The URL can be used to link to this page

Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center Copyrighted December 17, 2018 City of Dubuque Action Items # 7. ITEM TITLE: Phase 2 Planning foran Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center SUMMARY: City Manager is transmitting the Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center. The Consultants will make a presentation. SUGGESTED DISPOSITION: Suggested Disposition: Receive and File; Presentation ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded-Improved Five Flags City Manager Memo Civic Center-NNM Memo Information of Property Tax Impact Fi� Flags Debt- City Manager Memo NNM Memo (Added) NNM Phase 2 - Planning for Expanded/Improved Fi� Staff Memo Flags Civic Center Five Flags Renovation Debt Impact(Added) Staff Memo Summary of Phase 2 Planning for an Supporting Documentation Expanded/Improved Fi� Flags Civic Center Assessment and Study Regarding the Future of Five Supporting Documentation Flags Civic Center Five Flags Potential E�nts Memo from General Supporting Documentation Manager Initial Traffic ImpactAssessment Supporting Documentation Referendum Tmeline Supporting Documentation Presentation (Added) Supporting Documentation THE CITY OF Dubuque � AIFA�erlwGh UB E '�� III► Masterpiece on the Mississippi Z°°'�w'2 7A13 2017 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center DATE: December 13, 2018 Leisure Services Manager Marie Ware is transmitting the Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center. The consultants will be making a presentation at the City Council meeting. �� Mic ael C. Van Milligen �� MCVM:jh Attachment cc: Crenna Brumwell, City Attorney Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager Cori Burbach, Assistant City Manager Marie L. Ware, Leisure Services Manager THE CITY OF Dubuque � D �J L E ulnr�oCmi ,�I ��l► Masterpiece on the Mississippi Z°°''Zo'Z 2013 2017 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Five Flags Renovation Scenarios-Impact of the Average Homeowner DATE: December 17, 2018 Budget Director Jennifer Larson is providing information on property tax impact of the Five Flags debt scenarios. I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council approval. �� Mic ael C. Van Milligen �� MCVM:sv Attachment cc: Crenna Brumwell, City Attorney Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager Cori Burbach, Assistant City Manager Jennifer Larson, Budget Director THE CTTY OF Dubuque �" ui��eNe�ary DUB E 'il��i;' Masterpiece on the Mississippi Z°°' Z°'Z 2013 2017 TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Marie L. Ware, Leisure Services Manager SUBJECT: Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center DATE: December 13, 2018 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to request the City Council receive and file the Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center. BACKGROUND A bond referendum was held on Aug. 17, 1976, for the construction of the Five Flags Civic Center, to be attached to the existing theater. The bond referendum passed with 70% approval. Besides the arena, the new plan called for theater support rooms, as well as locker rooms, storage space, and administrative offices. The complex was connected to and designed to complement the restored theater. The new Civic Center opened its doors in 1979. The bond was a $3.7 million project. In 2005, over $2 million in renovations were performed which included relocation of the ticket windows to the Locust Street vestibule, reconstruction of the Locust Street entrance, replacement of the windows on both the Locust and Main Street entrances, replacement of the carpet and flooring on both levels of the promenade, relocation of the Gate E concession stand, second entrance to Majestic Room, improvements to Bijou Room, painting, replacement of arena north doors, and renovation of concession stands. In August 2016, the City Council identified a Five Flags Civic Center Study as one of its six (6) high priorities for 2016-2018. Funds were then budgeted in FY2018 to perform a study and assessment. Conventions, Sports and Leisure International (CSL) was engaged in 2017 to perform this assessment and study of Five Flags Civic Center. The Assessment and Study included a current status assessment of the Five Flags Civic Center and Theater, a review of local market conditions and a visitor industry assessment, an analysis of existing Five Flags Civic Center operations, industry trends review, a competitive/comparable facility analysis, an accounting of the survey plus an expansion study and assessment including market supportable program analysis, event/use levels analysis, conceptual renderings of four scenarios, preliminary construction cost analysis, financial operations analysis and an economic impact analysis. Naming rights and/or sponsorship opportunities were also analyzed. The scenarios also had an order of magnitude preliminary capital cost in 2018 dollars. Community Engagement and Input Opportunities Community engagement was very important in this assessment and study phase and numerous opportunities were offered for residents and stakeholders to participate and share their thoughts, ideas, concerns, desires and more. This was done in a variety of methods, including: • The process with CSL began with a public kickoff ineeting. CSL led a meeting allowing citizens to engage at the beginning of the Phase 1 process and ask questions about the process and share thoughts from the beginning of the study. • CSL was also provided any feedback the City had been provided by citizens about their ideas for the Five Flags Civic Center prior to the study kicking off. • CSL requested information from City staff and community partners including but not limited to Five Flags event reports, financial operating statements, rental and service rates, contact agreement with SMG, service provider agreements, agreements for the Grand River Center, community event facilities, perceived competitive event facilities and destinations, Five Flags users past and present, potential event users, Travel Dubuque information related to hotels and attractions, new and planned new projects in Dubuque, key competitive destinations and associated event facilities in the state, regional and national marketplace, lost/turned away conventions, sports and hotel nights, bookings, recurring events, annual reports and marketing reports, plus local/regional/ state socioeconomic/demographic data and more. • A Study Steering Committee was established with members of the Civic Center Commission serving on that committee. The Steering Committee met at various times throughout the process. Meetings were set up and held with City of Dubuque personnel to gather information and details about the community and the Civic Center. The consultant also met with a variety of organizations including but not limited to Travel Dubuque, Dubuque Main Street, Dubuque Area Chamber of Commerce, Greater Dubuque Development Corporation, arts and culture representatives and more. • The next step was to gather lots of public input into the study and assessment process. This was a very important part of the study, as outlined in the RFP. CSL worked with staff and others to develop a survey to collect as much input as possible from the community and users of the facilities. Many organizations assisted the City in promoting the survey as a means for all persons to give input. There were 1 ,086 responses to the survey. This was representative of nearly 3,100 people if one considers the households of the responses. CSL shared that, in other studies they have performed throughout the US in similar markets, the typical response rate to a survey is 500-700. • The Commission heard a presentation from CSL at the regular commission meeting on May 2, 2018. After the City Council work session presentation by CSL on May 14, 2018, the Commission then hosted a public input meeting on May 16, 2018 which was well attended. Input was also sought via the City's 2 website for those who could not attend the meeting. All that input is documented in the link below. The engagement of the community was very important and provided direction for the Assessment and Study. The community engagement and engagement of the business community and organizations supported the Civic Center's current location in downtown. The feedback received also cited concerns like the waiting time for restrooms during events. A full accounting of all the input received is in the Assessment and Study Regarding the Future of Five Flags Civic Center attached. Site and Architectural Work Betsch Associates and FEH were subcontracted by CSL to work with the site and the input received as well as consider the possible project scenarios related architecturally to the footprint and potential layouts. They received in-depth tours of all parts of the Civic Center facility, including the theater and all back-of-house areas, and spent significant time understanding the current structures. The assessment and study report showed what is possible at the property. It also explained that if future steps were taken toward any specific scenario, that the scenario presented was a preliminary representation and would need much more refinement and public input before being pursued. The report also identified capital needs of the current facilities and costs related to those capital improvements as well as construction costs and capital costs necessary for new or renovated facilities. The Assessment and Study report provided four scenarios. • Scenario 1 was a minimum "status quo" scenario recognizing that certain levels of expenditures will be required in the near term and in the foreseeable future on deferred maintenance and full capital repair/replacement items to keep the Five Flags Center safe and operational by current standards. (4,000 seating capacity) • Scenario 2 involved a limited renovation with no expansion to the facility footprint. (4,000 seating capacity) • Scenario 3 represented a renovated complex with an expanded arena. (5,600 seating capacity) • Scenario 4 involved a renovated complex and a fully redeveloped arena. (6,000 seating capacity) Scenario 3 and 4 represented northwest expansion of the facility footprint that would involve a block-long closure of West 5�h Street and development of a significant portion of the block opposite the current Civic Center closing 5�h Street in the block between Main and Locust Streets. Neither scenario required relocation of Ecumenical Tower. The Executive Summary of the Assessment and Study (page ES-7) contained a Summary of Key Estimated Costs and Benefits by Scenario in 2018 dollars. That summary is below. 3 SummxVrtReYBtimatedC isaMBerefi6bfSm�ario ��2oie ad�ars) � . . ._., . � ,.. . � wuwd: u�.su �ut� m,� ��a xm�w. .�;m�m .i:mue ,�m+ �,axvm .eww wM� - mss�m� : uettwe - m;»,ie' Msmmma+. iun nxe.w• �e �:�em x �m rv�wa+ m.wam vaAxw. �a�tan �&RsbF< a �ap� ynT�MT wMawr [PMMd L"Likb NAW.? tlA"&l� W�'� �� +.� R��Cm iMNnuNIXO tAYM M?M.?F< hN.Mi iR.'ID.b 4 Am lAFSA h�'++ ??k.:..� «mw�.�.. ' ��,� �,:�•�� v �'-�,� �... . ... �� o-.,a,�re ac�� au.9€� a�.�s a+�.s• a.ms.� �� R+ss* arew�.�.. .��'0"`�' wmaa .,.. ww ri�rmn wm�in � � v.w,� �mmm c�a.�.waw »ls�.ss x.,roai a:orad ma=,m awsn nx�a� vqas� wn..w«.w.i re w :Y,m ..:..e� �,�, az:� This table showetl ihe 15-year total which inclutles ihe consiruction cost antl 15 years of capital cosis necessary over ihe 15 years. For example,just as we tlo in ihe Grentl River Center, carpets woultl neetl replacetl within ihe frst 15 years or repainting of interiors to keep ihe facility fresh antl maintainetl with ihe use by ihe many visitors. The following table showetl ihe Preliminary Capital Cost Comparison in an ortler of magnitutle in 2018 tlollars. 4 EZM1id[9 Prelimi�ury Cm'[CaPtil 1'.m'[ComParison (ONer-d-MagniWtle, ]O]B tlollars) U irontCa italCOs�s so so a4eaz,aas tssm��v N.O10,000 N.O10,000 St1q000 31,]1?0.tl fnmfarqlNnu 50 N9�.000 050,000 itA,0.tl 50 N]5,000 000,000 i.W,0.tl 50 5].9t5,500 StB9t,500 y9t$M e 50 55,381,500 AB5,000 49$M 55,000 5?ID3,500 St0ID,000 51010,0.tl N.O15,000 FB$0�,500 NO,vR,]BS 159$ID$V 6Bn$50 63,OO,B15 6B4OiB,[55 Np3Bp9t TOM1IConWudb Cw4 MNWW N4616.1A W169Y0 WA�0.1W Upkont Hus Capilal Cosls Years 1-05 so so O1eaz,aes ium��v 51.590,000 51.590,000 5].oxl,000 i3,M],0.tl LRSekIyIWYeWirylknu 50 f5B]�000 Nt5�000 H25�A'O 50 5590,000 N00,000 4M,0.tl 50 N.u0,500 5?�01,500 3110]$M e 50 58,900,000 St?Bt,500 5925.0.tl 55,000 5?�81,500 Stt]5,000 S11Y,0.tl P,SB5,000 53?�Bt000 N?BIB,[BS iB;NB,]V Ft]8,350 5].]BB,t50 6B,IBS,B[0 39p9,M6 o�+[e.wae.twa N.n.xw ixyew.+w W.o»,w A+,�w.ne A[Ne July 2, 2018, Ciry Council mee[ing, [he Five Rags Civic Cen[er Commission forwarded Neirunanimous remmmenda0on fmm [he June 25, 2018, Commission mee0ng [o receive and file Ne Five Rags Civic Cen[er Assessmen[and S[udy mmple[edbyConvenfions, SpoR; andLeisureln[emafional (CSL). Addifionally, Ney unanimously remmmended, based upon Ne response of Ne Dubuque mmmuniry and all Ne public inpu[, Na[[he Council choose scenario fourforNe Five Rags renova[ions. All documents rela[ed m [his muncil mee[ing are loca[ed a[ we kcNoduuaueoa e WDocVewas ? d 9226seacd a0 a2a1]-0e]e-9b1S]bd2d80a]18c&dbid=1 . Thedocumen[ro[a1s46] pagesincluding allpublicinpu[ received. TheCiryCouncilw[ed [oreceiveandfile [hedocumen6. Dunng [heir annual goal setting session in Augus[2018, Ne Ciry Council, adop[ed [heir 201&2020 Poli�y Agenda wi[h [he Five Rags Cen[er DirecOon and Funding as a Top Pnonry. Discussiona[NegoalsettingsessionwasfocusedamundScenano4wi[h o[her scenanos discussed as well. The Qry Cou ncil asked s[aff dunng [he goal setting mee[ings ro pmvide general di�eQion on neM s[eps and possible Oming fo� moving forvva�d. I[was also sha�ed Na[ cert2in neM s[eps would �equi�e pnva[e involvemen[ if a ballo[ ini[ia[ive wou Id be undertaken. 5 The initial steps continue to be refined and information gathered as a work group has been meeting regularly on this City Council Top Priority. This is to ensure all aspects of a possible project to be considered are explored and that the information that will be needed is made available to the City Council as well as the citizens. The work group currently consists of City Manager Michael C. Van Milligen, Assistant City Managers Teri Goodman and Cori Burbach, City Engineer Gus Psihoyos, Project Manager Steve Brown, Public Information Officer Randy Gehl, City Attorney Crenna Brumwell, Five Flags Civic Center General Manager HR Cook and myself. The work group reviewed the questions that arose during the City Council discussion on July 2, 2018, at the City Council goal setting sessions, and the questions asked by citizens and organizations since the study was filed. While the study was being developed and since the study was filed, presentations were made to the Dubuque Chamber of Commerce Board, Travel Dubuque Board, Dubuque Rotary, and Dubuque Main Street Board. Additional presentations continue to be scheduled. The working group has also researched the timeframes for potential ballot initiatives and studied what the City's role can be if a ballot initiative is undertaken. Of course, citizens and organizations were and continue to be interested in what a new or renovated facility would look like. They would like to see an architecturally clear picture of what a specific project would look like, both inside and outside the building. They want to clearly understand the amenities. They asked what kinds of acts could be brought to Dubuque with a larger facility. They wished to clearly understand the parking needs and make sure they are met. They wanted a clearly defined size of the facility and to answer, "is it big enough?" Of major importance is a clear understanding of the cost to taxpayers. The first study outlined a general conceptual cost. There was a need to dig deep and define the costs in-depth by meeting with local companies and understanding the local market. Conventions, Sports and Leisure International was contracted to pertorm Phase 2 planning for an expanded and improved Five Flags Civic Center based upon diving deep into scenario 4 by approval of the City Council on November 5, 2108. The proposal was heavily weighted to work items to be completed by subconsultants Betsch Associates and FEH Design along with structural, mechanical and environmental subconsultants. The report was to be presented to staff by December 7 and City Council on December 17, 2018. DISCUSSION The background shared above is a compilation of all the steps that get us to today. The information in the Assessment and Study and all the community engagement were the foundation for the work completed in Phase 2. 6 Attached is the Summary of Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center completed by CSL. Bill Krueger of CSL and Ken Betsch of Betsch Associates will be at the City Council meeting and will share a presentation of the Phase 2 Planning. What follows is a summary of information related to the Phase 2. Renderings The cover features renderings of the exterior and specific interior renderings. Care was taken during this part of the planning to architecturally create a facility that could fit into the historic downtown of Dubuque and yet create an iconic look. The main entrance to the arena would be along Main Street on the north east corner of the building and features a large drop off lane and plaza area. An exterior aerial view shows how this moves the main entrance closer to City parking ramps and parking lots as well as closer to the Town Clock Plaza. The arena lobby is spacious which will allow people to quickly pass through and enter the facility. There are numerous stairs throughout the arena which can easily move people into and out of the arena and the design includes three elevators in the lobby to assist persons with mobility limitations. The concourse rendering shows how many people could move throughout this area at the same time especially right before and after shows. The arena has a fixed seat count of 5,912, which includes the premium seating areas. Premium seating includes loge boxes, club seats, suites and party suites. The study also notes that there would be a seating count of 6,398 if an end stage concert was held, as shown in the arena rendering. These premium seating options are defined and explained on page 6 of the Summary. A rendering shows a suite and the view the suites would offer. Premium seating areas are now an industry best practice that allows for premium pricing and revenue generation for the facility while offering additional amenities to the guests at events and activities. The new theater entrance can be seen in one of the renderings. The current long hallway that is the main entrance on Main Street would be transformed. The entrance area would include an elevator which could take persons with limited mobility to the second floor of the theater, which is not accessible at this time. Parking Analysis A deeper dive was taken into the topic of parking which has been expressed as a community concern. Based on industry standards it is often recommended that one parking space be available for approximately every three seats. The chart on page 17 shows that within practical walking distance the percentage coverage for parking is 275- 488°k. Meaning there is an overabundance in the walkable area. If parking is limited to a two-block walk of the arena and if the arena and theater were both at maximum capacity the coverage for parking would be 94°k. There are currently an estimated 2200 parking spaces in public surface lots and parking ramps in that two- 7 block walk. This does not include parking meter locations which are throughout the downtown area. The main entrance for the Civic Center's arena moved northward which made even more public parking spaces within a two-block walk. An expanded drop off area is planned at the main entrance of the expanded Civic Center. This drop off will accommodate more vehicles moving in and out to drop off those that need extra assistance. A trend in the industry of event centers is to accommodate Uber and Lyft type services for drop-off and pick up. The industry is seeing more use of these services as this is convenient to consumers for numerous reasons. There is an area that is planned that would create an area specifically for these services to drop-off and pick-up before and after events. The Cost As the listing shows on page four of the Phase 2 many professionals brought expertise to this study. The Assessment and Study provided an order of magnitude cost for scenario 4 and that cost was in 2018 dollars. A significant amount of time was spent with a variety of professionals in specific professional service areas to dig deeper into the specific costs of the site and perform due diligence. The local contractors were also involved in looking at local costing. With a deeper dive into the design of the specific scenario number 4 in Phase 2 the numbers for construction and costs are different from the previous study. The construction costs estimated in the previous study were in 2018 dollars. The construction costs of the specific design shown in Phase 2 are escalated through an assumed 2021 completion. This escalation is for inflation and construction cost changes over the period. The Study and Assessment order of magnitude cost was $68.5 million, the escalation would be approximately $10 million to that specific scenario. The figures for the Project Budget Summary on page 27 represent the current estimated all-in costs, assuming a late 2020 construction groundbreaking with completion in 2021 . CSL shared that "it is important to recognize that construction costs have historically risen at a higher rate than standard cost of living based on inflation." Outside factors not know at the time of the original estimate do not take into consideration the recent current event of steel tariffs. A view of the arena renderings gives some scale to the amount of steel necessary in a clear span building. The Phase 2 work does not complete a full set of architectural designs and schematics. This means that the cost estimate for the total project of the arena, theater and theater support of$84,791 ,656 has areas with contingencies that are higher at this point of design. There were items that were determined thus figures have been reflected at the correct level. For instance, it was determined that asbestos had been removed from throughout the facility. This lowered a cost contingency when it became a known factor. 8 Meetings were held with city staff and other utility providers to understand the costs necessary for all utilities and utility locates. The estimated soft costs shown (i.e. FF&E, financing, design fees, site costs, demolition, remediation, consulting, project management, contingency, etc) are about 20°k of the total. Items like remediation, design fees and even FF&E are estimates based on the best assumptions known. Additional architectural costing analysis would refine those estimates during any further design and schematic phase. This means that the soft costs and even construction costs might potentially be reduced with further design and review. The costs presented reflect 100°k of the costs. The Phase 2 shares an analysis of other cities and the specific funding sources used for comparable arenas and theaters. Some funding sources cited are not applicable in lowa however allow the reader to see the varieties of funding methods used for similar projects. Naming rights are typically used to offset capital costs. Naming right could offset the total capital cost presented if a vote was to be held on the project. For example, Cedar Rapids used to have the Five Seasons Center and now it is called the US Cellular Center. The consultants will go into further detail of the costs during their presentation. Would the escalation of costs affect the other scenarios not chosen? The answer is yes it would. Each scenario would need the same type of process used for scenario 4 in this Phase 2 study as no two scenarios are alike. If one just simply takes the escalation of the original costs in the Assessment and Study as compared to the Phase 2 for the scenario four and extrapolated that escalation to the other scenarios the chart below shows the effects for the upfront capital costs. Assessment and Study Phase 2 Scenario 4 $ 68,516,100 $ 84,791,656 1.237543526 Scenario 3 $ 46,152,220 $ 57,115,381 Scenario 2 $ 18,635,175 $ 23,061,840 Scenario 1 $ 4,686,250 $ 5,799,438 What acts can we bring to Dubuque with the expanded/improved facility? This question was asked of HR Cook, General Manager of Five Flags, who books the shows and events. A letter in the attachments to this action item from Mr. Cook shares examples of shows that are routing now or events that can be potentially hosted in our community. Each year there are different opportunities in family entertainment, sporting events that can be bid to host as well as concerts and other live events. The size of the arena floor, the height of the roof, the rigging weight capacity that performances require, the seating capacity and more goes into a decision by a promoter to host an event or show at the Civic Center. 9 Traffic Impact Assessment An initial traffic impact assessment was completed as Scenario 4 includes the closing of one block of Fifth Street. This was done outside the CSL contract and was completed by MSA Professional Services, Inc. The assessment is attached. Five Flags Civic Center Commission The Five Flags Civic Center Commission is meeting on December 14, 2018 thus no action from that meeting could be reported in this memo. Members from the Commission will be present at the City Council meeting. ACTION REQUESTED I respectfully request the City Council receive and file the Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded/Improved Five Flags Civic Center. attachments cc: Assistant City Managers Teri Goodman and Cori Burbach City Engineer Gus Psihoyos Project Manager Steve Brown Public Information Officer Randy Gehl City Attorney Crenna Brumwell Five Flags Civic Center General Manager HR Cook 10 Dubuque THE CTTY OF � DT T� r All-AmericaCiry U � Masterpiece on the Mississippi 1 I I I Ir,' mo�•zorz.zm;•am; TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Jennifer Larson, Budget Director SUBJECT: Five Flags Renovation Scenarios — Impact on the Average Homeowner DATE: December 17, 2018 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to provide supplemental information in regard to the impact of the Five Flags Renovation scenarios on the average homeowner. BACKGROUND Tionna Pooler of Independent Public Advisors provided analysis on the debt issuances for three scenarios for the Five Flags renovation. DISCUSSION The following charts summarize the impact to the average homeowner for each Five Flags Renovation scenario as compared to the Budget and Fiscal Policy Guidelines for Fiscal Year 2020 using the Fiscal Year 2020 projection as the base: Scenario 1: $5.9 Million —All Cash Funded or Fit in City Debt Schedules Scenario 1: Impact to Average Homeowner FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY24 FY20 Policy Guidelines Projected City Tax $10.4856 $10.5168 $10.8831 $11.3251 $11.9426 Rate Scenario 1 City Tax Rate Impact $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Scenario 1 Adjusted City Tax Rate $10.4856 $10.5168 $10.8831 $11.3251 $11.9426 FY20 Policy Guidelines Impact to Avg $770.17 $772.47 $799.37 $831.84 $877.19 Homeowner$ Scenario 1 Impact to Avg Homeowner$ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Scenario 1 Adjusted Impact to Avg $770.17 $772.47 $799.37 $831.84 $877.19 Homeowner Scenario 2: $23,410,000 Debt Issuance Scenario 2: lmpact to Average Homeowner FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY24 FY20 Policy Guidelines Projected City Tax $10.4856 $10.5168 $10.8831 $11.3251 $11.9426 Rate Scenario 2 City Tax Rate lmpact $0 $0.2864 $0.5760 $0.5721 $0.5660 Scenario 2 Adjusted City Tax Rate $10.4856 $10.8032 $11.4591 $11.8972 $12.5086 FY20 Policy Guidelines lmpact to Avg $770.17 $772.47 $799.37 $831.84 $877.19 Homeowner$ Scenario 2/mpact to Avg Homeowner$ $0 $20.83 $41.90 $41.61 $41.17 Scenario 2 Adjusted lmpact to Avg $770.17 $793.30 $841.27 $873.45 $918.36 Homeowner Scenario 3: $57,890,000 Debt Issuance Scenario 3: lmpact to Average Homeowner FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY24 FY20 Policy Guidelines Projected City Tax Rate $10.4856 $10.5168 $10.8831 $11.3251 $11.9426 Scenario 3 City Tax Rate lmpact $0 $0.7137 $1.4403 $1.4250 $1.4121 Scenario 3 Adjusted City Tax Rate $10.4856 $11.2305 $12.3234 $12.7501 $13.3547 FY20 Policy Guidelines lmpact to Avg Homeowner$ $770.17 $772.47 $799.37 $831.84 $877.19 Scenario 3/mpact to Avg Homeowner$ $0 $51.92 $104.76 $103.65 $102.71 Scenario 3 Adjusted lmpact to Avg Homeowner $770.17 $824.39 $904.13 $935.49 $979.90 Scenario 4: $85,910,000 Debt Issuance Scenario 4: lmpact to Average Homeowner FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY24 FY20 Policy Guidelines Projected City Tax Rate $10.4856 $10.5168 $10.8831 $11.3251 $11.9426 Scenario 4 City Tax Rate lmpact $0 $1.0656 $2.1465 $2.1270 $2.1060 Scenario 4 Adjusted City Tax Rate $10.4856 $11.5824 $13.0296 $13.4521 $14.0486 FY20 Policy Guidelines lmpact to Avg Homeowner$ $770.17 $772.47 $799.37 $831.84 $877.19 Scenario 4/mpact to Avg Homeowner$ $0 $77.51 $156.13 $154.71 $153.18 Scenario 4 Adjusted lmpact to Avg Homeowner $770.17 $849.98 $955.50 $986.55 $1,030.37 2 The Fiscal Year 2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program is currently being reviewed and balanced, so there are no new revised Fiscal Year 2020 debt projections yet. The following chart shows the impact of the Five Flags Renovation scenarios on the City's statutory debt capacity as compared to the statutory debt capacity in the FY 2019 Five-Year CIP: Impact to Statutory Debt Capacity FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 Statutory Debt Capacity Used: FY19-FY24 CIP 50.95°k 45.55°k 41 .08°k 37.00°k 34.18°k Scenario 1 : $5.9 Million - All Cash Funded 50.95°k 45.55°k 41 .08°k 37.00°k 34.18°k Scenario 2: $23.41 Million Debt Issuance 56.13°k 55.52°k 50.50°k 45.86°k 42.50°k Scenario 3: $57.89 Million Debt Issuance 63.76°k 70.22°k 64.37°k 58.94°k 54.78°k Scenario 4: $85.91 Million Debt Issuance 69.96°k 82.16°k 75.66°k 69.57°k 64.77°k The City does not have final property assessments from the Dubuque County Auditor for Fiscal Year 2020. The statutory debt capacity is based on estimated valuations until final valuations are received by December 31 , 2018. These statutory debt capacity used projections vary from the debt capacity figures provided by Independent Public Advisors because debt payments for Fiscal Year 2020 and planned debt issuances through the Fiscal Year 2019 budget process are considered. The Fiscal year 2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program will be balanced prior to January 2019. Additional information will be provided at that time in regard to the Five Flags Renovation scenarios and the impact on other debt issuances planned in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program. 3 DRAFT COPY �r; .. - - - — � �� , � ,� � � .� � _ '" � - ` ' � _- � , � � � ,,,� � .y - - �, .— �� '',�- � , � �. .�� , �°� � , �� rr�ra i f�,��l,��'j''� � � , �G � � _ . .ir� � {� — Q. 3w✓� " —��— 'A.a�" � � � �— � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� _'_"'_ ' ' �� -.�� .. .. .. - .. � .. . - �� a � S1 _ � � � — . I ' ,�� , �. �� ^;; ��, ,�� . _ �. � , � ' � �"� i tl � E -� - �, � �` � \\\\\�\\ ` �" �� 1 • ' I I► 4� \ I�'. , � '.� � ,1 � r 'T� ��Y I1�� i\ ■� �� F �� 41� � I �_�� ., � , I � i � � � A �-�-�, �y � ��, r,�,a,. � �'��'+4��, . ' . W � ` � �' % _� �, � � �. �. e�r —. ,, - 7 �;, �`��,, �. �� '"�_�-�= ��a� i. j �R v �` d'� l�� '�'.r.: , � � ' �� . �� ,�� . � � Av .l �� "� +� y e � � � � % �� .',. .l. � �C � s,:'. , .. a � - �' �,:.�ry.,,�..,. . .. .�}.S'� �` . . DRAFT COPY December 12, 2018 Ms. Marie L. Ware Leisure Services Manager City of Dubuque Leisure Services Department 2200 Bunker Hill Road Dubuque, lowa 52001 Dear Ms. Ware: The purpose of this summary report and supporting documents is to outline the findings of requested additional research, analysis and planning work associated with the proposed Five Flags Civic Center (FFCC) improvement and expansion project. The work outlined herein (referred to as'Phase 2") builds on thework and findings reached in theAssessment and Study Regarding the Future of the FFCC, dated June 19, 2018. Conventions, Sports& Leisure International (CSL), with the assistance of subcontrectors Betsch Associates and FEH Design, led both the original study and this current Phase 2 planning effort. It is understood that the City of Dubuque (City) desires to advance planning associated with a potential major renovation/improvement project for the FFCC, in advance of a potential ballot measure in 2019 to securefundingfortheproject. Specifically,theservicestobeprovidedincludedevelopmentofmorerefined layout,programming and preliminary architectural renderings, along with various research and investigation into estimated development costs and funding issues associated with the proposed FFCC project. Given the expedited timeframe required to complete this work effort, a summary of our work and findings is presented herein. This report outlines the key research, analysis, and findings associated with the contrected Phase 2 advisory effort, and is organized in the following sections: Section Page Number 1. Backgmund and Previous Work.....................................................2 2. Scope and Methods .....................................................................4 3. Facility Design and Layout............................................................5 4. ParkingMalysis ........................................................................ 16 5. Operating Performance Estimates................................................20 6. Economic Impact Estimates........................................................24 7. Construction Cost Estimates........................................................27 8. Malysis of Funding Issues..........................................................29 9. Conditions of Work....................................................................43 Supporting Documentation (provided separetely) co��a�no�s,sPons a�a�s�,a m�a,�ano�ai ezo N��oua�nnau.s��a ezo.nn��aapous,nnN eeaoz. Taiapno�a ei zzea.z000.Fa�s�m��ia ei zzea.zoae DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 2 of 44 1. Background and Previous Work In 2017, following a competitive bid process, the team of CSL, Betsch Associates and FEH Design was hired by the City to conduct an assessment and study of the FFCC. CSL has provided feasibility studies and planning advisory services for more than 1,000 event facility projects throughout the country over the past 25 years. Betsch Associates is a full-service design firm created to provide its clients with traditional architectural services, as well as complete pre-design services, including strategic planning, land planning, financial feasibility and market analysis. FEH Design, with offices in Dubuque, has operated since 1958 and offers over 360 years of active staff design experience. The FFCC has long-served as an important community asset for Dubuque and its residents. Its long history can be traced back to the mid-1800s with the opening of hotel and theater facilities in downtown Dubuque. Over the years, Five Flags has served as a critical gathering place in Dubuque, hosting thousands of entertainment, pertorming arts, sports, conventions, and civic events. The two primary elements of the current Five Flags Civic Center are the 4,000-seat Arena and the 700-seat historic pertorming arts Theater. In the decades since the last major investment in Five Flags, significant changes have occurred within the eventfacility industry nationwide. Atthe sametime, additional new event, sports and entertainmentfacilities have been developed elsewhere in Dubuque and in the region. As such, the City was interested in determining the most appropriate path forward as it relates to the Five Flags Civic Center and its ongoing role in Dubuque. Specifically, the purpose of the 2017 study was to assess the FFCC's current physical state and programmatic orientation, and conduct a study of market demand, supportable program, financial, economic, naming rights/sponsorship and feasible development scenarios relating to the future of the FFCC. A high-level summary of the primary conclusions reached by the FFCC Study concluded in 2018 includes the following: 1. Market support exists for both improved Arena and Theater facility products in Dubuque. a) The FFCC has long-served as an important community asset for Dubuque and its residents. b) Local quality of life and economic activity would be negatively impacted without a venue serving these roles. c) The FFCC Theater is an historic asset that should be protected. d) The FFCC's current location is ideal for an entertainmenUsports/arts complex. e) The FFCC Arena has exceeded its practical life. f) The FFCC Arena physical product and functionality are below industry standards. g) Significant upgrades to the FFCC Arena product are needed to better compete for and serve spectator and entertainment event segments. h) Investment in FFCC enhancements or redevelopment would be expected to drive new activity and positive impacts. i) The highest-and-best-use of the FFCC asset (building and land) is a multipurpose civic/entertainmenUarts complex. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 3 of 44 2. Four facility scenarios were identified for further high-level analysis for comparison purposes, including preliminary site configuration and layout drawings: • Scenario 1: Effectively represents a minimum, status quo scenario, recognizing that a certain level of expenditures will be required in the near term and in the foreseeable future on deferred maintenance and future capital repair/replacement items to keep the FFCC safe and operational by current standards. • Scenario 2: Involves a limited FFCC renovation (no expansion of facility footprint). • Scenario 3: Represents a renovated complex with an expanded Arena. • Scenario 4: Involves a demolition ofthe existing FFCC Arena, improvementsto FFCC Theater, and the development of a new, state-of-the-industry Arena via a northward expansion of the FFCCs footprint. 3. Preliminary order-of-magnitude capital costs (in 2018 dollars) were estimated for each of the four identified scenarios: • Scenario 1: $8.7 million • Scenario 3: $25.8 million • Scenario 3: $49.0 million • Scenario 4: $71.4 million 4. A summary of key estimated annual pertormance metrics for an assumed stabilized year of operation (assumed third full year of operations, in 2018 dollars) included the following: •- Events 103 138 194 230 EventDays 152 207 293 333 Utilization Days 261 346 479 536 Total Attendee Days(annual) 155,612 217,348 324,913 386,207 Non-LocalAttendeeDays 33,863 47,182 73,730 89,122 Hotel Room Nights(annual) 4,427 6,121 10,440 12,820 Opereting Revenues $410,000 $570,457 $1,137,160 $1,531,060 Operetinq Expenses $1,266,000 $1,381,603 $1,798,852 $2,002,457 Direct Spending $2,389,169 $3,055,223 $4,753,391 $5,737,937 Indirect/InducedSpendinq $910,680 $1,161,888 $1,806,039 $2,185,052 TotalOutput $3,299,850 $4,217,111 $6,559,429 $7,922,990 Personal Income(eamings) $1,062,529 $1,357,070 $2,114,236 $2,554,431 Employment(full& part-time jobs) 49 63 97 117 A detailed written report was developed and presented to the City in the spring of 2018. CSL presented findings to City Council in May 2018. A revised report was delivered to the City in June 2018. The City Council formally accepted the report in July 2018. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 4 of 44 2. Scope and Methods Subsequent to the delivery of the 2017/2018 study report and presentations, additional discussion among City leadership and project stakeholders continued. The project team was approached by City staff in October 2018 to discuss additional planning assistance. An amended contract for these services was executed between the City and CSL in November 2018. The City directed the project team to focus on Scenario 4 (as conceptualized in the 2017/2018 study) for the purposes of the newly-contracted Phase 2 planning work. The aforementioned Scenario 4 now represents the proposed facility Project of all Phase 2 work outlined throughout the remainder of this document and supporting information. The Project involves a demolition of the existing FFCC Arena, improvements to FFCC Theater, and the development of a new, state-of-the-industry Arena via a northward expansion of the FFCCs footprint. The Phase 2 effort involved multi-day visits by the project team to Dubuque, as well as the collaboration and participation of a variety of stakeholder and industry experts. CSL and Betsch Associates would like to thank the following individuals for their expertise, assistance, and contributions: Marie Ware—City of Dubuque Dennis Jordan-Mortenson Construction Co. HR Cook—Five Flags CentedSMG Randy Clarahan -Mortenson Construction Co. Daniel Holtkamp—Five Flags Center Jason Hopper- Mortenson Construction Co. Ali Levasseur—Five Flags Center Darin Knapp-Mortenson Construction Co. Kelly Sprietzer—Five Flags Center Brant Schueller—City of Dubuque Christy Monk—FEH Design Steve Sampson Brown —City of Dubuque Bryan Blair—FEH Design Wally Wemimont-Ci[y of Dubuque Paula Portz—Legends Project Development David Johnson-City of Dubuque Dieter Muhlack—MEP Engineers Gus Psihoyos-City of Dubuque Bob Habel—MEP Engineers Dave Ness—City of Dubuque DavidCampbell—GeigerEngineers TonyKress—CityofDubuque Bob Leto—Avant Acoustics Chris Kohlmann—City of Dubuque Steve Young—William Caruso and Partners Renee Tyler—City of Dubuque EmilySmart— BlackstoneEnvironmental BrentGiese—CenturyLink Travis Haas—Blackstone Environmental Bryce Parks—Five Flags Civic Center Commission Jayme Kluesner—Portzen Construction Lenore Howard - Fly By Night Productions Andrew Noble—Portzen Construction Doug Donald -Fly By Night Productions Ben Roush—Conlon Construction Co. Nick Schrup—American Trust Bank Keefe Gaherty—Conlon Construction Co. Mark Wahlert—Dubuque Symphony Tionna Pooler—Independent Public Advisors William Intriligator— Dubuque Symphony Thierry Gray—SMG A primary objective for this current work is to further investigate, evaluate, and define the identified facility concept to provide for the Project: 1. enhanced programmatic and architectural detail; 2. refinements and more detailed estimates of likely capital costs; 3. further evaluation and analysis of parking issues; 4. an updated cosUbenefit analysis; and 5. discussion of relevant funding issues. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 5 of 44 3. Facility Design and Layout As previously mentioned, the Project involves a demolition of the existing FFCC Arena, improvements to FFCC Theater, and the development of a new, state-of-the-industry Arena via a northward expansion of the FFCC's footprint. The 2017/2018 study identified the following as market supportable for the FFCC Project: • Arena: o State-of-the-industry, spectator arena o Seating capacity of between 6,000 and 8,000 o Some flexible seating to retain access to flat floor space o Premium seating and other hospitality areas o Enhance patron experience—ingress/egress, WiFi, food & beverage, ADA, etc. o Upgraded back-of-house, load-in/out and other support facilities • Theater: o Retention of historic Theater o Refurbish seating and make 2nd Balcony seating functional o Modest expansion of Bijou Black Box Theater o Address capital improvement project items o Enhance patron experience—lobby, WiFi, food and beverage options, etc. o Upgraded back-of-house facilities As a starting point for this Phase 2 effort, CSL further defined the market supportable program targets for the Arena component of the Project, as shown below. This does not represent the final program that was determined subsequent to the design and costing process by the project team with collaboration by City staff and the construction professionals previously identified in this report. Final identified seat counts are shown on page 14. MARKET Supporhable Seating Levels: SUPPORTABLE 4,350 Fixed seats(general admission) PROGRAM 120 Suite seats(12 seats per suite,24 per party suite) 112 Loge seats(4 seats per box) Modern 400 Club seats Multipurpose 1500 Removable/bleacherseats Spedator& 6,482 Total fixed seats(hockey capacity) Entertainment 7,082 Capacity(end stage concert, including floor seating) Arena Supporhable Premium Areas: 6 Privatesuites(traditional) 2 Private suites(party) 28 Loge boxes 400 Club seats 1 Club#1 (suite,loge box&club seat holders) 1 Club#2(Everyman's Club) DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 6 of 44 For the purposes of definition, the following description provides additional clarification concerning premium seating concepts, as they relate to the Dubuque Project and industry best practices: Private Suites Private (or luxury) suites often feature 12 to 16 seats and include preferred parking, VIP arena entrance, private restrooms, N monitors, exclusive arena club access and a right of first refusal to purchase tickets for other events in the building. In Dubuque, the suites could be located on one side. Club Seats Club seats are located in optimal event locations, typically in the lower bowl and/or mezzanine level. Club seats are wider, padded and typically provide more legroom relative to standard arena seating. Club seat amenities typically include preferred parking, a private arena entrance and exclusive access to a private club/lounge with private restrooms, upgraded food and beverage service, casual seating areas and flat screen televisions, among other amenities. In Dubuque, the 400 club seats could be located in the lower bowl on one side adjacent to the private club (i.e., a section stretching from first row to top row of lower bowl as close to mid-courUfloor as possible without becoming problematic with end-stage setup.) Loqe Boxes The emergence of a smaller loge box product has also served to meet a market need for a smaller- capacity premium seating product. Loge boxes, for example, typically have seating for 4 people (versus 12 to 16 seats for traditional suites) with chairs on roller casters that are wider and more comfortable than general seating areas. Loge boxes are typically equipped with a drink rail and flat screen television monitor. Loge box amenities typically could include preferred parking, a private arena entrance and exclusive access to a private lounge with private restrooms, upgraded food and beverage service and casual seating areas among other amenities. In Dubuque, there would be flexibility in where the loge boxes are located. Normally, they would be placed at the edges of the club seating area orin the corners. Club Rooms/Areas Normally, modern areas would incorporate multiple private clubs (for instance, one for club seat holders, one for private suite holders, and an additional one or two). In Dubuque, it would probably be appropriate to think in terms of a single private club behind the club seating area that is also accessible by private suite holders. Additionally, a lower finish "Everyman's Club" area could be included at the concourse level on one of the ends. Clubs would have views of the playing surtace with drink rails, stool chairs, and other chairs, couches,furniture, and food and drink service. Over the course of the four-week engagement, including a multi-day site visit, outreach and collaboration with a variety of local stakeholders/participants and national industry professionals, Betsch Associates completed further refinement of the ProjecYs layout, design, programming, and estimated construction costs. The exhibits on the following pages present a selection of some of the new layouts, drawings and renderings developed under this Phase 2 engagement. The full package of architectural documents is provided separately from this report document. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 7 of 44 �, �,. * aaa F � � �„_ � �F�F � E � F � �' r� i � ill �� .:_ - � L, � e � l �, , �� s � �r v.ae.. � x s�.�_. . .� ��.. . . � o!��Y 3�� '�—'j��_,.. 'q.�ll � ;'�..� ,1 1^�,�- �'��-. . . � '-yar�- � '�� I ..... .. . • ' - � � _ , � w�Y' , pb� : :--tCy Yj�,� n ' � , �4�� +' � .W..a �d � �`- � �, ��..:�&:. a('� �Y .' . _ 1 y�-•�"'�.jS N�r n �_� ( . r.f1f1t � : v ��" � �.�1 � S •x�d , .. :�` � � w � . 3. ' �' � � u..r:v:- �'�+ r ,a � >' � 'X .Y ■ � �� " �•i .A fi� - � . ��V.�( . �� , " � � t -- f, � �. J+ii � i" �e: �!�� ' �ie�:� � �.� i.�, 1 IIII � , . C�,�_��N� � �s�.,� ��°� � � ��a�' � ��,. ,, , .._ _ �, � d �� ' ' ' ` �'..: � `,�� . , � �� r� � \\� - _��;� " - N ��r„y� �� r "��, � �,t� !d :a, Y . • - , y � � P�� -� '4v � �f '• r \ � i � �� ., , ��,� ` °' � �� DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 8 of 44 I �I 4 � //'�_ � ^ _�� ; ,� � ! �u!!�� --. �� _ _ �: �,. � � = _ _ � , � _ � � � � � � i- i-i � i � � � � W� �'.� ' � � � - �- � � , , � � � - c , �� ti,� � • � � � . _ �;, � �� _�� ,a �� o � �a-�._-�--,_>� - - -'��. �;- _-�� - _-- ,-- •.� _.. �� ....�_'�''!�Pr�. ',�""w,,, '"°�'�a�.�-�""��111� ^��•� i �� 1\ �� d � ��\��F�� w� � 44_�� , ��4�'�W �� --� � � j � � ��- � 7�' � ' y � � � � � ;,�� . �� i �•��- .. n�� . ' �'.. � DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 9 of 44 � l �'�'�`��P�� 11�"i � '�{ �� f __. T , t�qZT�� i ., ^ — ��_—_: �� . �� 7 � � ?� �� y� t�. �+ " 1 � l � � � � �. �� , � ��_ , '� �� . � � r �`� ; _ , r � , � � :� �� .. �!� % j I � � �, �-� �� s , � � , � :��p�- �� { ;�' � i I� 1�\` .� ., � � � � � � �~�� L � i � � � ' � �� : �' _ , � _ � ;� �/ , - � ,�' ��'� , =� DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 10 of 44 r � \ � �; � �� S �� ' �'; I � =ai ! I � �:' _. , � ' ��, < Theater Lobby , v iak4 � � 1'��, I _' +'' � �! (� , � � � ,� `i' ti Y 1M1� l � i� _ � ,��, � � �� r 3�� T;� �'' �. " � ` :._- _ -.��: ��..��A ' '1 � V .IW�� \.v��._ ` DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 11 of 44 � - � 4 o a o o a o �� ° � � � �� o � � � _ � { � Q ; _�_ e S � � ' � 1 I � I � I 4� i � � �� .( ..i O t .. �� ___, .�, i � � �� r_ �__-�_� � � p �I o � � � � \� O \� �" � , ! �52� \\ � �� II ��Ll � �6 �� ' � � Q 'n tt j o � � � 1��` � o.e� Q �j �' �'1 p � ,�y� � '�� Q.o Q :. � �' Q.o � m +o I � 9 0 � r� � � ! o ° ` �� I � � � � I ° � � � � � a � p q P I � o � ! OO 1 � o S oo �� Q � I � o I � 0 S _ o � � � o � o� � � � � � ; � o '�� i ° � . � � � i ; � � a � � _� I � � � o — o � ; � i � � $ � ' � � � o � � � � , y � � � P� ,� o a o � � � � � � � i ' � . � ; o� �- � o � o I� i i �� _ \ n R I� 4 ' _ � � � . l � � � I � � o � p � �� 'Y7f ro / � o c4 �---------- —----7 i � I , � � , ~ � � � � � � , I o ' � , a ¢ �——� ! T—�- � % � � � . ' i � ' � !� � \� �� a � ��- t� ; � � ' . L i � � �� —�—-�—�—�- p � �� , � - ; � �i ;� ; � � � , �; � 8 o- � i � .-+� 7�� . �-_"'1 � I� z � .f"__t � �: i � s � p � > , � r � Ro � �� o _ '. ,, ; � � � � � � � ; p � � � [� �� ;�oJj�``� ' _ ' .i i � -� -� ° p I o o ��1yj�.- 4 Y V II.' I i �� *- - � � Zo �g �� o > �pi r � � o 00 �� L J c I - ' F- _ � a' .0—�-+�� ' � � i � � � r � � - � ' �" ___ � s > a- � y� y- - ' �� U ��\\Ull\1��UU��t� �� I " � '�Z c'�`� cTc'� ---- ",� .._ a �, � � , � � z � � � , � �� --- � �� k � � ��Up�� "� �RAFT COPY Ms_ Marie Ware �ecerr�ber -1 2, 20-1 S Page -1 2 of 44 � ----� -- � � -- - �_ - � m -i- ��-� ` -- - ` t� � � _ � - t - � � e�-� _- - � � � � � � a_o � �. � -9 -s � o o e o o� � �o � - �� -:z�- � r� _� a �_ � - e� �- -- � � � — - m � -� � _ � �m =----_- � �� -- � � - _ � � , � , �� e � --�- .� � �- � � s�� o � � �- o- �� _ a� � � -s z., �e �� o ve � - � - � � � - � � � � � � �� -�- ,� � _ �� ---- � �� _ � -�-- �m � - �� e� � � � � � � --- � � � ,. �� rl � �. � �. � � � - DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 13 of 44 � , �� , � a � � 0 � _,� � � � � � °� � � �� 3� � �� °� � �� , ��. �� _ � _ a � � � � � _„ �- � �� .� � � �. __�� °� � a�. Q � b ;► � � 1► � � �� -,► � s � • � �3 DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 14 of 44 i � ��i I / r = ��n��, 1� �� — .— -- !,II � Y� I ��rvn ��-p��L - ' �r- �o,�wn ll�. _ I �pinelcr - k��+i�rnn� '� u��nr�ea�.� �'� qd' ri�`F— �4�� '�°'�°� �� r�aa.a�� —� ,G°anf's°f�€a' ' � iod � �-=NY� I w�i��m�� il �� ; %'c�xa- 1 is.�- � � � , .�.�.,� �, f'� I � . i94n ,i aGe��. N' . � „��... ARNF u;UN� . ; II � � .2's �zizq7 `� �x�n I �(v�c+,��.ric�eelaa��ir�`��ir�wi�,r ��. � �,ry�, f ny. � „ �; �i � r —._ ' I — � � 1 "r � ��_-_ � , 1 „ i ��,___, � �'�� ' � �n��- �° ��s� � � �� +' �uo�, ;�<�w I i �� u��m„v�� '� ' , � � �,�r„� i � €� �9e' �" � . = ��,�a.��wr-� —� --. �.ru;Ar�m �`� — � L`� II w4 - -- � - _- I�� II�. . � � . �.._ . ,��.�.a„�..�',.� e� «t. - Ili � .