This (http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2012/06/stop-building-convention-centers/2210/) article seems to suggest no; that a new convention center would be chasing after a shrinking pie with a white elephant.
QuoteChristopher Leinberger, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program and former partner at an international real estate consulting firm, says that too many cities bought into the same dream at the same time.
"So many were saying, 'all you have to do is get one percent of the national market and you'll do just fine,'" he says. "Three hundred cities bought the same logic."
As a result, too many convention centers struggle to provide the economic benefit they initially promised. "You need to look very carefully before building another convention center in this country," Leinberger says. These centers require huge investments, money that could be better used "to bolster the quality of life, the parks, the retailing, the homeless situation."
The real cost in these things is opportunity cost - spending money that then can't be put towards some other alternative. Unlike some other types of venues, for instance a baseball stadium or a performing arts venue, convention centers don't really bring in their own quality of life benefits beyond the money they theoretically bring in.
This is something we really need to consider, especially if the convention market is changing.
I'd say there are some things in our market to consider though - for one, we're currently don't have anything like a modern facility in the Prime Osborne, so a new center may be worthwhile even if the market was declining. For another, we're Florida, so we'd immediately have a leg up over a lot of our competition under any condition.
Is it really worth trying to compete with Orlando/Miami/Tampa? Or even Savannah with it's modern convention center a short ferry ride away from a top-notch historical district?
Quote from: JFman00 on June 11, 2012, 06:37:49 PM
Is it really worth trying to compete with Orlando/Miami/Tampa? Or even Savannah with it's modern convention center a short ferry ride away from a top-notch historical district?
Yes. We also have some great historic areas in town, we just don't capitalize on it. Savannah wasn't in the best of shape years ago either, they just had enough sense to turn things around.
We're not going to attract huge events like Microsoft, or huge comic book conventions, but we could be a destination for smaller venues. (Monster truck jam collectable convention anyone?:) )
Convention centers are not totally about "large conventions", and also create space for corporate events, trade events, large-scale business meetings that need a hall or flex space, and they do bring quality of life events for people to go to like Boat and Car shows, home shows, balls, charity events, etc etc. I worked on the Antique Show one year...and attended (a couple years), and it was so much fun and everybody had a really good time (working on it and attending).
In Jacksonville's case, if we had a medium-sized convention center or a better hotel with quality meeting space (the Hyatt is ok), we could attract regional ULI meetings and various business functions. This would showcase the city a lot more than it is being showcased right now, and provides us the opportunity to make a good impression whereas at this point the only time most people of business see or hear of Jacksonville is in the media (not necessarily good).
Jacksonville could easily compete with Savannah because it has more direct flights/connections and more hotel rooms, and is in driving distance of a much larger population (all of FL). We also have a port, so it's not like port-related conventions could not come to Jacksonville.
Hardly anyone competes with Orlando, and Miami's CC is in Miami Beach, and as a whole S FL and Tampa aren't major convention destinations and Jax could easily compete.
For all the talk of the CC business dying a slow death, the tourism industry is going up up and up (largely due to foreigners like the Chinese). A CC is a big part of capturing that business, as is good press, things like quality beaches that cater to visitors as much as residents, etc etc. Members of the media who come to town for a show or meeting and leave with a good impression can only do the city good rather than harm.
Obviously by this post you know where I stand :) I live in a city with a downtown that would absolutely not survive without the convention business/tourism, so I have seen the impacts firsthand.
No. Yes. A convention center should come after we find a draw. Convention centers should be a result, not a cause of people to come here.
Orlando: Which came first, the convention center or Disney World?
Las Vegas: Which came first the convention center or the casinos and resorts?
Chicago: Which came first the convention center or the city's multiple attractions?
Now if we're going for the "cheapest convention rates in the nation" or "we'll beat their prices or your convention is free" thing, then that's a different story.
I'm still skeptical. Coming from Chicago I'm very aware of the benefits that a convention center can have, but with everyone and their mother competing for conventions that are on a long-term downward trend, I'm of the school that we can come up with better uses for our downtown and riverfront areas especially when it comes to spending public money. If a hotel wants to double as a convention center à la the Mandalay Bay in Vegas, more power to them. But can we really afford another single-use structure with taxpayers footing hundred(s) of millions of dollars? I've never been, but could the Veteran's Arena double as exhibition space? It has the square footage on paper.
See Niagra Falls for a city that tried to convention center its way to success.
Look around you. Yes!
^Jfman, I'm with you on being skeptical. Though I do think we need to consider our unique conditions. We're a large city in Florida that currently has no truly competitive convention center. When you have our weather, our beach, and our golf opportunities, but your convention business is behind places like Savannah, Louisville, and Detroit, you may not be capitalizing on all your assets.
I can agree with that.
If we do a convention center here, it needs to be mixed use to generate foot traffic on an everyday basis. A huge shell that's empty most of the year isn't going to provide downtown with the economic benefits everyone dreams about.
Quote from: cityimrov on June 11, 2012, 07:24:00 PM
No. Yes. A convention center should come after we find a draw. Convention centers should be a result, not a cause of people to come here.
Orlando: Which came first, the convention center or Disney World?
Las Vegas: Which came first the convention center or the casinos and resorts?
Chicago: Which came first the convention center or the city's multiple attractions?
Baltimore: Which came first, the convention center or the inner harbor?
Answer....the convention center....the inner harbor area had a science museum that attracted very few...then came the convention center, followed by the acquarium and Harborplace...and look at the area now.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 11, 2012, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: cityimrov on June 11, 2012, 07:24:00 PM
No. Yes. A convention center should come after we find a draw. Convention centers should be a result, not a cause of people to come here.
Orlando: Which came first, the convention center or Disney World?
Las Vegas: Which came first the convention center or the casinos and resorts?
Chicago: Which came first the convention center or the city's multiple attractions?
