Anderson Township:

Beechmont Avenue Corridor Study

May, 2014

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary 3

II. Introduction 4

III. Existing conditions 7

IV. Demographics/Marketplace Comparables15

V. Core Issues 18

VI. Opportunities 25

VII. Recommendations 41

Appendix 50

I. Executive Summary

· Beechmont Avenue is perhaps Cincinnati’s quintessential suburban commercial corridor. It has begun to age and lose population after decades of spirited growth.

· The length of Beechmont Avenue from its western border with the City of Cincinnati through to Five Mile Road reflects the Township’s early historic development and remains a strong area.

· It is imperative for the Township to develop strategic approaches to attract new residents and retain others considering leaving the community.

· Strategizing for redevelopment is not a matter of correcting past “mistakes” but rather, confronting and adapting to the evolving suburban environment.

· The automobile is the defining element in this study area. Future redevelopment will be largely determined by the extent to which the automobile’s dominance is reduced.

· Beechmont’s relatively soft real estate market is attracting sub-standard users seeking inexpensive rent rather than a strong demographic.

· Redevelopment along Beechmont will require a decade-long process involving site assembly, enabling public improvements, and broad research.

· The Anderson Towne Center is the focal point of the Township’s commercial community. Its strong retail/service base, excellent roadway access, central location, and significant adaptability to the principles of ‘new urbanism’ earn it the highest priority for additional development.

· The Eastgate Mall has grown to regional status as a retail/service area.

· The Anderson Ways secondary roadway system is a sound concept, as it provides connectivity between properties.

· There are significant challenges in adapting the principles of mixed-use projects to suburban environments.

· Collaboration between local government and the commercial community can be the major driving force in matters regarding sign reform.

II. Introduction

The transformation of rural, bucolic hamlets and agricultural acreage on the outskirts of metropolitan areas across the United States has had a profound effect on our national culture. The suburbs were originally intended to satisfy the pent up housing demands of the post WWII America. The results transformed the national landscape, and redefined how the majority of Americans live in residential environments, as well as how they shop, recreate, and socialize.

The automobile has and continues to be the fundamental force in developing the suburban lifestyle, re-defining the logistics of virtually every aspect of daily life.

Anderson Township has engaged the service of Hamilton County Development Company (HCDC) to continue an ongoing inquiry into the Beechmont Avenue commercial corridor, exploring how that evolutionary product can be adapted to contemporary economic, social, and environmental redevelopment.

Beechmont Avenue reflects a clear chronicle of suburban commercial development. The corridor has hosted several generations of retail and service businesses, a mall, and office development. Some stretches of Beechmont are pristine, while others appear to have suffered and become less attractive over time.

Beechmont’s past dominance has been eroded by many factors. The most significant development has been to the east in neighboring Clermont County, where the Eastgate area has grown from a covered mall built in the mid-1970’s into a regional retail destination.

Over the past two decades, rapid development, paradigm shifts in the retail/service sector, and periodic economic setbacks have produced a commercial property surplus in the metropolitan Cincinnati market. Many of these properties reside within Anderson Township’s portion of the Beechmont corridor.

An incompatibility has emerged between the area’s resident demographics and newer businesses that have migrated to the corridor. Many have moved to Beechmont for the affordability of its surplus properties and the corridor’s optimal location. As a result, there appears to an increasing number of businesses somewhat at odds with their surroundings.

Past inquiries reflected both a sense of community interest and ire over the conditions along Beechmont. The consensus among public officials, residents, and some developers was that it would take decades to “undo the errors of past” decisions.

Beechmont Avenue’s commercial corridor provides a clear example of the historic process that drove suburban development for nearly six decades. That paradigm is now shifting. Both businesses and their customers are expressing dissatisfaction with the current physical and logistical character of suburban commercial environments. Many consider the current conditions to be the result of development “errors”. An alternative view regards these “errors” as simply stages in the corridor’s evolutionary development. Accordingly, redevelopment strategies will adjust to these perceptual changes. Change will not be immediate. The community should plan to engage in this redevelopment over a period of decades. Policies and accompanying strategies will require flexibility. Though development is not as ephemeral as digital technology, those engaged in development are becoming quicker to respond to subtle changes than in the past.

The 2005 Beechmont Corridor Vision Plan referred to the area as “one of the most unsightly retail corridors in the Greater Cincinnati Region.” Though this sounds like a harsh and hyperbolic indictment, it warrants much reflection and a multi-faceted strategic response.

Residents and visitors attribute Beechmont’s unattractiveness to its sheer length and real estate volume. Others cite heavy traffic, garish signage, and navigational difficulties.

Though many express dissatisfaction, anxiety, and perhaps even anger at the physical conditions in the Beechmont Corridor, few would argue that this commercial area is not essential to the economic health and appeal of the overall Anderson community.

Most communities want an attractive commercial corridor. Both residents and visitors expect a direct reflection of the area’s demographic identity. Appearance alone, however, is no guarantee of the corridor’s physical and economic sustainability.

No one can reasonably discount the automobile’s historic place at the cornerstone of suburban culture. It has virtually defined the nature and style of contemporary commercial development. Despite the trend toward New Urbanism and the undeniable impact of the digital commerce, most township residents continue to find themselves deeply rooted in the auto-centric suburban paradigm. Diminishing its dominance is a formidable challenge.

After more than two generations of an auto-centric culture, planners, public officials, residents, and many businesses are looking for ways to “de-construct” this relationship. There is a movement afoot for a return to a slower, more intimate social, commercial, and cultural environment. This goal is gaining in popularity, driven in large part by the increasing influence of urban-oriented principles. The crucial question in this inquiry is how much of this shift is adaptable across the suburban landscape.

Suburban housing development has relied on the automobile for all but a handful of tasks that can be accomplished as a pedestrian within the confines of a residential subdivision. It seems as if virtually all other activities generally require the automobile.

Automobile-related products and services rival fast food restaurants’ ubiquitous presence within Beechmont’s commercial landscape. While new urbanism may be more readily adaptable to some sections of the Beechmont corridor, other sections are likely to remain in a classic suburban commercial mode where brands are prominently displayed through large, eye-catching graphics to attract motorists. A metaphoric visual “cacophony” prevails in these areas, as businesses compete for consumers’ attention. Prior exercises have produced multiple, strategic approaches to mitigating this situation. There have been and will continue to be opportunities for additional improvement. Merchandisers have become increasingly more sensitive to how they display their brands. Collaborative efforts between merchants and the communities can yield surprising results.

HCDC addresses and examines the seeming disparity between Anderson Township’s robust demographics, high quality housing stock, excellent linkages with major roadways, and the market image projected by the commercial corridor.

The Township’s concern and occasional frustration with this corridor are not unique. Older suburban communities are intensely involved in refining their core strengths and in a sense, reinventing themselves. Business and physical development paradigms are shifting rapidly. Anderson is similarly challenged by these pressures.

III. Existing Conditions

The Township

Anderson Township is one of twelve townships within Hamilton County, Ohio. Located in the southeastern part of the county and about 20 minutes from Downtown Cincinnati, the Township encompasses an area of 31.2 square miles. It is bounded by the Little Miami and Ohio Rivers, in an area dominated by a rolling, wooded natural setting.

As one of the most heavily populated townships in the State of Ohio, Anderson has the fourth highest population total of Hamilton County’s 49 political jurisdictions.

The Physical Corridor

In less than a century when it was a dirt road, Beechmont Avenue has been transformed into a residential and commercial corridor of approximately 4 miles, running from the City of Cincinnati line in Mt Washington to the I-275 interchange at Nine Mile Road.

As recently as the middle of the 20th century, Beechmont Avenue (State Route 125) was a two lane road passing through rural outposts such as Fruit Hill (near Salem Road), Forestville (near Forest Road), and Cherry Grove (near Eight Mile Road. Significant residential growth came to the Township shortly after World War II, as much of the area was agricultural and undeveloped compared to other more urbanized areas in the Mill Creek Valley. The completion of the Beechmont Levee, and the development of a series of high connected roadways, specifically I-275 and I-471, made employment in Downtown Cincinnati and other areas more accessible to Township residents.

The Township has managed to preserve a good measure of its pristine greenery and bucolic settings, while witnessing significant population and commercial growth. Much of this activity has followed Beechmont Avenue, the community’s major thoroughfare that connects much of southern Ohio to Columbia Parkway (U.S. 50) and Downtown Cincinnati. The advent of I-275 and more recently I-471 has significantly decreased drive times, making Anderson Township and areas further east significantly more viable commuter communities.

