Download pdf - Final Report Facility Feasibility Study - Amazon S3€¦ · Concerns included financial feasibility and the efficacy of B’nai Havurah’s decision-making processes. The listening

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 [email protected] Sarah Goldblatt, AIA Architect 366 South Gaylord Street Denver, Colorado 80209 [email protected] Megan Devenport Program Manager Denver Shared Spaces 953 Decatur St., Box #4 Denver, CO 80204 720-639-8457 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



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


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


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 an asking price of $1,575,000 for a two story 19,373 square foot building. With twice as much space, B’nai Havurah could accommodate a significantly larger sanctuary, larger social hall, more classrooms and still have additional space for flexible use or income-generation from tenants. Project costs, including building acquisition and renovation, are estimated at $4 million, but with the sale of the East Ohio Avenue property, B’nai Havurah could raise an estimated $1 million to be used toward acquisition and renovation. Pros: a new location with twice as much square footage would give B’nai Havurah a wide range of options in terms of layout and accommodating larger numbers in the sanctuary and social hall, additional parking, and room for considerable growth. Cons: double the ongoing operating costs of the building than that of the East Ohio Avenue location, much of the space may be idle for significant time periods, and, if Pontiac Way property becomes unavailable then B’nai Havurah will need to identify and compete in a real estate market with escalating prices. (4) Sharing Space – Central Christian Church has indicated that it would be interested in B’nai Havurah sharing space at 3690 Cherry Creek Drive South. Since B’nai Havurah has held High Holy Days services at this location for several years and has a strong relationship with the pastoral staff, this is a compelling option. Pros: could lease out or sell E. Ohio property to build B’nai Havurah’s financial strength, facility has many desirable amenities already in place, and environmentally responsible by maximizing the utility of space that already exists and would otherwise be vacant. Cons: Scheduling will be complicated (especially Sunday religious school), further clarification is needed on dedicated space that would be used by B’nai Havurah solely, and loss of control since B’nai Havurah would be a tenant not the owner. Our analysis of B’nai Havurah’s facility options has generated cost and design information that will enable the community to evaluate which option best serves its future needs. Through this engagement, it has become clear that in order to make the best final recommendation, the Facilities Task Force needs to engage the rest of the congregation with the findings of this study and solicit their input. As this phase concludes, our recommendations include (1) agreeing upon a deadline for making a final decision; (2) engaging the congregation in an authentic process for gathering input for the decision-making process (suggested Communications Plan included); and (3) researching a Campaign Consultant, Appraiser, Banker and Owner’s Representative for the next phase of the project. B’nai Havurah is well-poised to take the next steps in this process: commit to a facility option, raise the funds needed to complete the project and position its community for the future.


Introduction For over 50 years, B’nai Havurah has stood as Denver’s only Jewish Reconstructionist congregation. Today, the community has undertaken an analysis of how it uses space to fulfill its mission and whether its current facility, or an alternative, would best support and represent this dynamic community. In August 2015, the B’nai Havurah Facilities Task Force (FTF) was authorized by its Board of Directors to conduct a facility feasibility study to consider several options including (1) a renovation of the existing building at 6445 East Ohio Avenue, (2) construction of a new building, or (3) acquisition of a new building. Subsequently, a fourth option was added: sharing space with another religious community. The Nonprofit Centers Network was selected through a competitive process to complete the study with a team that included Sarah Goldblatt, Architect and Megan Devenport from Denver Shared Spaces to assist with facilitation. This report lays out the methodology, findings and recommendations our team developed over the five month engagement. Our goal is to provide B’nai Havurah with robust information on various scenarios to support their decision-making process moving forward. In the course of this engagement, we completed a listening phase in which we heard from over 55 members of the congregations about their aspirations for B’nai Havurah and their priorities about the current and hypothetical spaces. This contributed to design objectives that were applied to the various options under consideration. Conceptual diagrams were drafted to facilitate cost estimation and models were developed to test the financial sustainability of the options. The following information details each of these steps for the benefit of members of the decision-making bodies and the congregation at-large. Each option has been evaluated for programming, design, cost and financial considerations to present high-level information to compare options. Assumptions have been made in each scenario that may or may not be accurate once a specific facility option is pursued. Further analysis will be required to determine final design constraints and layout, actual costs and timing, and sources of funds. This project is meant to advance the conversation to the next level of refinement. B’nai Havurah is building from a solid base of a passionate, thoughtful and knowledgeable congregation. We hope this report reinforces a spirit of unity as the congregation determines its next steps.


Methodology This engagement involved gathering data from a variety of sources. The Listening Phase involved multiple face-to-face meetings with over 55members of the B’nai Havurah community. We met regularly with the Facilities Task Force and twice with the Board of Directors. Our approach also involved a review of organizational documents and surveys, site visits to potential locations, and engaged additional design and cost estimation expertise. We also held bi-weekly project update calls with the Executive Director. Meetings with Facilities Task Force We met monthly over the course of this project with the Facilities Task Force (FTF), the body chiefly responsible for this engagement. The FTF provided strategic direction and guidance, oversaw the details of our work plan, reviewed initial findings, and provided feedback on conceptual drawings. The FTF made changes to our scope of work by expanding the number of options to include sharing space at the Central Christian Church and to limit the “new build” option to the current Ohio Avenue site rather than acquisition of a new vacant lot. This modification enabled the NCN team to complete a fourth option within the original budget amount. A list of the Facilities Task Force members is attached in Appendix I. Informational Meeting NCN’s first open meeting to solicit input from the congregation was held on October 6, 2015. A flyer was distributed at High Holy Day services and email announcements were sent resulting in approximately 25 members in attendance. NCN presented information on the Feasibility Study process, led a discussion to confirm the findings of the 2014 survey, and led a discussion on what is important to the congregation about their physical space. The following questions were posed during the Informational Meeting:

• Think about places that you like to frequent or visit. What attracts you to this place? • More importantly, what about this space makes you want to stay? • Write down in a few words, one idea per sheet, what kinds of features would make B‘nai Havurah into this

kind of place. o Think especially of the kinds of features that would reflect B'nai's culture, ethos, and character.

Focus Groups We chose to conduct two focus groups in order to deepen our understanding of the congregation’s needs to complement the information gathered through the online survey conducted in 2014 and to build on the input from the large Informational Meeting. B’nai Havurah’s Executive Director took on the responsibility of inviting participants for these focus groups, specifically inviting people who represented a range of demographics, levels of congregational participation, and duration of membership in the community. A third focus group was added later due to a lower turnout among younger families in the first two focus groups. The focus groups were facilitated on the following dates/locations; participant information is included in the Appendix.

October 25, 2015; 10-11:30am; at B’nai Havurah, 12 participants

November 5, 2015; 7-8:30pm; at B’nai Havurah, 6 participants

December 6, 2015; 4-5:30pm; at Havurah Host’s Home, 12 participants (6 couples) Each focus group responded to the following questions:

• How did you come to be part of the B’nai Community? • In a few words, how would you describe the ethos of the B’nai community? • How do you use the B’nai facility currently? • Describe your ideal B’nai home. What specific features would it have? How frequently would you envision

using these features?


• As we move from feasibility to implementation, what do you see as some of the key challenges the congregation will face?

In responding to this set of questions, the focus group participants provided a depth of information that, while not fully representative of the entire congregation, helped to further clarify the needs and desires of the B’nai membership. The findings of these sessions are summarized below in the “Findings” section. Meetings with Staff A two-hour meeting was held with staff members, Carol Morris, Hal Aqua, Becky Epstein, Rabbi Evette Lutman on December 17, 2015. The conceptual program and diagrams were shared with the group with careful attention to space allocation and adjacencies. The group responded positively to the flexibility of spaces shown on the diagrams and the potential for additional space for larger seating capacities, events, and learning spaces as well as lobby space that could double as a gallery.

Site Visits The team visited each of the contemplated sites. The East Ohio location was reviewed in detail by Sarah Goldblatt, the architect on the team, to confirm the floorplan that was provided of the current layout of the building. In addition, the East Ohio location was evaluated by Daniel Krausz who assisted with computer-aided design (CAD) plans and Cliff Shumway who provided cost estimates. The team of architects and the cost estimator also conducted a walk-through of the Pontiac Way location. Lara Jakubowski and Sarah Goldblatt toured the Central Christian Church location to better understand the floorplan and meet the staff. Document Review As part of this engagement, the NCN team reviewed documents provided by B’nai Havurah including:

B’nai Blueprint

2014 Survey

2015 Memorandum by Dan Taubman

East Ohio Avenue floorplan (no CAD files were available)

B’nai Havurah financial statements (2013-2015)

B’nai Havurah Demographic and Program information (number of members, number of life cycle events, number of attendees)

Pontiac Way floorplans (CAD floor plan made available from Lee Architects) and real estate brochure

Central Christian Church floorplan Financial Modeling Using information from both B’nai Havurah and the cost estimator, NCN created project budgets and cash flow projections for each option. Assumptions used in these analyses are detailed in the sections for each option. The models are meant to give B’nai Havurah a realistic sense of the potential costs involved in the various scenarios, but should not be relied upon as final or complete. Once an option is selected, B’nai Havurah will need to refine the estimates in this report based on actual costs, amenities and timing.


Organizational Assessment As background, NCN researched the drivers of B’nai Havurah’s space usage. We completed an organizational assessment of B’nai Havurah to understand the status of its membership and programs, its financial standing, and the value of its assets (building). The following data was provided by B’nai Havurah staff and obtained through external sources in the real estate and finance fields. Membership and Programs B’nai Havurah is a congregation experiencing strong growth. The following chart shows the uptick in B’nai Havurah membership over the last three years, from 216 households to 259, an increase of 20%. Likewise, collected dues have increased from $240,383 in 2013 to $259,900 in 2015, an increase of 8%. This demonstrates the growth potential and future demand for space within the congregation.

We also examined B’nai Havurah program participation. Based on information provided by staff, we compiled the following chart which shows three years of religious school attendance by age. Class sizes are under 15, however at each grade level, classes are showing upward trends. It should be noted that B’nai Havurah’s religious school has 12 students (pre-K to 5th grade) from Rodef Shalom congregation in 2015.

216

234

259

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

$220,000

$230,000

$240,000

$250,000

$260,000

$270,000

$280,000

2013 2014 2015

B'nai Havurah Membership

Dues Collected # Members (Household Units)


When we examined life cycle events at B’nai Havurah, we found that relatively few ritual ceremonies are currently held on site. Based on comments heard during the listening phase, this is largely due to concerns about the aesthetics and functionality of the current facility, suggesting that an improved facility may attract more events.

