Convention Center - Regional Transportation Center

[icarus]

I of course can't agree more with what seems to be the general sentiment on this forum of reverting the Prime Osbourn back to its original use as a transportation hub.  But, I really can't wrap my mind around the various ideas and proposed locations for the convention center.

I often hear people talking about the old Duval County Courthouse as the prime location for it but I'm not sure I agree.  Too often, in our past, we have allowed lackluster, ill-conceived or just plain bad things to be constructed on prime waterfront.

In my experience with countless convention center locations, the convention center itself is essentially a big box accompanied by the supporting big box parking garages. 

In the interest of a creating a vibrant downtown with residential components, why would we put the convention center at the old courthouse location.  If anything, I see that location as creating a figurative barrier to the natural progression of development down the riverbank and essentially further isolating the shipyards from downtown.

Be interest to know others thoughts on this.

[thelakelander]

If your convention center isn't mixed use, it isn't worth doing on the courthouse site.  Does a convention center have to be a plain box?  No. Take a look at Seattle's...



However, what you do need in a successful convention center is an attached hotel, restaurants and entertainment within a compact setting.  In DT Jax, unfortunately, the Hyatt is our convention center sized hotel.  It's so large, you're not going to be able to successfully land another on a different site.

[icarus]

I don't know how successful Tampa's convention center is an example.

It has a connected hotel and restaurants but I wouldn't really call it a vibrant development.  Plus look at the footprint for that convention center. 

I simply don't think there is enough real estate at the old Courthouse location, even if razing the old City Hall as well, to build a comparable facility. 

Saying, we have to put it there because of the Hyatt is akin to doubling down on a bad hand/bet to me.  I would think it better suited for a portion of the Shipyards or the Brest tract as that would integrate with the marina and the sport district.

[thelakelander]

I'm not aware of Tampa's hotel being considered mixed-use.  However, even that scene is better than the Prime Osborn's. Oh, and there's enough real estate.  The property also allows for a better configuration than the Shipyards, unless you're also assuming filling in some of the river to create more space on that site. As far as a hotel goes, we'd be wasting money if we invest in a convention center without a hotel.  Might was well just build a larger box in the Prime Osborn's case.  Either way, the you're ROI will be damaged. The major issue with the courthouse site is the cost associated with constructing an exhibition hall.  We should have addressed this issue a decade ago but eventually we'll need to decide if the investment of a new convention center is worth the costs. If so, we need to move forward.  If not, we need to move on from the debate.

[icarus]

Well, I think we need to start with points everyone can hopefully agree upon:

1.) The Prime Osborn convention center is inadequate and is not providing an adequate ROI as a convention center.

2.) Expansion of the Prime Osborn for use as a convention center does not make economic, logical or practical sense.

I think as you say the real questions are:

1.) do we build a convention center? (that is does it actually make sense)

2.) If we were to, where would that be. (I still think the old courthouse site is just wrong for so many reasons.)


Personally, I think we are better off transforming the Prime Osborn back to the transportation center and putting a new convention center off.  I'm not entirely sure that the JEA site on the Southbank doesn't hold more promise as a potential site if done as part of a larger scale redevelopment.

[Steve]

Possibly, but I think getting someone to build a 1,000 room hotel is your issue. I also think it's disconnected from the rest of downtown. The courthouse site allows for Bay Street development (if done right), skyway expansion (if so desired, it was spec'ed to the stadium), and botique hotel possibilities. Even with the Hyatt, many convention centers have smaller botique hotels nearby for an alternative for people.

[Steve]

And, from a downtown perspective, I'd never turn down a flowing stream of business travelers on expense accounts.

[exnewsman]

I think using the Prime as a transportation center and moving the convention center to the Shipyard location, along with a new hotel and some restaurants, etc. make sense. Then you have created a gateway for extending the Skyway down Bay St with multiple uses - convention and sports. And really, extending it only makes sense if you have some sort of development at Shipyards. Why not the convention center and all it amenities. Not in favor though of just a plain box building. If we're going to build one, especially on the river, then make it memorable.

[thelakelander]

...and with a new hotel and restaurants....

That's the part where the reality of downtown Jacksonville's market kills the dream. You're pretty much forced to work with our current taxpayer subsidized (and struggling) hotel or forget about doing anything.

