All Forum Posts by: Rene Hosman

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.

 @Rene Hosman

Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:

1. - Resolving zoning conflicts
2. - Acquiring strategically important properties
3. - Consolidating land holdings
4. - Avoiding costly legal battles
5. - 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:

1. - Consolidate public land holdings
2. - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
3. - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits

Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:

1. - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
2. - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
3. - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
4. - Improved land management efficiency

I searched for some Urban examples for reference:

1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 

Quote from @Rene Hosman:

Quote from @Chris Magistrado:

Hope this thread isn't completely dead, but I wanted to weigh in my views for investing in Italy.

I've been living here for almost 2 years now, and have been spending time trying to understand the market more. I will preface by saying that I haven't invested here, but I have spoken to other investors who are here. Additionally, I am in the South of Italy, so my perspective will be of that of someone who has studied the people here. (My profile photo is actually me on a boat going across the Adriatic Sea from Brindisi, Italy to Greece) The north and south seem to be different in their views of business, as the south are more relaxed and the north, so I've been told, are more capitalistic. This is only a guess, take it with a gain of salt. I am 'boots on the ground' in case anyone wants to use us to make calls or inquire more information. That said, here is what I've learned.

1. Employment Rate: Italy has historically had one of the lowest employment rates in Europe. In 2024, approximately 62% of Italians aged 15 and above were employed, compared to the European Union average of 71%. This figure represents the highest employment rate ever recorded in Italy, indicating a positive trend despite remaining below the EU average. https://www.statista.com/topics/12899/employment-in-italy/

2. Population Growth Rate: Italy's population has been experiencing a gradual decline. In 2025, the population is estimated at 58,518,843, marking a 0.3% decrease from 2024. This downward trend has been consistent over the past decade, with annual declines ranging from 0.15% to 0.44%. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

3. Birth Rate: The birth rate in Italy has been steadily decreasing. In 2025, it is projected at 7.016 births per 1,000 people, a slight decline from 7.026 in 2024. Over the past decade, the birth rate has dropped from 8.354 in 2015 to 7.016 in 2025, reflecting a continuous decline. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

4. Death Rate: The death rate has been gradually increasing. In 2025, it is projected at 11.119 deaths per 1,000 people, up from 11.026 in 2024. Over the past decade, the death rate has risen from 10.192 in 2014 to 11.119 in 2025. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

Italy is in a unique position, where all the youth are either leaving for college, or once they get their degree, they leave Italy to go take jobs in other EU countries. Because they're EU citizens, they can live and work anywhere in the EU. The majority of people that are still in Italy, are the older population who are mostly on pension. I'm unsure if it's the entire EU, but forsure in Italy, they receive a pension at a certain age. This, and the work ethic here are completely different than a capitalistic country like the United States. With the given of pension so long as you work, most of the working class do not aspire or create businesses here. Additionally, the cost to create a business here is not as inexpensive as the United States, in some cases it can cost thousands of dollars to setup. While that is not a big hurdle, it should at least start to give you an understanding of the mentality the Italian government have towards business owners. Corporate Income Tax are 24%, however banks and insurances companies are higher with an additional 3.5%

Mortgage in Italy
It's also important to note that there are no Mortgage companies here, everything is done with 1 of the very few banks here. They hold all the cards. When I asked for a loan, they asked if my business received money in Euros. I told them no, they said the best they can do for a mortgage was for me to pay 50% down. That being said the, interest rate was very low. 1%-2%.

Appreciation Value
Over the entire country, the appreciation value of homes only increases 1%-2%. Look above and see the population to learn why.
 

1 Euro Houses
There are certain towns in Italy where the population growth had dropped dramatically, that some towns have been completely abandon. All the youth have left, maybe the elders are still there or they are deceased and the children don't want the property. Internet capabilities are low, and no one wants to live there. The houses are sold very cheap, however to fix them up, you are usually investing about $30k-$100k to make them livable. As an American, we love our amenities. So I'm sad to say, that because of the local italian government, any reconstruction of these types of buildings, must follow the guidelines of what is allowed and not allowed. You can rent these units out, but there aren't many people who want to rent and live in it. You could set it up as an Airbnb, but that brings me to the next section.

