $1,702,219.52 $1,753,286.11Administration$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Maintenance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Services $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Recreation Programs $21,462.00 $22,105.86 $22,769.04 $23,452.11 $24,155.67 $24,880.34Fitness$108,621.00 $111,879.63 $115,236.02 $118,693.10 $122,253.89 $125,921.51Natatorium$562,425.00 $579,297.75 $596,676.68 $614,576.98 $633,014.29 $652,004.72Gymnasium$199,803.00 $205,797.09 $211,971.00 $218,330.13 $224,880.04 $231,626.44Parties$48,900.00 $50,367.00 $51,878.01 $53,434.35 $55,037.38 $56,688.50Rentals$107,250.00 $110,467.50 $113,781.53 $117,194.97 $120,710.82 $124,332.14Child Care $14,000.00 $14,420.00 $14,852.60 $15,298.18 $15,757.12 $16,229.84Kitchen$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Total $2,574,861.00 $2,652,106.83 $2,731,670.03 $2,813,620.14 $2,898,028.74 $2,984,969.60
Expenditures 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$52,200.00 $52,200.00 $52,200.00 $52,200.00 $52,200.00 $52,200.00Administration$727,110.05 $767,959.05 $811,392.44 $857,589.88 $906,744.38 $959,063.24Building Maintenance $158,410.00 $169,161.40 $180,706.31 $193,105.84 $206,425.94 $220,737.70Building Services $192,833.38 $207,228.05 $222,740.51 $239,459.06 $257,479.03 $276,903.32Recreation Programs $137,482.20 $146,255.69 $155,655.05 $165,727.71 $176,524.78 $188,101.38Fitness$271,475.96 $287,472.13 $304,521.87 $322,700.50 $342,089.02 $362,774.52Natatorium$859,628.34 $922,895.11 $991,021.49 $1,064,388.71 $1,143,408.20 $1,228,524.02Gymnasium$114,309.80 $119,013.59 $123,931.05 $129,073.20 $134,451.75 $140,079.09Parties$33,425.40 $34,975.43 $36,606.51 $38,323.45 $40,131.41 $42,035.87Rentals$25,785.00 $27,197.80 $28,700.12 $30,298.27 $31,999.00 $33,809.60Child Care $36,202.24 $39,048.42 $42,120.79 $45,437.41 $49,017.77 $52,882.91Kitchen$2,750.00 $2,837.50 $2,928.03 $3,021.69 $3,118.60 $3,218.88Total $2,611,612.37 $2,776,244.17 $2,952,524.17 $3,141,325.74 $3,343,589.89 $3,560,330.53
Total Cost Recovery 99%96%93%90%87%84%
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
4
Estes Valley Recreation & Park District, CO Community Recreation Center Feasibility
Study (2014)
ESTES PARK, COLORADO
Estes Valley Recreation and Park District desired a feasibility
study for an Estes Valley Community Recreation Center in
partnership with the Town of Estes Park, Estes Park School
District R-3, Estes Park Medical Center, and Estes Valley
Public Library District. PROS Consulting completed the
feasibility study of converting an old elementary school into
a multi-generational center in July of 2014. EVRPD has
pursued the concept of building a community center in three
unsuccessful bond issue elections in 1994, 2001, and 2008;
however, formal feasibility studies were not completed prior
to any of the three previous bond issue attempts.
The purpose of the feasibility study was to assist in providing information
to the community and the proposed partners involved on the undertaking
of a new EVCRC. As such, the intended outcome was for the partners to
be well-versed on all aspects of the project in order to make informed
decisions about their desired needs; the sustainability of the proposed
design when considering the proposed site location and existing
structures; and, the requirements necessary to accomplish the project with available resources.
The partnerships for the EVCRC would create a business consortium that would pool collective resources
to offer recreation, health, and wellness that include medical, education, athletic, and social services
in one facility for residents, area employers, and visitors. The facility would serve as a catalyst in the
community when delivering recreation and other community functions in several disciplines. The facility
would also become an integral part of a larger community campus that includes the future development
of Stanley Park, Stanley Fairgrounds, and the Town of Estes Park Museum and Senior Center. The diagram
below illustrates how this planning process unfolded to produce the recommendations for the EVCRC:
Project Reference: Mr. Skyler Rorabaugh, Executive
Director; Estes Valley Recreation & Park District; 690 Big
Thompson Avenue; Estes Park, CO 80517; 970.586.8191;
skyler@evrpd.com
Pro Forma Revenues & Expenditures
ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
BASELINE: REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
SERVICE TITLE Revenues Expenditures
RevenuesOver (Under)
Expenditures
Cost Recovery -
Percent
Passes $989,500.00 $52,200.00 $937,300.00 1896%Administration $0.00 $540,110.05 ($540,110.05)0%Building Maintenance $0.00 $158,410.00 ($158,410.00)0%
Building Services $0.00 $192,833.38 ($192,833.38)0%
Recreation Programs $31,080.00 $102,427.50 ($71,347.50)30%
Fitness $112,630.00 $223,881.36 ($111,251.36)50%Natatorium $410,225.00 $859,628.34 ($449,403.34)48%Gymnasium $192,210.00 $154,826.00 $37,384.00 124%
Parties $37,500.00 $22,925.40 $14,574.60 164%
Rentals $65,700.00 $24,285.00 $41,415.00 271%
Child Watch $14,000.00 $36,202.24 ($22,202.24)39%Kitchen $0.00 $2,750.00 ($2,750.00)0%
Partnerships $226,500.00 $0.00 $226,500.00
Total $2,079,345.00 $2,370,479.27 ($291,134.27)88%
Data Collection and Needs Analysis
Strategic Partners & Stakeholder Strategy Public Participation
Program Identification Facility Building Program
Capital & Operating Cost Financing & Operating Pro Forma
Public Presentation & Final Report
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
5
City of Westerville, OH Multi-Generational Recreation Center Senior Expansion
Feasibility Study
WESTERVILLE, OHIO
In 2014, as part of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan, the
PROS Consulting Team worked with the City of Westerville to develop
Feasibility Study for a proposed recreation center expansion of the existing
Westerville Community Center. The Community Center expansion included
the inclusion of the Senior Center, which they would relocate from a different
location, as well as the expansion of the fitness center, gymnasium, aquatics,
and indoor track. The PROS Team completed the following components as
part of the feasibility study/business plan:
• Community Input (focus groups, public forums, stakeholder
interviews, surveys)
• Market Analysis (Demographic and Recreational Trends
Assessment)
• Vision and Core Program of the Expansion
• Operational Standards & Staffing Plan
• Conceptual Plans
• Financial Feasibility / Pro Forma Development
• Final Report Briefings and Development
The PROS Team presented the findings and outcomes in a
strategic process, built upon examining the most innovative,
effective and sustainable opportunity for the Parks and Recreation System for the next generation. With
the expansion of the Community Center and moving the Senior Center to one large Multi-Generational
Community Center, the City desired the facilities to achieve a higher cost recovery goal, moving from
60% to 84%.
Project Reference: Mr. Randy Auler, Director of Westerville, OH Parks & Recreation Dept.; 350 N.
