HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.a. St. Joe's Complex-Senior HousingR(DSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Nork Session: June 15, 2010
DISCUSSION
As the Council is aware updating is occurring at the St. Joe's church; the Steeple Center, to allow
assembly uses to occur at the building. Renovations include mechanical work, ADA improvements,
and cosmetic updating so the building can be used for local events, both private and public. The
long -term vision for the Center is to have it evolve into an arts and cultural center. However, in the
short -term it would function more as a multi- purpose center with an arts and cultural bent.
The future status of the school building is less defined. The St. Joseph's Facilities Task Force Report
noted that "The Task Force feels the decision of whether to keep or remove the school facility
should be based upon the ultimate use of the entire site and the economics and suitability of keeping
the building, replacing it, or other alternatives." There have been some estimates made about
updating the school building to meet ADA requirements and also address potential hazardous
materials. Initial discussions have taken place to address the first floor, gym and cafeteria upgrades
which are estimated at $230,000. An estimate for the entire school is projected at $1.6 million. While
economics is clearly a driving factor in decision making, the other issue is what the defined use of
the school would be to warrant these types of improvements. Often the question of whether the
school, or portions thereof, could be transformed into a senior center has been raised. In April 2010,
the Mayor received a letter from Rosemount Area Seniors indicating they do not believe the school
is a viable option for them. City staff has fielded numerous inquiries about the use of portions of the
school, however; it is unclear that the role of the City should be to renovate the school to lease to
other public or private entities.
In exploring opportunities for the Steeple Complex (all the land associated with the church including
the area once housing residential units) the concept of a senior housing project has been explored.
Of late, staff has been approached by several senior housing providers who feel the market is
underserved in the community. One option is to locate a senior project on the Steeple Complex
property. The site benefits by its close proximity to the library and retail shopping Downtown, as
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM: St. Joe's Complex- Senior Housing
Discussion
PREPARE) BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development
2A,
Director
AGENDA NO.
ATTACHMENTS: Rosemount Area Seniors letter dated
4/26/2010, Concept Plan, Preliminary
APPROVED BY:
Proposal Comparison, Cost Analysis
Study Update dated 8/13/2008
DAJ
RECOMMI :NDED ACTION: Discussion Item
DISCUSSION
As the Council is aware updating is occurring at the St. Joe's church; the Steeple Center, to allow
assembly uses to occur at the building. Renovations include mechanical work, ADA improvements,
and cosmetic updating so the building can be used for local events, both private and public. The
long -term vision for the Center is to have it evolve into an arts and cultural center. However, in the
short -term it would function more as a multi- purpose center with an arts and cultural bent.
The future status of the school building is less defined. The St. Joseph's Facilities Task Force Report
noted that "The Task Force feels the decision of whether to keep or remove the school facility
should be based upon the ultimate use of the entire site and the economics and suitability of keeping
the building, replacing it, or other alternatives." There have been some estimates made about
updating the school building to meet ADA requirements and also address potential hazardous
materials. Initial discussions have taken place to address the first floor, gym and cafeteria upgrades
which are estimated at $230,000. An estimate for the entire school is projected at $1.6 million. While
economics is clearly a driving factor in decision making, the other issue is what the defined use of
the school would be to warrant these types of improvements. Often the question of whether the
school, or portions thereof, could be transformed into a senior center has been raised. In April 2010,
the Mayor received a letter from Rosemount Area Seniors indicating they do not believe the school
is a viable option for them. City staff has fielded numerous inquiries about the use of portions of the
school, however; it is unclear that the role of the City should be to renovate the school to lease to
other public or private entities.
In exploring opportunities for the Steeple Complex (all the land associated with the church including
the area once housing residential units) the concept of a senior housing project has been explored.
Of late, staff has been approached by several senior housing providers who feel the market is
underserved in the community. One option is to locate a senior project on the Steeple Complex
property. The site benefits by its close proximity to the library and retail shopping Downtown, as
well as Central Park and the active public school complex. It also will be served by transit with the
construction of the new transit station. And, consistent with the Downtown Framework, a senior
development will bring more residents into the Downtown, increasing the overall residential density
of the area. The Framework indicates that this is a key location within the Downtown and serves a
gateway into the City Center. The document indicated that the remaining portion of the St. Joe's
property would most likely be given over to a residential use, and senior housing was specifically
mentioned as a development option.
