Convention Center Task Force

July 2007 Meeting Summaries

July 5 & July 12 & July 17

Site Selection Subcommittee - Meeting Summary

July 17, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee members – Charles Appleby (Chair), Toney Sleiman (Vice-chair), Danny Berenberg, Jack Diamond, Terri Lorince, Jim Overton, and Ted Pappas. Not in attendance: Anna Dooley and Mike Shalley. Community Participants: Dan King and Lawrence Muhammad. Media – Alison Trinidad (TU). Staff – Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, John Reyes, and Nicole Trueblood. [Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise staff.]

MEETING TIME: 5:00 - 6:30 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Select convention center sites that meet agreed upon criteria

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

The subcommittee accepted the July 12th meeting summary into the record and reviewed the evening’s handouts, which included the subcommittee’s draft white paper and a site comparison sheet. The sheet details whether or not the site discussed on July 5th meet the threshold criteria, land availability, and known site conditions/restrictions.

Before discussing the white paper, Skip Cramer updated the group on his preliminary conversation with CSL’s John Kaatz on site selection.

• Ted Pappas’s concern about site suitability is on target.  CSL will be looking at the courthouse site with this issue in mind.  John also has an architect doing some “imagining” on the idea of a Phase I with the city property and Phase II when the courthouse is available. 
• CSL has a short term (5 year horizon) and a long term perspective. The initial approach to site selection is to look out 3 to 5 years initially.  If no suitable short term site seems to work locally, then a longer term approach, such as acquiring rights to some property for a future project site will be considered. 
• The HOK study was an architectural look at physical sites and did not weigh in availability or seriously look at infrastructure or public-private partnership.
• Determining if a site will hold a 250,000 SF footprint is a reasonable test for site size.
• CSL views the stadium sites as unavailable and unsuitable.
• Probing the availability of properties is a reasonable task for the subcommittee to undertake.
• CSL sees potential for a public-private partnership with the Hyatt to operating the convention site, which would remove operating losses from the city’s ledgers.

The following comments were offered during subcommittee discussion of the white paper.

Final site selection should extend beyond the threshold criteria to include a focus on the appropriate sized site, safety of the area, and a long term view of what is best for Jacksonville.

The Kids Kampus location was eliminated from consideration because City staff confirmed that there are other plans for this site.

Private developers are in discussion with property owners and others regarding Stadium lot J and the Shipyards as possible locations for building a convention center. [Staff note: This information has not been verified.]

The convention center must be located in an area that has existing amenities.  Jacksonville does not have a history of successful complementary downtown development.  Example: After 12 years the stadium area does not have any bars or restaurants in the immediate vicinity. Building a convention center near the stadium would increase the likelihood of amenity development was offered as a counter viewpoint.  

The perception of an area’s safety is mentioned in the white paper from the Urban Land Institute’s lit of site criteria merits additional fact finding. It is a fact that delegates who have attended events at the Prime Osborn often feel the area is unsafe because it is relatively isolated and has little pedestrian and commercial activity.

The subcommittee agreed that the word “tier” should be deleted from the white paper to avoid judging one group of sites as superior to another. The good, better, and best language was also removed from the recommendations section of the white paper as well for the same reason.

The three recommended options presented in the white paper were:

Option 1 - Build the convention center near existing infrastructure:  Hyatt sites 1) Courthouse/City Hall Annex or (2) the Jacksonville Landing OR the Wyndham sites (3) Surface lots east of the Wyndham and the property under the DCSB building or the (4) JEA Southside Generating Station

Option 2 - Build hospitality infrastructure at the Prime Osborn

Option 3 - Build a new convention center and new hospitality infrastructure: East end of downtown – Fairgrounds, Stadium Lot J, or the Shipyards

If options 1 or 3 are ultimately chosen, the subcommittee agreed with CSL that another public use for Prime Osborn should be found. The subcommittee has asked that CSL provide some examples in its Phase II report of other communities who successfully house both civic centers and convention centers.

