All Forum Categories
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback
All Forum Posts by: Kristi Kandel
Kristi Kandel has started 44 posts and replied 307 times.
Post: Affordable Housing Development Capital Stack Structures
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Manuel Angeles:
When developing affordable housing in California (more specifically Los Angeles), how complicated is it to raise capital using subsidies?
Is it common for developers to use subsidies to cover 100% of the construction costs without needing to obtaining debt or raising equity?
Or do they leverage debt, and use the subsidies to cover the equity needed?
When dealing with federal, state, and local NOFA (notice of funds availabilities), do government funds allocated for affordable housing often get depleted from too many developers requesting funds for new projects?
When a developer can't obtain subsidies for their affordable housing projects, do they just wait until the next round of subsidies availability?
The capital stack especially in CA is VERY complex and typically involves everything and more that you mentioned. A couple developers we work with skip LIHTC and the tax credits and go the route of impact funds to help alongside other debt and sometimes equity. When relying on LIHTC to make the deal pencil, yes developers wait BUT only if they have the resources to wait and only if the property owner is willing to not close on the property until the project is fully funded. Or the developer can close on the land at risk but they have a lot of capital when that's the case.
Post: New to ADU - Checklist or Cheat Sheet?
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Kate Zieverink McMinn:
Does anyone have experience with ADU's (accessory dwelling units) in any market, but particularly Cincinnati? I've had a couple OOS investors ask about ADU potential in our market... not sure what hurdles there might be with the city (permitting, zoning, or otherwise).
Anyone have a cheat sheet or checklist for covering your ADU bases? Any/all advice welcome.
@Kate Zieverink McMinn we just hosted a webinar with a friend in Orange County, CA that used to be a public works engineer. However, after he saw the quantity of ADU applications come across his desk to plan check he went out and started his own consulting company. (YAY - I love people becoming biz owners). While we focused on his market for ADUs he did share a lot of valuable information that is transferrable to any market. Happy to share the video and his presentation if you shoot me a DM.
Generally - just reach out to the planning/zoning dept direct and ask them those exact questions. Each municipality is different and what's allowed will be based on your exact zoning. Utilities are OFTEN overlooked so reach out to power, telecom, gas (or go all electric), water, and sewer to make sure you understand what it would take to get separately metered services from the primary house. You could potentially tap into your existing utilities but there are other considerations that might make it worth separate utility laterals and services.
Reach out to the contractors currently building ADUs in your market. They are going to have the real costs and lessons learned that will save you lots of time and potentially headaches.
Post: WTF is a land swap?
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Where are my Denverites at?!
This is the first time I've heard of a city or municipality doing something like this. I'd love to get takes from folks who have been around the investing & development scene longer than me - The city of Denver announced yesterday that the mayor has coordinated a land swap with a private developer.
If you live in or around Denver you've probably heard of the Park Hill golf course - if not, here's a quick rundown
Background:
1. Park Hill Golf Course was owned by a trust, in the wayyy distant past it was previously a dairy farm, but it has been operated as a golf course since the 1930's!
2. In 1997, I don't fully understand why, the City of Denver paid the golf course owners $2mil to rezone this parcel as a "conservation easement" this was extremely restrictive zoning and meant it would essentially be destined to be a golf course for eternity
3. 2018 golf course closes citing low revenue and high operating costs. 2019, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) who intended to remove the conservation easement and develop this parcel in a highly sought after neighborhood of Denver
4. From around 2018, when the golf course closed, until 2021 local residents essentially used this giant open parcel of grassy land right in the city as open space. On most any day you could find people walking dogs, or children playing in the area.
Starting around 2021 WIP who clearly thought rezoning would be a no-brainer seemingly started to get frustrated with the pushback from the city and residents.
I can't say for sure what the reasoning was, but the developers at some point around this time put a chainlink fence around the entire property - its 155 acres. They cited insurance reasons, which could very well be true, but many residents felt it as a big "f you"
Now folks from outside the community could argue this was an entitled stance from the residents, to feel they had access to this private land when they didn't, and that on the face is certainly true. But it's also true that this had been open space provided to the community for the better part of a century and now it was fenced off with not even a path or sidewalks around most of the perimeter.
5. In 2021 there were two competing ballot measures that the citizens of Denver voted on - one measure from open-space advocates that would "keep status quo" and continue to prevent WIP from developing this parcel, the second measure sponsored by the WIP themselves that would exempt the property from the current zoning restrictions.
What in the world would have happened if both completely opposing measures passed?? We still have no idea. And will never find out because the open-space advocates won their measure while the developers measure failed by a whopping 63%!
