forest park redevelopment plan - home - oki regional...

Forest ParkRedevelopment Plan

City CouncilJames P. Lawler, MayorCharles Johnson, First Vice-MayorClara Pugh, Second Vice-mayorWyndell BurnsSheila CottleDiana HerbeDavid Lives

City Manager and Department HeadsRay Hodges, City ManagerChris Anderson, Comm. Development Dir.Stan Beeler, Building DirectorPaul Brehm, Econ. Development DirectorDave Buesking, Public Works DirectorTrish Brooks, Fire ChiefKen Hughes, Police ChiefLois Reynolds, Finance DirectorTye Smith, Human Resources Director

DRAFT

DRAFT 5/15/2007

Table of Contents

I. Introduction.................................................................................................................1

II. Six Guiding Principles ................................................................................................3

III. Commercial Redevelopment.......................................................................................7

Northland Area...................................................................................................7

Waycross-Hamilton Area.................................................................................12

IV. Residential Redevelopment ......................................................................................15

Major Home Improvement Program................................................................16

Spot-Purchase Program....................................................................................17

Attached For-Sale Housing Development .......................................................19

V. Financial Plan............................................................................................................23

VI. Summary of Recommendations................................................................................25

Appendix

A. Property Data Sheets....................................................................................................27

DRAFT

DRAFT 1 5/15/2007

I. IntroductionA citizen-based effort to modify

the City of Forest Park’s income taxstructure was approved by the voters onFebruary 6, 2007. Two priorities of thiseffort were to provide funds to hire anadditional five police officers, and for acomprehensive community redevelop-ment program for Forest Park.

Immediately following theelection, the Forest Park City Councildirected the staff to prepare thisRedevelopment Plan so that the Citycould move forward in a timely andorderly manner, one that makes the bestuse of our taxpayer’s dollars andprovides the greatest return in economicviability, quality of life, and service-loadreduction.

It is important to note that theCity Council and administration were

not simply standing still while awaitingthe result of the election. The City haslong been encouraging privateredevelopment of obsolete or underusedproperty, with some notable successes,including Cincinnati Mills andParkwood Plaza. More directly, the Citypurchased the long-vacant former K-Mart property at Hamilton and Waycrossin November, 2006, with the expressintention to redevelop the property.

The Redevelopment Plan is theresult of contributions by many on theCity staff, but especially Lois Reynolds,Dan Burke, Paul Brehm, Tye Smith andChris Anderson. City Manager RayHodges provided guidance and directionto the staff throughout the project, andwas closely involved in developing itspriorities and recommendations.

DRAFT

DRAFT 2 5/15/2007

This page left intentionally blank

DRAFT

DRAFT 3 5/15/2007

II. Six Guiding Principles

1. Reverse The TrendAfter over 40 years of growth and

tangible progress, Forest Park hasexperienced some downward trends on anumber of well-being and quality-of-lifeindicators, including housing foreclo-sures, crime, retail vacancy and disin-vestment. These negative trends have notoccurred uniformly throughout thecommunity, but rather are concentratedin identifiable geographic areas, and inthe long run could threaten the socio-economic diversity of the community.Continued progress in one part of ForestPark is not enough, however, if otherparts lag behind or worsen. This willeventually lead to a two-tier community,something that Forest Park has neverbeen and that we seek to avoid. Resi-dents and businesses always have achoice of where to locate, and it is im-portant to our future that Forest Park is aviable choice of location. Fortunately,none of these trends is so far along as tobe inevitable, and the City of Forest Parkcan use its Community RedevelopmentProgram to reverse negative trends be-fore they become irreversible.

This check-cashing store was once a BurgerKing Restaurant

2. Attract DesirableDevelopment That Has GoneElsewhere Lately

Part of the quality-of-life in ForestPark has been access to varied andconvenient shopping, recreational andmedical services. Forest Park’s morerecent evolution into a center of em-ployment has likewise benefited thecommunity and helped fund a full-service municipal government. Lately,however, we have seen multiple exam-ples of commercial development, whichonce sought the I-275 area, skip over usand locate in Butler and WarrenCounties.

Our demographics remain strong.Other advantages related to but also tran-scending raw income numbers are ourlocation and access to transportation, ourpopulation density, and our daytimeworkforce.

Part of the problem is simple lack ofdevelopment-ready sites. We are bothland-locked and nearing build-out. Wehave numerous sites for redevelopment,and a few successful redevelopmentprojects either planned or completed,and funded entirely by the private sector.Unfortunately, however, it is muchtougher to sell a development conceptfor property with obsolete or derelictbuildings than it is for a fully develop-ment-ready site. Few have the vision orthe time and wherewithal to deal withthe challenges of redeveloping a site.This is where Forest Park can actthrough its Community RedevelopmentProgram to change a failed, vacant ordeteriorating target area into a site thatwill attract the kind of development thatwe are currently watching go elsewhere.

DRAFT

DRAFT 4 5/15/2007

3. Leverage Private InvestmentOur redevelopment dollars are

limited, and dwarfed by the amount ofmoney available for investment by theprivate sector. Except in correcting anobvious development mistake (i.e. theQuaker State facility on Winton Road),we should target and prioritize land ac-quisition for both a return on the City’sinvestment and the opportunity to lever-age a small public investment with alarge private investment, as well as itsimpact on our service needs. This notonly maximizes the effectiveness of theCommunity Redevelopment Program,but also returns the property to produc-tive use and enhances the City’s taxbase.

Looked at another way, there will beinstances in which the best course for theCity is to forego putting public moneyinto redevelopment. If, as in the case ofParkwood Plaza, the property can beredeveloped entirely by the privatesector, then there is no need for the Cityto use scarce dollars in subsidizing thatoutcome. Other, more traditional,economic development tools are suffi-cient in that case. Every potential prop-erty should be analyzed to determinewhether the desired outcome can beachieved by the private-sector before weinclude it in the Community Redevel-opment Program.

With the understandable attraction todevelopment-ready sites, it is importantthat we maximize these options in ForestPark, or the development will continueto go elsewhere.

Vacant K-Mart PropertyAcquired by the City in November, 2006

4. Implement The HousingStrategy

The City conducted a residentialmarket study in October, 2006 and iden-tified a two-tier housing strategy. Thestudy showed that there are people insideand out of Forest Park who would like tomove up or move in, but may not do sobecause we lack the housing product thatthey desire. In summary, the housingstrategy includes support for existingneighborhoods to maintain a good qual-ity-of-life and a high level of mainte-nance and improvement. Growth inhousing values, meeting or exceedingthe overall Tri-State market, is key tomaintaining stable neighborhoods and asetting where maintenance and invest-ment is rewarded by the housing market.The strategy also includes filling thegaps in our housing supply as identifiedin the study through development of newfor-sale housing in the price ranges andstyles that the current housing supplylacks. Both of these objectives can beenhanced with the Community Redevel-opment Program.

