Dallas committee reviews expanded McKissick scope and advanced schematics for Wings practice facility at Joey G Park

The Ad Hoc Committee on Professional Sports Recruitment and Retention on Sept. 23 heard briefings on a proposed expansion of the city’s project-management contract for the downtown arena and advanced schematic designs, budget and funding sources for a Dallas Wings practice facility at Joey G Park.

The briefing, led by Rosa Fleming, Director of Convention and Event Services, said the council will consider an item the next day to add scope for the secondary (practice) facility to the McKissick and McKissick contract and to add cost for an extension of the arena delivery timeline. "Part of the item tomorrow is to add the scope for the secondary facility to the McKissick and McKissick contract," Fleming said.

Why it matters: the committee reviewed both programmatic and budget details that will affect the city’s capital plan and project schedule. Committee members pressed staff on scope changes and cost increases, long‑lead procurement risks and site remediation questions for Joey G Park, underscoring that timing and funding will determine whether the practice facility and arena meet contractual dates.

Key decisions and near-term steps - The committee received the briefing; the related ordinance/contract amendment was scheduled for the city council voting agenda the following day. Fleming said staff’s goal was "to bring it forward for approval recommendation for approval by city council tomorrow." - The committee approved routine minutes at the start of the meeting by voice vote (motion carried). - Staff announced a groundbreaking for the Joey G Park site scheduled for Friday, Sept. 26 at 10 a.m.

Contract scope, timeline and cost City staff told the committee McKissick and McKissick (the city’s owner’s representative/project manager) was selected in February 2024 and initially contracted for $7.9 million to manage design and integration for the arena (owner’s rep services, CMAR coordination and project integration). Fleming said the firm was asked not to price the secondary practice facility until the city finalized a site and schematic designs tied to FIFA negotiations.

Committee members were told the administration is seeking to add approximately $3.3 million for the off‑site practice facility scope and roughly $2.6 million to cover the extended arena schedule — a roughly $6 million increase over the original $7.9 million contract, according to staff remarks. Fleming said the arena’s substantial completion was pushed from 2026 to 2027 because of coordination with FIFA and other project constraints.

During breakdowns of the additional amounts, staff cited several discrete line items included in the supplemental work: about $750,000 for early design and geotechnical work on the practice site; roughly $250,000 for site-utility and environmental coordination; a $65,000 contingency; $1.25 million described as schematic/planning work to 30% completion; and about $1.7 million to continue oversight through construction. Desmond Denman of McKissick and McKissick confirmed a $65,000 contingency in the practice‑facility package. Staff provided an intermediate total of roughly $10.3 million for arena-related PM services after some scope additions, with the off‑site facility add of $3.3 million described separately.

Design, site and construction approach for Joey G Park Gensler is the design architect and architect of record for the project; Phoebe Thomas (Gensler) presented the advanced schematics for the Joey G Park practice facility sited east of Stone Mesa/Stone Mace (the cleared tract near the former cement facility). Thomas described the program as a compact, 70,000-square-foot building that combines a community-facing lobby and meeting space with player amenities, two full-size practice courts, strength and conditioning, recovery (including hydrotherapy), dining and player support spaces. "The intention of the space is for planned activities, community events, youth clinics, educational programs hosted by both the wings, as well as the city and the park and rec," Thomas said.

Staff said the building was reworked from a built-in-place steel structure to a pre‑engineered (prefab) metal building to speed delivery and reduce cost. That change, plus simplified circulation and a compact program, were presented as the main value‑engineering moves to shorten the schedule and lower price.

Budget and funding Staff provided a current project estimate of $48.6 million "all in" for the practice facility (construction plus soft costs, including design and owner’s-rep fees). Fleming told the committee the funding plan remains multiple sources: convention center capital construction funds, economic‑development/TIF funds, a state appropriation to fill the gap, private contributions, and a $3.1 million cash contribution from the Dallas Wings. Fleming characterized the convention center construction fund as the largest single source and described other sources as contributing portions of the total; she said the state funding would be used as gap funding and could require reimbursements to the city’s capital account.

Committee members sought more detail on the funding split and asked staff to provide a written breakdown. Council Member Blackman and others urged aggressive private fundraising and sponsorship to limit reliance on city capital funds. Staff noted that the $48.6 million estimate had been reduced from an earlier $54 million estimate through value engineering.

Risks, schedule and operations Staff identified several critical risks: electrical service replacement tied to dated vaults (1950s–1970s equipment) that must be coordinated with Encore and utility providers; geotechnical issues where the site abuts the City Hall garage; long lead times for steel and specialty equipment (hydrotherapy systems); and environmental remediation pockets that Terracon is testing and addressing. Fleming described replacement of electrical vaults as a critical‑path item for arena delivery. On schedule, Fleming said the arena contract term was extended to allow completion through 2027; she confirmed the practice facility target for substantial completion remained April 2026 but acknowledged committee skepticism about that date.

On operations, staff said the Dallas Wings would perform day‑to‑day janitorial and on‑site security and would maintain routine upkeep; the Wings would cover capital maintenance items up to $10,000 before city approval is required, according to staff’s summary of the pending supplemental agreement.

Committee reaction and next steps Council members pressed for clearer cost breakdowns, opportunities to defer nonessential equipment (for example, hydrotherapy) to later phases, and assurances that duplication of design fees between McKissick and Gensler would be avoided. Robin Bentley (City Manager’s Office) and McKissick staff explained the owner’s‑rep fees reflect extended duration of services and advanced planning work that McKissick provided before Gensler completed design development.

Staff said next steps include finalizing environmental testing, erecting fencing and geotechnical work, engaging the construction manager at risk (CMAR) for pricing (staff hoped to bring the CMAR contract back in October), and advancing construction documents if council approves the contract amendments and schematic direction.

Votes at a glance - Approval of minutes, May 12, 2025 (special called meeting): motion approved by voice vote (no named roll call recorded); outcome: approved.

Sources and quotations in this article are drawn from the Sept. 23 committee briefing and on‑record remarks by Rosa Fleming, Desmond Denman (McKissick and McKissick), Phoebe Thomas (Gensler), Robin Bentley (City Manager’s Office), Ryan O’Connor (Park and Recreation) and council members who questioned staff.