The Vision for Division Street by Leah Flax

Acknowledgements We are very thankful to all the people who took time away from their busy schedules to assist us with their research, experience, and knowledge to complete this project. We would like to thank everyone at the Biloxi Housing Authority who made themselves available to answer all of our questions and whose generosity in providing our team with background information, facilitation of contacts, and overall assistance made this project possible. We would like to recognize Helen Werby of the Biloxi Housing Authority whose knowledge of the community, her patience in answering all of our questions and her generosity in driving us around East Biloxi greatly facilitated this project. In addition, we would like to thank Mary Paumen of the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) for all her support and assistance in defining this project, as well as with her patience in answering all of our questions. We would also like to acknowledge Jake Cowan and Larissa Ortiz, also from LISC, who were generous with their time and provided us with invaluable data and other helpful material. We would also like to acknowledge David Perkes and Christina Cesquiera Gaspar from the Gulf Coast Community Design Studio who gave us community background information and data which helped launch this project. Another individual we would like to thank is Gordon Brigham who was always responsive and very supportive. We would like to express our deep gratitude to Nhadine Leung, our capstone advisor, who was able to guide us with her patience, knowledge and experience throughout this project. Finally, we would also like to acknowledge our families and partners, who supported us through a couple of trips away, late night meetings and many conference calls to complete a project we felt was important and would provide useful solutions for the people of East Biloxi. -Leah Daisy Flax, Samelys López and Inés Saldaña

Introduction The Biloxi Housing Authority (BHA) has followed its mission to actively improve the quality of life in Biloxi, Mississippi by providing safe and affordable housing to its residents. These efforts became even more vital after Hurricane Katrina hit in August 2005. Since then their work has been renewed and refocused in part because of collaboration with Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest community development support organization. The BHA and LISC (the Client) have also recognized the importance of developing a thriving commercial corridor to compliment ongoing residential development. Together, they engaged our team of three Robert F. Wagner School of Public Service students (the Team) to assess the viability of creating such a corridor in East Biloxi.

East Biloxi, December 2007

Our team undertook this project with the understanding this project would not only benefit the residents of East Biloxi, but would greatly benefit the City overall. The creation of a neighborhood commercial corridor would provide residents with an ample choice of goods and services, as well as generate additional revenue for the City and consequently help with further development and reconstruction of East Biloxi. In addition, the development of a thriving and viable commercial corridor at a short distance from the casinos would also create an opportunity for visitors to acquaint themselves with the history and culture of East Biloxi. Additionally, the project sought to build upon the recommendations previously set forth by community based reconstruction plans for East Biloxi. The East Biloxi Community Plan prepared by Warnke Community Consulting, the Reviving the Renaissance Steering Committeeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Reviving the Renaissance report, and the Moving Forward report prepared by Living Cities and Goody Clancy, were specifically used as stepping stones to guide our recommendations.

Furthermore, the recommendations proposed by these three plans had many similarities to each other. In specific there are three recommendations proposed in all three plans, as well as further elaborated in the ‘Recommendations’ section of this report, which are applicable to Division Street:

• Promote Development of Small Businesses • Define and Encourage Historic Districts • Encourage Mixed-Use Development The Team undertook three phases of analysis to assess the development potential of Division Street as a commercial corridor in the context of Biloxi’s overall redevelopment. The first phase of the assessment consisted of a site visit to evaluate Division Street and get a sense of the community’s needs. It was during this first site visit the Team was able to speak to many stakeholders such as community organizations, public officials, business owners, and residents to get their views regarding the development potential of Division Street. The second phase of the project consisted of analysis and research of similar cities across the United States that have revitalized their community through commercial development. The third phase of our project consisted of a second site visit to assess each parcel on Division Street and determine its development potential. These three phases led to the Team’s vision and recommendations on how to best convert Division Street into a lively and successful commercial corridor.

Executive Summary Throughout history, East Biloxi has built itself time and again as a dynamic and important coastal city. Residents and visitors alike have been celebrating its unique cultural history and exciting attractions since the 1800s. The devastating blow which Hurricane Katrina dealt East Biloxi in August 2005 has challenged the city to again rebuild and recapture the essence of what makes Biloxi such a special place. The Biloxi Housing Authority is committed to providing decent, safe, sanitary and affordable housing as the foundation for Biloxi’s recovery. In an effort to compliment the BHA’s goals this report focuses on developing a vision and tools to be used in creating a thriving commercial corridor that will serve and benefit East Biloxi. Designed as an action plan, this report includes information and research as a stepping stone for future development as well a set of recommendations that will facilitate the creation of a vibrant commercial corridor on Division Street. In the first section, Reinventing Division Street, this report sets out a vision for the development of Division Street and then outlines an implementation strategy that will achieve this vision and build upon previous and existing efforts to revitalize East Biloxi. In the second section, Knowing Division Street, detailed information about the existing conditions in East Biloxi and important regulatory constraints that affect real estate development are explored to provide background for the vision and support for the recommendations. In the last section, Envisioning Division Street, community input and the use of different commercial revitalization methods in comparable cities are summarized to support and advance the vision and implementation strategy for Division Street. The Vision for Division Street is to develop a thriving and lively commercial corridor to serve the community’s needs while helping to develop the whole of East Biloxi. To achieve this vision a set of eight specific recommendations have been developed. They include: 1. Develop a Vision Build upon ‘The Vision for Division Street’ set forth in this report to create a vision that will include and galvanize all those who have a stake in Division Street’s future. 2. Cultivate Public-Private Partnerships Reinforce the continued formation of public and private partnerships between corporations, community development organizations, private developers and the public sector to facilitate further development of East Biloxi. 4

3. Improve Streetscape Increase lighting, repair sidewalks, and institute unified signage to facilitate the creation of a lively commercial corridor. 4. Ensure Safety Increase police presence and create organized community neighborhood watches to help allay residents’ fears and promote pedestrian use of Division Street. 5. Encourage Mixed Use Development Increase vehicular and pedestrian traffic throughout the day, and create opportunities for small businesses by encouraging mixed-use development. 6. Foster Comparative Advantage/Niche Distinguish Division Street from other commercial corridors by capitalizing on its locality, history, and diversity in an effort to build a competitive edge. 7. Attract Diverse Retail Build retailer interest by providing local government support for their investment in East Biloxi thereby attracting amenities and services needed and desired by residents. 8. Preserve and Promote History and Cultural Diversity Seek ways of promoting community tourism to showcase the community’s special attributes and further economic development of local businesses. Landmark Dr. Gilbert Mason’s Division Street home as an important first step toward preserving the community’s rich history and cultural diversity within the development and revitalization effort.

These eight recommendations answer the question of ‘How can the revitalization of Division Street be achieved?’ But before the Team could undertake answering this question we first had to ask: ‘What is Division Street now?’ and ‘What could it be in the future?’ The Team gathered demographic information, surveyed existing land uses and street conditions, analyzed existing zoning, and researched major development factors such as community assets and flood zone regulations. The two site visits the Team conducted were especially helpful in gaining 5

familiarity with Division Street. This information led the Team to an understanding of Division Street’s revitalization potential, and is documented in the chapter Knowing Division Street. Information about physical and community characteristics provided the Team with a basis for considering Division Street’s potential. The Team used input gathered from a wide range of stakeholders and the examples set by other cities to develop a vision for the corridor. Envisioning Division Street captures the local input that defined how changes on Division Street could benefit the community, and includes a case study analysis which identifies specific tools and strategies for the street’s development as a commercial corridor. Division Street has great potential to be an important part of East Biloxi’s revitalization, and by knowing and envisioning the street, its full potential can be better understood. In sum, this report presents both a vision that includes decisive steps towards the creation of a commercial corridor, as well as information that facilitates further dialogue about Division Street’s future.

Reinventing Division Street

1.1 The Vision for Division Street ‘A place where you can live, work and play.’ East Biloxi is a community that stands out for its quaint charm, cultural diversity, stunning waterfront views and the warmth of its residents. These ingredients have helped make this community a destination point that draws visitors from around the country every year. Right now, many of these tourists come to Biloxi to enjoy the fine dining establishments and gaming opportunities along the waterfront, but very rarely venture outside of the casinos into the center of the community that is Division Street. Located in East Biloxi, Division Street runs from Keesler Air Force Base to the tip of ‘the Point;’ as the eastern end of Biloxi is commonly referred to. It is a main and busy thoroughfare with various interstate connections. Though Division Street is zoned for commercial and residential use, currently the street is dominated by vacancies and single family residential use. Division Street has great potential for development due to its central location in East Biloxi, and the availability of land outside of the 800 ft reach of onshore casino development. Generally, those with a stake in Division Street’s future agree that it is in need of commercial goods and service providers, but ideas about the street’s future vary widely throughout the community. Currently, residents and those who work in East Biloxi must drive out of East Biloxi for most goods and services including everyday needs such as food, leaving those without transportation with very limited options. Commercial development in East Biloxi is faced with a number of challenges; among the most pressing for potential business owners is the high cost of insurance, lack of existing commercial base, and public perception of Division Street. In the future, Division Street will be a vibrant and inviting place that caters to the needs of local Biloxi residents, tourists, and business entrepreneurs who recognize Division Street’s potential. Division Street will play a vital role in helping the City of Biloxi become a national symbol of prosperity that is inclusive and reflective of its cultural and economic diversity.

Informed by a shared vision that incorporates the values, needs and aspirations of residents, businesses, government agencies and community organizations, Division Street will not just be a thoroughfare, but the center of East Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s thriving community. It will be a lively and safe neighborhood commercial corridor in which residents and visitors can stroll along tree lined streets or take a short drive to purchase their groceries and other daily needs; a center where the community can enjoy a family dinner or brunch after Sunday services. This vision of Division Street has been born from the desires of the residents who cannot get basic goods and services locally, from public officials who recognize their community is being underserved, and from organizations who see the corridorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s potential to improve the lives of residents. Division Street is a street with many challenges, but it also a street with great potential.

1.2 Steps Towards Revitalization Our preliminary site visits, discussions with various stakeholders and research have helped our Team formulate eight recommendations that will strengthen Division Street and its potential to become a viable and thriving commercial corridor. Currently, there are a number of positive trends underway along Division Street that support this assertion. The casino industry has grown exponentially, both in the number of visitors attracted and the creation of jobs available to the community.. The development of single family homes, condos, affordable housing, and public infrastructure improvements have also contributed to Biloxi’s job growth. With the increase in employment and housing opportunities Biloxi’s population is rising towards pre-Katrina levels.1 These positive growth trends will attract much needed commercial investment that will complement the BHA’s existing housing development efforts. In order for Division Street to reach its potential, our Team has identified eight core recommendations: 1.

Develop a Vision

Cultivate Public-Private Partnerships

Improve Streetscape

Ensure Safety

Encourage Mixed Use Development

Foster Comparative Advantage/Niche

Attract Diverse Retail

Preserve and Promote History and Cultural Diversity

These recommendations are meant to build upon one another and are listed in a sequential order that will maximize their efficacy. Their implementation requires the coordinated action of multiple city agencies, community based organizations, small businesses and other private actors.

City of Biloxi, “General Market Analysis, Demographics,” February 2008.

1 Develop a Vision This report proposes ‘The Vision for Division Street’ as East Biloxi’s future commercial corridor. This vision is designed to guide the implementation of recommendations set forth in this report. The outreach and research the Team conducted informed this vision, but the vision did not develop out of an inclusive community process. Because Division Street’s revitalization can not occur without community support, it is necessary for the vision for Division Street to include and galvanize all those who have a stake in Division Street’s future. This support will then enable Division Street’s vision to be championed and implemented regardless of the obstacles confronted and the length of time it might take to accomplish. In order to implement a complete and successful revitalization, a clear and concise vision will be necessary to guide the planning process. As discussed in the ‘Case Study Analysis’ within Envisioning Division Street, most successful revitalization efforts required the cohesive partnership of different stakeholders united by a shared vision. Stakeholder support must be strong enough to withstand the full lifecycle of a project. For example in Baltimore, Maryland, cited within the ‘Case Study Analysis,’ the revitalization effort has been an ongoing project spanning several decades and outlasting the tenure of various public officials. The vision must have ardent champions and supporters who can rally behind the vision staying the course throughout the years, even if the project may take longer then expected or planned to accomplish. 2. Cultivate Public-Private Partnerships In many cities across the United States where a redevelopment project has been completed, its success has mainly been attributed to the cohesive working relationship between the private and public sector. As discussed in the ‘Case Study Analysis,’ cities such as Cleveland, Dallas and Baltimore were able to successfully revitalize their downtown by forming strong and cohesive partnerships between the private and public sector. Partnerships worked in these cities because they pursued mutually beneficial goals; the public sector benefited from the revitalization of their downtown and the private sector by the potential of new investment opportunities. The success of neighborhood and retail development on Division Street will rely on the strength of partnerships between the community, developers, lenders, retailers, community based organizations, religious institutions, local elected officials, small businesses and the casino industry. These different private and public entities can provide various forms of assistance and guidance to implement the vision for Division Street’s revitalization. The private sector has the ability to garner and bring forth expertise in 11

real estate development, as well as the financing needed to redevelop Division Street, while the public sector can guide the partnership through the regulatory process of completing a development project within East Biloxi and galvanize stakeholders to support development projects. Furthermore, we recommend that in order to coordinate the work of these different stakeholders and implement a lasting and successful commercial corridor on Division Street, it will be necessary to create an independent entity responsible for the day-to-day operations and management of the corridor. Mall management techniques could be employed to implement an overall design aesthetic to the corridor as well as oversee and monitor leasing trends, inventory parcels on the corridor, maintain streetscape, facilitate and provide information about tax incentives and credits to business owners, as well as seek proposals for other commercial corridor needs. By establishing an entity responsible for the management of the corridor the community will be in a better position to communicate their need for services and amenities along the corridor.

Oak Street Mural on Le Bakery

3 Improve Streetscape Streetscape improvements must be taken into consideration if a vibrant, successful commercial corridor is to take shape along Division Street. Providing adequate street lighting is very important because it will address the public safety concerns stakeholders and members of the community expressed during our Teamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s preliminary site visit. Better lighting and unified signage would encourage and increase pedestrian traffic on Division Street, which would help businesses attract customers. Unified signage is central to successful commercial corridors because it serves as a visual marker that allows residents and visitors to know when they are in a commercial district. The signage will help businesses attract new customers and maintain a solid client base. Community signage, including both banners and murals such as those seen on Oak Street situated at the eastern end of Division Street would greatly improve the atmosphere and help define Division Street as a unified corridor. While the roads are in good Caillavet Street Corridor Banners condition, sidewalk repairs are necessary on the eastern end of Division Street. Regular street cleaning and ticketing for blocking pedestrian use of sidewalks would also improve the walkability of the corridor. The beneficial impact of improved streetscapes as described by the Urban Land Institute in â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Ten Principles for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retailâ&#x20AC;? is further documented in Envisioning Division Street. 12

4 Ensure Safety Public safety and community development should also be at the forefront of Division Street’s revitalization strategy. National LISC has a program called the Community Safety Initiative (CSI) to establish better relationships between residents, housing development corporations and law enforcement. The goal of the program is to enhance the efforts of communities and development corporations to promote housing development and commercial corridor revitalization activities that will improve resident quality of life. The program exposes police officers to effective community strategies that have transformed once unsafe, blighted neighborhoods to places where residents can live and where businesses can thrive. One of National LISC’s Community Development Partners, Twelfth Street Heritage Development Corporation, implemented the CSI program in Prospect Park, one of Kansas City’s most notorious drug hot spots that lacked housing opportunities and was ridden with prostitution. Understandably, these illicit activities prevented this community from reaching its full potential and utilizing its public spaces. Under the CSI program residents, the police, and the aforementioned organizations worked together to clean the park and the nearby business strip by initiating a Walkers on Watch program, increasing bike patrol, and engaging neighborhood residents through a door-to-door campaign.2 The end result created a safe area where families and youth could spend quality time with each other. This would be a good program for the BHA to implement in collaboration with LISC because it would strengthen partnerships between the local precinct, the Housing Authority and the community. This program would address the need for more proactive public safety measures that residents along Division Street and stakeholders throughout Biloxi expressed a desire for. 5 Encourage Mixed Use Development It is recommended the BHA propose the rezoning of Division Street as a mixed-use corridor to the Biloxi Community Development Department. Mixed-use zoning allows for residential and commercial uses within a single building. The mix of uses creates activity throughout the day thereby increasing the flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Developing mixed use along Division Street will also allow residential structures to comply with flood elevations by locating them above storefront commercial businesses, which would be especially beneficial to small business owners residing above their businesses.

Local Initiatives Support Corporation., “Community Safety Initiative: Project Profiles, Kansas City, MI, 2008,” <http://www.lisc.org/section/areas/sec1/safety/profile/>

Currently, Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Community Development Department grants variances on a case by case basis to property owners who wish to change the zoning to address economic and physical hardships. Before the BHA purchases land parcels, they should start a dialogue with Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Community Development Department to institute a Corridor Redevelopment District (CRD) similar to the one established on Caillavet Street. This would make the viability of a unified commercial corridor more feasible and allow for greater flexibility under the proposed Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) regulations. As A Pattern Book for Gulf Coast Neighborhoods shows, this type of development is prevalent throughout other Gulf Coast cities and can make for a very attractive corridor. Institutions and parks should also be considered compatible uses within a mixed use commercial corridor. Institutions that have more of an office function are generally well aligned with the aims of such a corridor. Parks, like mixed-use development, can add to the vitality and traffic flow of the corridor. Churches similarly contribute to activity along the corridor, especially during the weekend. However, some restrictions do apply to the type of commercial development that can take place adjacent to churches and parks.

Examples of mixed use development from A Pattern Book for Gulf Coast Neighborhoods

6 Foster Comparative Advantage/Niche The provision of diverse goods and services will draw local residents to Division Street, but to expand the customer pool, Division Street must differentiate itself from surrounding commercial areas. Division Street has various comparative advantages that ideally suit it for a commercial and cultural resurgence. These advantages include the following:

•

It is the only East/West corridor on the Point

•

Central location and good highway connectivity make it conveniently accessible from anywhere on the Point

•

Proximity to casino tourists and Keesler Airforce Base broaden customer base

•

Long standing history of the seafood industry, and continued presence of seafood markets and restaurants

•

Culturally diverse Vietnamese and black population

•

Heritage of a thriving black neighborhood

This list of advantages has been created through research into East Biloxi and the surrounding commercial areas. An example of a community that fostered a comparative advantage to help revitalize its downtown is Providence, Rhode Island where the city uncovered and restructured itself around rivers that had previously run below the city streets. Further detail of how natural resources proved to be an advantage that helped revitalize Providence is described within the ‘Case Study Analysis.’ A full market analysis would provide quantitative information to concretely identify the best comparative advantages to pursue along Division Street. Stakeholders working towards Division Street’s revitalization can nevertheless use the advantages listed above as a launch pad for fostering Division Street’s niche.

7 Attract Diverse Retail Stakeholders expressed a desire for a diverse retail mix including entertainment, shopping, and dining. To best assess what type of retailers would be successful on Division Street, a market feasibility study needs to be conducted. Such a study would help guide development, as well as convince businesses of Division Street’s investment potential. Therefore, a feasibility study for East Biloxi, specifically along Division Street, is recommended as an important step towards fostering a positive climate that will draw businesses to the community. Nonetheless, knowledge of Division Street provides guidelines for achieving a successful retail mix along the corridor. The western half of Division Street is the perfect place to begin targeting diverse commercial development because of the following assets: •

Higher elevations

•

Greatest concentration of existing commercial activity

•

I-110 exit directly on Division Street

•

Links to Caillavet Street as a mixed use and North/South corridor

•

Zoning will accommodate commercial uses on most parcels

A grocery store would be an ideal anchor for the corridor given the strong desire of the community, and dearth of full-service grocery stores in East Biloxi. The vacant parcel on the northeast corner of Caillavet and Division Street, or the rumored to soon be for-sale Food Tiger, would also be a good site for a grocery establishment because of the size of land needed for the development of such a store. It is also recommended that boutique shops showcasing Biloxi's cultural and comparative advantages be developed along Division Street. The BHA should follow a model of cultural and economic empowerment, much like the one used by The Point CDC, discussed at further length in the ‘Case Study Analysis’ of this report. In addition, as discussed above in the ‘Private Public Partnerships’ Recommendation of this report, an entity with primary responsibility for management of Division Street is highly advised. This entity would be responsible for the monitoring of economic development trends as well as ensuring a healthy retail mix along Division Street. Furthermore, said entity could promote diverse retail by spearheading the creation of a Business Improvement District (BID) for Division Street. The formation of a BID would provide an additional funding source for streetscape improvements 16

and public safety efforts that would help attract a diverse retail mix. Division Street retail businesses can also tap into various business assistance programs outlined in further detail in Knowing Division Street. 8 Preserve and Promote History and Cultural Diversity Division Street is rich in history and culture which can help shape its future. Preserving Division Street's heritage and promoting them as assets will contribute to its revitalization. A community tourism strategy will entice tourists to venture beyond the casinos into the heart of Biloxi and along Division Street. Tourists can provide a great boost to Division Street's customer base without compromising the corridor's primary utility as a commercial center for the community of East Biloxi. The Client should partner with community based organizations to bring focus to Division Street's cultural diversity. For example, The Point Community Development Corporation and Business Enterprises for Sustainable Travel (BEST) worked together to promote the renaissance of the South Bronx in New York City by organizing walking tours of the community and showcasing local artist talent. As illustrated within the ‘Case Study Analysis,’ this strategy can be successful in preserving Biloxi's rich cultural heritage on Division Street while bringing economic development benefits to the community. Dr. Gilbert R. Mason’s House 670 Division Street

The managing entity previously discussed could also play a role as a liaison between the community and East Biloxi's major cultural institutions. Such a partnership could help East Biloxi's local residents re-discover their neighborhood while displaying the community's cultural assets to visitors, an effort that will undoubtedly bring Division Street's history to life. This approach is in keeping with the City's overall goal of becoming a first class tourist destination for the Gulf Coast region and beyond. As a first step towards promoting the culture of Division Street, existing historic assets should be preserved. The BHA should apply to the Community Development Department to landmark Dr. Gilbert R. Mason Sr.’s home at 670 Division Street. “The Civil Rights Doctor” as he was affectionately known, was a prominent doctor who played a vital role in the civil rights movement in Mississippi by fighting for the racial integration of Biloxi’s beaches and schools. His efforts resulted in the filing of the first successful anti-discrimination suit in Biloxi and in the U.S.3 He worked alongside many notable civil rights activists and served as VicePresident of the Mississippi NAACP for 33 years.4 Based on its historic, civic and cultural importance, his home should be preserved through landmark designation.

