Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFINAL Rec and Aquatic info CITY OF BOZEMAN RECREATION DEPARTMENT PO BOX 1230 BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59771 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR A RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY OCTOBER 2011 The City of Bozeman (City) is seeking the services of a highly qualified consultant to determine the recreation/aquatic needs of the City, conduct a feasibility study to determine the capacity of the City to meet those needs. Separate sealed Requests for Proposals (RFP) for RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY will be received by the City Clerk, City Hall; 121 N. Rouse Avenue, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 until 2:00 p.m., local time, Tuesday, November 1, 2011. Please write the name of the proiect on the front of the sealed RFP. The physical address is: City Clerk's Office, Suite 102, City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715. The mailinm address is: City Clerk's Office, Suite 102, City Hall, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, Montana, 59771. RFP's must be received before 2 p.m. Tuesday, November 1, 2011. Original RFP packages must be submitted—no faxed RFP's or electronic RFP's will be accepted. For Overview and Scope of Project, please go to www.bozeman.net and select the Bids and Projects Icon on the left. For further assistance, please contact the City Clerk's office at (406) 582-2320. Each entity submitting under this notice shall include a provision affirming in writing the submitting entity will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability in the exercise of contract should it be awarded to that entity. Each entity submitting under this notice shall also recognize in writing the eventual contract will contain a provision prohibiting discrimination as described above and this prohibition on discrimination shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the Contractor's employees and to all subcontracts. The City of Bozeman reserves the right to reject any and all bids, and to waive any informality in the bids received. The CITY OF BOZEMAN is required to be an Equal Opportunity Employer. Page 1 of 8 DATED at Bozeman, Montana, this 12Ih day of October, 2011. Stacy Ulmen, CMC Bozeman City Clerk Published in the Legal Section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle Sunday, October 16 Sunday, October 23 Page 2 of 8 Overview: The City's Parks and Recreation Department serves the Bozeman community by providing recreation/aquatic facilities, and recreation/aquatic programs. In addition to this the department also provides facility rentals, and parks and cemetery development and maintenance. The department provides activities to approximately 60,000 citizens from the city and surrounding area. This represents approximately 75% of the Gallatin County population. Existing City Aquatic facilities include one indoor 50 meter pool, the Swim Center which houses our aquatics staff, and one outdoor pool, Bogert Pool. City Recreation facilities include two buildings; Lindley Center, and Beall Center. Lindley Center has an area of 2,200 ft2, and Beall Center, which houses our recreation staff, has an area of 2,300 ft2. The recreation buildings also serve as rental facilities for the community. A list of programs for both recreation and aquatics can be found at http://bozemandailychronicle.com/app/special_sections/fallRecGuide_081211/. In December, 2007, the City Commission adopted the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails (PROST) plan. This plan can be viewed at http://www.bozeman.net/Smarty/files/78/78215fl9-19b9-44cO-8fd9-7df9O68aebeO.pdf. In the PROST Plan Survey, an indoor recreation center was the 5"' most mentioned response to the question "what additional recreational facility would you like to see developed in our community?" Swimming pools were the 3rd most mentioned response to the same question and the 4`h most mentioned response to "In your opinion, what recreation activity and reiated facility should be the highest priority for the City?" The Swim Center was constructed in 1974, and is best suited for upper-level (level 3+) learn to swim classes, life guard training, youth-oriented water aerobics, lap swimming and swim teams. The Swim Center is used by the high school swim team and for senior water exercising, however, it lacks separate water space for senior programming with appropriate temperature control and a family recreation area. Recent and on-going renovations include HVAC, lighting, and filtration systems. The City has made every effort to make the facility available to as many community groups as possible, but water time and space are limited. The City's outdoor pool, Bogert Pool, was built in 1939 and remodeled in 1974. The remodel changed the configuration of the pool, and did not make any changes or modifications to the bathhouse. Currently the pool meets the capacity of 350 patrons every day of the season,with patrons waiting outside to gain entrance once someone leaves. The pool has had a recent facility condition survey completed on it, but the survey falls short of identifying all of the issues, such as boiler replacement and bathhouse upgrades. A new regenerative filtration system was installed this fall (2011) and gutters and shell were scheduled for replacement in FY 2012. It was determined that the feasibility study should be completed prior to additional repairs and upgrades to the pools and therefore the gutter and shell replacement has been postponed pending the outcome of the feasibility study and determination of both short and long-term approaches to providing aquatics programming within the community. Page 3 of 8 As recommended by the staff and Commission during the City's budget process, a study will be performed by a qualified consulting firm to perform an analysis of existing recreation/aquatics facilities, programs and demographic data and provide recommendations for the current and future recreational and aquatic facilities and programming needs of the Bozeman area. Requirements for Proposal Proposals must include the following. • A letter of interest signed by a principal of your firm with a statement as to the availability of the firm to complete the study within a specified stated period, the firm's current workload, and a statement of the firm's financial stability. This letter should include a brief history of the firm. • Provide a narrative describing the firm's unique qualifications for this project; including examples of similar projects completed. • Submit resumes of the personnel who will be assigned to this project. • Identify the project manager and describe the extent of this person's involvement and availability during the project. • Describe past experience and approach to soliciting community input, conducting public workshops, and incorporating community and stakeholder participation into preliminary architectural and engineering services for similar projects • List a minimum of three completed projects similar to the one described in this RFP, including references, costs, and provide examples of critical information incorporated within these studies. • Provide any additional information which may be of value during the selection process. • A completed and signed City of Bozeman Non-Discrimination Affirmation Form (REQUIRED) Qualifications Based Selection Process Determination of the most highly qualified respondent(s) will be based on the competence and qualifications documented in the proposal and any follow-up interviews conducted by the City. Selection will be based on the best interests of the City. This request for proposal will neither commit the City to commence with any project, nor in any way limit the discretion of the City in selecting a firm or in making any future modifications to the scope of work under this proposal, before or during the life of the project, should it be undertaken. The City will not pay any costs associated with the preparation or submission of qualifications and/or presentations and/or interviews. Scope of Work Page 4 of 8 The scope of work performed by the selected firm will include, but not be limited to, collection, review, and analysis of the data necessary for the completion of a comprehensive Feasibility Study and Needs Assessment. Consultant will also provide recommendations, including justification, for the City of Bozeman regarding recreation/aquatics facility and programming needs. Recommendations will be based on community and stakeholder input, cost/benefit analysis, financial capacity of the City and similar criteria. The City is asking for each proposer to prepare a more detailed scope that incorporates your expertise, knowledge and project understanding in order to accomplish the work in the most productive, thorough, and cost effective manner possible. The following scope of services has been developed as a guide. Project Overview: • Prgiect review and update • Identify constraints and parameters • Meet with project team Market Analysis: • Service area identification • Demographic characteristics/community profile • Review of existing city aquatic/recreation facilities/programs/services • Competitive market analysis • Comparison with national,regional and local participation statistics • Market segment determination and analysis Citizen Participation Plan: • Random statistically valid survey of potential users • Determine desired data needs • Conduct community meetings • Conduct stakeholder interviews • Conduct focus group sessions • Compile and interpret all information received Identify Programming: • Project component recommendation/prioritization • Development of program statement consensus • Assess ability to accommodate ADA programming needs • Operating structure and parameters Site Analysis: • Identify all possible sites using geographical identification • Analyze each site • Recommend a site preference Page 5 of 8 • Site limitations/opportunities • Site prep/infrastructure costs Project Capital Cost Estimate: • Building construction and equipment costs • Total project cost estimate • Annual O&M cost estimates Identify Partnerships: • Identification of potential partnerships • Determination of realistic partnering opportunities and cost/benefit analysis Project Funding Analysis: • Identify possible funding sources • Determine possible funding scenario Final Report and Presentation: • Written final report • Conceptual drawings • Presentation of report Page 6 of 8 Discrimination in the performance of any contract awarded under this [notice/invitation] on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability is prohibited. This prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the awarded entity's employees and to all subcontracts. Every entity submitting under this [notice/invitation] must sign and return the required affirmation. AFFIRMATION [name of entity submitting] hereby affirms it will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability in the performance of work performed for the city of Bozeman, Montana, if a contract is awarded to it, and also recognizes the eventual contract, if awarded, will contain a provision prohibiting discrimination as described above and that this prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the [name of entity submitting] employees and to all subcontracts it enters into in performance of the agreement with the City of Bozeman, Montana. Signature Printed name of person authorized to sign on behalf of the respondent Page 7 of 8 QUALIFICATIONS EVALUATION CRITERIA Respondents to requests for proposals shall be evaluated on the following criteria and the requirements of 18-8-201 et seq. MCA with the selection committee choosing, in its opinion, the most qualified firm to provide the services required for the proposed project. —30% -- The qualifications of professional personnel to be assigned to the project. —30% -- Related experience on similar projects; —10% -- Capability to meet project time and budget requirements; 5% -- Location of firm in relation to project; —10% -- Present and projected workloads; and —15% -- Recent and current work for the City of Bozeman. The selection of finalists to be interviewed will be made by a selection committee representing the City of Bozeman. The selection will be based on an evaluation of the written responses to the request for proposals. Award will be made following contract negotiations to the most qualified firm at a price which the City determines to be fair and reasonable taking into account the estimated value of services to be rendered, as well as the scope, complexity and professional nature thereof. If the City is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the firm initially selected at a price the agency deems to be fair and reasonable, negotiations with that firm will be formally terminated and the agency shall select another firm, in accordance with 18-8-204 MCA, and continue until an agreement is reached or the process is terminated. All proposals must be submitted complete and contain the information required as stated in the "Request for Proposals." Page 8 of 8 Stacy Ulmen From: Jamie Saitta Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 3:50 PM To: Stacy Ulmen Cc: Ron Dingman; Dan McCarthy Subject: Feasibility Study Attachments: Firm List.xlsx Stacy, Attached is the list of firms that have submitted bids for the Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study. Let me know if you need any other information. Thanks, Jamie 1 Firm Name MacArthur, Means&Wells,Architects, PC The Sports Management Group CTA Architects Engineers Brannon Corp Civil Engineers &Aquatic Consultants with Intrinksik Architecture Inc. Sandholm Architects Hunden Strategic Partners RKG Associates, Inc. Sink Combs Dethlefs, Ballard King Associates, Councilman Hunsaker Tink One Comma Q& Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture OLC Architecture with Ballard King Associates 110% LLC V 9� ' Commission Memorandum CO. REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Ron Dingman, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Award of contract for Recreation/Aquatics Facility Feasibility Study MEETING DATE: January 23, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with Comma-Q Architecture, Inc. to conduct a recreation/aquatics feasibility study. BACKGROUND: On September 12,2011 the City Commission directed staff to move Capital Improvements Project(CIP)number GF136, Community Aquatic and Recreation Center Feasibility Study(Study), from FYI to FYI 2. The project was budgeted for$65,000 and described in the CIP as "A study to include: The analysis of existing facilities,programs, and demographic data, and recommendations fir the current and future,facilities needs of the Bozeman area. The study shall include:survey,public meetings, advertising, analyzing existing aquatics and recreational facilities, demographic analysis, market analysis, and the development of recommendations. " Staff has advertised for Request for Proposals (RFP)and chosen Comma-Q Architecture, Inc., in association with Barker, Rinker, and Seacat Architecture(BRS),to perform the feasibility study. Comma-Q, BRS, and staff have met and developed a scope of work(included in the contract attachment)and negotiated a cost for their services based on that scope of work. The scope of work includes an inventory and analysis of Bozeman's existing recreational and aquatic facilities and programs,market analysis, meetings with stakeholders and potential partners, meetings with the public, and a statistically valid survey. Through the process we will look for and evaluate opportunities to partner with other public and private entities in the provision of future services(i.e.; School District,YMCA, Deaconess Hospital, Gallatin County). Meetings with stakeholders and strategic partners will take place early in the process to insure the inclusion of any desired expansion of the scope of work agreed upon by the City and potential partners. Any additions to the scope of work would not alter the purpose or intent of the study and be treated as an amendment to the contract,paid for by outside sources. The intent of the study is to provide information that will allow the City to make more informed decisions about future recreation and aquatics facility options. The study will measure public opinion of our current services and facilities and ask what future recreational amenities the public desires. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: The contract is within the amount budgeted as directed by previous Commission action on September 12, 2011. Attachments: Contract with Comma-Q which includes the Project Scope of'work and hourly rate schedule Report compiled on: January 12, 2012 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 12th day of January, 2012, by and between the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Montana, 121 North Rouse Street, Bozeman, Montana 59771, hereinafter referred to as "City," and, Comma-Q Architecture, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Consultant." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency whereof being hereby acknowledged,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Purpose: City agrees to hire Consultant as an independent contractor to perform for City services described in the Phase One Scope of Services/Work Plan attached hereto as "Exhibit A"and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. Effective Date: This Agreement is effective as of the date listed above and will terminate 12 months after execution. 3. Scope of Work: Consultant will perform the work and provide the services in accordance with the requirements of the Phase One Scope of Services/Work Plan attached hereto. For conflicts between this Agreement and the Scope of Services, unless specifically provided otherwise,the Agreement governs. 4. Payment: City agrees to pay Consultant Sixty Five Thousand Dollars ($65,000) for services and reimbursables performed pursuant to the Scope of Services/Work Plan. Consultant may invoice the City monthly based upon the progress of each unit of work (Activities 1.0 through 1.6) described in the Phase One Scope of Services/Work Plan. Any alteration or deviation from the described work that involves additional costs above the Agreement amount will be performed by Consultant after written request by the City, and will become an additional charge over and above the contract amount. The parties must agree in writing upon any additional charges. 