6. in 2023, two years after losing the first ballot measure, WIP tried AGAIN, and this time they still lost with 58% of the vote against them
7. This second defeat at the ballot seemingly left WIP with few options, and it was looking like they way overpaid for this land that in it's current legal state could only be used as a golf course or park.
Fast forward to today in January 2025:
Mayor Johnston of Denver, who has now been in office about 1.5 years, announced that the city had completed a deal with Westside Investment Partners to essentially trade this 155-acre plot in the middle of the city, for a 145-acre plot that the city owned near the Denver International Airport.
The parcel formerly known as Park Hill Golf Course will now become Denver's 4th largest public park. It remains to be seen what the parcel by the airport now owned by the developers will become.
Now what?
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing as a land swap, especially between a municipality and a private entity. Does anyone else have examples of this happening in the past in other places? If so what were the circumstances and what was the reasoning?
For those more entrenched in the Denver development market than I am, is this a fair trade for the city and for the developers? Or did one side clearly come out a winner?
My initial thought is that the developers may have gotten a much better deal than they would have otherwise given the clear limitations on the land's use. Who else would have bought this land from them? And at what nominal price compared to the $24mil they paid in 2019? That being said, I have no idea what the land by the airport is worth or what they will be able to do with it.
To me the biggest takeaway is that as real estate professionals, we always talk about location, location, location. When this has me thinking that we also need to be talking about zoning, zoning, zoning. Because in this case zoning took a 155 acre piece of real estate with incredibly prime location, and made it only worth at maximum 145 acres miles outside the city.
Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:
- - Resolving zoning conflicts
- - Acquiring strategically important properties
- - Consolidating land holdings
- - Avoiding costly legal battles
- - Achieving public policy goals
When I was a Planning Commissioner projects would discuss land swaps for larger development projects to make sure the community impact was greater (typically gaining conservation land for us) than just allowing a rezone to be approved without public benefit.
Urban Development land swaps are often used as a strategy to:
- - Consolidate public land holdings
- - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
- - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits
Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:
- - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
- - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
- - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
- - Improved land management efficiency
I searched for some Urban examples for reference:
- 1. Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project (California): This project demonstrates how public-private land swap arrangements can be aligned with environmental restoration goals. The swap involved exchanging oil operations sites for wetland areas, allowing for habitat restoration while consolidating oil extraction activities/
- 2. New Orleans Project Home Again (Louisiana): Implemented after Hurricane Katrina, this program involved a land swap and redevelopment initiative. Residents in flood-prone areas were offered newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for transferring the title of their damaged original homes to the city.
- 3. Edgemere, Queens, New York (post-Superstorm Sandy): Similar to the New Orleans example, this program offered residents in high-risk coastal areas newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for their damaged properties.
- 4. Battery Park City Exchange (New York City): The city of New York engaged in a land swap with the Battery Park City Authority, allowing for the creation of a new public school and affordable housing units in exchange for a parcel of land that was then developed into a high-value commercial property.
- 5. Denver Union Station Project (Colorado): The city exchanged several smaller parcels of land with a private developer, who in turn constructed a mixed-use development that included retail, office space, and residential units. This swap catalyzed urban revitalization around a key transportation hub.
- 6. University of Kentucky and Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Land Swap: In 2018, the University of Kentucky exchanged 250 acres near its Coldstream Research Campus for control of several important roads in and around campus, contributing to economic development opportunities and improved urban planning.
This is a very thorough overview of land swaps! I'm curious when you were planning commissioner, how long did these land swap deals take to hammer out? I have to imagine it's a bit more negotiating than just purchasing something with cash, since it's essentially bartering
@Rene Hosman YEARS and that's if they actually got approved because it had to be so completely vetted to avoid lawsuits after approval. 5-10 years but the stance of that municipality was anti-change, anti-development, NIMBY on steroids, etc. Ironically most people MOVED to the area from somewhere else and then wanted to slam the door shut behind them...
That's kind of what I figured, the last public ballot measure vote to deny rezoning was late 2023. Which makes me wonder if this deal either
A. Has been being negotiated behind closed doors for years longer than we've known
or
B. Went through extra fast because the developer really had no other good options
I doubt we'll know the full details for years to come but I'm curious if you have an opinion, or if there's other probable options C,D,E I could be missing as just a public bystander to the situation
@Rene Hosman It's very rare that anything gets done quietly behind the scenes. For the public unless you're attending EVERY planning commission and city council/county commissioner meeting you wont hear all of the back and forth.
