Convention Center Wars

[thelakelander]

I could see a scenario where City Hall Annex could have been a hotel or workforce housing. However, we never put a RFP out for reuse to see what might have been possible. Instead, we let them sit empty for years and then decided they needed to be torn down and that razing them was equal to progress. It was like we've learned nothing from our bad decisions of the 70s, 80s and 90s.

[downtownbrown]

so now that DIA has scrapped the convention center at the old courthouse and rejected the RFP altogether, does that mean Khan gets to build his hotel there?

[Captain Zissou]

so now that DIA has scrapped the convention center at the old courthouse and rejected the RFP altogether, does that mean Khan gets to build his hotel there?

If we are scrapping the convention center at this site, I want to see that Rimrock Devlin multi-family project moving forward tomorrow.  Chances are that whole project was just smoke and mirrors though. 

[KenFSU]

so now that DIA has scrapped the convention center at the old courthouse and rejected the RFP altogether, does that mean Khan gets to build his hotel there?

Khan/Iguana never proposed a hotel at the old Courthouse site.

There were some early rumblings that Iguana might make a bid on a convention center at the Courthouse site, but ultimately, it's clear that they want all of their eggs in one basket out by the sports complex. Hence why, the day after the Courthouse RFP closed, Iguana submitted their own unsolicited proposal for a convention center on the eastern edge of the Shipyards.

In an effort to sweeten their own bid for a Shipyards convention center, Iguana's partner on the proposal - Rimrock Devlin - offered to also create a mixed-use development on the Courthouse site, consisting of low-rise apartments, a suburban style hotel, lots of surface parking, and just enough restaurant, retail, and marina space to look flashy on paper without competing with the Lot J plans.



This wasn't a separate thing, but rather an add-on the group agreed to develop if the city played ball on a Shipyards convention center.

A couple of problems here:

1) Iguana has exclusive development rights over the Shipyards, but not over the Courthouse site. We're not in a legal position to give that land to anyone, at least not without issuing another public RFP for all uses.

2) Hyatt technically still has right of first refusal on that property, giving them the right to match any offer for it.

To me, this week's developments are another clear signal that the convention center is ultimately going to the Shipyards.

The city and DIA aren't putting convention center talks on the backburner for the old Courthouse site, they're cancelling the RFP outright and rejecting the proposals from all three firms, including the winner, Jacobs. In essence, they're abandoning the grand Courthouse convention center plan outright for the foreseeable future.

I suppose there's always the chance that they re-RFP the Courthouse property for a smaller, more reasonably scaled convention center, but there sure does seem to be a lot of back-slapping going on between the mayor and the Jags today on getting the rest of that Hart Bridge ramp removal funding in place and moving forward as quickly as possible on bringing the ramps down (the city claims construction will be under way in 10-months, though that seems very optimistic).

Lamping has said multiple times that when the ramps come down, the Jags want to begin work on a Shipyards convention center.

2020 sounds about right for those negotiations to begin.

Hell, even the Innovation Corridor BUILD application references a Shipyards convention center.

Unfortunately, the most likely scenario is that the city grasses over the Courthouse site, Shipyards style, and sits on it for a few years while they figure everything else out.

[120North]

To me the cancellation of the RFP is a bad thing for JAX overall.  It seems like we have officially thrown all of our eggs into the iguana basket with respect to North Bank public development.  Viable developers are being told no.  Jacobs is a Fortune 200 company, with private financing for the CC project.  The city would have had nothing out of pocket until the center had completed construction. The CC would have been ready to roll in 5 years.  How much ancillary development around that site happens in that 5 years and in the couple of years afterwards in anticipation of the opening?  Likely more than enough to support the CC.  Instead, we cancel that deal for more Iguana development that is dependent on waiting for multi-year dominoes (Har Bridge Ramps) to fall before anything gets done.