Baltimore: Which came first, the convention center or the inner harbor?
Answer....the convention center....the inner harbor area had a science museum that attracted very few...then came the convention center, followed by the acquarium and Harborplace...and look at the area now.
Wikipedia says the convention center have not met expectations. The ship, the aquarium, and the other attractions surrounding it are doing pretty well. Harborplace doesn't look like it needed the convention center to succeed.
Read this: http://bojack.org/images/baltimorereport.pdf
This reminds me of the courthouse. The more people are distracted by it, the less attention everything else gets.
^ the convention center hasn't met expectations? guess that's why it has gone through several expansions over the years....from the report you cited:
THE CONVENTION CENTER
The Baltimore Convention Center, which opened in 1979, was built as an
economic development tool to attract to Baltimore conventions, trade shows and
meetings that would leave in the city millions of dollars spent on lodging, food,
entertainment and other services. Like many convention centers, it is a money-loser, a socalled
loss leader whose role is to bring to the city conventioneers who spend money at
hotels, restaurants and shops.
Built at a cost of $51.4 million, the 425,000 square-foot building included
115,000 square-feet of exhibition space and 40,000 square feet of meeting rooms.
Within a decade, it had become clear that the center lacked the size and amenities
to make Baltimore a major convention city. Consequently, city and state officials decided
on a major expansion and renovation. Completed with $100 million in state general
obligation and revenue bond funds and $50 million in city revenue bonds, the expanded
center opened in September 1996 and the renovation of the original space was completed
in April 1997. Tripled in size, the center now offers 300,000 square feet of exhibition
space, 85,000 square feet of meeting room space and a ballroom of 36,000 square feet.
believe me, the convention center brought people (locals) back to downtown Baltimore...in fact, we went to car and boat shows there when I was a kid....as for vistors, compare the # of hotel rooms downtown before the center was built (the Hyatt and Sheraton were linked to the center via a skkywalk) with the # of rooms today.
Your cited report talks about folks thinking Baltimore needs a convention-sized hotel adjacent to the center for it to succeed...guess what, WE ALREADY HAVE ONE!
Like Lakelander said above, all of the components of the Inner Harbor work together....as has been said here many times, convention centers rarely turn a profit (kind of like transit)....but the spinoff revenue in hotels, restaurants, and the like equates to a pretty nice overall ROI
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.
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
I have to agree with this .. although, I personally would like to see the Jacksonville Terminal returned to being The Jacksonville Terminal. If this does not happen and another Convention Center is built elsewhere , wherever in the city, guess what will happen to the Jacksonville Terminal Building.... The same thing that happens to every vacated ,significant, historic building. Abandonment, decay, wrecking ball. We do not need to add another one to the list.
SO unless the Terminal becomes a train Terminal again, I do not see the need to expend the money for a NEW convention center, only to let that magnificent structure (and the 1504) sit there and decay. If and when that is a go, then I am all for another Convention Center. If that is a go, most likely economics are also on the rise again and we have reason to be hopeful to afford a new one.
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2012/06/stop-building-convention-centers/2210/
I think replacing what we have something a little larger is no big deal. It isn't like we are going to try and compete with Orlando or Chicago for conventions. But, hell we could probably snag some from Mobile or Huntsville!
Quote from: cityimrov on June 11, 2012, 07:24:00 PM
No. Yes. A convention center should come after we find a draw. Convention centers should be a result, not a cause of people to come here.
This is exactly the point too many people miss in Jacksonville. Try hanging out in Buffalo, Cleveland, St. Louis, Omaha or the Twin Cities in January and tell me Jacksonville doesn't have a draw. Hell's bells guys, PALATKA HAS A DRAW! Quick, how many states have a beautiful beach? How many cities? How many have a mix of a beautiful riverfront AND a string of state and national parks like us? NONE! Not even Orlando can compete with us on those things. Jacksonville has MORE state and national parks and monuments within a short drive of downtown then ANY OTHER AMERICAN CITY.
I'd call that DRAW, but we've been in the hands of Neanderthals since about 1925, growing like a weed, in spite of ourselves.
+1000
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 12, 2012, 07:58:23 AM
Like Lakelander said above, all of the components of the Inner Harbor work together....as has been said here many times, convention centers rarely turn a profit (kind of like transit)....but the spinoff revenue in hotels, restaurants, and the like equates to a pretty nice overall ROI
Why can't Jacksonville just build the convention center last instead of first? Build a river tourist information and kayaking booth, bring the historic ship, build the aquarium, build the downtown zoo branch, build the restaurants, then build the convention center.
Jacksonville is also different in that it's part of Florida. Does it really need a convention center to attract people when millions of people pass by us on I-95 every day to vacation either at Miami or Orlando? The cheap tourist traps near Orlando do a better job of attracting them then the entire city of Jacksonville does.
Every time I drive on I-95, it looks like Jacksonville doesn't want tourists. Every highway exit on I-95 in Jacksonville except the last is dirty, scary, and uninviting.
Quote from: cityimrov on June 13, 2012, 02:04:37 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 12, 2012, 07:58:23 AM
Like Lakelander said above, all of the components of the Inner Harbor work together....as has been said here many times, convention centers rarely turn a profit (kind of like transit)....but the spinoff revenue in hotels, restaurants, and the like equates to a pretty nice overall ROI
Why can't Jacksonville just build the convention center last instead of first? Build a river tourist information and kayaking booth, bring the historic ship, build the aquarium, build the downtown zoo branch, build the restaurants, then build the convention center.
Jacksonville is also different in that it's part of Florida. Does it really need a convention center to attract people when millions of people pass by us on I-95 every day to vacation either at Miami or Orlando? The cheap tourist traps near Orlando do a better job of attracting them then the entire city of Jacksonville does.