Oh very interesting, I'll have to check the planning commission meeting notes because this was a hot topic in Denver the last few years so if it was discussed there on public record I'm surprised it wasn't in the news at all before! Thanks so much for the intel
@Rene Hosman Until I was on the Planning Commission I had no idea how much I was missing out on. The meeting minutes and agendas are public record but unless you attend every meeting and hear all the public comments it's very hard to actually follow along. City Council/County Commissioners officially make all of the deals PC is just a recommendation body of local residents appointed by CC. PC can't make any final decisions on rezones, parcel maps, etc. However, PC would vet the project and design and verify it meets all zoning standards. If we automated government, help live streaming meetings, sent out meeting recaps using AI summaries, etc. (you know all the things we using in running effective and efficient private companies) it would be a different story.
Post: WTF is a land swap?
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Where are my Denverites at?!
This is the first time I've heard of a city or municipality doing something like this. I'd love to get takes from folks who have been around the investing & development scene longer than me - The city of Denver announced yesterday that the mayor has coordinated a land swap with a private developer.
If you live in or around Denver you've probably heard of the Park Hill golf course - if not, here's a quick rundown
Background:
1. Park Hill Golf Course was owned by a trust, in the wayyy distant past it was previously a dairy farm, but it has been operated as a golf course since the 1930's!
2. In 1997, I don't fully understand why, the City of Denver paid the golf course owners $2mil to rezone this parcel as a "conservation easement" this was extremely restrictive zoning and meant it would essentially be destined to be a golf course for eternity
3. 2018 golf course closes citing low revenue and high operating costs. 2019, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) who intended to remove the conservation easement and develop this parcel in a highly sought after neighborhood of Denver
4. From around 2018, when the golf course closed, until 2021 local residents essentially used this giant open parcel of grassy land right in the city as open space. On most any day you could find people walking dogs, or children playing in the area.
Starting around 2021 WIP who clearly thought rezoning would be a no-brainer seemingly started to get frustrated with the pushback from the city and residents.
I can't say for sure what the reasoning was, but the developers at some point around this time put a chainlink fence around the entire property - its 155 acres. They cited insurance reasons, which could very well be true, but many residents felt it as a big "f you"
Now folks from outside the community could argue this was an entitled stance from the residents, to feel they had access to this private land when they didn't, and that on the face is certainly true. But it's also true that this had been open space provided to the community for the better part of a century and now it was fenced off with not even a path or sidewalks around most of the perimeter.
5. In 2021 there were two competing ballot measures that the citizens of Denver voted on - one measure from open-space advocates that would "keep status quo" and continue to prevent WIP from developing this parcel, the second measure sponsored by the WIP themselves that would exempt the property from the current zoning restrictions.
What in the world would have happened if both completely opposing measures passed?? We still have no idea. And will never find out because the open-space advocates won their measure while the developers measure failed by a whopping 63%!
6. in 2023, two years after losing the first ballot measure, WIP tried AGAIN, and this time they still lost with 58% of the vote against them
7. This second defeat at the ballot seemingly left WIP with few options, and it was looking like they way overpaid for this land that in it's current legal state could only be used as a golf course or park.
Fast forward to today in January 2025:
Mayor Johnston of Denver, who has now been in office about 1.5 years, announced that the city had completed a deal with Westside Investment Partners to essentially trade this 155-acre plot in the middle of the city, for a 145-acre plot that the city owned near the Denver International Airport.
The parcel formerly known as Park Hill Golf Course will now become Denver's 4th largest public park. It remains to be seen what the parcel by the airport now owned by the developers will become.
Now what?
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing as a land swap, especially between a municipality and a private entity. Does anyone else have examples of this happening in the past in other places? If so what were the circumstances and what was the reasoning?
For those more entrenched in the Denver development market than I am, is this a fair trade for the city and for the developers? Or did one side clearly come out a winner?
My initial thought is that the developers may have gotten a much better deal than they would have otherwise given the clear limitations on the land's use. Who else would have bought this land from them? And at what nominal price compared to the $24mil they paid in 2019? That being said, I have no idea what the land by the airport is worth or what they will be able to do with it.
To me the biggest takeaway is that as real estate professionals, we always talk about location, location, location. When this has me thinking that we also need to be talking about zoning, zoning, zoning. Because in this case zoning took a 155 acre piece of real estate with incredibly prime location, and made it only worth at maximum 145 acres miles outside the city.
Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:
- - Resolving zoning conflicts
- - Acquiring strategically important properties
- - Consolidating land holdings
- - Avoiding costly legal battles
- - Achieving public policy goals
When I was a Planning Commissioner projects would discuss land swaps for larger development projects to make sure the community impact was greater (typically gaining conservation land for us) than just allowing a rezone to be approved without public benefit.
