lower venice island performance center - strategic plan interim report

Diane L. Mataraza, Inc. Viera, Florida 321.690.4370 Office 321.427.0049 Cell 321.637.1384 Fax [email protected] www.matarazaconsulting

Interim Report to the Schuylkill Project For the Lower Venice Island Performance Center

Strategic Plan Progress through December 31, 2010

2 | P a g e V e n i c e I s l a n d P r o g r e s s R e p o r t 1 2 . 3 1 . 1 0

Contents

1 Executive Summary: Progress and Recommendations through December, 2010 3 Introduction: A Performance Center for Manayunk 3 Planning Progress: September – December 2010 4 Looking Forward 4 Proposed Next Steps 5 2 Project Overview and Background 7 3 Facility and Physical Plant Recommendations 9 4 Relevant Models Example 1 Blackrock Center for the Arts, Germantown, Maryland 12 Example 2 Sugar Sand Park, City of Boca Raton, Florida 14 Example 3 Seattle Public Theater at the Bathhouse, Seattle, Washington 15 Example 4 The Everett Performing Arts Center and Key Bank Theater 16 Example 5 Harlem Stage: Gatehouse, New York, New York 18 Example 6 Langston Hughes Performing Arts center, Seattle, Washington 19 Example 7 Red Hook Center for the Arts, Brooklyn, New York 19 Example 8 Prizery Community Arts Center, South Boston, Virginia 19 Example 9 Westminster Rose Center Theater, Westminster, California 20 Example 10 Peoria Center for the Performing Arts, Peoria, Arizona 21 Example 11 Adventure Theater at Glen Echo Park, Montgomery, Maryland 23 Example 12 Melrose Community Center, Bronx, New York 25 Example 13 Gary Comer Youth Center, Chicago, Illinois 25 Example 14 Miramar Cultural Center/ArtsPark, Broward County, Florida 27 Example 15 The Tannery Arts Center, Santa Cruz, California 29 Example 16 Collierville Parks, Recreation & Cultural Arts, Tennessee 31 Example 17 The Harrell Performing Arts Theatre, Highland Park, Illinois 33 5 Appendix 36 Project Overview and Approach 37 Original Scope of Work 38


Executive Summary: Progress and Recommendations thru December 2010

INTRODUCTION: A PERFORMANCE CENTER FOR MANAYUNK! Manayunk residents and the business community are excited! As part of a larger public works project for Venice Island, the City of Philadelphia is building a performance center for its Recreation Department. After nearly six years of planning and negotiations, ground breaking on the public works project has been scheduled. Performance center construction could begin as early as 2013. The long-awaited center and its amenities will greatly contribute to community vibrancy and economic vitality. To ensure this project succeeds in fulfilling the hopes and dreams of the City of Philadelphia Recreation Department and also propels agendas important to the Manayunk Community, the Manayunk Development Corporation [MDC] allocated resources for a broad- base community planning project. In August 2010, the Schuylkill Project of the Manayunk Development Corporation contracted with a consultant team. The team’s charge was to work with the Manayunk community and City of Philadelphia Department leaders to develop a strategic plan for the new center. Using Department of Recreation facility plans from 2004- 2005 as a point of departure, a 10-month scope of work was created to accomplish the following:

− Appropriately scale the physical plant and amenities for the setting;

− Imagine future use and purpose to ensure the physical plant will accommodate all planned activity;

− Position the project within Manayunk to capitalize on the smartest possible combination of City and community expertise and resources;

− Ensure the operating plan and business model are as solid and as sustainable as possible; and,

− See that an adequate administrative structure is created to operate, program, promote and market the Performance Center enticing visitors and welcoming broad-base community use.

Consultant scope of work included six components: recruitment of a Project Advisory Committee to ensure the plan reflects the interests and will of the community from start to finish; information gathering and assessment to ensure community needs and desires are reflected in performance center development; theater and physical plant recommendations to accommodate long-term use; delivery of a comprehensive strategic plan; recommendations for a management structure that would include partnership with a nonprofit entity to optimize available government and community resources; and, preliminary budget recommendations for capital build outs, plus earned and contributed income strategies for long-term financial stability.


The one thing we can be certain of is continuing uncertainty and uncontrollable change.

PLANNING PROGRESS: SEPTEMBER – DECEMBER 2010 Just as the consultant team’s work began, two factors surfaced that necessitated shifting gears. First, with Mayor Nutter’s merger of the Parks Department and Recreation Department still in progress, it became apparent our efforts to develop an operating plan for the center would be premature. Second (while enthusiastically welcomed) an accelerated timetable on the City’s bidding process meant performance center design recommendations were needed immediately. The project timetable was revised: the consultant team’s anticipated deadline for physical plant and design recommendations in Spring 2011 was moved forward to December 2010; and, the community assessment scheduled for fall 2010 was deferred. Direction from the City was clear. Modifications were encouraged to fine tune details on the existing performance center design, not change the design. During September and October architectural drawings were carefully reviewed, and meetings held with the architect, city planners, Department of Recreation personnel and representatives from the Manayunk community. On October 31, the consultant team submitted its first report with facility and physical plant recommendations. Suggestions to improve the flexibility, functionality, and sustainability of the space were offered (details are in section 3 of this report). We believe all were applied and submitted with the City bids. Given the decision to wait for the Parks Department and Recreation Department merger’s completion, the consultant team redirected efforts to scan the country for examples of similar facilities and their best practices. Seventeen case studies in section 4 of this report were offered to inform the performance center’s business model, management structure, and operations. In our research, facility representatives with whom we spoke reinforced the need to plan timely, and plan well for the long-term financial sustainability of the project. In December, further input was collected from around the country and added to October case study findings. LOOKING FORWARD Despite circumstances which have affected our planning – even consideration of the notion to put the entire

project on hold – prevailing wisdom has encouraged that we press forward. Venice Island’s long-term success will depend on the ability of its many partners to work together effectively and strategically at every step. Success will require local buy-in and leadership, good stewardship, ongoing communication, public/private cooperation, and entrepreneurial vision. From our national scan, it’s clear: municipal projects need bolstering from outside resources. From the City of Philadelphia’s own experience, we know this to be true. In an April 10, 2010 City budget hearing, in testimony from the Commission on Parks and Recreation, Nancy Goldenberg and Alexander


“Pete” Hoskins amplified the critical necessity of public/private partnership. “Municipalities can no longer be expected to have the resources to fully support, capital improvements, extra maintenance, equipment upkeep, build-outs, marketing, programming, events, staffing and more. New models - more cooperative constructs must be created.” PROPOSED NEXT STEPS Information and input gleaned from research and work completed to date on the Venice Island project suggest the following steps in pressing forward.. Given what we have learned from the experience of other centers and partnerships around the country, given their encouragement to plan timely and strategically, and given the construction date of 2013, these next steps should begin in 2011.