�.r .:. SF.GfILNfi�+I cAIGauRE� �=I'o" ��. - � FN¢NNf,aa'6R- BErx�YKeciMCS,iN�. ilali8 ��.:. . DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 15 of 44 A summary of the ProjecYs seating levels, capacity by primary type of event is presented in the exhibit below. As shown, total seating capacity is 6,398 for a hypothetical end-stage concert event and 6,000 for a hypothetical floor event (i.e., no portable floor seats). The seating count includes six (6) private suites, two (2) party suites, 32 loge boxes, 360 club seats, and general admission seats (through fixed, telescopic and floor seats). End-stage Floor Seating Counts by Type Concert Event Fixed Seating Count: Loge Boxes(32) 64 64 Fixed Seats(general) 3,254 Club Seats(2 sections) 360 360 Fixed Seats(premium) 532 Suites(6) 72 72 TelescopicSeats(max) 2126 PartySuites(2) 36 36 Total 5,912 TelescopicSeating Behind Stage -- 1,182 Fixed Seats Behind Stage(Upper) -- 530 TelescopicFrontofStage(Lower) 982 944 SquareFootageByLevel: Fixed Seats Front ofStage(Lower) 1,652 1,652 Arena Level 99,326 FixedSeatsFrontofStage(Upper) 1,072 1,072 Concourse 61,194 FloorSeats 2,072 -- UpperLevel 20,960 ADA Seating with Companions 88 88 Total GSF 181,480 Totals 6,398 Q000 Estimates related to the total Project gross square footage (in terms of new construction and renovated space) is presented in the exhibit below. NewCanstructian RenwatedAreas Arere 161,480 SF 0 SF AraneLaval 99,326 SF (Ancourea Laval 61,194 SF UpperSealingLevel 2Q960 SF Theao-e 0 SF 3,393 SF Basemen� 993 S�ree�Level Flrs�Balcony Secontl Balcony Thlrtl Belcony 2,400 Theao-e Swpa[Areaz 0 SF 25,844 SF Beeamant 3,503 Siraat Laval 1 Q767 (Ancourea Laval 11,574 TMalCmtli[ionetlBul6rgArea 181,480 SF 29,23] SF NonCortli[imetlAreaz 3,95] SF 150 SF Wnoplae(e�50%) 360 0 Celwelke(el 50%) 2,]04 150 EX�BtlOr Rempe(el SO%) O O Ovarhenge/Arcetlae(e�50%) 893 0 TMaI Gross BuiltlingArea 185,43] SF 29,38] SF DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 16 of 44 4. Parking Analysis As there continues to be discussion as to parking impacts and implications associated with the Project, additional research was conducted to lend more support to the conclusion in the 2017/2018 study that existing parking availability nearby the site in downtown Dubuque is sufficientto adequately absorb demand associated with the Project. Based on industry standards, it is oflen recommended that one parking space be available for approximately every three(3)seats. Therefore, based on the ProjecPs maximum seating capacity of Q398 seats, an estimated 2,133 parking spaces could be required to serve the FFCC for high demand events. In a rere situation where all FFCC spaces (Arena, Theater and Meeting Rooms) could theoretically be occupied by maximum-attended activities, total industry standard parking space requirements could rise to an estimated 2,366. The required parking spaces can be provided in a combination of on-site spaces directly controlled by arena management and existing or new parking within a reasonable walking distance (5 to 10 minutes) of the arena. Dispersing parking thorough the immediate area would serve to encourage patronage of area businesses within the downtown area by attendees in connection with FFCC attendance. Provided by the City's Transportation Services Department, the following map outlines key downtown Dubuque parking proximate to the FFCC. aa • • ' • zz az $ �5 55 ... g : ' , � § R93 � 3J 441 . � 8 ." sie 8 111 0R � � 19 ,591 1$ 46 513 �ev2¢vicemer� 399 .i � 16 $ 1080 25 $ . $ � � 19d � As shown, there are a number of parking opportunities nearby the FFCC. Specifically, there are nearly 7,000 parking spaces within a 15-minute walk of the FFCC (more than 4,000 of which are free of charge afler S:OOpm or 6:OOpm—times afler which the majority of FFCC attendees will be arriving for most events). DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 17 of 44 Further, as shown on the map below, even with the loss of approximately 80 existing parking space (Municipal Lot 10) due to the north parcel needed for expansion, there will still be an estimated 2,222 parking spaces through ramps and public surface lots(not including street parking)with approximately two blocks of a FFCC enVance. The northward expansion of the Projed site and the creation of a new north end Main Entrance and Plaza will make the 1,000+ parking spaces in the large two nearby ramps to the east much more desirable for FFCC attendees. ` +� ; ,� � �� ' . �i , rr � �, . ��ry 1� • , �•� l` ' �¢ �� ) �� . \\ ',n'�. 1 ' �` ,»+� � �� y � 1 `�, �� •`' � '" �; � ,� '� � .�� = .•4� , 4 " A� tmi '� � r _ � � � . • � `�,' � �" , _ ��- � -; � 1. � � ^ , �< o,� � �v. , , � �d ,�- � , Y ��,� s ,'•, � � � S� _�� ` �, � � �•�: ��.�,� ��, _ �:: r,. , ' � r� '� �'� '° . �, , � � :,� �:�<�`��. - � � � � . . .. � �., . y . . : �.:�. -_�°,.,+� ;�`�. ,�>y . -�:E� i = 2,222 parking spaces ��^ - ��- �� (rempsentleurfecelo�sonly)wi�hin , � �� ' �� , ^ appmz 2 blocks of a FFCC entrance � �' ' � � Y�t�,�._�� 7 � �{ '1 s, ' � �,I' . v � � �1:�� # � �i.��~� � 0�,�� . While latent downtown Dubuque parking demand may be moderate to high during daytime working hours Monday through Friday for certain lots, ramps, and street spaces, it is important to frst recognize that the vast majority of high attendance events are entertainmenVspectator events that occur in the evenin hours or on weekends. This supply and demand pattern is typical for nearly all entertainmenVspectator event venues and tends to beneft event facilities that are located in central business districts of downtowns. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 18 of 44 Shown below, a bird's-eye view aerial rendering Qooking north to south)gives a sense as the proximity the two existing parking ramps Qower lefl) would be relative to the new positioning of the FFCC Project. Demand at these two ramps are low on the weekends and afler the S:OOpm hour midweek-the time periods when most major FFCC events would occur. r� . ^y.a� � � �� _ y' ' - �- ,�. I =� �;` �a rt. _ -�. r, � t� �� -$ � � „ �",� � a � �ir� s �.�C� - _ .J � � � � ��.r+ _ • a S � t " �.'�` _ ,�'� , :,-.� �o�, p � ` � � �� '��[N��,. - � '• ,.�� 1 ' t�S . � _ ,., �� ,� �;� � t � _ ��'' f ��y_�y'�=�� " �* -r Adjusted for seating capacity, the parking supply in downtown Dubuque proximate to the proposed Project is more plentiful and less costly than that associated with most comparable arena venues located in other markets throughout the country. Thefollowing exhibit presents the estimated parking supply serving some successful comparable venues, with a comparison to the FFCQ Perking Es�lrre�etl See�ing Speoes Pmxlme�e Gove�ege QN.S�B�E FBOIIIN WpB01N NEEIIEII(1� SOppIV RI PEICEItlBqE La Cmsse,WI La Cmsse Cen�er 19,100 6,36] 5,369 84°/ Evansville,M FON Cen�er 11,000 3,66] 4,000 109°/ CorpusCM1ns�i,TX AmencanBankCen�er 10,000 3,333 Q200 126°/ Blooming�on,IL GmssingerMo�orsArena 9,146 3,049 2,59] 85°/ Beaurron�,TX FONArena 9,000 3,000 5,000 i6]°/ Bemitlji,MN SanfoN Cen�er 6,000 2,000 1,200 60°/ PrescotlValley,AZ PrescotlValleyEven�Cen�er 6,200 2,06] 3,000 145°/ Dotl eQ ,KS Uni�etlWvelessArena 4,935 1,645 1,600 9]°/ Average 9.423 3.141 3.3]1 10]°h Metlian 9,0]3 3,024 3,500 116°h Dubuque Es[imaRtl Supply`MMin PrecEcal Walking Disfnnce Dubuque,lA�2) FFCC�ExisEng) 4,000 1}33 6,500 488°h Dubuque,lA�2) NewFFCC�mazArena) 6,398 2,133 6,500 305°h Dubuque,lA�2) NewFFCC�mazArena�TM1eaRr) ],098 2}66 6,500 2]5°h Dubuque Es[imaRtl Supply Ramd��Supply`MMin 2 Blocks Dubuque,lA@J FPoG(Exls�ingJ 4,000 1,333 2,222 18]°/ Dubuque,lA@J NewFFGG(mexAreneJ 8,388 2,133 2,122 104°/ Dubuque,lA@J NewFFGG(mexArene+TM1ee�erJ ],OBB 2,388 2,222 84°/ �1�Edra�olellonbaz�onlitluc�ry�ryVmlawmmeitlelloncllpakligepse{rer9�x. �2�E91meletlpakligeu�qlywNM1lnrvsswblewalkligtlklece.Facetlmmmrermllo�wl�M1tl�yoRcleketl�orlalll�yme�emeiM1 �9�RepresertcmrerybllcismpaitleuRecepeMligeupply�NOTWCW�INGatreeryerdigorpMelelNc�wl�HnapyodmelelyNwbl¢kccl�IreFFCC. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 19 of 44 Based on industry standards and a review of parking supply in downtown Dubuque, it is not believed that the development of additional parking structures or lots will be necessary for any of the identified FFCC development scenarios. Conversely, downtown Dubuque's volume, availability and pricing of parking supply nearby the FFCC is considered a product strength relative to other comparable venues located throughout the region and country. It would be expected that parking demand with regard to the Project will be further mitigated through the continued expansion and consumer acceptance of ride sharing services (i.e., Uber, Lyft), as well as the much more functional and attractive passenger load/unload areas at the Plaza/Main Entrance for the drop- off and pick-up of FFCC attendees. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 20 of 44 5. Operating Performance Estimates The market, financial and economic model developed for the 2017/18 study was expanded and revised to consider the FFCC Project under this Phase 2 effort. Based on the program assumptions discussed herein, the exhibit below presents a summary of the estimated annual event levels, event days, and utilization days (move-in days, event days, and move-out days)by event type forthe FFCC Project during the startup period and over a cumulative period of years. Estimated FFCC Projed Annual Event and Utilization Levels Stabilized Vear 1-15 Veare 130 Vear1 Vear2 Vear3 Cumulative Cumulative Number of Events Community/Religious 5 6 8 115 235 Concerts 21 20 21 314 629 Convention/Tradeshow 5 5 6 88 178 Family/Ice Shows 10 11 12 177 357 Meetings/Banquets 40 50 50 740 1,490 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 18 19 20 297 597 PubliGConsumerShow 3 4 5 72 147 Sporting Events 50 55 60 885 1,785 TenantPerfortnance 26 26 26 390 780 Other 17 21 25 363 738 Total 195 217 233 3,441 6,936 Event Days Community/Religious 5 6 8 115 235 Concerts 23 22 23 338 677 Convention/Tradeshow 8 8 9 132 267 Family/Ice Shows 12 13 14 212 428 Meetings/Banquets 40 50 50 740 1,490 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 42 44 47 693 1,393 PubliGConsumerShow 5 6 8 108 221 Sporting Events 61 67 74 1,085 2,188 Tenant Perfortnance 96 96 96 1,438 2,876 Other 5 6 8 108 221 Total 295 318 335 4,970 9,996 Utilization Days Community/Religious 8 9 12 173 353 Concerts 24 23 24 362 726 Convention/Tradeshow 15 15 18 264 534 Family/Ice Shows 14 15 17 248 500 Meetings/Banquets 60 75 75 1,110 2,235 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 48 51 53 792 1,592 PubliGConsumerShow 8 10 13 180 368 Sporting Events 76 83 91 1,342 2,706 Tenant Perfortnance 202 202 202 3,023 6,045 Other 24 30 36 522 1,061 Total 478 513 540 8,015 16,119 DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 21 of 44 The exhibit below presents a summary of the estimated attendee days by event type for the FFCC Project during the startup period and over a cumulative period of years. A portion of the total attendee base represents non-local attendees (i.e., attendees that do not reside in Dubuque) and a modest portion of these non-local attendees represent visitors that require overnight lodging. As such, estimates relative to non-local attendee days and hotel room nights have also been presented. Estimated FFCC Project Annual Attendance& Hotel Room Nights Stabilized Vear 1-15 Veare 130 Vear1 Vear2 Vear3 Cumulative Cumulative Total Attentlee Days Community/Religious 11,500 13,800 18,400 264,500 540,500 Concerts 61,062 58,154 61,062 913,015 1,828,938 Convention/Tradeshow 11,250 11,250 13,500 198,000 400,500 Family/Ice Shows 21,000 23,100 25,200 371,700 749,700 Meetings/Banquets 10,000 12,500 12,500 185,000 372,500 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 28,350 29,925 31,500 467,775 940,275 PubliGConsumerShow 8,100 10,800 13,500 194,400 396,900 Sporting Events 79,677 87,645 95,613 1,410,290 2,844,484 Tenant Perfortnance 122,241 122,241 122,241 1,833,609 3,667,219 Other 11,156 13,781 16,406 238,219 484,313 Total 364,336 383,196 409,921 6,076,509 12,225,329 Non-Local Attentlee Days Community/Religious 1,150 1,380 1,840 26,450 54,050 Concerts 18,318 17,446 18,318 273,905 548,682 Convention/Tradeshow 5,625 5,625 6,750 99,000 200,250 Family/Ice Shows 6,300 6,930 7,560 111,510 224,910 Meetings/Banquets 2,500 3,125 3,125 46,250 93,125 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 4,253 4,489 4,725 70,166 141,041 PubliGConsumerShow 2,430 3,240 4,050 58,320 119,070 Sporting Events 15,935 17,529 19,123 282,058 568,897 Tenant Perfortnance 24,448 24,448 24,448 366,722 733,444 Other 3,347 4,134 4,922 71,466 145,294 Total 84,306 88,346 94,861 1,405,846 2,828,762 Hotel Room Nights Community/Religious 230 276 368 5,290 10,810 Concerts 2,748 2,617 2,748 41,086 82,302 Convention/Tradeshow 1,875 1,875 2,250 33,000 66,750 Family/Ice Shows 420 462 504 7,434 14,994 Meetings/Banquets 500 625 625 9,250 18,625 Non-Tenant Perfortnance 638 673 709 10,525 21,156 PubliGConsumerShow 97 130 162 2,333 4,763 Sporting Events 1,062 1,169 1,275 18,804 37,926 Tenant Perfortnance 3,667 3,667 3,667 55,008 110,017 Other 893 1,103 1,313 19,058 38,745 Total 12,130 12,596 13,620 201,787 406,088 DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 22 of 44 The exhibit below presents a summary of the estimated financial operating results for the FFCC during the startup period and over a cumulative period ofyears. Figures are presented in 2018 dollars. These figures only represent the annual operations of the facility scenarios and do not include construction debt service payments, capital repair/replacement reserve funding obligations, or other non-operating expenses. Estimated FFCC Projed Financial Operating Results(presented in 2018 dollars) Stabilized Year1-15 Years1-30 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Cumulative Cumulative Operating Revenues FacilityRent $803,725 $821,009 $864,220 $12,859,594 $25,822,894 Food&Beverage 447,749 462,192 481,450 7,168,791 14,390,541 AdvertisinglSponsorships 233,240 235,620 238,000 3,562,860 7,132,860 Premium Seating 165,645 174,848 184,050 2,733,143 5,493,893 Contract Service&Other 80,750 90,250 95,000 1,406,000 2,831,000 TotalOperating Revenue $1,731,108 $1,783,919 $1,862,720 $27,730,387 $55,671,187 Operating Expenses Salanes&Benefits $1,193,915 $1,206,223 $1,230,840 $18,401,058 $36,863,658 ContractLabor 72,390 74,676 76,200 1,137,666 2,280,666 Utilities 276,772 279,596 282,420 4,227,827 8,464,127 Repair&Maintenance 66,278 67,735 72,833 1,080,842 2,173,337 General&Administrative 138,594 140,022 142,880 2,136,056 4,279,256 Supplies 65,334 66,710 68,773 1,026,093 2,057,688 Insurance 70,012 70,012 70,012 1,050,180 2,100,360 Other 210,560 215,040 224,000 3,337,600 6,697,600 Total Operating Expenses $2,093,854 $2,120,014 $2,167,958 $32,397,322 $64,916,692 NetOperatingProfitlDeficit ($362,746) ($336,095) ($305,238) ($4,666,936) ($9,245,506) As shown in the exhibit, upon stabilization of operations (assumed Year 3) and presented in 2018 dollars, the FFCC Project is estimated to generate approximately$1.9 million in annual operating revenue and $2.2 million in operating expenses, resulting in an operating deficit of approximately $305,000. This indicates that the FFCC Project will operate with a significantly lower annual City-paid operating subsidy that the current FFCC facility(an approximate $500,000 annual improvement over the subsidy provided to maintain FFCC operations today). To provide context for how these FFCC Project operating projects compare to other similar facilities operating throughout the country, the exhibit shown on the following page presents a recent year summary of the financial operating results (excluding debt service and other non-operating items)at a set of recently- built comparable facilities arena and multipurpose eventfacilities. Based on requests for confidentiality that are commonly made by facilities providing this type of data, the names of the facilities/cities have not been specifically attributed to the data that are listed. As shown, the majority of comparable facilities annually operate at a financial operating deficit (requiring a public subsidy or other funding support). DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 23 of 44 V O V N I� N N N V O N N N N O O O N (D O O N O o O Ef> O � � O N (7 V Ef> (7 � I� O Ef> Ef> Ef> � N Ef> Ef> (7 I� I� N � I� � � N V N I� N N N � � N � � N (7 (7 O V V (7 V (D (D I� N � - � � � N (7 N O I� (D Ef> N V N N I� � � � � � N (7 � Ef> (D V N N (D � Ef> Ef>Ef>Ef>Ef>Ef>Ef> N � Ef> Ef> Ef> (7 � Ef> Ef> Ef> � O N N N O O O I� O O V (D N (D O � I� O V O � o (D (7 � (D Ef> O Ef> (7 Ef>Ef> O � O (7 N (7 N (7 N Ef> N � � I� O I� N � N N N � N � I� N N N I� � N (D N N (D (7 � (7 � (7 N O N N (7 N � ' (7 � V I� (7 (7 � N � N V N (7 (7 N � N� N� � Ef> � � � Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � Ef> Ef> (7 Ef> Ef> Ef>Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � aN.� N O N I� O O N O O � � (7 O N V V V O O (7 � fR � I� fR O fR fR fR I� (D O I� (D V O (D N N fR � N o � V V V (7 (D (D N V � V (7 � � N (7 N (� (D N (7 � V (D (D N N V I� I� � O � N I� O d I� I� V N N � N (D O � V N N N � � N N (7 N Ef> N V V N Ef> N N � Ef> Ef>Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � � Ef> � � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' O O y O � O O fR fR fR fR fR fR O O O O O O O O O O O O o a O � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � N V V (9 N � � N N N (9 (9 N N (D fO EA EA EA �EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA N � � � .� � v C N � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O � O O O O O O O EA O O O O EA O EA O O O EA O � LL O � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � N � O� O� OO O O O O � O O O OO O O O O OO O � � V V � EA V EA I� � EA (D (D N EA V EA (9 O � C EA EA EA EA EA EA � N � EA EA EA (.� E� C EA EA EA �- Q � O ^O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � O � O O O O O O O fR O O O O O O O fR O fR O O O o O � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � (9 � O N N (9 � N (D N N � N I� O N (9 V � � (9 � EA V (9 N � EA I� (D N EA � EA V V ��EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA � y E» -- E» E» K � N (7 N O N (D O V O (D � N O O N O (D O O (D o O � N � O N N N Ef> N N � (7 (D Ef> Ef> I� N N Ef> O N � � (D � (7 N � I� � I� O N � (7 � (7 N O O V � O � (D �N I� N N (7 N � � (D N I� N O N I� (D (7 N (7 � N I� O Ef> I� � � � N I� I� ` V � O (7 Ef> (7 N Ef> (7 V O � N Ef> Ef> � (7 � � Ef>Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � aEf>�'Ef>Ef> � Ef> Ef> Ef> �' � � MovMmmrnmo 0o rn M o v v� rn c� o O I� � � (D � V (D V N Ef> N N N � (7 V O (7 � V O (D V N (� V N N (7 � V V N N O � I� V I� � I� (7 � I� N (D r � N N I� (D I� N I�(7 (7 V N (7 (7 I� I� - � N � O N (D N (7 N � N N O N N � O N N V � � N � � � (7 N N V Ef> N (7 V V N (7 Ef> N � Ef> (7 (D � Ef>Ef>Ef>Ef> Ef>Ef>Ef>Ef> Ef> N � Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � Ef> N Ef> Y Eft Eft Eft � N � N (7 (7 O (7 (7 N O (D O V V I� � � O I� o � V � (7 � O N I� (7 � Ef> (D � N N (7 V � N N N N (D I� V N � (7 (7 � O (D I� � I� � (7 � V N N N V N N (D � (D O N � N V V � N N I� V N V N � (7 � ' d � � N N Ef> (D O N � Ef> N (D N V (7 � Ef> � Ef> N � N m N�Ef>Ef> Ef> � Ef>Ef> � � Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> (7 E� T Ef>� Ef> Ef> Ef> Ef> � �V � (D I� N N (D N O O V N N O N N O N V � O o fO � N (D I� (D V N Ef>Ef> V (D N � I� (7 O I� N N N lL V � O V (7 (D (7 N N � � N � � N (D N I� I� O O V N N N I� N N � N I� � N (D � (D I� � O I� V � � V � N N � V O N (7 � V � O (D N (7 � � d N � N N Ef> � Ef> � (D N V Ef> � Ef> � Ef> � (7 r f` � �Eft Eft Eft Eft Eft � � Eft Eft Eft Eft Eft N Eft � Eft � Eft Eft Eft � Q � N � d U a w � 3 o_ w � m �n N � m > w U d � Z N � Vl � Z O W � � N y W Z d U 0I � � N W d d ^ > .� N X � � 0I � C � LL W Q Q � C (i d:� N � � � `ry N C N N y (6 LL J � � � (n Q C J � � N C > N 0I y N Q 'O d Q W � o �j > m � � o� � � °� � a�i �23 m �23 0� � H � C7 z - w t� -o c�i a�i 3 � � � O � °� aNi m � '�a } a`� s m O � Q s o_ c m m o > � � � � a`� z `m � � '� o_ c c c z W N J p N 'O i� 3 (6 N � W (6 — N a N O N (6 (6 � w d' � LL � Q a ln d � C'�J d ln � S W d' U C7 � � W � a' w z O DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 24 of 44 6. Economic Impact Estimates An updated economic impact analysis was also conducted for the FFCC Project under this Phase 2 effort. As presented in the 2017/18 study, the following chart outlines key economic impact concepts and metrics. Economic Impact Analysis Concepts and Metrics ' . . . - . .. . • . . .. . . • 1. Direct Spending 1. Direct Spending 1. Direct Spending • Malerials • Room&Space Renlals • Lotlging • Labor • Pootl&Beverage • ReslauranlslBars 2. Indirect&Induced Spending • Reia�i a Mer�na�d�se • Reia�i $. �Ut(lUt(tllreot+lntllreot+lntluoetlspentling) • Enlerleinmenl • EnlerteinmenUGeming • Sponsorship&Ativertising • Transil 4. EmploymeM�mu a pan-nme�oes7 • Conlracl&Olher Services • Services101her 5. Earnings�pe�so�ai��ome� 2. Indirect&Induced Spending 2. Indirect&Induced Spending 6. TaxRevenue 3. Output�ao-em�mao-ern�ma�oeaspe�amg7 3. Output�ao-em�mao-ern�ma�oeaspe�amg7 • Seles&use l�es q. Employment�mu a pan-nme�oes7 4. Employment�mu a pan-nme�oes7 5. Earnings�pe�so�ai moome7 5. Earnings�pe�so�ai moome7 6. Tax Revenue 6. Tax Revenue • Sales&uselaxes • Lotlginglaxes • Excise,gaming&olherlaxes • Sales&uselaxes • Wrrenlal&lransitlaxes • Excise,gaming&olherlaxes For purposes of this analysis, results of the economic impact analyses are measured in terms of the following categories: • Total output represents the total direct, indirect and induced spending effects generated by the project. This calculation measures the total dollar change in output that occurs in the local economy for each dollar of output delivered to final demand. • Personal earninqs represent the wages and salaries earned by employees of businesses associated with or impacted by the project. In other words, the multiplier measures the total dollar change in earnings of households employed by the affected industries for each additional dollar of output delivered to final demand. • Emplovment represents the number of full- and part-time jobs. The employment multiplier measures the total change in the number of jobs in the local economy for each additional $1.0 million of output delivered to final demand. The initial spending of new dollars into an economy begins a series in which the dollars are cycled through the economy. The re-spending of the dollars is estimated by using the economic multipliers discussed above and applying them to the amount of direct, or initial, spending. The multiplier illustrates that spending in a defined economy will lead to additional spending until that dollar has completed its cycle through leakage. Leakage represents the portion of a dollar spent in areas outside the designated economy. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 25 of 44 This analysis onlv considers"net new" economic impact. This impact is derived solely by visitors attending or participating in FFCC events that do not reside in Dubuque. For conservative purposes, our approach to economic impact estimation does not consider any spending by facility attendees/participants if they reside in Dubuque. It has been assumed that any spending by these local residents would represent "displaced" spending, that would have otherwise been spent locally on other products and services. The existing FFCC annually generates economic impact in Dubuque associated the attraction of visitors to the city, and their spending in it, that would have not otherwise traveled to Dubuque if it were not for the event they chose to attend at the FFCC. Further, the construction and the subsequent operations of the FFCC Project will generate significant new economic impact in Dubuque particularly when considering aggregate impacts over time. The following exhibit depicts the cumulative net new economic impacts estimated to be generated by the FFCC Project during the startup period and over a cumulative period of years. Summary of Estimated Economic Impacts (presented in 2018 dollars) Stabilized Year1-15 Years1-30 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Cumulative Cumulative Construction Impacts Direct Spending $0 $0 $0 $44,550,000 $44,550,000 Indirectllnduced Spending 0 0 0 30.588.838 30.588.838 TotalOutput $0 $0 $0 $75,138,838 $75,138,838 Personal Income(eamings) $0 $0 $0 $25,303,175 $25,303,175 Employment(full&part-time jobs) 0 0 0 534 534 InfaciliTy Impacts DirectSpending $1,299,135 $1,330,140 $1,383,578 $20,615,783 $41,369,447 Indirectllnduced Spending 537.269 549.618 571.612 8.517.849 17.092.035 TotalOutput $1,836,405 $1,879,758 $1,955,190 $29,133,632 $58,461,482 Personal Income(eamings) $663,527 $679,557 $706,894 $10,532,707 $21,136,117 Employment(full&part-time jobs) 29 29 30 454 912 Out-offaciliTy Impacts DirectSpending $4,262,443 $4,401,665 $4,716,331 $69,976,414 $140,721,383 Indirectllnduced Spending 1.582.267 1.633.690 1.749.915 25.964.858 52.213.590 TotalOutput $5,844,710 $6,035,355 $6,466,247 $95,941,272 $192,934,973 Personal Income(eamings) $1,820,312 $1,879,288 $2,012,585 $29,863,200 $60,051,969 Employment(full&part-time jobs) 85 88 94 1,398 2,811 Total Economic Impacts DirectSpending $5,561,579 $5,731,804 $6,099,909 $135,142,198 $226,640,830 Indirectllnduced Spending 2.119.536 2.183.308 2.321.528 65.071.545 99.894.463 TotalOutput $7,681,115 $7,915,113 $8,421,437 $200,213,743 $326,535,293 Personal Income(eamings) $2,483,839 $2,558,845 $2,719,479 $65,699,082 $106,491,262 Employment(full&part-time jobs) 114 117 125 2,386 4,256 DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 26 of 44 In addition to the more quantifiable benefits, some anticipated benefits related to the construction and operations of the proposed FFCC Project cannot be quantitatively measured. Beyond the economic activity and jobs indirectly provided, these types of non-quantifable impacts of a project of this nature and scope can serve to elevate Dubuque's profile and brand as a visitor destination and as a quality place to live, work, learn and play. In fact, these qualitative benefits tend to be a critical factor in the consideration of public and private investment in projects of this nature, particularly those involving existing venues with a long history of service in the local community. These include issues pertaining to quality of life (through attracting entertainment events that would not otherwise travel to the area and hosting civic and private events), ancillary economic development facilitation, employment opportunities, community pride and other issues. Potential non-quantifiable benefits could include: • Potential Transformative and Iconic Effects — Elevating the quality, profile, and exposure to national, regional and local audiences of a key local event facility can have important transformative and residual impacts on the Dubuque community and destination, in terms of quality of life, community prestige, perception by visitors and non-locals, and other such effects. • Quality of Life for Residents — New/enhanced event and public assembly facilities provide diversified activities for local residents and families, which can make Dubuque a more attractive and enjoyable place to reside. Quality public assembly facilities can contribute to enhancing community pride, self-image, exposure and reputation. All these items can assist in retaining and attracting an educated workforce, particularly younger adults who often desire quality entertainment, cultural, leisure and recreational amenities. • New Visitation — New visitors will be attracted to the area because of an event in the expanded/improved arena and performing arts facility products. These attendees, in turn, may elect to return to the area later with their families, etc. for a vacation after visiting the area for the first time. • Spin-OffDevelopment— Private sector investment can be induced in the areas surrounding event facilities, such as arenas and performing arts centers, spurred by increased volume of visitors to the event facility, representing additions to the local tax base. Enhanced economic growth and ancillary private sector development near the FFCC could be more likely should the City elect to invest in a major FFCC improvement project. • Anchor for Revitalization — Key event facility project development can often times anchor larger downtown or community-wide master development plans and new development activities. • Other Benefits — Increased synergy with the other local event, entertainment and hospitality facilities can lead to increased tourism activity in communities. Likewise, the proposed FFCC investment would be expected to enhance affordable entertainment, cultural, educational and leisure alternatives for families in Dubuque. Further, this benefit directly links to the economic impact documented in the Arts and Economic Prosperity study which estimated that the Dubuque's nonprofit arts and culture industry generates approximately$47.2 million in economic activity. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 27 of 44 7. Construction Cost Estimates A construction cost analysis was pertormed, and preliminary construction budget was created by the Project Team, led by Betsch Associates,with assistance by a number of industry experts, including but not limited to: Mortenson Construction Company, Legends Project Management, FEH Design, MEP Engineers, Geiger Engineers, Avant Acoustics, William Caruso and Partners, Blackstone Environmental, Porizen Construction, and Conlon Construction Company. The exhibit below presents a summary of total hard and sofl construction costs for the Project broken down by primary type. Additional detail and supporting calculations are provided in the supporting documents associated with this report. Importantly, as will be discussed in the subsequent section, it should not necessarily be assumed that 100 percent of these costs be borne by the public sector (i.e., City of Dubuque). There will be important opportunities to engage the private sector to assist in defraying the total amount of any hypothetical City funding obligation to execute this type of Project. These figures represent current estimated all-in costs, assuming a late 2020 construction groundbreaking. Further, it is also important to recognize that construction costs have historically risen at a higher rete than standard cost of living based inflation. For instance, industry construction professionals who collaboreted on this Phase 2 effort typically assume between 4.0 to 5.0 percent annual increase in construction costs for planning purposes(as compared to approximately 3.0 percent in typical annual cost of living inflation). FIVE FLAGS CENIER EXPANSION PROJECTBUDGETSUMMARY TOTNLS ARENA THEATRE THEATRESUVPORT I. CONSTRUCTION COST $68,Y89,306 $69,934,268 $1,]O6p09 $3,OOB,6M A. SIIewoIX $6,355820 $6,31J8P $0 $38,�03 B. NewConslructian $5t,809p60 $5t,6]2,608 $0 $t31,012 C. Renovation 83,593]fi4 $0 $1,54],800 $2.045,965 O. Oesign/BitlContingenry�5°o) $3,09J952 $2899513 9]J,390 $111p69 ESublolaloillemsA-�. $60,846,996 $60889P9 $t625,190 $2332,�28 EConslmctionConlingency(5%) $3,262,350 $3,044,689 581259 $116,601 III. LONSTRULPNRELATEULOST 55,185,306 Sa,na,00a $OCG,6]5 j3.825 A. 1% lo�Htl $0 $0 $0 $0 B. WrniWreFlxWres.BEQuipmen� $4,432,33] $4,006,33] $423,500 $2,500 C. SAG WAQ Storm Water Fees SO 80 80 $0 O. Si�e 5urvey,Soil Borgs,Haz MaYI 5159,000 815),000 $0 $0 E. Conslmc�ion Tes�ing $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 F. rnea�re s��w�ai s�my as,000 ss,000 so so c. irco�:mrg sss,oao sss,00a so so H. CommissioninglTes�Balance $]5,000 $I5,000 $0 $0 L Special Inspeclions antl OIM1er $60,000 $fi0,000 $0 $0 J. Con�ingenry�5%) $245,96] $224,66] 521,95 $125 N.ADMINISTRATIVECOSTS ST,565,516 E1,tO5,A3i 5195,fi05 E3fiC,052 A.AcquisilionlNtlminisha�ion $440,000 $440,000 $0 $0 B. Design Fees $J.085,361 $3.836,056 $102,38➢ $1E6.918 C. PmjedManagemenl $2]5,000 $250,000 525,000 $0 0. Expenses SO $0 $0 $0 E. Financing(4%) $2]23,5]4 $2.55],311 558258 $9L945 F. Con�ingenry�5%�for $41,589 $22,000 $0 $19.589 AcquisilionlAtlmiq Expenses V. ESCALATION 50.W1,C8J SJ.919.]98 SH8.318 51JJA09 A. Design Escala�ion lo May 2020 $0 $0 $0 B. Conslmd'nEscalafn�oMay2W1 $3.]19]96 $1182]8 $�33.409 VI.TOTALPROJECTCOST $00,]91,858 $]9.6]]A96 $3,085,00] {3.80.9,115 DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 28 of 44 As shown on the previous page, based on the program, design and costing analysis completed for this Phase 2 effort, total hard construction costs for the Project is estimated at $68.1 million. Of this amount, approximately $63.9 million in hard construction costs relates to demolition and construction of a new Arena, while approximately $4.2 million in hard construction costs relates to the Theater renovation/improvements. Total soft costs, considering all estimated soft costs (i.e., FF&E, financing, design fees, site costs, demolition, remediation, consulting, project management, contingency, etc.), are estimated to total approximately$16.7 million (or 20 percent). Construction costs tend to vary widely among comparable event facility projects. Many variables exist that influence actual realized construction costs, including type of facility, size, components, level of finish, integrated amenities, costs of goods and services in the local market, location and topography of the site, ingress/egress issues, costs implications related to the existing FFCC site and integration with existing facilities and infrastructure, and other such aspects. Additional architectural costing analysis would be required to refine these estimates during any subsequent full design and schematic phase. These costs are higher than those preliminary estimated for Scenario 4 in the 2017/2018 study due to a number of factors, including: • The construction costs estimated in the previous study (along with all cosUbenefit figures in the study) were presented in 2018 dollars. As there was no sense at the time of the original study of if, or when, a project would be advanced and any sense of a timeline (i.e., date of referendum, design/schematics, construction bid, groundbreaking and construction end), costs were not escalated to future year dollars. Conversely, the construction cost figures in this Phase 2 work are escalated through an assumed 2021 completion. If the original study's order-of-magnitude cost estimate was escalated through the now identified 2021 completion, it would add an equivalent of nearly $10.0 million to the assumption in the previous report (using current projected construction cost inflation rates). • The intent of this Phase 2 analysis was to conduct further investigation and due diligence to provide the City with a maximum figure for construction of the market supportable project apportioned with a modern, industry-typical array of functionality, flexibility and revenue generating amenities, within the identified timeframe. As is typical with many projects of this nature, budgetary considerations could certainly lead the City to direct the ultimately-selected Design and Construction Team to modify or eliminate certain elements to reduce costs and meet certain budget expectations for a final project. Additionally, having a maximum figure allows for an evaluation and consideration of the level of private sector contribution which would be necessary to fill any gap in a capital stack. • Since a full set of Architectural Designs and Schematics have yet to be commissioned and undertaken for the Project, the contingency cost for this costing exercise was increased materially over the order-of-magnitude assumption included in the original study. This provides an important cushion for certain items that have been preliminarily investigated, but not yet determined with certainty, such final costs associated with site acquisition, environmental remediation, utilities costs, financing and legal costs, and other such items; • Based on discussions with construction firms that have active arena construction projects underway in other national and regional markets, the most up-to-date projected costs associated with certain construction materials are higher than historical growth would have indicated at the time of the previous study's research. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 29 of 44 8. Analysis of Funding Issues The purpose of this section is to provide a summary of the sources of funding that have been used within the event facility industries and to discuss certain opportunities for the FFCC Project. The intent of the analysis is not to produce a financing plan for facility development, but rather to discuss certain financing vehicles, as well as public and private revenue sources that could be utilized to fund the Project. Comparable Facilitv Benchmarkinq As the largest cost component of proposed FFCC project, the following exhibit presents an overview of the estimated construction costs associated with a selection of comparable arena facilities that have been built in recent years throughout the country. Summary of Comparable Arena Construction Costs& Funding Participation(dollars in millions) o.�gmai InOa[ion Atlj. Const Cos[ Const Cos[ Year Const Cos[ PerSea[ Arena Marke[ (in$millions� Public$ Priva[e$ Public% Priva[e% Openetl Capacity (in$millions� Capacity 1 AIIenEven�Cen�er Allen,TH $fi2fi $4]8 $fi8 8�% 1�% 2��8 B,fi�� $]4.8 $8,]�fi ......... .......... .......... .......... ........ ......... ........ ............. .............. .............. .......... 2 A enc nB nkCen�er Cor ueChne�i,TH $48.fi $48;fi $�.� 1��% �% 2��4 1�323 $Bfi.��$832� .................`._____.._.._ .._.._...._ ...._.._ 3 Arenaa�GwinneXCen�er DUW�hGA $81� $81� $�� 1��% �% 2��3 13�� $ifi38 $12fi�] 4 BOKCen�er TuleaOK $V8� $14fi� $32� 82% 18% 2��8 18��41 $2fi3fi $14fi�fi fi BonSecoureWellneeeArena Greenvlle�SC $fi3.� $3�.� $33.� 48% fi2% 1888 ifi,8fi1 $138� $Bfifi4 fi CenWryLinkCen�erOmaha Omaha,NE $]fi.� $]fi.� $�.� 1��% �% 2��3 V,�� $13fi.1 $],84fi ] Ce � yLnkCen�er BoeeierCi�y,LA $fi�.� $28.� $32� 4]% fi3/ 2�� 14,�� $121.fi $Bfi82 8 Ch p keEnergyA Oklah C�yOK„ $1�1.� $1�1� $�� 1��% �/ 2��2 18,2�3 $1882 $1�382, ........ ........ ............. ......... ............ ............ ......... . ............. . 8 Cl�izeneBuelneeeBankArena Ontano,CA $ifi�.� $ifi�.� $�.� 1��% �% 2��8 11,�88 $222� $2�,�23 ......... .......... .......... ......... ............. ......... ............. .......... .............. ............. .......... 1� CoveIllCen�er Younge�own,OH $4fi.� $44.fi $�.fi 88% 1% 2��fi ],�� $]4.8 $1�,]�4 ......... .......... .......... ......... ............. ........... ............. .......... .............. ............. .......... 11 DennySanfoNPremlerCen�er SlouxFalle,SD $11].� $11].� $�.� 1��% �% 2�14 12,�� $13fi.8 $11,4�fi ......... ............. .......... ............. ............. .............. ............. .......... .............. ............. .......... 12 FONCen�er Ereneville IN $12]fi $12].fi $�.� 1��% �% 2�11 11�� $ifi].��$ifi2fi3 13 GI n�Cen�er Heree ,PA $Bfi� $fi�� $3fi� fi8% 41% 2��2 12,�� $ifi82 $132fi] ia H��a� �o�cama� Toiaao,oH $i000 $ioo.o $o.o iooi oi zooe e,aai $iaza $ieza� _____ ___ ie mo- �s kn�a�a w��nr� Ks $zoee $zoee $oo iooi oi zoio ie.00a $zaz,e $ie,eae .......... ........ .... . ...... ........ ....... .. .... .. ie iow a �a�a��gn {�) .coai ua in „ $ezi $azi $ioo aei iii zozo e,ioo $ae.z $ie�oi, ........ .. .. .. ....... .... ... ....... .......... ......... . .............. .. . v �a�aa�sca��a� so�ma�a�,nns $z�.e $z�.e $o.o iooi oi z000 io,000 $ee.� $e,e�i .......... .......... .......... ......... ......... ......... ....... .......... .............. .............. .......... ie �a�aoe�a�gyn�a�a �a�aao,Tx $ae.e $ae.e $o.o iooi oi zooz e,ezz $ee.e $e,eio .......... .......... .......... ......... ......... ......... ....... .......... .............. .............. .......... ie nnm-nman�ca��a� co��iswrcs,in $�e.o $aea $ae.a eii aei zooz e,000 $iao.e $ie,eoe .......... .......... .......... ............. ......... ......... ....... .......... .............. .............. .......... zo P��a�iasa�kn��a u��oi�,Ne $va.o $iooa $�z.� eai azi zoia ie,eoo $zio.e $ia,zae .......... .......... .......... ......... ......... ......... ....... .......... .............. .............. .......... zi aa�oe�amscama� aa�oNv $ee.a $ee.a $o.o iooi oi zooe �eoo $iie.��$ieam zzaeecncen�er creens ,w� $eoa��$aea�� $ei � 9o°G�� io°6 zooz iqzoo $ea.a $ezee 23 S nfortlCen�er Be tl MN $]83 $]83 $�� 1��% �% 2�1� fi,�� $1�]2 $1]Bfi� 24 S nfortl Co o�e S oMe Cen�er Ver Illlon,SD $fifi� $4fi� $2�� ]�% 3�% 2�ifi fi,�� $]1.4 $11 888 2fi SantantlerCen�er Reatling,PA $3fi.fi $34.fi $1.8 Bfi% fi% 2��1 8,14fi $]11 $]]]4 ......... ............ ............. ......... ............. .............. .............. ............. ........... . ........... ............. 2fi SeareCentre HoHmanEeta�ee,IL $fi2� $3]2 $24.8 fi�% 4�% 2��fi 11,8�� $888 $8,412 ......... ............. ............. ...___..... ............. .............. .............. ............. ............ . ........... ..........._. 2] S�ock�onArena S�ocMoqCA $fi4.� $fi4.� $�.� 1��% �% 2��fi 11,8�� $i�fi.fi $8,�31 ......... ............. ............. .......... ............. .............. .............. .......... ............ . .......... ..........._. 28 TyeonEven�Cen�er SlouxCl�y,lA $4].4 $3fi.� $124 ]4% 2fi% 2��3 1�,�� $Bfi.4 $B,fi3fi .......... ............. ..._._...... ......... ............. .............. .............. .......... ............ . .......... .........__. 28 VerizonWveleeeArena Manchee�eqNH $fifi.� $fifi.� $1�.� Bfi% ifi% 2��1 11,]]� $12fi.fi $1�,]fi] ............. ............. .... .___... ......... .......... ......... .............. ............. ............ . .......... ........___. 3� Web � B nkArena Britlg p tlCT , , , $fi�.� $fi2� $8� 8]% 13% 2��1 1�,�� $11fi.8 $11fi8], ......... .... ...... ............. ......... ............. ............. ........ . . .......... 31 WelleF r oA n DeeMOlnee,lA $8�] $8�] $�.� 1��% �% 2��fi ifi88� $ifii.��$8884 32HFINITYArenaa�EvereX EvereXWA $]ifi $3]fi $338 fi3% 4]% 2��3 1�� $1288 $128]] . . Avera e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $833 S]i6 S11] 85% 15% zoos tt.aoo 51309 511.]20 Note:Compamble arenae exdutle univereity-ownetl arenae antl arenae wlih pmfeeei onal N BA or NH L francMeee. (1)Cone�mvlion coe�e repreeen�ee�ima�ee pmvitletl by�he cone�mvlion�eam of$3]fi hartl cone�mvlion coe�e per gmee equare foo�for a 188,8]4 gmee equare foo�facill�y. As depicted in the exhibit, in 2018 dollars, the average comparable arena facility project costs an average of$130.9 million to develop with project costs ranging from a low of$55.7 million for the Landers Center in Southhaven, Mississippi to a high of approximately$282.6 million for the construction cost of Intrust Bank Arena in Wichita, Kansas. The inflation-adjusted construction cost per capacity seat for the average comparable arena was $11,720 per seat. Extrapolating this the FFCC Project suggests an approximate $80 million arena project-consistent with the figures generated within this Phase 2 effort (excluding Theater-related costs, and higher than expected construction costs in future years and a large contingency cost, appropriate for planning purposes at this early stage). DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 30 of 44 The public sector contributed a significant amount of funding towards the development of the arena in each of these comparable markets, ranging from 47 percent to 100 percent of total costs. Nearly half of the projects were funded 100 percent by the public sector. The following is a summary of the specific funding sources for some of the comparable arenas. American Bank Center—Corpus Christi, TX Opened in 2004 in Corpus Christi, Texas, the American Bank Center was constructed at a cost of approximately $49.6 million. To fund the construction of the facility, the City issued $49.6 million in general obligation bonds. Debt repayment for the facility is derived from the revenue generated from a 0.0125 percent sales tax increase, which was approved by voters in 2000. Allen Event Center—Allen, TX The Allen Event Center, located in Allen, Texas, opened in 2009. The Arena's development was the result of a private/public partnership between the City of Allen and the MGHerring Group, a Dallas-based developer. Development costs totaled $70 million, which included infrastructure costs such as a parking garage and street signage. The City of Allen funded $47 million of the project via a bond issue backed by sales tax revenues. MGHerring, who was the developer responsible for the larger `The Village at Allen' project, contributed $23 million to the arena construction. The City of Allen, however, agreed to use additional sales tax revenues to reimburse MGHerring for up to 75 percent of their upfront payment. BOK Center—Tulsa, OK The $198 million BOK Center opened in 2008 in downtown Tulsa, Oklahoma. Approximately$166 million of the BOK Center development costs were funded through Tulsa's Vision 2025 initiative, which is supported by a one percent sales tax increase in Tulsa County for 13 years to fund various projects. Approximately $32 million in private arena funding was secured through corporate sponsorships and premium seating sales, including the sale of naming rights to Bank of Oklahoma for$11 million over 20 years. Covelli Centre—Youngstown, OH Located in Youngstown, Ohio, the Covelli Centre was developed at a cost of approximately$45.0 million. The majority of the funding came from a $26.8 million federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant. The State of Ohio contributed $2.0 million, while Ohio Edison contributed a $550,000 energy grant. The City also paid approximately $4.0 million for infrastructure improvements. To complete the funding of the facility, the City borrowed $11.9 million, which is offset annually by the operating surplus of the arena, food and beverage tax revenue and a 5.5 percent admissions tax the City charges on tickets sold at the facility. Denny Sanford Premier Center—Sioux Falls, SD The Denny Sanford Premier Center opened in September 2014 at a total cost of approximately $117 million (approximately $385 per gross square foot) financed through four sources. The city issued $102 million in tax-exempt bonds to be paid over 22 years at a 3.21 percent interest and $12.5 million in taxable bonds to be paid over 11 years at 1.87 percent interest. The bonds will be paid off with second penny sales tax funds, which is estimated to generate more than $50 million annually. The City of Sioux Falls is expected to pay an average of $7.9 million in principal and interest per year. The city also contributed $500,000 of sales tax fund cash from the city's budget in 2012. The fourth source of financing came from a $2 million donation from Sanford Health. Ford Arena— Beaumont, TX Ford Arena in Beaumont, Texas was developed as part of Ford Park, a $55.0 million sports and entertainment complex, which also includes an amphitheater, festival grounds and a DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 31 of 44 softball/baseball field complex. Arena construction accounted for approximately $32.0 million of the total development cost. The entire project was funded by Certificates of Obligation issued by Jefferson County. The Certificates are backed by general County revenue, not by a specific tax or revenue stream. County representatives indicated that, while a referendum would have been required to issue general obligation bonds, they did not need a referendum to approve the COO issuance. Ford Center—Evansville, IN Located in Evansville, Indiana, the Ford Center was built in 2011 at a cost of approximately$127.5 million. The City of Evansville issued bonds to pay for the facility, which are to be repaid through the City's share of casino (riverboat) funds, Downtown Tax Increment Finance District (TIF)funds and food and beverage taxes. In 2013, the Center's debt service was paid from $3.4 million in riverboat funds, $3.4 million from Downtown Tax Increment Financing and $1.2 million in food and beverage tax revenues. Intrust Bank Arena—Wichita, KS The 15,750-seat Intrust Bank Arena opened in 2010 and serves the Wichita region with concerts, family shows and various sporting events. Located in downtown Wichita,the $206.5 million project was funded without debt through a tax bill authorizing Sedgwick County to collect a one cent sales tax for 30 months while the arena was being constructed. PPL Center—Allentown, PA The $177 million PPL Center opened in September of 2014 in downtown Allentown, Pennsylvania. The PPL Center was funded through the issuance of municipal bonds, which are backed by tax revenues from the Neighborhood Improvement Zone ("NIZ"). A 10-year naming rights agreement with utilities provider PPL was secured prior to the arena opening. Reno Events Center—Reno, NV Located in Reno, Nevada,the Reno Events Center opened in 2005 at a cost of approximately$65.0 million. To fund the facility, the City of Reno issued $120.0 million in 30-year bonds, which are backed by 15 percent of the City's consolidated tax revenues. Of that, $43.0 million was used to retire the National Bowling Stadium debt, $7.6 million was used repay the city for the land the Bowling Stadium sits on and approximately $69.4 million was used to pay for the Reno Events Center. Resch Center—Green Bay,WI The 10,000-seat Resch Center is located in Green Bay, Wisconsin and was built at a cost of$50.4 million. Approximately $35.8 million of the project cost is supported through 30-year tax revenue bonds issued through the Community Development Authority of the Village of Ashwaubenon, backed by Brown County. The revenue bonds are backed by a room tax on hotels. The room tax was two percent prior to the project but was increased to eight percent to fund construction of the arena as well as a new convention center in Green Bay. In 2012, Brown County reached a 15-year agreement with PMI Entertainment Group to continue managing the Resch Center. The deal guarantees an additional $5.0 million more in capital improvements for the facility. PMI pays for all of the operating costs and utility expenses. In turn, PMI keeps all of the revenue generated from the facility including parking fees. Under the agreement, PMI pays more than $355,000 annually in rental fees. PMI funded the Convention and Visitors Bureau until 2011 when a two percent increase (now 10 percent) in hotel room taxes was passed to fund the CVB. The money that PWI used to fund the CVB is now used to pay the increased rent to the county to run the facility. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 32 of 44 Sanford Center— Bemidji, MN Opened in 2010, the Sanford Center and George W. Neilson Convention Center is a 193,000- square foot event center that is part of the 140-acre South Shore mixed-use development in Bemidji, Minnesota. The event center includes the 4,700-seat Sanford Center arena, which serves as the home of the Bemidji State men's and women's hockey teams of the NCAA Division I Western Collegiate Hockey Association. The complex also includes the George W. Neilson Convention Center, which offers 10,000 square feet of ballroom space, divisible into three separate rooms, and 4,000 square feet of ineeting space. Construction of the Sanford Center cost approximately $78.3 million and was funded entirely by the public sector. Funding of the facility included approximately $45 million from the extension of a half cent City sales tax, $20.0 million in state construction bonds, $3.0 million in state planning funds, approximately$5.0 million from a Tax Increment Financing district established at the South Shore development, approximately$4.1 million from the sale of City land, and a $1.2 million grant from the Department of Employment and Economic Development. In 2010, the City agreed to a 10-year, $2.0 million naming rights agreement with Sanford Health Systems that will pay the City $200,000 annually. In 2012, the Sanford Center generated revenues of$2.3 million and incurred expenses of$2.8 million, resulting in a net operating loss of approximately$417,000. Verizon Wireless Arena—Manchester, NH The Verizon Wireless Arena in Manchester, New Hampshire opened in 2001 and was constructed at a cost of $65.0 million, including $2.8 million in land acquisition. The majority of the projecYs funding consisted of$50.0 million in bonds issued by the Manchester Housing Authority on behalf of the City. The City leases the arena from the Authority with the bonds backed by the City's lease payments to the Authority. The City's lease payments are derived from the City's share of a state-wide tax on hotel/motel rooms and prepared meals. These taxes had been in place for many years prior to the arena's construction. However, due to changes in the way the State allocates the tax revenues back to local municipalities, the City of Manchester experienced an increase in its annual allocation. The City decided to use this incremental tax revenue to fund arena construction. The City's annual rent payment is based on the anticipated incremental revenue that will be received in each year of the lease, starting with $1.8 million in year one and increasing by approximately $450,000 per year thereafter, eventually peaking at$5.6 million per year. Along with these annual rent payments, an additional $3.0 million in cash from tax collections prior to and during the construction period and $2.0 million in interest earnings were contributed toward arena funding. Private funding for the arena consisted of$10.0 million in private debt issued by four local banks and backed exclusively by arena cash flows. The arena's management company receives all revenues from arena operations but also pays all event and operating costs. The management fee was $600,000 plus $150,000 in potential incentives in year one of the management agreement, increasing at an annual rate of two percent in subsequent years. After the management fee has been paid, the remaining revenue goes to pay offthe private bank debt. Ifthere is money left over after the debt payment, it funds a capital reserve or is allocated to other debt payments. Sanford Coyote Sports Center—Vermillion, SD The Sanford Coyote Sports Center is a 6,000-seat indoor arena located on the campus of the University of South Dakota. It opened in 2016 at a cost of approximately $66 million and houses the University's Men's and Women's basketball and the Women's volleyball teams. The University secured a $20 million donation from Sanford Health to support a portion of construction costs. According to the construction team, hard costs approximated $295 per gross square foot for the 186,240-gross square foot project. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 33 of 44 lowa River Landing Arena—Coralville, IA A new 5,100-seat arena at the lowa River Landing is expected to open in 2020. The $46 million arena is part of a larger$190 million development that includes the 53,000-square foot lowa Fitness and Sports Pertormance Institute, two hotel projects, a parking ram and multiple retail and mixed- use developments. Funding has included a $200,000 grant from Johnson County, a $12 million grant from the lowa Economic Development Authority, $4 million from New Market Tax Credits, nearly $10 million in land sales revenue, naming rights revenue and other sources. According to the construction team, hard costs are expected in the range of$300 to$375 per gross square foot for the 188,974-gross square foot project. Additionally, with respect to performing arts theaters, the following is a summary of the specific funding sources for some comparable theater projects. Christopher Cohan Center—San Luis Obispo, CA The Christopher Cohan Center opened on the Christopher Cohan Center opened on September 27, 1996 in San Luis Obispo, California. Total development costs for the project reached $30 million. The Center was developed under a joint agreement between California Polytechnic State University, the City of San Luis Obispo and the Center's Foundation. The Partnership became a 501(c)3 with weighted representation. Agreement terms included: (1) $20 million was paid for by the State of California for the University through G.O. Bonds as it qualifies as a State-owned instructional building; (2) $5 million came from the City's General Fund; and (3) $5 million was secured against the Foundations' assets, with repayment scheduled to come through ticket surcharges earmarked for debt service. Kentucky Center for the Pertorming Arts—Louisville, KY The Kentucky Center for the Pertorming Arts (KCPA) opened on November 19, 1983 after more than ten years of planning and three years of construction. The KCPA was developed through a unique partnership between the state, county, city and private sectors. The $34.5 million final construction cost was partly funded by$23.5 million from the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the use of the site and a parking garage (a$2.5 million benefit)from the City of Louisville. A$13 million endowment fund was raised almost entirely from local private sources to cover the remaining construction costs and to provide future operating funds. KCPA underwent a $4.1 million renovation in 2000 that included adding 3,500 square feet to the north and south lobbies and a reconfiguration of the Main Entrance. In 2009, an $8.9 million renovation included updating the stage floor and the rigging system in Whitney Hall, as well as installing new lighting and dimming systems in its three main venues. Gaillard Center—Charleston, SC The Gaillard Center, located in Charleston, originally opened in 1968 for approximately$6 million. The 1,800-seat municipal auditorium has been undergoing renovations for the pastthree years with plans to open in October 2015. The $142 million total renovation costs were funded through both public and private investments. Approximately$71 million was raised by the Gaillard Pertormance Hall Foundation from private donors. Public funding through the City of Charleston included approximately $32 million in revenues from a Tax Increment Financing District; $29 million in accommodations and hospitality taxes and New Market Tax Credits; and $19 million in general obligation bonds. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 34 of 44 Smith Center for the Pertorming Arts—Las Vegas, NV The Smith Center for the Pertorming Arts opened in 2012 and is owned by the City of Las Vegas. The $320 million Center was financed by 53 percent public and 47 percent private funding. The Donald W. Reynolds Foundation donated $100 million through a grant and $50 million through a lead gift. The City of Las Vegas funded $105 million via a City/County/State rental car tax and $65 million through City land, infrastructure and environmental cleanup. Fox Theatre Detroit—Detroit, MI Opened in 1928, Fox Theatre Detroit is a 5,174-seat venue located within the Detroit Theater District in downtown Detroit, Michigan. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1985, the theatre was designated a National Historical Landmark in 1989 following a $12 million renovation in 1988 that was funded by facility owner/operator Olympia Entertainment, which also owns the NHL Detroit Red Wings and the MLB Detroit Tigers. Broward Center for the Pertorming Arts —Ft. Lauderdale, FL The Broward Center for the Pertorming Arts opened in 1991 and is located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The Broward Center's presenters include Broadway Across America, the Florida Grand Opera, the Gold Coast Jazz Society, the Miami City Ballet and the Symphony of the Americas. The facility is owned by the Performing Arts Center Authority and has a capacity of 2,700 in its main theater. In 2012, the Center underwent a renovation to add new seating and carpeting, upgrade the light and sound systems, construct a new Club Level and build a pavilion and terraced lounge on the exterior of the building. The Broward Center launched a $56 million capital campaign to raise funds for the renovation. The Tobin Center—San Antonio, TX The Tobin Center opened in September 2014, consisting of a 1,740-seat pertormance hall, 240- seat studio theatre as well as an outdoor performance plaza connected to the River Walk in San Antonio, TX. Totaling approximately $203 million, the funding for the Center was a public-private partnership between the City of San Antonio, Bexar County, and the Bexar County Pertorming Arts Center Foundation. A 65 percent majority of voters in Bexar County approved a$100 million bond initiative in 2008 to provide the public funding through an extension of the hotel and car rental tax as well as $41 million from the City of San Antonio in land and building donations. The remaining $54 million was raised through private donations, including a $10 million reserve fund. Dr. Phillips Center for the Pertorming Arts—Orlando, FL The Dr. Phillips Center for the Pertorming Arts began construction in 2011 at an estimated cost of approximately$514 million. Phase 1 of the project opened in November 2014 and consists of the 2,700-seat Walt Disney Theater, 300-seat Alexis & Jim Pugh Theater, Seneff Arts Plaza, the Dr. Phillips Center Florida Hospital School of Arts in addition to other ancillary spaces. The cost of Phase I was approximately $348 million. Phase II of development includes a 1,700-seat performance hall built specifically for music, ballet, dance and other pertorming arts that depend on the purity of sound,additional work to the Plaza, and rehearsal, classroom and office space. The anticipated completion date for Phase II of the project is set for 2019, at a total estimated cost of approximately$166 million. Funding for the pertorming arts center is a public-private partnership including: (1) $134 million in corporate, private and philanthropic contributions; (2) $155 million from the Tourist Development Tax, a 6.0 percent resort tax; (3) $129 million from Community Redevelopment Agency bonds secured by pledged tax increment revenues on downtown Orlando district properties; (4) $81 million in City contributions; and (5) $15 million in State contributions. Approximately$443 million of the total project budget is being used for gross construction with the remaining $71 million allocated to land acquisition and site improvement costs. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 35 of 44 Potential Financinq Techniaues and Vehicles The development and financing of sports and entertainmentfacilities throughout the country in recentyears has largely relied on a combination of both public and private sector financing. The enhanced revenue- generating capabilities of new and/or renovated facilities have encouraged more public/private partnerships whereby public sector financing vehicles are supplemented with private sector revenue streams. In many cases, a public sector entity will issue some form of bond to wholly or partially finance the construction of the facility. The annual debt service required to retire the bonds is then sourced from a general fund and/or from various tax revenues including sales, hotel/motel, restaurant, entertainment and other taxes, as well as other revenue sources such as facility-related revenues. The types of financing mechanisms typically used in funding sports and entertainment facilities are summarized on the following pages. General Obligation (GO) Bonds General obligation bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the local government and paid for through general fund property taxes. This pledge is generally supported by a commitment from the issuer to repay the principal and interestthrough whatever means may be necessary, including levying additional taxes. The advantages associated with general obligations bonds revolve around the strength of the credit. It typically results in a simple financing that lowers the cost of issuance and reduces the bond size, since a debt service reserve fund is often not required. Also, the strength of the pledge provides a higher credit rating and, therefore, a lower cost of financing the project. General obligation bonds are the most common method of primary financing for comparable municipally-owned and operated sports and entertainment facilities such as the FFCC. General obligation bond financing may also be structured with a lower variable interest rate in the early years of the project with conversion to a fixed rate in later years; however, this could require legislation to be enacted. The primary disadvantage associated with general obligation indebtedness is that the bonding capacity for other capital needs is reduced. Based on conversations with local representatives and a review of prevalent comparable facility funding structures, the most viable option for financing the renovation/redevelopment of the FFCC may be through General Obligation Bonds, which would require a simple majority approval by local government council, as well as an approval by the State Director of Local Finance. Revenue Bonds Another frequently used method of sports and entertainment facility financing is the issuance of revenue bonds. Revenue bonds are special obligations issued by the respective governmental agency for which payment is dependent upon a particular source of funds, such as revenues generated by the project, to provide the amount needed for bond repayment. The issuer of the bonds pledges to the bondholders the revenues generated by the project being financed. No pledge of state or local ad valorem tax revenues is required; however, other taxes may be assessed and/or pledged in whole or in part by a municipality or by the state, often with legislative approval, to provide funds necessary to pay off the revenue bond offering. It may be the case, however, that any change in tax rates or allocation would have to be approved by public referendum. The major disadvantage associated with revenue bonds relates to interest rates that are typically higher than those associated with general obligation bonds. This is largely due to the fact that revenue bonds are not backed by the full faith and credit of the issuing entity. In addition, funding of a debt service reserve and other credit enhancement out of bond proceeds makes the required bond size larger with higher annual debt service payments. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 36 of 44 Revenue bond financing may be structured in such a way that payments may be tied to a lower variable rate in the initial years of operation and converted to a higher fixed rate in later years. This is often advantageous in situations where the particular revenue stream or streams that are pledged to bond debt service are expected to increase annually. Based on discussions with City officials, revenue bonds would be expected to be less viable of an option than general obligation bonds to finance construction costs for FFCC Project. Certificates of Participation Certificates of Participation (COPs) represent another financial instrument that has been used to finance sports facilities. COP holders are repaid through an annual lease appropriation by a sponsoring governmental agency. COPs do not legally commit the governmental entity to repay the certificate holder beyond the annual appropriations, and therefore do not typically require voter approval. Further, this type of instrument is not subject to many of the limitations and restrictions typically associated with general obligation bonds. As COPs generally offer the issuing authority less financial risk and more flexibility than other financing instruments, they tend to be more cumbersome due to the reliance of the trustee for appropriations while typically carrying a higher coupon rate relative to traditional general obligation bonds. COPs could allow a municipal government to enhance a revenue source with a pledge to make up any revenue deficiencies from other funds. This issue would be subject to annual appropriation. The certificates usually imply that some other security, such as revenue from operations or a sales tax, will be relied on as the primary source of credit worthiness. The primary advantage associated with certificates of participation is that the obligation enhances the issue, resulting in an interest rate more favorable than a standard revenue bond issue. The disadvantage associated with COPs is that primary credit must still be established. Based on discussions with City officials, COPs have not historically been used by the City for project funding and would not be expected to be a viable option to finance construction costs for a FFCC Project. Public Sector Revenue Sources Public sector revenue sources are often used to fund the all or a majority of the capital development or renovations of municipally-owned facilities comparable to the FFCC. City Property Taxes While private sector sources could help contribute to the capital stack for the proposed FFCC Project, based on a review of comparable facility funding sources and discussions with local officials, the most likely path forward for public sector funding of a majority of the construction costs associated with the proposed Project would likely need to consist of a general obligation bond supported by property taxes. This would require a greater than 60 percent affirmative vote via a public referendum for an increase in property tax assessment. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 37 of 44 Additional Public Sector Revenues Other taxes that have been used for arena, theater and event facility projects in other communities throughout the country to generate revenues, either locally or at the state level, include: • Hotel / Motel Taxes • Sales and Use Taxes • Amusement/Admissions Taxes • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) • Restaurant/Food & Beverage Taxes • Car Rental Taxes • Personal Income Taxes • Corporate Income Taxes and Fees • Gasoline Taxes • Insurance Taxes and Fees • Cigarette/ Liquor Taxes • Estate and Lottery Taxes • Other Taxes, Fees and Assessments Most of these are not applicable in Dubuque's case or do not generate significant levels of revenue relative to other taxes (such as propertytaxes)and would not resulting in meaningful funding levels if incremental taxes were imposed specifically for the FFCC Project. As a result, proceeds from increases in these taxes have not been estimated as part of this analysis. Private Sector Revenue Sources In addition to public sector funding sources, private sector revenue sources are often used to defray public sector funding obligations for development or renovations of municipally owned facilities comparable to the FFCC. These would be items that are not included in the facility operating budget and are instead used for capital funding purposes. For instance, naming rights and sponsorship partner agreements can involve contractually-obligated income that can be used to contribute to the capital stack to pay for construction. The revenue shown in the previously presented financial operating estimates herein include advertising and sponsorship revenue, but do not include revenue/income derived from the sale of a naming rights/sponsorship package to a single private partner. Based on a review of local facility and comparable facility funding sources, the most likely potential sources of private sector funding for the proposed FFCC Project could include the following: Naming Rights & Sponsorship Partnerships Naming rights partnerships are agreements in which a company places its name or logo on a specific venue, and in return, pays an annual fee to the venue's owner or manager. Regional examples of naming rights partnerships for arena and civic complex venues include: • U.S. Cellular Center, Cedar Rapids, Iowa • Dow Event Center, Saginaw, Michigan • Tyson Events Center, Sioux City, Iowa • Indiana Farmers Coliseum, Indianapolis, IN • TaxSlayer Center, Moline, Illinois • Huntington Center,Toledo, Ohio • Grossinger Motors Arena, Bloomington, Illinois • AMSOIL Arena, Duluth, Minnesota DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 38 of 44 Typically, these types of deals are done on a more intermediate or long-term basis (e.g. 20 to 30 years), while renewals typically are done on shorter terms (i.e. 10 years or less). Along with the naming of the facility,a naming rightr partner typically receives a variety ofexposure opportunities, including landmarks, scoreboard signage, exterior facility signage, digital marquee signage, directional signage,opportunitig foractivation and productsampling, hospitality beneftr,inclusion in the venue's media buy and editorial media coverage. The growth in naming rightr can be attributed to facilities and teams looking for new revenues. As properties put a greater emphasis on the imporhnce of naming rightr, decision-makers at corporations began to see naming rightr as an effective method for achieving specific marketing objectives. Naming rightr marketing is particularly valuable because of itr effectiveness in introducing new products, helping new or established productr contend with competitive brands, and increasing corporate brand awareness. However, the real value lies in the borrowed imagery of a property and the unique media exposure a brand receives through the agreement. A corporation's ability to associate their brand directly to a team, facility or event is an important component in the value of naming rightr agreementr. Naming and sponsorship opportunitig often presentwith modern arena and eventvenues include: • FacilityEnirance —;, • Fa�ade Landmark � �� _ :. • Arena Roof • OmCouNlce Logos • StaticScoreboard �, r �` ,. I� I �.f1 '.�. • BacklitTunnelSignage � ��i � � • ScoreboaN Underbelty — ,-; • Arena Seats ��,� �� • Concourse Signs � • ExtenorpoorDecal � � • DisplayArea - - • Digital Fascia Signage , • Center-hungVideoBoaNs / � • ArenaFloorMaps , � • Trash Receptacles � �' �^ � - �-, • StafNniform �, II ,1.�.' � ,�' � � • ATM Machines � - T�r � �/� � _��,�� I� The naming rightr and sponsorship package value that any event venue will be able to command depends, in large part, on the following factors: 1. Profile of sports tenant(sl: One or more high profile spo�ts tenants (major uniuersity or minor league professional team) is typically cntical in maximizing naming rights ualues. The sports teams driue media couerage,which in turn,driues demand and the ualue of the naming/sponsorship oppo�tunity. 2. Comoarable deals: A potential padner will analyze comparable deals in collegiate athletics and other sports industries throughout North America. 3. Market size and media coueraae: Sponsors are willing to pay more for naming rights for arenas that generate a considerable amount of inedia couerage—from teleuision, radio, print and online. Larger markets typically generate greater exposure for a naming nghts partner. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 39 of 44 4. Broadcast exoosure: National and regional broadcast exposure is often available to successful tenant teams and those in large markets. Sponsors are willing to pay a premium for naming rights to facilities that receive a high degree of such broadcast exposure. S. Newness of the faciliN: New or substantially renovated/expanded arenas can command higher naming rights fees; these tend to be state-of-the-art and architecturally signifcant. Properties can face obstacles in renaming older facilities that have been known by a certain name for an extended period of time. 6. Number of events: The more events hosted at a facility on an annual basis, the greater the attendance,the more value to a naming rights partner. The type of events hosted at an arena can also impact the amount a venue can command for naming rights. 7. Historical success: A tenant team's historical success(i.e. number of playoff/tournament appearances)typically has an impact on the overall value of a venue's naming rights. 8. Oualitative value: Qualitative facility factors provide corporations opportunities to align their brand with the image, emotions, popularity and lifestyle evoked by a facility property and product. The term and value of naming rights and sponsorship package transactions associated with comparable arena and civic event facility products have widely varied. To provide some context and understanding of the scope of these deals, the exhibit below presents a summary of 25 comparable facility naming rights transactions. �. R�concoose�m roromo,oN s�soq000 iszi ��asi zooa zma is S�o�ooq000 S�,00q000 ind��eneFermerscor�se�m ind��enepoos,iN i,sss,an isas a,zoo zma zoza io Ss,00q000 Ssoq000 semea,es�ercemer R��oRencno,NM �sn,ass zoos �,soo zoos Nin s Sz,soq000 Ssoq000 secunrene rowson,Mo z,�sa,ias zma s,zoo zma zoza io �t,�sq000 Sa�s,000 ra�sieyercemer Mor�ne,a an,zn issa s,zoo zom zon io �t,zsq000 Sazs,000 oowe�emcemer seg�new,Mi zos,az� is�z s,soo zma zoza io �t,zoq000 Sazq000 us.ceuwercemer cederRepms,in zs�,�ss is�s s,000 zmz zozz io Sa,aoq000 Saaq000 is�aenkcemer amomaem,co z,sza,aaz zoos s,soo zmi Nin s S�,�sq000 Sasq000 cerme�nnrene es�ero,F� soa,iaz issa �,ias zooa zoza zo S�,00q000 Sasq000 ri�nang�oncemer roiedo,ori soa,�ii zooa s,aai zmo zon s Sz,ioq000 Sasq000 nngeiormew��ndsaene �ereu,wn a,aaa,sas zooa a,ias zma zoza io Sa,aoq000 Sanq000 MessMw�eicemer spdngaem,Mn saa,ass is�z s,soo zoos zozo is Ss,00q000 Saaa,aaa snowerecemer rcem,wn a,am,aaa zoos s,soo zoos zms io Sa,ns,000 San,soo nMsoanrene owwn,MN z�s,zz� zmo s,�zs zmo zoao zo Ss,00q000 Saoq000 cem�rynnkcemer ao�se,io sa�,ass iss� s,�az zoos zozo is �t,00q000 Szss,ss� wesaenconrene wneer�ng,wv iaa,sas isn s,aoo zooa zoza io Sz,soq000 Szsq000 FomaerkE�emcemer aee�mom,rx an,ssi zooa s,ioo zoos Nin s S�,zsq000 Szsq000 Mone�ens�nnrenee�ceseyaiue w��ikes-aerre,Pn sas,aoa isss s,�oo zmo zozo io Sz,a�s,000 Sza�,soo semendernrene Reed��ng,Pn aoa,000 zooi s,000 zom Nin is Sa,00q000 Szoq000 cross�naerMomrsnrene aioom�na�on,a is�,sss zoos a,000 zon zozz s Sa�s,000 Sns,000 Tyson E�ems cemer s��o�x ary,in iaa,aa� zooa s,000 zma zoza ao �t,00q000 S�aa,aaa aqengies�cor�se�m cheaone,Ne i,�zqsas isss s,oss zmz zozi io S�,zsq000 S�zs,000 F��rs�nrene em�re,Nv sqaia z000 a,�oo zoos Nin io S�,00q000 S�oq000 cuRElnsurenceArene TrentoqNJ s,Bss,o7s lsss B,soo zo17 NIA NIA wA NIA BlgSentlySuperstoreArene HuntingtoqVJV 286,517 1977 9,�� 2�13 2�17 5 WA NIA AVEFAGE 1,336,422 199� 7,6�2 2�ID 2�22 11 $3,659,783 $342,536 MEDIAN 6�8,711 1999 �,soo 2��9 2�22 1� $3,8��,�� $35�,�� , iii DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 40 of 44 It is important to recognize some important factors that will impact the valuation or (or demand for) a possible FFCC opportunity. The value is potentially diminished due to the lack of a high- profile primary sports tenants (that many of the comparable facilities possess). Conversely, the value may be elevated due to (1) the limited number of existing high-profile corporate naming opportunities in the community, and (2) the inclusion of the historic performing arts theater element with the transaction. Nevertheless, a substantially upgraded and highly visible facility product located in the heart of Dubuque's downtown should present an opportunity for a naming/sponsorship transaction that could either assist in defraying the public sector's funding obligation. For purposes of planning, it would be reasonable to assume that the proposed FFCC Project could secure a naming rights partner for approximately $5.0 million over a 15-year term. Ticket Surcharges A ticket surcharge could be implemented at the expanded/improved FFCC, with the proceeds dedicated to service construction debt. Typical surcharges range from $0 to$4 per ticket sold. It should be noted that the ticket surcharges would be in addition to any facility fees, ticket taxes, convenience or handling charges. Care normally has to be taken to not assess onerous ticket surcharges, as increases in the cost to attend events, even through ticket surcharges, could have negative implications on demand. Any consideration of a newticket surcharge would need toweigh the total effective impact on the arena event consumer(spectator/attendee) and promoter. Examples of ticket surcharges implemented by comparable arena facilities as a funding source include: • CenturyLink Center in Omaha, Nebraska implemented a$1.50 ticket surcharge set for three years that can be adjusted thereafter. • Ford Center in Evansville, Indiana imposes a $2.00 ticket surcharge for all Evansville events. • Pinnacle Bank Arena in Lincoln, Nebraska has a $1.00 ticket surcharge that can be increased up to $3.00 per ticket if deemed "financially necessary". For purposes of planning for the FFCC Project, it would be reasonable to assume a $1.50 ticket surcharge with proceeds dedicated to service construction debt. Based on the projected ticketed attendance figures for the Project, it is estimated that this type of ticket surcharge could generate in excess of$300,000 per year (or a capital stack contribution of more than $5.0 million). Contractually-Obligated Income Contractually-obligated income has become a popular source of private funding participation. Contractually-obligated income refers to those revenue streams that are secured through multi- year contracts and include revenue sources such as naming rights, advertising/sponsorship agreements, and private boxes. However, given a FFCC Project would be expected to continue to be City-owned, and its estimated financial operating characteristics do not anticipate regular financial operating profitability, it is unlikely that traditional contractually-obligated income streams (other than potentially naming rights and other related sponsorships that were not assumed during DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 41 of 44 the financial operating analysis conducted for this study) would be available to assist in defraying public sector project costs. Private Donations/Endowments Particularly with respect to performing arts facilities, certain communities have succeeded in historical fundraising efforts for various public projects. In these instances, a few high-profile, community-oriented wealthy individuals have provided private donations of capital and/or land to help defray public sector development costs. Private donations from philanthropic individuals and organizations are often critical in the fundraising efforts for performing arts theaters. Local capital campaigns (many times via the establishment of a dedicated endowment fund)tend to be instrumental in establishing seed money and demonstrating local interest in a project. The fact that any improved/expanded FFCC will ostensibly continue to be owned by the City and operating by a third-party private management firm (rather than being owned and operated by a nonprofit arts organization) could potentially pose certain challenges for a capital campaign. Nevertheless, attempts should be made to identify seed money of this nature if a determination is made to pursue a major new/renovation project that involves a substantially upgraded Theater. Other Sources Other potential private sources of revenues could come from local foundations, contributions from a primary tenant, other major facility users, parking surcharges, facility operating profits, sale of brick pavers, investment income and other such sources. With respect to potential parking surcharges, it is understood that a current arrangement has been negotiated between the City and FFCC management to ensure the availability of affordable and convenient parking at specific nearby ramps during certain FFCC events. It is typical throughout the industry to charge for event parking (which often is critical in generating revenue for operations or debt service), and it would not seem unreasonable to consider this in Dubuque should a significant investment be made to substantially upgrade the FFCC product. To minimize the impact on non-event downtown parking consumers, maintain convenience for event attendee egress, and prevent additional costs for the City, one method that could be considered would for be for a small parking charge (i.e., fixed fee of$5 or less, paid upon entry) be assessed for a few of the ramps closest to the FFCC for ticketed events only that occur after normal parking garage operating hours (i.e., evenings and weekends). The FFCC could provide staff to operate the pay stations for vehicle entry and payment transactions for the period of time after normal parking garage operating hours until one hour after the scheduled evenYs start time. Exit from the ramp following the event would be unabated and not constrain egressing traffic. This revenue could form a dedicated source of funds to contribute to debt service or operations. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 42 of 44 Conclusions Based on the analysis of funding options, public sector revenue sources are often used to fund the all or a majority of the capital development or renovations of municipally-owned facilities comparable to the FFCC throughout the region and country. While private sector sources could help contribute to the capital stack for the proposed FFCC Project, based on a review of comparable facility funding sources and discussions with local officials, the most likely path forward for public sector funding of a majority of the construction costs associated with the proposed Project in downtown Dubuque would likely need to consist of a general obligation bond supported by property taxes. This would require a greater than 60 percent affirmative vote via a public referendum for an increase in property tax assessment. The analysis suggests that planning for the FFCC Project funding structure could have a reasonable target of 80 percent provided by City of Dubuque sources and 20 percent provided by private sector or other sources. Based on the approximate $85 million estimated hard and soft construction cost estimates (previously discussed herein), a hypothetical structure scenario to meet this 80/20 split might consist of: $65 million from proceeds via City of Dubuque G.O. bonds $5 million in contractually-obligated naming rights fees $5 million in dedicated ticket surcharge revenue ($1.50 per ticket) $5 million in ticketed event parking fees (in selected nearby ramps) $5 million in private fundraising (corporate donations, donations relating to arts elements, etc.) Furthermore, as previously presented, it is estimated that the FFCC Project will operate with a significantly lower annual operating subsidy that the current FFCC facility. Specifically, the annual operating subsidy required of the City is estimated to stabilize at approximately $300,000 per annum in 2018 dollars (an approximate $500,000 improvement over the subsidy provided to maintain FFCC operations today). Lastly, it is important to recognize that the design and construction costing exercise pertormed for this Phase 2 effort considered a near full build-out of all elements that were both market supportable and indicated through the outreach and concepting work. A higher amount of contingency and cushion was included in the preliminary construction budget to account for some ofthe less certain cost factors, such as environmental and unexpected renovation events that could be found during the more detailed civil engineering, design and schematic phases of work that would be ultimately be required if the Project is pursued. As such, the project team believes that, if required, a FFCC Project budget may be workable at a slightly lower total figure; however, further investigation and/or design compromises would be required. DRAFT COPY Ms. Marie Ware December 12, 2018 Page 43 of 44 9. Conditions of Work The information concerning within this document and related supporting documents presents a summary of our work and is intended to assist the City and other related project stakeholders with the information necessary to make informed decisions regarding next planning steps concerning a potential major FFCC renovation/improvement project. The work and information presented in this report and its various appendices/supporting documents are based on estimates, assumptions and other information developed from industry research, data provided by the City and other local project stakeholders, outreach with existing and potential facility users, discussions with industry participants, and analysis of competitive/comparable facilities and communities. The sources of information, the methods employed, and the basis of significant estimates and assumptions are stated in this report. Some assumptions inevitably will not materialize and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, actual results achieved will vary from those described and the variations may be material. The findings presented herein are based on analysis of present and near-term conditions in the Dubuque area as well as existing interest levels by the potential base of users for an enhanced FFCC product. Any significant future changes in the characteristics of the local community, such as growth in population, corporate inventory, competitive inventory and visitor amenities/attractions, could materially impact the key market conclusions developed as a part of this study. As in all studies of this type, the estimated results are based on competent and efficient management of the FFCC and assume that no significant changes in the event markets or assumed immediate and local area market conditions will occur beyond those set forth in this report. Furthermore, all information provided to us by others was not audited or verified and was assumed to be correct. This report has been prepared for the internal use of the City and should not be relied upon by any other party. The report has been structured to provide the City with a foundation of research and analysis to provide decision makers with the information necessary to advance planning on a potential FFCC project and should not be used for any other purpose. We hope this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require any additional information or clarification. Sincerely, Bill Krueger Principal CSL International i�� 9Wt;;��1�� ' �.w�� . "_ . � n �„- �, �i i i�� ; i � illl � ,,�, .��a � ��_ . yr , _tc— 1 � �n �r� � '�i � i � c �� ;° en �a� ru j�� , .,� t�+ „�' ' � ��: / x�n., �i' r uao oos �e� ' m � s� � �"� �, �+q :. p�� n m =� � ' - . '.11 !11 701 ' a, ' � IIY fl13 . III +ii iii�� _ "�'.-�� - ' � � � � �� n�r �, � ,, �� W,,, M m n i �,�.ti� I ��o o: , _.-�`—,—��`.;�°,yr, � � 1 ^_ . ., � .. ' I : ..., i — — . u.. .� x: i _ � .".111!III�� .,�: � ' �T1N'L�w� _ ':�� - � �"' ' ' '. li IIIIIIII � . �1 �l � F .J�� yF_ 'i II •;�� Y �I�i �� m �' �y ��.1��. I u�..Y . y v� Im �� .'� ,.C�.�.w��L . .l . � � — • 1 : �� ,�, , � � .... ,, . €� � �� N �a�. �.. � ' Ori��,.. � � �� !� . -. — ti;� � � ,,, l� � �, � (9;, � - �1 1� � ° � °'' 'b .► , ' � �i11� � � , ' �'Y, -,. � � � �. � , � , i t •i �. ,� ��.. �I Ili1' ' .��_ '� I i ;�. i' � � �-' 1 � 11l1 .. .. 'u� � � — ' � IICI '� � �„i , _ r �� Ysq . v - � �, � 4t � ,�!i�, � , � �aA`` � '*,,si �i. _ � n.� � ' .._ a��-�d S w s,!1 �, � ryy ._T � ,.. - . � ' �1�� i....� . .)�� - ,� ,.�,.,... ,,. -1 ,�=-- n : �:` �� . � ,� 1. i ��..�;� � �W..- M;y, ,�� N.h r ��,��u '�/ �� ! ;i June 19, 2018 Ms. Marie L. Ware Leisure Services Manager City of Dubuque Leisure Services Deparhnent 2200 Bunker Hill Road Dubuque, Iowa 52001 Dear Ms. Ware: Conventlons, Sports & Leisure In�rnational (CSL), in conjunctlon with Be�ch Associates and FEH Design, has completed a report rela�d to an assessment and study (or the Five Flags Civic Cen�r (FFCC). The atmched report presen�our research,analysis and findings and is in�nded to assist the City of Dubuque(City)and other rela�d pmject s�keholders with the infortnatlon necessary h� make in(ormed decisions regarding the future of the FFCC. The analysis presen�d in this report is based on estimates,assumptions and other infortnatlon developed from indushy research,data provided by the City and other local project s�keholders,surveys of e�cistlng and potential facility users, discussions with industry participan�, and analysis of competltive/comparable facilitles and communities. The sources of in(ormation, the methods employed, and the basis of significant estimates and assumptions are s��d in this report. Someassumptions inevitably will notma�rializeand unanticipa�d even� and circums�nces may ocwr. There(ore, actual resul� achieved will vary 6om those described and the variatlons may be ma�rial. The findings presen�d herein are based on analysis of present and near-�rtn conditlons in the Dubuque area as well as e�cistlng in�rest levels by the po�ntlal base of users (or an enhanced FFCC product. Any significant future changes in the characteristics of the local community, such as growth in population,corporate inventory, competltive inventory and visihx amenities/attractions, could materially impact the key market conclusions developed as a part of this study. As in all studies of this type, the estimated results are based on compe�nt and efficient management of the FFCC and assume that no signifcant changes in the event marke�or assumed immedia� and local area market conditlons will occur beyond those set (orth in this report. Furthermore, all in(ormation pmvided to us by others was not audited or verified and was assumed h� be correct. This report has been prepared for the in�rnal use of the City and should not be relied upon by any other party. The report has been structured to provide the City with a (oundatlon of research and analysis h�provide decision makers with the infortnatlon necessary h� stra�gically plan for Dubuque's future in the even� and public assembly industries and should not be used (or any other purpose. This report, i� fndings or references h�CSL or i�subcontrac�d �am members may not be included or reproduced in any public of(ering s��ment or other fnancing document. We sincerely apprecia�the assis�nce and cooperatlon we have been pmvided in the compilation of this report and would be pleased h� be of(urther assistance in the interpre�tlon and applicatlon of our findings. Very truly yours, CSL Internatlonal ConvenHons,Sporis&Lelsure IntemaHonal 520 Nlmllet Mall •SLlte 520•Mlnneapolls,MN 55402•Telephone 6 12 294 2000 •Fac;lmlle 6122942045 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................. ES 1-8 1.0 In tmductio n................................................................................................1 2.0 FFCC Situation and Operetions Malysis..........................................................4 3.0 Analysis of Local Market CondiOons .............................................................12 4.0 Competitive and Comparable Facilities and Markets.......................................21 5.0 Market Demand Analysis ............................................................................94 6.0 Analysis of Development Options and Concepts.............................................62 7.0 Cost/BenefitAnalysis..................................................................................72 8.0 Naming Rights and Sponsorship Opportunities Malysis..................................84 Appendix A: Compareble Facility Case Studies Appendix B: Comparable Market Demographic Data Appendix C: Community Survey Responses Appendix D: Architectural Concept and Layout Rendenngs Appendix E: Capital Cost Estimates FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENiER ASSESSMENT AND SRJDV � TABLE OF�NiENTS ��'�' �.. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 .ce�; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Conventions,Sports and Leisure International (CSL), in conjunction with Betsch Associates and FEH Design, was remined by the City of Dubuque (City) h� conduct an assessment and study of the Fve Rags Civic Center (FFCC). This summary outlines the key findings associated with the study. The full writ�n report should be reviewed in its entirety to gain an understanding of the study's methods, limitations and implicabons. Introduction and Background The FFCC has longserved as an important community asset(or Dubuque and its residents. I� long history can be treced back to the mid-1800s with the opening of hotel and theater facilities in downtown Dubuque. Over the years, Five Flags has served as a critical gathering place in Dubuque, hosbng thousands of entertainment, per(ortning arts, sports, conventions, and civic events. The hvo primary elemen� of the current Five Flags Civic Centerare the 4,000-seat Arena and the 700seat histonc performing arts Theater. In the decades since the last major investment in Five Flags, significant changes have oxurred within the event facility industry nationwide. At the same bme, addibonal new event, sports and entertainment facilities have been developed elsewhere in Dubuque and in the region. As such, the City of Dubuque is interested in determining the most appropnate path (orward as it relates to the Five Flags Civic Centerand its ongoing role in Dubuque. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to assess the FFCC's current physical state and pmgrammatic orientation, and conduct a study of market demand, supportable pmgram, fnancial, economic, naming nghts/sponsorship and feasible development scenanos relating to the (uture of the Five Flags Civic Center. The study process consisted of detailed research and analysis, including a comprehensive set of market- specifc information derived from the following: ✓ Expenence garnered thmugh more than 1,000 event facility and mixed-use evaluation and planning projects throughout the country. ✓ Local market visit at the outset of the project, including community and site h�urs. ✓ Vsual physical facility inspection and condition assessment of the FFCC. ✓ Research and analysis of local market condibons, existing facilities and infrastructure,and industry trends. ✓ Benchmarking research and analysis of facility data and interviews conducted with management of over 30 competitive and comparable arena and theater facilibes located throughout the region and country. ✓ Comparetive analysis of socioeconomic data fmm competitive/comparable facility markets. ✓ In-person interviews, meetings and public (orurrs with Dubuque area individuals, including representatives of municipal government, visitor and event industries, local companies, event producing organiza0ons, and community gmups. ✓ Online survey of over 1,C�7 Dubuque and community residents. ✓ Completed �lephone interviews with more than 30 representatives of organizabons and gmups that represent po�ntial users of multipurpose arena and theater facility space in Dubuque. FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageESl FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' Current Five Flags Civic Center The FFCC has longserved as an important community asset (or Dubuque and its residents. The hvo pnmary elements of the current Five Flags Civic Center are the 4,000-seat Arena and the 700seat hish�nc performing arts Theater. The FFCC is owned by the City of Dubuque and is managed via contrect by a leading national third-party pnva� management comp3ny, SMG. On a per square (oot and per seat basis, the FFCC's recent annual fnancial opereting per(ortnance is consistent with or slightly better than the average comparable facility located in similar markets, despite industrysubstandardproductcharectenstics. Eventandattendanceattractionareshowingfavorabletrends in recent years and fnancial operabng per(ortnance is stable, which is indicative of an expenenced and efficient management team and approach. Nevertheless, the FFCC is attracting a lower than averege level of event activity in both the Theater and Arena relative h�compareble facility avereges,which would be expected,given the FFCCs age,substandard physical pmduct, accommodated event mix, and (unctional/marketability challenges. There are a numberof important weaknesses and challenges with the existing physical facility pmduct that negatively impact marketability, event axommodation, delivery of services, attendee expenence, and operating e�ciency. Communities thmughout the region and country continue to invest in new, e�cpanded and improved event facility pmducts. The "state-of-the-industry", in tems of pmduct quality, layout, amenities, and (unctionality continues to nse. Current FFCC management has demonstrated creativity and e�ciency in its appmach in attracting events, maximizing revenues,and containing expenses with an aging and increasingly substandard facility product. In the competitive event facility envimnment (regionally and nationwide), with each passing year without major capital imestment, the FFCCs challenges and inefficiencies become more stark and impactful, and ultimately will not be able to be mitigated or countered even with a competent and creabve management team. Local Market Conditions The strength of the local market, in tertns of its socioeconomic and demogrephic attnbutes, can pmvide an indication of a community's ability to draw and accommodate large numbers of sports, entertainment, convention, arts, culturel, civic and other spectator event attendees. A community's hospitality infrastructure in terrrs of hotels, restaurents, entertainment and other such factors contnbute heavily to the potential suxess of event facilibes. Throughout the country, spectator/entertainment/arts event venues, such as the FFCC, are often located in downtown central business distncts. These locations often provide the highestdensity ofwalkable visih�r amenities, such as restaurants, bars, nightli(e, retail with character, and other such items. The FFCC's location on Main Street in the center core of the downh�wn is considered the ideal location for this type of venue in the Dubuque destination. The recent addibon of local supply of high-quality, specialized event facility pmducts (thmugh ihe development of the Grend River Center and the Mystique Community Ice Center) is consistent with trends seen thmughout the country relating to the development of more specialized facilities to better serve certain tenants and event types, thereby delivering better experiences and greater value h� specific consumers (attendees, exhibitors, spectators and participants). The FFCC Flrena, like many mulbpurpose facilibes of its vintage, was designed for maximum Aexibility, which allows (or the technical accommodabon of a wide FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageES2 �, FEH�ESIGN � Betscha„� 1� vanety of event types and uses. However, given that facility and amenity requirements differ significantly among specific event types/segments, the result of the FFCCs Aexibility is that a number of event types/segmen�are notoptimally served relabve h� modem industry standards. The developmentofquality convention and ice facilities in Dubuque has relieved the need (or the FFCC Flrena to axommodate much of its (omxr Flat Aoorand ice events/usage that were cntical in previous years. These issues are important in considenng future FFCC pmgram and development opportunities. Competitive &Comparable Facilities While the nearest competitive fixed-seat entertainment venues are located approximately 75 miles away in Cedar Rapids and the Quad Cities, the competitive envimnment within Iowa and the regional area (orarena venues thatcompete (or tounng entertainment acts is considered moderete h� moderetely-high. A number of quality arena venues exist in the regional area that are attractive for tounng shows. Dubuque's population within a short dnving dismnce is lower than averege among the competitive and compareble set, which will always serve to govern the upside potential for attracting levels of pmmoted tounng entertainment event levels relative to larger markets. It is believed that the largest regional markets will continue to host a significant level of non-local event activity, but Dubuque and the FFCC�ven while possessing significant facility limimtions relative h� modern facilities—have demonstrated that Dubuque can compete (or a number of these events. Eighteen compareble arena facilities and 17 comparable theater facilibes were analyzed in order to drew in(erences for a potential expanded/improved FFCC. Dubuque generelly ranks among the lower tier in tertns of severel demogrephic vanables and per(omiance metncs; however, limited competition in the immediate region and histoncal successes in event attrection (despite an aging and substandard FFCC product) suggest that a number of events are sustainable and it is able to draw attendees from further distances h� a greater degree than other compareble markets. Market Demand Three of the City's fve initial requested scenanos h� be considered under this study involve either the pertnanent removal fmm service of the FFCC Arena or its relocation to an alternate site elsewhere in Dubuque. Based on the entirety of the research, community outreach, and analysis conducted (or this study, there are not any obvious and compelling reasons to demolish the FFCC Flrena and redevelop the site for an altemate use. Important reasons (or this retionale include: a) Market demand exists for a mulbpurpose entertainment/spectator arena in Dubuque. It is clear that a such a facility is desired by many cibzens and viewed as an important quality of life element. b) There are important efficiencies involved with the co-location and co-management of ihe Theater and the Arena at the current FFCC site. Cos� to operate the FFCC Theater alone (without the synergy and benef ts of the FFCC Arena)would be higher than the opereting cos� that are currently attnbuted to it under its shared opereting model. c) The FFCC's current location in the core of the downtown centrel business district is the ideal location in Dubuque (orsuch a facility. The location maximizes synergy fmm an attendee and an economic perspective, levereging a pedestnan-fnendly environment with a density of nearby visitor amenities, attrec0ons and trensportation/parking infrastructure. It serves to drew people into the downtown core, enhancing the downtown's overell health. The prospect of abandoning an ideal arena site, that has beneftted fmm decades of pmduct/infrestructure investmentand brending, h� rebuild elsewhere in a less desireble location in Dubuque is not logical. FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageES3 FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' d) Under a scenano where the FFCC Arena is demolished and no replacement facility is developed elsewhere in the community, the Dubuque market would lose many, if not the majonty, of the events hosted at the FFCC, and the associated economic activity genereted in the downtown and thmughout the community by their attendees. Further, it would be e�cpected that more Dubuque citizens would elect to leave the community to at�nd entertainment and spor� events in other communities, as a result(thereby resulting in (urther emsion of local economic spending). e) In cities larger than Dubuque, property values and demand for developable land parcels loca�d in downtown central business distnct cores are often significantly higher than that presently exist in Dubuque's downtown. Current downtown land supply,demand and prices do not suggest that the costs and lost economic impact(quantifable and intangible) (or the City related to demolishing the FFCC Arena and disposing of ihe land asset to a potential private party would be mitigated by sale proceeds and the beneft genereted by any ulbmate al�rnate private development. As a result of these factors, it is believed that the highest-and-best-use of the FFCC asset (building and land) is a multipurpose civic/entertainment/arts complex. As such, the emphasis of the remaining concept development and cost/benefit analysis focused on FFCC Arena and Theater i mpmvement,expansion and/or redevelopment scenarios. Key conclusions associated with the detailed market analysis include the (ollowing: 1. Market su000rt exists for both Arena and Theater comoonents. Market research and analysis conducted (or this study indicates that demand e�cis� (or both the arena and performing arts theater(unctions in Dubuque that the FFCC provides. These types of facilifies would be expected to continue to have important roles in the Dubuque marketplace into the foreseeable (uture. 2. Local aualiN of li(e and economic activiN would be neaativelv imoacted without a venue servina these roles. The FFCC has long-served an important mle in Dubuque and the region, accommodating a signifcant portion of local sports, entertainment and per(ortning arts event demand, including certain activity that other local event facilities could not, or would not, accommodate. Important events, entertainment opportunities, attendance, and community exposure would be lost and negatively impacted without either of these types of facilibes. Should the FFCC be decommissioned and no other replacements are developed, other local venues would not be able to su�ciently axommodate the FFCCs displaced activity. 3. The FFCC Theater is an historic asset that should be orotected. The FFCC Thea�r continues to serve an important market niche (or a small fixedseabng venue space in Dubuque. It has been and continues to serve as an important asset to the local per(ortning arts. Improvements to the FFCC Theater are not expected to signifcantly increase market share or attendance; however, impact(ul enhancements could be made to support spaces associated with the Theater to improve its efficiency, financial performance, and marketability. 4. The FFCC's current location is ideal foran entertainment/soorts/arts comole�c. The existing location maximizes synergy fmman at�ndee and an economic perspective,levereging a pedestnan-fnendly environment with a density of nearby visitor amenities, attrections and trensportation/parking infrastructure. It serves to drew people inh� the downtown core,enhancing the downtown's overell health. In mostcases, cities who are planning new arena and/or theater facilibes first look to their downtown centrel business districts (or available development parcels, given the high density of amenities and a walkable envimnment. 5. Sianifcant uoaredes to the FFCC Arena oroduct are needed to better comoete for and serve scectator and entertainment event seaments. While ihe FFCC Flrena was onginally designed to accommodate a wide vanety of event types and uses, modem industry expectations nationwide have led h�ward the development and gravitation h� more specialized-purpose facilities. In recent FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageE59 FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' years, Dubuque has partially responded to these trends, thmugh the development of the Grand River Center (conven0ons/meetings/exhibitions) and the Mystique Community Ice Center (ice sports and rec). The result is that spectator/entertainment events remain as the key current and potential (uture target event segment for the FFCC Arena. 6. The FFCC Flrena has exceeded its oractical life. At a minimum, significant investment is required to shik the facility closer h� state-of-the-industry standards to address de(erred capital repair/replacement items, improve opereting efficiency and (unctionality, and allow it h� conbnue accommodating exisbng event activity and gmw (uture market share. Failure to do so will likely result in conbnued emsion of market share and diminishing event, performance and attendance levels at the FFCC Arena. Further, a minimum capital repair/replacement expenditures will be necessary in the near-term just to address li(e safety issues and maintain minimum operetional functionality. 7. The FFCC Arena ohvsical omduct and functionaliN is industry subsmndard. There are many aspects of the e�cisting FFCC Flrena that do not confortn, or are substandard, relabve h� state-of- the-industry arenas (in the competifive emironment and nationwide). In many respects, the FFCC Flrena possess attnbutes that are more consistent with a mulbpurpose Flat Aoor exhibition facility than with a modern spectator/entertainment arena. As will be discussed (urther in the subsequent chapter, given the exisbng FFCC's footpnnt and structurel elements, it likely would be significantly challenging—if not impossible—to renovate the exisbng FFCC Arena structure into a staterof-the- industry sports/entertainment arena. M expanded site area and a major redevelopment likely would be necessary to meet minimum requirements (or a long-term sports/entertainment venue solution. 