HomeMy WebLinkAbout48-98 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO 4 8- 9 8
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE TO APPLY TO THE STATE OF ARKANSAS
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION FOR A
GRANT FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF
ARKANSAS FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER AND
SEWER LINES AND STREETS NECESSARY TO DEVELOP THE
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK.
WHEREAS, the City of Fayetteville, in conjunction with the University of Arkansas and
the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce, employed the firm of Hammer, Siler, George Associates
to develop market potentials, site planning, and costs associated with the Research and Technology
Park Development; and
WHEREAS, the study has been completed, and it is now time to improve the Research and
Technology Park by constructing the required streets and water and sewer lines necessary for the
development of the Park; and
WHEREAS, the cost of these developments are estimated at $9,214,300; and
WHEREAS, the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration has funds available
through the Economic Development of Arkansas Fund Commission, to which we may apply for
either a grant or loan, and
WHEREAS, Paragraph 7(a)3 of the Economic Development of Arkansas Fund Commission
Regulations requires an ordinance, resolution, or other specific authorizing instrument or action
reflecting the applicant's authority for making application to the Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. Mayor Fred Hanna or his authorized representative is designated as the
authority for making application on behalf of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, for a grant to aid
in the construction of the water and sewer lines and streets at the Research and Technology Park.
- F. riCN
PASSEHAND APPROVED this 21 St day of April , 1998.
t. v,
:
, 4 4,:ty
ATT $T't ‘• •
By:
Heather Woodruff, C Clerk
APPROVE
By.
Fred Hanna, Mayor
1
1
•
Market Potentials, Site Planning, Costing
and Cash Flow for Arkansas Research and
Technology Park Development
Prepared for:
The City of Fayetteville and The University of Arkansas
HAMMER • SILER • GEORGE • ASSOCIATES
ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
v
Market otentials, Site
Planning, Costing and
Cash Flow for rkansas
esearch and Technology
Park Devclopmcnt
Prepared for:
The City of Fayetteville and
The University of Arkansas
January 1998
Hammer Siler George Associates
EDAW
McClelland Consulting Engineers
Hammer Stier George Associates
Table of Contents
Page #
Executive Summary
II. Assessment of the Research 1
Resource
III. Projected Range of Probable 13
Absorption
IV. Recommended Development 24
Program
V. Location and Site Assessment 26
VI Site Planning and Costing 35
VII. Phase I Financial Costs and 43
Revenues
Appendix. Survey Results
Hammer Siler George Associates
L IFXILL:,CUTIVF
SUMM Y
Hammer Siler George Associates
at:
Executive Summary
• 1. THE PURPOSE OF THE CONSULTANT WORK IS TO TEST THE
FEASIBILITY OF RESEARCH PARK DEVELOPMENT
• 2. THIS REQUIRES RESEARCH RESOURCE ASSESSMENT, MARKET
ANALYSIS, SITE PLANNING, SITE DEVELOPMENT COSTING AND CASH
FLOW ANALYSIS.
• 3. THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS HAS A STRONG RESEARCH
PROGRAM WHICH IS GROWING AT AN IMPRESSIVE RATE.
• 4 ENGINEERING, AGRICULTURE AND THE SCIENCES ARE
PARTICULAR STRENGTHS OF THE RESEARCH PROGRAM.
• 5. THE UNIVERSITY IS UNDERTAKING IMPORTANT INITIATIVES TO
FURTHER BUILD THE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
PROGRAMS.
• 6. POTENTIAL FLOOR SPACE ABSORPTION IN A RESEARCH PARK IN
FAYETTEVILLE IS ESTIMATED, BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF
RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE
AMOUNT OF RESEARCH AND THE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE
ABSORPTION WHICH HAS BEEN ACHIEVED AT COMPARABLE LAND
GRANT UNIVERSITIES WITH RESEARCH PARKS.
