Guest Editorial - Steiner's guidance will help Downtown Hampton blossom
Thursday, 19 August 2010 21:41
Tweet
By Perry PilgrimPresident, DHDP
In reading the Daily Press article entitled "Peninsula Town Center guru to be paid $45,000 for downtown Hampton plan" (August 18, 2010), I was pleased with their factual reporting of the Downtown Hampton Development Partnership's (DHDP) recent decision to contract with Yaromir Steiner, the chief executive of Steiner and Associates. Mr Steiner is responsible for the magnificent makeover of the former Coliseum Mall. The resulting Peninsula Town Center is concrete evidence of Steiner's experience and expertise in the business of re-establishing struggling retail market places.
The Downtown Hampton situation is clearly different than the Coliseum Mall project. The mall was owned and controlled by virtually one business entity while the downtown is a district comprised of numerous individual owners, with a number of city owned properties added to the mix. Decisions made and actions taken by one owner are clearly easier to effect than group efforts. At DHDP we refer to ourselves as the proverbial "herding of kittens".
City council adopted the Downtown Hampton Master Plan in early 2004. The plan was the result of extensive work done by Urban Design Associates (UDA) and it must be remembered that economic facts and figures used 7-8 years ago are quite different from those in evidence today. This is neither good nor bad. The economy is cyclic and dynamic so actions taken must always be judged by the factors in play at the time they were taken.
There have been some remarks made that suggest that the Master Plan is being abandoned. This is not the case. The best argument for hiring a "guru" is that such an expert may well help salvage a plan by providing a different perspective which then suggests modifications which enable the plan to proceed. I would like to illustrate this process with a very specific (and lengthy, I am afraid) example.The UDA mantra, repeatedly quoted to me as the Master Plan was being developed, was "Retail follows Roofs". The point was that a certain residential mass was critical to attracting and supporting retail. The simple formula was: more people living downtown creates more need for retail, restaurants, and services.
In the early 2000's, residential home sales were heating up and this included multifamily developments as well. High density condo and town home projects were easily financed and units were selling as quickly as they could be built.
That market has evaporated and construction financing for occupant owned developments has stopped. On the other hand, financing IS available for the development of similar projects which are to held by a business entity and rented to individuals.
What has this got to do with the Downtown Master Plan? Everything, Why? Because a simple shift in thinking puts the plan back on track.
Instead of pursuing high risk taking developers to build "For Sale" condos or town homes downtown (on the Goodyear site, for instance), the slight shift to building strictly defined apartments (complimentary architectural and materials standards, higher end of the rental scale, compatible with the downtown) could quickly accomplish the goal of increasing residential density downtown with the resulting demand for additional retail.
Two recent examples of this have occurred in downtown and at Peninsula Town Center. Both apartment complexes are extremely successful. In the case of the "Chapman" at Peninsula Town Center there is actually a waiting list for apartments. So the shift is away from new construction of "For Sale" units and toward rental construction. The end result is the same, increased residential density, in spite of the current economy.What is the mental shift in this example?. it is moving from the bias that "owning" is better than "renting," when in fact the building of higher end residential rentals has long been held to be the way to attract residents downtown. For those considering such a change in life style a one year lease allows a short term commitment to "try it out", versus actually buying.
So the issue has nothing to do with "abandoning the plan". Rather, it has to do with bringing in someone of Steiner's background and expertise and having that someone help direct the building of a bridge between the plan, developed almost 8-9 years ago, and the economic facts in evidence today.
I have no preconceived ideas about what Steiner will suggest around the end of the year. What I do know is that: he has begun by meeting one-on-one with a diverse array of downtown stakeholders, he brings to the table an easily documented history of successes in market reconstruction, and he has the luxury of speaking with equanimity.
In closing, I'd like to make three other points:
1. Is the Downtown Hampton Master Plan being abandoned? No, absolutely not.
2. Is Steiner facing a conflict of interest advising downtown while being involved at Peninsula Town Center? Rather than answering yes or no I would ask the opposite question: How could he be in conflict?
3. Is Steiner the right choice for this consultancy? I would answer this with the duck conclusion: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. In this case Steiner is a nationally recognized expert on market redevelopment projects who, due to his involvement with the Peninsula Town Center project, is frequently available here even though his headquarters are in Ohio. This means that we have an opportunity to work with a nationally recognized expert who has significant ties to our community.
Steiner is clearly the correct choice.Perry Pligrim is President of the Downtown Hampton Development Partnership. In his day job, he is principal broker for Abbitt Realty in Hampton.