Cleveland Ave.; Westerville, OH 43082; 614.901.6504; randy.auler@westerville.org
Revenues 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year
Passes $1,399,855.46 $1,441,851.13 $1,485,106.66 $1,529,659.86 $1,575,549.66 $1,622,816.15
Administration $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Maintenance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Services $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Recreation Programs $39,010.00 $40,180.30 $41,385.71 $42,627.28 $43,906.10 $45,223.28
Fitness $460,450.00 $474,263.50 $488,491.41 $503,146.15 $518,240.53 $533,787.75
Natatorium $651,750.00 $671,302.50 $691,441.58 $712,184.82 $733,550.37 $755,556.88Gymnasium$95,940.00 $98,818.20 $101,782.75 $104,836.23 $107,981.32 $111,220.75Parties$37,500.00 $38,625.00 $39,783.75 $40,977.26 $42,206.58 $43,472.78Rentals$101,100.00 $104,133.00 $107,256.99 $110,474.70 $113,788.94 $117,202.61
Child Care $24,500.00 $25,235.00 $25,992.05 $26,771.81 $27,574.97 $28,402.21
Vendateria $10,000.00 $10,300.00 $10,609.00 $10,927.27 $11,255.09 $11,592.74Senior Center $97,000.00 $99,910.00 $102,907.30 $105,994.52 $109,174.35 $112,449.59Total $2,917,105.46 $3,004,618.63 $3,094,757.19 $3,187,599.90 $3,283,227.90 $3,381,724.73
Expenditures 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$167,511.80 $167,511.80 $167,511.80 $167,511.80 $167,511.80 $167,511.80
Administration $929,768.37 $953,474.21 $978,122.73 $1,003,751.48 $1,030,399.49 $1,058,107.36
Building Maintenance $209,245.37 $210,756.77 $212,322.48 $213,944.48 $215,624.83 $217,365.68Building Services $250,730.60 $252,137.60 $253,589.63 $255,088.15 $256,634.68 $258,230.78Recreation Programs $127,520.01 $128,605.01 $129,726.66 $130,886.22 $132,085.01 $133,324.37Fitness$478,972.74 $481,977.74 $485,101.29 $488,348.08 $491,723.00 $495,231.10
Natatorium $692,151.45 $694,773.95 $697,490.93 $700,305.84 $703,222.29 $706,244.01
Gymnasium $33,384.00 $33,654.00 $33,933.90 $34,224.07 $34,524.89 $34,836.76Parties$32,925.40 $33,949.40 $35,013.16 $36,118.24 $37,266.24 $38,458.85Rentals$27,185.00 $27,791.00 $28,419.74 $29,072.08 $29,748.93 $30,451.21Child Care $33,268.72 $33,298.72 $33,329.62 $33,361.45 $33,394.23 $33,427.99
Vendateria $5,700.00 $5,878.00 $6,061.62 $6,251.04 $6,446.45 $6,648.03
Senior Center $806,563.00 $811,753.25 $817,137.60 $822,723.41 $828,518.31 $834,530.25Total $3,794,926.45 $3,835,561.44 $3,877,761.15 $3,921,586.33 $3,967,100.15 $4,014,368.20
Net Revenue ($877,820.99)($830,942.82)($783,003.96)($733,986.43)($683,872.25)($632,643.46)
Total Cost Recovery 76.9%78.3%79.8%81.3%82.8%84.2%
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
6
Muskingum Recreation Center, Indoor Pool Feasibility and Business Plan Study (2009)
ZANESVILLE, OHIO
Muskingum Recreational Center, a 501(C)3
partnership, contracted with PROS
Consulting in August of 2009 for consulting
services to analyze the feasibility of a
recreational facility (Muskingum
Recreation Center, or MRC).
The original four entities which funded the
Partnership for this endeavor are: Ohio
University- Zanesville, Genesis HealthCare
System, Muskingum County Community
Foundation, and the Muskingum Family Y.
The goal of this project was to complete a feasibility analysis and business plan for the recreational
facility in a comprehensive manner so that all entities of the Partnership had complete clarity of the
potential for sustainability. The scope of this project spanned the physical and operational aspects of
the proposed facility, including:
• Program analysis
• Site analysis
• Conceptual layout
• Operations analysis
• Potential partners
• Project funding analysis
The ultimate outcome of the project was
twofold – to provide a roadmap for the
Partnership that bridges the planning and
development stages, carrying forward into the
operational phase, and to utilize the program and concept development to inform the community about
the benefits and value the MRC will have in terms of quality of life, community satisfaction, and
community recruitment.
As a result of a feasibility study conducted by Williams Architects and PROS Consulting, Williams
Architects is currently designing a Multi-Generational Recreation Center / Indoor Pool Facility located at
Ohio University – Zanesville Campus. The MRC facility will contain: Racquetball Courts, Eight (8) Lane
25M Lap and 25Y Competition Lap Pool, Leisure and Therapy Pool, Health / Fitness / Wellness, Group
Exercise / Studio Rooms, Multi-Purpose Rooms, Walking Track, associated Locker / Changing Facilities
and general support spaces. The MRC is a collaboration of public and private partnerships between Ohio
University - Zanesville, Genesis Healthcare System, The Muskingum County Foundation and the Zanesville
YMCA. Construction is estimated to be completed in Spring 2014.
Project Reference: Ms. Beth Chapman, Executive Director of Muskingum Recreation Center; 3620 Court
Dr. #1; Zanesville, Ohio 43701; 740.454.4767; bchapman@genesishcs.org or Mr. Jim Fonseca, Dean of
Ohio University-Zanesville; 740.588.1489
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
7
Monon Community Center Feasibility Study (2001) and Business Plan (2010)
CARMEL, INDIANA
Set in a new park envisioned to be the “Jewel” of the Carmel-Clay
park system, the Monon Center features an indoor natatorium
containing a leisure depth pool and a six-lane, non-competition lap
pool; a three-court gymnasium; health/fitness areas; an indoor
children’s play zone; a café; flexible lobby space; administrative
offices; program rooms; and a banquet room with a catering kitchen
– are augmented by amenities contained in the facility’s
accompanying, 3.5-acre, 2,098-capacity outdoor aquatic center. The
amenities present in the finished project reflects input gleaned from
a year-long series of public forums.
Designed to serve as an “anchor” to the inter-urban Monon Trail, the
Center features an enclosed pedestrian bridge that spans the trail and
links the passive, dense, mature forested areas of the site to the east,
and active programming spaces in the open meadows of the site to
the west of the Center.
Client:
Carmel Clay Parks &
Recreation, City of Carmel
1055 Third Avenue
Carmel, IN 46032
Project Size:
160 Acre Park 146,000 SF Recreation Ctr. 2,200 Bather Aquatic Fac.
Estimated Project
Construction Cost:
$52,000,000
Actual Project Cost: $51,957,000 Completion Date: May 2007
PROJECT SERVICES:
Feasibility Study
Public Input and Bond
Programming
Master Plan
Basic Architectural Serv.