The subcommittee accepted the white paper with the requested edits into the record as its official report to the Convention Center Task Force. The white paper, convention site comparison sheet, and the list of all of the criteria used by previous consultants will be passed to CSL to evaluate the options presented by the Site Selection Subcommittee. CSL is being asked to review the options presented to determine overall costs; marketability of the area surrounding the convention center; site availability/suitability and potential for expansion; pedestrian access to the convention center and mass transportation; safety of the area as perceived by visitors and residents; etc.

The Site Selection Subcommittee will reconvene to discus and evaluate CSL’s recommendations.

Public Comment: None

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.

 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Site Selection Subcommittee - Meeting Summary

July 12, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee members – Charles Appleby (Chair), Toney Sleiman (Vice-chair), Danny Berenberg, and Terri Lorince. Not in attendance: Jack Diamond, Anna Dooley, Jim Overton, Ted Pappas, and Mike Shalley. Task Force Member: Ron Barton. Community Participants: Lindsey Ballast, Dan King, Eric Lindstrom, and Lawrence Muhammad. Staff – Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, and Nicole Trueblood. [Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise staff.]

MEETING TIME: 5:00 - 6:30 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Review convention center sites using selection criteria

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

The July 5TH meeting summary was accepted into the record. The subcommittee also reviewed and accepted Ted Pappas’ written comments regarding the reasons for choosing the train station in La Villa as the location for Jacksonville’s convention center in the 1980’s. The subcommittee agreed that that in addition to preserving a historic building the La Villa location also provided…

• Capacity to add-on to the train station for the main portion of the convention center. 
• Space for ample parking.
• Future expandability.
• Proximity to I-95 and the intersection of two major Interstate highways.

The subcommittee went on to review each of the proposed convention center sites using the threshold criteria. Each of the locations was divided into two buckets depending on whether or not they met the full criteria. The first tier bucket indicates that the site is located within an exiting hub of activity that includes hotels, restaurants, and other amenities. The second tier bucket includes sites without the hospitality infrastructure and requiring public private partnerships to complete the required infrastructure package.

The subcommittee recognized that the tier one sites are trending toward today’s burgeoning downtown development (3-5 years), while the second tier sites offer potential for future development (5+ years).

The threshold criteria for site consideration are as follows:

• 1)      The site is located within defined downtown core boundaries.
• 2)      The site is located within 3-5 blocks of hotels and related activities or offers the prospect of a public-private partnership to build such infrastructure

[Staff note: The downtown core was defined in the July 5th meeting by the following borders; North – Union Street, South – Prudential Drive, West – Prime Osborn Center, and East – Hart Bridge.]

(First Tier) The sites meeting both criteria were:

•          Courthouse/City Hall Annex: This site is located next to the Hyatt, Jacksonville Landing, and abuts the planned E-Town entertainment district on Bay Street. The Omni and Times Union Performing Arts Center are also within a one-half mile radius.
•          The Jacksonville Landing: This is a new site added by the Subcommittee for consideration.  It includes the ground level parking area west of the Hyatt and the Landings property.  Like the site above, this is near the planned development on Bay Street and is 1 block from the Hyatt. [Staff note: The restaurant, bars, and clubs in the Landing are part of what makes this area attractive as a convention center site.]
•          JEA Southside Generating Station: This site is approximately .2 miles from the Wyndham and within one-half mile of parking (Kings Street garage) Eateries (BB’s, Chai Tea House, Morton’s, and Charthouse), hotels (Crown Plaza, Extended Stay and Hampton Inn), and a nightclub (Endo Exo). This location is within a mile of San Marco Square and accessible to the Landing via Water Taxi. 
•          The Wydham site, which includes the surface parking lots east of the hotel and the site Duval County School Board building, is only viable if the DCSB building is moved, which would require a financial allocation to relocate DCSB staff and raze the building.

