Northfield Middle School R F STUDY - SMSQ Architects, Inc. · D. Reuse Laundry List: ... A. MIDDLE...

SMSQ Architects, Inc. Northfield, Minnesota

Northfield Middle School REUSE FEASIBILITY STUDY

11 February 2002 Revised RFQ: 6 August 2002

In addition to numerous Northfield community members who have contributed to the information provided in this report, the following Middle School Reuse Committee Members and School District representatives have given generously of their time. Middle School Reuse Committee Members: School District Staff Resources:

Dixon Bond Doug Crane Kim Brouillet Don Warhol Cliff Clark Terry Tofte Christie Clarke Jane McWilliams Bill Nelson SMSQ Consultant / Facilitators: Brett Reese Steve Edwins Richard Reynolds Alice Ritari Bardwell Smith Steve Wilmot Dan Stadler Karen Zimmerman

SMSQ Architects -Northfield Middle School Reuse of 55 File 3EBAAE90-2C3C-20F823.doc

REUSE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Executive Summary page 4 B. Reuse Issues: A List of Primary Concerns page 6

What are the major issues identified by the Committee relating to reuse of the Middle School? C. Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse page 6

What five criteria most succinctly define successful reuse of the Middle School? D. Reuse Laundry List: Comprehensive Listing of Reuses Considered page 7

What reuse possibilities have been brought to the attention of the Committee? E. Primary Preferred Options for Reuse (it may be possible to combine all four) page 9

Of all possible reuses identified, what reuses hold the most potential to effectively address Reuse Issues AND meet Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse?

1) Community Multi-needs Reuse 3) Arts Dominant Reuse 2) Housing Dominant Reuse 4) Business Commercial Reuse

F. Summary of Ownership & Operations Issues page 14

How can different ownership or operational strategies affect successful reuse?

G. Goals & Options: Performance Evaluation page 15

Considering the Goals For Successful Reuse, which Primary Preferred Options for Reuse are best? H. Uses and Places: Building Spaces & Most Appropriate Reuse page 18

What types of spaces exist within the Middle School building and how can these spaces be most efficiently converted for new uses?

I. Spatial Diagrams (A graphic depiction of existing building spaces) page 20 J. Preliminary Financial Pro-forma & Case Studies page 24

What potential funding exists for the Preferred Options for Reuse? How have similar projects been financed?

K. Sample Developer Request for Proposals page 27

What information might the School Board wish to include in any RFP sent to interested reuse developers?


TABLE OF CONTENTS continued L. Additional Information

What other information is useful to consider? 1. Reuse Study Interview List: Extensive interviews were conducted to page 36

gauge community interest in various reuses for the Middle School. 2. Middle School History: What is historically significant about this building? page 37 3. Case Studies: What other projects have companies like MetroPlains and page 39

Artspace Projects Inc. completed that are similar to the Housing Dominant and Arts Dominant Reuse options?

4. Letters of Interest: What groups have expressed a serious intent for page 41

involvement in this project? 5. Other Studies: What recent studies relate closely to Middle School Reuse? page 47 6. Relevant Web Sites: What web sites provide additional information about page 48

the Northfield community or similar adaptive reuse projects? 7. Public Forum Questionnaire (available at Online Forum) page 52


A. MIDDLE SCHOOL REUSE FEASIBILITY STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The initial charge of the Middle School Reuse Committee has been completed: “to provide a list of several potential viable re-use options to the Board of Education by December 10, 2001.” This final report builds upon the initial findings presented at the December School Board meeting along with significant additional information. The Committee has convened fourteen times since August of 2001 to prioritize goals, formulate process, review previously published data, and interview community members about reuse of the Middle School. Committee discussion led to a commitment to discover Reuse Options that best serve the Northfield Community of the future. The Committee first identified the community’s Primary Concerns about reuse (see page 5), later refined into goals that have served as baseline criteria to judge the quality of potential reuses. These Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse include:

That a Significant Community Use for the building will remain, Economic Feasibility will be achievable within a reasonable time, the new use will provide Downtown Support for the existing Central Business District (CBD), Historic Preservation will be accomplished for the significant historic fabric of the building, and the reuse project will remain a Good Neighbor to the adjacent Central Park residential area.

The Committee conducted numerous interviews with community leaders, regional organizations, Middle School neighbors, and prospective developers of successful school reuse projects. The Committee then evaluated responsible reuses for the Middle School building, and proactively solicited widespread community input. The proposed reuse scenarios expressed in this report are based upon this active community participation. After compiling and reviewing an extensive list of potential reuses (see Reuse “Laundry List,” page 6), the Committee found that four (4) options best met the goals for reuse. The Committee believes that all four of the recommended options could be successfully developed for the existing Middle School site, if supported by suitable proposals. The four Primary Preferred Options for Reuse include:

o Community Arts Dominant Reuse (highest recommendation) The building could house a mixed use that focuses on arts and education, including artist studios, artist housing, exhibition and gallery areas, small performance areas, coffeehouse, commercial and office spaces, workshops, community performance hall and gymnasium, conference and presentation rental space, and other mixed use spaces. School use (SEMSAT, Montessori, ALC) would be a compatible fit with the Arts Dominant Reuse (see Option 3, page 10).

o Community Multi-Needs Reuse

This option includes a Mixed Use of educational and community reuses such as: school use (SEMSAT, Montessori, ALC), college office “swing space,” incubator spaces, arts studios, community performance hall, recreation gymnasium, youth activities spaces, nonprofit offices, and community storage (see Option 1, page 8).

o Housing Dominant Reuse Housing geared toward the Northfield market demand may include individual or cooperatively owned housing, hotel, market rate or subsidized rental housing, targeted housing (such as senior or “affordable” housing), along with other mixed uses (see Option 2, page 9).

o Business Commercial Reuse


Business reuses compatible with the residential setting and supportive of the downtown may include a combination of light assembly, professional offices, commercial businesses, restaurant, movie theater, and conference facilities (see Option 4, page 11).


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY continued Although all four reuse options hold high potential for viability, the Committee believes that detailed feasibility of one of the four should be investigated first. Considering all information gathered to date, and based upon discussions with community representatives, the Middle School Reuse Committee recommends initial investigation of Community Arts Dominant Reuse for the following reasons:

1. Community Arts Dominant Reuse permits significant ongoing public access to the Middle School building, while providing a unique use supportive of Northfield as an Arts Community in the broadest sense. This reuse could play a new role in community education, by housing supportive educational entities such as the SEMSAT Charter School (also a major source of operating capital). Arts Dominant Reuse scenarios also demonstrate viability to retain community use of the auditorium and gymnasium, owned and programmed comprehensively along with other building areas.

2. Building reuse for the arts could include artist studios, galleries, living spaces, and workshops,

deemed economically feasible within a reasonable period. If the Middle School reuse is established as a nonprofit organization maintaining artist studios or residences, gentrification is lessened, permitting stable, ongoing affordable living spaces for a wide variety of artists.

3. An Arts Dominant Reuse supports the downtown through increased numbers of nearby residents

with a complementary, non-competing use. Unique community activities generating increased tourism would be possible, thus enhancing Northfield’s identity and unique sense of place.

4. With Arts Dominant Reuse, many areas of the building would be reused with relatively lower cost

remodeling. Modest remodeling fosters respectful historic rehabilitation, ease of reversibility, and lower rental rates.

5. Community Arts Dominant Reuse that supports a community of artists will continue to be a “good

neighbor” to the surrounding Central Park neighborhood, generating minimal vehicle traffic, and requiring modest parking and building revisions.

6. The proposed Community Arts Dominant Reuse is a mixed use, and could incorporate many of the

community entities included in Option 1 (Community Multi-Needs Reuse). 7. Community Arts Dominant Reuse supports current planning directions proposed by the Northfield

Area Chamber of Commerce, Northfield Arts Guild, and the Northfield area Comprehensive Arts Planning Program.

A sample Request For Proposal (RFP) is included in this report (page 26-revised August 2002) in order to simplify moving forward to further investigate detailed feasibility. Soliciting proposals from potential developers for the unique needs of the Northfield community give substance and impetus to speculation about viable reuses. It is also recommended that the School District solicit proposals for projects in such a way that proposed developments will best meet the needs of the future Northfield. Qualified developers will be interested in developing projects that build upon the needs and goals identified in this report if encouraged to do so. The recommended proposal process establishes the guidelines and evaluation process for determining developer approaches that are most beneficial to the Northfield community.


B. REUSE ISSUES: A LIST OF PRIMARY CONCERNS What are the major issues identified by the Committee relating to reuse of the Middle School?

1. Project Economic Feasibility: Which reuses will support economically feasible facility operation

and maintenance? 2 Downtown Support: What reuses best support the economic viability of nearby downtown?

3. Sustainability: What reuses are most friendly to the natural environment? 4. Reversibility: Is reversibility of the building for use as a public or private school use a likely goal? 5. Ownership: What ownership model is most feasible for each reuse? 6. Historic Preservation: To what extent is the preservation of the historic elements (especially the

exterior facade) an important goal? 7. Zoning: To what extent does Zoning impact the acceptable reuse? 8. Neighborhood Concerns: What neighborhood concerns impact reuses judged acceptable? 9. Taxes: How could tax abatements or tax increment financing be used for specific projects if the

project is returned to the tax roles? 10. Demolition: What is the impact of removing or retaining the East Wing or other areas? 11. Parking: What parking requirements are needed for each type of reuse? 12. Auditorium: How can ongoing use of the auditorium be financed? 13. Community Future: How can reuses contribute to the goals of the City Comprehensive Plan and

future quality of life in Northfield? 14. Community Use: Is it important for some part of the building to remain accessible to the

community in keeping with its current role? 15. Community Symbol: How can the facility continue to function as a symbolically important icon of

community life and of the historic architectural character of the neighborhood and downtown? 16. Current Projects: How does this project relate to other current or upcoming community projects

such as reuse of the existing hospital building?

C. RECOMMENDED GOALS FOR SUCCESSFUL REUSE

What five criteria most succinctly define successful reuse of the Middle School?

1. Significant Community Use: Community feedback indicates desirability for some part of the new use to continue to be accessible to a reasonable spectrum of the community. Best reuses respect the Middle School’s symbolic sense of place, defined by its location bridging downtown and residential neighborhoods.

2. Economic Feasibility: New uses, ownership and operations should be economically feasible within a reasonable period, with predictable ongoing viability.

3. Downtown Support: Best new uses will support the economic viability and vitality of the nearby downtown.

4. Historic Preservation: The older sections of the building (1910 and 1934) should be respectfully rehabilitated following historic preservation guidelines.

