One of the things that distinguishes a city from others, is it's unique landmarks. A while back, one of the working groups looking at revitalizing Phillip Randolph Blvd talked about the need for a city landmark. Now, just about every new developer hopes their project will be that unique landmark, but often it is only talk when all said and done.
The metal fire spar is there, the jogger - what about an entire building so unique that it itself is a landmark? I can envision a convention center/mixed retail/entertain/housing deal sitting on that shipyards property. Something with tensile structures so that the whole thing looks like a sail ship or sail qualities. Make them solar conductive to attract the greener world crowd. Make a docking area so you can go right from the Southside new towers to this place.
Basically I'm picturing something like a towering group of gigantic, tensile "tents" - almost a Sydney opera house look to it - but more sailish. The nautical museum and aquarium could be a part of it right there. Something that people driving down 95 would want to stop and see.
It would also be an international center. Something that brings culture to Jax beyond just the local flavor. Maybe you partner with Brazilian or European of or Japanese firms to be a part of it. On the skyline, it would look like a monstrous group of hybrid sails and be an attraction for trade shows and international business.
Something like this - but more towering, more sailship looking (taller, narrower)
(http://www.angstorm.com/sdcon2004/san-diego-convention-center-1a.jpg)
Use your imagination and draw something here.
(http://api.ning.com/files/DLVhUJVZRDDLT4r5u9ysiMNhRGCUHzCZ8mUIf9JVbI7KTqBZJxFy3uK*vZwfCtssALOEEE0*wETgx47dnqlTS-wxBU-*tMSL/972005Aerial_View_JacksonvilleFlsm.jpg)
Convention Center needs to go into that area! Union Station (Prime Osburn)needs to become what it was......Rail Station! I am all for moving everything along as long as it is cost effective.........none of this "Fee" garbage or a sales tax addition! Cut some City spending and use those savings to start something, go bonds to pay for it or TIC or no trade zones what ever!
Quotego bonds to pay for it
So how would you suggest we pay back those bonds since you are against any tax increases or fees?
I like the idea of an iconic convention center, but I don't think that is the highest and best use for the Shipyards site. I love that we're finally abandoning the idea of keeping at the Optimus Prime Osborne. Jason whipped up some pretty sharp renderings for the courthouse site.
I think the sail idea is getting a little played out these days.
(http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/student/club/meaba/Spec.%20Burj%20Al%20Arab%20web%20lay-out.jpg)
(http://clarkvision.com/articles/night.and.low.light.photography/sydney.opera.house.c04.05.2005.JZ3F8871-b-700.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3110/3142406941_2e769cca69.jpg)
(http://sustainabledesignupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/singapore-sail-skyscraper.jpg)
I don't care what it looks like but I do believe that the courthouse site is a superior location for a convention center. Long term, the shipyards site would be good for a mix of mixed-use development and integrated public space. It would probably be a good idea to plan something for the site that can be an economic engine (think college campus, maritime oriented uses, etc.) as opposed to "mixed-use" development being dominated by luxury residential.
lake I got to ask..........how much acreage is the old courthouse sitting on?
PS- We can do better than San Diego as far as design goes!!!
Captain............I just hope its better than the new Transportationn Center is depicted!
Quote from: CS Foltz on January 20, 2010, 01:37:04 PM
lake I got to ask..........how much acreage is the old courthouse sitting on?
Not including the Courthouse Drive ROW (which could be closed and added to the numbers), there's 8.379 acres (courthouse annex, courthouse and parking). The Hyatt property adds another 5.04 acres to the mix. Nevertheless, my advice for those who have a question about "space" is to think vertically (ex. like the convention centers in Philly or Seattle). Its an urban environment.
lake........thanks for the info and I agree as to the vertically! That would really be the only way to keep a reasonable foot print at the ground level and maybe even have underground parking to reduce sprawl horizontally! Skyway might even be Incorporated............but first things first!
^ Underground parking?
I think in our case that would be underwater parking. Look underneath the courthouse parking lot or through the cracks and you'll see water! It scares me to death, but I'm sure there's a reason behind it
Hmmm....a carquarium?
Thinking vertically..........
Pennsylvania Convention Center - Center City Philadelphia
(http://www.drmintl.com/images/clip_image002_0001.jpg)
(https://www.securecms.com/ICASSP2005/images/ConventionCenter_Map.png)
Washington State Convention & Trade Center - Downtown Seattle
(http://depts.washington.edu/uwconf/psgb/images/wsctr_aerial.jpg)
(http://www.backpackingdave.com/Seattle06.JPG)
Advice for Jax, think urban and don't put the exhibition hall box at street level.
Come on guys............what about the Channel Tunnel, its underwater is it not? Matter of engineering for the situation and something could be done to correct the isssue!
I'm fine with the courthouse site also. Only problem is it wouldn't be as big and would be more limited.
Definitely lose the riverfront parking lot!! Terrible use of space - put a park in there!
Even if played, the sail idea is a perfect fit for jax and recalls the nautical history and present.
Using the tensile membrane structures is what would make it both unique and cheaper to build.
You could probably squeeze 350,000-400,000sf of exhibition space at the courthouse site. We only need around 200,000.
I missed your post cline...........I am against "Fee's" because they circumvent voter approvel and I am against taxes unless government can prove to me that they are running a lean machine. Too much waste everywhere and I see no one taking steps to correct that ...........correct that then I would consider a tax increase but not before........make sense?
How big is the fairgrounds?
^They own around 12.5 acres.
Quote from: cityimrov on January 20, 2010, 08:28:45 PM
How big is the fairgrounds?
Sorry, but if I'm an out of town visitor, I'd rather attend a convention at 8Th and Myrtle, at least Durkeeville has some really nice redevelopment and small mom and pop businesses. OCKLAWAHA
Ock, I would too. The mayor has this one right. The current courthouse site makes the most sense. The land is already publicly owned, plus there's a hotel and entertainment district already in place. Any other site (shipyards, JEA, fairgrounds, etc.) means we'll have to subsidize infill supporting development to compete with whats already in place. Now lets figure out a way to make it happen so the terminal can be used for its original purpose.