Construction Administration
Aquatic Design / Engineering
Interior Design
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
8
Following completion of the feasibility study in 2001 completed by
the PROS/Williams Architects Team, in 2010 the Carmel/Clay
Board of Parks and Recreation again contracted with the PROS
Consulting to complete a Business Plan, as well as a Marketing Plan
for The Monon Community Center. PROS worked closely with
Carmel Clay Parks & Recreation management and staff to develop
an understanding of the business plan project and outcome
expectations, as well as access the current operating practices and
key issues facing The Monon Center.
The ultimate outcome of the business plan was to provide a true
measurement of The Monon Center’s ability to meet the financial and operating expectations of the Park
Board, elected officials, and the Carmel Clay community. Throughout the business planning process
three themes, or critical issues, emerged. These critical issues which the business plan was formulated
upon were:
• A true measurement of realistic revenue capacity of the facility
• The ability to affectively link the facility design and program in a manner to optimize operational
revenues to cover operational expenses
• To create a balance of the level of services provided to the value received with corresponding
pricing
The original feasibility study and conceptual design of the Monon Center and Central Park was performed
in conjunction by the PROS Consulting/Williams Architects Team.
Last year’s attendance was 591,296, including nearly 9,400 year-round members and day pass sales. The
center has an operating budget of over $4.5 million and has been self-sufficient since 2010. Through the
business plan, the Monon Community Center has moved from a cost recovery of 75-80% to self-sufficiency.
Project Reference: Mr. Michael Klitzing, Parks and Recreation Assistant Director; 1235 Central Park
Drive East; Carmel, IN 46032; 317.573.4018; mklitzing@carmelclayparks.com
Facility/Space Rentals;
Top-20 Rental Spaces, by Hours
Total
Rentals
Total
Hours
Average Hours
per Rental Rank
Assessment Room 392 1,545.0 3.94 1
Dance Studio 1,090 1,016.6 0.93 2
Gymnasium C 633 811.3 1.28 3
Fitness Studio B 971 789.7 0.81 4
Conference Room West 72 505.0 7.01 5
Meeting Room 154 415.8 2.70 6
Banquet Room A 111 394.5 3.55 7
Gymnasium B 206 349.2 1.69 8
Fitness Studio A 353 297.5 0.84 9
Indoor Lap Pool 3 324 256.0 0.79 10
Indoor Lap Pool 1 333 207.0 0.62 11
Computer Lab 60 164.0 2.73 12
Party Room A 77 154.3 2.00 13
Indoor Leisure Pool 3 298 151.5 0.51 14
Program Room C 105 146.7 1.40 15
Program Room A 113 142.8 1.26 16
Indoor Lap Pool 2 180 135.0 0.75 17
Program Room B 105 119.5 1.14 18
Banquet Room -All 3 83 108.8 1.31 19
Computer & Meeting R 39 100.5 2.58 20
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
9
City of Grapevine, Texas Community Activities Center Expansion Feasibility Study &
Business Plan (2012)
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS
In 2012, PROS Consulting formed a team consisting of Barker
Rinker Seacat, as well as Water Tech, Inc. to complete a
feasibility study/business plan for the 48,000 square foot
facility that opened in 1996. The City of Grapevine desired
a feasibility study/business plan for the
expansion/renovation of the Community Activities Center
that would include additional programming space, an
increase in the square footage of the weight/fitness area,
an added indoor aquatic component, as well as senior
programming expansion.
The diagram below illustrates how this planning process unfolded to produce the recommendations for
the Community Activities Center Business Plan:
By providing an objective analysis of the market and optimal management plan provided, created a viable
financially stable CAC to meet the needs of the local market and
the economic and financial expectations of the City. The
updated Community Activities Center will be a great addition to
the many public assets available to Grapevine residents. After
expansion, the renovated Community Activities Center will be
nearly 110,000 square feet. It will meet best practice standards
for indoor community center space for residents of Grapevine.
The Community Activities Center will have a balance between
programmed and open use space based on programming in the
building consuming 65% of the time available. The Community
Activities Center has the capability to generate additional
operating revenue that the pro forma presents, if the City
Council feels it is appropriate for the future. A facility based on
the new projected square footage can easily achieve 70% to 80%
of its full operating costs if desired. The 110,000 square foot
facility opened in 2015 and has exceeded the feasibility
study’s cost recovery goals.
Project Reference: Mr. Doug Evans, Former Parks and Recreation Director; 1175 Municipal Way;
Grapevine, TX 76051; 817.992.9340; dandlevans@verizon.net
Community Input Market Analysis Conceptual Design Management Strategy / Financial Plan Feasibility / Business Plan Development
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
10
City of Olathe, KS Recreation Center Feasibility Study & Business Plan(2013)
OLATHE, KANSAS
In 2012, the City of Olathe contracted with PROS Consulting, ETC
Institute, Barker Rinker Seacat, as well as Water Tech for consulting
services to analyze the feasibility of developing a Community Recreation
Center in Olathe as well as to develop a business plan for the facility if
developed by the City. The goal of the planning project was to complete
a feasibility analysis and business plan for the proposed new recreational
facility in a comprehensive manner so that all key leaders and decision
makers had complete clarity of the potential for financial sustainability
of the facility. The scope of the project spanned the physical and
operational aspects of the proposed recreation center facility, including:
• Program analysis
• Site analysis
• Conceptual layout
• Operations and financial analysis
• Demographic and Trend assessment
• Competition assessment
• Project funding analysis
• Business Plan development
The ultimate outcome of the project was to provide a roadmap for the City that bridges the design,
planning and development stages of the project into the operational phase and a management plan for
the Community Recreation Center. The 72,000 square foot facility opened Mid 2014 and has exceeded
the feasibility study’s cost recovery goals.
Project Reference: Mr. Brad Clay, Deputy
Director; Olathe Parks & Recreation; 100 E.