Local Initiatives Support Corporation, “Community Safety Initiative: Project Profiles, Kansas City, MI, 2008,” <http://www.lisc.org/section/areas/sec1/safety/profile/> 4 Ibid.

Knowing Division Street

2.1 Demographics The demographic section of this report covers population, household characteristics, and racial composition trends in Biloxi pre and post-Katrina. This information is included in the report because it provides an important snapshot of the existing community and its potential for commercial development. Businesses will be particularly interested in population and household trends as they directly correlate to investment potential. East Biloxi’s population three years after Katrina is still lower than numbers before the storm. Different entities have taken it upon themselves to research East Biloxi’s demographic trends. Though the Census is still two years away, we were able to compare demographic information from Warnke Consulting’s East Biloxi Community Plan published in June 2006, and the General Market Analysis published in February 2008 by the City of Biloxi. Population Prior to Katrina the population of Biloxi had exhibited a significant increase. This was as a result of continued construction within Biloxi and an increase in military base population.5 Before Katrina the population was 50,644 persons according to the Census; the Biloxi General Market Analysis estimated that population fell post-Katrina to 44,342 in 2006.6 Since Katrina, Biloxi’s population has slowly been growing. A positive indicator of East Biloxi’s projected population growth is the steady increase of construction permit applications being submitted to the Biloxi Community Development Department. Household Characteristics According to the General Market Analysis there are 20,094 households in Biloxi. The median age is 34.6 years of age and the median income is $38,665.7 In analyzing the effects of hurricane Katrina The East Biloxi Community Plan found the greatest proportion of survey respondents had annual family incomes below $34,999 both before and after Hurricane Katrina. Before Hurricane Katrina 31% percent of respondents had annual family incomes below $14,999, compared to 41% after the hurricane. In addition, 30% of respondents had annual family incomes ranging from $15,000 to $34,999 before the hurricane, compared to 23% after the hurricane.8

Joseph A. Lusteck & Associates, Inc., Market Research Institute, Southern Consultants, Inc. and Weatherford/McDade, Ltd. Vision 2020 The Biloxi Comprehensive Plan, June 18, 1996. 6 City of Biloxi, “General Market Analysis, Demographics,” February 2008. 7 Ibid. 8 Warnke Community Consulting, “East Biloxi Community Plan,” June 2006.

Racial Composition According to the 2000 census the racial composition of the overall population of Biloxi was 71.4% white, 19% black, and 3.4 % Asian. East Biloxi has historically been more diverse then the City as a whole. The racial composition of East Biloxi according the 2000 census was, 35% black, 50% white, 13% Asian, and 3% Hispanic. In 2006, Warnke Community Consulting undertook a comprehensive post-Katrina community survey. Based on the 511 surveys completed, the post-Katrina racial composition of East Biloxi is 38% black, 37% white, 13% Asian, 9% Hispanic, and 3% other. These percentages signify the racial composition of East Biloxi has not differed significantly since Katrina, and East Biloxi still has a racially diverse population in comparison to the City overall.

2.2 Assets History & Diversity Division Street’s history as a black neighborhood and existing diversity are assets highly valued by the community. According to Polk’s Coast Cities Directory of 1927, Division Street, in the ‘Central District’ of East Biloxi, has long been home to a large black population, a highly concentrated and isolated population of black homeowners who lived on Division Street, east of Lameuse Street. As a copy of the directory on the next page shows, ‘(c)’ was used to indicate ‘colored’ residents.9 In 1976, The Buildings of Biloxi: An Architectural Survey, definitively stated “the Central District of Biloxi is, and has been for many years, the black section of town.”10 The evaluation of the neighborhood emphasizes the presence of long standing black families and black owned business within the Central District of Biloxi; this description states: “Most of the families moved into this area around the turn of the century. They bought their own homes, which for the most part have been passed down through the families. These people primarily worked in the seafood industry, in the hotels on the beach, and as domestic servants. The commercial enterprises were, at first, owned by whites, but most of them were acquired by blacks…often these businesses were located next to the owners’ homes.”11 A 2000 edition of The Buildings of Biloxi further reinforces the long standing presence of diversity on Division Street when it states “a rich economic and cultural blend currently exists in Central [District], encompassing various groups.” This edition also depicts architecturally significant buildings which once contributed to Division Street’s character. The Mother of Sorrows School (1941) and Church (1914) still remain on Division Street as important landmarks. More recently the Vietnamese community has had a strong hand in shaping Division Street’s history. Since the 1970s the Vietnamese population has been growing in the Gulf Coast region. After Hurricane Katrina Vietnamese community members have had a particularly positive influence on East Biloxi’s development and economy. Currently, the Vietnamese population represents a vibrant part of the East Biloxi’s community and an influential part of its future redevelopment.

Polk’s Coast Cities Directory, Richmond: R.L Polk & Co., 1927. The Buildings of Biloxi: An Architectural Survey, Biloxi: The City of Biloxi, 2000, 109. 11 Julia Cook Guice, The Buildings of Biloxi: An Architectural Survey, Biloxi: The City of Biloxi, 1976, 103. 10

Major Industries and Employers Gaming, casinos, and tourism are Biloxi’s most lucrative industries. The casinos attract tourists and visitors from all around the Gulf Coast region and beyond. In 2003 alone, these industries contributed over $870 million to the local economy as the single largest source of revenue for the City of Biloxi.12 The state of Mississippi collects eleven percent of the casinos’ annual gross gaming revenue through taxes; eight percent of which stays with the State, while three percent goes to the City of Biloxi. Biloxi distributes this three percent to its city agencies, police department, public school system and the city’s general fund.13 The government sector employs by far the largest number of workers in Biloxi. Keesler Air Force Military Base employs 15,674 people representing a quarter of Biloxi’s total workforce and the majority of government sector employees.14 In 2002, Keesler generated $1.4 billion dollars for the Mississippi Gulf Coast region. Keesler also pays $179 million per year to military retirees, which contributes to the City’s economic prosperity. In addition, Keesler has many local construction projects and contracts in Biloxi that total over $160 million dollars.15 The average wage for Biloxi manufacturing employees was $12.88 an hour in 2003.16 The Harrison County Development Commission provides a convenient reference guide of the major industries. A copy of this guide can be found in Appendix 6 of the report. The seafood industry is another major economic contributor to the Gulf Coast and Biloxi. Eleven out of the 38 seafood processing plants for shrimp, oysters, menhaden and crabs distributed throughout the Gulf Coast region are located within Biloxi. These industries contribute an additional $450 million to the regional economy.17

City-Data.com, “Biloxi Economy: Major Industries and Commercial Activity,” 2008, <http://www.city-data.com/uscities/The-South/Biloxi-Economy.html> 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid.

Government Programs There are several local, state and federal programs that provide attractive incentives for industries to conduct their business within Biloxi. An inventory of some these programs is listed as follows: 1. Local - The Biloxi Department of Economic & Community Development provides a â&#x20AC;&#x153;renovated building tax exemptionâ&#x20AC;? to businesses that restore existing structures in Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s central business district. Tax abatements and Foreign Trade Zones are also offered to businesses that wish to relocate to Biloxi.18 2. State - There are numerous state programs that can assist commercial revitalization efforts on Division Street. They range from financing to counseling and are provided to a range of businesses. Biloxi also offers income tax credits and sales tax exemptions on construction products used to build facilities the businesses will be housed in.19 State run programs include: The Mississippi Development Authority (MDA) Industrial Development Revenue Bond Program, Business Investment Act Program, Energy Investment Program, Guaranty Loan Program, Minority Business Enterprise Loan, Minority Surety Bond Guaranty Program, Small Business Assistance Program, and Small Enterprise Development Finance Program. 3. Business and Workforce Development - The MDA also offers training opportunities for businesses who want to expand their industries throughout Biloxi. These trainings offer assistance on how to apply for the aforementioned state, local programs and various economic development services through the Workforce Investment Network. Located in Biloxi, the Mississippi Contract Procurement Center and The Gulf Coast Business Services Training Program informs potential employers about training, marketing assistance and technical support opportunities to advance their businesses.20

Ibid. Ibid. 20 Ibid. 19

4. New Market Tax Credits Program - The U.S. Department of the Treasury has designated the New Market Tax Credits Program (NMTC) to revitalize low-income communities throughout the United States. NMTC “provides tax incentives to induce private sector, market-driven investment in businesses and real estate developments located in economically distressed communities across the nation.”21 NMTC credits are awarded to qualifying economic and real estate development projects through a competitive application process. The goal of the program is to raise private funding for capital and infrastructure investments in low-income communities. Taxpayers are awarded tax credits for equity investments they make in these neighborhoods. Recreation Biloxi has a number of recreational and community centers which include the Biloxi Community Center, The Biloxi Sports Complex, the Biloxi Town Green, the Donald M. Snyder Community Center, and various parks. There are two parks located on Division Street: the John Joseph O’Reilly Park and John Henry Beck Park.22 The town green and community center are also located within East Biloxi. In addition the Salvation Army is planning to develop a community recreational facility, the Kroc Center, behind their building on Division Street. The construction of the Kroc Center will facilitate and provide a diverse range of recreational activities for the residents of East Biloxi. The garden at John Henry Beck Park

Accessibility The Coast Transit Authority provides two public transportation bus routes that travel through East Biloxi. The Biloxi/Route 31 Red Line runs the length of Division Street going west, however, service is limited running only Monday through Saturday on an hourly schedule from 5am until 7pm only. For those with access to automobiles East Biloxi is a highly accessible location. East Biloxi has direct access to I-110 which leads into D’Iberville and connects to I-10, a main east-west national interstate. East Biloxi also has access to route 90, which runs along the beach and connects with Oceans Springs and Gulfport.

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, “New Market Tax Credit Program,” < http://www.cdfifund.gov/what_we_do/programs_id.asp?programID=5> 22 City of Biloxi, “Parks,” <http://www.biloxi.ms.us/pr/Parks/Index.asp> (7 March 2008).

Community Based Infrastructure The City of Biloxi has an extensive network of institutions, and community and recreational facilities. They include schools, community based organizations, libraries, daycare centers, parks, senior citizen centers and churches. This infrastructure complements Biloxi's existing assets and should be highlighted as an important factor that will draw prospective residents looking to build a better life for themselves and their families. Division Street represents a microcosm of the aforementioned types of institutions located throughout Biloxi. Examples along Division Street include: Mother of Sorrows Catholic Church, Back Bay Mission, John Henry Beck Park, Family Coastal Health Center, and the Nichols Elementary School, These institutions are a reflection of Biloxi and Division Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s residents' values, needs and aspirations.

2.3 Existing Zoning

Map 1 (Biloxi Geoportal)

Division Street is the primary location of commercial zoning within the center of East Biloxi. As Map 1 depicts, zoning along Division Street is distinctive from the surrounding uses which are mainly residential (yellow). Municipal zoning along Division Street includes nine classifications:

• • • • • • • • •

B-2, Community business B-4, General business B-5, High volume business CRD, Corridor redevelopment district I-1, Light industrial RO, Residential office RS-7.5, Single-family residential, medium density RS-5, Single-family residential, high density RD, Duplex or two-family residential

Definitions for these zoning classifications can be found in Appendix 2 of this report. Map 2 on the following page, further illustrates current zoning along Division Street. While the majority of Division Street is zoned to permit for commercial uses, the type and intensity of business use varies along the corridor. In addition there are two areas on the North Side of Division Street, West of Querens Avenue, and 28

both sides of Division Street between Brown Street and Crawford Street that only permit residential use; these two areas are circled in green on the Map 2,. On these parcels a zoning variance would be required to allow for commercial use. The ‘residential office’ parcels West of I-110 are also limited in the type of commercial uses that are permissible. On the South side of the eastern end of Division Street, where the railroad tracks are closest to Division Street, there are a few parcels zoned for high volume business and light industrial uses The majority of Division Street is zoned either community or general business, which allows for a variety of commercial uses. According to Biloxi’s land ordinance ‘Community business’ includes business services and retail businesses to be used by the community, whereas ‘general business’ can include larger scale businesses that are particularly appropriate for “major thoroughfares.” East of I-110, parcels on either side of Caillavet Street are part of the corridor redevelopment district (CRD). CRD is the only type of zoning in Biloxi that allows for mixed uses. This district was newly created to encourage development of Caillavet Street as a major mixed-use commercial corridor connecting the Back Bay to the coast.

Map 2 30

2.4 Flood Zone Impact Division Street Elevations Within the Point, the highest elevations are about 24 feet above sea level, located on the Gulf Coast side of the peninsula. Towards the Back Bay and eastern tip of the Point, elevations reach as low as 6 feet above sea level. Similarly, Division Street reaches its highest elevations of 16 feet, west of I-110, and is at a low of 8 feet on the eastern side of Division Street as shown in Map 3. Overall elevation on Division Street tends to be around 12 feet above sea level.

Map 3

Proposed Flood Zones In November 2007, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Mississippi Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality released preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRMs). These maps are currently under review for appeals by the community, and are the final step before the maps are sanctioned as the official documents to guide construction in Biloxi. As Map 4 depicts, under the new DFIRMs Division Street will be almost entirely within the flood zone. The proposed DFIRMS designate Division Street as part of Flood Area A, which has a 1% annual chance of being flooded, and a base flood elevation (BFE) of 17 feet above sea level.

Map 4 (Biloxi Community Development Department) Insurance Issues Whether or not they are adopted into city ordinances, the new DFIRMs will become effective 90 days after the conclusion of the appeal period; approximately September 2008. If they are not adopted, the community will be suspended from the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and land owners will not be eligible for federally backed flood insurance. Not adopting these new regulations would also negatively affect the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s flood insurance rating, causing private flood insurance premiums to rise. 32

An additional insurance factor is the ‘freeboard.’ A freeboard is determined by the municipality and sets an elevation requirement above and beyond the Base Flood Elevations (BFE). Freeboards result in significantly lower flood insurance rates due to lower flood risks. Biloxi’s existing freeboard requires construction four feet above BFE, however, the freeboard may be changed or dropped with the adoption of the higher DFIRMs.

Flood-proofing in Commercial Flood Zones The NFIP allows non-residential structures, including mixed-use buildings with all residential uses above the BFE, to be flood-proofed up to three feet below the BFE. In other words the use of floodproofing techniques allows commercial buildings to be constructed with the finished floor height three feet below the BFE, unlike residential structures which can not be flood-proofed as a means to satisfy elevation requirements. For instance a commercial or mixed use building on a parcel fourteen feet above sea level could employ flood proofing techniques without raising the structure to accommodate NFIP regulations. FEMA defines flood proofing as “a combination of adjustments and/or additions of features to individual buildings that are designed to eliminate or reduce the potential for flood damage.”23 Floodproofing can include watertight closures for doors and windows, location of electrical equipment and circuits above flood levels, installation of pumps to control water levels, and many other methods. A building can be flood-proofed using any combination of these methods that meet the elevation or watertight flood-proofing standards of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

FEMA, “Floodproofing Non-residential Structures,” : May 1986.

2.5 Division Street Land Uses The Team conducted a survey of parcels along Division Street with a focus on identifying vacant parcels, and determining land use. Additional information was also collected to address building condition, value, and ownership. Detailed information and photos of the parcels surveyed is provided in Appendix 7. Parcel Status

Parcel Status: 213 Parcels

No Data 26%

36%

Vacant Lot Residential Commercial Institutional

Open Space

1% 1% 3%

Mixed Use 6%

Other 21%

Figure 1

The parcel survey assessed 213 lots along Division Street, and identified lots as either vacant (having no structure on them) or occupied.24 The building use for occupied parcels was recorded whether the building was vacant or occupied. From the assessment of parcel status the following conclusions were drawn: • At 36%, residential buildings make up the majority of structures on Division Street, a corridor zoned for commercial activity. • Over one quarter of parcels on Division Street are completely vacant. • Commercial structures exist on less than one quarter of Division Street parcels. It should be noted that information was not collected for 12 parcels because of data collection errors; which is reflected in Figure 1 as ‘No Data.’

Parks are an exception because they are considered occupied parcels although they have no building on them. * For 4% of parcels surveyed, it could not be determined (CNBD) whether or not the existing structure was being actively occupied.

Active Uses While vacant buildings can be redeveloped or rehabilitated in Division Street’s future, they are not currently contributing to the street’s activity. To determine what the active use of Division Street was, vacant buildings were removed from the parcel status analysis. Figure 2 reflects the breakdown of active uses along the corridor. From evaluating this information important trends were observed: • 42% of parcels are not being actively used. • Active commercial uses make up just 13% of parcels along Division Street. • Division Street’s main active use is residential housing.

Active Use Analysis: 213 Parcels 17%

26%

Vacant Lot Vacant Building Residential Commercial Institutional

5.5% 26%

4% 0% 3%

Open Space Mixed Use Bldg Occupancy CNBD*

5.5%

No Data

13% Figure 2

Vacancy A vacant parcel between Fountain Lane and Dorries Street

Combining the number of vacant parcels and vacant buildings, we found 42% of parcels on Division Street are not being actively used. Vacant buildings and parcels have a tremendous impact on Division Street, and represent both the loss of businesses and residents, as well as existing structures. Map 5 shows the mix of occupied and vacant buildings on a section of Division Street between Strangi Avenue and Laurel Court. Residential

A home at 508 Division Street

Although the majority of parcels on Division Street are not zoned specifically for residential purposes, housing stands out clearly as the primary passive and active land use on Division Street. Of the 75 houses on Division Street, 55 were occupied, 15 were vacant, and for 5 houses its status could not be determined. The residential structures surveyed were generally in good condition, with no structural or roof damage. The Team noted a number of rehabilitated 35

or newly constructed homes, however only a few homes were seen to be elevated in anticipation of new flood zones. Institutions and Parks Intuitions and parks are compatible land uses in both residential and commercial areas. The majority of institutions on Division Street are churches. In total there are seven churches of various Christian denominations. The Salvation Army, Hope Coordination Center, and Coastal Family Health Center represent other non-religious institutions on Division Street. Division Street is also home to two parks, however, only the John Henry Beck Park includes a playground. In Appendix 3, Map a.1 and the accompanying table illustrate the location of these institutions and parks and provides details about their condition. Nance Temple at 710 Division Street

Commercial Activity While the majority of Division Street is zoned for commercial use, currently commercial activity is limited. Overall only 13% of the corridor is being used by active commercial businesses. As illustrated in Map 6, commercial activity is most concentrated on either side of I-110. While the types of existing businesses do vary, the low level of commercial activity and lack of quality goods causes potential customers to shop elsewhere. The services currently being provided on Division Street in order of prevalence can be summarized as follows:

• Restaurant – Seven o Two true restaurants (Kim Long Vietnamese Cuisine and Inez Lounge & Café) o Five deli style, to-go, or grocery related restaurants

• Auto – Four o Automotive repair and other services

• Office - Four o Two casino offices for training, uniform distribution, etc. o NGO office o Law office

• Grocery – Four Quality Poultry & Seafood, 895 Division Street

o One large grocery store o One convenience store o Two seafood stores 36

• Retail – Four o o o o

Discount goods Appliances Paint Fire prevention products

• Beauty – Two o Hair o Nails

• Gas – Two (One of which also sells food and convenience items) • Health – Two (Doctors offices) • Other – Two o Funeral home o Construction materials testing

• Entertainment – One (Bar)

Just Us Bar, 906 Division Street

In addition to the 27 active commercial parcels, there are 15 vacant commercial buildings on Division Street, as well as two commercial buildings for which the occupancy could not be determined. While vacant buildings are not currently contributing to commercial business, they may have potential for occupancy. In Appendix 4, Map a.2 and Map a.3, and the accompanying table, gives details about the location, use, and condition of all parcels with commercial buildings on them.