Every time I drive on I-95, it looks like Jacksonville doesn't want tourists. Every highway exit on I-95 in Jacksonville except the last is dirty, scary, and uninviting.
I have never pulled off the interstate on an unplanned stop for anything other than gas, cheap food, or a room, and I never do so in an urban area because prices are generally higher. The prettiest exit ramp in the world is not going to suddenly make me want to stop somewhere. When my friends and I go on vacations to cities, we certainly don't do our exploring by getting on the highway.
^Yep. We actually see a lot of tourists here, though it's small potatoes compared to other parts of the state, and the ones that come come for the golf, the beach, boating, fishing, and big events - they wouldn't be won over by cheap tourist traps by the highway offramps.
Quote from: JFman00 on June 13, 2012, 02:13:38 PM
I have never pulled off the interstate on an unplanned stop for anything other than gas, cheap food, or a room, and I never do so in an urban area because prices are generally higher. The prettiest exit ramp in the world is not going to suddenly make me want to stop somewhere. When my friends and I go on vacations to cities, we certainly don't do our exploring by getting on the highway.
Your kids don't say "Daddy, Mommy, what's over there?" every time you pass by something. If it's the 9th time they are visiting, they don't scream at you wanting to stop by over there?
Quote from: cityimrov on June 13, 2012, 02:04:37 PM
Build a river tourist information and kayaking booth, bring the historic ship, build the aquarium, build the downtown zoo branch, build the restaurants, then build the convention center.
really....you'd rather us build an acquarium or zoo branch before a convention center?
Quote from: cityimrov on June 13, 2012, 02:56:46 PM
Quote from: JFman00 on June 13, 2012, 02:13:38 PM
I have never pulled off the interstate on an unplanned stop for anything other than gas, cheap food, or a room, and I never do so in an urban area because prices are generally higher. The prettiest exit ramp in the world is not going to suddenly make me want to stop somewhere. When my friends and I go on vacations to cities, we certainly don't do our exploring by getting on the highway.
Your kids don't say "Daddy, Mommy, what's over there?" every time you pass by something. If it's the 9th time they are visiting, they don't scream at you wanting to stop by over there?
No kids. And when I was a kid I just wanted to get to wherever it was we were supposed to be going. Every second in Nowheresville, Anystate was time not spent at Disneyworld or Niagra Falls or whatever.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 13, 2012, 02:30:10 PM
^Yep. We actually see a lot of tourists here, though it's small potatoes compared to other parts of the state, and the ones that come come for the golf, the beach, boating, fishing, and big events - they wouldn't be won over by cheap tourist traps by the highway offramps.
A lot of tourists come here for are fine Churches. http://www.floridavisiting.com/Jacksonville-FL/Churches
Quote from: Timkin on June 13, 2012, 01:31:24 AM
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
I have to agree with this .. although, I personally would like to see the Jacksonville Terminal returned to being The Jacksonville Terminal. If this does not happen and another Convention Center is built elsewhere , wherever in the city, guess what will happen to the Jacksonville Terminal Building.... The same thing that happens to every vacated ,significant, historic building. Abandonment, decay, wrecking ball. We do not need to add another one to the list.
SO unless the Terminal becomes a train Terminal again, I do not see the need to expend the money for a NEW convention center, only to let that magnificent structure (and the 1504) sit there and decay. If and when that is a go, then I am all for another Convention Center. If that is a go, most likely economics are also on the rise again and we have reason to be hopeful to afford a new one.
I, too, would like to see Jacksonville Terminal a terminal again (complete with a new Amtrak maintenance facility. Come on, Corrine. You did it for Sanford). Along with an indoor, air conditioned location for a re-restored 1504, and incorrectly labeled SCL Orange Blossom Special sleeper car.
The SCL sleeper is rusting away, too. Fortunately the olive drab paint hides it from a distance.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 13, 2012, 08:52:04 AM
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 11:59:46 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 13, 2012, 08:52:04 AM
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 12:22:06 AM
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.
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 11:59:46 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 13, 2012, 08:52:04 AM
Quote from: BackinJax05 on June 13, 2012, 12:28:43 AM
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.
They couldn't get financing to build it.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 14, 2012, 08:05:11 AM
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 12:22:06 AM
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?
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on June 14, 2012, 12:47:35 PM
They couldn't get financing to build it.
The city decided to finance what's now the Hyatt instead of the convention hotel.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 14, 2012, 08:05:11 AM
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 12:22:06 AM
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?
I think "high-quality" courthouse is a stretch when it comes to both design and construction.
Quote from: BrooklynSouth on June 14, 2012, 03:26:18 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 14, 2012, 08:05:11 AM
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 12:22:06 AM
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.
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 08:12:28 PM
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).
Quote from: BrooklynSouth on June 14, 2012, 03:26:18 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 14, 2012, 08:05:11 AM
Quote from: Timkin on June 14, 2012, 12:22:06 AM
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?
(http://www.imayberry.com/tagsrwc/wbmutbb/dc269/courthouse/courthouseblueprint.gif)
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?
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.
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?
I'll present an opposite argument:
Quote from: Jdog on June 26, 2014, 11:25:38 AM
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.
QuoteB. 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.
QuoteC. 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.
Quote2. 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.
QuoteIt'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.
QuoteB. 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.
QuoteC. 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.
QuoteD. 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.
QuoteThe 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.
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.
Boiled down for me it's the connectivity. I can't reconcile disconnecting almost 90 percent of all downtown hotels given the transit investments.
Question:
1. Is the current location a positive, negative, neutral, or who knows as far as AAF planning?
It seems that it would be easier to improve connectivity with the the hotels rather than put additional work into the Prime Osborne's convention center and surrounding uses.
I've raised the issue in previous threads but ... what real convention business do we have? I'm aware of very few events and very far in between said events being held at the Prime Osborne.
Most trade and business events that I have attended in the last 20 years have been held at Sawgrass Marriott.