Accordingly, Anderson Township’s growth history remained rapid and constant from the early 1950’s to the mid 1990’s. This steady population growth, expressed to developers cryptically as “rooftops” continued to attract a corresponding volume of commercial goods and services in response to increasing residential needs.

Though there is a considerably smaller supply of land in recent years accompanied by extreme fluctuations on the economy, new housing starts continue, along with a compliment of commercial developments.

Properties

Considering its 4 mile length, the corridor is considerably less dense than others in the region. The corridor does not include a major covered retail mall such as Northgate or the Kenwood Towne Center, which add 1.0 million square feet plus accompanying out lots to their respective corridors on Colerain Avenue and Montgomery Road. Despite the absence of a traditional shopping mall, Beechmont Avenue contains approximately 400 businesses, most of which are occupying small strip facilities or free standing structures. Ironically, what it may lack in actual physical density is offset by the perception that the corridor is extremely crowded, albeit with considerably smaller commercial strip centers and individual properties.

Traffic Counts

Beechmont Avenue29,680

Five Mile north of Beechmont32,178

Five Mile Road south of Beechmont54,601

Traffic counts reveal a high volume of commuter traffic heading toward Downtown Cincinnati during the two major drive time periods. A considerable amount of this volume passes through the Beechmont Corridor

Township Initiatives

The Township’s concerns over Beechmont Avenue are not unique. Approximately 1/3 of the nation’s traditional shopping malls are either deteriorating or closed.

Strip mall space accounts for over 10% of total commercial vacancy. It has been similarly estimated that in excess of 300 million square feet of big box retail sits vacant.

Though these figures are troubling, they also present opportunities for creative reuse of vacant spaces and site redevelopment.

The Township has conceived of and implemented several redevelopment initiatives in the Beechmont Corridor.

2001: In response to residents’ concerns the Township developed and adopted the Beechmont Landscape Plan, an attempt to install increased greenery within the corridor, giving the area a more contemporary feel.

2005: Anderson issued its first Comprehensive Plan which addressed a number of concerns for Beechmont Avenue’s development arc.

2005: The Township produced the updated Beechmont Corridor Plan. This plan sought to create a sense of place within the corridor through development patterns and land use. The update introduced the mixed-use neighborhoods concept to the Beechmont Corridor.

2009: The Township released the Anderson Trails Plan, which won the Ohio Planning Association’s Plan Implementation Award, provided recommendations for pedestrians and bicyclists along Beechmont.

Each of these planning efforts has connected planning professionals, technical experts, government agencies, citizens, businesses, property owners, and key stakeholders, to arrive at a vision for Beechmont Corridor.

The core issues that emerged involve efforts to offset the classic elements in the historical suburban commercial strip environment:

· Signage: Innovative approaches to signage/way-finding numbers have been installed along Beechmont Avenue to orient motorists.

· Enhanced Zoning Regulations: Addressing signage, parking and landscaping, including modifications to the site plan review process occasioned by requested property changes.

· Access Management: Driveway restriction regulations have been established by ODOT and the Hamilton County Engineer’s Office.

· Pedestrian access: Over 3,000 linear feet of sidewalk has been built since 2000.

· Innovative Infrastructure: Intersection streetscape improvements have been constructed at four intersections (Salem, Asbury, Nagel and Eight Mile) consistent with the Beechmont Vision Plan. Changes include decorative stone walls, pavers, and new handicapped ramps, landscaping, and enhanced crosswalk markings.

· Anderson Accessways: Wayfinding signs, identifying access to businesses were erected at the Five Mile Center and New England Club Drive.

Beechmont “Neighborhood” Concept

Among the valuable insights emerging from previous inquiries is the conceptual construct that divided the Beechmont Corridor into a series of six distinct sub-areas. This approach avoids the pitfall of viewing the corridor as one-dimensional. Beechmont Avenue’s character, strengths, and challenges vary over the course of the six sub-areas. This provides public officials, planners, and prospective developers the opportunity to focus more clearly on conditions and issues that occur in selected areas. This inquiry briefly examines each to identify their respective roles in the overall study area. It is interesting to note that the term “mixed-use “ in this context differs significantly from the term used to describe the recommended form of redevelopment discussed extensively in this text. The Vision Plan described six differing environments over Beechmont Avenue’s length. Specific mixed-use developments are composed of internal components that reflect a variety of interactive uses within a specific project.

The 2005 Beechmont Corridor Vision Plan introduced six “Mixed-Use Neighborhoods” that includes:

City West to Salem Road

This sub-area represents the first suburban development beyond the City of Cincinnati’s corporate limits east of the Mt Washington neighborhood. The housing scale continued much as that in the City. Commercial needs were less concentrated than they had been in centralized neighborhood business districts in Mt. Washington. Commercial activity shifted toward newer commercial development appearing at intervals along Beechmont, serving shoppers within relatively short distances.

Transition: Salem Road

This mostly modest residential area remains much as it has for the past half century. Residential properties are distributed among adjoining side streets and along the Avenue. Over time, a number of residential dwellings along Beechmont became converted to small offices, occupied by accountants, attorneys, medical, and other commercial users. Signage is relatively low-keyed in this area. This portion of Beechmont contains a number of relatively small, neighborhood-scale retail/service strip centers. Tenants represent a mix of local brand retailers, restaurants, services, etc. There are few national brand businesses, with the significant exception of chain pharmacies, with a recently renovated Walgreen store at the corner of Salem and Beechmont. There is, however, a plentiful assortment of local brands.

This portion of Beechmont has seen attractive infill office and service development. The transition is quite smooth moving east toward the Beechmont/Five Mile Road intersection.

Towne Center

The Anderson Towne Center does justice to its name, as it is effectively the focal point of the Beechmont corridor and for the Township in general.

Centrally located at the intersection of Beechmont Avenue and Five Mile Road, the Towne Center’s footprint was significantly enhanced with the addition of the Kroger Marketplace store, reputedly one if not, the highest sales volume unit in the Cincinnati region.

The Town Center contains a reasonably broad range of shops, anchored by Macy’s. Pharmacy, fuel, and additional food uses occupy the out lots adjoining Kroger’s Marketplace, making the Towne Center a truly full service venue, with a plentiful range of goods and services, entertainment, and food establishments.

The Towne Center emerged after the demise of the former Beechmont Mall, a traditional covered shopping center built in the late 1960’s.

Christ Hospital’s 70,000 sf healthcare facility across the avenue complements both the Marketplace and Towne Center facilities. It is significant and a testament to the strength of this area that a major healthcare facility located on a site that was the former Kroger location and a short-lived retail user. In many other communities a similar site might lie fallow for years.

The area is well landscaped, relatively easy to navigate in terms of parking and wayfinding, and is quite walkable once one passes the parking area and continues through a network of connecting sidewalks. The principles of new urbanism adapted to the suburban environment have the best chance of being realized at the Towne Center. The area to the north has long-term development potential for a broad range of uses.

As one continues north on Five Mile Road, Anderson Center, the Township Administrative facility is situated just beyond the Towne Center followed by Mercy Hospital and Group Health Associates complexes.

Major concerns involve design standards, more discrete signage, and other quality standards in construction.

Despite an overall look and feel of cohesion and activity, the area is vulnerable to aging real estate and degraded tenancy. A recent example can be found at 7731 Beechmont, a free standing commercial structure built in 1953. It was purchased by the former Pete’s Photoworld in 1990 as the company expanded from its original downtown store to a destination site in Anderson.

Pete’s Photoworld developed similar stores at other key destinations in the Kenwood and Tri-County areas. At the time, Anderson Township was in a high growth mode, having made populatuion gains of 33.29% and 15.75%, respectively, between the 1970-80 and 1980-90 censuses.

Pete’s Photoworld was purchased by Columbus’ Cord Camera in 2005. Cord operated the facility until it, too, went out of business in late 2013. Though ostensibly for sale, the property was recently leased to Loan Max at a rate of $19 sf. Loan Max is a variation on a “payday lender,” making loans on automobile titles. Though it is reasonable to conclude that payday loan offices and related operations have prolioferated in commercial corridors due to a difficult economy, the demographic composition of this portion of Beechmont would not appear to be optimal. This type of business has typically located further east, closer to Rt. 126 Beechmont/Amelia interchange at Nine Mile Road at the entrance to Clermont County’s Union Township.