• 7. DIRECT, RESEARCH -BASED FLOOR SPACE ABSORPTION AT THE
RESEARCH PARK IN FAYETTEVILLE, NAMED THE ARKANSAS
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK, WILL BE IN THE 30,000 TO
50,000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA RANGE, DURING THE FIRST
FIVE YEARS IN WHICH BUILDING SPACE IS AVAILABLE FOR
MARKETING. ABSORPTION WILL INCREASE IN SUBSEQUENT FIVE
YEAR PERIODS.
SIII11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.1......................
Hammer Siler George Associates
•
Executive Summary
• 8. RESEARCH PARKS ALSO ATTRACT OTHER UNIVERSITY,
GOVERNMENTAL AND COMPATIBLE PRIVATE BUSINESS USES. IN THE
ARKANSAS RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK, IT IS ASSUMED THAT
THIS ADDITIONAL FLOOR SPACE DEMAND VVILL BE ROUGHLY EQUAL
TO THE RESEARCH -BASED ABSORPTION.
• 9. THE LOCAL REAL ESTATE MARKET IS STRONG, AND THIS WILL HELP
GENERATE ABSORPTION FROM THESE OTHER USES.
• 10. A SURVEY OF 240 BUSINESSES FAMILIAR WITH THE RESEARCH
RESOURCES AT THE UNIVERSITY, YIELDED A 15 PERCENT RESPONSE
AND STRONG INDICATIONS OF INTEREST IN HAVING A CLOSE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNIVERSITY.
• 11. THE PROPOSED RESEARCH PARK SITE IS AT US ROUTE 71 AND
STATE ROUTE 112. THE SITE IS CONVENIENT TO THE CAMPUS, OF
ADEQUATE SIZE FOR THE EARLY PHASES OF THE PARK AND
EXPANSION, WELL SERVED BY EXPRESSWAYS, HAS FIBER OPTIC
LINKAGES AND IS NEAR NEEDED SERVICE USES; AND THUS WILL
SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARK WELL.
• 12. WHEN DEVELOPED TO THE QUALITY STANDARDS SHOWN IN THE
SITE PLAN, THE RESEARCH PARK WILL PROVIDE A QUALITY LEVEL OF
BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT NOT NOW AVAILABLE, AND VVILL MARKET
WELL WITH THE EXISTING FAYETTEVILLE INDUSTRIAL PARK.
• 13. THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WILL CREATE PARCELS OF VARIOUS
SIZES TO MEET THE MARKET, PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT,
FACILITATE EFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE PHASING AND
CONSTRUCTION AND PROVIDE A HIGH AMENITY ENVIRONMENT THE
SITE PLAN IS PRESENTED IN THE REPORT.
• 14. PHASE I SITE DEVELOPMENT COSTS WILL TOTAL $1,314,100, IN
CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND $310,800 IN SOFT COSTS. A TOTAL OF
$1,918,100 HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN SPENT ON THE PURCHASE OF THE
LAND AND THE INSTALLATION OF FIBER OPTIC LINKAGES
ii Hammer Slier George Associates
-
Executive Summary
• 15. THE ESTIMATED TOTAL SITE IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION
COSTS FOR THE FIVE PHASE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE $9,214,100.
• 16. PHASE I SITE IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION AND RELATED SOFT
COSTS WILL TOTAL $1,516,240, AND LAND SALES REVENUES FOR
PHASE I WILL BE $1,808,200.
• 17. IN PHASE I, THE COSTS WILL BE GREATEST IN THE EARLY YEARS
WHEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS BEING INSTALLED, AND MUCH OF
THE LAND SALE REVENUES WILL COME IN THE LATER YEARS. THIS
WILL RESULT IN A MAXIMUM NEGATIVE CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW OF
$956,100 FROM THESE SOURCES.