If we are trying to fill a niche market .. drop the old City Hall and expand exhibition space for use in conjunction with the Hyatt.
If we do build a new convention center first priority should be turning the Prime Osborn into a transport hub. We could save a lot of money by making it back into a train connection / bus stop / greyhound area rather than rebuilding everything all over again. I'm all for the Prime Osborn coming full circle if it means having a better, closer to the core and well managed convention center.
QuoteHeywood Sanders, a professor at the University of Texas at San Antonio lays out in a new book, "Convention Center Follies." U.S. cities invested tens of billions of dollars, expanding convention center capacity by 30 percent since 2000, while the demand for the space has barely budged.
All those consultants' reports, it turns out, were based on optimistic assumptions and failed to anticipate the impact of industry consolidation and slower economic growth on the demand for meeting space. Even more curious was the consultants' failure to take into account all the other cities contemplating subsidized expansions — something they surely knew because the same group of firms had prepared virtually all of the reports.
Rather than acknowledge their mistakes, however, the convention industry convinced political leaders that the reason bookings had failed to meet expectations was that they didn't have a big "headquarters hotel" to offer convention planners, who value such hotels because they reduce the cost and complexity of running such large events. Curiously, the private sector has been reluctant to seize on this golden opportunity to build them, so dozens of cities concluded that they had no choice but to provide subsidies for the hotels as well.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/steven-pearlstein-debunking-the-conventional-wisdom-about-conventions/2014/06/27/77cac02e-fd5f-11e3-932c-0a55b81f48ce_story.html
^ the same (flawed) logic is now being used to justify dredging ports up and down the east coast.
fact is cities have been (and will continue to be) competing with each other for decades. While building/doing something may not catapult a city ahead of its competitors as much as may be projected, doing nothing almost always guarantees it will fall behind.
Option C: Build an exhibition hall box adjacent to the things we've already have and continue to subsidize. Perhaps them all feeding off of each other, puts all of them in better position to be fiscally viable long term.
Further explanation:
In Jax's case, we've already subsidized the headquarters hotel. It's the +900 room Hyatt. We've also subsidized the entertainment and retail....in the form of the Landing, Bay Street, Riverwalk, etc. We're currently discussing pooring more money into the Landing. Unfortunately, all of of this public investment is a mile away from the exhibition hall, which is attached to a building that was designed (and should be converted back) to be a train station. If we're going to invest in a convention center, when one looks at the entire picture, it's cheaper to move the box into the right spot.
Ennis we've had this debate 2 or 3 times in great detail, and I don't recall that it went that well for you any of them. But after 4 years of it, you've tired me out. You're clearly not going to change your mind despite all the available evidence, and they're going to waste my taxes on something or another anyway, so what's the difference. I'm staying out of it this time, build the stupid thing.
Quote from: stephendare on July 02, 2014, 11:35:09 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 02, 2014, 11:28:51 AM
^ the same (flawed) logic is now being used to justify dredging ports up and down the east coast.
fact is cities have been (and will continue to be) competing with each other for decades. While building/doing something may not catapult a city ahead of its competitors as much as may be projected, doing nothing almost always guarantees it will fall behind.
So in the two options you present:
a. doing something may not work
b. doing nothing may not work
the difference is that valuable real estate and millions of dollars is spent with the option 'a' vs. option 'b'
I think that the main thrust of the article is that you can't fix a flat tire by eating salmon.
Well said Stephen. The difference is the massive cost to just "see what happens".
IMO how do we even talk about a new convention center without talking about a significant influx of hotels in the same breath? You can' be a significant convention town if you don't basic lodging supply to handle the visitors. The fact that Jax had to enlist a bunch of cruise ships to act as floating hotels, when the superbowl was here, might be a good indicator that we are not in any position to be a significant convention town.
IF we are going to consider trying to be a competing convention town, it has to go hand in hand with making serious moves to entice hoteliers to the area that a proposed site for a convention center would be.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on July 03, 2014, 07:20:57 AM
Ennis we've had this debate 2 or 3 times in great detail, and I don't recall that it went that well for you any of them. But after 4 years of it, you've tired me out. You're clearly not going to change your mind despite all the available evidence, and they're going to waste my taxes on something or another anyway, so what's the difference. I'm staying out of it this time, build the stupid thing.
LOL, good morning! Kind of sounds like bait. However, I fared just well and made my points pretty clear back then. I also don't think we'll change each other's minds either. I'm in Detroit for a few days so I won't be participating much in the discussion myself.
Cobo Hall in Downtown Detroit..
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Detroit-2014/i-wQrW65F/0/X2/DSCF1028-X2.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Windsor-Canada-2014/i-5JMR9dC/0/L/DSCF1038-L.jpg)
I still think it enhances the metropolitan area's appeal and ability to recruit new corporate residents, a sort of red carpet to tweak the senses. But since Ennis is on the other side of the Lake, Here's a couple of shots of 'The Milwaukee Center.' ;)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/URBANISM/ScreenShot2014-07-07at103123PM_zps3bb7a7cc.png)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/URBANISM/ScreenShot2014-07-07at103105PM_zpsdb125a3e.png)
The Milwaukee convention center is a perfect example for Jacksonville. It is not ridiculously large and fits quite well in its urban context.
Here is an image of Milwaukee's convention center and the hotel it is attached to:
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1231157333_jnhcR-M.jpg)
The attached hotel is Hilton Milwaukee Center. It has 729 rooms.
More images of downtown Milwaukee:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-apr-elements-of-urbanism-milwaukee#.U7v4BvldViY
The Wisconsin Center's exhibition hall (188,695sf) is more than double the size of the Prime Osborn's (78,500sf).