Loan Max opeates a store at the eastern edge of Beechmont at I-275/Nine Mile interchange. Acquiring space at the Five Mile interchange effectvely brackets the area and ultimately broadens Loan Max’s market presence throughout the larger area.

Asbury to Nagel

This sector’s most aggravating element is signage. The area is dense with both national and local brands, each faithful to the classic concept of being noticed by consumers driving at thoroughfare speeds. Signs have become both overbearing in terms of size, placement, and aesthetics. Brand recognition and visibility are obviously critical factors in merchandising for businesses that inhabit traditional suburban commercial corridors. The dense signage in this segment makes for a “visual cacophony” that has, in many ways, become the nemesis of modern suburban retail shopping.

The Pinnacle Plaza retail strip facility at 7900 Beechmont is situated within this segment. Built in 1974, this aging facility hosts a much more modest complement of users, decidedly in the value retail category. Though it appears reasonably well maintained, it is a very traditional example of the strip format and is positioned at the softer end of the commercial real estate marketplace.

Nagel to Eight Mile Road

This segment of Beechmont highlight’s the commercial corridor’s major problem. Aging strip centers, smaller commercial strips of between 4 and 6 bays, and former single purpose buildings re-tenanted with a predictable lower tier successor user. The new occupant’s business is at either physical or aesthetic odds with the structure specifically built for the former occupant. There are, however, exceptions that strengthen the corridor’s local retail character.

Cherry Grove Plaza retail development is located at 454 Ohio Pike, just east of Anderson’s border on Beechmont. The facility was a prime example of a main stream strip center. It has been re-purposed to feature a higher volume of “value” tenants. The property is a good example of adjusting the retail mix while continuing to maintain an attractive facility. A Kroger store is the central component, but of a size and design representing an earlier generation in store design.

This portion of the corridor contains a number of automobile dealerships, as well as a plentiful supply of automotive support services.

Long established in the public’s mind as an auto dealership corridor similar in tone to Colerain Avenue, the dealership presence along Beechmont has changed somewhat over the past decade. Dealerships refresh their facilities with greater frequency than in past decades, driven by manufacturers’ requirements regarding signage, building design, on-site logistics, and related concerns. Some dealerships have left the Township’s portion of the corridor. Some left due to convulsive change in the larger automotive industry. Other dealerships and brands have migrated further east into Clermont County’s emerging regional market. Yet others have moved closer to the center of their target demographic. The Beechmont Auto Group’s decision to re-locate its Volvo dealership was to situate itself in closer proximity to the demographic that broadened when it added the Porsche and Maserati brands. It was not as a reaction to eroding circumstances on Beechmont. The Group continues to maintain multiple dealerships, remaining heavily entrenched in the corridor.

Nine Mile Interchange

The impact of rapid, dense development has manifest itself in the massive ODOT project to adapt this I-275/US 32 interchange to the increased volumes of both commuter and consumer traffic that has gravitated eastward toward the Eastgate area over the years.

This portion also contains numerous four to six bay retail strips of varying occupancy. There are noticeably inconsistent uses set side by side. A wine shop shares a strip with a payday loan outlet and a shop simply titled “We Buy Gold.” A tattoo shop in the strip center (8259 Beechmont) is another recent addition to the mix.

The transition from Anderson’s portion of Beechmont with Clermont County’s Ohio Pike is noticeable. The semi-rural atmosphere is fleeting as one progresses toward the dense and sprawling Eastgate area.

IV. Demographics/Marketplace Comparables

Among the core issues is the fact that the Township is no longer in the dramatic growth mode that drove all development sectors over the past five decades.

Anderson Township Population Growth

1970 Census

1980 Census

% Change 1970-80

1990 Census

% Change 1980-90

2000 Census

% Change 1990-00

2010 Census

% Change 2000-10

25,887

34,504

33.29%

39,939

15.75%

43,857

9.81%

43,446

-0.94%

The most recent census data is hardly precipitous, but it does point to a gradual trend. National chains choose to locate in areas in which healthy growth is predicted over a multi-year period. The expectation was that demographics drove increased business.

By contrast, Clermont County’s Union Township has been experiencing aggressive growth that mirror’s Anderson Township’s halcyon years. Demographics are a driving force in development there.

Union Township Population Growth

2000 Census

2010 Census

% Change 2000-10

2015 Projection

% Change 2000-15

42,332

47,307

11.75%

49,378

4.4%

Between the 2000 and 2010 national census, growth figures were dramatically different. The modest project over the coming five years may be attributed to the recovery period coming out of recession.

Comparing Similar Commercial Properties in Adjoining Jurisdictions

Four reasonably similar commercial strip properties are compared below. Two are located in Anderson. The other two are in Union Township. Anderson Station and Park Plaza are mid-sized retail strip centers. They are oriented toward local shopper’s needs, convenience food, and small professional spaces for businesses such as CPA firms, attorneys, and allied medical uses. Being local, the underlying demographic should indicate stability and growth in the local customer base, which is effectively illustrated in concentric circles of one and three miles. At five miles, there is general overlap with a multiple of locations competing for what is essentially regional business. At the five mile distance, sites are competing for larger purchase items, national brands, department stores, and unique destination establishments, such as Jungle Jim’s Eastgate location.

Anderson Station

Park Plaza

8094 Beechmont, 45255

834 Ohio Pike, 45245

Total SF: 43,100

Total SF: 45,259

Vacant SF: 9,080 (21%)

Vacant SF: 5,380 (12%)

$12 SF

$11 SF

Though each has vacancy, the Anderson properties are much higher. This is compounded by the respective demographics. The core demographic issue is that the growth prospects residfent population for these prperties.

Anderson 8094 Beechmont 45255

Population

1 mile

3 miles

5 miles

2010 Census

11,784

53,996

105,378

2015 Estimate

11,146

54,235

107,624

% Change 2010-2015 Estimated

-7%

-2%

0%

2016 Estimate

10,465

54,026

107,889

% Change from 2010-2016 Estimated

-13%

-3%

0%

Park Plaza 834 Ohio Pike 45245

Population

1 Mile

3 Miles

5 Miles

2010 Census

7,323

41,643

92,522

2015 Estimate

8,281

43,515

97,664

% Change 2010-2015 Estimated

10%

1%

3%

2016 Estimate

8,886

45,104

101,014

% Change 2010-2016 Estimated

18%

3%

6%

The population most proximate to the Beechmont property is declining, whereas the opposite is true for the site located in Union Township. Their growth chartacteristics are projected to run in opposuite directions. [footnoteRef:1] [1: Copyright © 2014 by Xceligent, Inc. All Rights Reserved.]

Aside from their respective physical characteristics, the properties rent rolls reflect additional perspective on the character of the local market.

HCDC took a sampling of commercial strip centers on Beechmont Avenue and Ohio Pike. These properties resemble one another in terms of size, age, and typical tenant mixes. They cater to two distinct local and regional markets.

7231-8516 Beechmont

Total Sq.F.

306,514

Available Sq.F.

56,244

% Vacancy

18.3%

451-834 Ohio Pike

Total Sq.F.

114,895

Available Sq.F.

9,980

% Vacancy

8.7 %

Leasing Rates

Address

Sq.F.

$ per Sq.F.

(NNN)

7731 Beechmont

2,720

$ 19

7991Beechmont

1,200

$ 12

8094-8148 Beechmont

11,700

$ 12

8544-8595 Beechmont

3,000

$ 10

8544-8595 Beechmont

6,000

$ 15

671 Ohio Pike

1,215

$ 14

834 Ohio Pike

5,090

$ 11

How does Beechmont differ from Ohio Pike? Beechmont’s span from the City to Union Township is broad in its scope and atmosphere. As it progresses east, Beechmont becomes considerably more dense, intensifying the visual clutter. Businesses are set relatively close to the avenue. Their sites do not extend back significantly from the road with a few exceptions. Most strip centers are backed by residential areas that are within a few hundred yards of the commercial facilities.