(Second Tier) Each of the following sites met the first criteria of being located in the core city, but is not located within 3-5 blocks of hotels, restaurants, and entertainment; Alltel Stadium J, Fairgrounds, Kids Kampus, Prime Osborn, and the Shipyards.

These sites require public private investment in order to offer a convention package of interest to event planners and convention delegates. The subcommittee has asked that CSL review each of these sites for their development potential in terms of public private investment.

The committee acknowledged that each of these second tier sites would require development of a hospitality infrastructure as well as a convention center building. The exception is the Prime Osborn, which would require the hospitality infrastructure alone.  

The CSX building was the only property eliminated from contention. In 2005, HOK included this site as an intellectual exercise and comparative for the other sites being considered. The consensus point among the group was that CSX is of greater importance to the Jacksonville community as a Headquarters, Fortune 500 company.

Though not considered as threshold criteria, the committee did consider each site for its ability to accommodate the footprint of a 250,000 SF building. Only the Wyndham site fails this test without use of the DCSB property. For those sites devoid of any infrastructure - Alltel Stadium J, Fairgrounds, Kids Kampus, and the Shipyards - any consideration for convention center construction should include plans to build a headquarters hotel at the very least.

Therefore, these sites and the Prime Osborn must appeal to private developers for investment. Likewise, if constructed these hotels must attract non-convention business as only 30 to 40 percent of the hotel’s occupancy will be made-up of convention delegates. A hotel perceived to be outside the hub for business or leisure travelers will not be successful as these customers make-up the bulk (60 to 70 percent) of lodging consumers.

Of all the sites reviewed, there is no guarantee of availability. None of the property owners has been approached to determine whether or not these sites are for sale. Throughout the subcommittee’s conversation, anecdotal information was offered regarding plans for some of the properties considered.  

•          The City has plans for Kids Kampus involving greater public access to the River.
•          Development of Stadium Lot J would cut into the number of parking spaces mandated by the contract between the City and the Jaguars.
•          The Shipyards Property is owned by LandMar and slated for a mixed-use development (residential and retail) that does not currently include a convention center or hotel.
•          While the Fairgrounds site is not being considered for any particular use, some in the group thought it too far outside the core downtown.
•          The Hyatt has expressed some interest in a public-private partnership to develop a convention center, which would reduce the City’s operating losses.

The subcommittee will finalize its recommendations to the Task Force during the July 17th meeting either recommending only those sites that meet the threshold criteria or the tiered structure described above. The group will also determine whether or not to provide an interim recommendation to the Task Force on a specific location or wait for the consultant’s conclusions.

Public Comment: None

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m.

 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Site Selection Subcommittee - Meeting Summary

July 5, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee members – Charles Appelby (Chair), Toney Sleiman (Vice-chair), Danny Berenberg, Jack Diamond, Terri Lorrince, Jim Overton, Ted Pappas. Not in attendance: Anna Dooley and Mike Shalley. Task Force Members: Ron Barton and Phil Tufano. Community Participants: Dan King and Eric Lindstrom. Media – Rachel Witkowski (JBJ). Staff – Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, and John Reyes

[Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise staff.]

MEETING TIME: 5:00 - 6:30 p.m.

TOPIC:  Examine site selection criteria and convention center sites

PURPOSE:

•          Reach consensus on prior subcommittee work regarding site selection
•          Review and select site selection criteria
•          Develop list of potential convention center sites

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

After self-introductions, chair Charles Appleby welcomed the group and read the subcommittee charge as follows. “Consider various location options for convention center development, including the possibility of expansion at the existing site.  Factors for debate include land cost and availability, room for future development, proximity to existing hotels and entertainment, as well as ease of access.” As such the group is to determine what are the best criteria and possible location for Jacksonville’s convention center.

JCCI facilitator, Skip Cramer described the consensus process and walked through the evening’s handouts, which included site selection criteria and possible downtown locations that had been offered in previous studies. However, the group was reminded that it was within their purview to consider sites outside the downtown area.