5. Good Neighbor: Best new uses continue to be a good neighbor to the surrounding Central Park Neighborhood.


D. REUSE LAUNDRY LIST: COMPREHENSIVE LISTING OF REUSES CONSIDERED

What reuse possibilities have been brought to the attention of the Committee?

Child Care—Day Care Good proximity for the downtown, Central Park neighborhood and Carleton Requires on-grade facilities and a fenced in, equipped play yard Child Care—Preschool Requires on-grade facilities and a fenced in, equipped play yard Community Education—Standard Classroom Based Need and quantity of space depends on use of existing school classrooms each year Community Education—Workshop/Equipment Based Beneficial due to lack of availability in existing school buildings Community Education—Digital Technology Classroom Based Likely to become available in existing schools but not easily scheduled Possibly shared use with "remote learning" for college credit Community Education—Television/Video Technology Based Possible shared use of local media classrooms and/or studios Conference Center—Large Assembly The Auditorium suggests uses for conference assemblies of many types, including business

training, in-service teacher, hospital or city staff sessions, or for outside groups sought out through tourism efforts such as those through the Convention & Visitor’s Bureau.

Conference Center—Meeting Rooms Many conference programs call for breakout sessions, display areas, informal breakout and

refreshment spaces. Classroom spaces adjacent to the Auditorium will fulfill this need. Conference Center—Reception & Dining Conferences calling for luncheon or dinner programs have more difficulty finding facilities Education—Charter School: Elementary None currently identified or advocated Education—Charter School: Grade 6-12 The SEMSAT School (which is to be underway by fall of 2002) may be able to move into the

existing classrooms with sufficient updating and improvements for their program. As a Charter School, it is required to lease space rather than to own space.

Hotel: Major Space Use Meal service of some sort likely, could overlap with conference uses An ideal use for shared parking Hotel: Arts B&B Modest use of space, used for visiting professors, artists in residence, others Hotel: Hostel Style Larger rooms for individual and group rental, family based rooms

Housing: Apartments—Rental Housing aimed for singles, couples, students, artists, downtown employees, etc., but perhaps not

large enough to appeal to families. Market rents combined with the possibility of a proportion of below market rate units.

Housing: Apartments—Ownership Housing appealing to higher income brackets interested in living near the downtown, in an historic

housing neighborhood and close to Carleton. Owner occupied housing offers stability and perhaps more "disposable" income expended in the downtown.


Housing: Studio (Workspace)—Rental Rental housing, perhaps more modestly and simply outfitted related to workspace. The simpler

approach to rehabilitation may provide a lower rental rate than with more conventional housing requiring more extensive remodeling.

Housing: Studio (Workspace)—Ownership (Similar to rental studio or loft space, but with an equity interest such as cooperative or

condominium ownership. As a more permanent residence) This may require extensive remodeling efforts but may have the benefits of increased stability and support for the Central Business District.

Performance—Dance Use of the Auditorium for both rehearsals and performances is desired, and provides rental income.

Adjacent warm-up, rehearsal and dressing room space is important for some performances, particularly if traveling dance troupes are programmed.

Performance—Music: Large Ensemble Orchestra, band, chorus Performance—Music: Small Ensemble Chamber music (mostly acoustical) Folk, traditional, bluegrass (mostly acoustical) Rock bands (amplified) Performance—Musical Theater/Light Opera Musicals and historic operettas Vaudeville Dance with musicians Presentation—Speakers or Panels In addition to typical modes of use by conferences for the Auditorium, presentation groups and

newly programmed events might feature individual presenters or panel discussions ranging from incentive type programs to public policy or political discussions and debates.

Reception & Dining—Rental Reception space is frequently in demand, particularly if the ambiance and features are better than

other rental halls, and especially if alcohol can be served. Such receptions might be part of a gallery or exhibit opening, or as part of a public presentation or performance, or associated with a formal dinner. Suitable space for dancing is another desirable feature.

Recreation—Flexible (Adaptable) Fun Spaces Most desirable is afternoon or weekend attraction for young people, as a place to go with a variety

of activities. May use one or more large spaces (Gyms), not dependent on locker rooms. Recreation—Regulation Sized Gym / Basketball Based With or without locker/changing rooms Recreation—Small Gym Based With or without locker/changing rooms Office—College Ongoing but temporary space during campus remodeling Office—Business Startup businesses perhaps related to other users in the building Office—Nonprofit Organization A cluster of fledgling organizations could share support facilities and equipment Storage—Community Archives

Current needs include City records, Historical Society and/or genealogical records; also local Library for infrequently used book and periodical storage.

Studio—Visual Arts (Including Digital Arts) Working studio space typically with ample natural light and ceiling heights. Usual expectations include power, water, internet access, and economical rents.


Studio—Performing Arts: Rehearsal, Dance Dance class or rehearsal space typically includes a resilient floor, mirrored wall, acoustics suitable

for music, and occasional space for a small audience. Good temperature control is necessary as well as provisions for changing clothing.

Studio—Performing Arts: Rehearsal, Music Music rehearsal spaces may be of various sizes with attention given to room acoustics and sound

separation from other uses. Storage of instruments / equipment and changing places are also considerations.

Studio—Cyber Enterprise Many of the requirements for visual arts studios may overlap with these users, except that the

requirements for natural light and ceiling height may be less important. Cyber enterprise use could overlap with Office uses.

Studio—Television A new location for Northfield Community Television (NTV), with reception, classroom space/small

studio, and a number of editing suites, control room, and secured storage for equipment. Only the small studio space would require ceiling height and natural light is not required for editing and control rooms.

E. PRIMARY PREFERRED OPTIONS FOR REUSE Of all potential reuses identified, what reuses hold the most potential to effectively address Reuse Issues and meet Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse? Option 1. Community Multi-needs Reuse

Building Use: In this example, numerous community space needs could be filled to the extent that they meet the criteria for successful reuse. Such mixed use geared toward existing community needs could include the following leased spaces: a. School Use 1) SEMSAT Arts and Technology Charter School a) (8,000 – 9,000 SF) b) $180,000 available state funding for leased space 2) Montessori School (currently looking for new space) 3) Additional support spaces for Alternative Learning Center a) Recreation space b) Misc. overflow spaces c) Specific / unique program spaces b. College Use

1) Carleton College “swing” space for ongoing temporary offices (could be phased with SEMSAT Charter School).

2) Carleton College temporary use of auditorium during new construction c. Incubator Spaces 1) Technology related start up companies 2) Regional cottage Industries d. Studio Spaces 1) College art faculty

2) Fifth year college apprentices 3) Community photography studio 4) Emergent artists


5) Community television studio 6) Established artist family housing

e. Performance / Presentation & Conference Use 1) Arts Guild 2) Cannon Valley Orchestra 3) Dance programs 4) Community choirs and other music performance groups 5) Community events center 6) Conference meeting rooms 7) Presentations / conference assembly

f. Recreation Use 1) Parks and Recreation programs 2) Community dances 3) Health & fitness programs

g. Youth Activities 1) Key – Northfield Union of Youth 2) Middle School Project 3) After School Unlimited

h. Nonprofit Offices 1) Suite with shared reception and equipment

i Community Storage 1) Historical archives 2) Historical Society display items 3) City archives 4) Book storage

Ownership / Operations: The Community Multi-Needs Reuse approach assumes that the project could be community based or that a developer would come forward to take on the responsibility of ownership. Operations management could be by the same owner or by another group (ownership and operations could be accomplished through separate entities). A high level of local control may be possible with such a project approach and is considered desirable by many community members. Finding one developer to absorb the ownership risk for this use could be a challenge.

Special Considerations: Characteristics of some areas of the building more naturally suggest certain types of reuse, accommodated without significant alteration. For instance, the smaller, more unusual spaces of the West (middle) section may still be well suited to studio spaces, while the East Wing fits well with the needs of the school reuses. Recreation spaces fit with the gymnasium, and the upper level library with its high ceilings and light filled interior suggest reuse for conference meeting or exhibit use. The Auditorium would continue to be in demand as a music performance space, for presentations, and for conferences.

Option 2. Housing Dominant Reuse

Building Use: There is unmistakably a ready market for new housing in Northfield, where rental vacancy rates of one to two percent fall well below state averages. Affordable housing meeting the budgets of Northfield’s many entry-level professionals such as new college faculty is limited. Such housing geared toward typical market demand could include the following: a) Ownership:

1) Individually purchased condominiums 2) Cooperatively owned housing


b) Hotel: 1) Bed and Breakfast 2.) Hotel style residential housing

c) Rental: 1) Market rate rental housing

2) Partially subsidized rental housing 3) Other mixed occupant rental housing

d) Targeted Housing: 1) Senior housing (desirable near the downtown)

2) “Affordable” unit housing e) Mixed Use With Housing:

1) Housing in South Wing 2) Performance / Recreation in West and North Wings 3) Parking at East Wing site

Ownership / Operations: The model demonstrated by Metro Plains or Cornerstone would convert appropriate spaces for traditional one and two bedroom rental units, potentially with a single owner and on-site property management. Areas less suitable for housing due to room sizes or inadequate natural light or egress would not be included in the primary housing developer / owner project, and could be either demolished or transferred to another entity for ownership / operations. The auditorium and gymnasium spaces could be owned and operated separately for community performance and recreation uses as well. The East Wing occupies land area that developers may prefer to use for parking. Special Considerations: Metro Plains typically reuses only those historic buildings eligible for National Register designation in order to take advantage of tax credits. Although it is possible for the Middle School to receive such designation, the building is not a clear candidate for National Register designation. Spaces most desirable for traditional floor plan apartments include the South Wing, estimated to allow as many as thirty traditional housing units.

Option 3. Community Arts Dominant Reuse

Building Use: The building could house a combination of uses focusing on the Arts including the following: a) Artist Studios

1) Visual arts, weaving, photography etc. 2) Digital and media based arts 3) Book arts and writing

b) Artist Housing 1) Minimalist artist lofts 2) Established artist family housing units

c) Exhibition Areas 1) Rental gallery 2) Community gallery

d) Intimate Performance Areas 1) Dance recital 2) Music recital

e) Coffeehouse 1) Existing cafeteria location 2) Near gallery or common spaces


3) Adjacent to performance spaces f) Commercial / Office Spaces

1) Arts retail 2) Arts related offices 3) Nonprofit offices

g) Workshops 1) Housed in existing lower level shop areas

h) Community Performance Auditorium Rental i) Conference and Presentation Rental j) Mixed Use

1) School areas connected to studios or lofts 2) Auditorium & Gymnasium operated on lease basis 3) School areas not needed for artists used for childcare, preschool, charter school,

or office rental Ownership / Operations: Following one model demonstrated by Artspace Projects Inc., the entire Middle School Facility could have one owner, with all areas of the building supported financially as a whole. Operations costs for the auditorium (typically not able to produce revenue adequate for self-sufficiency) would be subsidized from other areas of the building with its rental income supporting operations. This model has also been accomplished in other places, also with cooperative artist ownership. Special Considerations: Artist lofts and studios typically can often be constructed within building areas not deemed suitable for traditional floor plan apartments. A substantial market has been found in nearby suburban communities for this model, and studio spaces for art faculty and 5th year apprenticeship programs at both Northfield colleges are in demand. Due diligence for this model would include extensive market testing first to determine that a substantial interest exists, thus improving economic viability. A hybrid approach could combine Community Arts Dominant Reuse with other types of uses.