2013/2014

2014/2015

2015/2016

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Pre-K& <4

K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th

2013/2014 9 1 9 5 4 11 9 8 10 9 0 0

2014/2015 6 9 3 9 9 6 11 9 9 4 9 0

2015/2016 8 5 14 11 8 13 10 12 7 3 3 7

Religious School Enrollment at B'nai Havurah

0

1

2

3

4

Engagement Wedding Baby Naming Funeral

Life Cycle Events 2013-2015

2013 2014 2015


Since Bat and Bar Mitzvah’s are such important life cycle events, we examined them specifically. Over the past three years, B’nai Havurah has had 32 Bat and Bar Mitzvah’s. Of these, 13 have held their ceremonies on-site at B’nai and 19 have been held off-site. The average on-site Bat and Bar Mitzvah has been smaller than the off-sites, with average attendance of 74 and with average invitations of 110. Bar and Bat Mitzvah’s held off-site have averaged 135 attendees with 175 invitations. This is consistent with feedback we heard during the listening phase about the space constraints at the current facility. It is also relevant to point out that none of the Bat/Bar Mitzvah’s have held a post-party on-site in the last three years.

Financial Position In order to better understand B’nai Havurah’s capacity for a facility project, we completed a review of B’nai Havurah’s financial statements for the last three years. The information provided is summarized below and forms the basis for the cash flow proformas for each facility option. B’nai Havurah has shown positive balances for each of the last three years, with growing program income and special events income. It should be noted that rental revenues ($20,794 in 2015) were identified as a line item to be eliminated in future years in each option we evaluated. Although each option has space which could be shared or rented out on either a regular or special event basis, we assumed the current office tenants at Ohio Avenue would need to move in the event of a renovation, new build or acquisition. B’nai Havurah may also bring additional resources to any capital project it undertakes if it chooses to tap into reserve and endowment funds. For the purposes of this analysis, we excluded those sources of funds. However, if the congregation chose to use them they could be a valuable resource.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Bat/Bar Mitzvah total Bat/Bar Mitzvah onsite

Oneg Shabbat on site Bat/Bar Mitzvah post-party on site

Bat/Bar Mitzvahs at B’nai Havurah

2013 2014 2015

On-Site Off-SiteAttendance: 74 135Invitations: 110 175


B'nai Havurah Financial Summary

2013 2014 2015

Income Actual Actual

Actuals thru Nov + Dec projections

*Program Income $272,567 $292,629 $345,614 Contributed Support $133,540 $143,723 $118,012 Special Events Income $25,661 $35,968 $46,000 Rentals $25,022 $27,532 $20,794 Investments $0 $0 Other $45,472 $14,504 $10,181 Total: $502,262 $514,356 $540,601

Expense Payroll $320,268 $305,688 $311,634

Contract Services $0 $39,340 $41,840 Operations and Awards & Grants $54,538 $63,294 $72,165 Awards & Grants $0 $0 $7,896 Facilities & Equipment $65,182 $66,557 $68,623

Business Expenses and Travel & Mtgs. $28,777 $31,195 $20,762

Travel & Meetings $0 $0 $2,288 Total: $468,765 $506,074 $525,208

Surplus/Deficit: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393

*Program Income- Membership Dues, and Program Service Fees Note: In 2013, payroll was combined with contract services.

Using the financial statements for the prior three years, we completed an analysis of B’nai Havurah’s debt capacity. The purpose of this analysis is to provide a general guideline for what portion of any project could be funded with debt financing. Once the congregation decides on a direction for the facility project, we would recommend speaking with a banker about financing options. The following chart shows the methodology for determining debt capacity. Using the net income (surplus) amounts for the last three fiscal years, we added back depreciation and amortization since they are non-cash expenses. Based on conversations with local bankers, we understand that it is likely any loan would be underwritten on the basis of B’nai Havurah’s liquidity and a standard debt service coverage ratio of 1.15 to 1.20. This means that B’nai Havurah needs to reliably generate enough net income to cover its debt service payments (principal plus interest) with a cushion of 15-20%. To be conservative, we will use 1.20 debt service coverage. We divided the amount available for debt service ($43,334 in 2013, which is the total of the surplus of $33,497 plus the depreciation and amortization of $9,837) by 1.2 to calculate the amount available each year for debt service. An average of the three years is $24,079 or approximately $2,000 per month. Based on a rate of 5.5% and a 20 year term, this would allow B’nai Havurah to obtain a mortgage of approximately $300,000. This is an estimate based on conservative assumptions and B’nai Havurah should consult a banker to confirm these figures once an option is selected.


Calculation of Debt Service Capacity

2013 2014 2015

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393

Add Back Depreciation & Amortization: $9,837 $9,837 $9,837

Available for Debt Service: $43,334 $18,119 $25,230

Available with 1.2 DSC: $36,112 $15,099 $21,025

Average Annual Available: $24,079

Average Monthly Available: $2,000

Assumed Interest Rate: 5.5%

Assumed Term: 20 years

Possible Loan Amount: $290,745

Asset Analysis As part of the organizational assessment, we also gathered background information on the value of the building. B’nai Havurah carries only a small remaining mortgage on the building, less than $50,000 so this is the congregation’s largest asset. The following chart summarizes comparable properties that were sold or listed for sale during the last two years. On average, buildings in the vicinity are selling for $102.79 per square foot, however there has been a clear upward trend so this is most likely conservative estimate. Using this figure, the B’nai Havurah building would be valued at $1,080,028 ($102.79 x 10,508 square feet). Comparison of B’nai Havurah to Comparable Sales/Listings

Address Land SF

Year Built

Bldg SF

Sale Date

Price $/SF

6445 E Ohio Ave 21,170 1980 10,508 11/28/95 $ 310,000 $ 29.50

4999 E Kentucky Ave 38,999 1985 19,026 4/1/15 $ 4,600,000 $ 241.77

6875 E Evans Ave 29,398 1972 17,100 9/28/15 $ 2,015,000 $ 117.84

4521 E Virginia Ave 13,547 1973 10,302 FOR SALE

$ 1,600,000 $ 155.31

2150 S Cherry St 37,461 1974 12,139 9/18/15 $ 1,225,000 $ 100.91

5777 E Evans (2 Bldgs) Na 1971 18,572 3/12/15 $ 965,000 $ 51.96

5701 E Evans Ave 27,721 1970 7,500 4/20/15 $ 835,000 $ 111.33

1280 S Parker Rd 30,099 1985 13,616 10/16/14 $ 825,000 $ 60.59

10170 E Mississippi 52,794 1973 13,005 11/20/14 $ 825,000 $ 63.44

6300 E Yale Ave 27,002 1971 9,365 2/20/14 $ 725,000 $ 77.42

5840 E Evans Ave 21,906 1972 11,934 11/21/13 $ 565,000 $ 47.34

- Steve Letman, Consultus Asset Advisors We also obtained an opinion from a broker who works with many nonprofits. She identified another comparable property at 4380 E Alameda Avenue that sold in June 2014 for $1.5M which equates to $209/SF. The Alameda building has similar zoning to the East Ohio Avenue location, but is smaller. This suggested a value of the East Ohio


building between $160-$200/SF. She also took an income approach assuming $16 full service rental rate (with about $4/SF for expenses) at an 8% cap, that would put the value of the building at $1,681,280 or $160 SF. B’nai Havurah currently rents about 2,000 square feet at roughly $12/SF. Combined, these analyses suggest that the value of the East Ohio Avenue building may be between $1,000,000 and $1,600,000. B’nai Havurah’s equity in the building could therefore be between $950,000 and $1,550,000 given the remaining mortgage balance of approximately $50,000. Once B’nai Havurah decides to proceed with a facility option, our recommendation would be to obtain an appraisal to confirm the value.

In summary, B’nai Havurah has many organizational strengths and assets to draw from in a facility project. It has a growing congregation with increasing needs around event space. The congregation is financially stable with net revenues exceeding expenses in each of the last three years. It has a strong asset in its building which is largely debt-free and may be valued between $1 million and $1.6 million.

Findings: Listening Phase and Space Analysis Listening Phase Through the listening phase of this project, we analyzed data from the online survey completed in 2014, the Informational Meeting, three focus group meetings and a meeting with staff. This process sorted the data into four broad categories that helped to clarify priorities, to inform our space analysis of the facility options, and to guide our suggested next steps. The following sections describe these four categories: culture and community, strengths and assets, considerations for change, and capacity. The B’nai Culture and Community

Throughout all of our interactions with the B’nai Havurah membership, the overarching theme is the depth and importance of the B’nai community. The B’nai building is home base for a dynamic, rich community culture that is open, welcoming, and supportive. Informational Meeting and Focus Group participants echoed the themes gleaned from the survey as they described what it is that has drawn them to B’nai. Below is a word cloud that captures many of the words used to describe the B’nai culture.


Strengths and Assets As the B’nai membership explores next steps for the facility, it is clear that it does so with many strengths and assets in its favor. Throughout the data, participants highlighted the strengths of B’nai. The priority placed on inclusivity and the careful consideration of diverse opinions will help ensure that the resulting facility plan has a high level of buy-in. Members at B’nai are open, thoughtful, and deeply invested in growing a strong community. The havurot form a strong, relational core to the community, and the importance of these groups was named by many participants in the focus groups. Participants also emphasized how committed the staff and volunteers are, recognizing that these people will be key to any facility project the community undertakes. Considerations for Change In addition to the strengths of the B’nai community, participants also lifted up potential challenges the community may face as it considers change. Specifically, the data suggests that there are two main considerations that the leadership of the community should address as part of next steps. The first, brought up in each focus group, is to ensure that there is a clear decision-making process in place. Some of the comments we heard included: “Do we know how the decision will be made?” and “We are great at listening. We aren’t great at deciding.” These comments and others point both to the importance of clear decision making processes as well as the importance of communicating that process to the broader member base. The second consideration that will be vital for this process is the communication plan used by staff and Board. During the focus groups, members discussed the importance of clear communication. Some people expressed getting “too many emails” or “emails that had too much information.” While it is basically impossible to please all people, it is important for staff and Board to consider how best to get information out to the membership throughout the facility project. Capacity A third broad theme that came out of the data is that of capacity – both financial and staff/volunteer. While we did not directly ask focus group participants about the financial capacity, actual or perceived, the topic came up organically in all three groups. Participants expressed a strong desire for a facility that better meets the community’s needs while also being financially sustainable. As leadership weighs the options for next steps, it will be important to gather more input on fundraising capacity and approaches. In addition to financial capacity, several participants also highlighted the importance of staffing capacity. Several people expressed that the Executive Director already goes above and beyond her job duties, and they are concerned that the addition of a facility project could put more strain on her. Others brought up the fact that many volunteers are “the usual suspects,” and they wanted to make sure that new volunteers were recruited to “share the load” and not burn out anyone currently on volunteer committees. The membership’s perception of B’nai’s capacity will be important for the Board and FTF to address in the next steps of this facility process.