The chair opened the floor for discussion.

Lessons from the Prime Osborn:  

The Prime Osborn location in La Villa was chosen to save a historic building; no other criteria were considered.

The location failed because it was assumed the development would automatically follow construction. It makes little sense today to follow that same pattern. When considering locations for Jacksonville’s convention center it is prudent to consider where Jacksonville’s inventory strengths are located. Jacksonville’s greatest inventory of amenities (hotels, restaurants, etc.) appears to be near the Hyatt and the Jacksonville Landing or on the Southbank (Wyndham hotel and San Marco’s restaurants).

When the Prime Osborn was being considered along with other sites for Jacksonville convention center 20 years ago, many agreed that the better site was the old Sears store on Bay Street which currently houses the Omni Hotel.

It is the opinion of some that the Prime Osborn has been unsuccessful due to low levels of public investment. With that history and today’s financial realities it is unlikely that a new convention center and supporting market infrastructure will be completely financed using public dollars.

Vision vs.  practicality:

A new or improved convention center must take into account more than existing market infrastructure and look to the city’s master plan.  

On the other hand, building a convention center in a location devoid of infrastructure may produce the same results as building the Prime Osborn in La Villa 20 years ago. Constructing a convention center will not create demand for hotels and restaurants or other amenities.

Possible locations should be reviewed in context to current and predictable market trends over a relatively short span (3-5 years). Right now that growing market infrastructure is most evident in core areas on the North and South bank. It is almost impossible to predict what Jacksonville will look in 5-10 years.

CSL offered both short and long term solutions for choosing a site.

1) Short term: Focus on building a convention center where inventory strength is the highest. At present, that is the site area surrounding the Hyatt, which already has significant meeting and ballroom space. An adjacent convention center, along with the Landing entertainment complex would create a more competitive convention package.

2) Long term: Continue to operate the Prime Osborn as a civic center. In 10 to 20 years La Villa and Brooklyn may have the market infrastructure (hotel/entertainment development) needed to support convention business. At the same time demand for the convention center adjacent to the Hyatt may outpace the available space and the city could return to a new and enlarged Prime Osborn.

[Staff note: Tampa’s convention center journey began with an overall plan for mixed use development downtown approximately ½ mile from the current convention center on Harbor Island. See the time line below.]

•         Mid 1980’s: Harbour Island, Incorporated was created to oversee operations for the creation of a multi-use downtown community (businesses, retail, and residential)
•          1990: The Tampa Convention Center was completed
•          Mid 1990’s: Ybor City began experiencing revitalization
•          1995: Florida Aquarium opened
•          1996: St. Pete Times Forum opened
•          2000: Marriott Waterside opened
•          2001: Channelside and Centro Ybor were completed
•          2001: Cruise ship terminal relocated to Channelside location
•          2002: Street car rail system completed
•          2004: Expansion plans to add at least 150,000 square feet of exhibit space were completed, but placed on hold because of unresolved financing issues
•          2006: The Embassy Suites, which connects to TCC by a land bridge, was completed
•          2009-10: Tampa Riverwalk, a 2.2 mile waterside walkway, will be completed]

Downtown or suburbia:

If the primary criterion is locating a convention center in an activity hub, then the St. John’s Town Center is the best possible location. As a matter of fact, Channelside (Tampa) developer Guy Revelle has plans to open an entertainment venue in the Town Center area, noting the Downtown Jacksonville is not successful as of yet.

After a round of discussion, the group rejected the idea of constructing a convention center outside the core city. The consensus opinion was, ‘any one-of-a-kind structure in the market should be built downtown.’

Site selection criteria: 

The subcommittee has three pieces of current data to consider the TAP report (destination attractiveness), GMA destination appeal study, and CSL’s feasibility study. [Staff note: Each of the reports above is available online at

http://www.jcci.org/convention%20center/CCTG%20HANDOUTS%20AND%20SUMMARIES.htm. ]

It was suggested that the group fully consider the CSL recommendations for site selection as follows:

• Focus on Existing Convention Facility Inventory Strengths: Under this scenario, the site area surrounding the Hyatt, with a significant inventory of meeting, ballroom and hotel inventory, would become an initial focus for investment in the Jacksonville convention industry utilizing public/private arrangement.