Santa Fe Street; Olathe, KS 66051; 913.971.8618; bclay@olatheks.org
Pro Forma Revenues & ExpendituresOLATHE RECREATION CENTER
BASELINE: REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
Revenues 1th Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year
Passes $1,537,977.14 $1,584,116.46 $1,631,639.95 $1,680,589.15 $1,731,006.82 $1,782,937.03Administration$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building servicesenance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Services $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Recreation Programs and fitnes $36,190.00 $37,275.70 $38,393.97 $39,545.79 $40,732.16 $41,954.13
Fitness $614,942.00 $633,390.26 $652,391.97 $671,963.73 $692,122.64 $712,886.32Natatorium$181,300.00 $186,739.00 $192,341.17 $198,111.41 $204,054.75 $210,176.39
Gymnasium $40,180.00 $41,385.40 $42,626.96 $43,905.77 $45,222.94 $46,579.63
Parties $37,500.00 $38,625.00 $39,783.75 $40,977.26 $42,206.58 $43,472.78
Rentals $101,100.00 $104,133.00 $107,256.99 $110,474.70 $113,788.94 $117,202.61
Child Care $22,320.00 $22,989.60 $23,679.29 $24,389.67 $25,121.36 $25,875.00
Kitchen $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Vendateria $10,000.00 $10,300.00 $10,609.00 $10,927.27 $11,255.09 $11,592.74Total $2,581,509.14 $2,658,954.42 $2,738,723.05 $2,820,884.74 $2,905,511.28 $2,992,676.62
Expenditures 1th Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00Administration$723,196.70 $740,146.50 $757,768.74 $776,090.16 $795,138.54 $814,942.80
Building servicesenance $130,410.00 $131,921.40 $133,487.11 $135,109.11 $136,789.46 $138,530.31Building Services $160,509.13 $161,241.13 $161,997.91 $162,780.32 $163,589.26 $164,425.64
Recreation Programs and fitnes $91,173.00 $93,225.56 $95,352.42 $97,556.33 $99,840.11 $102,206.72
Fitness $591,834.56 $609,598.17 $628,070.67 $647,280.37 $667,256.71 $688,030.30Natatorium$464,082.54 $468,865.04 $473,828.42 $478,979.59 $484,325.75 $489,874.36
Gymnasium $39,006.00 $39,476.00 $39,963.90 $40,470.39 $40,996.18 $41,542.02Parties$33,425.40 $34,469.40 $35,553.96 $36,680.67 $37,851.17 $39,067.18
Rentals $25,785.00 $26,335.00 $26,905.50 $27,497.28 $28,111.13 $28,747.90Child Care $33,268.72 $33,298.72 $33,329.62 $33,361.45 $33,394.23 $33,427.99
Kitchen $2,750.00 $2,837.50 $2,928.03 $3,021.69 $3,118.60 $3,218.88Vendateria$5,700.00 $5,878.00 $6,061.62 $6,251.04 $6,446.45 $6,648.03
Total $2,372,541.05 $2,418,692.42 $2,466,647.89 $2,516,478.38 $2,568,257.59 $2,622,062.14
Total Cost Recovery 109%110%111%112%113%114%
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
11
Resumes
Leon Younger
PROS Consulting
President
Education M.P.A., University of Kansas, Aug. 1988
B.S., Kansas State University, May 1975
Employment History
President, PROS Consulting, Sep. 1995 to present
Director/Chairman of the Board, Indianapolis Parks and Recreation, Apr. 1992 to Sept. 1995
Executive Director, Lake MetroParks (OH), Jun. 1988 to Mar. 1992
Director, Jackson County (MO) Parks and Recreation, Aug. 1983 to Jun. 1988
Certification Certified Park and Recreation Professional
Professional Experience
• Founder and President of PROS Consulting
• More than 30 years in parks, recreation, and leisure services
• Recognized leader in applying innovative approaches to managing parks and recreation
organizations
• Held positions as Director of Parks and Recreation in Indianapolis, Indiana; Executive Director of
Lake Metroparks in Lake County, OH (Cleveland vicinity); and Director of Parks and Recreation
in Jackson County, MO (Kansas County)
• Received the 1994 National Park and Recreation Association’s Distinguished Professional Award
for his progressive and innovative thinking in management of public parks and recreation entities,
as well as induction into the NRPA Legends Hall of Fame
• Co-creator of the Community Values ModelTM, a business model that synthesizes public input into
a strategic plan
• Regularly addresses sessions at the National Park and Recreation Conferences and has served as
a board member and instructor at the Pacific Revenue and Marketing School in San Diego,
California and the Rocky Mountain Revenue and Management School in Colorado
Similar Project Experience
• Estes Valley Recreation & Park District, CO Community Recreation Center Feasibility Study
• Riverside County, CA Regional Park & Open Space District Aquatic Facility Operational Impact
Report
• Prince George’s County, MD Regional Multi-Purpose Community Center Feasibility Study
• City of Olathe, KS Recreation Center Feasibility Study and Business Plan
• Blue Valley Recreation Commission (Overland Park, KS) Strategic Plan & Needs Assessment
• Shawnee County, KS Long Range Parks and Recreation Strategic Master Plan
• City of Kansas City, MO Recreation Community Facilities Operational Plan
• Carmel, IN Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan
• City of Westerville, OH Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan
• City of Westerville, OH Senior Center Expansion Feasibility Study
• Orange Township, OH Community Center Needs Assessment and Feasibility Study
• Leon County, FL Sports Complex and Field House Feasibility Study
• Northbrook, IL Park District Regional Recreation Center Feasibility Study
• Tropical Park (Miami Dade County, FL) Business Plan
• City of Aspen, CO Recreation Division Operations Audit and Business Plan Development
• City of Grapevine, TX Community Center Expansion Feasibility Study and Business Plan
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
12
Michael Svetz
PROS Consulting
Senior Project Manager
Education
B.S., Miami University, 1990
M.S., Miami University, 1991
Employment History
Consultant, PROS Consulting; 2012 to present
Director of Parks and Recreation, City of Goodyear, Arizona;
2009 to 2012
Director of Parks and Recreation, City of Charlottesville, Virginia; 2004 to 2009
Director of Parks and Recreation, City of Strongsville, Ohio 2000 to 2004
Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation, City of Strongsville, Ohio 1997 to 2000
Recreation Supervisor, City of Brunswick, Ohio 1991 to 1997 Professional Experience
• 21 years of experience in parks and recreation at the local government level
• Managed development and operations of $18 million, 157,000 sq. ft. Community Recreation
Center in Strongsville, Ohio
• Managed construction and development of $25 million in capital improvements in 3 years
resulting from PROS Consulting Strategic Plan in Charlottesville, Virginia. Projects include: $10
million Aquatic and Fitness Center, $6 million Outdoor Aquatic Complex, $9 million in park and
trail development as well as land acquisition
• Oversight of the development and operations of $103 million Spring Training Complex in
Goodyear, Arizona
• Board of Director, Ohio Parks and Recreation Association 1997-2004
• President, Strongsville Community Foundation 2003-2004
• Board of Director, Virginia Recreation and Parks Society 2007-2009
• Vice President, Arizona in Action, Present
Similar Project Experience
• Managed the development and operations
o $18 million, 157,000 sq. ft. Community Recreation Center in Strongsville, Ohio
o $25 million in capital improvements in Charlottesville, Virginia. Projects include: $10
million Aquatic and Fitness Center, $6 million Outdoor Aquatic Complex, $9 million in
park and trail development as well as land acquisition
o $103 million Baseball Spring Training Complex in Goodyear, Arizona
o 50,000 square feet community recreation center in Brunswick, OH
• Estes Valley Recreation & Park District, CO Community Recreation Center Feasibility Study
• Washington DC / Prince George’s County, MD Regional Multi-Purpose Community Center
Feasibility Study
• City of Westerville, OH Community Recreation Center Expansion Feasibility Study
• City of Napa, CA Senior Center Feasibility Study & Business Plan
• City of Pasadena, CA Sports Field Strategic Plan and Parks Maintenance Management Plan
• Santa Clara County, CA Cost Recovery and Pricing Plan
• City of Kansas City, MO Garrison Community Center Business Planning Services
• Prince George’s County, MD Regional Community Center Feasibility Study
• City of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Park Zero Based Budget Review
• City of Grandview, MO Aquatic Complex and Park Feasibility Study Development
• City of Aspen, CO Recreation Division Business Plan
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
13
Jeffrey J. Bransford
PROS Consulting
Senior Project Manager
Education
M.P.A., Clemson University, May 2005
M.S., Clemson University, May 2005 B.S., Texas A&M University, May 2002
Employment History
Senior Consultant, PROS Consulting August 2013 to Present
Associate Director, Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands, Indiana University, Mar. 2009 to
Aug. 2013
Associate Director, Center for Park Management, National Parks Conservation Association, Jun.