DRAFT

DRAFT 5 5/15/2007

5. Identify and Treat DistrictsStrategically

Different districts or geographicalareas of the City will require differentstrategies. This can apply to the level ofinvestment as well as the method ofredevelopment. A proven method forgovernment to support business districtsis in infrastructure, streetscape, districtidentification and establishment of gate-ways. This approach can also apply toacquisition and redevelopment, in se-lecting the most visible sites—those thatmake a lasting impression on thepublic—while placing a lower priorityon less-visible interior sites. The objectshould be to intervene where necessaryto foster the image of a district andstimulate private investment. The leveland method of intervention will varyfrom district to district.

6. Right-SizingForest Park began as a bedroom

community but has transitioned into amixed community of residents and busi-nesses. The Tax Modification Plan was

successful, in part, because it changedour tax structure to be consistent withthat reality. The implication for theCommunity Redevelopment Plan is thatsimple population numbers are nearlyimmaterial to our situation and pros-pects. Forest Park can be successful,perhaps stronger, with smaller popula-tion numbers and renter-to-owner ratio,provided that we have a strong housingmarket and a dynamic business commu-nity. Therefore, the focus of theCommunity Development Programshould be on enhancing both of thosethings. Our housing should attract a ca-pable, responsible population, regardlessof household size. Our business districtsshould compete at a higher level withsites in Butler and Warren Counties. Wecan increase value by reducing someburdensome or over-supplied land uses,thus achieving a more balanced commu-nity. This not only allows the City tocontinue providing a high level of mu-nicipal service, but also enhances theconfidence of those considering locatingor investing in Forest Park.

DRAFT

DRAFT 6 5/15/2007

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

DRAFT

DRAFT 7 5/15/2007

III. Commercial RedevelopmentThe Redevelopment Plan focuses on

the Northland Business District and theHamilton-Waycross Business District. Italso includes the apartment complexes inthe vicinity of each, although it makesno specific recommendations foracquisition of particular apartmentproperties.

Northland Business DistrictThe Northland Business District

redevelopment area includes the proper-ties between Waycross Road andSouthland Road, as well as the vacantBP and Burger King corner properties.The area is zoned Office on the northside and planned business on the southside. BP is zoned highway service andBurger King is zoned manufacturing.Redevelopment in general will followthe current zoning, with the exception ofthe BP property, which is an unusual“spot zone.”

BP StationThe BP station at 702 Northland has

been closed since Summer, 20061. Theproperty is owned by BP-Amoco, andthe company has not been forthcomingabout its intentions or plans for theproperty.

BP and its predecessor Standard Oilhave operated a gas station at thislocation since 1968. Its location is un-usual for a Forest Park business becauseit is in a single-property “spot zone.”Adjacent properties to the north and eastare offices; to the south and west,residential. Only diagonally across thecorner at Forest Park Plaza are thereother retail businesses. The spot zone isHighway Service, and it is the only

1 For a full property description, see the propertyfact sheets in Appendix A.

Highway Service zone located awayfrom I-275. The zoning district, whileappropriate for a gas station, is poten-tially problematic because it is the leastrestrictive of all business zoning dis-tricts. It is also considered bad planningand zoning practice to spot-zone a prop-erty, as it provides zoning benefits orrestrictions to single property and not itsneighbors.

The property has caused problemsfor the area in recent years, includingpoor maintenance of landscape areas,litter, and teens hanging out. Probablere-use scenarios, without Cityintervention, include another brand ofgas station, convenience store, auto ser-vice, or other small retail, such as dis-count cigarettes. None of these wouldcontribute to the redevelopment ofNorthland Boulevard.

The plan recommends three steps inaddressing the BP property:

• Place a 90-day moratorium on is-suance of permits for the property,for the purpose of evaluating andenacting a change of zoning. Theplacement of a moratorium is aCouncil action.

• Initiate a change of zoning fromHighway Service to Office, whichwould be an extension of the zoningfound on the north side of NorthlandBoulevard. The zoning would becompatible with redeveloping theproperty as part of a larger officecampus (see Waycross MedicalCampus section.)

• Pursue the purchase of the propertyfor demolition. As mentioned above,the owner has not placed theproperty for sale or indicated anyreuse. They have also passively

DRAFT

DRAFT 8 5/15/2007

resisted all attempts by Cityemployees to obtain information ordiscuss the future of the property.Nonetheless, the property should beclosely monitored for any change in

this position by the company. Ifnecessary, the City should useeminent domain to acquire theproperty.

Map 1

Northland AreaRedevelopment

r

rr

Gateway

Gateway

ParkingLot

FP Plaza

Northpoint

NorthlandTower

NORTHLAND BLVD

SO

UT

HLA

ND

RDW

AY

CR

OS

SR

D

KE

NN

RD

DANBURY RD

New Bui lding

New Building

PublicGreen

NewMedical

Acquire/Demolish

r

Streetscape

Boulevard Axis

Traffic Signal

Northland Office PropertiesThe three most distressed office

properties are located at 640, 660 and680 Northland, and all have the sameowner. The properties are over 90% va-cant and show the effects of long-termdeferred maintenance. Acquisition ofthese properties will help support thearea economically and aesthetically.

680 Northland is located immedi-ately west of the Parkdale branch post

office and is the smallest of the threeproperties. This property should be ac-quired to support the long-term retentionof the Parkdale branch on NorthlandBoulevard. The US Postal Service haslooked at the possibility of moving thisbranch in the past due to it being some-what cramped in its current location.According to Postal Service criteria,there are no other locations in ForestPark that would be suitable, and if the

DRAFT

DRAFT 9 5/15/2007

branch were moved, it is highly likelythat it would be outside of Forest Park.The post office is a large employer andkey driver of activity in the area, and itsretention is very important.

In the short run, the 680 propertyshould be converted to a parking lot,owned by the City and open to post of-fice customers and employees. This willalleviate some of the crowding in thepost office’s small parking lot and helpkeep the current branch viable. In thelong run, the property should be held bythe City for the purpose of expansion ofthe post office. By having this propertyready for sale or donation, the City canaffirmatively support the concept of ex-panding and renovating the Parkdalebranch in its current location.

