EverBank Field Development Renderings

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Some integration between the amphitheater and the south end of EverBank?

This is the most intriguing part in my head.  I saw the renderings and the first thing that came to me was:

Outdoor terrace with a bar inside overlooking the amphitheater?  Sounds like a perfect VIP section to me with premium ticket charges.  Not close enough to the stage?  How hard would it be to run a feed directly to the NEZ scoreboard.  Then you can draw that crowd that wants to see certain shows without actually dealing with the majority concert goer.

For the rest of the general seating, the SeaBest Cool Zone will be open with concessions, so it's a win-win-win in my head.

[Chuck McCue]

Total waste of money. How can we event think of spending millions when we have roads in disrepair, sinking boats moored at the south bank, shortchanged our firemen.....

[tufsu1]

This is the continually weird thing to me. Tufsu1 will comment in a way to attack the perspective that lists *a* problem with Metropolitan Park in order to assert that -- no, no, no! -- Metropolitan Park really did have some attributes but *the* real problem was the 12-ticketed event limit.

I never said that Met Park was in good shape or that there aren't issues.  But I'm willing to bet the City could remedy just about every one  of those issues for far less than $45 million.  As for the 12-event limit at met Park, that's still more than double the 5 events that the City would be guaranteed at the new facility.  Finally, until plans show the capacity of the new facility is in fact near 10,000, then it is clear that Met Park can hold far more people for concerts.

[mtraininjax]

How can we event think of spending millions when we have roads in disrepair, sinking boats moored at the south bank, shortchanged our firemen.....

Newsflash - We will always have some list of crisis that will be at the top of everyone's list. There will always be something else people can think of spending millions on for some other purpose. So what, its Jacksonville. It happens everywhere else too. Get on board with it or move.

[whyisjohngalt]

How can we event think of spending millions when we have roads in disrepair, sinking boats moored at the south bank, shortchanged our firemen.....

Newsflash - We will always have some list of crisis that will be at the top of everyone's list. There will always be something else people can think of spending millions on for some other purpose. So what, its Jacksonville. It happens everywhere else too. Get on board with it or move.

If it happens everywhere else, then where can we move to?

[Noone]

I don't think it's unreasonable for a citizen of a city to complain about how that city is run while still maintaining their residence. I even more don't think someone ought to stop complaining and move away simply because they don't like the guy in town that owns the NFL team. That's an idiotic argument.

Don't complain about anything in our 2014-560 zone.

[Noone]

My take away from Metro Park being such a disaster is JAX fails on many levels to maintain its properties......most parks are not well kept, roads are falling in the river, the list goes on........

+1

[brucef58]

DP is right; this is a win/win or the city and the Jaguars.  At Wednesday's Southside Businessmen's Club meeting, Mark Lamping explained the expenditures of the $90 million and what the improvements mean.  There will be a $25 million makeover the Club Seating areas, resulting in fewer seats and more amenities.  The part that everyone wonders about will be the amphitheatre. 

The stage will face the stadium so that sound to the south wall of the stadium to absorb the noise and not toward St. Nicholas.  There will be 4000 seats at ground level and the bud zone will extended out to the south allowing a second and third balcony level with 1000 seats each.  The facility will be under a roof to protect patrons and performers from the elements.  How does tie into the stadium and the indoor practice fields.

The step of removing the ground level outside concessions on the south end of the stadium will allow the field to be open to the theatre and allow people to walk through.  The 95% of the time the indoor facility is not being used for practice, it can be used as an event venue.  This opens the three venues to the probability for future festivals with performances on three stages.  This is the type of concert/special event venue we should have had 20 years ago.  Kudos to the city and the Jaguars on reaching this agreement.

[Adam White]

Will CoJ see revenue from events held at the venue? Or will the revenue go to the Jaguars and the company that is managing it?

Also - who will pay for maintenance? Will this be a CoJ responsibility or will it be shared with the company that manages it?

This is quite important as, if CoJ doesn't get any money from events but is expected to pay for the maintenance (as they will be the owners), this will mean that the Jaguars will recoup their expenditure over time, but CoJ will lose money on the project.

I haven't seen any info on how money from the events, concessions, etc will be split (or who will be responsible for the maintenance). Does anyone have a link or info about this?

[Tacachale]

This is the continually weird thing to me. Tufsu1 will comment in a way to attack the perspective that lists *a* problem with Metropolitan Park in order to assert that -- no, no, no! -- Metropolitan Park really did have some attributes but *the* real problem was the 12-ticketed event limit.