Staff has met with two senior housing providers who expressed interest in the site. The first is
Dakota County CDA. They have a senior housing program that they are implementing throughout
the County. Based upon existing commitments to other communities it would be estimated that they
would be able to finance the project in 2015. Their model is to provide income eligible housing for
qualified seniors. The other proposal is through Brad Freisz, who works with Stonebridge, developer
of Waterford Commons. This project would not be through Stonebridge but another entity he is
involved with. His proposal is that the entity, Daniel Farr, constructs and manages the senior
project but it is owned and financed by the City through the use of Essential Function Housing
Bonds. Staff is looking into the financing mechanism further and has a meeting with Springsted on
Monday. A verbal update can occur at the Council meeting. Ultimately, if the Council would want to
proceed with exploring senior housing on the site, staff would recommend some type of RFQ
process before settling on a particular provider.
As part of the discussions with the two providers, staff had mentioned a desire to provide a senior
center on the site. The size of the Center is projected between 3,000 -5,000 for senior use. Staff
would also expect that additional storage /class space would ultimately be necessary for use of the
church building. Without a basement, interior storage is very limited.
A site plan concept has been submitted by Mr. Friesz which indicates a senior project of 80 units
and a separate townhouse building with 6 units. The site plan maintains the church building and
provides some area, although it may be too small, for a senior center. The plan illustrates how a
senior project could fit on the site and provide space for a senior center and parking. Currently staff
is concerned about the amount and layout of on -site parking for the Steeple Center. The
redevelopment of the site will allow the City to assist in defining parking and permit installation of
additional parking, most likely as a shared use. This drawing does not allow additional space for
storage although there appears to be room on the site to add that use. A building massing elevation
was also submitted so the Council can see how the view from Hwy 3 could look with the change in
site development.
The CDA has also submitted a concept plan which depicts a senior housing building with 60 units
housed in a 3 -story structure. A one -story senior center connects the senior building and the Steeple
Center. Parking is more internal to the site although directly fronts onto a portion of Cameo.
Parking is reorganized and there are designated drop -off points for the senior center and for the
senior housing. Additional storage space for public uses should also be added on the site.
Both plans illustrate that senior housing of a typical size development can be accommodated on the
site.
CONCLUSION
The Council had requested that future uses and potential development at the Steeple Complex be
brought to a worksession for further discussion after decisions about the church building had been
made. Staff wanted to show the Council some ideas for the site and gauge the level of interest in
pursuing other redevelopment options. There appears to be some interest by senior housing
providers for the site. Should the Council wish to explore that land use on the site, staff will
continue talking to various providers.
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss and determine potential interest in senior housing project at the Steeple Center Complex.
Tzo,- i3 e"foi f-P Area !-�eniono
Box 402
7;eoserHOUrj,';�. Mirlrlesota 550615
Mr. Bill Droste, Mayor, City of Rosemount April 26, 2010
2875 145`" Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997
Dear Mr. Droste,
Thank you for meeting with the Rosemount Area Seniors Executive Board on April 8,
2010 and telling us the options available to the Seniors regarding St. Joseph's Church and
school. We were happy to have the opportunity to dialogue and exchange ideas.
The following options seem open to the Seniors of the Rosemount area:
#1 To use the gathering room and the sanctuary. While the gathering room is relatively
new and does have air conditioning, we feel that it would not suit our use. The area is too
small to accommodate our luncheon groups of 100 plus people and parking may be a
problem too. Also, this area is not private, appliances and cabinets belonging to the
Seniors would not be in a secured area. There would also be conflicts with other groups
who may wish to use the sanctuary in the evening. Since the gathering room has the only
restrooms and the only handicapped accessible entrance, the area would become a
hallway. The sanctuary, although a large room, would not be desirable because there is
no air conditioning there.
#2 To use the school. This option is not desirable because there are too many levels.
The first level classrooms are large and have great light from windows, but would be hard
to access,. Also, there is no air conditioning in the building. It would be too costly to get
the building up to code.
Our recommendation is to tear down the school and use the land to build a senior
housing unit with an attached senior center. We would hope that this could be
accomplished in two years.
The Rosemount Area Seniors will continue to meet in the Community Center in the
interim. There are three improvements we request - that we are able to use Room 210 for
card playing, etc., that there be new signage placed inside and outside the building, and
that benches be placed at the building entrances, a convenient place to rest for those
waiting; for a ride.
