Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mini Golf topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows site choices for a city‑operated mini golf course to two Buckroe parcels, orders public poll
Summary
After staff presented five options (four at Buckroe, one at Bluebird Gap Farm) and cost/revenue scenarios, council members signaled support for Buckroe parcels 3 and 4 as finalists and instructed staff to poll the public between those two locations; roughly $350,000 of revenue‑recovery funds remains available for an initial low‑cost course.
Hampton — City staff presented five potential locations for a city‑operated mini golf course and the council gave staff direction to poll the public on two Buckroe options.
Staff told council the city previously set aside about $350,000 in revenue‑recovery funds for a low‑scale, seasonal mini golf facility and presented a range of alternatives: a basic beachfront course (the amount set aside would cover the low‑profile option) and a full‑amenity course with buildings for concessions and parties, which staff estimated could cost roughly $800,000 or more to build. Staff provided revenue benchmarks used for planning: about $250,000 annually for a low‑operation course and about $375,000 for a full amenity facility under the department’s occupancy assumptions.
Mike Hayes, the planning division manager, described five site options: four Buckroe‑area parcels (two conservation‑easement lots intended to remain largely open and two developable ‘B’ lots) and a Bluebird Gap Farm location on Pine Chapel Road. Hayes noted that lots inside the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) conservation easement are constrained to a small percentage of impervious surface and would require VOF approval; some Buckroe parcels also have flood‑zone issues that would affect the design of any buildings.
Council members debated tradeoffs between preserving VOF easement open space and siting an amenity next to beach activity. Several members expressed a preference for Buckroe and specifically for the parcels staff labeled as options 3 and 4 because they keep the course near the beachfront activity while allowing future expansion and are consistent with the Buckroe master‑plan context. Councilwoman Mugler said she favored keeping one conservation lot open and considering the other two; Vice Mayor Gray noted a preference for low‑profile activities in conservation areas. Councilman Brown and others said they preferred a full‑service facility near the boardwalk with hours beyond typical park closing times.
Based on those discussions, the council directed staff to survey the public with a poll comparing Buckroe options 3 and 4 as finalists and to return with public feedback and further cost estimates. Staff also said it will explore contracting options so the city could opt to have a private operator manage day‑to‑day operations if council prefers.
The council did not adopt any construction contract or funding appropriation at the meeting; the $350,000 set aside remains the planning baseline for a low‑cost seasonal course.