QuoteThe building opened in 1998 and features 188,695 square feet (17,530.3 m2) of contiguous exhibit space along with a 37,506-square-foot (3,484.4 m2) ballroom. Naming rights were sold to Midwest Airlines. Skywalks connect the convention center to the nearby Hilton and Hyatt hotels. On April 13, 2010, Republic Airways Holdings CEO Bryan Bedford announced that the name would change to Frontier Airlines Center, coinciding with the consolidation of brands between Frontier and Midwest Airlines. On August 15, 2012, Delta Air Lines purchased the building's naming rights as part of the carrier's recent expansion at nearby General Mitchell International Airport.[2] The facility changed its name from the Frontier Airlines Center to the Delta Center after Delta purchased naming rights to the building. The change took place in November 2012.[3]
Art was incorporated early in the design stage and is the largest design-build project in Wisconsin. The Hilton's skyway entrance foyer floor features a green floor mosaic in the shape of Wisconsin, Michigan in gold, Minnesota, pink, Iowa red, and grey for Illinois. Region inlays represent area industries and dairy cows. A half dozen flush bronze containers contain different soil types.
It's architecture reinterprets the many historic German buildings found in downtown Milwaukee. Along with art-as-design features, the John J. Burke Family Collection is scattered throughout the interior.
On the Fourth Street side of the center is an outdoor reliquary garden titled City Yard. Created by artist Sheila Klein, it contains many iconic items from Milwaukee's DPW such as fire hydrants and the classic blue police call box. Within this area are planters containing ginkgo trees and a large monument with four limestone lion heads set in relief. These architectural elements were salvaged from the AT&T building that once stood nearby. [4]
Artist Vito Acconci created an indoor-outdoor sculpture titled Walkways Through the Wall. Designed to integrate private and public space, these curled terra cotta colored concrete strips flow through structural boundaries and provide seating at both ends.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Center
They have a government body that manages it:
QuoteABOUT US
Mission Statement
Governance
Funding
Operations
Economic Impact
Green Practices
History
The Future
Financial Information
The Wisconsin Center District (WCD) is a government body created under Wisconsin State Statute in 1994 to fund, build and operate the Midwest Express Center (now Wisconsin Center) in downtown Milwaukee, and continue operating the existing venues now called the UW-Milwaukee Panther Arena and Milwaukee Theatre. Not a unit of state, county or city government, WCD is instead a semi-autonomous municipality called a "district," meaning its leaders are appointed and it can issue bonds and collect taxes within strict limits.
Mission Statement
The mission of the Wisconsin Center District: to maintain, and continuously build, our professional reputation in the convention, entertainment and sporting events industry on all levels, both locally and nationally; to present first class facilities in the twenty-first century; to provide the most effective use of space for our clients by utilizing the collective talents of all Wisconsin Center District employees; and to create and sustain jobs, income, and prosperity in the Greater Milwaukee community.
Governance
WCD is governed by an unpaid, fifteen-member Board of Directors statutorily appointed by the Governor, the Milwaukee County Executive, the Mayor of Milwaukee and the Milwaukee Common Council President. The co-chairs of the State Legislature's Joint Finance Committee and the City of Milwaukee Comptroller serve on the board automatically, and two appointed members represent the hotel and restaurant industries, which derive the most benefit from a convention center.
The Wisconsin Center District Board of Directors currently consists of:
Franklyn M. Gimbel, Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, Chairperson
James C. Kaminski, Kaminski Consultants, Vice Chairperson
Willie Hines, Secretary
Jason Allen, Foley & Lardner
Joseph Bartolotta, The Bartolotta Restaurants
Joel Brennan, Discovery World
Senator Alberta Darling, Wisconsin State Senate
Mayor Kathy Ehley, City of Wauwatosa
Alderman Ashanti Hamilton, City of Milwaukee
Representative Dale Kooyenga, Wisconsin State Assembly
Stephen H. Marcus, The Marcus Corporation
Martin Matson, City of Milwaukee Comptroller
Alderman Robert Puente, City of Milwaukee
Chris Schoenherr, Wisconsin Deputy Secretary of Administration
Jeff Sherman, OnMilwaukee.com
Russell Staerkel, Interim President & CEO
Funding
WCD receives no property tax money or Federal, State or local subsidy. Its operations are funded by operating revenues. Special sales taxes on hotel rooms, on prepared food and drinks sold in restaurants and taverns, and on car rentals repay a $185 million bond issue that funded the Midwest Express Center project, and provide funding to Visit Milwaukee. None of these tax revenues are used to fund WCD operations.
Within the boundaries of Milwaukee County, WCD collects 2.5% on rooms, 3% on car rentals, and 0.5% on food and beverage sales. It also receives a 7% hotel room tax formerly collected by the City of Milwaukee. In January, 2011, the county-wide hotel room tax increased from 2% to 2.5%; the increase was requested by hoteliers to provide additional funding for Visit Milwaukee.
This financial plan is supported by political and business leaders - in particular, Wisconsin's hotel and restaurant associations - as an investment in economic growth. Among U.S. cities, Milwaukee is rare in that its visitor taxes are used only for visitor-oriented marketing, facilities and services.
Operations
WCD's diverse, skilled staff of about 285 full- and part-time employees markets and maintains the facilities, books and services events, and helps promote and produce them. Visit Milwaukee solicits major convention and tradeshow bookings, and WCD books smaller meetings as well as sports, entertainment and consumer shows. Levy Restaurants, WCD's exclusive food service provider, books banquet, luncheons and receptions.
Most WCD employees are members of such bargaining units as the International Association of Theater & Stage Employees, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the International Union of Operating Engineers, the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters, the International Brotherhood of Painters & Allied Workers, and the Service Employees International Union.
A wide variety of private businesses and entrepreneurs ranging from event planners and decorators to florists and specialty food providers do business in WCD facilities, or deliver products and services to WCD clients.