18. THE UNIVERSITY, THE CITY, THE CHAMBER AND THE STATE WILL
MAKE A STRONG PARTNERSHIP TO MAKE THIS PROJECT A SUCCESS.
iii Hammer Siler George Associates
II. ASSESSMENT OF
THE RESEARCH
RESOURCE
1
1
Trends in U of Arkansas
R&D Expenditures (Table1)
1
1
1
1
• External+Internal Expenditures
totaled $57.8 million in 1994
• R&D Expenditures at Arkansas
Increased by Almost 42% from
1991 to 1994, Led by Agriculture
and Engineering
1
• Ag. R&D Spending Increased by
1 53 Percent from '91 to '94
• Engineering R&D Spending
1 Increased by 79 Percent
1 • Other R&D Spending Increased
1 by Two Percent
1
1
1
1 Hammer Siler George Associates
Table 1. UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
EXPENDITURES, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
Expenditures in Thousands of Dollars 1991-1994 Change
Discipline 1991 1992 1993 1994 Amount Percent
Agriculture $22,997 $24,867 $35,160 $35,176 $12,179 53.0%
Engineering $5,710 $7,981 $8,733 $10,220 $4,510 79.0%
Other $12,124 $11,920 $14,432 $12,419 $295 2.4%
Total $40,831 $44,768 $58,325 $57,815 $16,984 41.6%
Note: Includes all internal and external R&D expenditures as compiled by the
National Science Foundation.
Sources: National Science Foundation and Hammer, Siler, George Associates.
U of Arkansas Research by
Source and Program
(Tables 2,3)
• Among External, Non -Ag
Awards, Federal Sources
Account for 59%; Major Awards
from Defense and Education
• State of Arkansas Accounts for
33%; Corporate is 4%
• External R&D Funding Totals
$43.4 million, Most from Federal
Sources
• Agricultural, Food and Life
Sciences Receives $16.8 Million,
or about 39% of Arkansas R&D
3
Hammer Siler George Associates
Source
Table 2. UNIVERSITY OR ARKANSAS AWARDS FOR NON -AG RESEARCH
AND SPONSORED PROGRAMS BY SPONSOR TYPE, 1995
Dollar Amount Percent
Federal/Other State Government
Department of Energy $273,000 1.0%
Department of the Interior $786,000 2.9%
Department of Defense $3,782,000 13.7%
Department of Health and Human Services $1,433,000 5.2%
Department of Agriculture $16,000 0.1%
Department of Education $3,776,000 13.7%
Department of Commerce $1,023,000 3.7%
Department of Transportation $1,000,000 3.6%
National Science Foundation $2,345,000 8.5%
Tennessee Valley Foundation $13,000 0.0%
Agency for International Development $18,000 0.1%
National Aeronautics and Space Admin $181,000 0.7%
Enivironmental Protection Agency $45,000 0.2%
National Endowment for the Humanities $261,000 0.9%
Corporation for Public Broadcasting $106,000 0.4%
US Postal Service $980,000 3.6%
Other State Governments $183 000 0 7%
Subtotal $16,221,000 59.0%
Arkansas State Government
Department of Higher Education $1,039,000 3.8%
Department of Health $45,000 0.2%
Department of Education $1,063,000 3.9%
Department of Human Services $3,408,000 12.4%
Department of Pollution Control/Ecology $84,000 0.3%
Highway and Transportation Department $984,000 3.6%
AR Energy Office $10,000 0.0%
AR Science and Technology Authority $764,000 2.8%
AR Game and Fish Commission $303,000 1.1%
AR Early Childhood Commission $15,000 0.1%
AR Soil and Water Conservation Commission $1,154,000 4.2%
AR State Plant Board $133,000 0.5%
AR Space Grant Consortium $24,000 0.1%
AR Arts/Humanities Councils $14,000 0.1%
AR State Parks S11 000 0 0%
Subtotal $9,051,000 32.9%
Private Sources
Foundation/Non-Profit $726,000 2.6%
Corporate $1,072,000 3.9%
Institution/Other 5444 000 1.6%
Subtotal $2,242,000 8.1%
Total Non -Agriculture
$27,514,000 100.0%
Notes: Individual grant amounts have been rounded. Total reflects rounding of individual grant
amounts. Institution includes both public and private educational institutions. Does not include
Division of Agriculture award activity.