The 660 and 640 properties are lo-cated on either side of the boulevard en-trance to the Northland tower. Anyredevelopment of these buildings wouldsupport the area economically, but ac-quisition and demolition by the Cityopens up several possibilities for en-hancing the district both economicallyand aesthetically.

Currently, the buildings obscure theview of the tower, which is the mostprominent feature of the district, andshould be featured more prominently. Asshown on Map 1, the properties shouldbe demolished, and the rebuilt officesshould be set back farther from theboulevard entrance as well as orientedtoward the boulevard entrance ratherthan Northland. Strong considerationshould be given to redeveloping each ofthese properties as build-to-suit build-ings for single users. Doing so will re-duce the amount of multi-tenant officespace in the district, of which there iscurrently a surplus. A study by theForest Park Economic Development De-partment found that the three properties

only had 12 employees total, a conditionthat is partly the result of high vacancybut also the nature of the small busi-nesses that do remain on the properties.The larger companies that would occupybuild-to-suit buildings on the redevel-oped properties would help providecustomers to support the restaurants andother businesses in the district, as well ashelp anchor the district as an office lo-cation.

Upon acquisition and demolition, theCity should use a Request for Proposal(RFP) process to identify the develop-ment partner best suited to achieve thegoals outlined above. Considerationshould be given to either providing theland at reduced cost, or structuring thepartnership to share the risk between theCity and developer. This will helpstimulate developer interest in theproperties.

Burger King PropertyThe Burger King property is vacant

and for sale. The property is part of thelarger Manufacturing zoning district onboth sides of Northland Boulevard fromSouthland Road to the Springdale citylimit. This is important because a restau-rant use is permitted, but other retail orfinancial service uses are prohibited.That restriction has limited the simple2

reuse prospects for the property. Themost viable reuse for the building is an-other fast-food restaurant, although noserious prospects have emerged.

The value to the City in acquiring theBurger King property is in its role as agateway feature the Northland Business

2 “Simple” meaning a business that would simplyreoccupy the property and put up its own signs.This happened to the Burger King at Waycrossand Hamilton, which was reoccupied by a checkcashing business. The zoning of the NorthlandBurger King has to date prevented a similaroutcome.

DRAFT

DRAFT 10 5/15/2007

District. It is the first property in thetransition from the industrial land uses tothe office and commercial land uses. Itscurrent gateway value is negative, pro-viding a poor first impression of theNorthland commercial district. By ac-quiring and demolishing the property,the City can convert the negative into apositive. This is the same approach theCity took in acquiring the vacant Q-Lubeproperty on Winton Road and convertingit into part of our greenbelt.

The property should be landscapedand mounded on the north side. The pur-pose of the mound is to obscure the viewof the car wash property to the north.Signs or other features from theNorthland Connection branding plan3

can be located on this property. Theproperty can continue in this use indefi-nitely, but the City should also keep theproperty available for purchase and re-development to an office use that wouldsupport the rest of the district.

Vacant BP Station on Northland Blvd.

3 See Appendix C for Northland Connectionconceptual drawings.

Shopping CentersThe two shopping centers on North-

land Boulevard provide the majority ofretail space in the district. Both shoppingcenters have a dated appearance andhave periodically struggled withoccupancy.

The Redevelopment Plan makes norecommendation for acquisition of eithershopping center, due both to the cost ofacquisition and the fact that both proper-ties are currently financially viable fortheir owners. Rather, the City shouldmonitor the ownership and occupancystatus of the properties. Unfortunately, itis the continued decline of propertiessuch as this that makes them candidatesfor redevelopment, as has been seen bothat Cobblewood Plaza and on HamiltonAvenue. Neither property is yet at thislevel of decline. It is clear, however, thatthe owners are not investing any sub-stantial money to upgrade or fullymaintain these declining properties.

If the City can acquire the North-point Center property for a reasonableprice, or work in partnership with theowner, then at least the east wing of theshopping center should be demolished.In its place should be a small publicgreen, with the adjacent portions of eachshopping center remodeled to face thisgreen. It would provide a north-southaccess from the Northland Tower to thepublic green through an extended north-south boulevard. It would enhance thelackluster aesthetics of the area. The de-sign features of recent lifestyle centerdevelopments also suggest that the spaceadjacent to the public green would beattractive to restaurants with outdoordining.

The City should work with the ownerof Forest Park Plaza to implement theNorthland Connection improvements onthe Northland Waycross corner. Cur-

DRAFT

DRAFT 11 5/15/2007

rently, this portion of the property hasonly the shopping center sign. It can ac-commodate the Northland Connectiongateway feature, as well as an updatedshopping center sign.

Waycross Medical CampusWaycross Road from Northland

Boulevard to the fork at Kenn Road hasa small concentration of medical offices.Most are small, single- or two-practitio-ner buildings. If acquisition of the BPproperty is successful, then the Cityshould approach these property ownersand professionals regarding an updatedand expanded medical office campusalong Waycross Road.

The goal is retention of valuablesmall business and medical services forthe City, as well as making better use ofthe available land in the vicinity. If thereis interest from the property owners re-garding the development, then the Cityshould also approach the Winton WoodsSchool District to add a portion of theirundeveloped land on the Waycross Ele-mentary School site to the developmentarea.

Northland Office Property

Northland Boulevard StreetscapeUp to now the City has done a good

job with the aesthetics of NorthlandBoulevard, recognizing that this workwas done with very tight budgets. Trees,banners and seasonal flower planting allgive the boulevard a pleasant appear-ance. This is a good starting point forhigher-impact improvements—there islittle that needs to be undone, and thepresence of the landscaped medianshould not be undervalued. Other com-munities (Fairfield, Evendale and Nor-wood) have attempted to retrofitmedians to their main commercial thor-oughfares with mixed results. ForestPark is ahead of where those communi-ties started with their streetscapeprojects.

Streetscape improvements can in-clude new traffic signals, streetlamps,trees and other plantings, sidewalks,benches and trash receptacles. The Cityshould work with an experienced de-signer and with the businesses and prop-erty owners in the area to develop astreetscape plan for implementation in2009. Special attention should be paid todistinguishing the Northland BusinessDistrict from the remainder of NorthlandBoulevard, and to improvements thatwill make the median more than just adivider for traffic.

The streetscape should also includesome form of the recommendations forthe Northland Connection brandingstudy conducted by ISI through theeconomic development commission.