Option 4. Business Commercial Reuse

Building Use: The Middle School could be redeveloped for other uses compatible with the residential setting and supportive to the downtown businesses such as: a) Light Assembly b) Professional Offices c) Commercial Business

1) Specialty shops 2) Travel or hospitality related 3) Arts and Books related

d) Restaurant / Cafe e) Movie Theater(s) f) Conference Facilities Ownership / Operations: A single (or multiple) buyer(s) may be attracted who could redevelop the property for these uses with the same developer overseeing operations or by another entity. Conditions of such uses are difficult to accurately predict without soliciting proposals from prospective owners and developers.


Special Considerations: Located within an area zoned for residential use, many non-residential uses are possible through a Conditional Reuse Permit. Off street parking requirements may prohibit some reuses or require creative additional arrangements (e.g. restaurants require a constant flow of people and convenient parking).


F. SUMMARY OF OWNERSHIP & OPERATIONS ISSUES How can different ownership or operational strategies affect successful reuse? (Also see chart on next page that summarizes Ownership & Operations Issues). A broad range of options for Ownership and Operations have been discussed, from transferring both land and building to a for-profit Developer, to community retention of the land and building, leased to other community entities, with Auditorium, Gymnasium, and meeting spaces programmed by still another community group. Since a purchase price is not presently a requirement of development, the school district may be in a better position to bargain for reuse options that provide long-term benefits to the community. Community ownership by an entity such as a nonprofit Land Trust is one option for how community ownership could be retained. Although there has been a lack of interest in City or School District ownership, it has also not been clearly identified that community ownership is always a desirable aspect. It is appropriate to remember that “Community Ownership” should not be confused with “Public Ownership.” Option 1. COMMUNITY MULTI-NEEDS REUSE

Ownership: The Community Multi-Needs Reuse approach assumes that the project could be community based or that a developer would come forward to take on the responsibility of ownership. Finding one developer to absorb the ownership risk for this use could be a challenge. Operations: Operations management could be by the same owner or by another group (ownership and operations could be accomplished through separate entities). A high level of local control may be possible with such a project approach and is considered desirable by many community members.

Option 2. HOUSING DOMINANT REUSE

Ownership: The model demonstrated by Metro Plains or Cornerstone would convert appropriate spaces for traditional one and two bedroom rental units, potentially with a single owner and on-site property management. Areas less suitable for housing due to room sizes or inadequate natural light or egress would not be included in the primary housing developer / owner project, and could be either demolished or transferred to another entity for ownership / operations. The East Wing occupies land area that developers may prefer to use for residence parking. The auditorium and gymnasium spaces may be required to be owned by a different group that the housing developer. Operations: Housing management could be by the developer or by a separate property management company. The auditorium and gymnasium spaces could possible by programmed and/or leased by other local groups such as the Northfield Arts Guild or Community Parks and Recreation.

Option 3. COMMUNITY ARTS DOMINANT REUSE

Ownership: Following one model demonstrated by Artspace Projects Inc., the entire Middle School Facility could have one owner, with all areas of the building supported financially as a whole. Operations: Operations costs for the auditorium (typically not able to produce revenue adequate for self-sufficiency) could be subsidized from other areas of the building with its rental income supporting operations. This model has also been accomplished in other places with cooperative artist ownership as well.

Option 4. BUSINESS / COMMERCIAL REUSE

Ownership / Operations: A single (or multiple) buyer(s) may be attracted who could redevelop the property for these uses with the same developer overseeing operations or by another entity. Conditions of such uses are difficult to accurately predict without soliciting proposals from prospective owners and developers.


SUMMARY OF OWNERSHIP & OPERATIONS ISSUES

P R E F E R R E D R E U S E O P T I O N S ISSUE DESCRIPTION Community Housing Community Business/ NOTES:

Multi-needs Dominant Arts Dominant Commercial1. High level of Community control YES Maybe YES Maybe A

most likely

2. Comprehensive ownership Maybe Unlikely YES Unlikely Bby one owner most likely

3. Separate Ownership & YES YES YES YES C, HManagement entities possible

4. Auditorium & Gymnasium likely Maybe Unlikely YES Unlikely B, Downed / programmed by sameentity as primary function

5. Retension of 1954 Building Wing YES Unlikely YES Unlikely Flikely

6. Land / Building Ownership Maybe Unlikely Maybe Unlikely Gretained by School District or City

7. Relevant Case Study for Ames, Iowa Cannon Falls Duluth Dcomparison Community Stonehouse Washington

Center Sr. Housing School

NOTES:A) Highest community control is gained through local ownership and management. B) Most for-profit Developers do not favor accepting responsibility for ownership or operations of

the Auditorium or Gymnasium spaces.C) Specialized management entities may be able to perform programming duties more efficiently. For

example, Arts Dominant Use programming for gym, meeting, and performance spaces may be best managed by groups such as the City Parks and Recreation along with the Northfield Arts Guild.

D) Only project examples by Artspace Projects indicated successful experience at including the Auditorium and Gymnasium in the overall development project, if desired by the Community.

E) See Detailed Case Study information included in Section L-3F) 1954 Wing probably may need to be removed to provide additional space for on-site parking.G) All options may be possible to lease land and/or building, with community Ownership retained.H) Apartments or other spaces (business, office) could be Owner occupied (condominium)


G. GOALS & OPTIONS: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Considering the Goals for Successful Reuse, which Primary Preferred Options for Reuse are best? The following spreadsheet displays a graphic comparison and ranking, comparing the four Primary Preferred Options for Reuse with the five Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse. Also included is a comparison of the Options with the majority of the Primary Concerns for reuse. The subjective measures used for the following chart are subject to change based on detailed development proposals. It is used here are for discussion and general comparison between the four options.


GOALS & OPTIONS: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION KEY: Most Positive (+3)T he subjective measures used here are for discussion and general comparison. ⌧⌧⌧ Most Negative (-3)

P R E F E R R E D R E U S E O P T I O N S Community Housing Community Arts Business/

RECOMMENDED GOALS: Multi-needs Dominant Dominant Commercial NOTES:see next page

GOALS1 Significant Community Use ⌧ A)

Sense of Public Access

2 Economic Feasibility B)Development Cost / Benefit

3 Downtow n Support C)Support w/o Competing Use

4 Historic Preservation D)Maximize Historic Integrity

5 Good Neighbor E)Compatible, Least Traffic

SUB-EVALUATION 11 -1 6 12 5

KEY ISSUES1 Sustainability F)

Least Remodeling, Energy Use

2 Reversibility ⌧⌧ G)Reversible or Adaptable

3 Ownership by Community ⌧ H)Local Control or Ownership

4 Zoning ⌧ I)Acceptability in Residential

5 Taxes J)Tax Generation Ability

6 Demolition not needed K)1954 East Wing

7 On-Site Parking L)Least On-Site Demand

8 Auditorium use financing ⌧ M)Supported by Development

9 Support Comp. Land Use Plan ⌧ N)Support CBD, Historic Core

10 Symbol: Community Identity O)Sense of Place

11 Relationship to other Projects P)CBD, Hospital, Westside

SUB-EVALUATION 17 -4 8 -1 19 -2 10

COLUMN TOTALS 0 28 -5 14 -1 31 -2 15

EVALUATION TOTAL 28 9 30 13


GOALS & OPTIONS: PERFOMANCE EVALUATION NOTES: A) Interviews with community members indicate that an ongoing public use is desirable and most likely to

be supported. B) Lowest development costs are incurred through reuses with least remodeling. The goal is to provide the

highest return benefit to the community. C) Downtown support by residents, users, or as an attraction. The close proximity of the downtown is a

valuable amenity for residents of the area. It is important that reuse of the Middle School support the downtown without creating a competing use.

D) Some reuses require minor interior remodeling, thus maintaining the historic integrity of the interiors (as well as exterior façade).

E) Constant or heavy traffic is not desired, but public events at the site are acceptable to the neighborhood. Neighbors have expressed an interest in seeing a public use continue, even to an extent matching current levels of use and traffic.

F) Sustainability refers to energy efficient usage as well as least remodeling required. Modest demolition has less impact on landfills and requires least new materials.

G) It has not been established that reversibility should be a goal. Yet, the possibility for an educational reuse holds higher potential if the building is not significantly altered. Remodeling for housing may require most changes.

H) Local ownership has been seen to be less likely in other communities where reuse is predominantly for housing. Anticipation of absentee landlord situations has triggered most comments about desirability of local ownership or control.

I) Existing zoning is least accepting of Business/Commercial, though some types are acceptable reuses. It is most important to consider impact on neighboring residences.

J) Housing development may require reduction in tax income via abatement or subsidy. Federal Tax Incentives are available for for-profit owners of buildings that are on the historic registry. The Middle School may be eligible, but is not a clear candidate for placement on the historic registry.

K) Demolition of the East Wing might be a desirable goal under some circumstances. While some uses increase the need for on-site parking requiring demolition, it may be financially feasible to use this area of the building for a revenue generating use such as the SEMSAT School.

L) Arts Dominant Reuse may require the least on-site parking. M) Case studies for developments in other places indicate a low potential for Housing Dominant Reuse to

support ongoing use of the auditorium (or gymnasium) space. Ongoing use of these spaces will probably require a separate owner/operations entity.

N) Existing Comprehensive Land Use does not support a Business / Commercial use of the site. Ideally, reuse will support the Central Business District and historic core with non-competing uses.

O) Community use, restoration, and ownership in combination create a sense of place that becomes a symbol for the community’s identity.

P) Speculation about affect upon or effect by other known developments at this time produced no indication of incompatibility between the four proposed options and current planning related to the Central Business District (CBD), future unused hospital building, Public Library Expansion, or Westside development.