Sources: University of Arkansas and Hammer, Siler, George Associates.
Table 3.
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AWARDS FOR RESEARCH AND
SPONSORED PROGRAMS BY PROGRAM AREA, FISCAL YEAR 1995
Program Area
Agricultural, Food and Life Sciences
Arts & Sciences
Business Administrations
Education
Engineering
HIDEC
Other Interdisciplinary Programs
Other
Total
Source
Federal State
$9,967,700
4,708,400
275,500
3,156,000
3,590,100
2,398,500
407,100
1,400,800
$810,900
5,224,000
229,900
1,569,500
753,000
0
97,500
1,158,000
Other
$6,066,300
571,000
26,600
32,900
584,400
171,300
15,000
194,200
$25,904,100 $9,842,800 $7,661,700
Notes: Other includes Administration, Student Services and the Law School.
Totals reflect rounding of dollar awards by source.
Includes all Division of Agriculture awards.
Sources: University of Arkansas and Arkansas Experiment Station.
Total
$16,844,900
10,503,400
532,000
4,758,400
4,927,500
2,569,800
519,600
2,753,000
$43,408,600
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.
1
1
1
1
Table 4. MAJOR RESEARCH
AWARDS, UNIVERSITY of
ARKANSAS, 1994-1995
HIDEC
Ark. Tech Trans Center
Ark Neuro Center
Non Androgenic Reg/
Cotton Prodtn Bmp Impacts
Somatic Genetic Instability
Peptide Transport Systems
$2,600,000
1,300,000
80,000
125,000
298,000
177,000
100,000
Dimorphism Genes of Candida
Albicans 95,000
Gas Electron Diffraction 117,000
Ion Transport Through Membrane
Channels 127,000
6 Hammer Siler George Associates
Table 48 MAJOR AWARDS
(cont.)
• Electron Transfer 211,000
• Non Linear Optical Materials 208,000
• Real Time Sensing of Composite
Material Stress 120,000
• Quantum Coherence in Multi -Level
Media 298,000
• Low Cost Multi -Chip Module
Manufacture 1,287,000
• Poultry Science 1,900,000
• Ground/Surface Waters Pesticide
Contamination 284,000
7 Hammer Siler George Associates
Comparable University
Research (Tables 6,7)
• U of Arkansas is 9th out of 10
Comparable Universities in Total
Research Expenditures
• Arkansas Receives the Smallest
Share from Federal Sources; But
the Highest Share from State
Government; and Second
Highest Share from Industry
• Arkansas has the Highest Overall
R&D Expenditure Growth
Among the 10 Comparables
• Arkansas was Highest in Growth
for Engineering R&D and Second
for Ag R&D
8 Hammer Siler George Associates
Institution
Table 6. R & D EXPENDITURES AT COMPARABLE LAND GRANT INSTITUTIONS
WITH DEVELOPING RESEARCH PARKS, FY94
Sources of Funding
Federal State/Local Private
Total Government Government Industry Instutional Other
Dollar Amount
University of Wisconsin $392,718 $225,403 $61,099 $13,729 $51,534 $40,953
Texas A&M $355,750 $136,942 $82,353 $28,576 $100,496 $7,383
NC State University $173,407 $69,608 $61,700 $22,101 $18,289 $1,709
Iowa State University $155,982 $56,439 $42,811 $8,185 $43,601 $4,946
VA Polytechnical Inst $148,313 $73,490 $33,147 $12,580 $25,593 $3,503
Washington State Univ. $94,632 $43,354 $6,698 $7,988 $27,684 $8,908
Arizona State University $62,563 $30,699 $997 $5,780 $23,137 $1,950
University of Arkansas $57,815 816,040 822,672 85,605 $11,531 81,967
University of Delaware $50,734 $26,250 $2,180 $4,117 $13,946 $4,241
Percent of Total
University of Wisconsin - 100% 57% 16% 3% 13% 10%
Texas A&M 100% 38% 23% 8% 28% 2%
NC State University 100% 40% 36% 13% 11% 1%
Iowa State University 100% 36% . 27% 5% 28% 3%
VA Polytechnical Inst 100% 50% 22% 8% 17% 2%
Washington State Univ. 100% 46% 7% 8% 29% 9%
Arizona State University 100% 49% 2% 9% 37% 3%
University of Arkansas 100% 28% 39% 10% 20% 3%
University of Delaware 100% 52% 4% 8% 27% 8%
Note: Total R&D expenditures as compiled through surveys by the National Science Foundation.