DRAFT

DRAFT 12 5/15/2007

Hamilton-Waycross DistrictThe Hamilton-Waycross area con-

sists of the former K-Mart shoppingcenter and outlots, the Civic CenterPlaza shopping center and outlots, andthe undeveloped Oberer property. Thisarea forms the western gateway to theCity.

K-Mart Shopping CenterThe City has acquired the former K-

Mart property and is in the process ofacquiring the adjacent shopping center.The only tenant is a church and its affili-ated organizations. Both buildingsshould be demolished and the propertymade available for development.

The goals for these properties are toeliminate the current blight, return them

to productive uses, and develop them ina manner that physically and visuallyseparates them from the area to thesouth, in order to create a gateway intoForest Park along Waycross Road.

The new building(s) on the propertyshould front primarily on WaycrossRoad. The presence of a new and aes-thetically-pleasing retail center on Way-cross Road will do much to correct thecurrent poor impression that this prop-erty provides upon entering Forest Park.The City should also study a mixed-useapproach to the development, with retailin front and office or flex-space devel-opment in the rear. This would allow thefull re-use of the property while pre-serving its function in separating the areafrom the rest of Hamilton Avenue.

Map 2

Hamilton-WaycrossRedevelopment Area

Oberer

CivicCenter

Kmart

%WAYCROSS RD

HA

MI LT

ON

AV

GatewayFeature

Orient New Toward WaycrossAcquire & Demolish

Streetscape

New Access

% Traffic Signal

DRAFT

DRAFT 13 5/15/2007

CashlandThe City should acquire the former

Burger King restaurant that now housesa check cashing establishment. Thiscorner property is the first impressionthat a visitor gets upon turning ontoWaycross Road, and the current impres-sion is a negative one. The City shoulddemolish this building and install agateway feature on part of the property.The property is also the location of theWaycross Point shopping center sign,which is a large, outdated pylon sign thatno longer serves its purpose. This signshould also be demolished.

Civic Center and Oberer PropertiesThe Civic Center shopping center is

not planned for acquisition. The Cityshould, however, coordinate its effortson the K-mart property with the ownerof the Civic Center property, with thegoal of making both properties compati-ble with one another, and supporting theowner’s efforts to replace the formerThriftway anchor. The City can also usethis partnership to encourage renovationof the Civic Center property in a waythat gives improved access to the unde-veloped Oberer property to the north.

The Oberer property is adjacent to I-275 and has a development plan for

mixed office, hotel and restaurant uses.Two impediments to the development ofthe property have been access and topog-raphy. The road frontage for all of thisproperty is ODOT limited-access right-of-way, meaning that no driveways arepermitted. The only access to HamiltonAvenue is through the Civic Centerproperty. The second impediment hasbeen the steep topography of the site,which limits the actual acreage that canbe developed and increases the cost ofbuilding a road.

The challenges to developing theOberer property notwithstanding, theCity has neither desired nor had thefunds to provide a direct subsidy to thedeveloper. The redevelopment plan,however, offers an opportunity to aid inthe development, by encouraging greatercooperation from the Civic Center owneron access, and the possibility of a TaxIncrement Financing (TIF) district tosupport the development of the infra-structure on the property.

The City took a similar approachusing a TIF to develop Carillon Boule-vard. A TIF district that includes the K-Mart, Civic Center and Oberer propertiesprovides the greatest potential tax in-crement for the area.

DRAFT

DRAFT 14 5/15/2007

Waycross StreetscapeThe City should fund a streetscape

project that distinguishes WaycrossRoad and the Waycross-Hamiltonintersection from the rest of HamiltonAvenue. Due to the Hamilton Avenuewidening in 2008, the streetscape im-provements should be done in twophases. The City should immediatelytake the steps necessary to provide a lo-cal contribution to the State wideningproject to provide an enhanced, mastarm traffic signal at the Hamilton-Way-cross intersection. The State is willing todo this if the local community fullyfunds the design cost and the differencebetween the enhanced signal and thestandard signal found in a typical ODOTproject. The second phase of the street-

scape on Waycross Road should betimed with the redevelopment of the K-mart property and occur concurrently orshortly after.

Multi-Family PropertiesBoth commercial redevelopment

areas have adjacent apartment com-plexes which are either in need of rede-velopment or conversion to a differentuse. The Plan makes no specific recom-mendation for acquisition of a specificproperty. It is recommended that theCity monitor the sale price of the apart-ment complexes in the Hamilton-Waycross area and the Northland-Waycross area for possible purchase.

DRAFT

DRAFT 15 5/15/2007

IV. Residential RedevelopmentThe City of Forest Park commis-

sioned a residential market study4 to bet-ter understand our local housing market.The study described Forest Park as a“capable housing market frozen in time,”with about 80% of the housing stock de-veloped between 1956 and 1976. Thishas led to some structural weaknesses inour local housing market, not basedupon household wealth and capacity(which are quite strong), but rather basedupon the kind of housing available in thecommunity. In short, the study foundthat many of the most capable house-holds “have settled for housing that doesnot meet their needs in order to live inForest Park.”

The study’s conclusions are summa-rized as follows (emphases added):

1. Forest Park is a city whose housinggrowth is held in check, not by itshousehold makeup or location asseen in most submarkets, but ratherby its aging and typically one-di-mensional housing stock.

2. The household demographics andtheir relative concentrations in ForestPark are unlike most first-suburbansubmarkets, resembling emerging-suburban contexts in their householdincomes, spread of ages, familialstatus, employment centers, and out-bound daily commuters. For mosthouseholds, their home purchasingpower exceeds their choices.

3. The current housing market is ripewith steady transfer activity justshort of our typical submarket trends.

4 A Residential Market Study for the City ofForest Park, Michael J. Dinn, September 9,2006.

The bulk of activity is seen in oldersingle-family homes on small lotswith pricing from $75,000-$150,000.Above $150,000, there are fewchoices and only one new home sub-division priced well ahead of any re-sale price strata. There is also anunusual balance between median andaverage household incomes that canbe attributed to the lack of upper-endhousing.

4. Bound by its aging housing stock,Forest Park is now seeing a rash ofhome foreclosures that are found inmost of the subdivisions. Theseforeclosures not only erode theneighborhood values in the shortrun, but also impact the pride ofownership and neighbors’ confi-dence in their home investment.

5. Strategic city planning should in-clude well-placed pockets of newattached for-sale housing to addressboth the housing affordability issuesand the unmet demand for suchhousing by several psychographicsegments already in Forest Park.Given the lack of attached for-salehousing, initiating very visible andincremental attached housing willupdate and “re-brand” ForestPark as a great place to live amonga capable and influential segmentof the population.