Map 5 38

Map 6 39

2.6 Street Survey Findings The Team conducted a survey along Division Street to assess conditions for both drivers and pedestrians by rating road surface and sidewalks. The survey also addresses street signage, litter, and additional elements such as bus stops and street lights. To design the survey the team used Trained Observer Ratings, which are predefined rating scales used to measure outcomes that can be visually perceived by an observer.25 Information about each section of the street is provided for further reference in Appendix 5. Road Surface Road surface on both the North and South sides of the street were assessed for 39 sections which compose the whole of Division Street. A scale of 1-4 was used; the ratings were defined as follows: 1234-

One or more large potholes or major defects Much of the road is broken up, no major hazards Minor defects potholes, or bumps No noticeable effect on rideability

The road was found to be in good condition for almost the entirety of Division Street. The average rating for the South side of the street was a 4, and the North side was 3.85, for an overall rating of 3.92 as illustrated in Map 7. Sidewalks Sidewalk conditions on both the North and South sides of the road were assessed for 39 sections making up the whole of Division Street. A scale of 1-3 was used; the ratings were defined as follows: 1-

2Garbage cans blocking the sidewalk between Bowen and Holley Streets

One or more severe problems that could cause pedestrians to stumble Some breaks or unevenness could cause stumble Smooth surface, may have small cracks that would not cause a stumble

The sidewalks were found to be in fair to good condition for most of Division Street. The average rating for the South side of the sidewalk was 2.72, and the North side was 2.28, for an overall rating of 2.50 as illustrated in Map 7. 25

Jake Cowan et al., â&#x20AC;&#x153;Trained Observer Ratings,â&#x20AC;? Urban Institute, 2008 <http://www.urban.org/toolkit/datamethods/ratings.cfm> (10 April 2008).

The Eastern end of the Division Street had the lowest ratings, where severe problems or a lack of sidewalk were observed. It should be noted that following Trained Observer Rating guidelines, a sidewalk section with any single severe problem was given a rating of ‘1’ even if other parts of that section were in good condition. Map 8 shows the condition of a sidewalk section with a rating of ‘1’ between Keller and Bowen St. The use of sidewalks as a storage place for garbage cans was noted to be a significant pedestrian barrier, however this factor was not considered in the sidewalk condition ratings.

Map 7 42

Map 8 43

Street Signage Street signage on both the North and South sides of the road were assessed for 39 sections making up the whole of Division Street. A scale of 0-3 was used; the ratings are defined as follows: 0- Largely lacking in appropriate signs 1- Damaged, ambiguous, obscured, illegible, or graffitied signs 2- Location and/or legibility issues, but still visible and readable 3- Signs present and easily visible, heads and support in good condition The average signage rating, not including sections rated 0 for missing signage, was 2.68. Signage on the North and South sides of Division Street did not vary significantly. The blocks with a lack of appropriate signage were between Porter & Querens Avenue, Iroquis Street & Seal Avenue, and Fayard & Reynoir Street on the North side, and Querens & Benachi Avenue, and Brown Street & Fountain Lane on the South side of Division Street. Litter Litter on both the North and South sides of the road, were assessed for 39 sections composing the whole of Division Street. A scale of 1-4 was used; the ratings were defined as follows: 1- Heavy distribution, or a single accumulation greater than a garbage can 2- Most of the street littered, single accumulation greater than a grocery bag 3- Isolated litter, single accumulation less than a grocery bag 4- No more than two pieces of liter or broken class Overall Division Street exhibited only isloated areas of litter, with an average score per section of 3.38. Litter accumulation between the North and South sides of Division Street did not vary significanly.

Street Lighting The number of street lamps on each section of the street was assessed. There were a total of 79 street lamps on the 2.1 mile long corridor. While the length of each section varied, there was an average of 1.88 street lamps per 1/10 of a mile, per side of the street. The Team found there to be a lack of regular interval street lighting overall, however there were significantly more street lamps on the South side of the street than the North side. Bus Stops The Team observed four west-bound bus stops for the Coastal Transportation Authority Biloxi/Route 31 Red Line on Division Street. The bus stops were uniformly lacking in clear signage, benches, and shelters. Busses were seen providing service, however, people were not observed getting on or off the bus along Division Street. Community Signs Community signs can include ‘welcome to’ or other signs at the entrance to streets or neighborhoods, painted murals, or neighborhood watch signs. Ten community signs were observed on Division Street, the majority of which were ‘Neighborhood Watch Area’ signs. The single mural on Division Street is on the eastern side of Bankston's Paint. Vandalism No vandalism of public property was observed on Division Street. Stray Animals No stray animals were observed.

Envisioning Division Street RETAIL History

OFFICE

CULTURE Restaurants

ENTERTAINMENT

INSTITUTIONAL RESIDENTIAL Shops

MIXED USE Supermarkets

RECREATION Art 46

3.1 Community Input The Team was able to gain additional perspective on how Division Street could be revitalized during site visits to East Biloxi, as well as ongoing contact with community organizations and city agencies with an intimate knowledge of East Biloxi. The Team gathered over 40 unique perspectives of Division Street’s potential over the course of the project. Although a comprehensive community survey was not conducted, the community input that was received was extremely beneficial in determining the needs of the community. Speaking to community stakeholders helped the Team learn about East Biloxi, develop recommendations, and guide the vision set forth in this report A list of the organizations the Team spoke with is included in Appendix 8 of this report. Individual residents and business owners are not included in the list to preserve anonymity. Perceptions of Division Street are summarized below in eight sections which address the major themes raised by stakeholders:

• • • • • • • •

Residential Retail Commercial/institutional uses Restaurants Streetscape Safety Education and Community Engagement Recreation

Residential The majority of home owners on Division Street have lived in East Biloxi for many years, which has allowed them to develop an intimate knowledge of their neighbors and of street activity. Currently there are a number of homes that front on Division Street. Some stakeholders interviewed felt the existence of residential structures diminishes potential for commercial development, while others strongly favored mixed-use development that would include commercial and residential uses. The benefits cited by stakeholders of mixed use development included maintaining a vibrant streetscape by keeping the area active after business hours, as well as increasing affordability for residents and small business owners.

Retail Division Street offers only basic goods, and lacks any luxury or specialty stores. Division Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest grocery store, Food Tiger, carries all the essentials, but many community members complained about the poor quality of goods, lack of fresh produce, and expired products. The need for a full service supermarket forces the great majority of residents of East Biloxi to drive to D'Iberville to do a large portion of their grocery shopping. The Family Dollar was highlighted by many stakeholders as an important store and dependable source for basic home goods. Overall, residents expressed a desire for better grocery and convenience stores, as well as the addition of retail services such as dry cleaners, another drug store, and entertainment venues such as a movie theatre. In general, stakeholders seemed to want a mix of national retailers, as well as specialty shops such as those present in Ocean Springs. Office/Institutional Uses Some stakeholders would like to see more office space along Division Street, many citing the Community Health Center on Division Street as a welcome addition. Stakeholders also expressed a desire for a post secondary educational institution that would offer training in casino management and hospitality. Restaurants Currently, Division Street does not offer its neighborhood residents or workers many restaurant options, and those that do exist close early, leaving people coming home from work with few choices. Stakeholders identified a need and desire for restaurants on Division Street, suggestions included fast food eateries, family dining establishments with low and middle price points, and restaurants appropriate for business lunches. The lack of restaurant choices forces those who work in East Biloxi to drive into Dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Iberville for lunch or bring lunch from home. Division Street has not only been unable to retain restaurants for its residents and workers, it has failed to attract tourists staying in nearby casinos. In order to increase commercial activity and attract the local tourist population, some stakeholders suggested showcasing East Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s local Mexican and Vietnamese culture and cuisine.

Streetscape Although the sidewalk along Division Street for the most part is contiguous, there is little pedestrian activity. Some stakeholders believed the lack of pedestrian traffic was due to local preference for driving, while others felt the narrow sidewalks with power polls in the middle deter pedestrian activity. Those who saw a future for a more pedestrian friendly Division Street suggested adding landscape architecture, widening sidewalks, sweeping regularly, painting murals, providing adequate street lighting, and encouraging a street-wall of retail shops. Safety Stakeholders generally agreed Division Street is a safer place than in years past, but all acknowledged illegal drug activity is still taking place in the area. Many stakeholders referred to Division Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reputation as a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Red Zone,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; a place where Keesler personnel are restricted from entering. Although some residents and locals did not feel particularly threatened by the possibility of crime, they readily recognized its existence. Other stakeholders felt less secure on Division Street and described the street as the type of place where you lock your doors at a stoplight. Suggestions to curb crime included increases in foot patrol, and better lighting at night. Education & Community Engagement Stakeholders expressed a strong belief in economic and community development, but felt these policies will not go far if residents are not encouraged to become financially literate where real estate valuation, homeownership, and small business entrepreneurship are concerned. As the revitalization effort moves forward, several stakeholders discussed the importance of community participation, as well as making existing and future plans accessible to the community. Some stakeholders felt it was necessary to empower residents through education, in order to encourage them to take part in the re-building process and thereby foster personal responsibility and community development.

Recreation The lack of recreational options for youth is particularly distressful to the community. Currently, parents do not have places where they can send their children after school, or where their children can spend the day with their peers. Various stakeholders felt the fabric of the community would be strengthened if the City prioritized parks, recreational activities, and green open space.

3.2 Case Study Analysis To answer the question of how revitalization of Division Street can be achieved, the Team conducted research on the revitalization that has taken place in cities that were facing various comparable challenges or had similar assets. The following analysis illustrates the level of success that specific tools and strategies have achieved in other communities, and their potential for application on Division Street. The ‘Case Study Analysis’ is a reflection of the research that helped inform the Team’s final recommendations. It is included as part of the report to provide readers with further detail about the specific cities mentioned throughout the recommendations. By documenting the shape and form of commercial revitalization throughout the country, this section can also provide concrete examples for those considering how the vision presented for Division Street can be achieved. Although many of the cities the Team researched have faced similar challenges and in some cases had similar assets, they have been organized here around four main themes:

• Revitalization of aging U.S. cities o Cleveland, OH o Pittsburgh, PA o Dallas, TX o Baltimore, MD o Providence, RI o South Bronx, NY

• Predominance of casino gaming o Atlantic City, NJ o Reno, NV

â&#x20AC;˘ Use of eminent domain o Roxbury, MA o Arlington Heights, IL o Ardmore, PA

â&#x20AC;˘ Recovery from natural disasters or floods o Grand Forks, ND and East Grand Forks, MN o East Grand Forks, MN, and Fargo, ND o Valmeyer, IL o Maricopa County, AZ

Each of these four sections provides background on how the category applies to commercial revitalization on Division Street, specific recommendations for Division Street drawn from the research, and synopses/details of how commercial revitalization took place in the selected cities.

Revitalization of US Cities Background As a result of federal policies such as the government supported FHA loans which made mortgages accessible to many middle class Americans for the first time, many families left the overcrowded inner cities for larger homes within the suburbs.26 While FHA loans gave many Americans the opportunity to become homeowners and acquire assets, this opportunity was not available for all Americans; for example, blacks often did not qualify for FHA loans due to biased and racist underwriting policies.27 As a result, cities slowly began to deteriorate due to the exodus of the highest earning residents to the suburbs; the declining population decreased tax revenue at the expense of infrastructure and city services. Once thriving mixed income, diverse communities became increasingly segregated, out of which disparate communities emerged. The inner cities became increasingly low income, while the suburbs became increasingly middle- to-- high income. As more people moved to the suburbs, employers also began to move away from the inner cities in search of cheaper land, bigger spaces and greater access to qualified employees. In addition, industrial and manufacturing cities across the United States were faced with high levels of unemployment as the changing economy caused employers to leave these industrial strongholds. Many cities across the United States had to contend with the after effects of suburban growth, inner city decline, loss of major sectoral employment and a decreased revenue base. Cities such as Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Providence, which once thrived on industrial production and manufacturing began to deteriorate. As those employment centers changed within these cities, unemployment began to rise, schools suffered, infrastructure deteriorated, and crime escalated. In other cities it was not so much the loss of businesses, but the loss of residential population that created enormous fiscal problems and abandoned urban centers. Many cities across the United States were left with the task of attracting employers, residents and visitors to their cities and remaking them into the thriving communities they used to be. Some cities that up to the 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s were forgotten and blighted have in recent years undergone a renaissance. Cleveland, Pittsburgh, 26

Oliver, Melvin L. and Thomas M. Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Routledge, New York, NY 2006. Gregory D. Squires, , Capital and Communities in Black and White, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY 1994. 27

Baltimore, Providence and Dallas are among the cities that have made great changes to improve the lives of their residents as well as attract visitors and businesses. While some have used their comparative advantage in natural resources, such as waterfront access, others have used private and public partnerships to accomplish their revitalization efforts. These cities have been able to adapt using distinct methods, but in each case the end goal was the same: to restore vitality and economic prosperity and bring forth vibrant communities. By considering revitalization efforts in the context of downtowns/main streets and neighborhood retail, the tools these cities used can be further analyzed for application in East Biloxi. Key Approaches to Downtown Revitalization and Neighborhood Retail Development In order to begin a downtown revitalization effort and develop a neighborhood commercial corridor there are a series of steps that must be undertaken. According to Main Street Renewal: a Handbook and the Urban Land Institute,28 these steps include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Forge strong private-public partnerships Develop a vision for downtown Implement a market-driven business plan Capitalize on unique niches Develop and provide housing within the downtown Engage in formal marketing campaigns Emulate mall management techniques Seek methods to attract business Great Streets Need Great Champions Honor the Pedestrian Parking is Power Be Clean, Safe and Friendly

1. Forge Strong Private-Public Partnerships Forging strong private-public partnerships is crucial to the successful implementation of a development plan in order to overcomes possible financing and regulatory challenges that may impede development. Public officials provide both their experience working with the community and the power to help move projects along through the regulatory process. Private developers, corporations, community and development organizations, on the other hand, can bring their knowledge and expertise in real estate development and the market. A cohesive partnership must have a clear and concise vision for the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s downtown in order for the development and revitalization effort to be implemented. 28

Michael D. Beyard, Michael Pawlukiewicz and Alex Bond â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ten Principles for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail,â&#x20AC;? Urban Land Institute, Washington D.C. 2003.

2. Develop a vision for Downtown It is important to have a clear vision in order to fully convey development plans, be able to attract investors, and garner support from the community. A well-defined vision will galvanize and maintain support for the various entities involved in development. 3. Implement a market-driven business plan The implementation of a well thought out market driven business plan is important in order to assess what type of development would be most beneficial to the city and the community at large. A market driven plan provides the analysis necessary to determine what type of project and what type of businesses should be attracted to contribute to the revitalization efforts. 4. Capitalize on Unique Niches It is also important to be able to capitalize on the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique niches or comparative advantage. Research must be undertaken to determine what is unique about the community that could be used to attract development and spur revitalization. It is vital for the community to carve out their own niche because once development begins the community will be competing with other communities for its consumers; a unique niche will allow the community to maintain a steady flow of customers. A communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ethnic heritage and diversity may differentiate it and be considered a unique niche, in which case shops and restaurants that promote cultural heritage can be developed. 5. Emulate Mall Management techniques Another way to manage for revitalization is to establish formal mall management techniques. For example, the community may develop a downtown partnership responsible for the day-to-day operation of its downtown, similar to the responsibilities of a mallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s management company. The downtown partnership may also seek to hire a full-time downtown director responsible for ensuring the vision and plan is implemented, as well as make certain businesses located within the downtown are thriving. The director can be in a position to design and implement a leasing plan to cluster businesses together, so the agglomeration of these businesses will benefit from a shared customer base. In addition, the director may then be in a position to implement a coherent leasing plan that will best benefit the corridor. The plan should focus on the type of retailers that are to be attracted into the community in order to support the vision for the commercial corridor and spur continuous development.

Furthermore, it is important to manage for change. The community must be attuned to the market and prevailing tastes, otherwise the commercial corridor may begin to once again deteriorate. Development and revitalization are ongoing processes that continue in perpetuity as they change and evolve with the market and the community. Stakeholders must be cognizant of this ongoing change and must be willing to continue to reevaluate their plans. For example if at a certain point a retailer no longer provides the vitality needed for the community, that lease should not be renewed, but leased to a retailer that encompasses the vision or plan for the community. 6. Engage in Formal Marketing Campaigns Engagement in a formal marketing campaign is another step that can be taken to attract people to shop downtown. Such a campaign should be professional and present a unifying vision of the downtown as an attractive place to live, work and have fun. 7. Seek Ways to Attract Business Another step is to seek ways to attract and retain businesses within the community. It is important to make the prospect of opening a business within the community a viable business venture. This can be facilitated by holding focus groups to assess the needs of business owners and offering assistance and solutions based on their problems and questions. New businesses can be offered support in business plan development and other types of business counseling. 8. Develop and Provide Housing within Downtown With a method for attracting and supporting businesses in place, it is necessary to seek ways in which to draw people to the downtown. Residential units can significantly add to the flow of pedestrian flow both during the day and after business hours. Many of the most successful and thriving developments around the country have embraced mixed-use zoning, whereby commercial and residential uses can occupy the same building. Mixing commercial and residential uses allows for commercial buildings housing commercial uses not to be relegated to solely to daytime working hours, and helps maintain other neighborhood businesses that would otherwise suffer from a lack of activity at certain hours. Attracting a mix of businesses that draws customers at different hours will allow the streets to be constantly active thereby increasing its safety. This may be accomplished by leasing to professional tenants such as doctors, attorneys, and accountants as they have a continual stream of visitors and employ staff during the

day, while restaurants, theaters and cinemas may bring people into the community after working hours. 9. Great Streets Need Great Champions In order to revitalize a commercial corridor it is necessary to have a strong and ardent champion as such efforts are often long-term endeavors. The time span needed to carry out a revitalization effort may be longer then a public official’s tenure in office or a private entity’s vision or ability to finance a development. Therefore, it is necessary for someone to be an advocate and a champion, to move the development forward through whatever obstacles are confronted, and not get discouraged if the revitalization effort can not be realized or completed within a few years. 10. Honor the Pedestrian Honoring the pedestrian with streets that are attractive and safe will create active streets and consequently produce an increase in business activity. By creating attractive streetscapes that include trees, flowers, lighting, benches, visible signs and unifying commercial signage pedestrians will be enticed to walk the streets and discover new businesses and create activity. 11. Parking is Power Just as honoring the pedestrian is important, creating a community in which parking is easy for consumers and residents will greatly increase the viability of a commercial corridor. By locating sufficient parking at different locations the activity of streets will be maintained, while supporting motorist’s preferences. Street side parking, as well as parking located behind establishments is one way to attract pedestrians and provide motorists with rapid and safe parking. 12. Be Clean, Safe and Friendly It is also necessary for the streets to be clean, safe and friendly in order to successfully attract businesses, consumers and residents. Streets which are viewed as potentially unsafe will not attract pedestrians nor will they attract as many consumers as a location considered safe. A negative reputation may be rectified with the visible presence of street patrols which provide consumers and business owners with a sense of security and safety. In addition streets must be cleaned regularly, as streets filled with litter and other debris detract from the area’s appeal and may prevent people from shopping or residing nearby. Fostering a sense of friendliness is important because it may attract additional people to visit the commercial corridor; this may be achieved by planning a holiday

celebration or special event along the commercial corridor to enhance the corridorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s image as a friendly place to visit.

Division Street Recommendations In order to bring forth vitality and revitalize East Biloxi it will be necessary to follow the recommendations for downtown and neighborhood retail revitalization in developing Division Street. First, it is imperative for an overall vision to be established. The vision should be one that will benefit the community and the city overall. Second, it will be necessary to have a champion, an ardent supporter to stay the course and help assist the development effort throughout the years, even if this may take longer than expected or planned. It will also be necessary to form strong, cooperative private-public partnerships. A working relationship between private entities such as developers, corporations, community development organizations, lenders and retailers, and public entities must be present in order to achieve the overall vision. Strong partnerships will lead to greater investment and will facilitate and spur additional development. Revitalization and development are long, time consuming and expensive efforts that require coordination of many different entities in order to reach success. Furthermore, it will be necessary to undertake a market feasibility study to evaluate what type of retail will be most feasible on Division Street. Following the study there should be a proactive lease and marketing effort to attract the most beneficial retailers. There should be both neighborhood retailers and larger establishments; a mix that will complement community needs and provide constant street activity is ideal. Improvements to Division Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s streetscape should also be planned for and completed. Improvements in streetscape will serve to attract consumers and help provide pedestrian activity. The creation of a unifying streetscape with trees, lighting and commercial signage can be placed along Division Street to signal and invite drivers to stop and look around at the retail offerings. Once the retailers are in place there should be active management to ensure the revitalization process continues. There should also be an increase in visible safety enforcement such as regular street patrols. Parking provisions that maintain driversâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; convenience and accessibility should also be included.

Community tourism is a great way to empower communities to ascertain where their comparative advantages lie; exploring culture is closely linked to increased economic development opportunities for neighborhoods that have been economically neglected. In time, the casino experience will not seem complete, unless visitors make a stop along Division Street. As the following case studies demonstrate, revitalization is a process that will take many years, a process that will not remain static, but will continue to change with time and with tastes.