Urban Development land swaps are often used as a strategy to:
- - Consolidate public land holdings
- - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
- - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits
Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:
- - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
- - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
- - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
- - Improved land management efficiency
I searched for some Urban examples for reference:
- 1. Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project (California): This project demonstrates how public-private land swap arrangements can be aligned with environmental restoration goals. The swap involved exchanging oil operations sites for wetland areas, allowing for habitat restoration while consolidating oil extraction activities/
- 2. New Orleans Project Home Again (Louisiana): Implemented after Hurricane Katrina, this program involved a land swap and redevelopment initiative. Residents in flood-prone areas were offered newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for transferring the title of their damaged original homes to the city.
- 3. Edgemere, Queens, New York (post-Superstorm Sandy): Similar to the New Orleans example, this program offered residents in high-risk coastal areas newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for their damaged properties.
- 4. Battery Park City Exchange (New York City): The city of New York engaged in a land swap with the Battery Park City Authority, allowing for the creation of a new public school and affordable housing units in exchange for a parcel of land that was then developed into a high-value commercial property.
- 5. Denver Union Station Project (Colorado): The city exchanged several smaller parcels of land with a private developer, who in turn constructed a mixed-use development that included retail, office space, and residential units. This swap catalyzed urban revitalization around a key transportation hub.
- 6. University of Kentucky and Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Land Swap: In 2018, the University of Kentucky exchanged 250 acres near its Coldstream Research Campus for control of several important roads in and around campus, contributing to economic development opportunities and improved urban planning.
This is a very thorough overview of land swaps! I'm curious when you were planning commissioner, how long did these land swap deals take to hammer out? I have to imagine it's a bit more negotiating than just purchasing something with cash, since it's essentially bartering
@Rene Hosman YEARS and that's if they actually got approved because it had to be so completely vetted to avoid lawsuits after approval. 5-10 years but the stance of that municipality was anti-change, anti-development, NIMBY on steroids, etc. Ironically most people MOVED to the area from somewhere else and then wanted to slam the door shut behind them...
That's kind of what I figured, the last public ballot measure vote to deny rezoning was late 2023. Which makes me wonder if this deal either
A. Has been being negotiated behind closed doors for years longer than we've known
or
B. Went through extra fast because the developer really had no other good options
I doubt we'll know the full details for years to come but I'm curious if you have an opinion, or if there's other probable options C,D,E I could be missing as just a public bystander to the situation
@Rene Hosman It's very rare that anything gets done quietly behind the scenes. For the public unless you're attending EVERY planning commission and city council/county commissioner meeting you wont hear all of the back and forth.
Post: WTF is a land swap?
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Where are my Denverites at?!
This is the first time I've heard of a city or municipality doing something like this. I'd love to get takes from folks who have been around the investing & development scene longer than me - The city of Denver announced yesterday that the mayor has coordinated a land swap with a private developer.
If you live in or around Denver you've probably heard of the Park Hill golf course - if not, here's a quick rundown
Background:
1. Park Hill Golf Course was owned by a trust, in the wayyy distant past it was previously a dairy farm, but it has been operated as a golf course since the 1930's!
2. In 1997, I don't fully understand why, the City of Denver paid the golf course owners $2mil to rezone this parcel as a "conservation easement" this was extremely restrictive zoning and meant it would essentially be destined to be a golf course for eternity
3. 2018 golf course closes citing low revenue and high operating costs. 2019, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) who intended to remove the conservation easement and develop this parcel in a highly sought after neighborhood of Denver
4. From around 2018, when the golf course closed, until 2021 local residents essentially used this giant open parcel of grassy land right in the city as open space. On most any day you could find people walking dogs, or children playing in the area.
Starting around 2021 WIP who clearly thought rezoning would be a no-brainer seemingly started to get frustrated with the pushback from the city and residents.
I can't say for sure what the reasoning was, but the developers at some point around this time put a chainlink fence around the entire property - its 155 acres. They cited insurance reasons, which could very well be true, but many residents felt it as a big "f you"
Now folks from outside the community could argue this was an entitled stance from the residents, to feel they had access to this private land when they didn't, and that on the face is certainly true. But it's also true that this had been open space provided to the community for the better part of a century and now it was fenced off with not even a path or sidewalks around most of the perimeter.
5. In 2021 there were two competing ballot measures that the citizens of Denver voted on - one measure from open-space advocates that would "keep status quo" and continue to prevent WIP from developing this parcel, the second measure sponsored by the WIP themselves that would exempt the property from the current zoning restrictions.
