September

2010 Economic Impact Study Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center (Chesapeake, VA)

[This document examines the effect of the Community Activity & Tennis Center project on the City of Chesapeake and the surrounding area. Combining analysis of local market demographics and trends, existing information culled from key local organizations and project stakeholders, comparable and exemplary tournament/event destinations, and potential competing facilities; this study arrives at optimal program plan considerations and recommendations to support a financially viable and sustainable business model for a sports and event complex to maximize economic impact in the Chesapeake area.]

Prepared for: City of Chesapeake

The SportsPrepared Facilities by : The Advisory, Sports Facilities LLC Advisory, LLC Page 1 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3 A Conservative Approach to Projections ...... 3 Overview of the Economic Impact Study ...... 4 Assumptions and Drivers to Success ...... 4 ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY METHODOLOGY AND BACKGROUND ...... 5 Work to Date...... 5 ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY OBJECTIVES ...... 7 SUMMARY OF SFA’S MARKET RESEARCH FINDINGS ...... 8 City of Chesapeake ...... 9 Key Attributes and Advantages ...... 10 Potential and Existing Challenges ...... 10 Conventions and Tourism ...... 11 Key Attributes and Advantages ...... 11 Potential and Existing Challenges ...... 11 Chesapeake Parks and Recreation ...... 12 Key Attributes and Advantages ...... 12 Potential and Existing Challenges ...... 12 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE PARKS AND RECREATION INVENTORY ...... 13 COMPARABLE FACILITIES ANALYSIS...... 15 Exemplary Sports Tourism Facilities ...... 16 Basketball Tournament/Event Facilities ...... 18 Aquatic Event Facilities...... 21 Tennis Event Facilities ...... 23 COMPETITION ANALYSIS ...... 24 Court and Multisport Facilities ...... 24 Aquatics Facilities ...... 26 Indoor Tennis Facilities ...... 26 Competition Summary ...... 27 RECOMMENDATIONS TO SUPPORT OPTIMIZED ECONOMIC IMPACT POTENTIAL ...... 28 Action Items and Projects ...... 29 FINANCIAL FORECAST AND PROJECTIONS ...... 30 Financial Forecast – Community Activity & Tennis Center ...... 30 Economic Impact Projections ...... 31 CONCLUSION STATEMENT ...... 33 APPENDICES ...... 34 APPENDIX A: CHESAPEAKE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY & TENNIS CENTER PROGRAM DOCUMENT ...... 35 APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ...... 36 APPENDIX C: STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW SUMMARY FINDINGS ...... 41 APPENDIX D: DESTINATION TOURNAMENT/EVENT STANDARDS ...... 45 APPENDIX E: POTENTIAL JOB CREATION ...... 46 APPENDIX F: PRO-FORMA SUMMARIES ...... 47 Facility Program – Community Activity Center ...... 47 Total Construction and Start-up Cost Estimates – Community Activity Center...... 48 Total Revenue and Expense – Community Activity Center ...... 50 Facility Program – Tennis Center ...... 51 Total Construction and Start-up Cost Estimates – Tennis Center ...... 52 Total Revenue and Expense – Tennis Center ...... 53

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 2 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In March 2010, The Sports Facilities Advisory (SFA) was engaged to complete a detailed financial forecast and economic impact study pertaining to a proposed community activity and tennis center in Chesapeake, VA and its various sports and recreation components. SFA is an independent sports facility consulting company which has completed economic impact studies and financial forecasts on more than $1 billion in both planned and operational community and recreation sports facilities throughout the U.S. and overseas.

The purpose of this study is to assess the financial sustainability of the project and to ensure that the facility program and design will support positive economic impact. This document contains the findings of this work and summarizes the results of a comprehensive market study, a stakeholder interview process, extensive research and analysis related to financials and facility performance, and the projected economic impact of the facilities. This analysis also includes findings and conclusions regarding the outdoor sports assets within the city and SFA‟s recommendation for Greenbrier Park.

As part of its work, SFA also completed a review of other sports facilities owned and operated by the city. City officials representing economic development, conventions and City Park Redevelopment Objectives tourism, parks and recreation, and education 1. Enhance Economic Impact were engaged in this process to ensure that 2. Improve Quality of Life SFA‟s findings and recommendations would 3. Address Social Issues address a broad set of perspectives and needs. SFA also met with representatives from Hastings+Chivetta Architects, Inc., Counsilman-Hunsaker aquatics consultants, and numerous others. Additionally SFA completed a thorough review of:  The Chesapeake Convention and Tourism Strategic Plan, completed by Randall Travel Marketing  2007 City Park Master Plan, completed by IDC Architects  2009 Community Activities Center Market Analysis, completed by Don Schumacher & Associates, Inc.  Chesapeake Strategic Readiness Plan  City of Chesapeake Comprehensive Plan for Services for Children and Youth  Parks and Recreation annual budgets

A Conservative Approach to Projections Based on the requirements of the TIF financing, City officials wanted to ensure that the proposed developments at City Park will provide positive economic impact within the City of Chesapeake. SFA was asked to complete this study and a detailed pro forma for the Community Activity & Tennis Center (CATC), and SFA was instructed to be conservative in its projections so as not to over-inflate the potential positive economic impacts.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 3 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Overview of the Economic Impact Study This study contains a detailed pro forma for the tennis facility, a detailed financial forecast for the community activity center, and an economic impact study which outlines the potential positive economic impact of these facilities. This study does not include an analysis of the economic impact of the dog park, fun park, or skate park as these amenities will require much less operational complexity and ongoing overhead than the activity center or tennis facility.

It should be noted that any financial forecast, including this one, is based on certain assumptions regarding the financing structure, the business and management model, regional and national economic trends, the need to market and effectively manage high-quality programs, and the competitive landscape. Changes to these factors can impact future results.

Optimistically, SFA‟s findings, as outlined within this document, indicate that the proposed financing structure for the Community Activity & Tennis Center provide a high level of potential for a self-sustaining operations, positive net revenue, and positive economic impact. Therefore, these projects have been deemed to be lower risk and to have a very higher likelihood of producing positive economic impact than more than 90% of the projects SFA has analyzed to date. In short, SFA‟s findings revealed that the City of Chesapeake possesses significant advantages and opportunities to attract sports tourism events.

SFA‟s findings have been based on a number of assumptions, outlined below.

Assumptions and Drivers to Success 1. The financing structure will provide 100% funding and the facilities will not carry debt service. 2. The proposed Community Activity & Tennis Center will be professionally managed by experienced staff, and the facility operating systems, software, marketing and other systems will meet local market standards for excellence. 3. The facility will charge membership fees that can be as low as 50% of the membership rates for the YMCA‟s within the city. 4. The operating expenses, salaries, fees, and cost of goods sold will meet the revenue-to- expense ratios outlined within SFA‟s pro formas. 5. The proposed facilities will include the types of sports surfaces, aquatics elements, offices, and other program areas outlined by SFA. These facilities meet a set of standards that are critical to tournaments and event competitions. 6. If a private management group is engaged to oversee a portion or all of the facility management, this group will operate in a manner consistent with promoting economic impact within the City. 7. Conventions and Tourism will play a major role in marketing sports and other group events.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 4 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY METHODOLOGY AND BACKGROUND

Prior to SFA‟s involvement in this project, the City of Chesapeake completed considerable work on the City Park master plan with IDC Architects, Hastings+Chivetta, and McDonough Bolyard Peck, along with other professional services groups. In the preparation of this study, SFA organized a series of stakeholder and city representative meetings, toured existing city facilities, toured and analyzed the offerings of regional facilities, conducted a review of the Parks and Recreation budgets for the previous three years, and completed demographic and market research related to program pricing, competition, and other important factors. Numerous factors have been considered including:  Community sports/recreation needs  Pricing comparables in the market  Current and desired sports and  Program Plan for the facilities recreation facilities and  Construction and equipment costs programming  Budgets/proposals related to site  Existing resources (human and and facility development financial)  Potential tournament users and  Existing data (studies and financials) other sports associations/  Market data (demographics, sports organizations for potential facility and recreation participation, utilization commitments competition)

Work to Date Following multiple conversations and in-person meetings to solidify the contract and project scope, SFA began its analysis and information gathering. This process is summarized below:

Step 1: March 15-21, 2010 – Existing Data Review and Market Research SFA conducted preliminary market research, encompassing demographics, sports participation, and competition/existing service providers, and inventory of existing parks and recreation facilities. SFA also completed an initial review of the 2007 City Park Master Plan, prepared by IDC Architects. Also, Dev Pathik (SFA founder/CEO) met by phone with David Carter (City of Chesapeake Parks & Recreation Director). As a result of this step, a site visit (Step 2) was scheduled. During this phase SFA also reviewed the following documents:  City Park Master Plan  Chesapeake Comprehensive Plan for  Chesapeake Convention and Services for Children and Youth Tourism Strategic Plan  Parks and Recreation annual  Hastings+Chivetta program budgets  Schumacher Market Report  Parks and Recreation inventory  Chesapeake Strategic Readiness Plan

Step 2: March 22, 2010 – Site Visit and Planning & Strategy Meeting SFA Founder and CEO Dev Pathik conducted an initial site visit and facilitated a planning meeting to more fully understand the history of the project and study objectives. These meetings – which included a City tour and visits to each of the City‟s major parks and community centers – included input from various stakeholders representing economic development, parks and recreation, education, and others.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 5 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Step 3: July 12-15, 2010 – SFA Stakeholder Interviews SFA facilitated several interviews with key stakeholder groups and representatives, including the Chesapeake Parks & Recreation department, the Economic Development department, the City Council, Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism, Chesapeake Public Schools, and Old Dominion University tennis coach Darryl Cummings. The details of these interviews and meetings can be found in Appendix C.

Attendees included:  Steven Wright – Director of Economic Development, City of Chesapeake  Tom Elder – Assistant Director of Economic Development, City of Chesapeake  Dr. Wanda Barnard-Bailey – Deputy City Manager, City of Chesapeake  Dr. Betty Jean Meyer – Deputy City Manager, City of Chesapeake  David Carter – Director of Parks & Recreation, City of Chesapeake  Jeff Brooks, McDonough Bolyard Peck  Donna Hill – Recreation Superintendent, City of Chesapeake  Lennie Luke – Senior Park Planner, City of Chesapeake  Raymond Wharton – Parks and Grounds Superintendent, City of Chesapeake  Kim Murden – Director of Conventions and Tourism, City of Chesapeake  Darryl Cummings – Old Dominion University, Tennis Center  Wayne Martin – Director of Student Services, Chesapeake Public Schools  Dr. Len Wright – Director of New Construction, Chesapeake Public Schools  Steven Gilbert – Assistant Superintendent, Operations, Chesapeake Public Schools  James Cleavenger – Supervisor of Student Activities, Chesapeake Public Schools

Step 4: July 16-August 15, 2010 – Pro Forma Development During this period, SFA‟s business analysts and facility development consultant teams completed the detailed financial forecasts. This process included a series of internal meetings among SFA, as well as consultations with:  Jeff Brooks - McDonough Bolyard Peck  Erik Kocher - Hastings+Chivetta Architects, Inc.  Tom Elder – City of Chesapeake  Steven Wright – City of Chesapeake  David Carter – City of Chesapeake

Step 5: August 16-September 8, 2010 – Economic Impact Finalization During this phase, SFA‟s business analysts and facility development consultants, along with SFA‟s sports marketing experts, compiled a conservative estimate for the economic impact. This work built upon the pro forma for the tennis facility and the community activity center. The methodology included an analysis of the average daily rate, average daily expenditures, projected number of tournaments and sporting events for years 1-10, and analysis of comparable facilities and comparable facility components.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 6 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY OVERVIEW

The purpose of the economic impact study is to evaluate the potential contribution of the community activity center and the tennis center for positive economic impact within the City of Chesapeake. The research-based pro formas produced for each of these two facilities illustrate the projected revenue from the operations, and both show very high potential for operational sustainability. The economic impact and contribution of these facilities has also been analyzed by SFA. SFA assessed the immediate economic impact of these facilities based on an assessment of the facilities‟ projected contribution to tourism through visiting teams Immediate Impact and players. This area includes an estimate for room Secondary nights and daily expenditures. Impact Tertiary The “secondary” economic impact – which would Impact include job creation, tax revenue, and other indirect impacts – was beyond the scope of SFA‟s initial analysis and has not been added to this “immediate impact” analysis; although, SFA has provided an outline of the potential new jobs that could be created through these developments. This further supports the goal of identifying a highly conservative estimate for the economic impact projections.