Quote from: CS Foltz on January 20, 2010, 06:51:40 PM
I missed your post cline...........I am against "Fee's" because they circumvent voter approvel and I am against taxes unless government can prove to me that they are running a lean machine. Too much waste everywhere and I see no one taking steps to correct that ...........correct that then I would consider a tax increase but not before........make sense?
not really...and it never has
tufsu.......lemme try it this way..........City decides to impose an access "Fee" to the net, just to increase revenue, or" Fee "to access downtown via vehicle! How about your phone, assuming you have a cell phone, did you ever notice all of the "Fee's" your paying, Universal Access Fee, Telecommunications Fee,Federal Excise Fee , if your bill was $100 Dollars............anywhere for $25 to $40 Dollars are Fees and Taxes! As for the Tax end.......maybe it is too simple............you spend more than you receive you will end up in jail sooner or later. That does not happen to governments does it............COJ is going to be $147 Million Dollars in the hole next Budget cycle and you think this is good! Oh I know...........we will just phone Washington and tell them to print us some more money! I have to live within my means and I see no reason why government can not either!
CS - If anything last year showed us all the waste in the city. The promises of working on next year's budget immediately have yet to show publicly, so yes, we are probably in for another black eye this summer as foreclosures continue to rise. If our Tally leaders are so good, in Wise and Ray, why don't they work to amend the Sales Tax rules and allow for sales taxes to assist in the revenue for governments? We all know 7 percent is cheap compared to other states, we can't keep living on the cheap, and with real estate in the tank, you can't keep taxing the smaller and smaller base.
CS...where do you get the $147 million budget hole thing from...just last week you said it was going to be $40 million?
Quoteyou spend more than you receive you will end up in jail sooner or later.
Are you assuming all poor people resort to crime??
Quote from: mtraininjax on January 21, 2010, 08:14:41 AM
CS - If anything last year showed us all the waste in the city. The promises of working on next year's budget immediately have yet to show publicly, so yes, we are probably in for another black eye this summer as foreclosures continue to rise. If our Tally leaders are so good, in Wise and Ray, why don't they work to amend the Sales Tax rules and allow for sales taxes to assist in the revenue for governments? We all know 7 percent is cheap compared to other states, we can't keep living on the cheap, and with real estate in the tank, you can't keep taxing the smaller and smaller base.
WELL SAID MTRAIN!
I don't have a problem with focused fee's as long as they are somewhat limited to those who will directly benefit from them. Parking fees on garage spaces, which support a special transit district (such as vintage streetcar), which in turn increase the value of all development are an example of a win - win situation.
Just because it's Jacksonville, doesn't mean we can't get it right, we have the benefit of learning from others who have gone before us. OCKLAWAHA
tufsu...........those were the last figures in the TU that was being bandied about...........so I think somewhere between the $40 Million and the TU's last figure of $147 ! Either way, we are going to be starting out in the hole are we not?
mtraininjax...........I would agree! There has to be a happy medium between what the real time costs are compared to projections! Whether or not an sales tax increase is the way to go, I am not sure right now! I do realize that an addition to the Bed Tax would be a bad idea, especially for the Hospitality Industry which is already strained! Having a cost effective Government in place would also be really nice, but what do I know, I am just a simple taxpayer!
There is immense potential for the courthouse site. Like Lakelander said "think vertical".
At around 8.3 acres we could easily see a 350,000 square foot facility with parking onthe first level or first coule levels and the main floor area above. Realistically, a three level convention center would not be that out of the ordinary. Picture 2/3 of the first and second floors devoted to parking...the leftover 1/3 on the first and second could be open area, perhaps a grand entryway with vendors, eateries, shops, and the entire third level would be the main convention floor. Also, mixed use spaces lining Bay street and the riverfront and possibly even an expanded Hyatt or some other anchor hotel along the riverfront as well. With the mix of uses you get an imbeded private sector commitment and you also get a more useable center that's not sitting vacant most of the year.
Here are some of the images I created a while back... Yeah, cheesy but they do make it clearer...
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/ConventionCenter-1.jpg)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/ConventionCenter-3.jpg)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/ConventionCenter-2.jpg)
the only issue with going vertical is loading docks...because Philly put one of their exhibition halls on the second floor, they needed loading a dock up there...so there is a ramp extending a full block beyond the convention center to get to it.
How would we do that here? Surely we wouldn't want bay Street to be a loading dock...maybe use a portion across from the Hyatt's loading docks....or maybe build a ramp on the Liberty Street side...as long as the Berkman residents approved.
Liberty Street would be perfect for a ramp with the existing sloping elevation. As far as Berkman residents go, that should not be a major concern, considering all Berkman brings to that street is a parking garage entrance. Nevertheless, it could be easily solved with good architectural screening.
Why not a Freight Elevator of sufficient size to accomodate a vehicle sized load? Ramp would be cheaper but is eating up valuable ground level real estate or a roundy round drive up ramp that could be used for foot transportation when not being used for freight? If we are starting from scratch,something to consider1
From Liberty Street, it would not have to eat up anymore ground space than a regular loading area would. Plus, you're going to need an area for service operations. With the river, Hyatt and Bay Street on three sides, and Liberty being a straight shot to State & Union, the Liberty Street side would be best for those operations.
lake..........makes sense, just exploring options since this will be a "Clean Sheet" start up and I want the most for my tax dollars not only in layout but options to select from!
Then leave the first floor for convention space and the 2nd and 3rd floors for parking.
I still think having an above grade view of the river from the third floor would be a great asset.
I think the answer Jason is to build a convention center on the block bounded by Liberty, market, Bay, and the river....and then build a garage behind the Hyatt (with ground floor retail on Bay) that could have another hotel or some other use above it.
That's a great idea as well.
Throughout this discussion, I have just been thinking about some of the boats at the boat show. Those things are HUGE. You'd need a bigggggg freight elevator for those. So either first floor exhibition space, or big ramp.
Tufsu, I really like your idea. Just put deep enough bays in the garage facing Bay street for practical retail. We don't want another Everbank situation.
i don't like the idea of loosing more existing building in downtown to build a convention center, and if you build on the courthouse site, that is exactly what will happen. I vote for the shipyards site. It is barren and can help promote the river.