Airbnb & STR Value
Almost all of the major cites, especially Florence, have created bans on new Airbnbin their cities. For the case of Florence, there are college students there who are having a hard time finding housing due to all the units becoming Airbnbs. The government has now started creating laws to stop the growth of Airbnb. It's also important to note that because much of the Italian citizens that are there and can vote are in the older demographic, much of the laws and policies are to keep them happy, which means less development and growth. It also keeps to a nationalistic conservative agenda, and without capitalism, it is just cuts to programs, and no investment into other areas. 

I have stayed at Airbnb's in Rome and Naples, and there are Airbnbs of course, but you really need to speak and learn the system. The one in Naples took a 4 bedroom, and divided it up to 4 Airbnb units. 

Expat network
Most of the expats I've met here in the south are retired and want to just relax. Many from non-EU countries, and because of Brexit, some brits here that don't want to leave. 

Military Housing
One opportunity I did hear about, is military housing. Apparently the US government will pay for the rent of enlisted men if the property is close to a military base. I think this actually happens all over the world, but some landlords will increase their rent to the amount that the US government is willing to spend on rent in that location. So while the rent prices on an island like Sardinia is low, the landlords will increase the prices for the military members because it comes out the US pocketbook.

Rehabs
There are no Home Depots, Walmarts, Costco's. This is on hard mode. What the local shop has, is what you get, unless you want to travel farther to see what else others have. Calling on the phone is usually useless as they'll tell you to come in. Even if you're hours away. And if you need to import something into Italy, add 20% to the cost of whatever it is you want in, due to the VAT tax. (This includes Amazon)

Equity Loan 
The last opportunity I've thought about recently, is taking the equity out of the house here in Italy, and investing it into a property in the US where appreciation is higher. Since loans here can be as low as 1% interest, and the LTV is up to 50% a property, I think you can take the equity out, get a small loan here, and put the money into an investment property in the US. The money generated could pay for both loans, and even cash flow.

Italian Buraccuracy
I thought the United States is slow and has poor processes set, but here is absolutely worse. Imagine you aren't able to make a phone call to get information and you need to physically go to where the person is to speak with them. This is how much of the businesses are here, not even talking about the Italian government. The laws shift and change frequently, and no one really seems to understand the process, and if they do, they are never incentivized to actually help you. As I stated above, maybe it is because I'm in the south, but if you attempt to speak with people, conducting due diligence, they become offended you would question anything they provide. 

Outside of Real Estate
Many of the business here in the south don't use digital marketing, ads, etc. So anyone who advertises or uses ANY marketing technique, can really advance businesses here. 

When it makes sense to invest in Real Estate in Italy
If you are looking for appreciation growth, or increased rental rates, I don't think Italy will be a good investment unless you are getting some of the best areas. I have seen appreciation in Milan as a market. Rome is probably good too, any major city will be much better than the rest of Italy. When you get to rural areas, even in Tuscany, you need to more risk-adverse as the property value might not increase, unless you have another operating business on it like a boutique hotel or vineyard, that you can blast social media influencers to get more people to come. If you don't have a content deliver network to show why people should come to your rural region, you might have a much more difficult time. If you're investing in major cities, you'll have an easier time with occupancy rates for STR for Airbnb, but will have be very cautious about the changing laws. I'd recommend either being in Italy for some time out the year, every year you have property here, or have someone physically here (like me!) who can monitor your investment closely.

I hope this provides some perspective on the situation here in Italy! I'm happy to answer any additional questions as best as I can.

 What a well thought out response! I'm curious with you and your wife, how did you decide it was worth it to put the 50% down and purchase? Because you plan to be there a long time? Was it cheaper in the long-run than renting? 

Great question Rene!
We actually determined it was NOT worth it to pay 50% down on the property. The first reasons was that it's way too much to come out of pocket. The second reason is that there's no appreciation value. Third reason, which I think many people here in the south have, (and possibly the north), is that the homes for her family are all already paid off. This means there's not really an incentive to buy another house to be able to still be established here in Italy, since it's entirely possible she will inherit it later. 