Space Analysis The following needs and desires were delineated in B’nai’s Blueprint, SWOT Analysis, Facility Task Force survey, and through a series of meetings and focus groups with the congregation and Facility Task Force over the last five months. The following design objectives were gathered from this information guided by the stated vision that “B’nai Havurah’s building is functional and attractive and supports the mission and goals of B’nai Havurah.”

Program Priorities:

1. Sanctuary: Increased space for ritual, programs and activities—boost sanctuary and reception space to allow for more life-cycle events to take place at B’nai Havurah. Current sanctuary seats 130, ideal would be 225-250. Space should feel comfortable for Shabbat and Kabbalat Shabbat (50)and expandable for life-cycle services (up to 250)

2. Reception/ Social Hall that would ideally accommodate the same number of congregants for a seated meal that could be seated for a service in the sanctuary. Shabbat dinner or Kiddush lunch. This space should be near the sanctuary and have built-in flexibility to accommodate larger events like b’nai mitzvah receptions, the Purim carnival, shabbatons, and community Passover seders.

3. Kitchen—Dedicated for meal preparation and catering in close proximity to social hall. Full kosher kitchen with dual-appliances not required. Larger space could be zoned for separate meat and dairy preparation. Cooking could be more easily incorporated into educational program. Kitchen space should include sufficient storage.

4. Classrooms- Current facility has 6 classrooms. Ideal would be 8 classrooms to accommodate growth in the religious school, along with space for adult and parent education experiences on Sunday mornings. Space for parent-tot and teen classes should also be considered.

5. Lobby: Welcoming, informative, flows into other spaces. A warm space to sit or wait comfortably and interact with others. Could double as a gallery, display, or pre-function space for events.

6. Library: Larger, multi-functional space with comfortable seating, visible location with added shelf storage for book collections. A larger library could be used for Board meetings (25 people) and media presentations with built-in AV equipment.

7. Offices: Rabbi, Executive Director, School Director, Administrative support. Include copy/work room and locked file storage. With growth, additional staff offices including space for the Music Director, conference space, waiting and larger meeting areas are desired.

8. Teen Room: Space where teens can hang out and feel like they have a place within the building to call their own.

9. Parent Lounge/ Parent Education Space: Area for parents to meet casually for conversation or gather for study or classes. Space should be available Sunday mornings during religious school programming

10. Accessibility: Fully-accessible spaces, designed to ADA standards throughout, including entrances, hallways and restrooms (and preserving gender-neutral option). Acoustics to optimize participation for people with disabilities.

11. Entry: Provide a visible, welcoming and accessible main entry that provides shelter from the elements. Enhance entry to accommodate a larger volume of people. Should be contiguous with lobby space.


12. Storage: Expanded and dedicated storage space for book collections, AV equipment, holiday materials, etc. Sufficient storage space should be provided for tables and chairs.

13. Outdoor space: Strong desire for outdoor play space for religious school, garden, contemplative space and sharing meals outside the building.

14. Parking: Additional parking beyond the 23 spaces currently available, including additional handicap spaces is desired.

Space Analysis Conclusions: From both a design and sustainability perspective, it will be important that any expansion of B’nai Havurah’s physical space, whether in a new location or within the walls of its existing home on East Ohio, carefully consider how to best accommodate the varying numbers of congregants and guests that attend services, life-cycle events and programs throughout the year. It will be wise to consider a plan that provides flexible, multi-functional space over large dedicated spaces that may be used less frequently but still require constant operational expenditure for heating and cooling. Designing for maximum anticipated capacities could ultimately be more burdensome than beneficial. The use of high-quality, sound attenuating operable partitions between rooms, could greatly enhance the ability to expand and contract spaces easily. Any future expansion plan should consider a reasonable number of classrooms for religious school, adult programming and other events and carefully evaluate the scheduling of spaces to determine how rooms like the library, sanctuary and overflow, can be shared. Uniformly-sized classrooms with natural light and operable windows will help establish optimal learning environments. A clearly defined entry will enhance the visibility of the entrance and the orientation of visitors. The entry should be welcoming, inviting, and wide enough for gathering and also provide shelter from the elements. Ease of pick-up and drop-off of children and family members should be considered in the design of an entry along with the specific spatial requirements of all life-cycle events, including funerals. Accessibility to all spaces should be a paramount consideration when evaluating an existing building along with a site that affords security, sufficient parking (or option for shared spaces) and access to green space. Based on previously generated information and the ideas expressed during this study phase regarding space needs and desires, a 12,000-14,000 square- foot building would likely accommodate B’nai Havurah’s ideal programmatic needs as it looks to the future.

Disclaimers:

No as-built drawings were prepared within the scope of this project

Surveys were not evaluated for any of the properties to inform the exact location of property lines and or easements.

Mechanical, electrical, plumbing or structural analysis was not performed on any of the proposed options

No hazardous material investigations were conducted as part of this study.

Proposed building diagrams are conceptual and reflect an initial survey of B’nai’s programmatic and spatial needs. A more in-depth analysis will be required to ascertain exact square-footage and adjacency requirements.

A cursory building and zoning code review was applied to each diagram and was not comprehensive


Option Summary

Three options were considered as part of this feasibility study. Each option is discussed in detail in the next section. The following summary information is provided to give a high-level overview of some of the key criteria in one chart. Option 1 – Renovate 6445 E. Ohio Ave. This option preserves the existing footprint of the current facility, but reconfigures the floorplan to make it more functional and to use space more efficiently. Option 2 – New Build at 6445 E. Ohio Ave. This option assumes the current facility is demolished and in its place a new 13,783 square foot building with two floors is constructed. This option provides B’nai Havurah with a completely new facility, oriented to Ohio Avenue to better utilize the site area Option 3 – Sale of Ohio Ave and Acquisition of New Property. This option assumes the sale of the East Ohio Avenue property and acquisition of a new building. A proxy property was identified during this engagement at 2015 S. Pontiac Way with an asking price of $1,575,000 for a two story 19,373 square foot building. Whether B’nai Havurah purchases the building at Pontiac Way or another of similar size, this option would afford the congregation a significantly larger sanctuary, larger social hall, more classrooms and still have additional space for flexible use or income-generation from tenants. Option 4 – Share Space at Central Christian Church. B’nai Havurah has a strong relationship with Central Christian Church due to the history of using this facility for High Holy Days. There is an option to share under-utilized space at the church on a year-round basis.

The following chart summarizes each option among twelve criteria:

Square Footage – Option 1 has the smallest square footage and Option 3 has the most (excluding Option 4)

Timing – The time to complete each option varies from Option 4 which would require the least, to Option 2,

which would require the most. Estimates on timing are included in the cost estimates in the Appendix.

Sanctuary Plus Overflow Seating – Option 4 has the most seating, Option 1 has the least.

Event Seating – is similar across all four options.

Classroom/Flexible Space – Ranges from a low of 7 to a high of 14 across options including the library and

social hall areas. As of this writing, Option 4 classroom space has not been specified.

Parking – Option 4 has the most and Option 1 has the least.

Price – Option 4 involves the lowest cost and Options 2 and 3 have the highest (although in Option 3 the

proceeds from the sale of Ohio Avenue would offset the cost considerably).

Cost Per Square Foot – Option 1 has the lowest cost per square foot and Option 2 has the highest.

Funds to be Raised – Option 4 would likely require the least amount of fundraising since it is a rental option

and Option 2 has the most funds to be raised.

Per Year if 3 Year Campaign and 5 Year Campaign – This line shows the amount to be raised if a capital

campaign were spread over three years or five years.


Option Summary

Option 1 –

Renovate (Ohio

Ave)

Option 2 – New

Build (Ohio Ave)

Option 3 – Acquisition

(Pontiac/other)

Option 4 –

Share Space @

CCC

Square Footage 10,508 13,783 19,373 NA

Timing

Sanctuary + Overflow

Seating

300 330 350-400* (250

chapel+library)

600

Event Seating @

Round Tables

240 260 250-300 (210 in

chapel+library)

250

Class/Flex Space 7 (10 max) 10 (14 max) 9 (14 max) NA

Parking 20 23 66 150

Price $$ $$$ $$$ $

Project Cost $ $1.9M $3.8M $4.0M NA

Cost PSF $179 $277 $206 NA

Funds to be Raised

after Financing &

Sale

$1.6M $3.5M $2.7 NA

Per Year if 3YR

Campaign

$533K $1.2M $900K NA

Per Year if 5 YR

Campaign

$320K $720K $540K NA


Option 1 – Renovate 6445 E. Ohio Ave.

East Ohio Background: The one-story building that B’nai Havurah calls home was constructed in 1980 as a multi-tenant office building. The congregation has owned and occupied the building for 20 years, and has remodeled the interior at various times to accommodate evolving needs and growth. A portion of the building’s 10,508 square feet has been continually leased since B’nai purchased the building in 1995. The property is approximately .48 acres. The existing building is surrounded by heavily trafficked, drive-through commercial businesses to the east, automotive-related businesses to the north, and a multi-family housing complex to the south and west. The building is bounded by East Ohio to the south and South Locust Street to the west. The building is assumed to be constructed of concrete block exterior walls with a low-sloped, trussed roof structure and a non-structural overhanging fascia. Numerous roof-top units provide heating and cooling to the building. Renovations/Changes: Option 1 evaluates the existing building’s physical capacity to meet the congregation’s needs within its current one-story, 10,508 square foot East Ohio location. The concept plan reconfigures all interior spaces to optimize adjacencies, flow and flexibility while retaining all exterior roof and wall locations. A second floor or “pop-top” was not explored in this option. Since the exterior still reflects its 1980’s medical office beginnings, Option 1 would also include enhancements to the building’s exterior to better reflect the character and spirit of the congregation within. The plan organization carefully considers the congregation’s current and future programmatic needs and desires including a more visible and accessible entrance, enhanced flexibility of interior spaces, a dedicated catering kitchen and additional classrooms to accommodate educational programming for children and adults. Please see the conceptual drawing of Option 1 on page 24.