2006 to Feb. 2009
Management and Business Analyst, National Park Service, Jun. 2005 to Jun. 2006 Certification
Project Management Professional (PMP)
Certified Park and Recreation Professional (CPRP)
Professional Experience
• More than 15 years in parks, recreation, and leisure services
• Experienced project manager, management consultant, business analyst, professional trainer,
and strategic planner
• Served as project manager or lead analyst for over 55 park and recreation projects
• Held positions as Financial Analyst for the Center for Park Management and Business Plan
Consultant for National Park Service
• Coordinated visitor programs at the Supreme Court of the United States from 2002-2003
• Served as Policy Fellow for U.S. Secretary of Agriculture in 2002
• Worked as Park Ranger and Park Guide for numerous seasons with National Park Service
• Received National Award for Excellence from the National Society for Park Resources in 2002
• Author of numerous research reports and peer-reviewed articles on park visitor management and
operations
Similar Project Experience
• City of Edina, MN Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan
• City of Columbus, OH Recreation Center Operations Plan
• Baton Rouge, LA (BREC) Recreation Center Operations Plan
• City of Kansas City, MO Recreation Division Operational Business Plan
• CityArchRiver 2015 & Jefferson National Expansion Memorial (MO) Maintenance Management
Plan, Strategic Plan & Business Plan
• City of Warrensburg, MO Parks and Recreation master Plan
• City of Kansas City, MO Parks and Recreation Master Plan
• City of Kentwood, MI Parks and Recreation Business Plan
• Toledo, OH Metroparks Strategic Business Plan
• Shawnee County, KS, Parks and Recreation Master Plan
• Cummins Employee Recreation Association Financial Sustainability and Master Plan
• Carmel Clay (IN) Parks and Recreation Compensation Assessment
• Everglades National Park Fee Operations Analysis
• Cuyahoga Valley National Park Revenue Feasibility Study
• Valley Forge National Historical Park Business Plan
• Statue of Liberty National Monument Concession Management Compliance Audit
• City of Louisville, KY, Southwest Greenways Master Plan and Public Survey
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
14
Terry Schwartz
PROS Consulting
Strategic Consultant
Education
Ed.D., Northern Illinois University, Dec. 1996
M.A., Northeastern Illinois University, May 1991 B.S., Southern Illinois University, May 1978
Employment History
Consultant, PROS Consulting 2014-Present Executive Director, Winnetka, IL Park District, 2009-2014
Superintendent of Citywide Services, City of San Francisco, 2005-2009
Studio Director, Councilman-Hunsaker, 2002-2005
Professional Consultant, PROS Consulting, 1996-2002
Executive Director, Glen Ellyn, IL Park District, 1993-1996 Superintendent of Revenue Facilities, Arlington Heights, IL Park District, 1983-1993
Director of Recreation, Champaign, IL Park District, 1978-1983
Superintendent of Recreation, Alton, IL Park and Recreation Dept., 1974-1978
Professional Experience
• Thirty five years as a park and recreation professional with diversified experiences as an
organization leader, educator and consultant:
• Significant experience when managing parks and open space, enterprise funds, recreation
programs and the financial management of special districts and public park and recreation
organizations
• A business mindset when developing and managing organizational budgets, a broad range of
special use facilities and special events
• Notable abilities when speaking in public open meeting settings, conducting community process
and leading organizations
Similar Project Experience
• Feasibility Study, Recreation Center, Batavia Park District, Batavia, IL
• Feasibility Study, Recreation Center, New YMCA, Morris County, NJ
• Facility Planning, Recreation Center Space Planning, Batavia Park District, Batavia, IL
• Feasibility Study, Recreation Center, Lake Park High School, Medinah, IL
• Indoor Athletic Complex Feasibility Study, Waukegan Park District, Waukegan, IL
• Audit and Feasibility Study, City of Worcester, Worcester, MA
• Feasibility Study, Recreation Center, Ottawa Township High School, Ottawa, IL
• Feasibility Study, Long Branch School District, Long Branch, NJ
• Feasibility Study, State of Delaware, Dover, DE
• Feasibility Study, Grand Forks Park District, Grand Forks, ND
• Feasibility Study, City of Boonville, Boonville, MO
• Strategic Planning, Collinsville Area Recreation District, Collinsville, IL
• Feasibility Study, Batavia Park District, Batavia, IL
• Master Plan, Park and Facility Audit, City of Mesa, AZ
• Park and Facility Audit, City of Sarasota, FL
• Strategic Planning, Cary Park District, Cary, IL
• Strategic Planning, Lemont Park District, Lemont, IL
• Strategic Planning, Oregon Park District, Oregon, IL
• Strategic Planning, Bloomingdale Park District, Bloomingdale, IL
• Strategic Planning, Pleasant Dale Park District, Bur Ridge, IL
• Strategic Planning, Collinsville Area Recreation District, Collinsville, IL
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
15
Scope of Services
The process of developing the feasibility study and design services follows a logical planning path as
described in the Scope of Work and illustrated below:
Task 1 – Data Collection and Market Analysis
A. Kick-off Meeting/Data Collection – The first task will establish the framework and outcome
expectations associated with the feasibility study. Included in this task will be a kick-off meeting
led by the prime consultant; the kick-off meeting should be attended by the key city of Edina
stakeholders and staff members to confirm project goals, objectives, and expectations that will help
guide actions and decisions of the consultant team. The role of PROS in this task includes:
• Review Existing Information, Reports, and the existing facilities – The PROS Team will review and
discuss with key city management and staff existing programs and operational issues at the
current facilities, as well as the current market, other services providers, customer base and key
findings and themes in relevant reports that have been done over the past several years if
available. Also, a review of quality and conditions of amenities within facilities will be
completed.
B. Demographic Analysis – The PROS Team will complete a demographic trends analysis which is based
on Census 2000 baseline data, 2010 reported data, and projected populations for next five and ten
years. Demographic characteristics analyzed and reported on will include population, age and gender
distribution, households, and income characteristics. Also, the effect of demographic changes for
the facilities being discussed will be researched. This analysis will provide an understanding of the
demographic environment for the following reasons: To understand the market areas which are
potentially served by the existing facility and potential new facilities to determine changes and assist
in making proactive decisions to accommodate those shifts.
C. Service Provider Analysis – The PROS Team will analyze all
major direct and indirect service providers. Direct and
indirect service providers will be based on typical
services/programs administered in like facilities. This data
will be utilized to compare against the activities and
programs identified in the Market Definition. An inventory
of comparable facilities will be performed on a local basis
to attempt to quantify market share. An analysis of
competition will include: location, service offering, pricing, and attractions.