What in the world would have happened if both completely opposing measures passed?? We still have no idea. And will never find out because the open-space advocates won their measure while the developers measure failed by a whopping 63%!
6. in 2023, two years after losing the first ballot measure, WIP tried AGAIN, and this time they still lost with 58% of the vote against them
7. This second defeat at the ballot seemingly left WIP with few options, and it was looking like they way overpaid for this land that in it's current legal state could only be used as a golf course or park.
Fast forward to today in January 2025:
Mayor Johnston of Denver, who has now been in office about 1.5 years, announced that the city had completed a deal with Westside Investment Partners to essentially trade this 155-acre plot in the middle of the city, for a 145-acre plot that the city owned near the Denver International Airport.
The parcel formerly known as Park Hill Golf Course will now become Denver's 4th largest public park. It remains to be seen what the parcel by the airport now owned by the developers will become.
Now what?
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing as a land swap, especially between a municipality and a private entity. Does anyone else have examples of this happening in the past in other places? If so what were the circumstances and what was the reasoning?
For those more entrenched in the Denver development market than I am, is this a fair trade for the city and for the developers? Or did one side clearly come out a winner?
My initial thought is that the developers may have gotten a much better deal than they would have otherwise given the clear limitations on the land's use. Who else would have bought this land from them? And at what nominal price compared to the $24mil they paid in 2019? That being said, I have no idea what the land by the airport is worth or what they will be able to do with it.
To me the biggest takeaway is that as real estate professionals, we always talk about location, location, location. When this has me thinking that we also need to be talking about zoning, zoning, zoning. Because in this case zoning took a 155 acre piece of real estate with incredibly prime location, and made it only worth at maximum 145 acres miles outside the city.
Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:
- - Resolving zoning conflicts
- - Acquiring strategically important properties
- - Consolidating land holdings
- - Avoiding costly legal battles
- - Achieving public policy goals
When I was a Planning Commissioner projects would discuss land swaps for larger development projects to make sure the community impact was greater (typically gaining conservation land for us) than just allowing a rezone to be approved without public benefit.
Urban Development land swaps are often used as a strategy to:
- - Consolidate public land holdings
- - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
- - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits
Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:
- - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
- - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
- - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
- - Improved land management efficiency
I searched for some Urban examples for reference:
- 1. Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project (California): This project demonstrates how public-private land swap arrangements can be aligned with environmental restoration goals. The swap involved exchanging oil operations sites for wetland areas, allowing for habitat restoration while consolidating oil extraction activities/
- 2. New Orleans Project Home Again (Louisiana): Implemented after Hurricane Katrina, this program involved a land swap and redevelopment initiative. Residents in flood-prone areas were offered newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for transferring the title of their damaged original homes to the city.
- 3. Edgemere, Queens, New York (post-Superstorm Sandy): Similar to the New Orleans example, this program offered residents in high-risk coastal areas newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for their damaged properties.
- 4. Battery Park City Exchange (New York City): The city of New York engaged in a land swap with the Battery Park City Authority, allowing for the creation of a new public school and affordable housing units in exchange for a parcel of land that was then developed into a high-value commercial property.
- 5. Denver Union Station Project (Colorado): The city exchanged several smaller parcels of land with a private developer, who in turn constructed a mixed-use development that included retail, office space, and residential units. This swap catalyzed urban revitalization around a key transportation hub.
- 6. University of Kentucky and Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Land Swap: In 2018, the University of Kentucky exchanged 250 acres near its Coldstream Research Campus for control of several important roads in and around campus, contributing to economic development opportunities and improved urban planning.
This is a very thorough overview of land swaps! I'm curious when you were planning commissioner, how long did these land swap deals take to hammer out? I have to imagine it's a bit more negotiating than just purchasing something with cash, since it's essentially bartering
@Rene Hosman YEARS and that's if they actually got approved because it had to be so completely vetted to avoid lawsuits after approval. 5-10 years but the stance of that municipality was anti-change, anti-development, NIMBY on steroids, etc. Ironically most people MOVED to the area from somewhere else and then wanted to slam the door shut behind them...
Post: Lot split with house on the line
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Yaroslav Shtogun:
Thank you James,
Do you know how difficult it is to do dimensional variance on the lot? I heard that you would need to get neighborhood approval in addition to the city approval...
@Yaroslav Shtogun James gave a great explanation. If you want the exact process you'd need to speak directly to the planning/zoning dept and specifically ask them these questions to outline the exact process for this property.
Post: WTF is a land swap?
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Rene Hosman:
Where are my Denverites at?!