8. Imestment in FFCC enhancements or redevelooment would be escected to dme new activiN and oositive imoac�. A distinct opportunity exis� (or Dubuque to capture new sports, entertainment and performing arts events with a new/impmved event facility product�pecifcally, through a modern arena venue that is more consistent with sta�-of-the-industry standards, allowing it h� protect existing business and compete for new business. 9. The hiahest-and-best-use of the FFCC asset (buildina and landl is a multioumose civic/entertainment/ar�comolex. Based on the entirety of the research,community outreach,and analysis conducted for this study,there are not any compelling reasons h�demolish the FFCC Arena and redevelop the site (or an altemate use. There is not believed to be any apparent compelling alternate use or more attractive economic opportunity for the City and its citizens to consider pertnanent retirement or relocabon ofa long-standing, productive community asset in the heart of Dubuque's downtown. These findings are also consistent with the Flrts and Culture Mas�r %an that was previously adopted by the City Council. Development Options &Concepts Based on the market analysis, key attnbutes of a market supportable pmgrem for a FFCC arena include: . Staterof-the-industry, spectatorarena . Seating capacity of behveen 6,000 and 8,000 (5,000 h� 7,000 fixed sea�) . Some Flexible seating to retain access h� Flat Floor space . Premium seabng and other hospimlity areas • Enhance patron experience— ingress/egress, WiFi, food &beverege, ADA, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house, load-in/out and other support facilities FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageESS FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' Based on the previous analyses undertaken, key attnbutes of a market supportable facility progrem for a FFCC theater include: . Retention ofhistonc Theater . Refurbish seating and make 2nd Balcony seating functional • Modest expansion of Bijou Black Box Theater • Address capital impmvement pmject items • Enhance patron experience— lobby,WiFi, F&B, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house facilibes In order to accommodate an industry smndard event facility complex that meets the identified market supportable pmgrammabc elements, the optimal solubon would involve an expanded site and redevelopment of the FFCC Arena. A renovation of the existing FFCC arena would not deliver a state-of- the-industry product, nor could a desireble renovation solubon be executed without expanding the FFCC's footprint. Whether the solution to address the FFCC Flrena is to expand or redevelop, the logical expansion direction would be northwest across West 5"' Street. Based on these market and pmgrem analysis conclusions,along with collaboration among the pmject team and the City, four primary facility investment scenanos were identifed (or additional analysis. • Scenano 1 effectively represents a minimum, status quo scenano, recognizing that a certain level of expenditures will be required in the near tertn and in the (oreseeable (uture on deferred maintenance and (uture capital repair/replacement iterrs to keep the FFCC safe and operational by current standards. • Scenano 2 involves a limited FFCC renovation (no expansion of facility (ootprint). . Scenano 3 represents a renovated complex with an expanded Flrena. . Scenano 4 involves a renovated complex and a (ully redeveloped Arena (including new street-side retail opportunities). Scenanos 3 and 4 both represent northwest expansion projections that would involve a block-long closure of West 5"' Street and development on a signifcant portion of the block opposite the current FFCC across West 5"'; however, neither scenario would require the relocation of Ecumenical Tower. Based on industry standards and a review of parking supply in downtown Dubuque, it is not believed that the development of addibonal parking structures or lots will be necessary for any of the identified FFCC development scenarios. Conversely, downh�wn Dubuque's volume, availability and pncing of parking supply nearby the FFCC is considered a pmduct strength relative to other compareble venues located throughout the region and country. CostlBenefit Analysis A detailed cost/benefit analysis was performed (or each of the four identifed FFCC scenanos. Results conclude that each of the scenarios would be expected to pmvide quantifiable benefts to Dubuque (with the greatest impacts generated by Scenanos 3 and 4). These quantifable benefi� often serve as the "return on investment"of public dollars that are contnbuted to develop these destination and constituent facilibes. The exhibiton the following page presen�a simplified summary of retum-on-investment,casbng total economic output (direct, indirect and induced spending) against total costs (upfmnt and ongoing) assumed to be borne by the public sech�r to implement each of the four analyzed FFCC scenarios. FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageE56 FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' The companson includes the total esbmated costs that will likely need to be borne by the public sector h� implement each of the (our scenarios, for a stabilized year of operabons (assumed third full year of operetions),as well as cumulated cos�over 15 years of operations. Benefits have been presented in tertns of annual total economic output(a sum of direct, indirect and induced visitorspending) in Dubuque. Costs have been presented in tertns of construction debt service (assuming the entire construction debt would be bonded debt)and opereting subsidy needed perscenario. Specifically,a 30-year termand a 3.5 percent tax exemptannual interest rete have been assumed for ihe hypothetical debtassociated with each scenario. However, importantly, there may be an opportunity to utilize (unding sources and financing mechanism (in part or in (ull) that would not require the issuance of treditional public sector bonded debt (in part or in (ull). In that event, the cost of capital would be reduced and overell annual costs would lower. Likewise, in the event that other non-public sector funds are contnbuted to the pmject to defrey costs, the annual costs estimated to be bome by the public sector would also be lower than indicated. Summary of Key Estima�d Coshs and Benefitr by Scenario (in 2018 dollare) ouaxnrwe�ecoss caaiuico��: HeNGon9ncibnGests — S]i595i� — ffi2i061i� — SRi639iW5 — S6�C%,]P WXGo�slncilonGa4s — 1i139i2Y.1 — 3i369i1W — 6i395i990 — 9i313iW9 PMe�eGonN�Wbn 0 0 0 0 TolalLos� — $8.i]AE50 �� $35&tOd50 �� $49.0]5845 — $ii]99.iE5 OngaingOpemtians: OpereMARevenues S110i� SSi1Wi� 55]Oi05] 59i5E5iB19 51i13]i160 SPi05]i400 51i531iCW ffi2i955i5(q oparewe�re� �xsav ias:oav i3aiw3 mrzawa nseeaz ecsanao zmzaer wo�seea TolalOpzralingLosts $856.000 $1E840.000 $8fl.J4i $II.i6CJ98 $661.693 $99E5]80 $4i1]9i $i.0i0955 OngaingCmts: �e��5ervlm Sl]5i� S]i125i� 51i0Wi� 521i0Wi� S�CC6iW0 539i9F1iW0 53iP92i� 559i2A:li� Opere�InA�e�lcll 9:5� 4810� 91110] 416i199 C51692 9925390 0i139] ]W0955 TolalAnnualLosb $1]]1.000 $19965.000 $EE1SJ4i AtyIICJ98 Ai]Ei.693 $49915]80 $Q]51]9i $65]00955 OIIANTIFNBLEBENEFRS OngoingQuantifiableBenNlis: �RrniSysndlnA 5�399i169 539i]6]iN9 53i055iP23 55]i051i919 SOi]53i391 593i?C6i999 55i]3]i93] 5119i199i93] IndtrMllnduce]SpendlnA 90690 6359993 6 P99 250G9269 &5039 0220 590 2 95052 W935i39 TolaIOWPW E1E99850 E56.1E6848 Ea,E1CJfl $BE861J8i E6.5594M E1]S.6W.SiE Ei9EE990 Eii].0]S.6i5 Peisonellncome�eeminqs� 51iC52i5D 519iP0i303 51i35]iW0 526i95]i921 5�110i2A6 SMi206i499 5�5Wi031 SESiE55,355 Emplrymen��NllMpeMlmepCs� 09 ]P9 63 1iW2 W iJ20 iP Z101 As shown, aggregated annual cos� (debt service plus operating subsidy) for the four scenanos over 15 years range fmm $20.0 million (or Scenario 1 (status quo) to $65.3 million (or Scenario 9--or a difference of$45.3 million. An imestment in FFCC renovation/expansion/redevelopment will represent new economic impact to Dubuque and the surmunding region, particularly when considenng aggregate impac�over time and more significantly for Scenanos 3 and 4. The exhibit also depicts the cumulabve net new economic impacts estimated to result from the construcbon and operetions of the FFCC scenanos esbmated (or a stabilized year(third (ull yearof operetions)and in the aggregate overa 15-year penod. Over a 15-year penod, the cumulative economic output (new direct, indirect and induced spending) over the 15-year penod is estimated to range behveen $56.1 million (or Scenano 1 (status quo) to $173.0 million for Scenario 9--or a difference of$116.9 million. FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageES] FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' Importantly, while not specifically esbmated under this analysis, it is believed that an approxima�ly equivalent amount of Scenario 1 economic impacts would be annually lost to Dubuque should the FFCC be demolished and not replaced. In this eventuality,many of the majorentertainment/spor�/spectatorevents held in the current FFCC would be lost to Dubuque if the FFCC was demolished and not replaced. However, some events (particularly smaller events, meetings, civic, etc.) may fnd other host venues in Dubuque. The resultwill likely be that much of the Scenano 1 economic impacts would disappear undera demolish/no replacement scenano. Further, the"lost"impact of local residen� now having to leave Dubuque to trevel to other regional cities to attend entertainment events (due to the loss of the local market's pnmary spectator event facility) has not been quantified, but would also represent reduction in economic impact. The net, incremental result of combining these hvo factors would likely roughly appmximate, or even exceed, the total loss indicated by the Scenario 1 economic impact fgures. It is important to recognize the quantifable economic impacts associated with the annual operetions of entertainment/spectator/arts facilibes,such as the FFCC, measured under this type ofanalysis are typically lower ihan other types of event facility products, such as convention centers, that emphasize genereting nonlocal events and hotel room nigh�. A community's decision to invest in arena and theater facility projects are often driven in large part by a recognition of the importance of pmviding quality entertainment and arts and culture options (or community residen�. Many of these reasons relate to enhancing quality of life,education and culture, and serve to elevate the community's pmfile and brand as a quality place to live, work, leam, play and visit. In fact, these qualimbve benefts tend to be a cntical factor in the consideration of public and private investment in projects of this nature, particularly those involving exisOng venues with a long history of service in the local community. These include issues pertaining to quality of life (thmugh attrecting entertainment events that would not otherwise travel to the area and hosbng civic and pnvate events), ancillary economic development facilitabon, employment opportunities, community pnde and other such issues. FIVE FLA65 CIVIC CENTER F�6ESSMENT AND SrUDV � ExuuHve SLmmary ��'�' PageE58 FEH�ESIGN � Betsch3 < <. �' 1.0. INTRODUCTION Conventions,Sports and Leisure International (CSL), in conjunction with Betsch Associates and FEH Design, was remined by the City of Dubuque (City) h� conduct an assessment and study of the Fve Flags Civic Center(FFCC). Study Overview &Objectives The FFCC has longserved as an important community asset(or Dubuque and its residents. Its long hish�ry can be treced back to the mid-1800s with the opening of hotel and theater facilities in downtown Dubuque. Over the years, Five Flags has served as a critical gathering place in Dubuque, hosbng thousands of entertainment, per(ortning arts, sports, conventions, and civic events. The hvo primary elemen� of the current Five Flags Civic Centerare the 4,OOOseat Arena and the 700seat histonc performing arts Theater. / � � P ,�� . � � 1, � w w �� lrt@! � � � 1 UQ � +� � g$�{�- j`� w1 � �IIf � ._-ps� �l� �fIP � � - _ _ 9 � — � �� II7 "�� , � � , ren � 1' � � A - � ------- — -_... � _-� _ '`, .�___�� .�;; _ -� �}�;r�rdY r'a . . � . _ Q� i'� ... .. � � � _ ..:�._: . • ` . • ..� . " . � .. . .. A . � . '� �. .. .. . In the decades since the last major investment in Five Flags, significant changes have oxurred within the event facility industry nationwide. At the same bme, addibonal new event, sports and entertainment facilibes have been developed elsewhere in Dubuque and in the region. As such, the City of Dubuque is interested in determining the most appropnate path (orward as it relates to the Fve Rags Civic Center and its ongoing role in Dubuque. Specifcally, the purpose of this study is to assess the FFCC's current physical state and pmgrammatic orientation, and conduct a study of market demand, supportable pmgram, fnancial, economic, naming nghts/sponsorship and (easible development scenanos relating to ihe (uture of the Five Flags Civic Center. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSrUDV �� u � Introductlon �� Page 1 ti�`9+,n'. FEH�ESIGN � BetscM�saaua_ _� At the direction of the City, these scenanos include: 1. Demolish Five Flags Civic Center except for the histonc theater to allow (or redevelopment of site. 2. Redevelopment/ leasing of Five Flags Civic Center except (or histonc theater for pnvate tenancy or ownership. 3. Renovation of current footprint of Five Rags Civic Center buildings. 4. Renovation of the existing buildings with expansion of square footage either current or expanded footprint. 5. Relocation of existing Five Flags Civic Center to another location fitting with current sustainability and growth plans (or the City of Dubuque. An important objective of the study is h� provide the City and stakeholderdecision-makers with a thomugh study relying on de(ensible, factual research and analysis of the existing FFCC, its (uture potential, and market supportable opbons that will best serve to pmtect the interests of the City and its citizens. Study Methods The study pmcess consisted of detailed research and analysis, including a comprehensive set of market- specific in(ortnabon derived from the following: ✓ Expenence gamered through more than 1,000 event facility and mixed-use evaluation and planning projects throughout the country. ✓ Local market visit at the outset of the project, including community and site h�urs. ✓ Vsual physi�al facility inspection and condition assessment of the FFCC. ✓ Research and analysis of local market condibons, exisbng facilities and infrastructure and industry trends. ✓ Benchmarking research and analysis of facility data and interviews conducted with management of over 30 competitive and comparable arena and theater facilibes located throughout the region and country. ✓ Comparetive analysis ofsocioeconomic data from competitive/compareble facility marke�. ✓ In-person interviews, meetings and public (orurrs with Dubuque area individuals, including representatives of municipal government, visitor and event industnes, local companies, event producing organiza0ons, and community gmups. ✓ Online survey of over 1,087 Dubuque and community residents. ✓ Completed �lephone interviews with more than 30 representatives of organizabons and groups that represent potential users of multipurpose arena and theater facility space in Dubuque. Conclusions of a particular event facility pmject's (easibility can be assessed in vanous ways, including: . Market feasibiliN — the facility's ability h� attract and support levels of event activity and patronizabon that are consistent with or in excess of industry standards. . Financial feasibiliN — the ability of the facility to"break-even"or generate an opereting pmfit (ocusing only on direct facility-related operabng revenues and expenses. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSrUDV �� u � Introductlon �� Page2 ti�`9+,n'. FEH�ESIGN � BetscM�saaua_ _� . Economic scendina — the facility's ability to generete new spending activity in the local community (i.e., direct and indirect spending that is attributable to outrof-town visitors that would not otherwise occur in the local area). . Tax aenerabon — the ability of the facility to generete new tax revenue for the local area (i.e., tax revenue resulting fmm direct, indirect and induced spending that is attributable to outrof- town visitors that would not otherwise occur in the local area). . Costs/benefits/return on investment— ihe facility's ability to generate new revenues (i.e., from taxes, operabng income and ancillary facility-related revenues, etc.) in excess of quantifable facility-related costs (i.e., construction costs, operabng costs, marketing cos�, public sech�r contribution, etc.). . Intanaible benefits/oublic aood — the ability of the facility to represent an important resource (or the local community, regardless of financial or economic concerns. These types of benefits add to the local community's "quality of li(e" in the same way that libranes, museums and recreational parks do, without consideretion of the economic impacts that the facility might generate. When evaluating the feasibility of a public assembly facility, such as multipurpose event facilibes, communities throughout the country have differed in the specifc cnteria that best reAects the defnition of "(easible`for their community. Fror instance, one community may (ocus more on the ability of the pmject to be operationally self-supporbve or require below a certain threshold of public sectorcontnbution, rather than the intangible "public good"aspects the project would pmvide local residents. The research, data, in(ortnation and analysis pmvided through this study is intended to allow the City and other community constituents to drew their own in(ortned conclusions concerning the"feasibility"of public sector i nvestment in the FFCC. This market and economic assessment pmvides a (oundation of research to give the City and otherdecision- makers the information necessary to strategically plan (or Dubuque's (uture in the event facility industry. Importantly, this research pmvides direcbon notonly as to the facility components that may be supportable fmm a market demand perspective, but also the visihx amenities surrounding Dubuque's primary public assembly facility, including hotel support. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSrUDV �� u � Introductlon �� Page3 ti�`9+,n'. FEH�ESIGN � BetscM�saaua_ _� 2.0. FFCC SITUATION & OPERATIONS ANALYSIS The purpose of this chapter is to inventory and analyze key elements of the current FFCC pmduct, i� current market onentation, and its historical operabng per(ortnance. Understanding the current strengths and challenges of the existing FFCC product, along with current and historical utilization levels, event mix and other such characteristics is important to pmvide a basis fmm which to evaluate short and long-term market demand characteristics for Dubuque and the FFCC, and to help make in(ortned decisions regarding the optimal business plan (or the (uture of the facilibes. Five Flags Civic CenterHistory The FFCC began as a hotel on the corner of Frourth and Main Street named the City Hotel in the 1840's. In 1862, William G. Stewart purchased the building and began converting it into a theater. Over the next 45 years, the venue endured a numberofdifferent owners and name changes, until the original structure was destroyed in a fre in Flpnl 1910. The existing theater was designed and built by C.W. and George L. Rapp of Chicago, who were highly regarded as some of Amenca's premier theater architects. The theatercontinued h� operate in a vanety of capacibes until 1969 when it was earmarked fordemolition as part of Dubuque's 12-block downtown urban renewal progrem. Those opposed to the demolition believed the facility was an irreplaceable treasure, and began obtaining pnvate donabons to combine a restored theater with a new exhibition-ar� facility for an all-purpose civic center on the block bordered by Frourth, Fikh, Main, and Locust Stree�. A steenng committee officially launched a fund drive in December 1971 to renovate the venue and build an adjoining arts arcade and exhibition hall. In November, 1972, the Orpheum was placed on the National Register of Hish�nc Places. The theater was restored in 1975, renamed the Five Rags Theater and reopened March 13, 1976. Shortly thereaker, a bond referendum was held (or the construction of the Five Flags Civic Center, to be attached to the existing theater. M overwhelming 70 percent majonty appmved of the pmject. The development included necessary theater support mom impmvements, upgrades to the locker roorrs, storage space and administretive o�ces. The complex was connected to and designed to complement the restored theater. The new Civic Centeropened its doors in 1979,alongside the restored Theateron Frourth and Main taking up a (ull city block. The bond was a $3.7 million pmject. Additional upgrades and renovations were completed in 2005 at a cost ofjust over$2.0 million. In August 2003,an analysis of Five Flags h�ok place to detertnine what could be done to hold the line on expenses or reduce the pmperty tax supporting that operetion. After weighing the advantages and disadvantages of all options considered, the City contrected SMG in April 2004 h� privately manage Fve Flags Civic Center. The current management agreement ends June 30, 2019 and has a possible five-year extension clause with SMG. An important clause implemented with the Management Agreement that remains today is that the FFCC will not compete with the Grend River Center (or conferences, conventions, dinners, banquets, meetings, receptions and Flat Floor events. A later amendment added a noncompete clause that included national political events. Additionally, in October 2009, the FFCC entered inh� another non-compete agreement, this time (or ice-related events that were otherwise able to be held at the newly constructed Dubuque Ice and Recreation Center. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page 4 � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres Over its lifespan, the FFCC has served the Dubuque community and surrounding region as a site of thousands of sporting events, concerts, theatrical perFormances, family shows, ice shows, civic events, religious events, and other such events. Analysis of Current Product& Recent Operations The Five Flags Civic Center is a City-owned multicomponent event facility, presently managed via contract by a leading national third-party private management company, SMG. In terms of common event industry vernacular, the FFCC primarily consists of an arena and a qerforminq arts theater. The FFCC also integrates some smaller flat floor space for meetings, banquets and other types of activities, as well as a black-box theater, but these spaces are secondary to its function/role as an arena and theater venue. Specifically, the FFCC consists of a 4,000-seat Arena, a 711-seat Theater, 1,950-square feet of ineeting space and a 1,700-square foot black box theater. � � ,� � ��-. I y �, n �� , o i, � ��f;`�:a��'3`�,t�'. ,r:�1'.��r��. t` 1 --� - � � "c,;,�3�aI� 1 � r� � _ . •'�.'� � , �. _ 4 . o -�� . \ � 5 l",� , C L�� n n ' �� . � \� �/• _ . m _ /��' M•, ' . .-.1.� �'. n ,.�'M�/•MM'�-� �arrM�V. .e��W�.''�ti � � � "... _. .. .. � � � �� , R .. A .9 S. � � �• • . .�. � �� • . .�. •• i � • • �1 • . •• •• •. � �� i � ♦I�. • � � .�' •� � � • C'. ' � • �� • Working with the City and FFCC management, a wide variety of information was collected regarding the FFCC product and historical operations. A facility-wide summary of annual number of events, event days, utilization days and attendance for the fiscal years 2012 through 2017 is presented in Exhibit 1 on the following page. The exhibit presents the number of events and event days that took place within event space at the FFCC during each of the past six fiscal years. Utilization days represent the total number of days that event space was occupied at the FFCC, including move-in/out and event days (the total number of days some event space was utilized at the FFCC, removing duplicate data for days in which multiple event spaces were used). Calendar Day Utilization is then calculated by dividing the number of Calendar Days Utilized by the total number of days in a given year. FlVE FLAGS CIVIC CENTER ASSESSMENT AND STUDY • • FFCC Situation&Operations Analysis �� Page 5 + �� FEHDESIGN Betsch;�:,:�c•:r�r=, Exhibit 1 Historical FFCC Operations Analysis— Summary(FY 2012—FY 2017) TaYal Number of Evanfs 94 96 6] �6 86 '103 Totzl Even�Days 153 158 113 1'17 109 '170 TaYal Utilization Days 255 255 198 189 139 261 CalendarDayUtilizaGon 69.9% 699% 542% 5�.8% 38.1% 71.5% Attendance 89,977 91,404 74,833 90,409 88,2W 93,3A4 Total Number of E�znts 55 56 40 45 59 66 Tobl Even�Days 67 70 47 53 76 86 Total Utilization Days 89 89 65 67 102 '105 CalendarDayUliliza�ion 24.4% 24.4% 17.6% 18.4% 27.9% 28.8% A�lentlance G6,63� 6]552 5�031 6],539 �1,840 69,4]3 ToYal Number of Evanfs 30 32 24 28 23 32 ToYal Even�Days 60 56 45 49 33 66 ToYal Utilization Days 12] 114 96 95 41 '125 fakndarDayUtilization 34.8% 312% 26.3% 26.0% 112% 3h2% Attendance 21,600 22,720 1$453 24,483 ifl.982 27,677 Behveen fscal years 2012 and 2017, overall event activity at the FFCC has varied fmm a low of 67 events inFY2014toahighof103eventsinFY2017. Furthermore,CalendarDayUtilizationpercentagesAuctuated behveen 38.1 percent(in FY 2016)and 71.5 percent(in FY2017). Overell, the numberofevents increased from FY2012 to FY2013,with a signifcantdecrease in FY2014 and steady increase from FY 2015 thmugh FY 2017. The decrease that oxurred in FY 2014 can be attributed in large part to the departure of the Eastem Iowa Outlaws Roller Derby, as well as a decrease in usage by the Dubuque Soccer Club, among other events. The Arena has hosted an averege of 54 events behveen fiscal years 2012 and 2017. Sporting events such as Dubuque Soccer Club, Eastem Iowa Outlaws Roller Derby, Dock Dogs Championships and Pinnacle Combat MMA have axounted (or the largest numberofArena events, averaging approximately 67 percent of total events (or the fiscal years reviewed. Fiscal year events at the Theater have renged from a low of 23 events in FY 2014 to a high of 32 events in fiscal years 2013 and 2017,avereging 28 events. Tenant performances,such as the Dubuque Symphony Orchestre and Rising Star Theatre Company have accounted for the largest portion ofevent activity at the Theater, averaging 38 percent of total fscal yearevents for the years reviewed. Non-tenant performance, such as the Colts Youth Organization and Studio 5678 accounted for approximately 24 percent, (ollowed closely by concerts with 17 percent. Utilization days at the FFCC remained steady in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 with a total of 255 utiliza0on days, declining thmugh FY 2016 to a five-fscal year low of 139 utilizabon days, and nearly doubling in FY 2017 with a total of 261 utilization days. Tenant performances axounted (or the largest number of FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page 6 � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres utilization days, with sporting events and non-tenant per(ortnances also making up a large share of FFCC utilization days behveen FY 2012 and FY 2017. Arena utilization days averege approxima�ly 86 days behveen fiscal years 2012 and 2017, with a low of 65 days in FY2014 and a high of 105 utilization days in FY2017. Sporting events accounted (or the largest share of fiscal year utilization days, with an averege of appmximately 60 percent of total utilization days. Theater utilization days peak in FY 2012 with a total of 127 utilization days, Auctuating thmugh fiscal years 2013and2016,reboundinginFY2017withatotalof125utilizationdays. Tenantperformancesaxounting for the largest porbon of acbvity, followed closely by non-tenant performances. Event attendance at the FFCC has remained fairly consistent ranging fmm a low of 74,800 in FY 2014 to a high of 93,300 in FY 2017 despite the decrease in overell event acOvity. Sporting events have drawn the largest attendance levels among event types at the FFCC, accounting (or an averege of 50 percent h�tal attendance at FFCC events during the fiscal years reviewed. Similarly, attendance levels at Arena and Theater events have remained relatively steady with Flrena attendance avereging approximately 66,700 and Theater attendance avereging 22,500 behveen fscal years 2012 and 2017. In addition to analyzing historical event activity,we have analyzed the histoncal fnancial operabons of the FFCC. &hibit 2 below presents a summary of FFCC operating revenues, espenses and resultant net operating deficit for each of the past six full fiscal years. Exhibit 2 Historical FFCC Operations Analysis- Fina ncial Operating Resultr(FY 2012-2017) � � . � � . � � Operating Revenues Facility rent $ 243,15] $19,104 $113,6]1 $109,115 $108,063 $118,488 Foodservire�net) 125,590 91,9]6 63,948 85,280 80,556 ]8,]0] Conhactservire/offier 21,4]0 56,660 59,128 62,404 62,9]9 45,]85 Total Operating Revenues 390,2ll 305,]40 236,]4] 256,]99 251,598 242,980 Operating Expenses: Salaries and benefits $ ]86,824 $]22,932 $646,006 $630,215 $638,091 $609,349 Conhactlabor 33,980 31,66] 29,46] 34,015 25,341 25,88] Utilities ll],562 183,324 186,]02 184,036 166,0]9 162,282 Repair&maintenance 30,552 24,95 18,362 D,OSS 20,83] 3],53] General&adminishative ]S,D6 ]4,625 ]0,080 ]1,9]0 ]4,695 6],654 Supplies 22,330 14,505 13,942 13,]6] 15,125 13,611 Insuranre 45,632 45,188 42,248 38,392 26,293 22,151 Offier 82,91 ]8,638 82,000 86,454 105,0]S 108,300 Total Operating Expenses 1,254,]D 1,ll5,454 1,088,80] 1,085,904 1,0]1,536 1,046,]]1 NetOperatingDeficit (864,510) (869,]14) (852,060) (829,105) (819,938) (803,]91) FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page] � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres As presented, the FFCC has operated at an annual defcit ranging from approximately $803,800 in FY 2012 to neady $870,000 in FY 2016. Like the FFCC, the large majonty of publiclyowned arena, theater, convention center, and civic center facilities located throughout the country generate an annual fnancial operating defcit. On a persquare footand perseat basis, the FFCCs annual fnancial operating deficit is consistent with or slightly better than the average comparable facility located in similar markets, which is an indication of management's emphasis on operafing cost containment and/or City budget mandates. However, the FFCC is attracting a lower than average level of event activity in both the Theater and Flrena relative to comparable facility averages, which would be expected, given the FFCCs age, substandard physical pmduct, accommodated event mix, and functional/marketability challenges. Current Challenges While the FFCC has longserved as a productive community asset and economic generator, there are a number of important weaknesses and challenges with the existing physical faciliry product that negatively impact marketability, event aaommodation, delivery of services, attendee experience, and operafing efficiency. Communities thmughout the region and country continue to invest in new, expanded and improvedeventfacilitypmducts. The"stateof-the-industry",interrrsofproductquality, layout,amenities, and functionality continues to rise. ' u� �� - �� ;., . .. _ ' � - � . _ ;Y�%. I ` _ ' -> � � ., � _:= � � �y �� ,,� � 1 �_ r�ii , � i'� i ' � �_ � _� '� ' � .--�� . � �.�- - -� � _ Current FFCC management has demonstrated creativity and e�ciency in its appmach in attracting events, maximizing revenues,and containing expensa with an aging and increasingly substandard facility product. In the competitive event facility envimnment (regionally and nationwide), with each passing year without major capital invatment, the FFCCs challenges and inefficiencies become more stark and impactful, and ultimately will not be able to be mitigated or countered even with a competent and creafive management team. FIVE FLAGS CIVIC CENiER ASSESSMENT AND SiUDV �� • FFCC SIWaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls �� Page 8 e � FEHDESIGN Betseh+��rvc�are= The Pmject Team conducted tours and a visual inspection of the FFCC at the outset of the study. Interviews were conducted with FFCC staff, including key management,sales and marketing, booking/scheduling,and operations personnel. The (ollowing key challenges were noted dunng this pmcess and represent key concems associated the existing FFCC pmduct. Challenges are organized into four categones: (A) life sa(ety concerns, (B) issues affecting opereting e�ciency, (C) issues impacting patmn expenence, and (D) issues impacbng event marketability. The (ollowing represents a summary of the key issues/concerns noted: A)Life Salety Concems Reviews of the exisfing infrastructure and FFCC facility setup have revealed concems that pose a potential nsk among attendees of arena and/or theaterevents. There are numemus sa(ety concerns with the exisOng exterior footpnnt of the FFCC that presents a risk to event attendees. The current building setback of(ers limited sidewalkspace and there are no protective bollards amund the building that protect patrons pre-and post-event. Pdditionally, building entrences/exits present a challenge with events thatdraw a large attendance. Issues with ingress/egress pose a potential safety nsk in the instance that attendees need to evacuate the FFCC quickly. Within the e�ctenor, safety concerns with the limited space within the lobby and gathenng areas present challenges dunng inclement weather, exacerbated by insu�cient shelter space within the FFCC. B)Issues Aflecting Operating Efficiency In addibon to safety concerns, current inefficiencies with the FFCC hinder the ability of the facility to operate at its full potential. From an event planner perspective, there is only one ten-(oot door available for them to load and unload their equipment. The lack of dock or multiple doors to load-in/out can be constraining. Additionally, the lack of storege and back stage areas pose issues (or events that require space to store equipment containers while utilizing the facility. Fror mulbpurpose facilities, (ood and beverege sales axount(ora large porbon of revenue. Current issues such as the limited storege space and placement relative h� point of sales, the lack of a (ull kitchen and (ood prep areas as well the poor concession stand design do not optimize food and beverage revenue generation. Furiher challenges include the additional time and labor required to lay down decking under the west side of seating, ine�cient electncal and lighting systerr� as well as an inadequate exhaust system. C) Issues Impacting Patron Experience In today's envimnment, the experience provided to event attendees is critical to the success of a multipurpose facility. As such, current conditions at the FFCC do not pmvide an ideal experience FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page 9 � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres that many competitive state-of-the-industry facilities of(er, putting the FFCC at a competi0ve disadvantage. Things such as a mailing address that better aligns with the main entrence of the FFCC, better idenbfcation of the location of the main entrence and box office, a larger/enhanced pmmenade and a lobby for the Theater would create an easier and bet�r arrival expenence for patmns. Other issues such as the lack of restroorrs, lack of ADA accessible locations, WiFi access and Theater acoustics are important to address as they greatly affect the overell patmn experience. Additionally, the lack of treditional premium seating in the current FFCC represents a missed opportunity in tertns of revenue, marketability, and patmn expenence. Creating premium sea0ng areas or hospitality areas would not only provide a betterexperience h� event attendees, but could pmvide cntical additional revenue streams (or the FFCC. D) Issues Impacting Event Marketabid'ty The marketability of a mulbpurpose facility to attract national and regional tounng events is important given the highly competitive envimnment ihmughout the region. There are multiple challenges with the FFCC Arena that decrease its desirability among compefitive venues. The limited seating capacity and challenging confguretion for shows with more than 3,500 seats make it difficult to market the FFCC to large national touring events. The low ceiling height as well as the ngging capabilities are not ideal and more expensive to produce large shows. The Flrena cannot create ice during warm-weather months (June through August). Dunng the months when it is possible, ice making is expensive to execute and maintain, and requires the appmval ofthe Dubuque Community Ice and Recreation Center,Ina Board (DICE),peragreement. The hish�nc Thea�r also presents challenges (or events considenng the Dubuque market. There currently are no points above the stage in Ay space to ng speakers as well as no wing space within the Theater making it difficult to pmduce per(ortnances that require sufficient space for speaker systerrs. Other Center challenges include a lack of staterof-the-industry green/dressing morrs for per(ortners and no existing pmduct/merchandise display space. Conclusions The FFCC has longserved as an important community asset (or Dubuque and its residents. The hvo pnmary elements of the current Five Flags Civic Center are the 4,000-seat Arena and the 700seat hish�nc performing arts Theater. The FFCC is owned by the City of Dubuque and is managed via contrect by a leading national third-party pnva� management comp3ny, SMG. On a per square (oot and per seat basis, the FFCC's recent annual fnancial opereting per(ortnance is consistent with or slightly better than the average comparable facility located in similar markets, despite industrysubstandardproductcharectenstics. Eventandattendanceattractionareshowingfavorabletrends in recent years and fnancial operabng per(ortnance is stable, which is indicative of an expenenced and efficient management team and approach. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page 10 � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres Nevertheless, the FFCC is attracting a lower than averege level of event activity in both the Theater and Arena relative to comparable facility averages,which would be expected,given the FFCCs age,substandard physical pmduct, accommodated event mix, and (unctional/marketability challenges. There are a numberof important v�eaknesses and challenges with the existing physical facility product that negatively impact marketability, event accommodation, delivery of services, attendee expenence, and opereting e�ciency. Communities thmughout the region and country continue to invest in new, e�cpanded and improved event facility pmducts. The "staterof-the-industry", in tems of pmduct quality, layout, amenities, and functionality continues to nse. Current FFCC management has demonstrated creativity and e�ciency in its appmach in attrecting events, maximizing revenues,and containing expenses with an aging and increasingly substandard facility product. In the competitive event facility envimnment (regionally and nationwide), with each passing year without major capital investment, the FFCCs challenges and inefficiencies become more stark and impactful, and ultimately will not be able to be mitigated or countered even with a competent and creabve management team. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� u � FFO�SINaHon&�eraHons AnalVsls '�' Page 11 � �, FEH�ESIGN Betscha>sao.nres 3.0. ANALYSIS OF LOCAL MARKET CONDITIONS The strength of the local market, in tertns of its socioeconomic and demogrephic attnbutes, can pmvide an indication of a community's ability to draw and accommodate large numbers of sports, entertainment, convention, arts, culturel, civic and other spectator event attendees. A community's hospitality infrastructure in terrrs of hotels, restaurents, entertainment and other such factors contnbute heavily to the potential suxess of event facilities. An analysis of ihese attributes was conducted as they relate to the market potential (or an enhanced FFCC pmduct in Dubuque. Location and Transportation Exhibit 1 illustretes the location of Dubuque and i� regional markets and the approximate dnve time to/from Dubuque. Additionally, the exhibit demonstretes the markets and land area captured within 30-, 90- and 180-minute esbmated dnving distances. These rings will be utilized throughout the report while analyzing and comparing demographic and socioeconomic variables. Exhibit 1 Location &Transportation —Driving Distance to Regional Cities : .�.,., .�... . : . .. .�_.a . : � � � � : '" �_... �... M,,,,,,�,,,Mx aaa clues,in t.15 �z ..... smu.nw,so � � Ceder FapiEs,lA 1'.18 ]2 _ q � A Mlwwktt,Wl 2'.50 �]2 � CM1ica9o.IL 3'.38 P9 � � *O� � �esNOlnes.lA 3D2 2�1 , O �""" MnneePa'is.AM J:J6 2`A � O SioueCiry,lA 4'.46 300 �.. u...ie 51.Lais,MJ 4'.53 335 "" •W .. °n`0�O"�F ,. .. IXreM1e.NE 5'.04 ]40 �Or'""""" Intlleneptlis,IN 534 P9 �� wx� O`,�. Linctlq NE S:JO 9� •"•+ KensesCiN�M� 5�.45 �94 m e., '•. .c w r.� ..... ..., ,. s,�vun.Mo � �� SlouxFel6,SD 5'b5 �9] w Leulrv�Ib,HV (�ypCi00Bfi,CH T59 411 . .� � lwlshlleKY ]20 482 " �." Source' Google Maps,Esri,20P As shown, Dubuque is located at the conFluence of Highways 20 and 61, connecting the city to Waterloo to the west, Davenport and Moline to the south and Madison to the northeast. Other population centers located within 400 miles include Milwaukee, Chicago, Des Moines, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Omaha, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Sioux Falls, Louisville, Cincinnati and Lincoln. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 12 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= Demographics Specific demographic and socioeconomic in(ortnation that can pmvide an indication of the ability of a market to support a multipurpose event facility includes population, age, household income and corporete base. Promoters/planners of spectah�r events (and other events that tend to draw largely from the local driving area)oken consider these factors when selecting the appropnate markets (or their events. Exhibit 2 pmvides a summary of key demographic characteristics estimated for the city of Dubuque, Dubuque County, marke� captured in 30-, 60-, and 180-minute drive time nngs amund the city of Dubuque, the state of Iowa, and a United States benchmark. Exhibit 2 Demographics—Dubuque Area Summary Dubuque DamographlcVariabla Oubuque Counry JO�Minu�e 90�MInu[e i00�Minu�e lowa U.S. Papulallm�Y000) SB33B 89,143 118,499 1.152,618 1,034,854 2,926,344 481A219�6 Popule�im�20t0) 5B4O58 9J,653 12G,680 1,212,5]9 ]A91]02 3,OA6,355 308 i45,5J8 Papulelim�20t1) 60,595 99216 131,119 1261,OB9 1,640,181 3.93b49 323,5B0,6P6 %Ghenge(POOPPOP) 3.8% 11.3% f0]% B9% 98% B.5% i5D% Papule11m�204Yesq 62433 10]314 fl5295 1291940 ]]"l1841 3280109 33I3Y6.11B %Chenge(PO1L4011) 3.0% 4.1% 32% 24% 1]% 94% 4.1% Avg.Househdtllnc�201]� 562,900 $69,509 S61,B25 $]0.1J8 SIa,S]6 $]0,305 S�1,008 Avg.Househdtllnc.�2022est) SfiB5J0 $]fi,106 51JA35 $80206 581393 $]i]01 $84�21 %Chenge(20f1-2022) 9D% 9.5% 9]% iPJ% 9.1% f05% 9.1% MeEian Pge(20t],in years) 38.6 J93 38.5 40.1 38.6 38] 38.0 Businesses(101]� 3.129 4,584 6223 50505 310914 145104 1340]211 Errployees(2011� 51,509 66I61 81694 13t,OJ6 433965J 1,B0].012 162,998341 ErtployeelResitlen�lelPop.Retio O85] Ofi]:1 OfiI] 05A:1 OA] OS]] 050:1 Sow[e.Es�i,201] The population of the city of Dubuque is approximately 60,600, while future pmjections based on U.S. Census data estimate Dubuque's popula0on h� be approximately 62,400 in 2022. The esOmated population within a 30-minute dnve of Dubuque is appmximately 131,100,which is an estimated 10.7 percent increase over the 2000 population within that radius. This growth is slightly higher than the estimated 8.5 increase throughout the state of Iowa though slightly lower than the 15.0 percent increase (or the United States as a whole. The population base within the 90- and 180-minute drive time rings is esbmated at 1.3 million and 7.6 million, respectively. Averege household income among Dubuque residents appmximates $62,900, which is approximately 18 percent (appmximately $14,100) less than the na0onal average, 11 percent (appmximately $7,900) less than the state average, and 10 percent(appmximately $6,600) less than the averege in Dubuque County. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 13 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= Local Event Facility and HotellLodging Inventory A community's hospitality infrastructure, in tems of hotels, restaurents, entertainment and other such factors, contributes heavily to the potential suxess of an event facility. The marketability of any event facility increases when there exists the support of amenities and infrestructure within close pmximity. This supporOng hospitality infrastructure also plays a key mle in genereting the desired economic impact of added event space, particularly when considering an events center pmject, such as the potenbal renovation/redevelopment of the FFCC. A paramount component of this hospitality infrastructure is the local inventory of quality hotel properties. As such, the pnmary hospitality infrastructure within Dubuque is outlined in Exhibit 3. Exhibit 3 Lodging—Dubuque Area Fbtels ��i� GentlHerOorRasM&Wa�erpark 199 . � Ik44eylnn LUbuque/Gelene 193 ' ' � �aysinn OubuQue ifi4 ��nia n Be9 Waram Rus W�e180on1 Ct 15D ns�� . 5 w�euurenouwoue ias 4�I � �� ' �`�L Hl(m Gartlem m�Oubuque Darm�wm 1�6 �'¢ � " O Hampbninn 9] �-�, un.yQ- - OI �� Ik44aylnnE,yresslWelBSuiks 8] BSymm�Inn85Wle5 8Y M61nSay Suiks ]5 � ' � ` � u�uq�b' '�° CounPylnnBSuiks 89 --'"` � hMel6 61 . � .— , . . / .'^'.'. �ParB 61 Feirfieltllnn 56 CenlieNlbtel 55 � EcanoLo]gelnn85wks 55 �y!s.. �� Qie4rylnn 51 " '� �� . � Sowce'. DUbuqueGV9.0oogl¢Map5.Y01] va __. _.:.;r� Qy% 0` ._..., As shown, there are 171odging pmperties in Dubuque with 50 or more sleeping roorrs, six of which of(er more than 100 guestmoms. Overall, Dubuque offers nearly 1,700 total hotel guestroorrs; however, only three of these properties (offenng 519 total sleeping roorrs) are located in downtown Dubuque. The majority of the sleeping room inventory is located along U.S. Route 20, west of downtown Dubuque. The pmperty closest to the FFCC is the 193-room Holiday Inn Dubuque, which is situated directly across Main Street and connected to the FFCC via undergmund tunnel. The 133-mom Hotel Julien Dubuque is also located within close walking distance. The 193-mom Grand Har6or Resort &Waterpark and the Grend River Center located on the Mississippi Rivers shoreline is within moderate walking distance. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 14 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= The number of potentially competitive event facilities capable of hosting local or touring spectator event performances is an important consideretion with respect to the overell viability of a potentially renovated/redeveloped FFCC. Exhibit 4 outlines the key facilities thmughout Dubuque with elemen� of fxed seabng. Exhibit 4 Dubuque—Key Ezisting Event Facilities n O �. �� `a . . . 0 g £� e .rE.w.,umm.mv.re. t., � '- ��. 0 . �,�,�. �� ...�„ �., .. � ' �tnnoMn� 400C yy�y'ne ` Po�mY p M A 1 Gbel L� ^ 1 � . : ; � i.v . Cl , uo�n � � � � ,.. � n. . ,i�. .. i�� i�� ,.�.:� .. '"'namm. rn .—y("Q ., source: oueuouecve,cooeiemaos.son N i � �, As shown, there are six exisbng theaters and one arena within the Dubuque area with capacities greater than 100 that may present some level of compebtion (or hosting promoted concerts, theater performances and other touring events in Dubuque. Additionally, the Mississippi Moon Barat Diamond b Casino and the Q Showroom at the Q Casino are host to touring concerts and events with approximate capacities of 600 (or generel admission standing mom. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 15 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= Exhibit 5 summanzes facility offenngs within the Mystique Community Ice Center, the University of Dubuque Hentage Center and the Grand Opera House. Exhibit 5 Dubuque—Summary of Key Ezisting Event Facilities � ��" r 'i;. . �� +C�ti,w. �� , ll niinmT � �t" � ^� ] .'�,'��'�'�!i'� +�,� � �.."",. ✓ja'�. �'" �(� a �� I�� 1i, � ° � � � J� '� � ' � , � �` - �� '. �� ,� , ._ - . - -.- -, - � � _. � I �. F ��°`.� ; ..�'�" fACILrtY: MVAIpUECOMMUNINICECEMER fACILrtY: HERITA6ECEMER fACILrtY: THE6PANDOPEPAHOUSE Ownen GryNoubueue Owner: unrversTyNoubueue �'�er: iM1e6rantloperaxoumPountlMlon OperMor: oubueue[ommunTyla&Pec[mtepinc OperMor: iM1e6rantloperaxoumPountlMlon Ope�Mon I1nNersilyN�ubupue KeVittlllry Imarena KNittlllry fWr!(aillry KNittlllry 6EEsea[ingmpaolry WmPonen6: ' OAOretlseMln&�V+mV [pmpanen6: ' mmpanen6: °�°� 2Ws�[BIaGBoviM1eMer lluw suM1es pFe�No�es: ' netlINS90 O�M1e�No�es: ' � e�netl�InID]O�Ma�¢dlmRNappm4nMely O�M1e�No�es: ' I1nNersilypeRommanc;loaantl peRommancssuaM1asmnwu[; 5 n $�]Mlllm. n&sM1ws[rvaM1ariM1lMryeBllntl�GnNs plry;eR fundmg[M1rmgM19lntlutlliga$llmllllon ooalEnsemblgGaulPekepe[c�,anticMer oiRMutlon(mmMeNbupueRaCng nenp m�M/Np PoL'$33 m(mm NortM1unllgM16Ho��IlqwnersNMe FgM1ting5aln6antic[M1erintlM&alantl Metlonors[M1rmgM1w[�ubupue Hone[o[M1e�ubupuefgMligSaliRs. The Mystique Community Ice Center is currently home to the Fighting Saints hockey team, a previous tenant at the FFCC. The Heritage Centerand the Grend Opere House are theaters that compete forcertain local and non-local event and utilization activity with the FFCC Theater. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 16 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= In tertns of facilities offenng sizeable Flat Floor meeting/exhibition space, the Dubuque area currently offers a number of event facilities, including meeting space within hotel facilities and event space at specialized area facilibes that would compete for conventions, meetings, amateur spor� and recreation usage, and other events. Exhibit6 presen� a listing of the primary Dubuque area facilities that offer Flat Floor meeting space for rental. Exhibit 6 Local Facilities—Dubuque Area Meeting Facilities u crana a.ercemer �A � HotelJufen Dubuque L r, n � . . . CIeBe Unherslry _ vou, O i DiarmndJOCasino I � Q . Bes�We9em PA�s Ho�el&Conf Gtr_ . Holiday Inn OubuquelG lena .-"�� , �Casino .�, ,_.....� ..i,.... :''`>>O O O . � Gantlflive�CenN� 30000 12000 12000 SY000 30,000 12000 30A00 6 193 Ho@IJullen�ubuque 0 6900 6300 13�200 0 63W 6�300 5 133 Qe�ke Unlrerslry 0 9100 0 9,200 5,GU0 � 5,600 5 - oiarmna�ocas�no o eoo s000 s,eoo o s.000 s,000 z - ees�wesre,�ai�sHo�eiaco�ra,. o a.zao a000 esoo o apaa aoao s isa Houaayinnouwqueic;�iena o �z.sao o izsoo o a s.�oo m isa ocas�m o saao o saoo o a zaoo z ne Average 30,000 ],300 6800 t5,500 1],B00 6800 8,100 5 t60 FNeFIageCNkCeMa ?A,500 J,)00 5,000 i9,M0 ]A,MO 5,000 t6,300 i 181 Sowce. �ubuQue W8.GoogleMap520q As presented, there are seven pnmary meeting facilities that e�cist in the Dubuque market that offer more than 5,000 total square (eet of Flat Aoor space. Overall, the downh�wn Dubuque market of(ers nearly 108,000 square feet of ineeting and Flat Aoor event space. The Grend River Center is the largest facility in the market. Detailed information of the Grend River Center is pmvided on the (ollowing page. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page ll � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= The Grand River Center(GRC)opened in 2003 at a total cost of$513 million. The Grend River Center was constructed in 2003. The pmject was funded publicly and pnvately with $51.3 million. Nearly $20.0 million came in the form of a grent from Vsion Iowa, a state (und created to assist projec� that pmvide recreational, cultural, entertainment and educational attractions. The City of Dubuque contnbuted over $5.0 million via issued debt and the remaining cost of $25.0 million was covered by pnvate developer, %atinum Hospitality Gmup. The Center project was part of a larger $188 million development initiative that was spearheaded by public and pnvate enterprises to revitalize and develop the Port of Dubuque. � x^ 3 z� �\ s � �. � i :, � - � u � [� < .'' . � � ' � ,r� ! i '�L@ : . � �ya,.�:; ✓ ,_. � ,.8,�`:. � '��; •.. �'.^..�� t�}��. � . ,R�� . '� �' #� ��Yie7y�� 1j (�� ~�--��\�� : �_+ �1� ��.lse_��rl � l^� ��a"" _ .l�'.^ ' `. .'_ _�_.�++�-.�r-� � � - ��1 r � • ��- ,.� . M1�": �� ., 9 r , ... ��f%�' The Grand River Center of(ers a total of 54,000 square (eet of total sellable space that includes 30,000 square feet of exhibit space, 12,000 square feet of ballroom space and 12,000 square (eet of inee0ng space. The Grand River Centers largest contiguous space is appmximately 30,000 square feet. The connected Grand Resort and Waterpark offers 193 guestmorrs. In recent years, the GRC has hosted an average of more than 800 events and neady 174,000 attendees annually. An important clause implemented with the Management Pgreement that remains today is that the FFCC will not compete with the Grend River Center (or conferences, conventions, dinners, banquets, meetings, receptions and Flat Floor events. A later amendment added a noncompete clause that included national polibcal events. While this policy (and the similar noncompete clause implemented for the Mystique Community Ice Center) is reasonable and important to protect the public investment in the City's other newer facility pmducts, it has had certain important impacts on event levels/mix and financial opereting performance of the FFCC since their implementation. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 18 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= The marketability of any event facility increases when there exis� the support of amenibes and infrastructure within close pmximity. This supporting hospitality infrestructure also plays a key mle in generating the desired economic impact of facility upgredes and enhancements. The (ollowing exhibit presents an aerial overview of the available hotels and restaurants within one-half mile of the FFCC. Exhibit 7 Ezisting Usitor Amenities Within �h Mile of the FFCC p�- ,,( a, - t i. , � t � w" i�S`�G oL�� tr�' � ''y �� .5��. .F� V'� p� � . Ho�els �� t�" frrtf��l� / ��+� Res[auran�s e} ` y ♦ �� C � F(� Ypt rr . � r.�� .�{ -q y� r� � t N � t��'� ', t '1 \ : fc�.'�� v a ��r y"��y �.,esf� `� �„i�ot ' / \�� s�lpY�' � �`j•"�� t�a� ! /� .�-^ �y� 9 f4..- . '(`�,1 � IA /�i F� (� ^ ,FF[� ll �. � .f�/ . �~ �� r� . C�� / - 'f ��S �yfi� i'-:+�� . '�,� � '� �/ f s '�� , �e, s��- ' � �% &l/ S� ♦ ifi', ^ �� ', �T�� r .. 4 � '.