10-30-14 Community Center Task Force minutes Archltesture � �ngineering � Piannlny
M e e t i n g M i n u t e s
PROJN CT: C'Jolden Valley Community Center
f�G<1 Commission Number 2065-004-00
t�RC�M: Jcssica Horstkotte vvxi'1'�?�t's v1tt1�:C1'v[�v.�tz-�5s-4zz�
DATE: October 31, 2014
MEETING
Purpose: Task Force Meeting#6
Date: October 30, 2014 Time: 5:30pm- 7:30pm
I_.ocation: Brookview Community Center
INVITEI�S: Task Force Members Facilitation Team
John Cornelius City of Golden Valley
Pat Dale Carrie Anderson
I.ynn Gitelis Kick Birno
Brad Kadue Ben Disch
J ohn Ifluchka Eric Eckman
Kelly Kuebelbeck Brian Exickson
Dcan Penk ,Jeanne Fackler
Karla Rose Greg Spencer
Merton Suckerman Cheryl Weilex
Jason Iimmerman
HGA
Nancy Blankfard
)essica Horstkotte
Victor Pechaty
Glenn Waguespack
COPIES: Those Not Present
Item
Task Force Meeting#6 was the sixth of seven meetings scheduled fox the Golden Valley
C�mmuniry Ccnter Task Force to review and provide communiry input £or the Feasibility
Study and Predesign for a new Community Center.
Meeting#6 included a review of the OctobeY 14 Ciry Council workshop presentation; an
overview of sustainable building strategies for the project; and an activity and discussion
around the prioritization of program elements for the project.
h{;�,r�z7�iel, C,rei:r� ,aair! Abr,�tia!ns�r4, �lnr. q2(7 5th Street NOrtlS • Suite 1Qp • Mlrnnea�0liS, Minrtesota USA SS4Q1 233F3
HGf1 A.cf�itects �rid M:ngirrkt�,rs� L.L.0
H6A Architects anci Eny3necrs, l G.P 7��lephor�e G12.758.4Up0 Facsiinil� b12.7,5�.4]99
� HGA Architectisre and En9ineerinq, ('C .
t�GA Mfrl-Atl�ntic, tnr:, Visit our 4Vebsife: YFe�a.e�n�
Uolden Valley Communiry Center
October 31, 2014
Page 2
Item
I. Overview of City Council Workshop
Rick Birno provided an overview of the October 1�, 2014 Ciry Council workshop.
A. Of the 5 options presented, Options 02 and 03 were identified for potential furthcx
development.
B. City Council asked the Task Force to develop a recommendation for an option
somewhere in between Option 02—Replace Existing Program at Current Brookview
Site (�9.5N� and Option 03—New ProgYam at Current Brookview Site (�$38Iv�
II. Sustainability Review
A. HGA provided an overview of sustainable building and project strategies as well as
the LEED CerrificaCion pxocess and cost implications.
� 1. Sustainabiliry strategies can include a focus on stoxmwater management, site
� design, on-site energy generarion, energy efficiency, and/or matErials.
2. LEED certification ranges from LEED certified to I,F.F,D Platinum. F:ach level
� has an increased emphasis on sustainable strategies as well as an increased cost
premium. Addirionally, the certificarion pxocess has a separate cost.
a. HUA's best pxacrices generally meet LEED Silver qualifications.This is
assumed in the initial cost estimates.
B. The Task Force discussed some of thc options presented. The following questions �
and opinions were expressed by the�roup.
1. Investing in energy reducing strategies will result in operating cost savings.
2. What is the payback for some of thc sustainable strategies�
� 3. Golden Valley is ineerested in developing a sustainability plan. '1'his building
� should support that initiative.
� C. Recommendation
1. The Task Force has idenri�ied a commitment to employing sustainable strategies.
2. The group is interested in pursuing LEED Gold as a sustainabiliry standard fox
the Golden Valley Community Center project. The group does not feel the
additional cost of obtaining the certification is necessary. The cost estimate will
include a line item that indicates the premium for achieving this status.