This is the first time I've heard of a city or municipality doing something like this. I'd love to get takes from folks who have been around the investing & development scene longer than me - The city of Denver announced yesterday that the mayor has coordinated a land swap with a private developer.
If you live in or around Denver you've probably heard of the Park Hill golf course - if not, here's a quick rundown
Background:
1. Park Hill Golf Course was owned by a trust, in the wayyy distant past it was previously a dairy farm, but it has been operated as a golf course since the 1930's!
2. In 1997, I don't fully understand why, the City of Denver paid the golf course owners $2mil to rezone this parcel as a "conservation easement" this was extremely restrictive zoning and meant it would essentially be destined to be a golf course for eternity
3. 2018 golf course closes citing low revenue and high operating costs. 2019, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) who intended to remove the conservation easement and develop this parcel in a highly sought after neighborhood of Denver
4. From around 2018, when the golf course closed, until 2021 local residents essentially used this giant open parcel of grassy land right in the city as open space. On most any day you could find people walking dogs, or children playing in the area.
Starting around 2021 WIP who clearly thought rezoning would be a no-brainer seemingly started to get frustrated with the pushback from the city and residents.
I can't say for sure what the reasoning was, but the developers at some point around this time put a chainlink fence around the entire property - its 155 acres. They cited insurance reasons, which could very well be true, but many residents felt it as a big "f you"
Now folks from outside the community could argue this was an entitled stance from the residents, to feel they had access to this private land when they didn't, and that on the face is certainly true. But it's also true that this had been open space provided to the community for the better part of a century and now it was fenced off with not even a path or sidewalks around most of the perimeter.
5. In 2021 there were two competing ballot measures that the citizens of Denver voted on - one measure from open-space advocates that would "keep status quo" and continue to prevent WIP from developing this parcel, the second measure sponsored by the WIP themselves that would exempt the property from the current zoning restrictions.
What in the world would have happened if both completely opposing measures passed?? We still have no idea. And will never find out because the open-space advocates won their measure while the developers measure failed by a whopping 63%!
6. in 2023, two years after losing the first ballot measure, WIP tried AGAIN, and this time they still lost with 58% of the vote against them
7. This second defeat at the ballot seemingly left WIP with few options, and it was looking like they way overpaid for this land that in it's current legal state could only be used as a golf course or park.
Fast forward to today in January 2025:
Mayor Johnston of Denver, who has now been in office about 1.5 years, announced that the city had completed a deal with Westside Investment Partners to essentially trade this 155-acre plot in the middle of the city, for a 145-acre plot that the city owned near the Denver International Airport.
The parcel formerly known as Park Hill Golf Course will now become Denver's 4th largest public park. It remains to be seen what the parcel by the airport now owned by the developers will become.
Now what?
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing as a land swap, especially between a municipality and a private entity. Does anyone else have examples of this happening in the past in other places? If so what were the circumstances and what was the reasoning?
For those more entrenched in the Denver development market than I am, is this a fair trade for the city and for the developers? Or did one side clearly come out a winner?
My initial thought is that the developers may have gotten a much better deal than they would have otherwise given the clear limitations on the land's use. Who else would have bought this land from them? And at what nominal price compared to the $24mil they paid in 2019? That being said, I have no idea what the land by the airport is worth or what they will be able to do with it.
To me the biggest takeaway is that as real estate professionals, we always talk about location, location, location. When this has me thinking that we also need to be talking about zoning, zoning, zoning. Because in this case zoning took a 155 acre piece of real estate with incredibly prime location, and made it only worth at maximum 145 acres miles outside the city.
Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:
- - Resolving zoning conflicts
- - Acquiring strategically important properties
- - Consolidating land holdings
- - Avoiding costly legal battles
- - Achieving public policy goals
When I was a Planning Commissioner projects would discuss land swaps for larger development projects to make sure the community impact was greater (typically gaining conservation land for us) than just allowing a rezone to be approved without public benefit.
Urban Development land swaps are often used as a strategy to:
- - Consolidate public land holdings
- - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
- - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits
Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:
- - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
- - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
- - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
- - Improved land management efficiency
I searched for some Urban examples for reference:
- 1. Los Cerritos Wetlands Oil Consolidation and Restoration Project (California): This project demonstrates how public-private land swap arrangements can be aligned with environmental restoration goals. The swap involved exchanging oil operations sites for wetland areas, allowing for habitat restoration while consolidating oil extraction activities/
- 2. New Orleans Project Home Again (Louisiana): Implemented after Hurricane Katrina, this program involved a land swap and redevelopment initiative. Residents in flood-prone areas were offered newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for transferring the title of their damaged original homes to the city.
