249 replies to this topic

[Mith242]

zman9810, on Mar 15 2008, 11:05 AM, said:

I imagine the third phase of the study that looks at funding will be the deciding factor as to where the center is located even if it isn't promoted that way. It may sound cynical but money talks- if the Benton County powers-that-be refuse to support a location other than Benton County it may come down to that. Hopefully I'm wrong and the obvious best choice of location (the present area) will be chosen for an expansion. It would be interesting to hear how the talks between Signet, the WAC representatives and the City of Fayetteville are going - it's been rather quiet lately.

Good point that I hadn't thought to mention.  I believe I saw something that noted that more donations are made by people from Benton County residents than Washington County residents.  That could possibly be made a factor as well.

[cowbreath]

Snaple4, on Mar 15 2008, 10:04 AM, said:

On a serious note, I really hope our Political system and the UofA make a sincere effort to make the WAC an offer they would not want to refuse. Is downtown Fayetteville so bad that no large entity wants to be in it? FHS, Courthouse, Police Station, WAC, Jail.....

Yeah, I really wish our city would engage in not letting these things move.  This kind of seems like a critical point in our city's future urban development.

[Mith242]

cowbreath, on Mar 17 2008, 11:10 AM, said:

Yeah, I really wish our city would engage in not letting these things move.  This kind of seems like a critical point in our city's future urban development.

I know we're getting off topic here.  But it's so ironic that we keep talking about trying to keep sprawl in check and so on.  Yet it seems like we're pushing our city services out of downtown.

[Snaple4]

Mith242, on Mar 17 2008, 01:32 PM, said:

I know we're getting off topic here. But it's so ironic that we keep talking about trying to keep sprawl in check and so on. Yet it seems like we're pushing our city services out of downtown.

Well, the views of this board are a little one sided (even if we differ so much on many issues) when it comes to sprawl. There are few people on this board that support urban sprawl to a high degree. But outside of this board it makes perfect sense to have urban sprawl. On the short term, everything about it is cheaper. Cheaper land, cheaper construction costs, cheaper everything. Even on a political standpoint it makes sense to side more with sprawl. Our government is short-term based and only cares about the now and only occasionally thinks about mentioning the later.



Sorry about trying to derail the topic about commenting on the Sprawl thing, although it could end up being a good topic starter… (do we have one for sprawl yet?)

[Aporkalypse]

This would be like us moving Robinson Auditorium to Benton.  It makes no sense.  The WAC is already in the right location.

[Mith242]

Aporkalypse, on Mar 17 2008, 10:50 PM, said:

This would be like us moving Robinson Auditorium to Benton.  It makes no sense.  The WAC is already in the right location.

Yeah but it certainly doesn't mean that residents in Benton County aren't going to try to lure the WAC away.  If they do move the main site of the WAC to Benton County I really hope they don't stick it basically in an outdoor mall like the site in Rogers is.

[cowbreath]

Snaple4, on Mar 17 2008, 08:45 PM, said:

Well, the views of this board are a little one sided (even if we differ so much on many issues) when it comes to sprawl. There are few people on this board that support urban sprawl to a high degree. But outside of this board it makes perfect sense to have urban sprawl. On the short term, everything about it is cheaper. Cheaper land, cheaper construction costs, cheaper everything. Even on a political standpoint it makes sense to side more with sprawl. Our government is short-term based and only cares about the now and only occasionally thinks about mentioning the later.



Sorry about trying to derail the topic about commenting on the Sprawl thing, although it could end up being a good topic starter… (do we have one for sprawl yet?)

The people on here also would prefer that buildings like Renaissance, the Dickson, St Charles Plaza, etc. would go ahead and get built.  Market factors and feasibility are less pertinent for us non-decision makers.  

You make a good point about the short-term persuasion of the decisions.  I can't really give a good argument about why the WAC should stay that wouldn't be able to see themselves.  I'm sure they're concerned about the bottom-line.  I'm concerned about the Dickson street economy.