The following are the primary assumptions of this plan: 1. Plan assumes full removal of existing interior improvements and full reconfiguration of interior spaces. 2. Main entrance is relocated to the east to allow for a new covered entry, easier access from the parking lot. 3. New covered entry at the revised main entry location for increased safety and shelter from the elements. 4. Increased size of sanctuary to comfortably seat 150. 5. Contiguous overflow spaces that double as additional sanctuary seating, classrooms, meeting and event

spaces. Expands sanctuary. 6. Provide a lobby space where people can gather, wait for a meeting or a ride with visibility to the parking lot. 7. Provide a dedicated catering kitchen adjacent to event space for easy access. 8. Provide a centrally located library with additional shelving for collections which also serves as larger meeting

space for movies, education, board meetings. 9. Administrative offices are located together near the front entry for visibility and security. 10. Recaptures leased space to provide seven uniformly- sized classrooms to accommodate 20-25 children. 11. Provide ADA accessible restrooms in a central location along with a family restroom in the classroom wing. 12. All spaces to be designed to ADA standards. 13. Utilize 3-4 parking spaces for small green space, garden/ play space at new front entry. 14. Provide new energy efficient windows and doors throughout. 15. Provide sound attenuating, operable partitions between sanctuary and overflow spaces. 16. Update HVAC configuration for revised plan configuration. 17. Enhance lighting and sound system. 18. Install a sprinkler system for fire suppression. 19. Reduces parking spaces to 20. A shared parking agreement with the adjacent bank or other businesses

could provide additional spaces when the demand is great.


Option 1 – Renovation of 6445 East Ohio Avenue


Project Budget- Option 1

USES OF FUNDS Cost Estimate Cost Per

Square Foot % of Total

Sitework & Demolition $69,304 $6.60 4%

Concrete $23,750 $2.26 1%

Masonry $0 $0.00 0%

Metals $38,585 $3.67 2%

Wood & Plastics $129,958 $12.37 7%

Thermal & Moisture Protection $106,313 $10.12 6%

Doors & Windows $159,500 $15.18 9%

Finishes $213,554 $20.32 12%

Specialties $20,850 $1.98 1%

Equipment $12,000 $1.14 1%

Furnishings $28,300 $2.69 2%

Special Construction $0 $0.00 0%

Conveying Systems $0 $0.00 0%

Mechanical $194,398 $18.50 10%

Electrical $157,620 $15.00 9%

General Conditions $92,331 $8.79 5%

Contractor’s Fee (6%) $74,788 $7.12 4%

Construction Total: $1,321,251 $125.74 71%

Soft & Miscellaneous Costs $230,202 $21.91 12%

Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment $103,750 $9.87 6%

Subtotal: $1,655,203 $157.52 89%

Project Contingency (10%) $165,520 $15.75 9%

Moving (2x) $20,000 $1.90 1%

Temporary Location (6 months) $12,000 $1.14 1%

$1,852,723 $176.32 100%

Total Gross Square Footage: 10,508

SOURCES OF FUNDS Per Square

Foot % of Total

Contributed Capital

Equity from Ohio Avenue $0 $0.00 0%

Capital Campaign $1,552,723 $147.77 84%

Debt

Conventional Financing $300,000 $28.55 16%

$1,852,723 $176.32 100%


The project budget for Option 1 totals $1,852,722 including construction costs, soft costs, furniture/equipment, contingency funds (for unanticipated costs), moving and temporary location rental. Based on the 10,508 square feet of the building at 6445 E. Ohio Ave, this equates to a total cost of $176.32 per square foot. The sources of funds for Option 1 are assumed to be a capital campaign of $1,552,723 and a $300,000 loan based on the debt capacity determined in the Organizational Assessment section. These figures are subject to change once a capital campaign consultant and banker are engaged to determine more precise estimates if this option is selected. It should also be noted that the capital campaign figure is provided to show the total amount needed, but this amount could be raised through pledges over a period of time, for instance two to five years depending on the donor. The uses of funds are listed in the preceding chart. These estimates were generated by Cliff Shumway, a consultant who specializes in project management and owner’s representation. He toured 6445 E. Ohio Ave. to complete his estimates based on the conceptual drawings prepared by Sarah Goldblatt and Daniel Krausz. The largest line items in the construction estimate for Option 1 are: finishes (drywall), mechanical, electrical, and doors/windows. Soft costs include architectural fees, construction and management fees, fundraising expenses, contractor bonds, permits, insurance, legal, and miscellaneous. Furniture, fixtures, and equipment include security system, phone, cabling, projection, sound system, office and classroom furniture, appliances, kitchen storage/cabinets and exterior signage. These items would be subject to review by B’nai Havurah to determine whether existing furniture and equipment could be used instead. A project contingency of 10% was included, which is important in a renovation project for unanticipated costs. It is based on 10% of the total construction, soft costs and furniture/equipment budget. The congregation would need to move twice in Option 1, so moving cost estimate of $20,000 is included ($10,000 for each way). In addition, the timeline projects a 6 month construction period, so temporary rental costs of $2,000 per month are also included for the congregation to relocate during the project. The sources of funds do not include agency assets such as endowment or reserve funds. Any cash available for the project from such sources would reduce the capital campaign amount and/or the loan amount. The loan amount was determined using the analysis on pages 14-15 of this report. It is subject to change and a financial institution representative should be consulted to gain a more accurate and timely estimate of the amount B’nai Havurah could finance. This analysis assumes a reliance on cash flow as opposed to asset value, but financial institutions will vary in how they underwrite this project. We also used a 1.2x debt service coverage ratio, assumed an interest rate of 5.5% and a 20 year amortization, which may also be more conservative than what B’nai Havurah may obtain on the open market.


Cash Flow – Option 1

2% = inflation factor for Income 2% = inflation factor for Expenses 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Income Actual Actual Internal Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected

Program Income $272,567 $292,629 $345,614 $352,526 $359,577 $366,768 $374,104 $381,586 $389,217 Contributed Support $133,540 $143,723 $118,012 $120,372 $122,780 $125,235 $127,740 $130,295 $132,901 Special Events Income $25,661 $35,968 $46,000 $46,920 $47,858 $48,816 $49,792 $50,788 $51,803 Capital Campaign $0 $0 $0 $517,574 $517,574 $517,574 $0 $0 $0 Rentals $25,022 $27,532 $20,794 $20,794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Additional Income/Fundraising $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 Investments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other $45,472 $14,504 $10,181 $10,385 $10,592 $10,804 $11,020 $11,241 $11,465 Total: $502,262 $514,356 $540,601 $1,068,572 $1,098,382 $1,109,198 $602,656 $613,909 $625,387

Expense Payroll $320,268 $305,688 $311,634 $317,867 $324,224 $330,708 $337,323 $344,069 $350,950

Contract Services $0 $39,340 $41,840 $42,677 $43,530 $44,401 $45,289 $46,195 $47,119 Operations/Awards/Grants $54,538 $63,294 $72,165 $73,608 $75,080 $76,582 $78,114 $79,676 $81,270 Awards & Grants $0 $0 $7,896 $8,054 $8,215 $8,379 $8,547 $8,718 $8,892 Facilities & Equipment $65,182 $66,557 $68,623 $69,995 $71,395 $72,823 $74,280 $75,765 $77,281 Facility Project-Renovation - - - - $1,552,722 - - - - Debt Service - - - $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 Capital Reserve ($.75 PSF) $7,881 $7,881 $7,881 $7,881 $7,881 Business Expenses $28,777 $31,195 $20,762 $21,177 $21,601 $22,033 $22,473 $22,923 $23,381 Travel & Meetings $0 $0 $2,288 $2,334 $2,380 $2,428 $2,477 $2,526 $2,577 Total: $468,765 $506,074 $525,208 $559,791 $2,131,108 $589,315 $600,462 $611,832 $623,429

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393 $508,781 -$1,032,726 $519,883 $2,194 $2,077 $1,958 Cumulative Surplus/Deficit: $41,779 $57,172 $565,953 -$466,774 $53,110 $55,304 $57,381 $59,339

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393

Average Monthly Available: $2,007 Add Back Depreciation & Amortization: $9,837 $9,837 $9,837 Assumed Interest Rate: 5.5%

Available for Debt Service: $43,334 $18,119 $25,230 Assumed Term (# months): 240 Available with 1.2 DSC: $36,112 $15,099 $21,025 Assumed Square Footage: 10,508 Average Annual Available: $24,079


Cash Flow: The preceding cash flow projections are based on B’nai Havurah’s historical financial data from 2013-2015. The projection shows the project starting in FY 2016 and construction expenses of $1,552,722 being paid out in FY 2017. The goal of the analysis was to keep net income (“surplus/deficit”) as close to breakeven as possible. A cumulative surplus/deficit is also shown to indicate when there might be timing mismatches between inflows and outflows. The purpose is to highlight the facility project impact on other aspects of the organization’s finances. The projections assume constant income and expense inflators of 2% each to maintain consistency. The line items in blue are detailed below. The projections show the capital campaign proceeds being collected over a three-year period, starting in 2016, through 2018 with $517,574 collected in each year. It should be noted that pledges may not be spread out evenly and some may extend for five years instead of three, which would change this projection but presumably total the same amount of $1,552,722. The model also assumes the loss of the rental income after 2016 when construction starts. Additional income of $40,000 per year is needed starting in FY 2017 to cover the loss of the rental income and the added debt service expense. This may be achieved through recruiting more members, more special event rental income from the improved facility, or more fundraising or capital campaign pledges earmarked to cover debt service or other expenses. All expenses are increased at a rate of 2% per year, per the inflator rate at the top of the chart. Facilities and equipment expenses have not been adjusted in Option 1 except for the inflator rate of 2% because the size of the building has not changed and the operating cost estimates provided by Cliff Shumway approximated what B’nai Havurah is already spending. The categories of expenses may change once the building is renovated, but we have kept the base amounts the same as before the renovation. The projection includes the total cost of the project of $1,552,722 in 2017. Payments will be spread out monthly, but for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that all project costs will be incurred within the 2017 calendar year. An additional line for annual debt service has been added, as well as a repair and replacement (Capital) reserve of $.75 per square foot, which is standard best practice to account for normal repairs. The resulting projections for 2016 – 2021 show B’nai Havurah returning to breakeven after a deficit of $466,744 in 2017 that is recouped in 2018 through capital campaign pledges fulfillment. B’nai Havurah should anticipate this cash flow shortfall and negotiate project payments over a longer period or secure a short-term loan to cover the overage. The final part of the projections shows the calculation of the debt service and is explained in greater detail on pages 14-15. This analysis shows B’nai Havurah can complete Option 1 by anticipating its cash flow needs, making sure capital campaign pledges are secured according to schedule, and by anticipating slightly increased fundraising needs that may be met through a variety of activities.


