![]() |
City of Lincoln Mayor's Department Mayor's Events Facility Task Force | |
Report to Mayor Coleen J. Seng
November 9, 2006
This report is also available in Adobe pdf format.
A list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) follows this report.
Introduction
The Events Facility Task Force issued a report to Mayor Seng in October 2005 detailing the information members had gathered during six months of fact finding, discussion and decision making. The Task Force's work resulted in eight basic recommendations, which can be read in full on page 2 of that report.
In short, the Task Force recommended that:
Dick Campbell, Chair, Chamber of Commerce; Rick Bjorklund, State Fair Park; Tom Lorenz, Pershing Center; Dale Gruntorad, Lancaster Events Center; Harvey Perlman, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Deb Schorr, Lancaster County Board, County Visitor Promotion Committee; Don Herz, City of Lincoln, Finance Department; Lori McClurg, State of Nebraska; Kent Seacrest and Roger Larson, Weste Haymarket; Polly McMullen, Downtown Lincoln Association; Wendy Birdsall, Lincoln Convention & Visitors Bureau; and Ron Ecklund, Lincoln Independent Business Association. Ann Harrell, Mark Bowen and Darl Naumann, City of Lincoln, provided staff assistance.
In submitting their report to the Mayor, the Task Force members asked her to re-authorize them to continue pursuing their recommendations, which she agreed to do. The Task Force also invited new members to join the group: Ron Snover and Alan Wood, Lancaster County Agricultural Society; Amy Tipton, Pershing Center Board; and Tam Allan, State Fair Board. In the months following October 2005, Rick Bjorklund left the Nebraska State Fair and his role was assumed by Joseph McDermott; and Lori McClurg left the State of Nebraska and her role was assumed by Gerry Oligmueller.
Working Groups Appointed
Dick Campbell organized the reconstituted Task Force into four working groups assigned to further study of the arena, hotel and convention center; the exposition center; financial considerations for each of the two projects; and site analysis for each of the two projects. It should be noted that the financial and site analysis groups reached out to the community for volunteer assistance from professionals in these fields, which was generously supplied, and the Task Force is very grateful to those individuals and their companies for their support.
As its first step, the arena/convention center group took one more look at eight sites suggested as alternatives to the west Haymarket immediately after the October 2005 report was released. The group concluded that the west Haymarket site remained the preferred location.
(For more information about the eight sites, see attachment "A".)
The arena/convention center group, led by Tom Lorenz, and the exposition center group, led by Ron Ecklund, reported their conclusions to the full Task Force on March 2, 2006.
The arena/convention center group concluded that:
(For the full report from the arena/convention group, see attachment "B".)
The exposition center group, led by Ron Ecklund, produced a side-by-side comparison of State Fair Park and the Lancaster Event Center. The comparison covered everything from physical features and legal structures to floodplain maps and future expansion plans.
(For the full reports from the exposition center group, see attachment "C".)
Design Sessions Held
With the March 2 information in hand, the site analysis group invited members of the
professional community to participate in two design sessions. The March 30, 2006 session
offered the community an opportunity to explore how an arena, hotel/convention center and
associated development might be handled in the West Haymarket. The April 6, 2006 session
looked at how the State Fair Park and the Lancaster Event Center might be improved, expanded
or re-planned to accommodate a single exposition center serving both the Nebraska State Fair
and the Lancaster County Fair.
(To review information distributed at the design sessions, see attachment "D".)
Design professionals, including architects and engineers, worked with city staff following the community design sessions to refine the ideas suggested by participants. The results were presented to the Task Force on May 25, 2006 as a set of alternative site plans for the west Haymarket, State Fair Park and Lancaster Event Center.
The Task Force narrowed nine site plans for west Haymarket to three preferred choices. The Task Force also narrowed two site plans for State Fair Park to one and four site plans for Lancaster Events Center to three.
(For the site plan alternatives, see attachment "E".)
On October 12, 2006, the Task Force selected as its first choice site plan "4A," which shows the arena west of Lincoln Station and the convention center south of the Harris Overpass. The Task Force ranked site plan "6" as its second choice, showing the arena south of the Harris Overpass and the convention center behind Lincoln Station. Site plan "1" was ranked third, showing the arena at the north end of the Haymarket and the convention center behind Lincoln Station.
Although the Task Force assigned these rankings, the members agreed all three remain viable alternatives.
The summer of 2006 was devoted to three tasks:
(For more detailed site analysis, see attachment "F".)
(For the funding sources and uses analysis, see attachment "G".)
(To see the various governance models, see attachment "H".)
