Loading...
02/25/2019 - SpecialMonday, February 25, 2019 3:00 PM City of Clearwater Main Library - Council Chambers 100 N. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL 33755 Main Library - Council Chambers Council Work Session Meeting Agenda Imagine Clearwater February 25, 2019Council Work Session Meeting Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Citizens to be heard re items not on the agenda 3. Presentations 3.1 ID#19-5792 Presentation of findings and recommendations of concept validation portion of the bandshell feasibility study by Webb Management Services, Inc. 4. Adjourn Page 2 City of Clearwater Printed on 2/25/2019 Cover Memo City of Clearwater Main Library - Council Chambers 100 N. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL 33755 File Number: ID#19-5792 Agenda Date: 2/25/2019 Status: Agenda ReadyVersion: 1 File Type: Action ItemIn Control: Council Work Session Agenda Number: 3.1 SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION: Presentation of findings and recommendations of concept validation portion of the bandshell feasibility study by Webb Management Services, Inc. SUMMARY: In January of 2019 the City engaged Webb Management Services, Inc. to provide a study to assess the feasibility of developing and operating a bandshell in “The Green” portion of the Imagine Clearwater Master Plan. The study is intended to be done in two parts, with this first part focusing on the viability of a bandshell in terms of supply and demand issues in the operating environment. This portion of the study included a review of project related materials and studies, a look at the arts and entertainment sector as a whole, an assessment of the market, a competitive analysis, interviews with potential users, research on touring product potential for the region, identification of potential operating, programming, and development partners, determination of community benefits and impacts, and research of comparable facilities. The consultant will provide a set of conclusions and recommendations on the potential development of the facility at this meeting and city staff will identify potential direct and indirect impacts of the recommended facilities. Based on these deliverables, staff would like council to provide direction on whether the consultant recommended facility or an alternative should be the focus of the second part of this study. The second part of the study will consider the financial and operating implications of the council directed facility. The consultant will be focused on creating a business plan and testing that plan to identify its financial impacts. We will have a meeting in early April to review the final portion of the plan, which will include a recommended operating model, programming plan, staffing requirements, facility management plan, pro-forma operating budget, and a critical path from planning through the start of operations. At the same meeting, city staff will provide Council with the changes to the plan that based the recommended facility. Based on these deliverables, staff will be requesting at that time to confirm whether to base final design on the council directed facility or make further adjustments. APPROPRIATION CODE AND AMOUNT: N/A USE OF RESERVE FUNDS: N/A Page 1 City of Clearwater Printed on 2/25/2019 File Number: ID#19-5792 Page 2 City of Clearwater Printed on 2/25/2019 Clearwater Amphitheater Assessment and Opportunities February 25, 2019 1 Study Brief •There are divergent opinions on the latest amphitheater plan relative to the original bandshell plan. •Our job is to make a recommendation on the optimal concept, including issues relating to its purpose, it’s functional capabilities, flexibility, seating options & capacities, amenities and covering options. •What’s the right balance between the amphitheater and the park? •The next phase of our work is to address how a preferred venue option be programmed, operated and financially sustained to maximize value delivered to the City of Clearwater. 2 The market assessment •What are the characteristics, growth and trends relating to permanent residents, seasonal residents and visitors as audiences? •What is the level and nature of demand on the part of local and regional users and promoters? •What is the regional competitive opportunity? •What is the best project to advance community goals? 3 Context •Imagine Clearwater plan published in Jan 2017 by HR&A to revitalize 23 acre waterfront area. Included “The Green,” a four-acre lawn with state-of-the-art bandshell. This was a community-driven master planning process. •2018 Downtown Redevelopment Plan noted the importance of “The Green” to support a variety of activities to support downtown redevelopment. •Subsequent discussions with REH and others lead to idea of the larger amphitheater, attractive because it could generate net revenue for the City and drive downtown revitalization. 