/Sincerely,
SENIOR HOUSING PROPOSALS
E eveloper
Daniel Farr
Dakota CDA
Type of Financing
City EFB
County EFB
12.0 to 12.8 m
$6,000,000
Cost
Number of Units
80 -92
60
Type of units
Varied
Independent
Senior Center
will consider
will consider
Underground
prefers no
yes
Parking
2012
2015
Construction year
Projected rents
Location St. Joe's campus
Other Features positive cash flow
650 -850
St. Joe's campus
$130,000 /yr
0
0
0
0
ONE
WAY
DROP
OFF
EXISTING
o ENTRY
o
THREE STORY ONE STORY a
60 UNIT SENIOR CENTER
IND °_PEDENT LIVING
E
�l
'A
IN
95
STALLS
-R
iA�
EXISTING
CHAPEL
41
,j ��I
NSA
Rosemount ►minim Housing 0 10 30 50
MAY 9 Nt10
Rosemount, Minnesota ` -mmmmawl
CHTrBM > �+ Dakota County HRA Concept Site A
June 1, 20 10
City of Rosemount, MN
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997
Re: Senior Housing
The Honorable Mayor, City Council, Administrator Dwight Johnson and relevant City Staff:
Since meeting with the City Representatives on March 31, 2010, we have taken the liberty of
further study of Rosemount senior housing needs and our proposed contribution. We have
engaged an architectural firm to do a preliminary study of the site, the environment, and what we
took away from our meeting as the City's suggestions and considerations.
To supplement our booklet regarding the site and our desire to become involved, we offer the
following:
1. A site plan showing our proposed land uses, parking, green areas, building types and
existing structures.
2. Our proposed mix of the homes:
a. Total — 86
i. Independent with services — 20
ii. Assisted Living — 30
iii. Memory Care — 30
iv. Single level townhomes — 6
3. An elevation from South Robert Trail showing the church (Art Centre), the senior
community center and the three story senior housing and care building.
Because of research since our meeting, we have eliminated the "very independent" sector as we
feel those needs are being met within the community.
We believe our initial estimate for costs and operations remain reasonable for planning purposes
at this stage. We would like to add a note regarding the financing by the city. In our past "city
bonded" projects we have provided all of the data necessary for the due diligence by the city and
their counsel and financial entity. We would expect to do this again. We have added + 6
townhomes that would be for sale to seniors and built and financed by us. This provides some
additional interest to the site and a good transition on Cameo.
Finally, we offer our unsolicited opinion as to why the City should seriously consider further
discussion with our team. "Each city is unique" "Each site is unique." We believe we are great
listeners to the decision makers and the senior community wherever we go. This has resulted in
"unique" housing that is successful, beneficial, a source of pride and unlike all others. A truly
custom, yet affordable, neighborhood for Rosemount.
Thank you,
Brad Friesz, CEO
�-'
O
w
O
O
z
LU
�
r n
V
z
D
Pg,F5
E
Q
rl
a
1w
W
^O
1CL.
L
0
ry
w
T-
0
/(S)
V
Z
Y
O
O
J
w
H
U
w
w
w
w
I
Pg,F5
E
Q
rl
a
1w
W
^O
1CL.
L
0
ry
w
T-
0
/(S)
V
Z
Y
O
O
J
w
H
U
w
w
w
w
-2 1.
B'M
E X
Li
le
-J35
bore
AD 31" '3
77
N
LU
ED
IRA
•
z
--
00-
2i
U-1
0-/
2
LLJ
QD
Z
Q
D
-2 1.
B'M
E X
Li
le
-J35
bore
AD 31" '3
77
N
LU
ED
IRA
•
AUGUST 1 3, 200E
FORMER ST. JOSEPH'S CHURCH AND
SCHOOL FACILITY
ROSEMOUNT, MN
COST ANALYSIS STUDY UPDATE
• CHURCH BID PACKAGES
• SCHOOL UPGRADES
7300 WEST 47TH STREET, SUITE x%504 APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124 -7580 - ! 1 PH: (952) 431 -4433
The Former St. Joseph's Church Facility project renovates the former St. Joseph's Church and
School buildings with the primary goal to upgrade it to meet current building code requirements for
a general multi - purpose assembly space. This study updates the previous reports provided in 2005
and 2007 with cost estimates updated to current construction cost levels. There are also breakouts
of the church remodeling into several different bid packages focusing on specific upgrade elements.
In addition, the study evaluates the minimum upgrades to the main floor of the school building
that would be required before a change in occupancy from school to an assembly use would be al-
lowed.
The description of code, accessibility and basic comfort described in the previous two reports may
be referenced to describe the work represented in this update. A new schematic design floor plan
for the school is attached at the end of this study.
AUGUST 1 s, 2008
Revised Schematic Design Budget Estimate for Former St. Joseph's Church Facility
The cost estimate below is the result of a detailed material and labor take -off done by our cost consulta
Professional Project Management (PPM) and updated to a 2009 construction start. The cost estim;
includes a design contingency of 10% in order to cover the additional information and possible fine ti
ing that will occur between these schematic design level drawings and the final construction plans a
specifications. The actual start date selected for the project may impact the inflation rate calculation,
or down, and therefore the final construction cost.