H. USES AND PLACES: BUILDING SPACES & MOST APPROPRIATE REUSE What types of spaces exist within the Middle School building and how can these spaces be most efficiently converted for new uses? Each of the identified reuses may suggest a best facility location or fit for that type of program. The Uses and Places spatial diagram attached illustrate uses in terms of most appropriate locations for specific activities. This makes the assumption that matching uses to spaces will reduce remodeling costs. Observations from this summary analysis of Uses and Places imply the way clusters of uses might inform Preferred Options. Initial observations about the building spaces for some of the reuses follow: 1. The two oldest wings, South (1910) and the West connection (1934) are suited for: a) Community Education and other classroom uses (including conference break out) b) Housing and hotel uses c) Office rental d) Studios for visual and/or performing arts 2. The Gym and ground floor locker rooms are well suited for: a) Recreational uses, ranging from basketball to informal children’s activity programs b) Performance rehearsal c) Conference shows (Gym) d) Adjacency to ground floor rooms (classrooms, small gym) is useful. 3. The Auditorium and Stage areas are well suited for: a) Performances for instrumental groups, chorus, and dance b) Presentations to large audiences: promotional, political and educational c) Performance group rehearsal and equipment storage ("back stage" areas) d) Conference uses e) Adjacencies to the Gym and West Wing rooms are useful for Conferences, rehearsals. 4. The Recreation Uses and the Performance/Presentation are complementary uses:

a) Conferencing may take advantage of gym and classrooms (and dining room) b) Recreation programs may include community events utilizing the Auditorium. c) Performance groups need a mixture of rooms available for rehearsal, studio classes, and

equipment storage. 5. Child Care and Pre-School uses fit best into the newest East Wing at ground floor level: a) Day Care and Pre-school programs have a licensing requirement to be on-grade and to have

fenced play lots (ideally without crossing a street). b) Child Care programs would likely require large motor activity spaces for indoor play and exercise

(even if not fully dedicated to their own use). 6. Charter School (6th through 12th Grades) is best accommodated by: a) East Wing, either or both floors, particularly due to science and art setup already present b) South Wing classrooms on all three levels c) South Wing "project or workshop" spaces (industrial-tech rooms) already useable d) Proximity to lunchroom with kitchen and gymnasium are attractions


7. The East Wing can accommodate many uses, but is best suited for: a) Child care b) Charter school or educational classroom based uses c) Office uses d) Food services e) Uses requiring the most ease of direct access from grade f) Temporary uses requiring minimal remodeling, given neighborhood interest in future demolition of

the entire wing

8. The South Wing original Library is best suited for: a) Specialty reading room or library b) Reception and dining hall c) Meeting and recital hall d) Exhibition gallery

I. SPATIAL DIAGRAMS (see following 4 diagrams)

A graphic depiction of existing building spaces These floor plan diagrams illustrate the logical assignment of reuses to building spaces for the four Preferred Reuse Options described earlier.


I.1 SPATIAL DIAGRAMS (one of four)

Option 1. Community Needs Reuse


I.2 SPATIAL DIAGRAMS (two of four)

Option 2. Housing Dominant Reuse


I.3 SPATIAL DIAGRAMS (three of four)

Option 3. Community Arts Dominant Reuse


I.4 SPATIAL DIAGRAMS (four of four)

Option 4. Business Commercial Reuse


J. CASE STUDIES & PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL PRO-FORMA What is the potential funding for the Preferred Options for Reuse? How have similar projects been financed? What can a financial pro-forma tell us about the four Preferred Options for Reuse? FINANCIAL CASE STUDY This is one example (provided by MetroPlains) of how a project of similar scope was funded for Housing Dominant Reuse. This includes both initial development costs and sources of revenue. PROJECT DETAIL Overview Funds / Cost Historic Rehabilitation of HOME Funds $ 1,275,671 1893-1916 School Complex First Mortgage 1,030,000 Senior Housing Tax Increment Financing 250,000 Mixed Income Affordable Housing Loan 171,000 56 Apartments Equity Raised Through Historic Tax Completed 1998 Credits and *LIHTC 2,534,000 $ 5,260,671 SOURCES AND USES Sources Uses First Mortgage $ 1,030,000 4-6 Acre Land Purchase $ 100 HOME Funds 1,275,671 New Construction 4,139.301 City Participation 250,000 Architectural & Engineering 192,951 Limited Partner Investment 2,534,000 Interim Costs 106,603 Affordable Housing Loan 171,000 Financing Fees & Expenses 63,576 $ 5,260,671 Related Costs 77,554 Developer Overhead 300,000 Developer Profit 204,903 Project Reserves 175,012 $ 5,260,000 *Low Income Housing Tax Credits The Preliminary Financial Pro-forma on the following pages looks at potential rental income, deferred maintenance costs, yearly expenses for maintenance, utilities, management, and annual mortgage amortization, given expected initial investment costs. The Preliminary Pro-forma indicates that the Community Arts Dominant Reuse option is a feasible option with retention of the Auditorium and Gymnasium. NOTE: It is anticipated that Proposals solicited from Developers will differ significantly in approach and estimates from this preliminary financial projection. Projected Yearly Revenues, Expenses, and Initial Investment are included here for discussion only. Estimates are based on uses at similar facilities located elsewhere, used here for general forecasting. Actual financial numbers will vary. This information should be viewed as a projection only and not as a Development Proposal.


PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL PRO-FORMA Summary of anticipated revenues and expenses for each Preferred Reuse Option

I N C O M E O R R E N T A L D A T A P R E F E R R E D R E U S E O P T I O N S C O S T Yrly Rental Rental Area Community Housing Community Business/

Discription Rate / area and Unit Multi-needs Dominant Arts Dominant Commercial NOTES:

PROJECTED YEARLY REVENUES nsf = net square feet area1 Lease (Rental) Income K)

Apartments SW -G,M,2 $ 1,000 /mo avr 30 units 360,000 Charter School EW - 2 9,000 nsf 180,000 180,000 Prof/Educ Office EW-M $ 10.00 /sf 5,000 nsf 50,000 50,000 50,000 Specialty Office EW-2 $ 12.50 /sf 9,000 nsf 112,500 SpecialtyHousing SW-2 $ 1,200 /mo avr 8 units 115,200 Specialty Retail SW-M $ 15.00 /sf 10,000 nsf 150,000 Studio/Rental SW-M $ 10.00 /sf 8,600 nsf 86,000 Hsg/Studio Lofts SW-2 $ 7.50 /sf 10,000 nsf 75,000 75,000 Nonprofit Org SW-M $ 7.50 /sf 5,000 nsf 37,500 Nonprofit Org WW-M,2 $ 7.50 /sf 5,000 nsf 37,500 37,500 37,500 37,500 Studio/Workshops SW-G $ 5.00 /sf 6,000 nsf 30,000 30,000 30,000

2 SUBTOTAL 67,608 nsf 410,000 397,500 458,500 495,200 3 Vacancy/bad debt factor 10% loss factor (41,000) (39,750) (45,850) (49,520) 4 Auditorium Rental (net) $ 500 av/use 100 use 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 5 Gym Rental (net) $ 50 av/use 250 use 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 6 Rec Space Rental $ 10 av/use 2,500 use 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 7 Grants / Underwriting available to Comm & Non-Profit 25,000 25,000 8 Housing "subsidy" suggested or probable 25,000 75,000 50,000

TOTAL PROJECTED REVENUES 506,500 520,250 575,150 533,180

PROJECTED YEARLY EXPENSES gsf= gross square foot areaOPERATIONS COSTS COSTS/area1 Maintenance 1.00 /sf 142,000 gsf 142,000 142,000 A)2 Maintenance 0.75 /sf 105,000 gsf 78,750 78,750 A)3 Utilities 0.50 /sf 142,000 gsf 71,000 71,000 A)4 Utilities 0.50 /sf 105,000 gsf 52,500 52,500 A)5 Management 0.50 /sf 142,000 gsf 71,000 71,000 D)6 Management 0.50 /sf 105,000 gsf 52,500 52,500 D)7 Investment Amortization (Mortgage) [from below] 223,793 427,814 223,793 352,528 8 Net Taxes/Tax Abatement assumed to zero out - See Note C)

Historic Tax Credit 20% of Investment (5 years) N/A {not likely} N/A {not likely}

TOTAL PROJECTED ANNUAL COSTS 507,793 611,564 507,793 536,278

PRO-FORMA BALANCE--EXCESS (shortfall or support required) (1,293)$ (91,314)$ 67,357$ (3,098)$


PROJECTED INITIAL INVESTMENT1 Deferred Exterior Maintenance 3.00 /sf 142,000 gsf 426,000 426,000 B)2 Deferred Exterior Maintenance 3.00 /sf 105,000 gsf 315,000 315,000 B)3 Site Demolition (East Wing) 15.00 /sf 37,000 gsf 555,000 555,000 E)4 Parking Lot construction 2000 /car 45 cars 90,000 G)5 Parking Lot construction 2000 /car 10 cars 20,000 20,000 20,000 G)6 Remod. 1910 Wing: Apts 90.00 /sf 28,000 nsf 2,520,000 7 Remod. 1910 Wing: UpScale 125.00 /sf 10,000 nsf 1,250,000 I)8 Remod. 1910 Wing: Studios 25.00 /sf 28,000 nsf 700,000 700,000 I)9 Remod. 1934 Wing: CR/Off 15.00 /sf 12,000 nsf 180,000 180,000 180,000 250,000 I)

10 Remod. 1954 Add: CR/Off 10.00 /sf 19,000 nsf 190,000 190,000 I)11 Code & Life Safety Updates 1.50 /sf 105,000 gsf 157,500 157,500 F)12 Code & Life Safety Updates 1.50 /sf 142,000 gsf 213,000 213,000 F)13 SUBTOTAL 1,729,000 3,817,500 1,729,000 2,547,500

14 Remodeling: Gymnasium 25.00 /sf 9,600 nsf 240,000 240,000 240,000 240,000 15 Remodeling: Auditorium/stage 50.00 /sf 16,000 nsf 800,000 800,000 800,000 800,000 16 Grants/Gifts lump sum amount (450,000) (450,000) (450,000) (450,000) H)17 Short Term Financing 5% of Subtotal 86,450 190,875 86,450 127,375

TOTAL PROJECTED INITIAL INVESTMENT 2,405,450 4,598,375 2,405,450 3,264,875 TYPICAL AMORTIZATION TIME PERIOD 20 20 20 20 INTEREST RATE 7% 7% 7% 9% J)AMORTIZATION FACTOR PER $10K PER YEAR, FOR YRS & RATE 930.36 930.36 930.36 1,079.76 TOTAL LOAN AMOUNT WITH INTEREST 2,406,380 4,599,305 2,406,380 3,265,955 AMOUNT OWED PER YEAR FOR LOAN TERM [carried above] 223,793 427,814 223,793 352,528

NOTES:A Maintenance & utility costs based on existing school use, but now shared by tenants.B Deferred maintenance required for all reuse options includes exterior painting, tuck-pointing, and roof replacement.C For-profit tax estimates provided by School District, likely cancelled by requested Tax Abatements.D Assumes that professional management will be required (amounts reflect varying requirements).E Includes exterior demolition (interior demolition included in "Remodeling" for each option).F The requirements for sprinkler, fire alarm, accessibility upgrades, etc. vary somewhat with each proposed occupancy type.