1. Explore and forge an alliance with an existing 501(c)(3). Start with assessing the feasibility of a formal

alliance with the Manayunk Development Corporation [MDC]. With MDC’s leadership, and all project stakeholders and funders, weigh partnership pluses and minuses. In the opinion of the consultant team, MDC’s work on the Venice Island Project since its inception in 2004 substantiates their commitment and dedication. MDC’s track record on this and other community development projects demonstrates their ability to lead. Before a final determination is made, all possible alternatives should be explored.

2. Lay tracks to prepare the 501(c)(3) for this partnership: Initially, focus on development of decision-making and administrative parameters. Be sure to consider both short and long-term partnership parameters to ensure the relationship remains balanced, effective, grounded, manageable, stable and strong.

3. Next, once City of Philadelphia project management and leadership are established (and given that Venice Island construction cost projections are dated - circa 2004), review and affirm the City’s financial commitment to the project. Beyond construction, to what extent can the City commit to operations, management, programming, marketing and other activity? Where will help be needed? Where will “partnership” be critical? This will ensure development of an effective game plan, and that the facility will be adequately equipped and fully operational from the day the doors open.

4. Next – and the consultant team cannot over emphasize this step - project a clear and realistic plan for long-term financial sustainability. To the greatest extent possible, with the City, develop a 10-year operating and programmatic pro forma for the Center. Include capital improvements and other long-term facility needs. Carefully review the advice of our counterparts around the country in section 4 of this


report. For some, success has been impeded because of penny-wise and pound foolish cost cutting measures on the front end, preventing the business model from working long-term. Specifically, reconsider venue capacity, plus venue adaptability for multi-use and revenue generation. It will be critical to Venice Island’s enduring success.

5. Tap City of Philadelphia wisdom and expertise. Before seeking any additional outside assistance, look to successful existing City operating models starting with Fairmount Park’s national research on entrepreneurial private/public business models. Where appropriate, with city administrators, cull City of Philadelphia Departments’ best practices, policies and systems, and private/public partnership protocols. See what might be applicable and valuable to the Venice Island Performance Center.

6. Honor public process. No matter what, ensure due diligence to ensure ample opportunity for public input in Performance Center planning.

7. Continue to test and explore ideas with practitioners from around the country who have contributed to Venice Island research. Forge valuable networks with colleagues from across the country to ensure Venice Island benefits from their wisdom and experience. Given the opportunities and challenges on the road ahead, continually look nationally for the next innovation to ensure Venice Island and the Manayunk Community continue to prosper.


2. Project Overview and Background On August 27, 2010, The Schuylkill Project (of the Manayunk Development Corporation) contracted with a consultant team to work with Manayunk leaders, representatives of the City of Philadelphia Department of Recreation (and other municipal departments), potential users of the theater, residents, and stakeholders to develop a Performance Center strategic plan. Given the City of Philadelphia Recreation Department’s intent, this assessment and planning project were intended to do the following:

− Help think through facility plans to ensure the physical plant and all amenities are appropriately scaled for the setting;

− Imagine future use and purpose to ensure the physical plant will adequately accommodate all planned activity;

− Position the project within Manayunk to capitalize on the smartest possible combination of City and community expertise and resources;

− Help ensure the business model will be as solid and as sustainable as possible; and,

− See that an adequate administrative structure is created to promote and market the Performance Center to entice visitors and welcome community use.

An assessment and planning process was scheduled over a ten-month period to conclude by June, 2011. Initial project design included these seven components which are fully detailed in the appendix.

1. Successful engagement of a Project Advisory Committee to ensure the plan reflects the interests and will of the community from start to finish.

2. Information gathering and assessment to ensure community needs and desires would are reflected in Performance Center development:

a. A communications strategy to ensure this process is accessible, inclusive and transparent to the community;

b. A comprehensive inventory and assessment of potential users; c. An on-line public opinion survey; d. Interviews with select community stakeholders; e. Facilitated community meetings; and f. Gathering of management models and public/nonprofit partnership examples.

3. Theater and physical plant recommendations

a. Given the construction budget, recommendations for optimal physical plant design; b. Based on what was learned from the inventory of potential users, determine what Center

elements will be needed to make the project as viable as possible, not only to the Recreation Department, but to Manayunk residents and businesses.


4. Delivery of a strategic plan with mission, vision, goals, objectives, strategies, timelines and outcomes.

5. Management structure recommendations that consider a partnership with a nonprofit entity to optimize available government and community resources and ensure the Center is as financially viable as possible.

6. Preliminary budget recommendations projecting capital build outs as well as project and operating funds.

7. Future counsel and guidance to project leaders by the Consultant Team to help this project achieve the success envisioned.

In September 2010, when the project schedule was amended to accommodate realities, the consulting team shifted gears. The assessment and research team work was deferred, and the work of consultant team member Bruce Charlick was moved ahead. Rather than basing recommendations on potential user input which would have taken more time than we had, Charlick was charged to review the existing architectural plans and, within the already determined construction budget (created around 2005), offer modifications and improvements. Though space and facility recommendations do not include broad community input, Charlick’s recommendations are grounded in 40 years of experience which include: extensive theater production, management and construction experience, familiarity with the Greater Philadelphia theater community, familiarity with contemporary performing arts presenter and producer realities, and eight years of theater production experience with a City Park property.

The consultant team accelerated efforts to explore applicable models from other parts of the country. Seventeen facility examples are included in this interim report to help City and Manayunk leaders develop a plan that will best serve their collective needs.


3. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS

A. FACILITY AND PHYSICAL PLANT RECOMMENDATIONS BY BRUCE CHARLICK Manayunk Arts and Recreation Center at Venice Island is an exciting municipal interagency project. It demonstrates how public works projects and community, social, and artistic needs can be integrated to produce a 21st Century facility. This river access project has residents, civic organizations, and businesses excited and anticipating a fully realized facility. With the understanding that projects of this type can’t be everything to everyone, careful analysis is required to produce a facility that will serve many constituent needs. My background is that of a practitioner. I have held several positions over the past 40 years where I have learned that many people’s ideas and understandings go into the shaping of such a facility. I have had to learn to work around other people’s mistakes and short sightedness, as well as my own mistakes and shortsightedness. Having developed a thorough understanding of how venues run based on negotiated artistic and operational plans, I have had the opportunity to be a part of those planning teams and have seen their achievements. I believe this project can be a success, as long as all parties concerned can define their similar goals and develop a mutual trust and respect for each other’s needs. When it was realized that the architect’s plans hadn’t been reviewed for several years, Diane Mataraza asked that I review and assess overall design and functionality. I was to note anything that might have been overlooked and/or could be altered given the finished nature of the design and its location on the site. The original design used many people’s input and incorporated much of what City Of Philadelphia Performing Arts Coordinator Tom Digman needed to run a successful year-round theatre program. I have been charged with reviewing the architect’s plans and making suggestions that will assist the Department in constructing a facility that will be as flexible and as useful as possible without having to make any major structural changes. What follows are my recommendations in three categories which I hope will increase the usability of the venue and maximize its functionality:


PROGRAMMING The Department of Parks and Recreation plan on running a full year-round program including After- School programs and other typical Department activities. FLEXIBILITY

• I would suggest that rooms 107 and 108 could be used as meeting rooms, dressing rooms, art studios and more. Closets could be built-ins and the janitor’s closet could be relocated.

• Adding a through-door between rooms 107 and 108 would allow for a crossover outside of the stage house from one side of the stage to the other, if both rooms are in use.

FUNCTIONALITY

• As the lighting equipment room is accessible from the stage house so too should the sound equipment room.

• The lobby is comfortable and functional. Users may want to offer light snacks and drinks and sell programs, cds, and books of the performing groups. This could be realized by a portable concession stand designed at the time of the interior fit out.

• There may be occasions when an event might involve ticket sales. Using storage area 115 and opening up wall access in the east wall would allow for an ample ticket booth that would be secure and not need to open the lobby prematurely.

• The space is perfect for convocations and small business meetings. It could be used for classes, children’s and senior activities, scout meetings and an endless list of community-oriented activities. If this were additionally considered with the interior fit out, seating with swing arm desks could be incorporated.

• In the lighting and sound console control area an A/V cart and digital projector with accessibility to the central sound system could provide first-rate support for:

− PowerPoint business presentations

− Slide presentations

− Film screenings and festivals


• In accordance with ADA requirements an assistive listening system for patrons with hearing disabilities should be incorporated into the theatre and a show program sound system should be incorporated into the two main rooms, the lobbies, and the manager’s office.

• One of the items I observed in the stage house that is very often suggested, but also expensive and rarely used, is stage lighting electrical floor pockets for stage lighting use. I would suggest removing these and relocating the circuiting to a more useable position. These tend to fill up with dirt or are often blocked by scenery.

SUSTAINABILITY

• At very little cost, a wireless computer network could be established for use in classes and business meetings and eventually being able to incorporate remote functions into the operations.

• Access to power on the exterior of the building is becoming more and more a requirement in a modern facility. It allows numerous opportunities for community groups to utilize the grounds while other activities are taking place inside. Something reasonably easy and very versatile would be a weather-proof, vandal-proof exterior access box for electricity so that community groups could hold outside lectures, poetry readings and concerts in conjunction with the Manayunk Arts Festival and other Festivals in the future.


4. Relevant Models

In this section are 17 examples of facilities similar to Manayunk’s Performance Center that the Consultant Team researched from October thru December 2010.

EXAMPLE I. BLACK ROCK CENTER FOR THE ARTS

LOCATION: Germantown, Maryland (near DC, Bethesda, Baltimore)

HISTORY: In the early 1990s, Germantown’s civic leaders formed the Germantown Cultural Arts Center, Inc. (d/b/a BlackRock Center for the Arts), a not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) to develop, own and manage BlackRock. Developers of the town center in Germantown, Maryland contributed the land, while the Milestone developers made cash contributions to be used for the construction of the new state-of-the art, 30,878-square foot facility.

YEAR BUILT: 2002

FACILITY INCLUDES: • 209-seat proscenium-style stage; uses include traditional stage plays, small music acts, folk

artists, traditional and ethnic dances, lectures and meetings.

• a "black box" multi-purpose performance space. The floor is specifically designed for ballet, modern and jazz dance. Ballet barres and mirrors on the room walls facilitate its use as a classroom and dance presentation space. The space also hosts BlackRock's Third Thursday Coffeehouse series, and is popular as a large meeting and banquet room for birthday parties, bat and bar mitzvahs, and wedding receptions.

• 1500 square-foot art gallery, noteworthy for high ceilings and immense windows, serves as a performance venue for selected Sunday classical concerts.

• Outdoor stage serves as a performance venue for their free summer concert series.

PROGRAMMING: Ticketed events include 3-4 part series in classical, jazz, theater & dance and a “coffeehouse” singer/songwriter series. Education department offers classes for all ages in dance, drama, guitar, violin, piano, musical theater, visual arts, and more. 2010 OPERATING BUDGET: Income: $1,290,623---553,525 contributed, earned income $737,097 Expenses: $1,317,835 BLACK ROCK BOARD OF TRUSTEES: 23 members, includes 1 representative from Montgomery County Dept of Recreation, and 1 from Montgomery County Government STAFF OF 11 includes Executive Director, directors of Education, Tech/operations, Development, Box office, Finance and Administration, Marketing and Communications, Marketing/Patrons Services Associate, Gallery/Front Desk Coordinator, Rental Coordinator, Front Desk Associate plus about 30 part-time faculty and a financial consultant. Most staff wear multiple hats, with the Executive Director


performing the role of Artistic Director, CFO, and managing which she finds overwhelming and is planning to change. Marketing director is also a designer. Tech and Operations director are one and the same. Were they to add personnel, they would increase Development, patron services and marketing. MANAGEMENT/LEASING ARRANGEMENT: Blackrock began with private funding. But they ran out of money at the end of the capital campaign and asked Montgomery County to buy the building. Today, like a number of arts organizations in the area, they lease from the county.

