VIRGINIA BEACH
Four companies have submitted proposals to build a headquarters hotel for the Virginia Beach Convention Center.
The plans, solicited by the city in its quest to have a landmark hotel built to support the new exhibit space, will now be reviewed by city staffers and the Virginia Beach Development Authority.
There is no deadline for a decision to be made, but Steve Herbert, the city's chief development officer, said he would like "to get through a first cut in no more than 90 days."
Herbert said the Beach is under no obligation to act on any of the ideas, similar to the process the city used to gauge developer interest in the long-vacant Dome site. "It's a healthy response," he added. "I'm glad we've got this many people interested in making an investment in Virginia Beach."
All of the plans would likely ask for public money, but none have specified how much. The plans, which were due to the city Wednesday but probably won't be publicly released until next week, are from:
- Garfield Traub Development, a Dallas firm working with Hyatt and the architectural firm that designed the Convention Center.
The plan - accepted last year - would build up to 700 rooms in two towers across 19th Street from the Convention Center. The estimated $112 million project could be built in phases and include condominiums.
Hyatt originally proposed building the hotel on the western end of the convention center, but city officials wanted it moved across the street to foster more growth along the 19th Street corridor.
- Harmony Hospitality, a Virginia Beach firm that already operates the Doubletree Hotel on 19th Street. The plan includes an $8 million upgrade to the 292-room hotel and two new towers - built in phases - with a total of 276 new rooms. The entire project would cost an estimated $53 million, said Page Johnson, Harmony's president.
Johnson said the hotel would remain a Doubletree, with the booking power of the Hilton hotel chain that oversees that flag. He added he would prefer to build the three-tower complex on his current parcel, but would move to the city's favored site across 19th Street if the city selected them.
Johnson dismissed concerns that the Doubletree name can't compete with Hyatt.
"We're a growing brand," said Clay Snyder, regional director for Doubletree Hotels. "We are growing into that tier."
- Armada Hoffler and Bruce Smith Enterprise of Virginia Beach and Crestline Hotels & Resorts. The plan includes 700 rooms split between two towers, which would be built in phases. The first tower would cost an estimated $110 million, said Danya Bushey, Armada Hoffler's spokeswoman.
The full project also calls for about 95,000 square feet of meeting space.
"It's designed to be complementary to the existing convention center and not compete with it," Bushey said. "We don't know that it's the best. The city has to the make the decision of what's best for the city."
Bushey added that a hotel chain hasn't been chosen, but "our hopes are for it to be a four-star quality flag."
- Garrison Walker Financial LLC, a development newcomer to Virginia Beach. Craig Baptiste, a city resident and company principal, said the project would cost more than $100 million and include a 400-room tower with an indoor water slide, two pools and a parking deck.
Baptiste said he has worked in real estate but never developed a project, and said his partners are Boyken International, a development management firm from Atlanta, and Morris Architects, with offices across the country.
Ed Schrank, a senior vice president for Boyken, said a hotel flag has not been chosen, but deals would be in place if the city selects his group.
"I always thought Virginia Beach was stuck in the 1970s," said Baptiste, whose wife, Denise, works in advertising for The Virginian-Pilot. "We can do much better.... You have to have a world-class headquarters hotel as well as a world-class convention center."
Richard Quinn, (757) 222-5119, richard.quinn@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Well of course PPV's are not
Well of course PPV's are not necessary; the point is, should it be city policy to engage in them if the effects demonstrated by the Town Center PPV are likely to re-occur. I suggested that yes, if the city can stimulate significant tax revenue that would not have happened without the PPV, then it may make sense to enter into a PPV. Given the success of such PPV's it may make sense to do so for the development of the hotel and/or the Dome site. The precedent has been established, and those who would oppose PPV's in principle must admit that they will cause real estate tax rates to rise more precipitously than they would if we had PPV's. You can't have it both ways; that is, if you oppose these forms of creative financing to stimulate private economic activity that results in net revenue to the city that reduces our tax rate, then you must accept the responsibility for the cost of that opposition which will result in a higher real estate tax rate. Your choice.