5. Consultant's Representations: To induce City to enter into this Agreement, Consultant makes the following representations: a. Consultant has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of this Agreement, the Scope of Services, and with all local conditions and federal, state and local laws, growth policies, adopted plans of the City, ordinances, rules, and regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress or performance of the Scope of Services. b. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has the experience and ability to perform the services required by this Agreement; that it will perform said services in a professional, competent and timely manner and with diligence and skill; that it has the power to enter into and PROFESSIONAL.SERVICES AGREEMENT Page l of 5 113 perform this Agreement and grant the rights granted in it; and that its performance of this Agreement shall not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third party, whether rights of copyright, trademark, privacy,publicity, libel, slander or any other rights of any nature whatsoever, or violate any federal, state and municipal laws. The City will not determine or exercise control as to general procedures or formats necessary to have these services meet this warranty. 6. Independent Contractor Status: The parties agree that Consultant is an independent contractor for purposes of this Agreement and is not to be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. Consultant is not subject to the terms and provisions of the City's personnel policies handbook and may not be considered a City employee for workers' compensation or any other purpose. Consultant is not authorized to represent the City or otherwise bind the City in any dealings between Consultant and any third parties. Consultant shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Workers' Compensation Act, Title 39, Chapter 71, MCA, and the Occupational Disease Act of Montana, Title 39, Chapter 71, MCA. Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation coverage for all members and employees of Consultant's business, except for those members who are exempted by law. Consultant shall furnish the City with copies showing one of the following: (1) a binder for workers' compensation coverage by an insurer licensed and authorized to provide workers' compensation insurance in the State of Montana; or (2) proof of exemption from workers' compensation granted by law for independent contractors. 7. Indemnity/Waiver of Claims/Insurance: For other than professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City harmless against claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses connected therewith that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from or suffered by the City by reason of any injury or loss, including but not limited to, personal injury, including bodily injury or death, property damage, occasioned by, growing out of, or in any way arising or resulting from any intentional or negligent act on the part of Consultant or Consultant's agents or employees. For the professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims, demands, suits, damages,losses, and expenses, including reasonable defense attorney fees, to the extent caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the Consultant or Consultant's agents or employees. Consultant also waives any and all claims and recourse against the City or its officers, agents or employees, including the right of contribution for loss or damage to person or property arising from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to the performance of this Agreement except "responsibility for his own fraud, for willful injury to the person or property of another,or for violation of law,whether willful or negligent"as per 28-2-702,MCA. Should City be required to bring an action against the Consultant to assert its right to PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 2 of 5 114 defense or indemnification under this Agreement or under the Consultant's applicable insurance policies required below the City shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in asserting its right to indemnification or defense but only if a court of competent jurisdiction determines the Consultant was obligated to defend the claims) or was obligated to indemnify the City for a claim(s)or any portion(s)thereof. The above obligations shall survive termination of this agreement. In addition to and independent from the above, Consultant shall secure insurance coverage acceptable to the City and furnish to the City an accompanying certificate of insurance issued by a company authorized to do business in the State of Montana in amounts not less than as follows: • Workers' Compensation- statutory • Employers' Liability- $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate • Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate • Automobile Liability - $1,000,000 property damagelbodily injury; $2,000,000 annual aggregate • Professional Liability- $1,000,000 per claim; $2,000,000 annual aggregate The City of Bozeman, its officers, agents, and employees, shall be endorsed as an additional or named insured on a primary non-contributory basis on both the Commercial General and Automobile Liability policies. The insurance and required endorsements must be in a form suitable to City and shall include no less than a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation or non-renewal. The City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to the Consultant commencing work. 8. Professional Service: Consultant agrees that all services and work performed hereunder will be accomplished in a professional manner. 9. Compliance with Laws: Consultant agrees to comply with all federal, state and local Iaws, ordinances,rules and regulations, including the safety rules, codes, and provisions of the Montana Safety Act in Title 50, Chapter 71, MCA. Consultant agrees to purchase a City business license. 10. Nondiscrimination: Discrimination in the performance of this Agreement on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability is prohibited. This prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the Contractor's employees and to all subcontracts entered into by the Contractor in the performance of the duties under this Agreement. 11. Default and Termination: If either party fails to comply with any condition of this Agreement at the time or in the manner provided for, the other party, at its option, may terminate PROFESSIONAL.SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 3 of 5 115 this Agreement and be released from all obligations if the default is not cured within ten (10) days after written notice is provided to the defaulting party. Said notice shall set forth the items to be cured. Additionally, the non-defaulting party may bring suit for damages, specific performance, and any other remedy provided by law. These remedies are cumulative and not exclusive. Use of one remedy does not preclude use of the others. Notices shall be provided in writing and hand- delivered or mailed to the parties at the addresses set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. 12. Modification and Assignability: This document contains the entire agreement between the parties and no statements, promises or inducements made by either party or agents of either party,which are not contained in this written Agreement,may be considered valid or binding. This Agreement may not be enlarged, modified or altered except by written agreement signed by both parties hereto. The Consultant may not subcontract or assign Consultant's rights,including the right to compensation or duties arising hereunder, without the prior written consent of City. Any subcontractor or assignee will be bound by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 13. Ownership and Publication of Materials: All reports, information, data, and other materials prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, except those separately identified in the Scope of Services/Work Plan or in other written agreements between the parties, are jointly owned by the Consultant and the City. The City has authority to release, publish or otherwise use, in whole or part, reports, information, data, and other materials prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties. Any re-use without written verification or adaptation by the Consultant for the specific purpose intended will be at the City's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant. No material produced in whole or in part under this Agreement may be copyrighted or patented in the United States or in any other country without the prior written approval of the City. 14. Liaison: City's designated liaison with Consultant is Ron Dingman and Consultant's designated liaison with City is Ben Lloyd 15. Applicability: This Agreement and any extensions hereof shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Montana. 16. Non-Waiver. A waiver by either party any default or breach by the other party of any terms or conditions of this Agreement does not limit the other party's right to enforce such term or conditions or to pursue any available legal or equitable rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument the day and year first above written. CITY OF BOZEMAN,MONTANA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 4 of S 116 CITY OF BOZEMAN,MONTANA By By Chris Kukulski, City Manager CONSULTANT Print Name: Ben Lloyd APPROVED AS TO FORM: Print Title: President/Architect By Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Attest: BY: (Clerk of Commission) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 5 of 5 117 Exhibit BOi, Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study �Zt City of Bozeman, Montana `�,`•! - s`c Work Plan TAN CO.10 November 28,2011 Revised.January12,2012 Team Involvement Activity Scope Description CQ I BRS B'K WTI PHASE ONE 1.0 City Commission Approves • Notification of Consultant and Teaming Strategy Conference Confirm Existing Facility Assessment work scope Call Confirm Architectural Design and Operational Feasibility work scope _ • Confirm public input process requirements • Schedule and timeline approval • Contract approval • Planning,data gathering and research for the following: 2 2 • Project vision,goals and objectives 1 1 • Preliminary program review discussion 3 _ • Schedule,budget and project delivery objectives 1 • Finalize stakeholder meetings(participants,dates,locations,questions,invitations) 1 • Discuss draft presentation for Community Meeting 1 Phase Cost: $1,665 $440 $1,225 1.1 2 days, Workshop 1-Market Analysis/Stakeholder Meetings/Site Toursl Community January Meeting I Day 1-Team Meeting with City Staff/Steering Committee TRIP 1 Meeting 1 Introduce team and discuss conceptual design/feasibility study process 16 48 • Project vision,goals and objective,including sustainable design goals • involvement planfor City,community,and stakeholders • Discuss and review desired facilities and project budget • Discuss potential partnership and funding opportunities • Current and future demands with the community • Discuss design potential and alternate sites • Schedule,budget,phasing and project delivery objectives _ • Play the'Program Cord Game" • Review Market Analysis process • Review Aquatics Options • Review/collect Owner provided site data _ • Review Draft Community Meeting 1 Presentation • Meet with City Manager and Commission • Meet with Planning and Public Works Staff • Tour sites,existing facilities,local amenities,key architectural character sites and get to know the community • Begin compiling data on all existing recreation amenities/facilities/providers • Begin on-site market analysis research Meeting 2-5 Day 1-&Day 2-Stakeholder Meetings • Conduct(4)stakeholder/focus group meetings Meetings Day2-Community Meeting 1-Community Meeting I-Program"Card Game" • Similar agenda to Meeting 1 • Prepare meeting minutes 2 Phase Cost: $11,710 $1,760 $8,750 $1,200 BARKER RINKER RACAT Page 1ofrJ 1AR-CH 1 VRE •� ` soz Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study "! tx City of Bozeman, Montana a Work Plan H CO.1• November 28,2011 Revised:January 12,2012 Team Involvement Activity Scope Description1.2 3 weeks Work Period I-Market Analysis/Preliminary Site Analysisl Preliminary CQ BRS B*K WTI Program Budget Scope Change.See Options 3&4 Below • Draft Mission and Goals Statement 1 • Prepare preliminary Market Analysis • Identify and research potential partners • Prepare summary of existing programs and facilities • Prepare Preliminary Program Options and SF Cost Model Budget(Card Game) 4 4 • Prepare site analysis diagrams based on Owner provided site data for up to 3 sites 3 3 • Update site plan alternatives exploring: • Vehicular and pedestrian circulation • Environmental criteria(sun,light topography,drainage...) • Parking • Utilities,service access,maintenance issues • Draft Site Alternatives Budget Comparison Matrix to compare all site alternatives using k�$176-0 provide materials • Prepare scaled bubble diagrams to test fit program options on sites 2 • Prepare draft presentation for City Commission/Community Meetings 2 Phase Cost: $7,035 $2,275 $3 000 1.3 6 weeks Statistically Valid Survey Meeting 7 Conduct Statistically Valid Survey • Develop survey instrument/questions 2 • Establish survey type • Administer community wide survey(300 responses guaranteed) • Compile and interpret survey results 1 Phase Cost: $525 $0 $525 1A 1 day, Workshop 2-Market AnalysisIStakeholder MeetingslSite Toursl Community a March Meeting 2 Team Meeting with City Staff/Steering Committee Trip 2 Meeting 8 Introduce team and discuss conceptual design/feasibility study process 8 12 • Review project goals • Review existing facility assessments • Review findings from stakeholder meetings • Review findings from statistically valid survey • Review potential partner opportunities • Update on Market Analysis process • Review program and budget scenarios/options • Review site analysis options • Conduct aquatic programming preferences activity • Review Community Meeting 2 Presentation • Meet with Planning and Public Works Staff Meeting 9 Community Meeting 2-Program"Card Game"and Site Discussion(Evening Meeting) • Present findings from Community Meeting 1 • Present Power Point slide show of program and aquatics options • Play program"Card Game"with all attendees • Conduct aquatic programming preferences activity • Review game results and discuss priorities • Review preliminary site analysis diagrams and review criteria for up to 3 sites j • Review Market Analysis and Survey Process • Next steps BARKER RINKER SAACAT_ Page 2of5 —fARCHI uRe k -� Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study City of Bozeman, Montana `4 fiee Work Plan rr�co:vto November 28,2011 Revised:January 12,2012 Team Involvement Activity Scope Description CQ BRS B-K WTI Deliverables: • Mission and Goals Statement • Statistically valid survey results • Draft Market Analysis • Program and conceptual budget options • Site Analysis Diagrams and alternate budget matrix • Existing facility assessment summary • Existing programs and facility inventory summary • Meeting Minutes 2 Phase Cost: $4,530 $880 1 $2.450 1 1 $1,200 1.5 3 weeks Work Period 2-Market Analysis/Preliminary Site Analysis Preliminary Program& April Budget • Revise preliminary program options and selected site plan based on; 2 • City Staff workshops • Stakeholder Meetings • Community Meetings • City Commission Meetings • Prepare community center plan relationships diagrams for test fit to alternative sites. 1 4 • Prepare a Conceptual Project SF Budget Model for each alternative to include: 1 2 • Program based construction budgets and phasing options • Suggested fixture,furniture and equipment budgets • Site&utility improvement/restoration/demolition budgets • Fees and development budgets • Contingencies • Prepare draft presentation for City Commission/Community Meetings 2 Phase Cost: $11920 $220 $1,400 $300 1.6 1 day April Workshop 3- Commission Presentation ofPhase One Report- Community Meeting 3 Scope Change:See Option 2 Below TsiPa Meeting 10 Review Conceptual Program Options 4 12 GoTo Meeting Review Conceptual Aquatic Options • Review Conceptual Budget Options • Review Preliminary Market Analysis/Proforma Projections • Review Preferred Site Option(s) • Review Partnership Opportunities-Cost/Benefits • Review Funding Options Phase Cost: $2,540 $440 $2,300 END OF ONE +/- 4 Months Subtotal Phase One Cost$62,725 $5,500 $18,725 $32,800 $5,700 Estimated Phase One Reimbursable Expenses See Option 5 below$11,800 $5,800 $3,600 $2,400 Total Phase One Estimate$74,525 $5,500 $24,525 $36,400 $8,100 NO Option 1 ORS lig SOF161 9141Y GFai9fQF IINGFIN149P 4,FFaRk to paAiGlpake via GoTe Meeting $0 ✓ Option 2 Item 6.1,Meeting#10(Final Phase 1 Report to GoTo meeting in lieu of onsite meeting.($2,600) ✓ Option 3 Reduce B*K cost of assessing existing facilities(See B*K Scope Description)($1,000) ✓ Option 4 Item 1.2,delete all existing facility physical assessment scope(CQ,WTI)($3,880) ✓ Option 5 Reduce estimated reimbursable expenses(Cap total fee at$65K with expenses)($2,045) Revised Total Phase One Lump Sum Contract Amount$65,000 BARKER RINKER ACATAM Page 3of5 TARcHi rZU uRE 1W °fB°2 Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study .. City of Bozeman,Montana C ._O. 04`` Work Plan M November28,2011 Revised:January 12,2012 Team Involvement Activity Scope Description CQ BRS B'K WTI Notes 1 Topographic Survey,if required,to be provided to Design Team by Owner.Survey work can be provided as an additional service. Legend 2 Soils report to be provided to Design Team based on criteria and boring locations as necessary for the engineering of the Project. CQ=Comma Q,LeadBRS=Barker Rinker Seacat 3 Environmental and hazardous materials studies to be provided to Design Team. B*K=Ballard*King WTI=Water Technology 4 Traffic Study,if required,to be provided to Design Team by Owner.Traffic Study can be provided as an additional service. 5 Rezoning and planning approvals for the selected site can be provided as an additional service. 6 Project to be designed using a 3D modeling program.Detailed renderings and animations can be provided as an additional service. 7 LEED certification,day lighting analysis and energy modeling is excluded. 8 Final deliverables will be in electronic format 9 Expansion of this work scope or deliverables can be provided as an additional service at any time during the course of the study. 