There's nothing worth preserving about the existing courthouse and most of the site is a surface parking lot. On the other hand, if you build a convention center at the Shipyards, other then being on the riverfront, it still fails because there is no attached hotel similar in size to the Hyatt.
If the city were to RPF the courthouse site, the buyer would likely demo the existing building, in order to get higher density out of the site. It is nothing special,IMO.
I guess I'm just assuming Jason can design whatever we want, right Jason? :) I think I brainstormed in some posts last year that an urban park on top of the new convention center would be really neat. I'm sure part of it will be enclosed mechanical, but we need to make sure the new convention center becomes a destination on it's own without just being used during actual conventions. A park-like setting on top of the center with views of the river and bridges would be an instant hit. And what a great place to watch the fireworks!
If you are reading this Adam H. let's open up our taxpayer-funded public buildings to include citizen input on design. Residents will take more ownership in our public buildings if they feel their opinions are valued and considered. Allow people to make suggestions on what should be included in the convention center or ideas for look and design. Think how much better the new courthouse and future trans. center would be if it hadn't been a behind closed doors design. You know I'm right!
Quote from: thelakelander on January 20, 2010, 04:16:19 PM
You could probably squeeze 350,000-400,000sf of exhibition space at the courthouse site. We only need around 200,000.
Lake, I couldn't find the thread were we once before hashed out all the particulars of a convention center located at the courthouse site. (Perhaps you could locate the link.)
But, I recall my concerns about the adequacy of the courthouse property to properly house a floor plate appropriate for an enlarged exhibit hall, food service facility, loading docks, storage and staging areas, and entry hall. Also, the footprint you were counting on was "L" shaped as I recall and that doesn't jive with a quadrangular exhibit hall. And, even with a street car line, the center will need quite a bit of parking to attract attendees and stage exhibitor trucks and vehicles that I think will exceed much of what the courthouse site can accommodate.
Sorry, but I support the stadium end of the shipyards site over the courthouse. Proximity to our other public gathering areas, their existing parking lots, the marina at Metro Park, more area to build the convention center properly, and a chance to bridge from existing downtown, down the riverwalks, all the way to the stadium/arena/ballpark area. Add a public riverfront park on the balance (western half) of the shipyards property and we are on our way. Hotels can join the convention center on the eastern end and/or be built vertically over the center. Use the courthouse site for more hotels, condos, office towers, etc.
P.S. Don't forget the courthouse site is in proximity to the City Jail and "Fort" JSO.
At a minimum, the city should ask for RFP's for both sites and see how the submitted concepts compare.
Wasn't it the thought that development would "fill in" the space between downtown and the current convention center site? We can see how well that's gone, and its been what, 20+ years? I'm with Lake - use the current Court House / Annex site for a new convention center, and close Market Street (?) between the Hyatt/Annex block and the CH block. As stated by others, parking could be above or below (or both) the exhibit hall - which could take up most of the block between Bay and the river. Smaller meeting rooms and ancillary spaces could be on the leg of the "L" on the Annex site.
Don't forget that Hyatt has some existing space on the second floor. If desired, the existing Hyatt's meeting space could be incorporated into a new complex. It all really depends on how much space you actually want.
lake...........I would think that would depend on just how much space we need? There would have to be a limit as to what can be done with the footprint available isn't there? I mean if I had a choice between the two seperate area's..........I would opt for the Ship Yards, just because of the possible views......river! Either location would have to be a blank sheet start up and Ship Yards has the edge since nothing has to be removed to get started right? The only plus that I see for the Courthouse location is proximity to Hyatt and downtown reduction in the urban sprawl? I can see this one is going to be tough!
I think, earlier in this thread, Lake pointed out that the CH site could accommodate an exhibition hall several times larger than we would need here. And whatever goes on the current Court House / Annex site is going to have to tear down the existing buildings.
I would hope the design would have large clear span areas without columns.
Quotelake...........I would think that would depend on just how much space we need? There would have to be a limit as to what can be done with the footprint available isn't there?
From studies in the past, all they need is somewhere that includes between 200,000sf and 250,000sf of exhibition space. That and much more can be accommodated on the courthouse site with no question.
QuoteI mean if I had a choice between the two seperate area's..........I would opt for the Ship Yards, just because of the possible views......river!
You'll get this view with either.
QuoteEither location would have to be a blank sheet start up and Ship Yards has the edge since nothing has to be removed to get started right?
Having the Hyatt and Bay Street immediately adjacent and the Landing a short walk away is a significant advantage, imo. The Shipyards is just as isolated as the Prime Osborn. To build the supporting services needed for a new convention center would cost just as much or more than the center itself. Plus if we do subsidize these new developments (and we will because the market can't support them) they'll compete against what taxpayers are already subsidizing. Imo, that would be a bad use of taxpayer dollars.
In addition, the Shipyards site isn't all peaches and cream either. Its a pretty narrow site. A decent sized exhibition hall would have to span blocks and blocks (dead space at street level)......unless you went vertical. Imo, we can do more with the Shipyards instead of converting it into a big rectangle that would still lack the support uses necessary for a successful convention center.
QuoteThe only plus that I see for the Courthouse location is proximity to Hyatt and downtown
That's a huge advantage and could easily be the major factor to success or fail.
QuoteI can see this one is going to be tough!
It looks like the Mayor believes the courthouse site is superior.
You have to put it next to a major hotel. I can't see as there is really any room to debate that. So if it is going to be Downtown that is the Hyatt or Omni.
Quote from: brainstormer on January 21, 2010, 07:39:32 PM
I guess I'm just assuming Jason can design whatever we want, right Jason? :) I think I brainstormed in some posts last year that an urban park on top of the new convention center would be really neat. I'm sure part of it will be enclosed mechanical, but we need to make sure the new convention center becomes a destination on it's own without just being used during actual conventions. A park-like setting on top of the center with views of the river and bridges would be an instant hit. And what a great place to watch the fireworks!