masterful!
our Virginia Beach excusemeister has conducted this blog masterfully! No matter how pointed and explict the question, it was expertly side stepped and responded to in politically correct blather. I've never question the benefit of economic development so don't repeat the Town Center story again. The question is the NECESSITY of so called "public private partnerships". You'd have us believe that no project would get off the ground without a public handout. When asked for specifics you mentioned some "highrise". Which one? No response. Surprized you don't run for public office...but appointments are much cozier,...I mentioned before that my taxes went up, they didn't. They only went up in the "little peoples" neighborhoods. Wouldn't want to offend those folk where mosy of the campaign contributions come from, this IS an election year.....Enjoyed the tete-a-tete, next time we cross paths at a "movers a shakers" event I'll say hello...
Oh, that's classic. You
Oh, that's classic. You admit you don't know what had happened previously, which means you don't know the background, but you express your opinion unemcumbered with the facts anyway. Point is, if Town Center had not been developed, we would not have the $5M in cash flow this year to balance the budget. So if the city had not stimulated the development of Town Center, you would have paid a higher real estate tax rate or Council would have had to make an additional cut of $5M. Now of course long term the Town Center will continue to generate even more in business taxes, and when the common area improvements are paid off, the full value of the real estate tax will inure to the general fund. But you opine this is bad anyway, yet clearly you will be one of the first to condemn the city for high real estate taxes, even though if they had acted as you suggest, the taxes would have to be higher. What is wrong with this picture?
???
What history?? Please be specific...you can't because there is no such "history". I know how and why these public/private "partnerships" became de riguer. It has nothing to do with the general public good as you've attempted to claim. The idea grew out of "sponsored seminars" at meetings such as "national mayors conferences" and such. Developers professional organizations concocted the idea and then presented the methodology. It simply sweetens the pot for them and they in turn contribute to the campaign cofers of those who voted to approve the project. You can fool some people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time....
Well, to put it another way,
Well, to put it another way, would the Town Center project, which now produces over $5M in tax revenue to the general fund, not counting real estate taxes, have been developed if the city had not entered into a public private partnership? History shows a list of previous announcements of high rise projects that came and went, but nothing happened. When the city entered into the PPV, in which the developer pays a higher real estate tax rate, and the revenue gleaned from the increase is used to finance improvements in the area, the Central business district took off, and the result is a fiscal dividend to the city of $5M this year and when the public improvements are paid for, all the real estate tax revenue will inure to the city as well. So you can criticize that all you want, but if you do, you have to either pay higher real estate taxes or you have to cut something else out of the budget. But of course most anti tax zealots from the taxpayers association like the revenue but criticize the projects anyway. Go figure.
??
I've never questioned what economic development does for the city. Let me try to put this in the simplest terms......WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO "GREASE THE PALMS' OF DEVELOPERS WITH PUBLIC MONEY!! show me where they decided to cancel a project where public money was denied!
So let me get this straight.
So let me get this straight. You acknowledge that if Town center had not been built that we would not have the $5M in annual income from business taxes generated within the project. So you would rather have the residentail tax base pay that extra $5M, and of course the extra millions provided by the 31st Street project. In essence, you are agreeing that you would rather have the average homeowner pay more in taxes rather than to use the TIF or a PPV that stimulates new economic development that expands the tax base and holds down the real estate tax rate. Frankly, I don't think you will find too many taxpayers that would agree that makes any sense. If you stimulate economic development that would not have occurred, and you use that income to hold down the real estate tax rate, then you have done what most citizens want. That is what I hope will happen with the Dome site and with the Hotel site as well.
and.....
next time I run into my distantly related relative who is on VB council, I'll ask what your stipend is for being their online excusemeister...
excuses
they make money, plenty of it, there is no REAL reason why public money has to be involved they'd build it without it. Recall me a project that the "developer" declined to build because of a refusal of "public" money. This is nonsense, I'm every bit as educated as you and understand your perspective. "public money" little more than a backward bribe.