- 3. Edgemere, Queens, New York (post-Superstorm Sandy): Similar to the New Orleans example, this program offered residents in high-risk coastal areas newly built, elevated homes on safer ground in exchange for their damaged properties.
- 4. Battery Park City Exchange (New York City): The city of New York engaged in a land swap with the Battery Park City Authority, allowing for the creation of a new public school and affordable housing units in exchange for a parcel of land that was then developed into a high-value commercial property.
- 5. Denver Union Station Project (Colorado): The city exchanged several smaller parcels of land with a private developer, who in turn constructed a mixed-use development that included retail, office space, and residential units. This swap catalyzed urban revitalization around a key transportation hub.
- 6. University of Kentucky and Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Land Swap: In 2018, the University of Kentucky exchanged 250 acres near its Coldstream Research Campus for control of several important roads in and around campus, contributing to economic development opportunities and improved urban planning.
Post: Resources to Help LA Communities & Families Rebuild After Wildfires
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Bryant Brislin:
This is great info! I'm a land broker in Orange County, one hour from where the fires hit. I'm excited to see so many of my peers in tech, prefab construction, government policy, architecture, et al come together to try to help those who need it!
@Bryant Brislin it was the modular construction that was awesome to see on our end in FL. It took new construction costs from $800-2500 down to $325 / SF and instead of 2 years it can be done in 8-12 months (design, permits, fabrication, shipping, and erection) depending on how much homeowners customized the standard plans.
I have a feeling we'll see a LOT more progress like this out in LA!
Post: Advice on Specific Performance for Breach of Real Estate Contract
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Steve K.:
I definitely see what you’re saying about the seller backing out being a violation of your good faith agreement, and what is the point of a contract if the seller can just change their mind… However in my experience most people do end up settling for monetary damages incurred rather than trying to force the sale.
I have seen two cases where it went the distance and the buyers successfully sued for specific performance. The first was a $10M historic property in Downtown Denver that was truly unique due to its location and age. There are no other properties like it. The buyer had performed at closing, delivered funds to the title company, signed closing docs and everything. Seller decided to back out at the last moment for some arbitrary reason and just didn’t show up to closing to sign the docs. Closing funds were held in escrow, buyer decided to sue for SP. Eventually after about 3.5 years the buyer did prevail. I’m not sure who paid legal fees but they must have been significant.
The second case was a commercial property (an 8 unit multifamily in a complex of 6 individual 8 unit buildings), owned by a group of investors. A developer had already worked out deals with the owners of the other 5 buildings and finally got the 6th and final building under contract. Some of the owners had wanted to sell and others didn’t. I believe the owners with the majority ownership share forced the others to sell, but they weren’t cooperating. They all had their own lawyers of course and it was a mess that took 3 years but eventually the buyer (the developer) did prevail. I think the key in that case was that the property was the last one needed in a large development of a group of blighted small MF buildings that were to be torn down and redeveloped. The building was vacant and completely rundown with the windows all smashed out by the end of the lawsuit. The owners were essentially slumlords. The buyers had invested a lot into the deal (~$100M) and purchasing the property was critical to complete their development.
In almost every case involving vanilla SFH's that I've been privy to, buyer and seller have settled during mediation for monetary damages. In a few cases the buyer has moved forward trying to sue for specific performance but eventually gave up after about a year and around $30k spent on legal fees.
The gamble is that the outcome hinges upon the courts discretion and it's rare to see specific performance unless buyer can demonstrate that monetary damages aren't enough to make them whole. As an investor looking to purchase an STR in a ski town, I'm not sure I'd feel that confident in a court deciding in my favor, personally. Seller might claim that the contract wasn't fair and equitable to begin with, or use stalling tactics, or they might say they need to move into the property because they are getting divorced/ lost their job/ need to move their ailing mother into the property, etc. and anything along those lines might make a judge more sympathetic to them than an investor buyer looking to turn the property into an STR.
I’m also not quite convinced that the property is unique enough to justify specific performance because it is typically only enforced when there is a lack of other remedies such as monetary damages. For example the property being historical or a critical part of a large development plan. You could probably just go buy a different investment property and achieve the same returns. So that will be a tricky element to this IMO.
But I get where you’re coming from, it’s super lame when a seller backs out. Keep us posted on what your lawyer says if you can, let us know how it goes, and good luck.
@Steve K. awesome response. That covered pretty much everything!