Cleveland, Ohio: Success through Public-Private Partnership Cleveland’s economy once thrived on industrial production and manufacturing, but as the nation’s economy moved away from manufacturing to the service sector, Cleveland experienced an economic downturn. During the 1970’s, Cleveland was considered by many a symbol of urban blight, an example of an aging blue collar town. The once thriving city became ridden with many of the urban ills affecting other cities such as: high unemployment, failing schools, racial tension, population flight, pollution and deteriorating infrastructure. Another factor that contributed to Cleveland’s eventual fiscal crisis was the strong, anti-business policies promulgated by its then mayor Dennis Kucinich. Eventually, the mayor’s strong opposition to and antagonism towards the businesses and the corporate community led to their refusal to roll over municipal notes when they became due, leading Standard & Poors to suspend the city’s credit rating.29 Eventually Kucinich was replaced by George Voinovich and thus commenced an era of revitalization and public and private partnership and cooperation between the city and the business community. Mayor Voinovich along with the private community began to plan the revitalization of the city, beginning with its downtown. In 1980, Voinovich created a 90 member task force made up of business representatives to study Cleveland’s problems and come up with possible solutions. The task force offered 650 specific recommendations to revitalize the city including creation of an economic development department within city government, as well as methods to fund much needed infrastructure projects.30 The mayor accepted and began to implement the majority of these recommendations. As a result, by the late 1980’s Cleveland was slowly beginning to come out from bankruptcy and pay back its accumulated debt. Since Voinovich’s first term in office, Cleveland through the years has been able to revitalize itself with strong commitments from public and private stakeholders. The revitalization Cleveland experienced was achieved through a combination of mixed use projects, as well as expansion and revitalization of several long standing institutions. Development projects included creation of a mixed-use district, residential housing and sports arenas. Cleveland developed many residential housing units by converting deteriorating warehouses along the river and in a neighborhood known as the Flats. The Flats, in turn, has become a diverse and dynamic entertainment district that 29 30

Robert J. Brown and Michele Laumer, “Comeback Cities,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) August 1995. Ibid.

attracts hundreds of people a week; with over 40 nightspots along the riverbanks easily accessible by water taxis.31 Cleveland has also developed a retail center, and renovated and expanded museums. In 1990, Cleveland’s former primary train terminal was converted into a three level high-end retail hub called Tower City Mall. The mall includes 120 luxury retailers, an 11 screen movie theater, a sports complex, a 42,000 seat open air stadium, and a 21,000 seat Grand Arena.32 Sports facilities have triggered additional development in the area such as restaurants, bars and nightclubs, as well as five new downtown hotels and the renovation of many others. In addition, Cleveland’s theater district received a $40 million makeover between 1989 and 1993 which restored three former vaudeville houses and theaters.33 Another entertainment district which has been developed is North Coast Harbor, a 176 acre entertainment center along Lake Erie. North Coast Harbor contains a steamship museum, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, the Great Lakes Science Center, and the Great Waters Aquarium.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Unique Niche/Comparative Advantage Pittsburgh’s economy once thrived on heavy industrial manufacturing. As the economy shifted away from manufacturing, Pittsburgh experienced a period of economic contraction and social ills. Pittsburgh, just like many of the cities in the U.S. whose main employment sector had mostly disappeared to other states and nations experienced high levels of unemployment, a decrease in population and deteriorating infrastructure. Pittsburgh is a city which has used some of the methods previously discussed towards achieving revitalization. It has been able to form strong public and private partnerships, and also found a niche for itself, in which it has been able to develop a comparative advantage. Considered in the context of other major metropolitan areas, particularly on the East and West coasts, the Pittsburgh region offers a number of advantages, including highly affordable housing, low cost of living, a stable and skilled workforce, low cost of labor, a surplus of electric power capacity, plentiful water supply, clean air, a low crime rate, high quality educational

James C. Mastandreaand Richard E. Huelsman, “Back on Track in Downtown Cleveland: A Catalog of Projects,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) April 1996. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid.

institutions and a major airport.34 Capitalizing on these advantages, Pittsburgh has over the past 20 years been able to change its image as a gray and polluted city to one that is a leader in health care, education, financial services, technology and transportation.35 Pittsburgh has also heavily promoted niche sectors through investing in new initiatives and programs in information technology and health research such as tissue engineering. In addition, Pittsburgh has used its natural resources as development tools to bring forth vitality and diversity within the community. It has developed a large river front park that extends 1.5 miles along the North Shore from the West End Bridge to the Fort Wayne Railroad Bridge, which at one point only served as stadium parking. This park now connects a ballpark, the stadium and a mixed use development.36 The park contains several sections including a wading area, an esplanade, boating facilities, paths and promenades for use by joggers, and families. Another reason for Pittsburgh’s success has been its strong and successful public and private partnerships. Through the cohesive work of these partnerships various projects have been developed and the city as a whole has been revitalized. Funding for these projects has been accomplished through hotel and sales tax revenues, parking fees, state and federal sources, corporations and foundations, and contributions from sports teams.37 There has also been a spur in redevelopment of former industrial sites, converting them into space suitable for commercial use by high tech firms. The downtown area now boasts several high rise office buildings, several performing arts venues, a convention center, and a professional sports arena. Pittsburgh also enjoys the presence of cultural amenities such as the Carnegie museum, the Andy Warhol museum, University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University. In addition, two new professional sports stadiums have been developed, and substantial work was completed at expanding the convention center. Pittsburgh has also invested in the development of mixed use development. The North Shore where most of these improvements and revitalization efforts have taken place has received approximately $40 million in infrastructure improvements, including reestablishing a grid road

Allan E. Wampler, , “Reinventing Pittsburgh,” Urban Land , ( Urban Land Institute) October 2002. Ibid. 36 David Salvesen, “Downtown Debate, Building a New Era in Pittsburgh,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) September 2001. 37 Ibid. 35

system, the construction and repair of roads, extensive improvements to streetscape and lighting, and parking additions.38

Dallas, Texas: Extend Day into Night The city of Dallas, Texas during the 1980’s experienced an economic downturn as a result of many major retailers leaving the city for the suburbs. This was partly as a consequence of the failing banking industry. During this time the city continued to sprawl as more and more residents and then employers chose to leave the downtown business district for the suburbs. During this time Dallas’s downtown became nearly a ghost town with only a farmers market and the historic entertainment district remaining. Dallas is yet another example of a strong partnership between the city and the business community. These partnerships have been able to spur a mix of development which attracts people throughout the day, and in effect has revitalized the city’s downtown. Business leaders have spearheaded many major public sector projects, while the city invested millions of dollars in infrastructure improvements, combined efforts that spurred other development within downtown.39 Investment in transportation improvements such as the Dallas Area Rapid Transit have connected the downtown with points north and south making it more accessible to more people facilitating the vitality of downtown. Years ago residential housing within downtown Dallas was nonexistent, now as a result of government subsidies and tax abatements for developers, new housing has been constructed and older buildings have been either rehabilitated or converted. The creation of residential communities in downtown Dallas has created a thriving downtown where residents walk to shops and restaurants. The long standing Farmer’s Market has received a substantial expansion transforming it into an active and lively weekend retail marketplace. There has also been development of public open space such as parks. The West End district which was once dominated by deteriorating warehouses has been converted into a thriving entertainment district with more than 65 restaurants and nightclubs and over 100 retail shops.40 Throughout the revitalization the city has fostered a unified district by rehabilitating historic buildings, and improving the streetscape and signage.

Ibid. Robert J. Brown and Michele Laumer, “Comeback Cities,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) August 1995. 40 Ibid. 39

Baltimore, Maryland: Great Streets Need Great Champions Baltimore experienced many of the problems other cities underwent throughout the late 1970’s and 80’s. It had a high crime rate, high illegal substance abuse, low performing schools, high unemployment and poverty rates. Like other cities the shift in the economy from manufacturing to service sector propelled many employers to leave the city. As a result, many residents fled the downtown to the suburbs and left behind a city with decaying infrastructure and blight. Baltimore was able to revitalize itself with cohesive public and private partnerships, proactive marketing and by having an ardent champion. The revitalization and redevelopment of Baltimore has occurred over the span of several decades, several public officials’ tenure in office and longer then some community members' recollection. By 1954 the rapid flight to the suburbs had prompted a ten year decline in downtown property values and as a result a significant reduction in the city’s tax revenues. Through public and private partnerships the slow redevelopment and revitalization of Baltimore was planned, a revitalization plan that would take several decades to fully complete. The first project undertaken by the city and private business was the redevelopment of the Charles Center within the center of downtown41. Once this redevelopment was accomplished the city was then ready to tackle the revitalization of the downtown waterfront, an area eight times as large as the Charles Center. The shipping industry at this time had completely abandoned the inner harbor, prompting businesses surrounding the waterfront to vacate. By 1969 the momentum that built up in the development of Charles Center catapulted support for the Inner Harbor Master Plan: the strategy of attracting prestigious buildings to sites overlooking the harbor. In order to accomplish the development of the waterfront it was necessary for public entities to invest before private capital could be attracted to invest in the development. The plan commenced by bringing in floating attractions and working boats to activate the public space, which would then attract people to the waterfront. Eventually, privately operated tour boats, a shuttle boat, a dock for rental pedal boats, a WWII submarine and a coastal steamer converted to a restaurant came into the harbor. In addition, the mayor in order to further attract visitors to the harbor, began promoting festivals and various outdoor activities.

Martin L. Millspaugh, , “The Inner Harbor Story,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) April 2003.

Baltimore has been able to successfully revitalize a once deteriorated and almost abandoned waterfront into a destination which attracts millions of tourists a year, provides thousands of jobs and produces millions of dollars in tax revenue for the city. 42 A model of urban waterfront development, Baltimore’s Inner Harbor offers an adventure in downtown revitalization. Additionally, the development and revitalization of the Inner Harbor has produced other developments such as construction of new offices, hotels, entertainment venues and residences. These strategies helped build new residential housing, preserve existing housing units, and develop mixed-use retail and office projects. In addition, the waterfront has been redeveloped so it can once again be enjoyed by residents and visitors. Baltimore has also been able to change its economy from one dependent on manufacturing to one thriving within the service sector.

Providence, Rhode Island: Comparative Advantage Providence located in New England was an industrial city whose downtown became blighted slowly over the years. Between the 1950s and 1980s Providence’s economy experienced a contraction as a result of a change in the economy from one dependent on manufacturing to one supported by services. Over the years Providence has used public and private partnerships, established a comparative advantage, and diversified its economy in order to bring forth vitality and revitalize its downtown. With the assistance of the Rhode Island Economic Policy council, a public/private group, the city of Providence identified several sectors for growth such as arts and entertainment, financial services, information technology, high-tech manufacturing, jewelry making, ocean studies and technology services.43 Based on these recommendations, Providence has sought ways to develop the targeted sectors to further bolster the economy. In addition, Providence has been working to boost employment growth in financial services by capitalizing on its proximity to Boston and the highly educated young population drawn by nearby universities. This new population, in turn, has helped fuel the growth in restaurants, the arts, entertainment, and housing. The city has also been working on increasing its tourism and hospitality industry to help spur revitalization of its downtown. 44

Ibid. Jerry W. Szatan, “Regional Rejuvenation,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) September 2001. 44 Jim Mara, , “Reviving Cities,” Urban Land , (Urban Land Institute) July 2005. 43

The process to revitalize the downtown began in the early 1980’s and has been continuing and evolving ever since. In 1981, city officials decided that in order to alleviate the traffic problem, help spur development, and revitalize the downtown it would be necessary to uncover the riverfront that flowed underneath the city streets. Three rivers flowed underneath the streets of Providence, but these had been covered up with cement and were inaccessible to the public. In March 1981, the plan was set forth to move the rivers which required them to be rerouted, three bridges to be reconnected, dredging of the rivers, removal of roadway decking, and construction of a river walkway and park. The four acre Waterplace Park that was built now symbolizes the city’s commitment to revitalization.45 Waterplace Park has a fountain, plazas, amphitheater, and a restaurant allowing it to stay active during the day and night, attracting thousands of people to its many events. The park has also spurred additional development throughout Providence. Another large development that has helped bring forth vitality and revitalization is the completion of Providence Place Mall. Providence Place mall opened in 1999 and serves as one of the largest malls within the region; a region that until its presence had been largely underserved by retailers.46 The mall located at the intersection of two main interstates, within downtown Providence serves as a community gathering place and venue for community events with its many retailers, a theater and restaurants. In addition, the city has worked on maintaining an active artistic community within its downtown. The city of Providence, along with various organizations, developed the Heritage Harbor Museum to showcase all artists under one roof and provides tax credits for artists who live/work downtown. Development has also contributed to the creation of 6,000 jobs, retail space, hotels and housing units.47 Providence’s downtown is currently seeing a transformation of existing buildings into lofts, offices, shops and restaurants around the Providence performing Arts Center, which is located in what was once an elaborate movie theater. The Downtown now is a place of tightly knit neighborhoods, art and culture, which attracts residents and visitors to its center.

Paris Rutherford, “Redevelopment: The First Wave,” Urban Land (Urban Land Institute) June 2003. Jim Miara, “Sharp Distinctions,” Urban Land , ( Urban Land Institute) October 2004. 47 Paris Rutherford, “Redevelopment: The First Wave,” Urban Land, ( Urban Land Institute) June 2003. 46

South Bronx, New York: Unique Niche When tourists come to New York City they visit places such as Times Square, Central Park, the Theatre District, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, and The Empire State Building, making sure they get pictures of the city’s most impressive skyscrapers. Since tourists rarely venture outside of Manhattan, they miss much of the beauty, history and diversity that New York City has to offer. A group called Business Enterprises for Sustainable Travel (BEST) has started to work with community development corporations throughout New York City’s low-income neighborhoods to help attract tourists to these communities. Through a series of walking tours and history discussions, BEST helps tourists experience the real New York at the community level while the community benefits from increased business and activity.48 The Point Community Development Corporation, which serves the Hunts Point neighborhood of the South Bronx, is one of the organizations BEST works with. As an industrial center Hunts Point has been home to a diversity of ethnic groups from around the world since the early 20th century. After World War II many of the immigrant residents fled to escape what they perceived to be urban blight and to search for cheaper housing and job opportunities. This was happening in cities all over the country as the industrial economy lost its footing in the American city. As these immigrants left Hunts Point, Puerto Rican and AfricanAmericans flocked to the neighborhood calling it home for future generations. From the ‘60’s through the ‘80’s Hunts Point suffered all the ravages of urban decline. Drugs, prostitution, building arson and crime almost destroyed the close neighborhood ties that once characterized the community. In the early 1990’s an organization called The Point CDC emerged to bring about hope and get the neighborhood back on track. The founders of The Point CDC, a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit organization, realized there were no movie theatres, recreational opportunities or community centers that children and adults could use as an outlet for artistic expression.49 The Point CDC established workshops, plays and recreational opportunities to help children develop pride in their community and the ability to see past their everyday realities. Through their success in encouraging youth to develop effective forms of self expression through the arts, The Point CDC has become a national community empowerment model. 48

Go Nomad.com, “Community Tourism Comes to New York City,” 2006. <http://www.gonomad.com/helps/0107/helps_nyc.html> 49 The Point Community Development Corporation <http://www.thepoint.org/>

With the The Point CDC, and the organization’s recent collaborative efforts with BEST, Hunt’s Point has been able to market its cultural heritage to the benefit of the community. Art exhibitions featuring local artists, the South Bronx film festival, and The Point marketplace (a 4,000 sq. ft. facility) have all been opportunities to both foster and showcase Hunt’s Point cultural heritage. To support these local artists and entrepreneurs, The Point CDC makes resources and office space available to help jumpstart businesses. Arts and cultural based programming has turned the community around while contributing to the local and economic development needs of the poorest congressional district in the United States.50 While BEST is critical in helping tourists navigate their way to Hunts Point, it is the community’s own vibrancy and assets that make it a memorable place.

Ibid.

Revitalization of Casino Towns Background The introduction of casino gambling has been used as an economic strategy in many states. The impact of gambling is often measured by growth in jobs and tax revenues. It is also described as an export economy because it brings money into the community that would normally be spent elsewhere. Gambling addiction, increased crime, and the substitution effect are cited as some of the costs of legalized casinos. The substitution effect is the decrease in spending by residents at establishments such as restaurants and movie theatres, which results from increased spending at casinos by locals. Bearing in mind both benefits and costs, casino development has contributed to varied successes in stimulating local economies and in improving quality of life. Whether it is in spite or because of the successful introduction and proliferation of casino gambling, further revitalization efforts are often necessary. Mississippi’s own history with gambling can be traced as far back as the Choctaw, and Chickasaw Native Americans. Over the centuries gambling along the Gulf Coast continued as a pastime and part of social life until 1951 when it was outlawed by the federal Organized Crime Committee. The destruction caused by hurricane Camille in 1969 further reduced the number of illegal gambling operations that remained in Biloxi after the committee’s investigation. Despite recovery efforts after hurricane Camille, by the 1980s the economy of the Coast began to flounder. Viewed as an economic revitalization opportunity, the Mississippi State Legislature passed the Mississippi Gaming Control Act on June 29, 1990 due in large part to the efforts of State Senator Tommy Gollott of Biloxi. Less than a year later Harrison County residents voted to allow offshore gambling within their county.51 While the net impact of casinos in Biloxi is debated, they have played a particularly distinct role in Biloxi’s recovery since hurricane Katrina. However, just as before the hurricane, Biloxi is in need of a further renaissance. Since the post-Katrina legalization of onshore gaming, casinos in Biloxi have built back bigger, and life within the casinos has returned to normal. In 51

Von Herrmann, Denise, Resorting to Casinos: The Mississippi Gambling Industry (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2006), p. 23.

large part this is because casinos are self contained entities designed to meet the every need of their guests. In contrast to the casino’s visitors, the people of East Biloxi must leave the Point to get some of their basic goods and services.

Division Street Recommendations As illustrated in the following case studies, Reno, Nevada, and Atlantic City, New Jersey are examples of cities known both for their gaming and for deteriorating social conditions. In recent years these cities have made great efforts towards revitalization, and in both cases this has included a commercial development aspect. While both were successful in creating new shopping and eating districts outside of the casinos, they have integrated these new businesses in two very different ways. Atlantic City approached a lack of stores and restaurants outside of the casinos with a strategy that proved successful in creating a secondary tourist attraction, but limited in its usefulness to city residents. Thirty years after the introduction of casino gamming, Atlantic City’s urban core has yet to see true revitalization. While the development of an outlet mall on blighted land has improved Atlantic City as a tourist destination, Reno’s downtown has done more than make visitors feel comfortable leaving the casino floor. Reno’s approach incorporated both their goals of attracting new non-casino tourists and of improving the quality of life for residents. By emphasizing art and the Truckee River as important cultural assets they broadened their entertainment appeal without alienating residents. As was the case in Reno, where the needs and desires of both residents and tourists meet there is great business potential. With casinos in such close proximity, Division Street. can draw customers from the inflow of visitors to Biloxi. Whether it is forgotten toiletries, non-casino dining, or authentic Biloxi souvenirs, there are a variety of ways that Division Street’s closeness to the casinos could be capitalized on. However if Division Street. is to play an important role in revitalizing Biloxi as a whole, than it is the residents who must be kept in mind as the primary stakeholders.

Atlantic City, New Jersey: Outlet Shopping Atlantic City has long had a reputation for entertainment. In the early 1900s Atlantic City was a resort town, the “Disneyland of its generation,” featuring a lively boardwalk that attracted families throughout the region.52 After World War II, like many coastal cities it began to experience disinvestment and a rise in crime and poverty as its wealthier residents moved to the suburbs. At the same time deteriorating hotels, air travel innovations, and new trends in entertainment and leisure caused the tourist industry in Atlantic City to decline sharply. By the 1970s the boardwalk was deserted and the neighborhoods and downtown were crumbling, it became “a poster child for urban blight and decay.”53 In an effort to stimulate economic development Casino’s were legalized by referendum in 1976. In just ten years this effort turned Atlantic City into the single most popular tourist destination in America, attracting 30 million yearly visitors in 1986.54 But even as the casinos exceeded tax revenue and job creation estimates, local and small businesses declined, contrary to the intent of the legislation which believed casino revenue would “trickle down the avenues of the city.”55 In addition, increased land values due to casino speculation made it harder for Atlantic City to retain its middle class homeowners. Without the casinos it is possible that Atlantic City may have been headed for worse times, nevertheless the casinos failed to be a tool for revitalization in the city’s urban core where poverty and unemployment persisted. The Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) was established in 1984 with the mission to promote “economic development and community projects that respond to the changing economic and social needs of Atlantic City and the In 1993, as part of the CRDA’s State of New Jersey.”56 Corridor Projects Fund, a $1.50 casino parking fee was enacted to generate money for transportation, infrastructure, and economic development projects through the issuing of bonds. Under the Corridor Projects Fund the Cordish Company of Baltimore undertook construction of ‘The Walk.’ Completed in 52

Simon, Bryant. Boardwalk of Dreams: Atlantic City and the Fate of Urban America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 7. Ibid, p. 11. 54 Dan Henegan, “Economic Impacts of Casino Gaming in Atlantic City,” in Legalized Casino Gaming in the United States, ed. Cathy H. C. Hsu. (New York: Haworth Press, 1999), 120. 55 Chuck Hardwick, “Don’t Bet on Casinos,” The New York Times, 19 June 1982. 56 Casino Reinvestment Development Authority <http://www.njcrda.com> 53

2003, The Walk is an open-air mall which consists primarily of outlet shops and chain restaurants, located at the end of the Atlantic City expressway; it serves as a link between the convention center and casino/hotel district. As the official website proclaims “Great Outlet Shopping Begins Where the Atlantic City Expressway Ends!”57 The CRDA describes The Walk as enhancing the urban fabric of the city by breaking down large blocks of single story buildings into “stylish sub-buildings, with distinctive two story masonry facades” which incorporate amenities such as “plazas, fountains, whimsical kiosks and environmental graphics.”58 The Walk at night (Paul Bauke, www.city-data.com)

The Walk has successfully created viable retail development outside of the casinos, yet has failed to meet the needs of the community and of the local businesses that existed in the area prior to Casino development. The Walk has been so successful in attracting shoppers that expansions plans are underway to grow the complex an additional 350,000 square feet.59 Further developing the Walk would contradict statements made by developers in 2000 who said the objective was to “build a project that becomes a living organism that continues to spread out through the city as opposed to placing a project in the middle of the city as its own entity.”60 Thus far the impact of The Walk has been insular, and has not triggered commercial development elsewhere in the city. This has stirred the common complaint among residents that CRDA funds intended to improve the quality of life in the city have been funneled back into casinos and tourism.61

Reno, Nevada: Diverse Attractions The context of legalized gambling in Reno varies from the pattern seen in Biloxi and Atlantic City where it was introduced as an economic development tool; gaming in Reno has been continually legal since 1931. Despite a decline in casino tourism due to the popularity of Indian gaming in California, Reno is thriving and has experienced very little job loss overall.62 57

Atlantic City Outlets, The Walk <http://www.acoutlets.com> Casino Reinvestment Development Authority <http://www.njcrda.com> 59 David Koch, “Atlantic City Redux,” Retail Traffic, 1 May 2005. 60 Joe Weinberg of the Cordish Co. as quoted by Jackie Spinner, “Atlantic City Hedges Its Bet; Even Casinos Recognize that Town Cannot Live by Gambling Alone,” Washington Post, 21 March 2000. 61 Simon, Bryant. Boardwalk of Dreams: Atlantic City and the Fate of Urban America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 205. 62 “Turning Up Trumps; Reno,” Economist, 29 September 2007. 58

Reno’s current economy has shifted towards the transportation of goods and the production of slot machines which are sold to the tribal casinos. Development of the downtown has occurred under the direction of the Reno Redevelopment Agency (RRA) since 1983. The same year that the RRA was created, it identified 45 blocks in the downtown core as Redevelopment Project Area 1 (RDA1). Over the past twenty-five years the RRA has kept the downtown core as its focus for commercial development. To facilitate their goals the RRA has purchased private property for resale, used eminent domain to acquire property, and reallocated property tax increment in order to finance the redevelopment program. As casino gaming lost its magnitude, development of the downtown also took a new form, emphasizing the area’s natural resources, art, culture and business; billing itself as a great place to live and work. The RRA has made a concerted effort to make the downtown more attractive to residents and reclaim what was once thought of as the casino district. The creation of the Nevada Museum of Art and Truckee River Whitewater Park, have further sparked residential and commercial growth making retail development of the downtown both necessary and viable. In 2005, the RRA recommended 4th Street, running the entire length of the City’s downtown from east to west, as a corridor for strategic retail and mixeduse in-fill opportunities.63 Downtown Reno (www.downtownmakeover.com)

Reno has not given up its gambling roots, but it has shifted away from the Las Vegas model of an isolated entertainment Mecca. Locals who once surrendered downtown to the gaming industry are now sharing the area’s new attractions with out-of-towners.64

Reno Redevelopment Agency, “Downtown Retail Study: Identifying Opportunities for Retail In-Fill Development in Downtown Reno,” October 2005. <http://cityofreno.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=6802> (3 January 2008) 64 “Reno Bets on Shops, Culture; Without Giving Up its Gambling Roots, the City Has Moved Away from the Las Vegas Model,” Philadelphia Inquirer, 19 May 2002.