By contrast, Ohio Pike, beginning at the Township corporation line is considerably less dense. It has a more expansive feel, with strips set back further from the roadway, interspersed with stand-alone structures, remnant of the earlier commercial development when the local villages of Withamsville and Tabasco were decidedly rural. The real estate is a decade newer. Uses resemble those on Beechmont, but appear to serve a somewhat lower demographic. Similar users are appearing on Beechmont as the real estate market gets increasingly softer. The Cherry Grove Center at the effective border between Anderson and Union Township has transitioned into more of a “value shopping” center than in its previous incarnation.

V. The Study Area’s Core Issues and Challenges

“Economic development and its resulting impact on township residents has been one of the top issues identified by residents and businesses throughout the 2005 and 2010 planning processes. Citizens want to see a more stable business community with vacant buildings occupied by new businesses, marketing of local businesses to the greater region and the ability to work and shop, all within the confines of Anderson Township” [footnoteRef:2] [2: 2011 Anderson Plan Update]

Anderson residents’ concerns reflect the issues examined in this inquiry. Conditions for both local and national retail/service businesses, office facilities, entertainment, and other shopper’s goods have all felt the effects of the recent national recession. The Internet’s technological development and the dramatic rise in online consumerism have taken their toll on much of traditional retailing. There is a mounting concern that problems historically affecting urban commercial settings have finally come to the suburbs. Issues previously attributed to urban decline are taking differing forms in the suburban enclaves across the country. Approaches to remedying the situation have taken a curious reversal over the past several decades. Whereas urban areas sought revitalization through adopting many of the attributes of the suburban setting, the reverse appears to be on the rise as a return to many historic urban principles are taking shape in the emerging “New urbanism” movement. In a sense, the proverbial pendulum has reversed as many contemporary redevelopment techniques and formats have adopted these principles.

A Geographic Irony

Typically, the edges of older urban areas were the starting points for suburban growth in corridors such as Beechmont. As a consequence of extended development, these areas lost a significant portion of their former commercial vitality. As the city’s bordering neighborhoods aged, signs of incipient decline became apparent and began to extend outward to the suburban corridor. This is readily observable in the Colerain Avenue and Montgomery Road commercial corridors.

Beechmont’s surplus commercial real estate, especially in the Nagel to Eight Mile segment, appears to be influenced from the newer suburban development to the east. Tenant quality has eroded in this area. Numerous smaller strip centers carry high vacancies. Some are empty. Conversely, other older properties are well tenanted, albeit with lower grade users than in the past. Local and regional commercial real estate professionals attribute much of this to market pressures for businesses more inclined to locate in the Eastgate area but which are in search of lower cost space.

The character of Beechmont’s retail goods and services remains local. Real estate professionals claim that the area is not attractive to national chains, department stores, high-end retailers; the stuff of potent malls and other retail concentrations. Though the Township’s demographics clearly reflect a local customer base for these businesses, the marketplace offers more central and/or accessible regional locations for such goods. Though the proximate demographic for the Kenwood Towne Center is undeniably strong, the retail center’s strongest asset is its ability to draw similar demographic customer profiles to its doors through a highly accessible network of vehicular routes. I-71 is the major feeder route, running on a northeast axis from Northern Kentucky to Cleveland. Connecting routes such as the Ronald Reagan Cross County Highway, the I-275 Beltway, and the Norwood Lateral provide maximum access to this facility. National retail chains have by passed the Beechmont corridor for lack of sufficiently sized sites, plus the demographic indicators that the Township is no longer growing.

Well designed public improvements have made sections of Beechmont more attractive, but have failed to mitigate the soft market conditions that exist in a number of the corridor’s sections.

The connectivity provided by the I-275 Beltway affords Township residents efficient and rapid access to Downtown Cincinnati’s Central Business District, Northern Kentucky, and the remainder of the metro region.

Connectivity has also enabled new development. The Newport Pavilion is an interesting example. The Kroger Marketplace that anchors the center is alleged to have almost 40% of its sales volume from Ohio consumers. Assuming patronage by residents of Mt Adams, downtown Cincinnati and Over-the-Rhine, one can reasonably conjecture that a significant portion of that volume can be attributed to other consumers who commute along I-471 en route to I-275 and the eastern portion of the metropolitan area. Real estate professionals speculate that additional retailers, such as Dick’s Sporting Goods and Target, will draw more of these customers as trip demands are consolidated on the return commute from the CBD. In the absence of definitive data, this scenario is speculative at best. It does, however, raise the notion that the efficiencies of connecting roads has also presented residential areas with alternative shopping routines that ultimately draw business away from residents’ traditional shopping patterns.

There Is a Visually Cluttered Look to the Beechmont Corridor

The commercial corridor’s appearance ranks as one of local residents’ major issues regarding Beechmont Avenue. This is not unique, as most suburban commercial districts of the same vintage are perceived with similar criticism.

The historic argument in defense of large, vividly colorful, branded signage was based an ability to attract prospective shoppers driving along the corridor at traffic speeds. The perception is exacerbated by Beechmont Avenue’s length and the high number of separate properties.

Visual clutter may be offensive. It may be seen as garish. It is, however, an enduring legacy of the auto-centric suburban paradigm and, to a much lower degree, remains effective in attracting the new or infrequent visitor. Strip centers offer some relief through a central monument or tower sign that includes all tenants. Conversely, many establishments, particularly fast food outlets, have redundant signage. The two examples pictured below often defend their signs as iconic. There is, however, an alternative perspective, contending that ‘iconic’ is diminished by ubiquity.

National business brands and their local operators/franchisees continue to express a vested interest in their signage. Anderson’s current design and signage regulations are forthright in addressing signage in new construction. These controls will, however, be challenged by the need to mount a collaborative effort with existing businesses that employ garish and physically overwhelming signage.

The Anderson Towne Center, a fine example of subtlety signage and way-finding infrastructure, exists in stark contrast to numerous properties located within a short distance to its east. Most shoppers would likely welcome the visual relief that this venue offers.

In many cases, their buildings’ architectural features are themselves signage. The McDonald’s arches are the franchise’s core symbol, yet they are both an integral element in the building design, and are typically accompanied by tower signs that can be viewed at a distance. This redundancy is unwarranted in dense environments such as Beechmont Avenue. As with local shopper’s goods, residents who patronize these chain businesses are familiar with their location.

Anderson’s recent design and signage initiative is a significant, positive step in the right direction. Judicious application of aesthetic guidelines and regulations can be an effective force in defining and reinforcing segments of the Beechmont corridor. Although these applications often carry either overstated or unrealistic expectations, they certainly can be selectively applied and very effective. Though often seen as an exercise in vanity, a highly compelling argument can be made for significantly reducing the visual clutter and sheer ubiquity of what has become overwrought symbols of suburban banality. Just about all communities would, at minimum, want to reduce the visual clutter that large branding signage has become.

Successful communities have engaged in a collaborative relationship with national chains to bring signage more in tune with the prevailing local aesthetic or, at minimum, in a lower profiled form.

Shoppers local goods needs are well met, comprising the majority of businesses along Beechmont. The regional retail and service market has shifted to the general Eastgate area.

The Beechmont Mall history is familiar to most anyone with an interest in this corridor and options for its redevelopment. There is a wealth of information regarding this retail center, split almost down the line between the factual and anecdotal.

As one of the earliest covered malls in the Cincinnati region, the Beechmont Mall was built in 1969 during a period when the Township was experiencing extremely rapid growth. At the time, the Mall provided a clear alternative in product offerings to the emerging Eastgate Mall in Clermont County, approximately 10 miles to the East. What eventually developed into the Kenwood Towne Center was close to 20 miles from Anderson and a relatively long drive in a time before the highly efficient connective roadways that circulate consumers throughout the Cincinnati region. The Mall was situated just across the Ohio River from the emerging, growing Northern Kentucky region. Aspiring to be a strong regional retailing and service center with a full complement of national chains, department stores, and smaller shops catering to a higher demographic was not an unreasonable goal before the late 1990’s. Pointing fingers abound on the root causes for the Mall’s demise. Aside from anecdotes relating to the Mall’s internal workings, it appears that the facility succumbed to a shifting economic base and greatly enhanced access to other retail centers, along with extremely robust competition. Kenwood Towne Center’s central location and access attract a demographic base that spans the Cincinnati market, making it a leader in retail for the overall region. The Eastgate Mall area has had a more modest, but nevertheless, influential impact on the regional retail map, spawning numerous sub-centers, a plethora of big box and other national retailers, as well as a significant share of automobile sales.

Local commercial leasing firms and their national clients tend to regard the Beechmont corridor as a highly attractive environment for local shoppers goods.