I never said that Met Park was in good shape or that there aren't issues.  But I'm willing to bet the City could remedy just about every one  of those issues for far less than $45 million.  As for the 12-event limit at met Park, that's still more than double the 5 events that the City would be guaranteed at the new facility.  Finally, until plans show the capacity of the new facility is in fact near 10,000, then it is clear that Met Park can hold far more people for concerts.

No offense, tufsu1, but this strikes me as backward thinking. We *could* spend money renovating the bandshell at Metro Park but it would have the exact same issues it has now with noise complaints and the Parks Service, and would still be restricted to only 12 events a year. Why spend any money on a losing proposition?

Again, the city could have as many events as it wants at the new amphitheater. At Metro Park, it's limited to 12 ticketed events total, both city events and everyone else's. Many of the events held there (Rockville, Big Ticket, the boat show, various things with "Fest" in the name) aren't city events. Again, how many events does the city hold there every year?

As for the size, there are plenty of other empty fields for holding thousands of people. There's another one right in the sports district, the Fairgrounds. What we're really missing is a venue with suitable infrastructure for modern concerts holding 2-5k people. We don't have that now, Metro Park isn't it, it never has been and it never will be.

[Adam White]

This is the continually weird thing to me. Tufsu1 will comment in a way to attack the perspective that lists *a* problem with Metropolitan Park in order to assert that -- no, no, no! -- Metropolitan Park really did have some attributes but *the* real problem was the 12-ticketed event limit.

I never said that Met Park was in good shape or that there aren't issues.  But I'm willing to bet the City could remedy just about every one  of those issues for far less than $45 million.  As for the 12-event limit at met Park, that's still more than double the 5 events that the City would be guaranteed at the new facility.  Finally, until plans show the capacity of the new facility is in fact near 10,000, then it is clear that Met Park can hold far more people for concerts.

No offense, tufsu1, but this strikes me as backward thinking. We *could* spend money renovating the bandshell at Metro Park but it would have the exact same issues it has now with noise complaints and the Parks Service, and would still be restricted to only 12 events a year. Why spend any money on a losing proposition?

Again, the city could have as many events as it wants at the new amphitheater. At Metro Park, it's limited to 12 ticketed events total, both city events and everyone else's. Many of the events held there (Rockville, Big Ticket, the boat show, various things with "Fest" in the name) aren't city events. Again, how many events does the city hold there every year?

As for the size, there are plenty of other empty fields for holding thousands of people. There's another one right in the sports district, the Fairgrounds. What we're really missing is a venue with suitable infrastructure for modern concerts holding 2-5k people. We don't have that now, Metro Park isn't it, it never has been and it never will be.

It would seem to me that the suitability of Metro Park and this proposal are two separate issues.

[Tacachale]

Will CoJ see revenue from events held at the venue? Or will the revenue go to the Jaguars and the company that is managing it?

Also - who will pay for maintenance? Will this be a CoJ responsibility or will it be shared with the company that manages it?

This is quite important as, if CoJ doesn't get any money from events but is expected to pay for the maintenance (as they will be the owners), this will mean that the Jaguars will recoup their expenditure over time, but CoJ will lose money on the project.

I haven't seen any info on how money from the events, concessions, etc will be split (or who will be responsible for the maintenance). Does anyone have a link or info about this?

According to this, the city would get some revenue from all events at the new facilities through ticket surcharge and parking. From the Jaguars' 25 events, the city would expect to see about $800k. Sounds like they'd put that money back into the facilities. They would also keep the revenues from city-sponsored events, of which there will be at least 5, but the city has to pay for the operations.

As for maintenance, that seems to be a wider question. As the owner, the city would be on the hook for maintenance, as they are for existing facilities now. But according to that article and previous ones, it sounds like the Jaguars will be contributing money as well. They'll also be operating the facility, which takes some pressure off the city.

[Tacachale]

This is the continually weird thing to me. Tufsu1 will comment in a way to attack the perspective that lists *a* problem with Metropolitan Park in order to assert that -- no, no, no! -- Metropolitan Park really did have some attributes but *the* real problem was the 12-ticketed event limit.