The residential component of the re-development plan is designed to addressthe highlighted problems and opportuni-ties identified in the residential marketstudy.

DRAFT

DRAFT 16 5/15/2007

Provide Incentives for Owner-Occupied Housing Investment

The residential market study con-cluded that there are many homeownersin Forest Park who are living in a lower-priced home than they could otherwiseafford. It also found that the socio-eco-nomic status of these residents was onpar with the surrounding communities.Furthermore, 80% of the employedpopulation in Forest Park works outsideof the City. This indicates that most ofthese residents have chosen to live inForest Park, but also have the means andmobility to live elsewhere, including thecommunities surrounding Forest Park.Given that many residents are living inrelatively modest houses and can affordmore, it is important to the redevelop-ment program to provide these residentswith an incentive to further invest in andupgrade their homes.

Currently, Forest Park homeownershave access to two programs that pro-vide an incentive or subsidy for repairand upgrades to their homes. The ForestPark Home Improvement/Small RepairProgram provides a small grant (up to$500) to eligible homeowners for repairsor improvements to the exterior of theirhouses. This program, funded by afederal Community Development BlockGrant, is limited to low and moderateincome homeowners. While thisprogram provides a helping hand tohomeowners of limited means and sup-ports the City’s property maintenanceprogram, it is insufficient in its fundingand target population to make a differ-ence in the overall housing market.

Hamilton County has a home im-provement loan program, which pro-vides all property owners access to loansthat are discounted 3% below the interestrate that the owner would otherwise getwith conventional bank financing. HIP

Loans, as they are known, must be usedfor home improvement, have a time limitof 5 years, and are obtained through se-lected banks in the same manner as ahome equity loan or second mortgage.The expressed goal of the HIP Loanprogram is to stem the population loss inHamilton County, by providing an in-centive to homeowners to stay in theirhomes rather than move to an outlyingcounty. This goal is completely consis-tent with the City’s redevelopment goals,but the HIP Loan program has onlymade a small difference at the margins,and as recent Census numbers show, ithas not stemmed the population lossfrom the County.

For the residential component of theredevelopment plan to succeed, the Cityneeds a more direct and attractive incen-tive program than the two programs al-ready in place. In order to enhance thelocal housing market by improving anddiversifying the 80% of the housingstock built between 1956 and 1976, weneed to provide an incentive that cangenerate higher participation than theHamilton County HIP program, and isavailable to homeowners of all incomes.

Forest Park should use a portion ofits redevelopment dollars to fund a“Major Home Improvement Program.”This program would have the followingfeatures:

• For home improvement projects of$5,000 to $50,000, based upon thebuilding permit data.

• For houses built prior to 1995, whichwould exclude homes that have noneed of updating.

• For owner-occupants of single-family houses.

DRAFT

DRAFT 17 5/15/2007

• A subsidy of 20% of the cost of theproject, in the form of a grant orforgivable loan (see below).

• Limits on speculation, either by re-quiring a minimum time as owner(such as one year) or by structuringthe grant as a forgivable loan5 so thatit must be paid back if the house issold soon after the improvement ismade.

• Architectural review, in order to en-sure that the proposed renovation oraddition does enhance the property.

• A fixed time period of 10 years inwhich the program would operate.

Implement a Spot-PurchaseProgram in Targeted Areas

The residential market study identi-fied home foreclosures as a drag onselling prices in some Forest Parkneighborhoods. These properties are soldunder a distress condition, which meansa sale price 20% below the average pricefor the area. This has two effects on thesurrounding area, first reducing the priceobtainable for similar homes due tocompetition, and second reducing theconfidence of other property owners re-garding the investment value of theirown property.

A prior analysis of purchasingwhole neighborhoods for redevelopment

5A “forgivable loan” is recorded as a mortgageon the property for the full amount, with nopayments due, and a timeline for reduction ofthat amount. For example, a five-year forgivableloan would reduce in amount by 20% per yearuntil at the end of the fifth year nothing is due. Ifa homeowner sold the home right away, then100% would be due, after a year, 80% due. Thus,it functions as a grant because payment wouldonly be required from the sale proceeds of thehouse, if that house were sold quickly.

showed the whole-neighborhood ap-proach to be unfeasible for two reasons.First, the analysis chose three areas ofthe City where property values were thelowest for Forest Park. Each area had190 to 220 homes. The simple assessedvaluation of these small areas was be-tween eighteen and twenty milliondollars, as shown below:

The actual market price of theseproperties can reasonably be expected tobe 10-25% in excess of the amountsshown above. Simply put, the City couldspend its entire redevelopment budgetfor the next 30 years on one relativelysmall project. The second reason to de-emphasize the whole-neighborhood con-cept is that the State of Ohio, in reactionto the Norwood eminent domain contro-versy, has taken steps to eliminate theuse of eminent domain for this kind ofredevelopment project. The chance ofacquiring hundreds of properties in aconcentrated area through negotiatedsales at a reasonable price—without thethreat of eminent domain—is vanish-ingly small.

Furthermore, where residentialblight6 exists in Forest Park, it is over-whelmingly spot blight, involving anindividual house or a few houses in

6 Our definition of blight is considerably morestringent than typical urban definitions. As usedhere, a blighted property is one with repeatedmaintenance violations, fire damage, vacancybeyond one year, or constituting an attractivenuisance. A property does not have to be unsafe,boarded or unsanitary to be considered blighted,and indeed, almost none in Forest Park everreaches that condition.

Name Acres# of

parcels# of

owners ValuationArea 1 46.55 221 220 $20,602,900Area 2 46.43 225 220 $19,687,130Area 3 42.44 188 175 $18,257,700

DRAFT

DRAFT 18 5/15/2007

proximity. The effects of spot blight,however, can disrupt the quality of lifeon an entire street. Therefore, theRedevelopment Plan provides for thepurchase and renovation, or purchaseand demolition of blighted residentialproperties.

The preferred areas for spot-blightremoval are shown on Maps 3 and 4below. These areas were identified bymapping properties with the followingconditions:

• Past Year Sales Price below$80,000

• Auditor Valuation below$100,000

• Known Foreclosures

• Property Maintenance issues onmore than 50% of Block

• Rental Properties above 25%

• Section 8 Properties

The maps showing these conditions arein Appendix A.

