news-record.com

NEWS

Study: Hotel faces difficult prospects

Saturday, January 30, 2010
(Updated 7:25 am)

Regardless of how it is financed, a new downtown hotel would likely struggle to succeed if it’s built as proposed by developers, a report says.

Urban Hotel Group  would enter a Greensboro hotel market that is coping with depressed room rates, occupancy levels and commercial real estate values, according to the survey commissioned by the city of Greensboro.

The study, written by hotel consultant HVS Global Hospitality Services  and completed Jan. 18 , says the recession has pummeled the hotel industry nationwide, especially in Greensboro, where business trips and conferences have declined dramatically.

Urban Hotel Group, which plans to use a combination of special federal stimulus financing and private investment, says in its proposal to the city that the 206-room  hotel would enter the market well-occupied so it can maintain a healthy room rental rate to meet its financial obligations.

Two of its closest competitors, according to the city report, would be the Proximity and O. Henry hotels, two luxury hotels owned by Quaintance-Weaver Hotels & Restaurants. 

Dennis Quaintance  and Mike Weaver , the company’s primary investors, have publicly questioned Urban Hotel Group’s plans and are doing their own analysis of the proposal. They say city and county officials have done a sloppy job of vetting the proposal’s application for stimulus financing.

But Melvin “Skip” Alston  says the two businessmen’s sole motivation is to stop competition in downtown, where they have considered a hotel of their own. Alston, the chairman of the Guilford County Board of Commissioners, brought together several of the key investors on the hotel project and is a broker on the deal.

Alston said the proposal “shouldn’t be based on the influence of Dennis Quaintance and Mike Weaver or on the influence of me or (hotel advocate) Deena Hayes. They should judge this hotel on its merits.”

The HVS report seeks to do just that.

Randall Kaplan , an investor in the downtown hotel, has said the group’s plans won’t be set in stone until they’ve done their own final economic analysis.

Urban Hotel Group says that 64 percent  of the hotel’s rooms would be occupied on an average business day in 2012 at an average rate of $155 a night .

But the HVS report is not so optimistic.

“The developer’s projection of occupancy at the proposed hotel over the first five years is highly unlikely to be achieved given the recent occupancy levels achieved by the four hotels that will be primary competitors of the proposed hotel,” the company wrote.

The Marriott hotels downtown and at Piedmont Triad International Airport are considered by HVS to be the other primary competitors.

The new hotel is dependent upon special bonds that Urban Hotel Group wants to issue under the federal recovery zone program in the 2009 stimulus package. It allows developers to borrow money at lower interest rates while giving investors tax-free income from the interest they earn.

There’s plenty of evidence, the report suggests, that the recession has dealt a heavy blow to the Triad’s hotel industry, as it has to the nation’s.

Rates have been slashed and the number of luxury hotel rooms on the local market grew by 322 rooms in 2007 — up to 734 —  when the Proximity and DoubleTree  hotels opened in Greensboro. 

HVS says its research shows the average daily luxury hotel rate would be $147 a night in 2012 , less than Urban Hotel Group’s projection. The report suggests the average could grow to $180 a night by 2016 , which matches Urban Hotel Group’s projection.  

Another factor could threaten the downtown proposal as well: Real estate values for hotels have dropped, and savvy investors will be able to buy those properties and upgrade them to luxury level at a fraction of the cost of a new hotel.

The 175-room DoubleTree  hotel on High Point Road, for example, was a run-down Howard Johnson  hotel until a developer turned it into an “upper upscale” hotel, in industry terms. HVS reports that the developer spent about $18 million, or $106,000 per room , to turn it into a top-quality hotel.

“Compare this cost to the projected total project cost of the proposed luxury hotel to be built in downtown Greensboro at $54,486,248,  or $264,496  per room for the 206-room hotel, and it is clear that the proposed hotel will not be able to compete at an economically viable level,” HVS writes.

Quaintance and Weaver stress they are not against the specific project, just the city’s process.

Quaintance said he was angry when Urban Hotel Group was allowed by the city to shift its proposed location for the hotel from South Elm and Lee streets to its current site — Davie Street and February One Place — a week after the Dec. 15 deadline for proposals.