[thelakelander]

I think it's bad in that it was all based off faulty information. That RFP was bloated with criteria we don't need at that site or Metropolitan Park. I do believe a realistic solution could have been done with Jacobs or someone else for a fraction of what we're going to be on the hook for, for much of the stuff being talked about east of Liberty Street. The other negative is wasting the resources of credible development teams. It takes a lot of time and money to respond to RFPs. Don't burn business money for the sake of burning it. Have a plan and be ready to implement before playing games with the private sector. Now we've burned $8 million in demo money to look at another two blocks of vacant land for the foreseeable future.

[KenFSU]

The other negative is wasting the resources of credible development teams. It takes a lot of time and money to respond to RFPs. Don't burn business money for the sake of burning it. Have a plan and be ready to implement before playing games with the private sector.

Can you imagine?

We fund a study that concludes that Jacksonville doesn't have the infrastructure to support a large convention center at this time.

We proceed to ignore the findings and issue an RFP for a massive convention center anyway, requiring every bell and whistle.

Jacobs spends three months and likely hundreds of thousands of dollars preparing a thoughtful, 257-page response to the RFP.

They bring in 35 people to present the plan to the DIA.

Jacobs scores a 93 on their proposal - 13 points higher than the other firms - and wins the bid.

A month later - after someone else has put in an unsolicited bid for a convention center at a totally different location - the city tells Jacobs, "Nevermind, we've got this study that says none of this was a good idea to begin with. Plus, we can't afford what we listed in the RFP. Whoops. We're rejecting your bid."

Plus, you can't discount the fact that we really did Hyatt dirty as well by dangling this convention center carrot on a string. They've been a good partner to the city through all the construction, they worked very closely with Jacobs on their bid, and we're ultimately going to need their blessing on anything we do with that property. Can't imagine we haven't wrecked some goodwill with Hyatt as well.

Jacksonville has historically had a hard time getting bids on RFPs from the private sector to begin with (Noah's Ark at the Shipyards doesn't count), you've gotta think that private developers will take notice of how the city is treating companies like Jacobs, Hyatt, and Sleiman Enterprises.

Still don't understand what the harm is in telling Jacobs and Hyatt, "Hey, we love what you guys came up with, but we can't afford the terms of the financing. What do you think you could do as a phase one for $XXX million?"

[120North]

I think it's bad in that it was all based off faulty information. That RFP was bloated with criteria we don't need at that site or Metropolitan Park. I do believe a realistic solution could have been done with Jacobs or someone else for a fraction of what we're going to be on the hook for, for much of the stuff being talked about east of Liberty Street. The other negative is wasting the resources of credible development teams. It takes a lot of time and money to respond to RFPs. Don't burn business money for the sake of burning it. Have a plan and be ready to implement before playing games with the private sector. Now we've burned $8 million in demo money to look at another two blocks of vacant land for the foreseeable future.

I have no doubt that a reasonable project with the size/features that made sense could have easily been negotiated with Jacobs at the courthouse site.  That's usually how it works.  Developers from outside of JAX seem to get the short end of the stick so to speak.  JAX is developing that kind of reputation.

[KenFSU]

I'm sure Jacobs (and Shad Khan) will love this quote:

The DIA Strategic Implementation Committee comprises Craig Gibbs, Braxton Gillam, Ron Moody and Marc Padgett.

All agreed it was time to table the discussion. "I think it's probably wise to wait," Padgett said.

Gillam said he thought the board moved too quickly over the summer by issuing a request for proposals and allowing firms to present their visions.

He said the East Bay Street location isn't the best fit.

"I never thought the proposed location was a good one for a convention center," said Gillam. He said the 8.4-acre property restricted the possible scope of a convention center.

full article: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/dia-committee-recommends-halting-plans-for-bay-street-convention-center

[thelakelander]

West Palm Beach's convention center was built for $83 million in 2004. It has a 100,000 square foot exhibition hall and a 25,000 square foot ballroom. It's across the street from CityPlace, a mixed-use retail, dining and entertainment complex that opened in 2000. Palm Beach County had an estimated 1,471,150 residents in 2017. Duval had 937,934.