D. Market Definition – The PROS Team will confirm the size of the market by age segment and
race/ethnicity for the study area. Detailed demographic analysis will be compared to potential
recreational activities to estimate potential participation per national and local trends, as
Data Collection and Needs Analysis
Market Analysis Key Leadership Interviews
Program Identification Facility Building Program
Capital & Operating Cost Financing & Operating Pro Forma
Public Presentation & Final Report
Comparative of Programming
Court SportsFitnessCardio/ Free WeightsAquaticsSeniorsLife SkillsYouthTeensRentalsChild CareSpecial EventsFitness CentersParkpoint Health Club x x x x x x xHealdsburg Health and Fitness x xCurvesxx
Healdsburg Pilates & Personal Fitness x x
Yoga on Center x xChildcare CentersLive Oak Preschool x x x
Pine Tree School-Preschool x x x
Healdsburg Montessori School x x xLittle Lambs Preschool x x xSaint John the Baptist School x x x
Fitch Mountain State Preschool x x xHealdsburg Community Nursery School x x x
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
16
documented in the Sports & Fitness Industry Association’s (SFIA) Study of Sports, Fitness and Leisure
Participation market research data, as well as ESRI Local Market Potential. This will help to
determine the size of the activity market by age segment and frequency rates that can be applied
to the facility. These figures will serve as the basis for participation and revenue projections of the
facilities.
Deliverables: A kick-off meeting and a data assessment of the market will be developed along with a
report on the condition of the existing facilities will be provided. The PROS Team will prepare a market
analysis report that summarizes the above referenced information: identify specific areas of deficiencies
that currently exist within the public, non-profit, and the private sectors in the study area. The summary
report will also identify specific areas of deficiency, duplication, and opportunities for collaboration and
shared services.
Task 2 – Community and Stakeholder Public Input
The foundation of all projects should be built upon an inclusive input process. This project’s input
process will be based on qualitative data gleaned from leadership and city stakeholder meetings. The
PROS Team will work with the prime consultant to utilize contacts and relationships of the City of Edina
to identify stakeholders and leaders to gather input in order to gain consensus on key development
priorities and operational strategies and programs.
A. Stakeholder Interviews – The PROS Team will support the prime consultant in conducting up to six
(6) interviews or focus groups with key community stakeholders to evaluate the vision for the facility.
The community values, strengths and challenges potentially facing the facility, trends, and existing
level of services provided will also be evaluated during this time. These interviews and focus groups
will identify vision, values, and key issues and provide insight into facility and program needs,
usability issues, and opportunities. While PROS has a preference to attend and support the facilitation
of these interviews under the direction of the prime consultant, PROS has the flexibility to focus
their scope on providing review, critique, and comment on the written outcomes of these meetings.
B. Operational Interviews – The PROS Team will conduct up to six (6) interviews or focus groups with
city staff, key operational partners, user groups, educational groups, and other select individuals to
evaluate the operational requirements of the proposed facility. The content of these meetings will
relate directly to the unique needs that need to be considered for the facility to inform program
delivery, operational standards, maintenance levels, staffing requirements, etc. The prime
consultant has the option of attending the interviews and can provide review, critique, and comment
on the written outcomes of these meetings.
Task 3 – Program Identification
A. Visioning and Core Program – Utilizing the community and
stakeholder input, demographic analysis, service provider
analysis, and market definition, the PROS Team will support
the prime consultant in identifying the recommended core
programs for the facilities. This will include key activities and
programs for participants, as well as the potential size of the
core program and market positioning. Program identification
could include: recreation, sports, therapy, enrichment,
fitness and wellness, family activities, arts, education,
aquatics, active adults, boomers, and seniors.
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
17
This information can be presented in a Visioning Session with key management and staff to finalize a
recommended program plan from which the concept, spatial analysis, and operational and finance plan
will be created. This core program will drive the components and design of the facilities including the
sizes of each program space in the building to achieve maximum flexibility and revenue return as well as
any other site evaluated.
Task 4 – Facility Building Program
The PROS Team will support the prime consultant by interpreting the findings of Tasks 1-3 into
information that can be used by the prime consultant to develop a conceptual facility design and spatial
relationship. This task is often performed in conjunction with Task 5. This collaborative planning process
where program and space are jointly formulated can yield a representative model where the
interrelationship of program and space and associated choices and consequences can be directly
illustrated. PROS will provide ongoing review, comment, and critique of work products developed by the
prime consultant during this Task to ensure a highly-coordinated and informed site assessment, space
allocation plan, and conceptual building design illustration.
Task 5 – Operational Plan
A. Operational Plan – The PROS Team will analyze management practices and limitations to understand
the operational situation of the facilities, as well as long term maintenance needs. This analysis will
provide support for a future organizational structure and staffing requirements, and strategies for
operational efficiency, policy development, system and technology requirements, and
marketing/communication capabilities. Also, operational standards will be established and costs for
the facility based on full operations. This will include hours of operation, staffing levels needed,
technology requirements and customer service requirements based on established and agreed upon
outcomes. Where appropriate, personnel standards as dictated by all state and/or local codes and
ordinances will also be determined based on the design and program of the facilities.