The “tertiary” impact would include additional benefits such as repeat/return visits and other positive financial impacts that the advertising and marketing campaigns would have on non- sports tourism visitations. This too was beyond SFA‟s original project scope and has not been included below. Therefore, the economic impact included within this document should be viewed as highly conservative.

Importantly, the projections for economic impact outlined within this document will require the implementation of a comprehensive sports tourism campaign which will require collaboration between conventions and tourism, parks and recreation, and management for the Community Activity & Tennis Center and tennis center facility. For this reason, SFA has outlined a high- level organizational chart which illustrates the development of a proposed organization to facilitate this necessary collaboration. SFA also recommends the development of a detailed business plan to support the objectives identified throughout this study. There should be no illusions that building these facilities alone will guarantee the results identified by SFA. An organized approach to marketing the new facilities will be required and facility management will need to provide tournament development and management.

● ● ●

[Note: When assessing the economic impact of such facilities, it is important to recognize that mega- sporting events or large-scale, national tournaments and events should not be the primary focus of optimizing economic impact. Research shows that such events have little meaningful immediate economic impact. For this reason SFA has focused its economic impact analysis on smaller-scale regional and national events that do not require major updates to the extensive tourism infrastructure and that would provide for repeat and year-round visits by groups of 50 to 250 players. This notion is supported by a growing body of research that supports that smaller, regular events have a greater potential to have a positive impact on the host economy (Daniels & Norma, Estimating the Economic Impact of Seven Regular Sport Tourism Events).]

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 7 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

SUMMARY OF SFA’S MARKET RESEARCH FINDINGS

Through multiple meetings, site visits, stakeholder interviews, demographic research, competition and sports asset analysis, tours of regional facilities, and other market research; SFA identified a range of market characteristics and priorities. The primary driver throughout SFA‟s process was to analyze the potential for the Community Activity & Tennis Center to drive positive economic impact in the City.

Drivetime Map (5, 15, 30 minutes) – Overlying Population Density by Zip Code)

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 8 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Drivetime Map (5, 15, 30 minutes) – Overlying Median Household Income by Zip Code)

City of Chesapeake The City of Chesapeake is a suburban residential community near the more urban cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Hampton and bordering the sprawling city of Virginia Beach. The south side of Chesapeake is rural and residential, whereas the more congested communities to the north comprise the busy Hampton Roads region. The bottom of I-64 bisects the upper portion of Chesapeake, running east-west, and is part of a loop highway around the perimeter of Norfolk. This highway – its tributaries (I-664, I-264, I-464) provide the primary roadways for the region – is one of the best tourism assets for the area as it is a primary artery for travelers.

This diverse, business-friendly city has attracted companies from all over the world, with large employers such as Canon, Cox Communications, and Dollar Tree. A strong military presence (Norfolk Naval Base is just to the north) helps stabilize the local economy. Also, arts, entertainment, and recreation are integral to the area with proximity to Norfolk and Virginia Beach.

Chesapeake consistently ranks as one of the top cities in numerous publications and categories. Most recently, Chesapeake was ranked #85 in CNN Money‟s “Top 100 List of Best Places to Live 2010” and #45 in Parenting Magazine‟s “Top 100 List of Best Cities for Families 2010.”

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 9 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Key Attributes and Advantages The following attributes and advantages for the City of Chesapeake include references from the Conventions and Tourism Strategic Plan:  Proximity to the beaches, Williamsburg, and Norfolk allows the City to be positioned as a central point in the Hampton Roads experience. This can be marketed as a key advantage to teams traveling from a distance. These are the teams with the longs stays and the highest percentage of visitors requiring overnight accommodations.  The market is also well-suited to hosting unique corporate events such as the ropes course and rock wall climbing corporate parties and “weatherproof” corporate picnics that will now be available through the Community Activity & Tennis Center.  The Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism strategic plan and the current leadership within the CC&T are supportive of sports tourism as a major initiative. This is a key advantage because the support of CC&T will provide the facility with marketing exposures through key sports tourism channels.  The regions other facilities can be co-marketed to promote Hampton Roads as a truly unique sports destination and major tournament venue which allows players to compete in multiple facilities.  The proactive nature of the City‟s Economic Development group and the collaborative approach that it shares with Education, Parks and Recreation, Planning, and City Management is a key advantage. From SFA‟s perspective the interactions, access to information, and professionalism of these groups has been the best we have yet to experience in any city.  Parks and Recreation‟s commitment to proper planning was a key driver in the City‟s decision to engage in this analysis. Parks and Recreation has consistently provided critical information and insight. The department‟s flexibility, adaptability, and commitment to encourage expert involvement demonstrate a high degree of commitment to the long-term success of the City.

Potential and Existing Challenges  As noted within the Randall Strategic Plan and based on comments and input from Conventions and Tourism, currently no visitor center exists in the City of Chesapeake. Therefore, all trip facilitation for visitors falls upon either the state welcome centers or visitor centers in neighboring towns and communities. This places a burden on the Chesapeake Visitor Guide and website as the only options and sources for trip planning information. To combat this and to support the use of City Park and the Community Activity & Tennis Center, additional information kiosks or welcome centers have been recommended.  This is not the beach - The City will need to position the Community Activity & Tennis Center as a central location that provides unique assets. The rock wall, warm water pool, tennis facility, skate park, and proposed outdoor ropes course can all be part of this messaging.  History of facility fees and historic model - The City will need to engage in a communication campaign to assist citizens in understanding the rationale for the fee structure, management approach, and other unique aspects which will be new to City residents. City resident fees, resident-only events, and other promotions can be part of this program.  Name and Identity - The Current title as Community Activity & Tennis Center may not be an ideal brand identity. The name implies a smaller, locally focused environment. SFA recommends that the city consider an alternative name which can be quickly recognized as a Hampton Roads and Chesapeake Sports destination.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 10 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Conventions and Tourism The Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism division (CC&T) recently commissioned RFL Communications to conduct comprehensive tourism research and reconnaissance to provide current reliable data and recommendations to position and market Chesapeake, VA as a tourism destination of choice. The results of this 2008-2009 Tourism Research Study – which included information gathering, an organizational performance audit, a lodging property survey, a market segment survey, and a visitor mail survey – along with input from Kim Murden, were instrumental to SFA‟s findings. The CC&T has several key attributes worth noting.

Key Attributes and Advantages  As stated previously, the CC&T leadership has demonstrated a commitment to marketing the Community Activity & Tennis Center. This will provide marketing exposures and opportunities that are not common for this type of facility.  Conventions & Tourism has expressed a desire to collaborate to find ways to employ the conference center as a component of certain corporate programs. In these programs, groups may begin or end their off-site or meeting day at the conference center with a teambuilding or corporate picnic at the Community Activity & Tennis Center. SFA has models and examples of this kind of product, in which Conventions & Tourism has expressed interest.  Conventions & Tourism has thoroughly reviewed the economic impact projections and has provided their input on key data sets including average daily room rate, average daily expenditures, and projected number of guests per room. This, combined with the Randall Report data sets, provides assurance that the projections finalized and provided by SFA are reliable.  It should be noted that SFA has found the leadership within the City of Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism to be stellar by comparison to the leadership of such departments within other comparable cities.

Potential and Existing Challenges  There is currently little prior experience within the City for the oversight, design, and delivery of higher end corporate teambuilding events. This statement would be true for nearly all cities. The revenue model proposed within the SFA documents will require the conventions and tourism team to learn these products and to learn how to promote these products. Given the caliber of professional leadership within Conventions & Tourism, this potential challenge is viewed as a minimal obstacle which will be quickly overcome.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 11 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Chesapeake Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Director David Carter has played an instrumental role in the development of SFA‟s findings. The experienced Parks and Recreation team is currently managing a very large number of park assets across a large region. They are doing this with relatively limited resources and in some cases, aging facilities.

Key Attributes and Advantages  The City of Chesapeake Parks and Recreation Department oversees a vast array of City parks. These include outdoor parks, such as Greenbrier and Deep Creek, which can be further developed to provide important opportunities for future tournament play. SFA findings indicate that there is enough market opportunity to warrant further investigation into the redevelopment of certain outdoor sports parks within the City.  Parks and Recreation has consistently demonstrated a desire to properly plan, analyze risk, and establish high standards for the new Community Activity & Tennis Center. Parks and Recreation leadership has been directly involved in the work of SFA and has played a pivotal role in the preparation of this document. This provides assurance of buy-in and commitment to the proposed objectives.

Potential and Existing Challenges  Although several sports and recreation facilities exist in the City of Chesapeake, these facilities would require certain updates to become highly sought after tournament and events destinations. This is especially true when compared to nations exemplary facilities. With the addition of the Community Activity & Tennis Center, additional upgrades to Greenbrier and Deep Creek Parks could provide the City with a broader range of indoor and outdoor tournament destinations. SFA also recommends that the City consider the development of outdoor zip lines or ropes course elements.  The City of Chesapeake Parks and Recreation Department is currently overseeing facilities and parks with limited resources. Additional Parks and recreation resources may be needed to support maintenance, security, and operations within City Park.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 12 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE PARKS AND RECREATION INVENTORY

Chesapeake has hosted numerous successful national sporting events – including several AAU events – encompassing sports such as archery, horseshoes, baseball, wrestling, gymnastics, running, martial arts, kayaking, canoeing, basketball, and billiards.

High Schools & Facilities

1. Deep Creek High School 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 1 SB field, 1 lighted FB field with track, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium 2. Grassfield High School 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 2 SB fields, 1 FB field, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium, lighted outdoor track 3. Great Bridge High School

4. Hickory High School Sports Facilities High Schools & Facilities 5. Indian River High School 1. Bells Mills Park 23. Deep Creek High School

2. Cahoon Plantation 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 1 SB field, 1 lighted FB field with

3. Centerville Park track, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium 6. Oscar Smith High School 4. Charlton-Mott Youth Complex 24. Grassfield High School

5. Chesapeake City Park 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 2 lighted SB fields, 1 FB field, 6 7. Western Branch High School 6. Chesapeake Conference Center lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium, lighted outdoor track

7. Chesapeake Golf Club 25. Great Bridge High School

8. Chesapeake Lanes – AMF Bowling Alley 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 2 SB fields, 2 FB fields (1 lighted), 9. Chilled Ponds Ice Sports Complex 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium, lighted outdoor track 10. Dismal Swamp Canal Trail 26. Hickory High School 11. Great Bridge/Hickory Family YMCA 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 1 lighted SB field, 1 lighted FB 12. Greenbrier Family YMCA field with track, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium 13. Greenbrier North YMCA & Racquetball 27. Indian River High School 14. Greenbrier Sports Park 1 lighted BB field, 2 lighted SB fields, 1 lighted FB field with track, 6 15. Northwest River Park lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium 16. Oak Grove Lake Park 28. Oscar Smith High School 17. Taylor Bend Family YMCA 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 1 lighted SB field, 1 lighted FB 18. Triple R Ranch field with track, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium (cap.

19. Western Branch Lanes – AMF Bowling Alley 3,840)

20. Western Branch Park & Sports Complex 29. Western Branch High School 21. Battlefield Golf Club at Centerville 1 lighted BB field with concessions, 2 lighted SB fields, 1 lighted FB See matrix on following page for amenities at these facilities. field with track, 6 lighted tennis courts, 1 indoor gymnasium

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 13 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 14 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

COMPARABLE FACILITIES ANALYSIS

SFA placed a primary focus on sports tourism that will attract sports teams for exhibition games and tournaments/events that are designed for players and spectators. These types of tournaments/events project to attract a significant number of players, associated team members (coaches, trainers, statisticians, etc.), and spectators; therefore, it is imperative that the venues can accommodate these teams, players, and spectators.