I never said that Met Park was in good shape or that there aren't issues.  But I'm willing to bet the City could remedy just about every one  of those issues for far less than $45 million.  As for the 12-event limit at met Park, that's still more than double the 5 events that the City would be guaranteed at the new facility.  Finally, until plans show the capacity of the new facility is in fact near 10,000, then it is clear that Met Park can hold far more people for concerts.

No offense, tufsu1, but this strikes me as backward thinking. We *could* spend money renovating the bandshell at Metro Park but it would have the exact same issues it has now with noise complaints and the Parks Service, and would still be restricted to only 12 events a year. Why spend any money on a losing proposition?

Again, the city could have as many events as it wants at the new amphitheater. At Metro Park, it's limited to 12 ticketed events total, both city events and everyone else's. Many of the events held there (Rockville, Big Ticket, the boat show, various things with "Fest" in the name) aren't city events. Again, how many events does the city hold there every year?

As for the size, there are plenty of other empty fields for holding thousands of people. There's another one right in the sports district, the Fairgrounds. What we're really missing is a venue with suitable infrastructure for modern concerts holding 2-5k people. We don't have that now, Metro Park isn't it, it never has been and it never will be.

It would seem to me that the suitability of Metro Park and this proposal are two separate issues.

I think so. It would take a lot to turn Metro Park into something comparable to the amphitheater project (and similar ones around North America). Unfortunately, as we learned in the 1990s when we tried that very thing, pulling it off is prohibitively difficult. There are  legitimate questions that could be raised about this project, but by and large I think most critics have focused on wrong ones.

[Adam White]

Will CoJ see revenue from events held at the venue? Or will the revenue go to the Jaguars and the company that is managing it?

Also - who will pay for maintenance? Will this be a CoJ responsibility or will it be shared with the company that manages it?

This is quite important as, if CoJ doesn't get any money from events but is expected to pay for the maintenance (as they will be the owners), this will mean that the Jaguars will recoup their expenditure over time, but CoJ will lose money on the project.

I haven't seen any info on how money from the events, concessions, etc will be split (or who will be responsible for the maintenance). Does anyone have a link or info about this?

According to this, the city would get some revenue from all events at the new facilities through ticket surcharge and parking. From the Jaguars' 25 events, the city would expect to see about $800k. Sounds like they'd put that money back into the facilities. They would also keep the revenues from city-sponsored events, of which there will be at least 5, but the city has to pay for the operations.

As for maintenance, that seems to be a wider question. As the owner, the city would be on the hook for maintenance, as they are for existing facilities now. But according to that article and previous ones, it sounds like the Jaguars will be contributing money as well. They'll also be operating the facility, which takes some pressure off the city.

Thanks Tachacale. That was the sort of info I was looking for. I wonder if it would be better for the city not to own it. I am not certain I see a real benefit to owning the amphitheatre.

[Tacachale]

Will CoJ see revenue from events held at the venue? Or will the revenue go to the Jaguars and the company that is managing it?

Also - who will pay for maintenance? Will this be a CoJ responsibility or will it be shared with the company that manages it?

This is quite important as, if CoJ doesn't get any money from events but is expected to pay for the maintenance (as they will be the owners), this will mean that the Jaguars will recoup their expenditure over time, but CoJ will lose money on the project.

I haven't seen any info on how money from the events, concessions, etc will be split (or who will be responsible for the maintenance). Does anyone have a link or info about this?

According to this, the city would get some revenue from all events at the new facilities through ticket surcharge and parking. From the Jaguars' 25 events, the city would expect to see about $800k. Sounds like they'd put that money back into the facilities. They would also keep the revenues from city-sponsored events, of which there will be at least 5, but the city has to pay for the operations.

As for maintenance, that seems to be a wider question. As the owner, the city would be on the hook for maintenance, as they are for existing facilities now. But according to that article and previous ones, it sounds like the Jaguars will be contributing money as well. They'll also be operating the facility, which takes some pressure off the city.

Thanks Tachacale. That was the sort of info I was looking for. I wonder if it would be better for the city not to own it. I am not certain I see a real benefit to owning the amphitheatre.

That's an interesting thought. The city owns the lot it's going on, so they'd have to do a deal like the Landing, where the Jags own the building but not the land. I think it's more likely the thing just wouldn't get built without the city owning it. Jacksonville's music scene isn't at a place yet where private owners see profit in building venues of this scale. The only similar venue in the metro area is the St. Augustine Amphitheater, which is also publicly owned. All the other privately-owned venues are much smaller.