If you are reading this Adam H. let's open up our taxpayer-funded public buildings to include citizen input on design. Residents will take more ownership in our public buildings if they feel their opinions are valued and considered. Allow people to make suggestions on what should be included in the convention center or ideas for look and design. Think how much better the new courthouse and future trans. center would be if it hadn't been a behind closed doors design. You know I'm right!
We can make it looke like whatever we want! ;) My concept included an office tower and hotel tower along the riverfront with ground level dining and retail, another dining/entertainment component along Bay Street with residential lofts above. Portions of the roof would make for a great urban park, similar to waht was proposed with the Shipyards (b-ball courts, tennis courts, playgrounds, etc.).
I love the idea of opening up the conceptual design to the public. Hell, a design competition limited to local talent would be great too.
Quote from: JeffreyS on January 22, 2010, 09:06:11 AM
You have to put it next to a major hotel. I can't see as there is really any room to debate that. So if it is going to be Downtown that is the Hyatt or Omni.
Omni is less than 400 rooms - not really ideal for a convention hotel.
Hyatt is nearly 1,000. The no brainer IMO
Hyatt is the clear winner. Take down the courthouse, expand, then in time take down the City Hall Annex and expand there as well. Shoot, they could even take down the crappy parking deck and build on top of it as needed for more space.
The Hyatt is the clear winner.
Quote from: JeffreyS on January 22, 2010, 09:06:11 AM
You have to put it next to a major hotel. I can't see as there is really any room to debate that. So if it is going to be Downtown that is the Hyatt or Omni.
Great idea team!
Why don't we hand the project to the JTA consultants that came up with the "Jacksonville Transportation Center" plan, and have THEM design the new Convention Center with hotel access. It's probably the only way we could ever put it next door to the Hyatt downtown, Omni downtown, Best Western on JTB/I-95, and the Airport Clarion, all at the same time! ;)
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: thelakelander on January 22, 2010, 06:34:22 AM
Don't forget that Hyatt has some existing space on the second floor. If desired, the existing Hyatt's meeting space could be incorporated into a new complex. It all really depends on how much space you actually want.
Lake, any luck finding the thread where we discussed various square footages and floor plates for a "L" shaped convention center at the courthouse site? No need to rehash all that if we can just link to it.
MJ has so many threads now its getting hard, even with search, to find them all. It would be nice if one could do a limited or advanced search just on thread titles, by forum category, and/or by just threads one has posted to.
Gentlemen............hope you can find that thread! You guys are usually ahead of the power curve and would save some time discussing something that has allready been hashed out!
It won't hurt that the new Convention Center at the Court House Site will be next door/or connected via paseo to: the Riverwalk, The Marineland Aquarium at Jacksonville, The Jacksonville Maritime Museum, Jacksonville Traction Company Museum/Car Barn, The Skyway, A. P. Randolph Pullman Museum, The Negro League National Heritage Museum, The Florida Theater, The Baseball Grounds, The Southern Fried Rock Hall of Fame, The club district, The Jacksonville Landing, TU Performing Arts Center, Laura Street, Hemming Plaza/Library (largest in the state), Friendship Fountain and park, MOSH, Museum of Modern Art, Ray's (Ray Charles) Blues Club, Ritz Theater, Water Taxi, Veterans Memorial Arena, Veterans Memorial, The Jacksonville Fire Museum and Monument, Metropolitan Park, Kids Kampus, The Shweeb and The Shipyards Quay. Everything within an easy walk or river taxi trip in the near future. All of it connected by bus, networked by streetcar, and sped over the streets by Skyway...
All of which would just beat the hell out of hosting a convention in the middle of a former bomb test range.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: stjr on January 22, 2010, 11:34:40 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 22, 2010, 06:34:22 AM
Don't forget that Hyatt has some existing space on the second floor. If desired, the existing Hyatt's meeting space could be incorporated into a new complex. It all really depends on how much space you actually want.
Lake, any luck finding the thread where we discussed various square footages and floor plates for a "L" shaped convention center at the courthouse site? No need to rehash all that if we can just link to it.
MJ has so many threads now its getting hard, even with search, to find them all. It would be nice if one could do a limited or advanced search just on thread titles, by forum category, and/or by just threads one has posted to.
No luck yet.
Stjr, I found it. I had to go back to when you first signed up and search your posts individually. I had to comb through 20 pages before it came up.
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,4764.0.html
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/urbanjax7816/bayconventioncentersite.jpg)
The existing courthouse parcel and parking lot is roughly 285,600 square feet. This does not include the Courthouse Annex parcel (an additional 102,400) or the Hyatt (27,100sf grand ballroom).
http://www.jacksonville.hyatt.com/hyatt/images/hotels/jaxrj/floorplan.pdf
We only need around 200,000sq feet of continuous exhibition space. The courthouse site can easily accomodate that on a single level and much more once the courthouse annex block is included. If we think vertical (two or three floors), we should be able to accomodate parking, smaller meeting rooms and support retail & entertainment uses. On top of that, we could also sell air rights for private development to be built on top of the convention center.
Washington State Trade & Convention Center
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/tu_proposal/WashingtonTradeCenter-1.jpg)
This aerial shows the convention center with two highrises (a hotel and office tower) that have been constructed on top.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/tu_proposal/WashingtonTradeCenter-3.jpg)
The exhibition hall is not at street level. Instead, the main entrance, along with retail and entertainment uses face the street. Such a move at the courthouse site could really bolster the vibrancy of both Bay Street and the riverwalk.
Lake, great job. Thanks for taking the time to find it. This is a big help in revisiting this subject.
I think Jax first needs to determine the size exhibition hall it wants and everything will flow from there. Remember, a 200,000 sf hall will need tens of thousands of support square footage on the same floor for an entry and gathering foyer, breakout rooms on the same floor, foodservice operations, bathrooms, storage and staging, loading docks and bays, stairs, elevators, security, communications, audiovisual, utility and maintenance rooms, ticket office/event office space, etc. If it's not ground level, a ramp for large rolling stock (oversized vehicles, boats, RV's, trucks, tractors/commercial vehicles, maybe even small planes? ) would have to also be considered.