With all of these reasons, it makes more sense to invest in other locations.

Hope this thread isn't completely dead, but I wanted to weigh in my views for investing in Italy.

I've been living here for almost 2 years now, and have been spending time trying to understand the market more. I will preface by saying that I haven't invested here, but I have spoken to other investors who are here. Additionally, I am in the South of Italy, so my perspective will be of that of someone who has studied the people here. (My profile photo is actually me on a boat going across the Adriatic Sea from Brindisi, Italy to Greece) The north and south seem to be different in their views of business, as the south are more relaxed and the north, so I've been told, are more capitalistic. This is only a guess, take it with a gain of salt. I am 'boots on the ground' in case anyone wants to use us to make calls or inquire more information. That said, here is what I've learned.

1. Employment Rate: Italy has historically had one of the lowest employment rates in Europe. In 2024, approximately 62% of Italians aged 15 and above were employed, compared to the European Union average of 71%. This figure represents the highest employment rate ever recorded in Italy, indicating a positive trend despite remaining below the EU average. https://www.statista.com/topics/12899/employment-in-italy/

2. Population Growth Rate: Italy's population has been experiencing a gradual decline. In 2025, the population is estimated at 58,518,843, marking a 0.3% decrease from 2024. This downward trend has been consistent over the past decade, with annual declines ranging from 0.15% to 0.44%. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

3. Birth Rate: The birth rate in Italy has been steadily decreasing. In 2025, it is projected at 7.016 births per 1,000 people, a slight decline from 7.026 in 2024. Over the past decade, the birth rate has dropped from 8.354 in 2015 to 7.016 in 2025, reflecting a continuous decline. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

4. Death Rate: The death rate has been gradually increasing. In 2025, it is projected at 11.119 deaths per 1,000 people, up from 11.026 in 2024. Over the past decade, the death rate has risen from 10.192 in 2014 to 11.119 in 2025. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ITA/ita...

Italy is in a unique position, where all the youth are either leaving for college, or once they get their degree, they leave Italy to go take jobs in other EU countries. Because they're EU citizens, they can live and work anywhere in the EU. The majority of people that are still in Italy, are the older population who are mostly on pension. I'm unsure if it's the entire EU, but forsure in Italy, they receive a pension at a certain age. This, and the work ethic here are completely different than a capitalistic country like the United States. With the given of pension so long as you work, most of the working class do not aspire or create businesses here. Additionally, the cost to create a business here is not as inexpensive as the United States, in some cases it can cost thousands of dollars to setup. While that is not a big hurdle, it should at least start to give you an understanding of the mentality the Italian government have towards business owners. Corporate Income Tax are 24%, however banks and insurances companies are higher with an additional 3.5%

Mortgage in Italy
It's also important to note that there are no Mortgage companies here, everything is done with 1 of the very few banks here. They hold all the cards. When I asked for a loan, they asked if my business received money in Euros. I told them no, they said the best they can do for a mortgage was for me to pay 50% down. That being said the, interest rate was very low. 1%-2%.

Appreciation Value
Over the entire country, the appreciation value of homes only increases 1%-2%. Look above and see the population to learn why.
 

1 Euro Houses
There are certain towns in Italy where the population growth had dropped dramatically, that some towns have been completely abandon. All the youth have left, maybe the elders are still there or they are deceased and the children don't want the property. Internet capabilities are low, and no one wants to live there. The houses are sold very cheap, however to fix them up, you are usually investing about $30k-$100k to make them livable. As an American, we love our amenities. So I'm sad to say, that because of the local italian government, any reconstruction of these types of buildings, must follow the guidelines of what is allowed and not allowed. You can rent these units out, but there aren't many people who want to rent and live in it. You could set it up as an Airbnb, but that brings me to the next section.