He said he felt the city had initially required proposals to offer specific details but did not seem to mind when Urban Hotel Group made broad, general changes to its plan.

So, sleepless in the wee hours of Jan. 12,  Quaintance said he dashed off an e-mail to Andy Scott, Greensboro’s assistant city manager for economic development , making a hypothetical argument.

“I am disappointed in that if we’d known earlier what we know now, we probably would have gotten busy and put together our own project (smaller initial phase), three variations of which have been in the works for years,” he wrote.

He said Thursday he wanted to give the impression that such an incentive to build might have attracted other developers as well, from which city leaders could have chosen the best project.

“I was exasperated. I was talking hypothetically,” he said. “I was pushing hard for a better 'process’ for our community.”

Scott, meanwhile, has been reprimanded for not turning the HVS report over to City Council members before it was turned over to Quaintance and others in a public records request. Council members did not know the study, which cost more than $3,000,  had been commissioned by city staff.

Scott said he was docked a vacation day by the city manager over the incident.

Staff Writer Amanda Lehmert contributed to this report.
 

Contact Richard M. Barron at 373-7371 or richard.barron@news-record.com

Accompanying Photos

John Newsom (News & Record)

Photo Caption: This parking deck is part of the property being considered for a new luxury hotel in downtown Greensboro.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Panacea

January 30, 2010 - 8:31 am EST

Even though tax payers are not on the hook for the cost of the hotel itself, it WILL be on the hook for other costs. Parking will become more of an issue if they demolish the parking deck in that area. Traffic will be snarled due to demo and construction--the city will have to pay for those associated costs as will individuals who have business in that area.

If this was to construct something that had real necessity or a real chance of economic success, then those costs would be worth it.

But the project, as described, does not sound like it will pay off.

tuffi

January 30, 2010 - 8:43 am EST

Pan you are correct! The project is not fiscally sound, and should be put on the back burner until the economy rebounds. Another hotel will dilute the occupancy rate of all the other hotels who have been in business for some time and need the business to stay afloat.

countryboy

January 30, 2010 - 8:56 am EST

Greensboro's leaders have to come to grips with the fact that it is not a destination city. Mt. Airy is more of a destination city than Greensboro. Lexington is more of a destination city than Greensboro (at least they have BBQ). Another empty hotel is not needed.

Abner Doon

January 30, 2010 - 9:14 am EST

"If The City of Greensboro had an independent analysis prepared for the Downtown Hotel, what did the independent analysis of the Aquatic Center proposal say?"

George Hartzman

We got sold a bridge.

GSOnativeson

January 30, 2010 - 11:23 am EST

Re-read what the analysis said about current and future hotel room rates and occupany levels. With what are we going to pay for the aquatic center??? Hold onto your wallet!!!

Mick

January 30, 2010 - 11:35 am EST

Though I do wish a thorough study would have been done on the GAC .... the two projects are not at all similar. The pool (like the CVM complex) is not completely and totally a business. It has other value. Also, it will bring business to town. It fills a void. There is no shortage of adequate hotel rooms in or near downtown.

So tell me how these two very differant projects equate again?

Abner Doon

January 30, 2010 - 1:58 pm EST

They are related because they are both dependent on approval by Greensboro's City Council.

Yet one project recieved a $3,000 city feasability study by a disinterested third party, and the other didn't.

The News and Record Editorial Board cited an "expert" who said the numbers created for the Visitors Center (an interested party) were bunk.

"…Michael G. Curran, president of the privately built Triangle Aquatic Center in Cary…questioned its estimated $14 million annual economic impact.

I’d be surprised if you did half that amount,” he said in an interview.

As for operating costs, Curran also offered words of caution. “There’s just a lot of things in a business plan you just don’t think about,” he said.

“I am surprised at what’s being built in Greensboro, and what is being presented,” Curran said of the estimated operating budget of $652,000.

“It makes no sense to me the numbers I’m seeing projected and what we’ve done here. I just don’t see them being met.”

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Mick

January 31, 2010 - 3:20 pm EST

I am well aware of the information Mr Curran provided. Privately owned, not for profit, COMPETITOR. Not saying the info he provided was incorrect , tainted, slanted or not valid to the subject.. But where is info on other publically owned facilities in the state/region? There are a few. To difficult for N&R to acquire? Didnt fit in their box? Also, I might add that his responses kind of sound off the cuff. Oh, but that is ok because he agrees with you and N&R, right?