Timing: The project timeline provided by Cliff Shumway shows a 20 month total project period. The first 13 months would be used for fundraising, as well as building the project team including owner’s representative, design team, construction documents, general contractor, bids, and utility services. Construction is estimated to take six months including installation of furniture, fixtures and equipment. Option 1 - Summary

Pros Cons

High value because it accomplishes most of the design

objectives for the lowest cost.

Parking meets code but could be insufficient if

congregation grows.

Maintains current location and is the most modest in

scope (haimish).

Outdoor space is limited.

Easier to renovate a building you know than one you

haven’t occupied.

Large events will require reconfiguration of social hall

(moving tables and chairs).


Option 2 – New Build

Summary Option 2 explores the impact of demolishing the existing B’nai Havurah building and constructing a new building for the congregation on the existing .48 acre East Ohio site. This concept orients a 13,761 square-foot building to the south to maximize solar exposure and to establish usable green space for a garden or play area adjacent to the front entry. The new-build concept includes an efficient and functional 23-space parking lot with direct access to a highly visible, covered main entry. Once inside, the sanctuary and overflow areas are configured within a one-story portion of the building (with higher ceilings) to emphasize the sacred nature of the space while optimizing adjacencies, flow and flexibility throughout. High quality operable partitions would allow the sanctuary seating to expand from 172 to 332 for large services or events. A large lobby (that could double as a gallery), centrally located library, and dedicated catering kitchen are all organized around the primary sacred spaces for ease of access and use. An adjacent two-story wing could accommodate the congregation’s stated educational and social programming for children and adults with 10 uniformly-sized classrooms plus a teen lounge, a collaborative office arrangement, and enhanced resource access and storage. All new construction would be designed and built to a high level of energy efficiency and per ADA standards throughout.


Option 2 – New Build


Option 2 Project Budget

USES OF FUNDS Cost Estimate Cost Per

Square Foot % of Total

Sitework & Demolition $277,864 $20.16 7%

Concrete $221,454 $16.07 6%

Masonry $167,350 $12.14 4%

Metals $390,967 $28.37 10%

Wood & Plastics $158,577 $11.51 4%


Doors & Windows $203,700 $14.78 5%

Finishes $360,510 $26.16 9%

Specialties $34,300 $2.49 1%

Equipment $12,000 $0.87 0%

Furnishings $47,350 $3.44 1%


Conveying Systems $45,000 $3.26 1%

Mechanical $318,387 $23.10 8%

Electrical $220,528 $16.00 6%


Contractor’s Fee (6%) $166,907 $12.11 4%




Subtotal: $3,514,647 $255.00 92%

Project Contingency (7%) $246,025 $17.85 6%

Moving (2x) $20,000 $1.45 1%

Temporary Location (10 months) $20,000 $1.45 1%

$3,800,672 $275.75 100%


SOURCES OF FUNDS Per Square

Foot % of Total

Contributed Capital

Equity from Ohio Avenue $0 $0.00 0%


Debt

Conventional Financing 300,000 $21.77 8%

$3,800,672 $275.75 100%


The project budget for Option 2 covers the demolition of the building on E. Ohio Ave. and new construction of a 13,783 square foot building with two stories. The budget totals $3,800,672 including demolition, construction costs, soft costs, furniture/equipment, contingency funds, moving, and temporary rental location. This equates to a total cost of $176.32 per square foot. The sources of funds for Option 2 are assumed to be a capital campaign of $3,500,672 and a $300,000 loan based on the debt capacity determined in the Organizational Assessment section. These figures are subject to change once a capital campaign consultant and banker are engaged to determine more precise estimates if this option is selected. It should also be noted that the capital campaign figure is provided to show the total amount needed, but this amount could be raised through pledges over a period of time, for instance two to five years depending on the donor. The uses of funds are listed in the preceding chart. These estimates were generated by cost estimator, Cliff Shumway. As part of his analysis, he toured 6445 E. Ohio Ave. to complete his estimates based on the conceptual drawings prepared by Sarah Goldblatt and Daniel Krausz. The largest line items in the construction estimate for Option 2 are: metals, finishes (drywall), mechanical, and sitework (demolition). Soft costs include architectural fees, construction and management fees, fundraising expenses, contractor bonds, permits, insurance, legal, and miscellaneous. Furniture, fixtures and equipment include security system, phone, cabling, projection, sound system, office and classroom furniture, appliances, kitchen storage/cabinets and exterior signage. These items would be subject to review by B’nai Havurah to determine whether existing furniture and equipment could be used instead. A project contingency was included which is important in a demolition/new-build project for unanticipated costs. It is based on 7% of the total construction, soft costs, and furniture/equipment budget. Note that the contingency percentage is lower than Options 1 and 3 (both 10%) because new construction involves fewer construction risks. The congregation would need to move twice in Option 2, so moving cost estimate of $20,000 is included ($10,000 for each way). In addition, the timeline projects a 6 month construction period, so temporary rental costs of $2,000 per month are also included for the congregation to relocate during the project. The sources of funds do not include agency assets such as endowment or reserve funds. Any cash available for the project from such sources would reduce the capital campaign amount and/or the loan amount. The loan amount was determined using the analysis on pages 14-15 of this report. It is subject to change and a financial institution representative should be consulted to gain a more accurate and timely estimate of the amount B’nai Havurah could finance. This analysis assumes a reliance on cash flow as opposed to asset value, but financial institutions will vary in how they underwrite this project. We also used a 1.2x debt service coverage ratio, assumed an interest rate of 5.5% and a 20 year amortization, which may also be more conservative than what B’nai Havurah may obtain on the open market.



2% = inflation factor for Income 2% = inflation factor for Expenses

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Income Actual Actual Internal Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected

Program Income $272,567 $292,629 $345,614 $352,526 $359,577 $366,768 $374,104 $381,586 $389,217

Contributed Support $133,540 $143,723 $118,012 $120,372 $122,780 $125,235 $127,740 $130,295 $132,901

Special Events Income $25,661 $35,968 $46,000 $46,920 $47,858 $48,816 $49,792 $50,788 $51,803

Capital Campaign $0 $0 $0 $1,166,891 $1,166,891 $1,166,891 $0 $0 $0

Rentals $25,022 $27,532 $20,794 $20,794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Additional Income/Fundraising $0 $0 $0 $0 $57,000 $57,000 $57,000 $57,000 $57,000

Investments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other $45,472 $14,504 $10,181 $10,385 $10,592 $10,804 $11,020 $11,241 $11,465

Total: $502,262 $514,356 $540,601 $1,717,888 $1,764,698 $1,775,514 $619,656 $630,909 $642,387

Expense

Payroll $320,268 $305,688 $311,634 $317,867 $324,224 $330,708 $337,323 $344,069 $350,950

Contract Services $0 $39,340 $41,840 $42,677 $43,530 $44,401 $45,289 $46,195 $47,119

Operations and Awards & Grants $54,538 $63,294 $72,165 $73,608 $75,080 $76,582 $78,114 $79,676 $81,270

Awards & Grants $0 $0 $7,896 $8,054 $8,215 $8,379 $8,547 $8,718 $8,892

Facilities & Equipment ($6.91PSF) $65,182 $66,557 $68,623 $69,995 $88,349 $90,116 $91,918 $93,757 $95,632

Facility Project Renovation -less loan amt - - - - $3,500,672 - - - -

Debt Service - - - $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079

Capital Reserve ($.50 PSF) $6,892 $6,892 $6,892 $6,892 $6,892

Business Expenses and Travel & Mtgs. $28,777 $31,195 $20,762 $21,177 $21,601 $22,033 $22,473 $22,923 $23,381

Travel & Meetings $0 $0 $2,288 $2,334 $2,380 $2,428 $2,477 $2,526 $2,577

Total: $468,765 $506,074 $525,208 $559,791 $4,095,022 $605,618 $617,111 $628,834 $640,791

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393 $1,158,097 -$2,330,324 $1,169,896 $2,545 $2,075 $1,596

Cumulative Surplus/Deficit: $41,779 $57,172 $1,215,269 -$1,115,055 $54,841 $57,386 $59,461 $61,058

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393 Average Monthly Available: $2,000

Add Back Depreciation & Amortization: $9,837 $9,837 $9,837 Assumed Interest Rate: 5.5%

Available for Debt Service: $43,334 $18,119 $25,230 Assumed Term (# months): 240

Available with 1.2 DSC: $36,112 $15,099 $21,025 Assumed Square Footage: 13,783



Cash Flow: Option 2 cash flow projections are based on B’nai Havurah’s historical financial data from 2013-2015. The projection shows the project starting in FY 2016 and construction expenses of $3,800,672 being paid out in FY 2017 ($300,000 in a loan and the remainder through a capital campaign). As in Option 1, this analysis is meant to show how the project costs impact the congregation’s financials. The goal was to keep net income (“surplus/deficit”) as close to breakeven as possible by 2021. The cumulative surplus/deficit indicates when there might be timing mismatches between inflows and outflows. The projections assume constant income and expense inflators of 2% each to maintain consistency. The line items in blue are detailed below. The projections show the capital campaign proceeds being collected over a three year period, starting in 2016, through 2018 with $1,166,891 collected in each year. It should be noted that in reality, pledges may not be spread out evenly and some may extend for five years instead of three, which would change this projection but presumably total the same amount of $3,500,672. The model also assumes the loss of the rental income after 2016 when construction starts. Additional income of $57,000 per year is needed starting in FY 2017 to cover the loss of the rental income, increased facilities expenses (due to larger building), added debt service expense and a capital reserve. This may be achieved through recruiting more members, more special event rental income from the improved facility, more fundraising, or capital campaign pledges earmarked to cover debt service or other expenses. All expenses are increased at a rate of 2% per year, per the inflator rate at the top of the chart. Facilities and equipment expenses have been increased from $69,995 in 2016 to $88,349 in 2017. This jump is due to the larger size of the building. Costs were estimated by Cliff Shumway at $6.91 per square foot, which is similar to what B’nai Havurah has paid in the past. The cash flow projection assumes the project is completed in 2017 and all expenses of are incurred during that period. A line item for annual debt service has been added, as well as a repair and replacement (Capital) reserve of $.50 per square foot, which is standard best practice in a new construction project to account for normal repairs. The resulting projections for 2016 – 2021 show B’nai Havurah returning to breakeven after a deficit of $1,115,055 in 2017 that is recouped in 2018 through capital campaign pledges being met. B’nai Havurah should anticipate this cash flow shortfall and negotiate project payments over a longer period or secure a short-term loan to cover the overage. The final part of the projections shows the calculation of the debt service and is explained in greater detail on pages 14-15. This analysis shows B’nai Havurah can complete Option 2 by anticipating its cash flow needs, making sure capital campaign pledges are secured according to schedule, and by anticipating increased fundraising needs that may be met through a variety of activities. Timing: The project timeline provided by Cliff Shumway shows a 25 month total project period. The first fourteen months would be used for fundraising, as well as building the project team including owner’s representative, design team, construction documents, general contractor, bids, and utility services. Construction is estimated to take ten months including installation of furniture, fixtures, and equipment.