Airbnb & STR Value
Almost all of the major cites, especially Florence, have created bans on new Airbnbin their cities. For the case of Florence, there are college students there who are having a hard time finding housing due to all the units becoming Airbnbs. The government has now started creating laws to stop the growth of Airbnb. It's also important to note that because much of the Italian citizens that are there and can vote are in the older demographic, much of the laws and policies are to keep them happy, which means less development and growth. It also keeps to a nationalistic conservative agenda, and without capitalism, it is just cuts to programs, and no investment into other areas. 

I have stayed at Airbnb's in Rome and Naples, and there are Airbnbs of course, but you really need to speak and learn the system. The one in Naples took a 4 bedroom, and divided it up to 4 Airbnb units. 

Expat network
Most of the expats I've met here in the south are retired and want to just relax. Many from non-EU countries, and because of Brexit, some brits here that don't want to leave. 

Military Housing
One opportunity I did hear about, is military housing. Apparently the US government will pay for the rent of enlisted men if the property is close to a military base. I think this actually happens all over the world, but some landlords will increase their rent to the amount that the US government is willing to spend on rent in that location. So while the rent prices on an island like Sardinia is low, the landlords will increase the prices for the military members because it comes out the US pocketbook.

Rehabs
There are no Home Depots, Walmarts, Costco's. This is on hard mode. What the local shop has, is what you get, unless you want to travel farther to see what else others have. Calling on the phone is usually useless as they'll tell you to come in. Even if you're hours away. And if you need to import something into Italy, add 20% to the cost of whatever it is you want in, due to the VAT tax. (This includes Amazon)

Equity Loan 
The last opportunity I've thought about recently, is taking the equity out of the house here in Italy, and investing it into a property in the US where appreciation is higher. Since loans here can be as low as 1% interest, and the LTV is up to 50% a property, I think you can take the equity out, get a small loan here, and put the money into an investment property in the US. The money generated could pay for both loans, and even cash flow.

Italian Buraccuracy
I thought the United States is slow and has poor processes set, but here is absolutely worse. Imagine you aren't able to make a phone call to get information and you need to physically go to where the person is to speak with them. This is how much of the businesses are here, not even talking about the Italian government. The laws shift and change frequently, and no one really seems to understand the process, and if they do, they are never incentivized to actually help you. As I stated above, maybe it is because I'm in the south, but if you attempt to speak with people, conducting due diligence, they become offended you would question anything they provide. 

Outside of Real Estate
Many of the business here in the south don't use digital marketing, ads, etc. So anyone who advertises or uses ANY marketing technique, can really advance businesses here. 

When it makes sense to invest in Real Estate in Italy
If you are looking for appreciation growth, or increased rental rates, I don't think Italy will be a good investment unless you are getting some of the best areas. I have seen appreciation in Milan as a market. Rome is probably good too, any major city will be much better than the rest of Italy. When you get to rural areas, even in Tuscany, you need to more risk-adverse as the property value might not increase, unless you have another operating business on it like a boutique hotel or vineyard, that you can blast social media influencers to get more people to come. If you don't have a content deliver network to show why people should come to your rural region, you might have a much more difficult time. If you're investing in major cities, you'll have an easier time with occupancy rates for STR for Airbnb, but will have be very cautious about the changing laws. I'd recommend either being in Italy for some time out the year, every year you have property here, or have someone physically here (like me!) who can monitor your investment closely.

I hope this provides some perspective on the situation here in Italy! I'm happy to answer any additional questions as best as I can.

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.

 @Rene Hosman

Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:

1. - Resolving zoning conflicts
2. - Acquiring strategically important properties
3. - Consolidating land holdings
4. - Avoiding costly legal battles
5. - 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:

1. - Consolidate public land holdings
2. - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
3. - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits

Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:

1. - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
2. - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
3. - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
4. - Improved land management efficiency

I searched for some Urban examples for reference:

1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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...  

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.

