Do we need a convention center?

[Timkin]

A convention center close to the Hyatt would be nice, but not right now. Obamanomics still has the economy in the toilet, and there are bigger local issues to deal with as well.

Besides, didnt we try a convention center once already?

The Prime Osborn center saved Jacksonville Terminal from the wrecking ball, and that was a success. As a convention center, though, Prime Osborn has been a total flop.

its not like it could get built overnight...reality is it will likely take 4-5 years at minimum....in the meantime, the space will sit empty, which surely isn't going to help our downtown!

as for the Prime Osborn being a total flop, the main reason is there's no adjacent hotel.

No one ever wanted to chance building one there. Dont know why, there's plenty of vacant land around.

Me either.  Past Administrations Razed Most of Brooklyn and LaVilla . Certainly room for a hotel there.  Of course with the two Downtown struggling, I'm not sure that a new one adjacent to the convention center will solely make it a success.

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

Our past Administrations have miserably failed us and we have paid and paid and paid.  Our current one is disappointing... and we are still paying. 

We , the taxpayers, need to take control of our City.   Our leadership is not doing a proper job to do EVERYTHING it can possibly do to make Jacksonville all it can be.

[tufsu1]

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

I'm pretty sure that maintaining an adequate court system is a primary function of government.  And there is little to no argument that the existing facility was in any way adequate.

[Tacachale]

A convention center close to the Hyatt would be nice, but not right now. Obamanomics still has the economy in the toilet, and there are bigger local issues to deal with as well.

Besides, didnt we try a convention center once already?

The Prime Osborn center saved Jacksonville Terminal from the wrecking ball, and that was a success. As a convention center, though, Prime Osborn has been a total flop.

its not like it could get built overnight...reality is it will likely take 4-5 years at minimum....in the meantime, the space will sit empty, which surely isn't going to help our downtown!

as for the Prime Osborn being a total flop, the main reason is there's no adjacent hotel.

No one ever wanted to chance building one there. Dont know why, there's plenty of vacant land around.

Someone did want to build a hotel there for many years. Even tried to get tax dollars to do it at the same time the city was looking into subsidizing what's now the Hyatt. Unfortunately for him it's a pretty week location and the plan was a boondoggle.

[Debbie Thompson]

They couldn't get financing to build it.

[BrooklynSouth]

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

I'm pretty sure that maintaining an adequate court system is a primary function of government.  And there is little to no argument that the existing facility was in any way adequate.

^^^^
+1000

Why do people complain about spending tax money on local capital improvements, like a high-quality courthouse building that could be used for the next one to two hundred years? I'm pretty sure that local businesses will always need a functioning court system to enforce contracts.

You know what else costs a lot of money? Bridges. Maybe we should tear down the bridges and sell them for scrap metal and then send everyone in Jacksonville a check for $100. That would be good for taxpayers, right?

[Tacachale]

They couldn't get financing to build it.

The city decided to finance what's now the Hyatt instead of the convention hotel.

[Timkin]

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

I'm pretty sure that maintaining an adequate court system is a primary function of government.  And there is little to no argument that the existing facility was in any way adequate.

Would you argue that the size and cost of the slightly upgraded Courthouse was just a bit over the top?

[JFman00]

I think "high-quality" courthouse is a stretch when it comes to both design and construction.

[Timkin]

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

I'm pretty sure that maintaining an adequate court system is a primary function of government.  And there is little to no argument that the existing facility was in any way adequate.

^^^^
+1000

Why do people complain about spending tax money on local capital improvements, like a high-quality courthouse building that could be used for the next one to two hundred years? I'm pretty sure that local businesses will always need a functioning court system to enforce contracts.

High Quality . LOL.  So high quality , we couldn't move into it because it kept having issues.  Just wait.  the fun is just beginning. That building will be a problem child (and an expensive one)  from now on.

