Chardon United Methodist Church

For the past several years the Church has had an option to purchase the 22.35 acres west of our existing 28.8 acres, and has been working with Ohio Presbyterian Retirement Services (OPRS) to determine the feasibility of the development of senior housing on a portion of the option parcel and on our existing property.  OPRS is the entity which developed and operates Breckenridge senior housing facility in Willoughby.

During the past year OPRS engaged the services of a consulting engineer to perform a more detailed evaluation of the property (existing and option parcel), including identification of any zoning and engineering issues.  In late September, the OPRS engineer and I met with representatives from the City of Chardon and identified two primary issues which will need to be addressed before proceeding much further with any real development: zoning and sewers.

All of the property owned by the Church is in the City of Chardon, but it is currently zoned for low density residential purposes.  The option property is partially in the City and partially in Chardon Township, and is also zoned for low density residential purposes.  A zoning change will be required to permit development as contemplated.

Currently there are no City sewers which extend to the Church property (our current needs are met by an on-site system), but there is the possibility that there could be sewer service to our property in the next two or three years.

Representatives from the Church and OPRS met again in October, and during this meeting OPRS confirmed it’s continued interest in a housing project of approximately 150 independent and assisted living units, and also indicated that the existing but currently undeveloped portion of the Church’s property (approximately 16 acres) would suffice for it’s purposes (and that it would not require the option parcel); that the current state of the economy has negatively impacted the ability of OPRS to secure the necessary bond financing; and that any additional development would still be three or four years off in the future.

In light of the above, and the Church’s financial circumstances, the Administrative Council voted at it’s October 26, 2009 meeting to let the option to purchase the additional 22.35 acres lapse.  There is still the possibility that our Church may acquire all or a portion of the “option” parcel in the future, but our absolute contractual right to purchase it for the specified option price by  October, 2010, is what has lapsed.

On a positive note, if OPRS should determine to proceed with the unused portion of our existing property, and if we (the Church) determine to sell it to OPRS, the Church should recognize significant financial benefit.  Also, I continue to believe that it will be in the long range best interests of the Church to acquire some, if not all, of the option parcel property for whatever needs the Church may have in the future.

I would welcome questions or comments from anyone.  Bill Hofstetter