3. In addition to the LEED Gold standard, the Task Force would like to investigate
additional innovative energy conservation solutions with reasonable a payback as
a means of reducing operating costs.
III. Program Discussion
"I'he Task F'orce engaged in c�iscussion and a participatory exercise to prioritize the project
� elements in c�rder to develc�p a recommendation between C)ption 02 and Qprion 03. "I'he
discussion and rec�inmendauons that resulted ��rc capCurcd as foll�ws.
� � r�. HGA reviewed the differences in size and cost between Options 02 and 03. Progxam
types were grouped together and reflected gross impact,including parking, of
increasing from existing to desired program.
B. The group was in agreement that the impxovements to the golf program and parks
Goldcn Valley Community Center
October 31, 2014
Page 3
Item
and rec admin were necessary to better support the primary functions of the project.
Those specific items include Parks &Rec Admin, Golf Program, On site Cart
Storage,Driving Range improvements, and I'utting Green improvements.
C. The ranking exercise illustrated the range of prioriries of the Task Force. The specific
outcome of the exexcise,including number of votes and written comments, are
enclosed.
D. Reflecting on the exercise�enerated discussion among the gxoup and led rhem to
articulate the following priorities.
1. Potential for cross programming and cfficiency c�f spaces.
a. Is it possible to cross progYam certain spaces to aecommodaCe the
meeting and gathering needs?
b. It is important ro be mindful that cross ptogramming of rcvcnue and non-
revenue generating programs can lead to a loss in revenue. Dedicated
space for each would allow this to be minimized.
c. A white box theater would be a cultural icon that should not be subsumed
inro another generalized meering space. Important to keep the quality of
Che Yoom but it could be used for other functions.
d. A white box theater is a cultural statement.
2. Revenue generating programs are impartant.
a. 'I'hese programs include I3anquet,�3istro, Mini-golf, and Kids Play.
3. C:utting program whole sale vs. shrinking program
a. There is a difference between cuCring programs whole sale and shrinking
each program to get to a boiled down version of the groups original
vision.
�4. To be responsible to the people the task force represents the task force believes it
would not be prudent to present an option less than Option 03.
a. 'I'o cut anything from Oprion 03 detracts from the goal of Che project
creating a destination.
b. '1'he group went through an exercise to prioririze elements of the project.
� Certain prioritization and cuts had already been made to develop Option
03, '1"here may be room for maximizing efficiency�within Option 03, but
� the"I'ask Force is not interested in recommending a middle option.
c. Whole salc reductions are not being made at this point because it would bc
out of context without the full value of the investment (vision, operaung
costs,public/ private partnerships, etc)
5. Important to understand the full value an all-inclusive community center brings to
Golden Valley and not just focus on initial cost.
a. Many of the program offer opportunities for revenue generation.
b. Option 03 promotes the vision for Golden Valley as a destination.
c. Option 03 will give Golden Valley a personality and is a talking point and
attractox for people moving to the communiry.
d. Enetgy efficient building strategies as well and energy generating
�� Golden Valley Community Centcr
October 31, 2014
Page 4
Item
technologies will reduce opexating costs.
e. There is potanrial ro tap into cxeative funding options to reduce the cost of
the project for Che city.
� i. Public-private partnerships
ii. Grants
iii. Individual or corporate sponsors
IV. Next Steps
:�. HU�� will develop concept level drawings and images for Option 03.
B. Task Force meeting 7 will focus on reviewing conceptual drawings as well as
� developing a strategy for presenting to City Council.
'1'he next meeting is scheduled for 1�7onday, Noveinber 17, at 5:30pm at Brookview Communiry
� C;entex.
'I'he foregoing represents I-ICUA's undcrstanding of the discussions and decisions made during this
meeting, If anyone has any changes or comments,please notify the author within seven days �f
� the date of this document.
F?nclosure
Sign-in Sheet
Compiled Ranking Fxercise
Ranking Exercise scans
u:A2000\2065\00400\7.general communicapons\meeringminutes\20741030 ta,k force meetin�G\20141030-task force mtg
6,docx