[Mith242]

Snaple4, on Mar 17 2008, 08:45 PM, said:

Well, the views of this board are a little one sided (even if we differ so much on many issues) when it comes to sprawl. There are few people on this board that support urban sprawl to a high degree. But outside of this board it makes perfect sense to have urban sprawl. On the short term, everything about it is cheaper. Cheaper land, cheaper construction costs, cheaper everything. Even on a political standpoint it makes sense to side more with sprawl. Our government is short-term based and only cares about the now and only occasionally thinks about mentioning the later.



Sorry about trying to derail the topic about commenting on the Sprawl thing, although it could end up being a good topic starter… (do we have one for sprawl yet?)

Sorry I must have missed your post.  I do see where you're coming from and it's obvious there's a reason why developers always go to the outskirts of a city to build.  
We've discussed sprawl a lot but I don't recall having a specific topic for it so maybe I'll get one going.

[zman9810]

The city is trying to find a way to come with some money to help keep the Walton Arts Center in town. Refinancing the bonds used to build the Town Center is being looked at and may be the only way to raise money without a tax increase. Seems in a city where a one cent sales tax increase was approved to build a new library a tax increase to keep WAC in town would stand a good chance of passing. WAC is at least as important to the community if not more than the library or Town Center.

It's good to hear that local property owners are willing to sell their land if it means keeping WAC downtown. A strong community effort will be needed preserve Fayetteville's place as the cultural center of the region.

NWA Times article

Edited by zman9810, 14 May 2008 - 12:36 PM.

[CentralArkansas]

cowbreath, on Mar 19 2008, 02:23 PM, said:

The people on here also would prefer that buildings like Renaissance, the Dickson, St Charles Plaza, etc. would go ahead and get built.  Market factors and feasibility are less pertinent for us non-decision makers.  

You make a good point about the short-term persuasion of the decisions.  I can't really give a good argument about why the WAC should stay that wouldn't be able to see themselves.  I'm sure they're concerned about the bottom-line.  I'm concerned about the Dickson street economy.

While losing the Walton Arts Center would hurt Dickson, I wouldn't be overly concerned with the impact on the economy. In my experience on Dickson, mostly college students support at least 60% of revenue for the bars and restaurants. Beyond that, it's locals and others that frequent regardless of what is going on at the WAC. I can't tell you how many times I've watched hundreds of people flock out of the WAC, straight to their cars, and away from Dickson. I've also been out to eat on Dickson before quite a few shows at WAC, and rarely have I noticed a larger crowd that was making its way to the WAC.

I tend to believe that the WAC draws a crowd that normally wouldn't be on Dickson, and hence has a limited effect on its overall economy (although it does add a lot in other areas).

[cocothief]

CentralArkansas, on May 14 2008, 12:50 AM, said:

While losing the Walton Arts Center would hurt Dickson, I wouldn't be overly concerned with the impact on the economy. In my experience on Dickson, mostly college students support at least 60% of revenue for the bars and restaurants. Beyond that, it's locals and others that frequent regardless of what is going on at the WAC. I can't tell you how many times I've watched hundreds of people flock out of the WAC, straight to their cars, and away from Dickson. I've also been out to eat on Dickson before quite a few shows at WAC, and rarely have I noticed a larger crowd that was making its way to the WAC.

I tend to believe that the WAC draws a crowd that normally wouldn't be on Dickson, and hence has a limited effect on its overall economy (although it does add a lot in other areas).

I agree with this, but I'd add that WAC serves nowadays to diversify the people and atmosphere on Dickson Street by bringing in a more (truly, not STIR-patronizing) upscale crowd.  I think losing WAC would make Dickson more one-dimensional, and some of the nicer places would leave.