Economic Impact
WCD exists to support Milwaukee's economy by attracting visitors and wealth to the community. In addition to the economic impact of visitor spending for rooms, meals, transportation and entertainment, WCD and its caterer, Levy Restaurants, help cultivate small and disadvantaged business development through "third-party vendor" contracts for specialty foods and other contracts for everything from construction services to printing. WCD's success in fueling local and regional prosperity is measurable in many ways, including the opening of some 1,500 new downtown hotel rooms since 1996. WCD has also helped stimulate community pride and economic development on the downtown, neighborhood and metropolitan levels
http://wcd.org/categories/12-wcdinformation/documents/1-about-us
This is the money that is being used to fund the new scoreboards at EverBank Field. During the Peyton administration, it was considered as an option for funding a new convention center/redoing the Prime Osborn.
QuoteFunding
WCD receives no property tax money or Federal, State or local subsidy. Its operations are funded by operating revenues. Special sales taxes on hotel rooms, on prepared food and drinks sold in restaurants and taverns, and on car rentals repay a $185 million bond issue that funded the Midwest Express Center project, and provide funding to Visit Milwaukee. None of these tax revenues are used to fund WCD operations.
As Lake has noted the Milwaukee center's contiguous exhibit space is just shy of 200,000 square feet. That seems to be the magic number for needed medium-sized convention centers, and should be considered a requirement for any new (or renovated) center in Jax. The current Prime Osborn's exhibit hall is 78,500 square feet.
^The Wisconsin Center District operates and manages other venues as well. Assuming they are successful (being financially self sustainable would suggest success, IMO), the extra business could trigger a need for more employees than what may be needed in Jax locally.
QuoteThe Wisconsin Center District (WCD) is a government body created under Wisconsin State Statute in 1994 to fund, build and operate the Midwest Express Center (now Wisconsin Center) in downtown Milwaukee, and continue operating the existing venues now called the UW-Milwaukee Panther Arena and Milwaukee Theatre. Not a unit of state, county or city government, WCD is instead a semi-autonomous municipality called a "district," meaning its leaders are appointed and it can issue bonds and collect taxes within strict limits.
QuoteCity leaders in the United States devote enormous public resources to the construction of large entertainment projects, including stadiums, convention centers, entertainment districts, and festival malls. Their justification is that such projects will generate economic returns by attracting tourists to the city. Although this economic expectation is tested in the literature, little attention is given to the political and social implications of building a city for visitors rather than local residents. A focus on building the city for the visitor class may strain the bonds of trust between local leaders and the citizenry and skew the civic agenda to the detriment of fundamental municipal services.
http://uar.sagepub.com/content/35/3/316.refs.html
Quote from: finehoe on July 08, 2014, 11:59:13 AM
QuoteCity leaders in the United States devote enormous public resources to the construction of large entertainment projects, including stadiums, convention centers, entertainment districts, and festival malls. Their justification is that such projects will generate economic returns by attracting tourists to the city. Although this economic expectation is tested in the literature, little attention is given to the political and social implications of building a city for visitors rather than local residents. A focus on building the city for the visitor class may strain the bonds of trust between local leaders and the citizenry and skew the civic agenda to the detriment of fundamental municipal services.
http://uar.sagepub.com/content/35/3/316.refs.html
+1
Now I'm pretty interested in the Milwaukee example. According to them, they're financially sustainable and self-sufficient. Milwaukee appears to have a pretty well rounded downtown that's built for everyone.....residents and visitors.
Milwaukee seems to have their act together. In recent years, they've reclaimed their waterfront, added a downtown public market, expanded their intermodal transit center and removed an elevated expressway. They also fought with the state to move forward with their streetcar project.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1231147604_D8R69-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1231107928_ACVf4-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1231162251_s6oxk-M.jpg)
(http://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/legacy/2011/09/22/thebrewery-aerial_west-east.gif)
(http://urbanmilwaukee.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/milwaukeestreetcarroute.jpg)
Quote from: thelakelander on July 08, 2014, 03:05:41 PM
Milwaukee seems to have their act together.
+1
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-apr-elements-of-urbanism-milwaukee
The 4th photo outlines the former Pabst Brewing Company plant on the edge of downtown. However, it captures the path of the expressway that was removed and replaced with a ground level boulevard. The removal of the Park Freeway in 2002 created 60 acres in the heart of the city for new infill development.
http://city.milwaukee.gov/Projects/ParkEastredevelopment.htm#.U7xE_vldViY
(http://www.cnu.org/sites/www.cnu.org/files/mil1.jpg)
(http://www.cnu.org/sites/www.cnu.org/files/1_mi.jpg)
(http://www.cnu.org/sites/www.cnu.org/files/2_mi.jpg)
QuoteGiven the fairly recent opening of the boulevard -- the redevelopment interest is proving the value of converting this area into a walkable urban space. Fortune-500 Manpower Corporation has moved its headquarters a block from the former highway and mixed-use developments are popping up along the boulevard as well as in the surrounding blocks. Between 2001 and 2006, the average assessed land values per acre in the footprint of the Park East Freeway grew by over 180% and average assessed land values in the Park East Tax Increment District grew by 45% between 2001 and 2006. This growth is much higher than the citywide increase of 25% experienced during the same time period.
http://www.cnu.org/highways/milwaukee
Looks like New Orleans wants to go in a similar direction:
QuoteThe convention center's governing authority says it needs a hotel and other amenities.
Under legislation signed into law last week by Gov. Bobby Jindal, the authority has been given permission to move forward with a plan to develop a 47-acre tract of vacant land it owns at the center's upriver end into a hotel and entertainment district and to make changes to the area along Convention Center Boulevard.