Redevelopment Using Eminent Domain Background Eminent domain is the federal or state government’s power to take or seize private property for public purpose. One of the most common circumstances under which eminent domain is used is the taking of private land for highway, or rail right of ways. This power is implicitly stated in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution which reads: “…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” While both federal and state entities can use eminent domain, the definition of public use is determined largely at the state level which has led to debate over what constitutes a public use. In 2005 the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London affirmed New London, Connecticut’s authority to take private property by eminent domain and sell it to a private developer. In the wake of this controversial decision several states have enacted, or considered enacting, legislation to restrict the use of eminent domain for private development. Such a bill (SB 2152) was brought before the Mississippi State Legislators in 2007, but died in conference between the House and the Senate on March 29, 2007. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) maintains that eminent domain is a critical tool for revitalizing cities and improving the quality of life in declining areas, but qualifies this statement with a set of principals that should be used in exercising eminent domain powers. One of the ULI’s most important principles of eminent domain use is that it should be employed “only after other methods of property acquisition are found unworkable.”65 In addition, they recommend establishing a process whereby public officials and redevelopment agencies include property owners and residents in evaluating the public benefits of proposed redevelopment projects.

Urban Land Institute, “Eminent Domain: An Important Tool for Community Revitalization,” ULI Current Issues Report, Washington, D.C.: ULI, 2007.

Division Street Recommendations As case studies of eminent domain, the Dudley Street Neighborhood in Boston, Arlington Heights in Illinois, and Ardmore in Pennsylvania, exemplify varying degrees of success in using police power to take land for commercial development. Local reaction to the use of eminent domain is a clear theme in these three cases. The Save Ardmore Coalition in Ardmore, Pennsylvania is just one example of growing community opposition to the use of eminent domain in private development. Since the Kelo case there is greater debate over the use of eminent domain even in places where it was used successfully in the past such as such as Arlington Heights, Illinois. But as the Dudley Street neighborhood of Boston exhibited, when the community drives its use, eminent domain can in fact be part of long-term participatory community-building. The Biloxi Housing Authority as a federal and state entity, has the power to exercise eminent domain in the development of Division Street as a commercial corridor. In considering its use, the public benefit must be weighed against the costs. Eminent domain should not be precluded as a tool in the development of Division Street. In the acquisition of specific sites or in land banking eminent domain may be an appropriate power for the Housing Authority to use given the high proportion of vacant parcels. While eminent domain could aid in creating developable sites, given the current climate it should not be invoked without thorough community input and alternative analysis.

Roxbury, Massachusetts: Community Control Beginning in the 1950s, disinvestment, abandonment and arson turned Dudley Street in Roxbury, Massachusetts into the worst neighborhood in Boston. By 1981, one-third of Dudley's land lay vacant, serving as an illegal dumping ground for city and state trash.66 In the 1980s the city came up with a solution: urban renewal. The Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI), a grass roots community organization, rose in opposition to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s plans for large-scale urban renewal of the 1.5 square-mile neighborhood. DSNI commissioned DAC International to perform a neighborhood survey and strategic plan with support from the 66

Peter Medoff and Holly Sklar, Streets of Hope, (Boston: South End Press, 1994).

Riley Foundation. After a political battle, the group received authorization to use eminent domain to acquire tax-delinquent and abandoned properties and create a community land trust consistent with their strategic plan. From 1991-1994 the DSNI assembled 132 parcels where they developed affordable housing, and constructed a new town common, community center, child care center, and community greenhouse. The goal that originally brought the community together was to prevent displacement, but as Gus Newport, executive director of DSNI from 1988 to 1992, has said, housing is “not all there is to a community” shared and commercial space are also vitally important parts of a neighborhood because they provide “culture” and “commerce.”67 In addition to construction of new housing units on vacant lots throughout the Dudley neighborhood, the revival included major renovations centered around Dudley Square which had once been Roxbury’s second largest commercial district.68 Over the last decade, Nuestra Comunidad Community Development Corporation and Madison Park have acquired and renovated dilapidated commercial buildings to create new housing and commercial space in the square. Development around the square is in keeping with DAC’s 1987 plan which included a convenience retail center to be built off of the common area.69

Central Boston Elder Services’ new headquarters in Dudley Square (FFHLB Boston)

Today, Dudley Square includes the headquarters for Central Boston Elder Services, a commercial building developed by a local church group, a Walgreen’s, and national clothing retailer Ashley Stewart. The city has also made plans to move offices for several city departments into the historic Ferdinand Building off of the square.70 The use of eminent domain, in combination with the creation of an affordable housing land trust has truly transformed the neighborhood. Dudley Street is now a community with secure affordable housing, open space, and growing commercial activity.

Gus Newport as quoted by Jay Walljasper, “The Dudley Street Example,” Conscious Choice, June 2000. FFHLB Boston, “Comeback Places: Roxbury Revival,” Tools for Housing and Economic Development, 2007, Issue No. 27. 69 DAC International, “The Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative Revitalization Plan: A Comprehensive Community Controlled Strategy,” September 1987. 70 FFHLB Boston. 68

Arlington Heights, Illinois: Facing New Opposition During the 1980s the spread of shopping centers dominated the retail market in Arlington Heights, leaving the downtown area characterized by vacant storefronts, run-down buildings, and parking lots. In 1987 officials drew up a master plan for the Central Business District which encouraged mixed-use and highdensity development. To that end, the town created a financing district to make bond proceeds available for gap financing of new developments, business relocation assistance, and grants and loans for facade improvements and interior renovations. Over a decade, the town acquired key downtown properties to serve as a land bank for future projects. In the late 1990’s the town worked cooperatively with several developers to shape feasible development, using eminent domain to acquire properties when necessary to produce developable sites. The town also undertook streetscape and public space improvements to provide private construction with an “attractive public framework.”71 More recently, the use of eminent domain in Arlington Heights for private development is facing stiff opposition. In 2002, Arlington Heights condemned International Plaza, a strip mall made up mainly of Korean- and Chinese-owned businesses, so that a Super Target could be built on the site. The city was forced to face a lawsuit challenging the plaza’s ‘blighted’ designation but the condemnation was upheld in court despite local opposition. However, in June 2007, Target backed out of their contract with the Village. It remains to be seen whether or not the site will be developed by another retailer using eminent domain.72 Although the plaza is outside of the downtown area (about one mile south), public opposition to eminent domain will likely affect its future use throughout the area given the major press coverage. The Village of Arlington Heights 2007 downtown master plan retains the use of eminent domain as a strategy to carry out the objectives of the plan but notes the impact of recent events saying “this may change as the Illinois General Assembly considers the use of eminent domain.”73 71

Urban Land Institute, “Eminent Domain: An Important Tool for Community Revitalization,” ULI Current Issues Report, Washington, D.C.: ULI, 2007, p. 22. 72 John Stossel, “Property Owners Win One,” Creators Syndicate, 21 June 2007. <http://www.consciouschoice.com/2000/cc1306/citizen1306.html> (3 March 2008) 73 Village of Arlington Heights, “Downtown Master Plan,” 2007, 44.

Ardmore, Pennsylvania: A Barrier to Development Downtown Ardmore experienced economic decline during the 1980s causing high turnover rates and frequent vacancies in the business district. In addition to these problems parking capacity was too low to support commuters using SEPTA/Amtrak, and patrons of the Suburban Square Shopping Center and Ardmore Business District. In 2003 a master plan was adopted by the Board of Commissioners to address multi-modal transit, transportation and parking inefficiencies and economic revitalization needs in Ardmore. Commissioners of the Township of Lower Merion initially proposed the use of eminent domain in the Ardmore Business District to achieve the goals of the Master Plan. However community members formed the Save Ardmore Coalition (SAC) to organize against what they considered an eminent domain abuse. The issue was brought before the Board of Commissioners and in March 2006 the Lower Merion Township Board adopted a resolution disavowing the use of eminent domain for the benefit of private redevelopment projects.74 Later that year, the Pennsylvania General Assembly enacted legislation restricting the use of eminent domain for private projects. Since the use of eminent domain was precluded as a tool in the redevelopment of the Ardmore Business District, EBL&S Development of Philadelphia was named as the development team to design and construct the new Ardmore Transit Center and lead the hotly-debated revitalization of the downtown business district.75 However, in the beginning of March 2008, EBL&S withdrew from negotiations because of the downturn in the credit market.76 The township has since invited the development teams who originally responded to the RFP to submit updated proposals, but the township has not issued any statement about when or if a developer will be chosen.

Save Ardmore Coalition <http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org> EBL&S Development <http://www.ebl-s.com/> 76 Township of Lower Merion, â&#x20AC;&#x153;ERC Invites Three Development Teams to Special Meeting on Ardmore Project,â&#x20AC;? 7 March 2008. 75

Natural Disasters and Floodplains Background There is no question that flooding affects communities negatively. The loss of life and property makes flooding one of the natural disasters people fear the most. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) set up regulations to protect communities located along floodways and the floodway fringe in 1968.77 The NFIP also established regulations that discouraged development within floodzones. The mechanisms used to control flooding’s adverse impacts have been proven to affect property values. Okmyung Bin and Stephen Polasky’s study of flood hazards and property values concludes that building within a floodplain significantly lowers values.78 They articulated their conclusions in their study of Hurricane Floyd in Pitt County, North Carolina. Hurricane Floyd hit Pitt County especially hard in the fall of 1993. In response to this tragedy, Pitt County took action to mitigate the future effects of natural disasters by instituting floodplain development zones throughout flood prone areas. Before Hurricane Floyd, the price effects of locating properties within a floodplain were not fully understood. Bin and Polasky studied the market value of 8,000 properties prior to and after the hurricane to determine whether being in a floodplain zone influences property values. The results showed properties located within a floodplain had significantly lower market values than properties located outside the floodplain.79

Natural Disaster Strategies Despite the market reality just described, cities across the country have developed innovative ways to integrate flood protection measures to further their cities’ missions to re-build their communities to promote their long-term economic and community development goals. The cities of Grand Forks in North Dakota, East Grand Forks in Minnesota, Fargo in North Dakota, Valmeyer in Illinois and Maricopa, Arizona are prime examples of the kinds of strategies that could be used to protect communities against natural hazards while revitalizing the community. These cities

FEMA, http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/

Bin, Okmyung and Polasky, Stephen. “Effects of Flood Hazards on Property Values: Evidence Before and After Hurricane Floyd, August 2003, <www.ecu.edu/econ/wp/03/ecu0306.pdf>, p. 2

Ibid.

have used a range of methods to protect and revive their communities including: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Greenways Invisible Flood Control Wall Technology No Adverse Impact (NAI) Principles Cultural Confidence and Preservation

Division Street Recommendations The four natural disaster methods outlined above all have a common theme. Not only do they protect the lives and property of residents in their municipalities, but they also contribute to their cities’ economic and community development goals. These strategies are able to accomplish these goals because they blend in with the local community’s character, promote much needed open space, do not obstruct the community’s relationship with nature and maintain precious waterfront views. These strategies have the added benefit of coming out of collaborative planning processes that sought to involve the community early on. It seems the residents of the cities where these strategies have been applied have the best of both worlds as they feel the flood control mechanisms will protect them in the event of a natural disaster while they appreciate the benefits these flood strategies have brought to their lives. Biloxi should consider using a combination of some of these technologies along Division Street. Two strategies that would work best would be establishing an Invisible Flood Control Wall (IFCW) much like Fargo, North Dakota did when it used IFCW to save a high school, a nearby neighborhood and the city’s sewer system, as well as coming up with a cultural preservation strategy. Division Street could be used as the first IFCW project of its kind in Mississippi. In addition, the cultural preservation practiced in Valmeyer has application on Division Street. While Division Street is not undergoing a geographic move, revitalization will drastically change a place that many people feel a deep connection with. If Division Street is to have a sense of community in the future, it must take into account of the existing community today. A more in depth discussion of these strategies and their applications can be found throughout the remainder of this section.

Grand Forks, North Dakota & East Grand Forks, Minnesota: Greenways In 1997, the twin cities of Grand Forks and East Grand Forks suffered through one of the worst floods in U.S. history as a result of the melting of snowcaps during the beginning of the spring season. The flood caused 60,000 residents to be evacuated and left in its wake $2 billion in damages and a destroyed downtown business district.

Greater Grand Forks Greenway (http://www.grandforksgov.com/greenway/index.htm)

Immediately after the flood, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recommended that a dike system of levies be constructed down the length of the Red and Red Lake river. A 2,200 acre greenway now known as the Greater Grand Forks Greenway was developed between the levies and the river. Greenways have been described as “natural corridors crisscrossing a landscape that has been otherwise transformed by development . . . they provide open space for human access and recreation use, and they serve to protect and enhance remaining natural and cultural resources.”80 The 2,200 acres, the Greenway was hailed as a groundbreaking strategy that would combine flood protection and recreational benefits to revive the downtown district through increased pedestrian traffic. The point leading up to these developments involved extensive coordination and collaboration between the state governments of North Dakota and Minnesota. Economic revitalization was one of the motivating forces behind the initial discussions to develop the Greenway. This prompted the formation of public and private partnerships between elected officials, the community, businesses, and government agencies at the federal, state and local levels. In an effort to implement the conceptual framework laid out after the flood by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, the City of Grand Fork formed the Greenway Alliance composed of governmental agencies that included the Chamber of Commerce, Parks and Planning Department. East Grand Forks also launched a city-wide planning process called the City Action Recovery Team (CART)

Schroeder, Tim and Joy James, “Collaboration in Greenway Development: Case Study of the Grand Forks Greenway,” 2001. <www.prr.msu.edu/trends2000/papers_pdf/schroeder.pdf>, p. 1

to gather recommendations from the community as to how they envisioned the birth of the greenway. CART made valuable suggestions to the greenway that included: “…the enhancement of riverfront activities, development of a community gathering place and outdoor riverfront amphitheater, inclusion of green space within the business community, creation of outdoor recreation/meditation areas, increasing outdoor winter activities, development of a campground, and creation of community partnerships between public, private, and nonprofit sectors.”81 The Urban Land Institute and the Trust for Historic Preservation also provided guidance. East Grand Forks worked to entice Cabela’s, the self proclaimed largest outfitter store in the world, to be one of its major retail anchors. At the time the Greenway was being developed, Cabela’s alone contributed to a 28.5% rise in sales tax revenue and a $30 million increase in annual sales.82 The area’s main newspaper, the Grand Forks Herald has also been an important ally to the greenway that has promoted its success. These meetings and alliances produced the wonders that have made the greenway what it is today, an oasis that is grounded in the middle of a flood protection zone that has enhanced the community’s character and contributed to its long-term neighborhood and economic revitalization goals. Today, the economic, recreational, ecological benefits, not to mention the transportation linkages the greenway provides to both of these cities cannot be ignored. People point to the greenway as one of the twin cities’ best assets that has successfully improved resident quality of life, promoted the revitalization of the business district while protecting lives and property from the ravages of future natural disasters.

81 82

Ibid, p. 2 Ibid, p. 5

East Grand Forks, Minnesota, and Fargo, North Dakota: Invisible Flood Control Walls After the 1997 Red River flood, East Grand Fork, MN not only worked with Grand Forks, ND to develop the Greater Grand Forks Greenway, but instituted a system of Invisible Flood Control Walls (IFCW) throughout the City to protect it against the possibility of future flooding. IFCW technology is approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as a mechanism for coping with flooding and other natural disasters. European in origin, IFCW involves the construction of a low permanent flood wall base, into which interlocking aluminum planks can be fastened when floodwaters threaten. The goal of such a system is “to provide adequate flood protection while maintaining a visual connection with the river during non-flood conditions.”83

The City worked with a flood prevention organization called Flood Control America to develop an IFCW system in East Grand Forks, the project was recognized by U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration (EDA) as one of its five major "success stories" of the 20th century.84 The way the project was carried out in East Grand Forks earned Flood Control America the Minnesota Society of Professional Engineers Seven Wonders of Engineering in Minnesota Award for excellence in flood control technology.85 IFCW in East Grand Forks, Minnesota (http://www.floodcontrolam.com/multimedia.php)

The floodwalls are erected only when there is an eminent likelihood of flooding throughout the city and its downtown business districts. At any other point during the year, workers, shoppers and visitors in the downtown area have access to scenic river views, lush greenery, parks and open space that welcomes

Ibid, p. 3 Flood Control America. “Invisible Flood Control Wall, East Grandforks, Minnesota,” <http://www.floodcontrolam.com/projects_EGF1.php> 84

Ibid.

people while enticing them to take a stroll or stop at one of the restaurants or shops that abound. At the foundation of the IFCW is a permanent concrete wall base that blends in with the existing architecture of most residential, commercial and industrial buildings. This permanent wall is low in order to maintain a visual connection to nature as well as the rest of the City. The wall has vertical beams interspersed throughout its base with metal planks stored within the base. When there is a flood warning, the metal planks are taken out of the wall and vertically assembled from the base wall. Assembling the metal planks takes less than 1.5 IFCW in East Grand Forks, Minnesota hours. (http://www.floodcontrolam.com/multimedia.php) Many cities throughout the country have used IFCW technology to ward off the damages of floods including Fargo, ND, another city that was affected by the Red River flood of 1997. The City had acquired 30 houses and Oak Grove Lutheran High School located in a flood zone district. Instead of displacing students and residents, the City decided to enlist the services of Flood Control America to help them build a pilot IFCW to test its effectiveness. The City exercised good judgment in making this decision because in the Spring of 2001 the Red River flooded again, but this time the flood caused minimal damage. Thanks to the IFCW technology, the High School, a neighboring district, and the City’s sewer system were saved. The technology’s success inspired the City of Fargo to use IFCW to protect its famous Fargodome Stadium.