The Palm Beach County Convention Center did not turn a profit until 2017. To do that, it took the addition of a $110 million, 400-room Hilton Hotel that opened in 2016. I don't think anyone here is crazy enough to argue that we get more tourist than South Florida or that our convention pull is stronger.



When I see this, I wonder why we need a center twice the size for something that already barely makes end's meat in a much larger market?

I also wonder what in the world is someone like Gillam thinking when he says the convention center scope is restricted at the courthouse site? Whatever it is, it sure can't be based on market reality. The scope should be shrunk.....in half at a minimum and if the courthouse is evaluated, a hotel (which costs more than the convention center itself) shouldn't be in it. If you really want to see what you can do with the courthouse site, set your parameters to the basics and make respondents come up with a $100 to $150 million plan with the option of taking advantage of what's already in place. If you want to realistically compare that site with another one that lacks the supportive infrastructure, no problem. Just make sure the other site includes the numbers for the rest. Then you'll have some apples to apples numbers to play with in your decision making.

[marcuscnelson]

Bringing this thread back from the dead for something I came across.

It's not clear when this was made or who ordered it, but someone had a pretty swanky concept for what ultimately became the Ford on Bay.

https://philliphunter.com/jacksonville-cc-study

Also wow, talk about tragic that two years on, we've gotten nowhere. If anything, we're worse off now than we were when this all started. It'd be hilarious if the utter lack of leadership wasn't so sad.

[thelakelander]

I can't remember the year but I do remember seeing that waterfront rendering. Looking at those graphics, someone wasted a lot of money on them. The waterfront park along the riverwalk is the type of public space that could have been pretty cool for Jax. Instead we ended up with this:



In any event, these graphics do display how a convention center could sit on the property. Still much larger than what Jax actually needs. Just take this concept, bottle it up and drop it on the old City Hall Annex block. The exhibition hall will be much smaller than this, but it will still be larger than what's at the Prime Osborn.

[marcuscnelson]

Right, I remember the concept you've brought up before:

Designing a box on box shaped site doesn't have to be rocket science. The loading docks are already on Market. Expand them. If they put in a grocery, it would need the same. Also not worried about expanding 30 years from now. An exhibition hall on the back of the Hyatt is a real solution that can be implemented now and on the cheap. Make a vibrant downtown first and we'll deal with the bigger box during our grandkid's generation at the shipyards or Daniels Building site.

Feels like they're thinking in the right direction but going overboard with stuff that could be prohibitively expensive or difficult. If the space is there on the city hall annex space that feels like the easier solution.

I get the gist that they are debating the merits of a 100% new and supersized convention center complex and not necessarily viewing the addition to the Hyatt, combined with the Hyatt's existing meeting facilities as also being a convention center. It reminds me of the JTA Brooklyn Skyway thing. For some reason we never consider no-frills solutions from the start. Instead, we come up with things we'll never have the money to pay for, ultimately doing nothing and missing economic cycles in the process.

As for this site, here is the old civil council sketch from the Alvin Brown days:




Here's how it would look with the hotel and surrounding area:

One thing I have forgotten at this point, why are we doing this whole "remove the parking lot" thing again? I don't remember why this project exists anymore.

[Steve]

Here's the thing: In a box, sure the Hyatt Garage/Parking lot is a fine site for it....if it was completely empty. But it isn't. There's a cost to demo/replace the garage, cost to replace what is currently some Hyatt Meeting space, etc.

And yes....especially if you get rid of the Main St Bridge Ramp to Newnan Street, it is a slightly larger site

It just doesn't seem like a very pragmatic solution.

[Peter Griffin]

The parking lot was crumbling into the river. 2 separate collapses happened over the last few years. Plus, maintaining a bridge structure over a river just to support a surface parking lot is a waste.