Sources: National Science Foundation/SRS and Hammer, Siler, George Associates.
Institution
Table 7. TOTAL AND FEDERAL R&D EXPENDITURES BY SELECTED DISCIPLINES
AMONG COMPARABLE INSTITUTIONS, FY9I AND FY94
Expenditures in Thousands
Total Federal
FY91$ FY94$ % Change FY91$ FY94$ % Change
All Disciplines
University of Arkansas $40,831 $57,815 41.6% 512,371 516,040 29.7%
Washington State Univ. $75,244 $94,166 25.1% $32,257 $45,513 41.1%
Texas A&M 5288,005 5355,750 23.5% $97,727 5136,942 40.1%
NC State University $142,606 $173,407 21.6% $46,894 $69,608 48.4%
University of Wisconsin $326,489 $392,718 20.3% $183,652 $225,403 22.7%
VA Polytechnical Inst $125,256 $148,313 18.4% $47,866 $73,490 53.5%
Iowa State University $134,657 $155,982 15.8% $42,793 $56,439 31.9%
University of Delaware $44,696 $50,734 13.5% $20,053 $26,250 30.9%
Arizona State University $63,489 $62,563 -1.5% $26,246 $30,699 17.0%
Agricultural Sciences
Arizona State University $158 $1,183 648.7% $65 $85 30.8%
University of Arkansas 522,997 535,176 53.0% $7,158 58,202 14.6%
Texas A&M $40,244 $55,362 37.6% $6,065 $10,955 80.6%
Iowa State University $25,216 $32,919 30.5% $8,558 $10,219 19.4%
University of Delaware $9,309 $11,378 22.2% $1,398 $2,201 57.4%
NC State University $37,659 $45,258 20.2% $7,797 $12,641 62.1%
VA Polytechnical Inst $35,933 $41,310 15.0% $7,011 $10,073 43.7%
University of Wisconsin $23,154 $25,999 12.3% $8,269 $7,709
Washington State Univ. $24,581 $23,735 -3.4% $8,082 $6,864 -15.1%
Engineering
University of Arkansas $5,710 $10,220 79.0% $2,457 $3,675 49.6%
Washington State Univ. $6,792 $9,185 35.2% $2,774 $5,575 101.0%
NC State University $46,343 $58,871 27.0% $17,192 $26,734 55.5%
University of Wisconsin $43,341 $55,021 26.9% $25,715 $34,375 33.7%
Texas A&M $65,627 $82,565 25.8% $12,826 $22,788 77.7%
Iowa State University $36,768 $44,152 20.1% $12,747 $20,444 60.4%
University of Delaware $12,528 $14,668 17.1% $4,561 $6,926 51.9%
Arizona State University $20,129 $19,555 -2.9% $5,400 $6,637 22.9%
VA Polytechnical Inst $48,407 $43,623 -9.9% $24,273 $21,304 -12.2%
Note: Includes internal and external R&D expenditures, as compiled by the National Science Foundation.
Sources: National Science Foundation and Hammer, Siler, George Associates.
Important University
Initiatives
• Increasing Research Funding
Emphasis in Faculty Recruitment
• Aggressive Business School Role
in Entrepreneurial and Small
Business Development
• Incubator Expansion and
Aesthetic and Functional
Upgrading of the Engineering
Research Center
• More Extensive Use of College
and Departmental Councils
11 Hammer Siler George Associates