�f 'r''. ��_ w:�. �� \�F �``'�F� ,• < �7 " � ' 'l -~I��'v+z 2� •M �ia i .1,,.. �'4I.k � �y - M `, �"{'� `` • •� -� �� \�� In addition to the appmximately 500 hotel rooms, within one-half mile of the FFCC, there are more than 20 fullservice restaurants. These, in addition to other nearby bars, nightli(e and entertainment establishments provide patmns with things to do pre- and post-event. Throughout the country, spectator/entertainment/arts event venues, such as ihe FFCC, are oken located in downtown central business distncts. These locations often provide the highest density of walkable visitor amenities, such as restaurents, bars, nightlife, retail with character,and othersuch items. The FFCC's location on Main Street in the center core of the downtown is considered an ideal location for this type of venue in the Dubuque destination. Fmm an industry best prectices standpoint, many modem event venues actually integrate street-level retail and restaurant space within the actual event venue itself to capture additional income streams and best utilize valuable street-level square footage in dense downtown envimnments. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 19 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= Conclusions The strength of the local market, in tertns of its socioeconomic and demogrephic attnbutes, can pmvide an indication of a community's ability to draw and accommodate large numbers of sports, entertainment, convention, arts, culturel, civic and other spectator event attendees. A community's hospitality infrastructure in terrrs of hotels, restaurents, entertainment and other such factors contnbute heavily to the potential suxess of event facilibes. Throughout the country, spectator/entertainment/arts event venues, such as the FFCC, are often located in downtown central business distncts. These locations often provide the highestdensity ofwalkable visih�r amenities, such as restaurents, bars, nightli(e, retail with character, and other such items. The FFCC's location on Main Street in the center core of the downh�wn is considered the ideal location for this type of venue in the Dubuque destinabon. The recent addibon of local supply of high-quality, specialized event facility pmducts (thmugh the development of the Grend River Center and the Mystique Community Ice Center) is consistent with trends seen thmughout the country relating to the development of more specialized facilities to better serve certain tenants and event types, thereby delivering better experiences and greater value h� specific consumers (attendees, exhibitors, spectators and participants). The FFCC Arena, like many multipurpose facilities of its vintage, was designed for maximum Aexibility, which allows (or the technical accommodabon of a wide vanety of event types and uses. However, given that facility and amenity requirements differ significantly among specific event types/segments, the result of the FFCCs Flexibility is a number of event types/segmen�are notoptimally served relabve h� modem industry standards. The developmentofquality convention and ice facilities in Dubuque has relieved the need (or the FFCC Flrena to axommodate much of its former Flat Floor and ice events/usage that were cntical in previous years. These issues are important in considenng future FFCC pmgram and development opportunities. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Local Market CondlHons '�� Page 20 � � FEH�ESIGN � BetscN�oauz�r= 4.0. COMPETITIVE AND COMPARABLE FACILITIES AND MARKETS This chapter pmvides an analysis of various physical characteristics and resources of both compebtive and comparable facilities and communibes. The data helps place the Five Flags Civic CenterArena and Theater within a competitive and compareble market context with respect to facility space and other related community features. Data was compiled and analyzed on a set of competitive and comparable arena and theater facilibes to obtain insight into the physical and operetional characteristics of these facilibes. The research and analysis presented in this chapteris divided into the (ollowing sections: • Competitive Facilities • Comparable Flrena Facilities • Comparable �r(ortning Arts Theater Facilities Competitive Facilities The market potential of the FFCC is affected by the number and type of facilities competing for the fnite supply ofeven�,spectah�rs and parbcipants within the regional marketplace. In orderto betterunderstand the competition faced by Dubuque and the FFCC, in(omiation was collected on the physical and operetional characteristics of select venues in the regional area that may compete with the FFCC (or events to varying degrees. Exhibit 1 presents the 15 regional arena facilities identified as competih�rs, their h�tal seating capacity and their location relative to the FFCC. Exhibit 1 Competitive State/Regional Arena Facilities � � �. � . . , . � ., �. y' �, NlfebNme PaurtmllL 1&5N V WeIICFe�goFrma 0.5Mpnoc.lA 18.T.0 . G G�wrWweyeFrene Ic.vCiry.N iS,Y� , Huw,w��m a�.w �a,aw � Q .wFre yaraCenOe Na1MunEnwalL it&0 PwiaCivcCer�W� Pm'ie.IL flA?0 m � � . � �W�nbnCenW 1lnme,IL 9Zq O � U.S.Ce'46r Lmmr C�r PnpEs,IA B,YO � � � LeCra.wGenbr LeCrw».WI Btt0 �/�� /� BMONanis&nkLmbr PuoklwE.IL ].SO IOWN 'u..n.m�.n c[n', � . VAM^ M[Em�'/wOlwium WabrM,lA ],MO Y� B V � u. 0 w,aNena CaaMiB,IA 6116 �� m � � 0 � ijJ MeyoGpoCmmr PaAedn.MN SXq � Ue� ' CeN�RapdfluNana CebrWPtla.IA 4.U0 � � � BuaenxrNme VbantleM,lN J,aW 0 m O m FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 21 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Exhibit 2 Summary of Competitive State/Regional Arena Facilities Alls�ateArme RosemontlL 163 1980 18.500 WeIlsFargoArena DesNaines, lA 193 2005 16.980 Cane�FHwkeye Arena lowa Gty, IA 8] 1983p011 15,5fi0 HiAon Coliseum Ames, IA 182 1911 14.356 SearsCenire HoftmanE9ates. IL 146 2006 11.800 PeoriaCiNCCenter Peoria, IL 16] 1982 11.330 IWrelessCen[e� MOIIne, IL ]6 1993 9,200 U.S.GHlularGenter GedarRapitls. lA 12 19]9/2013 8.600 Le Cmsse Cen�er La Cmsu,W I 118 1980 8.000 BMO Harns Bank Center Rockford, IL 92 1981 ],200 MCElroy Autlibrium Wa�etloo, IA 93 19�9 1.000 IaxaArena GoralHlle, lA 85 20�9 82�6 Meyo CiNc Center Rochester, MN 161 1938 5 200 CedarRapitlslceArena CedarRapids, lA ]4 2000 4,000 Buccaneerqrena Urbantlale. IH 199 196V2008 3,408 Average 128 1981 9,823 Median 118 1982 8,6W FiveFbgsl4ere - 1818 6,OW As shown, the capacibes of the identified compebtive arenas renge from a low of 3,400 seats at the Buccaneer Arena in Urbandale, Iowa to a high of 18,500 seats at the FVlstate Arena in Rosemont, Illinois. It is important to note that the averege maximum seating capacity among competitive arenas is approximately 9,800 seats, more than hvice the size of the maximum capacity currently available within the FFCC Arena. Pdditionally, the Iowa Arena in Coralville, Iowa is currently in the final planning stages and will be open in 2019. The estimated 6,200-seat arena may of(er some additional compe0tion for touring events in the future. The only hvo arenas to have opened since 2000 are the Wells Fargo Arena in Des Moines (IA)and the Sears Centre in Hoffinan Estates (IL). The Buxaneer Arena in Urbandale (IA)was renovated in 2008. A summary of recent event activity among a select number of arenas reviewed are presented below and on the following page. • Wells Fargo Arena (Des Moines, IA)— Site of large regional tournaments including NAIATreck and Field Championships, Mid-Amencan Con(erence Volleyball Championships, USA Volleyball Junior Men's Treining, and �nn State versus Ohio Sta� Men's Volleyball. Hosted appmximately 145 events in a recent year. • Tyson Even� Center (Sioux City, IA) — In recent years has hosted an average of 120 even�, drawing attendance of appmximately 192,000 annually. • La Crosse Center (La Cmsse, WI) — In recent years, the La Crosse Center has hosted an average of 200 events annually drawing an averege attendance of 90,000 annually. The Center will soon undergo a $40 million renova0on and expansion project. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 22 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss • Mayo Civic Center(Rochester, MN)— In 2015, the Mayo Civic Center had an estimated $48 million economic impact on the Rochester Community with approximately 265 total events, 90,000 hotel room nights genereted,288,200 attendees to the Civic Center and 17,000 jobs associated with the MCC. • Sears Centre (Hoffman Estates, IL)—In recentyears, the Sears Centre hosted a total of83 events with total attendance of approximately 306,200. Comparable Arena Facilities In order to idenbfy compareble facilibes throughout the country, it is useful to understand the seating capacities of arenas currently operabng in marke� ofa similarsize to Dubuque. Exhibit 3 summanzes the capacities of arenas located in marke� with CBSA (core-based statistical area) populations ranging in size from 30,000 to 500,000. Dubuque and the capacity of the FFCC Flrena are plotted and highlighted in the chart below. Exhibit 3 Seating Gpacityvs. Population �s.enneac.nry �—casnPocm.non R6 W 0 . 6Y0,000 �60G00 xo,wo � �oo,aoo >conoo is,wo 000.aoo sco.aoo io,wo I z00000 �so.aoo saoo I IIII I. , , /, , . , , , , „ , /�III, I , ,5 , I. . , AI, . , , , II I I I I ooeoo sowo 0 - - :- � ' = � x3 � 3 � > Sz < � � & � g � > ; B3 ° LLt ' � �� rFm � e � q � °� � d Fom � �, � ovY § � m 8 a mc �q " " $ fi § tl � p � ' � LL . m � " N �� 5 f & q s The total averege seating capacity among the marke� presented in above is appmximately 8,200. Of the 94 marke� and facilities pbtted, Dubuque renks 90`^ in tertns of CBSA population size. When organized by seafing capacity, Dubuque renks 81�t Although there are severel examples of large arenas in smaller cities,as well as small arenas in metmpolitan areas, there is a general trend to have larger capacity venues FIVEFLA65CIVIC �SRJDV r CompetlHve and C rkeG �� . Page 23 �,�, FEH�ESIGN � Betsch��socz�c= in more densely populated areas. Relative to compareble markets thmughout the country, the seating capacity of the Dubuque Flrena ranks at the low end of ihe spectrum based on the market's CBSA population as well as arena seating capacity. Certain inferences can be made by reviewing arena facilities operabng in markets thmughout the country of a similar size or geogrephic positioning. Each of the 18 listed facilities is loca�d in a market that is similar to the Dubuque area, with respect to population size, geogrephic pmximity to other metmpolitan areas, and/or facility size/characteristics. As available, physical facility and operational data was obtained and analyzed from these facilities. Exhibit 4 summanzes key charecteristics ofeach compareble facility. Exhibit 4 Comparable Arena Facilities—Summary Infinite Energy Arena Duluth.G4 1992 13,000 Pord Cenler EvansHlle, W 2011 11,000 American Bank Cen�er Corpus Christi,TX 2004 10,000 Kay Veager Coliseum Wichi�a Falls,TX 2003 10,000 Tyson Even4s Center Sioux Ciry, lA 2003 9,657 Pord Arena Beaumon(TX 2003 9,000 Pmps�Arena a�V8C Hun�sNlle.AL t975 9,000 US Cellular Coliseum Bloomngbq IL 2006 8,000 Mid-America Center Council Bluffs, IA 2002 8,000 La Crosse Center La Crosse,W I 1980 8,000 Budweiser Even�Center Loveland, CO 2003 7,200 SilversleinEyeCentersArena Intleperitlence, MO 2009 7,000 SwiftelCenter Brookings, SD 2001 6,500 Verizon Wireless Center Menkatq MN 1995 6,500 Prescott Valley E�ren�Cen�er Prescotl Valley, FlZ 2006 6,200 Sanford Center Bemtlji, MN 20�0 6,000 UnitedWirelessArena DodgeCity, KS 2011 4,935 Gentral National Bank Cen�er Enid, OK 20�3 3,782 Average 2002 8,000 Median 2003 8,000 Five Flags Arena 1979 4,000 As shown above, each facility displays the location, year opened and maximum seating capacities. The 4,000 seats at the FFCC is most comparable to capacities available at the United Wireless Center in Dodge City (KS)and the Centrel National Bank in Enid, Oklahoma. Excluding the FFCC,with the exception of(our, all of the compareble venues have opened since 2000. The averege sea0ng maximum sea0ng capacity among comparable arena facilities is approximately 8,000 seats, hvo times the current maximum capacity of the FFCC Arena. The FFCC Arena ranks second to last among the identifed compareble facilities in terrrs of maximum seating capacity of(ered. Case study information pertaining h�a selection of these facilities is provided at the conclusion of this report in the Appendix A. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 24 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Demographic Benchmarking A primary component in assessing the current suxess of the FFCC Flrena as well as the potential suxess of a renovated/redeveloped arena in Dubuque is the demographic and socioeconomic pmfile of the local market. To gain an understanding of the relative strength of the Dubuque market area, it is useful to compare vanous demogrephic and socioeconomic charectenstics among the compareble marke� supporting similar arena venues. Exhibit 5 summanzes the populabon, averege household income, median age and corporete base present within the city, 30-minute drive time, 90-minute dnve time and 180-minute dnve time of the venues in the 18 compareble markets, as well as where Dubuque fts in relative to those comparable markets. Exhibit 5 Comparable Arena Facilities-Demographics Summary � Population Giry 14.300 332,a00 11�,400 63,000 61J00 34% 11 30.MInWeO�ive 38,200 1]05,30� 243200 299,100 134,300 55% 13 90.MinWeDrive i6],600 6,520,500 662,600 1,505,400 12]6,900 193h 10 180-MInNeOnw 1201600 18060,90� 2,023500 5,98],200 8,539,200 352h fi Average Householtl Income Gtty 551.9p0 $86,800 $55,�00 584,�00 563700 118% 10 3PMinWeDrive 563.900 $95,100 $10,000 $fi8,600 559.300 93% 10 90.MinWeDrive S6t500 $82,000 $]4,500 $]1,500 5]5.300 101% 8 180-MInWeOnw 56],]00 $80,30� $83900 $]0,]00 5]9,W0 95% ] Metlian Age Gity 25.1 40] 35.3 35.8 38.9 110b 4 3PMinWe Drive 30.6 39.3 35.4 35.8 38.9 110% 3 90.MinWe Drive 34.5 43.0 36.] 3].3 40.1 109% 4 t86MIw�eOtlw 33.8 39� 3]8 3]] 388 103°h 2 Corporete Base Gity 1.100 11,000 2,600 2200 2.W0 108% 10 3PMinWeDrive t500 ]2,400 5,300 10,300 5.fi00 iW°h 11 90-Mlnule0�ive 8600 239,800 2]000 3],100 51300 190% 10 180-Minu�e0�iw 52,400 fi00,fi0� 2fi]300 208,800 320,W0 120% A Source: EsriOemograpM1ic Repotl20P As shown, the averege population within a 30-minute dnve of the comparable arena facility markets is 243,200. Dubuque has a population ofappmximately 134,300 within a 30-minute drive. When considenng city and 30-minute drive times, Dubuque ranks below the averege compareble facility market, but consistent with the median comparable market. However, the estimated 8.5 million population within a 180-minute dnve of Dubuque ranks more favorably among the markets reviewed. Average household incomes, median age and corporate base are also displayed to help better demonstrete the market conditions of Dubuque relative to the 18 othercompareble facility markets. The averege household income within the City of Dubuque and corporete base is slightly higher than the averege among the marke� reviewed. These factors are important when considering the potential disposable income among residents and sponsorship/naming righ� opportuni0es among local businesses. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 25 �;�,�, FEH�ESIGN � Betsch „ << Event Level Benchmarking In addition to the surrounding market demogrephics, it is also useful to analyze event and attendance levels of compareble arena facilities. Exhibit 6 presents the event and attendance levels at 13 dif(erent comparable facilities for which data was made available. Exhibit 6 Comparable Arena Facilities—RecentYear Event and Attendance Levels Total Total Evenis Attentlance FacilityA 39 1� 2 25 �1 55 209 685,200 Facility B 5� 23 i6 22 45 9 1]2 6]5,686 Facility C 38 50 19 0 0 24 131 334,305 Facility 0 36 13 1� 8 39 3 116 29],fi4] Facility E 40 9 6 15 19 23 112 326,12] Facility F 0 20 � �2 5 0 10] 941,251 Facility G 33 12 11 1� 10 20 103 383,300 Facility H 42 14 1� 5 12 11 101 35],881 Facility I 45 1� 3 6 21 8 100 826,289 Facility J 38 i6 23 � 4 11 99 384,521 Facility K 51 13 8 3 9 8 95 362,903 Facility L 5 � 20 20 15 26 93 215,113 Facility M 36 12 1 5 0 1 55 328,40] Average 36 1] 12 i6 19 15 115 432,203 The averege comparable facility hosts appmximately 115 events annually. This level is nearly hvo bmes larger the 66 events that were held at the FFCC Arena in FY 2017. Among the averege 115 annual events of compareble facilities, appmximately 31 percent were Tenant Sports, 15 percent were Concerts, 10 percent were Family/Ice Shows, 14 percent were Non-Tenant Sports, 17 percent were Civic/Religious events and 13 percent were Other events. The FFCCs lower event levels relative to the identified comparable facilities is due in large measure to its lack of a major pnmary sports tenant and industry substandard condibon of the facility. In consideretion of this, it is our opinion that FFCC management has done well to attract the events and attendance that it has in recent years. The compareble venues analyzed genereted an averege of appmximately 3,760 attendees per event, resulting in appmximately 432,200 attendees annually. The FFCC Arena in companson generated an averege of appmximately 1,050 per event (72 percent less) and approximately 69,500 total attendees, which renks last among compared arena facilities. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 26 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Penetration Analysis Another help(ul exercise in identifying a markeCs seating venue capacity and appmpriate posi0oning is a market penetretion analysis of select comparable facilities and their capacities in relabon to their market population. The exhibit below presents each selected comparable facility and total capacity relative to their market size within a 30-and 90-minute drive time compared to the FFCC and Dubuque market. Exhibit 7 Comparable Arena Facilities-Population Market Penetration Rauo of Ratlo of Total Population Popula4on Markel FacilM1y Capaciry Popu6fion toCapacrty Populalion roCapaury DuIUN,G4 InfniteEnergyArena 14.800 1.]05.318 115 6,520,594 441 Independence.MO Silvers�inEyeCentersAra�a $i6] 1,t]3,019 128 2802]10 306 ComcilBWRs,IA Mitl-AmericaCenter 11J]0 830085 ]1 1$053]5 128 LorelandCO ButlweiserEvaitCenkr 9,OW 591,105 06 3959,025 440 Corpus CM1ri9i.TX American Bank Cen�er 9,3h1 40]640 44 ]3fi.345 ]9 Hun6ville,NL PropsiHrenaatVBC Q5�@ 405,54] 82 1555,W1 238 Beaummt,TX PordArena 10,000 348]02 35 3333928 333 E�ansville.M Ford Center 13.000 299,101 23 1,004,563 ]] SiouxCiry, lA TywnEven6CenRr ],000 293,i59 35 662.62] 95 Bloomington, IL USCellularCdlsum 8,145 iB2,852 21 1,68QB81 184 WlcnlbFalls.TX KayYeegarCdisaum 13,295 152,335 ii 636.660 48 laCmsse_WI LaCmsseCen[ar iB,100 13Q610 ] 6513]6 34 DubuQue, IH Firx Fl�s Citic Center 4.000 134,39 34 12]6,858 319 PrescotlValey,AZ PresrottValeyEventCenter 9,9A 132021 13 1851]95 105 Nanka�qMN VerimnWirelegGen�x �5,900 111,OG1 ] 1,810,2]2 120 Enidq( CenhalNa�iwalBankCen@r 15,951 66.504 4 9933]2 62 Bemidi,MN Sa�Raa Cen�er 14,800 45 50� 3 18]550 11 Brookings,SD SvnflelCen�er 13,000 44.W5 3 4W.412 30 DotlgeCiry. KS llnitedWirelessArena 23,500 38246 2 1]9.043 8 Araragali) '12.520 300,600 CO 1.10].090 1fi0 Aasmge�2) 13,120 1]Sp20 ZO 96M1,t50 90 30�Mnu[aMarketPenena[ion(1� 3,360 �m�soemem�o�i�op✓m��o:ean�P��amn*n aoaoonnnmeaaiire�rezmoon�ancnnes�mmeam� 30�Mnu[e Market Penetracion(2) 6,TN „�ra�unv� 90-Mnu[eMarke�Penehatlon(1) ],9� [�le.�mn::o�b�e�e 90-Mnu[eMarketPenetrafion(2) 14,190 Qle.�mam¢o�b�e�ea�amnne�.�ounaso.r��remrv:powia�4� AVERA6E 8,Ofi0 o�e v ,ouon�nro.yomo-m.an�re�opwmio�o.e,zow,ow. m�,a�e.,i mv As shown, the average arena capacity among compareble marke� appmximates 12,520,and 13,120 when excluding markets with a 30-minute dnve population of over 500,000 and/or 90-minute dnve population over 2.0 million. Utilizing the ra0o of population to capacity among markets reviewed and applying this to Dubuque's 30-and 90-minute dnve populabons respectively,itis estimated thatan arena venue in Dubuque could support a total capacity ranging fmm 3,360 to 6,720 based on the population within 30 minutes of the FFCC, or behveen 8,000 and 14,200 based on the population within a 90-minute drive. Importantly, the analysis in Exhibit 7 does not take into consideretion demand specifc to the Dubuque market, local or regional competition for events or other such factors, and is purely presented here to provide context (or a discussion on po�nbal supportable capacities at a new or expanded arena in Dubuque. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 2] 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss State-of-the-Industry Arena Facil'dies The (ollowing information has been assembled to highlight key nationwide industry trends as they relate to modern arena facility design, functionality, amenities, and aesthebcs. The difference behveen the current condition of the FFCC and these modern facilities that have been built throughout the region and country begin to bring into contest some of the competitive challenges the FFCC increasingly faces for retaining current and attracting new events and attendees. A) Entry In today's modern event facility design, facility entnes are more than mere portals h� exit the outdoor elements. They are showpieces that tell an attendee"you've arrived."They are identifiable at a signifcant distance so that attendees are not lek wondenng where they should enter the building; entnes typically include signifcant glass elemen� that pertnit significant lighting (or the interior, but also provide those outside with glimpses of the excibng activities going on inside. There should always be ample plaza space for gathering and queuing, and ideally there exis� a vestibule h� help in maintaining the intenor temperature and humidity levels. Examples of state-of-the industry entnes, in companson to the current FFCC entry, are pmvided below. Exhibit 8 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Entry 11�� - _ -� � � ' � F-_' _ r ..__�„' . I _ , � � , �� "�"�� .' ' IIII".b�� — �.- ,:'dt � I � �� i .� M � ��,f� m �- I�y 4� y� _ �' � �� .� �['� � � � ' � " ` • it�- �`�`- d� � Ci. . - i :� /�� I � . �r �,,.�� 3so� �� :- ��i— . ' ��i� .� � ?j � i�'�� .� j...� �. ..r ' � . � i , � �� : , -� , } _. -"�-a . 1 , i �;� ',;.: ,/:i�ii - � �a , _" � � s:::t:•. ,. I�, . ' �, _ . �.,�� :. . . . _ � As shown, the current entries (or the FFCC are undistinguished, as they are in the middle of the structure withlimitednobceablesignage. Theentnesconsistofagingstorefmntglasswithnoarchitecturelorlighting enhancements, reFlective of a typical industrial and utilitanan design of the FFCC's vintage. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 28 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss B) Entry/Lobby Modem lobby design includes areas that are spacious, well appointed, well-lit with naturel light as well as LED fxtures, and display in(ortnabve and visually pleasing signage. Finishes are more upscale nowadays, and the generous amount of space provides (or not only significant gatherings, but also can double as i� own event space, offer areas for sponsor displays (revenue generetion), and provide enough space (or event producers to host their own sponsors, merchandise sales, or other promotional activities. Exhibit 9 pmvides examples of these desigre. Exhibit 9 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Entry/Lobby � ..A . ___. � �� f i i , � ��)hn�r; -;-^i��++w.� ,� r :�'- _ � r� , � .�-,wr- r �'' � � I '.��g � ¢I� � �� j - �� ` 4 R /,� �� _ �_ �� I r� � �� :��. ., . o ; � � — •ti� � , �� ,� , , �:. i "'� � 1 � � � .._. ^ �l � '� � _ 4 � .. � ,,�� s� F4 >> �i . � � " 1 �.� ..�Jr�u• ._ P� i.�.. . ' . :<i.t:.,. vrf� ... . -...i The FFCC offers an outdated lobby that does little to enhance the overell guest esperience, relative to more modem and state-of-the-industry venues noted above. In ihe FFCC, there is no clear"front door' and, given the compact overall site, (unctionality and layout is considered industry substandard. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 29 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss C) Concessions Frood service is conbnually evolving and becoming an increasingly cntical element h� facility operabng pmfitability or cost containment. FVI-inclusive pncing that includes admission ticket, parking and (ood and beverage is gaining traction, necessitating the design of buildings that create neighborhoods or zones conducive to facilitating dif(erent levels of seating, pnce points and amenities. Mobile apps are being used to order(ood and beverege from your seat that may be either delivered by the arena staff or picked-up in a special line, bypassing the generel concession crowds. Digibzed menu boards are being used to employ dynamic pricing and/or (ood of(erings depending on demand. The fare being of(ered at sports and entertainment arenas has expanded considerebly from hot dogs, hamburgers, popcorn, nachos,sodas and beer. Today, sports and entertainment arenas are of(ering a much more diverse food and beverage menu that offers fartn-to-table concepts, local crak beers, partnerships with famous chefs and other concepts to dnve value for the food and beverage expenence. 5chibit 10 displays some examples below. It is important to note that not every arena should feel compelled h� do everything mentioned here, but should consider what would work best in their particular marketplace given the event activity, tenant partnership, and available resources. Exhibit 10 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Concessions Y I - � `1�;fN�r��: � � I � i ,��,"� ,_.. — I ' i f � �. � � - _ _ ��k. °' � � i i � � � ..�.�i,�� '�p'. f � �� . u9,�rTr�^.��...:w�°Jd.yrhP�lJIrP{�IL[R�A1��1��Is1�� Updating (ood and beverege and other hospitality-rela�d options offers the FFCC a signifcant opportunity for future attendance gmwth and revenue generetion. The FFCC Arena of(ers fewer points of sale and lacks many of the technological and sponsorship/branding implementations that other modem arena venues in operabon ihmughout the country do. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 30 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss D) Capacity/Seating Many arenas are being designed with staterof-the-art retrectable seating in the lower bowl h� pmvide Flexibility to pmvide larger Aoorspace (orcertain events such as motorspor�,equestnan events,consumer shows and youth athlebc sport tournaments. Many acts in the concert industry are moving towards a general admission Floor seating model (or small to midsized acts. Retractable seating that can expand the general admission Floor capacity on an arena Aoor increases the marketability of the venue for addibonal concerts. Retrectable and fxed seating is also cushioned with cup holders (or each seat. Newerand renovated venues are typically designed h� include state-of-the artcurtaining systerrs thatallow arena management to ef(ectively reduce sea0ng capacity of the venue by curtaining off the upper bowl or pmviding half-house or theater-style confguretions within a larger arena. The ngging capacity requirements forsports and entertainmentvenues are increasing as concertand other entertainment event shows become more elaborete, requiring more sound and lighting equipment to be hung from the structurel support. Modern arenas typically have ngging capacities oken exceeding 100,000 to 125,000 Ibs. Exhibit 11 shows multiple examples of state-of-the-art seating bowls as well as the FFCC Arena to pmvide a basis of companson. Exhibit 11 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Capacity/Seating .... .�r'@w� � i ..� � - - _ - �[�!��•�� I1S '`.� r �� w .ss � ��yf �� \ y/ � � I � 1��;,�,� ; �� : � ; • ��. ��;-h Y�„ '� �1��11\�\��.�� -�, �� .�, �� , ��. , �, r«.�� < "_,,. i �e' � �� _ Y , . �. , . „<:�Bi� _ . , I�� '� ( �� ,,: ; ', � � , :.d ':.lai ',. , ,, �� , _� ' . � , FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 31 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss E) Premium SeaOng &Premium Areas Diversification of premium seating products fmm more traditional suites and club seats h� include loge boxes, theater boxes, ledge tables, courtside clubs and other products that provide a broaderspectrum of experiences and price points h� more ef(ectively penetrete the market and maximize revenues. Past conventional wisdom designed premium seating on an exclusive mezzanine-level seabng area. Now premium seating patrons are demanding the best seats in the house and premium inventory is being designed in the lower seating bowl and at courtside/on-ice locations. Bunker suites, courtside clubs, and clubs seats in the lower bowl are all designed to bnng ihe highest-paying customers closest to the oncourt or on-ice acbon. Exhibit 12 pmvides e�camples of premium seating options in newly built arena facilities. The FFCC presently lacks premium seating and could be an importantconsideretion with any new/expanded Arena venue in terrrs of enhancing revenue strearrs and positioning the venue to potentially attract one or more minor league sports tenants. Exhibit 12 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Premium Seating � r � �'1 � �, � - � : e,�.'� `�,� . , . � !.l -.� � � Y `�� ., ii � � � �� Y ii � �� I ,�,,,`' � � �`�•,, � - s ' ` ,._ � �;�' . �F � y d� a s ' '� � � , � �V &... � / � t . � i .. . . , . L� . �t�- � FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 32 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Incorporeting a (ounders suite pmgram or building signature partners inh� the design ofa facility is being done to maximize private revenues raised to (und the construction of public assembly facilities. Even on a more simple note, having a club or other entertainment space for the highest paying ticket holders is now the standard in modem arena designs, a (ew examples are shown below in Exhibit 13. These areas will have upscale fnishes, restmorrs, (ood and beverege offenngs, multiple television screens, and well attired and engaging wait staff. Ideally there is a view to the bowl, but in a situation when this is not possible due to design or space constraints, this club or entertainment space is within a short walk of the premium seats. Exhibit 13 Comparable Arena Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Premium Areas �. . e . � I —r � '��, � A_ . _ _ - -� � � .�� -- � _ =� �. �� s . , � � L� '� - � , � � �� • ` _ V _, � � F-�� - _ .! l�y � .rt �- � IP ` � ., I ��C`�� `+_-�� '�� 7��' � ��_- `�_' \ ' `. `« 7FC� f a. -. �� ' - � P i f �.. � f:,�. E-,�_ t w"�..._� +E["T1 ' x'T+ _ . . ��1—t��'' � li ��'A�� M+. .i_ i i_._ � _. . . . �_ra r' Y FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 33 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Comparable Theater Facilities Additionally, certain inferences can be made by reviewing theater facilities opereting in similar-sized markets thmughout the country. The facilibes reviewed were selected based on their charectenstics, mission/marketonentabon, h�tal seabng,and the size and location ofthe markets in which they are located. Exhibit 14summanzes the key characteristics ofthe 17 selected compareble facilities and markets analyzed. Exhibit 14 Comparable Thea�r Facilities—Summary Durham Pertormng Arts Center Durham, NC 2008 2,712 Kay Yeager Coliseum Wichita Falls,iX 1927 2,700 American Bank Center Corpus Chris�i,TX 1979/2004 2,500 AdlerThee�r Devenport, IA 1931 2400 ComnadoPerformingAr�sCen�er RocMord, IL t927 2,310 Event Center aNerizon Wireless Center Manka�o. MN 20�6 2,100 Rialto5quareTheaVe Joliet, IL t926 1,9fifi Mark Q Smi�h Concert Hall at VBC HuntsNlle, AL t975 1,955 Wagner NOEI Performing Arts Center Midland,iX 2011 1,800 The Georgia Theatre AU�ens, GA t977 1,000 BarrymoreTheatre Madison, WI 1929 800 Peery Egyptian Theater Ogdeq Ui �924 800 The Bijou Thea�er Knozville,TN 1909 750 Infinife Energy Thea�er Duluth, flA 2003 708 ParamountThea�re SainlCloutl. MN �921 700 Oshkosh Grend Opere House Oshkosh, WI 1883 688 Sioux Falls OrpheumTheatre Center Sioux Falls, SD �9�3 688 Averege 7949 1,800 Metlian 1928 �.B00 Five Flags Theater 1910 711 The facilibes listed above comprise a bmad range facilities—fmm histonc theaters to recently- constructed/renovated theaters, some also share a facility with an adjoining arena venue. These theater facilibes are analyzed to help benchmark the operetions, event levels and financials of the current and potential (uture scenanos of the FFCC Theater. The total seating capacity renges fmm 688 in both the Oshkosh Grend Opera House in Oshkosh, Wsconsin and the Sioux Falls OrpheumTheatre Center in Sioux Falls, South Dakota to 2,712 in the Durham �r(orming Arts Center in Durham, North Carolina. The average toml capacity is appmximately 1,600 among the select theaters. As a historic theater with an emphasis on local arts productions and uses, the FFCC Theater ranks near the bottom relative to ihe comparable set of facilibes reviewed. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 34 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Demographic Benchmarking A primary component in assessing the current suxess of the FFCC Theater as well as the potential suxess ofa newly constructed/renovated Theater in Dubuque is the demogrephic and socioeconomic pmfile of the local market. To gain an understanding of the relative strength of the Dubuque market area, it is again use(ul to compare various demogrephic and socioeconomic characteristics among the compareble markets supporting similar theaters. Exhibit 15 summanzes the population,average household income,median age and corporate base present within the city, 30-minute dnve time, 90-minute drive time and 180-minute drive time of the theater facilities in the 17 comparable markets, as well as where Dubuque fits in relabon to those comparable markets. Exhibit 15 Comparable Thea�r Facilities—Demographics Summa ry Population Clty 30000 33�400 �45,900 129.800 61,100 4� 16 30-MinuteDri�e 111.100 1]05,300 499,100 353.200 134,300 2]% 11 90-MinuleDri�e 559900 9663,100 2990,900 2231900 1,216,900 43% 14 180.MinuRDrive 1.499200 18.6]],100 9560,400 8,6]4.]00 8,539,200 &9°b 10 Average Household Income Ciy 554000 $90,600 Sfi8,300 5G5,000 563,]00 93% ii 30-Mlnut¢Dme $64.100 $95,300 511900 5]6300 569,300 89°/ 15 90-Mlnufe0�iee $61.800 $9],500 5]]&l0 5]5400 5]5,300 91% 10 180.MinufeDrive 563,800 $86,100 5��200 580,500 S]9,5�0 103% 10 Median Age Clty 2G.1 389 33] 344 389 116% 1 30-MinuteDri�e 31.0 39.8 36.0 35.8 38.9 108% 4 90-MinuleDri�e 302 422 3]5 3]] 00.1 iW% 3 180.MinuRDrive 30.5 40.3 3).1 3].8 38.8 10.5% 3 Corporete Base c�ry tsoo iz,oao s9oo a,soo z,eoo a�� i5 30-MlnuteDme 4500 ]2,400 18200 12400 5600 31% 16 90-MlnuYeDtl�e 20400 336,000 1W,]00 ]]fi00 51,300 48% 13 180.MInufe�nve 54,800 665,400 334,100 330,300 32Q5�0 96% 10 Saume: Esri,201] As shown, the average population within a 30-minute dnve of the 17 comparable theater facility marke� is just below 500,000. Dubuque's popula0on of appmxima�ly 134,300 within a 30-minute dnve of the Dubuque area is at the bottom of compareble markets. Pdditionally, Dubuque ranks near the bottom (or city, 30-, 90- and 180-minute dnve Omes based on population size among compareble markets. Averege household incomes, median age and corpora� base are also displayed h� help better demonstrete the market conditions of Dubuque relative to the 17 other compareble facility markets. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 35 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Event Level Benchmarking In addition to the surrounding market demographics of the selected theater facilities, it is also use(ul to analyze event and attendance levels of each venue. Exhibit 16 presen� recent yearevent and attendance levels at eight different comparable theaters in a recent year. Exhibit 16 Comparable Theater Facilities—RecentYear Event and Attendance Levels Total Total Evenis Attentlance Facility A � 39 66 29 141 412,000 Facility B 20 28 5 31 84 65,]11 Facility C 24 32 i6 6 ]S 1]4,594 Facility 0 - - - - ]4 66,66] Facility E 4 21 12 24 61 ]],313 Facility F 25 21 9 1 56 100,000 Facility G 20 11 6 - 3] 60,814 Facility H - - - - 25 30,38] Average 1] 25 19 18 ]0 123,436 Among the comparable facilibes reviewed, there was an averege ofapproximately 70 events each year, of which, appmximately 24 percent were Tenant �r(ortnances, 36 percent were Concerts, 27 percent were Non-Tenant Perfortnances and approximately 26 percent were Other events. FFCC Theater in companson to the other facilities renks eighth in h�tal number of events in FY 2017, a total of 38 less even� than the average. The comparable venues analyzed genereted an averege of appmximately 1,780 attendees per event, resulting in appmximately 123,400 attendees annually. The FFCC Theater genereted an averege of appmximately 870 per event with a total attendance of 27,680, appmximately 78 percent less than the average of comparable theater facilities. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 36 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Penetration Analysis Another important measure of a market's seating venue capacity and position is a market penetretion analysis of select compareble facilibes and their capacities in relation to their market. The exhibit below present each selected compareble facility and total capacity relative to their market size within a 30- and 90-minute drive Ome compared h� the FFCC and Dubuque market. Exhibit 17 Comparable Theater Facilities-Popula tion Market Penetration Retio of Retb of Total Popule[bn Populetbn Marke[ Feciliry Capeciry Popula[bn toCapaciy '�,Populetbn toCapeciry DoIUN.G4 In9ni�eEnergyThea�er ]08 1]05318 2408 852Q544 9210 Durham.NC DurhamPertormingArtsCen�er 2]12 1039.832 383 4.320.1]1 1.596 Knomlle, iN The6qouTheater ]50 609,186 812 1650,193 2,219 Ogtlen.lJ� PeeryEgypOanThea@r 800 56],331 ]03 2.643,155 3,304 Matlison,Wl BarrymoreThea�re B00 51I,033 646 3.342,9T/ 4,119 CarpusChristi,TX AmencanBankCenter 2500 401,6G0 163 ]36,345 295 IUnisnlle,AL Mark C.Smlih Concert Hall at VBC 1 955 405,561 20l 1 555,911 ]96 Da�enport, IA Atller Th��e� 2,400 341,446 142 1.329714 5% Mitllend TX Wagner Mel Pertortning Ark Center 1,800 328.992 183 559,861 311 Oshkosh.Wl Os�koshGrendOperaFbuse 688 299.835 435 2.553438 3,111 A�hens, G4 TheGeorgiaThealre t,000 26a,224 264 a.Ota,593 a,015 SiouxFalls,5� SiwxFalsPpheumThealreGen�er 688 243,159 353 652,62] 963 SanlClaud.MN Peramoun�TheeVe ]00 2fW,890 293 3.55150] 5.0]4 W[hllaFalls,TX Ka Yeae�Collseum 2]00 152,335 56 63fi,fifi0 236 Dubuque, lA FivaFlagsThealer �11 130,32] 189 1.2]6,858 1,]96 Menka�o. MN E�en�Cen�ere�VenzonWirelessCmter 2.100 111061 53 1910P2 910 Averege(1) 1,d90 C19,880 G10 2,d00,610 2,dB0 Avere9el2) 1.5/0 27 JBO 780 1387750 11A0 30.Minu[e Merket Perenation(1) 290 30.Minu[e Market Pe�[ra�ion(2) 750 .�.�.aenrere•e��o��e��e� ,.a�,.,.e�,,.,a„ 90.Minu[eMerketPeretration�i) 510 p��aa��eu��om�we 90.Minu[eMerketPereVation�2) ��Ip innn�e��o�e�a�.,.ama�r��w;m,so-m�w�<e�m.000�i,no.o..� AVERFGE 670 .,��,.°[;�m��,.i.��.e�rv�w�i� � v, n.o. As shown, the average theater capacity among compareble markets appmxima�s 180, and 1,140 when excluding markets with a 30-minute dnve population of over 500,000 and/or 90-minute dnve population over 2.0 million. Utilizing the rabo of population to capacity among markets reviewed and applying this to Dubuque's 30- and 90-minute dnve populations respectively, it is estima�d that a theater venue in Dubuque could support a total capacity ranging from 290 to 750 based on the popula0on within 30 minutes of the FFCC, or behveen 510 and 1,120 based on the population within a 90-minute dnve. As previously noted, the analysis does not mke inh� consideretion demand specific to the Dubuque market, local or regional competition for events or other such factors and is purely presented here h� pmvide context(or a discussion on poten0al supportable capacities at an arena in Dubuque. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 3] 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss State-of-the-Industry Facid'ties As was shown with respect to arena facilities, the following information has been assembled to highlight key nationwide industry trends as they relate to modern per(ortning arts theater design, functionality, amenities, and aesthetics. A) Entry In today's theaterdesign, facility entnes tend to be signature pieces that are visible fmm a distance,clearly indicating to the arnving guest where to go. Exhibit 18 displays a few examples of this. They may be large, modemistic glass edifces,or they could be a stone faGade with arched openings leading h� the entry doors. There are many times canopies pmtect arriving guests fmm the elements, while a marquee above the entrence both inforrrs patmns and acts as a beacon for arnving guests. There may even be lighbng elements that highlight the area, indicabng to guests their destination. Ideally there will be a vestibule at the entry that will allow better contml of intenor environmental conditions. Exhibit 18 pmvides examples of staterof-the-industry theater entrences relative to the FFCC Theater entrance. Exhibit 18 Comparable Thea�r Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Entry N� � g� � _.. �+, � � � � �„ . � ; a , � . �� , , � E �>i:� ._.... .' . � ,�� rc � � � — � , i i�G .:. �_ . . ai � �� — ' � �: '�d _ . . . _ - -. . --..�, ��. _"..,,,,�— .'.�*.� ]=''_ ��..i �' I Is i.- i � �- r r ��t �� ,. �� +��, J�--'�� tP " � �. � sl �, I MF. � � `� '�� , � ell �u .�1 I . �imr , , - • _�-�-� i� i . ,.,, ; _ . . The histonc facade of the FFCC Theater's exterior and entrance is iconic and represents signature elements that would not be desireble to disrupt under any expansion/renovation scenano. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 38 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss B) Entry/Lobby Modem lobby design includes areas that are spacious, well appointed, well-lit with naturel light as well as LED fxtures, and display informative and visually pleasing signage. Finishes are more upscale (carpeting, glass, stone),and the genemus amount of space allocated pmvides for not only signifcant gathenngs, but also can serve as an event space, offer areas (either wall space or Floor space) for sponsor/donor recognition, and provide enough space (orcirculabon to restroorrs, concession stands and bars. Examples of this can be seen below in Exhibit 19. Exhibit 19 Comparable Thea�r Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Entry/Lobby L� I �� , • � • • � w^ . �� ; � �. �� - �� i ; � �� _ - , _ �L , `' .. , : ,, sa� , �, �n,=�'-y` , : , � . . : �. . �� . � � , ��:�" �' � � ._ � � � , ,_� � .�s� � , ,F ; � ,: �- _ � f �i �� . �. „ a � � � ��,� �- __��j � � �, z� �l " _ �- � „�; � .�, �V. , r. �-4 , _ �ier�;��-4� �u-�� - �`'{ Currently, there is very limited lobby space available within the FFCC Theater,which is important not only to the safety of event attendees but also (or the overall patron expenence. Given the FFCCs current constreined site and positioning of the FFCC Theaterentrance immediately fronting Main Street, it does not appear that it would be prectical h� matenally expand the FFCC Theater's lobby volume. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 39 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss C) Box O�ce Box office and ticket window design today includes constructing windows that are easily accessible fmm a parking area (even if short-term parking), that are located such that guests cannot enter the building without authonzation from the ticket window area, that are protected fmm the elements, that have windows ADA height with appropnate communication devices, and are secured from possible thek (e.g. bullet pmof glass). Pdditionally, there is electronic signage that can easily change from event to event. Exhibit 20 displays staterof-the-art box office offenngs atcomparable theater facilities in respect to the box o�ce of the FFCC Theater. Exhibit 20 Comparable Thea�r Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Box Office � � ' .' _ r S . � __ . �. . � �' . � .. �i � I ��, �� r � � � , . , � . : d B�X � - ; , � �..,,, ,�;��. `�= � _ -, 'z , 1 � �� - - - , - , The FFCC Theaters box office is located in the shared lobby space with the Arena and is relatively non- descript and utilitanan in nature, lacking some of the modem aesthetics and adverbsing elements that newer facilibes offer. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 40 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss D) Concessions In theaters, foodservice has typically included a very limited and basic menu, due to the fact that events are not"come and go" like one would find in sporting events (with breaks behveen periods) or concerts (breaks behveen ac� and in�rtnissions). Also, since many venues do not permit (ood and drinks in the theater, iterrs must be consumed quickly. There(ore, we have (ound of(erings to include beverages, prepackaged (oods, and items requinng limited cooking requirements like popcorn or pretzels. Today's (oodservice design includes the acceptance of credit cards at all pointsrofsale, and many venues of this type offer a pre-order opbon so that gues� do not have to wait in line. Also, it is prefereble to of(er something of local Flavor. Today's design standards dictate all counters would be at ADA height so as not to highlight the difference in patmns'physical abilibes, as well as be able to serve all patrons at all points of sale. Exhibit 21 presen� examples of modem concessions within compareble thea�r facilities. Exhibit 21 Comparable Thea�r Facilities— State of the Industry Comparison—Concessions �_ — _—_ _ � ��. Y .. . . i. . ..X . � �BQ�oC n: i ' . :...'.fn�:hh.fi�r : �P ��I 1 \ _ "`°�Rr � n;-. .�, _ �� J, f 5' � '.:.`� �' � •., Limitations with the FFCC Theaters (ood service of(erings is largely a (unction of the lackofavailable lobby, pre-(unction, and circulation space immediately in the Theater, negatively affecting the venue's ability to drive revenues and enhance guest expenence. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 41 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss E) Capacity/Seating Seating in state-of-the-industry per(ortning arts facilities is designed to be cushioned and upholstered, set on a slope that offers ideal sightlines, is constructed with reliable seat lik mechanisms, maintains adequate legroom behveen rows, and offers some degree of Flexibility by having some sea� closer to the stage be removable. FVso, there are premium seats in box-type settings in order to accommodate sponsor, donors, or others who have the resources to pay a premium (or private seats and axess to other amenities, as shown below in Exhibit 22. The premium seats become more cntical when there is a regular tenant where guests may seek to attend every performance. Exhibit 22 Comparable Thea�r Facilities- State of the Industry Comparison-Capacity/Seating �� _ I, �� —� . � -- w [- tl � ^�".: � ai i � . .. ' t t sYJ�i' .'-- � � .' .=a� -� � . , . s....- W+.a' ..:! ,-�,..,.- ..�_. � .... - � . _ .�- �. _ ' _� � �` �=— 1 ' .. . .r� �_�:I �� 1yy 1 njF. � ; . . . � � � I. '�ire '.��iS�6 . � , ��`� M .11. '�_�,�, '�^�a��,��, ��r':— ' � - ,� , o� � � � ,' � , � „ �•/ �� IG! "* _ _ _ _ u� � ,�� `'��"�""`'� �"'� U3r�e:��*.�,��'��Z:,_I � . '6.f� - `�:. I '�'J�. .✓J[i..viL:•. . 'CifS•:'Jh91 I Although the seats in the Thea�r have some age and wear, they are cushioned, upholstered, and of(er good sightlines. There is a nobceable absence of premium seats or boxes, however, which represents the potential (or lost revenue. The top level balcony sea� have not been in service and available for events for many years. While this seating area has some important sightline and axessibility limitations, the unused top level balcony could represent a renovation i�m thatcould add some additional seating capacity and associated revenue under an expansion scenario. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 42 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss Conclusions While the nearest competitive fixed-seat entertainment venues are located approximately 75 miles away in Cedar Rapids, the competitive environment within Iowa and the regional area (or arena venues that compete (or h�uring entertainment acts is considered moderete to moderetely-high. A number of quality arena venues exist in the regional area that are attractive for tounng shows. Dubuque's populabon within a shortdnving distance is lower than average among the competibve and comparableset,which will always serve to govern the upside potential for attracting levels of promoted touring entertainment event levels relative to larger markets. It is believed that the largest regional markets will continue to host a significant level of non-local event activity, but Dubuque and the FFCC�ven while possessing significant facility limimbons relabve to modem facilities—have demonstreted that Dubuque can compete for a number of these events. Eighteen comparable arena facilities and 17 compareble theater facilibes were analyzed in order to drew in(erences for a potential expanded/improved FFCC. Dubuque generally renks among the lower tier in terrrs of severel demogrephic vanables and performance metncs; however, limited competition in the immediate region and histoncal successes in event attrection (despite an aging and substandard FFCC product) suggest that a number of events are sustainable and it is able to drew attendees fmm further distances h� a greater degree than other compareble markets. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • CompetlHve and Comparable FadllHes and MarkeG '�' Page 43 4�:�„ FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss 5.0. MARKETDEMANDANALYSIS The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the market demand associated with the FFCC. The overell market analysis consisted of detailed research and analysis, including a comprehensive set of market- specific in(ortnabon derived from the following: ✓ Expenence gamered through more than 1,000 event facility and mixed-use evaluation and planning projects throughout the country. ✓ Local market visit at the outset of the project, including community and site h�urs. ✓ Vsual physi�al facility inspection and condition assessment of the FFCC. ✓ Research and analysis of local market condibons, exisbng facilities and infrastructure and industry trends. ✓ Benchmarking research and analysis of facility data and interviews conducted with management of over 30 competitive and comparable arena and theater facilibes located throughout the region and country. ✓ Comparetive analysis ofsocioeconomic data from competitive/compareble facility marke�. ✓ In-person interviews, meetings and public (orurrs with Dubuque area individuals, including representatives of municipal government, visitor and event industnes, local companies, event producing organiza0ons, and community gmups. ✓ Online survey of over 1,087 Dubuque and community residents. ✓ Completed �lephone interviews with more than 30 representatives of organizabons and groups that represent potential users of multipurpose arena and theater facility space in Dubuque. The types of facility products serving the even� industry are diverse. Communities of all sizes throughout the country are home to event facilities that serve a wide assortment of event segments, attendees, exhibitors, participan�, and spectators. Beyond broad vanation in the physical facility pmducts offered, there are a multitude of dif(erences in structure/approach to operating mission, policies, pmcedures, sales and marketing, (unding, financial/economic performance goals and other such items. As the public assembly and multipurpose event venue industnes continue to evolve, facilities continue to expand the types of even� they are able to axommodate. This diversifcation is increasingly important in genereting incremental revenue (or the facility, driving economic activity (or the community and mitigating nsk associated with Auctuations (both seasonal and cyclical) in demand inherent to dif(erent types ofevent activiry. However, dif(erent types of events can have very dif(erent pre(erences and requirements with regard to facility charectensbcs. Fror example, conventions typically place high premiums on high quality finish of event space (including carpeted space), adjacent/pmximate (ull-service hotel morrs and other visitor amenities (i.e., resmurents, retail, entertainment, etc.) in close walking distance, while sporting events typically (ocus on large seating capacities, premium seating and amenities,and plenti(ul parking. This discussion begins to lay the groundwork (or some important issues that will likely affect the types of events that may be attracted to a potentially renovated/redeveloped FFCG The type, level of finish, configuration, and amenities of the space offered in any potential facility will play a stmng mle in determining the ability of the FFCC to attract and axommodate certain types of events and their corresponding attendees. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 44 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� The exhibit below illustretes how specifc types of industry-typical event facilities fit within the framework of events that treditionally consider utilizing event space at a multipurpose event venue such as the FFCC. As shown,event facilities situated near the top of the diagram tend to be facilities that are more spectator/ entertainment event-onented, while those facilibes located near the bottom of the diagram tend to be those that do not integrate fxed seating and are instead Aat Aoor venues that focus on conventions, meetings, tredeshows and other such events. Exhibit 1 Traditional Event Types SPECTATOR/ ENIERTAWNENT- FOCUSED - •• � - FU1T FLOOR/ BUSWESS- FOCUSED While facilibes employ varying degrees of Fle�cibility and multipurpose space, allowing them to technically accommodate events from all three general categories ((or instance, arenas and civic centers), any event facility will possess attnbutes that will allow it to bettercompete/serve certain event types,while being less competitive/efficient/ef(ective in other segments. As such, it is cribcal h� determine the pnmary event segment(s) that present the greatest opportunity for driving event activity at a renovated/redeveloped FFCC. We can then analyze the physical and operetional elements required to attract these events and measure the opportunity and likelihood of attrecbng incremental activity fmm secondary and tertiary event segments. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 45 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� The (ocus of much of the remainder of this chapter is focused on the data obtained from the four primary surveys�nterview techniques deployed (or this study: 1. The Online CommuniN Survev. Web-based interective survey adverOsed by the City, FFCC, and vanous other Dubuque-based gmups and open h� any participant. In(ortna0on gathered largely represents opinions by Dubuque citizens, most of which have attended numerous FFCC events in the past. 2. User Grouo Survev —Soectator and Entertainment Events. Telephone interviews were completed among promoters/representatives of tounng concerts, family shows, theatrical productions, non- tenant sporting events and other pmmoted shows. 