Retail Center Configurations

Typical Anchors

Type

Concept

SF Including Anchor(s)

Acreage

No.

Type

Anchor Ratio

Primary Trade Area

Neighborhood Center

Convenience

30,000-150,000

3-15

1 or more

Supermarket

30-50%

3 miles

Community Center

General Merchandise; Convenience

100,000-350,000

10-40

2 or more

Discount dept store, supermarket, drugs; home improvement, specialty discount apparel

40-60%

3-6 miles

Regional Center

General Merchandise; Fashion

(typically, enclosed mall)

400,000-800,000

40-100

2 or more

Full-line dept store, jr. dept store, mass merchant, disc dept store, fashion apparel

50-70%

5-15 miles

Super Regional Center

Similar to region with more variety and assortment

800,000+

60-120

3 or more

Full-line dept store, jr dept store, mass merchant; fashion

50-70%

5-25 miles

Fashion/

Specialty Center

Higher end, fashion- oriented

80,000-250,000

5-25

N/A

Fashion

N/A

5-15 miles

Power Center

Category-dominated anchors; few small tenants

250,000-600,000

25-80

3 or more

Category killer, home improvement, disc. dept store, warehouse club; off-price

75-90%

5-10 miles

Theme/

Festival Center

Leisure; tourist-oriented retail and service

80,000-250,000

5-20

N/A

Restaurants, entertainment

N/A

N/A

Outlet Center

Manufacturers’ outlet stores

50,000-400,000

10-50

N/A

Manufacturers’ outlet stores

N/A

25-75 miles

[footnoteRef:3] [3: International Council of Shopping Centers, 2014]

It is a somewhat surprising and recent irony that big box and other large national retailers, whose presence was often considered validation of an area’s demographic strength, are taking a serious look at the amount of space they utilize and actually need. Brick and mortar national stores have seen their sales steadily eroded by the phenomenon of Internet retailers. A new dimension has emerged in which these retailers are further looking into their business plans for new ways to adapt to online competition. The relative efficiencies of operating space are under close scrutiny. Many big box and national retailers are re-assessing the size if their stores. The obvious and threatening impact of this downsizing may result in a huge inventory of facilities that will either need to be re-purposed or totally redeveloped from the ground up. Many in commercial real estate fear that the number of closings could quickly swell the already significant volume of commercial properties rendered [prematurely] obsolete by big box and other more regionalized retail development that now finds itself under pressure.

Commercial real estate professionals keeping track of store openings and closings have been forecasting for more than a decade that the day was coming when American retailers would have to pay for building way too many stores.

Some of the closings are driven by weak performance, such as Radio Shack, which has struggled to find its niche in the modern electronics world as it approaches its 100th birthday. But in other cases, closings are being announced by retailers such as Staples that have decided that in the Internet age, market dominance will not be achieved by building more brick-and-mortar stores.

Fulfilling local shopper’s needs is certainly not immune to these paradigm shifts, but is beginning to appear more resilient.

Though businesses serving local shoppers needs tend to be modest and often ephemeral and subject to turnover, they are somewhat insulated from the higher profile issues affecting national chains, in that they have no realistic Internet alternative. The controlling factors in this sector center mainly on matching the volume of business to the resident demographic.

Efficient Roadway Connections Create Differing Business Opportunities

The Beechmont commercial corridor through Anderson Township is particularly well connected to connecting roadways. I-275 interchanges at Five and Nine Mile Roads bracket the majority of the corridor’s commercial area. This high grade access offers local residents an efficient and timely commute to the urban core, as well as to points throughout the region. It also enables a much expanded customer base to obtain rather quick access to businesses from points beyond the local shopper’s goods demographic. Accordingly, this also expands location opportunities for businesses seeking lower occupancy costs.

Physical and Economic Conditions along the Beechmont Corridor Vary Greatly

As one moves east from the Towne Center, visual clutter, re-tenanted facilities and aging properties present a broad range of problems. They occur throughout the corridor; however, these properties are primarily between Nagel and Eight Mile Roads. This situation is rooted in the surplus of older, often obsolete real estate along Beechmont. These properties are rare in the western section of Beechmont, but increase as one passes the Towne Center area and continue with greater frequency moving east toward the Clermont County/Union Township line.

Local and regional real estate professionals are generally in agreement that there is an excess of commercial retail/service property in the Greater Cincinnati region. There have been numerous areas of growth, but typically at the cost of movement from other areas as opposed to increasing population and accompanying demand in the overall market area. Disjointed design provides a confused visual image and a significant number of properties are in questionable physical condition.

There is an increasing sense of incompatibility among business neighbors. The Beechmont corridor through Anderson is considered to be a venue for local and a few chain national brands. It is not considered a destination for consumers from out of the local area.

Shopping venues vary in tenant quality and physical condition. The two do not necessarily occur in tandem.

VI. Opportunities

Mixed-Use Projects and New urbanism

Over the past three decades, there has been an increasing awareness within the development community that greater variety and density, compactness, and operating efficiencies could be better achieved through a mixed-use development concept.

Though initially regarded as a hedge against risk, mixed-use projects have now become desirable and have achieved a land use and zoning response from progressive public officials.

As inner-ring suburbs across the country become denser, development professionals expect rise in demand for access to nearby, walkable urban environments.

Though this demand may in fact rise, many practitioners will question the degree to which this can be realized in realistic and logistically feasible terms. Residents are looking for shorter driving distances to commercial, cultural, leisure, and work opportunities.

Suburban environments differ widely. Many communities and comparable neighborhoods in older, established, traditional cities may be more readily adaptable to developing new or improving upon existing pedestrian networks that can decrease dependence upon the automobile. Other suburban settings are much broader geographically, lack an adequate public transit network within their boundaries, and are otherwise more auto-centric. This is an assessment that will ultimately determine the extent to which communities can be adaptable to new urbanism principles.

The principles of new urbanism provide a useful framework for infill development and redevelopment in these areas, as long as they are informed by the best practices of successful retail and mixed-use design, awareness of the capital allocation and financing realities faced by developers, attention to market demand and demographic trends, and new approaches to coping with and parking the automobile.

Early new urbanism efforts applied these principles to new, primarily residential projects. Extending the concept to mixed-use projects is not without a string of caveats.

The challenges involve land use issues as well as the market prospects for businesses and other non-residential users to succeed in the mixed-use setting.

In addition, a new Main Street-style retail project may have difficulty competing with existing regional retail projects in the suburbs.

“Peoples’ lifestyles and how they want to live are changing,” explains Walter S. Clements, CCIM, president of Greenleaf Properties in Overland Park, Kansas. Greenleaf Properties is developing the Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods, which combines 275,000 sf of retail space with 185,000 sf of offices, a 129-unit hotel, and both rental and for-sale housing on 56 acres of land in Overland Park.

There is a growing demand for mixed-use that enables people to work, shop, exercise, and be entertained close to home. This demand has brought about a growing consensus among economic development professionals, architects, planners, housing developers, public officials, and lenders that mixed-use projects are currently the most progressive and sustainable options for both urban and suburban settings.

The category is not new, but rather, updated to address and perhaps transform a more contemporary framework.

With origins in the dense urban setting of the traditional city, mixed-use buildings contained a range of uses. We are familiar with modern high-rise developments in urban downtown areas that combine office with supportive retail/service spaces, typically situated on the structure’s ground floor. The retail and service businesses cater to both the office population and that from the street. The concept is often expanded to include larger [national] retailers, formal restaurants, and in recent decades, residential users. The primary access and occupant circulation is pedestrian-oriented. Office occupants, residents, and people in nearby facilities do not need automobiles to access goods and services. Occupants and visitors typically have access to parking facilities to accommodate automobiles. In cities with well-developed mass transit systems, a significant percentage of both workers and residents do not rely on automotive transportation. In essence, this is a classic vision of a high density urban environment.

Cities actively engaged in revitalization have focused on re-capturing the density, scale, and overall ambiance of the classic urban village. Many downtowns across the nation still have relatively recent historic roots in mixed-use facilities. The streetscape is still pedestrian dominant. High concentrations of residential development have been able to attract retail and service users that adapted to a denser, less auto-centric urban landscape

The “New urbanism” has emerged as a powerful revitalization and redevelopment movement in recent years. Principles involving density, pedestrian-centric, the integration of work, shopping, entertainment, services, historic preservation and sustainability have looked to the mixed-use project as the vehicle for realizing these goals.