Option 2 - Summary

Pros Cons

Allows for additional space for growth and greater

flexibility.

Cannot utilize the equity in the building to fund this

project.

Maintains current location. Parking meets code but could be insufficient if

congregation grows.

Enables complete re-imagining of the site and building

configuration

Highest per square foot cost.

.


Option 3 - Acquisition

Summary:

Option 3 explores the impact of renovating an existing building to meet the congregation’s programmatic and spiritual needs. For this study, the Facilities Task Force identified a two-story 19,373 square-foot vacant office building on a one acre property in southeast Denver. The building is surrounded by parking, other commercial structures, and some mature trees. By utilizing the bulk of the existing room configurations, the proposed layout of B’nai’s concept program yielded a plan with sufficient space for nearly all desired synagogue functions, including an area large enough to potentially hold larger life cycle events and High Holy Day services along with larger annual events and celebrations. The building interior could be configured to achieve the stated ideal program configuration where 225-250 people could be seated for a service in the “chapel” while the “social hall” could accommodate an equal number for a seated meal without having to turn over the space. The first floor could take advantage of an existing kitchen space adjacent to the sanctuary/ social hall and also accommodate a large library for study, meetings, and movies. An elevator would be needed to provide full access to the second floor. The second floor could be configured to accommodate the entire religious school needs with 9+ classrooms along with space for adult programming and a teen lounge. Sufficient storage areas could be located throughout the building to accommodate book collections and resources. All restrooms would be updated to be ADA compliant. With existing 9’-0” ceilings throughout the building, this plan proposes to raise the ceiling height in the chapel and in a selected area of the sanctuary to enhance the sacred quality of these spaces. These modifications would require structural alterations to the second floor and reduce the occupiable square footage on the second floor. It’s assumed that green space around the building could accommodate garden and play space. No enhancements to the building’s exterior, aside from additional exit doors as required by code, would be made. Since this property was selected as a proxy for the acquisition of any larger building, the following information is meant to provide guidance around design, fit and cost. If the Pontiac property is not available in the future, the concepts identified here could be applied to another location.


Option 3 - Acquisition


Budget – Option 3

USES OF FUNDS Cost Estimate Cost Per Square

Foot % of Total

Acquisition $1,575,000 $81.30 39%

Acquisition-Related Costs $50,000 $2.58 1%

Acquisition Total: $1,625,000 $83.88 41%

Sitework & Demolition $149,517 $7.72 4% Concrete $13,250 $0.68 0%

Masonry $0 $0.00 0%

Metals $94,890 $4.90 2%

Wood & Plastics $77,857 $4.02 2%


Doors & Windows $81,800 $4.22 2%

Finishes $343,077 $17.71 9%

Specialties $27,150 $1.40 1%

Equipment $12,000 $0.62 0%

Furnishings $48,500 $2.50 1%


Conveying Systems $45,000 $2.32 1% Mechanical $271,222 $14.00 7%

Electrical $279,940 $14.45 7%


Contractor’s Fee (6%) $99,924 $5.16 2%




Subtotal: $3,778,430 $195.04 94%

Project Contingency (10%) $215,343 $11.12 5% Moving (1X) $10,000 $0.52 0%

Temporary Location $0 $0.00 0%

$4,003,773 $206.67 100%


SOURCES OF FUNDS Per Square Foot % of Total

Contributed Capital

Proceeds from Sale of Ohio Ave $1,000,000 $51.62 25%


Debt

Conventional Financing 300,000 $15.49 7%

$4,003,773 $206.67 100%


Option 3 involves selling the E. Ohio Ave. site and purchasing and renovating a new property. In this engagement, a 19,373 square foot property at 2015 South Pontiac Way was identified and used as a proxy for this analysis. The Pontiac property was listed for sale for $1,575,000. Since it is unknown whether the Pontiac property will be available for sale when B’nai Havurah is prepared to proceed, it should be used as an example of what is possible at this budget level. The project budget includes acquisition costs, renovation costs, soft costs, furniture/equipment, contingency funds, and moving. The budget totals $4,003,773 which equates to a total cost of $176.32 per square foot. However, Option 3 has the benefit of the sale of the E. Ohio Ave. property, netting an assumed $1 million. This, along with a loan of an estimated $300,000, reduces the needed capital campaign to $2.7 million. The uses of funds are listed in the preceding chart. These estimates were generated by cost estimator Cliff Shumway. As part of his analysis, he toured the Pontiac property and completed his estimates based on the conceptual drawings prepared by Sarah Goldblatt and Daniel Krausz. The largest line items in the construction estimate for Option 3 are: acquisition, metals, finishes, and mechanical. Soft costs include architectural fees, construction and management fees, fundraising expenses, contractor bonds, permits, insurance, legal, and miscellaneous. A project contingency of 7% was included to account for unanticipated costs. Furniture, fixtures and equipment include security system, phone, cabling, projection, sound system, office and classroom furniture, appliances, kitchen storage/cabinets, and exterior signage. These items would be subject to review by B’nai Havurah to determine whether existing furniture and equipment could be used instead. As opposed to Options 1 and 2, in this scenario the congregation would need to move only once at an estimated cost of $10,000. There would be no need for a temporary rental location. Sources of funds include proceeds from the sale of the current property, capital campaign and loan. The sources of funds do not include agency assets such as endowment or reserve funds. Any cash available for the project from such sources would reduce the capital campaign amount and/or the loan amount. The loan amount was determined using the analysis on pages 14-15 of this report.



2% = inflation factor for Income 2% = inflation factor for Expenses

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Income Actual Actual Internal Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected

Program Income $272,567 $292,629 $345,614 $352,526 $359,577 $366,768 $374,104 $381,586 $389,217

Contributed Support $133,540 $143,723 $118,012 $120,372 $122,780 $125,235 $127,740 $130,295 $132,901

Special Events Income $25,661 $35,968 $46,000 $46,920 $47,858 $48,816 $49,792 $50,788 $51,803

Capital Campaign $0 $0 $0 $901,258 $901,258 $901,258 $0 $0 $0

Rentals $25,022 $27,532 $20,794 $20,794 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Additional Income/Fundraising $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000

Investments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Other $45,472 $14,504 $10,181 $10,385 $10,592 $10,804 $11,020 $11,241 $11,465

Total: $502,262 $514,356 $540,601 $1,452,255 $1,542,065 $1,552,881 $662,656 $673,909 $685,387

Expense

Payroll $320,268 $305,688 $311,634 $317,867 $324,224 $330,708 $337,323 $344,069 $350,950

Contract Services $0 $39,340 $41,840 $42,677 $43,530 $44,401 $45,289 $46,195 $47,119

Operations and Awards & Grants $54,538 $63,294 $72,165 $73,608 $75,080 $76,582 $78,114 $79,676 $81,270

Awards & Grants $0 $0 $7,896 $8,054 $8,215 $8,379 $8,547 $8,718 $8,892

Facilities & Equipment $65,182 $66,557 $68,623 $69,995 $117,804 $120,160 $122,564 $125,015 $127,515

Facility Project - Renovation (less loan amt) - - - - $2,703,773 - - - -

Debt Service - - - $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079 $24,079

Capital Reserve ($.75 PSF) $14,530 $14,530 $14,530 $14,530 $14,530

Business Expenses and Travel & Mtgs. $28,777 $31,195 $20,762 $21,177 $21,601 $22,033 $22,473 $22,923 $23,381

Travel & Meetings $0 $0 $2,288 $2,334 $2,380 $2,428 $2,477 $2,526 $2,577

Total: $468,765 $506,074 $525,208 $559,791 $3,335,217 $643,300 $655,394 $667,730 $680,312

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393 $892,464 $1,793,152 $909,581 $7,262 $6,179 $5,075

Cumulative Surplus/Deficit: $41,779 $57,172 $949,636 -$843,516 $66,065 $73,327 $79,506 $84,580

Surplus: $33,497 $8,282 $15,393 Average Monthly Available: $2,000

Add Back Depreciation & Amortization: $9,837 $9,837 $9,837 Assumed Interest Rate: 5.5%

Available for Debt Service: $43,334 $18,119 $25,230 Assumed Term (# months): 240

Available with 1.2 DSC: $36,112 $15,099 $21,025 Assumed Square Footage: 19,373



Cash Flow: Option 3 cash flow projections are based on B’nai Havurah’s historical financial data from 2013-2015. The projection shows the project starting in FY 2016 and acquisition and construction expenses of $4 million being paid in 2017. Due to proceeds from the sale of E. Ohio Ave being available ($1 million) and an assumed loan of $300,000, the remaining capital campaign amount of $2.7 million is raised over three years. As in prior Options, this analysis is meant to show how the project costs impact the congregation’s financials. Income and expenses are increased each year by 2% to reflect inflation. Additional costs are balanced by additional fundraising to bring the cash flow to breakeven by 2021, indicated by the surplus/deficit line item. The cumulative surplus/deficit indicates when there might be timing mismatches between inflows and outflows. The line items in blue are detailed below. The timing of Option 3 will be the most challenging of the three options because B’nai Havurah must buy one property, sell one property and undertake a capital campaign at the same time. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the timing follows a simultaneous process that allows the congregation to secure the property while it begins a capital campaign. The campaign proceeds are spread over a three year period, with $901,258 collected in each year. It should be noted that in reality, pledges may not be spread out evenly and some may extend for five years instead of three, which would change this projection but presumably total the same amount of $2.7 million. The model also assumes the loss of the rental income in 2017 when the congregation moves to the new location. For the purposes of this analysis, we are not including rental income of excess space, although a 19,373 square foot building would likely afford the option to sublease some of its space. Additional income of $100,000 per year is needed starting in FY 2017 to cover the loss of the rental income, increased facilities expenses (due to larger building), added debt service expense, and a capital reserve. This may be achieved through recruiting more members, more special event rental income from the improved facility, more fundraising, or capital campaign pledges earmarked to cover debt service or other expenses. Facilities expenses increase from $69,995 in 2016 to $117,804 in 2017. This jump is due to doubling the size of the building. The cash flow projection assumes the project is completed in 2017 and all expenses of are incurred during that period. A line item for annual debt service has been added, as well as a repair and replacement (Capital) reserve of $.75 per square foot, which is standard best practice to account for normal repairs. The resulting projections for 2016 – 2021 show B’nai Havurah returning to breakeven after a deficit of $843,516 in 2017 that is recouped in 2018 through capital campaign pledges being met. B’nai Havurah should anticipate this cash flow shortfall and negotiate project payments over a longer period or secure a short-term loan to cover the overage. The final part of the projections shows the calculation of the debt service and is explained in greater detail on pages 14-15. This analysis shows B’nai Havurah can complete Option 3 by anticipating its cash flow needs, making sure capital campaign pledges are secured according to schedule and by anticipating increased fundraising needs that may be met through a variety of activities.