 @Rene Hosman

Generally, Reasons for Land Swaps are to:

1. - Resolving zoning conflicts
2. - Acquiring strategically important properties
3. - Consolidating land holdings
4. - Avoiding costly legal battles
5. - 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:

1. - Consolidate public land holdings
2. - Acquire important natural or recreational areas
3. - Facilitate development while ensuring community benefits

Land swaps can provide several benefits to communities:

1. - Preservation of open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas
2. - Creation of new public parks or recreational facilities
3. - Protection of wildlife habitats and corridors
4. - Improved land management efficiency

I searched for some Urban examples for reference:

1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

Quote from @Rene Hosman:

Quote from @Chris Seveney:

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! Until 2018, when it was closed due to low revenue and high maintenance costs 

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. After closing the golf course in 2018, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) in 2019 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 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.

 This happens all the time, when I worked in Boston and outside the city in some counties there would be land swaps that occurred. First and foremost you are just reading a newspaper article. There are a lot more things that occur as part of the contract that would be included including valuations for each parcel, specific tax consequences, proffers offered to the city etc. 

Typically its done for open space or use for community property (ie. fire station location or other county use) and typicaly would assist in increasing tax base. 

 Yeah that all makes sense, and I'm sure there was a ton that happened in the background here for the last 2 years since the vote to re-zone failed a second time. 

I guess my questions that still remain: 

Did the city in theory have a lot of leverage in these negotiations after the second failed attempt at rezoning by the developers? 

In light of that did the developers wind up getting a pretty decent deal out of this after they took a big risk on a property with crazy restrictive zoning and no clear path forward prior to purchase? My guess is this will remain to be seen for some time, and hindsight is always 20/20. Not much has been released about the land that this new park was traded for, but even if that information was out there, not being a developer myself I'm not sure how to quantify if the developer got a "fair" or a "good" deal

yup very common.  Usually conservation easements come with Huge tax benefits for the party putting the property into a CE.  This is also very good example of jurisdictions that have zoning and annexations that need voter approval its a great way to STOP development.  I am at this writing currently selling a 35 acre tract to a big developer who is converting the local golf course here in Oregon that was zoned Open space.. they have been successful in getting the rezone.. As its not a vote of the peeps if it was would never have happened.. Golf course is a tough business with dwindling  play .. think the rise of Top golf and pickle ball.. :)

Also if you look at federal forest ownership maps you will see that Huge areas are checker boarded with private ownership . IE one section  6X 6 miles is owned by the US the one next to it is private.. Timber companies and the feds swap these lands all the time in an effort to create large blocks of either gov land or private timber lands. So you will have 3 ownerships 1 us gov  (fed forest)  2. BLM  ( bureau  of land management) 3. Private ownership primarily large timber owners like Warehouser in the PNW  Stimson in Idaho Montana  etc etc.

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! Until 2018, when it was closed due to low revenue and high maintenance costs 

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. After closing the golf course in 2018, the parcel was sold to a developer named Westside Investment Partners (WIP) in 2019 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 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.

 This happens all the time, when I worked in Boston and outside the city in some counties there would be land swaps that occurred. First and foremost you are just reading a newspaper article. There are a lot more things that occur as part of the contract that would be included including valuations for each parcel, specific tax consequences, proffers offered to the city etc. 

Typically its done for open space or use for community property (ie. fire station location or other county use) and typicaly would assist in increasing tax base. 

Thank you for all the details of this story. It was entertaining.

This is a larger example of what has been happening all over the country.  I was involved in two small infill developments in Michigan (about 15 houses in total) so two very small parcels.  From the neighbors reaction, you would have thought we were building a garbage dump on those locations.  There were even anti-development people from outside the community that came to try to shut it down.  In our case, fortunately, they were unable to stop the rightful use of the land.  (Ironically, I'm sure a good portion of the people arguing against development are also upset with the government for not tackling the affordable housing issue.)

If I were WIP and felt I just got cheated out of my right to develop that land, I would have put a fence around it.  After the restrictive zoning passed, WIP still retained the right of ownership and they also had the right to prevent people from using their land.  (Let's put up beware of dogs signs and have a pack of dobermans patrolling the grounds.)  I'm sure that factored in to the government trying to find a way to gain ownership of the land and the only solution appeared to be a land swap.  Still, WIP lost huge in that deal.  Industrial land is not as valuable as an infill residential parcel.