I recommend providing for a construction contingency of 5% after the final bids are received as includ
above to cover unknown conditions that might be encountered in remodeling of a building of this age
02000 Sitework and Demolition
$70,134.11
03000 Concrete
$31,355.33
04000 Masonry
$75,014.08
05000 Metals
$9,179.60
06000 Wood & Plastics
$9,684.16
07000 Thermal
$26,258.53
08000 Doors, Windows & Glass
$22,609.80
09000 Finishes
$43,769.79
10000 Specialties
$10,197.20
11000 Equipment
$0.00
12000 Furnishings
$0.00
13000 Special Construction
$0.00
14000 Conveying Systems
$0.00
15000 Mechanical
$493,108.82
16000 Electrical
$91,039.98
Subtotal Direct Cost
$882,351.39
General Conditions
10%
$88,235.14
Overhead & Profit
6%
$58,235.19
Total w/o Contingency
$1,028,821.72
Design Contingency
10%
$102,882.17
A &E Fee
6.75%
$76,320.00
Construction Contingency
5%
$51,441.09
$1,259,464.98
Total Project Cost
Alternates:
Total:
Alt. 1 Recarpet Assembly Hall
$18,982.36
Alt. 2 Security System
$17,836.14
Alt. 3 Public Address/Intercom
$16,152.70
Alt. 4 Telephone and Data System
$29,925.06
Alt. 5 Cable Television System
$4,666.80
-II
AuGUST 1 3 2008
Exterior Front Entry - Bid Package 1
Bid Package 1 includes a new entry ramp, stairs and landing to meet accessibility requirements. At the
front entry doors, new handicap operators need to be installed to improve accessibility. New sidewalks
are needed to connect to the new accessible ramp and stairs.
Bid Package 1 Subtotal I I $52,210.30
General Conditions
12%
$6,265.24
Overhead & Profit
10%
$5,847.55
Total w/o Contingency
$64,323.09
Design Contingency
15%
$9,648.46
A &E Fee
8%
$5,917.72
Construction Contingency
5%
$3,216.15
Total Project Cost
$83,105.43
Interior Ramp - Stage Extension - Bid Package 2
To make the stage accessible, a new ramp and handrails need to be installed in the southwest corner of
the assembly space that will also provide a connection to the existing chapel. The existing stage needs
to be extended to connect to the new accessible ramp.
Bid Package 2 Subtotal 1 1 $10,218.40
General Conditions
12%
$1,226.21
Overhead & Profit
10%
$1,144.46
Total w/o Contingency
$12,589.07
Design Contingency
15%
$1,888.36
A &E Fee
8%
$1,158.19
Construction Contingency
5%
$629.45
Total Project Cost
$16,265.08
AucusT 1 3, 2008 3
Restroom Addition - Bid Package 3
A new building addition to provide new multi - fixture men's and women's restrooms is needed to fulfill
code requirements. Remodeling of the sacristy is required to provide access to the new restrooms as well
as creating a new lobby outside of the new restrooms. The north assembly room needs a few upgrades
to allow access from the assembly room to the new restrooms.
Bid Package 3 Subtotal
General Conditions
Overhead & Profit
Total w/o Contingency
Design Contingency
A &E Fee
Construction Contingency
Total Project Cost
Additional , --hurch HC Accessibility - Bid Package 4
To improve accessibility, some doors will require widening and new hardware. Handicap drinking foun-
tains need to be installed as well as handicap signage. New handicap parking stalls are required to meet
code accessibility requirements.
Bid Package 4 Subtotal
General Conditions
Overhead & Profit
Total w/o Contingency
Design Contingency
A &E Fee
Construction Contingency
Total Project Cost
HVAC & Mechanical Addition - Bid Package 5
A new building addition to the west is required to house the new mechanical units. The existing boilers
will need to be replaced. A new make -up air and air conditioning unit will need to be installed as well
as supply and return ductwork.
Bid Package 5 Subtotal 1 I $508,325.54
General Conditions
12%
$60,999.07
Overhead & Profit
10%
$56,932.46
Total w/o Contingency
$626,257.07
Design Contingency
15%
$93,938.56
A &E Fee
8%
$57,615.65
Construction Contingency
5%
$31,312.85
Total Project Cost
$809,124.13
Fire Suppression System - Bid Package 6
A new sprinkler system needs to be installed throughout the existing building as well as water service
sized for the new sprinklers. A new fire alarm and smoke detection system needs to be installed.