10 Hardcopy printing of final report and meeting materials can be provided as a reimbursable expense 11 A 10%administrative fee will be added to reimbursable expenses BARKER RINKER,�&ACAT+ Page of —AR CNI F&CITURE "` BILLING RATE CATEGORIES AND REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (Effective January 1, 2012) Hourly Rates 1. Comma-QArchitecture, Inc: a. Senior Architect $110 b. Architect $90 c. Architectural Designer $60 d. Drafter $55 e. Project Administration $40 2. Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture, P.C.: a. Principal $175 b. Project Manager $110 c. Job Captain $110 d. Project Administration $ 85 3. Ballard *King&Associates: a. Principal $125 b. Associate $ 75 4. Water Technology,Inc.: a. Principal/Project Leader $150 b. Project Manager $105 c. Project Designer $ 95 d. CAD Technician $ 65 e. Administrative $ 55 5. Services of Professional Consultants are billed at a multiple of one point one(1.1)times the amount billed to Comma-QArchitecture,Inc 6. In addition to compensation for time and the services of professional consultants,compensation shall be made to Comma-Q Architecture, Inc.for the following reimbursable expenses,which will be billed at a multiple of one point one(1.1)times the amount billed to Comma-Q Architecture, Inc.: a. Expense of transportation traveling outside the Metropolitan Bozeman area in connection with the project. Use of private automobile shall be billed at fifty-five cents($.55) per mile. b. Long distance phone calls,deliveries and shipping,extraordinary mailing expenses and fees paid for securing approval of authorities. c. Printing,plotting and other document reproduction,brochures,contract documents and other special presentation expenses(e.g. renderings,finish models). 7. Other expenses that are directly attributable to a project shall not be billed unless prior approval is obtained from the Owner. 8. Payment due Comma-Q Architecture,Inc.shall bear interest at the rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%)per month,commencing sixty days after the date of billing. Page 5 of 5 122 moo PAN-gigstra Y - 4iw - � _ __ 14 PROPOSAL FOR A RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIE. FEASIBILITY STUDY ---A M �• b� ' in association with L 0VEMBER 1, 201 1 ARCHITECTUREa :,•�rtT rril"', ' r BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE CMn ArM1lCCtU" October 31, 2011 City Clerk's Office City Hall, Suite 102 121 N. Rouse Avenue Bozeman, MT 59715 Dear Members of the Selection Committee: Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture and Comma-Q Architecture are very excited about your project and we are pleased to submit our qualifications to provide professional services for the feasibility study for Recreation/Aquatics Facilities for the City of Bozeman. Community recreation/aquatics centers are often the image maker and heart of activity for the citizens of a community. Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture brings over 35 years of experience in recreation facility planning and design. We have assisted more than 160 communities—large and small—in the feasibility and design of their centers. The City of Bozeman is seeking a highly qualified consultant firm/team to determine the recreation/aquatic needs for the City, and to conduct a feasibility study to determine the capacity of the City to meet those needs. We believe that the team we have assembled brings the best talents available to you. Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture will lead the project team and be responsible for the programming, design and public process. Craig Bouck will be the Principal in Charge and Frank Buono will be the Project Manager. Ben Lloyd, Principal with Comma-Q Architecture will be our local liaison and lead all site analysis and coordination efforts with City staff. Ken Ballard of Ballard'King &Associates,will be responsible for conducting market research, exploring partnering opportunities and developing a comprehensive operational proforma for the project.As part of the Market Analysis, ETC/Leisure Vision has been included on our team for a statistically valid survey. We have also included Water Technology on our team for aquatic facility analysis and design. Whenever we work outside Colorado,we partner with a local firm. The local firm has an understanding of the jurisdictional code and zoning issues, construction climate and any political subtleties we, as outsiders, may not fully understand. Combining local knowledge and our national expertise in public process and community recreation/aquatic center design makes a winning combination. In Montana,we have chosen to team with Comma-Q Architecture of Bozeman. Their recent work on the City Hall with the City of Bozeman will provide valuable input to your project. Our teaming relationship with Ballard"King &Associates goes back over 20 years. In addition,we have been teaming with Water Technology for over 15 years. Our team offers a successful track record providing operations analysis, innovative design, and extensive knowledge of publicly-funded recreation/aquatic projects. Ultimately, the selection of a consultant is a subjective one. How well we communicate is as important as the breadth of our experience. We encourage you to call our clients and visit our projects. They are the best testament to our commitment to service and design excellence. Sincerely, 44_L41� - Craig Bouck, President/CEO Ben Lloyd, Principal Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture Comma-Q Architecture 3457 Ringsby Court,Unit 200 Denver,Colorado 80216 303-455-1366 Fax 303-455-7457 Toll Free 866-646-1980 www.brsarch.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 SECTION A Firm Profiles • Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture • Comma-Q Architecture SECTION B Relevant Completed Experience SECTION C Project Team SECTION D Project Approach, Process, Methods and Workplan SECTION E Completed Non-Discrimination Affirmation Form SECTION F Appendix - Subconsultant Team • Ballard*King & Associates • ETC/Leisure Vision • Water Technology, Inc. BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA FIRM PROFILE r VA yL f � 1 Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture Designing great places for communities has been the driving passion of Barker Rinker has been recognized nationally as Seacat Architecture since its early beginnings more than 35 years ago.With 10 principals, a leader in the strategic planning, four senior associates and a total firm of 24,our mission and commitment are the same today as they were then.By putting the client's needs first and remaining true to master planning,programming and architectural excellence,we have been at the forefront of innovative design.We have design of community facilities. assisted more than 160 communities across the country in the strategic planning,master planning,programming and design of community facilities. Structural engineering&Des!99 Recreation centers,schools,libraries,city halls,cultural and performing arts centers, visitor facilities,chapels and other public buildings round out the collection of projects we design.The thread that runs through them all is our commitment to an interactive process INIEST FIRM"! that includes our clients in the design and development of their project.Decision makers To Work For must often navigate through a minefield of stakeholder groups and agency review,trying to balance the needs of all.We help facilitate"best-value"decisions unique to each community. • How do we do it?We wear many hats.We're artists and analysts,mapmakers and MacGyvers,sages and band leaders,shepherds and scouts.We encourage potential clients to contact past and current clients to learn the value of a BRS-led project. Our mission statement is,Designing Inspired Community Architecture.We get our inspiration from the communities and clients with whom we work.We'd love to work with you. BARKER RINKER SEACAT AR eBITECTUAE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA I PAGE 1 RECREATION CENTERS MEW Now- MonI t �'`•�_ i t i� i COLORADO • Gunnison Community Aquatic Center Addition • Adams 12 Five Star School District Veterans Memorial • Gypsum Community Recreation Center Aquatic Center Thornton • Hatfield-Chilson Community Recreation Center Loveland • Apex Center Arvada • Heather Gardens Senior Center Study Aurora • Arapahoe Recreation District Study • Lone Tree Recreation Center • Aspen Ice Rink&Community Center Study • Longmont Recreation Center • Bally Neal Golf&Hunt Club • Mountain Village Community Center Study&Full Service • Battlement Mesa Recreation Center Study • North Boulder Recreation Center • Berthoud Recreation Center Study • Northglenn Recreation Center • Bob L.Burger Recreation Center Lafayette • Paul Derda Recreation Center Broomfield • Boulder Parks&Recreation Feasibility Study • The Ridge at West Meadows Recreation Center • Breckenridge Recreation Center&Addition • South Boulder Recreation Center Renovation • Brighton Community Recreation Center • The Splash Family Aquatics Center Golden • Brighton Senior Center Study • Storage Tek Wellness Center Louisville • Buchanan Recreation Center Evergreen • Thompson Rivers Recreation Center Study • City Park Recreation Center Westminster • Washington Park Recreation Center&Addition Denver • Colorado College Recreation Master Plan • Western Eagle County Fieldhouse Eagle • Commerce City Recreation Center/Senior Center&Addition • Wheat Ridge Recreation Center • Cortez Recreation Center • Wheat Ridge Recreation Center Study(1992&1997) • Depot at Five Parks Arvada • Devil's Thumb Activity Center,Lodge&Spa Tabernash AR IZONA • Douglas Buck Recreation Center Littleton Cottonwood Recreation Center Study&Full Service • Durango Community Recreation Center Flagstaff Aquaplex • East Boulder Community Recreation Center/Senior Center Sahuarita Site Study • Englewood Malley Senior Center&Addition TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Phoenix • Englewood Parks&Recreation Feasibility Study Tucson Adaptive Recreation Center • Englewood Recreation Center&Addition MICHIGAN • Erie Community Center Dearborn Community Recreation Center Study • Erie Recreation/Senior Center Study Isabella County/Mt.Pleasant Recreation Center Study • Fort Collins Senior Center • Fossil Trace Golf Club Clubhouse Golden Livonia Recreation Center • Fraser Valley Recreation Center Study Macomb Township Recreation Center • Golden Community Center Study Summit in the Park Canton • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Planning • Golden Community Center/Senior Center • Grant Ranch Community Building Denver Detroit • William Clay Ford Center Detroit BARKER RINKER SEACATJM ARCHITECTURE TW PAGE 2 I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY. BOZEMAN, MONTANA RECREATION CENTERS i _.rry ., 7 MISSOURI Hobbs Community Recreation Center Study New Mexico • Belton Recreation Center • Huffhines&Breckinridge Parks Richardson,Texas • Clayton Shared-Use High School&Community Center • Huffhines Recreation Center Study&Design Richardson, • Excelsior Springs Recreation Center Study Texas • Ferguson Recreation Center Study • James City/Williamsburg Community Center Virginia • Northeast Community Center Study Kansas City • Las Cruces Multipurpose Recreation/Aquatic Center New • Warrensburg Recreation Center Mexico • Manheim Township Community Center Study Pennsylvania OH IO • North Tahoe Recreation Center Study California • Bainbridge Community Recreation Center • Oconomowoc Programming&Site Selection Wisconsin • Fairfield Community Arts Center • Owensboro Recreation Center Study Kentucky • Huron Recreation Center Study • Portsmouth Recreation Center Feasibility Study New • Mentor Arlington Recreation Center Study Hampshire • Natatorium Community Recreation&Wellness Center • River Winds at West Deptford Recreation Center New Jersey Cuyahoga Falls • Roanoke Recreation Center Study Virginia • Upper Arlington Recreation Center Study • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Augusta, • Vandalia Community Recreation Center Georgia • Westerville Community Recreation Center • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Coeur d'Alene, Idaho UTAH • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Green Bay, • Park City Ice Center Study Wisconsin • Provo Recreation Center Study • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Quincy,Illinois • Sand Hollow Aquatics Center St. George • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Salem,Oregon • Springville City Recreation Aquatics Complex Study • TSA Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Staten Island, WASHINGTON New York • Federal Way Recreation Center • Warner Park Center Madison,Wisconsin • Kent Aquatics&Recreation Center • Waunakee Senior Community Center Wisconsin • Redmond Recreation Facilities Assessment • Tumwater Recreation Center Study OTHER STATES • Arlington North Tract Recreation Center Virginia • Cedar Rapids Recreation Center Study Iowa • Coon Rapids Recreation Center Feasibility Study Minnesota BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 3 Firm Profile Our Idea 'v At Comma-0 Architecture, Inc. we believe that buildings can be more than just buildings; they comma-0 can be an attractive and functional part of the Ar hiteCure,Inc community and enhance daily life. From quality residential and commercial projects to historic renovations, we provide an outstanding value In architectural services, creating inspiring places we are proud of.We are small enough to pay close attention to each project,and big enough to han- dle large projects. A Sense of Place For a building to be successful,it must respond to the physical context,the climate,and the people who will be using the building.In order to create successful buildings,Comma-0 Listens to clients carefully, focuses on the site and its surround- ings, and designs with an awareness of budget constraints.We rely upon our extensive experi- ence and knowledge of Montana-its people,cli- mate, history,and beauty-to provide appropri- ate design solutions.Our buildings perform well in our mountain environment and enhance their surroundings rather than overwhelm them. We Community FoodCo-op-Bozeman provide creative solutions that fit the individual as well as the unique landscape of Montana. Our Work Speaks For Itself The name Comma-0 reflects the nature of what we do: pause to question our assumptions be- fore we embark on a new project.This results in high-quality projects such as additional produc- tion space for West Paw Design, renovated facili- ties for Great Harvest Franchising in Dillon, MT, a new home for Starky's Authentic Americana, Educational Wing Renovations to Bozeman's First Presbyterian Church, Window Replacement and Exterior Stabilization of the Historic T.B. Story Mansion, and the Commercial Rehabilitation of the Missoula Mercantile Warehouse. Comma-0 understands the importance of shaping neigh- borhoods and communities;we are proud to be known for projects such as the Renovation and Addition to Bozeman High School,the Renovation and Addition to the Bozeman New City Hall,Ad- dition and Renovation at Monforton Elementary School,and Northside. Communication Is the Key Architecture is about problem-solving,which re- Royal Wulff Residence-Paradise VaLLey quires teamwork and collaboration. Successful projects require strong communication between client, architect, contractors, and government agencies to create design for the real world,and to get projects completed on time and on budget. Comma-0 takes an active role in facilitating this communication and encouraging teamwork so that problems get solved. Our People Make the Difference The most important resource we can offer is our i people.Comma-Q's architects and designers have years of training and are experienced in turning a client's vision,wants,and needs into a creative and functional solution. We believe in engaging directly with our clients in order to provide them with the best possible results.Although we have sophisticated computer software to provide sup- port,we never lose sight of what dialogue and a First Presbyterian Church-Bozeman pencil can accomplish. CamrG PAGE 4 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN. MONTANA RECREATION oil Ar CLIENT Gypsum Recreation Center Town of Gypsum Gypsum, Colorado CONTACT Jeff Shroll,Town Manager The town of Gypsum,located on the western end of Eagle County in ski country,wanted 720.524.7514 to provide a multigenerational facility to serve the needs of the town and surrounding communities.Through a feasibility study,Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture and GreenPlay, BUDGET LLC were able to help define these needs.The town's dream came true through a successful $11 Million bond election in November 2004. COMPLETION The 59,000-s.f.center includes a multi-activity gymnasium,gymnastics center,climbing 2006 and bouldering walls,leisure pool with interactive play area and lazy river,fitness areas, aerobics/dance studio,jog/walk track,multipurpose/senior activities rooms,game room, babysitting and indoor play area,and lobby/cafe/lounge. The new recreation center joins a developing campus of town buildings and recreation facilities that express an exciting vision for the town of Gypsum. BARKER RINKER SEACAT 19 ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 5 RECREATION 4W LE CLIENT Flagstaff Aquaplex City of Flagstaff Flagstaff, Arizona CONTACT Elizabeth Neumayer, Director of Parks& The project team of Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture and Johnson Walzer Architects worked Recreation with the city of Flagstaff to develop a feasibility study that included site recommendations, 928.213.2305 programming and conceptual design for a new Indoor aquatics and multigene rational eneumayer@flagstaffaz.gov facility.Community and user-group workshops were held to gain citizen input and to involve them in the planning process.A project website was also developed,which documented ASSOCIATE FIRM progress of the study.Council approved the design team recommendations and the team Johnson Walzer Architects moved forward with the design and construction of the center. BUDGET The new 52,000-s.f„energy-efficient center is designed with every age in mind.It features $12 Million a leisure pool with lazy river,community/multipurpose room,multi-activity(MAC)gymnasium, and weight and fitness areas with an elevated jog/walk track.The two-story gallery/lobby COMPLETION area features natural daylighting and is complemented by wood timber construction.The 2008 natural materials allowed the building to nestle into the beautiful mountain