Based on the objectives outlined by the key stakeholder groups for the Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center, SFA has identified a need for the following sport/recreation spaces:

 Court: A 4-court layout is necessary to accommodate the regional- and national-level tournaments/event that would be conducted through organizations/associations such as AAU, USSSA, USTA, and USA Swimming.  Competition Pool: A 50-meter x 25-yard pool is ideal because the 50-meter length would allow the venue to host major regional and national competitions while the 25-yard width would allow the pool to be reconfigured for smaller meets, training, and recreational swimming.  Tennis Facility: For a tennis facility with indoor and outdoor courts, a minimum of four indoor courts would be required as well as four outdoor courts. This would allow for ample competition space as well as overflow space for local, regional, and national tournaments/events.

These facilities expect to attract anywhere from 250 players/spectators for a small-scale tennis tournament and 400 for a medium-scale basketball tournament to 750 for a large-scale basketball tournament and 1,200 for a large-scale swim meet. SFA recognizes the limitations and challenges of very large events, which include infrastructure issues, crowd management, proper accommodations, establishing a large volunteer base, and extensive preparation. For this reason, SFA has broken out the analysis by sport/program and selected several comparable youth- and family-oriented tournament and event facilities that represent a mix of the criteria. One of the factors which will make the CATC unique is that it blends many of the key attributes of these noted facilities.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 15 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Exemplary Sports Tourism Facilities The following facilities set the standard for sports tourism destinations that attract large-scale, national-level tournaments, competitions, and events:

ESPN Wide World of Sports Complex at Walt Disney World – Orlando, FL This expansive complex (220 acres), considered by many to be the standard for multisport competitions and tournament/event destinations, is home to more than 200 events each year encompassing more than 60 sports for athletes of all ages and skill levels. With an unparalleled roster of facilities and partners – as well as the backdrop of the world‟s top vacation destination – this complex is the pinnacle for athletes and fans alike. The complex features:  A baseball quadraplex  A championship baseball stadium  The Hess Sports Fields (11 outdoor fields for football, soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, baseball and softball)  The Jostens Center (44,800 sf indoor court/rink facility for basketball, volleyball and inline hockey)  The Milk House (70,000+ sf indoor arena)  A softball diamondplex  A tennis complex (10 clay courts including a 1,000-seat Centre Court Stadium)  A track & field complex  The ESPN Wide World of Sports Grill  The PlayStation Pavilion

The facility also hosts events in other sports such as cheer & dance and martial arts.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 16 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Ripken Baseball Academy – Aberdeen, MD The home of Ripken youth camps and tournaments, the Ripken Baseball Academy consists of a youth-sized version of Oriole Park at Camden Yards and youth-sized replicas of Wrigley Field, Fenway Park, and Memorial Stadium. The complex, which also features four skinned softball fields, offers an assortment of training areas including professional-quality batting cages, a newly designed bullpen with four pitching mounds, and a synthetic turf practice field.

Cooperstown Dreams Park – Cooperstown, NY This tournament-based sports complex focuses on youth baseball tournaments. Cooperstown, NY – home of the Professional Baseball Hall of Fame and Induction Ceremony – is a village with a total permanent population of less than 4,000 and limited hotel options; however, each year over 500,000 people visit the park to participate and watch youth baseball games. The park hosts weekly 96-team tournaments, over 13 weeks, totaling 1,248 teams per season. The annual revenue for this facility exceeds $15,000,000 and the additional economic impact of the facility exceeds $20,000,000 annually.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 17 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Basketball Tournament/Event Facilities

Spiece Fieldhouse – Fort Wayne, IN Located in Northeast Indiana, near the confluence of Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio, this two- level, multi-purpose sports/fitness facility encompasses 150,000 SF. Components include the following:

Indoor Courts  4 full-size hardwood courts  Adaptable to 8 courts (cross-court play)  Leagues (basketball and volleyball)  Tournaments/showcases  Instruction (camps/clinics)  “Drop-in” play

Fitness Center (70,000 SF)  Membership-based  Free weights and cardio equipment  Personal training  Exercise studio (group fitness classes)  Medical services

Swimming Pool  3 Lane, 25-yard indoor pool  Wheelchair accessible warm-water pool  Swim lessons  Classes (exercise, physical therapy, etc.)  U.S. Masters Swimming program

Additionally, Spiece Fieldhouse features a café and arcade area, a day spa, a pro shop, and a running track, in addition to services such as childcare and birthday parties.

Greensboro Sports Complex – Greensboro, NC This 106,000 SF, multi-sport facility features 8 basketball courts, 3 volleyball courts, 4 indoor soccer fields, and an inline hockey rink. The facility offers basketball and volleyball leagues, tournaments, instruction (camps/clinics), and pick-up/drop-in games, in addition to summer camps, youth and adult soccer leagues and indoor roller hockey leagues. The Greensboro Sports Complex also hosts large-scale events such as the State Games of North Carolina and the Triad Athlete Challenge.

Hoops House of Basketball – Louisville, KY Conveniently located in the tri-state region of Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky and with close proximity to Indianapolis, Cincinnati, and Lexington, this 90,000 sf facility features six Connor hardwood basketball courts, four high school regulation courts, two college regulation courts, stadium and bleacher seating, sky boxes, men‟s and women‟s locker rooms, retail shops, hospitality rooms, free wi-fi, and room for 3,200 athletes, coaches, and spectators. Programming encompasses regular leagues, camps, instruction, fitness, and training, as well as national tournaments, events, and showcases.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 18 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Boo Williams Sportsplex – Hampton, VA Located midway between Virginia Beach and Williamsburg, Boo Williams Sportsplex is a 135,000 SF indoor sports and event center. The facility includes:  Eight tournament play basketball courts  12 competition volleyball courts  25‟ floor to ceiling dividers  Eight competition indoor hockey fields  200 meter, 6-lane indoor track with IAFF Certified synthetic surface, long jump, pole vault, triple jump and shot  Registration room, meeting room, put banquet room  Drop down batting cage  Operation Center  Playing pavilions (64,000 SF and  2 training rooms 31,000 SF)  A 4,238 SF concession area  Computer scoring  High-speed Internet access  Seating up to 4,000  Speed and conditioning center

The Boo Williams Sportsplex offers programming in a wide variety of sports including basketball, soccer, disability sports, lacrosse, track and field, volleyball, gymnastics, baseball, baton, dance, karate, boxing, field hockey, cheerleading, paintball, archery, and other indoor sports. The facility hosts AAU basketball tournaments, as well as meetings, conferences, and other events. Additionally, the facility is one of several venues to host programming for the AAU Junior Olympic Games. For this AAU event – which comes to Hampton Roads every five years (most recently in July-August of 2010) – Boo Williams Sportsplex hosts cheerleading, gymnastics, and jump rope competitions.

Suwanee Sports Academy – Suwanee, GA This 100,000 sf facility offers programming in basketball (youth leagues and training), volleyball (youth leagues and training), after school athletics, and performance training clinics for athletes in all sports. The facility, which conducts numerous large- scale events in the area/region, can host up to 15,000 spectators. Amenities include:

 7 NBA regulation basketball courts  15,000 sf off-court performance training area  Full line of weights and fitness  On-site physical therapy center equipment  Numerous meeting rooms and  11 Volleyball courts conference space  Mark Price Shooting Lab  1/6-mile indoor track

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 19 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

American Sports Centers – Anaheim, CA This state-of-the-art indoor court complex – which is touted as the largest of its kind in the U.S. at 150,000 sf – features 22 volleyball courts, 16 basketball courts, and nine indoor soccer courts. The majority of the courts are Schelde hardwood, and three of the volleyball courts are Teraflex. ASC also includes several sports-related training facilities, a sports-themed café, and a retail store. Several prominent national and international sports organizations are headquartered at the facility, and it is the practice facility for the Anaheim Arsenal of the NBA-Developmental League. American Sports Center‟s tenants include the Southern California Volleyball Association, National Junior Basketball, College Sports Quest, and Golden West Volleyball. The facility has the capability to – and usually does – host a large-scale event every weekend (normally the events are Saturday- Sunday format). Additionally, ASC offers court rentals with rates of $55/hour (volleyball courts), $68/hour (basketball courts and indoor soccer courts).

Orlando Sports Center – Orlando, FL At 92,000 square feet, the Orlando Sports Center is a state- of-the-art event and sports complex with the resources to host leagues, tournaments, and national competitions, as well as the ability to provide quality coaching and instruction in baseball, softball, volleyball, basketball, football, soccer, and more. The facilities encompass:  4 NBA-regulation basketball courts  12 indoor volleyball courts  Indoor batting cages  4 instructional pitching lanes  Meeting rooms and conference space  18,000 sf multipurpose indoor turf field  Agility training facilities  6 outdoor sand volleyball courts  Outdoor training area restaurant

The Fieldhouse USA – Frisco, TX Opened in December 2008, The Fieldhouse USA offers programming (leagues, tournaments, camps, clinics/training) in sports such as basketball, volleyball, soccer, lacrosse, and football. Additionally, the facility is home to Athletes Performance, a performance training business. The Fieldhouse USA, through a public/private partnership with the City of Frisco, is the cornerstone of the Sports Village complex, which combines major sports, recreation, entertainment, shopping, and living space. At 145,000 square feet, this state-of-the-art facility features:  12 courts + an arena gym (seating capacity  Food Court of 500+)  Daycare  2 indoor turf fields  Pro Shop  Health/Physical Therapy area  Fitness and Training Center

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 20 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Aquatic Event Facilities

William Woollett Jr. Aquatics Center – Irvine, CA One of the premier aquatic complexes in the country, this facility features two 50-meter pools and one multi-use pool. The center was built to attract some of the swimming world‟s most elite competitions. Since it‟s renovation in 2004, the Woollett Aquatic Center has played host to several major competitions including USA Swimming‟s National & Jr. National Championships in 2005 and 2006. It was also the home to the Mutual of Omaha’s Dual in the Pool which faced off two of the world‟s swimming power houses, the United States vs. Australia.

Bill and Mae McCorkle Aquatics Pavilion – Columbus, OH Ohio State University‟s RPAC (Recreation & Physical Activity Center) Aquatic Center is home to the Bill and Mae McCorkle Aquatic Pavilion and the Recreation Natatorium. The McCorkle Aquatic Pavilion – built to host large-scale aquatic competitions – features a 50-meter competitive pool, diving well with platform and springboard diving, seating for 1,400, and locker and training rooms. The Recreation Natatorium features a class pool with a moveable floor, lap swimming pool, leisure pool and whirlpool spa. The facility has hosted numerous championship competitions including:  Toyota Grand Prix  World Cup Selection Camp of  Collegiate Synchronized Swimming Diving Nationals  Men's Big Ten Championships  Women's NCAA Championships  Synchronized Swimming Olympic  NCAA Zone C Diving Duet Trials Championships  World Selection Camp of Diving  Women's Big Ten Championships  McCorkle Long Course Classic  International Diving Invitational

Flickinger Aquatic Center – Buffalo, NY The Flickinger Aquatic Center, located on the campus of Erie Community College, houses an Olympic-size swimming pool with a movable floor and a 25-meter warm-up pool. The facility is a part of the Flickinger Athletic Center which also features three regulation basketball courts, a fieldhouse which seats 3,000, an indoor jogging track, wellness center, men‟s and women‟s locker room and shower facilities, and athletic department offices and classrooms.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 21 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

King County Aquatic Center – Federal Way, WA The Weyerhaeuser King County Aquatic Center is a legacy venue of the 1990 Seattle Goodwill Games. It features an Olympic-sized competition and training natatorium – to accommodate swimming, diving, water polo, and synchronized swimming events – as well as a 25-yard x 15- yard recreational pool with pirate cove features and theme and a banquet hall with seating for 300-400 persons. This 2,500-seat facility maintains one of the most active competition schedules in the country, hosting more than 50 events annually. It has been the site of Olympic Trials, top national and international competitions, and the Pacific Northwest's premier events. A recent economic study conducted for King County measured the financial impact of these events on the region in excess of $7.5 million annually. In addition to the swimming and diving events, the WKCATC is open to the public for lap swims, family swims, swimming lessons and more.