Timing: The project timeline provided by Cliff Shumway shows a 20 month total project period. The first thirteen months would be used for fundraising, as well as building the project team including owner’s representative, design team, construction documents, general contractor, bids and utility services. Construction is estimated to take six months including installation of furniture, fixtures, and equipment. Option 3 - Summary

Pros Cons

New location with twice as much square footage would

give B’nai Havurah a wide range of options in terms of

layout and accommodating larger numbers in the

sanctuary and social hall.

Ongoing operating costs double.

Additional parking. Much of the space may be idle for significant time

periods.

Room for considerable growth. If Pontiac Way property becomes unavailable, then

B’nai Havurah will need to identify and compete in a

real estate market with escalating prices.

Current structural column locations may limit flexibility

of use in some spaces.


Option 4

Option 4 is to share space with Central Christian Church, an organization that B’nai Havurah has had a positive relationship with in the past. Central Christian Church (CCC) asked B’nai Havurah to consider sharing space when they heard this Feasibility Study was underway. In the past, B’nai Havurah has successfully held High Holy Day services at CCC. This is a large, 60,000 square foot facility that is underutilized for most of the week. As part of this engagement, our team toured CCC and compiled a list of questions based on B’nai Havurah’s program schedule, religious school calendar and current space usage. These questions were sent to CCC in early December. Pastor Canaan Harris responded with the caveat that CCC’s governing body needs to investigate our questions in greater detail before firm commitments can be made. The following is a summary of his comments: - Scheduling – CCC would be looking for firm commitment around timing of space usage to accommodate all users. They suggest B’nai Havurah could use the facility on Saturdays until noon and Sundays after 2pm. - Dedicated Space – CCC needs to look into specifically which rooms would be soley used by B’nai Havurah, including some areas that need to finished and some that are currently used for storage. To meet B’nai Havurah’s needs around classroom space, some classrooms would need to be shared with CCC, meaning that B’nai Havurah wouldn’t be able to permanently store materials/toys. - Parking – Parking would be difficult if both congregations were using the space simultaneously. For this reason, CCC is most interested in a schedule in which use would not overlap. - Costs – Regular monthly fees or rental terms were not indicated in the information we received. CCC would need to further deliberate on this but is positively inclined to work out a beneficial arrangement. Also, the cost of upgrading or improving the space to be used by B’nai Havurah would need to be discussed. This especially applies to the basement level and kitchen that need significant upgrades to be functional. In summary, CCC is interested in pursuing this option but did not have time to gather answers to all our questions. This option needs more research to determine whether it is viable or not.


Other Considerations:

As B’nai Havurah moves forward with its facility project, there are several considerations that should be part of the ongoing process:

Competing capital campaigns – NCN and DSS are completing a nonprofit space survey that shows an upturn in capital campaigns as nonprofits face an increasingly expensive rental real estate market. During the recession, many capital campaigns were deferred and now many are being re-activated. The Jewish Community Center - Denver recently announced a $50 million capital campaign. Various campaigns may or may not impact a B’nai Havurah campaign, but a scan of competing demands on financial resources is important.

Alternate sites – this analysis makes assumptions about certain locations that may or may not be available when B’nai Havurah is ready to proceed. Consideration of alternative sites may be necessary, and this may involve re-assessing the timeline for various options. It is our goal that this analysis will provide a framework for evaluating other options not considered here.

Shared space – if B’nai Havurah chooses an option that contains space that can be leased to others on a regular basis, we have additional resources we can provide to support this arrangement if desired. Any facility should be considered for its flexible use of space. As B’nai Havurah has generated rental income in the past, this is an approach that can be beneficial on many levels. We recommend first satisfying B’nai Havurah’s needs in selecting a facility, but are happy to provide assistance at a later date if shared space is something B’nai Havurah decides to pursue.

Recommendations We have spent five months getting to know B’nai Havurah and its facility needs and desires. Our hope is that this report helps the congregation move forward in a unified way to achieve a facility that best reflects this dynamic, growing community. We have presented information on four options for your consideration, including conceptual designs, cost estimates, and financial models. Recommendations for next steps include: (1) agreement on a deadline for making a final decision – this will provide accountability and allow for transparency to the entire congregation; (3) engaging the congregation in an authentic process for gathering input for the decision-making process (suggested Communications Plan included); and (4) researching a Campaign Consultant, Appraiser, Banker, and Owner’s Representative for the next phase of the project. B’nai Havurah is well-poised to take the next steps in this process: commit to a facility option, raise the funds needed to complete the project, and position its community for the future.

Conclusion

NCN believes that B’nai Havurah is poised for the next stage of its history. It is a growing congregation with

increasing financial sustainability. There is a consistent desire to develop a facility that better represents the

community in terms of its aesthetics and functionality. We have presented the opportunities and challenges for four

different options, including design concepts, cost estimates, and financial models. B’nai Havurah now has the

information to collectively discern which option best meets all of its needs and to move forward and create a new

physical space that best reflects the community.


Appendix I: Facilities Task Force and Participants in Focus Groups and Informational Meeting Facilities Task Force

Daniel Taubman, Chair Rob Baumgarten Gail ben Ezra Holly Greenfield Joel Judd Dan Prendergast Ben Honigman Emily Roet Jamie Stone Joyce Thorn Howard Tishler Marilyn Winokur Staff: Rabbi Evette Lutman Staff: Becky Epstein, Executive Director

Informational Meeting and Focus Group Participants:

Shari Abramowitz Hal Aqua Gail ben Ezra Guido Bender Marty Caplan Julie DuPree Barbara Ellman Becky Epstein Liz Evans John Freed Jordan Forstot Risa Friedman Steve Galpern Marla Gedel Michael Goodman Dave Gordon Mike Hudson

Joe Klocek Leah Klocek Marc Krasner Robert Kruger Sheila Lehrburger Ruth Lurie Rabbi Evette Lutman Pat Madsen Sherry Martin Patrick Martin Scott Merenstein Maggie Miller Liane Morrison Priscilla Press Alyson Probst Sandie Radetsky Banks Emily Roet Miriam Rosenblum Glenda Schumann Carla Sciaky Shawna Sherman-Morgan Kate Shiroff Jen Stier Maya Stone Jamie Stone Greg Tamkin Dan Taubman Howard Tishler Ed Towbin Bobbie Towbin Linda Trebitiz Jennifer Wiener Marilyn Winokur


Appendix II: Informational Meeting Findings During the Informational Meeting, we facilitated an interactive group exercise to generate input from the participants. The following reflects the group’s responses.

A building not so large that space will not be used. Space needs to be flexible. (3x)

Accessibility Accessibility for all members

Accommodating

Adaptable, Expandable Rooms (3x)

Aesthetic Appeal (3x) Airy (2x) Artwork (2x)

Beautiful for Life Events Bigger Kitchen – Functional Space for Caterers to Set Up (3x)

Calm Colorful

Comfortable Seating/ Flexible Seating (2x)

Comfy Communal Spaces Completely new HVAC

Entrance with Seating Area

Full kitchen with room for classes

Functional Full kitchen with large, warm eating area that can open to accommodate 100+

Good acoustics (4x)

Good conversation, good food

Good/Natural Lighting (10x)

Green (2x) Higher Ceiling in Sanctuary

Indoor/Outdoor Space, Central Courtyard (5x)

Intentional design in the building

Inviting Kitchen – Accommodates Meat or Dairy

Large, Welcoming Entrance

Larger sanctuary (2x) Many people joyful about being Jewish and dedicated to Reconstruction; Recon Joy

More accessible use to expand classrooms in religious school

More Open Site for Building

New Space that’s Open No fan freezing my head No sun in my eyes

Not Huge Parents and Kids Together

Participatory Set-Up People in Circle or Facing, Non-Hierarchic

Photos Place to Walk Pop the Top Quiet

Reading lounge Sanctuary that inspires awe

Sanctuary with lighting that backs up to double use social hall

Seating in a Lounge

Silent Radiant Heat Simple not Pretentious Space that is Aesthetically Inviting

Spacious Feeling, but not Glitzy or Oversize

View of Outdoors/Connection to Nature/Shade (6x)

Warm (3x) Welcoming


Appendix III: Communications Plan

In order to maintain momentum, secure buy-in across the congregation, and establish a framework for next steps, we

recommend the FTF implement a communications plan to share this feasibility report and gather feedback. We

propose the following plan for your consideration, and encourage you to edit it as needed. It is based on a

framework used with previous clients, as well as input from FTF members.

Plan Goals

Members understand the findings of the feasibility study

Members have their questions answered and feel that their input is being taken into consideration

Members have access to needed information

FTF/Board hear and integrate member input and feedback about the options

Plan Metrics

Page on website that captures all relevant facility planning information; could be password protected for member access only

6 informational meetings in geographically varied locations

Face-to-face participation with 60% of adult membership

Written summary of each session submitted to FTF/Board

Process

This communication plan is comprised of two parts – new page on B’nai website to store/share facility information and in-person sessions to share and solicit input.

The webpage does not need to be fancy, but should include a few key components. Depending on the desires of the FTF and Board, this page could be public or password protected for access only by members. Information on the page should include:

Process to-date

Reports and relevant documentation

Opportunities to connect (informational meeting dates, etc.)