(http://theadvocate.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=FDETUmK9aUVW0AkdxuhFn8$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYt23xuEKOWve$E67socTVeRWCsjLu883Ygn4B49Lvm9bPe2QeMKQdVeZmXF$9l$4uCZ8QDXhaHEp3rvzXRJFdy0KqPHLoMevcTLo3h8xh70Y6N_U_CryOsw6FTOdKL_jpQ-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg)
http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/home/9449334-172/convention-center-envisions-a-new
Quote from: stephendare on July 08, 2014, 03:32:50 PM
Is it part of the expansion district around the convention center?
Partially.
(http://urbanmilwaukee.com/wp-content/gallery/kilbourn-town/conventioncenterrendering.png)
The circular building (new arena?) in the bottom right of this image is Lot 6 on the freeway redevelopment map.
Quote from: thelakelander on July 08, 2014, 03:05:41 PM
Milwaukee seems to have their act together. In recent years, they've reclaimed their waterfront, added a downtown public market, expanded their intermodal transit center
Just think if Jax had a convention center that was near a DT intermodal transit center (Greyhound, Railroad station, trolleys / monorail to get around dt and to the riverfront, light rail connection to the airport and the Beaches...) - this would make it a lot more attractive imho - easy to get to and easy to get to bars, stadium, the beaches from there - a convention is that much more fun if you can have fun before and after it :)
Quote from: stephendare on July 08, 2014, 11:04:13 AM
TUFSU. What do you mean the magic number needed?
Do you see more of a correlation between the amount of space and success or the number of local people working on the project.
285 people working on a convention center seems like it would get a space pretty busy, even if by accident.
sorry for the delay in responding. The magic # I was referring to is 200,000 square feet of exhibit space. That is the size that folks in the industry nationally believe is needed to attract medium-sized conventions and trade shows.
By no means should Jacksonville be trying to compete with Chicago, Detroit, Las Vegas, Atlanta, San Diego, or Orlando for the largest shows. Nor should we be aiming for that next tier (Philadelphia, Washington DC, Houston, New Orleans). But with a larger facility, we could (and in IMO would) be able to compete with places like Milwaukee, Tampa, Nashville, Charlotte.
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 09, 2014, 11:44:10 AM
But with a larger facility, we could (and in IMO would) be able to compete with places like Milwaukee, Tampa, Nashville, Charlotte.
Or, we could get out of the convention business altogether since study after study after study show the return on investment rarely makes it worthwhile.
I don't think Jax will be on Nashville's convention tier, ever, since I believe it is up there with San Antonio and a few other pretty large convention markets, especially with their new Music City CC, and all those new hotels, and their nightlife and attractions and destination status.
However, I'm not ready to rush to "non-compete" status by giving up on the convention business. I don't see any cities giving up, rather, every city seems to be expanding and trying to win new business. SF is expanding Moscone Center by 400,000 SF or something around there, but it has all those tech conventions to handle (Oracle, Salesforce, Apple, etc).
I put CC's in the tourism sector, and tourism is on the rise. Especially with Asians. There's a lot Jax can do better to bring in tourism, and it's not doing anything. Building a new CC is one of the more expensive options, but it is something that the city can do. If a place like Indianapolis or Hartford can build or expand a new center and take on more conventions and build more hotels and relatively fill them, Jax certainly can do so better. It's warm year round!
Quote from: simms3 on July 09, 2014, 12:30:16 PM
I don't see any cities giving up, rather, every city seems to be expanding and trying to win new business.
All the more reason for Jacksonville to spend the money on something more useful.
^^^My point was that if every city sees some benefit to enhancing convention business, they can't all be wrong...maybe there is intrinsic value that Jacksonville just doesn't understand since it's never really had robust convention business. Maybe the net positives aren't necessarily with convention business itself, but a ripple effect it causes for the city. Similar in fashion to building a useful light rail line - the light rail is expensive and a money loser, but produces presumably net positive economic effects over time.
"My point was that if every city sees some benefit to enhancing convention business, they can't all be wrong"
I disagree. Politicians will continue to support big projects intended to create jobs and economic growth in spite of studies and historical evidence that clearly show them to be bad investments of tax payer dollars because they will be long gone by the time the disappointing results are seen.
Any idea to how Milwaukee has created a situation where their's appears to be financially sustainable? Perhaps, whatever they are doing operationally should be considered locally, just as much as relocating and expanding.
I was actually just thinking of a similar idea Stephen. It's about people's creativity, not the space itself that can make the biggest difference.
A convention center would be great for TedTalks, trade shows, etc. But while we don't have one, why not utilize our resources to land a big one? Two of the best conventions a city could get is either the GOP or DNC convention every 4 years. Cleveland just landed the GOP convention and it'll be at the Quicken Loans Arena. Tampa had the GOP convention 2 years ago at the Times Forum, not their convention center. Charlotte had the 2012 DNC convention at the Time Warner Cable Arena, not their convention center. And then of course, there was the 2008 DNC convention at Invesco Field (imagine how cool that would look on the largest video boards in the world?!)
I know this thread is about having a facility for conventions that would most likely be meetings, conferences (a few dozen to a couple hundred people max.) But why not set a plan in motion for one of the biggest conventions you can? Obviously, the size of the event dictates the venue, so when you're talking about these events, you need space for around 15,000 people - making the Vet capable of hosting such an event, or even Everbank if there's ever another phenom like Obama circa 2008 capable of drawing 80k+ for a single political event. I would love to see Jacksonville throw its hat in the ring to be the host city for the 2020 or 2024 convention for either party.
The idea of having a convention center would be to attract medium-sized conventions, not DNC or GOP conventions - I get it. But while we don't have a 200,000 sq foot convention center where we can host medical conferences, academic summits, etc., why not look at comparable cities like Tampa, Charlotte and Cleveland and follow their lead and go after one of the two biggest conventions possible?
Quote from: stephendare on July 09, 2014, 02:46:28 PM
Lake, our local SMG contract does the same thing as the Milwaukee group, and they are also (obviously) profitable. The just ship the money back to philadelphia. And they don't have to make things profitable for anyone else in order to succeed.