Valmeyer, Illinois: Cultural Confidence and Preservation Before 1993, the small town of Valmeyer was a farming community located in Southwest Illinois. When the Mississippi River flooded the small town in 1993 it left Valmeyer underwater for months and damaged 200 homes.86 With assistance from 86

Floodplain Manager’s Association. “Mitigation Success Stories, Valmeyer, IL”

FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, and the Economic Development Administration, the City purchased over 200 damaged parcels to relocate two thirds of its residents 400 ft above the floodplains.87 This new location became known as the “New Valmeyer” while “Old Valmeyer” was converted for farming and recreational purposes.88 New Valmeyer is now a thriving community located minutes away from St. Louis. Anthropologist David Maybury-Lewis is an advocate of cultural confidence and cultural preservation, he maintains that at the heart of cultural preservation is making sure that a community’s way of life, not just its buildings, are conserved. Too often, historical preservation groups focus on rehabilitating buildings and creating a sense of place based on a city’s physical features. This view limits a community’s sense of itself and its potential as a dynamic, ever changing cultural beacon. The amount of cultural confidence a community has is especially relevant where natural disasters are concerned because the focus is on re-building a replica of what an area looked like before. Cultural confidence does not discount the important of re-constructing the physical structures of a community; it states that you must also pay as much attention if not more, to the ways in which a community has re-invented is culture and traditions overtime. Valmeyer’s transition was not easy. City leaders were legitimately concerned over what the creation of New Valmeyer would mean to the community, its character and whether or not the community would be the same after the relocation. The community and the City worked together to articulate what their cultural values were so they could be preserved in the re-building process. The City focused on remaking the physical structures as well as the social networks in New Valmeyer that had given Old Valmeyer its character. While there is continued debate over whether the town will ever be the same due to its new location Valmeyer is an exemplary case of a recovery effort that values cultural confidence and preservation.89

<http://www.floods.org/Publications/mit%20succ%20stories/mssiiiil.htm#valm> 87 Birch, Eugenie L. and Susan M. Wachter. Rebuilding Urban Places After Disaster. Lessons from Hurricane Katrina Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006, p. 272 88 Floodplain Manager’s Association. “Mitigation Success Stories, Valmeyer, IL” <http://www.floods.org/Publications/mit%20succ%20stories/mssiiiil.htm#valm> 89

Birch, Eugenie L. and Susan M. Wachter. Rebuilding Urban Places After Disaster. Lessons from Hurricane Katrina Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006, p. 264-272

Maricopa County, Arizona: No Adverse Impact Maricopa, AZ is an example of a city that has adopted No Adverse Impact (NAI) principles within their flood mitigation strategies. Maricopa County is known for the comprehensive scope of its planning and development strategies as well as its use of NAI floodplain management principles. NAI principals guide cities in implementing mitigation programs before major flood disasters impact their communities; Maricopa uses these principles when evaluating what kind of flood mitigation strategies they will use to safeguard the community against the threat of a natural disaster. Maricopa has managed to control the negative effects of storm water flooding by requiring development projects abide by strict county-wide planning regulations and comprehensive development requirements. These stringent requirements ensure the municipality has ultimate control over how development ties into flood mitigation.90 The Floodplain Manager’s Association maintains that local communities are not given a choice to work on flood mitigation strategies that are specifically tailored to their own localities. Instead, these communities are expected to adopt FEMA’s top down federal mandates for flood prevention. FEMA’s mandates often overlook the unique needs of individual communities and assume that what reduces impacts in one community will do so in another. FEMA’s flood prevention guidelines are inherently problematic in the sense that they mitigate floods in one area of a locality by re-directing potential flood impacts to another area of town, thereby creating what the Floodplain Manager’s Association calls adverse impacts. On the other hand, NAI strategies for flood mitigation limit adverse impacts across the board. This approach more equitably mitigates potential impacts by making sure that one area of town is not overburdened when a flood does occur. Every development project planned for Maricopa County has to meet the comprehensive basin-wide standards set forth by the county. The county has a comprehensive plan that incorporates, floodplain management, smart growth principles, a Hazard Mitigation Plan and a Community Rating System to make sure elements of the plan do not conflict with the City’s overall planning objectives. “The intent is for the Plan to be implemented through the District Strategic Plan, Business and Financial Plan, Planning Studies, the Capital Improvement Program, regulations 90

Association of State Floodplain Managers. No Adverse Impact Community Case Studies, 2004 <www.floods.org/PDF/NAI_Case_Studies.pdf> p. 16

and policy.â&#x20AC;?91 NAI is ideal because it encourages flood mitigation choices that are specifically suited to a communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s environmental, economic, and social values. An additional example of a project that was built using NAI principles was Indian Bend Walsh Greenbelt which was created to reduce and control the impacts of flooding in the middle of a desert city. This strategy has created a sense of community that has contributed to the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s revitalization.92 Along the greenbelt, the City built parks and enough open space to create a remarkable urban hike trail that attracts residents and visitors alike. Today, the community enjoys miles of parks, lakes, golf courses, picnic areas, and various sporting venues that lie along the Greenbelt while pedestrians, cyclists and skaters are shielded from traffic and navigate the park through the Greenbelt Pathway.

91 92

Ibid, p. 17 Ibid, p. 18

Appendix 1 - Methodology This project employed three methods to identify opportunities for and barriers to commercial development on Division Street: 123-

Existing conditions analysis Case study analysis Physical environment inventory

Existing Conditions Analysis The existing conditions analysis is based on demographic data, as well as input received during the teamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s two site visits. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, population flux has made it difficult to accurately ascertain population characteristics, therefore a number of demographic data sources were used for the analysis. Existing conditions information gathered while in Biloxi is based on semi-structured interviews with a variety of stakeholders. The team targeted interviews towards community development organizations, public officials, and other institutional stakeholders. To gain community perspective, the snowball effect was employed to interview pedestrians, residents, customers, business owners, and other people the team met over the course of two site visits. Case Study Analysis The case study analysis consisted of researching revitalization techniques in cities with significant historical or social traits similar to Biloxi. The case studies were used to both better understand the different forms that commercial revitalization can take, and to identify tools that can be employed on Division Street. While the case studies touched on a multitude of unique and overlapping topics, the team specifically identified four general areas to explore commercial revitalization in the context of: 1234-

US Cities Casino Towns Disaster Recovery The Use of Eminent Domain

Physical Environment Inventory The team identified parcels and streets as the two main components of Division Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s physical environment and developed two surveys to capture existing physical conditions. In developing these surveys and defining ratings the Team used Trained Observer Rating Scales, developed by LISC staff member Jake Cowan, as a template. The parcel survey focused on identifying vacant parcels, and determining land use. In an effort to address building conditions, the survey also notes the presence of roof and structural damage, boarded windows, and other factors that help gauge whether or not the building can or is presently being rehabilitated. The street survey assesses conditions for both drivers and pedestrians by rating road surface and sidewalks. The survey also addresses street signage, litter, and additional 1

elements such as bus stops and street lights. The Parcel Survey and Street Survey are included in the appendix and should be referenced for further definition of ratings used. The team implemented the surveys along the whole of Division Street over the course of two days on February 29th and March 1st 2008. Parcel data is linked to Harrison County parcel numbers,1 and street data is linked to State determined county roads and city street identification numbers.2 Data collected was entered and submitted to the clients, after which further analysis was undertaken using mapping software and Microsoft Excel. Appendix 5 and Appendix 6 document the survey findings in detail. Limitations While there were few barriers to the case study analysis, the existing conditions analysis and physical environment inventory did have some limitations. The team sought community and stakeholder input, but this was not the only purpose of the project and as such time did not permit for a comprehensive community survey. The team met with over 40 people, and made an effort to listen to a diverse range of voices, but undoubtedly some opinions were not heard and some were overrepresented. Specifically, the team feels the outreach effort failed to gather input from former residents who have not been able to return to East Biloxi, as well as Casino employees who do not live on the Point, but would be interested in doing so. For the physical environment inventory, distance proved to be a barrier. It was not possible to return to Division Street to re-check information gathered during the site visit. Given these limitations the report is based on information on 94% of the parcels along Division Street, and 100% of the street sections. The analysis provided is intended to be used for general planning purposes only. Any user of the data or maps contained within this report assumes all responsibility for their use.

1 2

This number is identified as ‘PARCEL_ID’ This number is identified as ‘CCO47_ID’

Appendix 2 - Zoning Definitions The following definitions have been excerpted from Biloxiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Land Development Ordinance, Sec. 23-92. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Base districts and purposesâ&#x20AC;?: (e) RS-7.5 single-family residential, medium density. The purpose of the RS-7.5 single-family residential district is to provide for single-family residential development on medium sized lots, together with such other uses as places of worship, parks, recreational facilities and accessory uses that are deemed necessary or related functionally and which would not be considered incompatible with a residential environment. (f) RS-5 single-family residential, high density. The purpose of the RS-5 single-family residential district is to provide for higher density residential development on smaller lots together with such other uses as places of worship, parks, recreational facilities and accessory uses that are deemed necessary or related functionally and which would not be considered incompatible with a residential environment. (g) RD duplex or two-family residential. The purpose of the RD two-family residential district is to maintain a quiet residential environment by requiring medium density residential development of no more than two family units per lot and to permit accessory uses and such institutional uses as places of worship, parks, recreational facilities, and accessory uses that are deemed necessary or related functionally and are compatible with residential surroundings. (l) RO residential office. The purpose of the RO residential office district is to create an environment especially suited to a group of professional, general administrative and general sales offices, together with certain commercial uses primarily to serve employees in the district. The residential alternatives to office use are the same as permitted in the RM-25 multiple-family residential district. (n) B-2 community business. The purpose of the B-2 community business district is to provide for personal and business services and retail business uses of the community. traffic generated by the uses will be primarily passenger vehicles and only those trucks and commercial vehicles required for stocking and delivery of retail goods. (p) B-4 general business. The purpose of the B-4 general business district is to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for a wide variety of commercial and miscellaneous service activities serving a wide area and located particularly along certain major thoroughfares, without extensive warehousing, frequent heavy trucking activity, open storage of materials or other nuisance factors associated with manufacturing. (q) B-5 high volume business. The purpose of the B-5 high volume business district is to provide for the conduct of personal and business services for the motoring public. (u) CRD corridor redevelopment district. The purpose of this district is to establish criteria for redevelopment of major commercial or mixed-use corridors within Biloxi. It is the intent of this district to encourage redevelopment that is consistent both with the historic character of the commercial development along such corridors, which is often very different from more recent commercial development, as well as with the comprehensive plan and uses of surrounding properties. (v) I-1 light industrial. The purpose of the I-1 light industrial district is to provide for a wide variety of light manufacturing, processing or fabricating, wholesale distributing and warehousing uses located in the vicinity of major streets or railroads for access. Commercial uses are permitted, but new residential development is excluded except as a conditional use. 3

Appendix 3 - Institutions and Parks

Map a.1 5

Building Status

Business Name

Business Type

Under Constr- Visible uction Permits

Clear of Debris

Boarded Windows

Roof Damage

Structural Damage

1 1046 Division St

Occupied

Coastal Family Health Center

Health

Yes

2 1012 Division St

Occupied

Community Organization

Yes

3 Unknown

Occupied

Church

Yes

4 803 Magnolia St 5 810 Division St

Occupied

Back Bay Mission Flowing Rivers Of Life Ministries Nondenominational Our Mother Of Sorrow's Church

Church

Yes

Church

Yes

6 800 Magnolia St

Occupied

Church

Yes

7 769 Division St

Occupied

Church Our Mother Of Sorrows Lighthouse Apostolic Holiness Church

Church

Yes

8 Unknown

Occupied

Health

Yes

9 710 Division St

Occupied

Church

Yes

10 683 Division St

Occupied

Park

Yes

11 436 Division St

Occupied

Park

Yes

12 Unknown

Occupied

Park

Yes

13 Unknown

Occupied

Coastal Family Health Center Nance Temple Church Of God In Christ John Henry Beck Park John Henry Beck Park John Henry Beck Park John Henry Beck Park

Park

Yes

14 661 Division St

Occupied

John Henry Beck Park

Park

Yes

Address

Vacant

Address

Building Status

15 575 Division St

Occupied

16 551 Division St 17 Unknown

Occupied Occupied

18 Unknown

Occupied

19 425 Division St

Occupied

Business Name

Business Type

Under Constr- Visible uction Permits

The Salvation Army (Formerly Known As Biloxi's Yankie Stadium) Methodist African Episcopal

Community Organization

Yes

Church

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

Park

Yes

Community Organization

Yes

N/A City Of Biloxi Monsignor John Joseph O'Reilly Memorial Park Hope Coordination Center (GCCDS)

Clear of Debris

Boarded Windows

Roof Damage

Structural Damage

Appendix 4 - Commercial Properties

Map a.2 9

Business Name

Business Type

Under Constr- Visible uction Permits

Clear of Debris

Boarded Windows

Roof Damage

Structural Damage

Grocery/Resta urant

Yes

Address

Building Status

1087 Division St

Occupied

1075 Division St

Occupied

Division Hot Food & Grocery Desporte & Sons Seafood Market And Deli

3 4

1057 Division St Unknown

Occupied Vacant

Park Fire Gulf Coast, llc For Sale

5 6

1029 Division St 1015 Division St

Occupied Occupied

1011 Division St

Vacant

1001 Division St

Occupied

974 Division St

Occupied

971 Division St

Occupied

963 Division St

Occupied

12 13 14 15 16

964 Division St 935 Division St 917 Division St 905 Division St 904 Division St

Occupied Vacant Occupied Occupied Unknown

301 Caillavet St

Occupied

895 Division St

Occupied

Prestige Plaza Cap Auto Repair For Sale (Carter's Service) Dr. WM Earl Malone (Optometrist) Mississippi Center For Justice Law Offices Kalom & Associates, pllc

ATC Associates, Inc. Gary's Appliance Sales & Service N/A Food Tiger Just Us Unknown Simons Service Master Quality Poultry & Seafood

Grocery/Resta urant Other â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Fire related supplies N/A

Yes

No No

Yes Yes

No No

Health, Office, Tax Services Auto

No No

Yes Yes

No No

N/A

Yes

Health

Yes

Office

Yes

Office

Yes

Other Construction Materials Testing

Yes

Retail N/A Grocery Bar Unknown

No No No No No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No Yes

No No No No No

Auto Grocery/Resta urant

Yes

Address

Building Status

Business Name

Business Type

Under Constr- Visible uction Permits

856 Division St

Occupied

Retail

Yes

Unknown

Vacant

N/A

Yes

832 Division St

Occupied

Yes

Unknown

Occupied

Restaurant Other Funeral Home

Yes

290 Magnolia St

Vacant

N/A

Yes

785 Division St

Vacant

N/A

Yes

25 26

764 Division St 762 Division St

Vacant Vacant

N/A N/A

No No

Yes Yes

No No

Unknown

Occupied

Gas/Restaurant

Yes

751 Division St

Vacant

N/A

Yes

N/A

294 Division St

Occupied

Banks ton's Paint Asia Gifts, Car Wash Kim Long Vietnamese Cuisine Marshall Funeral Home Cook & Son's Body Shop Church's Fried Chicken Stephanie's Fashion & Beyond N/A Corner Station & Food To Go Sl Nails And Beauty Supply Inez Lounge & CafĂŠ

Restaurant

Yes

Clear of Debris

Boarded Windows

Roof Damage

Structural Damage

Map a.3 12

Address

Building Status

30 31

684 Division St 676 Division St

Occupied Vacant

32 33 34 35 36

670 Division St 640 Division St 636 Division St Unknown 602 Division St

Vacant Occupied Occupied Vacant Occupied

37 38 39 40

560 Division St 518 Division St 307 Division St 338 Division St

Vacant Occupied Vacant Unknown

339 Division St

Vacant

327 Division St

Occupied

43 44

321 Division St 295 Oak St

Occupied Occupied

Business Name Travis Haircare Barber & Beauty Shop N/A Gilbert R. Mason M.D. Unknown Unknown Unknown Family Dollar Twins Harbor Seafood Fancy Nails Unknown Unknown Transportation Service Center Of Mississippi Boomtown Learning Center Isle Of Capri Resort Uniforms And Wellness Clinic Chevron

Business Type

Under Constr- Visible uction Permits

Clear of Debris

Boarded Windows

Roof Damage

Structural Damage

Beauty N/A

No No

Yes Yes

No Yes

No No

No Yes

Health Auto Auto N/A Retail

No No No No No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No No

N/A No No No No

No No No No No

N/A Beauty N/A Unknown

No Yes Yes No

No No No No

Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No Yes No

No No No No

N/A

Yes

Office

Yes

Office Gas

No No

Yes Yes

No No

Appendix 5 - Street Survey Findings The following appendix includes information about the 39 street sections that make up Division Street. The sections are based on â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;CCO47_ID,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; a state determined identification number for county roads and city streets. The street survey findings are listed from West to East. This information is provided as a planning tool, any user of this information assumes all responsibility for its use.

CCO47_ID: 4590 From: Forrest to Porter Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 他 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 1 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 CCO47_ID: 4593 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 0/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4597 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 0/3 Litter: 2/4

From: Porter to Querens Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Querens to Benachi Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 1 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 17

CCO47_ID: 4601 From: Benachi to Graham Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 1/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 CCO47_ID: 4620 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4684 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 0/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

From: Graham to Iroquis Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 From: Iroquis to Seal Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0

CCO47_ID: 4715 From: Seal to Santini Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4714 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4712 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 1 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 2 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Santini to Hopkins Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 1 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 From: Hopkins to Bohn Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1

CCO47_ID: 4693 From: Hopkins to Bohn Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 2/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 CCO47_ID: 4711 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4676 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 1.5/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2.5/3 Street Signs: 2.5/3 Litter: 3/4

From: Bohn to Couevas Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Couevas to Anglada Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0.5 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1

CCO47_ID: 4705 From: Anglada to Fayard Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 2/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 2/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 CCO47_ID: 4703 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 0/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4700 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

From: Fayard to Reynoir Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 From: Reynoir to Magnolia Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 3

CCO47_ID: 4702 From: Reynoir to Magnolia Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 2/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 3 CCO47_ID: 4694 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4663 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

From: Magnolia to Delauney Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 From: Magnolia to Delauney Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2

CCO47_ID: 4696 From: Delauney to Lameuse Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 2/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 CCO47_ID: 4661 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4679 Condition North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Sidewalk: 2.5/3 Street Signs: 1.5/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

From: Delauney to Lameuse Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 From: Lameuse to Main Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2

CCO47_ID: 4677 From: Main to Elmer Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 2/4

CCO47_ID: 4670 Condition North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4687 Condition North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 2/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 2/3 Litter: 3/4

Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Elmer to Nixon Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 4 From: Nixon to Nichols Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1

CCO47_ID: 4685 From: Nichols to Lee Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 1 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 3 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 CCO47_ID: 4673 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

CCO47_ID: 4669 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

From: Nichols to Lee Elements Bus Stops: 1 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 3 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Lee to Keller Elements Bus Stops: 1 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1

CCO47_ID: 4699 From: Keller to Bowen Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 1/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 2/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 3/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 CCO47_ID: 4697 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4

CCO47_ID: 4689 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

From: Bowen to Holley Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Holley to Brown Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0

CCO47_ID: 4707 From: Brown to Fountain Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 0/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 CCO47_ID: 4706 Condition North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

CCO47_ID: 4682 Condition North Side Road Surface: 3/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

From: Fountain to Strangi Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 2 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 From: Fountain to Strangi Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 2 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1

CCO47_ID: 4680 From: Strangi to Penny Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 1 Sidewalk: 1/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 CCO47_ID: 4664 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

CCO47_ID: 4691 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 3/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

From: Penny to New Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0 From: New to Dunbar Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2

CCO47_ID: 4690 From: Dunbar to Crawford Condition Elements North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Bus Stops: 0 Sidewalk: 3/3 Stray Animals: 0 Street Signs: 3/3 Community Signs: 0 Litter: 4/4 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 CCO47_ID: 4651 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

CCO47_ID: 4646 Condition North Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 1/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 3/4 South Side Road Surface: 4/4 Sidewalk: 2/3 Street Signs: 3/3 Litter: 4/4

From: Crawford to Collier Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 1 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 2 From: Collier to Oak Elements Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 3 Bus Stops: 0 Stray Animals: 0 Community Signs: 0 Vandalism: 0 Street Lamps: 0

Appendix 6 – Major Employers Casinos3 Beau Rivage Resort & Casino Biloxi Boomtown Casino Biloxi Grand Casino Biloxi (Harrah’s Entertainment) Biloxi

www.beaurivage.com www.boomtownbiloxi.com www.harrahs.com

Hard Rock Hotel & Casino IP Hotel & Casino Isle of Capri Casino Resort

Biloxi Biloxi Biloxi

www.hardrockbiloxi.com www.ipbiloxi.com www.isleofcapricasino.com

Palace Casino Resort Treasure Bay Casino

Biloxi Biloxi

www.palacecasinoresort.com www.treasurebay.com

Biloxi

http://www.biloxischools.net/

Tulane University – Mississippi Campus

Biloxi

www.tulane.edu

Virginia College

Biloxi

www.vc.edu

Education Public Schools Biloxi Public Schools Colleges and Universities

Health Care Biloxi Regional Medical Center Cedar Lake Surgery Center Gulf Coast Medical Center Keesler Medical Center VA Gulf Coast Veterans Health Care System

Biloxi Biloxi Biloxi Biloxi Biloxi

www.hmabrmc.com www.cedarlk.com 228-388-3690 http://www.keesler.af.mil/ www.va.gov

Biloxi

www.keesler.af.mil

Biloxi

228-374-6011

Biloxi

www.edgewatermall.com

Military / Federal Keesler Air Force Base

Contractors / Engineering W.G. Yates & Sons Construction

Commercial / Retail Edgewater Mall

http://www.mscoast.org/majoremployers.htm 30

Appendix 7 - Parcel Appendix The following appendix includes photos and information about the 213 parcels along Division Street. The parcels are listed from West to East, alternating between the North and South block. The information included comes primarily from the land use survey that the team conducted in February 2008. Value and owner information dates from 2007 and comes from the Harrison County Tax Assessor. Photos and information were not collected on some parcels because of surveying errors and an inability to return to the site for further data gathering. This information is provided as a planning tool, any user of this information assumes all responsibility for its use.