• BlackRock manages programming and fundraising.

• The county pays utilities and oversees day to day maintenance. BlackRock does not know what these costs are (and were told it's not possible to sort out from other county expenses).

• BlackRock is responsible for major capital investments and is charged through their lease agreement with keeping an escrow account for such purposes. Capital upkeep has not kept pace with this escrow account however, and the county is demanding BlackRock increase the size of the escrow account, which they are unable to do. Ultimately, BlackRock is initiating a new capital campaign, but the issue has created tension between BlackRock and the County.

• County gets to appoint two people to the board and one to the finance committee.

• County gets use of the facility four times during the year and must provide advance notice.

Have realistic expectations of what people can do. Ballooning reserves required by our lease have proved a burden. Occasionally the county asks to use the facility at times that conflict with programming. Make sure in the lease that programming takes priority. The education center is great and helped stabilize Black Rock income when the economy dipped. Our performing arts center is 210 seats, but 300 seats would have provided us the capacity to hire professional A-Level artists which we cannot currently afford.


EXAMPLE 2. SUGAR SAND PARK: COMMUNITY CENTER AND 150 SEAT THEATER, CITY OF BOCA RATON, FLORIDA

YEAR BUILT: 1998 CONSTRUCTION COST: community center plus 150 seat theater = $3 million ANNUAL OPERATING COST: $1.6 mil includes carousel, community center with science exhibits and theater. (Does not include electricity) ANNUAL PROGRAM COSTS: $150K PROGRAMMING: City leases spaces to local theater companies, students, schools. Community center also rents interactive science exhibits. Offers range of music and arts classes for families, teens and seniors. STAFFING: 38, plus volunteers RENTAL FEES: renting is not a priority. Theater rents a few times a year. Space is given free for non-profits and community events. For non-profits, theater rental fees are 15% of gross. 30% of gross for for-profit. Free for student recitals. Free for school groups. CONTACTS: Bob Langford—Boca Beach and Park District Tiffany Lucia, Facility Manager, City of Boca Raton, 561-347-3900

Know your community and who you’re trying to serve. Consider ways to earn revenue. Our facility was built when times were flush, without enough thought to earned revenue.


EXAMPLE 3. SEATTLE PUBLIC THEATER AT THE BATHHOUSE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

YEAR STRUCTURE WAS BUILT: old 1900s bathhouse converted in 1969. Leased from Parks Department to Seattle Public Theater, a 501(C)(3) via RFP. Monthly payments of $500. There are a number of restored bath-houses around the city, each runs similarly in service of arts. CONSTRUCTION COST--NA –renovated too long ago SEATING: 160 ANNUAL OPERATING COST: $500K (excludes park funds for maintaining exterior of building) PROGRAMMING: Seattle Public Theater uses the venue nearly full time. They produce 6 professional shows annually, and many youth productions categorized by age group: elementary, middle and high school. They have theater camps during winter and summer school holidays. OTHER USES: all non city productions STAFFING: 2 full time staff, 1 artistic director, 1 managing director, 7 part-time staff GOVERNANCE—they are a 501(c)(3) with a board of 5 members RENTAL FEES: rentals are infrequent due to high use of space. They charge minimal fees for productions--$250 for 5 hour show, plus additional for any staffing. OTHER REVENUE: tickets to professional productions, and suggested donations for youth performances, tuition fees CONTACT: Keith Dahlgren, Managing Director [email protected]


EXAMPLE 4. THE EVERETT PERFORMING ARTS CENTER (EPAC) & KEY BANK THEATER OPERATED BY VILLAGE THEATER, 501(C)(3) LOCATION: Everett Washington BUILT: 1998 CONTACT: General ManagerSherrill Dryden (425) [email protected] SITE SPECS:

• 514 seat theater for lectures, film screenings, graduations, theatre, ballet, and musical performances. The venue includes a proscenium stage, full theatrical lighting, professional audio system, orchestra pit, rigging/fly system, wing space, and dressing room facilities

• A multipurpose room (capacity 125)

• 4 dressing rooms, 1 chorus dressing room, a green room and lobby.

GOVERNANCE: Owned and supported by the City of Everett, the city contracted the Village Theater (501(C)(3)) to be the resident performing and management company in 1998, when this theater was built. The Village Theater works in multiple venues in the Puget Sound area and develops new productions for its Seattle theater. The city of Everett hired the Village Theater to manage this facility and program it with these new productions and extensive youth education programs. These shows anchor the series which is filled out with rentals managed by the Village Theater.

• 4 year management contract with the city

• City pays Village Theater $262,506.39 annually (with adjustments for inflation) to manage the facility.

• City provides custodial services and facility maintenance.

• Village theater manages rentals, marketing for renters, box office, house management, artistic programming.

• Village Theater pays rent for the theater but the youth programs are exempt.

OPERATING COSTS: $7.6 mil covers multiple venues, not just EPAC. 80% of that budget comes from earned revenue—tuition and ticket sales. Does not include costs of custodial services and maintenance. PROGRAMMING: A musical theater series, family concerts, and extensive youth theater programs. Rental events include choral concerts, film festivals, ballet, receptions, seminars and business meetings.


RENTAL INFO:

NEW VENUE—RENOVATION OF KEY BANK SPECS: Village Theater is working with the City of Everett to renovate an old bank building to create a 8000 square foot, 158 seat black box theater that will house of their youth education programs. Based on previous experience at EPAC, they are adding:

o Sprung floors for dance

o A modified light grid.

o Telescoping theater seats to make the space convertible

o Acoustical curtains to make the space convertible.

CONSTRUCTION: The city and Village Theater are working collaboratively on the project. City is managing/financing shell improvements with $1,900,000 from a city capital fund and a community advocacy group. Village Theater is building out the theater. They will be leasing the building from the city in five year increments. City is also building a plaza/performance venue outside of the theater as a way of revitalizing the downtown area. LEASE AGREEMENT:

• City provides maintenance, but otherwise it’s a straight 5-year commercial lease.