Salvation Army Kroc Center – Coeur D’Alene, ID This 12-acre community-based sports and recreation facility features a chapel/performing arts center, a teen activities center and game room, an indoor aquatics center with competition pool and family pool/splash area, a gymnasium, an elevated indoor walking/jogging track, a 5,350 sf fitness center, a rock climbing wall, a group fitness studio, and a recording studio. This 25-yard x 25-meter 10-lane competition lap pool facilitates the needs of growing swim clubs, as well as the four high school swim teams in the immediate area. The competition pool features stadium seating and includes meet management space. The 11,000 sf cove pool, separate from the Competition Pool area, provides both fun and relaxation in the form of water slides, spray features, a lazy river, an indoor family spa and outdoor adult spa.

Coral Springs Aquatics Complex – Coral Springs, FL This premier outdoor swimming and diving facility (opened in 1989) hosts numerous swim and dive events throughout the year for all ages and skill levels. The complex features both 50-meter and 25-meter competition pools, a diving well (spring board and platform diving), and an acclimation pool. Additionally, the complex encompasses a 5,000 sf fitness center.

Brittingham-Midtown Community Center – Newport News, VA This facility, which features the only 50-meter competitive indoor pool in the Hampton Roads region, also includes a 14-foot-deep diving well with a 3-meter diving board and two 1-meter boards, a moveable bulkhead for sectioning activities and events, a retractable roof for natural lighting and ventilation, and seating for 500. Additionally, the community center encompasses a gymnasium (including a walking track, a performance stage, and seating for 200), an open air pavilion (14,000 sf, two full-size basketball courts with tennis capabilities), 8 flex-use rooms, two demonstration kitchens, a mini stage, and a computer lab.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 22 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Tennis Event Facilities

The Clubs at River City – Peoria, IL The facility features 12 indoor and 8 outdoor Har-Tru courts for all-year play. With a full-time professional staff, The Clubs at River City offers lessons, leagues, tournaments, and events.

Rush-Copley Healthplex – Aurora, IL The facility features 8 Deco-Turf (hard) indoor courts and 6 outdoor Har-Tru clay courts. Programming encompasses leagues, private and group lessons, clinics, tournaments, and events.

Queen City Racquet Club – Cincinnati, OH This expansive (180,000 square feet) facility features 13 indoor courts and 7 outdoor clay courts. Other amenities include racquetball courts, squash courts, wallyball courts, a fitness area (including free weights and machines), basketball and volleyball, and group exercise rooms, as well as a heated outdoor pool.

Lexington Tennis Club – Lexington, KY This facility features 15 indoor, 5 outdoor (clay), and 2 outdoor (hard) courts. Programming encompasses leagues, instruction, and tournaments. Additional amenities at the club include a fitness center, member lounge, café, pro shop, nursery, saunas and whirlpools, and a meeting room.

Tennis Center at College Park – College Park, MD Located on 11 acres of parkland, this award- winning tennis facility features 27 courts, a running track, fitness center, clubhouse with retail shop, locker rooms, lounge, classrooms and administrative offices. The 12 indoor courts – 8 Decoturf II hard courts and 4 Har-Tru clay court – are located in large, permanent structures with high ceilings and sunlight quality lighting. The 15 outdoor courts encompass 9 Decoturf II, four Har-Tru, and the only two French-style red clay courts in the Mid-Atlantic.

Racquet Club of the South – Norcross, GA Situated on a 23-acre, wooded setting, this full-service tennis facility features:  18 outdoor lighted courts  4 outdoor clay courts  8 climate-controlled indoor courts allowing play in any weather condition  A full-service bar and restaurant within RCS that is open to the public  25-meter swimming pool, with diving board  Workout facility & cardiovascular equipment available to members at no additional cost

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 23 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

COMPETITION ANALYSIS

As previously recommended by Randall Travel Marketing in its strategic plan, SFA also determined that a competitive analysis of existing sports facilities in the area was necessary. This analysis examines sports facilities in Chesapeake and compares them to facilities throughout the neighboring counties and communities, identifying existing and potential advantages and challenges. This analysis will then (a) reveal which sports segments are underserved and over-served in the region and (b) identify the most optimal and lucrative sports segments that Chesapeake can realistically target.

Essentially, the analysis of the competition will provide the City and the key stakeholder groups with an understanding of which facilities can and should be targeted for development to serve as significant tournament/event destinations that attract visitors, drive revenues, and bolster economic impact.

Court and Multisport Facilities In addition to several local YMCA‟s – including the Greenbrier Family YMCA, the Greenbrier North YMCA, and the Great Bridge/Hickory YMCA – there will be other multisport and multipurpose facilities in the area that will compete for regular use as well as tournament/event hosting. These facilities are outlined below:

Boo Williams Sportsplex – Hampton, Va. Located midway between Virginia Beach and Williamsburg, Boo Williams Sportsplex is a 135,000 sf indoor sports and event center. The facility includes:  Eight tournament play basketball courts  12 competition volleyball courts  25‟ floor to ceiling dividers  Eight competition indoor hockey fields  200 meter, 6-lane indoor track with IAFF Certified synthetic surface, long jump, pole vault, triple jump and shot  Registration room, meeting room, put banquet room  Drop down batting cage  2 training rooms  Playing pavilions (64,000 sf, 31,000 sf)  A 4,238 SF concession area  Seating up to 4,000  Speed and conditioning center

The Boo Williams Sportsplex offers programming in a wide variety of sports including basketball, soccer, disability sports, lacrosse, track and field, volleyball, gymnastics, baseball, baton, dance, karate, boxing, field hockey, cheerleading, paintball, archery, and other indoor sports. The facility hosts AAU basketball tournaments, as well as meetings, conferences, and other events. Additionally, the facility is one of several venues to host programming for the AAU Junior Olympic Games. For this AAU event – which comes to Hampton Roads every five years (most recently in July-August of 2010) – Boo Williams Sportsplex hosts cheerleading, gymnastics, and jump rope competitions.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 24 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

DLH Sports & Fitness – Virginia Beach, VA At 250,000 sf, this three-level complex – scheduled to open in early 2011 – will be the largest multipurpose sports and training facility in the Hampton Roads area. Centrally located in Virginia Beach, DLH is adjacent to Northampton Boulevard and in close proximity to Interstate 64, the Norfolk International Airport and Virginia Wesleyan College. The complex – which will offer both indoor and outdoor sports and programming for football, soccer, lacrosse, basketball, volleyball, and adult kickball – will feature the following components and amenities: • Dre' Bly Field (outdoor synthetic • Exercise Rooms turf field) • Deluxe Locker rooms • 200 meter Indoor Track • Walking/Jogging Track • 5 Basketball Courts (hardwood • Weightlifting/Cardiovascular floor) Workout Center • Aquatic Center (Competition Pool & • Youth Activity Room Recreation Pool) • On-site Child Care • Hydro-Therapy Pool • Pro Shop • Sports Medicine Center • Food Court/Concessions • Banquet and Conference Rooms • Parking Additionally, the complex will host numerous tournaments and events including contests for the Hampton Roads Hurricanes of the North American Football League (minor league football), Norfolk Christian High School football, and Norfolk Academy football. Dre‟ Bly, a defensive back in the NFL, is part owner of DLH.

Virginia Beach Field House – Virginia Beach, VA Touted as “Virginia‟s premier indoor sports facility,” this 175,000 square foot complex – scheduled to open Sept. 7, 2010 – offers leagues, camps, clinics, and tournaments for youth and adults in soccer, flag football, volleyball, basketball, arena (indoor) baseball and softball, field hockey, lacrosse, dodgeball, and other sports and activities. The Field House also hosts birthday and team parties, corporate events, and other organized activities. The facility features: • 6 turf fields • Food court including the Blue Moon • 8 regulation volleyball courts Grille • 4 basketball courts • Full locker rooms • Multiple party rooms • Lounge featuring four 110‟ giant- • Arcade screen TV‟s • Fun Zone • 40 flat-screen TV‟s throughout the facility

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 25 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Aquatics Facilities Aquatics facilities in the area include the following:

Chesapeake • Greenbrier Family YMCA (indoor) • Great Bridge Swim & Racquet Club • Great Bridge/Hickory YMCA (indoor) (indoor) – 6-lane, 25-meter • Taylor Bend Family YMCA (indoor) • Greenbrier Country Club (outdoor) – • Marlin Club (indoor) private pool

Norfolk • Blocker Norfolk Family YMCA • Huntersville Pool (indoor) (indoor) • Chesterfield Pool (indoor) • Old Dominion University (indoor) • Larrymore Lawns Swimming Pool • Norfolk State University (indoor) (outdoor) • Berkley Swimming Pool (indoor)

Virginia Beach • Indian River Family YMCA (indoor) • Marina Shores Swim Club (outdoor) • Hilltop Family YMCA (indoor) • Baycliff Recreation Center (outdoor) • Mount Trashmore Family YMCA • Lakespur Swim & Racquet Club (indoor) (outdoor) – 5 lanes, 1-meter diving • Princess Anne Recreation Center board (indoor) • Ocean Pebble Sawgrass Recreation • Carolanne Farms Swim Club (outdoor) Center (outdoor) – 25-meter pool

Portsmouth • Portsmouth YMCA (indoor) – heated • Elizabeth Manor Country Club 25-meter pool (outdoor) – Olympic-style pool • Portsmouth Center for Youth (indoor) • Churchland Swim Club (outdoor) – • Effingham Street Family YMCA Olympic-style pool with adjoining (outdoor) diving area

Indoor Tennis Facilities Indoor tennis facilities in the area include the following: • Folkes-Steven Indoor Tennis Center at ODU • Virginia Beach Tennis & Country Club • Tidewater Tennis Center • Princess Anne Country Club • Owl Creek Tennis Center • Centre Court Racquet Club

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 26 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Competition Summary The Hampton Roads region is home to a number of quality sports and recreation and tennis facilities. Additionally, there are at least 2 new facilities planned to open in the near future. It is also true that there are currently no comparable facilities within the City of Chesapeake which offer the breadth of amenities called for in the Community Activity & Tennis Center plans (i.e. indoor court facilities for basketball and volleyball, in addition to an aquatics center and a tennis center with outdoor skate park and other park amenities). Given these factors, SFA stresses the need for professional management and a high degree of collaboration among key organizations.

SFA‟s analysis of the market indicates a high degree of likelihood for a self-sustaining operation that produces significant economic impact. The financial projections and analysis of this statement can be found within the detailed financial forecasts and the economic impact projections within this document. Still, SFA notes that success will require the Community Activity & Tennis Center to be professionally managed, marketed, and maintained. The facility management team must also possess expertise in tournament and special events marketing, event management, facility operations, facility financial oversight, senior programming, youth and family programming, competitive sports programming, and community based leisure and entertainment programming.

Additionally, to remain a regional leader long after opening, SFA‟s proposed model balances facility rentals with programmed events. Facility rentals include hourly rentals of playing surfaces. Programmed events include events and services which include design, marketing, organization, and customer service that is beyond that offered in a facility rental model.