I HOPE the glass palace DOES last and is in use 2 centuries from now, but if you look at the track record of the continued use of any building in Jacksonville,  My bet is, it MIGHT (and I highly doubt this)  make it 100 years.

Yes we do need to maintain an adequate system .. I agree 100% .. Tell that to the genius group who built that pile of junk.

[tufsu1]

Would you argue that the size and cost of the slightly upgraded Courthouse was just a bit over the top?

size, no....sadly Jax. outgrew the old courthouse 20 years after it was built...

cost, also not really....people lock into the $350 million figure, but the new building alone came in around $230 million...the rest is in renovating the old federal courthouse (I assume you think that's a good thing), providing the new PD space in other city building, acquiring the land, and building the garage.

Now, one could argue that the courthouse could have been phased...such that space was built as needed....but I still would have recommend setting aside all the money up front (can't count on getting voter approvals in the future).

[Ocklawaha]

It is amazing that we spend hundreds of millions of dollars for Courthouse buildings , Next to nothing to do anything appreciable to revitalize our downtown , save our historic fabric and incorporate these important relics of Jacksonville's past into potentially great points of interest and destinations all through the urban core.   

I'm pretty sure that maintaining an adequate court system is a primary function of government.  And there is little to no argument that the existing facility was in any way adequate.

^^^^
+1000

Why do people complain about spending tax money on local capital improvements, like a high-quality courthouse building that could be used for the next one to two hundred years? I'm pretty sure that local businesses will always need a functioning court system to enforce contracts.

You know what else costs a lot of money? Bridges. Maybe we should tear down the bridges and sell them for scrap metal and then send everyone in Jacksonville a check for $100. That would be good for taxpayers, right?

I still think this would have been a more appropriate model....

The "EXPLOSION IN A PILLAR FACTORY" masquerading as a 'new' courthouse is one of the ugliest urban buildings ever to rise above the dirt. Completely out of scale with the balance of the surrounding downtown structures, it leaves the impression of 'Mayberry on Steroids,' hardly the message a truly cosmopolitan city would embrace. I keep expecting to see a 19 foot tall Barney Fife come swaggering down the front steps clutching that one precious bullet. I can think of few public servants that would be comfortable in the thing this side of Hazard County. Boss Hogg and Roscoe P. Coltrane would both be happier then a tornado in a trailer park with Jacksonville's dumb choices.

How much simpler and how much more 'urban' a high rise office tower would have been. I guess we can all hope for another  Great Jacksonville Fire. Failing that does anyone know how to contact David Copperfield?

[Ralph W]

The party's over folks. Time to set your sights on another project and come back to this when evidence of additional failures in the building envelope or landscaping or juror transportation or flyovers for the State Attorney or the conversion to two-way streets is back on the front burner,

Where is that thread on the proposed Greyhound terminal? Is there or is there not going to be a consolidation of sorts to develop a true inter-modal center with the Jacksonville Terminal as the centerpiece? This over the river and through the woods trek idea floated a while back just to get from the potential Amtrak relocation to the Greyhound station must be on someones radar or drawing table.

[Jdog]

This will be unpopular but here's my contention:

1. We neither need a brand new convention center nor should we move it next to the Hyatt and
2. The current convention center location can be compatible with the JRTC. 


1. Putting a convention center on the river and next to the Hyatt would be a questionable approach: 
A. We would take the convention center off of the Skyway system (which hotels on the Southbank do rely upon and care about).  There are about half a dozen hotels on the Southbank, including three Hilton brands. 
B. We are using land on the river.  Maybe it is productive, but I think there are better uses. 
C. I don't trust the City (sorry).  Is the City going to appropriately squeeze out the proper compensation for giving the Hyatt a near-monopoly on conventioneer accommodations? 