[zman9810]

cocothief, on May 14 2008, 09:26 AM, said:

I agree with this, but I'd add that WAC serves nowadays to diversify the people and atmosphere on Dickson Street by bringing in a more (truly, not STIR-patronizing) upscale crowd.  I think losing WAC would make Dickson more one-dimensional, and some of the nicer places would leave.

That's funny- I often stop in STIR   before walking across Dickson to WAC, but then, I'm at STIR before most of  their regular patrons show up and not quite upscale.

I agree that WAC's presence on Dickson Street is about more than just the crowds that attend peformances. It is still the linchpin of the entertaiment district- it helps make it more than just a bar and resturant area. When Fayetteville is recruting business to come here the cultural scene is one of the things they look at. WAC is THE performance venue for the region - to lose it would be a major blow to Fayetteville's attractiveness.

The economic impact of WAC is also measured in where the entertainers and their entourages stay when performing here. Some of the touring companies have large groups of people supporting their acts and normally stay in Fayetteville. The peformers normally stay and eat in Fayetteville. This impact would all move north with WAC if it goes.

[Mith242]

We all know that Dickson St changed once the WAC opened on it.  Maybe Dickson St can do just fine without it.  But I would have to agree with the others.  I also think it adds more depth.  I'm not sure I also want want to tempt fate and see how well Dickson St could do without it.  I do think it's best for the city to do all it can to try to keep it here.  maybe we're just spoiled here in Fayetteville, but I'm just used to being able to do everything I wanted here in the city.  Just seems like more and more things are opening in Benton County instead.  Not that I'm complaining about things like Crystal Bridges and such.  But I'd hate to feel like many of the amenities will be outside the city in other parts of the metro.

[zman9810]

According to the consultant, the price tag for the Walton Arts Center's expansion is estimated at $180 million without a location chosen yet. That would pay for 106,000 sq ft with 2,200, 600 and 100 seat spaces if constructed by 2013. This would be an expansion that doesn't include the present Baum Walker Hall, which is the main theater in the present building. It would be used for smaller performances while the larger new one would be used for larger productions.

For comparison, Kansas City is constructing the Kaufman Performing Arts Center for $358 million. It will have 316,000 sq ft with spaces of 1800, 1600 and 250 seats. It is being built without taxpayer money, which is not the norm, but the city is building two parking garges for it.

The tone of this article indicated to me that the consultants are leaning towards recommending the the expansion happen away from the present site. This quote in particular makes me wonder "Right now, you have the franchise on the arts in Northwest Arkansas, and anything you do to keep that is a benefit to the region as a whole, wherever it's located." Who is the "you" that is being referred to- Fayetteville? I doubt it. Almost sounds like Doublespeak straight out of "1984".

Morning News article

[thewizard16]

These price tags stun me. I know major buildings are expensive, but that's insane. What exactly causes a building like that to cost in the hundreds of millions? (I also don't get why schools cost that much to build, I'm clearly missing something, I'm just curious to what it is)

[Mith242]

Yeah I know construction costs have really shot up in recent years.  But I admit I would have thought $180 Mil would have bought more than a 2,200 seat theater for an art center.  But I am assuming that like the article said, they are planning ahead and building something a little more upscale than the present location.  I'm also assuming that the building will be fine tuned for acoustics and such and that probably drives up the costs as well.

[zman9810]

Considering the present building was built for less than $10 million only 15 years ago those figures are shocking but understandable. The whole press release goes into a little more detail about the costs and what is being considered.

It sounds like the present site is seen as a venue for the University to use for student productions while the major productions such as Broadway shows and big name artists will be at the new venue. Throwing out a large cost estimate might be a way to drive home the point that the financial concerns are the top priority in choosing a site.

WAC press release

[Mith242]

zman9810, on May 22 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

Considering the present building was built for less than $10 million only 15 years ago those figures are shocking but understandable. The whole press release goes into a little more detail about the costs and what is being considered.