I agree that the courthouse site is inherently a good possibility given its proximity to downtown, the waterfront, and the Hyatt. However, in revisiting our past thread, I stand by my concerns that the size and shape of the courthouse/annex property may be too confining for our LONG TERM needs. Jax needs to figure out how long a new center's life should be. The longer the life expectancy, the more flexibility the site should have for future needs, changing technology, and expansions. Over 30 years, Jax could easily grow 50 to 100% in population and this may dictate a bigger hall than currently envisioned.
Given the expense of this project, we should master plan for expansions and updates so we don't find ourselves in this same hole less than 20 years from now. Keep in mind how many times stadiums such as ours are constantly finding themselves in need of upgrades as others pass them by. I think this may be even truer for a convention center that must serve even more masters/users/needs.
P.S. Parking and intermodal (street car, tour and city bus stops, taxis, etc.) transit connections also need to be resolved. I would think anything less than 1,000 to 2,000 parking spaces would be an issue.
QuoteGiven the expense of this project, we should master plan for expansions and updates so we don't find ourselves in this same hole less than 20 years from now. Keep in mind how many times stadiums such as ours are constantly finding themselves in need of upgrades as others pass them by. I think this may be even truer for a convention center that must serve even more masters/users/needs.
Pretty simple, really. The City Hall Annex will be gone from service before 20 years are up. The uprgades and maintenance can be paid for by a tax on all who use the site and/or part of the bed tax for the county. More conventions benefit everyone and the velocity of money has an incredible multiplier. Since the city owns the land to the Annex, I'd look to, once courthouse is over, give the Hyatt a 99 year lease on the property or some sort of win-win proposal with the Hyatt, who will surely need the space at some time.
This could be an excellent jewel of downtown.
The convention center could expand to the JSO site in 20-30 years, if necessary.
Quote from: mtraininjax on January 23, 2010, 12:44:19 PM
Since the city owns the land to the Annex, I'd look to, once courthouse is over, give the Hyatt a 99 year lease on the property or some sort of win-win proposal with the Hyatt, who will surely need the space at some time.
Not sure of the accuracy, but I have heard that the Hyatt has an option on the Annex parcel. Maybe someone could verify this. If true, I wonder how this would impact things if the Hyatt refused to give it up.
I've heard that as well. If it is true, the Hyatt would probably use this to their advantage to get the convention center on the courthouse site. A new center on any other site would be to their detriment.
If the Hyatt has an option on the Annex property...........they are going to be sitting pretty if the old Court House is brought on line as the new Convention Center location! Now that is some vision, or else they knew about this situation a long time ago? I wonder if the GOB network gave them a heads up or if they saw far enough ahead to take advantage of the situation!
The Hyatt does have some sort of option or right of first refusal on the City Hall annex, of course it was the Adam's Mark originally. No doubt that transferred with the hotel sale.
When Mike Weinstein ran for mayor, his plan was to put the convention center at the courthouse site. Had he won, it would probably be there now.
Here is an article from 1998 about the Adams Mark (now Hyatt) deal:
QuoteTime needed to examine hidden costs to taxpayers for hotel deal
The Florida Times-Union - Friday, June 5, 1998
Author: Ronald L. Littlepage, Times-Union columnist
As the Adam 's Mark Hotel project is on a fast track -- these tax-giveaway deals almost always are -- we had better hurry to ask more questions while we can.
Of course, the most important question is: What is this deal going to cost taxpayers?
A lot.
The biggest bites out of the taxpayers' pockets -- or at least the most obvious -- are pretty well known.
In making its proposal to build a 950-room hotel on the downtown riverfront, the developers of the Adam 's Mark Hotel came with their hands out and they didn't leave empty-handed.
The Jacksonville Economic Development Commission agreed to give them $13 million up front. They also get the prime riverfront site -- the City Hall Annex parking lot and the Daniel Office Building, both taxpayer-owned and valued at $8 million -- for free.
But the cost to the taxpayers will go beyond that $21 million; just how far beyond isn't known.
Under the agreement with Adam 's Mark now being hurried through the City Council, taxpayers also will pay up to $750,000 to prepare the property for construction.
Taxpayers also will be obligated to repave and fix-up the streets leading to the hotel. Given the Downtown Development Authority's tendency to put in fancy street lights and sidewalks in conjunction with such projects, that's likely to cost a pretty penny as well.
Taxpayers also will have to pay to extend utilities to the hotel site.
Then there's the issue of parking.
The Jacksonville Landing now has use of about 300 parking spaces in the Daniel Office Building garage. Those spaces won't be available after the hotel is built.
And think about it. The property behind the City Hall Annex is called a parking lot for a reason. People park there, not just city workers but people using the city services offered at the annex.
Taxpayers get ready. Replacing all of that lost parking won't be an inexpensive deal .
This next little item could be costly as well.
The agreement with Adam 's Mark requires that the hotel be one of the stops for a downtown shuttle system.
Don't confuse this shuttle system with the Automated Skyway Express, for which taxpayers have already spent close to a quarter billion dollars.
No, this is a new bus system that will shuttle people from places like the parking lots at Alltel Stadium to key points downtown.
Suffice it to say that it won't pay for itself.
Finally, let's not forget the restrooms. Yes, the restrooms. The public restroom pavilion at the corner of the annex parking lot and Coast Line Drive, built just a few years ago at a cost of many thousands of taxpayer dollars, will be torn down to make room for the hotel.
The argument for the restroom in the first place, and it was the focus of much City Council debate, was that the Northbank Riverwalk had to have public restrooms. Presumably, taxpayers will have to build another. Hotels usually don't like ordinary folks wandering in to use theirs.
As you can see, there's more to this deal than just the direct $21 million subsidy.
There's another aspect of the agreement that's not widely known. The developers of Adam 's Mark get the first right of refusal on the City Hall Annex should the city decide to sell it.