landscape. AWARDS & FEATURES 2009 Arizona Parks&Recreation Association Outstanding Facility Award BARKER RINKER SEACAT_ I ARCH IT ECTU RE PAGE 6 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA RECREATION *:V 'y "r 1 J' CLIENT Hobbs Community Aquatics/Recreation City of Hobbs/JF Maddox Foundation CONTACT Center Feasibility Study and Concept Design Hobbs, New Mexico Mia Russell,Director of Parks&Recreation 575.397.9293 Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture,in association with Ballard*King&Associates and Water mrussell@hobbsnm.org Technology,Inc.,conducted a comprehensive feasibility study and development plan for Bob Reid,Executive Director a municipally-operated community aquatics/recreation center.Services included needs JF Maddox Foundation assessment,feasibility,a development/operational plan,conceptual design and computer- 575.393.6338,ext.22 generated 3-D exterior/interior fly-through animation. bobreid@jfmaddox.org Ten of the 17 components BUDGET comprising approximately $28 Million(Estimated) 84,000 s.f.were selected _ by the recreation center COMPLETION ; committee for conceptual Study:20O9;updated:2O10 —� 4— 1 y planning and design,including •--y; g. ., a cool-water,eight-lane, 25-yard competition pool; warm-water leisure pool : •— `� ! incorporating therapy/ wellness features;indoor elevated walk/jog track; multipurpose community meeting rooms with catering kitchen;wood-floor gymnasium;fitness center and aerobics/ dance studio;child watch/babysitting room;and wet classroom/party rooms. An updated program and operational proforma was conducted for the JF Maddox Foundation in 2010. The foundation is contributing 50%of the capital investment in the project. BARKER RINKER SEACAT® ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 7 RECREATION CLIENT Bentonville Community Center City of Bentonville Bentonville, Arkansas CONTACT David Wright, Manager of Parks& In February 2010, Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture,in association with Ballard*King Recreation &Associates,Water Technology,Inc.and Hight Jackson Associates,completed a 479.271.6826 comprehensive feasibility study and development plan for future construction,operation dwright@bentonvillear.com and maintenance of a new municipally-operated multipurpose community recreation center for the city of Bentonville.With a population of 34,000,the BRS team engaged ASSOCIATE FIRMS Bentonville residents to create a"wish list"of space requirements.The city tasked the Hight Jackson Associates architectural team to balance the current needs of the community with the future desires for BUDGET a 35-acre community center park. $14 Million The mission of the Bentonville Community Center is to provide an epicenter for fun while promoting healthy living and social interaction.The resulting 78,000-s.f.,$14 million COMPLETION center is being designed to invite and create a sense of place,community and inclusion November 2012(Estimated) for all ages of Bentonville residents.An estimated building cost of$152/sf is being achieved with the incorporation of a pre-engineered metal building structure.Activity areas contained within the two-level facility include leisure and lap swimming pools,party rooms, a gymnasium with an elevated jog/walk track,fitness center and aerobics area.Passive spaces include two lounge areas:one to be used as a central gathering place providing views of the pool and track,and the other for the quiet activities of active agers.A large multipurpose room with catering kitchen will seat 200 for banquets,while a child watch/ babysitting space and outdoor children's play yard are included for infants to 5 years of age. The building is tucked into the site contours,which radiate downhill from south to north and open to an adjacent park,providing views and overlooking a future amphitheater in the distance. The BRS team is fully engaged in architectural and engineering services.The citizens of Bentonville are anxiously awaiting completion of their new center,which is scheduled to open at the end of 2012. BARKER RINKER SEACATIM ARCHITECTURE PAGE 8 I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA RECREATION CLIENT Cottonwood Recreation Center City of Cottonwood Parks&Recreation Cottonwood, Arizona CONTACT Richard Faust, Director The Northern Arizona city of Cottonwood is located approximately 140 miles north of 928.639.3200 Phoenix,with a population of 10,500 residents and a service area of 34,000.In 2004, rfaust@ci.cottonwood.az.us Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture completed a feasibility study regarding a community recreation center.Subsequently,residents approved a vote to reapply an existing tax to build BUDGET the center;in 2007 we were commissioned to begin design. $15.5 Million (Includes Outdoor Pool Renovation) The 53,000-s.f.center includes indoor leisure aquatics,athletic-fitness and health facilities as well as an office complex for staff.An existing eight-lane outdoor lap pool was also COMPLETION renovated under the contract.The center's high-performance building employs skylights, 2010 automatic lighting controls and extra insulation,and a regenerative media filter in the pool saves water and energy in addition to using less chemicals than traditional sand filters. The recreation center is situated in a park setting close to the city center and across from the library,near the senior center and hospital.The building is organized by a two-story daylit central spine,which links the active and passive functions of the facility.The Cottonwood Recreation Center was modeled after the city's old train station—now home to the senior center. The folks in Cottonwood and nearby areas are excited about their new center,where they can hang out,work out and make friends. BARKER RINKER SEACAT 19 ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA I PAGE 9 RECREATION INK I _ � CLIENT Federal Way Recreation Center City of Federal Way Federal Way, Washington CONTACT Betty"B"Sanders,Farmer Parks Planner In the growing City of Federal Way,a diverse community of 100,000 north of Tacoma, 425.556.2328 Washington,a new community recreation center was designed and opened in 2006.The city had inherited a 30-plus-year-old indoor lap pool;however,a feasibility study verified that ASSOCIATE FIRM it would be less costly to build and operate a new facility than to renovate and maintain the Arai Jackson Ellison Murakami existing structure. BUDGET The site for the new center is at the edge of a park that has existing soccer and softball $20.5 Million(Hard&Soft Costs) fields.Athletic tournaments held at the park are a significant source of business for local hotels and restaurants.The city hopes to expand upon this idea by hosting indoor court COMPLETION sports tournaments year-round. 2006 The 78,450-s.f.center provides programs to appeal to citizens of all ages and abilities, satisfying both their athletic and lifelong learning needs.In addition to leisure and lap swimming pools,the building features a gymnasium,fitness spaces,climbing wall,seniors' lounge,and community spaces that include classrooms,a pre-school and multipurpose room that can seat up to 380 people. BARKER RINKER SEACATS )ARCHITECTURE PAGE 10 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA RECREATION all CLIENT Veterans Memorial Aquatic Center Adams 12 Five Star School District Thornton, Colorado CONTACT Henri Vos,Facilities Development Adams 12 Five Star School District envisioned a regional aquatic venue to support the high Manager schools and surrounding middle schools in the district.In late 2007,we were hired by the 720.972.6175 school district and the city of Thornton to design a state-of-the-art competitive aquatic henri.vos@adamsl2.org center for athletes,students and staff from all five high schools,as well as residents of the community and nearby areas. BUDGET $16.5 Million The 43,570-s.f.center includes a competitive 50-meter pool with moveable bulkheads -- and spectator seating for 800.The pool can be configured into twenty-two 25-yard cross- COMPLETION course practice lanes;50-meter,25-meter or 25-yard race lanes in the center between 2010 the bulkheads;or a diving and warm-up configuration.Energy-efficient features include solar hot-water heating for the pool,high-performance windows,a daylit two-story lobby, i continuous skylight in the - natatorium,and advanced 1 . mechanical and electrical systems. In the future,the aquatic center will be joined by the addition of .....,t ,�, the North Thornton Recreation Center,offering this growing community a multifunctional gathering place.The centers will become a source of pride, bringing the community together at a year-round destination. BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 11 RECREATION A 1 I 1 CLIENT Brighton Outdoor Aquatic Park City of Brighton Brighton, Colorado CONTACT Gary Wardle, Director of Parks and Recreation Located on Bromley Lane in Brighton,the new outdoor family aquatic park sits on a 4.8 303.655.2049 acre site adjacent the National Register's historic Bromley-Koizuma Hishinuma Farm. The gwardle@brightonco.gov proposed improvements include two swimming pools,a bath house,and a second building BUDGET for ticketing,staff and concessions. The overall design allows for a Leisure pool area for family recreational use and a Lazy River with a deep water area for diving,and includes $5.4 Million a bouldering wall. At one end of the Lazy River is a wave machine generating 2'high COMPLETION ocean waves that will pulse down the river adding more thrills to the otherwise passive 2011 float. In addition,there will be a slide stair tower which serves both a body flume slide with deceleration run-out and an inner-tube slide landing in a plunge pool. Generous decks are provided for both pools. The citizens of Brighton are excited about the new outdoor family aquatic park. BARKER RINKER SEACAT® ARCHITECTURE PAGE 12 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA RECREATION CLIENT Cook Creek Outdoor Pool South Suburban Parks&Recreation District Lone Tree, Colorado CONTACT The South Suburban Parks and Recreation District's Cook Creek Aquatics Center is located Melissa Reese-Thacker,Senior Park on a 3.4-acre isthmus nestled between Cook Creek and Willow Creek,southwest of Denver. Planner The existing center,which included two pools,two buildings,two tennis courts and a parking 303.483.7023 lot,was demolished to make room for the new expanded facility.Although the South melissar@ssprd.org Suburban Parks and Recreation District runs and operates the pool,the project was funded BUDGET by the City of Lone Tree through a property tax bond election held in 2007. $5.6 Million The new facility includes two new outdoor swimming pools,a bathhouse,pool mechanical equipment building,and a third building located near the lap pool for picnicking and pool COMPLETION storage.The expanded parking lot nearly doubles the capacity of the existing lot.The overall 2009 design allows for a leisure pool area for families'recreational use,including a zero-depth beach, play structure,lazy river,water basketball and a very long open-flume body slide.An eight-lane competitive lap pool accommodates lap swimming and competitive swim meets. Both pool areas are intended to be open when a swim meet is being held.Generous decks have been provided for both pools with new landscaping. The facility has been designed with photovoltaic solar collectors to reduce electrical consumption and a regenerative media filtration system to reduce use of water,chemicals and heat by thousands of gallons per year. BARKER RINKER SEACATO IARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 13 . f '�" Aitmect.cr111e�1`n�c.y= namrar nn Iwa ? 4 3 , New Bozeman City Hall Renovation & Commission Meeting Room Addition Bozeman, MT completed 2008 When the City of Bozeman opened a new public library in 2006,the old library building was renovated to house City Hall.The renova- size tion increased office space and provided additional meeting room for the City Commission,which had been meeting in a dark and 22,614 sf(renovation) crowded basement.As a civic building in a growing community,the 1,077 sf(addition) new City HaLL was designed to reflect community pride without excessive expense,and to be energy efficient. budget The new building provides citizens with a bright,clean space to in- $2,000,000 teract with their government,including gathering spaces,a Commis- sion Meeting Room,and public outdoor space along Bozeman Creek. client It was designed to serve as a"living room"for the community,with City of Bozeman several small meeting rooms,seating areas,and extra-wide corri- dors to promote interaction with city officials and serve as overflow generaL contractor/ space for heavily-attended Commission meetings. construction manager Comma-0 oversaw an extensive programming/space planning/feasi- Dick Anderson bility study phase,resulting in a project that is expected to accom- Construction,Inc. modate growth needs for the next 30 years.Replacement of glass on the south side of the building allowed for reduction in the size of mechanical equipment and reduced the overall cooling Load on the building.Arrays of photovoltaic panels also help reduce Long-term dependence on energy supplied by utility companies.The building meets the requirements for LEED-EB Silver Certification and has achieved an Energy Star rating of 86. PAGE 14 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA Comma-Q Archaecture,Inc I 1 I - Bozeman High SchooL r Bozeman, MT Faced with a sprawling complex of aging buildings for its high school,Bozeman School District No.7 decided to turn an ad- joining middle school into the heart of Bozeman High School. - —� The result is a seamless combination of renovated space and 1 new construction that provides an appropriate setting for I ' educating the community's young people,from the bright cafeteria to the comfortable library to the classrooms wired for modern technology. completed As with any high school project,there was a wide range 2010 of constituents and stake holders involved in this renova- tion.Comma-0 listened carefully to students,teachers, size administrators,and community members to craft a building that meets needs in a cost-effective solution.Attention was 225,000 sf paid to customizing the building in ways relevant to the high school experience,including the school mascot built into budget the courtyard and the latitude and longitude of the school �� � $26,500,000 •r �° inlaid in the main hall floor. ✓� ' - �+ Above all,the building was designed to provide a pleasant client and welcoming place for the high school community.The Bozeman School Library and cafeteria are gathering places for students,staff, District No.7 �\ and volunteers,providing opportunities for spontaneous \ learning and debate as well as tutoring and learning in small general contractor/ groups. construction manager Long-term concerns were also addressed.The community Dick Anderson has expressed a need for an auditorium and,in anticipation has of future funds,the high school is designed to accommodate -� one.The building's Energy Star rating,87,beats the School Board's requirement of 75 and will reduce energy costs For decades. RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE is Yes Comma-Q Architecture.Inc t 11 I I l The Historic T.B. Story Mansion Bozeman, MT completed The Story family name is a cornerstone of Bozeman history.Our 2009/2007/2005 physical surroundings,our agricultural heritage and our spirit are, in part,a result of the individual efforts of Nelson Story,a true pioneer. size 18,680 sf T. Byron Story,one of Nelson's sons,is a direct connection to Boze- Mansion and Carnage House man's history.His stately home on South Willson Avenue is one of the last physical examples of the era and it stands as a symbol of budget the achievements of the family In an expression of its commitment $1,071,000 to historic preservation,the City of Bozeman purchased the Story Basement&Ist Floor Mansion On April 14,2003. $249,000 Window Replacement In 2003 Comma-Q Architecture,Inc.was selected by the City of $480,000 Bozeman to undertake an architectural assessment of the property. Exter,orStaenaat; In 2005 the firm was selected again to oversee exterior stabiliza- tion work.Replacement of rotted wood trim,masonry cleaning& client restoration,and exterior painting were but a few of the tasks that City of Bozeman were undertaken as part of the project. In 2007 Comma-Q oversaw the Window Replacement portion of general contractor(s) the exterior stabilization,including the restoration of the leaded R&R Taylor diamond window sashes. Construction,Inc. Dave Svejkovsky Most recently Comma-0 continued to assist the City of Bozeman in Construction,Inc. realizing public use of the first floor of the Mansion with comple- tion of basement and first floor renovations PAGE 16 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN. MONTANA PROJECT TEAM CITY OF BOZEMAN BOZEMAN PARKS&RECREATION BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION • • BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE • COMMA-Q ARCHITECTURE,INC. • ARCHITECT OF RECORD ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT • Craig Bouck,LEEW AP • Ben Lloyd.AIA,LEED`AP Principal-in-Charge • Principal Frank Buono • Project Manager • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Ballard*King& ETC/Leisure Water Associates Vision Technology,Inc. Feasibility& Survey Aquatics Design Operations &Engineering As Project Managert Frank Buono will be the day to day contact with the City of Bozeman. Frank will coordinate the consultant team and assist Craig Bouck, Principal in Charge,with the public meeting process. With a staff of 24,BRS and our consultant team are prepared to commence work on the Bozeman Recreation/Aquatics Facilities Feasibility Study upon notification to proceed. Our team is committed to staffing the project appropriately to meet the City's schedule objectives. BARKER RINKER SEACAT 19 -0 ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA I PAGE 17 CRAIG BOUCK, ASSOCIATE AIA, LEED° AP PRINCIPAL Craig is the managing principal of Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture.An extremely talented and creative designer,he has a quick intellect and discerning eye.He brings his expertise to all aspects of the practice,from project management to graphic design.Craig has authored articles for Athletic Business Magazine and is a frequent speaker at conferences on recreation and aquatics facility design. RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Paul Derda Recreation