4 Goals of the project •Project goals from Imagine Clearwater: –Make the waterfront the heart of Clearwater –Celebrate the City’s authentic history and identity –Provide public access to safe and beautiful natural amenities –Connect to the rest of Clearwater –Be a catalyst for a more vibrant downtown to drive economic and fiscal wellbeing •Goals often expressed in interviews regarding the amphitheater/bandshell: –Drive revitalization of downtown –Generate sufficient revenues to subsidize operations of the entire site. 5 Relevant charter restrictions •Prohibits the sale, donation, lease or conveyance of any property designated recreation open space on the City’s comprehensive land use plan - the property can be leased for an existing use; •Prohibits the development or maintenance of the property for other than open space and public utilities together - Provides for a City-owned bandshell and associated facilities including removable seating; •Prohibits the sale, donation or lease or other transfer or use of the property for other than city facilities without a referendum; •“The Green” must be used for public parks and places of recreation only. 6 Forces + Trends: Amphitheaters •Venues supporting a broader experience •Temporary, pop-up and retractable elements •Venues built into the landscape •The “premium” experience 7 Page 8 9 Page 10 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 20 Market analysis 21 Source: Mango Maps Market analysis 22 Source: Mango Maps Market analysis 23 Market analysis 24 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis 25 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis 26 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis 27 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis 28 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis 29 Source: Environics Analytics Market analysis: seasonal residents 30 Source: 2010 Census Market analysis: visitors 31 •Travel for vacation •Stay an average of 7.2 days •5.23M rooms were sold in St. Pete + Clearwater in 2017 •Most travel by air and fly into PIE or TIA •Travel as couples or families •Beaches and weather are motivating factors for visit •12% of visitors surveyed attended a festival or special event •Majority of visitors have been to St. Pete/Clearwater before (mean number of past trips is 9.6) •Mean travel party spending of $320.65 •Majority of visitors do not feel any improvements are needed to enhance visitor experience •Statewide, 116.5M visitors came to Florida in 2017, a new record Source: Visit St. Petersburg/Clearwater 2017/18 Visitor Profile prepared by Destination Analysts, Inc. Market analysis: visitors 32 •Mean age: 52.9 •Mean household income:$92,043 •Married/partnered: 71% •Ethnicity: 86% Caucasian •From USA: 81% •State of origin: Florida (21%), Ohio (15%) •MSA of origin: Tampa (9%), Sarasota- Bradenton (8%) Source: Visit St. Petersburg/Clearwater 2017/18 Visitor Profile prepared by Destination Analysts, Inc. Market analysis: Comparable Markets 33 Comparable Markets Market analysis: conclusions 35 •The market is large and growing •Significant differences between full-timers, seasonals and visitors suggests need for segmented approach to programming and marketing •Some opportunity for culturally and linguistically-specific programs •Visitors traveling for beaches and weather. The segment is attractive in terms of “destination” acts and the “destination” park. •Comparable markets analysis suggests that this region has the capacity to support current/planned facilities 36 Florida Amphitheaters + Bandshells 37 Local outdoor facilities Regional facilities Regional facilities Community Users 40 41 Community users Additional Users •Ruth Eckerd Hall –Previously hosted 6 events in Coachman Park –Interest in renting revenue 20x per year –3,000 to 4,000 seated capacity with cover •Live Nation + AEG –Interested in presenting shows –Currently route across FL outdoor music venues •Local Promotors 42 Capacity •Before looking at options, let’s consider seating capacity. •Comparable Markets: –Majority of ”boutique” venues have a total seating capacity between 3,000 and 5,000 –Only one comparable has covered seating –Seated capacity could be in the 2,500-3,000 range •Local + Regional Venues: –No facilities exist between 10,000 and 15,000 seats –Three “boutique” venues across the state have covered seating, the rest offer flexible, un-covered seating or lawn seats 43 Capacity •Lawn Capacity— •Comparable venues indicated flexibility is a key to success for their venue •Lawn and flexible seating arrangements allow operators to stage festivals, community gatherings, fitness classes AND live entertainment events •Interviews suggest lawn seat ticket buyers are just as inclined to buy F&B offerings as seated ticket buyers •Concert events are promoted as Rain or Shine events, encouraging audiences to come prepared with ponchos and rain gear •Anecdotally, un-covered venues find more tickets sold closer to the event because they believe audiences are waiting to see the weather forecast •The lawn capacity could be closer to 10,000, but not if that reduces the park size. But for the Jazz Festival… 44 Conclusions •There is a market opportunity for a bandshell or an amphitheater. •The current amphitheater concept works from a market perspective and supports some community goals. •The original concept works from a market perspective and supports other community goals. •We believe there is a slightly different concept that also works from a market perspective and responds to more community goals. 