Convention Center Expansion Updates

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by austin242

How about a new convention center near the domain.

Hard pass. Why plant it outside the core next to a suburban shopping mall with little to no walkability.

That’d be similar to how Dallas planted the Cowboy stadium in Arlington, we know how that worked out for them-very car dependent. DFW metro area as a whole is a suburban nightmare to begin with. There could have been major investment in Downtown Dallas instead they dragged a major event space outside the core which only made sprawl worse up there. We can expand our convention center the right way but our city council likes to keep their feet in the sand.

People who attend conventions are mostly coming from another city and enjoy the convenience of walking/staying to nearby attractions and restaurants. Can easily stay Downtown and branch out to South Congress, East Side, etc.

[drummer]

For what it's worth, I think the new concept (plan?) for the Dallas convention center is to go across I-30. Not sure where that is in reality.

And I don't think wwmiv's plan is a bad one - I actually like the concept. I just think that would be nearly impossible realize.


Edit: Here's at least one article on the Dallas plan: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2022...ention-center/

[H2O]

I've been advocating for at least allowing for future convention center expansion over 1-35 between Cesar Chavez and 4th, but TxDOT will not entertain large structures over the depressed main lanes. The Convention Center does not seem very interested either, so the Corridor Office (which is leading Our Future 35 / Cap and Stitch) is not pursuing the idea at all.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by H2O

I've been advocating for at least allowing for future convention center expansion over 1-35 between Cesar Chavez and 4th, but TxDOT will not entertain large structures over the depressed main lanes. The Convention Center does not seem very interested either, so the Corridor Office (which is leading Our Future 35 / Cap and Stitch) is not pursuing the idea at all.

Interesting. I wonder why TxDOT is opposed to it if it's a feasible(?) option for Dallas.

[H2O]

Different District Engineers. Austin District has always been very conservative. Maybe because the Commissioners and State Elected Leaders are always looking over their shoulders?

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

Hard pass. Why plant it outside the core next to a suburban shopping mall with little to no walkability.

That’d be similar to how Dallas planted the Cowboy stadium in Arlington, we know how that worked out for them-very car dependent. DFW metro area as a whole is a suburban nightmare to begin with. There could have been major investment in Downtown Dallas instead they dragged a major event space outside the core which only made sprawl worse up there. We can expand our convention center the right way but our city council likes to keep their feet in the sand.

People who attend conventions are mostly coming from another city and enjoy the convenience of walking/staying to nearby attractions and restaurants. Can easily stay Downtown and branch out to South Congress, East Side, etc.

It's worth pointing out that Cowboy Stadium and the Ranger's stadium are actually located very close to the center of population for the DFW metro, and they don't actually contribute much to the sprawl of the DFW area other than the fact that people have to drive to these venues from other parts of the metro. I'm not advocating for suburban convention centers or stadiums, but the truth is that the location of these stadiums in the mid-cities area makes a good amount of sense for most people who live in this very auto dependent region.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by austlar1

It's worth pointing out that Cowboy Stadium and the Ranger's stadium are actually located very close to the center of population for the DFW metro, and they don't actually contribute much to the sprawl of the DFW area other than the fact that people have to drive to these venues from other parts of the metro. I'm not advocating for suburban convention centers or stadiums, but the truth is that the location of these stadiums in the mid-cities area makes a good amount of sense for most people who live in this very auto dependent region.

At the risk of derailing the convo (probably should go the sports thread) I'm coming around to the idea that NFL stadiums like the Cowboys' should go in suburbia. They're a waste of valuable urban space otherwise. They'd just be a unused hole in the urban environment ~350 days per year. Even with a few extra days for concerts and such.

It can be different for different sports (Rangers probably should be urban) but NFL is just different enough (so few home games per year, no international exhibition games, no parallel women's major league, etc.). Especially with the move away from multi-sports use.

So to bring the conversation back, assuming the convention center gets used most days of the year, it can (should) be a functioning part of the urban environment.

[drummer]

Agreed on all points, Novacek.

So, what is the current plan with the CC anyway? I haven't heard of any new updates in a while.

[We vs us]

Last I heard -- and this was almost 6 months ago -- the city was in negotiations with the bondholders of the Hilton, who have a clause in their contract that stipulates a default if the Convention Center should be unavailable for a certain amount of time (the reasoning being that bond payments could feasibly be interrupted by a sustained loss of the business the convention center generates)

No idea how far along that's gotten, though I have to assume they're close to finalizing a deal.

[Urbannizer]

https://www.austinmonitor.com/storie...for-expansion/

Leaders from the Austin Convention Center plan to take a campus-style approach to coordinating a greatly scaled back calendar of meeting and event business at downtown hotels during the four to five years the facility is closed for a substantial reconstruction expected to cost more than $1 billion.

Staff from the convention center spoke with the Tourism Commission at its meeting earlier this month, answering a number of lingering questions about the expansion and general recovery of local convention and event business after the Covid-19 pandemic. As part of the discussion, convention center Director Trisha Tatro said the center’s 300 staff members would be allocated throughout other city departments during the reconstruction and brought back when the center reopens for full business.