Bid Package 6 Subtotal 1 1 $83,494.88
General Conditions
12%
$10,019.39
Overhead & Profit
10%
$9,351.43
Total w/o Contingency
$102,865.69
Design Contingency
15%
$15,429.85
A &E Fee
8%
$9,463.64
Construction Contingency
5%
$5,143.28
Total Project Cost
$132,902.47
AUGUST 1 3 2008 5
Summary of Church Facility Bid Packages
The previous six bid packages cover most of the planned remodeling but a few miscellaneous items are
only included in the overall project cost estimate. These items include items such as new lighting in the
entry, patching and painting former water leaks and similar miscellaneous improvements identified with
the City staff on the previous study. As shown below these items represent $212,623.81 in additional
costs.
It is important also to point out that due to economies of scale and general conditions efficiencies, the
church facility remodeling will cost up to $157,000 more if done in separate packages. This additional
cost will likely be even more when calculating in inflation between the 2009 start date shown on the
updated costs and the actual date when the remodeling is undertaken. While breaking the project into
smaller steps provides flexibility, there are trade -offs to consider.
Total Project - All 6 Bid Packages
Total Not Included - Bid Packages
Total Project Cost
AUGUST 13. 2008
$1,203,889.02
$212,623.81
$1,416,512.84
Revised Schematic Design Budget Estimate for Former St. Joseph's School Facility
The following table is the updated costs to remodel the entire school building based on the 2005 build-
ing analysis work scopes but update for a 2009 construction start. These numbers represent preliminary
budget costs and unlike the church cost estimates, are not unit cost take -offs. Consequently, this estimate
is intended for ballpark comparisons only.
School Buil ilinLY - Overall
Ouantity
Unit Cost
Total Cost
Exterior
Replace rusting steel lintels over windows
??
$1,823
$40,106
Tuckpoint and rebuild brick around NW
corner of building
1
$6,078
$6,078
Replace BUR roofs, $ashings & upgrade
insulation to meet code
13,500
$13.98
$188,730
Structure
(No work - lintels noted above)
0
$0
$0
HVAC
New ventilation & cooling system
1
$486,202
$486,202
Temperature control system
1
$42,543
$42,543
Boiler replacement (upgrade size of church
boiler to serve both)
1
$36,465
$36,465
Plumbing
Fire suppression system
21,600
$2.73
$58,968
(Bathrooms will be included below under
accessibility)
0
$0
$0
Electrical
Fire alarm, lighting, panel board upgrades
1
$182,326
$182,326
Interior Condition & Codes
Replace corridor doors with fire rated openings
25
$1,823
$45,575
Enclose and fire rate stairwell
2
$9,724
$19,448
Fire rate corridor wall penetrations
1
$4,862
$4,862
Accessibility
Add three -stop elevator and enclosure
1
$109,396
$109,396
Add single -use HC restroom - one per gender
2
$14,586
$29,172
Upgrade knob handles not already replaced
above
20
$608
$12,160
Miscellaneous HC upgrades
1
$6,078
$6,078
Subtotal
$1,268,109
Contingency
15%
$190,216
Softcosts & Equipment
Design Fees (A/E) - estimated
10%
$145,832
HE equipment
Unknown
Minimum Total Church & Gathering Area Upgrade $1,604,157
AUGUST 13 2008
St. Joseph's School - First Floor Upgrade
As an option instead of remodeling the entire school building, the main floor remodeling shown in this
option only addresses the minimum handicap accessibility and code updates necessitated by the change
in occupancy. This work is shown on the attached sheet SCO1 and provides upgrades to three class-
rooms, cafeteria, gymnasium and restrooms only. These upgrades include the following items:
• Handicap access down to the cafeteria and gymnasium rooms
• Replacement and widening of all room entrance doors smaller than Y -0" wide
• Addition of through -wall make -up air units in each occupied space
• Addition of fire suppression system in first floor only
• Upgrade of exit and emergency lighting systems
First Floor Subtotal 1 1 $142,576.94
General Conditions
12%
$17,109.23
Overhead & Profit
10%
$15,968.62
Total w/o Contingency
$175,654.79
Design Contingency
15%
$26,348.22
A &E Fee
8%
$16,160.24
Construction Contingency
5%
$8,782.74
Total Project Cost
$226,945.99
AUGUST 1 3, 2008
m
100MOS 4dowr
f � $ / ■ � ■ )/! 2 � 2 � .
z
0
D
z
0
C)
0
11
F-
0
z