It sounds like the present site is seen as a venue for the University to use for student productions while the major productions such as Broadway shows and big name artists will be at the new venue. Throwing out a large cost estimate might be a way to drive home the point that the financial concerns are the top priority in choosing a site.

WAC press release

Good point about throwing out the numbers to make sure people are really dedicated to something like this.  I'm obviously biased for the current location.  But really I can't say I'm a big fan of a lot of those other locations.  I can't say I'm a fan of the other possible Fayetteville location for that matter.  If they don't decide to expand at the current site the only other option I personally liked was having it near Crystal Bridges.  All the other options seemed to place it mainly in sprawling areas of either north Fayetteville, west Springdale or west Rogers.  I know they want room to grow.  But I'd still think surely there's even some areas near downtown Rogers that would prove suitable over some of the current choices.  I'm sure not everyone agrees, but I just think the main facility of the WAC should be located in a somewhat downtown setting.

[bubba72704]

Mith242, on May 22 2008, 02:30 PM, said:

Good point about throwing out the numbers to make sure people are really dedicated to something like this.  I'm obviously biased for the current location.  But really I can't say I'm a big fan of a lot of those other locations.  I can't say I'm a fan of the other possible Fayetteville location for that matter.  If they don't decide to expand at the current site the only other option I personally liked was having it near Crystal Bridges.  All the other options seemed to place it mainly in sprawling areas of either north Fayetteville, west Springdale or west Rogers.  I know they want room to grow.  But I'd still think surely there's even some areas near downtown Rogers that would prove suitable over some of the current choices.  I'm sure not everyone agrees, but I just think the main facility of the WAC should be located in a somewhat downtown setting.

For $180 Million they could buy the entire Fayetteville high school campus (about 40 acres and all buildings for a current pricetag of around $60 Million) and spend the remaining $120 Million on some sort of performing arts megastructure.   To put it another way, for $180 Million you could build FOUR Arvest ballparks (less than $40 Million each) and still have another $20 Million left over.

Personally I feel that downtown Fayetteville is the best setting for an updated arts center, however $180 Million sounds terribly excessive.  I'd be interested in seeing the pricetag for comparable projects around the country.  My fear is that the Fayetteville administrators are trying to "keep up with the Joneses" by trying to out-spend the Crystal Bridges project.   I'm hoping someone simply misplaced a decimal.

[Mith242]

bubba72704, on May 22 2008, 03:11 PM, said:

For $180 Million they could buy the entire Fayetteville high school campus (about 40 acres and all buildings for a current pricetag of around $60 Million) and spend the remaining $120 Million on some sort of performing arts megastructure.   To put it another way, for $180 Million you could build FOUR Arvest ballparks (less than $40 Million each) and still have another $20 Million left over.

Personally I feel that downtown Fayetteville is the best setting for an updated arts center, however $180 Million sounds terribly excessive.  I'd be interested in seeing the pricetag for comparable projects around the country.  My fear is that the Fayetteville administrators are trying to "keep up with the Joneses" by trying to out-spend the Crystal Bridges project.   I'm hoping someone simply misplaced a decimal.

From what I've read in the paper today there is more involved than just a 2,200 seat performance hall.  There's also a 600 seat flexible space and a 100 seat black box theater.  Granted that price tag still sounds rather expensive for that.  I'm wondering in part if they're wanting a building that stands out more.  Perhaps something from a bigger name architect or a building with some unique architecture.  Something to make it stand out more and maybe get a little recognition despite the size.  If you were going to expand the current site then you'd need money for demolition of nearby buildings.  But if you're building at one of those other sites that's basically 'empty' land, then you'd think there wouldn't be as much costs involved.  I guess I'm basically just trying to throw out some ideas as to why this new facility would have costs that high.  Maybe the performance hall would be built using precise (and expensive) acoustics.  Perhaps something a bit more cutting edge than what you typically see.  I don't know, hopefully we'll find out a little more in the future.  But for now I guess the big question will be where will the facility be built.