Well, of course, the project
Well, of course, the project is not built yet so it can't generate cash flow to the city. But we can look at a similar project, that is, Town Center, to see how it works. That project which relies upon a tax increment financing district, pays for its own development with a higher real estate tax, and that money is used to pay back the bonds used to build common infrastructure. But right now, the new business growth there generates over $5M annually in business taxes, money that goes into the general fund and reduces the pressure on the real estate tax. Since $5M equals about $0.01 on the real estate tax rate, that project results in a $0.89 rate per $100 of assessed value instead of a $0.90 rate. The hotel could be structured in much the same fashion, and since hotel taxes are the highest paid, that fiscal dividend will benefit all of us. Too bad you reveal a total lack of appreciation for the benefits of economic development to keep our tax rate the lowest in the region.
??
our?we??....my taxes just went up...I guess it was to cover that part of the deal that was going to "line my pocket"
Well, very simply put, it
Well, very simply put, it lines our pockets first.
SO?
Mike, who cares how much revenue it generates for the city? The question is VERY simple. Why are the citizens of Virginia Beach expected to contribute to a project that is ultimately going to line the pockets of the investors? You may obfuscate all you wish....
Amazing how much criticism
Amazing how much criticism is generated by simply asking for posters to withhold judgment until a financial analysis can be completed. Seems to me that is the prudent thing to do. Given the tax rate paid by visitors, and given the potential investment of private capital from all four of the proposals, we need to see the financial analysis. While some form of public investment may be necessary, we need to see how that effects the return on investment generated to the city. For example, while many criticize PPEA's, just the taxes generated in the Town Center from business license taxes, sales taxes, personal property taxes on business property, generates over $5M which is equivalent to $0.01 on the real estate tax rate. Point is, the city and its taxpayers have quite an incentive to stimulate economic development, not just for the real estate taxes, but also for the business related taxes and jobs that business activity generates.
Parking is already provided
Well you just have to ask what would the public funding provide? Parking is already there in the new lots so parking garages are not needed. What is it they need?
I agree that private investors should take the risk and gain all the profit if they want this hotel. We'll get the tax money from the land and rooms even if we don't fund a dime of it.
As I wrote before, we don't have any tax money left to fund this project. Maybe the city might after the city budget gets passed in May but not until then...
The Right Choice
Who are we kidding? I'm sure the City will pick either the most grandiose or the one requiring the most public funding. And to the person who said that the City can't just print money, sure it can. They call it raising taxes.
You Built the New Hilton Too Far Away
It seems like your flagship is too far away from the pier - the convention center. All convention goers want is a room for the night that they can afford. If they want more than that, they will be able to limo up to the ritzy hotels.
Mr. Bailey makes a point
Mr. Bailey makes a point that there is no public money available to fund these projects. There shouldn't HAVE to be ANY public money poured into this project. Why can't they (the private developers) pay for it themselves and then reap the profits if it is a success. The city will collect taxes on real estate as well as room taxes, etc. City money should not have to be put to risk when the true functions of government cannot be funded.
this city council is nothing but idiots
get a clue another hotel has the city council forgotten the fact that there is already a fairly good sized hotel already next store to the convention center why do we need another hotel , we never hear about a new park, or a larger surfing area or anything for the taxpayers , they cant even aford to spend our taxpayer dollars on a decent bathroom at 1st street ,taxpayers have to use a smelly porta potty , why cant this city council use the hotel facilities that are already right next store , this will be more taxpayer dollars spent on another hotel to litter the oceanfront ,
Mr. Fab,.,,
You mean so all the people coming into town for the gun & knife show have more expensive digs? This ain't Vegas bro, it's just another one of a million regions who recently built a convention center to try to boost tourism. Heck, some of the big conferences in Vegas are falling off (comdex). Everyone has one now, so the market is kind of crowded. Just no gambling or tig bitties in VaBeach... plastic buckets and lawn chairs, florescent illuminated t-shirt shops and an arcade where the ms pac man reboots every time you touch the machine.