A comprehensive code review will be required.G Parking requirements vary for each occupancy type. H Includes $500,000 committed by School District for reuseI Remodeling goals for each section of the building will vary with proposed use.J Housing and Community or Non Profit status likely to utilize less costly financingK SW = South Wing, EW = East Wing, WW = West Wing, G = Ground, M = Main Floor, 2 = Second Floor; for North Wing, see lines 4, 5, 6L Based on rental schedules in other communities with sliding scales for nonprofit rental


K. DEVELOPER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL What information might the School Board wish to include in any RFP sent to interested reuse developers? It is the goal of the Reuse Study Committee to assist the School District with information that will ease the future transition from study to action. In order to continue to assess the viability of the Preferred Options for Reuse, it will be necessary to engage qualified professionals who will further research the financial and planning logistics necessary to take the Middle School Reuse from dream to project. One method to do this includes extending a Request for Proposal (RFP) to qualified developers. Interested developers who meet a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) review will be asked to provide proposed development plans and financial projections. The following sample RFP is modeled after one distributed in 1998 for the Winona (Minnesota) School District’s Middle School reuse development, modified for this situation. The Step-One Request For Qualifications (RFQ) submission and Step-Two Request for Proposals (RFP) is weighted toward developer project proposals for Community Arts Dominant Reuse, as the preferred reuse rated highest for best reuse.


Northfield Public Schools Independent School District No. 659

1400 Division Street South Northfield, MN 55057

Request for Qualifications Submission:

For development of the Middle School building and site located in Northfield, Minnesota. The School Board of Independent School District No. 659 of Northfield, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the “District”) is requesting submissions from qualified developers regarding their qualifications and approach for developing the reuse of the existing Northfield Middle School building. The District’s objective in issuing this Request for Qualifications and later Request for Development Proposals is to achieve the most beneficial and feasible use of this property when it is no longer in use as a Middle School, as guided by the Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse determined by the District’s Reuse Study. The Developer or Developers selected after review of their Qualifications Submission will then be asked to provide more detailed Development Proposals as a second step in the selection process. A. Step-One Qualifications Submission and Evaluation (RFQ). All Qualifications proposals shall include the information called for in this Request for Qualifications

document, as follows: 1. Qualifications Submissions will be limited to twenty-five (25) pages, including introductory letter. 2. Number of copies needed: six bound copies, one unbound copy.

3. Qualifications Submissions will be received in School District Offices at the High School Building: Northfield Public Schools ISD #659, 1400 Division St. South, Northfield, MN 55057 no later than: 2:00 PM on October 15, 2002.

4. Submissions will be marked “Step-One Middle School Reuse Qualifications” on the outside of a sealed envelope.

5. Faxed proposals will not be accepted. 6. All submitting firms are required to visit the site before submitting a Qualifications Submission. 7. A pre-submission Conference and tour will be scheduled and announced. 8. An addendum to this RFQ may be issued in response to questions submitted.

All questions regarding this Request for Qualifications should be directed to: Douglas A. Crane, Director of Business Affairs at 507 663-0626, fax 507 663-0611. Step-One Qualifications Submissions will be reviewed and accepted by the School Board based upon

review and evaluation by its designated community evaluation committee (the Middle School Reuse Study Committee). A recommendation for a qualified Developer (or Developers) will be made on or before November 15, 2002, at which time a Letter of Intent resolution will be issued by the District to the Qualified Developer(s) who best meet(s) the District’s goals and timeline. The selected Developer(s) will then submit a Step-Two Development Proposal for the District’s Board to evaluate and approve. The District reserves and retains the right to reject any and all proposals, to request additional information (thus delaying a selection date), or to choose no Qualified Developer after considering the proposals and recommendations from its community evaluation committee. It is anticipated that Developers invited to produce Step-Two Proposals will be permitted approximately five (5) months to complete Step Two Proposals. Developers selected to submit Step-Two proposals will be reimbursed a fee not to exceed $9,000 (see Fee Reimbursement under “Step-One Developer Qualifications Submission).

Criteria for Selection of Step-One Submissions


Criteria for selection of Step-One submissions (pre-qualifying Developers who will be invited to submit Step-Two proposals) includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1. Relevant experience with successful development projects of similar scale. Proven experience

with development issues including financial and design issues related to successful reuse projects

2. Completeness of Qualifications Submission 3. Understanding and response to requirements unique to the Northfield community

B. General Description of the Project Intent1. Background: The Northfield School District voters recently approved the construction of a new Middle School on a tract of land near the existing Northfield High School. Prior to the referendum vote, and upon passage of the referendum, the School Board pledged to vacate the current Middle School and offer the buildings for a new use. Proposals may include retention of the Middle School land or transfer to a new entity. The buildings will be vacated when the new school is completed on or about July of 2004. The School Board appointed a 14-person Middle School Reuse Committee to investigate and recommend reuses for the Middle School. This Committee presented its findings at the February 11, 2002 School Board meeting. The Committee also recommended that the District accept proposals from developers for reuse of this property, with redevelopment commencing at the time that the existing Middle School is vacated. The Committee then moved forward in the spring of 2002 to further define a process to solicit proposals from potential developers. The Reuse Committee is also charged with evaluation of the feasibility of these proposals, primarily the economic viability and compatibility with adjacent neighborhood and historic downtown areas.

2. Buildings: The building covered by this request for qualifications / proposal is: The Northfield Middle School, 301 Union Street, Northfield, Minnesota 55057

3. Legal Description of the Property: Northfield Original Town, Lot 003, Block 025, Parcel No. 22.1409.000.

4. Date Available: The building will become vacant on or about July of 2004. 5. Condition Acceptance: Developers are hereby notified that the real estate described in this

request for submissions is to be purchased or transferred in ownership “AS IS.” These buildings contain asbestos and may contain other environmentally sensitive substances. The buyer is solely obligated for compliance with federal, state and local laws concerning these substances.

6. Documentation: Included in this Request for Proposal are the following documents (Note that a recent City of Northfield Comprehensive Plan is also available online at www.ci.northfield.mn.us):

a. Existing site plan showing the building in relation to adjacent streets, Central Park and the nearby downtown Historic District

b. Existing floor plans of the building, including 1910, 1934, and 1954 sections c. The Middle School Reuse Study (February 2002, Revised August 2002)

7. Projected Timetable: a. RFQ received by Developers September 16, 2002 b. Pre-submission Conference and Tour September 27, 2002 c. Step-One Qualifications Submission due October 15, 2002, 2:00 PM d. Step-Two Developers selected (max 3) November 15, 2002 e. Step-Two Proposals developed December 1 2002 – April 1, 2003 f. District requests Proposal clarifications April 1 – May 1, 2003 g. Developers reimbursed for complete Proposals May 1, 2003 h. Developer Proposals evaluated by District May – June 2003 i. Developer Presentation of Proposals June 2003 j. One Developer Proposal accepted July 2003 k. Middle School vacated and construction begins July 2004


C. STEP-ONE DEVELOPER QUALIFICATIONS SUBMISSION 1. Organizational Information

a. Identity: Name and Address of Developer and Identification of Authorized Person(s). The name, mailing

address, telephone and fax number of the Developer must be included along with the name of the individual(s) authorized to speak for the Developer.

b. Development Team Personnel: List proposed Development Team personnel, to include the managing partner, project

manager, and relevant support staff. List proposed consultants who will be part of the Development Team.

c. Status of the Development Organization: Provide a description of the Development Organization’s terms of incorporation, project history

and marketing focus. d. Description of Development Team’s Overall Organization: Provide a description of how the Development Team is organized: who will direct the project,

and who will contract with whom. e. Disclaimer of Existing Relationship: Provide a statement of any business, financial or blood relationships with any member, officer

or employee of the Northfield School District.

2. Experience and Qualifications a. Resumes of Individuals Involved in the Development: Provide a thorough resume for each individual who will be involved in the Development. The

resume must include training, degrees awarded and past professional experiences. b. Projects of Similar Scope of Work: Provide a listing of projects, both completed and underway, which are similar in their scope of

work to this project. The project listing also should contain names and phone numbers of individual clients who can serve as references for each project. Include financial information outlining method by which such projects are funded.

c. Documented Evidence of Projects Completed on Time and Within Budget: Provide a documented listing of past projects that have been completed on time and within

budget. Said listing must include the name and telephone number of a client contact for each project.

d. Past Two Fiscal Year’s Financial Statements: Include Developer financial statements for the two (2) most recent business years. Such

financial statements must be signed by a certified public accountant. e. Credit References: Provide a listing of credit references, including mortgage investment brokers, banks and other

such financial credit institutions who are familiar with the Developer’s work and who have worked with the Developer on past projects. Such references must include the name and telephone number of a contact person with each institution listed.

f. Experience Working With School Boards, City Councils and Citizen’s Committees: Provide a listing of projects where the Developer has worked with public school districts, city

officials or citizen advisory committees. Project listing must include the name and telephone number of a client contact person for each project.


3. Project Understanding and Approach

The Developer Team shall identify its understanding of the community issues and goals and relevant development issues, and describe its approach for developing a reuse plan, including the following: a. General Description of the project’s goals and benefits to the community. b. Description of process for determining building reuse or combination of reuses. c. Expected needed research by Developer into community needs to identify potential user-

tenants to support the Developer’s Reuse Plan. d. Explanation of key development and financial issues for the Developer, including Ownership

Models. e. The proposed timeline for accomplishing the Developer’s Reuse Plan in coordination with

building vacation. f. Understanding and response to the goals outlined in the Middle School Reuse Study.

4. Fee Reimbursements and Schedule Selected Developer Team(s) shall be reimbursed a flat fee of $9,000 to produce a Step-Two

Development Plan that follows the noted procedures and requirements listed under the following “Step-Two Development Proposal Submission.”

Step-One Qualifications Submissions should also provide a Schedule of Tasks for producing the Step-Two Development Plan, assuming a five (5) month timeframe for completion. Also provide a breakdown of all estimated costs for labor and expenses, as well as indicating the number of site visits and meetings to be held in Northfield.

