Loading...
20160829 Convention Center SurveySouthwest corner of the renovated Miami Beach Convention Center. Source: Fentress Architects/Arquitectonica/West 8 MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL Maria Ilcheva, Ph.D. Dario Moreno, Ph.D. VOTER SURVEY RESULTS SUMMARY Miami Beach residents are deeply divided about building a Convention Center hotel Today 46% of the voters support the original project while 46% oppose it Opposition to the project has grown Only 30% of those surveyed voted against the hotel in March but 46% are opposed to a similar proposal 17% of those who supported the hotel in March would now oppose it. 46% of those who did not vote would support the hotel if it was the same as proposed before, and 18% are unsure. The proposed hotel’s impact on traffic is clearly the most important concern for Miami Beach residents. SUMMARY continued… Residents’ concerns could be alleviated by a properly designed project that mitigates the hotel’s impact on traffic and parking. Part of a citywide comprehensive plan process after the signing of lease Public participation in the planning process Process includes experts (architects, planners, traffic and parking engineers) Comprehensive Plan has more support than downsizing the hotel or changing location METHODOLOGY Survey of 600 registered voters conducted August 2-14, 2016 Race and Ethnicity • 48% White • 44% Hispanic • 2% Black • 6% Other Gender • 47% Male • 53% Female Language • 74% English • 26% Spanish Party Affiliation • 45% DEM • 31% REP • 22% NPA • 2% Ind Area • 25% North Beach • 34% Mid Beach • 41% South Beach SUPPORT FOR REFERENDUM Approximately 46% of the voters still support the original referendum that failed to get the necessary super majority (60%), while another 46% would oppose it. The original referendum failed in March 2015 as it received only 54% of the vote with 46% opposed. Men are more likely to support (53%) than women (41%). Older residents (65+) are more likely to support (52%) than younger (42%). Hispanic residents are more likely to support (59%) than White, non- Hispanic (35%). 36% of Hispanics but only 7% of White, non- Hispanics 16% of Hispanics but 26% of White, non-Hispanics It will improve the area, 11.2% It will provide additional revenues to the city, 17.2% Other , 17.3% It will create new jobs, 20.7% It will help bring quality conventions, 21.3% I would not vote in favor of the hotel, 31.5% PRIMARY REASON TO SUPPORT BENEFITS OVERALL ISSUES 7.2% 7.7% 12.7% 16.6% 17.1% 30.4% 48.6% The location of the hotel The design of the development The parking shortage it may produce The height of the proposed development Citywide traffic Other The traffic congestion it will create What was your primary concern when you voted against the hotel development? While voters are apprehensive over the size, height and location of the project, it is the hotel’s impact on traffic that concern most voters. ISSUE: TRAFFIC Two-thirds of the respondents cited Traffic as their principle concern with the new convention hotel.  Residents are mostly concerned with the project’s impact on traffic in the area immediately around the proposed site (48.6%) but there was considerable concern on its impact on citywide traffic patterns (17.1%). Almost two-thirds of the respondents (64%) would be more likely to support the hotel development if it includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic in the area of the hotel. ISSUE: DESIGN Residents also have concerns regarding the design of the building. Almost half support reducing the building footprint 49.5% more likely to support if height is reduced 38% more likely to support if rooms are reduced Reducing the height or number of rooms would not make a difference for large percentages. Recruiting a world-class architect to design the hotel would make 49% more likely to support. 38.0% 49.0% 49.5% 21.8% 20.3% 20.5% 40.2% 29.0% 30.0% the hotel size was reduced from 800 rooms to approximately 600 rooms a world-class architect was recruited to design the hotel the hotel height was reduced from 288 feet to a maximum of 185 feet HOTEL DESIGN More Likely Less Likely No difference ISSUE: LOCATION Location in parking lot across from Convention Center is a non- starter as it will significantly increase opposition to the hotel project The Gleason theater option has some support (44%) but by itself not enough to assure passage of hotel project. 49.0% 49.5% 50.8% 64.0% 20.3% 20.5% 25.0% 16.8% 29.0% 30.0% 20.7% 15.0% a world-class architect was recruited to design the hotel the hotel height was reduced from 288 feet to a maximum of 185 feet, which is approximately the height of the Clock Tower building at Lincoln Road… the hotel design was the product of a public process after the lease is approved the hotel development includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic in the area of the hotel WOULD YOU BE MORE OR LESS LIKELY TO SUPPORT THE HOTEL IF … More Likely Less Likely No difference SUPPORT FOR HOTEL CHANGES SUPPORT FOR HOTEL CHANGES continued… CONDITIONS FOR SUPPORT 1 2 3 4 5 I voted and supported Hotel development includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic in the area of the hotel (76.9%) World-class architect (63.4%) Public process (60.8%) Reduced hotel height (59.3%) Hotel developer rebuild and incorporate a new Fillmore Miami Beach at Jackie Gleason Theater (53.7%) I voted and did not support Hotel development includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic (40.9%) Reduced hotel height (34.3%) Public process (32.6%) Reduced number of rooms(27.6 %) World-class architect (25.4%) I did not vote Hotel development includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic (68.9%) Public process (55.0%) Hotel developer rebuild and incorporate a new Fillmore Miami Beach at Jackie Gleason Theater (52.3%) World class architect (51.7%) Reduced hotel height (50.3%) AREA DIFFERENCES: SOUTH, MID AND NORTH BEACH South Beach residents are more likely to support the hotel (50.8%) than Mid Beach (42.4%) or North Beach (44.2%). Traffic was the primary concern for those who rejected the hotel. Opposition to the hotel remained strong even after suggested concessions. 36% would not vote in favor in North Beach, 33% in Mid Beach and 30% in SoBe North and South Beach residents mentioned job creation and attracting quality conventions as their reasons to support the hotel. Mid Beach residents most frequently mentioned the attraction of quality conventions and the additional revenues to the city. The traffic mitigation plan, the initiation of a public process, and the reduction of the hotel height were most impactful in building support. AREA DIFFERENCES: SOUTH, MID AND NORTH BEACH 27.5% 21.7% 27.5% 41.5% 35.8% 49.1% 40.0% 42.0% 50.0% the hotel height was reduced from 288 feet to a maximum of 185 feet, which is approximately the height of the Clock Tower building at Lincoln Road and Washington Avenue the hotel design was the product of a public process after the lease is approved the hotel development includes a comprehensive plan to mitigate traffic in the area of the hotel Effect of Proposed Changes on Opposition North Mid South COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Inclusive process to deal with design, location and traffic 1 Experts, politicians, and citizens 2 Traffic mitigation plan instead of another traffic study 3 Unique and iconic design maybe incorporating the Jackie Gleason 4 Economic Impact Study 5