3. User Grouo Survev —Amateur Soorts Oraanizations. Telephone interviews of representatives of amateur and youth sports organizations, clubs, pmgrams, and leagues were conducted. 4. User-Gmuo Survev — Flat-Floor and Other Event Soace Users. Telephone interviews were conducted among a vanety of consumer, civic, culturel, special event, and other such events that represent the segment of demand that cannot be accommodated within the Grand River Center. A summary of the market demand research, key organizations interviewed, and analysis and conclusions for facility type is provided below and on the following pages. Community Survey Analysis The purpose of this section is to pmvide a summary of the survey research conducted with Dubuque-area community members concerning the current and potential future FFCC. A primary objective of the survey was to ascertain interest levels and opinions of Dubuque community members and other local stakeholders regarding likes and dislikes of the current FFCC and opinions as h� the future of the facility. With the assistance of the City of Dubuque, Dubuque Area Chamber of Commerce, Dubuque Main Street, Greater Dubuque Development Corporation, Trevel Dubuque and the management of FFCC, a link to an online survey was distnbuted for the purposes of gathenng direct (eedback on the pmposed project. The online survey remained open fmm June 15, 2017 thmugh June 27, 2017 and a total of 1,087 responses were received. Pddibonal detail conceming Community Survey questionnaire and responses received is provided in Flppendix C. Community members were initially asked a senes of questions in order to (ortn a demographic profle of respondents. Highlights include: . Flpproximately 25 percent of respondents reside within the Ward 1, which represents southwest and west Dubuque. Appmximately 33 percent of respondents live either within the frst nng of zip codes or (urther outside of Dubuque. The remaining respondents were fairly well distributed among Wards 2, 3 and 4. . Nearly 50 percent of respondents are between the ages of 25 and 94. . The average household size among respondents is 2.8 people. . Appmximately 41 percent of responding households have children under the age of 18. . Nearly 60 percent of responding households indica�d an annual household income behveen $50,000 and $149,999, evenly distributed behveen three stretifications of $50,000 to $74,999, $75,000 to $99,999 and $100,000 h� $149,999. • Appmximately 93 percent of respondents are Caucasian. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 46 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Frollowing these and other intmductory quesbons, respondents were asked whether they had attended an event at the FFCC Arena,Theater or both in the past 12 months. Responses are summanzed in the exhibit below. Exhibit 2 Five Rags Civic Center Eventr—Past 12 Months Flve Flags Genter 2�� ARENAonly Five Flegs Cen�er �� THEATER only BON 25% None ol Ne above 32% e:Pzsul�ssAawn rep�esenblrvao�l AB)survryremandmlc. As shown, appmximately 68 percent of respondents have been to an event at the FFCC within the past 12 months. M esOmated 52 percent of respondents have attended an event at the FFCC Arena, while 42 percent indicated having attended an event at the FFCC Theater. Among respondents having attended an event at the FFCC Arena, appmximately 48 percent attended just one event, with 29 percent of respondents attending hvo events and 11 percent attending three events. Similady, appmximately 96 percent of respondents indicated having been to only one FFCC Theater event within the past 12 months, with 24 percent having attended hvo events. Flppmximately 15 percent of respondents have been to five or more Theater events within the past 12 months. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 4] �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Respondents were then asked why they have not attended more events at the FFCC, responses are presented below. Exhibit 3 Reasons for NOT At�nding More FFCC Eventr Nm m�argeea i�ma a�ams booketl/scM1 tluletl BBh Famoy obllgauorslume connlcts 35% cos�ro avena - 24°k �iRculryparking - 1]% Sea�oombtl/slgM1tllnes � 13% oiner _ 8°/a LeckolQuelirylamliryammnies � ]% p.e..renroans.concesslons,em) Llvemotaraway ■ 4% Inconoenlant or Inaoresslblelacllily , 3� Iwe�lon 5¢Cullly/sa�elywncelns ' 2�/a Traflc ' 1% No�e_Results s�own represen�aWe of t�OB]survey rasponaen�s. Saurce:CSLCommuniry Survey.201] As shown, neady 70 percent of community members do not attend more events at the FFCC because they are not interested in the even� being booked/scheduled at the FFCC. Among responses that can be addressed through a renovated/redeveloped FFCC are the respondents indicating that cost to attend was a factor(24 percent),di�culty in parking (17 percent), issues with the seatcom(ort/sightlines (13 percent) and the overall lack of quality facility amenities (i.e., restroorrs, concessions, etc.; seven percent). FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 48 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� To better undersmnd the user expenence within the FFCC, respondents who have attended either an Flrena ora Theater event at the FFCC within the past 12 months were asked to rete their satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5,with 1 being"very dissatisfed"and 5 being"very satisfied",with certain elements of the complex. Responses are summanzed below. Exhibit 4 Five Flags Civic Center Facilityand Location Satisfaction Ratings Seaudry/Safery a z PrelPos�Event Things To Oo Nearby �� Facility Enl2nce I Exiling 3'9 Vehicle TraRic Flow 38 PaMing Access/ Convenlence 32 e:Rasuncmownrep�eseneuveonne�curreyrecponaen¢. Soumm CSL Commwny S�me�.rzon Typically, ratings exceeding 4.0 indicate a relatively strong/positive overall ranking among respondents (indicating a relatively mbust set of 4's and 5's from respondents), while renkings behveen 3.5 and 4.0 typically indicate somewhat more moderate or indifferent views (a few more 3's and somewhat(ewer 5's). Anything below a 3.5 typically indicates a pmduct or service that is in need of added attention. Overall, the FFCC received relafively high marks with respect to security and sa(ety, while the downtown area was viewed highly as having good access to things to do pre- and post�vent, with both receiving average scores in excess of4.0. However, impmving the guestexperience as they axess parking amund the FFCC is an element that could be addressed with any future facility improvements. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 49 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Respondents where then asked about their satisfaction of of(erings specifc to the FFCC Arena, as summarized below. Exhibit 5 Five Rags Civic Center Satisfaction Ratings—ARENA Evenhs E,cer�ono�c:iae ae�a Nppearance 3B Cleenllness oi Resnooms 3 8 see�signnines 3.6 Number af Rssimoms 3 8 CellularCoverege 35 Number otcmcessim 5'ands 3.5 mtenannsiee arena nppearence 3.5 aaury orew�a snrem a a Quelly of Conwssion OHerings 3 4 seet ance 3.3 Wifi Cororage 3 3 seat camm� 33 VenelyofConcesslonOffenngs - 32 No�e'.ResN�s sFown represen�a�iveol9625urvey res0ontlen�s M1aving been lo a Five Flags Civic Cenle�even�wi�M1in IM1e pas�4ve(5)years. Sourw:CSLCommuni�ySurvey201] Overell, the FFCC Flrena received moderete to poor rankings in tertns of the overell sabsfaction with the venue, suggesting a desire among local stakeholders in impmving/renovating the facility and its of(erings. Guest e�cperience and hospitality-related elements received the lowest overell averege renkings,with iterrs such as sound system quality, concession quality and variety, seat comfort and Wi-Fi coverege receiving some of the lowest rankings. Importantly,of(erings such as the e�ctenor Flrena appearence and cleanliness of restmorrs received relafively high retings among attendees of FFCC Flrena events. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 50 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � A similar reting exercise was also completed with attendees of FFCC Theater even�,as summarized below in Exhibit 6. Exhibit 6 Five Flags Civic Center Satisfaction Ratings—THFATER Evenhs ex�enonowsiae rnee�er Nppearonre 4-1 mierioninsme mea�er Appeerence 4� aueory o�sauna sys�em 3 8 aeannnessofeesnooms 3.8 sea�signaines 3] CellularCoverage 36 Seat Price 3 5 Wlfi Lbverege 3.4 seat comtorc 3.4 rvumber of cmcession s�anas 3 2 Quaiiry oi concession orcerings 3 2 Number of Resimoms 3 2 Verie�y o�Concesslon Offetlngs 3.1 Nole_Resulls sM1own represenG�lve o�962 survey responaen�s�eving been[o a Flve Flags CNm Cen�er even�wllM1ln[M1e pas��lve(5)years_ Source'.CSL Communiry Survey.201] As shown, there is a fairly consistent renking among Arena and Theater attendees, with slightly higher satisfaction with the histonc fa�ade and intenor of the Theater. It will be important h� preserve these histonc and iconic elements with any potential renovation and redevelopment of the FFCC Theater. The relatively low rankings among hospimlity and food service options are a staple of more modem theater and arena event venue, and are indicative of the evolving preferences among event attendees. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 51 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� As previously discussed, appmximately 68 percent of respondents indicated that the reason they do not attend more events at the FFCC is due to their lack of interest in the types of events oxurnng at the FFCC. As such, respondents were asked h� renk their level of anticipated interest in attending or participating in a variety of potential even� and types of events. Exhibit 7 summanzes the level of interest noted among respondents. Exhibit 7 Level of Interest in At�nding Eventr—by EventType Touring Concert Acis 4.1 BmaawayMuzmals 37 T�eavicals/Plays 35 Civic Evenls I Fes�ivalz I Fairs 3 3 e�iiysnows 3.1 Public SM1ows/ExM1ibilians 3.7 Protessional/Minor League Spore 2 8 sympnwiY 2.8 Conventions/Canrerences 2.5 Ice Snows 2 5 Graa�aoo�siC�me��eme��s 2.5 ealle�/Dance Protluqions 2.A Roaeas 2.3 Opera 2,2 Monsler TmCkS/Mo�amss 2,� Nole:Resulls sbown represen�ativeof 1 OB]survey respontlenis. Swme�.CSL Cammunily Survey.40P Tounng concert acts, Broadway shows/musicals and theatrical plays received the highest overall averege ranking among respondents, while events such as mdeos, operes and monster truck/motocross generally received low overall interest levels. We discuss the opportunities and likelihood associated with attracting these types ofevents,assuming a redeveloped/renova�d FFCC, in the subsequentsections of this chapter. With the overell low fan expenence currently perceived by the community, it is important to gauge the interest in (uture imestment in the FFCC. As such, respondents were asked whether they felt renovabng/redeveloping the FFCC Flrena and Theater was necessary. Exhibit 8, on the following page, summarizes these responses on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being not needed whatsoever and 5 being absolutely necessary. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 52 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Exhibit 8 Importance of Renovating/Redeveloping the FFCC Arena and Theater Arena Theater s- 5- AbeolWely 32% AbedWely 1�% Necessary Necessary 4 2�% 2 12% 3 �� 3 30% 2 �% 4 21% Nol Neetletl a� Neetletl �� As shown, appmximately 59 percent of respondents renked ihe importance of renovating/redeveloping the FFCC Arena as a 4 or higher, with an overall average rating of 3J. Comersely,41 percent of respondents rated the importance of renovating/redeveloping the FFCC Theater a hvo or lower, with an overell average ranking of3.0. Tenant Sports Minor league and/or collegiate sports tenants often provide significant utilization and revenue for major spectator/entertainment arena throughout the country. In past years, the FFCC has hosted severel minor league sports tenants, including the Saints (Tier ljuniorhockey teamof the USHL, now the Fighting Saints) who relocated h� the Mystique Community Ice Center. There are a wide variety of professional and junior level sports and leagues throughout the country—representing many spor�, including hockey, basketball, indoor football, indoor soccer, (utsal, lacrosse, volleyball, and other such sports. There are no local university/college candidates with men's and women's athletic pmgrarrs that could serve as a logical candidate (or a major sports tenant at an improved or new FFCC Arena. Given the size of the Dubuque market and its geogrephic location, the number of candidates in the minor league sports realm is limi�d—particularly, without a modern arena facility with cribcal amenibes such as premium seabng, sponsorship/signage, VIP areas,and su�cient ceiling heights and center hung scoreboards,etc. Should a new staterof-the-industry arena be developed to replace the FFCC Arena, attrecbng a minor league sports tenant would be possible, and could contribute positively h� event levels, attendance and revenue generetion, but should not be relied upon as a permanent anchor in a new or impmved arena facility in Dubuque. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 53 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Spectator and Entertainment Events Market-driven events are defned as those events that are affected by local market forces and characteristics. The number of marketYlnven events in a given community is typically a function of the size of the marketplace and the number of available facilibes to host these events. Pmmoted and touring shows such as concerts, comedy acts, family shows, rodeos, sporting events and competitions, moh�r sports,andotherticketedeventswereanalyzedaspartofthisresearchef(ort. Asampleoftheorganizabon contacted are presented below. AEG Liva Na�ion Relm Rewintl CarShow BusEn�etlainmen�Gmup LMG RisingS�arThea�erCompany Col�s Mammo�hEMetlainmen� RobetlsGmup Dancingwi�h�heS�ars Mons�erTmckEn�etlainmen� RocklantlsEn�etlainmen� Dubuque Symphony Orches�m Moscow Balle� Seren Four Pmmo�ions Dueling Dogs/Dock Dogs Mossbmker Rotleo S�onebritlge Pmtluc�ions FamswotlhEMetlainmen� MusicMenBarbershopQuatle� TopBillingEMetlainmeM Feltl En�ertainmen�Inc On Cue En�etlainmen� Tmxras Mons�erTmck�our Fly By NigM Pmtluc�ions Oulback Cometly Vs�ar JDIFF PinnadeComba�MMA WWERaw Conceds Concerts oken represent some of the most highly visible and well-attended events at mulb-purpose arenas and, in certain cases, theater facilities. In addition to the FFCC, the region currently features several venues capable of hosting mid-to�arge sized concerts including U.S. Cellular Center, iWireless Center, Carver Hawkeye Arena, BMO Harns Bank Center, La Crosse Center, Wells Fargo Arena and Mayo Civic Center, among other venues. When choosing a muting pattem among a competitive set of venues and market such as these, concert and live entertainment promoters tend to consider the (ollowing factors: ability to sell tickets, ability to generete ancillary revenue (e.g., through alcohol, other food and beverage, and merchandise sales; thmugh enhanced opportunities (or sponsorships, etc.), backstage space/amenities, accommodations from local event staff, event space and configuration, rigging capacity, venue ticketing system and other such factors. Interviews were conducted with concert promoters representing a wide renge of music and live entertainment genres to gauge the market potential for concerts to be hosted at a renovated/redeveloped FFCC, relative to the competifive set of facilities identified. Overall, concert promoters indicated limited to moderete levels of demand (or the Dubuque market due to the large number of existing facilities within the state and region that can axommodate larger tounng acts. However, it was noted among pmmoters that if the FFCC Arena were to be renovated/redeveloped and offered staterof-the-industry accoutrements, some opportunity exists for a more intimate sized facility. Importantly, respondents who had previously hosted events at the FFCC indicated a high desire to retum to the Dubuque market, suggesting that a renovated/redeveloped FFCC Arena that could generete interest from new promoters and pmmoted acts may present signifcant and lasting ef(ects in the market. Interviews among pmmoters with a potential interest or history in utilizing FFCC Theater space also indicated a somewhat moderete overell level of demand for renovated/redeveloped theater space in Dubuque. Promoters no�d the small capacity of the Theater as a govemor of the type and size of event candidates, but cautioned against any changes that would affect the intimate atmosphere and histonc nature of the venue. Some demand was noted for additional performance space in the (ortn of Ae�cible, black box thea�r space. Assuming renovations were made to the FFCC Theater, pmmoters indicated a potential opportunity to moderetely increase the number of annual performances and/or attrect a slightly larger audience (or the average FFCC Theaterevent. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 54 4�',. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch+��socz�r= _ $ Famiy Shows Family shows cater to spectators of all ages and include events such as the Harlem Globetmtters, Shrine Circus, Sesame Street Live!, Marvel Universe Live! and Disney on Ice (i.e., Frozen, Princesses and Hemes, Finding Dory, Toy Story, etc.). These events are usually held over consecutive days, with behveen one and three shows per day and hvo to six toml per(ortnances per stop. Family show tounng seasons oken run behveen October and May and depending on the market and facility capacity/availability, generelly draw a few thousand spectators per per(ortnance. In order to understand the market potential (or attrecting additional family shows to the FFCC, several leading family show pmmoters were contacted. Typical drawing power (or family show events extends somewhat (urther out from the typical drawing redius of concerts or other pmmoted events, with families generally axustomed to living (urther on the periphery of a given market. Additionally, key facility needs among family show pmducers include ngging capabilities that allow for the cast to"Fly-in`stage props and a large event Aoor (minimum 85'x 200� to axommodate stages, Aoor seating and in some cases, circus nngs. Most family show events require a minimum of 3,000 seats but usually pre(er more and look (or markets with at least 100,000 or more residents. Markets with younger median ages and appmpriate venues tend to host a more mbust family show schedule than older markets with less favorable demogrephics or host venues. Similar to discussions with pmmoters of concerts, family show promoters indicated a limited to moderete level of demand, largely due to the population base of the Dubuque market. It will be important to demonstrate that a renovated/redeveloped FFCC Arena is capable of drewing well for family shows. It is likely that inibal runs of family shows will offer a limited number of dates h� minimize promoter nsk; however, this directly af(ects the incentive for promo�rs to mute shows through Dubuque rather than more established marke� throughout the region. The FFCC Theater is too small a venue for most family show pmmoters to consider using on a consistent basis. OtherPromoted Events Other pmmoted events typically hosted at arenas include a vanety of events including, but not limited to motorsports, pm(essional wrestling,dog/cat shows,and rodeos,among otherevents thaton average draw fmm 30 to 50 miles away. While events such as wrestling are generally one-time performances, other events such as rodeos and mohxross events have the potential to conduct ticketed per(ortnances over several days ateach tourstop. These types ofevents oken fnd success in niche markets and otherevents may have the ability to draw non-local patrons, and there(ore may not have the same population or demographic requiremen� of cermin other events. If a mdeo or moh�rsports event finds success in a market one year, they are more likely to return the (ollowing year and potentially include addibonal event days. Particularly with events such as motorspor� or rodeos, many lower level sea� are often removed fmm circulation due to safety requirements. While the FFCC Arena can currently axommodate some motocross events, AV, seating and guest expenence enhancements are necessary to keep this gmup returning. Further, larger motorsports (e.g., monster trucks) require additional seating capacity (minimum of 6,000 fxed seats) to pmvide an opportunity h� generate the necessary retumron-investment (or pmmoters h� consider the market. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 55 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Amateur Sports ToumamentslEvents Another core event market(ora renovated/redeveloped FFCC is indooramateur/youth sports toumaments and events including basketball, volleyball, wrestling, gymnastics, martial arts, dance and indoor soccer. Key representabves from local and non-local youth sports organizations, as well as regional and national tournament organizers were interviewed in person and/or by telephone to assess their potential interest in utilizing a renovated/redeveloped FFCC. A summary of the market surveys conducted is pmvided below and on the (ollowing pages. A sampling of organizations contacted as part of this study included: AAU-BoysBaske�ball IowaAAUTaekwontloCM1ampionsM1ip Ne�lynxSpotls AAU Gymnas�ics Iowa Ama�eur A�M1le�ic Union Performance Volleyball AAUJunior0lympicGames IowaGames SWtlio56]8 AAWolleyball IowaGames-Baske�ball TheExpenence-EIi�e1��Toumamen� AAU Wres�ling Iowa Games-Matlial Atls TnS�a�e Eli�e Baske�ball AKKA Kara�e Iowa Games-Volleyball Uni�etl S�a�es YOWM1 V011eyball League �ubuque�ance IowaHigM1ScM1oolA�M1le�icAssocia�ion Uni�ersalCM1eetleatlersAssocia�ion �ubuqueGymnas�icsClub JuniorV011eyballAssocia�ion-Na�ional Uni�ersal�anceAssocia�ion EYASGymnas�iw LeePamulakMltltlleScM1oolNafl�uals USAGymnas�ics HeerlofAmericeVolleybell MltlAmericeYOWM1Beske�bell USAWres�ling IA S�a�e Boy's baske�ball�oumey Mltlwes�S�arz�ance Compe�i�ions USSSA Baske�ball IowaAAU Na�ionalCM1eetleatlersAssocia�ion USSSATaekwontlo lowa AAU Folks�yle S�a�e�uals NCAA Wres�ling Na�ional CM1amps Win�er W Games Iowe AAU Gltls Beske�bell Reg.Toumey NCAA Wres�ling Regionels YOWM1 V011eybell Assocle�ion There were varying degrees of demand among event organizers representing the vanous sports organizabons and interests surveyed in terrrs of ublizing the event space within a renovated/redeveloped FFCC (or their toumaments, meets, competitions, etc. It was noted that there is a general lack of a single indoor facility in the greater Dubuque market capable of hosting large state and regional toumaments. Further, amateur sports event organizers generally noted the accessibility of the Dubuque market to the communities throughouteastern Iowa,southeastem Minnesota,southwes�rn Wsconsin and northwestern Illinois, as well as relatively good access to large metropolitan markets in thmughout the region as a strength of the community. However, the general lack of hotel rooms within close pmximity to the FFCC, accessibility issues of the facility within the downtown core, preference for major destination markets and pncing relative to other regional indoor sports facilities were noted as potential challenges with increasing the FFCC's presence within the sports tounsm market segment. Specific demand by sport are pmvided below and on the (ollowing pages. BasketballDemand Basketball is the leading participatory team sport in the U.S. Based on national statistics, there are approximately 25.5 rcillion individuals that participated at least once in basketball last year. Of this amount, approximately 22 percent (5.7 million) were considered frequent participants, having participated 25 or more days in the last year. Toumaments typically feature 10 to 12 athletes and coaches per team, and 1.5 spectators per athlete. In order to be able to host most basketball toumaments, access to a minimum of 6 to 8 courts is necessary (however, like the FFCC Flrena, most modern arena facilifies are only able h� accommodate 2 to 3 (ullsize basketball courts on the arena Floor). Typical sizes (or youth/tournament basketball courts renge from approximately 5,000 square feet per court, up to nearly 10,000 square feet (or championship court requirements (which incorporates additional surmunding space for seating, scorer's tables, benches, etc.). Additional requirements include temporery/bleacher seating (or 20 h� 90 people per court, bathmom FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 56 4�',. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch+��socz�r= _ $ facilibes, space (or temporary concessions, lobby/registrabon space, small meeting facilibes, dividing walls/curtains for courts, and at least fve feet of distance behveen courts. Further, it was noted that planners prefer a facility that would of(er reasonable highway access and be within 15 minutes of at least 150 to 200 hotel roorrs. Conversations with basketball organizers suggest that the majority of existing facilities are well suited to accommodate local community demand; however, the lack of a critical mass within each of these facilities limits the opportunity h� market and attrect larger regional and national toumaments. State and regional basketball planners noted a moderate level ofdemand in utilizing a renovated/redeveloped FFCC, with low interest levels noted among nabonal basketball organizers. Volkyball Demand There are appmximately 10.1 million individuals in the United States that parbcipated at least once in volleyball within the past year, of which appmximately 34 percent (3.4 million) were considered frequent participants, having parOcipated 25 or more days in the last year. Appmximately 70 percent (7.1 million) played volleyball at least 13 times last year. Volleyball participation retes continue to gmw among young girls, and many communities have introduced youth boys'volleyball tearrs and leagues as well. Typically, it is possible to fit hvo youth/tournamentvolleyball courts within one youth/tournament basketball court. Volleyball tournaments typically consist of tearrs with 10 to 12 players per team,and can attrect 60 to 70 tearrs within a 6 to 8 court facility and an averege of 1.5 spectators per athlete. Volleyball organizers from regional and national levels indicated an overell moderate level of demand (or additional court space in the greater Dubuque area. One prominent regional toumament organizer noted that they would consider hosting a regional volleyball toumament that could attrect 1,500 athletes within a renovated/redeveloped FFCC that could axommoda� a minimum of 16 volleyball courts. OtherindoorSports Demand There are a vanety of other indoor sports that typically require a cntical mass of Aat Aoor space and accompanying seating in which to host large h�urnaments, meets,compebtions,exhibitions and othersuch events. Currently, the FFCC hosts a number of annual amateur wrestling events. Event organizers surveyed generelly indicated that the potenbal exists to attract additional wrestling meets and tournaments to a renovated/redeveloped FFCC. One particular example noted that the current FFCC space offenngs are adequate for smaller toumaments, but limit the ability to gmw these toumaments. Should su�cientspace be made available, there is an opportunity to host at least one or hvo additional toumaments drewing up to 2,000 participants per event. Wrestling tournaments tend to last hvo to three days, and are typically start either Fnday night or Saturday moming, and run through Sunday. Gymnastics presents another potential opportunity for hosting meets/competitions in a renova�d/redeveloped FFCC Flrena. The gymnastics season typically runs from October to May with meets typically requinng at Ieast20,000 square feetofcontiguous Aat Aoorspace to host tournaments, but prefer closer h� 40,000 square feet for larger meets and competitions (e.g., (our tearrs or more, hosOng both boys and girls gymnastics progrems, etc.). In speaking with organizers of one regional gymnastics competition promoter, the space available at the FFCC is adequate for hosbng theirsmallest event, but has limi�d theirability h�gmw the meet. If the FFCC were to be expanded,opportunity exists to nearly double their participation from 900 to 700 competitors, as well as presenting an opportunity to extend the competition with one or more additional day. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 5] �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Conversations with dance toumamentorganizers noted that there is a potential to attrectone or hvo annual dance competitions that could drew behveen 300 h� 1,000 participants. The minimum amount of space needed in order to axommodate their event is appmximately 20,000 square (eet of space,with preference for hvo separete spaces of(ering behveen 12,000 to 20,000 square (eet of space each. However, this is a market segment that can be accommodated within the Grand River Center's event space, suggesting that any potential FFCC Arena or Theater space usage would occur only when specific dates are not available at the Grand River Center. Another opportunity is presented with martial arts organizations, which run year-mund pmgrarrs, typically with a greater emphasis during the summer months. However, organizers of martial arts toumaments noted that Dubuque is generally too small of a market to host regional or national even�which are typically held in large convenbon centers located in major desbnation markets. Indoor Soccer Demand Another impormnt segmentof potential indooramateursports space demand originates fmm the Dubuque Soccer Association, which currently utilizes the FFCC (or precbce during the winter months. Local soccer gmups indicate the need fora large indoorspace with some type ofsynthetic turfwould allow(or increased usage dunng winter months, and pmvide an opportunity to host state and regional soxer events. While sufficient demand likely does not exist (or dedicated indoor turf space within the FFCC at this time, consideretion could be given h� investing in a rolled Wrf option h� be able to accommodate this market segment. Importantly, consideration would also have to be given h� pmviding adequate storege space for this turf dunng other FFCC Arena functions. Flat Floor Events Beyond concerts/entertainmentevents as well as indooramateursports toumaments, multipurpose arenas such as the FFCC are commonly used (or Flat Floor events. Dubuque currently has a staterof-the-industry convention center in the Grend River Center with an operetional mandate of generating room nigh� and local market protected smtus within the convention event category. As such, events such as consumer/public, civic, special events, and large community events often receive a lower booking priority and require event space elsewhere in the market at a venue not directly bed h� genereting ovemight stays. Having identified a significant number of these event pmmoters, we completed in-depth phone surveys with organizations that utilize Aat Aoor space (or their events, including: ApparelMarke[s Cal[s MarvKmusPmmo[ians CltyExpa KwlkTrlp Mltlwas[PhermecyExpo Cllydf�OI]OqOB INVB HQRIB BfIA PBIIQ$YIOW MIIIBI CltySpltl[Wnch IaveMaetPmcassarsAssaGetlan MlsslanafMa�cy�arRelCllnlc Cenhal W Gem antl Mineml Show Jus[BeRveen Frieritls Cansignmen[Sale Re[m Rewintl �ubuquaHlghSchoal MecShays TaysfarTas The overell survey data indicates a moderate level of interest among Aat Aoor event organizers for a renovated/redeveloped FFCC with high local interest, moderete interest among regional events and low interestamong national events. The majority of the market ofevents with a potential interested in utilizing FFCC Arena Aat Floor event space could be accommodated with approximately 30,000 square feet of contiguous exhibit space. While this would position the venue to be able to attract gmups in excess of 2,000 attendees, the majonty of events would averege 900 attendees. Nearly all interested events noted FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 58 4�',. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch+��socz�r= _ $ demand (or breakout event space and an onsite catenng opbon (or at least kitchen facilibes) to better facilitate hospitality pmvisions for events. Among event planners not interested in the Dubuque market, concerns pnmanly centered around the limited regional populabon immedia�ly surrounding Dubuque and its locabon on the eastem border(rether than the center) of the state. Those who expressed a positive interest in Dubuque and a renovated/redeveloped FFCC, identified as a strength its locabon in downtown Dubuque, including the vanety of downtown entertainment, retail and food of(enngs available nearby. Altemate Uses 1 Redevelopment of the FFCC Arena Site Three of the City's fve initial requested scenanos h� be considered under this study involve either the permanent removal fmm service of the FFCC Arena or its relocation to an alternate site elsewhere in Dubuque. Based on the entirety of the research, community outreach, and analysis conducted (or this study, there are not any obvious and compelling reasons to demolish the FFCC Flrena and redevelop the site (or an alternate use. Important reasons for this rabonale include: a) Market demand exists for a mulbpurpose entertainment/spectator arena in Dubuque. It is clear that a such a facility is desired by many citizens and viewed as an important quality of li(e element. b) There are important efficiencies involved with the co-location and co-management of the Theater and the Arena at the current FFCC site. Costs to operete the FFCC Theater alone (without the synergy and benef ts of the FFCC Arena)would be higher than the opereti ng costs that are currently attnbuted to it under its shared operating model. c) The FFCC's current location in the core of the downtown centrel business district is the ideal location in Dubuque (orsuch a facility. The location maximizes synergy fmm an attendee and an economic perspective, leveraging a pedestnan-fnendly envimnment with a density of nearby visitor amenities, attractions and trensportation/parking infrastructure. It serves to drew people into the downtown core, enhancing the downtown's overell health. The prospect of abandoning an ideal arena site, that has benefitted from decades of producUinfrastructure investment and branding, to rebuild elsewhere in a less desireble location in Dubuque is not logical. d) Under a scenano where the FFCC Arena is demolished and no replacement facility is developed elsewhere in the community, the Dubuque market would lose many, if not the majority, of the events hosted at the FFCC, and the associated economic activity genereted in the downtown and thmughout the community by their attendees. Further, it would be e�cpected that more Dubuque citizere would elect to leave the community to at�nd entertainment and spor� events in other communities, as a result (thereby resulting in further erosion of local economic spending). e) In cities larger than Dubuque, property values and demand for developable land parcels located in downtown central business distnct cores are often significantly higher than that presently exist in Dubuque's downh�wn. Current downtown land supply,demand and pnces do notsuggest that the costs and lost economic impact(quantifiable and intangible) for the City related to demolishing the FFCC Flrena and disposing of the land asset to a potential pnvate party would be mitigated by sale proceeds and the beneft generated by any ulbmate al�rnate private development. As a result of these factors, it is believed that the highest-and-best-use of the FFCC asset (building and land) is a multipurpose civic/entertainment/arts comple�c. As such, the emphasis of the remaining concept developmentand cost/beneftanalysis (ocused on FFCCArena and Theaterimprovement,expansion and/or redevelopment scenanos. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 59 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� Conclusions Key conclusions associated with the detailed market analysis of the FFCC include the (ollowing: 1. Market su000rt exists for both Arena and Theater comoonents. Market research and analysis conducted (or this study indicates that demand e�cis� (or both the arena and per(ortning ar� theater(unctions in Dubuque that the FFCC provides. These types of facilities would be espected to continue to have important roles in the Dubuque marketplace into the foreseeable (uture. 2. Local aualiN of li(e and economic activiN would be neaativelv imoacted without a venue servina these roles. The FFCC has long-served an important mle in Dubuque and the region, accommodating a signifcant portion of local sports, entertainment and performing arts event demand, including certain activity that other local event facilities could not, or would not, accommodate. Important events, entertainment opportunities, attendance, and community exposure would be lost and negabvely impacted without either of these types of facilities. Should the FFCC be decommissioned and no other replacements are developed, other local venues would not be able to su�ciently axommodate the FFCCs displaced activity. 3. The FFCC Theater is an historic asset that should be orotected. The FFCC Thea�r continues to serve an important market niche (or a small fixedseabng venue space in Dubuque. It has been and continues to serve as an important asset to the local per(ortning arts. Improvements to the FFCC Theater are not expected to signifcantly increase market share or attendance; however, impact(ul enhancements could be made to support spaces associated with the Theater to improve its efficiency, financial performance, and marketability. 4. The FFCC's current location is ideal foran entertainment/soorts/arts comole�c. The existing location maximizes synergy fmman at�ndee and an economic perspective,levereging a pedestnan-fnendly environment with a density of nearby visitor amenities, attrections and transportabon/parking infrastructure. Itserves to drew people inh� the downtown core,enhancing the downtown's overell health. In mostcases,cibes who are planning new arena and/or theater facilibes first look to their downtown central business distncts for available development parcels, given the high density of amenities and a walkable envimnment. 5. Sianifcant uoaredes to the FFCC Arena oroduct are needed to better comcete (or and serve scectator and entertainment event seaments. While ihe FFCC Flrena was onginally designed to accommodate a wide vanety of event types and uses, modem industry expectations nationwide have led h�ward the development and grevitation to more specialized-purpose facilities. In recent years, Dubuque has partially responded to these trends, thmugh the development of the Grand River Center (conven0ons/meetings/exhibitions) and the Mystique Community Ice Center (ice sports and rec). The result is that spectator/entertainment events remain as the key current and potential (uture target event segment for the FFCC Arena. 6. The FFCC Flrena has exceeded its oractical life. At a minimum, significant investment is required to shik the facility closer h� state-of-the-industry standards to address de(erred capital repair/replacement items, improve opereting efficiency and (unctionality, and allow it h� conbnue accommodating exisbng event activity and gmw (uture market share. Failure to do so will likely result in conbnued emsion of market share and diminishing event, performance and attendance levels at the FFCC Arena. Further, a minimum capital repair/replacement expenditures will be necessary in the near-term just to address li(e safety issues and maintain minimum operetional functionality. 7. The FFCC Arena ohvsical omduct and functionaliN is industry subsmndard. There are many aspects of the e�cisting FFCC Flrena that do not con(ortn, or are substandard, relative h� sta�-of- the-industry arenas (in the competifive emironment and nationwide). In many respects, the FFCC Arena possess attnbutes that are more consistent with a mulbpurpose Flat Aoor exhibition facility FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 60 4�',. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch+��socz�r= _ $ than with a modern spectator/entertainment arena. As will be discussed further in the subsequent chapter, given the exisbng FFCC's (ootpnnt and structural elements, it likely would be signifcantly challenging—if not impossible—h� renovate the existing FFCC Arena structure into a state-of-the- industry sports/entertainment arena. M expanded site area and a major redevelopment likely would be necessary to meet minimum requirements for a long-tertn spor�/entertainment venue solubon. 8. Investment in FFCC enhancements or redevelooment would be escected to dme new activiN and oositive imoac�. A distinct opportunity exis� (or Dubuque to capture new sports, entertainment and performing arts events with a new/impmved event facility product�pecifcally, through a modern arena venue that is more consistent with sta�-of-the-industry standards, allowing it h� protect existing business and compete for new business. 9. The hiahest-and-best-use of the FFCC asset (buildina and landl is a multioumose civic/entertainment/ar�comolex. Based on the entirety of the research,community outreach,and analysis conducted for this study,there are not any compelling reasons h�demolish the FFCC Arena and redevelop the site (or an altemate use. There is not believed to be any apparent compelling alternate use or more attrective economic opportunity (or the City and its citizens to consider pertnanent retirement or relocabon ofa long-standing, productive community asset in the heart of Dubuque's downtown. These findings are also consistent with the Flrts and Culture Mas�r %an that was previously adopted by the City Council. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • Market Demand MalVsls '�� Page 61 �b�:`:�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ �� 6.0. ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS & CONCEPTS The purpose of this section is to build on conclusions reached with regard to market demand to analyze and identify impmved/e�cpanded FFCC scenanos that are market supportable in Dubuque. Pursuant h� direction provided by the City, these scenarios include varying levels of investment and physical facility renova0on, expansion and/or redevelopment, (or the purpose of comparison. Dnven by the conclusion that an event venue complex is needed in Dubuque that services both arena and theater mles, a market supportable pmgrem of the physical FFCC facility product is outlined herein, based on industry best prectices for arena and per(ortning arts theater complexes and market demand that is unique to Dubuque. This pmgram is trenslated and adjusted as required (or the size, locabon and geogrephical constrein� imposed by, or likely (or, each scenano, to be subsequently discussed. Potenbal construction cos� and site issues are also assessed (or the scenanos. Market Supportable Program Based on the previous analyses undertaken, key attnbutes of a market supportable facility progrem for a FFCC arena include: . Staterof-the-industry, spectatorarena . Seating capacity of behveen 6,000 and 8,000 (5,000 h� 7,000 fixed sea�) . Some Flexible seating to retain access h� Flat Floor space . Premium seabng and other hospitality areas • Enhance patron experience— ingress/egress, WiFi, food &beverege, ADA, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house, load-in/out and other support facilities Based on the previous analyses undertaken, key attnbutes of a market supportable facility pmgram for a FFCC$yP3(,�include: . Retention of histonc Theater . Refurbish seating and make 2nd Balcony seating functional • Modest expansion of Bijou Black Box Theater • Address capital impmvement pmject items • Enhance patron experience— lobby,WiFi, F&B, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house facilibes FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 62 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Analysis of Development Scenarios In order to acmmmodate an industry standard event facility complex that meets the identifed market supportable programmatic elementr, the optimal solution would involve an expanded site and redevelopment of the FFCC Arena. A renovation of the existing FFCC arena would not deliver a state-of- the-industry product, nor could a desirable renovation solution be executed without expanding the FFCCs footprint. Whether the solution to address the FFCC Arena is to expand or redevelop,the logical expansion direction would be northwest across West 5°h Street Any expansion/redevelopment solution in this direction would most likely involve dosure or reroute of West 5'^ behveen Lomst and Main to acmmmodate the project at grade. Exhibit 1 illustrates the existing FFCC and the hypothetical erpansion area/direction. Exhi6it 1 FFCC Site Layout and Theoretical Expansion Opportunity ,��`a�� C . � .. ;r Vy��,�A '�" � .fr . � �� ,,� _ �� i �' � � � �� R � .� .s �. (i� � � ,-� r�: ,r�.- - '\ ` ., ��. { '`�� T � • 1 ' 'r � � a, �;, � =s� ,� .. � � �� `_ r •�7 � � \� �=+� .•-�"` '� � , � / � � � �f � � �� 1 � � �� :11 ` �� . Y,� '! _ .. � (. y ,c .. ` . � `. � � . � � ; '� `� �� .:�, •�� t o•. � ` \ �� • � �. ' ��raa' � � "�e , - �*;a,�� i�._ rt _,l� * _ �ee iacsc�vnrFmrrenssecsntNramo;•. �i [>c lo �or.ero K t ornePts , I;,; ��, �e1scM1 Nearly all modern spectator/entertainment arenas throughout the country are larger than the FFCC Arena (and the total FFCC itsel�. In fact, modern arenas with capacities less than 10,000 seats often occupy sites hvo to four times larger than the FFCCs current footprint Exhibit 2 illustrates examples of the footprints of three comparable arenas superimposed over the current fFCC Arena (and theoretical expansion parcel). Exhibit 2 MotlernAreoa Footprint Examples Tyson Events Center Ford Center US Cellular Center Sioux Cily,lA Evansville, IN CedarRapids, lA Opened 2003 Opened in 2011 Openetl In 2006 ��t " � �� a .e� x�l:. � � '�.�j°` � ��'" �� , �. ��, . �c . �_ . . �� . � .; � ��" ; . � << . � � � �� ' � �= � :,, � �� ' . � ��'� � .� � � � � .� � �' ,� �i �� . `�,� , � � �- , .� �.. ,, - � • �i' � ��' � � �<' , "�s �`-�,r.s, , 9,700 seats 11,000 seats 8,600 seats Therefore, based on these market and program analysis mndusions, along with collaboration among the project team and the City, four primary facility investment scenarios were identifled for additional analysis. Scenario 1 effectively represents a"status quo", or minimum, scenario in the analysis, as a certain amount of expenditures will have to be made in the near term and in the foreseeable future on deferred maintenance and future capital repair/replacement items[o keep the FFCC safe and operational by current standards. Scenario 2 involves a limited FFCC renovation. Scenario 3 represents a renovated compler with an expanded Arena. Scenario 4 imolves a renovated mmplex and a redeveloped Arena. � Scenario 1: Status Quo with Deferred Maintenance (4,000 Arena seating capatity) • Scenario 2: Deferred MaintenanCe and Limited Renovation (9,000 Arena seating capacity) � Scenario 3: Deferred Maintenance, Theater Renovation and Arena Expansion (5,600 Arena seating capacity,4,600 fxed seats,4 private suites) • Scenario 4: Deferred Maintenance,Theater Renovalion and New Arena Constmction (6,000 Arena seating capaciry, 5,000 fxed sea[s, 8 private suites, 2 party suites) —_ i� - , i,�� i . . . , . �. va o� � - � . . .. ��.. Bets<n In collaborebon with CSL, Be�ch Associates and FEH Design developed layout and concept schemes for the identified scenarios, along with pmgrammabc detail and preliminary construction cost estimates (to be outlined in the subsequent chap�r). This information is summarized below and on the (ollowing pages. Appendix D pmvides larger illustretions of these concepts, along with alternate concepts that were initially developed by the Project Team, but were detertnined not to be viable/suitable (oraddibonal consideretion. Scenarios 1 and 2 Scenano 1 is based upon addressing the de(erred maintenance items for the theatre and arena h� continue the operetion of the existing Center and resh�re worn out building systems. It includes major items such as the necessary replacement of the theatre and arena HVAC package units,arena lighbng system, theatre stage lighting and dimmers, theatre and arena stage curtains, arena and theatre mo(s, the elevator, and general repainting. The Floor plans (or the exisbng FFCC are contained in this study. Exhibit 3 displays an overview of the exisfing FFCC, with the street level Aoor plan presented in the center, and the concourse level plan shown on the nght. Scenano 2 is based upon adding some limi�d renovation to the arena and theatre to the deferred maintenance in Scenario 1. The renovabon iterrs are planned to address li(e safety and code compliance, to improve building security, to enhance event marketability and patmn amenibes, and to make building operations more efficient. It includes better ADA access, impmved fall pmtection, elevator access to all levels,a newsecunty and surveillance system, updated box o�ce,airconditioning and heating in the locker roorrs, new operable walls, new telescopic seabng, new theatre dressing morrs in the basement, black box theatre upgrades, existing toilet renovabon, replacement of concourse finishes, updated wi-f system, concession stand renovabon, fixed arena seating replacement, theatre seating replacement, arena and theatre sound system replacement, increased electncal system capacity, and replacement of the theatre steam HVAC system. However, it did not include an increase in the seabng capacity of the arena. Exhibit 3 Scenario 1&2(Ezisting FFCC, No Significant Physical Facility Changes) � r�,,�,, , _� � , � � z � i�', iN � �; � �;N F � ' � �{r, I,I i � r I � �° r `. � I�I�LI �� _ � � (�� ` � _ - 1 , � ��d� � i�� ` � - � u' p �l �� '-'� '�; ` a�L � �r �' �� ' � � .,. ,...., - P .,„ ,... � �� r,—,=-�-.��,-, , _ � ��. __ I� I .� � �i , � � r�..__ _ -., � ._,.1�.� �� `� �� :.,� � �a ��., �;w` � �, �--�w � ,2�, ' � '4 ; ��. ..2 ' "« . . _ _ ' _ °� . ." I . FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 65 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Scenario 3 Scenano 3 involves an expansion of the FFCC Arena, renovation of the FFCC Theater, and addressing remaining applicable de(erred maintenance iterrs. Exhibit 4 Scenario 3(Theater Renovation and Arena Expansion) �JI . ' � � ; ` — 1 � c:.,. �� ..�.,.. '`�� `� �_ �� o s.�,�,: � A e�-r'�, ��T � i e i �: �,�` I'� � � �y��y1 ,r �-1� . I —_ „�P �C _ � I I I .a,.��j�z' i�:�;:^�^- , I a1 IPr� 'Pr3_ �j �� p� , �'7�,��V. L..�I��m-. . I �� Ir . .9,�, � NI» � iLu -�n�Y'S .�� f I�',''� I � �....,i, �,,,r�, � � ��.: I� � )�- � � ' ��+.�, �� — ,,� � . ! � I If��l� 'f�n' , � , _�"`�� i�k �a �_,I '��i [ �� j�kt� �� M..�...� ...A.�.pss-� r L- ......,�,.� � �+w. . w.�. ��m, �'M` i.l � � F4 '"^ . "_ " . . . _ I � � .. 4.� �, . " _ . _ _ , . = ,.y , -�µ l ..�� _ �4.- +Ye s . � � � - �� <�� v��16..- � � ti. � � � `r=- } ., '. . ' � � J I . ^��. .. �� l , � Y�n � � � ,;� �� "r r.�- � .��, � A � Q °fNs� .!'�"O�'C �^ � ''� i y� 'Y �_t`�+ �� y +;;1l��" �'" �: i �,y °�` �z+�i��9� 1�;.�T i- F 35 � �. ' �! ` �-a, � -` ^�� ,ry �', :ry�ti z ,.' W 5+„�, " .� �''- ' ' ' h :4��_, s_ ? � � ' ��, ,. � _ >� _ FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 66 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Exhibit 4, on the previous page, displays an overview of the Scenano 3, with the street level Aoor plan presented on the lek,and the concourse level plan shown in the middle,and the upper level plan displayed on the nght. A preliminary e�cteriorconcept rendenng ofthis scenano is also shown,indica0ng appmximate size, site confguretion, and relationship to the greater site area. The illustration shows the reoriented Arena entry and public ingress/egress points h� the north, as well as the opportunity to create an attractive plaza and modern gathering space to the north. Scenano 3 would involve the purchase of the adjacent convenience store, closing of Fikh Street north of the Center, renovation of the existing FFCC Theater, renovation of the existing FFCC Arena bowl to expand the seating capacity to 5,600, and construction of new arena support areas north of the existing FFCC. It does not have all of the de(erred maintenance arena iterrs in Scenanos 1 and 2 since many of the needs have been alleviated by the construction of the new backrof-house areas and new building systems. This scenano includes a new secunty and surveillance system, replacement of the telescopic seating, replacement of roof structure to reise the clear ngging height inside the arena, new locker morrs, new production areas, new commissary, new sh�rege areas, new loading docks, and renovabon of the street level of the Center h� expand the support areas (or the theatre and pmvide space (or new offices for the symphony. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 6] �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Scenario 4 Scenano 4 involves the developmentofa new FFCC Arena, renovation of the FFCCTheater,and addressing remaining applicable de(erred maintenance iterrs. Exhibit 5 Scenario 4(Thea�r Renovation and New Arena Construction) I „�. � .x �.—� � I ',� �� Ji I . •e�� ,�„ pg 'u"�� - ' �� -..�-�i I)�a _ � . � 1 �C .ly,a!a,3,,.. ,�. � ' I y ,k°" 9 >' . . �i T�1 l"- .K.�� -�.Ps V' �. � � -: �.� �� ' �``� i r��j � 7 ,�.�— I� /"AJ� �� I '*'a,^ a...F..'��I I' .i —`�� i �� j� '� � l� I �� .� �. : I � r �a, .,,. '� i I �� I.� � 1�� 'i �� t � � c . a il' I I �.� _Iyl ( I T �., li, �� . F ly �� I �. I � ^ � �S. ! "� i��' i �� ^� �E l,t ...,. �.I � � �-r � �.�... ,�� -'� �.i a�9]�' ° .� ,� . .,, , , .,�.,� �i -„ ' , ...:�E^'�' i ,.., I,�, . I . , . �, '-� _— ' - ' - — '- . �� :�:. _ � ilN` ='tiyr � . � - � `• �. � E 4:,'x� }r- � � :i .�-. �iAI�1 �W, .. itr _ ' ; J_�.. � TL �`2` � '' � .� � �r � c *+ � ' m �`.$�� _ _ � �� "-'� i; � � � �� , .- ' �, � =-.Y wr � 4`_.a�a �„w �� . ��+ ^ . ' z _ �i: h :`, .' ':�. �.. ' i +.,,_ x . � ...- _ '1 Y�t_,: ' ' ., . > . �',.: �. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 68 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Scenano 4 would involve the purchase of the adjacent convenience store, closing Fikh Street north of the Center, renovation of the existing theatre, demolibon of the arena portion of the FFCC,and construction of a new 6,000-seat Arena with new support areas in i� place. It has even fewer of the de(erred maintenance items in Scenanos 1 and 2 since many of the needs have been alleviated by the construction of the new arena. This scenano will maintain the Ecumenical Tower on its site north of the Center and allow for creation of a new lobby entrence and plaza in the northeast corner of the site. The remaining portion of the FFCC will be renovated inh� support areas (or the theatre and provide space (or new o�ces (or the symphony. Pdditionally, con(ortning to industry best prectices (or modern event facility development, this scenano also pmvides new streetside retail activabon and leasable opportunities. Issues Related to Parking A question that oken anses in communibes that are considenng new or e�cpanded event facility pmject� particularly those in downtown urban cores—relates h� the availability of sufficient parking and related impacts. Theavailabilityofsu�cientparkingisnormallyimportanttothesuccessofeventfacilities. Based on industry standards, it is oken recommended thatone parking space be available (orappmximately every three (3) seats. There(ore, based on a FFCC Scenario 4 maximum seating capacity of 6,000 seats, approximately 2,000 parking spaces could be required to serve the FFCC (or high demand even�. In a rare situation where all FFCC spaces (Arena, Theater and Meeting Roorrs)could theoretically be oxupied by maximum attended activibes, total industry standard parking space requirements could rise to 2,500. The required parking spaces can be pmvided in a combination ofon-site spaces directly contmlled by arena management and existing or new parking within a reasonable walking distance (5 to 10 minutes) of the arena. Dispersing parking thomugh the immediate area would serve to encourege patmnage of area businesses within the downtown area by attendees in connection with FFCC attendance. Provided by the City's Transportation Services Departrnent, the following map outlines key downtown Dubuque parking proximate to the FFCC. aa � _. .. . �� • � � . 1R B] $ � � $/' E 292 � � � 30 491 � . ...� $ �' 618 ' $ 111 . . 8R .._ � � 19 �91 18 46 513 �iveFlagsceiner� 399 , .i 16 $ 1080 25 g ' $ � � 190 � L:� �, �� FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page 69 y�- FeH�E51GN � Betschasoaz« "9� As shown in the previous map, there are a number of parking opportunities nearby the FFCC. Specifcally, there are nearly 7,000 parking spaces within a 15-minute walk of the FFCC (more than 4,000 of which are free of charge after S:OOpm or 6:OOprr�times after which the majority of FFCC attendees will be arriving for most events). While latent downh�wn Dubuque parking demand may be high during daytime working hours Monday thmugh Fnday (or certain lots, ramps, and street spaces, it is important to first recognize that the vast majority of high attendance events are entertainment/spectator events that occur in the evening hours or on weekends. This supply and demand pattem is typical for nearly all entertainment/spectator event venues and tends to beneft event facilities that are located in centrel business districts of downtowns. Adjusted (or sea0ng capacity, the parking supply pmximate to a hypothetical Scenario 4 FFCC is more plentiful and less costly than that associated with most comparable arena venues located in other markets thmughout the country. A sample of the esbmated parking supply serving some successful compareble venues, with a companson to the FFCC, includes: PaMing EAima�etl Sea�ing Spacee Pmxima�e Covemge Ci�y, S�a�e Faoli�y Capaci�y Neetletl(1) Suppry(2) Pemen�aqe Erensville, IN FONCen�er 11,�� 3,fifi] a,000 1�8% CorpusChris�i,TH AmencanBankCen�er 1�,�� 3,333 4,2�� 12fi% Beaumon�,TH FONArena 8,�� 3,�� fi,�� ifi]% Bemitlji, MN SanfoN Cen�er fi,�� 2,�� 1,2�� fi�% PrescoXValley,AZ Presw��ValleyEven�Cen�er fi,2�� 2,�fi] a,000 14fi% Dotlge Ci�y, K5 Uni�etl WuelessArena 4,83fi i,fi4fi i,fi�� 8]% Dubuque,lA FFCC(Exisling) a,000 1,333 fi,fi�� 488% Dubuque,lA FFCC(Scenano3) fi,fi�� 1,Bfi] fi,fi�� 348% Dubuque,lA FFCC(Scenano4-arenaonly) fi,�� 2,�� fi,fi�� 32fi% Dubuque,lA FFCC(Scenano4-maxconaven�even�s) ],�� 2,333 fi,fi�� 2]8% �1�E9rapalellonbazetlonlMuc�ryryplmlrawmmentlelloncll perkligeptt�e{rer9-<x= �2)Fillmeletl perkingeupplywl�M1ln reesoreblewalkingtlk�erce,bazetlon mmer.sello�wl�M1d�ycfllclekaM�orledll�y ma�emeiM1 Based on industry standards and a review of parking supply in downtown Dubuque, it is not believed that the development of addibonal parking structures or lots will be necessary for any of the identified FFCC development scenanos. Conversely, downtown Dubuque's volume, availability and pricing of parking supply nearby the FFCC is considered a pmduct strength relative to other compareble venues located thmughout the region and country. Conclusions Based on the market analysis, key attnbutes of a market supportable facility progrem (or a FFCC arena include: . Staterof-the-industry, spectatorarena . Seating capacity of behveen 6,000 and 8,000 (5,000 h� 7,000 fixed sea�) . Some Flexible seating to retain access to Aat Aoor space . Premium seabng and other hospitality areas • Enhance patron experience— ingress/egress, WiFi, food &beverege, ADA, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house, load-in/out and other support facilities FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page]0 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Based on the previous analyses undertaken, key attnbutes of a market supportable facility progrem for a FFCC theater include: . Retention ofhistonc Theater . Refurbish seating and make 2nd Balcony seating functional • Modest expansion of Bijou Black Box Theater • Address capital impmvement pmject items • Enhance patron experience— lobby,WiFi, F&B, etc. . Upgraded backrof-house facilibes In order to accommodate an industry smndard event facility complex that meets the identified market supportable pmgrammabc elements, the optimal solubon would involve an expanded site and redevelopment of the FFCC Arena. A renovation of the existing FFCC arena would not deliver a state-of- the-industry product, nor could a desireble renovation solubon be executed without expanding the FFCC's footprint. Whether the solution to address the FFCC Flrena is to expand or redevelop, the logical expansion direction would be northwest across West 5"' Street. Based on these market and pmgrem analysis conclusions,along with collaboration among the pmject team and the City, four primary facility investment scenanos were identified for additional analysis. • Scenano 1 ef(ectively represents a minimum, status quo scenano, recognizing that a certain level of expenditures will be required in the near tertn and in the (oreseeable (uture on deferred maintenance and (uture capital repair/replacement iterrs to keep the FFCC sa(e and operetional by current standards. • Scenano 2 involves a limited FFCC renova0on (no expansion of facility (ootprint). . Scenano 3 represents a renovated complex with an expanded Flrena. . Scenano 4 involves a renova�d complex and a (ully redeveloped Flrena. Scenanos 3 and 4 both represent northwest expansion projections that would involve a block-long closure of West 5"' Street and development on a signifcant portion of the block opposite the current FFCC across West 5"'; however, neither scenano would require the relocation of Ecumenical Tower. Based on industry standards and a review of parking supply in downtown Dubuque, it is not believed that the development of addibonal parking structures or lots will be necessary for any of the identified FFCC development scenanos. Conversely, downtown Dubuque's volume, availability and pricing of parking supply nearby the FFCC is considered a pmduct strength relative to other compareble venues located thmughout the region and country. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENTANDSRJDV �� r • MalVsls of Development�Hons&Concept; '�� Page]1 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � 7.0. COSTIBENEFIT ANALYSIS This chapter presents an analysis of esbmated capital costs, utilization and attendance levels, financial operating results, and economic impac� associated with each of the previously identified FFCC scenanos. This section presents an analysis ofestimated utilization and costs/benefts associated with the FFCC under the (our identified scenanos. Initially, based on the results of the market demand, building progrem, and development options analyses, modeling and analysis was performed to generate per(ortnance esbmates for the FFCC. We have presented per(ortnance esOma�s for the FFCC (or a stabilized year and over a 15- year projection period (commencing upon the frst (ull year of operetions aker completion of the expansion/development indicated by the scenario). A stabilized year of operetion is assumed to oxur by the third (ull year of operetion. All dollar fgures are represented in tertns of 2018 dollars. Estimated Event and Use Levels A detailed market, fnancial and economic model was developed. Based on the market analysis completed and the pmgram assumptions discussed herein, Exhibit 1 presents a summary of the estimated annual event levels,event days,and utilization days (move-in days,event days,and moverout days) by event type for the FFCC during a stabilized year and over a 15-year pmjection penod. Ezhibit 1 Estimated FFCC Utilization by Scenario STABILIIEDYFAR 15YFARCOMOLATNE NOMBEROFEVENTS Gommun@//Rell�bus 0 6 ] ] 60 9] ID5 ID5 GonceRs 13 15 19 i➢ 195 225 295 3W Gomen�bnR¢desAo�v 2 0 6 6 30 W 9] 9] Femlly/IceSAau 5 ] 10 12 ]5 ID5 iW 190 Mw�InA�OenqueLs 9 15 30 W 120 225 OW ]W NonTenen�Pe�o�mence 6 10 P i➢ 90 iW 255 3W P�ouaco��marsno,•i z 3 e a 3o ae ra ra Sp�NnAF/enLs 31 40 52 W 065 6W ]90 9W Tenen�PeOo�menm i6 i➢ 26 26 200 3W 39] 39] ONe� i6 19 22 20 200 PO 330 3W To�el 103 139 190 230 1iW5 �0]0 �910 3i0W EVENTOAYS Gommun@//Rell�bus 0 6 ] ] 60 9] ID5 ID5 GonceRs 10 i6 20 P2 2ID 202 3W 323 Gomen�bnR¢desAom 3 6 9 9 05 9] 135 135 Femlly/IceSAa•.¢ 6 9 12 10 90 126 190 216 Mw�InA�OenqueLs 9 15 30 W 120 225 OW ]W NonTenen�Pe�o�mence 10 23 00 0] 210 3W 595 ]W P�ouaco��mareno,•i 3 a a a ae es n3 n3 s�nme�a�� 3e as sa ra ero r3a sn i,io3 Tenen�PeOo�menm 59 ]0 96 95 P95 1i105 1i039 1i039 ONe� 3 5 9 9 OS 69 113 113 To�al 152 2W 2l3 333 2290 31W 0391 0995 OTILINTION DAYS Gommun@//Rell�bus 6 9 11 11 90 135 159 159 GonceRs 15 P 22 2A P25 2W 3D 306 Gomen�bnR¢desAom 6 12 19 19 90 190 PO PO Femlly/IceSAau ] 10 10 P ID5 10] 2ID 252 Mw�InA�OenqueLs 12 2A 05 ]5 190 339 6i5 ii125 NonTenen�Pe�o�mence i6 P 05 53 200 OW 690 9W P�ouaco��mareno,•i a a i3 i3 ra n3 ies ies Sp�NnA F/enLs 0] 61 ]9 91 ]05 910 ii193 ii365 Tenen�PeOo�menm 40 155 i➢2 202 1iW0 2i325 3i023 3i023 ONe� 23 26 32 35 NS 3P9 0]0 519 To�el 261 316 0i9 535 3i915 5i1N ]i1P9 9i003 FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page R �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � As shown in the previous e�chibit, it is estimated that annual event levels at the FFCC, during a stabilized yearofoperation,would renge behveen 103 and 230 total even�,depending on the scenario. Total annual utilization days would range behveen 261 and 536, depending on the scenano. Scenario 1 effectively represents a status quo case, which appmximates current event and utilizabon levels at the existing FFCC. Noteworthy dif(erences among the scenanos include increased accommodation of key entertainment/spectator even� (such as concerts, family shows and sporting events) under Scenanos 3 and 4. While it remains a (uture possibility(particularly undera Scenano 4 pmject), (orpmjection purposes, a primary sports tenant(i.e., minor league sports frenchise or university/college sports team) has not been assumed. Exhibit 2 presents a summary of the estimated attendee days by event type (or the FFCC by scenario in a stabilized year and over the 15-year pmjection penod. A portion of the total attendee base represents non-local attendees (i.e., attendees that do not reside in Dubuque) and a modest portion of these non- local attendees represent visitors that require overnight lodging. As such, estimates relative to non-local attendee days and hotel mom nights have also been presented. Ezhibit 2 Estimated FFCC Attendance &Hotel Room Pightr by Scenario STABIL6EDYEAR 15YFARCOMOLATNE ATIENOEEDAYS Gommun@//Rell�bus ],46 10i900 10JW i6i100 106i990 162i0W 2i➢i5W 201i:a] GonceRs 11i4Gd 10i539 35i9:9 51i692 165iG92 219i0]] 53ii115 ]]5i395 Gomen�bnR�edesAom 3iP25 Oii➢0 11i2W 13iW0 09i3i5 63i0W 169JW i➢2i:a] Femlly/IceSAa..¢ ]iW9 11J60 19i� 23J60 110i40 P6i0W POiOW 3:Si0P] Mw�InAg�n9uek ii693 3J50 ],:a] 12iW0 25i495 :Si2W 14i5W 19ii:a] NonTenan�Pe�o�mance 0063 1516] 26J]5 31W0 46N5 22]SW 001625 0i2:a] Pu�IItlGo�sume�SAav 5iW1 ]i650 iZ]01 1�]01 ]6ii➢9 110JW 19ii519 19ii519 Sp��InAF/enk 49,39] 69iW5 91,1E6 93i653 ]25i912 1i0Di6]] 1i2Pi092 1i4WJ99 Tenen�PeOo�menm 59i069 ]3J50 ID5i063 fl5i050 9]]i035 1i1C5i2W ii591i939 iJ25JW ONe� 0519 ]W9 fl5W 15]50 692P iC5313 P32W 2352W To�al 15564 21]N9 320913 39620] 2330P9 32EJ,2P 09]36P9 5]93101 ATIENOEEDAYS�NONIOCAL) Gommun@//Rell�bus ]13 1iW0 1i0]0 1i610 10i699 i6i2W P2i0W 20i1W LonceRs 3,302 0352 10J02 i5W9 09529 65023 161135 232615 Gomen�bnR�edesAom ii613 2i100 5i625 6J50 20i199 31i5W BQ3i5 101i2W Femlly/IceSAa•.¢ 2i292 3i529 5i0P] ]i49 30i236 52i9i➢ 91i0W iC5i9i➢ Mw�InAg�nquek 025 939 ii9i5 3i45 6i3i1 10i063 29i125 O6i9i5 NonTenan�Pe�o�mance 1269 2P5 0016 0]25 19W2 N,125 EJ,240 ]09]5 P�ouaco��marsno,•i i,aza z,ma 3,aio 3,am zz,asz npze ar,in ar,in Sp��InAF/enk 9i6]] 13J29 i6i233 19J31 W5i162 205i935 203i099 290iYA Tenen�PeOo�menm 11i6N 10J50 21iG93 23i010 P5i40] 221i2W 316i3P9 315i1W ONe� 1?61 246 3065 0]25 20065 319N 51W5 ]09]5 To�al 33W3 0i192 ]3J30 9942 W]950 ]0]]35 1105905 1 335926 NO�EL ROOM NIGNTS Gommun@//Rell�bus 103 216 LW 322 2i139 3i240 Oi010 Oi930 LonceRs 095 650 i6fl 2326 ]029 9913 20P0 N992 comamn�nrea�no�•i e�s roo i,ara z,zao a,cs3 iqam zapza 33,rw Femiryn�sno,•u iaz z3a � ma z,zaz 3,aze a,am rpza m�wesa��q�a� ea iea 3ra sza i�na z�ai3 e�sza s�3ra NonTenen�Pe�o�mence 19] 311 W2 ]09 2i956 5i119 9iO3] 10i631 Pu�IItlGo�sume�SAav 61 92 152 152 910 ii3]] 2i2W 2i2W Sp��InAF/enk W5 915 1iW2 1i209 9i6]] 13JD i6i233 19J31 Tenen�PeOo�menm iJW 2i213 3,iW 3i052 26i311 33i1P9 0]i059 51Ji3 ONe� ?61 :5] 920 1260 SOA 9505 139W 195(q To�el OiOP 6i121 10i440 1�920 66i403 91i911 1:Si6W 192i➢5 As shown, upon stabilizabon, total annual attendee days would be expected to reach as high as 386,000 under Scenario 4, while annual hotel room nights genereted are estimated at approximately 12,800 under Scenano 4 (or an increase of more than 8,000 over existing FFCC levels). FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]3 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Estimated Capital Costs A preliminary orderrof-magnitude capital and construction cost analysis was per(ortned by Be�ch Associates and FEH Design, with parOcipation by CSL, City representatives, and FFCC management. The analysis included consideretion of pending deferred maintenance and major capital requirements that will need to be addressed during the 15-year projecbon penod. A detailed review of these iterrs, including the identifcation ofa reasonable timing/sequencing allocation,was conducted, and adjustments were made to remove i�ms which would be addressed or no longer needed under Scenarios 3 and 4 involving expansion and/or new build development. Construction costs tend to vary widely among comparable event facility pmjects. Many vanables exist that inAuence actual realized construction costs, including type of facility, size, components, level of fnish, integrated amenities, costs of goods and services in the local market, location and topography of the site, ingress/egress issues, costs implica0ons related to the exisOng FFCC site and integra0on with exisOng facilities and infrastructure, and other such aspects. Pdditional architectural costing analysis would be required to refine these estimates, parbcularly those related to demolition, infrestructure and renovation aspects. Exhibit 4 presents a companson of a summary of preliminary orderrof-magnitude capital costs for each of the four identified scenanos. Presented in tertns of 2018 dollars, a summary by major cost type is shown in terrrs of upfmnt costs (i.e., construction costs and immediate de(erred maintenance costs), as well as costs through Year 15 of the pmjection period (i.e., construction costs, deferred maintenance, and upcoming assumed capital repair/replacement costs). A detailed line item breakdown of preliminary estimated capital costs by scenario is pmvided in Flppendix E. Exhibit 4 Preliminary Cost Capital Cost Comparison (Order-of-Magnitude, 2018 dollare) U front Ca ital Costs Expenslan/Canrtmctlan $0 $0 $33,802,BBfi $fifi,08],21] �efeiretl Ma'mtenance $4,0I0,000 $4,0I0,000 $1,I12,000 $1,I12,000 Llh Sefety/Catle Campllence $0 $404,000 $3fi0,000 $3fi0,000 Sewdry $0 $43fi,000 $300,000 $300,000 Even[Merketeblllry $0 $3,01fi,fi00 $1,802,fi00 $802,fi00 PatmnAmenities $0 $5,29I,500 $]95,000 $45I,500 Ope�etlans $fi,000 $2,102,fi00 $1,010,000 $1,010,000 HeN Canrtmctlan Carts $4,0Ifi,000 $18,204,fi00 $40,132,38fi $fi8,fi]8,21] SokConstructlonCosta $811,2fi0 $2,430,8Ifi $8,018,Bfifi $0,838,003 To[alCons[ruc[ionCos[s $6,686,250 $18,635,V5 $46,152,220 $68,516,100 Upfront Plus Capital Costs Vears 1-15 Expenslan/Canrtmctlan $0 $0 $33,802,BBfi $fifi,08],21] �efeiretl Ma'mtenance $],590,000 $],590,000 $3,02I,000 $3,02I,000 Llfe Sefety/Catle Campllence $0 $fiO3,000 $42fi,000 $42fi,000 Sewdry $0 $fi00,000 $400,000 $400,000 Even[Merketeblllry $0 $4,440,fi00 $2,40I,fi00 $1,10I,fi00 PeOanAmenitles $0 $8,000,000 $1,282,fi00 $82fi,000 Ope�etlans $fi,000 $2,48I,fi00 $1,13fi,000 $1,13fi,000 HeN Canrtmctlan Carts $],fi8fi,000 $22,481,000 $42,838,BBfi $82,008,I1] SokConstructlonCosta $1,138,2fi0 $3,388,ifi0 $8,38fi,800 $8,313,000 To[alCons[ruc[ionCos[s $8,]36,250 $25,830,150 $49,035,845 $]1,399,85 FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]4 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Based on comparable facility data adjusted (or estimated Dubuque condibons and the identifed facility pmgram, total orderrof-magnitude capital cos� for Scenario 1 (representing the minimum required to sustain FFCC operetions over the next 15 years) appmximates $8.7 million in 2018 dollars. This would be considered a minimum figure,as itshould be expected ihatcertain capital repair/replacement needs beyond those identified for this exercise will matenalize over the next 15 years. Total upfront capital costs (immediate deferred maintenance costs plus renovation cos�) associated with Scenano 2 are esbmated at $18.6 million. Total upfront capital costs (immediate de(erred maintenance costs plus construction and renovation costs)associated with Scenanos 3 and 4 are estimated at$96.2 and $68.5 million. Over the 15-year projection penod, total cumulative capital cos� range fmm $8.7 million (Scenano 1) to $71.4 million (Scenano 4). Estimated Financial Operations An analysis of the estima�d financial operabons of the FFCC by scenano was conducted. This financial operating analysis only considers revenues and expenses generated thmugh the operetion of the FFCC itself and does not consider other potential ancillary income that may be related to the pmject (such as incremental tax revenue, parking income, admissions surcharges, interest income, or contrectually- obligated streams such as naming rights, retail leases and other such iterrs, etc.), nor does it consider other non-opereting costs, such as construction costs (i.e., debt service) and ongoing capital repair/replacement (unding. This analysis is designed to assist pmject representatives in assessing the fnancial effects of the FFCC under the identifed scenanos and cannot be considered a presentation of expected (uture results. Axordingly, the analysis of potential financial operabng results may not be use(ul (orother purposes. The assumptions disclosed herein are not all inclusive, but are those deemed to be significant. Because events and circurrstances frequently do notoccuras expected,there usually will be differences behveen estimated and actual results and these dif(erences may be matenal. As with all new/expanded event facility projects, an initial startup penod is assumed be(ore event levels are anticipated to stabilize. Financial operabng esbma�s prepared in this section reAect a stabilized year of operetion (assumed to occur by the third full year of operetion), shown in 2018 dollars. This analysis has been developed to reAect"neC'operetions. For instance, reimbursed event expenses and associa�d event revenues are not presented, rather, they are assumed to "pass thmugh" the financial opereting estimates developed in this section. �r capita revenue and expense assumptions were also developed using comparable facility data and industry expenence with similar pmjects, along with consideretion of the unique attnbutes of the Dubuque marketplace and specifc condibons envisioned for the facility. Working with City representatives and FFCC management, detailed histoncal event and financial operafing data associa�d with the FFCC was obtained and analyzed (or this study. Scenario 1 ef(ectively represents the current operations of the FFCC. As in all studies of this type,the estimated results are based on competentand efficient facility management and assume that no significant changes in the vanous event markets will occur beyond those set (orth in this report. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]5 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Operatinq Revenues The pnmary sources of operating revenue for the FFCC include space rental, food and beverege, contract service,and other revenue. For purposes of this financial operabng analysis, no parking revenue has been assumed to be retained by the facility. The assumptions regarding the individual revenue components are also based on a review of the operations ofcompareble facilities throughout the country and industry trend data. Facilitv Rent Facility rent income is typically based on a daily rental (ee or, in some cases,a percentage of gmss ticket sales. Renml rates will likely vary depending on the type of event(i.e. commercial, not-for- pmfit,community events,etc.)and the portion of the facility used (i.e. (ull-house,half-house,etc.). The number of even�, rental retes, paid attendance and ticket pnces assumed in this study are based on an analysis of historical FFCC operetions, projected events, ticket pnces, attendance and rental rates at comparable venues, regional competitive facilibes, discussions with pmmoters and industry trends. Food and Beveraqe Frood and beverege (F&B) revenue consists of the sale of various food service (concessions and catenng) iterrs at the FFCC. Revenue assumptions are based on historical FFCC operetions and estimated event and attendance levels and estimated per capita spending for various event types. Estimated (ood service revenue is presented in terrrs of net revenue retained by the FFCG To calculate amss revenue, the net revenue fgure would be divided by 35 percent(reFlecting cost of goods sold and associated expenses). Adu ertis in q/Sp ons orsh ip s Advertising and sponsorship revenues are denved fmm the sale of signage related to scoreboards, scorer's table, concourse, interior and extenor fascia, courtside (dorna signage), dasher boards, vomih�nes, outdoor marquee displays and pmmotions. Ultimately, the retes charged (or advertising and sponsorships at the FFCC will be determined by factors such as the particular scenano pursued, the number events and attendance at the facility, if any faciltiy even� are bmadcasted (television, redio, etc.), and the amount of tie-ins such as pmgram adverbsing and public address announcements that are included with advertising packages. Pdvertising and sponsorship revenues were analyzed (orothercompareble venues. Contrectually-obligated income associated specifically with the potential sale of naming rights is not included in this pmjection of fnancial operetions,as itwould be assumed to be used to defrey the capital debtobligations bome by the public sector. Premium Seatinq Scenanos 3 and 4 assume the development of premium seating. This revenue stream represents the net income genereted from the annual and perevent lease of pnvate suites, party suites, loge seating and other premium areas developed. Contract Seruice &Other Contrect service consists of charges h� event management and exhibitors (or event-related services, such as pmviding electrical hook-ups and other utilities, leasing of equipment, and pmviding secunty and cleaning services. Esbmated service and equipment revenue is based on histoncal FFCC operetions, compareble facility fnancial operations, and estimates of the number of events, at�ndance, square footage used, assumed future gmwth retes and receipts at compareble facilities. Other revenue includes miscellaneous operabng revenue iterrs, including but not limited to merchandise sales, credit card fees, equipment rentals, and other such iterrs. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]6 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Operatinq Expenses The esOmated opere0ng expenses for the FFCC are based on histoncal opereting expenses at the FFCC, industry standards and those expenenced at competitive/compareble facilities. Specifically, histoncal and comparable facility opereting e�cpense data was analyzed on a per square foot and per seat basis. Salaries and Benefts Esbmated salaries, wages and benefits include compensation for (ull- and part-time employees (excluding event personnel cos� passed through to the event pmmoter or organizer). Employee benefts include payments (or employee hospitalization pmgrarrs, unemployment compensation, workers' compensabon, and FICA. This analysis is based on histoncal FFCC operetions and the fnancial operetions ofcompareble and competitive facilities,adjusted for the FFCC's size and event levels by scenario. It has been assumed that the FFCC will be staffed with personnel levels similar to that of other similar, well-managed sports/entertainment/spectator venues. Contract Labor Expenses associated with contrect labor derived from outsourcing to contrechxs or other service pmviders that is not reimbursed by FFCC renters, including certain temporary or event day service contrectors and part-time event day employees that may include ticket takers, ushers, concession workers, security, EMT and others. Utilities Utilibes oken represent one of the largest expenses incurred by events center operetors. Costs estimates for events center utilities include electricity, gas, water and steam. The estimates are based on histoncal FFCC opera0ons, industry avereges and the assumption that any new FFCC capital investment will include current industry standard energysaving components. Repairs and Maintenance Expenses related to repairs and maintenance reAect mutine expenditures ihat are necessary (or normal facility operetions. Histoncal FFCC operabng expenses were analyzed, along with an assessment and allocation behveen items that would be considered capital expenses versus operating expenses. Scenarios 3 and 4 assume that annual maintenance costs in the early years of the project period are relatively low, reAecbng the large capital investment in facility pmduct and infrastructure. It is likely that such costs will increase incrementally over time as the facility depreciates. General and Administrative Generel and administretive expenses include various day-to-day costs such as subscriptions, staff training,dues,staff travel,staff tuition reimbursement, licenses and pertni�, bad debt charges and other such iterrs. This category also includes costs related to administrative business-related expenses such as postage, administretive supplies, administrabve furniture and fxtures, auto allowances, administretive trevel, memberships and maintenance of the administretive space. SUpp�12S Costs (or matenals and supplies (or the FFCC include those materials,supplies and equipment used forfacilityoperationsanditsadministrativeoffices. Theanalysisofmaterialsandsuppliesexpense is based on histoncal FFCC levels, compebtive/comparable facility operabons and the levels of facility space. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]] �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Insurance Insurence expense includes typical property and liability insurence coverage necessary (or the operation of the FFCC. The analysis of insurence e�cpense is based on histoncal FFCC opera0ons, competitive/compareble facility expense data, with adjustments (or local market conditions. OtherExpenses Other expenses include costs associated with pnvate management and (or services including accounting and legal functions and other non-recurring consulting and service pmvision. Summary of Estimated Financial Operations Exhibit 5 below presents a summary of the esbmated fnancial operabng resul� (or the FFCC by scenario in a stabilized year and over a 15-year pmjec0on period (commencing upon the first full yearofoperetions aker completion of the expansion/development indica�d by the scenario). Fgures are presented in 2018 dollars. These figures only represent the annual operetions of the facility scenanos and do not include construction debt service payments, capital repair/replacement reserve funding obligations, or other non- opereting expenses. Exhibit 5 Estimated Fnancial Operating Resultr by Scenario(in 2018 dollare) STABILQEO YEAR i5 YEAR CIIMIIIATNE OPERATINGREVENIIES FecIIIryRw� $24fi,000 $33B,81fi $fiBfi,3fi0 $810,480 $3,81fi,000 $fi3OB122fi $B,B30.1b0 $1$ifi8.B00 Fwd&Bemrege 130,000 184.130 348.080 418.800 1.Bfi0.000 2.]]O.BfiO fi.iB0.B00 898.000 Adeullsligl6ponmrsM1lps 20,000 2fi.000 10fi.000 13fi.000 300.000 31fi.000 i.fi]fi.000 202fi.000 Premlum6ee�lig 0 0 4fi,000 110.000 0 0 81fi.000 18fi0.000 Gamrecl6eMce&OIM1er ifi,000 20.84 4fi]fi0 fi1.000 22fi.000 313813 888.1b0 Bfifi.000 Ta�elOperelingRevence $410,000 $fi10,4fi] $1,131J80 $1,fi31,080 $8Jfi0,000 $B,fifi8,848 $11,Ofi1,400 $92,BBfi,B00 OPERATINGEXPENSES 6eledu&BereNs $]80,000 $828,812 $1,OOB,110 $1,136120 $11]00.000 $12430.080 $ifi,14fi.8fi0 $18,Bfi3.300 Gamrecllebar 3fi,000 4]]4fi 838fi0 ]O.B80 fi2fi.000 ]01.11fi Bfi0.1b0 1.084]00 Wlll�les 180,000 201240 2fi1888 282A20 2]00.000 3.018800 3.]]6820 4238800 Repelr&Melmerens 30,000 3B.fi10 80800 84.580 4fi0.000 fiB3.fifi0 BOB.000 888400 Gwuel&Ptlminls4ellm ]fi,000 81]fi0 140fi0 40.10fi 1]2fi.000 12112fi0 1.880]fi0 1.801.fi]fi Suppfes 20.000 24.880 45.840 48.ifi0 300.000 313200 fiW.fi00 ]22400 ce 48,000 fi0fi48 fi4.814 ]0.04 880.000 ]fiB8B0 W2210 1.Ofi0]80 O�M1er�n 100,000 108,300 iBiJ00 218,000 1,fi00,000 1,fi24,fi00 2,888,fi00 3,240,000 Ta�elOperelingExpwres $1,288,000 $1,381,803 $1]88,852 $2,002,4fi] $18,BB0,000 $20)24,04fi $28,882,180 $30,038,Bfifi NETOPERATINGPROFRIOEFlCR �$BSfi.000� �$BN.fAi� �$fifif.fi93� �$Aif.]9i� �$13,BA0.000� �$13,iW,19B� �$9935.]B0� �$i.W0955� As shown in the exhibit, the current FFCC(Scenario 1)is genereting a netopereting deficit ofappmximately $856,000 annually. As mentioned previously in this report, on a per square foot and per seat basis, the FFCC's recent annual financial opereting performance is consis�nt with or slightly better than the averege compareble facility located in similar markets, despite industry substandard pmduct characteristics. The annual net opereting defcit under Scenario 2 would be expec�d to be consistentorslighter lower than the current FFCC. The net opereting defcit under Scenarios 3 and 4 would be expected to improve to appmximately ($662,000) and ($472,000), respectively, reAecting greater event and attendance levels, higher pmfile events, improved revenue genereting opportunities, and impmved opereting efficiencies. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]8 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Estimated Economic Impacts Often, the pnmary "benefts" associated with event facilities relate to the quantifable, incremental economic impacts genereted in a local community and economy thmugh their construction and ongoing operation. As such, when attempting to quantify "incremental" economic impact from event facility ocerations, it is normal industry practice h� only attribute impacts to spending associated with"visitors"to a given market(i.e., persons that do not reside in the local area), rather than including spending by"locals` (i.e., persons that reside in the local area) in the calculation. The theory is that a facility at�ndee that is a local resident would likely have otherwise spent their disposable income on some other discretionary purchase in the local community anyway. This results in a more conservative esbmation of economic impact, as the focus is on spending by visih�rs who would have not even been in the local community if it were not for the subject event facility that was host to the event they chose to travel to and attend. The following chart outlines key economic impact concepts and metncs. Economic Impact Analysis Conceptr a nd Metrics � � • � 1. Direvl5pentling 1. Direvl5pentling 1. Direc�Spentling � Ma�erlals � Room85paceRendls � Loaging � Labor � Woa89eveage � Resduan�s'Ears 2 Intlirevl&IntlucetlSpentling � aeduannermanaise � aetau 3. Output�ei�.r.inei�.r.meu�3�nemgi ' Emenalnmem � EmerdlnmenvGaming � SponmrsMpBMve�lsing � Transl� 4. Employmen�hmaPewimop� . �ntactaomersemces � semcegomer fi. Eamings��r�o�ew�omo� p, Intlirec�&IntlucetlSpentling 2 Intlirevl&IntlucetlSpentling fi. TaxRevenue 3. Oulpu��ewn.�im�iwr.�i�e��w�a�emg� 3. Ou�pu��e�iwr.�i�eiwr.�i�e�we..a�emg� � saiesausetams q, Employmen�pma�wm�olo�l 4. Employmen�pmaPewimopw� fi. Eamingeiar..��einmwmo� fi. Eamingeiar..o�eri��omo� fi. TaxRevenue fi. TaxRevenue � SalesBum�axes � Loaging�ams � Emise,gamingBo�M1er�axes � SaksBum�axes � Carren�al8�ansl��axes � Exdse,gamingBo�M1erdms Fror purposes of this analysis, results of the economic impact analyses are measured in terrrs of the following categones: . Total ouq�ut represents the total direct, indirect and induced spending ef(ects generated by the pmject. This calculation measures the total dollar change in output that oxurs in the local economy for each dollar of output delivered to final demand. . Pereonal earnings represents the wages and salanes earned by employees of businesses associated with or impacted by the project. In other words, the multiplier measures the total dollar FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page]9 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � change in eamings of households employed by the affected industnes (oreach addibonal dollarof output delivered to final demand. • Employment represents the number of (ull- and part-time jobs. The employment multiplier measures the h�tal change in the number of jobs in ihe local economy (or each addibonal $1.0 million of output delivered to final demand. The initial spending of new dollars into an economy begins a senes in which the dollars are cycled thmugh the economy. The respending of the dollars is estimated by using the economic multipliers discussed above and applying them to the amount of direct, or initial, spending. The mulbplier illustrates that spending in a defined economy will lead to additional spending until that dollar has completed i� cycle thmugh leakage. Leakage represents the portion of a dollar spent in areas outside the designated economy. As previously menboned, this analysis only considers "net new"economic impact. This impact is derived solely by visih�rs at�nding or parbcipating in FFCC events that do not reside in Dubuque. Fror conservative purposes, our approach to economic impact estimation does not consider any spending by facility attendees/participants if they reside in Dubuque. It has been assumed that any spending by these local residents would represent"displaced" spending, that would have otherwise been spent locally on other pmducts and services. The exisOng FFCC annually generates economic impact in Dubuque associated the attraction of visih�rs to the city, and their spending in it, that would have not otherwise traveled to Dubuque if it were not (or the event they chose to attend at the FFCC. Further, ihe construction and the subsequent operabons of a renovated/expanded/redeveloped FFCC(particulady under Scenarios 3 and 4)will generate significant new economic impact in Dubuque particularly when considenng aggregate impacts over time. 5chibit 6 depicts the cumulative net new economic impacts estimated to be generated under the four identified FFCC scenanos (or a stabilized year(assumed Year 3 ofoperebons) and cumulative over a 15-year penod. Exhibit 6 Summary of Estimated Economic Impachs by Scenario (in 2018 dollare) STABILII£�VEAR iSVEARLOMOLATVE LONSIROLTIONIMPALA OIaY6penEing W W 50 W 59i990i019 511i619i:69 512iA"6i190 59'{129i8i6 InEIaVlnEuce]6penEing 0 0 0 0 26�`699 ]9�09`2 ]�]WS 12�`09FA 9`0 TWeIOWpW W W 50 W 58i613iID5 519iC4Ni51➢ 59ii2Pi196 SWi190i892 Fer�rellncome(rsming� W W 50 W 5'{19'{9W 58iW1iWi 51'{592i955 518i208iE86 Emplrymm�(�ull&Po�-�Imepts� 0 0 0 0 0 199 &N 985 IN�FALLITVIMPALA OIaY6penEing W18i909 SSWi899 5391i891 51iffi1i596 58i1&1i292 58i959i00 510ii1Bi9i1 518i929i098 InElrxNnEuce]SpenE'mg P5011 2312P 40�101 5231P 26260II 3069259 6016610 1856361 TNeIOWpW 559Q01➢ 5I88ifl5 51i986i939 51ii85i139 58i910i9W 511i821ii1B 51➢i&Wi990 5ffiiii9i993 Fer�rellncome(rsming� 5219i290 51BOi059 SFA1i899 8Yl9i4E0 59i199i006 W/d'AiE89 SIi51Bi995 53i65'{1:A5 Emplrymm�(�ull&Po�-�Imepts� . 12 22 1B 196 189 915 010 OOTAFFALILITVIMPALTS OIaY6penEing 51iW0i11➢ 5'{098i915 59iii1i099 Wi06i402 513i559i9W 59ii00iE82 SFAi5l2i48i SWi106i019 InElrxNnEuce]Sy'enEing ]� �j ]�] ]�('g]y ]]j��Q]� ]A��"�iQs�], � � TNeIOWpW 5'{i05i813 59i028i3A SSiP'{090 58i19ii6A SGOi59ii099 551i0?Oi999 SIii596i0FA 53'{WSi4M Fer�rellncome(rsming� �E09i293 51i0i9i0fl 51i61'{?09 51i910i918 51'{i99i091 516i035iID5 520i185i198 51BiW0i219 Emplrymm�(�ull&Po�-�Imepts� 40 51 i6 89 6W iW 1i195 1i?02 TOTALELONOMILIMPALTS OIaY6penEing 5'{989i169 59i055i129 SOii59i991 SSii9ii99i 599ii6ii909 SSIi051i919 539i9C6i9�8 5118i198i99i InEIaVlnEuce]6penEing 9y0`W ]�]6]E9�98 ]8�.�0`9 2�0`2 6�8` 25� 22�5�. 8W. 96.199 TNeIOWpW 59i133i8FA Wi2Pi1fl SQ559i029 S1i912i93'J SFAi1ffii848 58'{W1i18i 5195iW9i512 SP9i095i6i5 Fer�rellncome(rsming� 51iW'{513 51i95ii0i0 5'{110i196 5'{SWi091 518iP0i909 5ffii951i921 SGOi206i4E8 SFAiFA5i955 Emplrymm�(�ull&Po�-�Imepts� 09 69 .i 1P iE8 1iW2 1ii20 '{101 FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page 80 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � As shown in the exhibit on the previous page,over a 15-year penod, it is estimated that Scenano 4 would generate $173 million in economic output (direct, indirect, and induced spending) in Dubuque. This represents approximately $117 million in incremental eronomic output over 15 years relative to Scenano 1 (status quo). Importantly, while not specifically esbmated under this analysis, it is believed that an approximately equivalent amount of Scenario 1 economic impacts would be annually lost to Dubuque should the FFCC be demolished and not replaced. In this eventuality,many of the majorentertainment/sports/spectatorevents held in the current FFCC would be lost to Dubuque if the FFCC was demolished and not replaced. However, some events (particularly smaller events, meetings, civic, etc.) may find other host venues in Dubuque. The result will likely be that much of the Scenario 1 economic impacts would disappear under a demolish/no replacement scenano. Further, the"lost"impact of local residen� now having to leave Dubuque to trevel to other regional cities to attend entertainment events (due to the loss of the local market's pnmary spectator event facility) has not been quantified, but would also represent reduction in economic impact. The net, incremental result of combining these hvo factors would likely roughly appmximate, or even exceed, the total loss indicated by the Scenario 1 economic impact fgures. In addition to ihe more quantifable benefits, some benefits related to the construction and operetions of the new, renovated and redeveloped multipurpose event facilities cannot be quantimtively measured. Beyond the economic activity and jobs indirectly pmvided, these types of non-quantifable impacts of a project of this nature and scope can serve to elevate Dubuque's pmfile and brend as a visitor destination and as a quality place to live, work, learn and play. In fact, ihese qualitative benef� tend to be a critical factor in the consideration of public and pnvate investment in projects of this nature, particularly those involving exisOng venues with a long history of service in the local community. These include issues pertaining to quality of life (thmugh attrecting entertainment events that would not otherwise travel to the area and hosbng civic and pnvate events), ancillary economic development facilitabon, employment opportunities, community pride and other such issues. Potential non-quantifable benefits could include: • Potentia/ Tiansform3tive and Iconic EJfects — Elevating the quality, pmfile, and exposure to national,regional and local audiences ofa key local event facility can have important trans(ortnative and residual impacts on the Dubuque community and destination, in terrrs of quality of li(e, community prestige, perception by visih�rs and non-locals,and other such ef(ects. . Qua/ityofL�IeforResidents— New/enhancedeventandpublicassemblyfacilitiespmvidediversifed activities forlocal residents and families,which can make Dubuque a more attrective and enjoyable place to reside. Quality public assembly facilities can contnbute to enhancing community pnde, self-image, exposure and reputation. FVI these iterrs can assist in retaining and attrecting an educated work(orce, particularly younger adults who oken desire quality entertainment, culturel, leisure and recreational amenities. . New Usitation — New visitors will be attracted to the area because of an event in the expanded/impmved arena and performing arts facility pmducts. These attendees, in tum, may elect to retum to the area later with their families, etc. for a vacation aker visibng the area (or the firsttime. . Spin-0ffDeve/oprnent— Pnvate sector investment can be induced in the areas surrounding event facilibes, such as arenas and perfortning arts centers, spurred by increased volume of visitors to the event facility, representing addibons to the local mx base. Enhanced economic growth and ancillary private sector development near the FFCC could be more likely should the City elect to invest in a major FFCC improvement project. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page 81 4�'::. FEH�ESIGN � Betsch=c�;o�_�.:m_ ' $ • Arxhor for Revib/ization— Key event facility pmject development can oftentimes anchor larger downtown or community-wide master development plans. . Other Berrefits — Increased synergy with the other local event, entertainment and hospitality facilibes can lead to increased tounsm acbvity in communities. Likewise, the pmposed FFCC investment would be expected to enhance affordable entertainment, cultural, educational and leisure altematives (or families in Dubuque. Estimated CostslBenefits &Conclusions Based on the cost/benefit analysis completed for this study,the identified FFCC scenanos are each expected to pmvide quantifiable benefits to Dubuque (with the greatest impacts genereted by Scenarios 3 and 4). These quanbfable benefts oken serve as the"return on investment"of public dollars that are contnbuted to develop these desbnation and constituent facilities. Exhibit 7 presents a simplified summary of retum-on-investment, casting total economic output (direct, indirect and induced spending)against total costs (upfmntand ongoing)assumed h� be bome by the public sector to implement each of the (our analyzed FFCC facility scenarios. Exhibit 7 Summary of Key Estima�d Coshs and Benefitr by Scenario (in 2018 dollare) ouaxnrwe�ecoss caaiuico��: HeNGon9ncibnGests — S]i595i� — ffi2i061i� — SRi639iW5 — S6�C%,]P WXGo�slncilonGa4s — 1i139i2Y.1 — 3i369i1W — 6i395i990 — 9i313iW9 PMe�eGonN�Wbn 0 0 0 0 TolalLos� — $8.i]AE50 �� $35&tOd50 �� $49.0]5845 — $ii]99.iE5 OngaingOpemtians: OpereMARevenues S110i� SSi1Wi� 55]Oi05] 59i5E5iB19 51i13]i160 SPi05]i400 51i531iCW ffi2i955i5(q oparewe�re� �xsav ias:oav i3aiw3 mrzawa nseeaz ecsanao zmzaer wo�seea TolalOpzralingLosts $856.000 $1E840.000 $8fl.J4i $II.i6CJ98 $661.693 $99E5]80 $4i1]9i $i.0i0955 OngaingCmts: �e��5ervlm Sl]5i� S]i125i� 51i0Wi� 521i0Wi� S�CC6iW0 539i9F1iW0 53iP92i� 559i2A:li� Opere�InA�e�lcll 9:5� 2810� 9 0] 2 6] 99 CS 692 9925390 0] 39] ]W0955 TolalAnnualLosb $1]]1.000 $19965.000 $EE1SJ4i AtyIICJ98 Ai]Ei.693 $49915]80 $Q]51]9i $65]00955 OIIANTIFNBLEBENEFRS OngoingQuantifiableBenNlis: �RrniSysndlnA 5�399i169 539i]6]iN9 53i055iP23 55]i051i919 SOi]53i391 593i?C6i999 55i]3]i93] 5119i199i93] IndtrMllnduce]SpendlnA 90690 6359993 6 P99 250G9269 &5039 0220 590 2 95052 W935i39 TolaIOWPW E1E99850 E56.1E6848 Ea,E1CJfl $BE861J8i E6.5594M E1]S.6W.SiE Ei9EE990 Eii].0]S.6i5 Peisonellncome�eeminqs� 51iC52i5D 519iP0i303 51i35]iW0 526i95]i921 5�110i2A6 SMi206i499 5�5Wi031 SESiE55,355 Emplrymen��NllMpeMlmepCs� 09 ]P9 63 1iW2 W iJ20 iP Z101 As shown, aggregated annual cos� (debt service plus opereting subsidy) for the four scenanos over 15 years range fmm $20.0 million (or Scenario 1 (status quo) to $65.3 million (or Scenario 9--or a difference of$45.3 million. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page 82 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � Within the previous exhibit, the companson includes the total estimated costs that will likely need to be bome by the public sector to implement each of the four scenanos, for a stabilized year of operetions (assumed third full year of operations), as well as cumulated costs over 15 years of operetions. Benefts have been presented in tertns of annual total economic output(a sum ofdirect, indirectand induced visitor spending) in Dubuque. Costs have been presented in terrrs of construction debt service (assuming the entire construction debt would be bonded debt)and operating subsidy needed per scenario. Specifically, a 30-year�rtn and a 3.5 percent tax exempt annual interest rate have been assumed for the hypothetical debt associated with each scenario. However, importantly, there may be an opportunity to utilize (unding sources and fnancing mechanism(in part or in full) thatwould not require the issuance of treditional public sector bonded debt (in part or in full). In that event, the cost of capital would be reduced and overell annual costs would lower. Likewise, in the event that other non-public sech�r(unds are contnbuted to the project to defray costs, the annual costs estimated to be bome by the public sector would also be lower than indicated. M imestrnent in FFCC renovation/expansion/redevelopment will represent new economic impact to Dubuque and the surrounding region, particularly when considering aggregate impacts over time and more significantly (or Scenarios 3 and 4. The exhibit on the previous page also depicts the cumulative net new economic impacts estimated to result fmm the construction and operations of the FFCC scenarios estimated for a stabilized year(third (ull year of operetions) and in the aggregate over a 15-year period. Over a 15- year penod, the cumulative economic output (new direct, indirect and induced spending) over the 15-year period is estimated h� renge behveen $56.1 million (or Scenano 1(status quo)to $173.0 million for Scenario 4�ra difference of$116.9 million. It is important to recognize the quantifable economic impacts associated with the annual operetions of entertainment/spectator/arts facilibes,such as the FFCC, measured under this type of analysis are typically lower than other types of event facility products, such as convention centers, that emphasize genereting nonlocal events and hotel room nigh�. A community's decision to invest in arena and theater facility projects are often driven in large part by a recognition of the importance of pmviding quality entertainment and arts and culture options for community residen�. Many of these reasons relate to enhancing quality of life,education and culture, and serve h� elevate the community's pmfle and brend as a quality place to live, work, learn, play and visit. In fact, these qualitative benef� tend to be a critical factor in the consideretion of public and private investment in pmjects of this nature, particularly those involving exisOng venues with a long history of service in the local community. These include issues pertaining h� quality of li(e (through attracting entertainment events that would not otherwise travel to the area and hosbng civic and pnvate events), ancillary economic development facilitabon, employment opportunities, community pnde and other such issues. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSE�MENTANDSRJDV �� r • Ccst/BeneFlt MalVsls '�� Page 83 �b�:':�:- FEH�ESIGN � Betscha>sao.ars_ ' � DRAFT COPY 8.0 NAMING RIGHTS AND SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES ANALYSIS Naming rightr partnerships are agreementr in which a company places itr name or logo on a specifc venue, and in return, pays an annual fee to the venue's owner or manager. Regional examples of naming rightr partnerships for arena and civic complex venues include: • U.S.CellularCenter,CedarRapids,Iowa • Tyson Euents Center,Sioux City,Iowa • TaxSlayer Center, Moline,Illinois • Grossinger Motors Arena, Bloomington,Illinois • Dow Euent Center,Saginaw,Michigan • Indiana Farmers Coliseum,Indianapolis,Indiana • Huntington Center,Toledo,Ohio • AMSOIL Arena, Duluth, Minnesota Typically, these types of deals are done on a more intermediate or long-term basis (e.g. 20 to 30 years), while renewals typically are done on shorter terms (i.e. 10 years or Igs). Along with the naming of the facility,a naming rightr partner typically receives a variety ofexposure opportunities, including landmarks, scoreboard signage, exterior facility signage, digital marquee signage, directional signage, opportunities for activation and product sampling, hospitality benefitr, inclusion in the venue's media buy and editorial media coverage. The growth in naming rightr can be attributed to facilities and teams looking for new revenues. As properties put a greater emphasis on the importance of naming rightr, decision-makers at corporations began to see naming righ� as an effective method forachieving specific marketing objectives. Naming rightr marketing is particularly valuable because of itr effectiveness in introducing new productr, helping new or established productr contend with competitive brands, and increasing corporate brand awareness. However, the real value lies in the borrowed imagery of a property and the unique media exposure a brand receives through the agreement. A corporation's ability to associate their brand directly to a team, facility or event is an important component in the value of naming rightr agreementr. Naming and sponsorship opportunities often prgent with modern arena and event venues include: • Facility Entrance • Fa�ade Landmark I • Arena Roof • On�CouNlce Logos � r l. � a y • StaticScoreboard ;f� . �� . r _ � � • BacklitTunnelSignage 's � � • ScoreboardUnderbelly � - -' ,-'-�� . �I • Arena Seats ��u �� .- _ • Concourse Signs :=F • Exterior poor Decal � �� • DisplayArea �y _ -�-T • Digital Fascia Signage � — • Center�hung Video Boards ' � � • Arena Floor Maps - , � • Trash Receptades ;. ".- � � � • Staff Uniform d� • ATMMachines �.I�'�� , FIVE FLAGS CIVIC CENTER ASSESSMENET PND STUDY � � � Naming Rlghtr and Sponsorshlp Opportunitles Malysis '�' Page 89 ///�� FEHDESIGN � Betsch-c:�,�:,�.�.,��e:, DRAFf COPY The naming rights and sponsorship package value thatany event venue will be able to command depends, in large part,on the (ollowing factors: 1. Pmfile of soorts tenant(sl: One or more high profle sports tenants (major university or minor league professional team) is typically cntical in maximizing naming rights values. The spor� tearrs dnve media coverege,which in tum, drives demand and the value of the naming and sponsorship opportunity. 2. Comoarable deals: A potential partner will analyze comparable deals in collegiate athletics and othersports industnes thmughout North Amenca. 3. Market size and media coveraae: Sponsors are willing to pay more for naming nghts forarenas thatgenerate a considerable amount of inedia coverage—fmm television, radio, pnnt and online. Larger markets typically generete greater e�cposure (or a naming nghts partner. 4. Bmadcast e�coosure: National and regional broadcast exposure is oken available to suxess(ul tenant tearrs and those in large marke�. Sponsors are willing to pay a premium for naming rights to facilities that receive a high degree of such bmadcast exposure. 5. Newness of the faciliN: New or substantially renovated/expanded arenas can command higher naming righ� fees; these tendtobestaterof-the-artandarchitecturallysignifcant. Pmpertiescanfaceobstaclesinrenaming older facilities that have been known by a certain name (or an extended penod of time. 6. Numberofevents: The more events hosted at a facility on an annual basis, the greater the attendance, the more value to a naming righ� partner. The type of even� hosted at an arena can also impact the amount a venue can command (or naming rights. 7. Histoncal success: A tenant team's historical suxess (i.e. number of playoff/h�umament appearances) typically has an impact on the overall value of a venue's naming nghts. 8. Oualimtive value: Qualimtive facility factors pmvide corporetions opportunities to align their brand with the image, emotions, popularity and li(estyle evoked by a facility pmperty and product. The �rtn and value of naming rights and sponsorship package trensactions associa�d with compareble arena and civic event facility products have widely vaned. To pmvide some context and understanding of the scope of these deals, the three e�chibi� on the (ollowing pages present summanes of 25 compareble facility naming nghts transactions,sorted by the estimated annual fee paid in Exhibit 1, by seating capacity in Exhibit 2, and by CBSA(core-based stabsbcal area) population in 5chibit 3. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Naming RIghG and Sponsorshlp OpportunlHes MalVsls '�� Page 85 �b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY Exhibit 1 Summaryof Comparable Facility Naming Rightr Transactions (sorted byannual fee) RImM1Collssum Tomn�o.ON �600000 ,1921 ]891 2003 2018 $10•000.000 $1000000 IMIereFaimersCollseum IMlerepalk,IN 1,595W] 1999 8200 20W 2020 10 $fl00LL000 $900000 Ben�eAreB�er�n�er RloRsndo,NM 16l899 2009 1500 91CB WA $$5➢LL000 $500000 BECII/uere TmrvwqM� 2]59,109 2019 5200 2019 2029 10 $A]5LL000 $0]5000 TeeHleyer�n�er MOIIre,IL W]2]] 1999 9200 20W 20P 10 $A25LL000 $025000 �mrvEren��n�er Beglrew,Ml 20999 1W2 5500 9110 9120 10 $A91LL000 $091.000 LLB.CellulerCen�er CetlerRepldc,lA 2Bl,199 1W9 9000 9112 9112 10 $480LL000 $980000 1atBenkCen�er Bmom�eltl,CO 2528802 2009 Q500 209 WA $1J5LL000 $9N,000 Geimaln/uere @tem,FL 908,182 1998 ]18B 20W 2020 20 $],OOLL000 $9N,000 HUAIng�onCeAer Toletla,OH 908.]9 2008 9901 20ID 20P 9 $2IDLL000 $9N.000 Mgelo(�IreWlndc/uere ErereX,WA 9998999 2009 8109 9118 9148 10 $400LL000 $900000 MessMWuelCeAer Bpdig�eN,MA 98BA95 1W2 fl900 9105 9191 $q00LL000 $999999 BM1OYVere�n�er Nen�,WA 9AW848 2009 Q500 2009 2019 10 $4Pq000 $91]500 AMBOIL/uere �uIWM1,MN 9929 2010 fl]26 20ID 2090 20 $fl00LL000 $900000 CeAuryLlnk�n�er Bol.sa.l� 9W85B 199] 5]32 2005 2020 $AOOLL000 $29899] WssBenm/uere WIreeIInqYVJ 1M,98B 1W] 5A00 2009 2029 10 $25➢LL000 $2N.000 FoitlPaMEren�CeAer Beeumon�,T% 9T991 2009 9100 9105 WA $1¢FLL000 $2N,000 MOM1eaenBun/uerea�CaseyPlss WllkacAeire.PA 5098W 1999 9100 9110 9191 10 $2Wq000 $25l.500 Ben�eMer/uere Reetllig,Ph 008,000 2001 9000 91N WA $400LL000 $200000 GmssingsrMo�ors/uere Bloominglon,IL 19]999 2009 8000 20P 2012 $Wq000 $P5000 TysonErenKCeAer BIowLY�yN 1098W 2009 9000 9110 9120 90 $AOOLL000 $199999 Bo�engbc'Colkeum CM1etloXe,NC 1]ffi58B 1955 9095 2012 2021 10 $125LL000 $125000 Flrst/uere Elmlis,NY 90A19 2000 9]00 2005 WA 10 $1,OOLL000 $100000 Cl1RElrvcrosnm/uere Tren�on,NJ 5855,019 1999 8900 91P WA Nlh WA Nlh BIg8eMy8u{rerstore/uere HUAIng�oqYVJ 289,511 1W1 9000 9119 91P � WA Nlh AVERPGE 1995Al2 1990 ]902 20ID 2012 11 $4954]89 $902595 ME�IPN 608.]11 1999 ]900 2009 2012 10 $3800.000 $390000 Exhibit 2 Summary of Comparable Facility Naming Righhs Transactions(sor�d byarena seating capacity) MOM1eaenBun/uerea�CaseyPlss WllkacAeire.PA 5098W ,1999 9]00 20ID 2020 10 $2Wq000 $29]500 HUAIng�onCeAer Toletla,OH 908.]9 2008 9901 20ID 20P 9 $2IDLL000 $9N.000 TeeHleyer�n�er MOIIre,IL W]2]] 1999 9200 20W 20P 10 $A25LL000 $025000 FoitlPaMEren�CeAer Beeumon�,T% 9T991 2009 9100 9105 WA $12FLL000 $2N,000 Bo�engbc'Colkeum CM1etloXe,NC 1]ffi58B 1955 9095 2012 2021 10 $125LL000 $125000 LLB.CellulerCen�er CetlerRepldc,lA 2Bl,199 1W9 9000 9112 9112 10 $480LL000 $980000 Ben�eMer/uere Reetllig,Ph 008,000 2001 9000 91N WA $$OOLL000 $200000 Cl1RElrvcrosnm/uere Tren�on,NJ 5855,019 1999 8900 91P WA Nlh WA Nlh BIg8eMy8u{rerstore/uere HUAIng�oqYVJ 289,511 1W1 9000 9119 91P WA Nlh TysonErenKCeAer BIowLY�yN 1098W 2009 9000 9110 9120 90 $AOOLL000 $199999 IMIereFaimersCollseum IMlerepalk,IN 1595W] 1999 8200 20W 2020 10 $fl00LL000 $900000 Mgelo(�IreWlndc/uere ErereX,WA 9998999 2009 8109 9118 9148 10 $400LL000 $900000 GmssingsrMo�ors/uere Bloominglon,IL 19]999 2009 8000 20P 2012 $Wq000 $P5000 RImM1Collssum Tomn�o.ON �600000 1921 ]891 2003 2018 $10.000.000 $1000000 Ben�eAreB�er�n�er RloRsndo,NM 16l899 2009 1500 91CB WA $$5➢LL000 $500000 Geimaln/uere @tem,FL 908,182 1998 ]18B 20W 2020 20 $],OOLL000 $9N,000 MessMWuelCeAer Bpdig�eN,MA 98BA95 1W2 fl900 9105 9191 $q00LL000 $999999 AMBOIL/uere �uIWM1,MN 9929 2010 Q]26 20ID 2090 20 $fl00LL000 $900000 1atBenkCen�er Bmom�eltl,CO 2528802 2009 Q500 209 WA $1J5LL000 $9N,000 BM1OYVere�n�er Nen�,WA 9AW848 2009 Q500 2009 2019 10 $4Pq000 $91]500 CeAuryLlnk�n�er Bol.sa.l� 9W85B 199] 5]32 2005 2020 $AOOLL000 $29899] �mrvEren��n�er Beglrew,Ml 20999 1W2 5500 9110 9120 10 $A91LL000 $091.000 WssBenm/uere WIreeIInqYVJ 1M,98B 1W] 5A00 2009 2029 10 $25➢LL000 $2N.000 BECII/uere TmrvwqM� 2]59,109 2019 5200 2019 2029 10 $A]5LL000 $0]5000 Flrst/uere Elmlis,NY 90A19 2000 9]00 2005 WA 10 $1,OOLL000 $100000 AVERPGE 19°SA12 1990 ]902 20ID 2012 11 $4954]89 $9025°5 ME�IPN 6W]82 1999 8]09 20ID 2012 10 $3A00.000 $333333 FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Naming RIghG and Sponsorshlp OpportunlHes MalVsls '�� Page 86 �b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY Exhibit 3 Summaryof Comparable Facility Naming Rightr Transactions (sorted by population) Cl1RElrvcrosnm/uere Tren�on,NJ 5855,019 �1999 8900 91P WA Nlh WA Nlh RImM1Collssum Tomn�o.ON �600000 1921 ]891 2003 2018 $10.000.000 $1000000 BM1OYVere�n�er Nen�,WA 9AW848 2009 Q500 2009 2019 10 $4Pq000 $91]500 Mgelo(�IreWlndc/uere ErereX,WA 9998999 2009 8109 9118 9148 10 $400LL000 $900000 BECII/uere TmrvwnM� 2]59,109 2019 5200 2019 2029 10 $A]5LL000 $0]5000 1atBenkCen�er Bmom�eltl,CO 2528802 2009 Q500 209 WA $1J5LL000 $9N,000 Bo�engbc'Colkeum CM1etloXe,NC 1]ffi58B 1955 9095 2012 2021 10 $125LL000 $125000 IMIereFaimersCollseum IMlerepalk,IN 1,595W] 1999 8200 20W 2020 10 $fl00LL000 $900000 Ben�eAreB�er�n�er RloRsndo,NM 16l899 2009 1500 91CB WA $$5➢LL000 $500000 MessMWuelCeAer Bpdig�eN,MA 98BA95 1W2 fl900 9105 9191 $q00LL000 $999999 CeAuryLlnk�n�er Bol.sa.l� 9W85B 199] 5]32 2005 2020 $AOOLL000 $29899] HUAIng�onCeAer Toletla,OH 908.]9 2008 9901 20ID 20P 9 $2IDLL000 $9N.000 Geimaln/uere @tem,FL 908,182 1998 ]18B 20W 2020 20 $],OOLL000 $9N,000 MOM1eaenBun/uerea�CaseyPlss WllkacAeire.PA 5098W 1999 9100 9110 9191 10 $2Wq000 $25l.500 Ben�eMer/uere Reetllig,Ph 008,000 2001 9000 91N WA $400LL000 $200000 FoitlPaMEren�CeAer Beeumon�,T% 9T991 2009 9100 9105 WA $12FLL000 $2N,000 TeeHleyer�n�er MOIIre,IL W]2]] 1999 9200 20W 20P 10 $4�25LL000 $025000 BIg8eMy8u{rerstore/uere HUAIng�oqYVJ 289,511 1W1 9000 9119 91P WA Nlh AMBOIL/uere �uIWM1,MN 9929 2010 Q]26 20ID 2090 20 $fl00LL000 $900000 LLB.CellulerCen�er CetlerRepldc,lA 2Bl,199 1W9 9000 9112 9112 10 $480LL000 $980000 �mrvEren��n�er Beglrew,Ml 20999 1W2 5500 9110 9120 10 $A91LL000 $091.000 GmssingsrMo�ors/uere Bloominglon,IL 19]999 2009 8000 20P 2012 $Wq000 $P5000 WssBenm/uere WIreeIInqYVJ 1M,98B 1W] 5A00 2009 2029 10 $25➢LL000 $2N.000 TysonErenKCeAer BIowLY�yN 1098W 2009 9000 9110 9120 90 $AOOLL000 $199999 Flrst/uere Elmlis,NY 90A19 2000 9]00 2005 WA 10 $1,OOLL000 $100000 AVERPGE 19°SA12 1990 ]902 20ID 2012 11 $4954]89 $902595 ME�IPN 6W]11 1999 8,000 20ID 2012 10 $3A00.000 $300,000 As shown in the exhibits, of the 25 comparable facility naming rights transactions considered, the median market size is just over 600,000 and the median total fee paid was approximately $3.8 million over 10 years. A hypothetical extrapolation applying the average compareble market population and naming nghts fee to Dubuque's popula0on would suggest an annual (ee of approximately $183,000 for a compareble arena facility in Dubuque. However, it is impormnt to recognize some important factors that could potentially lower the ultimate valuation or (or demand for) a possible FFCC opportunity. The most importantofwhich is the lack ofa high pmfile pnmary sports tenants(that many ofthe compareble facilities possess). The second of which is to the degree that the any expanded/impmved FFCC pmduct is still perceived as the "Five Flags Civic Center' by the local and regional marketplace. A long history with an established facility, location, name and brand can work to lower demand and the valuabon of a potential deal. Nevertheless, parbcularly if Scenarios 3 or 4 are pursued and even without a high profle sports tenant, a substantially upgreded and highly visible facility product located in the heart of Dubuque's downtown should present an opportunity for a naming/sponsorship trensaction that could either assist in defraying the public sectors (unding obligation. FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Naming RIghG and Sponsorshlp OpportunlHes MalVsls '�� Page 8] �b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY APPENDIX A: COMPARABLE FACILITY CASE STUDIES FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Appendlx A�. Comparable FadIIN�se S[udles '�' �b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY APPENDIX B: COMPARABLE MARKET DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Appendlx B'. Comparable Market DemograpMc Data '�� b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY APPENDIX C: COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONSES FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Appendlx C Community SLrveV Responsps '�� b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY APPENDIX D: ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPT AND LAYOUT RENDERINGS FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Appendlx D'. ArcMtutural Concept and LaVoutRenderings '�� b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � DRAFf COPY APPENDIX E: CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES FIVEFLA65CIVICCENiERASSESSMENETANDSrUDV �� r • Appendlx E�. Capltal Cc�st EstlmatPs '�' �b�"4:�:-: FEH�ESIGN � Betschn>sao.arss ' � �� FIVE FLAGS C E N T E R f� DUBUQUE `� IOWA Memorandum Date: January 12, 2018 To: Marie Ware, Director Leisure Services From: H.R. Cook, General Manager ��,' Five Flags Center c�� l Subject: Proposed Arena Design and Potential Shows Per our discussion, I have reviewed of the proposed design plan which included, seating size and configuration, low roof steel rigging capacities and our market. Based upon the design, a review of our market and previous inquiries from agents regarding Dubuque, I created a list of events that realistically could be held at Five Flags Center. These events are in addition to the current menu of events that we currently host. As we have discussed in the past, trying to predict what events will be popular in the future and be supported in our community is like looking into a crystal ball. The concerts listed are based upon the latest Pollstar Concert Hotwire Top 100 tours as of November 2018 and current shows touring in SMG facilities in North America. The family and sporting events are events that we can pursue and have a good chance of hosting based upon our infrastructure of amenities in the community and support system of Travel Dubuque and the Hotel/Motel Association. Family Entertainment: • Feld Entertainment Marvel Universe Live! • Cirque du Soliel • Trans-Siberian Orchestra • Game of Thrones Live in Concert • Stars on Ice • Harry Potter in Concert 405 Mnw Sr, Du¢ucZue IA 52001 � 5G3-589-4254 I Pnx 563-589-4351 I www.FivEF�ncSCF�TeaCOM � Sporting Events: • NCAA Division II and III Basketball and Wrestling Tournaments • NAIAWrestlingChampionships • JuniorWrestingTournaments • National Cheerleading Championships • National Dance Championships Concerts and other Live Entertainment: • Elton John • Keith Urban • AlanJackson • Jason Derulo • Barry Manilow • Alabama • Fall Out Boy • Scorpion • Toby Mac • Gabriellglesias • Steve Miller Band • Rob Zombie • The Avett Brother • 311 • Alice Cooper • Bare Naked Ladies • Brian Adams • Jim Gaffigan • Jack White • Bob Segar Again, this is a sample of events that will fit into the arena being conceptualized, a ticket buying market the size of Dubuque and/or meeting the bid qualifications. Should you have any further questions or inquiries, please feel free to contact me directly. �� M S/4 Memo To: Gus Psihoyos, PE, City Engineer, City of Dubuque From: Ben Wilkinson, PE and Brian Huibregtse Subject: Five Flags Center—5th Street Closure Date: November 29, 2018 At the request of the City of Dubuque, MSA Professional Services, Inc. (MSA) completed a preliminary impact assessment for a potential closure of 5th Street between Main Street and Locust Street in downtown Dubuque. The purpose of the potential closure is due to a proposal to expand the Five Flags Center. A complete Traffic Impact Study is recommended when more details of the proposed development is known. This memorandum will assist with determining the study area for the Traffic Impact Study. Data Collection The City of Dubuque provided weekday AM and PM turning movement traffic counts at 15 intersections on November 8, 2018 along the 3�d Street, 4th Street and 5th Street corridors (See Exhibit 1). 3�d Street & Bluff Street 4th Street & Bluff Street 5th Street & Bluff Street 3�d Street & Locust Street 4th Street & Locust Street 5th Street & Locust Street 3�d Street & Main Street 4th Street & Main Street 5th Street & Main Street 4th Street & lowa Street 5th Street & lowa Street 4th Street & Central Avenue 5th Street & Central Avenue 4th Street &White Street 5th Street &White Street Traffic counts were also obtained by the City on November 15 while 5th Street was closed for an event at the Five Flags Center. Those counts were obtained for the 3�d Street and Main Street intersection and along the 9th Street corridor from White Street to Bluff Street. The counts at 3�d Street & Main Street collected during the closure assisted with determining the magnitude of the impacts during the normal PM peak (4PM — 5PM), but were likely impacted while a train was blocking 5th Street for 45 of the 60 minutes in the peak hour. The train blocking traffic likely changed the characteristics of the normal daily traffic, but is a regular occurrence that also needs to be considered. 5th Street Corridor Assessment As part of this preliminary impact assessment, MSA reviewed existing traffic volumes during the AM and PM weekday peak hour and intersection control types to better understand how the network is currently 2901 I NTERNATIONAL LAN E,SU ITE 300,MADISON,W I 537043133 P(608�242-7779 •TF(800�446-0679 • F(608�242-5664 W W W.MSA-PS.COM Page 1 of 3 \\msa-ps.com\8\Prolects\490s\492\004920J0\TrafFc\Sth Street Corritlor Memo_Final2tlocx MEMO November 28, 2018 used. See Exhibit 1 showing the existingtraffic volumes, locations oftraffic signals and net gain and loss between intersections. The differences in numbers between the intersections were used to assess the number of trips with a destination or origin along the corridor. Using this information, MSA developed maps showing potential alternative routes for traffic affected by the closure for the AM and PM weekday traffic. See Exhibits 2 and 3 for expected routes for eastbound and westbound Sth Street traffic that will divert to other routes. A series of observations and assumptions were used when generating the possible alternative route maps including: • Daily traffic along the Sth Street corridor appears to be primarily traffic with an origin or destination along Sth Street. These trips appear to primarily be traveling to or from downtown parking ramps or other locations within the corridor. It appears that limited through traffic is using the Sth Street corridor. • Due to the roadway characteristics of Main St and lowa St, these roads act more as local streets than collector streets and would likely not facilitate through traffic as efficiently without some geometric and control changes. • The expected traffic diversions are based on perceived easiest routes for traffic to getto expected destinations. • Based on the observation that most traffic using Sth Street does not travel along the entire corridor, it is unlikely that the traffic will divert to 9th Street. The traffic is more likely to divert to adjacent streets. o Traffic moving westbound on Sth Street will likely divert to 4th Street or 3� Street if the ultimate destination is Bluff Street. o It does not appear that much traffic is traveling westbound from beyond White Street on Sth Street and then turning northbound on Locust Street. The traffic making that movement during the PM peak hour is likely coming from the parking ramps or other downtown locations. The assumption is that traffic with an ultimate destination west on 9th Street will use White Street as there are less traffic signals and better overall traffic flow alongthat corridor. The traffic counts also appear to support that assumption as the numbers grow moving westbound along the Sth Street corridor after lowa Street. Traffic originating along Sth Street will likely divert to 4th Street and back to Locust Street, or travel northbound along lowa Street. • There is a significant amount of AM peak hour traffic traveling northbound on Locust Street and turning eastbound on Sth Street. Most of that traffic appears to have a destination along Sth Street as shown with the 102 vehicles lost between Main Street and lowa Street. This traffic will likely divert to other routes adjacent to Sth Street. Since little of that traffic is moving all the way through the corridor, it is expected that the traffic making that movement will turn eastbound on either 3�d Street or 4th Street and use Main Street or lowa Street to get to the parking structures. • There is a nominal amount of southbound Bluff Street traffic turning eastbound onto Sth Street. Traffic currently making that movement is likely to divert to 4th Street or 3�d Street. If their Page 2 of 3 \\msa-ps.com\fs\Projects\490s\492\00492070\Traffic\Sth Street Corridor Memo Final2.docx MEMO November 28, 2018 destination is a location along Sth Street,the traffic may divert to 8th Street or 9th Street and then to Main Street or lowa Street. • Events at the Five Flags Center are unlikely to have a large effect on the normal peak hour traffic. • Events at the Port of Dubuque are unlikely to cause significant traffic issue due to the Sth Street closure. However, event traffic should be further evaluated by obtaining traffic counts during an event at the Port of Dubuque along the Sth Street and 3� Street corridors. After making the observations shared above, the potential magnitude of traffic diverted is shown in Exhibits 4 and 5. The primary routes affected by the Sth Street closure are likely to be the 3�d Street and 4th Street corridors along with Main Street and lowa Street between 3� Street and Sth Street. Secondary affects along 8th Street and 9th Street between Bluff Street and lowa Street may also occur. Conclusion While it may be feasible to close the desired section of Sth Street to accommodate the development, MSA strongly recommends additional detailed study to verify impacts and unanticipated consequences of the proposed closure. Based on the existing information collected and provided to MSA, it is anticipated that the closure of Sth Street between Main Street and Locust Street will have an adverse effect on the operation of other nearby intersections. When details for the future expansion of the Five Flags Center are known, a full Traffic Impact Study should be conducted followingthe guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies provided bythe City of Dubuque. A possible scope for that study is included in Attachment A. It is also known that there have been discussions of conversion to two-way streets in the central business district. That conversion would have significant impacts on traffic in the downtown and should be considered as part of the analysis conducted for the Five Flags Center. Page 3 of 3 \\msa-ps.com\fs\Projects\490s\492\00492070\Traffic\Sth Street Corridor Memo Final2.docx .N�a�NS� N w� �O �2 � �� ''; � l � ,,-, O �G � �,� #'« � � � � �• `r� � s � '\\ � � � 't� � V � 6`,�p1� � � � /L1��`,�23� N S� �r� \ � F S �N• S T 'I ro �� r `�1� � � y y T c� ✓✓�'� �9� �5� h �' o � � � `13� `r`r r'u'u, � 16` k�2 9k�J1 ��,� � �� O � �'''3 �`ti15� V/ �`Ik 29 � �6,�'�✓ �, � �' � 1� � `31� �9 � � '� 6, o�'�� 3`2� �`kl�� ,ti0�� 51 � � N G� �,� � � �`k2.� 0,30>1\ o E,41 �� -�, /C,5�9� tilk� 1� � �1�.`39,1371 k o � 6,�N S �✓ ��`2 k3p /�1��, \�p✓ '� �` �I•1. � � �,o � 9`35� 6� 2� f �,�� 6., k� �' ✓ u� �� -10 2� �� ✓ ,l 6` y �i `ka� `13� 6� 1`�� o�6,� � �'� �;' O u� � Ik9�3 k ✓✓ �. �� 5�N S � `2�6 '�l �✓`, �� u'c,r'�,�\ � � a �, ► 3�`�2� �N• � � d, � O k k �C•'I� 9�J `�y � �/ , �C' 2a`ti6ti�9 `2� � �r'`r u� �✓ ✓ �`�f 1�`Ik� ` �1 �� `�9�� I � '� � � k2� � ✓�✓ `'✓ ,l � �1 6�' �,k3�j� 'c^ � �i . � � � ` `12, 1�9� � � � � � 3�'`� � v-�', ,� �., � � . �'�/ �. � � �:�_ � �� a�2�10� 6� � � �'35�3 � ✓ � /G�`11� � � �-�N S�� `5��16'�/ / m ��- � ;�` �i = � � ��✓ c, �`1 ,1a � � �,"'�� . �� a�� 9`�� l `A� „ . ,+ � x � �� i � k�3 12� ,l�� ✓ `��, 2`12� k36`9� �1� � �*''�j �� , � k9� a� � ✓ � �G ,� ✓ ,� �1 k9 �u� 1 ,+ ��1 , �. 1 � O � � � � �� i ��.� � ��\ � � � �Za�60 � � c� u'�, � �k3 11k�1� � �✓'l� ,�� `� � , _ O �. � `, V/ �. 30 � ✓ _ f. I y .: -�, .�N S�' � k 1a� � VI � `63�� ,�� S`' '.' ! u� `. �. /�1 � � , � � `1��,'I .y � '� ��. � ��12�.3�3�k 3� � �o "��'�� O � r - . `ti � ��6� 'I ��'✓ �' � � \ k� �k `32�11��1 �� `� � o � � 1 �� .�� ,u's �, 1`�� O.� �.� � � �'36�3 � x��' �C.3`�'a, Ik� 3��S� m / ✓ � � � � �,5 ,1 �1 � �� ti1 �•l• ��'7� �` /� � � � ✓ � 1� Ik ` � u� �r� � � � a` Q .� •�"�`-�`.�r �.�w�l°.��`_ �'� �i '' k5 I � 6� � � ��, �� L��' �1� _ � - F.�' ` ,r � �`k5� 9.�3 6� �� 6� � " ROS� �� 1 �-�N S�� `16�1 �X '� ✓ � � � � �: r�1 '�� N � 26, � � � � � 3 � ,.► s �'� /C,12� titi3� 3� �1 �`'u, ' - `5� 3�y � � �2�` k6 k g,� � ��6, , r �.9� ✓ t�`6� 9.�3p J� ✓ �� O `' �y; , 3 4 ��/ � �� .� �� `�6� �► �Z��o�ti3 .� � 51 _�� -_ � �� u� �'�r� � ��,'I�'� ,11� �1 �s�` `�,2�� J, ✓ ✓ ,� 2 �. � �o �,� � ��d � �23�2� 39�2� � r � �✓ . � � � 3��S�. ` `��6,�� G � �'� ,� �, � � , LEGEND �' `r� XX =AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES(7:00 AM-8:00 AM) `r� [XX]=PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES(4:00 PM-5:00 PM) 111��$ � � +XX =NET TRAFFIC VOLUME GAIN BETWEEN INTERSECTIONS �'-� �`�1�''a lG� '� '..� '' �p -XX =NETTRAFFICVOLUME LOSS BETWEEN INTERSECTIONS s� � y O=PARKING RAMP �, . ,r� � S�(. ;� O=EVENT VENUE � 3��S'C ��ZNO \ �1• =EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION � � � Exhibit 1: Existing 2018 Traffic Volumes ✓ � �.tio�NS�� o N � , ��NS.�, y �� :�,�-p. . , �� ,"y � ,� � 2 1 � . I►'>' 2� c� 1 '-,�"� � 0 � �� s � o y� 9�N S� � ��N S�. e �� .ti��NS�� e , � _ � ,._.. � �2 �� `� - s� � ��, � ,,��. �� «� r� =-� r ..f�. `r'� $.�NS�• '� �t�i�A � `7: 4� � e � . . �� `. �,. .�. .,I. „tY'� ;� � '.�\ � o � , ` �� . . �. �'� 51 � � �otijM�R ��,. 'I-�NS� %�ST - O R Q � �� ' � � �.� y � e � � s� O 2 T R R w 'o �� S�' _ .. g F FRy�R. � � � �.6�N � .,3 _•��' �� ,'�� O J'� � 4.. - * 9v,, � � � \ � r, �i � : . - ,� ; �.; e �� = � � �� F� �� r . , ;.. � a ��.�NS� � � F F, � � � �` t 1� � �o � STtis . � � � � T �<� f �� ' � \ \ � SN�NG��N � O �' . '''� � ,!� ��' �,.. i/ � �P e PR� E.4�N 5�' f � T �� N•6�NS� �, , � � ,� = � f; 0 0 �` ��, , �, � -� ,�, f %' ; � �" ' � . � 'a•. � � e � o� �� l�� _ F STy �� NS�� F`v �.''��1,� �.�i `� ST �: �• O , `r� `N'�'� O 2��-o I ��'� o�\. ' E , �NS-(. `[` v// �,� ` � \ !/ � I Y ` 5 C� ,► 1� ,,,� �r�'" � � +� � � � O � � `` •�,A o. /", �� /a.x. � �� o t� ,:'i EN�'N � ' ��1' �y► � �' MP�� 3Ro S.�. m F�,OS `r•. ` �� .. �N• = R T + � �� `� LEGEND W � � `-' � �� =ANTICIPATED NEW EASTBOUND c oQ�RQ�.• �o e � TRAFFIC ROUTES o Za ` � . "� � � ._ � QP =PARKING RAMP .� '�-: � � �� O =EVENT VENUE G�, 51 � � , . . ,} �� . �3RQS�• �� t�'=�� ; � =EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION _ � `� ,� �N��pNe�" � NaS-�. �� ' ' _`� � �. I� -PROPOSED ROADWAY CLOSURE F `N'2 `r� _ � , �'�� l �.,. 6s �� . ! �' �/ � � .,i� Exhibit 2: Sth Street Eastbound Routes ✓ � �.tio�NS�� o N � , ��NS.�, y �� :�,�-p. . , �� ,"y � ,� � 2 1 � . I►'>' 2� c� 1 '-,�"� � Q � �s � � v� ��N S.�. e � �� N tio�NS� � ,� , \ � - � �,_ .. i �2 a' �y`' - s� � �'�, � ,��. �� «� r� =-� r ..f�. `r'� $.�NS�• '� �t�i�A � `7: 4� � e � . . �� `. �,. .�. .,I. „tY'� ;� � '.�\ ` ��G O 'f T � , ti �'� 51 � � �otijM�R ��,. 'I-�NS� %�ST - O R Q � E� '_ b` �' , S�(. � � ��$�N O 2� T R R w �p �� S�• g F FRy�R. � � � �.6�N � .,3 ��' �� ,'�� , 4� - 9v,,yy ♦ � ' �� .T_+''' 7';�I�°� � • e F� � � r �'i-• � � a ��.�NS�• � F F, �`� � � �` t 1� � �o � STtis . � � � �' � T �<' � �� . � � � � �_�� PS,��PG� `r� QO � . � �,� �� .. G e R E 4�N 5�' f '' T T s� �•6�NS'( , � ,� = 0 f; � O �- � ,�, ,, � � - �� /i f.,'� ;% I 'I ' -- o� �� l�� F STy -- ti C'� �5-�N� � 2�� ST , S v �.''��I,� �i,.�i `� , �: Q � ��'� o��. � . S� �2 �'/Y � �N 1 �� , , �� ,. `.�� , ,�- 0 � � �� Q , �; =.a o , ` • '' �� .. � � � N• , „ .i . ' � � EN� � � �''► MP�� 3Ro S.�. m F�,OS `r•. ` �� .. � = R T '}� �►� �� # � � � " �� `� / �'�.; LEGEND �� f t' �=ANTICIPATED NEW EASTBOUND �opQERP� �02 � � : �•, TRAFFIC ROUTES ° � � � '�": � � OP =PARKING RAMP � y��`�;, . .� � 51 ��'� '-y�,} O =EVENT VENUE .ti ��: '� ' � =EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION � . - �' � ,.� F�NE��Ne� � 2NoS�' �� ,n'�� ._1 � 6�� =PROPOSED ROADWAY CLOSURE �N• s� ` � 'Y � �. � I� � = �\ ,. < <' J �.i ' � '�� Exhibit 3 : Sth Street Westbound Routes �•a�NS� O � ,,,� �2 N � � �� l , O �G ,�� ' ,� � � GL �� •� •,` �` � T v �� . s � �N•��N S � r F ST S �o � ti T �G � � � J`� i" � � S� O '► �1 � �/ 51. G� �,� � E q.1N s� � 6�N S� /C� �� - � � � �•��NS� •� `{ . � I 1► 1' O � � '' � O � � ' � , a/'' `� � � I ♦ �: �,,� � �:� � / . , i ♦ , - � G J� '�I Y�a � ' , 5-� � � ��f� .�;�� It , � 5�`� h� -�. �� ,�� , `N' � ��NS / 2�� 1 � �+i O . � 1 � �. . .� , �' �_ - 2 � �/� � i'r�i<• r�., O � ('1 *- ��)� y� �. r {` � � �� . � I�1 \�` . � A � -,. r I., .�� ` ^ O `\ r :�• � �� , � ��,yI� : � .�`�,. v � � FLO S� O� '� 1 � �� . _ ' `� S�. ��i o, i �•�' Q �*f �` ;� • -�N y• . �• = F � � �!�'.. ��= � �i �.� � JR # � W p �.T O ��T`�� `J p ' �� `S\ � 1 � �1 ♦ � � `'�.�, LEGEND � � O � U=0-25 ADDED TRIPS �� T �l 51 � ❑=25-50 ADDED TRIPS � � � ,;, 2 � =50-75 ADDED TRIPS ��' QS�� "i `r�, =75-100 ADDED TRIPS � 3� � '� . �p � «, �=100-150 ADDED TRIPS � � �=150-200 ADDED TRIPS s � J',, � �=200-250 ADDED TRIPS , � O =PARKING RAMP \�� G� �. �� : �� -� � O =EVENT VENUE � S�(. �� =EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION � � �C• N� � 3�OS �,2 � �' =PROPOSED ROADWAY CLOSURE � � � Exhibit 4: Projected AM Peak Hour Volume Increase By Block �NS-� Q ` � N � � �''# O � ``\2 � � �' � � � l � O �G ,�� ,� � � GL �� ,,.� ,� ' � � 2 �s� /� �. ,r � � ,�,r S � I F ST �N � ' � tis ro � T c�G � �: � s� � � s� O � G� �* E q.1N5�' T � �� s� � 6'C`�`S� /` - � �• � �,�N S�• /� •� � : �1• I � � � �� T O � � '' � O � ' � � , a/'' `� � � I ♦ � : :.� �,.�� Vr � ` ' � �� , - � �'� �� : . , 5-� � � ��f� .�;�� It , � �.�,�,� ��. �� i, � �``--. �, � ��`� , �� 1 � � i , O � 1 a � .� ��` �. . 2 � - � � .��.�<. , :_ r`.. O ('1 � ��)� y� �. {` � � �� . � � ��/ \•`/� . � P A \ - > r ', ja� - O / r � � � \ :�� Q � , ,yI 7 .��e � , �► '� ! � � ,, - � �p S�' m �� ..�, � _ � <o S-(. � � o � i �'�' Q -'�+� �` '�►:;� �A��- .: � �'(N v,� � ,• 2 F � � � � ' � p �R� �,�t '� -� � — � � , sT � � `��; � � � LEGEND ..� � ` O � � =0-25 ADDED TRIPS � � �� ❑=25-50 ADDED TRIPS �� =50-75 ADDED TRIPS � +. 2 �pS�' � �`r� =75-100 ADDED TRIPS � 3 r� , � � =100-150 ADDED TRIPS �J, � � � �=150-200 ADDED TRIPS � �- � �=200-250 ADDED TRIPS 6, O =PARKING RAMP �`� G� �. �� : �� ,.� � O =EVENT VENUE � �� =EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION � � N�S� � 3�OS'�• �,2 � �N• =PROPOSED ROADWAY CLOSURE � � � � Exhibit 5: Projected PM Peak Hour Volume Increase By Block PROPOSED TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY SCOPE OF SERVICES The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the Five Flags Center development should follow the guidelines and procedures outlined in the City of Dubuque Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies which includes consideration for additional traffic due to the expansion of the site. The following text provides supplemental scope considerations for any possible traffic impact study for the development. Study Area The proposed study area for the TIS is separated into two categories. The primary areas affected by the Sth Street closure are likely to be the 3� Street and 4th Street corridors along with Main Street and lowa Street between 3� Street and Sth Street. The secondary area is along 8th Street and 9th Street between Bluff Street and lowa Street. The secondary study area includes the intersections that are likely to see some increase in traffic but with limitedimpacts. Reviewofthesecondarystudyareashouldbefurtherconsideredifother changes in the downtown are anticipated that would influence those locations (such as the conversion to two-way streets). Primary Study Area Sth Street & Bluff Street 4thStreet & Locust Street Sth Street & Locust Street 4th Street & Main Street Sth Street & Main Street 4th Street & lowa Street Sth Street & lowa Street 4th Street & Central Avenue Sth Street & Central Avenue 3� Street & Bluff Street Sth Street & White Street 3� Street & Locust Street 4th Street & Bluff Street 3� Street & Main Street Secondary Study Area 9th Street & Bluff Street 9th Street & White Street 9th Street & Locust Street 8th Street & Bluff Street 9th Street & Main Street 8th Street & Locust Street 9th Street & lowa Street 8th Street & Main Street 9th Street & Central Avenue 8th Street & lowa Street ATTACHMENT A 1 Traffic Counts While existing traffic counts have already been provided for most of the study area, additional counts are needed and it is recommended that vehicle turning movement counts be collected on a typical weekday (Tuesday through Thursday) duringthe AM and PM peak hours at the selected study area intersections. The counts should collected on a weekday with a typical schedule (no special events, etc.) and average, precipitation free weather conditions. All counts should be collected on the same day or week if possible, which may require re-counting some of the intersections. It is also recommend that vehicle turning movement counts be collected while special events are being held in the downtown area. Those special counts should be coordinated with City of Dubuque traffic staff and may include events at the Five Flags Center,the Millwork or Main Street areas, the Port of Dubuque, etc. Counts should begin 2-hours before the start of the event and continue for at least 1-hour after completion ofthe event at the selected study area intersections. Analysis Afull traffic model ofthe study area should be created to determine ifthe existingtraffic control is adequate or will require changes. Analysis should include special events as coordinated with the City of Dubuque traffic staff. Analysis should consider typical conditions for AM and PM peak hours with and without the closure of Sth Street. Event traffic is likely to overlap with PM peak hour traffic and should be accounted for after considering typical PM traffic diversions and growth. Weekend traffic should be considered at the discretion of the city traffic engineer. ATTACHMENT A 2 THE CTTY OF Dubuque �" ui��eNe�ary DUB E 'il��i;' Masterpiece on the Mississippi Z°°' Z°'Z 2013 2017 CRENNA M . BRUMWELL , ESQ. CITY ATTORNEY TO: MAYOR ROY D. BUOL AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL DATE: NOVEMBER 2, 2018 RE: FIVE FLAGS REFERENDUM TIMELINE I have looked into the timeline related to referendum issues under lowa law. Special elections must be held on a Tuesday. lowa Code, section 39.2(4) provides the following dates for a public measure via special election: First Tuesday in March First Tuesday in May First Tuesday in August Day of General Election Day of the regular city election Day of a special election held to fill a vacancy in the same city. A referendum for the issuance of bonds for a general corporate purpose is governed by lowa Code, sections 75.1 and 384.26 (2-4). A special election cannot be scheduled until the County Auditor receives a copy of the action by the City Council calling for the special election. lowa Code, section 47.6(3) requires the applicable County official have notice from the City forty-six (46) days prior to the date the referendum vote. Using the first Tuesday in May as a possible date of a special election/referendum vote the time line looks like this working backwards: May 7, 2019: Special Election March 22, 2019: Ballot Deadline for County March 18, 2019: Last City Council Meeting before ballot deadline OFFICE OF THE CITYATTORNEY DUBUQUE, IOWA SUITE 330, HARBOR VIEW PLACE, 300 MAIN STREET DUBUQUE, IA 52001-6944 TELEPHONE (563)589-4381 /Fnx (563)583-1040/Ennni� cbrumwel@cityofdubuque.org January — March: City staff prepares factual information related to scope, cost, and impact of project on taxes, city staff presents to groups upon request, city staff responds to questions. Information widely distributed to the public via mailings, social media, city website, cable television, and other media sources. January 7, 2019: Recommendation City Council initiate discussion of ballot language if City Council intends to initiate a special election related to the issuance of general obligation bonds for a project at the Five Flags Center. Ideally, if a special election will be held on the issuance of general obligation bonds related to the Five Flags Center the City would provide the ballot language to the County further in advance of the forty-six (46) days prior to the vote. This allows a coordinated effort by staff to prepare factual information for the public, and any committees organized related to the referendum, on the impacts of the project in advance of the election date to ensure voters have the facts, have proper time to review the information, and can reach an informed decision. If you have any questions please let me know. Thank you. 2 Phase 2 Planning for an Expanded / Improved Five Flags Civic Center , - December 17, 2018 �� ,,,�; - , ,, 'If{f-c'I-Il�)f- / ��... DUB E f7 �� ., , - � � / Ada:�rr�ii��rr�nrt tlr� 1�1r•i•:i��E�i -T� r / � -_ _ ; �r� _ � �- SPORTS ONS � ' - S f ,_ ` _ ��{ . Q- -__�-- _ _r_ I� LEISURE� � � . -� _ �� ■ �' - -- , - - � _ _ � � �! __ -_ � - � � - f _ - , ; . � � -_,:,: � — ' � � �KY�� __ - -- . . � .� r = , � ��-:. ._ . a': �,. _ us' �, -t' ,•. �� "' � - --", __ — - � #�� — �t7 1� r: - �• - _ � � - � xi^: � { a r'.��At�,i„ �t?� `` ]rl �� , i.� j 1 _"`� i_ ' ;_ ' —. ' � T��.,�'. .r�►�� q • , � � -1 I�f �\ � � � \ � I 1' 'p.�-c. - � _ r � � i � � .� i - a - _ _ � � ,. _ -� � �� w - � - � � _ _ = , — �.�� v . ��`�`` � � .�, i ��R - s tl �'= r - , � � - � r. ` � i..- q�_ _._. _ . � ;� �1 _ _ _-_ �� — i t�� . �� _ . • � �� . � , • 2017/2018 Five Flags Civic Center (FFCC) Study: PREVIOUS 1 . FFCC long-served as an important community asset 2. Quality of life would be negatively-impacted without facilities WORK serving these roles 3. FFCC Theater should be protected 4. FFCC location is ideal 5. FFCCArena has exceeded its practical life, functionality/marketability substandard 6. Demand exists to protect/grow FFCC business with investment 7. Highest-and-best-use for FFCC is multipurpose event complex 8. Identified and analyzed scenarios: • Scenario 1 — Status Quo • Scenario 2 — Limited Renovation • Scenario 3 — Theater Renovation + Arena Expansion • Scenario 4 — Theater Renovation + New Arena Construction RBetschFswci,,;e, � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� 2 , • 2018 Phase 2 Planning: SCOPE OF ' 1 month timeframe • Scenario 4 focus: CURRENT • New6,000-seatArena P LAN N I N G • Renovated Theater EFFORT ' Purpose of further concept investigation, evaluation and definition: 1 . Enhanced programmatic and architectural detail 2. Refinements and more detailed estimates of likely construction costs 3. Further analysis of parking issues 4. Updated cost/benefit analysis 5. Evaluation of funding issues and options • Collaboration with a large number of local and national stakeholders and industry professionals • Core objective was to advance the concept and narrow the understanding of costs RBetschFswci,,;e, � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� 3 ' FFCC ARENA FFCC THEATER RE F I N E D ' Designed to fit the historic context. • Renovated lobby in the existing FFCC. • 6,000 seat capacity (full floor event). • New elevator access to the theater PROG RAM • 6,398 seat capacity (end-stage concert). balconies. E LE M E NTS � Enhanced ADA accessibility and • Enhanced patron amenities including elevator service. increased toilet facilities, family toilets, • Premium seating, including club seats, and improved concession offerings. loge boxes, private suites, and club • Enhanced ADA accessibility to main lounge. entrance. • Enhanced patron amenities, including • Exterior brick and stone repairs. increased toilet facilities, family toilets, • Interior wall repair and painting. and improved concession offerings. • Theater flyrail replacement and rigging • Improved sponsorship opportunities. enhancements. • Enhanced Wi-Fi and technology • Exterior window and door replacement. capabilities. • Black box improvements. • Improved backstage and support • Renovation of existing building into facilities. theater support spaces. • Enhanced rigging height and capability. • Improved stage and lobby lighting. RBetschFswci,,;e, � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� 4. PROJECT � �. �� _ n }�. ��; ��,�.,�-„,,.. ,� � .rT` _- -.: ��+:��r"°,,.."� ^:J .,3 S ITE ��=: �� fi � ��. �- ! ' b ��F `�..' �yl sC u, �,s � . ; . k � .. . � .� _ _ , , , � . -� ". ,ca: �.=� _�,,,,,,, �,�� ,: - -. �.n�`�- -. " , ._ .;... �i � ��' V�'��j—`- �� .r � �,�.-��:. ., �ili ..... . V' +i� ��'`' . !-'` ��F��s� L � , ,Y" � � . - . �. I 'i .�'.. ., ,, ��.r ��, ��' ` � � - .,� � �� :'� — ' - rsr, t°� ^'G' � I��r� % �� "� r '�' .� � '..� � ._��` • .L ' � � a-� �� , �i�,i �,rr- �"� ( : � r �� 1 � � 'a +a_ � ��,� - � � � � _ - _ `n'f�-`�� '�� . • � � � " _ _ �� -� 'r '- _ ��tr.� - �' /�41u - - , --`� q I ♦ + ii � �N. ` � �� I �� %11 ��I • �y�. , �� /� p �� /�� '�` �. . '�e . ` �i � �� _ �\ a�Y+ '^'� — �r�y '�' �"<S �-. ,,�• ,,� _ - -.; — `F � � „�il. , �..�., �� - � - ' i► �— "` � • - `. - .a.. � � ,.,,,� - _ . 1 �. �� - Y d� �' _ k� '_'_AI�,�!� `` � '_-___ 1'3�!v> i� , '� �\ ry - �� a - - Y � �\\ _ �,.� >^� ` __� _3 ..Yj�".,_ �� r�ll�� V ' �.�\ , • ` . .y. ' . ,! �,, . .�,. ` i� ,�+ ` '1 �I . � t. . , � ,l a . � t _ •JY'J,� � ' ` \� '% :_� - Y� � ' � " . l . S/� ' _ - t � � � '?� Y�' _� � ��_ ^� �� w� � • . � � \ � � r� �'y� �i�� ` V� � _ . � =� f - `� `s- -. � Betsch .,,:_:.'�s • • • Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN 5. . - PROPOSED - µ: ��:� � . . . � �� i� ��,�i,, ; _ _ �.. �'�"'�'�„�„�.a.,. ,�, I � .�,.� ; _ .—� .� '� _x ,�i,`;L; � — �`,i� P" �r - a, � � _ FFCC �� —� � : - . , - . � �� k . '' .r"-r-.a,. � a�� Y.. � .��' .la` . ARE NA . � �,� ��.� F� .�. e, _ .,; _ - - .._..,�,�, � , , �� _'�p __ � - 5�11 � *.� .9 ' '�� uT " � -\. ..w1 . �fi�' .. _ � �a� � P �� i '�.�.'1� � � r a . . u' � � � �-� _ � � �� '�� •:� � ��.� �r �� i u'{ �� N�� \b i � :� ,�S-ifi= � �.4 " 1� � ,.�....1 ,. � - � y i �•��*�. � '��J��6U�-� 'p P j �� 1 - . �' n � �... - �a .� � i = — ,,_��, J � ,., ._ �' , e ._�- �,„„„a �� .� " n - n � �' a, � , ��. .s �� . �� is „ n ' ��.,\. � . �r� ' � +. � t a��i • j �� ji �� .n q..., � y� - �. � �, � � �� . �� r` � �� F ,� s � i � R,. - = . . � '" � �� y� � ��q' . � � t - S`� .. i�\� _ �� Q� I'�i�ii'I.i��.. �. ` �S' C =a _ ��J, . �', ` M � r rX;.. _�'"�.. �� 9 ° - _ � � � � \. ai� L � .. , -� � r,. .. ' _ \ ' « Y � . \l � � rqW' � ? 4 fr.��v < ' '� -' _ . � z �`�.� - - �,.�ti� _�,� �'J`-- � � .. �.r k . ��' � � -.- - s _'-_ - - Y �M � . ,�� '_` � . - �j��V `\\ �.';s .t,�. ,��._�� .'� �- n �.l� s � Z , ,�� '4= ? � �17 ��T _ ' r�T3=v .�� - �� . _ y a ` •�s ' � � ' i � � J' , y' � �� . . �- a� • _ 4 �T •� _ �'� _ � � t.�-,_ � w, , �. � � ~�/�. �!7.. � � ` -'\- , -�i �. ��I �,I�1�� -. .. .� _-.,! �• ..i_ � _ � Betsch_.,,: :.::; • • • Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN 6. ARE NA ,; , ENTRANCE ,; , �.sr �:, �.,� :� �.. �' �k.� � ... �} r-.� � r ; I _� � �'' _ -;�� E I [ � ' � __ � I _�; __i ,y, �` . I _ � � � �f I „F I6H, - � �I,�_ � � , � ,,>'-�� .- ' � �T� _ -_-„ � p �IIII Y� .:K `4 . .. � �:I� _ � � ,�.� y ' � �� ' 1 -- __� ��' � - ��0. � � �a' � __. � � � _ , , � � F � e a_ - . � I. , �. �; _ , . ' . , � �` �°� Y'�=�_ ;� '� -'0� * `"�� ' � - — _ � � ` �_ _ '�- � � � BBtSCh%;ssooz;es �'�' � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN 7 . ARE NA � LOBBY � i� � �-� � � ; -- ' � - � �1� � � � ' �I�r�., � � �� -� - _ _ � i � e : �� w �� — - _ � — — - i . �' �� x � .� � � � � , ' � ' l s � �� '� „ , :. . �_ �� I � � �� 'r�� W��, e � � �� , --� .. , � � � - lb. '" I �' . .f � � � ��' ��_ � � � '� • "h � � �,� ��i � �� '�� ,\ � #,� � '.� _ _ �1 -� � i i �� sa- � ""�-!_= � 1 _ � � BetschAssoaates �'•• � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN 8 �� _ . �� ARENA � ��:� �� CONCOURSE � �`,, = {;� _ � i ,_ , � _ ::, ; _ � ' , _. � �• � � �F ,�, � ��' � � � � � - �/ �= � I � � � __ __� ��"/ � � tB * �7 � �� ' ..a. =, , -� . 1 z �,�, !�"�=�j �._�. . � � .. i — � _ . � . ,' +�.� o 'e� —�- �,� .. �� I 5 _��' i � � l. � I � �I �� '�' `-.�'� � _ � � n r� �� P° ;�, � � �� ^�� i � :.' �� \� �/E--� 7 4 "t� �� :��J ' i � ; �'� '� � � � -�'�'• �'� � ��""1 i W � _ � = � - , : s.- ; � � �� -� � � � � �� — � — � — . ,� �� Y � � BBtSCh%;ssooz;es �'�' � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN • - � - , � � � - - , � - ,-_�_ '-- ,� " ___ i � � - �� . - rr ' , r a�� _.�� .., � _� a � �� ' TIi�4F``.. � '�1� .,. _ � - - = :: �"`�.:.. _ _ , ; ,�: rr _ . ,,. _ �� ° /1'��,,,�t �-- � . . fl6p�� +�• , � - � — ��. �� rn�r�1 �T� l � � . _ �u� .. i � „: � � ,�� (!�/� . .. . 1 _1 . �. � � � ri �� 7t 'V � � - � �"v�. II�� J .,�> ,. __ � ,�.....rnn�� `"� . -i- f.1 '�tiYT'�T}, ��.`t � �,, ; 1r � � ; , �� \�� t . � t(r�� `{ �'�' \ �.��'' '��,�� -w y � �� y � �� ■. " ` � � a ' a . � � a .��•• ,n.�� r ' . . . :1�� '1 �`•1 , ,^',r��1 .� r�, -.. r � -� �• ,••,, ^•^''Y,1 „'.11' ,� • r ` '• ` •,`- �i � !1�� •y�t �s��,u �n�� .,��,�■ �y N'. -v�� 1�lt 44�6 uU4y ��''1 'y� � "�r* r _i a ■ V. '� �r��• ��. �Vp 4D4 Y�� q�r � r��y�� ..,�, .nY,i�,� � ��• Q� ti • � � �. y U . �s� n�,,,,,, ^r�� l1.�1, /� �� •�� •�� ,��`�� 4�yV ,�U, i7�.�,i � ��4''l�r . "/+ � �•� � `.` --� V� I,�� ,��,��*��,��;�*�;.� � ��r1�r�u��F�U��yn�"n� , �n.�, ! ; _ 1, 1' �, 1, 1\` \� 1� � . � � �. 1 �+� 1,,1`` � \`�� .� � � � CS�NVRE,NI,STICNS /^'( ` . � � � � � i � � � � T ��L 10 . �- CLUB ► I < � � � ` �� LOUNGE �� ,��l�� -�s � _� -� � � - � �- �� T � �i " y� � F �� ,;,,- ! � � �_.r*.±s�ewwre� `---t � — �� — � — �!� � I ��' �` � W � � _ �� r _— =�d, ,. , G ,�� " ' � � � r , , , i , .: .�-_ � . o� � -f „� - -, _ 1.:,: � _ � �- �" - � � �_� �; , i,� � � . _ _ �„_ � �-, � ; � ' ' � �. - , . < - „ '� - � _ 4� - , - ,`y`�:� :� �� - _ -�..; _ �; ;. _ ' - �;, � � '-:�� t � � , � - �- , �;. ,_ � � _ _ ��_:� , - , . . �� j�' q -. " - _ � - . �_ .��. �. 1' 1. �--�� { � �` . \ '� . ii11 � � . �� _.`�. . �,, �,�;-' _ �-- 'c�� ,T � J • ( ` S �... ��^� 1 ' � :.., L•\' � . f . � . � u�� JKy�^ I � ' . � � �_ nx .m . y � a.i �r . �l/��-i� �i �4 �i. \a�sL �� .n��1� ..a�t- � � BBtSCh%;ssooz;es �'�' � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FEHOES�GN 11 . '� THEATER LO B BY �, u � � � ��, ;! '� � � - � , ►��,.� - �� F - . � �y �;� '.; �`„s, ' '�. �� ; ��t; ..�, „� < Theater Lobby � � raiers � �� r �s��<=� � ��M i.;, * � � � �� ,., �� `z , � . �1 � �� .�1 � 1� � �� ..-' �� - - _- -` � � '�'� _ _ ,� -- � -- . .. "-� � �—� �1�� ;..il�- - :3 �_� � � � " - '�.�..,-�_ ,r�'- '�- ` � r _,,,..�_��= .- � �. ��;- �< <.? `��,,� �� c��ii..�$�r ��`�.�k.�-=�... '�-:.,. • • � BBtSCh��sso?�a�es '�' Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � FExoES�GN 12 . STREET LEVEL PLAN - -- _ - - _ i---�� ° ° _- - - � -�;L�'`��-� � }— �^- �%= P I � �q� y�� . . X � �(qi{µ . �� FM1CIYA� ��. � II rNw o o a _ �p,� �,� i � �� - : � � I �. rtF h UAAiGGF'14 � � � � � 'a'JI Y�.q} 6 i `^`^ ) I I� la� �pW1 ��ufiMl'..._ aTs .�neno L—�. R�1 ,�_ . ./, � o' t�'...:. dFK q�� y�e �FMfAIf.I � r� 6RUW� I`�'I[Efi 4'A'�fcU� /9� /„N/� �a a�F �� 'I el4 � J/ / I q � ! �'' I! i � lr-. � i �� . i �� : ; --� � _ ., � � ,w � ��.� � � —..— —..—� � � �� -�'" .�-�'�,� � � � � �, i � 1 � - --� - - - � ,��v' i i � \ �`w°�' ""',� w "°" P wi� , a,a � �,- �.. .��, ,�— � .�'� � � � °, ° ,, �_ " F - , � �r �-nw'°'' ��'� _� � � � _, �� , - r j ' � �� 4 > p �i �� 4 � � � dlR � ' I � JIlI ' c—�� m S�cMP .�y c46 i�� L� i. I"I rM� I o� I ` €=' ex ��w�e �� _ s , ._�' wnexo+wxefl.e � ra o ° ' wear � i',li /I � ��mx� � �I ' { , ° a��P-��✓�I �q�1� w� �T14:MARMAzbB � 4 0.__._ = IJdM� � u"4^`"�I _. �� „ �44iLmlC'l:lY � � I �_'� � IMOR� ��MW. � � � ��h6F .�IpM11�EpLT �VW �4 � . j � fW�� .. f�" ��'a�l� �a � ��..�e'' �r� '.�'.i � . .. J =_ o e�` e '• b—�uu,vu�w�§. N� `Y .� > i�— r r i wNM1wr- €i. ,. I � "'_�.��Y--a— o - a o � —. o— e ._ � _ — �_—e� 1N'd� .��L_ _� '.•�owrwr � � ` 7; � -__ : - _. . . .._. — _ . _J �`^�i - -N�FA�AL(NE6P�A� ��.w I,� . MMN9rti[f RBetsch+;sse<iz;es � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoesicv 1�� 13 . CONCOURSELEVELPLANL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �1 � � - � � '� : N.YMA1 �yYM ti I I '.lY�PI . � � � f � �� I �{q� '� — vNRN1( � � � r. FrtW66V5 y�p� � ��-�— � � � � I � �IAIf � NF �I`�cAre � � I� �� I � — - I V I"P�i "cvr a..��' � `� y"'°� � ��.�`,. � /T � M � L�IK�� '� _ i Rf Wf f __ ' �VYiI � � � i�'�I � . ,�-TIS1�5 � � � �, nlr�9riatrov,� �L- � � � .,�rtcnunl � � II � � a �—�'�� 4� p� � �.'r�� I�—_ _— .•�YbMcd � . "'. _ _ I °k�� AW�� --•- . I i� - - , -{ � � A ; � � *-w.w, �� wrfn� ,� O i�� '� �cuewz �� j cwozas ; I�p � ��CMssuvMY I il r � I � �� { � � . i � - �- �{ - ] CN6�'MCt - `�� A'irtfi 9 4fRRI0E�' I'e�. � °" yylMl{��" �a T P� _ _ e'T— o u ��_�. �1 - - i i r.uzzca�rv� � �. I �I ', f I �- �_ _�-z��—.�_ —� —�-�* �� —�` �� RBetechFssociate� � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicv 1�� 14. UPPER LEVEL PLAN 5wo�mna Aucx �t� KNSS �.-_.. I �� I � � lYR'I141,N�M� RBetschi;sseeiz;es � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoesicv 1�� 15. BASEMENT LEVEL & ARENA SECTION - ,� � � �� -- ,�� . aFor- � ' Dadwo� .. �� ----� ., - aeMcs I �°Daa� No ck1WAN� ---�� I 7 I �. I, I ��m�'! � � . �i"ue�l, F�`-�RE6nAFn bR�iVH�� -� � �u�� --�' � �I � wirror�,�'��,,, �;- io"�w"' �aP�aDIdG uPRR�nrl.OaAN.� �i �48" q��Mvew[YZh I 'N UPFeReatl�v' � � ��—�I r��.;��t^;�yr�_�. Y' ��io�oF��eL �/CuS\> _ _ dd — � '�aP Y 5��, tl� (a1fGR \ . ..- -_- - I, 22�nC+it� il� II -�� - i I 1 � � �� I 1b49[�NG�F6 ��ftt '� ��I '', ' �� s / I� I �i 19�k� ° MNd `Jff�£T � � �1 �� - �— � i�RiVc � � � '� � ��PPF�iuYvOt��( �I � A1��6 4 N��7° f.iG��, 233" � 2i�si° � ZZ�y^ � � O� 5 15 �v I �� rL� � � i � _- -- --_ : -4:.==-T�� RBetachFssociate� � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � r�Lt`1LI rexoEsicN 1�� 16. ARENA End-stage Floor Seatinq Counts by Type Concert Event S EATI N G Fixed Seating Count: COU NTS Loge Boxes (32) 64 64 Fixed Seats (general) 3,254 Club Seats (2 sections) 360 360 Fixed Seats (premium) 532 Suites (6) 72 72 Telescopic Seats (max) 2 126 Party Suites (2) 36 36 Total 5 912 Telescopic Seating Behind Stage -- 1 ,182 Fixed Seats Behind Stage (Upper) -- 530 Telescopic Front of Stage (Lower) 982 944 Square Footage By Level: Fixed Seats Front of Stage (Lower) 1 ,652 1 ,652 Arena Level 99,326 Fixed Seats Front of Stage (Upper) 1 ,072 1 ,072 Concourse 61 ,194 Floor Seats 2,072 -- Upper Level 20,960 ADA Seating with Companions 88 88 Total GSF 181 480 Totals 6,398 6,000 RBetschFswci,,;e, � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� PROJECTBUDGETSUMMARY TOTALS ARENA THEATRE THEATRESUPPORT 7 • I. CONSTRUCTION COST E68,089,346 563,934,268 $1,70fi,449 E2,448,629 A. Sitework 56,355.820 $6,317,817 $0 538.003 S U M M A RY O F C Renovati nmc�ion $$3 593�64 $5' 6'�,4$0 $, s4�,eoo $2 045 965 D. Oesignl Bid Con�ingency(5%) $3,087,952 $2,899.513 $77,390 5111.049 E ST I M AT E D E s�b�o�a�o��ems A o $64.�6.996 $so 889.�,9 g,.6z5.,90 $2 332 028 F. Cons�mc�IonCoNingency(5%) $3,242,350 $3,044,488 $81,259 $116,801 C O N S T R U CT I O N IIAI. CONS�TA�CPN RELATED COST §5,165,3$4� $4,718,0�4� §444,6$�5 42,6$5� C O�� B FurniNre,Fiatures,8 Equipment $4 432 337 $4 006,337 $423 500 $2 500 Q SAC,WAQ Storm Water Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 D. Sile Survey,Soil Bor'gs,Haz MaPI $157,000 $157,000 $0 $0 E ConsimctionTesting $125.000 $125,000 $0 $0 F. TheaVe StmcWral Study $5.000 $5.000 $0 $0 G. IT ConsNCg $65,000 $65,000 $0 $0 H. Commissioning/Test 8alance $75,000 $75,000 $0 $0 I. Special Inspections and O�her $60,000 $60.000 $0 $0 J. Contingency(5%) $245.967 $224,667 $21.175 $125 IV. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS E7,565,524 87,105,427 5195,645 E264,452 A. AcquisitionlAdministration $440,000 $440,000 $0 $0 B. Oesign Fees $h,085,361 $3,836.056 $102,387 5146,918 C. Project Managemen� $275,000 $250.000 $25,00� $0 D. Expenses SO $0 $0 $0 E. Financing(4%) $2,723,574 $2,557,371 $68,258 $97.945 E Contingency(5%)for $41.589 $22,000 $0 $19,589 AcquisitionlAdmin,Expenses V. ESCAIATION E3,971,483 53,719,796 5178,T78 E733,409 A. Design Escalation lo May 2020 $0 $0 $0 B. ConstmcCn EscalaCn to May 2021 83,719.796 5118,276 5133,409 VI. TOTALPROJECTCOST $84,791,656 E79.477,494 52,465,047 E2,849,fl5 RBetschh,a_c rztes � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoEsicv 1�� 18 . SUMMARY OF ' ' • ' ' ' - ! • ' � - AN N UAL Events 103 233 Event Days 152 335 PERFORMANCE Utilization Days 261 540 ESTIMATES TotalAttendee Days (annual) 155,612 409,921 Non-Local Attendee Days 33,863 94,861 Hotel Room Nights (annual) 4,427 13,620 Operating Revenues $410,000 $1,862,720 Operating Expenses $1 ,266,000 $2,167,958 Operating Deficit ($856,000) ($305,238) Direct Spending $2,389,169 $6,099,909 Indirect/Induced Spending $910,680 $2,321,528 TotalOutput $3,299,850 $8,421,437 Personal Income (earnings) $1 ,062,529 $2,719,479 Employment (full & part-time jobs) 49 125 RBetsch ca.ccn:es � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoEsicv 1�� 19 . NEARBY PARKING ISSUES � � �� .- C�� `'� � � � � . ��,,, -.,� �� LL � - - , . .� �= �;� � � �� , . - � _ � _;:� � ,� ,, . . �' � '' . I - ��;��: � �` �^ 1'.�;'�� , �'�'�- � � .� � , ,�� .�� ; :: .a� � ,� � , „r. ' Jd{ i' �� `�1 ��' _ _�,`� � � �� \� ':. �'��.. _ � # �� ,. :. _ � , _ , ` , � ¢ �_ , • ..� . . y _ .,,. . � y ' , _ , , � f `. °� ,i. � `�_ � • V�U��;,: - ��.�" � y � � �. _ -.� ��y "- "• i � ` . �� . . : ' � ' ,�` .. ,�y ! . �i� r � �.. �`�✓�j .� `�{.Q � � . r � � �z , � ��•� � .-,� .,. �' � �- • '�y�'y � � ,.`;�! _°" � � �� '�,��/� � � � . � �- � � ,;� � � . .. • :� �� ,� �� \ ' -` .. . �- r �_- `_�.� ;��1;�►' �► �:9 = �' 2,222 parkin9 spaces �"� �� i • f (�mPsa�as�rtaoeiasa�iy7w�n� T ' ' .' appmx 2 blocks N a FFCC en[rance `. �� ^"�•� � �\ \��`_�� io� '1 • . ■ (� Betschf,sseeiz;es � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� 20 . OVERALL PARKING CAPACITY � �33� . Parking Estimated �: � , � , � Seating Spaces Proximate Covemge /pp _ 821 • Cdy, State Facildy Capacdy Needed (1) Supply(2) Peroentape � �.. $ 8� � �q�`, 55, A,� � � � La Crosse,WI La Crosse Center 19,100 6,367 5,369 84% $� �29�� Evansville, W FOMCenter 11,000 3,667 4,000 109% :33� 941 � . � . $ CoipusChnsti, TX AmencanBankCenter 10,000 3,333 4,200 126% � $ � '�\ � Bloomington, IL GrossingerMotorsArena 9,146 3,049 2,597 85% �� (618 .'� � Beaumont,TX FOMArena 9,000 3,000 5,000 167% $� Bemidji, MN SanfoM Center 6,000 2,000 1,200 60% � PrescotNalley,AZ PrescotNalleyEventCenter 6,200 2,067 3,000 145% Dod eCd , KS UnitedWrelessArena 4,935 1,645 1,600 97% �1 i19 82�� 591 . Average 9 423 3A4A 3 37A A07% � � $ Metlian 9 073 3 024 3 500 116 a '.� � � � 96; � � � �"�p � ��%� , � Oubuque Estimatetl Supply Within Practical Walking Oistance r e ne¢s c t � �39@� � � ,� � Oubuque, IA(2) FFCC(Existing) 4,000 7,333 8,500 488°/a �6 g� . �0e�� Oubuque, IA(2) New FFCC(max Arena) 8,398 2,733 8,500 305°/a `25 ,�g . '' � � � Oubuque, IA(2) New FFCC(max Arena +Theater) 7,098 2,366 6,500 275°/a $ � � . � �, iii Oubuque Estimatetl Supply Ramp/Lot Supply Within 2 Blocks Dubuque, lA(3) FFCC(Existing) 4,000 1,333 2,222 167% � �� 193! Dubuque, lA(3) NewFFCC(maxArena) 6,398 2,133 2,222 104% �. . . . , �-''" Dubuque, lA(3) NewFFCC(maxArena+Theater) 7,098 2,366 2,222 94% u�a (1J5:trqnlaC b etlonlNustryrypcelrecommaitletlonNiperk'�gspeceper3seals m'�� i � (�Estl eRNp k'�g upplywtli'nreesanetlewelkl�gdstaice besetlmcmversetlmswtlicryalf" I rvllarfedl'rymenegemert � �j ��'.`n� �v'�., „ (3JRep rAs putllcrempeMsurtaceperk'�gsupply(NOTINCLU�INGstreHperk'�gop' alelolsJ ItlilnepprmimaletyWoblocksNtl�eFPoC. RBetschFswci,,;e, � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � � rexoesicN 1�� 2 � Original Inflation Atlj. Const.Cwt � Const.Cwt Year Const.Cwt PerSeat Arena Market �in$millions� Public$ Pr'rvate$ Public°/a Pr'rvate°/a Openetl Capactly �in$millions� Capacily COMPARABLE 1 AIIenEventCenter AIIenTX $526 $478 $53 90% 10% 2009 8600 $749 $8705 2 AmericanBankCenter Cor usChristi,TX $49.6 $49.6 $0.0 100% 0% 2004 10,323 $85.9 $8,320 3 ArenaatGwinnettCenter Duluth,GA $91.0 $91.0 $0.0 100% 0% 2003 13,000 $163.9 $12,607 A�� 4 BOKCenter Tulsa OK $1780 $1460 $320 82% 18% 2008 18041 $2635 $14605 5 BonSecoursWellnessArena Greenville,SC $63.0 $30.0 $33.0 48% 52% 1998 15,951 $138.0 $8,654 6 CenWrLinkCenterOmaha Omaha,NE $75.0 $75.0 $0.0 100% 0% 2003 17,000 $135.1 $7,945 CONSTRUCTION8 Chesa eakeEnerr Arena Oklaho al`CitAOK $$01�0 $$O80 $$00 100% 50% 2002 18208 $1892 $$0392 9 CitizensBusinessBankArena Onizno,CA $150.0 $150.0 $0.0 100% 0% 2008 11,089 $222.0 $20,023 CO�1��1 10 CovelliCenter Voun stown OH $450 $445 $05 99% 1% 2005 7000 $749 $10704 � � 11 Denn SanfoMP ierCenter SiouxFalls,SD $117.0 $117.0 $0.0 100% 0% 2014 12,000 $136.9 $11,406 12 FordCenter Evansville, IN $127.5 $127.5 $0.0 100% 0% 2011 11,000 $167.8 $15,253 13 GiantCenter Herse ,PA $85.0 $50.0 $35.0 59% 41% 2002 12,000 $1592 $13,267 14 Huntin tonCenter Toledo,OH $100.0 $100.0 $0.0 100% 0% 2009 9,341 $1428 $15,237 15 InirustBankArena Wichitz,KS $206.5 $206.5 $0.0 100% 0% 2010 15,004 $282.6 $18,836 16 IowaRiverLandingArena(1) Coralville, lA $92.1 $82.1 $10.0 89% 11% 2020 5,100 $852 $16,701 17 LandersCenter Southaven,MS $27.5 $27.5 $0.0 100% 0% 2000 10,000 $557 $5,571 18 LaredoEner Arena Laredo,TX $35.5 $35.5 $0.0 100% 0% 2002 9,622 $66.5 $6,910 19 Mid-Amenca Center Council BIuHs,IA $75.0 $388 $36.8 51% 49% 2002 9,000 $140.5 $15,608 20 PinnacleBankArena Lincoln,NE $173.0 $1008 $727 58% 42% 2013 15,900 $210.5 $13,238 21 RenoEvenisCenter Reno,NV $69.4 $694 $0.0 100% 0% 2005 7,500 $115.6 $15,407 22 Resch Center Green Ba ,WI $50.4 $458 $5.1 90% 10% 2002 10,200 $944 $9,255 23 SanfordCenter Bemid�i MN $78.3 $788 $0.0 100/ 0/ 2010 6,000 .$1,072 $17,860 . ........... . . . . ........... . . . . ......... . . . ........... . . . . ............ . . . . ............ . . . . .......... . . . . . ......... . . . . .................. 24 SanfordCo oteS orlsCenter Ve illion,SD $66.0 $46.0 $20.0 70% 30% 2016 6,000 $714 $11,898 25 SaniznderCenter Readin ,PA $36.5 $34.6 $1.9 95% 5% 2001 9,146 $71.1 $7,774 26 SearsCenire HoffmanEstates, IL $62.0 $372 $24.8 60% 40% 2006 11,800 $998 $8,412 27 StocktonArena Stockton CA $64.0 $64.0 $0.0 100/ 0/ 2005 11,800 $106.6 $9,031 28TsonEventCenter SiouxCit ,lA $47.4 $35.0 $12.4 74% 26% 2003 10,000 $854 $8,536 29 VerizonWirelessArena Manchester,NH $65.0 $55.0 $10.0 85% 15% 2001 11,770 $126.6 $10,757 30 WebsterBankArena Brid e ort,CT $60.0 $52.0 $8.0 87% 13% 2001 10,000 $116.9 $11,687 31 WeIlsFaroArena DesMoines, lA $907 $907 $0.0 100% 0% 2005 16,980 $151.0 $8,894 32 XFlNITVArenaatEverett Evere WA $71.5 $37.6 $33.9 53% 47% 2003 10000 $128.8 $12877 A era e $83 3 $71 6 $11 7 85°/a 15°/a 2006 11,400 $130 9 $11,720 Note�.Compamble arenas exclude university-own ed arenas and arenas with professional NBA or NHL franchises. (1)Construction costs represent estimates provided by ihe con struction team of$375 hard construction costs per gross square foot for a 188,974 gross square foot facility. RBetschh,a_ccrles � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoEsicv 1�� 22 , • Public sector revenue sources are used to fund the large majority of FUNDING municipally-owned comparable projects. • Most likely path forward for a FFCC Project would City issued G.O. bonds. �SSUES • Private sector and non-City sources could assist in defraying City's cost. • Hypothetical funding structure: • $65 million from proceeds via City of Dubuque G.O. bonds. • $5 million in contractually-obligated naming rights fees. • $5 million in dedicated ticket surcharge revenue ($1 .50 per ticket). • $5 million in ticketed event parking fees (in selected nearby ramps). • $5 million in private fundraising (corporate donations, donations relating to arts elements, grants, etc.). • Other issues to consider: • Annual operating subsidy funded by City is expected to be lower (approximately $500,000 per year savings). • Subsequent full design/engineering phase could identify cost savings. • Industry expectation of continued 5% annual inflation in constr. costs. RBetschh,a_ccrles � Five Flags Civic Center Phase 2 Planning � DUBUQUE, IOWA � � aj vexoEsicv 1��