The Community Activity & Tennis Center management staff will need to continually design and manage sports programs, senior programming, fitness, court-based and aquatics-based programs rather than simply renting these spaces. While it is true that certain spaces and times will include rental revenue, SFA urges the future management of The Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center to organize a majority of its own programs and tournaments to avoid a decline in net revenues. In a potentially competitive market such as Hampton Roads, other facilities may begin to offer low cost rentals of playing surfaces to attract other tournaments to the region. If the CATC were to follow suit, this can lead to a rapid market-wide decline in prices which can force facilities to require subsidization. By offering high-quality programming and events management, CATC can be a market leader.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 27 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

RECOMMENDATIONS TO SUPPORT OPTIMIZED ECONOMIC IMPACT POTENTIAL

Note to the Reader: This document addresses the major findings of SFA as of September 17, 2010. These findings have been summarized below for the purpose of capturing the major strategic points and guiding principles that will directly impact the facility development and operations/management systems development processes. Readers outside of SFA, the construction consulting firm of McDonough Bolyard Peck, and key City stakeholder entities may wish to discuss some or all of the points outlined below to better understand the data and methodology driving these strategic findings and recommendations.

Aside from the funding assumptions, SFA‟s findings are based on several management assumptions which are critical to the potential for financial performance as outlined within the pro formas and economic impact projections. Among these assumptions are: 1. The facility will be operated under the leadership of experienced sports facility managers. 2. The facility will benefit from proactive tournament marketing and dedicated sports marketing personnel. 3. Tournaments will include tournament management and set up and will not simply be based on facility rentals to others who manage tournaments. 4. The Economic impact study assumes the number of playing surfaces outlined in the 4 court pro forma and the number of tennis courts outlined in the August 2010 tennis center pro forma produced by SFA. 5. The center will benefit from a strategic relationship between the facility management group, the Parks & Recreation Department, Conventions & Tourism, Schools, and Economic Development. 6. Management will achieve the revenue to expense ratios outlined within the pro formas produced by SFA. 7. The aquatics facility will include a recreational warm water pool as well as a cooler temperature competition pool. 8. The facility will house the other programming spaces outlined within the pro formas produced by SFA.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 28 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Action Items and Projects  Project 1: Documentation of a Detailed Development Timeline SFA has been asked to produce a detailed pre-opening development timeline to include construction milestones and very specific actions related to: the development of the brand; marketing materials and marketing and PR action items; staff recruitment and development; operations systems; scheduling; software selections, installations, and training programs; and an employee training and grand opening events plan. SFA can begin this at any time.

 Project 2: Development of the Sports Tourism Authority In order to obtain optimal economic outcomes and host the aforementioned programming, SFA has recommended the development of a managing body for the Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center. This management entity – working on behalf of the key stakeholder groups (the Chesapeake Economic Development department, City Council, the Convention & Visitors Bureau, the Parks & Recreation department, and the facility management and staff) – would oversee the development of the business plan and operational plans and would then govern the facilities‟ marketing and programming aspects of the Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center. The goal of the Sports Tourism Authority is to bring the sports and non-sporting events management and the marketing of these events, along with the respective sports associations/organizations, under one umbrella. SFA‟s market research indicates that success in the region‟s sports events, sports tourism, and tournament business will require a high degree of collaboration among these groups. SFA is recommending an exploratory meeting to discuss the development of this authority. The Sports Tourism Authority would meet quarterly to review and update marketing action plans, schedules, fees, and programming.

Chesapeake Convention & Parks & CAC Economic Visitors Schools Recreation Management Development Bureau

Sports Tourism Authority

Non- League and Marketing & Local Regional National Sporting Regular Business Tournaments Tournaments Tournaments Community Participation Development & Events & Events & Events Events & Management Festivals

 Project 3: Development of Detailed Program and Program Management Plans The major economic driver for the Community Activity & Tennis Center will be memberships, along with local, regional, and national sports tourism events. For this reason, SFA has identified a need for a formal collaboration between the City of Chesapeake, Parks & Recreation, and Conventions & Tourism. Furthermore, if this initiative is going to support optimal economic benefit, it will require some form of integrated budgeting, planning, scheduling, and management efforts. For these and other reasons, SFA is recommending a meeting between these entities to explore this issue.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 29 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

FINANCIAL FORECAST AND PROJECTIONS

[Note: This Economic Impact Study and the projections below are based on a 4-court model in the Community Activity Center.]

The detailed financial forecasts contained in this section, address a myriad of revenue and expense assumptions. It is important to note that actual results will be almost completely dependent upon the management, marketing, and operating systems within the facilities that have been analyzed below. SFA‟s analysis assumes the use of best practices throughout these facilities. SFA‟s projections also assume experienced facility management, proactive marketing and collaboration between conventions and tourism and sports management, high-quality registration and membership software, and diligence in financial tracking systems. The results portrayed within SFA‟s projections assume that the community activity center and tennis facility will operate with a fee structure that is different from the fee structures employed within current City of Chesapeake community centers. Given the breadth of analysis and the multiple variables addressed, readers will benefit from a thorough pro forma orientation which can be provided by an SFA representative.

The detailed financial forecast for the community activity center projects Year 1 positive revenue of $118,000, whereas the tennis center projects a Year 1 loss of ($26,000). Additionally, SFA has determined that the both facilities combined can have a positive economic impact on the City of Chesapeake, conservatively projected at $1,750,000 in Year 1. This is because the 4- court model combined with the competition swimming pool and the unique recreation attraction of the aquatics facility are expected to draw visitors to the City of Chesapeake. SFA has included an estimate for the number of court (basketball and volleyball) tournaments, swimming competitions, and tennis tournaments which will require overnight stays for a portion of the visitors.

The total benefits to the City, when combined with the other projected events and festivals that the re-designed City Park has the potential to attract, will be far greater than the conservative Year 1 projection of $1,750,000. Additionally, and as stated within the Randall Travel Marketing Strategic Plan, SFA recommends that the City invest in the re-development of Centerville Park for the potential of attracting additional large-scale outdoor tournaments and events.

Financial Forecast – Community Activity & Tennis Center The financial forecast for the CATC is conservative by nature and was derived from the analysis of local demographics, market research, competition and pricing. Industry standards and metrics for revenues, memberships, programs, and costs were also utilized. The tennis center forecast was created in a similar fashion, in conjunction with data and recommendations from industry professionals and experts such as Darryl Cummings.

It is also important to note that all revenues and economic impact collected inside of the community activity center and tennis center are reflected within the pro formas. From an economic impact perspective, this includes: 1. Tournament Team Entry Fees 2. Visitor/Spectator Gate Fees 3. Food and Beverage Spending within the Facility

All other economic impact – such as hotel, restaurant, retail, and entertainment spending outside of the facilities – is reflected in the Economic Impact Matrix.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 30 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Economic Impact Projections Conservative economic impact projections to be based on: 1. Average Daily Room Rates 2. Average Daily Expenditures for Visitors 3. Other Revenue-Generating Factors

Sports tourism has the potential to be the primary contributing factor to the success of the CATC. For this reason, the potential economic impact of the facility can be assessed utilizing historical tourist trend information. The key contributors to sports tourism economic impact beyond the direct fees associated with sporting events (team entry fees, sanctioning fees, etc.) are accommodations fees and daily expenditures. SFA has provided a growth projection or “ramp up” for this economic impact beyond Year 1 based on realistic growth trends demonstrated by similar venues. For this 4-court model, annual growth for the court and aquatic components has been projected at 20% in Year 2, 10% in Year 3, and 5% thereafter. Annual growth for the tennis component has been projected at 10% in Year 2 and 5% thereafter.

An economic impact analysis was also conducted for a 2-court model of the CATC. This model is sufficient to run smaller, local tournaments but will hinder the ability to draw large-scale court tournaments. The larger tournaments are typically more regional or national and would draw teams from outside of the Chesapeake area, thus compounding the economic impact. The total economic impact for the 2-court model is $1,490,000 in Year 1 and a cumulative total of $9,385,656 through year 5. For comparison, the 4-court model is $1,750,000 in Year 1 and a cumulative total of $11,042,690 through year 5. Also, the 5-year difference between the internal facility revenues is $943,816. This equates to a total 5-year cumulative difference of $2,600,000 in revenues and economic impact if the facility is reduced to a 2-court model.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 31 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 32 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

CONCLUSION STATEMENT

Based on current available information and the TIF financing, and assuming no debt service and that the facility will be operated to meet the standards recommended by SFA within this document, SFA‟s analysis indicates that the Community Activity & Tennis Center can be self- sustaining and that it can provide positive cash flow and significant positive economic impact to the City of Chesapeake.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 33 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDICES

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 34 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX A: CHESAPEAKE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY & TENNIS CENTER PROGRAM DOCUMENT

The Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center shall be separated into eight main program areas/building elements:

1. Public Spaces a. Main Vestibule f. Men‟s Restroom (first floor) b. Lobby/Lounge/Seating g. Women‟s Restroom (first floor) c. Admission Control/Front Desk h. Men‟s Restroom (second floor) d. Concession Area/Juice Bar i. Women‟s Restroom (second floor) e. Concession Area/Juice Bar storage 2. Indoor Aquatics Center a. Competition Pool (50 m x 25 yd) f. Meet Management Room b. Competition Pool Bldg. Enclosure g. Pool Equipment Room (floor system, bulkheads, diving h. Chemical Storage tower, scoreboard/timing/video, i. 50 m Aquatics Storage whirlpool) j. Leisure Pool (with 3 lap lanes) c. Spectator Seating (1,500) k. Leisure Pool Building Enclosure d. Aquatic Director‟s Office l. Leisure Pool Storage Room e. Lifeguard Room/First Aid 3. Gymnasium a. 4-court Gymnasium (84‟ courts) c. Elevated Walking/Jogging Track b. Gymnasium Storage 4. Fitness/Multipurpose/Racquet Sport a. Fitness Area (weights, training) g. Multipurpose Storage b. Fitness Area (cardio) h. Rock Climbing Wall c. Fitness Area Storage i. Rock Climbing Wall Storage d. Aerobics/Dance Room j. Fitness Control Desk e. Aerobics Storage k. Fitness Director Office f. Multipurpose Fitness Room 5. Meeting/Multipurpose Rooms a. Multipurpose Room c. Catering Kitchen b. Multipurpose Room Storage 6. Support Areas a. Men‟s Locker Room d. Family Cabana Changing Rooms b. Women‟s Locker Room e. Equipment Issue/Laundry c. Visiting Locker Rooms – Aquatics 7. Administration Office Suite a. Customer Service/Reception Area f. Supervisor Office b. Director‟s Office g. Work Station c. Associate Director‟s Offices h. Mail Room/Copy/Admin Area d. Bldg. Operations Manager‟s Office i. Storage e. Business Manager‟s Office j. Suite Circulation 8. Building Support a. Main Mechanical Room g. Janitor‟s Closets b. Main Electrical Room h. General Building Storage c. Air Handler Room – Aquatics i. Main Data Room d. Air Handler Room – Activity Areas j. Electrical Closet e. Elevator k. Data/Communications Closet f. Elevator Equipment Room

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 35 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

Date: 05/24/10 Lat: 36.753070 Long: -76.224950 Current Geography Selection: (4 Selected) 5,10,15,30 mile radii: FAIRWAY DR & City: Chesapeake Pop: 216,184 GREENBRIER PKWY, CHESAPEAKE, VA 23320 County: Chesapeake city Pop: 216,184 Your title for this geography: ChesapeakeVA_5_10_15_30miles Zip: 23320 Pop: 53,185 Current Index Base: Entire US

SFA Market Report 5 Miles: 10 Miles: 15 Miles: 30 Miles:

Basic Variables 2000 Population 172,845 603,666 953,414 1,362,180 Basic Variables 2009 Population 185,554 632,475 1,004,191 1,443,697 Population Density 2,362.54 2,013.23 1,420.64 510.60 Population in Households 183,074 618,152 959,555 1,386,755 Basic Variables 2009 Age: Total (Pop) Age 0 to 4 12,094 44,009 70,053 99,767 Age 5 to 9 12,597 44,965 70,355 98,788 Age 10 to 13 10,935 36,419 55,687 78,694 Age 14 to 17 11,371 39,103 59,205 83,500 Age 15 to 19 14,147 47,234 75,154 105,973 Age 20 to 24 12,988 45,282 80,680 112,623 Age 25 to 29 12,412 45,508 75,035 105,616 Age 30 to 34 11,545 41,725 66,818 94,537 Age 35 to 39 12,742 44,136 69,798 98,697 Age 40 to 44 14,701 47,460 73,872 106,933 Age 45 to 49 16,338 48,871 75,385 110,340 Age 50 to 54 14,400 44,423 69,036 100,830 Age 55 to 59 11,173 36,319 55,745 82,325 Age 60 to 64 8,438 29,198 44,649 66,761 Age 65 Plus 18,288 67,702 108,109 162,266 Total Population Median Age 36.35 35.22 34.59 35.33 Basic Variables 2009 Age: Total (Pop): By Percent % Age 0 to 4 6.52% 6.96% 6.98% 6.91% % Age 5 to 9 6.79% 7.11% 7.01% 6.84% % Age 10 to 14 7.37% 7.21% 6.93% 6.81% % Age 15 to 19 7.62% 7.47% 7.48% 7.34% % Age 20 to 24 7.00% 7.16% 8.03% 7.80% % Age 25 to 29 6.69% 7.20% 7.47% 7.32% % Age 30 to 34 6.22% 6.60% 6.65% 6.55% % Age 35 to 39 6.87% 6.98% 6.95% 6.84% % Age 40 to 44 7.92% 7.50% 7.36% 7.41% % Age 45 to 49 8.80% 7.73% 7.51% 7.64% % Age 50 to 54 7.76% 7.02% 6.87% 6.98% % Age 55 to 59 6.02% 5.74% 5.55% 5.70% The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 36 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

% Age 60 to 64 4.55% 4.62% 4.45% 4.62% % Age 65 Plus 9.86% 10.70% 10.77% 11.24% Basic Variables 2009 Income: Disposable Income (HH) Median Disposable Hhd Income $52,154 $45,185 $45,612 $44,911 Basic Variables 2009 Income: Household Income Median Household Income $63,064 $53,748 $54,334 $53,363 Basic Variables 2009 Race and Ethnicity: Population: By Percent % American Indian or Alaska Native 0.70% 0.62% 0.62% 0.51% Population % Asian Population 6.17% 4.55% 4.01% 3.53% % Black Population 27.65% 35.84% 31.34% 33.28% % Hawaiian or Pacific Islander Population 0.09% 0.12% 0.13% 0.12% % Hispanic Population 4.30% 4.25% 4.65% 4.21% % Multirace Population 2.06% 2.49% 2.51% 2.30% % Non Hispanic Population 95.70% 95.75% 95.35% 95.79% % Other Race Population 0.93% 1.10% 1.24% 1.09% % White Population 62.39% 55.28% 60.15% 59.17% Basic Variables 2014 Population 183,758 643,843 1,032,055 1,489,164 Population Density 2,339.67 2,049.42 1,460.06 526.68 Basic Variables 2014 Age: Total (Pop) Age 0 to 4 11,774 42,246 67,544 96,683 Age 5 to 9 11,797 43,676 69,531 99,604 Age 10 to 13 9,653 35,774 56,259 79,063 Age 14 to 17 10,099 36,255 55,661 78,728 Age 15 to 19 12,595 42,736 68,667 97,381 Age 20 to 24 13,310 43,139 74,684 105,559 Age 25 to 29 13,026 48,147 80,562 113,236 Age 30 to 34 11,964 45,586 74,900 105,504 Age 35 to 39 11,230 40,828 66,121 94,183 Age 40 to 44 12,024 43,052 68,667 97,896 Age 45 to 49 14,254 45,935 72,203 105,309 Age 50 to 54 14,997 46,657 72,993 108,119 Age 55 to 59 13,124 43,307 66,930 98,321 Age 60 to 64 10,155 34,891 53,500 79,641 Age 65 Plus 21,436 78,746 125,431 188,955 Basic Variables 2014 Age: Total (Pop):By Percent % Age 0 to 4 6.41% 6.56% 6.54% 6.49% % Age 5 to 9 6.42% 6.78% 6.74% 6.69% % Age 10 to 14 6.56% 6.97% 6.81% 6.63% % Age 15 to 19 6.85% 6.64% 6.65% 6.54% % Age 20 to 24 7.24% 6.70% 7.24% 7.09% % Age 25 to 29 7.09% 7.48% 7.81% 7.60% % Age 30 to 34 6.51% 7.08% 7.26% 7.08% % Age 35 to 39 6.11% 6.34% 6.41% 6.32% % Age 40 to 44 6.54% 6.69% 6.65% 6.57% % Age 45 to 49 7.76% 7.13% 7.00% 7.07% % Age 50 to 54 8.16% 7.25% 7.07% 7.26%

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 37 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

% Age 55 to 59 7.14% 6.73% 6.49% 6.60% % Age 60 to 64 5.53% 5.42% 5.18% 5.35% % Age 65 Plus 11.67% 12.23% 12.15% 12.69% Business Summary 2009 Employees Total Employees 85,465 364,548 482,679 678,658 Business Summary 2009 Establishments Total Establishments 5,933 23,679 33,287 47,489 Consumer Expenditure 2009 Summary: Average Expenditure Entertainment $3,149.05 $2,867.74 $2,959.91 $2,907.98 Total Household Expenditure $56,072.21 $51,329.25 $52,910.33 $52,021.72 Consumer Expenditure 2009 Summary: Average Expenditure: Entertainment Recreational Equipment and Supplies $1,249.98 $1,138.21 $1,169.30 $1,148.93 Consumer Expenditure 2009 Summary: Average Expenditure: Food and Beverages Alcoholic Beverages $650.28 $593.32 $616.71 $606.88 Food At Home $4,418.23 $4,133.08 $4,223.97 $4,158.06 Food Away From Home $3,485.18 $3,178.49 $3,274.98 $3,219.22 Consumer Expenditure 2009 Summary: Total Expenditure Total Household Expenditure $3,798,476,720.74 $11,691,142,370.75 $18,893,534,113.57 $27,313,290,051.37 Financial 2009 Net Worth (HH) Average Household Net Worth $491,752 $440,750 $459,624 $456,073 Index: Average Household Net Worth 96 86 89 89 Occupation and Employment 2009 % Civilian Employed 88.59% 86.93% 83.72% 85.06% % Civilian Unemployed 6.29% 6.84% 5.98% 6.04% % Not in labor force 29.64% 32.25% 30.96% 32.08% % in Labor Force 70.36% 67.75% 69.04% 67.92% Civilian Employed 89,930 287,335 450,349 650,269 Civilian Unemployed 6,390 22,623 32,189 46,151

Current year data is for the year 2009, 5 year projected data is for the year 2014. Demographic data © 2009 by Experian/Applied Geographic Solutions. All rights reserved.

© 2010. DemographicsNow is brought to you by Alteryx, LLC. Alteryx, DemographicsNow.com and the Alteryx and DemographicsNow.com logos are trademarks of Alteryx, LLC. All rights reserved.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 38 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 39 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 40 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX C: STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW SUMMARY FINDINGS

As previously mentioned, SFA – during the week of July 12, 2010 – facilitated several interviews with key stakeholder groups and representatives, including Chesapeake Parks & Recreation, the Economic Development Corporation, the City Council, Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism, Chesapeake Public Schools, and Old Dominion University tennis coach Darryl Cummings. Below are the key points and notes from these meetings and discussions:

Chesapeake Parks & Recreation and Economic Development Corporation – Kickoff Meeting  Revenue-generating spaces and programs that must be included in the facility  Leisure programs and cost recovery for such  Enterprise model and opportunity costs  Memberships and what‟s included (residents and non-residents)  Facility Program Plan o Aquatics – 2 pools, 1 competitive, 1 leisure o Fitness – Small enough to not compete with Bally’s and other local providers o Courts – 4 regulation courts (8 cross-courts) o Tennis o Rockwall o Therapy – aquatics based o Multi-purpose rooms (dance room, art room, activity/party room, etc.) o Kitchen facilities o Racquetball (Greenbrier YMCA has 7 racquetball courts … probably do not want to compete) o Tennis Courts (4 covered; 8 outdoor) o Concessions – Scalable food service for both events and reoccurring business. (Does/could the food service run through the conference center?)  Appeal to “Baby Boomers”  Surrounding communities that will support the facility (Portsmouth, Norfolk, Suffolk, Virginia Beach)  Target Audiences o Local community (youth, teens, adults, seniors) o Business travelers o Corporate groups o Specialty groups (veterans, special needs, etc.) o Sports events (gymnastics, wrestling, swim meets)  Tax Revenue Sources o Sales Tax = 5% (City receives 1%) o Hotel o Food & Beverage = 10.5%  Comparable Community Centers (i.e. Smithfield, NC)  LEED Certification  Festivals/Events o Greenbrier Parks o Town Point Park (Norfolk)  City Park Rental Agreements  Summer Concert Series at City Park

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 41 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Meeting with City Council  The structure must be LEED certified  A portion of the facility would ideally be storm-hardened (gymnasium)  SFA to reach out to both Counsilman-Hunsaker (aquatic design firm), as well as Hastings+Chivetta Architects, Inc. o Understand what is fastest possible date to very conceptual layout  Comparable facility (publically owned, privately operated): Huntersville, NC

Meeting with ODU Tennis Director Darryl Cummings  Important factors are: o Tennis courts with bathrooms and shade o Limited public facilities in Hampton Roads o Courts (8 indoor, 12 outdoor) at ODU – shade and bathrooms at outdoor o USTA uses outdoor often o Al Creek tennis facility in VA Beach o Tennis lessons in City of VA Beach = 30,000 total hours o Currently 2,000 hours of lessons at Greenbrier Country Club o 1,200 people at ODU Grand Opening o 49.5 million people playing in 1970‟s; 25 million currently o 35 – 40 kids in ODU tennis camp each week ($320/wk); 10 weeks (9am-4pm) o Pods of 2 with seating for 30-50 (outdoor) o Indoor uses more barstool-type atmospheres o Courts must be built North – South o USTA to introduce/expand sport . A lot of money from US Open . Grass roots program . Grants to renovate facilities . VA office that will support block party (use for GO)  Tennis Industry Association: All market data  Court surfaces o Block surfaces that control ball speed o Quick start tennis (30/60 tennis in Europe) plays opposite way on courts; twice as many kids per court at one time o Sooner you get kids playing, the better – games-based approach  Tennis Camps o 9 – 12pm, to 9 – 4pm tennis camps o Most about $200 to $225 o ODU pays college players $400/wk for coaching  Tennis Tournaments o 300 players o 1.5 spectators each o 3 nights for 1-day rec tournament o Divide into two segments – USTA League Tennis (bring players to facility based on districts, regionals, national events) pre-packaged, you just provide the facility. ODU is doing about 3 or 4 of these type per year. o Other type is you host . 240 college player tournament . Example: Host on Saturday (arrive Friday, leave Sunday) o Rack rate about $1000/day for facility

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 42 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

 High School o Local high schools have budget to use indoor complex during inclement weather  Public o Membership-based, but non-members can come in and rent courts  Org Structure o Tennis Director/Facility Coordinator o Receptionist o Head pro o COG‟s tennis instructors  Cape Henry Racquet Club o ODU coach owns in Virginia Beach, 5 clay courts  Norfolk – 12 indoor courts (8 at ODU; 4 at Tidewater)  Franklin – 2 courts  Suffolk – none  VA Beach – Princess Anne Country Club (7 tennis courts); most expensive club in area ($35k to join)  Alice Creek is a bubble facility with two courts  VA Beach Racquet Club – 1000 members, $1k/year membership  Gut check on 4 indoor, 8 outdoor: Gross Revenue $300k – 350k (by year 3)  40 hrs per week, 5000 hrs of instruction for head tennis pro  $100k/ indoor court for naming rights, $25k/court outdoor, $1MM for facility naming rights