Mixed-Use Project Configurations

Neighborhood commercial 

Convenience goods and services

Main Street residential/commercial 

Two to three-story buildings with residential units above and commercial units on the ground floor facing the street

Urban residential/ commercial

Multi-story residential buildings with commercial and civic uses on ground floor

Office convenience 

Office buildings with small retail and service uses oriented to the office workers

Office/residential 

Multi-family residential units within office building(s)

Shopping mall conversion 

Residential and/or office units added (adjacent) to an existing stand-alone shopping mall

Retail district retrofit

Retrofitting of a suburban retail area to a more village-like appearance and mix of uses

Live/work

Residents can operate studios or small workshops in the building where they live

Studio/light industrial 

Residents may operate studios or small workshops in the building where they live

Hotel/residence 

Mix hotel space and high-end, multi-family residential

Parking structure with ground-floor retail

Adaptable to a broad variety of retail users, including supermarkets

Single-family detached home district with stand alone shopping center

Adapting mixed-use project concepts to the suburban setting has also been on the rise across the United States. “Every suburban city now wants pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented, vertically integrated mixed-use projects,” says John Breitinger, CIM, vice president and general manager of real estate investments with United Properties in Minneapolis that is developing a mixed-use project in Wayzata, Minnesota.

Anderson Township has varying opportunities for mixed-use development. Initially, it is recommended that the first project be an outgrowth of the current Anderson Towne Center, as that facility reflects several of the fundamental elements of “new urbanism” thinking.

Having its roots in the traditional urban setting, the mixed-use project is not a “one size fits all” concept. The above table illustrates the conceptual range of mixed-use projects. Accordingly, the following caveats need to be considered:

General: The idea of “build it and they will come” may not pan out for developers unless the demographics are right, the population numbers support it, and individual uses are timed to market needs.

Site size: Mixed-use projects require significant site size in suburban settings. This inquiry identified few sites above 12 acres. The reasonable inference to draw here is that site assemblage for mixed-use developments may be an arduous, lengthy process. One relatively unique aspect of commercial development along Beechmont’s Anderson Township sector relates to the relatively closeness between commercial uses fronting the Avenue and residential subdivisions within a short distance behind them. This has been an issue in site assemblage, and also has possible implications for mixed-use. Finding the right site for a suburban mixed-use project is important in today’s changing real estate market.

Land Use Densities: Combining office components with residential and retail/ service uses implies a higher density than has traditionally been the standard in suburban communities. This inquiry can only speculate that density issues might arise regarding multi-family development in mixed-use projects. Some are met with opposition from residents who want to keep the town’s population density low and retain local character. However, developers and commercial real estate professionals look for areas where the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

Working with/reconciling with neighborhood groups over added traffic, parking, and tenants’ hours of operation, infill is a thorny business. Why then are some developers choosing to tackle urban redevelopment rather than more conventional single-use projects in smaller markets?

Form Based Code: This land use approach is fast becoming an integral component in developing multi-use projects. Though all jurisdictions employ land use controls, suburban design has historically separated distinct uses from one another. Projects that seek to integrate multiple uses are challenging in the traditional code paradigm.

Form-based codes use physical form, as opposed to Euclidian zoning which mandates separation of uses as the organizing principle for jurisdictional land use oversight. This approach seeks to codify rather than merely issue guidelines, addressing the relationship between building facades and the public space. It places major concern for the form and mass of buildings and how they, in turn, relate to one another. The codes seek to employ regulation to balance aesthetics, character, and more traditional land use policies to achieve an integrated built form.

Lastly, the approach comprehensively considers the sum of these elements in determining the scale and overall site layout.

These new codes aspire to achieve a community vision based on enduring forms of urbanism. The automobile, density, and combined uses are challenged by the entrenched concepts of suburban development. Accordingly, they have both technical and emotional aspects.

The Traditional Alternative: Anderson Township’s continuing commitment to development, as evidenced by its sponsorship of numerous inquiries over the past decade, clearly indicate that it has taken a considered approach to developing a progressive land use policy with accompanying guidelines and regulations, significant public commitment to improve the Beechmont corridor, professional expertise, developer input and resident commentary.

Collaboration: The component parts of mixed-use projects benefit from a collaborative arrangement comprised of specialized developers for each of the component parts.

Great opportunities exist for acquiring/incorporating top design into mixed-use project. Design can be critical. People want to live and shop somewhere that is eye-catching and attracts more visitors and new residents.

Financing/Underwriting: Though the mixed-use concept traditionally spread risk among its components, financing can nevertheless be difficult and may require a level of public participation. If the project’s mixed-use components include retail, office, and/or multi-family, lenders may be comfortable with one property type but not the others.

The only way to make projects economically viable is to dramatically increase their density by adding a mix of uses and integrating them vertically, and this includes the inevitable parking needed to accommodate visitors/customers. Building parking structures with entrances through small surface lots is another way to gain support.

Beyond providing a product to suit a growing need, mixed-use infill developers gain a diversification of income streams that may sustain the property through difficult economic periods. “When the office market is down and not performing too well, the apartments could still be making a contribution to the property owner,” Hunt says.

Local Development Interests: This can prove to be one of the critical factors in any collaborative arrangement for multi-use projects in that those practitioners in the area have a finely tuned sense of place and context. They additionally have ties to design, financing, and other development elements that can contribute significantly in producing a product that the local market will respond to positively. This faction should include local developers, commercial realtors, and retail/service business leasing professionals. A seasoned, multi-skilled team is fundamental to attracting the best equity and debt sources.

Demographics: It takes significant population density to support a retail center, especially a regional one. In a post recession economy, demographics play an increasingly more significant role than in past years when growth projections were met with greater confidence. Accordingly, mixed-use projects will, in large measure, depend upon recruiting new residents, businesses, and other users as well as retaining older residents who may be inclined to leave the Township after their child rearing years are complete.

It is common knowledge that senior citizens are the fastest growing demographic. There have been traditional, negative perceptions of this growth, making the assumption that many seniors would leave the community if financially capable, leaving a remaining group that will have diminished income in their later years.

The suburban paradigm has traditionally been based on a family-oriented lifestyle. Seniors within suburban communities have often gravitated to institutional residences when in need of assisted living services.

Given that a surplus exists among more traditional retail and service commercial real estate space in this corridor, mixed-use projects will ultimately need an accompanying strategy designed to attract new people, office tenants, and supportive retail/service components.

Attracting/Retaining Residents

The Township will need to develop an active strategy to attract new residents. It should begin by mounting an initiative to retain existing residents.

The modern suburban community has witnessed two generations since their dramatic expansion in the years after WWII. Alternately called “empty nesters,” seniors who have raised a family in a larger home often do not find residential options more suitable to their altered lifestyles. Many seniors are reluctant to leave their communities as social, spiritual, and other ties remain. Traditional apartments built for a mass market are often a poor option. Conceptually, mixed-use developments which afford proximate easily accessible goods and services, in addition to professional, medical, and perhaps recreational components, might be attractive in terms of convenience and scale.

Tenant Mix: The right tenant mix in suburban mixed-use is challenging. Retail is the biggest draw in mixed-use developments. Supportive shopper’s goods are a fundamental element. National brands and larger retail facilities are more problematic.

A successful retail mix optimally includes bookstores, fast-casual dining, bakeries, coffee shops, and small apparel and related retail. These uses provide a unique synergy promoting an entertainment atmosphere that, in turn, benefits the overall feel of the project.

The retail component delivers goods and a service in support of the other components depends, in large measure, on its resident population. It also provides new options for other local shoppers. The pedestrian transition that characterizes mixed-use projects better consolidates trip demands and leads to lower traffic volumes.

Parking: Parking plays a crucial role in the success of all mixed-use projects, especially in auto-centric suburban settings.

Suburban residents, especially shoppers, are accustomed to readily available, proximate parking. In a sense, parking in the suburban paradigm is an entitlement as opposed to a service or commodity. Developers have traditionally included vast amounts of surface space to customer parking. Many have constructed garages as a built-in amenity. Mixed-use projects present a paradigm shift as it relates to parking. The initial issue is space. Less space translates into higher density which in turn implies a vertical parking structure.

