Final Report Facility Feasibility Study - Amazon S3 Concerns included financial feasibility and the

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Final Report Facility Feasibility Study - Amazon S3 Concerns included financial feasibility and the

  • Final Report Facility Feasibility Study

    Prepared for:

    Prepared by:

    February 2, 2016

  • CONTACT INFORMATION:

    Lara Jakubowski Executive Director The Nonprofit Centers Network 1536 Wynkoop, Suite 103 Denver, CO 80202 720-836-1187 lara@nonprofitcenters.org Sarah Goldblatt, AIA Architect 366 South Gaylord Street Denver, Colorado 80209 sarah@sarahgoldblatt.com Megan Devenport Program Manager Denver Shared Spaces 953 Decatur St., Box #4 Denver, CO 80204 720-639-8457 megan@denversharedspaces.org

    mailto:lara@nonprofitcenters.org mailto:sarah@sarahgoldblatt.com mailto:megan@denversharedspaces.org

  • 3 The Nonprofit Centers Network

    Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Organizational Assessment ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Findings: Listening Phase and Space Analysis............................................................................................................ 14 Option Summary .......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Option 1 – Renovate 6445 E. Ohio Ave. ...................................................................................................................... 20 Option 2 – New Build ................................................................................................................................................... 28 Option 3 - Acquisition ................................................................................................................................................... 35 Option 4 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Other Considerations: .................................................................................................................................................. 43 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................... 43 Appendix I: Facilities Task Force and Participants in Focus Groups and Informational Meeting ................................. 44 Appendix II: Informational Meeting Findings ................................................................................................................ 45 Appendix III: Communications Plan ............................................................................................................................. 46 Appendix IV: Space Allocation ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Appendix V: Seating Comparison ............................................................................................................................... 50 Appendix VI: Seating Diagrams ................................................................................................................................... 51 Appendix VII: Professional Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... 54 Appendix VIII: Code Study ........................................................................................................................................... 55 Appendix IX: Option 1 Cost Estimates ......................................................................................................................... 57 Appendix X: Option 2 Cost Estimates .......................................................................................................................... 64 Appendix XI: Option 3 Cost Estimates ......................................................................................................................... 71

  • 4 The Nonprofit Centers Network

    Executive Summary B’nai Havurah is at a crossroads in its history, and its facility is a reflection of this juncture. As part of a process that B’nai Havurah began in 2014, The Nonprofit Centers Network (NCN) was retained in September 2015 to conduct a Facility Feasibility Study. The goal of this engagement was to provide reliable information on several facility options to inform the decision-making for a facility that best represents this vibrant community. NCN’s team included Lara Jakubowski, Executive Director at NCN; Sarah Goldblatt, Architect; and Megan Devenport, Community Facilitator from Denver Shared Spaces. The team undertook an analysis of how B’nai Havurah uses space to fulfill its mission and how improvements to its current facility, or an alternative, might better support its goals. The work of the B’nai Havurah Board and Facilities Task Force, including B’nai Blueprint, the 2014 survey, and 2015 memorandum, were foundational for NCN’s work. Four facility options were analyzed: (1) renovation of the existing building at 6445 East Ohio Avenue, (2) construction of a new building on the current East Ohio site, (3) acquisition of a new building at a new location, or (4) sharing space with another religious community. These options provide B’nai Havurah with a rich range of features from which to choose and each one has distinct advantages and disadvantages. The methodology for this engagement included a listening phase and space analysis. During the listening phase, multiple small and large group meetings were held with congregants to better understand their feelings and opinions about B’nai Havurah and their priorities around space usage. Our findings included confirmation that the community views itself as open, welcoming, supportive, and inclusive. The importance of the havurot as a strong, relational core was noted, as well as the importance of transparent and well-communicated decision-making for any facility project. Concerns included financial feasibility and the efficacy of B’nai Havurah’s decision-making processes. The listening phase also generated input on B’nai Havurah’s space usage. Feedback from participants helped establish baseline needs and wants for the space needs assessment. Similar to the 2014 survey, the findings included an emphasis on improving aesthetics, needing a more functional layout, and having more space for lifecycle events. In addition, there was agreement on the importance of creating a space that reflects B’nai Havurah’s values, facilitates community and relationship building, and promotes sustainability. An architectural “test fit” of the four options was completed based on these qualitative and quantitative inputs. Some assumptions were made for each scenario with the goal of providing B’nai Havurah with realistic cost estimates. A “baseline” approach was used to complete each scenario; additional features may always be added at an extra cost. (1) Renovate Current East Ohio Avenue Building – This option is predicated on the removal of two currently rented office spaces to allow a reconfiguration of the 10,508 square feet using the existing footprint of the building. This enables better flow through more functional space, significantly improves aesthetics, and increases the capacity for attendance at religious ceremonies as well as social events. This option would include a 20 month timeline at an estimated total project cost of $1.9 million, and preserves B’nai Havurah’s equity in the property. Pros: high value because it accomplishes most of the design objectives for the lowest cost, maintains the current location, and ease of renovating a familiar space. Cons: parking meets code but could be insufficient if congregation grows, limited outdoor space, and large events will require reconfiguration of social hall (moving tables and chairs). (2) New Building at East Ohio Avenue – In this option, B’nai Havurah would demolish the existing building and construct a 13,783 square foot two-story building in its place. This option provides B’nai Havurah with a completely new facility, oriented to Ohio Avenue to better utilize the site area. The conceptual floorplan for this option allows similar seating in the sanctuary and social hall as Option 1, but includes four additional classrooms, a teen lounge and twice as much outdoor space. This option assumes a 25 month timeline at an estimated total project cost of $3.8 million. Pros: allows for additional space for growth and greater flexibility, maintains the current location, and enables complete re-imagining of the site and building configuration. Cons: the organization cannot utilize the equity in the

  • 5 The Nonprofit Centers Network

    building to fund this project; parking meets code but could be insufficient if congregation grows, and highest cost per square foot. (3) Acquisition of New Building – In this option, B’nai Havurah would sell the East Ohio Avenue property and acquire a new building. A property was identified during this engagement at 2015 S. Pontiac Way with a

Recommended

View more >