Meeting with Chesapeake Conventions & Tourism  How can we cross promote local commerce at the community center? Ex: kiosks, brochures, etc.  Lost business report – what could we have captured with this project  Currently, no budget for bid fees  In order to be competitive in attracting youth sports, you must have some budget for attracting opportunities  $48/night ADR for area (has declined very rapidly in recent years)  Length of time, expenditures, etc. are all available in either smith report or in the Randall report  Virginia tourism corporation (Virginia Visitors Corporation)  We need to identify ways to clear certain times during year where events can be hosted to make economic impact  $950k budget for Chesapeake vs. $25MM budget for Virginia Beach (1:25 in marketing youth sports)  Chilled ponds, used to have 2 ice rinks. Now 1 is turf. Used to have 12000 room nights per year  Had concerns about political challenges and issues…also concerned about having enough program time allotted for tournaments  Summer hotels are not an issue in Chesapeake…really need to fill hotels in other seasons.  Seasonality for larger swim meets

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 43 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Meeting with Chesapeake Public Schools  6 schools currently renting other facilities - approximately $5-6k per school  High school, state, regional, and national tennis meets may require 12 courts  Review Community Improvement Plan (CIP)  Have held state wrestling for last 12 years; host approximately 3000-4000 attendees each session; 4 sessions/year  Schools currently travel to Boo Williams for regional track meets  ODAC put a bubble over a pool – high schools use two days per week  Currently have diving at all schools (low board only)  Ideal setup is a stretch 50-meter pool or split 50-meter with movable bulkheads  Currently renting YMCA‟s daily from Nov. 15 to late February or early March  Teams are rotating before school and after school practice times where two teams are training out of facility  6 HS have JR ROTC programs that travel to a rock climbing center for character development  RRR Ranch has a large rock climbing facility  Separation of student athletes from public very important. Prefer balcony seating for separation  Proms - $10-16k to rent a facility and host Prom. Could prom be hosted in this facility? 500-600 students for each prom. Need enough tables to host 8-12 students per table, dance floor, etc. (This will drive economic impact to local restaurants.) Host in May/June, contract is done in the summer.  Potential use of amphitheater for concerts, plays, etc.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 44 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX D: DESTINATION TOURNAMENT/EVENT STANDARDS

Sport Dimensions Functional Properties and Elements Starting Blocks: For shallow forward dives and backstroke starts only. Backstroke Flags: Hung over the pool, 15 feet from the

end of pool. Lane Lines: Plastic floats around a steel cable stretched across the length of the pool. Used to stop wave turbulence

Standard “Short Course” and separate swimming lanes. Solid pattern from wall to 15 feet, alternating pattern between solid patterns at both ends of 25 yards long (6-10 lanes) pool. Swimming Lines: Painted lines on the bottom of the pool, used to help swimmer swim in a straight line. In the USA, it is part of swimming etiquette to swim counter-clock wise around the swim line to prevent collisions. Swimming Lanes: 5-8 foot Standard “Long Course” strip of pool length defined as a single swimming channel. Turn Targets: Markings on the wall at the end of each swimming 50 meters long (8-10 lanes) Swimming lane. Used as a guide for turns and a demarcation of the end of the pool. Turning T’s: „T‟ formation at the end of a swimming Competition Competition line (bold lines on bottom of pool). Used to help swimmer gauge the distance to the end of the pool. Pace Clocks: The heart of a pool workout. Used in a myriad of ways. Usually there is one pace clock stationed on each side of the pool. Middle of net to singles sidelines: 13.5‟; Middle of net to doubles sideline: 18‟; Net to baseline: 39‟; Net to service line: 21‟.

The tennis court shall be a rectangle, divided across the middle by a net suspended by a cord or metal cable which shall pass over or

) Width of court (singles): 27’ be attached to two net posts at a height of 3 ½ feet. The net shall be fully extended so that it completely fills the space between the two Width of court (doubles): 36’ net posts and it must be of sufficiently small mesh to ensure that a ball cannot pass through it. The height of the net shall be 3 feet at

Width of court (including the center, where it shall be held down tightly by a strap. A band shall cover the cord or metal cable and the top of the net. The strap

USTA (

runoff on sidelines) = 60‟ and band shall be completely white. Length of court = 78’  The maximum diameter of the cord or metal cable shall be 1/3 inch Total length of court (including  The maximum width of the strap shall be 2 inches

Tennis runoff space at endlines) = 120‟  The band shall be 2 to 2 ½ inches deep on each side. For doubles matches, the centers of the net posts shall be 3 feet outside the doubles court on each side. For singles matches, if a singles net is used, the centers of the net posts shall be 3 feet outside the singles court on each side. Playing Area: Rectangle Top of the Net: 8‟ (men); 7‟4” (women) measuring 60‟L x 30‟W, Width of Net: 36‟ from center of stanchion to center of other stanchion surrounded by a free zone Minimum Ceiling Height: 23‟ which is a minimum of 10‟ wide Attack Line: 10‟ from center line on each side. Volleyball on all sides. Team bench areas: Marked outside the playing court on the same side as the scorer's table; limited by a line extending from the end line, at least 2 m in length and by another line at least 2 m in length drawn 5 m from the inside edge of the center line and at right angles to the sideline. There must be 14 seats available in the team bench area for coaches, players, and team personnel.

Any other persons shall be at least 2 m behind the team bench. Distance from Free Throw Line to Backboard: 15‟ (Note: As the Professional and College rim protrudes from the backboard, the actual distance from the Free Throw Line to the front of the rim is 13‟. Size of the Key: 94‟L x 50‟W 19‟ from the baseline (out of bounds line) to the Free Throw Line; 12‟ in width across the lane. 3-Point Line – College and High

School: (All distances from the center of the rim.) Starting at the baseline (near the sideline on each side of the court), there is a Junior High and High School straight line of 5.25‟ that runs from the baseline until the “arc” of the 3-point line begins. From that straight line, an equidistant

Basketball 84‟L x 50‟W arc measuring 19.75‟ extends over to the other side of the court to meet the opposite straight line that extends 5.25‟ from the baseline. For college, the arc measures 20.75‟ from the straight line on one side of the court to the straight line on the other side of the court. The Half-Circle above the Key: The radius of the half-circle above the key is 6‟. The diameter (12‟) is equal to the width of the key (or the length of the free throw line).

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 45 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX E: POTENTIAL JOB CREATION

The Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center Redevelopment Project has the potential to create jobs in three key areas, which includes: construction phase jobs, operational phase jobs (pre- and post-opening), and special events jobs. The following outlines the projected potential jobs for each of these phases.

Facility Construction Currently the potential number of jobs to be created in the construction phases cannot be determined. However, SFA recommends utilizing local contractors and labor wherever possible in order to have the strongest economic impact.

Operational Jobs Sports complexes of this nature generally have a full-time operating staff of 15-20 employees. These employees include:  General Manager  Aquatics Director  Director of Operations  General Sports & Recreation  Chief Financial Officer Director  Director of Marketing and Public  Director of Events Relations  Marketing and Group Events  Tennis Director Coordinator

Part-Time Staff Part time staff for a facility of this nature will be approximately 100-125 employees. These include:  Tennis staff  Facility maintenance and upkeep  Aquatics staff staff  Lifeguards  Retail staff  Concessions staff  Sports Instructors  Office administration staff  Referees and Officials

Special Events Staff The special events staffing would require a fulltime head of special events, 3 special events coordinators, and part time events staff of approximately 4 – 10 per event. In addition to this staff, additional security, concession workers, parking attendants, and ticket/gate staff will be required. The number of additional staff would be determined on an event-by-event basis and thus cannot be accurately estimated at this time.

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 46 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

APPENDIX F: PRO-FORMA SUMMARIES

Facility Program – Community Activity Center

FACILITY PROGRAM – CHESAPEAKE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER Dimensions Indoor Programming Product/Service Quantity Approx. SF each Total SF Length (') Width (') Court Area Basketball Courts - Wood (4) 84'x50 4 125 90 11,250 45,000 Courts with (8) 74' x 50' cross courts Volleyball Courts 8 60 30 Over Court Area 0 Seating/Bleachers (Pull Out) 2 250 18 Pull Out Over Court 0 Elevated Track 1 Above Court 6,720 6,720 Aquatics Area 50 Meter Pool Enclosure 1 100 206 20,600 20,600 50 Meter Pool with Bulkhead 1 168 75 Within Enclosure 0 Bleachers/Seating 1500 7 10,500 Leisure Pool Enclosure 1 10,800 10,800 Leisure Pool 1 75 75 Within Enclosure 0 Aquatic Office 1 12 10 120 120 Life Guard Office 1 15 12 180 180 Fitness Area Fitness and Training 1 100 50 5,000 5,000 Aerobics/Dance Room 1 40 40 1,600 1,600 Multi-Use Fitness Room 1 30 25 750 750 Adventure Area Rock/Climbing Wall 1 30 20 600 600 Ropes Course 1 30 30 900 900 Admin Area Concession Stand & Seating Area 1 40 40 1,600 1,600 Multi-Purpose Rooms 4 25 25 625 2,500 Meeting/Party Rooms 2 20 15 300 600 Office Area 1 40 40 1,600 1,600 Lobby and Welcome Area 1 40 20 800 800 Restrooms 4 20 15 300 1,200 Cabana Family Restrooms 4 10 10 100 400 Locker Rooms 2 40 30 1,200 2,400 Aquatic Locker Rooms 2 30 20 600 1,200 Required SF for Products and Services 115,070 Mechanical, Electrical, Storage, etc. Infrastructure as 15% of P&S SF 17,261 Common Area, Stairs, Circulation, etc. Circulation/Common Space as 15%of P&S SF 17,261 Total Estimated Indoor Facility SF 149,591 Estimated Building Acreage 3.43 SITE DEVELOPMENT Outdoor Programming Dimensions Product/Service Quantity Approx. SF each Total SF Length (') Width (') Parking Spaces Total (10'x18') 598 20 20 400 239,346 (20' x 20' inc. aisles) Required SF for Products and Services 239,346 Setbacks, Open Space, etc. 20% of SF 47,869 Total Estimated Outdoor Complex SF 287,215 Minimum Outdoor Complex Acreage 6.59 Total Complex Acreage 10.03

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 47 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Total Construction and Start-up Cost Estimates – Community Activity Center

CONSTRUCTION & START-UP COST ESTIMATES – CHESAPEAKE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER Budgeted Item Details Qty. Unit Cost/ Unit Cost Land/Design Land Acquisition Real estate land acquisition cost 10.03 Acres $0 $0 Site work (grading, drainage, Site work and Parking Lot 10.03 Acres $125,000 $1,253,460 utilities) Architecture and Engineering 5% of Sitework and Structure Cost $810,628 Landscaping 10.03 Acres $15,000 $150,415 Impact Fees Connection fees, Traffic Studies, etc. $20,000 Site Survey, Geotech, Borings, and Report $10,000 Land/Design Total $2,244,503 Structure Building Structure (Warm Shell) 149,591 SF $100 $14,959,100 Design-Build Fee $0 Construction Management Fee 2.00% $299,182 Performance Bond 1% to 1.5% of Structure per estimate 1.25% $186,989 Permits/Inspections 1.00% $149,591 Structure Total $15,594,862 Field Construction & Sport Equipment Court Area Wood Flooring 45,000 SF $9.25 $416,250 Basketball Net and Stanchion System Mechanical Roll-down system 12 Ea. $4,800 $57,600 Volleyball Net System Includes Nets, Poles, Padding, etc. 8 Ea. $3,000 $24,000 Scoreboards With Controllers 8 Ea. $4,000 $32,000 Goals (Futsal) 8 Ea. $700 $5,600 Benches (Participants) 16 Ea. $300 $4,800 Bleachers (Spectators) Pull Out Over Court 2 Ea. $150,000 $300,000 Curtains (Court) Court Separation 4 Ea. $15,000 $60,000 Elevated Track 1 LS $750,000 $750,000 Aquatics Area