B. Financial Plan/Pro-Forma – Based on the program, operations, and conceptual plan for the facilities,
the PROS Team will develop a detailed financial plan illustrating pricing strategy for each of the
programs and services. The detail financial plan would include a space utilization summary based
on detailed line item projections and detailed participation
by program area. Financial modeling will be completed in
Microsoft Excel; a fully functional version of the electronic
model will be provided to the City for future use as a
budgeting and planning tool. The electronic financial model,
fully linked and functional with the ability to project and
model dynamic scenarios, will include:
• Expenditure detail: Detailed staffing by
space/program area; Contractual costs, including
but not limited to, utilities, maintenance and repair,
insurance, office/license/dues, advertising and promotion; Commodity costs for program area and
general facility requirements; Contract
instructor/officiating costs
• Revenue and participation detail: General admission by month of year, by participant
category and price point (youth, adult, weekday, weekend, etc.); Program/class
participation by session/meetings, by participant category ; Rental by space/program area
by price point
Pro Forma Revenues & ExpendituresOLATHE RECREATION CENTER BASELINE: REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
Revenues 1th Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$1,537,977.14 $1,584,116.46 $1,631,639.95 $1,680,589.15 $1,731,006.82 $1,782,937.03Administration$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building servicesenance $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Building Services $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Recreation Programs and fitnes $36,190.00 $37,275.70 $38,393.97 $39,545.79 $40,732.16 $41,954.13Fitness$614,942.00 $633,390.26 $652,391.97 $671,963.73 $692,122.64 $712,886.32
Natatorium $181,300.00 $186,739.00 $192,341.17 $198,111.41 $204,054.75 $210,176.39Gymnasium$40,180.00 $41,385.40 $42,626.96 $43,905.77 $45,222.94 $46,579.63Parties$37,500.00 $38,625.00 $39,783.75 $40,977.26 $42,206.58 $43,472.78Rentals$101,100.00 $104,133.00 $107,256.99 $110,474.70 $113,788.94 $117,202.61
Child Care $22,320.00 $22,989.60 $23,679.29 $24,389.67 $25,121.36 $25,875.00Kitchen$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Vendateria$10,000.00 $10,300.00 $10,609.00 $10,927.27 $11,255.09 $11,592.74Total $2,581,509.14 $2,658,954.42 $2,738,723.05 $2,820,884.74 $2,905,511.28 $2,992,676.62
Expenditures 1th Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th YearPasses$71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00 $71,400.00Administration$723,196.70 $740,146.50 $757,768.74 $776,090.16 $795,138.54 $814,942.80Building servicesenance $130,410.00 $131,921.40 $133,487.11 $135,109.11 $136,789.46 $138,530.31Building Services $160,509.13 $161,241.13 $161,997.91 $162,780.32 $163,589.26 $164,425.64Recreation Programs and fitnes $91,173.00 $93,225.56 $95,352.42 $97,556.33 $99,840.11 $102,206.72Fitness$591,834.56 $609,598.17 $628,070.67 $647,280.37 $667,256.71 $688,030.30
Natatorium $464,082.54 $468,865.04 $473,828.42 $478,979.59 $484,325.75 $489,874.36Gymnasium$39,006.00 $39,476.00 $39,963.90 $40,470.39 $40,996.18 $41,542.02Parties$33,425.40 $34,469.40 $35,553.96 $36,680.67 $37,851.17 $39,067.18Rentals$25,785.00 $26,335.00 $26,905.50 $27,497.28 $28,111.13 $28,747.90Child Care $33,268.72 $33,298.72 $33,329.62 $33,361.45 $33,394.23 $33,427.99Kitchen$2,750.00 $2,837.50 $2,928.03 $3,021.69 $3,118.60 $3,218.88Vendateria$5,700.00 $5,878.00 $6,061.62 $6,251.04 $6,446.45 $6,648.03Total $2,372,541.05 $2,418,692.42 $2,466,647.89 $2,516,478.38 $2,568,257.59 $2,622,062.14
Total Cost Recovery 109%110%111%112%113%114%
PROS CONSULTING
FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLANNING SERVICES
18
Pricing strategies would be based on a ten (10) step process which highlights the level of exclusivity
received by the participant and the value of experience provided. The detailed financial plan will
be included as a deliverable to provide management and staff the ability to affectively plan and
budget for future years. In addition to the line item detail and summary schedules for revenues,
expenditures, and debt service, this model will provide a five-year pro forma and cash flow for
budgetary purposes.
Deliverables: The PROS Team will analyze management practices and limitations to understand the
operational situation of the facilities, as well as long term maintenance needs. An operating pro-forma
will be prepared that includes a detailed analysis of building and program expenses and specific revenue
sources from citizens, businesses, user groups, or other interested groups. The detailed financial plan
will include a space utilization summary based on detailed line item projections and detailed
participation by program area. Financial modeling will be completed in Microsoft Excel (version 2007 or
later); a fully functional version of the electronic model will be provided to the City for future use as a
budgeting and planning tool.
Task 6 – Draft Report, Presentations and Final Report
Based on the analysis and findings, the PROS Team will support the prime consultant in the assembly of
a report document that clearly and succinctly states the programmatic, physical, and operational
elements required to achieve the outcome expectations.
A. Draft Report Production – The feasibility study will establish a definitive direction for the City. The
plan will be one that generates energy and advocacy while providing confidence in the business
practices required for success. A draft plan will be developed and distributed to key management,
City Advisory Commission, and staff.
B. Presentation of Findings and Recommendations – The PROS Team will present the draft Feasibility
Study findings and recommendations over a one (1) day period for comment and review.
Presentations will be made to the City Council, Parks Board, and other advisory or steering
committees.
C. Final Report Production – Following consensus on the draft analysis and recommendations, the PROS
Team will help prepare the final report documenting all findings, analysis and recommendations to
support implementation.
Timeframe
PROS Consulting can complete the study in four (4) months. Detailed dates for meetings and milestones
will be outlined during the kick-off meeting.
Fees
If PROS is selected as a subconsultant working under the direction of a prime consulting architecture
firm, PROS fee would be $27,500 including expenses for two trips.
Proposed Scope of Services
11/1/2015
Parks and Recreation Department
City of Edina, MN
Analysis & Recommendations for Edina
Community Arts & Recreation Center
Sutton + Associates, Inc.
528 Hennepin, Suite 215 Minneapolis, MN 55403
TEL (612) 840-1392
Ann Kattreh
Director, Edina Park and Recreation Department
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Ann,
It is with pleasure that Sutton + Associates submits this proposal to
work with HGA Architects and PROS Consulting to provide the City
of Edina with a comprehensive analysis for a potential Community
Arts & Recreation Center at the Grandview site in Edina.
Sutton + Associates has been involved with the Edina Arts Center
since the summer of 2012 helping to establish a new operational
approach and assisting its leadership to examine the potential to
better serve the residents of Edina at a more centralized location.
As a team member in the four month process anticipated to start in
mid-November, Sutton + Associates brings a clear understanding of
EAC issues, a strong background in community arts facility
development and continuity to the consideration of the potential of
the Grandview site.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist with this effort. If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (612) 840-
1392.
Sincerely,
George Sutton
Sutton + Associates, Inc.
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
1 Sutton + Associates
OVERVIEW
The City of Edina’s Park and Recreation Department has assembled a
team to analyze the potential for a Community Arts and Recreation
Center at the Grandview site in Edina. Sutton + Associates would join
HGA Architects and PROS Consulting to provide a comprehensive
assessment of programming potential, related facility space needs,
organizational structure, operational budget and development costs.
The analysis will include identifying comparable organizations and facilities
in the region and ascertaining key strategies to their success, as well as,
best practices in their operations and programs. Further, a competitive
analysis will identify market potential in the Greater Twin Cities area and
the impact of demographic trends on future participation.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following scope of services outlines how Sutton + Associates will
collaborate with HGA and PROS Consulting. For this project George Sutton
will be assisted by Community Arts Organizer, Sara Shaylie. Projected
completion date is the end of February, 2016.
MARKET & COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: To better understand the
competitive environment and market potential a comparative analysis of
community Art Centers in the region will be undertaken. Consultants will
work with PROS Consultants to identify at least 3 Minnesotan and 3
national centers that provide services to similar communities and outline
specific aspects of their facility, program, legal structure and operation
that are relevant to Edina. Benchmarks by which other communities and
centers judge their success will be identified along with recommendations
for the City of Edina. Consultant work will focus on specifically addressing
the following points;
What types of benchmarks are generally used to evaluate
community arts related centers?
Which communities have like Centers that are broadly
viewed as successful?
What makes them successful?
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
2 Sutton + Associates
What are their programming models and related fee
structures?
How are they organized?
What are the sources and percentages of funding that
support them?
How do they market their programs?
How does current EAC compare in terms of each of the
above?