That, too, is a nifty little deal for Adam 's Mark and just another reason the City Council should ignore the JEDC's suggested June 23 deadline for approving this project and, instead, take its time to do it right.
http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_product=NewsBank&p_theme=aggregated5&p_action=doc&p_docid=0EB4257832E02BED&p_docnum=72&p_queryname=16
The key words seem to "should the City decide to sell it" - if the City keeps the Annex land for a new Convention Center, that never comes into play.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 23, 2010, 12:50:58 PM
The convention center could expand to the JSO site in 20-30 years, if necessary.
Perhaps, but it isn't directly across Bay Street - some of the Bay Street nighlife places are. The Blackstone building - mostly lawer's offices - is across from the Annex block - it might be available if all the lawyers move close to the new courthouse.
If the JSO and jail site were used, you would just have a north and south exhibition hall. That would be similar to Orlando's convention center on I-Drive. However, lets be realistic. There is no funding for a new center and construction can't begin until the new courthouse is completed in 2012. We're probably 5-10 years away from seeing a riverfront convention center. Even at that point, the courthouse site is still large enough to handle twice the amount of desired expansion square footage. It will be decades down the road before we need +400,000 square feet of continuous exhibition space.
In a way I can see why some folks favor the shipyard site. However, realistically the courthouse site is ideal. The Hyatt is just sitting there already in place and is a great hotel. Doesn't make much sense to build way away someplace then struggle to open an adequate hotel near it. Duh!!!
Quote from: thelakelander on January 23, 2010, 09:20:40 PM
If the JSO and jail site were used, you would just have a north and south exhibition hall. That would be similar to Orlando's convention center on I-Drive. However, lets be realistic. There is no funding for a new center and construction can't begin until the new courthouse is completed in 2012. We're probably 5-10 years away from seeing a riverfront convention center. Even at that point, the courthouse site is still large enough to handle twice the amount of desired expansion square footage. It will be decades down the road before we need +400,000 square feet of continuous exhibition space.
Which makes delaying the Transportation Center to wait for the Convention Center to move a bit problematic. If the money comes through for the TC, it will be hard to get the agencies to wait.
As for the transportation center, my suggestion would be to switch the phasing around. Phase 1 is fine where it is, so that should not be a problem. Greyhound and the proposed bus terminal locations are the problem. Instead of phasing them in first, work on getting the rail terminal and streetcar sections funded first. This will give the city time to get the convention center out of LaVilla.
Well I am sure glad that my tax dollars enabled the "Hyatt" to basically get paid to take the Annex, Daniel Bldg off of our hands..........makes me wonder just who was leading the City side of things? I believe that was Mr Delaney was it not? I understand so-called incentives are necessary to bring what is needed to downtown but at what cost? This particular deal involved what.... $21 Million Dollars of our tax money? Property and a Bldg for $8 Dollars the taxpayers owned just given away! JEDC passing over to them $13 Million Dollars, plus we got to cough $750,000 for preconstruction work, pay to extend all utilities to where they were built at, repair and extend the streets and we tore down the Public Restroom Facilities that we allmost brand new? Gentlemen, I am going to be perfectly blunt...........This outright stealing from the taxpayers has got to stop! If the proposed Convention Center involves giving more incentives and passing out more of our tax money as freebies, I for one will be against it! A point of matter regarding the Hyatt............did you know that the roof has 4 Cell Phone carriers on it............all who pay Hyatt to be there? Also while I am thinking about it......11E (Old American Heritage Bldg.........has 4 also that pay Vescor to be there! There has to be a limit guys and what took place here went above and beyond! At what point do the payers say ..........No More?
Now you know why I believe it doesn't make much sense to move the convention center anywhere else in DT that will require us to incentive another hotel to complete head-to-head against one we have already subsidized.
C S Foltz, you want all these things done, yet you don't want tax to go up, and you don't want to pay incentives. Sorry, pal. It don't work like that.
I wish incentives weren't required either, but the real world says diffrently. Otherwise you get left out of the rewards.
The Hotel would never have come to Jax without those incentives. Even with the incentives it has struggled. The Super Bowl would not have been even a possibility without the Adam's Mark either. Not that the SB was such a great investment.
The property taxes and room taxes that the hotel pays will eventually cover a big part of the investment. Plus it increases the value of surrounding property which also pays various taxes. You don't get something for nothing.
I can understand where you are coming from CS but unfortunately Vic is right. Incentives are a part of doing business these days. The problem for Jacksonville is the lack of vision and a strategic plan. The city gives incentives so sporadically that we do not maximize the benefit of them. That is why so many people talk about mass transit and clustering on this site. With smart investments you get more for your money. I would have to research the actual time line for buildings but let's think about how much more money we would have made from room taxes if the convention center and Hyatt had been attached since they were built? How much more private investment would have occurred if the skyway had been finished instead of building a ton of parking garages? That's why Ock is constantly saying invest in streetcars. Upfront it is a lot of money, but it encourages private investment which increases the amount of taxes the city collects. I don't have a problem with the city using incentives to increase growth. My problem is with the city not having vision and a smart strategic plan.
brainstormer..........believe it or not, I do agree! You hit the nail on the head about the lack of vision or a plan! I really have no problem with increased taxes if they are parralled with a corresponding cut in the waste? City government has used incentives and tax breaks, as you stated, for trying to bring something into the inner core but without a correlated cut in the waste, we will continue to basically shoot ourselves in the foot! There has to be a limit to the incentives and the tax breaks without having something to show for giving our owned property to a developer no matter what the purpose is and that is where I have issue's! Convention Center in the proper location and with the support of the area around it, that is a no brainer, but lack of vision and a master plan for overall along with giving what little we actually own is not right no matter what the reasoning behind it! The Vescor project comes to mind for some reason............breaks up front and now they want more of the same plus incentives to attract business and this should have taken into account from the start! Do I need to point out that there is $29.4 Million Dollars which have not been used to enhance but just put into someones pocket since we show nothing for that money and I mean nothing to show for it? So should I ask where did $29.4 Million Dollars go to?
C.S. , sometimes I think you post stuff just to get a rise out of others.
The $29.4 mm was spent on the buildings. Two historic vacant, decaying buildings were renovated. Two eyesores became positive assets again. They provide residential options that didn't previously exist and pay taxes, and add to property values just as the Hyatt does.
You want your cake and eat it too.