Decision-making process/timeline and next steps

The Facilities Task Force will facilitate 6 informational meetings over the course of two months. In order to accommodate the different schedules and geographic locations of the membership, these meetings will be hosted at a range of locations and times. Locations will include a mix of community-based locations, the B’nai facility, and members’ homes (where possible)

In order to achieve the metric 60% of adult membership participate, each session will target attendance of 40 people. One strategy to achieve this level of participation could be to identify 2-3 havurot to co-host each session, alongside 3-4 members of the FTF. These co-hosts could help the FTF in the facilitation of each session if they are briefed on the role ahead of time.

In order to streamline the administration of these sessions, it will be helpful to post all 6 dates on the B’nai website and in the community spaces at the facility. To manage the RSVP process, we recommend Google forms as a simple, free tool to create a survey link for members to submit their RSVP. This could also help in emailing reminders to confirmed participants ahead of each session.

We recommend distributing the feasibility study report or a summary document to all members. Ahead of each informational session, send or resend the document and encourage participants to come to the session prepared to discuss the information.


Much like the approach used for the focus groups, we recommend following the same agenda for each session in order to ensure consistency for all participants. Suggested agenda:

Welcome from havurot hosts (if using) and FTF/Board

Brief (10-15 min) presentation of feasibility findings by FTF

Statement of goals for info session

Small group (5-7 people; 20-25 minutes) conversations using question prompts o If possible, each group will have a “host” to help facilitate o Question prompts will be provided to each participant o Each group will designate a note taker to capture the comments o Use Fist-to-Five o Proposed prompts:

What about these options are you most excited about? What surprised you about the findings? What, if anything, would you like more information about? What additional questions do you have? Which option would yield a facility that best represents and meets the needs of B’nai

Havurah in 2017-2027 What would you like the Board to consider as it makes a decision about a new facility

option for B’nai Havurah?

Large group debrief – each group reports out, feedback captured on flip charts

Wrap up, summary, and next steps by FTF/Board

Following the 6 informational sessions, all feedback should be compiled and shared with the Board. It will also be important to share a summary of the findings to all members (or at minimum those who participated in the sessions), along with a clear statement of what the Board will be doing with the input. This will ensure that everyone knows that their input was valued and integrated into the decision-making process.

Next Steps

Once this process has been completed and the Board takes a vote on next steps, it will be important to develop a communications strategy for the next phase of the process. This will likely include additional digital or print communications that coordinate with any fundraising and planning processes.


Appendix IV: Space Allocation

B’nai Havurah –Space allocation comparison between existing building and building options 1,2,3

SPACE Existing SF B’nai Remodel

B’nai new-build

Pontiac Notes

Sanctuary 1280 1420 1520 3185 Seats 150 theater style/ 120 at 10’ round tables

Lobby/ Gallery 0 633 580 693 Doubles as pre-function space for 85-100 or lounge/ waiting area

Social Hall/ Overflow Combined with kitchen

@645=1290 2@635=1270 Included in Sanctuary

Seats 80 each/ 160 total theater style/ 120 at 10’ round tables

Staff Offices

Executive Director 122 150 120 160

School Director 160 120 120 127

Administrative Support 149 120 110 120

Music Director 0 0 158 0

Rabbi’s Office 152 205 180 190

Reception/ waiting 0 185 180 175

Work room/copy 96 100 162 200

Secure file storage 0 25 In work room In work room

Classrooms 2518 (6 classrooms)

2732 (7 classrooms)

3332 (10

classrooms)

4,341 (8classrooms +1 Flex

classroom)

Seats 20-25 per classroom/ built-in storage closet in each classroom

Library 338 476 475 625 20 at conference table, 50 seated theater style

Kitchen 683 400 445 490 Dedicated catering kitchen/ not full kosher kitchen

Chapel 250 shared shared 1610 In unused classroom or library

Teacher resource room 251 145 214 216 Storage only, no office space

Board/ Conference Room

In library In library In library Library or overflow space when not in use

Restrooms 235 370+50 720 430 Fully accessible


SPACE Existing SF B’nai Remodel

B’nai new-build

Pontiac Notes

Coat Room 0 0 0 0 Mobile for large events

Volunteer Space 0 Overflow or library

Overflow or library

In flex classroom

Library or overflow space when not in use

parent learning space-Sun AM

0 Overflow In classroom or overflow

In flex classroom

Library or overflow space when not in use

Teen Lounge 0 0 374 370 Extra classroom if available

Parent Lounge 0 0 0 In flex classroom

Lobby seating areas

Project Space (Tikkun Olam)

0 Overflow In classroom or overflow

In flex classroom

Overflow space when not in use

Storage-tables/ chairs 0 200 270 235 Dedicated chair/ table storage

Storage-book collections

363 116 In resource room

240 Additional book storage space in expanded library

Storage-Kitchen 0 In kitchen In kitchen In kitchen

IT/ AV Equip.Rm In mech/elect In elect. 40 In copy/storage

Mechanical/ Elect 50 67 60x2=120 50

Janitor closet 36 31 37x2=74 2x18=36

Lease/ expansion space

1720 (2030?) 0 0 865

Total Net Square Feet 8403 8835 10,464 14,358 SF

Bldg Gross Sq. Feet 10,508 10,508 13,761 19,373

Efficiency (net: gross) 80% 84% 76% 74%

Note: Lease space within current B’nai building was noted as 2,030 square feet. A take-off from a CAD drawing

generated from an existing floor plan suggested it.


Appendix V: Seating Comparison

B’nai Seating comparison for Existing vs. Options 1, 2, and 3

SPACE Existing SF B’nai remodel

B’nai New-build

Pontiac Pontiac Notes: Pontiac calculations reflect the fact that there are larger spaces that can have flexible programming

Sanctuary (sq. feet) 1280 1420 1520 *3,185 *For large events, no fixed seating

Theater style seating in sanctuary only

130 150 172 350-400 *could potentially meet High Holiday needs

Social Hall/ Overflow (sq. feet)

Combined with kitchen

645 each/ 1290 total

635/ 1270 total

*1600 *Could be used as a daily chapel or social hall: Seats 178 theater style/ 150 at 10’ rounds

Seating in overflow theater style

N/A 150 160 *72 In library

*additional seats in adjacent library space with operable partition

Sanctuary+ Overflow theater style

N/A 300 332

*178+72= 250

*Chapel +Library seating –theater style

At 10’ rounds Sanctuary only

84* *At 6’ long banquet tables (40 in kitchen)

120 140 *260-300 *Large Sanctuary space could double as event space. Seating number accounts for space for a dance floor,

etc.

At 10’ rounds In Overflow

N/A 120 120 *60 *in library space adjacent to Social Hall/ Chapel

At 10’ rounds Overflow+ Sanctuary

N/A 240 260 *210 *Social Hall +Library at 10’ rounds

Chapel 250 0 0 *See Social Hall above

*Social hall could be used as daily chapel space

Lobby 0 633 580 693 Doubles as pre-function space for 85-100 or lounge/ waiting area


Appendix VI: Seating Diagrams

Option 1


Option 2


Option 3


Appendix VII: Professional Acknowledgements

Cost Estimation/Owner’s Representative Cliff Shumway Construction Management & Consulting, LLC 7025 South Quince Circle Centennial, CO 80112 303-290-9655 Office 720-363-9929 Cell [email protected] Architecture/Code Evaluation Daniel Krausz, AIA, LEED, AP Design/Develop Architecture LLC 245 S. Benton Street Lakewood, CO 80226 303-237-2755 [email protected] Broker/Real Estate Valuation Steve Letman Consultus Asset Valuation 303-770-2420 Erinn Torres Senior Vice President Broadstreet Realty 1440 Market Street, Suite 100 Denver CO 80202 303-825-1735 x3000 [email protected]

Finance Marc Spritzer and Derek Peters CoBiz Financial [email protected] [email protected] Capital Campaign Consultants Robin Chalecki (303) 521-0306 [email protected] Ann Roecker Roecker Consulting Group LLC Zim Consulting 3600 S. Yosemite St, Suite 600 Denver 80237 [email protected] 303-226-5478









Appendix VIII: Code Study

Brief Zoning and Code Analysis for B’nei Havurah 12/14/2015

6445 E OHIO AVE.

Size of zone lot is approximately 137ftX150ft. South property line appears to be very close to sidewalk edge.

West property line appears to be 3ft from sidewalk edge. North property line appears to be 3-5ft south of

building north edge. East property line appears to be 4ft west of site retaining wall. These are NOT surveyed

dimensions, but these do strongly suggest that a survey is necessary.

APPLICABLE ZONING ORDINANCE

Zone: S-CC-3X

Religious Assembly, Day Care, and Community Center are allowed.

0’ setback being that lot is not adjacent to a protected district.

There is a limitation if used for education, like an elementary school.

For Religious Assembly and Community Center:

o Vehicle parking requirement: .5/1000sf

o Bicycle parking requirement: 1/10,000sf

For Day Care:

o Vehicle parking requirement: 1/1000sf

o Bicycle parking requirement: 1/10,000sf

APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES

Denver is adopting the IBC 2015 edition.

EXISTING BUILDING

o Current building is presently not sprinklered.

o If non-sprinklered, corridors are required to have a fire-resistance-rating of 1 hour (Table 1020.1).

o In a non-sprinklerd building, where two exits are required, they shall be placed a distance apart not

less than one-half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal of the building or area to be

served measured in a straight line between them. When equipped with a sprinkler, the requirement

is reduced to one-third. If the interior exit stairways are connected by a 1-hour fire-resistance-rated

corridor, then the required exit separation shall be measured along the shortest direct line of travel

within the corridor (1007.1.1).

o Exit Access travel Distance if non-sprinklered is 200ft (Table 1017.2).

NEW BUILDING OR CHANGE OF USE

o Fire sprinkler system required.

o A 2nd set of stairs is required to be provided for the 2nd floor (Table 1006.3.1).

o If 2nd floor is used for a B occupancy (Business), 2nd set of stairs is not required if the occupant load

is not more than 29 and the maximum common path of egress is 75ft (Table 1006.3.2(2)).


ELEVATOR REQUIREMENTS AT 2ND FLOOR

o If primary function is on 2nd floor, accessible route is required (i.e. elevator).

o If identical primary function is provided on the 1st floor, can negotiate with city for an exemption. (“If

a service or facility is provided in an area that is not accessible, the same service or facility shall be

provided on an accessible level and shall be accessible.” 1108.2.1)

If 2nd floor is limited to <3000sf, elevator is not required. (“An accessible route is not required to stories and

mezzanines that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet, and are located above and below

accessible levels.” IBC 2015 1104.4 Exception 1)


Appendix IX: Option 1 Cost Estimates








Appendix X: Option 2 Cost Estimates








Appendix XI: Option 3 Cost Estimates