• Village Theater agreed to build/run a small upscale concessions area open to the plaza.

• City requires Village Theater to present some outdoor productions during the summer to enliven the plaza. They receive some deferred rent in return.

• City may also use the building for 10 events a year.

• Rent is $4000/month


EXAMPLE 5. HARLEM STAGE: GATEHOUSE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK ABOUT: The Gatehouse Theater is a flexible designed space that provides a 2,990 square foot open performance area, with a full grid for hanging lights and most scenery. The theater has a maximum capacity of 192 (including wheelchair accessible locations) with flexible seating configurations that can be tailored to production needs. This space is ideal for performances, lectures, cocktail receptions, fundraising events and photo and film shoots. MISSION: celebrating and supporting artists of color from Harlem and around the world. PROGRAMMING: mix of music, dance, film, theater, family and school programs. Harlem Stage presents roughly 80% of events in the theater. They are also responsible for renting out 2 larger theaters on the City College Campus. GOVERNANCE: City of NYC leases building to Harlem Stage a 501(C)(3) for $1/year. In exchange, Harlem Stage funded the renovation of the space and programs and manages the facility. YEAR STRUCTURE WAS BUILT: Renovated in 2007, former NYC aqueduct building CONSTRUCTION COST: $26 million ANNUAL OPERATING COST: $2.8 million (includes $1.2 mil staffing) ANNUAL PROGRAM COSTS: $700,000 STAFFING: 18 full time staff -- 5 directors of department, general management and production and box office=6, finance=1, programming 4, development=2 GOVERNANCE: building owned by NYC, managed by Harlem Stage a 501(C)(3). RENTAL FEES: $6-7000. For non-profits and weddings, $10-15,000 for-profits OTHER: Facility manager seemed cautious about running on parks property. Felt Parks Dept doesn’t really understand what it takes to produce performance events. Bureaucratic. This sentiment was echoed by other producers/venues. CONTACT: Greg Schank, Managing Director

In building a new theater, all partners must seriously and equally take ownership. Both staff and user input should be a mandatory presence in the planning process, because the day the doors open, they will have questions.


EXAMPLE 6. LANGSTON HUGHES PERFORMING ARTS CENTER, SEATTLE, WA

ABOUT: Refurbished synagogue built in 1913 transformed into arts facility in 1969. Came under auspices of Parks and Recreation in 1972. The primary space in the building is the theater space, which has fixed seats with a capacity of 285 individuals. Within the lower part of the original building is a large activity hall which can accommodate almost 300 individuals. Building is currently closed for $3.3 mil in capital improvements. MISSION: The center’s mission is to provide quality cultural entertainment and educational components that meet the needs of the community. Every season, Langston Hughes Performing Arts Center has new classes, events and programs. Langston Hughes offers both performances and instruction, and the programming reflects the diversity of the surrounding neighborhoods, the Central District and the International District. GOVERNANCE: I appears the center is run by Seattle Parks and Recreation.

EXAMPLE 7. RED HOOK CENTER FOR THE ARTS, BROOKLYN, NY

BUILT: 2000/2001 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 22,000 square feet (existing) 6,000 square feet (new construction) TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $2.7 million ABOUT: RHCFA is an art gallery, performance space, and art education center in Brooklyn. The NYC Housing Authority renovated the run-down gym into community arts center with new stage, arts and crafts area, a dining facility (many area children receive subsidized meals), a dance studio, and a library. A classroom will accommodate a new Housing Authority initiative to bring computers to youth whose families may not be able to afford them.

EXAMPLE 8. PRIZERY COMMUNITY ARTS CENTER, SOUTH BOSTON, VA (SOUTHERN VIRGINIA, NEAR NORTH CAROLINA)

ABOUT: Renovation of early 20th century brick warehouse. The Prizery accommodates an art gallery on the first floor, a welcome center on the 2nd floor, and a multi-purpose community room on the 3rd floor in addition to a performing arts theatre seating 326 people. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $7 MILLION DATE OF RENOVATION: 2003 ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS: Not available ANNUAL PROGRAMMING COSTS: Not available PROGRAMMING: eclectic mix of touring and local music, theater, comedy, art classes, art and history


exhibits. STAFFING: 2, the venue features programming by a number of local non-profits (“Prizery Partners”), all volunteers that produce theater production, gallery shows, historical exhibits, etc. GOVERNANCE: The Community Arts Center Foundation (CACF) is the private, non-profit organization that owns the Prizery and will maintain the renovated building. CACF has representatives from most of the Prizery Partners on its Board and is responsible for oversight of the project. The Community Arts Center Foundation (CACF), a volunteer-led organization that has been one of the "sparkplugs" in the revitalization plans for the Historic Tobacco Warehouse District. MISSION: To establish a regional community and fine arts center. The purpose of the center is to provide, promote, and preserve the performing arts, visual arts, and literacy arts for multicultural and historical education of the region. In addition, the building serves as a welcome center for visitors.

EXAMPLE 9. WESTMINSTER ROSE CENTER THEATER, WESTMINSTER, CA (BETWEEN LONG BEACH AND SANTA ANA)

GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: Westminster Theatre & Cultural Center – 33,840 sq.ft. COMPLETION DATE: January, 2006 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $14.7 million OWNER: City of Westminster ABOUT: The 33,840-square-foot community center houses a 420-seat performance hall, a 500-seat banquet hall, a catering kitchen, and administrative offices. PROGRAMMING: musical theater, affiliated with Westminster Community College. FUNDING: The financing for the Center included redevelopment funds, grants from county, state and federal agencies, along with private donations. GOVERNANCE: The Rose Center is operated by The Rose Center Foundation, a non-profit community volunteer group organized in 1999. Contact Margie L. Rice at (714) 898-3311 ext. 275. CATERING/RENTING handled by private Crystal Rose Catering.


EXAMPLE 10. PEORIA CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS, PEORIA, ARIZONA (MAJOR SUBURB OF PHOENIX)

SITE: PEORIA CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS (OPERATED BY THEATER WORKS, 501(C)(3))

LOCATION: Peoria, Arizona (serves West Phoenix)

SITE SPECS: 21,000-square-foot project includes a 280-seat theater, 80-seat black box theater, dressing rooms, offices, two large classrooms/workshops, gallery and lobby.