PROGRAMMING PLAN: The Edina Art Center has a wide variety of visual
arts programs and services. Sutton + Associates will work closely with EAC
GM and team to determine a program plan for new art spaces and a list
of potential arts partners. Consultants will review current program
offerings, participation and cost structure at Edina Art Center. Relevant
programming models at comparable centers will be provided along with
an assessment of typical cost recovery rates by program. Potential
partnerships that could allow expanded program offerings and potentially
bring efficiencies will be examined. Consultants focus will be to address
the following questions.
What overall seem to be the best practices in comparable
arts centers for generating community participation in
programming?
How does EAC compare?
To achieve a stronger cost recovery percentage, are there
current programs and service offerings that should be either
expanded upon or no longer offered?
What are EAC’s weaknesses and strengths in marketing and
advertising? OPERATIONAL PLAN
Sutton + Associates will work with project team to identify potential
programming participation and recommended fee structure and to
identify range of potential revenue sources. Requisite staff needs will be
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
3 Sutton + Associates
identified along with other operating cost considerations. Consultants will
assess current operations and financials of the Edina Art Center to identify
strengths and weaknesses and work with project team to recommend an
operational plan with expanded programming and broader community
impact. Cost structure of current programming to participants will be
examined and compared to fees at like centers. Best practices for
optimizing gift shop, art supplies, and other auxiliary revenue options will
be provided based on observations of successes at like facilities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In collaboration with other team members Sutton + Associates will review
all analysis findings and make recommendations specific to
programming, space planning and operational budgeting.
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
4 Sutton + Associates
QUALIFICATIONS
The project contract will be with Sutton + Associates, Inc. who will be solely
responsible for the delivery of all elements of the Scope of Services. The
team of consultants assembled for the Edina Art Center project brings a
unique blend of skills, experience and knowledge of the Greater Twin
Cities Metropolitan Area as well as communities around the country. In
their consulting practices the team has worked individually and together
in a diverse range of communities across the country providing guidance
to:
Design, manage, and evaluate cultural programs and facilities
Anticipate changes in demographics and cultural participation
Balance civic purpose, artistic excellence, and financial stability
Secure broad community engagement to guide and support
important community cultural resources
Listen to community stakeholders and institutional leadership
Clarify and assess how new initiatives can fit within a
community
Focus a diverse range of community players around shared
community assets and goals
Forge strategic partnerships that get the right people behind
an important plan and provide a solid foundation for success
Ensure that the most pragmatically planned endeavors will
still have the power to inspire
Project Leadership
Sutton + Associates, Inc. is a full service cultural and community-planning
firm with the unique combination of creativity, experience, community
leadership, and analytical expertise to carry major institutional initiatives
from concept to reality. Led by George Sutton, a twenty-five year veteran
of cultural and community planning, Sutton + Associates has successfully
managed feasibility studies, operational planning, project
conceptualization, and leadership cultivation efforts behind some of the
country’s biggest community revitalization initiatives. From several million
dollar projects to major multi-million dollar ventures, Sutton +Associates has
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
5 Sutton + Associates
a proven track record of providing reliable, sound planning leadership to
complex cultural projects.
Sutton’s ability to listen to an institution’s leadership and stakeholders, work
with staff to assess how a new initiative will fit within the community,
conduct smart analysis to determine costs, operational options, and
feasibility, forge strategic partnerships, and get the right people behind an
important plan provide a solid foundation for success. His creativity
ensures that the most pragmatically planned endeavors will still have the
power to inspire.
Joined by a top-notch groups of business and cultural planning
professionals, Sutton + Associates complements its own experience with
teams of widely-respected cultural events planners, fund raising
professionals, logistics experts, researchers, and community experts who
lend creativity, sound judgment, and a collective 75 years of professional
experience to Sutton + Associates’ resume.
Team Member Profile
Based upon the areas of work identified above, Sutton + Associates will
engage Community Arts Organizer, Sara Shaylie to assist with this project.
Sara Jean Shaylie brings twelve years of experience in the arts supporting
campaigns, events and coordinating projects for Minnesota nonprofit and
for-profit organizations. Ms. Shaylie has worked with Sutton + Associates on
past projects including a recent comprehensive analysis of the Tulsa
Performing Arts Center. Her extensive knowledge of public administration,
executive administration, project management and research and
communication skills will be a great asset to the Edina Analysis Project. Specific Vendor Requirements
1. Sutton + Associates, Inc. is a full service Cultural Facility
Development consulting firm based in Minnesota and providing
services in communities throughout the country.
Sutton + Associates, Inc.
528 Hennepin Avenue Suite 215
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Tel (612) 840-1392 FAX (612) 605-4313
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
6 Sutton + Associates
2. Sutton + Associates nor any of the participating project partners
have terminated or been terminated from any contracts within the
past 24 months.
3. Sutton + Associates and the assembled team of specialist bring a
long standing history of working both within the Minnesota arts
community as well as around the country. Our experience with
demographic and marketing analysis and business and feasibility
planning for performing arts centers include a long list of venues
including:
PAC Comprehensive Analysis Tulsa Oklahoma
Center for the Arts Jackson Hole WY
Gallo Performing Arts Center Modesto, CA
Minnesota Shubert Theater Minneapolis, MN
State Theater Eau Claire, WI
Mabel Tainter Memorial Theater Menomonie, WI
Wilson Performing Arts Center Red Oak, IA
Guthrie Theater Reuse Analysis Minneapolis, MN
PAC Comprehensive Inventory Saint Paul, MN
Ritz Theater Minneapolis, MN
Jungle Theater Minneapolis, MN
Intermedia Arts Minneapolis, MN
Children’s Theater Minneapolis, MN
Comprehensive analysis of multiple capital initiatives
San Francisco, CA
4. Additionally, the team is experienced in working with and or for
local and state governmental entities. Local and state
governmental entities that consultants have worked with include:
City of Saint Paul, MN City of Minneapolis, MN
City of Red Wing, MN City of Santa Cruz, CA
City of San Francisco, CA City of San Jose, CA
City of New York, NY City of Brainerd, MN
City of Duluth, MN City of Minot, ND
City of Chicago, IL City of Philadelphia, PA
City of Fort Lauderdale, FL City of Seattle, WA
City of Portland, OR City of Tacoma, WA
City of Tulsa, OK City of Fergus Falls, MN
Edina Community Arts & Recreation Center Analysis
7 Sutton + Associates
City of Los Angeles, CA City of Rochester, MI
City of Yellow Spring, OH University of Minnesota, MN
5. Sutton + Associates nor any of the participating project partners see
any conflict of interest with any party related to the proposed
scope of services.
6. George Sutton of Sutton + Associates will have specific responsibility
and oversight of all elements of the proposed work.
City Council Updates
Oct. 20, 2015
• Approved request for purchase to replace the main park boiler at Edinborough Park.
• Approved request for purchase to replace the deteriorating concrete on the sidewalks on
the north side of Edinborough Park.
• Approved request for purchase for the replacement of all exterior doors to improve
energy efficiency and the first impressions of Edinborough Park.
Nov. 10, 2015
• Approved request for purchase of a new security camera system at Braemar Arena.