Including Deck, Blocks, Stanchions, 50 Meter Pool 1 LS $2,500,000 $2,500,000 Timing Systems, Equipment, etc. Recreational Pool Including all Equipment 1 LS $2,500,000 $2,500,000 Perimeter Recirculation Systems 168 LF $250 $42,000 Bulkheads Adjustable 1 LS $140,000 $140,000 Filtration System $50,000-$150,000 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Moveable Pool Floors 0 LS $300,000 $0 Bleachers (Spectators) 1000 Seats. $150 per seat 1,000 Ea. $150 $150,000 Fitness Area 1 Ea. $40,000 $40,000 Fitness Equipment 5,000 SF $55 $275,000 Fitness Flooring 5,000 SF $7 $35,000 Adventure Area Mats, Mounds, L-Screens, etc. 1 Ea. $10,000 $10,000 Rock/Climbing Wall 1 LS $180,000 $180,000 Ropes Course and Equipment 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Miscellaneous Athletic Equipment Balls, Cones, & Training Equip. $10,000 Aquatics Equipment $10,000 Field Const. & Sport Equipment Total $7,742,250

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 48 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Food & Beverage Equipment Movie Theater Style Concessions $50,000 Finish Out $15,000 Food & Beverage Equipment Total $65,000 Offices Furnishings, computers, phones, etc. $50,000 Software $15,000 Offices Total $65,000 Miscellaneous Banners Advertising/Program Banners $10,000 Signage Interior and Exterior $40,000 Sound/Video Interior Sound/Video System $25,000 Maintenance Equipment $5,000 Renderings/Arial Photos $3,000 Brand Creation $25,000 , Marketing Allowance Printing $5,000, Marketing (pre- $75,000 opening) $45,000 Information on Total Payroll Pre-Opening Staff Compensation $215,885 Summary Tab Miscellaneous Total $486,885 Professional Services Developer Fee $0 Legal & Accounting $30,000; SFA Pre-Launch Professional Services $100,000 $45000; Bank $25000 Interest on Construction Loan $0 SFA Facility, Operations, Marketing $4.00/SF $598,364 Development Fee Professional Services Total $698,364

Sub-total Indoor Facility (w/o WCR) $26,896,864

Contingency 2.00% $537,937

Total Indoor Facility (without WCR) $27,434,801 Capital to cover Working Capital Reserve $500,000 negative cash flow and operating costs Total Indoor Facility Total with WCR $27,934,801

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 49 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Total Revenue and Expense – Community Activity Center

TOTAL FACILITY REVENUE & EXPENSES – COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER Revenues Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Memberships $1,776,254 $1,825,727 $2,108,715 $2,214,150 $2,441,101 Basketball $177,830 $195,613 $225,933 $237,230 $261,546 Volleyball $26,469 $29,116 $33,628 $35,310 $38,929 Futsal $38,983 $42,881 $49,528 $52,004 $57,335 Court Rental $61,250 $73,500 $88,935 $93,382 $102,953 Indoor Events $150,304 $180,365 $218,241 $229,153 $252,642 Fitness & Training $140,600 $154,660 $178,632 $187,564 $206,789 Rockwall $42,350 $46,585 $53,806 $56,496 $62,287 Aquatics-Recreation $206,300 $226,930 $262,104 $275,209 $303,418 Aquatics-Competition $241,480 $289,776 $350,629 $368,160 $405,897 Birthday Parties $34,200 $37,620 $43,451 $45,624 $50,300 Youth Programming $111,390 $122,529 $141,521 $148,597 $163,828 Group Events $70,700 $77,770 $89,824 $94,316 $103,983 Food and Beverage $280,483 $294,507 $309,233 $324,694 $340,929 Secondary Revenue Areas $53,500 $56,175 $58,984 $61,933 $65,030 Total Revenues $3,412,092 $3,653,754 $4,213,164 $4,423,822 $4,856,966

Expenses Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Memberships $256,965 $195,893 $219,927 $228,924 $248,217 Basketball $89,204 $90,300 $100,476 $105,499 $114,207 Volleyball $12,080 $12,123 $13,591 $14,271 $15,507 Futsal $17,791 $17,855 $20,017 $21,018 $22,839 Court Rental $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Indoor Events $70,921 $79,694 $95,315 $100,081 $109,724 Fitness & Training $86,344 $94,978 $109,700 $115,185 $126,992 Rockwall $15,670 $17,236 $19,908 $20,904 $23,046 Aquatics-Recreation $436,508 $449,803 $480,385 $493,085 $514,979 Aquatics-Competition $118,385 $130,471 $157,870 $165,763 $182,754 Birthday Parties $11,520 $12,672 $14,096 $14,800 $16,019 Youth Programming $49,833 $54,816 $62,768 $65,906 $72,361 Group Events $30,048 $33,052 $38,175 $40,084 $44,193 Food and Beverage $172,965 $181,613 $190,693 $200,228 $210,240 Secondary Revenue Areas $11,605 $12,185 $12,795 $13,434 $14,106 Total Cost of Goods Sold $1,379,838 $1,382,693 $1,535,716 $1,599,182 $1,715,183

Gross Margin $2,032,255 $2,271,061 $2,677,448 $2,824,640 $3,141,783 % of Revenue 60% 62% 64% 64% 65%

Facility Expenses $696,184 $725,467 $757,780 $793,324 $833,148 Operating Expense $644,295 $632,397 $656,281 $676,081 $712,470 Administrative Payroll $320,000 $328,350 $336,965 $345,854 $355,028 Payroll Taxes/Benefits/Bonus $253,769 $262,084 $274,227 $280,874 $290,970 Total Operating Expenses $1,914,248 $1,948,299 $2,025,252 $2,096,132 $2,191,616

EBITDA $118,007 $322,762 $652,196 $728,508 $950,167

Interest $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Net Income $118,007 $322,762 $652,196 $728,508 $950,167

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 50 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Facility Program – Tennis Center

INDOOR TENNIS FACILITY (ITF) Dimensions Approx. SF Indoor Programming Product/Service Qty. Total SF Length (') Width (') each Indoor Tennis Indoor Tennis Courts 4 120 60 7,200 28,800 Admin Spaces Lobby Vestibule, Reception 1 30 20 600 600 Offices 2 15 15 225 450 Meeting/Party Rooms 1 25 20 500 500 Conference Room 1 25 20 500 500 Locker Rooms 2 25 20 500 1,000 Restrooms 2 15 10 150 300 Note: No Retail store (suggest a display case) 0 15 10 150 0 Required SF for Products and Services 32,150 Mechanical, Electrical, Comm, Storage, etc. Infrastructure as 10% of P&S SF 3,215 Common Area, Mezzanine, Stairs, Elev, Circulation/Common Space as 15%of P&S SF 4,823 Circulation, etc. Total Estimated Indoor Facility SF 40,188 Building Acreage 0.92 SITE DEVELOPMENT Dimensions Approx. SF Outdoor Programming Product/Service Qty. Total SF Length (') Width (') each Outdoor Tennis Courts 8 120 60 7,200 57,600 Parking Spaces Total (10'x18') 121 20 20 400 48,225 (20' x 20' incl. aisles) Required SF for Products and Services 105,825 Setbacks, Open Space, etc. 20% of SF 21,165 Total Estimated Outdoor Complex SF 126,990 Minimum Outdoor Complex Acreage 2.92 Total Complex Acreage 3.84

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 51 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Total Construction and Start-up Cost Estimates – Tennis Center

INDOOR TENNIS FACILITY Budgeted Item Details Qty. Unit Cost/Unit Cost Land/Design Land Acquisition Real estate land acquisition cost 3.84 Ac. $0 $0 Sitework and Parking Lot Site work (grading, drainage, utilities) 3.84 Ac. $125,000 $479,733 Architecture and Engineering 5% of Sitework and Structure Cost $149,673 Landscaping 3.84 Ac. $15,000 $57,568 Impact Fees Connection fees, Traffic Studies, etc. $0 Site Survey, Geotech, Borings, & Report $10,000 Land/Design Total $696,975 Structure Building Structure (Warm Shell) 40,188 SF $60 $2,411,250 Design-Build Fee $0 Construction Management Fee 2% $48,225 Performance Bond 1% to 1.5% of Structure per estimate 1.25% $30,141 Permits/Inspections 1.00% $24,113 Structure Total $2,513,728 Field Construction & Sport Equipment Indoor Court Tennis Flooring 28,800 SF $5.00 $144,000 Tennis Court Accessories (Indoor) Court & Perimeter Nets, Poles, Pads, etc. 4 Ea. $10,000 $40,000 Scoreboards With Controllers 4 Ea. $3,000 $12,000 Benches (Participants) 8 Ea. $300 $2,400 Outdoor Court Tennis Flooring 57,600 SF $5.00 $288,000 Tennis Court Accessories (Outdoor) Court Nets, Fencing, Poles, Pads, etc. 8 Ea. $5,000 $40,000 Court Lighting 8 Ea. $5,000 $40,000 Benches (Participants) 16 Ea. $300 $4,800 Shade Structures 4 Ea. $1,000 $4,000 Miscellaneous Athletic Equipment Balls, Cones, & Training Equip. $10,000 Field Const. & Sport Equip. Total $585,200 Food & Beverage Equipment $0 Finish Out $0 Food & Beverage Equipment Total $0 Offices Furnishings, computers, phones, etc. Mezzanine furnishings incl. $50,000 Software $15,000 Offices Total $65,000 Miscellaneous Banners Advertising/Program Banners $5,000 Signage Interior and Exterior $20,000 Sound/Video Interior Sound/Video System $25,000 Maintenance Equipment $5,000 Renderings/Arial Photos $0 Marketing Allowance Printing $5,000, Mktg. $25,000 $30,000 Pre-Opening Staff Compensation Info. on Total Payroll Summary Tab $30,000 Miscellaneous Total $115,000 Professional Services Pre-Launch Professional Services Legal & Acct. $10,000; SFA $0; Bank $0 $10,000 Interest on Construction Loan TIF Funding $0 SFA Facility, Ops, Mktg Develop. Fee TBD $0 Professional Services Total $10,000 Contingency 3% of Cost excl. professional services $119,277 Contingency Total $119,277 Total Indoor Tennis Facility (without WCR) $4,105,180 Working Capital Reserve Capital to cover negative cash flow and operating costs $100,000 Indoor Tennis Facility Total with WCR $4,205,180

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 52 Economic Impact Study ♦ Chesapeake Community Activity & Tennis Center ♦ Chesapeake, VA September 2010

Total Revenue and Expense – Tennis Center

TOTAL FACILITY REVENUE & EXPENSE – TENNIS CENTER Revenues Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Tennis $287,250 $315,975 $398,129 $418,035 $460,884 Birthday Parties $12,000 $14,400 $17,424 $18,295 $20,170 Secondary Areas $95,000 $103,750 $108,938 $114,384 $120,104 Total Revenue $394,250 $434,125 $524,490 $550,715 $601,158

Expenses Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Tennis $14,363 $6,320 $7,963 $8,361 $9,218 Birthday Parties $3,720 $6,264 $7,651 $8,363 $9,305 Secondary Areas $12,261 $13,674 $14,358 $15,076 $15,830 Total Cost of Goods Sold $30,344 $26,258 $29,971 $31,799 $34,352

Gross Margin $363,906 $407,867 $494,519 $518,916 $566,805 % of Revenue 92% 94% 94% 94% 94%

Facility Expenses $124,168 $127,893 $131,730 $135,682 $139,752 Operating Expense $166,554 $149,780 $141,581 $131,939 $134,914 Management Payroll $75,000 $78,750 $82,688 $86,822 $91,163 Payroll Taxes/Benefits/Bonus $23,283 $24,414 $25,989 $26,961 $28,199 Total Operating Expenses $389,005 $380,837 $381,987 $381,404 $394,028

EBITDA ($25,099) $27,030 $112,532 $137,512 $172,777 % of Revenue -6% 6% 21% 25% 29%

Interest $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Net Income ($25,099) $27,030 $112,532 $137,512 $172,777

The Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC Page 53