We do agree as I would have liked a true independant study also. Have said so many times. Would at least have given us a better starting point. But, we must also be honest... if it would have come back in a positive light many would simply changed their tack and would have screamed "pre-determined conclusion" etc. We all know that.

Since we had to spend so much on design, etc. $3,000 would have been worth it. Though I still contend the pool facility is quite diff from hotel and more similar to NSC.

citywatcher

January 30, 2010 - 9:30 am EST

this is just a repeat article from last week. Its old news. not sure would the point of the article is.

Mick

January 30, 2010 - 11:38 am EST

The HVS study has been all over the blogs for some time. No news here. When the editorail staff decides it is against something that will be the end of "fair and balanced". Actual investigation and/or reporting is no more. If they cant find anything negative to print they just go to re-runs. You watch.

All that being said..... I dont get the hotel either.

Panacea

January 30, 2010 - 11:41 am EST

Given the controversy Alston generated with his ill conceived remark, it is no wonder this hotel remains in the news.

First, the Council approves spending without knowing what they are voting on.
Then Alston threatens 3 Council members when 2 local hoteliers raise questions.
Then, the City has to figure out what bond issues it can really afford.

There is plenty of news here. The N&R can't help it if that news makes people uncomfortable.

Illiterati

January 30, 2010 - 12:44 pm EST

Mick, If you had ever worked within an editorial department, you would know that there's neither time nor resources to make up and adhere to these alleged agendas. It's all you can do as an editor to stay on top of as breaking and ongoing stories and to get people to return your calls and emails before deadline. It's obvious that our local politicians and business interests are keeping the N&R staff pretty busy keeping up with all of their shenanigans.

citywatcher

January 30, 2010 - 5:12 pm EST

The thing is there is nothing new. The News & Record reported on the HVS report earlier this week saying the same exact thing. Clearly the local media including the Triad Business Journal editorial staff is against this hotel. As long as they keep the same negative news in the minds of the public and city leaders, they figure the project will lose more support. Why dont the News & Record do some investigative reporting and find out what Chrisholm and Kaplan are doing to address concerns in the report. Clearly there were some things that were not considered in the report. One of them is the impact of the Civil Rights Museum which is projected to attract 200,000 visitors the first year. Tourist attractions help make hotel rooms more feasible. There will be a number of national bus tours stopping in Greensboro. Also the feasibilty report didnt take into account of the office and retail portion of the project which will provide additional income that could offset any losses from a high hotel vacancy. Why won't the media try investigate that instead of just reporting the negative?

Mick

January 31, 2010 - 3:10 pm EST

Then what is your theory as to why there was little to no info on other facilities? MAC, PULLEN, HUNTERSVILLE, SAVANNAH GA? . Just info on the one privately owned, not for profit facility which is struggling fanancially? Do you think info on other publically owned facilities in the state or region would ahve been pertinant?

Vikingsfan

January 30, 2010 - 9:40 am EST

I have written many market studies and feasibility studies for the hospitality industry and I can absolutely say that no developer would build a luxury hotel (or any other style of hotel) in the Greensboro market based on the HVS report that I just finished reading. In fact, most every bank I know would never lend the developer any money for such a project. The only reason that I can see that this group is so bent on building this hotel is because they "might" be able to qualify for federal stimulus money. Just because you can get money to build somehting does not mean it should be built. As Mr. Alston said, let the project speak for itself on it's own merits. If that is so, Mr. Alston, then the "merits" say NOT to build this hotel. This market does not justify a luxury hotel. This hotel will be very lucky, if it is built, to achieve a 50% occupancy level at $100 per night average room rate. That is the market we live in today and over the next several years! Have you been keeping up with what has been happening with our economy? As a real estate broker Mr. Alston, I would think that you would understand when an outside, objective third party such as HVS writes that this hotel should not be built due to economic, financial and market factors, then take them for their word!