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $12.9 million, paid for by the city which voted to allocate .1% of taxes for the arts. 501(C)(3) contributed $200K which helped them secure the exclusive lease.

COMPLETION DATE: February 2007

GOVERNANCE: Owned by City of Peoria. Operated by Theater Works, a non-profit theater company based Peoria Center for the Performing Arts.

ABOUT 501(C)(3): Theater Works is the longest running community theater in the West Valley. Founded in September of 1986 as a non-profit community theater by a group of theater patrons who believed that the northwest area of suburban Phoenix, AZ, needed and was ready to support, a community theater.

501(C)(3) PROGRAMMING: Stage productions, 6 Youth Works productions, 3 Black Box productions, in addition to year-round Youth Works arts education workshops for youth 8 – 18, summer, winter and spring arts camps, a series of workshops and community performances for home schooled youth, specialty workshops and community performances for the cognitively disabled members of our partner organization, One Step Beyond.

MISSION: Theater Works provides opportunities for children, patrons and artists to experience theater that inspires, enriches and enlightens their lives through the celebration of the performing arts.

STAFFING: staff of 11 full time staff includes: Executive Director: Jack Lytle [623.815.1791 ext 101 [email protected]] Artistic Director, Director of Finance & Grants, 2 Directors of Youth Programs, Patron Services & Group Events Manager, Volunteer Coordinator, Technical Department, Patron Services / Box Office, Costume Shop, Public Relations Manager.

LEASE AGREEMENT TERMS: • 20 year exclusive lease with the city of Peoria

• 501(C)(3) pays $1/year

Think through and adequately plan for staffing: we have been struggling because we did not plan for a full-time grant writer, business development or box office positions. The 501(C)(3) is responsible for all operations and revenue, including maintenance, utilities and programming. $1/from each ticket is allocated to maintenance. Cost of utilities has proven a sticking point in the lease to be renegotiated. The City had projected lower than the $9-10K a month they currently pay. The 501(c)(3) hopes to share these expenses. Sign a lease that allows for ongoing discussion and renegotiation.


• City is responsible for larger capital investments (ex. New light board). 501(C)(3) responsible for ongoing maintenance. (Ex. To help mitigate high electricity bills, 501(C)(3) secured a donated solar system and city approved the install.)

• City has use of the building up to 12 days a year. Those are to be selected in concert with annual programming, which takes priority.

• City is represented on 501(C)(3) board by one ex officio non-voting member.

OPERATING BUDGET: 1.3 million. 1/3 ticket sales, 2/3 all other—grants, sponsorships, donations. Rental income: $40-50k

• Re Lease Agreement: Relationship with city is strong and collaborative. City is a help with strategic and financial planning. 501(C)(3) thinks they are able to be more nimble as they are not city employees.

• Re. venue: Add more storage, more room for costume shop and props

RENTAL RATES (on 280 theater)

FACILITY WEEKLY RENTAL DAILY RENTAL 1/2 DAY RENTAL

FOR PROFIT NON PROFIT

$5000 $2500

$1500 $950

$800 $500


EXAMPLE 11. ADVENTURE THEATER AT GLEN ECHO PARK, Montgomery County, MD (Washington DC suburb, near Bethesda)

Montgomery County, MD (Washington DC suburb, near Bethesda)) OPERATIONS: Managed by the Adventure Theater, a 501(C)(3) that is leasing the theater from the Glen Echo Park Partnership for Arts and Culture, another 501(C)(3) that operates the entire park. MANAGEMENT HISTORY: Venue owned by the National Park Service. In 2002 they transferred management of the park to Montgomery County, Maryland. The County formed the nonprofit Glen Echo Park Partnership for Arts and Culture, Inc. to manage day-to-day operations and work with resident groups and artists to conduct programs at the Park. At its founding, the Partnership received startup funding from Montgomery County and the federal government. Since that time, Montgomery County, the state of Maryland and the federal government have funded renovations to Park facilities. Today, the Glen Echo Park Partnership, along with its National Park Service and Montgomery County partners, act as stewards of the Park, helping to maintain and enhance the high quality arts and education programming that makes Glen Echo Park a unique cultural resource in the Washington metropolitan area. The Glen Echo Park Partnership for Arts and Culture, Inc. is funded by an operating grant from the Maryland State Arts Council, an agency dedicated to cultivating a vibrant cultural community where the arts thrive, and also by funding from the Arts and Humanities Council of Montgomery County. All programs are produced in cooperation with the National Park Service and Montgomery County, Maryland.

ABOUT ADVENTURE THEATER: Founded in 1951, Adventure Theatre is the longest-running children’s theater in the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area.

MISSION: To cultivate new generations of audiences and artists by creating memorable theater experiences in an intimate and interactive environment. To offer a wide variety of activities including live performances of classic and contemporary classic children’s stories, theater classes and camps (which complement in-school learning), workshops, birthday parties, and community engagement projects.

PROGRAMMING: 8 professional productions for children, theater classes for kids 3-12. SITE SPECS: Old theater from 1910s, renovated in 2007. Funding for renovation came from Adventure Theater, not Glen Echo or National Parks

• 165-180 seat theater, bench seating

• Rehearsal/classroom space

• Small concession/gift shop

• room for an expanded administrative staff 1) Can you tell me a bit about your venue? Seats, classrooms, rough


ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET: $1.5 million, 1/3 ticket sales, 2/3 contributed TERMS OF LEASE WITH GLEN ECHO PARTNERSHIP:

• Adventure pays a monthly rent plus a percentage of ticket proceeds. Note: rent has gone up in recent years as has the percent of ticket proceeds.

• National Parks Service manages and patrols surrounding grounds and sets ticket prices

• Adventure oversees programming, fundraising, major capital renovations including the renovation, operations, utilities and custodial services.

• Glen Echo Partnership oversees maintenance and phones

ADVENTURE BOARD OF TRUSTEES: 18 members. Separate from Glen Echo and Parks Dept.

STAFF: Full time staff of 8 includes Producing Artistic Director, Managing Director, Technical Director, Development Director, Production Manager, Director of Education & Outreach, Administrative Manager, Bookkeeper, Marketing, and Communications & PR Director. This is supplemented by faculty/contract employees. They are happy with structure.