45 Bandshell concept •Functionality: This is a public park that can occasionally be used for community events and touring entertainment. There is a gentle slope down to a bandshell that provides adequate sightlines but still supports other park-activities •Capacity: As many seats as are needed for specific events, with a total maximum capacity of 18,000. •Flexibility: Seats can be removed, but the slope is fixed •Stage: Small permanent covered stage with limited backstage accommodations. Stage size approx. 2,400 sf •Tech: Minimal package of sound and lighting equipment supplemented by touring acts •Amenities: Temporary food and beverage outlets brought in for events. Permanent and temporary restrooms. 46 Bandshell challenges •What is the risk and financial downside of not covering the audience? •Is the stage and audience area large enough to attract the performers the community wants to see? •How many portable seats are required? 47 Simsbury PAC 48 Simsbury PAC 49 Simsbury PAC 50 Koka Booth 51 Koka Booth 52 Koka Booth 53 Daytona Beach Bandshell 54 Daytona Beach Bandshell 55 Daytona Beach Bandshell 56 Amphitheater concept •Evolved from the original concept with input from Ruth Eckerd Hall and others. •Purpose: Attract world-class artists and entertainers to Clearwater, bringing audiences from around the region, generating more revenue and driving downtown spending and revitalization. •Functionality: Focus is on large music events •Capacity: 3,500+ seats under cover plus lawn seating to a maximum of 15,000. •Flexibility: Seats can be removed, but the rake is fixed •Stage: Large permanent covered stage with full backstage accommodations •Tech: Basic package of sound and lighting equipment supplemented by touring acts •Amenities: VIP, concession and some restroom buildings plus area for food trucks and additional temporary restrooms. •Funding: REH has suggested that an outside partner would contribute capital to the amphitheater development project. Depends on arrangements. 57 Amphitheater challenges •Does the venue align with the goals of the Imagine Clearwater project? •Can it be profitable? •Can the venue be restored as a park after a performance? •Will events increase spending in downtown Clearwater? •What is the optimal capacity? 58 Pompano Beach Amphitheater 59 Pompano Beach Amphitheater 60 Pompano Beach Amphitheater 61 Cynthia Woods Mitchell Pavilion 62 Cynthia Woods Mitchell Pavilion 63 Cynthia Woods Mitchell Pavilion 64 Saint Augustine Amphitheatre 65 Saint Augustine Amphitheatre 66 The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again. Saint Augustine Amphitheatre 67 A modified concept •Purpose: Push capacity, functionality, flexibility and technical capabilities up from the small venue in order to support larger events while minimizing scale and impact of the facility so as to honor the park concept •Functionality: Support community events and large touring events. •2,500-3,000 seats and up to 10,000 total. •Explore the integration of the structures into the park site, flexible seating systems, a flat floor component, retractable elements (over stage and seating) and pop- up amenities and backstage 68 New concept challenges •Is there technology sufficiently advanced to support flexible seating systems and a retractable roofs in a cost-effective manner? •Can the amphitheater elements be sufficiently minimized so as not to compromise the park concept? •Do the operating costs associated with preparing the venue for a performance make the venue prohibitively expensive to sustain? •Can these facilities deal with a wide range of other community events? 69 Addison Circle Park 70 Addison Circle Park 71 Addison Circle Park 72 Addison Circle Park 73 Addison Circle Park 74 Mizner Park Amp 75 Mizner Park Amp 76 Mizner Park Amp 77 Mizner Park Amp 78 Ascend Amphitheater 79 Ascend Amphitheater 80 Ascend Amphitheater 81 Ascend Amphitheater 82 Profitability of Amphitheaters 83 Outside threats •The presence of guns on the site will limit the artists who will come. •Increasing traffic and road congestion will dissuade ticket buyers. 84 In summary •Covered seats and excellent technical & operational capabilities will attract strong promoters who will book higher level artists who will attract regional audiences who will positively impact downtown Clearwater. •The fully developed amphitheater serving a range of community goals is not likely to generate significant profits for the City. The key driver of profits is F&B. •The latest seating plan and cover can be slightly reduced. More importantly, there should be a deeper exploration of the opportunities for temporary, flexible and retractable elements so as to enhance the park-like setting when the amphitheater is not in use. This will allow the project to serve the other important goals that came out of the public input process. Also important is maintaining the slight rake. •The City must also take a position on outside threats. 85 Discussion •Have we fairly and completely described situation and the prospects for the project? •What additional information is required to move forward? •What parallel physical planning is appropriate? •With your blessing, I would now like to proceed with business planning based on our modified concept 86 Name: Citizen Comment Card i 5 2_ 0/4-2--*_ Address: z% =! 7, o Lt`9 C1 City: i;v Zip: Telephone Number: 702 7 - 5f Email Address: zG Speaking under citizens to be heard re items not on the agenda? id r"lai%C,e n1 Agenda item(s) to which you wish to speak: e. X04 VJ m k ljSC' e_ 5 k0f-tIe .,/,4!)4'rd CT What is your position on the item? For f Against