Post: Resources to Help LA Communities & Families Rebuild After Wildfires
- Developer
- Fort Myers Beach, FL
- Posts 327
- Votes 166
Quote from @Robert Ellis:
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:
Helping LA Communities Rebuild After Wildfires
When Hurricane Ian hit Fort Myers Beach in 2022, it changed our lives forever. The road to recovery is long, messy, and full of setbacks—but it also taught us something important: with the right support and determination, rebuilding isn’t just possible—it can create stronger, more resilient communities.
Now, as wildfires tear through LA, I want to share the lessons we learned to help others rebuild with hope and purpose.
Here’s what made a difference for us:
🔹 Mortgage Relief – Many lenders offer disaster relief options like payment pauses or loan modifications. But you have to ask proactively, and be mindful of how long you stay in forbearance to avoid long-term credit issues.
🔹 Insurance Challenges – Even when insurance pays, it rarely covers the actual cost to completely rebuild. The process will be slow, but with patience and smart planning, you can move forward step by step.
🔹 Property Tax Relief – If your property is severely damaged, you may qualify for reassessment and potential tax refunds. It’s worth reaching out to your local tax office to explore options. These small wins add up when you’re trying to rebuild.
🔹 Partnering with Trusted Local Experts – Engaging experienced and reliable builders, architects, contractors, and surveyors is essential for a safe, efficient, and successful rebuilding process.
Recovery isn’t just about getting back to where you were—it’s about creating something better. Visit RestoreFMB.com for practical resources and tools that can be replicated in other communities to help LA through this process.
No one rebuilds alone. Shout out to permit professionals like Roy Hasson (just a friend in LA specializing in navigating permit process - this is not a business play we do not work together), who are dedicated to helping others and will likely develop similar resources to support their communities through the rebuilding process.
If you’re working on rebuilding efforts or have questions, feel free to connect with me—I’d love to collaborate. Together, we can help communities not just recover, but thrive. 💪
what's this have to do with new construction and development?
Each person who lost their property will need to rebuild their home. Having developed a majority of my career in CA the regulations and red tape for construction and development are intense.
For a lot of people they will ve so overwhelmed and in shock that they just want to walk away. However, there are ways to leverage SBA loans so they can buy a new primary and then look at their current property as an investment property and secure a DSCR loan to redevelop and rebuild. There's no reason to go through a disaster (I'm mid recovery myself) and not get the financial upside by becoming the developer and selling a finished product versus raw land.
If you have to completely rebuild, it’s a two year process at minimum. That’s if you are on top of everything don’t have to fight insurance for a full payout, have an architect you immediately start working with drafting plans and pulling permits, secure a construction loan, and hire a contractor who prioritizes your construction. (many contractors are going to bite off more than they can chew and communication will be key).
Realistically in California, it’s probably a 3 to 5 year process. Ideally the elected leaders can try to streamline the process like we did in FL by prioritizing the rebuilding permits & waiving permit fees. Ideally LADWP will prioritize the infrastructure repairs and new service requests to these properties as getting power service in LA can be 6-24 months without project prioritization.
There are codes that allow for more density or at min ADUs on SFH lots now. So the added cashflow to property owners it they are willing to become the developer and increase density that tactic could help more owners stay than could otherwise afford to stay.
Even with full coverage insurance you will not receive enough money to actually rebuild your home to today's building codes. Your mortgage company gets paid off first and then it's up to the homeowner to secure a construction loan to rebuild.
Another factor is that insurance coverage is only for the actual building cost to rebuild the structure. Many people have a mortgage on a property where the land value is much greater than the home (aka near the water) and insurance is not able to pay off your entire outstanding mortgage. Putting people in a position where they would need to sell or come up with an alternative strategy to pay off the mortgage balance prior to rebuilding.
Example 1: Buy property for 1.4M. Mortgage is for 1.1M. Insurance coverage for the structure covers up to 650K if a full payout is given. Delta after insurance payout = -450,000 still owed to the mortgage company after the insurance payout.
Example 2: Same scenario but FLOOD being the reason the structure was destroyed. In FL flood is typically the main cause along the coast. All flood policies have a max payout of 250K. Now your delta after insurance payout = -1.075M still owed to the mortgage company after the insurance payout.
My guess is that with the recent fire policy changes in CA there are likely caps on the fire payouts and many homeowners will be in the situation of example 2. There will also be many homeowners who have had the properties in the family through generations and own free and clear but now still need to obtain a construction loan to rebuild.
Typically, homeowners who lost everything are going to be in shock and not going to be in that mental headspace right away. However, if friends/family/community members can get them there, that’s going to give them the best possible financial outcome in a horrible situation.
If they are willing to become the developer and do want to move back after rebuilding, they can sell the property that they bought to live in temporarily for 3 to 5 years and most likely it went up in value and helps offset the new build costs of their current lot.