Center Broomfleld,Colorado Gypsum Community Recreation Center Colorado Longmont Recreation Center Colorado Las Cruces Regional Recreation&Aquatic Center New Mexico EDUCATION Flagstaff Aquaplex Arizona University of Pennsylvania Master of Architecture Cottonwood Recreation Center Arizona Stanford University Crown Mountain Recreation Center Basalt,Colorado Bachelor of Arts in Urban Studies Wheat Ridge Recreation Center Colorado University of Colorado Denver Graduate School of Policy WECMRD Fieldhouse Edwards,Colorado Denver Community Leadership Forum Gunnison Community Center Aquatic Addition Colorado REGISTRATIONS Grand Valley Community Recreation Center Study Colorado Green Building Certification Institute Brighton Adult Activity Center Colorado LEED8 Accreditation Fraser Valley Recreation Center Concept Design Winter Park,Colorado PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Bradburn Community Clubhouse Westminster,Colorado Guest Lecturer:"Planning&Design of a Recreation Center,"University of Northern Oconomowoc Community Center Site Selection&Feasibility Study Wisconsin Colorado Physical Education Department Waunakee Village Center Wisconsin Guest Critic:University of Colorado Denver School of Architecture Columbine Country Club Clubhouse Addition,Pool&Tennis Colorado Judge:Athletic Business Facility of Merit Heather Gardens Adult Community Recreation Center Study Aurora,Colorado Awards American Institute of Architects United States Green Building Council SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS PUBLICATIONS • 2010 Athletic Business Conference: 2009 City by Design:"Barker Rinker linkedin.com/in/craigbouck "Innovation and Evolution:The Future of Seacat Architecture" Community Recreation Center Design" 2009 Parks&Recreation Magazine: craigbouck@brsarch.com 2010 Athletic Business Conference: "What's Hogging All the Energy?" "What's Hot,What's Not?Trends 2008 Parks&Recreation Magazine: in Facility Programming,Design& "Designing for the Ages" Technology" • 2008 Architect Colorado Magazine: Asso• National Recreation&Park "Recreation Centers Invite Community Association Midwest Regional Members to Enjoy Healthier Lifestyles" Conference:`Operate Your Recreation Center with No Subsidy,"with Steve 2007 Recreation Management Russell Magazine:"Parks&Community Recreation Centers:Building Active, • 2009 Athletic Business Conference: Involved Communities.A Look at Tends "Time for Your Facility Physical: Design, in Parks&Community Recreation Operations&Energy Strategies for Lean Centers" Times" BARKER RINKER SEACAT© ARCHITECTURE WW PAGE IS I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN. MONTANA FRANK BUONO PRINCIPAL Frank has an exuberant curiosity,a passion for the details and a can-do attitude.He is a principal and director of information technology, having won several awards by his fellow staff deeming him one of the most valuable people in the office.He has developed many systems that allow us to streamline our information management process,enabling all to be more efficient. Frank divides his time between IT and development of early concept drawings for feasibility studies and pre-design services.Whether his role on a given team is project r� manager or design team member,he listens,contributes and is"always thinking." RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE APEX Fieldhouse Arvada,Colorado EDUCATION University of Kentucky WECMRD Fieldhouse Edwards,Colorado College of Architecture Gypsum Recreation Center Colorado Bachelor of Architecture Centre College, Danville,Kentucky Steamboat Springs Recreation Center Feasibility Study Colorado Bachelor of Science in Government Mid Valley Recreation Center Study Colorado Harvard University The Salvation Army Ray&Joan Kroc Corps Community Center Phoenix,Arizona Graduate School of Design Summer Program North Tahoe Recreation Feasibility Study&Concept Design California London School of Economics Owensboro Recreation Feasibility Study Kentucky Summer Semester — National Park Service Beaver Meadows Visitor Center Renovation Estes Park,Rocky Mountain PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES National Park,Colorado AIA Colorado Technology Committee National Park Service R.O.L.L.Building Rocky Mountain National Park,Colorado Denver AEC IT Roundtable Devil's Thumb Activity&Conference Center Tabernash,Colorado National AEC IT Roundtable Devil's Thumb Lodge Tabernash,Colorado frankbuono@brsarch.com University of Colorado at Boulder Williams Village Student Housing* Boulder Community Hospital Arapahoe Campus* Colorado The Summit Corporate Center* Broomfield,Colorado Eldorado Ridge Office Building* Broomfield,Colorado *with OzArchitecture,Boulder,Colorado SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS 2011-AIA Colorado Annual • 2011 Colorado Parks and Recreation Conference, Professional Practice Association Annual Conference_ Session: `The Forecast for Cloud "Innovation and Evolution of the Computing" Recreation Center" 2010 National Association of State Park • 2011 Colorado Parks and Recreation Directors Annual Conference:"Green Association Annual Conference: "A New Building-LEED and Beyond" Concept in Public Recreation Facilities: The Anti-Gravity Center" BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 19 Principal Architect =I Ben Loyd Architectum,Inc PrincipaLArchitect/President, LEEDTm AP EDUCATION Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 1986 Bachelor of Architecture 2009 Master of Architecture PROFESSIONAL LICENSES Montana-Registered Architect No. 1678 PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS American Institute of Architects USGBC LEED v2.2 Accreditation-2007 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Comma-Q Architecture,Inc.-Bozeman, MT 1994-Present President/Principal Architect Architecture,Construction Management and Estimating Project Administration and Design Montana State University-Bozeman 1995-Present Assistant Adjunct Professor of Architecture First&Second Year Design, Historic Preservation Paradigm Architects, P.C.- Missoula, MT 1994 Residential and Commercial Architectural Design Planning&Coordination Llewellyn Const, Mgmt, Inc.-Three Forks, MT Selected Projects 1991-1993 Bozeman High Schoot On-site Supervision, Scheduling, Budgeting The Trail.Head Coordination, Design West Paw Design MSU ADA Projects Sortun-Vos Architects-Seattle,WA Starky's Authentic Americana Firehole Ranch 1989-1990 Northside Architectural Design Bozeman Schools BeLgrade Schools Kuhn/Riddle Architects-Amherst, MA Monforton School. 1987-1989 PLonk Architectural Design, Historic Preservation, Community Food Co-op Architectural Illustration Department 3 Courtroom Mercury Advertising COMMUNITY SERVICE/AFFILIATIONS Fort Benton Schools Member: North VaLLey Public Library Story Mansion Assessment City of Bozeman Parking Commission 2010-current Story Mansion Rehabilitation Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board 1999-2006 oryMaBozem nonRehieLibrary Bozeman FiLm FestivaL2003 Talbot Residence Five Rivers District of the American Red Cross 2000-2001 PAGE 20 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROJECT APPROACH, PROCESS AND METHODS Public Process Experience News Media encourage meetings with all interested Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture has • We believe it is important to meet with parties or stakeholders who might affect been playing a leadership role in public the news media to inform them of the the project including regulatory and process on nearly all our projects since project process encouraging as much other government agencies, user groups, visibility o our early beginnings over 35 years ago. tY as possible. adjacent property owners,businessorganizations,impacted businesses and We pride ourselves in being able to engage all members of the public to help — others we may identify with you. them create"their community center". Public Open Houses We work with our clients from the onset Presentations or work sessions are to determine how much community designed to achieve a variety of objectives involvement is necessary.The following from informational only to highly engaged are suggestions for how we would begin participation.We have included several the project: active public forums for your project. • Assemble a Project Steering These are planned to solicit input and Committee composed of City Staff,Parks / response from the general public. Some &Recreation Commission members successful ideas for these meetings and citizens that are connected to the Community members playing the Program include: Card Game community and have the enthusiasm • Hold events in highly trafficked areas-a and energy to make sure the project is a priority for the communi shopping center,a City hall,etc. p ty. Newsletters • Develop a Mission Statement and goals • Advertise the events through g Publish periodic newsletters about for the Center that all citizens and special the project. Explain the mission and the newsletters,PSA's on radio and TV,through flyers in utility bills, local interest groups can adopt as their own goals and activities to accomplish. Ask newspaper,at public buildings. Have and against which all project goals can be for feedback and announce schedules of Steering Committee distribute their measured. public meetings. feedback network. • Make sure the community feels apart Web Page of the process and has ownership in the Provide babysitting and snacks. project. Have a web page where the public can look at the progress of the project and Use games such as"dotocracy"to Recommend refinements to the can respond/comment through e-mail,a prioritize program elements and site process to maximize stakeholder input dedicated blog thread or twitter. selection. Make sure that everyone, and support. Telephone Hot Line including children,participates in • Assist and lead,where appropriate, voting. advisory group and focus group meeting • Have a "Hot Line"where people can call and ask for information or give their discussions. input into the project. • Lead community wide open houses Develop a Matrix and workshops. • Develop an operational business plan With the Steering Committee and/or simultaneously with the design. the Owner,we develop a matrix of issues and groups/organizations to identify • Provide marketing/informational potential conflicts. This is a technique materials. that identifies concerns,possible conflicts Some of the strategies and devices and issues early.Once identified,a Community Memberplaying dotocracy we have used in the past to assure strategy to address these issues can be community-wide involvement have developed. Presentation Materials included: Engage all Stakeholders We develop presentation tools such as • At the outset of a project,we boards,charts,power point presentations BARKER RINKER SEACAT C___ ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 21 PROJECT APPROACH. PROCESS AND METHODS and models(both for public presentation and a clear understanding of shared costs • Maximize participation of team and display). The information and and benefits. members and stakeholders graphics we provide electronically and The Work Plan • Consider choices in a context of the can be used for fund raising events, The first step in any community planning best current information brochures,grant proposals and other similar activities. process is to develop a detailed Work Maintain a creative energy to look for Plan for your project based on knowledge the big opportunities in your project Key Issues for Success we've gained from the City and significant The key issues for a successful design experience with similar community Prioritizing Games process and outcome for a community recreation center projects in Montana and These are early program phase exercises project are building consensus quickly throughout the country. We have included that allow the project team and your and making timely decisions. Typical in our proposal a preliminary draft of public to participate in prioritizing what impediments to moving forward a Work Plan for your review.The key can be accomplished within funds are control of the budget,meeting objectives of this document are to: available. A goal is to maximize buy- jurisdictional requirements,reaching in and support of all stakeholders to • Articulate a specific timeline organized cam inevitable re wired agreement with all of the stakeholders around key events or Workshops q promises.One and incomplete business planning. of the activities we have used early in We start associating construction Clarify specific objectives and the programming/concept phase is and operational costs with program participants for each Workshop a way to identify the square foot size elements from the very beginning of • Clarify work activities and Deliverables and construction cost of each of the discussions. Site issues such as zoning for each Work Period between Workshops. program components,their relative changes,utility access,drainage, expense in terms of maintenance,and Workshops their operational/cost recover sustainability and environmentaly value. We believe in the Workshop Process put this information on a series of concerns have to be identified early. as a tool to focus project activities and We p Additionally, if partnerships are to be cards and have the Steering Committee, participants. Workshops are highly prioritize the cards seriously considered,inter-governmental planned events to move the project public Forum and staff p agreements need to be discussed.There with their cumulative value adding up to through key milestones. The process the budget.This tool is identified as the needs to be a commitment to the project allows the Project Team to: g "Program Card Game"in the attached work plan. Phasing Strategies Having a clear vision of potential facility Facility Administration spaces additions can clarify 2,035 g,s.f S253,000 the"big picture" :N�bnof,WyUnCbrC oe for all and optimize other opportunities •Cmre:naim Of'm •RKe01m+Mrtvq Afll[Ye�,tre AYf1eM SKre�", on the site. It is important to A—"So Ad Off project P •�Speriepafs Vh14 Are. consider these early and plan for them in •51—C..RMt—.SYII B—k R— initial phases. MyA NMYrw lw XKM.E - Operational Costs xpeme — We advocate balancing your service objectives with revenue considerations. We believe a good community center Indoor Leisure Pool offers"something for all",yet should 7,503 g s f. .�a.A. 52,811.000 to be planned to minimize subsidy -�P •-� -• requirements. Making patron utilization projections a visible part of the early ` w,p planning process can help decision R•"•"' Exp•n.•_4 I- making. Ken Ballard of Ballard*King& --•. =':� Associates will lead this critical portion of the planning process. Ballard*King BARKER RINKER SEACATAIII& I ARCHITECTUREW yq PAGE 22 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROJECT APPROACH, PROCESS AND METHODS specializes in developing detailed and Sustainable Design strengthening community through building accurate operations pro-formas for In the process of creating projects for re-use and sensitive urban design. community recreation/aquatics facilities. our clients,we at BRS are committed Wellness looks at creating places whose With extensive experience as operators to developing our skills as teachers and activities and environmental qualities of public recreation centers as well as advocates. We believe the increasing make us healthier. Quality of Life can developing operating budgets for over 75 demand that public buildings be be enhanced by paying special attention centers, Ballard*King has an enviable exemplary of the best ideas in sustainable to how public spaces can support track record where well over 90%of thinking calls for a thoughtful process community connections and interactions. their facilities have outperformed their to inform and guide decision making. Finally,we think public buildings can budget projections. Those that have not Public facilities receive a wide variety of Teach sustainable thinking to the many met projections have usually changed stakeholder input and agency review that people who use them that can be applied their amenities,developed a different can create tricky territory for decision to their home or office environments. operating philosophy or altered the makers as they seek to balance the needs We are optimistic about the future at BRS. projected fee schedule. of all. Our architects and consulting teams are We believe these business planning We feel the architect should be pro- especially excited about our opportunity services should be integrated throughout active in raising awareness,providing to help create a more sustainable future our work plan.Some of the focus areas choices and helping facilitate"best value" through design. include: partnerships,market analysis, decisions unique to each community. This approach supports our firm's Technology and Communication operational feasibility analysis of pp program elements and an operational mission of Designing Inspired Community Efficient and effective communication Architecture. is critical to a successful project. For pro-forma listing detailed budgets for this reason,we employ a number of expense and revenue projections, We aspire to promote a process of software tools to assist in reaching staffing,operating hours and scheduling, sustainable design that embraces as broad to audience as possible. attendance estimates,fee structures and conservation,wellness,quality of life Primary in our methodology is the use maintenance plans, and teaching. Conservation includes the of three-dimensional modeling software traditional areas of resource and fiscal throughout the conceptual design conservation but also preserving and process.From the early stages of our Process we are able to engage the project team and public in virtual explorations of the project.In our workshops we have the ability to explore ideas for site and building options in real-time -viewing the project from all angles and perspectives which enables the project team to make \` decisions with greater understanding and confidence.The refined concept design model can then be used as a dynamic wayto help educate the public about the � project. BRS provides virtual exploration through the use of three-dimensional modeling BARKER RINKER SEACAT� Comn►G FAR C R I T E C TU RE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN. MONTANA I PAGE 23 PROJECT APPROACH, PROCESS AND METHODS Examples of Public Outreach Publications 1 O N 5 •i MRYYPXF[LOIRNY YITTI[L■IaR n1�Ml CsmmYRIq CMLN - , Spaces to ------------ -------- - -- --- Add tommunitl/ Referendum To A centeri N�� proposed To 1—I �. - .