• Pursue the Prime F. Osborn Center: Given the fact that the Center currently is viewed as the primary venue within the community catering to the convention and tradeshow market, consideration could be given to further investment in this venue. This option would require significant hotel/entertainment development adjacent to the existing Center’s site.

The subcommittee reached consensus that the threshold criteria for site selection follows the recommendation offered in the Market Support and Infrastructure white paper: “The convention center should be located in an activity hub within close proximity (3-5 blocks) of hotels, restaurants, shopping, transportation, and other amenities. This requires building a new convention center in what is or will be an amenity rich area or creating the necessary market infrastructure in La Villa.”  

To that recommendation the following caveats were offered:

• The activity hub does not have to exist today but the site must offer the likely prospect of a public-private partnership to develop the appropriate market infrastructure before a site is finalized.
• Said infrastructure must be planned for completion within 3 to 5 years. [Staff note: A planned concentration of lodging, retail, and/or restaurants might require consideration for an entertainment complex.]
• A hotel must exist at the site or the site must have sufficient space to build a hotel. The site must be attractive to a private hotelier to prompt private investment.
• A site up for consideration that is not located near existing amenities must have enough land to build such. 
• The center should be located in an area that leverages existing public/private facilities (ex. museums, theater, etc.)
• Parking should be given some consideration; however the majority of conventioneers leave their cars at home. They stay at the headquarters hotel and venture out on foot or using public transportation.
• The convention center does not need to be near the ASE (skyway), but should offer easy access to public transportation, including trolleys, buses, and cabs.
• The site should offer adequate load and unload capacity as well as transportation infrastructure (highway access and roads) for trucks to enter and exit.
• The site, building, and surrounding market infrastructure development must offer public/private investment potential.
• The site must be large enough to accommodate a convention center not smaller than the Prime Osborn. [Staff note: The 600,000 SF, 4 story Tampa Convention Center - 200,000 SF of contiguous exhibit space, 36,000 SF ballroom; and 36 breakout rooms (total 42,000 SF) – is built on 5 acres of land with future vertical expansion plans.]
• Property must be available or owners must be willing to sell a property to the city for a convention center. 

The subcommittee also reached consensus to use the site selection criteria in HOK’s 2005 report, which was distributed at the meeting. [Staff note: That criteria is listed below in weighted order. The values were double checked, as was requested during the 5 July meeting. See attached.]

Identifying the core city: 

Determining downtown’s central point is key to determining where development is focused. For too long the plan has been to develop all of downtown to no avail. Development should begin at the core and work outward, because it is impossible to develop all of downtown at the same time.

Downtown Jacksonville does not have a true center point where everything comes together. However the hub of activity is concentrated in two areas on either side of the river. The Landing is also considered to be a central focal point. Depending on the location of future development, the river could serve as a focal point for transportation.

The CSL report makes the point that Jacksonville has a good convention center and a strong convention hotel (Hyatt), but the two are in two different areas of downtown. Likewise many of downtown’s best restaurants are located on the Southbank and the cultural center is on the Northbank. The question is how do we connect all of these pieces?

Sites for consideration

For the purposes of site selection, nine locations within downtown’s Central Business District will be considered for review.

• 1.       Hyatt site (Courthouse/City hall annex)
• 2.       Southside generating station (Getting to JEA property is one way in and one way out)
• 3.       Fairgrounds
• 4.       Alltel Stadium J
• 5.       Shipyards
• 6.       CSX property
• 7.       The Jacksonville Landing
• 8.       Kids Kampus
• 9.       Wyndham

Unanswered questions:

What size site does Jacksonville need to build a convention center?

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.