forusa

January 30, 2010 - 9:50 am EST

After the N&R initially reported no "local" tax dollars would be involved in this project, we now know over $3,000 of our tax dollars have already been spent. That is probably just the tip of the iceberg. It's easy to understand the skepticism about this project. What else is Skip covering up? It should also be noted that Skip has made it clear that Guilford County will not approve similar federal stimulus bond funds (over $34M) for Guilford County Schools. I guess the school system should have hired him as a broker.

tarheelmike

January 30, 2010 - 10:17 am EST

Please keep in mind the that making money from operations is not the goal. Skip will make his brokerage fee then money will leak out the back door for years while city and federal subsidy dollars are continually input to continue to aid the "community". Upon failure, Skip will make more money converting it to a HUD project and then have a nice retirement annuity bleeding that one out for years. This project will set him up for life.

tnw

January 30, 2010 - 10:22 am EST

This project is not about roomrates and occupancy. I't s about how much money Skip Alston and his band of crooked NAACP buddies can pocket. It will fade away and become part of the depressed east side of Greensboro where the Black community walks up and down the sidewalks looking for handouts before they go down to buy a 40 and procede to shoot eachother.. what's wrong with Greenboro? Go for a drive through the East side of the city
and you'll see

tomod526

February 12, 2010 - 1:27 pm EST

This is an article about wasting tax dollars to line one County Commisioner's pocket. It is not about race, but I guess you see this as another opportunity to make it appear that Guilford County is chock full of ignorant racists. If you think it's wrong for Skip to scream racism every time he hears the word no, what makes your comments any different. I don't care for the man, or his brand of politics, but - the color of his skin is not the issue. It's the content of his character that worries me.

dcolin

January 30, 2010 - 10:34 am EST

Look,

You have got to give Skip credit.
He is accomplishing the American dream.

He stands high on the shoulders of former white
politicians who have lead the way.

Panacea

January 30, 2010 - 11:53 am EST

Ouch!

bmitch

January 30, 2010 - 10:39 am EST

After having lived in GSO and working in the hotel industry for many years, I'm left wondering about where the real data is for this projects merits and why it has not been mentioned.
ANYONE who is involved in the hospitality industry knows that the standard metric used is called the STR report. It is the most widely respected, unbiased report on the industry, broken down into markets and segments. Why has no one i.e Q & W, the city, Koury or anyone whipped out the last oh say 12 months of the STR reports for the GSO market and just thrown it on the table and let everyone look. Yes, HVS is a widely respected consulting company but they were paid by an entity to provide a report. Look at the STR reports folks..........Any private individuals thinking of investing in this project, either thru the purchase of bonds or thru direct investment after looking at the STR reports is either delusional or just plain dumb given the state of the hotel industry. There are literally thousands of hotel real estate brokers that would love to sell hotels right now and no one is buying, let alone building new. Financing is impossible. The current figure right now is approx $50 bill in hotel assests either ready to technically default now or will in the next 12 months. Who would like to pull themselves up to that table and eat off the plate?

bbcooks

January 30, 2010 - 10:58 am EST

Interesting how several people can read the same article of news and interpret it so much differently!

We are told that the HVS report does not support the conclusion that GSO could/would support a new hotel.
In support of that arguement Dennis Q who has just opened his second hotel in GSO says that had they known about the opportunity earlier they would have submitted plans for their own Hotel? We are then informed in the same arcticle that this new hotel could not expect to sell rooms much above $106.00 a night. If you go right now to the O'Henry web page you will find that if you check in Monday-Wed of next week you will pay a nightly rate of $248.00 per night. Hmmm Is the hotel empty?

Comments posted re-state that this is "already costing the city money as they spent $3000.00 on the HVS study. But we also know that a competing HVS study was filed with the city by the developers and they don't reach the same conclusions. The preparer of the first study actually came to Greensboro and the actual site unlike the preparer of the study by the city. Did you happen to read that Scott was docked pay for sending the report to QW before the city saw it.

Sad that we now think so little of our city that we would toss away a project that would create up to 400 jobs in construction and FF&E- We still build furntiure and mattresses around here. 100 jobs in ongoing operations. The building has been operating as an event center for most of the last decade. This Hotel would not open for a couple years so apparently things are doomed never to improve. Interesting that somehow this project was OK when it was located on LEE ST?