=t .1. Wi......,d e..1,,,,, `I i-: ww4u�.G„ •.it �r.«:�••, v.' r c. ,o.zmo..av�«'.'��1 ,..w�.,y• «,,,,,,..����N wn�e+.",.,.++o..... .._ �w ma•o,e � sm ro.a° "'.rd....++•r an••'.""` a e",ew+• '"^'w.wew.� ., w,e..a.,. ��� °'w:...nwrr.e.wm•a=•'"A„e„,e.w,•... '°"",w<"..,� .."xw..e"w...°'... �wwM a.s. d.v+v"„"I.G,w✓.MJ' pCnM.•ve^^' "Mp'�.mnr•^^^A°" .o,...<.bm.r+r Orv' 4v G,•ereme rewwbe W-•um MVlx.Mwa �,._+W"r°'I.uM'ed W�^��`p�� �._._. w,mu'C� � TI"'M�d��,nr r��d..lY w•� �wad",Nt W".w,"�+d�•M✓�a4v+^�b� 0,.�W.�Pu, ivM Mom.. y,ne e.�r•Jw.F Mvu4•.?•�•nm 1 M •�•ywv�,r,��wr.p�.�..wV^a..'pd RmvW^. M.. � yp,YOnP"•°,nnM�.,d nnvm!"•e A...d�. Nd.mmw•v...w M""•°W a,�dpw edon cm, i,.n.. m�b.vnr�"m+ewui..n.��w �.rw p..w"+��.M,wr• ��y.w,• 6rw�w.p„ t G'^.a...e WuW.9.^i"n."r,,.. TMl imbn.a,au Upp.r Fbd Ft. Cottonwood Community Recreation Center Cottonwood Community p-wry; p°P>.L CemmuM yRkn mroR Gne M1 Recreation Center -- e•.r•1ee•�••��•a,A'Recieation er,d Apurtia C[nper reeks to rcRho rotary eM Cwnq _ ••••, , � /, {•�, ��cy.. _ lhtwte%(a a(es and ad�ie+a.d ruseanaWY(W(AT^e nrcd(er udmr rtcreoLb.octimes _ ,Y ( _ -.e•r... the d N nrhe Yedc voRq. `, 1.. dunumvmi@fsttmwwCs comrmenmcID wriemM'✓nD�°'t C''ry v( _ •� �'�``�� - µussnn slaamenr/N�me Im+�'r soar ana oe+Tn Concept ntoaa w -- - _- ru u,arm�arrw '. `-r "�w��,"�� eR'^N4L Cammudry R.rmtlen G..nr A New Cemmenhy Recreation Comm for Canmwood Yam. , 'w `a�c""'^•'"�"'•+w4•-w ra- ,"��"� h�a ca�r..w-u" nie.Re lnpa.M CocXnwseG Csmmudry Recre.Ibn Fnrsr •"�•--'• r"wr.-►•+..Y.�,.+n�r•.r•+•�4„ar�.� ..-...,re �'^' v.v...• �+.v.. •s.� v�>µ�w cxwo,n� ✓..Wn���. ''�"�� 1. .a..r.��.a_�. � �•.�•...,.. w'�ua� '. i-iE G_ .` n ..�..w-'n ranii•.nau mL.vesr ��� � i , -"� I BARKER RINKER SEACAT_ ARCHITECTUREMW L•pQ 1 PAGE 24 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE Preliminary Work Plan r Lead 31-0ct-11 ■ Assist o Review 1.0 PHASE ONE-Data Collection,Market Analysis&Evaluation of Citizen Preferences Team Involvement Activity Scope Description BRS CQ B'K 1.1 Board Approves Selection of Consultant/Contract Approval r January 2012 Notification of Consultant and Teaming Strategy *Contract approval Schedule and timeline approval 1.2 Work Period-Program Review.Research&Planning-Mission/Goals.Conceptual Program r 1 week Planning and Research for the following: •Project vision,goals and objectives •Preliminary program review discussion •Schedule and timeline approval •Priorities and phasing options •Review work to date,surveys,programs,plans,traffic analysis or studies and all previous data 'Gather utility,zoning,adjacent neighborhood information *Schedule,budget,and project delivery objectives 1.3 Project Team Kick Off Meeting-Mission/Goals.Conceptual Markel Analysis&Program r r Early Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard February Introduce team and discuss conceptual plan process 2012 Project vision,goals and objectives • Involvement plan for City,neighboring communities,and stakeholders Preliminary program review discussion Priorities and phasing options Current and future demands with the community Discuss design potential Schedule,budget,and project delivery objectives • Identify constraints and parameters for market analysis •Markel •Potential site locations •Mission and goals Community input and information process • Discuss sustainable design/high performance project goals and Criteria *Discuss goals for sustainable certification(LEED),if any 'Discuss goals for energy efficiencies,energy reduction goals,or net zero approaches, 'Explore opportunities for water use reduction,material and resource protection,air quality...etc. Prepare a scorecard of sustainable/high performance approaches to be utilized as a goal • Tour existing facilities,sites,local recreation amenities,key architectural character sites and get to know the community • Begin Assessment Analysis of Existing Facilities Community Workshop 1-Programming and Citizen Preferences r Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard Conduct Public Community Workshop *Introduce project team and discuss conceptual planning process Present work-to-date with staff and committees Present project mission statement and goals *Present results of the Citizen Statistical Survey (if optional survey performed) Collect citizens'comments on potential programs for the Recreation/Aquatic Center "Play Dot-ocracy"or"Program Card"game in public meeting • Conduct/participate in stakeholder meetings(up to 5)reviewing special needs of specific groups in separate sessions Youth groups,senior groups Swim teams,sport groups,and other teams Community theater,music,dance,arts groups and leagues BARKER RINKER SEACAT Co ►O ARCHITECTUREVW RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 25 PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE Team Involvement Activity Scope Description BRS CQ B'K 1.4 Work Period-Project Proaram Market Analysis and Data Evaluation 3 weeks Draft mission statement and goals Consolidate previous programming and community center design ideas,if any • Gather data and prepare Markel Analysis: 'Service area identification for recreation/aquatics center 'Review of demographic characteristics/community profile Population/age range/income Population growth Businesses/schools Trends Review and analyze each existing operation of programs/services Meet with parks and recreation staff Master planlexisting studies Organizational structure/wage scales Existing recreation/aquatic program statistics Demand for programs/services Review competitive market analysis Facilities and services offered in the area Operational structure Admission rates/attendance numbers/expense and revenue comparison Comparison with national,regional and local participation statistics and trends NSGA standards 1.5 Statistical Valid Survey Feb-12 Conduct Statistical Valid Survey to prepare for Phase 2 where a program will be developed Develop survey instrument/questions Establish survey type(telephone/mail/combo) Administer community wide survey(300 responses guaranteed) Compile and interpret survey results 1.6 Partnership Potentials Feb-12 Identification of potential partnerships Determination of realistic partnering opportunities 1.7 Present Summary of Phase One Planning 1 March 2012 Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard Present to Staff and/or Village Board the Phase One Report 'Review Phase One Report Present in PowerPoint formal 'Review recommendation for next steps End of Phase Deliverables: Phase One Report: Written narrative of process to date Written summary of data collected Market analysis of similar facilities,services,and programs Survey format(if optional survey performed) Survey results tabulated and analyzed(if optional survey performed) 'Agendas and minutes for all meetings Recommendations for next steps Existing Facilities Analysis Report BARKER RINKER SEACATA ARCHITECTURE 1WCoG PAGE 26 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE 2.0 PHASE TWO-Program Preparation,Site Evaluation,Selection and Planning Team Involvement Activity Scope Description BRS CQ B'K 2.1 GoTo Meeting Phase Two Preparation r March 2012 Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard • GoTo Meeting to review: `Discuss deliverables listed below Review site and building program options in relation to Phase One results •Review sites and plan a methodology to arrive at a recommended site selection -Review and discuss site selection process -Alternative sites analysis and comparisons -Site evaluation criteria determination and matrix 'Goals for the Ideal site Plan for Community Workshop 2 2.2 Work Period 2-Program Development f Programmatic Project Budget r ■ s weeks . Organize information garnered from Community Workshop 1,stakeholder meetings and staff/committee input sessions and statistical valid survey • Prepare project program of activities and space for both building and site uses. • Prepare site analysis for the three sites considered for selection including: Access to site,roads,bike,bus,pedestrian Adjacency I proximity to compatible or non compatible neighbors 'Internal traffic flow:vehicular and pedestrian circulation Environmental/sustainable criteria(solar access,topography,natural features,wetlands,etc,) Parking and service drive needs Landscaping,plazas,walks,outdoor programming spaces opportunities 'Utililies,detention needs,maintenance issues • Prepare up to three(3)conceptual site plan alternatives for each of the three sites considered for selection showing variations for: Program based building blocking plans to scale test fitted to site Suggested development,utility,infrastructure impacts and plans Access.roads,parking,pedestrian and service circulation layouts Landscaping,plazas,walks,outdoor programming spaces opportunities Sustainable design approaches • Prepare project budgets for each alternative for all sites comparing relative costs for development 'Program based building construction budgets •Suggested development,utility,infrastructure cost variables for each budget 'Site&utility improvement f restoration I demolition budgets 'Fees and development budgets 'Contingencies • Prepare criteria matrix diagram used for scoring conceptual site plan altemative: Planning opportunities Environmental criteria •Utilities,detention needs,maintenance issues • Prepare for Community Workshop 2 2.3 Team Meeting and Community Workshop 2-Conceptual Site Plan Alternatives for All Sites r April 2012 Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard • Conduct Team meeling in preparation of the Public Community Workshop • Conduct Public Community Workshop Present work-to-date with staff and committees Present Conceptual Site Planning Alternatives with wall mounted plans 'Have public respond to alternatives gathering comments through: -Public applying comments on sticky notes directly to site plans hung on walls -Public discussion for each alternative Collect public comment cards at end of meeting • Prepare meeting notes summary documenting all comments heard • Make recommendation for preferred alternative for further development 1.4 Work Period 4-Prepare Fully Developed Preferred Conceptual Site Plan r 2 weeks Select site for refinement into a fully developed preferred conceptual site plan • Update budget reflecting preferred conceptual site plan • Prepare Draft Phase Two Report and Recommendations for review • Revise as directed to arms at Phase Two Report and Recommendations 2.5 Deliverables: ♦ L r April2011 Phase Two Report and Recommendations: 'Written narrative of process to date Updated Mission and Goals Statement 'Site analysis for each site Detailed program of activities and space for both building and site uses. 'Site aftemalives for each site Project budget model matrix of each afternalive 'Site planning matrix scoring site criteria and amenities of each site 'Recommended site selection and conceptual site plan 'Project budget model matrix of recommended conceptual site plan 'Project sustainability goals and budget allocations to achieve Agendas for all meetings 'Meeting minutes Recommendation for next steps BARKER RINKER SEACAT pp Q ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 27 PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE 3.0 PHASE THREE-Site and Building Design&Operation/Revenue Projections Team Involvement Activity Scope Description BRS CQ B'K 3.1 Work Period-Conceptual Building Plan and Elevations Development V g 4 weeks Organize information from Community Workshop 2 and review with committee Prepare alternative approaches to building plan layout working with the preferred site plan including: Program relationships and adjacencies for each floor plan alternative Internal circulation,efficiencies,mechanical and support spaces `Opportunities for phasing and future expansion Prepare exterior elevations and sectional possibilities with three dimensional computer model to include: Massing and roof characteristics Building sections showing inferiors of key spaces and vertical relationships Window fenestrations 'Exterior materials Incorporate sustainable design/high performance project strategies into design alternatives Potential energy efficiencies,energy reduction goals,or net zero approaches Opportunities for water use reduction,material and resource protection,air quality...e1c. Prepare a scorecard of sustainable/high performance approaches Update project budget model matrix to plan and elevation alternatives 3.2 Prepare Operational Proforma Analysis to include- c0muffent with Programming and Activity Evaluation: 3.1 'Community Center project component prioritization for revenues and expenses 'Validate the facility program Operating structure and parameters Philosophy of operation Priority of use Feasibility and Operations Analysis: Develop fee structure Drop-in Multiple admissions/annual passes Family,corporate,group Rentals Sources of income -Identification and verification of revenue sources Develop a staff plan Establish maintenance standards Operating cost projections Develop a line item budget Personnel by position Contractual services Commodities Capital replacement Revenue generation projections Develop a line item accounting Admissions Annual/multiple admissions Programs and services Rentals Other revenue sources 'Revenue/expenditure comparisons -Cost recovery level Project recommendations/profitability of options Marketing strategy Program/service considerations Prepare for Project Team Workshop 3 3.3 Team Meeting and Community Workshop 3-Conceptual Building Plan&Elevations and Operational May 2012 Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard Present work-to-date with staff and committees Conduct Public Community Workshop 3: Present conceptual building and elevation alternatives Have public respond to Community Center design gathering public comments through: Public providing comments on sticky notes directly to drawings hung on walls Public discussion for each alternative Collect public comment cards at end of meeting Present Operations and Revenue Projections Review updated project budget model matrix Prepare meeting notes summary documenting all comments heard Make recommendation for preferred alternative for further development BARKER RINKER SEACATAM JARCHITECTUREMW C0 PAGE 2B I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,SOZEMAN,MONTANA PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE Team Involvement Activity Scope Description BRS Ca B'K 3.4 Work Period 4-Prepare Fully Developed Preferred Conceptual Proiect Plan r M III 3 weeks • Prepare Recreation/Aquatic Center plans and elevations for the recommended building layout in relationship to approved conceptual site plan. Update project budget model matrix reflecting preferred conceptual site plan Prepare Draft Phase Three Report and Recommendations for staff and committee review Revise as directed to arrive at Phase Three Report and Recommendations • Combine all three end of phase reports into a final Project Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report • Prepare PowerPoint Presentation of Project Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report for City Council presentation and review with committee Deliverables: Phase Three Report and Recommendations: Written narrative of process to dale Updated mission and goals statement Two building plan and elevation alternatives Project budget model matrix update Building plan alternative matrix scoring each alternatives Recommended building Floor plan and elevation Perspective rendering of exterior front elevation of the building in its site context Project sustainability goals and budget allocations to achieve 'Agendas for all meetings Meeting minutes •Recommendation for next steps Project Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report(combines end of phase reports) Prepare PowerPoint Presentation of Project Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report for City Council presentation Provide color bound book of Project Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report Provide one set of presentation boards showing site and building plans,elevations,sections,and exterior perspective view(scale 1/8"=V-0") • Provide electronic copies of all deliverables in PDF format. 