No one, not even an astute businessman like Rood, could forsee in 2003 that the economy would be what it is today and that DT would flounder when it was clearly gaining momentum at that time.
visupstate.............I beg to differ! $1.3 Million dollars was spent on upgrades, so I ask again what happened to the other $29.4 Million Dollars. I have been in the Old American Bldg when there was no elevator and had to walk up the 18 stories to the top inorder to fix the T Molible site on the roof! What happened to the rest of the money? I have no problem with taxes being raised if there is something to show for the money and I have not seen any indication that this has taken place! Do you know for a fact that $29.4 Million Dollars went into the Bldgs?
What evidence do you have that the money didn't go into the buildings? That work didn't get done for FREE and it obviously cost many millions to complete!
Where are you getting that $1.3mm figure from?
No, CS, the elevator was working, they just wanted to make you walk up!! ;)
Incentives may have a place but we must be careful how we use them. Why? Because they distort the free market place and force decisions that maybe should not be made. Also, because they enable others to justify further incentives for their projects leading to a trail of bad decisions and a wasteful spiral of public subsidies to offset other public subsidies.
One reason so many incentivized projects fail is because they really are not demanded by the free market. The Hyatt, Jaguars, Vestcor Projects, Shipyards, Offshore Power Systems, and so many others have fallen below expectations in the free market because the market really wasn't in a position to support them and, despite public good feelings to the contrary, were or are not being supported with the free market's money pushing the projects back to the taxpayers or other investors.
And, why do Downtown and urban core projects need subsidies at all? Because, we are already subsidizing urban sprawl and this is a way of equalizing the playing field. If we made everyone pay for their share of their real burden on public resources, the free market would take care of everything without public subsidies for anyone.
vicupstate............these are numbers posted courtesy of tufsu1 - two low interest loans,courtesy of the Bank of Jacksonville, one $17.8 Million Dollars @ 1.5% interest and the second of $16.5 @ 1.4%! They received a Grant of $5 Million Dollars and paid $4.75 Million for 11E and the Carling they put $ 3.6 Million in upgrades and paid a developers fee of $1.3 Million.....excluding the two loans which total $34.4 Million, total cost to this point $4.9 Million! That is the total cost, so once again I ask where is the other $29.4 Million? I have no problem with incentives or tax breaks, I have a problem with City Hall continuing to hand out my money and the developer returns with their hands out again! Nothing being done at the City level to curtail cost's, but stewards of our tax money......I don't get that impression at all! stjr..............I agree!
Post the source of this figure:
Quote3.6 Million in upgrades
There is no way in hell those two buildings could have been renovated for that amount.
the quote from CS above came from a T-U article...that said, I agree that there is no way that both buildings were renovated for $3.6 million.
Gentlemen.......I have to ask...........just what was spent on those Bldgs? Vescor is asking for "Interest only" payments for three years and incentives (here we go again)to insert retail on the bottom floors. Now I have never been at the Carling, but I have been in the Old American Heritage...........there is no place to put retail there...............lobby and ground floor units! I don't know for sure just what, if anything,was spent to rehab both Bldgs but somehow I don't think $29.4 Million Dollars was spent on both! If I remember correctly 11E Bldg was rehab'd but each apartment was refurb'd by the person who bought it...........is this correct?
Quote from: CS Foltz on January 24, 2010, 09:33:55 PM
Now I have never been at the Carling, but I have been in the Old American Heritage...........there is no place to put retail there...............lobby and ground floor units!
guess you never saw the retail spaces on the street, including the one Starbucks had for 2 years (w/ lease incentives btw)?
and no, the individual apartments were not refurbished by each owner....both buildings were completely redone.
These are apartments, no one bought a unit.
Quote from: vicupstate on January 25, 2010, 08:47:11 AM
These are apartments, no one bought a unit.
true...didn't want to mislead anyone with my "owner" statement...guess I should have said renter.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 21, 2010, 05:57:36 PM
There's nothing worth preserving about the existing courthouse and most of the site is a surface parking lot. On the other hand, if you build a convention center at the Shipyards, other then being on the riverfront, it still fails because there is no attached hotel similar in size to the Hyatt.
I personally think the red brick high-rise building on the corner of Bay and Newman is worth saving. And I have a feeling with it's adjacency to the Hyatt, with the way this city master plans; it will get leveled if a convention center gets built in this area. I'm kind of surprised with all the griping that goes on this site about the loss of any building downtown, that you would now be for demolition for new construction.
I think a convention center done right should have its own hotel, similar to the one on Hutchinson Island across the river from Savannah. Then you could extend your trolley from the old convention center converted back into a train station all the way down to the sports/convention center complex. I seems to justify the trolley more this way.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 22, 2010, 06:34:22 AM
Don't forget that Hyatt has some existing space on the second floor. If desired, the existing Hyatt's meeting space could be incorporated into a new complex. It all really depends on how much space you actually want.
don't forget the Hyatt is a dump of a hotel that is cheaply built!
QuoteI'm kind of surprised with all the griping that goes on this site about the loss of any building downtown, that you would now be for demolition for new construction.
I have always tried to look at the bigger picture. With that said, I do believe the courthouse building is not worth preserving over better utilizing the site as a convention center.
QuoteI personally think the red brick high-rise building on the corner of Bay and Newman is worth saving. And I have a feeling with it's adjacency to the Hyatt, with the way this city master plans; it will get leveled if a convention center gets built in this area.
The way I see it, the entire convention center (for what we need now and for the next 20-30 years or so) could be built on the site bounded by Bay, Liberty, the river and Market St. With that said, I can see city hall annex coming down as well but if deemed worth preserving, it probably could be worked into plans for a new center.
QuoteI think a convention center done right should have its own hotel, similar to the one on Hutchinson Island across the river from Savannah.
I agree. Unfortunately, we already have a convention center hotel DT in the Hyatt and an entertainment district in Bay Street that we have already subsidized. A center at any other site will require us to subsidize more private development that the market can't support to compete against the places we've already spent public money on to get them downtown.
Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 25, 2010, 02:07:45 PM
don't forget the Hyatt is a dump of a hotel that is cheaply built!
why do you say that?
Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 25, 2010, 02:07:45 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 22, 2010, 06:34:22 AM
Don't forget that Hyatt has some existing space on the second floor. If desired, the existing Hyatt's meeting space could be incorporated into a new complex. It all really depends on how much space you actually want.
don't forget the Hyatt is a dump of a hotel that is cheaply built!
The exterior design style may not be worthy but it is anything but cheap. Structurally, its not going to fall apart anytime soon.
Quote from: tufsu1 on January 25, 2010, 02:26:37 PM
Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 25, 2010, 02:07:45 PM
don't forget the Hyatt is a dump of a hotel that is cheaply built!
why do you say that?
Have you looked closely at the materials, fixtures and furniture in that place? Low budget and horrible craftsmanship, the whole building looks of fast-track developer bottom line construction.
Those are cosmetic features. My guess is structurally its pretty sound. Given that it was built basically in the river, I imagine the pilings driven to support it go pretty deep.
you can't see the structure. what do you think the majority of people who book hotels look at? the cosmetic features, which enhance your experience and add to the aura around you. the hyatt is very lacking in this department. I'm sorry, but every time I have had to go to that hotel for functions, it depresses me that this building has a major impact on what out of towners get as an impression of what Jax thinks is a nice hotel.
My point is, cosmetic appearances are not enough to subsidize and build another competing hotel that the market can't support. If cosmetics are a concern, they can be upgraded without rebuilding the structure.
Ok............I stand corrected.........11E renters only! Not sure what was done inside and not sure about "Starbucks".........last time I was inside it.......bldg had power, but elevators did not work! Cell sites on the roof were running on commercial power, had no generator backup! Not sure just what was done as far as a refubishment for the Bldg other than paint and carpet past that I can not say!
is the city going to pay for these upgrades when they build the convention center. i sure hope not. and i seriously do not see teh hyatt paying for them either. as the hyatt sits today, it is not to the standards of a true convention center hotel.
by the way, i never said anything about rebuilding the structure of the hyatt. just that it needs a complete overhaul if it is going to be the cornerstone of a new convention center.
Quote from: CS Foltz on January 25, 2010, 03:24:11 PM
Ok............I stand corrected.........11E renters only! Not sure what was done inside and not sure about "Starbucks".........last time I was inside it.......bldg had power, but elevators did not work! Cell sites on the roof were running on commercial power, had no generator backup! Not sure just what was done as far as a refubishment for the Bldg other than paint and carpet past that I can not say!
when was that...2005?
Quote from: JaxNative68 on January 25, 2010, 02:58:24 PM
you can't see the structure. what do you think the majority of people who book hotels look at? the cosmetic features, which enhance your experience and add to the aura around you. the hyatt is very lacking in this department. I'm sorry, but every time I have had to go to that hotel for functions, it depresses me that this building has a major impact on what out of towners get as an impression of what Jax thinks is a nice hotel.
have you been recently?
Hyatt has done quite a bit upgrading the cosmetic features from what the Adam's Mark has.
Put a decent sized convention center next door and we're not going to lose conventions because the Hyatt's exterior doesn't look architecturally stunning. All we really need is a convention center placed in a location where the support services are adjacent and within easy walking distance. Personally, I would not touch the Hyatt or put one more red cent in it. Imo,future convention center money should be spent on the convention center.
tufsu1: I can't recall how recently. Hopefully you are correct and it was when it was still and Adam's Mark (but I'm not holding my breath). Next time I'm in the neighborhood, I'll peek inside and report back to this thread.
lake: if the new convention was anything like the one in Savannah, and being located adjacent to the sports complex, and connected through DT with a street car back to the old train station, where a connection to a high speed rail could be made to the rest of the eastern seaboard, a majority of the hotel chains would jump at the chance to build a new hotel . . . wow, my head is in the clouds . . . nevermind. I can still dream . . .
Savannah's convention center has been around for a while now and there is still only one hotel adjacent to it on Hutchinson Island. Our center has been around for 20 years and there is still no hotel, restaurants or entertainment adjacent.
Nevertheless, like you I do believe a well located center and surrounding environment will eventually grow to the point where additional hotels will be feasible. I just believe it won't be anytime soon and we're better off better utilizing what we already have from the start.
savannah's convention center and hotel was built at the same time. Westin was courted to Hutchinson Island by the building of the convention center. where they are built, the are cut off from the city, you either have to drive or take a river taxi. but savannah is much more pedestrian friendly, if you take the river taxi, its just a nice rest during your walk about. I just afraid the urban fabric in DT Jax isn't strong enough to get people behind building a new convension center. My fear is that it will get more backing in the burbs.
The city already owns the land and has heavily invested in the Hyatt, Bay Street Town Center and Riverwalk. Can't imagine it going in the burbs. In that scenerio, it would most likely cost more to subsidize another 1,000 room hotel, purchase land and build adjacent entertainment and dining uses. Short of SJTC donating their surface parking lot for a new convention center, there is really no other site in town with as many supporting components already in place.
tufsu not 2005 but 2001! That Bldg was empty period, no elevator power and 18 stories up in the dark, lots of fun! Bldg did have power, but empty and nasty foul smelling! T Mobile is the only one with 4 sector's upstairs and you can see the antenna's on the outside of the bldg face on all 4 sides. East side was hooked up on Game day at the cabinets..........they don't use that side anymore, have enough sites to pick up the slack around the Stadium!
Quote from: CS Foltz on January 25, 2010, 11:51:03 PM
tufsu not 2005 but 2001!
guess that about sums it up...you haven't been there since Vestcor got the building and renovated it....I suggest you take some time to visit both buildings before bemoaning the loan/grant provided by the City.
tufsu my biggest issue is with all of the low cost loans, which I could not get, and an outright Grant! I understand incentives and tax breaks and the neccesity, but have to ask where is the limit? We are allready in the hole and keep getting deeper! A moritorium or a freeze might be suggested till we can get revenue's up, but to keep giving and giving is not smart over the long range outlook when you don't have the resources! You want to raise taxes but don't discuss keeping the outflow within reason, you cant spend more than you get!