Map 3Preferred Redevelopment Areas

Western Forest Park

I-275 EXWY

W KEMPER RDHA

MIL

TO

NA

V

MIL

LR

D

Map 4

Eastern Forest Park

W KEMPER RD

WIN

TO

NR

D

KE

NN

RD

HANOVER RD

SMILEY

AV

WAYCROSS RD

These areas are referred to as “preferred”because the conditions identified aboveare favorable for acquisition by the City,and the neighborhoods with theseconditions are more at risk of developingblighted properties that private ownerscannot or will not resolve. As anexample, a foreclosed property in aneighborhood with strong values andsales prices, while still a problem, ismore likely to attract an owner who willrepair or renovate the property to thegood condition of the surrounding prop-erties in order to maximize its value. Aforeclosed property in an area with lowervalues and sales prices may attract a dif-ferent kind of investor, either quicklyflipping the property, or converting it toa rental, but in neither case bringing theproperty up to the prevailing standard.

While spot acquisition is possible forany blighted property within the City,within the preferred areas, the Cityshould attempt to assemble property sothat an entire group of properties (i.e.10-40 properties on a block or street)may be redeveloped with new housing.

DRAFT

DRAFT 19 5/15/2007

Forest Park can take some simplesteps to implement a spot-purchaseprogram:

• Close monitoring of homeforeclosures and vacant property.

• Inspection of such property forblighting conditions.

• Analysis of the cost to acquire and torenovate to a standard condition.

• Selling the renovated house, or ifdemolition is indicated, the vacantland.

• With spot acquisition and demoli-tion, and where the City is not as-sembling property, considerationshould be given to one or more of theadjacent property owners if they areinterested in purchasing the propertyfor increased yard space.

The proposed budget for this pro-gram is $300,000 per year for 10 years.This budget allows the City to acquirefour to six properties per year, with aportion of the money spent recoveredthrough the sale of renovated houses orvacant land. A further supplement to thisbudget is Spot Blight Elimination fundsavailable through the Hamilton CountyCommunity Development Department,for properties that are to be demolished.

Develop Attached For-SaleHousing

The residential market studyfound that attached for-sale housing (i.e.condominium or townhouse) is in verylow supply in Forest Park compared withother communities. The study furtheridentified this as a weakness in the localhousing market, particularly because oftwo effects. First, Forest Park has ahighly desirable socio-economic group(referred to in the study as “young cos-mopolitans”) who rent housing primarilyin the three Kemper Meadow apartmentcommunities. This group favors attachedhousing as a move-up option, and in itsabsence, Forest Park loses some of theseresidents to other communities as theymove into home ownership. Second, thestudy identified a below-average level ofsales activity for the City, which signalsthat some homeowners are staying intheir houses although they might prefer adifferent living situation. An examplewould be an older homeowner whowants to stay in Forest Park but wouldlike a lower-maintenance or single-levelalternative to their current home. Withthe lack of such an option, the home-owner stays in that house. The resultacross the City is that the level of salesactivity is below optimal. This of courseonly applies to homeowners who place apriority on staying in Forest Park—theothers simply depart the community ifthe kind of housing they are looking fordoesn’t exist here.

DRAFT

DRAFT 20 5/15/2007

Map 5

The study identified the best location fordeveloping attached housing for sale asthe adjacent properties owned by theCity and School Board at Sharon andWaycross Road. Both properties are intransition and will no longer be used fortheir original purposes7. The site, asshown on Map 5 below, is approxi-mately 15 acres in size, and slopes downin a south- southeast direction from theSharon-Waycross corner.

Preliminary indications of theresidential market study are that this siteand location would be highly marketablefor attached for-sale housing. The slope

7 The Activity Center swimming pool closed in2005. Cameron Park school is planned to beclosed permanently by the Winton WoodsSchool District following the conclusion of the2006-2007 school year.

of the site, which is a barrier for single-family development, is a potential assetfor attached housing, allowing garages tobe placed underneath the home. Inaddition, the site has excellent views ofthe West Fork valley, and has nearbyamenities including the library, WintonWoods Park, and convenience shopping.

Several steps need to be taken inorder to pursue the redevelopment of thisproperty:

1. A Visioning session with both theCity Council and the School District,to develop a consensus fordevelopment of the property,including general site layoutfeatures, architectural styles, andconnectivity to the surroundingproperties.

W SHARON RD

WA

YC

RO

SS

RD

VERSAILLES

BRADBU

RYDR

CA

SC

AD

ER

D

CARLSBAD RD

BRUNNER DR

CONVERSE DR

CRENSHAW LN

Activity Center

Cameron ParkSchool

DRAFT

DRAFT 21 5/15/2007

2. Negotiations with the Winton WoodsSchool District to determine a saleprice or partnership structure for theland.

3. A site market study to analyze thenumber, size and type of housingunits and amenities to constitute amarketable project.

4. Requests for Proposals to developerswith the specifications determined inthe market analysis.

5. Rezoning of the property, ifnecessary, and Planning Commissionreview of the development plan.

The above steps can be expected to takeabout one year.

DRAFT

DRAFT 22 5/15/2007

This page left intentionally blank

DRAFT

DRAFT 23 5/15/2007

V. Financial PlanConservatively, the tax modification

plan is expected to generate enoughrevenues to appropriate $700,000 peryear to redevelopment. In addition, theCity modified department budgets for2007 to set aside approximately$2,000,000 for the initial funding of theredevelopment plan.

The following two graphs show thefinancial projections for the redevelop-ment plan. The financial plan does notmake assumptions regarding the even-tual sale and redevelopment of someproperties, which will supplement thefunds available for redevelopment. Thefinancial plan will be revised as proper-ties are acquired, sold or developed.

Redevelopment Financing Plan updated

3.15.07 3.57 pm 3.27.07 12.30pm 4.5.07 10 am

3.28.07 3.10 pm

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 totalsPROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED

Carryover from Prior Year 812,000 924,837 2,531,983 2,093,365 1,066,661 354,440 209,138 183,456 (71,424) 44,732 8,149,1870

Plus Actual/Anticipated Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Funding from other budgets 0

general fund 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000street fund 650,000 550,000 1,200,000stormwater fund 230,750 230,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 461,500capital improvement fund 350,000 60,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 650,000economic development fund 73,000 73,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 786,000Transfer from general fund-tax proceeds 700,000 750,000 800,000 850,000 900,000 950,000 1,000,000 1,050,000 1,100,000 8,100,000

Debt proceedsK Mart note- see above c/o 0 0Proceeds sale of $2.5 million bond 2,500,000 2,500,000Patriot purchase/bonds-bonds issued 0 5,200,000 5,200,000sale of K Mart property 0 0 300,000 100,000 400,000sale of Polaris properties 0 0 250,000 100,000 350,000