3.5 Team Meeting and City Council Presentation-Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report r 0 r .rune 2012 Attending:Craig Bouck,Frank Buono,Ben Lloyd,Ken Ballard Present work-to-date with staff and committees prior to Council Meeting Present Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report and receive comments Presentation with PowerPoint showing all graphics Distribute Conceptual Design and Feasibility Report Presentation Boards on display Available Additional Services Computer Fly Through Animations of Site and Building Additional Color Perspective Renderings of Project Traffic Analysis • Environmental Analysis,Hazmat Studies,Site Surveys,Soils Reports, Aquatic Pool Detailed Designs BARKER RINKER SEACAT ARCHITECTURE ' RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 29 Non-Discrimination Affirmation Form Discrimination in the performance of any contract awarded under this [notice/invitation] on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability is prohibited. This prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the awarded entity's employees and to all subcontracts. Every entity submitting under this [notice/invitation] must sign and return the required affirmation. AFFIRMATION Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture [name of entity submitting] hereby affirms it will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or disability in the performance of work performed for the city of Bozeman, Montana, if a contract is awarded to it, and also recognizes the eventual contract, if awarded, will contain a provision prohibiting discrimination as described above and that this prohibition shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture [name of entity submitting] employees and to all subcontracts it enters into in performance of the agreement with the City of Bozeman, Montana. Signature , Craig Bouck, President/CEO Printed name of person authorized to sign on behalf of the respondent BARKER RINKER SEACAT Cp, O ARCHITECTURE RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY. BOZEMAN. MONTANA I PAGE 30 fib br BALLARD*KING �l & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants Ballard*King&Associates was established in 1992 by Ken Ballard and Jeff King in response to the need for market-driven and reality-based planning for recreation facilities. B*K has h�1 achieved 19 years of success by realizing that each client's needs are specific and unique. With over 70 combined years of facility management and planning experience in the public, non-profit,collegiate and private sector,our consulting firm has completed over 500 projects in 47 states and has working relationships with more than 50 architects coast-to-coast.We are honored to be the recipient of five Athletic Business Facilities of Merit Awards. We form a consulting team that provides a variety of pre- and post-design services for clients who are considering construction of a sports,recreation, aquatic,or wellness facility. Our vast practical experience enables us to guide clients through the challenges of planning, constructing, opening and operating a facility. From pinpointing specifics to broad visions, B*K provides services to ensure the long-term success of your project. Ballard*King&Associates offers a broad range of services. These services can be integrated into a design team or contracted independently. Some of our services include: feasibility studies,operations analysis, maintenance cost estimates, revenue projections, staffing levels, budgeting,marketing plans and third party design review. Additionally,we perform audits for existing facilities as well as parks and recreation master plans. By bringing practical,proven experience to a project we can accurately represent the client's best interests. Our firm has a keen awareness of the impact a sports or recreational facility has on the community and the organization that operates it. Thanks to our extensive field experience we are able to provide assistance with practical tools,an uncommon ability to see the overlooked and view your project from a wealth of expertise and knowledge. Teamwork is a core aspect of our company. We work together ensuring all clients are receiving the wealth of knowledge our B*K team brings. The success of any project begins with an integrated,mutually valued approach to the individual needs and goals of each client.Thus,we team with you and for you. First and foremost to Ballard*King & Associates is our reputation of being a company of I strong ethical character. Our top concern is our client's best interests and our approach is I always honest and down-to-earth. We aim to help each client see the full potential of their project by providing trustworthy services to achieve their goal. Let us help you,move forward! Ballard*King and Associates is committed to comprehensive planning and operations consulting services,providing for the effective and efficient use of available resources to develop and operate sports.recreation and wellness facilities. 2743 E.Ravenhill Circle*Highlands Ranch,CO 80126* (303)470-8661 *www.ballardking.com*BKA@ballardking.com RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY.BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 31 b - BAT.T.ART)�I��TG l� & •ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants SPLASH MONTANA AQUATIC CENTER Missoula,MT Missoula can be proud of the success they have achieved with their dream to build two j exciting water parks called "Splash Montana"and"The Lake."These aquatic facilities were achieved through the community working together to create family -"- -- j oriented places for refreshment and recreation. They believe these aquatics facilities are not just swimming pools,but a long-term investment in their health and - community. Splash Montana is an outdoor aquatic facility with amenities that includes three 3-story waterslides, a lazy river, party shelters, a cafe and family locker rooms. The Lake is the addition of a 50-meter pool with eight-lap lanes. This 12,300 SF of water space added to Splash Montana will provide competitive swimming, fitness classes, swim lessons, lap swimming, kayaking and scuba classes. The Lake is also used for water polo, water volleyball and basketball. It has a wheelchair-accessible ramp and lift and is fully ADA-compliant. The total cost of the project was about$1.2 million. J s B*K's scope of services for this exciting project included: project overview, market / analysis, programming, concept review and _ operations pro-forma. _ RallareftKing raid Avvoriare%is conurtitted ur and aperaliom con.vtddrfg ser►ive%.providing for file e11ective ecnd efficient use of arcdlahle resources to develop and operate sperm,recreation and wellness facilities. 2743 E. Ravenhill Circle x Highlands Ranch.CO 80126*(303)470-3661 * www.ballardkiiig.com* BKACY,ballardking.cam PAGE 32 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY. BOZEMAN,MONTANA b BAT.T.ART)*DING l� & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants LAWRENCE AQUATIC CENTER Lawrence, Kansas _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; The Lawrence Aquatic Center is 53,000 SF and cost $9.5 million. The facility is home to the City of Lawrence Aquatic Department, adjacent to Lawrence Free State High School - -. and connected to it by a tunnel, and home to _ swimming and diving teams. This indoor Ella n on III aquatic center features a 10-lane, 50-meter r + -t-� tray r competition pool with diving well, an underwater classroom, a separate family pool with zero depth entry, water slide and interactive children's play features. The center includes meeting rooms, shower/locker rooms, 750-seat balcony, and j -; cafe-style concession area. Both the locker „ cacti rooms and pools are fully accessible by both 41 ramp entry and lift. Named Best of Aquatics in 2004 by International Aquatics Magazine. Ballard*King & Associates performed a market analysis and needs assessment study, 1 - ON focus group sessions, development of program options and operations cost t projections for the Lawrence Aquatic Center. Ballartl*King and Assex•iales is cnnnnitted to comprehensive pkutnht,¢and operatinaa cnasaltin.e.serrices,providing for rile effective and efficient use of nvailah/e resanrres to develop mul operate sports.recreation and wellness facilities. 2743 E. Ravenhill Circle* Highlands Ranch.CO 80126 *(303)470-8661 * www.ballardkinR.cotn* BKAckballardking.com I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 33 br BALLARD*KING �1 & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants FLAGSTAFF AQUAPLEX Flagstaff,AZ The Aquaplex is a multi-generational, multi- function recreation center with aquatics and so much more. The recreation center was designed to serve both the local community and also tourists. The center includes a large fitness and aerobic area overlooking the pool, cardio equipment, gymnasium,classrooms, 2 story rock climbing wall, ' lounge with fireplace, meeting and banquet space 'r with catering kitchen, an elevated walk/jog track, - — childcare space, game room, vending machines and birthday party room. _ The aquatic components of the center include a " -a 8,643 square foot solar heated leisure pool, a lazy L river current channel with vortex, kid's splash area with zero depth entry and play features, plus 3 lane lap pool and 2 slides. T 17% In conjunction with an architectural team, B*K completed for the City of Flagstaff a comprehensive feasibility study for this aquatic and multi- generational recreation facility. B*K's scope of services included the following: partnerships, focus groups, market analysis, programming, stakeholder meetings and operations pro-forma. Illir; 14,1,s, I Ral/ard*King and AscoriatP%is ronnnitted to and openuions ronsultinr serrires.providing for the effective and et•cieut use of available resoumes to develop and operate slx,rts.rerrett►ion and N•ellness fmWities. 2743 E. Ravenhill Circle* Highlands Ranch.CO 80126 w (303)470-8601 x www.ballardking.com* MAC,ballardking.com PAGE 34 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA KING b l� & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants Montana Experience Splash Montana and Currents Aquatic Center Missoula, MT Billings Aquatic Facilities Master Plan Billings, MT Fort Peck Community Wellness/Recreation Center Study Wolf Point, MT Madison Valley Aquatic Center Study Ennis,MT References Splash Montana Aquatic Center and Currents Aquatic Center Ms. Donna Gaukler Director of Parks and Recreation City of Missoula 100 Hickory St Missoula, MT (406) 258-3754 Billings Aquatic Master Plan Mr. Kory Thomson Recreation Supervisor City of Billings 390 North 23`d St. Billings, MT 59101 (406) 657-8374 Bullurd*Kin,+;unit A.csociutes is committed u,comprehensive planning and operutions consubin.q services.providing for the effective and efficient use of ctrctiluhle resourres to clevehrp and operute sports,recreation umd wellness futilities. 2743 E.Ravenhill Circle Highlands Ranch,CO 80126 (303)470-8661 * wwwballardkino.com * MACOballardking.com RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY.BOZEMAN.MONTANA I PAGE 35 *1QNG br �l & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants 50 Meter Aquatic Center Project Listing Feasibility and Actual Operation EPIC Center—Ft. Collins,CO—7 years of operation Rec-Plex—St.Peters,MO—7 years of operation Feasibility and Development Georgia Tech-Olympic Pool Enclosure—Atlanta,GA University of Missouri Student Recreation Center—Columbia,MO Osborn Aquatic Center Renovation—Corvallis, OR Lawrence Aquatic Center—Lawrence,KS Operations Audit Belmont Plaza Aquatic Center—Long Beach,CA Feasibility Study Gastonia Aquatic/Recreation Center—Gastonia,NC Mobile Aquatic Center—Mobile,AL Seaside Aquatic Center—Long Beach,CA West Linn Aquatic/Recreation Center—West Linn,OR Memorial Coliseum Reuse Study—Portland,OR James City County—Williamsburg, VA Delaware Aquatic Center—Wilmington,DE Moorhead Aquatic Center—Moorhead,MN Hillsboro 53`d Ave.Recreation Center—Hillsboro,OR Bellevue Aquatic Center—Bellevue, WA Oro Valley Municipal Pool Renovation/Expansion—Oro Valley,AZ Hershey Aquatic Center—Hershey,PA PAGE 36 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA BALLARD*IQNG �1 & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants B*K Outdoor Aquatic Center Experience Aberdeen Aquatic Center* Aberdeen, SD Amazon Park Aquatic Center Eugene, OR W . Aqua Port*. Maryland Heights, MO Billings Aquatic Center Study . Billings, MT Blackbob Aquatic Center Olathe, KS Carmel Clay Aquatic Center Carmel, IN - Cheney Aquatic Center Study Cheney, WA DeSoto Aquatic Center Study DeSoto, KS Edmonds Aquatic Center Study Edmonds, WA Graydon Pool Renovation Study Ridgewood, NJ Greenfield Aquatic Center `• Greenfield, IN Marietta Aquatic Center Marietta, OH - RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 37 i I R BALLARD*IQNG & ASSOCIATES LTD Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants Ken Ballard, C.P.R.P President Professional Experience Pam, As a founding partner of Ballard*King & Associates, Ken has over 30 years experience in recreation facility operation and planning. Ballard*King & Associates was established in 1992 by Ken Ballard and Jeff King in response to the need for market driven and reality based planning for recreation facilities. In his years of work with B*K, Ken has provided planning, feasibility and operations consulting to more than 300 recreation projects across the country. Ken is well known for his vast knowledge of recreation facility development and operations. His expertise has Ken Ballard been developed over the years from a .wide breadth of experiences within the recreational field. *Education Ken's diverse experience has led to his active involvement with the Colorado Parks and Recreation Association's Recreation University of Colorado Facilities Design and Management School. For the past 13 years BS Recreation,BA History Ken has been a faculty member at the Athletic Business Certified Parks&Recreation Conferences, where he presented numerous sessions on Professional recreation facility planning. He has also been a speaker at several National Park and Recreation Association Congresses and *Professional Affiliations numerous state parks and recreation conferences. Athletic Business Magazine Prior to co-founding B*K, he was the Recreation Manager for Advisory Board the City of Thornton, CO, and was a key member of the team responsible for the pre-design phase of their recreation center. Colorado Parks &Recreation For 12 years before joining them he was the Director of the Association Englewood, CO, Recreation Center, in charge of the operation and administration of the Englewood Recreation Center, which National Recreation&Park received the 1986 "Facility of Merit" award from Association AthleticBusiness Magazine for design and operations excellence. Ken's expertise, down to earth approach and proven practical Metropolitan State College of experience combined with solid ethical values gives each client Denver—Former Adjunct Faculty superior counsel. Ballard* in,g and Asi;ocicrtes is coaunitted to comprehensive phuruing unit operation.%cousrdtiug.rerriees,prorit in for the effective and efficient me of available resources to develop and operate sports,recreation and ire Iluess facilities. 2743 E.Ravenhill Circle* Highlands Ranch,CO 80126 *(303)470-8661 * www.ballardking.com * Bl(ACkballardking.co rn PAGE 38 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA Firm Overview Overview Our ability to Effectively Listen & Involve Citizens and Clients has given Leisure Vision/ETC Institute a reputation as one of the premier public policy market research firms in the country. Leisure Vision's services focus on involving citizens, users, and stakeholders in the decision making process and developing creative and sustainable funding strategies. Core services of the firm involve conducting How Respondents Would Vote on a Sales Tax statistically valid phone and maiUphone services Issue if It Included Projects of Highest Priority to Household Members and related market research. We have conducted by percentage of respondents more than 600 surveys for parks and recreation Vote it,Favor systems in 46 states across the Country for a wide 43' variety of projects including parks and recreation master plans, strategic plans and feasibility studies. Since 1992, the principals and associates of ETC Vote Against 8% Institute/Leisure Vision have helped secure Might Vote In Favor ii funding for more than $2.5 billion of parks and 31 Not Sure recreation projects. The firm has extensive 18% 4.une Itnn\'san FTl Imbnuc l/Jcmbtt,?nool experience conducting surveys as components of plans leading to successful voter elections. Leisure Vision's work allows the community to see itself in their planning efforts,providing buy-in and trust in the process. Examples of clients who have selected us to work with them include: Arlington County,Virginia Henderson,Nevada Peoria,Arizona Atlanta,Georgia Kansas City,Missouri Pinellas County(FL) Aberdeen, South Dakota Kalamazoo,Michigan Provo,Utah Aurora,Ohio Key Biscayne,Florida Rolla, Missouri Bend,Oregon Kirkwood, Missouri Ramsey,Minnesota Broward County, FL Las Vegas,Nevada Radnor,PA Brunswick,Maine Los Angeles, California Richmond,California Castle Rock,Colorado Macomb Township,MI Saint Paul,Minnesota Casper,Wyoming Mesa, Arizona San Diego, California Cedar Rapids,Iowa Miami,Florida San Francisco,California Champaign,IIlinois Miami-Dade County,FL Shawnee,Kansas Claremont,New Hampshire Morris County,New Jersey Shoreline,Washington Dallas,Texas Mundelein, Illinois State of Connecticut DeKalb County, Georgia Naperville,Illinois State of Rhode Island Denver, Colorado National Park Service St. Charles County,MO East Baton Rouge, LA Norfolk,Virginia St.Louis County,MO Edina,Minnesota Northville,Michigan South Burlington, VT Fairfax County,Virginia Oakland County,MI Tempe,Arizona Fort Lauderdale,Flrida Olathe,Kansas Tucson, Arizona Glendale,Arizona Overland Park,Kansas Victor,New York Greenville County, SC Owensboro,Kentucky Westchester County,NY Leisure Vision P,ECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA I PAGE 39 Firm Overview health care institutions, water and electrical utility improvements, tourism attractions, neighborhood improvements, downtown ETC revitalization projects, etc. In-House Capabilities ETC Institute has a PARENT new research center equipped with a high- COMPANY OF LEISURE VISION speed 24 station call center, state-of-the-art focus group facilities, and a mail processing ETC Institute is the parent company of center capable of processing more than Leisure Vision. ETC Institute is a 62- 30,000 pieces of mail per day. ETC person, market research firm that specializes Institute also has extensive capabilities for in the design and administration of market the administration of surveys in Spanish and research for state and local governmental other languages organizations. Areas of emphasis include: community attitude surveys, citizen In 2000, ETC Institute was selected as one satisfaction surveys, employee surveys, of the Top 10 Small Businesses in the focus groups and stakeholder interviews. Kansas City Area by the Greater Kansas The company is woman-owned and certified City Chamber of Commerce for our as a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise commitment to customer satisfaction, (DBE). Since 1982, ETC Institute has quality, and innovations in the field of completed research projects for city and market research, particularly with regard to county governments in 46 states. ETC our extensive database for benchmarking Institute has designed and administered citizen satisfaction with the delivery of local more than 2,500 statistically valid surveys and our team of professional researchers has governmental services. More than 1,700 moderated more than 1,000 focus groups firms in the metropolitan Kansas City area and 1,500 stakeholder meetings. were nominated for the honor. The Kansas City Business Journal recognized ETC Our Research is Implementation Institute as One of the Best Places to Work Oriented: ETC Institute specializes in in Greater Kansas City for our commitment helping organizations use market research to to workforce diversity. make better decisions. During the past four years, the results of our market research have lead to more than $2 billion in funding initiatives by state, municipal and county governments as well as numerous nonprofit organizations. Projects that have been funded include a wide range of community redevelopment projects, transportation initiatives, improvements to schools and Leisure Vision PAGE 40 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Experience References for Major Related Project Experience Major Related Project Experience NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY AND INDOOR RECREATION FACILITIY EXPANSION Teton County/Jackson,Wyoming Results