2. The current convention center location can be modified to synergistically work with the JRTC.
A. The parking lot footprint of the convention center appears to be larger than the convention center itself.  There is ample room to expand the convention center westward, therefore.  It's been demonstrated in the past that a hotelier would invest in a hotel near the current convention center.  If parking becomes a concern there is a solution:  a walkway over McCoy's Creek can lead to municipal parking in Brooklyn (admittedly it might be in Brooklyn Park, which would require consideration).  Clean up the creek at that spot, which might be done for free, and you've got a nice, short little walk. 
B. The JRTC plan shows the rail station as an annex (or at least the easternmost portion of the convention center).  If convention center space is moving west both this station area and convention center activity can feasibly reside adjacent to one another. 
C. The Skyway convention center station is not moving.  Yes, we want the most compact intermodal transit center as possible but the Skyway station is not moving. Some portion of the JRTC located adjacent to, or along with, this station area causes no damage to the compactness of the intermodal design, therefore.  Can BRT, for example, come in underneath the station as bus transit currently comes into Rosa Parks station? 
D. Incrementalism. Without relocating the convention center wholesale this plan could be incrementally implemented as different modes of the JRTC are added. 

The question for discussion is thus:

Must we spend gobs of money to move the convention center off of our hundreds of millions dollar worth of fixed transit while giving one of many hotels a near monopoly on hotel traffic rather than expand the current location to synergistically add to TOD for purposes of bringing rail back to downtown? 


   
   

[thelakelander]

I'll present an opposite argument:

This will be unpopular but here's my contention:

1. We neither need a brand new convention center nor should we move it next to the Hyatt and
2. The current convention center location can be compatible with the JRTC. 


1. Putting a convention center on the river and next to the Hyatt would be a questionable approach: 
A. We would take the convention center off of the Skyway system (which hotels on the Southbank do rely upon and care about).  There are about half a dozen hotels on the Southbank, including three Hilton brands.

I wouldn't make a decision on where to invest in a convention center based on the Skyway, or the aging hotels on the Southbank.  Half of those rooms could be gone in another five years and the Skyway can't be counted on for connecting guests with the Prime Osborn now.  It's typically closed on weekends and nights.
 

B. We are using land on the river.  Maybe it is productive, but I think there are better uses.

A convention center doesn't have to be "on the river".  Just like parking garages can be surrounded with a mix of uses facing the street or waterfront, so can an exhibition center.

C. I don't trust the City (sorry).  Is the City going to appropriately squeeze out the proper compensation for giving the Hyatt a near-monopoly on conventioneer accommodations?

Well the city did subsidize the construction of its convention center hotel (The Hyatt...then the Adams Mark) to the tune of +$20 million.  It has also subsidized the development of supporting mix of uses (ex. The Landing, Bay Street as a nightlife district, etc.) a successful convention center environment needs. At the current site, we'd have to pay for an expanded/renovated convention center, a new hotel and restaurants to compete against the struggling ones we've already subsidized.  Doesn't sound like a smart investment for the taxpayer, when you start considering everything outside of a larger box for exhibitions. On the other hand, clustering our previously and stills struggling public investments together with something that could help put them in the black long term, does make sense for a fiscal sustainability standpoint.  The added benefit is that clustering complementing pedestrian scale uses within a compact Northbank setting, breeds the walkable, vibrant urban environment every claims they want.

2. The current convention center location can be modified to synergistically work with the JRTC.
A. The parking lot footprint of the convention center appears to be larger than the convention center itself.  There is ample room to expand the convention center westward, therefore.

Yes, it can.  Atlantic City is an example of a city that has a convention and transportation center coupled together. However, that's not the main issue in deciding what location is best for a convention center that generates the highest ROI for taxpayers and goals of a vibrant urban center.

It's been demonstrated in the past that a hotelier would invest in a hotel near the current convention center. If parking becomes a concern there is a solution:  a walkway over McCoy's Creek can lead to municipal parking in Brooklyn (admittedly it might be in Brooklyn Park, which would require consideration).  Clean up the creek at that spot, which might be done for free, and you've got a nice, short little walk.