** sale of Patriot properties 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 800,000Proceeds sale of $5 million note- municomplex TIF anticipation note 5,000,000interest 49,875 43,930 120,269 99,435 50,666 16,836 9,934 8,714 0 2,125 401,784

TIF proceeds 2,100,000 *

Total Funds Available 5,665,625 3,582,516 10,812,253 3,102,799 7,077,328 1,631,276 1,579,072 1,502,170 1,588,576 1,556,857 30,998,471

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 totalsLess Expenditures PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED

Purchases and related costsK Mart purchase 810,000 810,000

Purchase Rockefeller 400,000 0 400,000Purchase Daffin 725,000 725,000Purchase Polaris Properties 725,000 725,000Purchase Royal 1 350,000 0 350,000Demo costs 200,000 52,000Finishing interim landscape 10,000 10,000purchase Royal 2 700,000 0

** Patriot purchase/demo/costs 5,200,000 5,200,000

Contingency 300,000

TaxesTaxes 44,103 90,773 207,378 207,378 207,378 207,378 202,356 197,334 197,334 113,259 1,674,671

Otherinsurance 10,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 10,000 160,000Residential redevelopment 200,000 200,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 2,500,000Residential redevelopment grant 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000

Debt costsDaffin-K Mart Dec/ reissue costs 7,000 7,000 15,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 0 44,000Principal reduction 0

K Mart- Daffin 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 900,000Patriot principal repayment 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,200,000

Municipal campus 200,000 200,000 200,000 600,000Interest payment 0

K Mart- consolildated w Daffin in 12/08 34,425 140,760 136,510 132,260 132,260 132,260 128,010 123,760 119,510 115,260 1,195,015Daffin 75,260Patriot note- interest 221,000 208,250 195,500 182,750 170,000 157,250 144,500 1,279,250Muni campus alterations 212,500 212,500 212,500 199,750 187,000 1,024,250

ImprovementsPolaris surface parking lot 200,000 200,000Streetscapes

Northland Road 200,000 500,000 500,000Waycross/Hamilton 200,000 500,000 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,200,000

traffic signals-Waycross/Ham. 100,000 0 100,000Muni Building upgrade/Winton Rd improvements 2,100,000 *Municipal Campus upgrade 5,000,000 *

Northland intersection upgrade 200,000Total Expenditures 4,740,788 1,050,533 8,718,888 2,036,138 6,722,888 1,422,138 1,395,616 1,573,594 1,543,844 1,420,019 30,624,446

Ending Balance 924,837 2,531,983 2,093,365 1,066,661 354,440 209,138 183,456 *** (71,424) 44,732 136,838 7,474,024

7,474,024

DRAFT

DRAFT 24 5/15/2007

3.28.07 added 300,000added 300,000 contingency to be used for general fund balancing. If not needed, will revert back to plan.reduced 100,000 for 2 years from the residential redevelopment planreduced Polaris properties from 750,000 to 725,000reduced royal 1 from 400,000 to 350,000 ion 2008reduced royal 2 by 100,000 to 700,000removed first principal payment on Patriot in 2010

Explanation of asterisks* The revenue of $2.1 million for the Winton Road/ Muni Expansion are expected to be financed by TIF proceeds

These proceeds would be received one year after the project is completed. This revenue is not included in the plan.The TIF is expected to generate about $1.0 million over 10 years.The $5.0 million borrowing for municipal campus upgrade is to be funded by TIF proceeds. If a TIF is not created to providethis debt service, it is likely the project would be vacated.

The revenue to be generated by these TIF's is currently not included in the plan.

** The Patriot properties are included as a placeholder for the acquisition of a multi-family development. The overriding conceptis to reduce some of the multi-family stock. However, the target property could change; Patriot is included to represent amulti family acquisition.

*** The ending balance for 2014 is negative. It is anticipated this negative balance will diminish as actual costs are captured andwill be monitored but is not a major concern as all numbers in the plan are estimates.

Note: Please keep in mind that the locations and projects listed that have not yet been finalized and represent a concept in theredevelopment plan. The targeted properties and projects are included as there appears to be an opportunity to acquire andredevelop. However, another site could become available and one target could be vacated and another added to the plan.

Debt remaining 2016Waycross Pointe Patriot

In 2016 , the debt balances are as follows: 2,412,000 4,000,000 6,412,000The annual repayment for a 10 year bond for this amount is approximately 820,332Source of funds- income tax transfer of 800,000 -If there is a desire to bond earlier, the bond issue should be for 10 years or less, if possible.

Municipal update is not included above as the debt will be retired by TIF proceeds and not operating funds.

DRAFT

DRAFT 25 5/15/2007

VI. Summary of Recommendations

Commercial Redevelopment1. Change the zoning of the BP

property from Highway Service toOffice.

2. Pursue the acquisition of the BPproperty, up to and including theuse of eminent domain. Uponacquisition, demolish the property.

3. Acquire and demolish 640, 660 and680 Northland.

4. Use an RFP process to redevelop640 and 660 Northland as build-to-suit offices.

5. Build a city-owned parking lot on680 Northland and hold theproperty for future expansion of theParkdale branch post office.

6. Acquire and demolish the vacantBurger King property onNorthland. Use the property for agateway feature, and hold theproperty for future development.

7. Monitor the status of the Northlandshopping center properties forpossible acquisition or public-private partnership.

8. Develop a north-south axis fromthe Northland Tower to a newpublic green area in the vicinity ofthe Northland shopping centers.

9. Explore the development of anupdated expanded medical campuson Waycross Road betweenNorthland and Kenn.

10. Implement a streetscapeimprovement project for NorthlandBoulevard beginning in 2009.

11. Implement the “NorthlandConnection” district branding plan,using the Burger King property asan east gateway location andseeking cooperation of Forest ParkPlaza for use of their property for awest gateway.

12. Demolish the K-mart and shoppingcenter properties and use an RFPprocess to develop a retail/mixeduse project that is oriented towardWaycross Road.

13. Acquire and demolish the Cashlandproperty, and remove the WaycrossPoint Sign. Develop a gatewayfeature on the property.

14. Coordinate efforts on the K-martproperty with the Civic Centerproperty, in support of the effort toreplace the former Thriftwayanchor at Civic Center.

15. Encourage cooperation betweenCivic Center and Oberer regardingroad access.

16. Establish a TIF district for the K-mart, Civic Center and Obererproperties.

17. Implement a two-phase streetscapeproject for Waycross Road, withphase I in conjunction with theHamilton Avenue widening andPhase II timed with theredevelopment of the K-martproperty.