from the survey were used to pass 2 highly successful voter election projects. COMMUNITY AND AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY(1999) Columbia, Missouri A successful sales tax voter election was held to build the facility. SURVEY FOR INDOOR AQUATIC CENTER AND MASTER PLANS(2002)(2004)(2010) Arlington County,Virginia Results from the survey were used to help pass a$75 million bond election. INDOOR FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY SURVEY Casper,Wyoming Results from the survey were used to help pass a voter election to build the center. COMMUNITY AND AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY Erie,Colorado Results from the survey were used to help pass a voter election to build the center. COMMUNITY AND AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY SURVEY St.Louis,Missouri Community Center is currently operational COMMUNITY CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY SURVEY Round Rock,Texas Facility is currently operational OUTDOOR AND INDOOR AQUATIC PROGRAM SPACES SURVEY St.Paul, Minnesota Facility is currently operational NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY AND AQUATIC CENTER Independence,Missouri Results from the survey were used to help pass a voter election to build the center. STUDENT UNION SURVEY AND VOTER ELECTION University of Missouri I Vote passed and the campus developing a$45 million addition to the campus Union. COMMUNITY CENTER CITIZEN SURVEY Ferguson,Missouri Results from the survey were used to help pass a voter election to build the center Leisure Vision RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 41 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Experience COMMUNITY ATTITUDE AND INTEREST SURVEY Aberdeen,South Dakota Results from the survey were used to help to help build the outdoor center aquatic center PARKS AND RECREATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY FOR AQUATIC CENTER Elk Grove Park District,Elk Grove,Illinois Results from the survey were used in a successful voter election for a$9 million family aquatic center NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY (2002) Key Biscayne,Florida Results from the survey were used in a successful voter election for a new recreation center FAMILY AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY NEEDS ASSESSMENT Rock Island,Illinois The pool is currently operational COMMUNITY SURVEY Grandview,Missouri Results from survey used in a successful voter campaign COMMUNITY INTEREST AND OPINION NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEYS A successful election was held to renew the annual tax for overall park system. NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY FOR MASTER PLAN (2007) Mecklenburg County, North Carolina Results from the survey help result in a $200 voter lection to fund parks and recreation facilities PARKS AND RECREATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY Lisle Park District, Illinois Survey resulted in a successful voter election to develop and operate new facilities. Leisure Vision PAGE 42 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA RESUMES OF KEY PERSONNEL RONALD A. VINE? PRESIDENT LEISURE VISION VICE-PRESIDENT ETC INSTITUTE 1999-PRESENT Education M.S., Leisure Services Administration, University of Illinois, 1975 B.S., History, University of Illinois, 1973 For more than 30 years, Mr. Vine has strategically involved citizens and clients into decision making processes that affect their lives, with these efforts resulting in over $2.5 billion of voter approved initiatives for a wide range of parks and recreation initiatives. Mr. Vine has worked on over 600 public opinion surveys and strategic planning and consulting assignments for a wide variety of open space, parks, trails and recreation master plans, strategic plans and feasibility studies for community centers, family aquatic centers, zoo's, ice-rinks, trails, etc. He has extensive highly successful experience assisting communities with projects leading to sales tax and other tax referendums. Mr. Vine has directed survey efforts in 46 states across the United States,with public sector clients of various sizes ranging up to over 10 million populations. Mr. Vine has managed Market Research Surveys for over 600 open space, parks and recreation projects including: Aberdeen(SD) Elk Grove(IL) Naperville(IL) St.Charles Ct.(MO) Aiken(SC) Fort Wayne(IN) New Haven(CT) St.Louis County(MO) Albemarle County(VA) Fulton County(GA) Normal (IL) St.Paul(MN) Arlington County(VA) Greenville CT(SC) Northville(MI) South Burlington(VT) Atlanta(GA) Henderson(NV) Oakland County(MI) Springdale(AR) Bend(OR) Huron(OH) Orlando,Florida State of Connecticut Bloomington(IN) Kansas City(MO) Palm Desert(CA) State of Rhode Island Boonville(MO) Kettering(OH) Park City(UT) Superior(CO) Canon City(CO) Key Biscayne(FL) Peoria(AZ) Tempe(AZ) Carol Stream(IL) Las Vegas(NV) Platte County(MO) The Woodlands(TX) Cedar Rapids(IA) Lawrence(KS) Portland(OR) Tyler(TX) Champaign,IL Lee Summit(MO) Pinellas County(FL) Union County(PA) Chandler(AZ) Lemont(IL) Richmond(VA) University Place(WA) Claremont(NH) Lindenhurst(IL) Rock Island(IL) University of Missouri Columbia(MO) Los Angeles(CA) San Diego(CA) Wake County(NC) Deerfield(IL) Mecklenburg CT(NC San Francisco(CA) Westchester Ct.(NY) Denver(CO) Miami(FL) Sheridan(WY) Wheeling(IL) E.Baton Rouge(LA) Morns County(NJ) Shoreline(WA) Leisure Vision RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN, MONTANA I PAGE 43 FIRM PROFILE WATER TECHNOLOGY INC DESIGN PHILOSOPHY f Water Technology, Inc's (WTI) creative energy and passion embraces the philosophy that aquatic recreation completes communities and makes them a better place to live. Founded in 1983, WTI has evaluated, designed and engineered literally hundreds of aquatic facilities throughout North America. WTI designs are forward-looking, and support dynamic community programs. Another key ingredient to a project's success is our historical database that helps us provide client's accurate cost estimates and a realistic timeline. Our solution driven planning and design philosophy emphasizes that the most successful and effective plans result from active community participation. We believe that it is important to work as a team throughout the process to address important issues, identify assets to be enhanced and challenges to overcome. Our planners engage citizens and key interest groups using various unique and highly interactive techniques. Creativity is an important aspect to our swimming pool designs.We strive to stay on the cutting edge of new trends in swimming pool design and programming.Afew of the ways we accomplish this are by attending industry trade shows, conferences and seminars. s Most importantly, WTI's designs are not simply creative and innovative -they are also functional. During all stages of Design, project managers do several engineering"reality checks"to ensure that the design that looks good will also run efficiently and smoothly after it is built.A high-quality pool design leads to cost efficient operations and usage of energy and resources. 1-' WTI is also very familiar with the materials and equipment used in aquatics facilities ,* because we are specifying these materials every day. Additionally, we keep in contact ' with clients after their aquatic facilities are open and operating;therefore, keeping abreast of how products, equipment and designs work after they leave the drawing board. ENERGY EFFICIENCY At Water Technology, Inc. we understand the importance and are committed to energy efficiency, conservation and the use of sustainable building practices.Our firm has been a proponent of energy efficient pool operations for many years and gains more experience on each project we undertake. Internally, we have a group of professionals that meet on a regular basis to discuss LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) sustainable practices and how we can apply them to our projects. We have also committed to enhance energy efficiency in its own operations. We feel that it is our responsibility to develop new ways to apply sustainable design practices to our projects and in turn encourage manufacturers that we specify to make this same commitment.Where there are challengesWe find opportunities... WTI AND STAFF Water Technology is headquartered in Beaver Dam, WI, with an additional office in Dallas, Texas and satellite offices in Norfolk, VA; Phoenix, AZ; Houston, TX. Our multi-office locations allow us to stay close with clients and projects. Our Design Portfolio includes aquatic design for the following venues: Municipal Indoor and Outdoor Pools, Community Center Pools, Family Aquatic Centers, YMCA and YWCA Pools, Competitive Venues, University and School Pools, Community Developments, Resort and Hotel Pools,Therapy and Wellness Pools, Water Playgrounds,Waterparks, Specialized Aquatic Features and Elements. We foster a challenging and rewarding workspace. We understand that the encouragement and development of each member of our staff will advance the practice of design. Our greatest assets are the people who make up the firm of Water Technology, Inc. and the communities that we serve. WTI's key personnel all have backgrounds in aquatic design, engineering and construction. We have project leaders and managers that are Engineers,Architects, and Landscape Architects which require bachelor college degrees in their related field.Many of these individuals also hold master degrees.Accounting, marketing, and business development personnel hold bachelor's degrees in their fields and drafting(Computer Aided Drafting-CAD)and administrative personnel are encouraged to hold an associates degrees or higher. It is Water Technology's experience that can help achieve a product to meet recreation and financial goals,and most importantly ensure your project is successful. W T/ w A T E R T E C H N o L o G Y I N c. LEADERS IN AQUATIC PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PAGE 44 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY.BOZEMAN, MONTANA „BENTONVILLE_ COMMUNITY CENTER STUDY BENTONVILLE, ARKANSAS poll -� 10 _ _ _. .r OWNER Water Technology, Inc, teamed with Barker Rinker Seacat City of Bentonville Architects and Ballard*King in conducting a study for the City of Parks and Recreation Department Bentonville. Water Technology was responsible for the planning, 305 SW A Street design and engineering of the aquatics portion, which consists of Bentonville,AR 72712 three pools and a body slide with deceleration runout. The three pools desired by the community, as determined through public REFERENCE(S) input,include;a Warm Water Leisure/Program Pool,a Competitive Pool, and a Whirlpool. The Competitive Pool and Whirlpool will David Wright, Manager be housed separately from the Leisure/Program pool, utilizing a Bentonville Parks and Recreation Department transparent building wall in order to provide ease of phasing these 305 SW A Street amenities and the opportunity for energy savings with different Bentonville,AR 72712 water and air temperatures in unison, while allowing each pool to (479)464-7275 operate independently without impacting the operation of the other dwright@bentonvillear.com facility. Features that will enhance operations and access include underwater pool lights, easily accessible stairs in water less than COMPLETED 4'-0”,in-wall steps,or a combination of the two.There shall be one 2010 means of egress that meets ADA Guidelines for each pool. AMENITIES Swimming ranks high among all ages as a popular recreational activity and combining competitive and leisure components into Leisure Pool one facility helps create a partnership that includes a full spectrum 1 Zero Depth Entry Lazy River of activities that complement one another well. 1 3 Lap Lanes Body Slide with runout 1 10 Lane, 25-Yard x 25-Meter Competition Pool 1 Starting Blocks Whirlpool 1 1 1 t tAoav T1 W A T E F TECHNOLOGY I N O. LEADERS IN AQUATIC PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 45 HOBBS COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER STUDY HOBBS, NEW MEXICO mow _ IF 'w k�I1R2 N.r �a J OWNER Barker Rinker Seacat, Water Technology, Inc. and Ballard*King City of Hobbs Parks and Recreation pulled together their experience and resources to perform an 200 E Broadway operational feasibility assessment and conceptual design for a new Hobbs. NM 88240 Hobbs Community Recreation Center. The team began the process by gathering data and doing research to determine the project vision REFERENCE(S) and to set a schedule and budget. A project team kick off workshop Mia Russell was held with focus group meetings,charrette design session and 200 E Broadway community open house to involve the community. Things such as Hobbs, New Mexico 88240 the projectvision,possible partnerships,schedule,budget,funding, (575) 397-9293 and site were discussed. Sketch diagrams were created based mrussell@hobbsnm.org on the preliminary program workshop along with input from the Recreation Center Committee and Stakeholders. COMPLETED After each project and program evaluation work period in which 2009 the program options were revised and an operational feasibility analysis was prepared, the team met again with the Recreation AMENITIES Center Committee to review and discuss the options and findings. 11,500 SFLeisure Pool with Zero Depth Entry Interactive Water Play Features Water Technology, Inc. was responsible for the programming, Lap Lanes design and engineering of the aquatics. In addition to the aquatics, Current Channel the proposed facility also includes a gymnasium,elevated track for Vortex jogging and walking, catering kitchen, community room, activity Body Slide room,child watch room,fitness center,aerobics/dance studio,party 25-Yard x 25-Meter, 8 Lane Competition Pool room, support spaces and facility administration spaces. (2) One Meter Diving (1)Three Meter Diving 252 SF Whirlpool WWW.HOBBSNM.ORG W T/ W A S E R TECNNOLCGY I N Q. LEADERS IN AQUATIC PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PAGE 46 1 RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN, MONTANA ABERDEEN AQUATIC CENTER Aberdeen South Dakota i t .s i OWNER On June 30,2007 the Aberdeen Aquatic Center drew a huge crowd The City of Aberdeen to celebrate the grand opening of the long-awaited water park.The 225 Third Ave SE $7 million facility replaced two aging pools in town and sits where Aberdeen, SD 57401 the 50-year-old Southside Pool used to be. REFERENCE(S) The Aberdeen Aquatic Center is the result of a long process starting with a feasibility study including market analysis,programming,site Doug Johnson, birector evaluation, concept design and operations which determined the (605)626-7015 doug.johnson@aberdeen.sd.us aquatic needs for the City of Aberdeen. Water Technology, Inc. prepared four concepts that illustrated a COMPLETED variety of pool components, sizes, configurations and entrance 2007 building locations on their chosen site. Each of these concepts were developed to progressively include more program elements. AMENITIES 9,000 SF Leisure Pool: On August 9th, the City of Aberdeen celebrated the completion of Zero Depth Entry the facility with a formal ribbon cutting ceremony.The new aquatic Multi-Level Interactive Water Play Structure center includes a leisure pool with zero depth entry, a multi-level Geysers interactive water play structure,a lazy river,a slide tower including a tube slide and two body slides,and a 50 meter,8 lane competition 250 LF Lazy River pool with two drop slides,five themed floatables,water basketball 280 LF Tube Slide and water polo. 215 LF Open Body Flume Slide 125 LF Enclosed Body Flume Slide AWARD(S)/FEATURE(S) 8 Lane, 50 Meter Competition Pool: Dream Design Showcase- Leisure 9,845 SF Aquatics International,August 2008 (1) 1 Meter Diving Board (1) 3 Meter Diving Board Architectural Showcase Feature (2) Drop Slides Athletic Business, June 2008 (5)Themed Floatables Water Basketball and Water Polo Area Innovative Architecture & Design Highlight Recreation Management, May 2008 WWW.ABERDEEN.SD.US V4V T/ . . I ER TECHNOLOGY I N O. LEADERS IN AQUATIC PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY,BOZEMAN,MONTANA I PAGE 47 DOUGLASS G. WHITEAKER President As President and Principal-in-Charge at Water Technology, Inc. Doug Whiteaker has a wealth of knowledge and experience in the aquatic industry. Doug has worked in all facets in the aquatic industry and has an extensive background in planning,programming and design,construction and operations of pools. He excels in managing integrated project delivery teams and his hands-on managing abilities energize effective collaboration, inspiring teams to deliver ultimate project excellence. Doug's goal is to ensure that the needs and expectations of the client are met and exceeded. His engaging personality helps to facilitate a two- way sharing process with our clients and helps the team to understand unique neighborhood demographics, public needs and ultimately results in team ownership of the project and produces the best aquatic facility to meet the public's needs. Education: Bachelor of Arts, Chemistry and Biology, Luther College, Decorah, Iowa s c Affiliations:Construction Specifications Institute, National Recreation and Park Association Partial Project List: The Colony at The Grand - Fairhope,AL Cottonwood Recreation Center- Cottonwood,AZ Flagstaff Multigenerational Aquatic Center- Flagstaff,AZ DC Ranch Desert Parks Community Center Spray Garden-Scottsdale,AZ Montelucia Resort Study-Scottsdale,AZ Clark Park Master Plan-Tempe,AZ Kiwanis Park-Tempe,AZ South Bay Health Club Family Aquatic Center - El Segundo, CA Spectrum Athletic Club Masterplan - Redondo Beach, CA Discovery Bay Family Aquatic Center-Greeley, CO Centennial Pool Renovation, Greeley, CO Sunrise Sprayground - Greeley, CO Island Grove Sprayground - Greeley, CO Grant Ranch Pool Masterplan - Littleton, CO Walsenburg Family Aquatic Center Walsenburg, CO Hyatt Regency Pool Improvements-Curacao Harbour Lights Resort- Myrtle Beach, SC Aberdeen Family Aquatic Center-Aberdeen, SD Hillcrest Family Aquatic Center- Brookings, SD Lakeway Resort-Austin, TX Headquarters Texas 100 Park Avenue-PO Box 614 3010 LBJ Freeway-Suite 1205 Beaver Dam,WI 53916 Dallas,TX 75234 www.watertechnologyinc.com T 920.887.7375-F 920.887.7999 T 972.919,6122-F 972.919,6120 info@watertechnologyinc.com WATER TECHNOLOGY INC. LEADERS IN AQUATIC PLANNING, DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PAGE 48 I RECREATION/AQUATICS FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, BOZEMAN. MONTANA