Arena Economic Impact Analysis
Also during the summer and fall of 2006, Dr. Eric Thompson of the University of Nebraska-
Lincoln Bureau of Business Research prepared a report addressing some of the economic
consequences of developing a new arena in Lincoln. In particular, the report estimates the
potential economic impact of the proposed project. The report estimates the net increase in
business receipts, employment and income the project can bring to Lincoln.
In short, Dr. Thompson concluded that "there is a large positive economic impact during the construction period. Economic gains outweigh losses in the years after the arena opens when tourists are coming to Lincoln but bond debts are being paid. There is a positive net economic impact each year that the arena is completed and in operation."
It should be noted that this report is not a benefit-cost analysis. It does not consider the consequences of the arena's contribution to the City's quality of life. Rather, its focus is limited to economic impact.
(To read Dr. Thompson's analysis, see attachment "I".)
Direction Reaffirmed
The full Task Force reconvened on September 21, 2006. At that meeting, members reconfirmed their short list of preferred site plans for an arena and hotel/convention center in west Haymarket and for a single exposition center at State Fair Park or the Lancaster Event Center. The Task Force also heard a report from Kent Seacrest on the five governance models designed by his subcommittee.
At the September 21 meeting, discussion prompted by the governance models presentation suggested disagreement among Task Force members as to the original October 2005 recommendation that the Nebraska State Fair and the Lancaster County Fair co-locate at a single exposition center. As a result of that discussion, Dick Campbell convened a Task Force meeting on September 28, 2006 at which each member was asked to answer three questions directly:
Also at the September 28 meeting, the Task Force concluded that it would be best not to recommend any specific formal governance structure at this time. Instead, the members agreed it would be better if the State Fair Board and the Lancaster County Agricultural Society explore governance at a later date.
An estimate of what it would cost to update and expand both State Fair Park and the Lancaster
Events Center in accordance with the most current master plans for each was reviewed by the
Task Force on October 26. The estimate, prepared by an ad hoc group led by Don Herz, looked
at what it would cost to improve both facilities without co-location; what it would cost to co-
locate at State Fair Park; and what it would cost to co-locate at the Lancaster Events Center. The
ad hoc group concluded it would cost less to co-locate at either site than it would to improve both
and have the fairs remain at separate sites.
Task Force members disagreed about how current the master plans used to prepare the estimates actually were for both State Fair Park and the Lancaster Events Center. Some members questioned whether the plans used still were valid enough to warrant their use.
(To read the cost estimates, see attachment "J".)
Position Statements
Both the Lancaster County Agricultural Society and the State Fair Board issued position statements regarding the Task Force's work. In short:
(The full formal positions of each board are contained in attachment "K".)
Conclusions
On October 12, the Task Force recommended that:
On October 26, the Task Force approved the following resolution:
On November 2, the Task Force selected as its first choice for a co-located facility site plan "B3," which would place the agricultural exposition center on 84th Street. Although this was selected as the first choice, the members agreed all four site plans for co-location remain viable alternatives. Representatives of the State Fair Board and the State of Nebraska voted against the motion identifying "B3" as the preference.
The State of Nebraska representative recommended that the Task Force not indicate a preference for co-location on 84th Street versus State Fair Park because 1) the cost estimates and presumed savings to move the State Fair to 84th Street are based upon significant and immediate increased public spending not only by the City of Lincoln and Lancaster County, but also the State of Nebraska (Nebraska Legislature), 2) the cost/savings estimates do not consider any costs to the State of Nebraska associated with continued maintenance and re-use of the vacated State Fair Park, and 3) is contrary to the spirit of the October 26 resolution calling for further examination by both the Nebraska State Fair Board and the Lancaster County Agricultural Society of co-location alternatives.
(For the site plan alternatives, refer back to attachment "E".)
The final motion approved by the Task Force on November 2 encouraged the City of Lincoln and the Lancaster County Agricultural Society to work toward resolution of the legal issues surrounding advertising on the sign in front of the Lancaster Events Center.
The Task Force presented its report to Mayor Seng on November 9, 2006.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
The size of an arena floor can vary from something as small as 16,000 square feet which is Pershing's floor size to over 30,000 square feet. That large floor area lends itself to being a large trade show floor, a large banquet floor set or exhibition floor for large equipment shows. Generally floor access to an arena is large enough to allow large trucks and vehicles adequate access to the floor. An arena also will have large concourses and foyers that can be used for banquet, display and exhibit show space. Meeting rooms in the arena or club/suite level spaces within the building can serve as meeting spaces for various sized local groups and the service infrastructure of the building can more than adequately service these ancillary areas. Because of the ability of an arena to host an event with 16,000 patrons, a trade show with 250 booths or a small meeting of 50, it is a very versatile and multifunction facility.