RENTALS: Very little, they program full time CONTACT: Janet Butler Berry Development Director [email protected] (301)634-2262

Plan ahead for growth. We wish we had 200 seats rather than 165-180!


EXAMPLE 12. MELROSE COMMUNITY CENTER, BRONX, NY BUILT: 2001 ABOUT: An average daily number of about 250 children and teenagers now can be accommodated for a variety of sports, music, and dance activities, as well as arts and crafts, photography, and computer workshops. GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 20,000 square feet TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $6.5 million OWNER: New York City Housing Authority www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/nycha/home.html

EXAMPLE 13. GARY COMER YOUTH CENTER, CHICAGO, ILL

FUNDING: financed by Lands End founder Gary Comer YEAR COMPLETED: 2006 COST: $30 mil ABOUT: The building’s main space is an adaptable gym that supports everything from basketball to circus arts classes. It converts to a 600-seat performance theater via telescoping seating, motorized blackout curtains and ceiling panels. Metal wall panels open to reveal a stage that supports Drill Team performances, as well as gospel choirs, graduations and film screenings. Spaces for dance, classes, a kitchen and a roof garden for farming. MISSION: This youth center located on Chicago’s south side provides a constructive environment for area youths to spend their after-school hours. It supports the activities of the South Shore Drill Team as well as a wide range of youth educational and recreational programs. GOVERNANCE: Associated with the Revere Community Partners Fund CONTACT Greg Mooney, Executive Director


October 20, 2010

1

Land Construction $$

Depts. of Parks

Recreation Arts

Community Partnerships

& Relationships

2


Miramar Cultural Center/ArtsParkBroward County, Florida

3

Tour guide – Mary Becht, DirBroward County Cultural Division

Mission

Where Community and Culture Converge

2009

4

3


5

814‐seat theaterexhibition spaceclassroomsrecital roomlecture/multipurpose roombanquet roomstudiosoutdoor amphitheaterbotanical and sculpture garden

6


The Miramar City Commission created the Miramar Cultural Trust, Inc. in 2005 for the purposes of establishing a non‐profit 501 (c) 3 corporation to support the arts and culture in the City and to provide endowment and financial support for the Cultural Arts Center. The Trust solicits and administers gifts and bequests of property and funds for the advancement and long term viability of Center.

Cultural Arts Advisory Board

Education Advisory Board

Community Services Advisory Board

7

The Tannery Arts CenterSanta Cruz, California

8


Scenario ResultsHours Per Week Per Room

Rent per Hour

% Rented

Total Earned Revenue

Operating Surplus (Subsidy)

Difference from Pure Rental

Pure Rental 56 $ 22.00 100% 832,831$ 713,791$ -$ Pure Rental Low 25 $ 10.00 100% 169,000$ 49,960$ 663,831$ Pure Rental High 84 $ 25.00 100% 1,419,599$ 1,300,559$ (586,768)$ 75% Rental / 25% Program 56 $ 22.00 75% 1,216,123$ (85,916)$ 799,707$ 50% Rental / 50% Program 35 $ 22.00 50% 384,475$ (303,315)$ 1,017,106$ 100% Program 56 nm 0% 2,365,998$ (2,485,038)$ 3,198,830$

Hours of operation% OccupancyPopulations to be servedTypes of entities to which space will be rentedRental rates% for Custom Programming

11

The success of the Tannery Arts Center will depend on its ability to ensure that its own activities as well as the activities of its tenants are able to receive sufficient philanthropic support

On an upfront basis (capital campaign $)And on an ongoing basis (reliable annual subsidy $ to support growth)

This will require:all participants to prepare projections of annual activity, expense and revenue required to support their operations once on site at the TACcreation and sustenance of an ongoing planning environment where all participants can share sensitive data and concerns—and have that data and their concerns be treated respectfully and fairlyTAC’s board to play a leadership role with the Santa Cruz arts funding community▪ to articulate what it will take to make TAC a success and to build▪ to maintain ways to keep funders engaged and knowledgeable about the activities

completed as a result of their investments▪ growing the number of supporters and dollar amounts from supporters

12


13

Land City owned

Building City owned (built 1985)

Buildingmanagement & operations (utilities, janitorial, rentals, landscape upkeep, etc.)

City staff of 3

Operating budget for the above $550,000 (of which $45 – 50 k per year = community rental)

Programming 100% by the 501(c)(3), camps, productions, events, children & youth programs 12 mos of the year

City‐501(c)(3) Partnership elements C3 bd nominees approved by the mayorPark/rec head is a resource to the C3 bdPark/rec adv bd chair sits on C3 bd

14


The Cultural Arts Division along with the Collierville Arts Council and the Harrell Performing Arts Theatre seeks to advance and strengthen community bonds by developing interest in the ARTS.

It is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence by producing theatre, music, and dance performances that continue to be an expression of the community’s talents, values, needs, resources, and aspirations

15

Develop, promote, assist and coordinate the arts in the Town of Collierville and surrounding areas; to perform other charitable services for the benefit of the Town of Collierville and surrounding areas; and, to do any and all things allowable under the Tennessee Non‐Profit Corporation501(c)3; donations are tax deductible

SponsorsPlatinum ‐ $1000Diamond ‐ $500Gold ‐ $250Silver ‐ $100Donor ‐ $50

16


Category ALight Rentals$50.00/Hr.Examples:Piano Recitals, Homeowners Association Meetings, Classes

Category BMedium Rentals$75.00/Hr.Examples:Seminars, Meetings Requiring A/V

Category CHeavy Rentals$100.00/Hr.Examples:Dance Shows/Recitals, Concerts, Plays/Musicals, Conferences

Sample benefits to welcome & encourage community use…

The Town of Collierville has enrolled in a program which allows the Event Sponsor, the "user" to secure cost effective comprehensive liability insurance that provides protection for you as well as The Town of Collierville.

17

Adult and Youth Programs (visual arts, school) ExhibitionsGift ShopRentals

18


Land City owned

Arts Center building City built and city owned

Arts Center management 501(c) (3) that pays nominal rent to the City

Operating budget $1 millionCity provides $30‐40,000 in annual support.