18. Monitor the adjacent multi-familyproperties in both the Northlandand Hamilton-Waycross areas forpossible purchase.

DRAFT

DRAFT 26 5/15/2007

Residential Redevelopment

19. Begin a 10-year Major HomeImprovement Program for owner-occupied properties.

20. Implement a spot-purchaseprogram of single-familyproperties, for either renovation ordemolition, depending on thecondition of the individualproperty.

21. Use the spot-purchase program towork toward assembling groups of10-40 adjacent properties, in orderto redevelop an entire street orblock with upgraded housing.

22. Develop attached for-sale housingon the Cameron Park/ActivityCenter property.

DRAFT

DRAFT 27 5/15/2007

Appendix ASite Data Sheets

DRAFT

DRAFT 28 5/15/2007

Burger King Northland & Southland

Address: 610 Northland Blvd

Property Size: 0.741 Acres

Owner: Mackids, Inc

Value (Auditor): $410,000

Property Tax: $10,877/year

Use: Restaurant/Food Service

Status: Vacant

Code Enforcement: Boarded, Delinquent on Taxes & Stormwater

Zoning: M-Manufacturing

Surrounding Land Use and Zoning

North: Car Wash, M—Manufacturing

East: Business, M-Manufacturing

South: Gas Station/Convenience Store, M-Manufacturing

West: Day Care, O-Office

Visibility: High

For sale/price: Yes/$475,000

Re-Use: Gateway Feature

Zone Change Required: No

Private Sector Ability: Low

Leverage Potential: Low

Do Nothing Option: Medium

Carrying Cost: $2,000/year

Demolition Cost: Unknown

DRAFT

DRAFT 29 5/15/2007

640 Office Building



Owner: Great Miami Real Estate



Use: Office Building

Status: Vacant

Code Enforcement: Delinquent on Taxes & Stormwater

Zoning: O–Office


North: Office Building, O—Office

East: Office Building, O—Office

South: Bank, PB—Planned Business

West: Office Building, O—Office

Visibility: Low

For sale/price: Yes/$800,000 (includes 660 & 680 Northland)

Re-Use: Office



Leverage Potential: Medium-High

Do Nothing Option: Low-rent, high-vacancy office


Demolition Cost: $40,000

DRAFT

DRAFT 30 5/15/2007

660 Office Building







Status: Vacant


Zoning: PO – Planned Office



East: Office Building, O—Office

South: Restaurant, PB—Planned Business

West: Post Office, O—Office

Visibility: Low


Re-Use: Office







DRAFT

DRAFT 31 5/15/2007

680 Office Building







Status: Vacant


Zoning: O—Office



East: Post Office, O—Office


West: Office Building, O—Office

Visibility: Low


Re-Use: Office







DRAFT

DRAFT 32 5/15/2007

BP at Northland & Waycross



Owner: BP Oil & Exploration



Use: Gas Station/Convenience Store

Status: Vacant

Code Enforcement: Boarded, Delinquent on Stormwater Assessment

Zoning: HS—Highway Service District


North: Medical Office, PO—Planned Office

East: Administrative Office, O—Office

South: Single-Family Residential, R-2, One Family Residence

West: Multi-Family Residential, PR-3, Planned Multi-FamilyResidence

Visibility: Corner Lot/High

For sale/price: Unknown/unknown

Re-Use: Greenspace/Gateway, Office, Residential

Zone Change Required: Yes


Leverage Potential: Low alone, High w/other property

Do Nothing Option: Other gas station/other convenience store/other retailCarrying Cost: $12,000/year

Demolition Cost: Unknown due to underground storage tanks

DRAFT

DRAFT 33 5/15/2007

Revere Village Apts.

Address: 704 Northland


Owner: Stratford Income Properties

Value (Auditor): $3,789,500


Use: Apartment Complex

Status: Occupied

Code Enforcement: Delinquent on Stormwater

Zoning: PR3—Multi-Family


North: School, R-2—One Family

East: Gas Station, HS—Highway Service

South: Single and Two-Family Residential, R-2—One Family

West: Single-Family Residential, R-2—One Family

Visibility: Medium

For sale/price: Yes/$5,100,000

Re-Use: Office



Leverage Potential: Medium

Do Nothing Option: Continued mid-market apartment units

Carrying Cost: Depends on Occupancy

Demolition Cost: Unknown

DRAFT

DRAFT 34 5/15/2007

Cameron Park School

Address: 628 Waycross


Owner: Greenhills Forest Park


Property Tax: (Exempt)

Use: Elementary School

Status: Planned for Closure, June 2006

Code Enforcement: None

Zoning: R-2—One Family


North: Activity Center, R-2—One Family

East: Single-Family Residential, R-2—One Family

South: Single-Family Residential, R-2—One Family

West: Single-Family Residential, R-2—One Family

Visibility: Low

For sale/price: Yes, Unknown

Re-Use: Attached For-Sale Housing


Private Sector Ability: Medium

Leverage Potential: High

Do Nothing Option: Day-care or charter school



DRAFT

DRAFT 35 5/15/2007

K-Mart



Owner: City of Forest Park



Use: Discount Store

Status: Vacant

Code Enforcement: Boarded

Zoning: PB – Planned Business


North: Various Retail

East: Retail

South: Residential/Retail

West: Hamilton County Sheriff/Public Library

Visibility: High

For sale/price: Purchased/$806,000

Re-Use: Retail/Mixed Use


Private Sector Ability: Medium


Do Nothing Option: N/A



DRAFT

DRAFT 36 5/15/2007

2219 Waycross



Owner: Daffin Jolly Investments



Use: Shopping Center

Status: Vacant




North: Vacant, PB—Planned Business

East: Multi-Family, PR3—Multi-Family

South: Residential (Springfield Township)

West: Hamilton County Sheriff (Colerain Township)

Visibility: Medium

For sale/price: Under Contract/$725,000

Re-Use: Retail/Mixed-Use




Do Nothing Option: N/A



DRAFT

DRAFT 37 5/15/2007

2299 Waycross



Owner: J & E Investments Limited Partnership



Use: Shopping Center

Status: Occupied




North: Restaurant, PB—Planned Business

East: Vacant, PB—Planned Business


West: Hamilton County Sheriff (Colerain Township)

Visibility: High

For sale/price: Unknown

Re-Use: Gateway Feature



Leverage Potential: Medium

Do Nothing Option: Continuation of present use



forest park redevelopment plan - home - oki regional...

Documents