A convention center is a facility that is designed to host trade shows and exhibitions. The physical building will have a large clear span exhibit space with 35' foot ceilings, utilities and data connections in the floor. The space will be divisible into smaller "halls". Multiple truck docks for exhibitor access are another key factor. A typical convention center will also have an area that is finished with hotel quality accoutrements for formal dinners and luncheon functions. Minimum exhibition hall space would be in the 30,000 square foot range plus pre-function space, break out rooms and service areas. Convention centers are not normally configured for concert activities. A convention center can host car shows, boat shows, RV and equipment shows. A key benefit drawn from convention centers are the room night and ancillary spending from convention exhibitors and out of town attendees. If a convention center would be built in Lincoln it is conceivable that UNL departments and research divisions could host plenary sessions and academic conferences that would benefit both the City and the University. Several key local businesses and manufacturers would also be able to host exhibit shows "at home".
An exhibition center would be a facility similar to a convention center. The configuration of an exhibition center would be a large exhibition hall of potentially 75,000 to 100,000 square feet of contiguous space. The interior finish would be less formal and ideally utility service locations would be strategically placed throughout the building. Pre function space, high finish break out spaces and hotel quality ancillary amenities are lower priorities. Typical events held in exhibition center would include RV shows, farm and agricultural equipment shows, swap meets, car shows, gun shows, boat and travel shows and heavy construction equipment exhibitions. Because of a less formal level of finish livestock exhibitions and pet shows are also events that would be hosted in an exhibition center. An exhibition center would be an important complimentary facility on the site of an entity like the State Fair or the Lancaster Event Center.
An agricultural exposition center would be closer to an arena in configuration. It would
be a larger floor space either dirt or concrete that is surrounded with spectator seating. Horse
shows, livestock exhibitions, antique tractor and horse pulls and livestock clinics would be
normal uses for an agricultural exposition center. Because of the need for keeping the patron or
participant close to the exposition floor the seating capacity is less than an arena built for
basketball and major level concerts. Patron amenities might include a pre event foyer,
concessions stands, merchandise stands and some break out meeting rooms. An agricultural
exposition center would be an important complimentary type of facility for any entity that
would focus on large livestock or agriculturally based shows and expositions.
Multiple options exist for Pershing.
One consideration would be that after the construction on a new arena is complete, an
infrastructure update could be done to the Pershing structure so that small and mid-size events
could still be held at Pershing. Having a new arena and a mechanically sound Pershing would
significantly expand the ability of Lincoln to increase event, convention, meeting and exhibition
offerings for the entire community. A shared governance and operations staff with the new arena
would provide an economical way to keep Pershing viable and usable for the foreseeable future.
The Lincoln Library Board examined a second consideration for a future use of Pershing. A local architect studied the Pershing structure and gave the library a preliminary estimation that Pershing could be converted into a 150,000 square foot library space that could replace the current Bennet Martin library. Pershing's location on Centennial Mall close to museums and midway between the UNL campus and the state capitol would make a major library on the site a very desirable possibility.
Additionally, the location of Pershing again could make it an attractive property to be converted into a state, county or city government facility. Other similar facilities in urban areas have been converted into science museums.
Secondary reasons for the Haymarket site vs. the State Fair location include the inability for the city to capture incremental tax revenues from state owned land and the lack of business development i.e. hotels, restaurants and retail adjacent to the fairgrounds.
During the initial phase of the Task Force discussions, the West Haymarket Postal Office site
was considered one of the leading locations of interest. Informal discussions with Postal Officials
indicated that sometime in the future the Postal Service might consider moving out of the
Haymarket area to a location that had better truck access and a single level mail processing area
but in the short term no immediate plans existed to leave their present site. While the site is
logistically a good option, the reality of the situation makes it less desirable because of the long
time line associated with securing that location. Should the current perceived situation change
significantly and if the site became rapidly available, that location would be reassessed.
Low capacity, aging infrastructure, lack of parking and parking revenue, small concourses that limit food and beverage sales, lack of patron amenities, lack of performer / client amenities, lack of open floor space and a landlocked building footprint combine to make the use and economic return for Pershing less than optimal. The Pershing staff and the City of Lincoln do a good job with a 50 year-old facility but the competition from surrounding communities and the challenges of an out of date physical plant provide sometimes a less than first class experience for the citizens of Lincoln.
The current convention space in Lincoln is limited. The major areas that currently function as convention spaces are the Embassy Suites and the Marriott Cornhusker. Additional open span "convention floors" are Pershing Center, the Lancaster Event Center and a couple of different buildings at the State Fair Park. The hotel spaces are 12,000 square feet or less and the suggestion to the Mayor is that minimum convention space should be 35,000 square feet or more.
Mayor's Department