End Step-One Request for Qualifications Submission


D. STEP-TWO REQUEST FOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (RFP)

The District will require the information listed in this section from only the Developers whose initial Qualifications Proposal are accepted. Information outlined in this section is not required for Step-One Qualifications Submissions, but is provided for reference and to assist with estimating costs of producing a Step-Two Development Proposal. Only a select number of Developers pre-qualified through Step-One Qualifications Submissions will be invited by the District to submit Step-Two Development Proposals. Up to three (3) Developer finalists will be invited to submit Step-Two Development Proposals. The timeframe for production of Step-Two proposals is anticipated to be five (5) months from the selection of Step-One Developer finalists. Step-Two finalists will be compensated a flat fee of $9,000 within 30 days after District receipt of completed Step-Two Development Proposals.

1. Organizational Additional Information a. Development Plan Team Members and Consultants b. Identification of roles and experience of each Development Team Member c. Credit and Financial Institution References d. Full disclosure of relationships or financial connections to any School officials. e. Identification of each participant’s financial interest in the Project. 2. Development Plan

a. General Description of Development Concept b. Provide a detailed description of the development concept being offered. What will be done

with all areas of the existing Middle School building? c. Conceptual Site Plan: Include a rendered conceptual project site plan. d. Architectural Submission: Provide a professionally produced architectural submission of the

project proposal including graphic and written materials describing the proposed development. Include reuse of existing facilities along with any proposed new construction.

e. Proposed Phasing Plan f. Provide a timeline of activities for each phase of the project. The timeline should begin with the

date that the Developer is selected and systematically proceed through final project completion.

g. If a Market Study or other analysis will be conducted as part of the work to produce a Step-Two Development Proposal, describe the process, and timeline.

3. Response to Community goals (also see #4 Benefit to the Northfield Community and Response

to Reuse Study Goals) The Middle School Reuse Committee and the District will require information about how the following components are addressed by the Reuse Development Plan: a. Primary Preferred Options for Reuse: The 2002 Northfield Middle School Reuse Feasibility Study identified primary preferred options

for reuse of the building that reflect the Goals for Successful Reuse: 1) Community Arts Dominant Reuse (primary preferred reuse) 2) Other Acceptable Reuses (also see Reuse Study)

a. Community Multi-Needs Reuse b. Housing Dominant Reuse c. Business Commercial Reuse b. Zoning:


Both the District and the City of Northfield will require the developer to design and provide sufficient off-street parking to complement the focus of the submitted development plan and to meet zoning goals. Verify all planning requirements with the City of Northfield Planning Department.

c. Auditorium and Gymnasium Use: Proposals must consider the community preference for on-going use of the Auditorium and

Gymnasium in the Development Plan. d. Land Ownership: If the Developer finds it advantageous, the District may consider an ownership transfer of the

land upon which the Middle School buildings are constructed to Public or Nonprofit entities. Provide considerations in the Development Plan that will detail and support this option if desired.

4. Benefit to the Northfield Community and Response to Reuse Study Goals Provide an explanation regarding the way that this project will benefit the Northfield community if the

proposed development plan is approved. Provide an explanation of how the proposed development plan meets the Recommended Goals for Successful Reuse identified in the 2001 Northfield Middle School Reuse Feasibility Study: a. Significant Community Use: Community feedback indicates desirability for some part of the

new use to continue to be accessible to a reasonable spectrum of the community. Best reuses respect the Middle School’s symbolic sense of place, defined by its location bridging downtown and residential neighborhoods.

b. Economic Feasibility: New uses, ownership and operations should be economically feasible within a reasonable period, with predictable long-term viability and stability.

c. Downtown Support: Best new uses will support the economic viability and vitality of the nearby downtown.

d. Historic Preservation: The older sections of the building (1910 and 1934) should be respectfully rehabilitated following historic preservation guidelines.

e. Good Neighbor: Best new uses continue to be a good neighbor to the surrounding Central Park neighborhood.

f. Environmental Sustainability: Benefit for reduced material usage, low maintenance requirements and energy conservation strategies.

g. Reuse Entities: Consider negotiation with entities already identified as best reuses in the Reuse Study.

5. Financial Feasibility a. Detailed Breakdown of Hard and Soft Development Costs:

Present a breakdown of proposed development costs and any development financial support that indicates that you understand and can successfully predict costs. Such presentation should include itemized cost categories including, but not limited to, the following:

COST AND SUPPORT CATEGORIES (ITEMIZED) BUDGETED AMOUNT PROJECT COSTS:

Property Acquisition Cost ___________________________ Market Study (or other research) Costs ___________________________ Pre-construction Costs ___________________________ Developer Fees ___________________________ Architectural / Engineering Fees ___________________________ Other Consultant Fees ___________________________ Construction Management (if utilized) ___________________________


Construction Cost (Cost of the Work) ___________________________ Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment ___________________________ Construction Contingency Allowance ___________________________ Construction Financing ___________________________ Other short-term Financing ___________________________ Other costs ___________________________

Cost Subtotal: Project Costs ___________________________ PROJECT INCOME & EQUITY:

Private Investors ___________________________ Grants ___________________________ Condominium Sales Income ___________________________ Private donations ___________________________ Other expected income ___________________________

Equity Subtotal: Project Income ___________________________ NET PROJECT PROJECTION ___________________________ b. Annual Operational Income and Costs:

The Developer shall present the anticipated Operations Plan with sufficient detail for confirming the financial feasibility of the Plan. Such presentation should include itemized cost categories to include, but not limited to, the following:

YEARLY INCOME AND OPERATIONS CATEGORIES BUDGETED AMOUNT Community Contributions ___________________________ County Contribution or Equivalent ___________________________ Private Investment Loans ___________________________ Grants in aid, operational grants ___________________________ Private donations ___________________________ Other expected yearly income ___________________________ Rental Income: A ___________________________ Rental Income: B ___________________________ Rental Income: C ___________________________ Association Fees ___________________________ Space Rental/Event Income: ___________________________ Working Capital ___________________________ Other Income ___________________________ Yearly Income Subtotal: ___________________________ Marketing Expenses ___________________________ Utility Costs ___________________________

Maintenance ___________________________ Taxes and Permits, as applicable ___________________________ Operating Shortfall Reserve ___________________________ Investor Compensation ___________________________ Developer Operation OH&P Fee ___________________________ Yearly Operating Costs ___________________________ NET YEARLY CASH FLOW ___________________________


c. Sources and Amounts of Funds: Include a presentation showing the various sources and amounts of funds and types of financing planned for the project.

d. Any Required City or County Participation: If City or County participation is proposed, include public sector participation assistance needs or requirements.

e. Equity and Debt Commitments: Provide a letter of intent from one or more lenders for mortgage and equity financing of the project being proposed.

6. Affirmative Action Requirements Developer shall provide assurance that he or she is an equal opportunity employer, practices

affirmative hiring, and agrees to attach equal employment opportunity language to all contracts for this project.

7. Criteria for Selection of Step-Two Proposals

Criteria for selection and award of Step-Two proposals includes but is not limited to the following: a. Long-term stability associated with management of similarly developed projects b. Understanding and response to needs and requirements unique to the Northfield

community c. Understanding of financial and design issues related to successful reuse development d. Proven ability to plan and implement creative and financially sound reuse projects e. Benefit of the proposed development to the Northfield Community

End Step-Two Request for Development Proposal


L. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

What other information is useful to consider? 1. Reuse Study Interview List: Extensive interviews were conducted to gauge community interest in

various reuses for the Middle School. Please note that more additional groups were invited for the Interview Sessions that were unable to attend.

a) Interview Session One, Context: Community and Neighborhood Issues, The Building, included

interview / presentations with representatives from the following: 1) City of Northfield Administration 2) City of Northfield Economic Development

b) Interview Session Two, Housing / Mixed-Use Options, included interview / presentations with

representatives from the following: 1) Housing developer 2) Northfield Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) 3) Artist living spaces / studios developer 4) Local studio artists

c) Interview Session Three, Organizations With Space Needs, included interview / presentations with representatives from the following: 1) St. Olaf College 2) Carleton College 3) Southeast Minnesota School for Arts and Technology (SEMSAT) 4) Alternative Learning Center 5) Northfield Historical Society 6) Neighborhood residents 7) Northfield Downtown Development Corporation

d) Interview Session Four, Space Needs: Performing Arts, Enterprise Incubation, Recreation, included interview / presentations with representatives from the following: 1) Performing Arts (Cannon Valley Regional Orchestra, Cannon Valley Youth Orchestra,

Youth Choir) 2) Northfield Arts Guild 3) Arts and Technology Enterprises (Cybervillage, Artstown, business Incubators, NTV,

media production) 4) Youth and Recreational Activities (KEY, Middle School Activities Center, Northfield Parks

& Recreation, After School Unlimited, Community Education) 5) Public Forum

e) Interview Session Five, Additional Interviews, included interview / presentations with representatives from the following: 1) Northfield Mayor Keith Covey 2) Northfield Chamber of Commerce 3) Northfield Library 4) Northfield Hospital


2. Middle School Building History: What is historically significant about this building?

This Place in Northfield When John North laid out the original town plat with blocks 330 feet square on each side of the river, his plan had but a few significantly placed public spaces; namely, what we now call Bridge Square, the Central Park, and abutting the park an open city block for a public school. The bird’s eye view drawing of Northfield from 1888 shows a proud High School building centered on the block and facing the downtown and river. That school was taken by fire and replaced with a new High School built in 1910, which is the current section of the Middle School facing Fourth Street. It is a dark brick building trimmed in stone, typical of many key commercial, college and religious buildings built at that time. Northfield has identified this historic era with strong dairy farming based economy as the Holstein Context. Buildings significantly representing this development period ought to be preserved, especially

because many have disappeared in recent years. The town grew and the school soon needed more space. In 1934, during hard economic times, the school added more classrooms and a combined auditorium/gymnasium. As a project funded through the Works Progress Administration (WPA), it represents a unique time in the community's past, and symbolizes the dreams to advance itself despite the

state of the economy. The front of the Auditorium section is of an Art Deco period of design, and is the only remaining building in Northfield of that style. With a little work, its best features can still be restored and be made attractive and noticeable. As a result of this addition, the High School again faced toward the downtown. The buildings are set back from the street as communities do with buildings of public importance such as libraries, post offices, courthouses, churches, and places of education. The building's arrangement continued the “conversation” with both the downtown along the river and with Central Park: a place of dialogue between eras, as well as between the public realm and a quiet neighborhood. When the school ran out of space due to population growth following World War II, an addition was placed on the east side, connecting to the 1934 auditorium/gym wing. The new larger gymnasium had bleacher and balcony space for the crowds attending basketball games.