Parcel #: 1310H-01-085.000 Address: 1098 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $25616

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) CVITANOVICH MILDRED L

Parcel #: 1310H-01-084.000 Address: 1092 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) REED ROBERT E

Parcel #: 1310H-01-083.000 Address: 1084 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) HUA MINA

Parcel #: 1310H-01-082.000 Address: 1080 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BOURGEOIS LINDA C 33

Parcel #: 1310H-01-081.000 Located on the North side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave Address: 1076 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $6196

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BOURGEOIS JOHN J III & LINDA C

Parcel #: 1310H-02-105.001 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

RD (Duplex or Two Family Residence) NGO HONG XUAN

Parcel #: 1310H-02-104.000 Located on the South side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave Address: 1087 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $41200 Improvements Value: $20693

Name Use Zoning Owner

DIVISION HOT FOOD & GROCERY COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) NGUYEN BE VAN

Parcel #: 1310H-02-079.000 Located on the South side of Division between Forrest Ave and Porter Ave Address: 1075 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $59400 Improvements Value: $143580

Name Use Zoning Owner

DESPORTE & SONS SEAFOOD MARKET AND DELI COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) DESPORTE & SONS SEAFOOD INC

Parcel #: 1310H-01-012.000 Address: 1066 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Porter Ave and Benachi Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17940 Improvements Value: $42993

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) JACKSON KIRK P & LOIS ANN

Parcel #: 1310H-01-011.000 Address: 1060 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Porter Ave and Benachi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) WOODS CASS 36

Parcel #: 1310H-01-010.000 Address: 1054 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Porter Ave and Benachi Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $14250 Improvements Value: $9101

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) LEBLANC EUNICE M L/E

Parcel #: 1310H-02-078.000 Address: 1057 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Porter Ave and Querens Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $39600 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

PARK FIRE GULF COAST, LLC COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) DESPORTE AND SONS INC

Parcel #: 1310H-02-077.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Porter Ave and Querens Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $24960 Improvements Value: $900

Name Use Zoning Owner

‘FOR SALE’ COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) DESPORTE AND SONS INC

Parcel #: 1310H-02-036.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Porter Ave and Querens Ave

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $45344 Improvements Value: $8751

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) DAVIS PATRICK J

Parcel #: 1310H-01-009.000 Address: 1046 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Porter Ave and Benachi Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

COASTAL FAMILY HEALTH CENTER INSTITUTION B-2 (Community Business) COASTAL FAMILY HEALTH CENTER INC

Parcel #: 1310H-01-008.000 Address: 1040 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Porter Ave and Benachi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) UPTON CRAIG B 39

Parcel #: 1310H-02-035.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Querens Ave and Benachi Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $32928 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) MAURICE A TAQUINO REAL ESTATE LLC

Parcel #: 1310H-02-001.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Querens Ave and Benachi Ave

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $33600 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-2 (Community Business) PRESTIGE MANAGEMENT LLC

Parcel #: 1410E-05-001.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Benachi Ave and Iroquois St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BILOXI

Parcel #: 1410E-05-002.000 Address: 1012 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Benachi Ave and Iroquois St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

BACK BAY MISSION INSTITUTION B-2 (Community Business) BACK BAY MISSION INC 41

Parcel #: 1410E-05-006.000 Address: 0 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Benachi Ave and Iroquois St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RO (Residential Office) 1ST FAITH MISSIONARY BAPT CHURCH

Parcel #: 1410E-06-072.000 Address: 1029 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Benachi Ave and Graham Ave

This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $57000 Improvements Value: $173516

Name Use Zoning Owner

PRESTIGE PLAZA COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) PRESTIGE MANAGEMENT LLC 42

Parcel #: 1410E-06-071.000 Located on the South side of Division between Graham Ave and Iroquois St Address: 1015 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $31500 Improvements Value: $28985

Name Use Zoning Owner

CAP ENGINE REBUILDERS (CAP AUTO REPAIR) COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) DRONET GARY A & WF

Parcel #: 1410E-06-037.000 Address: 1011 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Graham Ave and Iroquois St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $23562 Improvements Value: $7436

Name Use Zoning Owner

CARTER'S SERVICE COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) DRONET GARY A & ANN M

Parcel #: 1410E-06-036.000 Located on the South side of Division between Graham Ave and Iroquois St Address: 1007 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $22050 Improvements Value: $9282

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) BALIUS MARTHA

Parcel #: 1410E-06-035.000 Located on the South side of Division between Graham Ave and Iroquois St Address: 1001 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $25039 Improvements Value: $47766

Name Use Zoning Owner

DR. WM EARL MALONE (OPTOMETRIST) COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) HOWARD AVENUE PACKAGE PROPERTIES

Parcel #: 1410E-04-048.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $4859

Name Use Zoning Owner

FLOWING RIVERS OF LIFE MINISTRIES NON-DENOMINATIONAL INSTITUTION RO (Residential Office) 1ST FAITH MISS BAPTIST CHURCH

Parcel #: 1410E-04-047.000 Address: 990 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $16100 Improvements Value: $8239

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) WHITLOCK BOSTON 45

Parcel #: 1410E-04-045.000 Address: 305 SEAL AVE This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $3667

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) GLENN ELIZABETH J & MARY JOYCE

Parcel #: 1410E-04-046.000 Address: 301 SEAL AVE This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) PARYLAK JEROME 46

Parcel #: 1410E-06-034.000 Located on the South side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave Address: 997 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $18060 Improvements Value: $10532

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) WILD EVA RUTH -ESTATE-

Parcel #: 1410E-06-033.000 Located on the South side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave Address: 991 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $10250 Improvements Value: $8633

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) PAM LLC

Parcel #: 1410E-06-001.000 Located on the South side of Division between Iroquois St and Seal Ave Address: 987 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $15952

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) MELTZ MARY K

Parcel #: 1410E-04-028.001 Located on the North side of Division between Seal Ave and Santini St Address: 978 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $23260 Improvements Value: $40749

Name Use Zoning Owner

SANDMARK DEVELOPMENT CORP MIXED USE RO (Residential Office) KASOVICH GERALD A 48

Parcel #: 1410E-04-027.000 Address: 974 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Seal Ave and Santini St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $26208 Improvements Value: $37825

Name Use Zoning Owner

MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE COMMERCIAL RO (Residential Office) KASOVICH GABRIEL C

Parcel #: 1410E-04-026.000 Address: 970 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Seal Ave and Santini St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $13238 Improvements Value: $23469

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) KALOM T MITCHELL 49

Parcel #: 1410E-03-109.000 Located on the South side of Division between Seal Ave and Santini St Address: 294 SEAL AVE This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $16723

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) SUMRALL HOUSTON G & SYBIL D

Parcel #: 1410E-03-069.000 Located on the South side of Division between Seal Ave and Santini St Address: 971 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $28340 Improvements Value: $54186

Name Use Zoning Owner

LAW OFFICES KALOM & ASSOCIATES, PLLC COMMERCIAL RO (Residential Office) KALOM T MITCHELL

Parcel #: 1410E-04-017.000 Address: 964 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $10080 Improvements Value: $61023

Name Use Zoning Owner

GARY'S APPLIANCE SALES & SERVICE COMMERCIAL RO (Residential Office) MORYKWAS GARY S

Parcel #: 1410E-04-016.000 Address: 962 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $5292 Improvements Value: $18694

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) KASOVICH GERALD & WF 51

Parcel #: 1410E-04-015.000 Address: 960 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $6900 Improvements Value: $17110

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) RICHARD ARLAN A & LORNA

Parcel #: 1410E-04-014.000 Address: 956 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $7950 Improvements Value: $17720

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) DEMOURELLE THEODORE J JR ET AL 52

Parcel #: 1410E-04-013.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RO (Residential Office) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410E-03-068.000 Address: 963 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $13104 Improvements Value: $50533

Name Use Zoning Owner

ATC ASSOCIATES, INC. COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) KASOVICH GABRIEL C ET AL

Parcel #: 1410E-03-067.000 Located on the South side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd Address: 961 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8400 Improvements Value: $26533

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) KASOVICH GABRIEL C

Parcel #: 1410E-03-030.000 Located on the South side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd Address: 957 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8400 Improvements Value: $19494

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) KASOVICH GERALD A

Parcel #: 1410E-03-029.000 Located on the South side of Division between Santini St and Hopkins Blvd Address: 955 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $39988

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RO (Residential Office) SAUCIER NITA M

Parcel #: 1410E-03-028.000 Address: 947 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Hopkins Blvd and I-110

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RO (Residential Office) SKRMETTA BOBBIE JEAN

Parcel #: 1410E-03-001.000 Address: 935 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between I-110 and Bohn St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $40125 Improvements Value: $85722

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) A & H CORP

Parcel #: 1410E-01-072.000 Address:

Located on the North side of Division between Bohn St and Couevas St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $4773 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) STRAYHAM W P JR & GERALD G ETAL

Parcel #: 1410E-01-071.001 Address: 922 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Bohn St and Couevas St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) STRAYHAM WILLIAM P & GERALD G ETAL

Parcel #: 1410E-01-071.000 Address: 920 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Bohn St and Couevas St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) STRAYHAM WILLIAM P & GERALD G ETAL 57

Parcel #: 1410E-01-070.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Bohn St and Couevas St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) MISS POWER CO

Parcel #: 1410E-02-067.000 Address: 917 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Bohn St and Couevas St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $72000 Improvements Value: $479460

Name Use Zoning Owner

FOOD TIGER COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) RHODES RENTALS LLC

Parcel #: 1410E-01-043.000 Address: 906 DIVISION ST This lot is Occupied by a building that is Occupied

Located on the North side of Division between Couevas St and Caillavet St

Name Use Zoning Owner

JUST US COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) LILES MARY A

Parcel #: 1410E-01-043.001 Located on the North side of Division between Couevas St and Caillavet St Address: 904 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17122 Improvements Value: $33591

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) DORA LAND A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Parcel #: 1410E-01-042.000 Address: 301 CAILLAVET ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Couevas St and Caillavet St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $37683 Improvements Value: $13260

Name Use Zoning Owner

SIMONS SERVICE MASTER COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) SIMON GEORGE

Parcel #: 1410E-02-032.000 Address: 905 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Couevas St and Caillavet St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) BACK BAY MISSION INC

Parcel #: 1410E-02-031.000 Address: 291 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Couevas St and Caillavet St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) CHANN VUTHY & SOTHEARY

Parcel #: 1410E-01-010.000 Address: 880 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Caillavet St and Anglada St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) BILOXI CITY OF 61

Parcel #: 1410E-02-019.027 Located on the South side of Division between Caillavet St and Anglada St Address: 895 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $80213 Improvements Value: $340525

Name Use Zoning Owner

QUALITY POULTRY & SEAFOOD COMMERCIAL CRD (Corridor Redevelopment District) QPS PROPERTY LLC

Parcel #: 1410F-05-112.000 Address: 868 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Anglada St and Fayard St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) HEYEN INVESTMENT INC

Parcel #: 1410F-06-122.000 Located on the South side of Division between Anglada St and Fayard St Address: 867 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $1210

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-4 (General Business) NGO HUNG XUAN

Parcel #: 1410F-05-084.000 Located on the North side of Division between Fayard St and Reynoir St Address: 856 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $52122 Improvements Value: $205189

Name Use Zoning Owner

BANKSTON'S PAINT COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) BANKSTON ALTON G & KAY R 63

Parcel #: 1410F-06-089.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Fayard St and Reynoir St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $41661 Improvements Value: $6688

Name Use Zoning Owner

ASIA GIFTS, AND CAR WASH (ON THE SAME LOT) COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) NGUYEN LONG HOANG

Parcel #: 1410F-05-063.000 Located on the North side of Division between Reynoir St ad Croesus St Address: 832 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $44254 Improvements Value: $4270

Name Use Zoning Owner

KIM LONG VIETNAMESE CUISINE COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) PHAM THAO T 64

Parcel #: 1410F-05-062.000 Address: 826 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Reynoir St ad Croesus St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $1966

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-4 (General Business) HARRIS CATHEREAN A

Parcel #: 1410F-05-061.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Reynoir St ad Croesus St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BILOXI 65

Parcel #: 1410F-06-087.000 Located on the South side of Division between Reynoir St and Magnolia St Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $24829 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

MARSHALL FUNERAL HOME COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) SUGAR LUMPS CORP

Parcel #: 1410F-06-088.000 Located on the South side of Division between Reynoir St and Magnolia St Address: 821 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $10000 Improvements Value: $1433

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-4 (General Business) DORA LAND

Parcel #: 1410F-06-048.000 Located on the South side of Division between Reynoir St and Magnolia St Address: 803 MAGNOLIA ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

OUR MOTHER OF SORROW'S CHURCH INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) ST JOSEPH SOCIETY

Parcel #: 1410F-05-037.000 Address: 810 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Croesus St and Magnolia St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) DIVISION ST CHURCH OF CHRIST 67

Parcel #: 1410F-05-036.000 Address: 800 MAGNOLIA ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Croesus St and Magnolia St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

OUR MOTHER OF SORROWS INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BILOXI

Parcel #: 1410F-06-047.000 Address: 290 MAGNOLIA ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Magnolia St and Delauney St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $12600 Improvements Value: $8692

Name Use Zoning Owner

COOK & SON'S BODY SHOP COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) COOK WILLIE J & WF

Parcel #: 1410F-06-046.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Magnolia St and Delauney St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $7380 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) FRIS CHKN LLC

Parcel #: 1410F-06-001.000 Address: 785 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Magnolia St and Delauney St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $51282 Improvements Value: $20964

Name Use Zoning Owner

CHURCH'S FRIED CHICKEN COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) FRIS CHKN LLC

Parcel #: 1410F-05-015.000 Address: 786 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Magnolia St and Haise St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) DORA LAND

Parcel #: 1410F-05-013.000 Address: 774 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Magnolia St and Haise St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) DORA LAND 70

Parcel #: 1410F-05-014.000 Address:

Located on the North side of Division between Magnolia St and Haise St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $7000 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) DORA LAND

Parcel #: 1410F-03-088.000 Located on the South side of Division between Delauney St and Lamuse St Address: 769 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

LIGHTHOUSE APOSTOLIC HOLINESS CHURCH INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) LIGHTHOUSE CHURCH A F A INC

Parcel #: 1410F-03-088.001 Address: 757 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Delauney St and Lamuse St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) FAGAN RANDOLPH F & JOEDNA R

Parcel #: 1410F-03-087.000 Located on the South side of Division between Delauney St and Lamuse St Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $10890 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

CORNER STATION & FOOD TO GO COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) DOAN XINH THE

Parcel #: 1410F-03-086.000 Address: 751 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Delauney St and Lamuse St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $22869 Improvements Value: $4092

Name Use Zoning Owner

SL NAILS AND BEAUTY SUPPLY COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) DOAN XINH THE

Parcel #: 1410F-04-071.000 Address: 764 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Haise St and Lamuse St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $13160 Improvements Value: $1603

Name Use Zoning Owner

STEPHANIE'S FASHION & BEYOND COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) PREMEAUX P & BALIUS DONALD SR 73

Parcel #: 1410F-04-070.000 Address: 762 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Haise St and Lamuse St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $6060 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) BALIUS DONALD G SR ET AL

Parcel #: 1410F-04-069.000 Address: 758 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Haise St and Lamuse St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $6900 Improvements Value: $2231

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-4 (General Business) DORA LAND INC 74

Parcel #: 1410F-04-068.000 Address: 301 LAMEUSE ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Haise St and Lamuse St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) CHERRY RALPH M & WF

Parcel #: 1410F-03-044.001 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Lamuse St and Midway St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

COASTAL FAMILY HEALTH CENTER INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-04-036.000 Address: 304 LAMEUSE ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Lamuse St and Rosado Ln

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) NGUYEN CAO

Parcel #: 1410F-04-035.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Lamuse St and Rosado Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) GULF SOUTH PIPELINE COMPANY LP 76

Parcel #: 1410F-04-026.000 Address: 714 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Lamuse St and Rosado Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $1167

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-4 (General Business) LEWIS WAYNE

Parcel #: 1410F-04-023.000 Address: 712 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Lamuse St and Rosado Ln

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) THAI SENG T & ANG KIM L 77

Parcel #: 1410F-03-025.000 Located on the South side of Division between Midway St and Main St Address: 294 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

INEZ LOUNGE & CAFĂ&#x2030; COMMERCIAL B-4 (General Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-03-005.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Midway St and Main St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-03-004.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Midway St and Main St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-03-001.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Midway St and Main St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-04-022.000 Located on the North side of Division between Rosado Ln and Main St Address: 710 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

NANCE TEMPLE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST INSTITUTION B-4 (General Business) FIRST CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST

Parcel #: 1410F-02-093.000 Address: 709 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Main St and Elmer St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-4 (General Business) THOMAS INEZ E & PROBY VIREECE

Parcel #: 1410F-02-094.000 Address:

Located on the South side of Division between Main St and Elmer St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $9300 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-4 (General Business) MCSWAIN NOLAN

Parcel #: 1410F-01-081.000 Address: 696 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Main St and Elmer St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: No Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $21560 Improvements Value: $1235

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN MIXED USE B-4 (General Business) RUFFIN JAMES JR & THOMAS E SR 81

Parcel #: 1410F-01-080.000 Address: 690 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Main St and Elmer St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8000 Improvements Value: $759

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN MIXED USE B-4 (General Business) NGUYEN LE THI & NGO CHAU

Parcel #: 1410F-02-119.000 Address: 683 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

JOHN HENRY BECK PARK PARK B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-02-118.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

JOHN HENRY BECK PARK PARK B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-02-117.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

JOHN HENRY BECK PARK PARK B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-02-116.000 Address: 436 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

JOHN HENRY BECK PARK PARK B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-02-115.000 Address: 661 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $18144 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

JOHN HENRY BECK PARK PARK B-2 (Community Business) MCDANIEL DOROTHY V

Parcel #: 1410F-02-114.000 Address: 651 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) POLLARD JAMES HENRY JR ET AL

Parcel #: 1410F-01-048.000 Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St Address: 684 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $12674 Improvements Value: $3866

Name Use Zoning Owner

TRAVIS HAIRCARE BARBER & BEAUTY SHOP COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) TRAVIS L J & GILRON A 85

Parcel #: 1410F-01-047.000 Address:

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-2 (Community Business) DIVISION ST BAPTIST CHURCH

Parcel #: 1410F-01-046.000 Address: 676 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $7308 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) CALMES JOHN

Parcel #: 1410F-01-045.000 Address: 674 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI MAIN STREET LLC

Parcel #: 1410F-01-043.000 Address: 670 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17808 Improvements Value: $2100

Name Use Zoning Owner

GILBERT R. MASON M.D. COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) MASON GILBERT R SR -ESTATE-

Parcel #: 1410F-01-042.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) STEELE ERNESTINE

Parcel #: 1410F-01-041.000 Address: 662 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) DICKEY AMOS & MARY L

Parcel #: 1410F-01-040.000 Address:

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: Visible permits: Mainly clear of debris: Boarded windows: Visible roof damage: Significant structural damage: Land Value: $4662 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

B-2 (Community Business) DICKEY ERIC E

Parcel #: 1410F-01-039.000 Address: 656 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) BARNES LUTHER W & LOTTIE B L/E

Parcel #: 1410F-01-038.000 Address: 658 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410F-01-037.000 Address: 301 NIXON ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Elmer St and Nixon St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) POLLARD JAMES HENRY JR ET AL

Parcel #: 1410F-02-001.000 Address: 643 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $31920 Improvements Value: $2083

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) JAMES PETER K

Parcel #: 1410G-06-027.000 Address: 635 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) DIXON ROBERT S

Parcel #: 1410G-06-028.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) MOORE RICHARD

Parcel #: 1410G-06-030.000 Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr Address: 629 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) GINES LAWRENCE ESTATE

Parcel #: 1410G-06-033.000 Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr Address: 613 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $18020 Improvements Value: $9073

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A or UNKNOWN RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) ROBEY LEOLA T ET AL

Parcel #: 1410G-06-032.000 Address: 617 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) GINES JOHN

Parcel #: 1410G-06-031.000 Address: 625 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) MOSS SADIE B

Parcel #: 1410G-06-034.000 Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr Address: 611 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $10120 Improvements Value: $6491

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) MILLER LLOYD M & PROBY JOSEPH

Parcel #: 1410G-06-035.001 Address: 601 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Nixon St and Nichols Dr

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) SMITH HURLEY & JOHNNIE M

Parcel #: 1410F-01-015.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nixon St and Huff Ln Address: 640 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $27930 Improvements Value: $863

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) RATLIFF DAVID JR & BESSIE

Parcel #: 1410F-01-014.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nixon St and Huff Ln Address: 636 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $12936 Improvements Value: $1215

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) PITTMAN SYLVESTER

Parcel #: 1410F-01-013.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nixon St and Huff Ln Address: 632 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $5016 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) PHAM THO

Parcel #: 1410G-05-051.000 Address: 630 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Huff Ln and Nichols Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8400 Improvements Value: $5496

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) AGEE YVONNE G -EST-

Parcel #: 1410G-05-049.000 Address: 622 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Huff Ln and Nichols Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $5882

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) CRIDDELL JUNIUS J & WF

Parcel #: 1410G-05-048.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Huff Ln and Nichols Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $11503 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) CRIDDELL JUNIUS J & WF

Parcel #: 1410G-05-047.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Huff Ln and Nichols Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI VISIONS OF HOPE INC 98

Parcel #: 1410G-05-047.001 Address: 602 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Huff Ln and Nichols Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $32175 Improvements Value: $67638

Name Use Zoning Owner

FAMILY DOLLAR COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) HICKS TED & CONSTANCE F

Parcel #: 1410G-06-001.000 Address: 575 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Nichols Ln and Lee St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

THE SALVATION ARMY (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BILOXI'S YANKIE STADIUM) INSTITUTION B-2 (Community Business) SALVATION ARMY THE 99

Parcel #: 1410G-05-039.000 Address: 340 NICHOLS DR

Located on the North side of Division between Nichols Ln and Heidenheim St

This lot is VACANT Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Parcel #: 1410G-05-024.000 Address: 582 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Nichols Ln and Heidenheim St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) JOHNSON ELIJAH M & WF 100