Although in-line shops lend themselves to new urban formats, larger anchor stores and requisite parking does not integrate well with a pedestrian dominated environment. Nevertheless, anchors are needed to attract patrons from beyond the project’s immediate resident base project’s setting. Inevitably, a hybrid approach often results.

The first step in adding density and diversity to an existing site is to free up land that is customarily assigned to surface parking.

Solutions to these parking issues are likely to be found and realized by local governments which see their vested interest in promoting mixed-use developments and ultimately become involved in, at minimum, assisting in the financing of parking facilities to offset costs and increase the chances for project success.

Suburbanites are less willing to pay for parking than urbanites and are more accustomed to surface parking, but habits can change.

A multi-pronged approach is required--one that reduces demand and slowly introduces paid parking.

Anderson Township has taken several steps in this direction and possesses current assets that can mature into a fully realized mixed-use environment.

Charging for close-in premium parking is a first step toward acclimating customers to paid parking.

In Main Street-style projects, parking meters on the street can bring in revenue while encouraging turnover; merchants benefit because customers can generally find a spot to park.

Many cities are introducing modern parking meters that enable users to pay for their space with a credit card or smartphone. The City of Cincinnati has installed credit devices throughout downtown. It is almost a foregone conclusion that this payment system will be expanded through technological capabilities of smartphones and other mobile devices. This may be a crucial factor in bridging the gap between pay parking and formerly free access. Alternatively, offering a 90-minutes-free parking program for the less convenient spaces gives shoppers enough time for short trip demands.

Technological enablement may allow communities to have variable parking rates based on time of day, occupancy, special events, etc. It is safe to say that we can anticipate these technological advances as well as a generic form or application of payment interchangeable with other public venues that have timer-based rates.

Use of paid parking and demand management will help the parking supply match demand, eliminating the excessive supply generated by minimum parking standards. Elimination of minimum parking standards should be a major goal of planners seeking to add density to suburbs. Achieving it requires creating neighborhood parking districts with permits so parking does not spill into neighborhoods; changing the practice in many cities of using reduced parking requirements as a negotiating chip with developers; and managing on-street parking with meters, returning the money to the district.

Attaining Authenticity

(Mashpee Commons Mashpee, Massachusetts, planned by DPZ,is a lively, mixed-use, mixed-income, and pedestrian-friendlytown center, redeveloped incrementally over 15 years from astrip shopping center.)

A major challenge in creating mixed-use developments of any size is creating a qualitative feeling of authenticity.

No matter how much the form of a project echoes pre-automobile town centers or how much the architectural style takes its cues from the region, the place likely will lack a sense of authenticity and fail to attract members of younger generations. Derivative architecture’s shortcomings are only compounded by all too familiar national chain tenants found in almost the exact placement sequence as in every other retail center.

Customers want a mix of both national and local tenants. They do not, however, share the need to underwrite projects like real estate developers who rely heavily on national chains to generate sales volumes that enable sizable retail projects to become financially feasible.

Smaller “mom and pop” tenants usually are all too often not considered creditworthy by the lenders and investors who finance mixed-use projects. Achieving a judicious blend of strong local and regional tenants can often be an effective alternative approach to the ubiquitous retail mix.

Restaurants and other food service users have the ability to attract customer volume that can assist other tenants in meeting individual goals. Cincinnati has experienced a significant increase in quality, locally owned dining venues but their location choices have typically been in areas of intense activity, most notably in the revitalized Over-the-Rhine area astride downtown Cincinnati. There are, however, a growing number of smaller, artisanal food groups that have developed small chains that often look to establish themselves in evolving suburban settings.

Non-commercial uses are a newcomer to the tenant mix that relate to the locale and that diversify and broaden the user base. Examples include offices, professional practices, cultural centers, and other elements; things that better attach the development to the particular area. Here is a particular opportunity for ethnic groups within the community and ethnically-oriented businesses serving them to fill these roles.

All this helps ensure long-term economic stability and local relevance.

Potential Site Assemblages and Site Expansions

Possibilities for mixed-use development are both numerous and will have a greater impact north of Five Mile Road.

In its current form, The Towne Center addresses several of the core concepts of both mixed-use and new urbanism principles. Though it is currently a commercial retail/service complex, the Towne Center’s expansion possibilities suggest the potential for residential, office and additional development in pursuit of the mixed-use goal. The Kroger Marketplace is a major trip demand and provides the majority of surface parking. The established pedestrian patterns to the Towne Center encourage visitors to circulate through the area without the need of a second parking exercise. It has a fairly broad mix of shopper’s goods and services, recreation, food, entertainment and national brand retailing. Lastly, the center’s optimal location affords excellent roadway access and a central location.

In the course of this inquiry a number of properties identified as commercial surplus may be considered as sites for future mixed-use development, assuming that acquisition and assembly can occur over the coming decade. HCDC examined a number of additional sites that could accommodate mixed-use development.

The threshold size for mixed-use development varies with the surrounding environment and non-geographic factors, in areas in which high density and vertical development are normative.

Establishing a local project threshold size is tempered by numerous factors. Short of acquiring a large institutional property, local assemblages typically involving multiple owners, would rarely exceed 20 acres of contiguous developable land. A goal of this inquiry was to identify commercial real estate elements in the Beechmont corridor that were contributing to a market and perceptual state of confusion and malaise. Accordingly, these examples involve relatively small and medium size retail strip properties, typically fewer than 10 acres. Assembling larger sites would imply extended acquisition efforts to enlarge the potential development sites. Many properties would additionally entail relocation consideration. Suffice it to say that the length and complexity of site assemblage in the Beechmont commercial environment would be somewhat comparable to that faced in the densely built out urban sectors of the region.

Priority should be given to site assemblage of blighted or otherwise obsolete commercial strips and stand-alone structures in Beechmont’s Nagel to Eight Mile segment. Prospective sites would be relatively close to the I-275 interchange at Nine Mile. That location could prove attractive for new residential prospects as it is an efficient access point for those involved with commuting, as well as an equally attractive and efficient route for office visitors, retail clients and other visitors.

Re-inhabiting, redeveloping, retrofitting, re-greening, or repurposing, are all means to bring life to aging retail centers.

Bringing life back to retail centers increases the surrounding properties’ value, attracts new investments, and can bring new jobs to area. Reason dictates, however, that if the supportive population is not growing, prospects are diminished.

Though retrofitting has often been thought to be cost-beneficial, redevelopment of traditional commercial properties into multi-use projects implies a totally different conceptual approach to configuring the project. Accordingly, HCDC sees greater merit in assembling and acquiring sites that can be formally run through the RFQ/RFP process in pursuit of the most progressive redevelopment concept.

The properties profiled below have varying merit. Some are currently viable, though in need of some physical refreshment. Others are objectively positive, performing assets for their owners, but though in relatively good condition, are nonetheless reflective of the surplus character of the Beechmont corridor’s market environment and could be redeveloped. Finally, there are properties that lack redeeming value. They are, for all intents and purposes, obsolete, poorly tenanted, and would be better served in the marketplace and the civic sphere as a component part of a larger land assemblage that might lend itself to a more progressive redevelopment. Notable examples include:

The Festive Marketplace: 7685 Beechmont Avenue

The Festival Market is a 26,324 sf strip center with approximately 5,000 sf (19%) vacant. This facility houses numerous local uses, represented by both national chain store tenants and local independent businesses. Lease rates are in the area of $17 sf, which is a healthy rate within the corridor.

Though a well trafficked facility, the center is a primary example of confusing and harsh signage common among earlier suburban commercial corridor development. It is fair to say that the major portion of customer volume in this center is decidedly local, with tenants offering a range of shopper’s goods, gathering spots, and specialized services. It is a well known destination among local residents. It could definitely pursue a decidedly more subtle approach to attracting those non-local customers searching for a specific business.

The Marketplace’s close proximity to the Towne Center suggests its long-term redevelopment move toward a denser, less automobile-centric character. It is, however, very difficult to improve and add density to a center that is operating. This is particularly the case with re-allocating surface parking for additional development.

Given its close proximity to the Towne Center, this would be a prime example in which collaboration with property owners and a program of measured incentives could bring a less cluttered, more contemporary look to this center.

The Crossings of Anderson: 8315 Beechmont Avenue

This is an aging retail strip center that appears to serve as a well tenanted, quality shopper’s goods destination. It is located in the area between Nagel Road and Eight Mile, the section of the Beechmont corridor that contains a number of marginal properties due to a lower level of maintenance or a weak tenant mix.