A two-story wing provided "modern" science and home economics classrooms, an industrial technology shop, and food service facilities. This addition required the acquirement and closure of College Street and thus connected the school property to park, which the school has used for recess play and physical education. Central Park was originally dedicated for public use by the entire community and not as a structured recreational facility. This was most recently tested when the Central Park neighborhood challenged a proposed installation of ball fields and game areas for the school. The group raised funds to restore the pedestrian character of its original design.

This developmental history of the current Middle School has resulted in the current building composed of four wings, each with its own characteristic features. Clearly the earliest classroom section from 1910, with a first rate high ceiling reading room, and the 1934 Art Deco auditorium wing, are worthy of preservation through new uses which will respect and continue to recognize their historic features and significance in the Northfield's institutional, economic, and architectural heritage.


3. Case Studies: What other projects have companies like MetroPlains and Artspace Projects Inc. completed that are similar to the Housing Dominant Reuse option and Arts Dominant Reuse options?

a) MetroPlains Development, LLC (text provided by MetroPlains—also see

www.metroplains.com)

1) MetroPlains Development, LLC develops and acquires multi-family housing in small and mid size communities in the Midwest. We use various government programs and agencies that make the housing affordable. These include: Rural Housing Service, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Home Loan Bank, state and local housing finance agencies, local tax increment financing, historic tax credits and housing tax credits. Approximately half of the properties that MetroPlains or its principals have developed over the past twenty years involve substantially rehabilitating historic building into housing. These buildings had formerly been hotels, schools, hospitals, post offices, fire or police stations, apartments and office buildings. The remaining half of MetroPlains developments is split between new construction and acquisition with rehabilitation. MetroPlains has also developed a special expertise in providing congregate housing for the elderly. MetroPlains Properties, Inc., an affiliate, serves as the managing general partner or owner of the real estate after development. This long-term commitment to the community and investor assures participants that the asset will be maintained and operated for their benefit. MetroPlains Properties, Inc. also invests in commercial properties and market rate multi-family properties often working with communities to fulfill local needs and reposition these properties. Garsten/Perennial Management Corporation, an affiliate, provides long-term management services to most of our developments. Site managers hired from the community are trained and supported to provide quality management services over a wide geographic area. Garsten/Perennial manages over 3,000 multi-family housing units and over 250,000 [square] feet of commercial space.

2) MetroPlains has developed housing projects in the following Midwest States/Cities:

Illinois: Belvidere Iowa: Burlington, Dubuque Kansas: Arkansas City, Garden City, Marysville, Ottawa, Pittsburg, Witchita, Winfield Michigan: South Range Minnesota: Cannon Falls, Dilworth, Little Falls, Minneapolis, Monticello, Owatonna,

Red Wing, St. Paul Nebraska: Omaha, Scottsbluff North Dakota: Bismarck, Buelah, Devils Lake, Dickinson, Fargo, Grand Forks,

Grafton, Jamestown, Maddock, Richardton Oklahoma: Claremore, McAlester, Sapulpa South Dakota: Belle Fourche, Canton, Deadwood, Lead, Spearfish, Sturgis Wisconsin: Ashland, Black River Falls, Ladysmith, New Richmond, Two Rivers

See www.metroplains.com for project photographs.


Case Studies continued

b) Artspace Projects, Inc. (text provided by Artspace—also see www.artspaceprojects.org)

1) The Artspace Mission

The mission of Artspace is to create and manage space where artists can live, work, exhibit, perform, and conduct business. We pursue this mission through development projects, asset management activities, consulting services, and community-building activities that serve artists and arts organizations of all disciplines, cultures, and economic circumstances. By creating this space, Artspace supports the continued professional growth of artists and enhances the cultural and economic vitality of the surrounding community.

2) The Artspace Story

Finding and retaining affordable live/work space is an age-old problem for artists – painters, sculptors, dancers, and others who require an abundance of well-lit space in which to work. Many artists gravitate to old warehouses and other industrial buildings, but their very presence in an industrial neighborhood often acts as a catalyst, setting in motion a process of gentrification that drives rents up and forces the artists out. This is precisely what happened in Minneapolis’ historic Warehouse District in the 1970s and led to the creation of Artspace in 1979. Established to serve as an advocate for artists’ space needs, Artspace effectively fulfilled that mission for nearly a decade. By the mid-1980s, however, it was clear that the problem required a more proactive approach, and Artspace made the leap from advocate to developer. Since then, the scope of Artspace’s activities has grown dramatically. Artspace is America’s leading nonprofit real estate developer for the arts.

3) Artspace has developed projects for the Arts in the following “Neighborhoods:”

Northern Warehouse Artists’ Cooperative, St. Paul, Minnesota Frogtown Family Lofts, St. Paul, Minnesota Tilsner Artists’ Cooperative, St. Paul, Minnesota Traffic Zone Center for Visual Art, Minneapolis, Minnesota Washington Studios, Duluth, Minnesota Hennepin Center for the Arts, Minneapolis, Minnesota Calhoun Arts Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota The Shubert Theater, Minneapolis, Minnesota Spinning Plate Artists Lofts, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Everett Station Lofts, Portland, Oregon The Riverside Artist Lofts, Reno, Nevada The National Hotel Artist Lofts, Galveston, Texas

4) Artspace is also in the process of developing its smallest project, The Hotel Kaddatz in

Fergus Falls, Minnesota. This project will include mixed income housing for ten artist families with additional ground floor commercial space and lower level community arts center space.

See www.artspaceprojects.org for project photographs.


4. Letters of Interest: What groups have expressed a serious intent for involvement in this project? (See following letters of interest)

a) Southeast Minnesota School of Arts and Technology b) Artspace Projects, Inc. c) MetroPlains Development, LLC d) Cornerstone


January 28, 2002 Doug Crane Director of Business Affairs for Northfield Schools Northfield Public Schools, ISD #659 1400 Division Street Northfield, MN 55057-2799 RE: Letter of Interest for Northfield School Redevelopment Project MetroPlains Development, LLC is writing to express interest in being considered as the developer of the Northfield School Redevelopment Project. MetroPlains has undertaken a variety of redevelopment projects throughout the Midwest in cities such as Owatonna, Minnesota; Burlington, Iowa; and Two Rivers, Wisconsin. For example, in Cannon Falls, Minnesota, we substantially rehabilitated two historic schools into 32 units of senior housing and a senior center. On the former recreational fields we built 18 three-bedroom affordable townhomes. MetroPlains combined city funds, federal funds such as HOME funds, and private investment from housing and historic tax credits to finance the development. This public/private partnership provided needed affordable housing while contributing to the vitality of the downtown area by providing new housing within an established residential neighborhood close to the city center. MetroPlains continues to own and operate most of these properties, in conjunction with its affiliated management company, Garsten/Perennial Management Corporation, and maintains effective working relationships with community members and businesses. MetroPlains is currently working in the downtowns of both Owatonna and Mound, Minnesota on retail/housing projects on infill sites. In Mound, construction has begun on a site that was the location of the former high school, just adjacent to their downtown. This development will have 99 for-sale townhomes and condos and 67,000 square feet of grocery-anchored neighborhood retail. In Owatonna, we have signed a development agreement with the City for “Owatonna Gateway” - 60 upscale apartments with river views standing as the gateway to the downtown. We hope to begin construction in Owatonna this spring. MetroPlains Development, LLC and MetroPlains Properties, Inc. are the development and ownership companies, respectively, that would be involved with the Northfield School redevelopment site. MetroPlains Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, provides development services including site analysis, design, construction administration, financing, community relations and accessing government programs. Substantially all of these services are provided for MetroPlains Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, which acts as managing general partner for 137 real estate limited partnerships. I have enclosed brochure materials for information regarding our development staff, projects completed, and a more detailed description of our companies. You can also find information on MetroPlains Development at our website: www.metroplains.com. If you have further questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at 651-523-1245. Sincerely, LaVerne Hanson, Jr.

Enclosures


5. Other Studies a. HGA Architects: Northfield Performing Arts (Study Draft), February 12 2001.

The Northfield Arts Guild, along with Carleton College and St. Olaf College, commissioned this study to evaluate the long-range use of community performance spaces. Focusing specifically on the desirability of the Grand Theater for community performance, the study also catalogues the needs of area performance groups. Other performance venues were surveyed as well, including the Middle School Auditorium. College, school district, and community performing arts facilities were also briefly evaluated for their strengths and weaknesses as performance spaces. A stated goal of the study includes the need to identify community needs, thus leading to new facilities planning that would address these needs. Performing arts groups listed include: • Carleton College and St. Olaf College music, dance, and theater programs • Northfield school district musical and drama organizations • Northfield community performing arts organizations

Performance venues reviewed include (listed, but not all evaluated): • Carleton College: Skinner Memorial Chapel, Concert Hall, Arena Theater, Nourse Hall

Little Theater, The Great Hall, The Great Space • St. Olaf College: Boe Chapel, Urness Recital Hall, Skoglund Center, Kelsey Theater,

Haugen Theater, Dittman Center Dance Studio, Lion’s Pause, Studio A Recital Hall, Viking Theater

• Northfield Community: Arts Guild Theater, Grand Theater • Northfield School District: Middle School Auditorium, High School Auditorium

Noteworthy in the discussion about the Middle School Auditorium is a scenario for use by Carleton or the School District as “swing space” when new facilities are under construction. Another scenario suggests use of the Middle School Auditorium stage area as a community athletic facility. The Middle School Auditorium was only considered as a multi-use hall for all of its programs.

b. The Arts at the Heart of the Learning Community: dance, literary arts, media arts, music, theater, and visual arts, June 2000. As an initial plan document of the Northfield area Comprehensive Arts Planning Program (CAPP) and the school district, this study looks at arts programming projections for a five-year period. CAPP is an important educational initiative that can increase public awareness and involvement in the Arts. A primary goal is expressed in the selected theme of “Connecting Resources,” that views arts education in the broader sense as fundamental to high quality education. The study also stresses that this education is best accomplished through a community-wide joint effort, utilizing all resources of the school district, community, and area colleges.

c. Rozeboom Miller Architects et al: Northfield Public Schools Secondary Facilities Planning Study, Citizen’s Facility Task Force Report to the Board of Education, September 25, 2000.


This study investigates secondary school enrollment projections and evaluates the suitability of existing facilities to meet both existing and anticipated needs. A key emphasis of this report identifies existing Middle School deficiencies along with options for a new or expanded facility. The study found only that the Middle School facilities were unsuited for the educational program and class size structure needed. Three options are identified and explored, along with associated costs. The second and third options convert the existing middle school to non-school use. The three recommended options include:

1. Renovate and expand the existing middle school. 2. Build a new middle school at a new site south of the high school. 3. Build a new high school and convert the existing high school to a middle school.