Parcel #: 1410G-05-025.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nichols Ln and Heidenheim St Address: 578 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $10627

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) WALKER SARAH DIANE ET AL

Parcel #: 1410G-05-022.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nichols Ln and Heidenheim St Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $7500 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) WATSON LEON R & WF

101

Parcel #: 1410G-05-021.000 Located on the North side of Division between Nichols Ln and Heidenheim St Address: 570 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $9233

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) HUFF DARLENE MARIE BRUNIES

Parcel #: 1410G-05-020.000 Located on the North side of Division between Heidenheim St and Lee St Address: 564 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $9111

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) ODOM JEANNETTA ET AL 102

Parcel #: 1410G-05-019.000 Address: 560 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Heidenheim St and Lee St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $21210 Improvements Value: $23546

Name Use Zoning Owner

TWINS HARBOR SEAFOOD COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) ASSET MANAGEMENT DIRECT LLC

Parcel #: 1410G-03-124.000 Address: 551 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Lee St and Keller Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

METHODIST AFRICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH INSTITUTION B-2 (Community Business) ST JOHN AME CHURCH

103

Parcel #: 1410G-03-083.000 Address: 543 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Lee St and Keller Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8400 Improvements Value: $3879

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) DICKEY MARVIN M JR & DAPHNEY D

Parcel #: 1410G-03-082.000 Address: 295 KELLER AVE This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Lee St and Keller Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $7771

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) LEPRE NANCY W

104

Parcel #: 1410G-04-113.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Lee St and Sherry Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $36082 Improvements Value: $16877

Name Use Zoning Owner

J.R.'S FOOD MART COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) NGUYEN JOHN D & TRANG D

Parcel #: 1410G-04-068.000 Address: 542 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Sherry Ln and Keller Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) TRIEU LORIE THU

105

Parcel #: 1410G-04-069.000 Address: 538 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Sherry Ln and Keller Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $34615 Improvements Value: $28465

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN UNKNOWN B-2 (Community Business) TRIEU TAM JOHN

Parcel #: 1410G-03-081.000 Address: 296 KELLER AVE This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Keller Ave and Bowen St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) TRUONG GAI

106

Parcel #: 1410G-03-041.000 Address: 519 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Keller Ave and Bowen St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $5982

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) STEINWINDER HARRY LEE

Parcel #: 1410G-03-040.000 Address: 517 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Keller Ave and Bowen St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $8856 Improvements Value: $4155

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) LE NGOC MINH & PHAN TUYET NGOC

107

Parcel #: 1410G-04-067.000 Address: 526 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Keller Ave and Bowen St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $27087 Improvements Value: $20768

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) MUISE XUAN

Parcel #: 1410G-04-027.001 Address: 518 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Keller Ave and Bowen St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $33572 Improvements Value: $18267

Name Use Zoning Owner

FANCY NAILS COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) BUI RENTALS & MANAGEMENT LLC

108

Parcel #: 1410G-03-039.001 Address: 511 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $15299 Improvements Value: $6889

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN UNKNOWN B-2 (Community Business) NGO THAO VAN & PHAM TUYET T

Parcel #: 1410G-03-039.000 Address: 509 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $7388

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) NGO THAO VAN PHAM TUYET T 109

Parcel #: 1410G-03-002.000 Address: 505 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $10897

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) LE PHUNG T & NGOI LE

Parcel #: 1410G-03-001.000 Address: 295 HOLLEY ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $9656 Improvements Value: $5926

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) DIXSON ELISE R

110

Parcel #: 1410G-04-026.000 Address: 510 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $5499 Improvements Value: $8056

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) PHAM THU T & TRAN QUANG Q

Parcel #: 1410G-04-022.000 Address: 508 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $9677

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) TUCKER TIMOTHY ETAL

111

Parcel #: 1410G-04-025.000 Address: 307 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Bowen St and Holley St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: Yes Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17360 Improvements Value: $7781

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) SANTA MARIA IV

Parcel #: 1410G-02-072.000 Address: 493 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Holley St and Brown St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) PATTERSON L J & WF

112

Parcel #: 1410G-02-073.000 Address: 489 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Holley St and Brown St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $9200 Improvements Value: $3405

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) LUONG TONY

Parcel #: 1410G-02-074.000 Address: 487 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Holley St and Brown St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $7912 Improvements Value: $12218

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN UNKNOWN B-2 (Community Business) PARKER WILLIAM E

113

Parcel #: 1410G-01-017.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Holley St and Brown St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410G-02-063.000 Address: 481 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Brown St and Fountain Ln

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17472 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) PARKER KAREN C ETAL

114

Parcel #: 1410G-01-016.000 Located on the North side of Division between Brown St and Fountain Ln Address: 480 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $8654

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BURBRIDGE MARY B

Parcel #: 1410G-01-015.000 Located on the North side of Division between Brown St and Fountain Ln Address: 476 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: Yes Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $5800 Improvements Value: $2509

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) LONBERGER MELVIN

115

Parcel #: 1410G-01-014.000 Address: 474 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Brown St and Fountain Ln

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) PRICE JAMES EDWARD

Parcel #: 1410G-02-030.000 Address: 467 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave

This lot is VACANT Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $12600 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) NGUYEN QUAN 116

Parcel #: 1410G-02-029.000 Address: 459 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) PHAM MINH & NGA

Parcel #: 1410G-02-001.000 Address: 447 DIVISION ST

Located on the South side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $20240 Improvements Value: $7024

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) PHAM NGA THI 117

Parcel #: 1410G-01-005.000 Address: 468 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) SAUCIER CLEMENT B JR & WF

Parcel #: 1410G-01-004.000 Address: 458 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) HALL MELANIE P ET AL 118

Parcel #: 1410G-01-003.000 Address: 450 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Fountain Ln and Strangi Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) DANG SIEM V & TRINH HOA T

Parcel #: 1410H-06-085.000 Address: 292 STRANGI AVE This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Strangi Ave and Kuhn St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) LUU KY THI 119

Parcel #: 1410H-06-085.001 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Strangi Ave and Kuhn St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN INSTITUTION RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BILOXI CITY OF

Parcel #: 1410H-06-084.001 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Strangi Ave and Kuhn St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

CITY OF BILOXI MONSIGNOR JOHN JOSEPH O'REILLY MEMORIAL PARK PARK RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BILOXI CITY OF 120

Parcel #: 1410H-06-084.000 Address: 425 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Strangi Ave and Kuhn St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

HOPE COORIDINATION CENTER (GCCDS) INSTITUTION RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BILOXI

Parcel #: 1410H-06-083.000 Address: 295 KUHN ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Strangi Ave and Kuhn St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) GRIFFIN DEBRA A

121

Parcel #: 1410H-05-057.000 Address: 440 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Strangi Ave and Penny Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) HO BUU DINH & HANH THI VU

Parcel #: 1410H-05-056.001 Address: 426 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Strangi Ave and Penny Ave

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) HO HANH THI VU ET AL

122

Parcel #: 1410H-05-056.000 Address: 424 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Strangi Ave and Penny Ave

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) TRAN HAI T

Parcel #: 1410H-05-031.000 Address: 420 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Penny Ave and New St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) TRAN NGHIA VAN & LE BANH THI

123

Parcel #: 1410H-05-031.002 Address: 416 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Penny Ave and New St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) KHUONG NGOC CAM LAM JULIE H

Parcel #: 1410H-05-031.001 Address: 410 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Penny Ave and New St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) KHUONG NGOC CAM LAM JULIE H

124

Parcel #: 1410H-06-051.000 Address: 294 KUHN ST

Located on the South side of Division between Kuhn St and Laurel Ct

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) NGUYEN DAI TRONG

Parcel #: 1410H-06-050.000 Address: 295 LAUREL CT

Located on the South side of Division between Kuhn St and Laurel Ct

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) NGUYEN JOHN & TRANG 125

Parcel #: 1410H-05-024.000 Address: 402 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between New St and Dunbar St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) CASE LESTER L

Parcel #: 1410H-05-023.000 Address: 400 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between New St and Dunbar St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) TUNSTALL CLAUZELL

126

Parcel #: 1410H-05-022.000 Address: 396 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between New St and Dunbar St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $9415

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) MANNING DORA

Parcel #: 1410H-05-021.000 Address: 392 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between New St and Dunbar St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) FRENTZ RICHARD ET AL

127

Parcel #: 1410H-05-020.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between New St and Dunbar St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) GOLDEN GULF CASINO INC

Parcel #: 1410H-06-016.000 Address: 294 LAUREL CT This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Laurel Ct and Crawford St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $17710 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-7.5 (Single Family Residential Medium Density) VU ADRYENE ANH

128

Parcel #: 1410H-06-005.001 Address: 363 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Laurel Ct and Crawford St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-7.5 (Single Family Residential Medium Density) NGUYEN HUU VAN & VO THI BAY -L/E-

Parcel #: 1410H-06-001.000 Address: 359 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Laurel Ct and Crawford St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-7.5 (Single Family Residential Medium Density) NGO THANH P & WF

129

Parcel #: 1410H-05-016.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Dunbar St and Crawford St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) FERRARA CHRISTOPHER A

Parcel #: 1410H-05-015.000 Address: 362 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Dunbar St and Crawford St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) NGUYEN THANH

130

Parcel #: 1410H-04-081.000 Address: 339 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Crawford St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $187140 Improvements Value: $43849

Name Use Zoning Owner

TRANSPORTATION SERVICE CENTER OF MISSISSIPPI COMMERCIAL B-5 (High Volume Business) JOHNSON DIESEL SERV INC

Parcel #: 1410H-04-080.000 Address: 327 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Crawford St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $69600 Improvements Value: $50454

Name Use Zoning Owner

BOOMTOWN LEARNING CENTER COMMERCIAL B-5 (High Volume Business) DESPORTE JAMES A & LINDA

131

Parcel #: 1410H-04-079.000 Address: 321 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the South side of Division between Crawford St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $61425 Improvements Value: $163800

Name Use Zoning Owner

ISLE OF CAPRI RESORT UNIFORMS AND WELLNESS CLINIC COMMERCIAL I-1 (Light Industrial) DESPORTE JAMES A & LINDA L

Parcel #: 1410H-04-078.001 Address: 311 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the South side of Division between Crawford St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A I-1 (Light Industrial) BILOXI CITY OF

132

Parcel #: 1410H-04-073.000 Address: 295 OAK ST

Located on the South side of Division between Crawford St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

CHEVRON COMMERCIAL I-1 (Light Industrial) DO TRONG D

Parcel #: 1410H-04-025.000 Address: 306 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

This lot is VACANT Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: No Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) SCARA BILLY J 133

Parcel #: 1410H-04-026.000 Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St Address: 338 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OF UNKNOWN OCCUPANCY STATUS Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $30000 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

UNKNOWN COMMERCIAL B-2 (Community Business) FAGAN RANDOLPH F & JOEDNA R

Parcel #: 1410H-04-027.000 Address: 336 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) PARKER JOSEPH K

134

Parcel #: 1410H-04-028.000 Address: 326 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: No Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $8944

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) LOPEZ WEBB JOSEPH JR

Parcel #: 1410H-04-034.000 Address: UNKNOWN This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: No Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: N/A Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: N/A Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A RS-5 (Single Family Residential High Density) BOYS CLUB OF BILOXI INC

135

Parcel #: 1410H-04-054.000 Address: 322 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Condition Under construction: Yes Visible permits: No Mainly clear of debris: Yes Boarded windows: No Visible roof damage: N/A Significant structural damage: No Land Value: $0 Improvements Value: $0

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) TRAN NHAN T & HIEP H

Parcel #: 1410H-04-055.000 Address: 320 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) NGUYEN VICTORIA B

136

Parcel #: 1410H-04-056.000 Address: 312 DIVISION ST This lot is OCCUPIED by a building that is OCCUPIED

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A RESIDENTIAL B-2 (Community Business) BUI THI MANH & NGUYEN TUAT

Parcel #: 1410H-04-057.000 Address: 310 DIVISION ST This lot is VACANT

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) LE PHAT TAN

137

Parcel #: 1410H-04-058.000 Address: 308 DIVISION ST

Located on the North side of Division between Collier St and Oak St

Name Use Zoning Owner

N/A N/A B-2 (Community Business) BALIUS DON III

138

Appendix 8 - Organizations Consulted Biloxi Housing Authority Helen Werby, Development Coordinator 330 Benachi Avenue Biloxi, Mississippi 39530 228-374-7771 x207

Knight Foundation Adele C. Lyons, Program Director for Biloxi 11975 Seaway Road, Box I Gulfport, MS 39503 (228) 896-2802

City of Biloxi Department of Community Development

Local Initiative Support Corporation Mary Paumen, Senior Program Director 1825 K Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006-1210 202-739-0887

Jerry Creel, Director 676 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. Biloxi, MS 39530 228-435-6280

Main Street Missionary Baptist Church Dr. Kenneth Haynes, Sr., Pastor 321 Main Street Biloxi, MS 39530 228-432-8648

East Biloxi Coordination & Relief Bill Stallworth, Executive Director 425 Division Street Biloxi, MS 39530 228-435-6280

National Alliance of Vietnamese American Service Agencies (NAVASA) Trinh Le, Dan Than Corps Hope Coordination Center 425 Division Street Biloxi, MS 39530 228-383-0910

Gulf Coast Community Design Studio David Perkes, Director 425 Division Street Biloxi, MS 39530 228-435-7180

139

Appendix 9 - Works Cited Association of State Floodplain Managers. No Adverse Impact Community Case Studies. 2004. <www.floods.org/PDF/NAI_Case_Studies.pdf> (20 January 2008). Atlantic City Outlets The Walk. <http://www.acoutlets.com> (3 January 2008). Beyard, Michael D., Michael Pawlukiewicz and Alex Bond. “Ten Principles for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail.” Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute, 2003. Bin, Okmyung and Stephen Polasky. “Effects of Flood Hazards on Property Values: Evidence Before and After Hurricane Floyd.” August 2003. <www.ecu.edu/econ/wp/03/ecu0306.pdf> (15 December 2008) Birch, Eugenie L. and Susan M. Wachter. Rebuilding Urban Places After Disaster. Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006 Brandes Gratz, Roberta and Norman Mintz. Cities Back from the Edge, New Life for Downtown. New York: Preservation Press, 1998. Breen, Ann and Dick Rigby. Intown Living, A Different American Dream. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2004. Bright, Elise M. Reviving America’s Forgotten Neighborhoods. New York: Garland Publishing, 2000. Brown, Robert J. and Michele Laumer. “Comeback Cities.” Urban Land, August 1995. Brown, Steve. “Dallas/Fort Worth Real Estate Markets: Hotter Than Hot,” Urban Land, September 1998. Burayidi, Michael A. Edited. Downtowns, Revitalizing the Centers of Small Urban Communities. New York: Routedge, 2001. Business Enterprises for Sustainable Travel. “About BEST.” 2004-2005. <http://www.sustainabletravel.org/about.htm> (27 January 2008). Casino Reinvestment Development Authority. <http://www.njcrda.com> (7 January 2008). Cassel Means, Annette. “Downtown Revitalization in Small Cities.” Urban Land, January 1997. City-Data. “Biloxi Economy: Major Industries and Commercial Activity.” 2008. <http://www.city-data.com/us-cities/The-South/Biloxi-Economy.html> (13 March 2008). ———. “Grand Forks, ND: Sorlie Memorial Bridge over the Red River.” 17 May 2005. <http://www.city-data.com/picfilesv/picv10409.php> (10 January 2008). 140

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. “New Market Tax Credit Program.” 15 April 2008. <http://www.cdfifund.gov/what_we_do/programs_id.asp?programID=5> (21 April 2008). Corcelli, Diane and Victor Dubina. “Cleveland’s Rejuvenated Neighborhoods.” Urban Land, April 1996. DAC International. “The Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative Revitalization Plan: A Comprehensive Community Controlled Strategy.” September 1987. EBL&S Development. 2007. <http://www.ebl-s.com/> (3 January 2008). Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Floodproofing Non-residential Structures.” May 1986. ———. “National Flood Insurance Program.” 10 December 2007.

<http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/>. FFHLB Boston. “Comeback Places: Roxbury Revival.” Tools for Housing and Economic Development 27 (2007). Flood Control America. “Invisible Flood Control Wall, East Grandforks, Minnesota.” 2007. <http://www.floodcontrolam.com/projects_EGF1.php>. ———. “Invisible Flood Control Wall Installation Video.” 2007. <http://www.floodcontrolam.com/video.php>. ———. “Presentation for the National Flood Proofing Conference.” 2002/. <http://www.floodcontrolam.com/multimedia.php> Floodplain Manager’s Association. “Mitigation Success Stories, Valmeyer, IL.” <http://www.floods.org/Publications/mit%20succ%20stories/mssiiiil.htm#valm> Flynn, Larry. “Drivers and Keys to Mixed-Use Development.” Urban Land, 1 March 2003. Go Nomad. “Community Tourism Comes to New York City.” 2006. <http://www.gonomad.com/helps/0107/helps_nyc.html> Hardwick, Chuck. “Don’t Bet on Casinos.” The New York Times. 19 June 1982. Harrison County Development Commission. “Mississippi’s Major Employers.” 2008. <http://www.mscoast.org/majoremployers.htm> Harrison County Library System. “Biloxi.” 21 February 2008. <http://www.harrison.lib.ms.us/libraries/bc_lib.htm>

141

Henegan, Dan. “Economic Impacts of Casino Gaming in Atlantic City.” In Legalized Casino Gaming in the United States, edited by Cathy H. C. Hsu. New York: Haworth Press, 1999. Joseph A. Lusteck and Associates et. al. “Vision 2020: The Biloxi Comprehensive Plan.” 18 June 1996. <http://www.biloxi.ms.us/PDF/Vision2020.pdf> (22 April 2008). Kemp, Roger L., ed. Main Street Renewal, A Handbook for Citizens and Public Officials. North Carolina: McFarlands & Company, 2000. Koch, David. “Atlantic City Redux.” Retail Traffic. 1 May 2005. Leinberger, Christopher B. “The Shape of Downtown.” Urban Land, December 2004. ———. “Turning Around Downtown: Twelve Steps to Revitalization.” The Brookings Institution. March 2005. Local Initiatives Support Corporation. “Community Safety Initiative: Project Profiles, Kansas City, MI.” 2008. <http://www.lisc.org/section/areas/sec1/safety/profile/>. Mastandrea, James C. and Richard E. Huelsman. “Back on Track in Downtown Cleveland: A Catalog of Projects.” Urban Land, April 1996. Medoff, Peter and Holly Sklar. Streets of Hope. Boston: South End Press, 1994. Miara, Jim. “Reviving Cities.” Urban Land, July 2005. ———. “Sharp Distinctions.” Urban Land, October 2004. Millspaugh, Martin L. “ The Inner Harbor Story.” Urban Land, April 2003. Murray, Alice, “Will Dallas Move Downtown.” Urban Land, September 1998. Nyren, Ron. “Riverfront Connections.” Urban Land, July 2007. “Reno Bets on Shops, Culture; Without Giving Up its Gambling Roots, the City Has Moved Away from the Las Vegas Model.” Philadelphia Inquirer. 19 May 2002. Reno Redevelopment Agency. “Downtown Retail Study: Identifying Opportunities for Retail In-Fill Development in Downtown Reno.” October 2005. <http://cityofreno.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=6802> (3 January 2008). Rombouts, Christine. “The Challenges of Mixed Use.” Urban Land, Washington, DC August 2006. Rutherford, Paris. “Redevelopment: The First Wave.” Urban Land, June 2003. Salvesen, David. “ Downtown Debate.” Urban Land, September 2001. 142

Save Ardmore Coalition. 2008. <http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org> (7 January 2008). Schroeder, Tom and Joy James. “Collaboration in Greenway Development: Case Study of the Grand Forks Greenway.” 2000. <www.prr.msu.edu/trends2000/papers_pdf/schroeder.pdf>. Simon, Bryant. Boardwalk of Dreams: Atlantic City and the Fate of Urban America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Spinner, Jackie. “Atlantic City Hedges Its Bet; Even Casinos Recognize that Town Cannot Live by Gambling Alone.” Washington Post. 21 March 2000. Stossel, John. “Property Owners Win One.” Creators Syndicate. 21 June 2007. <http://www.consciouschoice.com/2000/cc1306/citizen1306.html> (3 March 2008) Szatan, Jerry W. “Regional Reinvention.” Urban Land, September 2001. The History Makers. “Dr. Gilbert R. Mason, Sr. Biography.” 2008. <http://www.thehistorymakers.com/biography/biography.asp?bioindex=390> The Point Community Development Corporation. <http://www.thepoint.org/> Township of Lower Merion. “ERC Invites Three Development Teams to Special Meeting on Ardmore Project.” 7 March 2008. “Turning Up Trumps; Reno.” Economist. 29 September 2007. Urban Land Institute. “Eminent Domain: An Important Tool for Community Revitalization.” ULI Current Issues Report. Washington, D.C.: ULI, 2007. Van Tilburg, Johannes. “Living above the Store, L.A.-Style.” Urban Land, October 2007. Village of Arlington Heights. “Downtown Master Plan.” 2007. Von Herrmann, Denise. Resorting to Casinos: The Mississippi Gambling Industry. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2006. Walljasper, Jay. “The Dudley Street Example.” Conscious Choice (2000). Waltz, Karen. “The Dallas Plan.” Urban Land, September 1998. Wampler, Allan E. “Reinventing Pittsburgh.” Urban Land, October 2002. York, Lou Ann. “On the Way Back.” Urban Land, July 2002.

143