All staff salaries, program and operational costs, interior maintenance & upkeep supported by the c3

Public-Private Partnership

19

20


Summary

21

CLARIFY CITY’S

COMMIT-MENT

Assign Project Management Team Liaison to the City &

Mataraza-

To the greatest extent

possible, clarify City’s

current & future intent

–What’s in

place? What’s not?What are project

constants? Variables?

Clarify City’s expectations?

Establish communicatio

n plan with the City.

RAISE AWARENESS - ENERGIZE THE COMMUNITY

What are we doing, why, potential value?WELCOME INPUT

•Reach out to all entities impacted by the project in any way

•Generate excitement

Theater Design

Revisited Current thinking invited

CONDUCT IMPORTANT FACT FINDING

Assess, assess, assess!

•Ask community leaders how the project can be maximized

•Gather info from all potential users to assess interest, intent, and $$ capacity

•Collect public opinion

PROPOSE FRAMEWORK –TEST ITWeigh & analyze all the facts. Given what we’ve learned, what should be the facility's mission and priorities?

Given wants, needs & financial realities, what facility design, administration & overall construct makes sense?

Apply learning from othersDetermine what scenario will work brilliantly

FINALIZE PLANS - PROCEED

Vet, fine- tune & present the plan

Vet plan framework & key project elements with all stakeholders involved in the process

Invite thinking & debate to improve, strengthen & forge consensus

Garner broad base support

Lay tracks formovingforward.

22


Appendix


SCOPE OF WORK

Project Phase When Estimated

Time 1. Plan Context

Consultant team would review of all available materials: construction plans and timetable, preliminary operating plans and schematics, resources committed, interested users, expectations of the City re: maintenance, operations, types of desired Center activity, as well as any press or other information enabling the team to grasp a full understanding of the project.

Aug -Oct

1 day

2. Lay Planning Foundation Recruit Project Leadership It would be valuable to enlist a three-to four person Project Management Team to work closely with the consultant. These individuals would assist with logistics, Advisory Committee recruitment, communications, expediting information gathering and doing whatever it takes to see that the project stays on schedule and on track. A Performance Center Advisory Committee would be recruited to inform, guide and promote the assessment and planning process. ( size and composition to be determined). Advisory Committee roles and responsibilities would be developed by the consultant with three to four meetings scheduled at pivotal junctures during the process: for the rollout, assessment results review, preliminary plan framework review, and final recommendations. The Advisory Committee would contribute to development of the Center’s mission, vision, goals, and guiding principles, and lend thinking to important policy matters such as:

• To whom Center use will be available: Will priority be given to users based in the City of Philadelphia, based outside the City with a track record of serving City residents, touring groups, etc.? Must groups be nonprofit organizations or will for-profit entities have Center access?

• Center types of activity. What will be the range of activities offered? Will non-arts and cultural events and gatherings be welcome?

• Given the economic realities of running the Center, what kinds of revenue will need to be generated to ensure the long-term financial sustainability of the facility and what would, therefore, be the best management and operating model?

3. Advise on Building Specifications

• Given the City’s accelerated timeline, meet with architects, city designers and other personnel. Participate in preliminary meetings and conversations with those responsible for the physical structure.

• Review and sharpen recommendations for the theater space to ensure we are not overlooking anything and making the wisest, cost efficient recommendations for both back and front of house – or if the theatre space must be multi-use because the economics of the center won’t otherwise work.

Sept - Nov

2 days

4. Information Gathering and Assessment a. Interviews. Select community leader and City Government interviews recommended by the Project Management Team would be conducted in person or by phone. Protocols would be reviewed and approved in advance. b. A comprehensive inventory and assessment of potential Center users. Given possibilities for Center use proposed by the Advisory Committee, we would create a

Nov – Mar 8 days


Project Phase When Estimated Time

data base of all potential Center partners and users. We would seek assistance in identifying potential users from the Manayunk Development Corporation, Philadelphia Parks and Recreation Department, the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance and others. We would develop, vet, promote and distribute an electronic survey to collect information from potential users. Areas of inquiry would include but not be limited to: intended frequency and nature of use; space, equipment, technical and other production needs; average audience size; parking needs; and range of fees users would be able to afford. c. Community input Gatherings Mataraza would spend two days on site to facilitate as many gatherings of business, residential, arts & cultural, stakeholders we’re able to schedule. To ensure maximum participation, we would recommend asking for time on the agenda of already scheduled meetings such as the Main Street Merchants, Manayunk Neighborhood Council, and other community groups. A discussion guide and questions would be developed and vetted by the project Management Team and Advisory Committee members who might be recruited to assist in convenings. On-line public opinion survey Based on the themes that emerge from the Advisory Committee and stakeholder gatherings, we would develop, vet, promote and upload an electronic survey to gather public opinion. Links would be posted on highly trafficked websites. Advisory Committee members would be asked to assist with promoting the survey within their spheres of influence (employees, colleagues, customers, constituents and more). d. Learn from others Borrowing from the successes and challenges of others, we would bring to the Performance Center the best strategic practices and success indicators from other similar projects in the country. E.g., Broward County, Florida, and The Tannery Arts Center in San Jose, CA.

5. Write Plan Framework Draft 1 Based on assessment findings, the consultant team would develop a preliminary plan framework and present them to the Project Management Team and Advisory Committee for review, improvement and approval. The framework would include a recommended Center vision, mission, core values, goals and objectives as well as physical plant recommendations (theater and center space).

Apr - May

6 days 6. Write and Present the Plan Based on feedback from step 4, Mataraza would write the plan and add more meat to the bones of the approved plan framework. Strategies, timelines, benchmarks, outcomes and recommended operational next steps to guide project leaders would be added. The Nonprofit Finance Fund would assist with the overall pro forma development. To the greatest extent possible, we would work to see that Performance Center goals are in synch with Manayunk community and economic development goals, fortify partnerships and capitalize on all available resources to ensure the Center’s long-term success.

June

Note: Proposed Additional Element. A financial analysis of prospective Center partners and users was not articulated in the RFP and not possible by the Nonprofit Finance Fund within the $30,000 budget. When this


important step is excluded from projects like yours, the probability of success may be diminished because user capacity has not been factored into the overall game plan. If interested, please let’s further discuss it.

lower venice island performance center - strategic plan interim report

Documents

new center

peoria center

tannery arts center

blackrock center

longawaited center

prizery community arts

melrose community center

manayunk community