Maybe the city should have told all the private investors who have made tens of millions of dollars in private investments into our downtown that our situation is so hopeless. Maybe we should tell the hundreds of media people who are in town for the International Civil Rights Museum opening, or who in a few weeks will be coming to the ACC Tournament that there is obviously no reason to think that Greensboro's future is anything but bleak.

How ridiculous to think that any city of any substance could possibly need or support a Hotel in the Heart of their Downtown entertainment district. After all there are so many examples of successful vibrant cities with no decent Hotels downtown like, um, well, there must be one. Why don't ya'll think of some and get back to me.

jstevenh1952

January 30, 2010 - 11:50 am EST

One major difference here ....public funding vs. private funding. The proposed hotel has virtually no outside capital and relies almost entirely on public funding.

O'Henry and others are private capital. Investors taking a risk with their capital not the taxpayers.

The economics are a matter of public debate and are valid. Whether you agree or not, any business, or person has the right to verify the use of Goverment funding that is in direct competition with their own private enterprise.

It also seems that you are overstating the value of the downtown area including the ICRM to justify critism of those that challenge the project. Fact are facts, it (the hotel) will not perform as expected or promoted. The numbers are not there. It has the high probability of becoming a white elephant for our taxpayers down the road.

Citizens have the right to debate and object to use of public funds for private enterprise. That's right PRIVATE ENTERPRISE funded by our tax dollars.

Panacea

January 30, 2010 - 12:00 pm EST

To be viable, a hotel must be able to achieve a certain occupancy rate throughout the year. Large events that occur only once, or once every couple of years aren't going to cut it, not for a luxury hotel.

Where's the market for this hotel?

bbcooks

January 30, 2010 - 12:40 pm EST

Hello J, I agree that the public has a right to scrutinize the funds going to support private projects. Can I pose a few questions for your consideration? What public projects be they local state or federal do not have a positive financial impact on some private entity. When we build a new road doesn't a private company do the work and isn't that the way you would want it?

When a large private construction project is undertaken isn't there almost always a cost in infrastructure improvement to the municipality? The off-ramp from I-40 directly into Four Seasons public or privately funded? The tax credits and water and sewer improvements for the Proximity Hotel public or private? Do we not hope that the tax benefits from these preojects and the employment they provide will be a net positive?

It is untrue that there are no private dollars in this project, the site and the use of the site were paid for with private dollars and are being integrated into the final use. The funding is from a publically issued bond that people have a choice to purchase or not is that not a free market vehicle? In the current climate the big banks won't make business loans to buy gum, Isn't it good to bring jobs and investment dollars into the city when tax dollars are not needed. Are we now saying to our politicians "Keep those federal dollars and benifits away from our area we don't want them?

I respect your arguement but it seems unrealistic and is not actually applicable to the situation we are considering.

jstevenh1952

January 30, 2010 - 4:25 pm EST

We'll see. Thank you for reminding us what is applicable.

Abner Doon

January 30, 2010 - 2:05 pm EST

"In support of that arguement Dennis Q who has just opened his second hotel in GSO says that had they known about the opportunity earlier they would have submitted plans for their own Hotel?"

Good point.

So which study wins?

None of what you are espousing rescinds the ethics issues.

The project wasn't OK when it was at Lee Street either. Same problems, different spot.

tledford

January 30, 2010 - 11:04 am EST

From what I've read, every expert who has been consulted, questioned or asked to do a feasibility study on this project states that it doesn't make any sense financially. I know that the ARRA-related low-interest loans must surely be attractive to the people who want to see this hotel built, but if they move forward despite the warnings of the experts, for years there will be raised eyebrows and reasonable questions about the true motives of the people behind the project.

If the project is truly viable, then it can wait two or three or five years (or whatever is necessary) when it *does* make sense financially.

haztwo

January 30, 2010 - 11:21 am EST

BB,

"If you go right now to the O'Henry web page you will find that if you check in Monday-Wed of next week you will pay a nightly rate of $248.00 per night."

The published rate is rarely what is paid. Just like a car dealer hotels will negotiate rates. They have all different tiers. You're looking at their "rack" rate. You'd be more accurate if you had called The O'Henry or the Proximity and asked them what their average room rate was.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Mobile
  • Social
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search