The 1990 vintage main structure contains 57,289 sf, with a second free standing out lot building, also constructed in 1990, containing an additional 10,275 sf.

The development is situated on 8.53 acres.

The current eleven tenant mix includes Susan’s Health Foods, Country Fresh (produce, delicatessen meats/chesses and imported food items), two learning centers, The Book Rack, a used bookseller, a weight loss center, a regional optical center, and Servatti’s, an iconic Cincinnati bakery.

Country Fresh is the largest tenant. This business has been in the Cincinnati region for the past decade with locations on Beechmont Avenue in Anderson Township, Vine Street in Springfield Township, and Werk Road in Western Hills. The company appears to prefer locations that evoke an older, smaller time in grocery store size and design. Accordingly, they search for spaces that actually served in that capacity or resemble this site. For example, the Springfield Pike location is housed in a 1950’s-early 1960’s [former] grocery store that is a component part of a multi-use strip configuration with retail and service businesses on the first level and offices above. The facility shares a relatively good sized parking lot with two free standing retail spaces and a small office building. Though the structures themselves are obsolete, there is a good amount of shopper’s activity generated primarily by Country Fresh.

The center appears top run, counter to the notion that the aging strip center is obsolete. This is generally the case. There is, however, a positive element in the operation at the Crossings facility. Users provide typical shoppers goods and services. The Country Fresh anchor is paired with other relatively offbeat, but attractive users. Books, educational tutoring, and health foods add to the eclectic character of this center.

This property’s value can be approached from two vantage points. In the short term, the property‘s current configuration is of value to the commercial corridor, providing an interesting array of shoppers goods to the residential and visiting consumer. It is, however, a dated property and could be significantly improved or renovated with appropriate public infrastructure and financial incentives. The second vantage point involves a more long term view. The Crossings property could conceivably be either incorporated into a larger site to become part of a mixed-use project or evolve into an ancillary facility connected to a larger mixed-use property through secondary roadways in the Anderson Ways system.

Dollar General: 8263 Beechmont Avenue

This property, zoned as a community shopping center (Land Use # 426) is a 58,910 sf facility constructed in 1985 and situated on a 4.894 acre site. It sits in close proximity to the Crossings of Anderson but reflects a rather different ambiance.

Built in a traditional strip center configuration, the center is situated at the rear of a sizable parking lot. A lone drive-up ATM machine is located at the front of the parking area nearest to the street. A seemingly vacant Asian restaurant sits at the property’s western edge.

The center is anchored by a Dollar General store and complemented by an array of disparate users. The facility has a high vacancy factor. This property is a prime example of traditional shopper’s goods and services facility that has moved toward obsolescence and compounded by minimal maintenance. Though the property may serve its owners well as an investment, it does the commercial corridor little in the way of providing fresh, active retail and service space. As one of those properties referred throughout this inquiry as “soft” or “surplus” sites, the center offers a highly accessible location coupled with affordable lease rates.

This property should be considered be among the first for site assemblage. The larger site that might accommodate a mixed-use development contains a broad range of buildings of varying condition, which includes a contemporary office structure, several service-oriented but dated facilities, a free standing restaurant, and the aforementioned strip center. The site effectively begins at the corner of Beechmont and New England Club Drive. This site assemblage could link the assisted living projects and residential subdivisions south of Beechmont through the Anderson Ways system. The aggregate size would be approximately 10.7 acres. The Crossings of Anderson could conceivably either be linked to the site or incorporated into it if the owners opted to become part of a larger footprint, increasing the site to 19.2 acres.

Pinnacle Plaza: 7900 Beechmont Avenue

This retail strip center was built in 1974, making it one of the oldest retail strips in the corridor. The facility contains 132,676 sf on a 9.4 acre site without lots serving automotive needs. Considering its age, this facility appears to be well maintained. It is a utilitarian design, devoid of much exterior artifice. The tenant mix is decidedly oriented toward value retail, the euphemism most often applied to discount shopping in other than national branded big box settings. A considerable amount of space is devoted to commercial storage. The major tenants include an independent outlet store, a local/regional fitness center, a storage facility, and an Applebee’s restaurant on the front out lot. A Subaru auto dealership faces the site across Beechmont Avenue. Fast food and other franchise venues bracket the facility on the east and west. There are 8,400 sf (6%) of vacant space at this center, in the $10 per square foot range.

This is a modest retail and service center that shares a robust demographic with the surrounding portion of the Beechmont corridor. It is fair to conjecture that given the property age, style, tenant mix, and price point for leased space, this property represents an opportunity for retail that might otherwise serve customers more closely in the neighboring county and township. Users will find comparable space to be more expensive as they move eastward toward the Eastgate area. It may also be noted that the residual effects of the dramatic economic downturn from the 2008 recession has created new customers for this tenant mix within the Township and represents a proximate and value-oriented retail/service option.

Beechmont Plaza: 8550 Beechmont Avenue

This facility, built in 1987, is very similar in size, condition, and tenant mix to the aforementioned Pinnacle Plaza. At 132,468 sf, the facility is almost exactly the same size as the Pinnacle Plaza. It is of straight forward design and a former location for Home Depot. The facility has been re-purposed for multi-tenant occupancy. Its tenant mix is value retail, with major tenants including a Dollar Tree store, Once Upon a Child, and Gabriel Bros., a regional chain of discount clothing stores located in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Georgia, and South Carolina. Once again, it appears fair to conjecture that this tenant mix is driven by space cost. In both cases, the facilities are proximate to the I-275 interchange at Nine Mile Road, providing businesses with an ability to continue to offer their customers relatively quick access to goods and services. The above properties represent differing perspectives on the issue of surplus retail/service real estate, and display several variations of “stress,” depending upon who is evaluating them.

Communities that seek to maintain their commercial bases tend to view these properties as displaying either early signs of physical deterioration or an erosion of the tenant mix. One decreases property valuation while the other implies dissatisfaction with the quality of or incompatibility of goods and services as they relate to the community’s demographics. The opposite perspective regards properties as investments. A healthy net operating income (NOI) will satisfy most property owners who see their particular properties as pragmatic investments. If they can provide space in a tough post-recessionary market, they are maintaining their asset.

Property rights and the civic sphere are often at odds with one another. Obviously, the public perception of property characterizes them as at least quasi-public assets in that they make up the overall community fabric. Public officials have long recognized their stewardship included a significant concern for and involvement with the [continuing] redevelopment of the community’s economic sector. In past decades the concept of eminent domain expanded to include active public appropriation and acquisition of property in pursuit of maximal economic development. That role came to an effective end in 2006 with the case of Norwood, Ohio v Horney (110 Ohio St 3d 353), in which the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that eminent domain was no longer applicable to involving public acquisition of real property for private economic development projects. This decision has significantly altered the public approach to redevelopment issues. Accordingly, land assemblages involve the cultivation of local governments, developers, and property owners in extended negotiations, with a measureable increase in collaborative outreach to other related interests. This process will become increasingly complex as communities consider mixed-use development.

Taking the above into account, it is imperative that the Township form a collaborative Beechmont Avenue redevelopment entity and dispatch representatives to engage property owners in dialogue regarding the future of their respective properties. As the retail/service landscape shifts, many of these commercial retail/service centers will no longer remain attractive investments in their current configurations.

VII. Recommendations

Creating A Redevelopment Strategy

Goals vs. Objectives

For the purpose of this study, goals are community aspirations that can be achieved over an extended period of time. In an economic development context, these goals are, for the most part, ongoing. Given their long-term character, goals may be realized with the ebb and flow of economic conditions, social changes, and other cultural variables. Accordingly, such goals should be reviewed on a periodic basis to determine whether they remain achievable and beneficial to the community.

Objectives are the component actions taken toward the realization of broad goals. Often, they involve putting structural entities, activities, or programs in place. Most are achievable in one year, assuming resource capabilities are at hand and reasonable lines of access/communication exist.

Goal 1: Decrease the volume of surplus and obsolete commercial real estate in the Beechmont corridor east of Five Mile Road.

The corridor’s major impediment is its cluttered appearance and increasingly marginal real estate. The Township should focus on creating a judicious mixture of green space, multi-family residential complexes, and renovation of existing, viable retail/service properties, additional medical facilities, and mixed-use development projects.

· Objective A: The local government must make a significant, long-term capital commitment to support the re