So what we have is actually profitable and if remodeled/expanded and managed right, could be more profitable?
Something tells me Jax is a longgg way off from hosting either a DNC or a GOP national convention. I've heard that the effort to putting on those conventions is akin to a Superbowl in some respects. There is no way the city has the hotel rooms, logistics, sex appeal, or major swing/base voter city status to be a logical candidate.
I would think the small to mid-range conventions/exhibits are perfect for a Jacksonville.
A convention center is merely an amenity to a business center or economy. Isn't Jacksonville's prime meeting space technically down in Southpoint and out at Ponte Vedra? It's no wonder downtown isn't it. If you amenitize downtown to foster a healthy, collaborative and convenient business environment, and pull in a little bit of tourism, too, then you have a political/economic/geographic shift back towards downtown as the center of town.
I don't think there's much reason to do business downtown or be downtown right now, but an appropriately sized and connected convention center convenient to activities and offices is one major tool that can potentially make a sizable difference. It's not just about large exhibitions. Convention centers have traditional meeting space and flex space, as well. The Prime Osborn has meeting space that probably goes unused simply because the Hyatt is closer to office and activities and connected to hotel rooms.
Quote from: simms3 on July 09, 2014, 04:29:25 PM
Something tells me Jax is a longgg way off from hosting either a DNC or a GOP national convention.
No doubt Simms. We definitely could not host a convention in 2 years, but why not plan on it for 2024? If memory serves me correctly, we made our push to host the Superbowl back in 98 or 99 and we were subsequently awarded it in 2000 giving us 5 years of prep time. Why not aim for 10 years out for something like that? And I don't think many people would say Cleveland has much sex appeal, but they got one. Why not us? And Florida is definitely a swing state; conventions are starting to be held in battleground states more frequently i.e., Tampa, FL; Charlotte, NC; Cleveland, OH; Denver, CO (in '08 it was considered a swing state,) instead of traditionally blue or red states like PA or NY.
Quote from: simms3 on July 09, 2014, 04:29:25 PM
A convention center is merely an amenity to a business center or economy. Isn't Jacksonville's prime meeting space technically down in Southpoint and out at Ponte Vedra? It's no wonder downtown isn't it. If you amenitize downtown to foster a healthy, collaborative and convenient business environment, and pull in a little bit of tourism, too, then you have a political/economic/geographic shift back towards downtown as the center of town.
ABSOLUTELY! I hope that this effectively answered the question "Do we need a convention center?" It'd be great, but it's not going to work if simply building one is the goal. Rather, a need to build a convention center would be the natural result of creating a better environment downtown. Doing things like putting in place a 25-30 year plan to move the holding facility, offer incentives to companies to relocate downtown, etc.; that will create the business climate needed to require a convention center in the downtown area. Great answer Simms!
Quote from: finehoe on July 09, 2014, 12:06:34 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 09, 2014, 11:44:10 AM
But with a larger facility, we could (and in IMO would) be able to compete with places like Milwaukee, Tampa, Nashville, Charlotte.
Or, we could get out of the convention business altogether since study after study after study show the return on investment rarely makes it worthwhile.
most convention centers are loss leaders...meaning that while they lose money themselves, the spinoff revenue in hotel rooms, restaurants, nightlife, etc. more than makes up the difference.
While Political conventions are technically held in arenas, the Charlotte Convention Center was put into use as the media HQ during it's convention, and was completely filled. There would definitely need to be much more than just an arena available to host a convention. Conventions are 4 days too, much longer than a Super Bowl.
It took longer than a decade before Charlotte was even taken seriously, much less awarded, its convention. JAX has a very long ways to go, if it wants to go that route. The business community would have to put up sizeable funding too. I don't see that happening.
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 09, 2014, 10:01:20 PM
most convention centers are loss leaders...meaning that while they lose money themselves, the spinoff revenue in hotel rooms, restaurants, nightlife, etc. more than makes up the difference.
This is the claim, but studies show that the projections almost always promise positive externalities and multipliers that could, in a fanciful world, justify hundreds of millions in public subsidies. But those externalities are vague, opaque and almost impossible to measure. I don't think that any rational benefit-cost analysis can justify it in most places.
Quote from: finehoe on July 10, 2014, 08:42:53 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 09, 2014, 10:01:20 PM
most convention centers are loss leaders...meaning that while they lose money themselves, the spinoff revenue in hotel rooms, restaurants, nightlife, etc. more than makes up the difference.
This is the claim, but studies show that the projections almost always promise positive externalities and multipliers that could, in a fanciful world, justify hundreds of millions in public subsidies. But those externalities are vague, opaque and almost impossible to measure. I don't think that any rational benefit-cost analysis can justify it in most places.
Again, +1.
Like always I think this depends on how willing we are to get out of the comfortable box and pioneer a little bit. There are thousands of 'what if's' out there and there is no reason why it has to be a box locked up 5 days out of every week. I think when you put it in the context of pedestrian level 12/7/360 with plenty of lease space the picture changes dramatically.
EXAMPLES USING THE OLD COURTHOUSE LOCATION:
Couldn't we build a convention center box, surrounded by street level retail/restaurants along the Riverwalk, Bay and Market?
What about a adding a marine welcome center, Visit Jacksonville and small ship port (with a second level pedestrian bridge to the waterfront?
Could there be a direct physical link to at least two major hotels, Hyatt and ?
Take out a corner or use a building bump out or second floor for an attraction such as a museum, gallery, or kids space.
Consider value added services such as a hair stylist, nail salon and/or gym.
Attach the AQUA JAX aquarium?
Facilities for water sportsmen, small marina area, retail, and dedicated pier or Riverwalk space for fishermen.
...Then
JUST ADD STREETCARS! :D