Tatro said even with planned and recently completed expansions of meeting areas at assorted downtown hotels, the closure of the convention center for multiple years will result in a dramatic reduction for meetings and events that tend to fill midweek bookings for those hotels.

“Even with the new exhibit halls and such, there are so many events that are too large that the hotels cannot take, so some of the smaller events that we’ll be able to accommodate and we’ve already had conversations about that. The ones that were already on the books for the years of construction we’ll be working to rebook them on a kind of first-come, first-served basis in the new center when we reopen,” she said. “We plan on using other city facilities and large venues as we work through this process. We do have the Palmer Events Center and exhibit halls there and we will be working just as Dallas and other convention centers are undergoing renovations and closing portions of their facilities.”

Currently the expansion process is on hold while Austin Convention Center Enterprises works to renegotiate some of the terms of bond debt related to the Hilton Austin hotel to avoid a default trigger caused by the closure of the convention center during the reconstruction. Tatro said that process is expected to conclude this spring, after which the city could release the request for qualifications for the design and engineering work.

[We vs us]

This whole thing is such a clusterfuck.

[H2O]

I don't understand why they don't do the reconstruction in phases. They could keep the newest section along 3rd Street while they tear down and rebuild the oldest section. It would just be in reverse of when they built the expansion.

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by H2O

I don't understand why they don't do the reconstruction in phases. They could keep the newest section along 3rd Street while they tear down and rebuild the oldest section. It would just be in reverse of when they built the expansion.

They’ve discussed this a lot in the last few years, actually, and the consensus from the hotel community was that doing it in stages would almost certainly extend the completion date by a significant amount vs just ripping off the band aide and doing it all at once. Also there was a real question as to who would book the center while the other end has been demolished by heavy machinery. Super disruptive to the major aims of meetings of that size.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by We vs us

They’ve discussed this a lot in the last few years, actually, and the consensus from the hotel community was that doing it in stages would almost certainly extend the completion date by a significant amount vs just ripping off the band aide and doing it all at once. Also there was a real question as to who would book the center while the other end has been demolished by heavy machinery. Super disruptive to the major aims of meetings of that size.

I imagine the construction for this will be going on at the same time as Project Connect is digging up Trinity St. So there will be that disruption as well.

Between those two, I-35, and Waterloo Greenway, there is going to be a ton going on over here. This side of downtown is going to be transformed in a major, major way.

[drummer]

Don't have any experience in that particular industry, but from my novice opinion, it seems like the rip-the-band aid-off approach may be the best of a lot of bad solutions.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by We vs us

This whole thing is such a clusterfuck.

Because the 2014 city council ignored the convention center when they very explicitly published a warning about moving fast to acquire land across trinity before real estate prices exploded. That council wasn't prepared to make such a large commitment and now we are paying for it.

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by freerover

Because the 2014 city council ignored the convention center when they very explicitly published a warning about moving fast to acquire land across trinity before real estate prices exploded. That council wasn't prepared to make such a large commitment and now we are paying for it.

Agreed, but there were other opportunities in between then and now. It’s been an ever present topic among DT hotels. I guess my point is it’s now a cultural problem, a can that multiple administrations and city departments have been casually kicking down the road.

@Paul78701 — you’re spot on, the overlapping disruption in the Palm District are going to be monumental later this decade, but the change is going to be generational. So much crazy new stuff all at once!

[We vs us]

I'm hearing lots of major rumblings about this behind the scenes. Seems that Mayor Watson and the new City Council are much less conflicted about getting this done than the prior administration. Rumor has it the CC has 2025 (after SXSW) through 2029 (just before SXSW) as the time frame for construction -- and they have begun relocating conventions, so it's definitely getting serious. Supposedly an announcement is in the works for the coming weeks (I've actually heard within days, but I'm hedging); and the CC will be releasing their RFQ imminently.

I'm no longer working near the convention center, so I'm missing out on a lot of scuttlebutt, but consensus is that things are all the sudden moving rapidly.

[Echostatic]

Glad to see something may (finally) be getting done. A lot of the options the convention center had on the table have been lost over the last few years as land prices soared and developments started getting proposed on neighboring lots. They're in a rough spot - pretty much anything done to upgrade the CC now is going to take it offline for years, losing god knows how much money for the city. But it looks like we're going to go ahead with plans anyway, which is desperately needed. I don't envy whoever has to make the call, though.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by We vs us

I'm hearing lots of major rumblings about this behind the scenes. Seems that Mayor Watson and the new City Council are much less conflicted about getting this done than the prior administration. Rumor has it the CC has 2025 (after SXSW) through 2029 (just before SXSW) as the time frame for construction -- and they have begun relocating conventions, so it's definitely getting serious. Supposedly an announcement is in the works for the coming weeks (I've actually heard within days, but I'm hedging); and the CC will be releasing their RFQ imminently.

I'm no longer working near the convention center, so I'm missing out on a lot of scuttlebutt, but consensus is that things are all the sudden moving rapidly.

Watson got downtown moving when no one would. Perhaps he can indeed make this happen!