[icarus]

True statement but what comes first the chicken or the egg. The existing location has no hotel or other amenities.  I think making shoot from the hip decisions based on how things are versue what they should be .. is what has gotten us in the circumstances we are in now.

[thelakelander]

I think you just made a case for the courthouse site.  Assuming the chicken is the convention center, it's been nearly 30 years and we're still waiting for the Prime Osborn to lay an egg.  There's really no difference between the Prime Osborn, Shipyards and JEA sites, outside of two being waterfront.  All three are not centrally located or within decent walkable distance of complementing services such as existing hotels, retail, entertainment and restaurants.  With all three, you're looking at having to add new complementing uses.....at the expense of already existing struggling ones.  It can be argued that selecting another isolated site could be considered as shooting from the hip by making decisions not based on economic reality.  This theory didn't pay off with the Prime Osborn, so what provides the belief that the Shipyards or JEA sites would be any different?

Overall, the chicken or egg theory doesn't apply well to DT Jax because we're not starting from scratch.  The courthouse site's strongest asset is that many of the complementing uses are already in place and the land for the center is already in public ownership.  Thus, you have an opportunity to do something nice with a more centrally located parcel without having to also invest/subsidize additional complementing uses at the expense of the existing.  The end result is you also create a situation where business increases for existing uses as well, creating a critical mass of complementing parts that stimulate more compact growth and infill in the core of the Northbank.

[urbanlibertarian]

I'm not a fan of COJ being in the convention center business at all, BUT is there a way it could be done at the old courthouse site so that the property (at least eventually) generates ad valorem taxes?   Wasn't one of the benefits of moving public buildings away from the river to get those properties on the tax rolls?

[Steve]

I'm not a fan of COJ being in the convention center business at all, BUT is there a way it could be done at the old courthouse site so that the property (at least eventually) generates ad valorem taxes?   Wasn't one of the benefits of moving public buildings away from the river to get those properties on the tax rolls?

I think this is where a public-private partnership can come in. A convention center likely won't sustain itself, but if the city can negotiate with the Hyatt owners, that will likely be the best plan. Like, something where they build and manage it, but the city gives them some breaks and incentives in the short term. This might be cheaper than the city paying for it entirely, and the Hyatt gets a guarantee they won't lose their shirts.

[ChriswUfGator]

I'm not a fan of COJ being in the convention center business at all, BUT is there a way it could be done at the old courthouse site so that the property (at least eventually) generates ad valorem taxes?   Wasn't one of the benefits of moving public buildings away from the river to get those properties on the tax rolls?

I think this is where a public-private partnership can come in. A convention center likely won't sustain itself, but if the city can negotiate with the Hyatt owners, that will likely be the best plan. Like, something where they build and manage it, but the city gives them some breaks and incentives in the short term. This might be cheaper than the city paying for it entirely, and the Hyatt gets a guarantee they won't lose their shirts.

So we're back to building something we admit can't sustain itself, to serve an industry we are really unable to compete in, just because....? I still think my uranium mine is a fine idea. For that kind of money could probably have 10 of them. Just turn the prime Osborn back into a rail terminal and forget wasting money on a convention center that will inevitably be a boondoggle.

[icarus]

The Hyatt has been staying off creditors and foreclosure for some time.  I'm quite sure they are not in a position to be a partner in any relocation of the convention center. 

Putting the convention center on the riverfront will not generate ad valorem taxes.  If anything it will tie up a piece of property more likely to generate ad valorem taxes in the hands of a private developer.  The only up side of a new convention center would be the possible increase in bed taxes to help pay for jumbo trons and pools at the stadium.

I can think of so many possible uses for the old courthouse site, i.e. mixed use with street level rest. & entertainment as an enhancement to what's there. I'm tired of seeing our beautiful riverfront tied up with utilitarian municipal buildings and private pseudo Mediterranean stucco behemoths.

Why a convention center and why there? Lakelander is the only one who made a rational case and his is simply that we are unlikely to get any other supporting hotel in our market.

I think we are better off shelving the convention center for now and working on making a more vibrant downtown where people will want to visit and have conventions rather than starting from the other direction.