Mountain View Recreation Center Town Hall Presentation THIS TUESDAY❗️

Mountain View Recreation Center Town Hall Presentation

Tuesday, September 16, 2025, from 5:30-9:00 pm at
Sundial Center

Join the RCSC Board for an in-depth presentation from triARC regarding the current progress for the Mountain View Recreation Center. During the session, triARC will present a programming recap. A Member Q&A session will immediately follow the presentation. Please click the link to the triARC programming recap video HERE.
Hope to see you there.
#

Source: RCSC Eblast Friday, September 12, 4:41 pm HERE.

 

I watched the presentation closely and one thing stood out to me, actually two things:
1). Almost every user group (stakeholder) wanted exactly what they had, only more.
2). The costs of the 5 options were staggeringly high. They admitted upfront everything was high-balled.

On a sub-note, the data was also fascinating; especially taken in context with what groups were asking for. I'll be fascinated to listen to the rationale for keeping or adding to what groups have when the data doesn't dictate doing so. At some point, reality has to set in and expectations between what we want and what we need has take hold.

I was surprised to see the theater explode to 400 plus seats. I was surprised to see the additional pool, beyond the spa and the existing pool. I was surprised to see the size of the fitness area. I was surprised to see the number of optional covered pickleball courts and the relative costs. I was shocked to see the lawn bowlers requesting shaded gathering space. Then again, this is what happens when we ask members what they want.

It's become akin to kids visiting Santa at the mall or department store at Christmas time. Ask for it all and hope you get it. When i look at the related numbers associated with what members told them they wanted, my immediate reaction was we simply cannot afford it all; not even close.

I don't use Mountain View. I'm not going to die on the hill over what's there or what isn't. I am a fan, a proponent of spending money wisely. Every consideration of what is done there needs to be in conjunction with what they are doing fitting in with the rest of the community's needs. Centers shouldn't be considered one-offs or a stand-alone.

I have written often about "big-picture Sun City." This exercise will be the classic example of doing what is best for the community and not just a small portion of those who live near the center or who will use it. That's not to say it shouldn't be done, but it best be done right (truly a subjective term but everything is at some point).

The tragedy is this remodel should have been done 10 year ago, the costs would have been a fraction and the wasted reinventing the wheel over and over again could have been avoided. Too bad, but hopefully we've learned something from all of these past mistakes.

We'll see eh?

 

I feel the added cost of adding a theater to the center should be decided by the members, not just the board. Adding a theater is going to raise yearly assessments for every homeowner in Sun City due to additional expenses to maintain it. This is beyond the exorbitant costs to create such space. Just my opinion.

 

I'll tell you again; for less than $1 million dollars they can provide approximately 352 tiered retractable, cushioned seating, and an additional 300 matching removable seating for the flat floor area in the Sun Dial auditorium. The East and West wings can be set-up with the usual tables and chairs like they do during concerts if more seating is required.

The retractable seating units do not need to be bolted to the floor, so the stories we've been told that there needs to be an 8' wide aisle behind the seats, occupying too much floor space is not true. The units come with motorized wheels so that the units, once retracted, can be motored back against the walls occupying only 4'-6" of floor space.

The price includes supply, delivery and installation, protective floor panels to prevent damage to the floor as well as trolleys to store the removable seating, training, maintenance, and operating manuals.

A much, MUCH more economical (and fiduciary) use of the Members money.

Just my opinion, as well as my money!

 

I also watched the video and found the ideas interesting, but pricey.
Parking was such an issue when the SAC was working on the MV project. I did not see nor hear any mention of parking conflicts during the presentation.
I believe each option is affordable, with the new PIF monies collected and to be collected.
Overall I think Tri-arc did some excellent work.

 

Do we continue to spend money on the contigency that it will continue to pour in? Arent there other items also needing attention and requiring PIF funds? I am not in favor of mortgaging everything for the sake of a theater. Dont know how much longer I will be this side of the dirt, but am not in favor of creating such a deficit within the budget for the sake of a single building. As long as I live here, I will also be responsible for paying the yearly assessments. Let us keep it reasonable for now and for the future.

 

I agree with the other commentators. The presentation is much better than the ill-fated MV option 2 bum's rush presentation. However, I like Carole, am bothered by the Board's conclusion that we must build a third performing arts venue at a cost of well over $20M. I agree with Tom's conclusion that Sun Dial could easily and relatively inexpensively (less than $5M) be adapted and scheduled for the 100 +/- member Player's Club's to perform three plays a year. IMHO Triarc was not allowed to take a serious look at this option. The things I found lacking in the presentation are as follows:

1. The utilization figures for the MV auditorium are readily available but the Board chose not to provide this information to Triarc. Similarly, the Board chose not to provide the actual attendance figures at the three plays the Player's club performs each year. The result is the vast majority of the project capital cost is not supported by actual data. I believe Steve Oaks reported during the SAC MV town halls that average attendance at the plays was about 108 +/-.
2. It seems to me the presentation assumes that all the performing arts groups who provided input would move their performances to the new MV PAC. This means that less than 10 performances, which are currently easily accommodated at Sun Dial, would move to MV and leave Sun Dial further underutilized. Moreover, many of the performances draw much more attendance than the seating capacity at new MV could accommodate. That would mean each group would need to perform several shows.

My one man's opinion is that building a third performing arts venue is simply unaffordable and a foolish expenditure. If you disagree, please show me actual data that shows me the "light".

Thanks,

John

 

What I found lacking was a more detailed explanation of the PAC! Sure, they said they're going to build one, but is it a brand new building or renovating the existing building? I heard 400 seats, but are they retractable seating so that the space could be utilized for other venues or are they thinking of a sloped floor?

Seems to me, the big stink over the last many, many years was in reference to a PAC, but this presentation seemed to concentrate on everything but?