Parking should be the last concern of anyone for any use in downtown Jax.  However, I question the sentiment that a hotelier would invest in a convention center size hotel without public subsidies.  If there were a true market for a hotel there, it would have been built already, considering the Prime Osborn has been in business since 29 years.
 

B. The JRTC plan shows the rail station as an annex (or at least the easternmost portion of the convention center).  If convention center space is moving west both this station area and convention center activity can feasibly reside adjacent to one another.

Without the exhibition hall, the entire intermodal center could be located south of Bay Street, meaning all the blocks north of the Skyway station could become property tax paying infill TOD development. Thus, you'd end up with a viable transportation center while also placing your convention center in a location that gives it the best chance to succeed and promote downtown development.  Simply forcing them together in a bomb out section of the urban core, without giving serious thought to the importance of supporting infrastructure and development, means we've invested millions for two subpar facilities.  If that's the route, I'd rather get out of the convention business and put good earned taxpayer money into something else that betters the community. 

C. The Skyway convention center station is not moving.  Yes, we want the most compact intermodal transit center as possible but the Skyway station is not moving. Some portion of the JRTC located adjacent to, or along with, this station area causes no damage to the compactness of the intermodal design, therefore.  Can BRT, for example, come in underneath the station as bus transit currently comes into Rosa Parks station?

BRT is already proposed to utilize Bay and Forsyth Streets, adjacent to the Skyway.  The Skyway station isn't the problem.  The problem is the two additional bus terminals spread out between Forsyth and Adams Street.  The parking garages and office building can be considered questionable "needs" as well. Completely overkill. There's really no solid reason for any transportation terminal to be north of Forsyth, IMO. Especially, with all that moonscape remaining that we used to refer to as LaVilla.

D. Incrementalism. Without relocating the convention center wholesale this plan could be incrementally implemented as different modes of the JRTC are added.

I'm a believer in incrementalism. We can start by bringing Amtrak back downtown and turning the surface lot adjacent to the Skyway station into a bus terminal.  I'd also forget about the parking garage and use the existing surface lots in for parking until a need truly arises to fund a structured parking facility.  As for the office building, they can fill some of the hundreds of thousands of empty Northbank office space, if truly a need.

The question for discussion is thus:

Must we spend gobs of money to move the convention center off of our hundreds of millions dollar worth of fixed transit while giving one of many hotels a near monopoly on hotel traffic rather than expand the current location to synergistically add to TOD for purposes of bringing rail back to downtown?

I think my rebuttal above indirectly answers this question.  In short, I believe building a larger exhibition hall adjacent to all the already subsidized (and struggling) supporting uses a successful convention center needs, will be the cheaper option and generate a higher ROI for taxpayers.

If we're going to half ass it again at the Prime Osborn, funds should be redirected elsewhere.

[spuwho]

It is not uncommon to have hotels contracted to have exclusive access or connectivity to a convention center.

The Peabody is now a Hyatt Regency at the Orange County Convention Center. They are the only hotel where you can register for your event inside the hotel and use the ped bridge to walk directly into the center.

Hyatt Regency also has the same arrangement with McCormick Place in Chicago. You can stay, register and walk directly into the event.

So building a center next to or attached to the current Hyatt is a non-issue in my mind.

While I agree that not having good connectivity east of Laura Street would be an issue, I would say poor connectivity with the airport is the largest hindrance to any center here. I think it hinders our cruise capabilities too, but that is just my opinion.

Some people think condos, parks, museums office towers are all a waste of riverfront space. So it really comes down to what the town wants as opposed to what is appropriate.

The Prime Osborne fits a niche convention need. I don't think there are enough events that fit that niche in that location, therefore its purpose is underutilized.

If AAF returns to Jacksonville (and that is likely thus far) we should look at a total transportation plan that includes not only the terminal, but addresses connectivity inside the core, any replacement centers as well as the airport.