6. Relevant Web Sites

a. Developers:

MetroPlains Development, LLC www.metroplains.com Artspace Projects, Inc. www.artspaceprojects.org The Cornerstone Group www.thecornerstonegroup.com

b. Community Sites (General):

Area Chamber of Commerce www.northfieldchamber.com

Carleton College www.carleton.edu City of Northfield www.ci.northfield.mn.us Community Video Project www.northfieldvideo.com Economic Development Authority of Northfield (EDA) www.ci.northfield.mn.us/eda Northfield Historical Society www.northfieldhistory.org Northfield News (newspaper) www.mnnews.com/newspapers/northfield.html Northfield School District www.nfld.k12.mn.us

Northfield Web Portal www.northfield.org St. Olaf College www.stolaf.edu 1869 Northfield Birdseye View dmoz.org/Regional/North_America/United_States/Minnesota/Localities/N/Northfield/

c. Relevant Projects:

These school buildings have been (or are in the process of being) adapted for a new use.

Project 1: Niagara Falls High School, Niagara Falls, NY

cbca.buffnet.net/NFHS%20saved.htm Harold McNeil: The Buffalo News, Sunday, April 22, 2001. It took a little pushing and pulling to keep the old Niagara Falls High School from falling victim to the wrecker's ball, but the effort paid off, said Harold Faba, president of Save Our Sites, a group that had been battling to take over the building. The Niagara Falls School Board made it official Thursday, voting 7-0 to transfer ownership of the building on Pine Avenue and Portage Road over to the Save Our Sites group. cbca.buffnet.net/NFHS.htm The former Niagara Falls High School building has been sitting vacant at the intersection of Pine Avenue and Portage Road in the City of Niagara Falls. Recent proposals by


developers have included one plan which demolish the near 80-year-old building to throw up another strip mall in its place. Some recent discussion has included talk of rehabilitating this majestic old educational facility into an arts and community center.

Project 2: Public School #1, Long Island, NY

www.ps1.org/cut/history.html In the halls of P.S.1 one can sense the passage of time, the sound of children, even the smell of school lunches. Its transformation from a public school into a contemporary arts center maintains the building’s original function as a place of gathering, learning, and enlightenment. And while certainly other historic structures in New York City have grown old more gracefully, P.S.1 wears its age proudly, an impressive pile of stone and brick with a rich and somewhat scandalous history.

Project 3: New Chicago Elementary, North Memphis, TN

www.stls.frb.org/publications/br/2000/d/pages/2-article.html The former New Chicago Elementary School in North Memphis was built during the early 1960s and remained in operation until the late 1980s. After remaining idle for a decade, a 16-month effort—using funds from a variety of sources—helped community leaders renovate and convert the school into Chicago Park Place—a mixed-use structure encompassing 39 affordable rental units for seniors, a police mini-precinct and a community center.

Project 4: High School, Salem IL

www.stls.frb.org/publications/br/2000/d/pages/2-article.html The original high school in Salem, Ill., was auctioned by the school board on the courthouse steps in the mid-1970s. Thelma Bailey, a member of the community, bought the school, which was built in 1915, with the intent of turning it into a community center. Bailey spent $25,000 to acquire the building another $100,000 for all the renovations necessary to convert the school to a community center.

Chicago Park Place Sources of Funds First Tennessee Housing Corporation $1,846,092 First Tennessee Bank $ 500,000 City of Memphis $250,000 Division of Housing and Community Development Greater Community Projects, LLC $156,000 Total $2,752,09

Project 5: LaFollette School, West Allis, WI

www.uli.com/assisted/milwaukee.htm LaFollette School in a beautifully renovated historic school near Milwaukee in West Allis, Wisconsin. LaFollette School offers one and two bedroom units of Affordable Elderly Housing.

Project 6: Lincoln School Apartments, Eugene, OR


www.lincolnschoolapartments.com The Lincoln School Apartments are conveniently located in a residential neighborhood, offering easy access to city parks, the library and medical facilities.

Project 7: Hickory High School, Hickory, NC

www.catawbascience.org/memloc.html . . . Catawba Science Center, a hands-on museum for kids of all ages! We are located on Hickory NC's SALT Block (Sciences, Arts, and Literature Together) at 243 Third Avenue NE. The museum's three levels of hands-on fun include permanent, temporary, and traveling exhibits. Permanent exhibits include Hall of Life Science, the Physical Science Arcade, KidsSpace, Science Courtyard area, Footprints Preschool Gallery, EarthWatch Center, and Naturalist Center. www.ncarts.org/news/pressrelease/economy.html The Arts and Science Center of Catawba Valley is housed in the former Hickory High School in the city of Hickory, North Carolina.

Project 8: C.S. Brown Cultural Center and Museum, Winton, NC

www.ncculturetour.org/CSB.htm The C. S. Brown Regional Cultural Arts Center is located in the town of Winton. The Center was established to preserve the multiethnic heritage of Northeastern North Carolina and enhance the quality of life in the community through the visual and performing arts. The organization is housed in historic Brown Hall. This building was a part of the campus of Chowan Academy, a school for black youth founded in 1886 by Calvin Scott Brown. Brown came to Winton from Salisbury, North Carolina in 1883 to pastor Pleasant Plains Baptist Church. Built in 1926 and renovated in the early 1980s, Brown Hall was the last structure built on the Academy campus by its founder, who was associated with the school for over 50 years. The 10,000 square-foot facility includes an auditorium, an archive, an antique classroom, seminar and dining rooms and a kitchen. The Center also has a collection of West African and African American artifacts.

Project 9: Little Earth Neighborhood Early Learning Center, Minneapolis, MN (elementary school)

education.umn.edu/alum/link/2000fall/babyspace.html Baby’s Space, an early childcare and education center for infants, toddlers, and families in the Phillips neighborhood of Minneapolis, is up and running at the Little Earth Neighborhood Early Learning Center. From an empty, echoing space, it has gone to a specially designed home-away-from home for 14 infants and toddlers. The staff has expanded to four full-time teachers, one part-time, and a full-time family service home visitor. Up to eight volunteers regularly help at the center. Family Night every Wednesday is now attracting about a half-dozen parents and up to 15 children. Nine community and early childhood organizations in Minneapolis, including the Harris Training Center for Infant & Toddler Development and the Institute of Child Development, designed Baby’s Space to integrate prenatal support and education, home visiting and parenting support services, full- and part-time child care, and weekly family nights featuring parent education and family activities. The Minnesota


Children’s Museum helped to design the space, using its HABITOT learning landscape as a model. Other collaborative members include Fraser Child and Family Center, Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association, Reuben Lindh Child and Family Service, Southside Family Nurturing Center, the University’s Department of Pediatrics, and the Children, Youth, and Family Consortium. www.users.qwest.net/~famphiladv/jfbgrants98.doc James Ford Bell Foundation Grant ($50,000)

Project 10: Beulah Senior Housing, Beulah, ND

www.yhr.com/www/services/architecture/historic/proj_sheets/renovation/9618.htm Adaptive use of an historic school building built as a high school at the turn of the century and expanded in the teens and again in the 1950's, and now abandoned by the school system in favor of new facilities on a new site. The structure was acquired by a developer for use as senior congregate housing. The project converted classrooms into 28 apartments, along with common dining, sitting, and activities spaces. A coal-fired boiler was replaced with smaller equipment and the space claimed to make a new entry sequence and porte-cochere. An elevator was inserted, as well.

Project 11: Park School Adaptive Use - Moorhead, MN

www.yhr.com/www/services/architecture/historic/proj_sheets/renovation/9618.htm Adaptive use of a turn of the century 8-room elementary school to residential usage. The schools gymnasium, added in 1960, was adapted to use by a latchkey program operated by the local YMCA.

Project 12: Stone House Development, Schoolhouse Apartments, Mineral Point, WI commerce.state.wi.us/CD/CD-MSN_issue1_01.pdf The two-story Romanesque Revival Mineral Point High School was constructed in 1904, and served as the community’s high school until 1924. It then served as the city’s middle school. The L-shaped building is constructed of rock-faced ashlar with limestone trim on a raised basement. Its intersecting hip roofs were clad originally with asphalt shingles and the building is enriched with lintels, sills, and a water table of smooth limestone. Stone House Development acquired the property in 1997. The project was funded under a limited partnership of private investors called Mineral Point School Apartments. . . . [With] 11 one and two-bedroom apartments ranging from 800-1,600 sq. ft. The $925,000 project was finished in the spring of 2000 and reached 100% occupancy in January 2001.

d. Other Information:

Northfield High School & Middle School blueline prints, including floor plans, elevations, heating, ventilation, foundation, and footing plans, probably from the 1910s special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/html/mss/nwaa0080.html


Reuse Study for the Northfield Middle School

Public Forum Questionnaire

Your input is needed to successfully represent the Northfield community’s goals for reuse of the Middle School such that it will be of maximum benefit (assume that the new use will be feasible and sustainable). Please take a few moments to respond to the following.

1. Reuse of the Middle School for a new use could BENEFIT the Northfield community. a. Strongly Agree b. Agree c. Uncertain d. Disagree e. Strongly Disagree 2. I AGREE with the adaptive reuse of the middle school building IF it creates a space for one

or more of the following uses (circle all that you believe are viable and appropriate):

a. Offices j. Youth Activities b. Senior Activities k. Restaurant c. Artist Residences l. Storage – Community Archives d. Housing m. School – Educational e. Art Gallery n. Community Performances f. Retail / Business o. Cyber-Business Incubator g. Community Recreation p. Other (list): ________________________ h. Daycare q. Other (list): ________________________ i. Artist Studios

3. The middle school building should NOT be reused for the following uses (list):

a. ______________________________ b. ______________________________ c. ______________________________ d. ______________________________

Why? ________________________________________________________________________

4. The Middle School should be redeveloped for mostly PRIVATE uses (for example Housing). a. Strongly Agree b. Agree c. Uncertain d. Disagree e. Strongly Disagree 5. The Middle School should be redeveloped for mostly COMMUNITY uses. a. Strongly Agree b. Agree c. Uncertain d. Disagree e. Strongly Disagree 6. There IS community support for continued use of the Middle School AUDITORIUM or

GYMNASIUM for community events. a. Strongly Agree b. Agree c. Uncertain d. Disagree e. Strongly Disagree 7. Other Comments (continue on back of sheet) 8. Name (optional): ____________________________________________________________

Northfield Middle School R F STUDY - SMSQ Architects, Inc. · D. Reuse Laundry List: ... A. MIDDLE...

Documents

Transcript of Northfield Middle School R F STUDY - SMSQ Architects, Inc. · D. Reuse Laundry List: ... A. MIDDLE...