An ambitious project in a small Ohio city illustrates how historic tax credits, economic-development grants and private financing can work together to revive vacant properties. The approach could offer lessons for older communities struggling to attract investment.
MARIETTA, Ohio — Two historic buildings in downtown Marietta are at the center of a $10 million redevelopment that could offer a model for communities seeking to transform aging commercial properties into productive investments.
The former Glass Press buildings, constructed in 1900 and 1906, are slated to become a mixed-use development featuring apartments, offices, a coffee shop and a food hall. The project encompasses approximately 43,800 square feet.
But beyond the proposed transformation of the buildings, the financing arrangement illustrates an increasingly important development strategy: combining public incentives with private investment to make projects financially feasible.
Developer Ataraxia Properties LLC has secured announced support that includes $2.5 million in Ohio historic preservation tax credits and a $1 million grant through JobsOhio’s Vibrant Communities Program.
Together, those incentives represent $3.5 million toward the approximately $10 million project. The complete financing structure, including the amount of private equity and conventional debt, has not been publicly disclosed.
The arrangement highlights an opportunity for developers, businesses and community institutions in older cities where vacant buildings often remain unused because rehabilitation costs exceed what traditional financing can support.
Making the numbers work
Ataraxia Properties purchased the buildings in 2023. Located at 212 Putnam Street and 217 Union Street, the properties previously housed several commercial operations, including furniture and music stores and a publishing business.
The redevelopment calls for extensive masonry repairs, replacement windows, roofing improvements, upgraded mechanical systems and interior reconstruction.
Seth Murphy, manager of Ataraxia Properties, said in the project’s announcement that the development followed more than two years of planning and coordination.
The company worked with JobsOhio, Ohio Southeast Economic Development, the Southeast Ohio Port Authority and the City of Marietta to advance the project.
Such partnerships can be critical in historic redevelopment.
Unlike new construction, rehabilitating older buildings can involve substantial uncertainty. Structural problems, environmental conditions, preservation requirements and aging mechanical systems can drive costs beyond what projected rents or property values can justify.
A developer might identify a building with strong commercial potential but discover that the anticipated revenue cannot support the financing needed to restore it.
Historic tax credits and economic-development grants can help close that gap, reducing the amount of conventional debt or private equity required.
In Marietta, the announced incentives account for approximately 35% of the project’s stated development cost. That percentage describes the face value of the announced support, not necessarily the amount of cash available to the developer during construction.
Historic tax credits are becoming an important development tool.
Ohio’s Historic Preservation Tax Credit Program is designed to encourage private investment in older buildings by reducing the financial burden associated with qualified rehabilitation work.
According to the Ohio Department of Development, the program has approved tax credits for 759 projects involving more than 1,000 historic buildings across 95 Ohio communities.
The program is competitive, with applications generally accepted twice annually. Developers must satisfy historic preservation requirements, demonstrate financial feasibility and submit detailed project documentation.
Federal incentives can provide additional support.
The federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit generally allows qualifying developers to claim a credit equal to 20% of eligible rehabilitation expenses for certified historic buildings used for income-producing purposes.
The National Park Service and Internal Revenue Service oversee the program, which requires substantial rehabilitation and compliance with historic preservation standards. The federal credit is claimed over five years rather than provided as an upfront construction grant.
Not every older building qualifies, and not every rehabilitation expense is eligible.
Developers may be able to combine state and federal historic tax credits, but doing so requires careful financial planning. The Marietta announcement identifies a state historic tax credit award but does not confirm a federal award.
Could the same approach work in older urban neighborhoods?
The financing strategy used in Marietta has potential applications far beyond the city’s downtown.
Across Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton and other older communities, vacant commercial buildings and former industrial properties present redevelopment opportunities that may be difficult to finance through traditional lending alone.
Some buildings occupy valuable locations near established neighborhoods, transportation corridors and existing infrastructure. Yet rehabilitation costs can exceed what projected rents or eventual property values would support.
A developer may identify a vacant commercial building that could accommodate apartments, neighborhood retail or professional offices but struggle to secure enough financing to begin construction.
Public incentives can sometimes change that calculation.
JobsOhio’s Vibrant Communities Program, which is supporting the Marietta development, provides competitive assistance for qualifying projects in eligible communities. The program can support mixed-use redevelopment and projects intended to attract investment and strengthen local economic activity.
The same concept may apply to former schools, warehouses, manufacturing buildings and historic commercial corridors, provided the properties and proposed uses satisfy applicable program requirements.
For smaller developers, community-development organizations and local investors, understanding those requirements before acquiring property can be critical.
A building’s age alone does not make it eligible for historic tax credits. Its designation, physical condition, intended use and rehabilitation plan must meet specific standards.
That makes early project evaluation an important part of the investment process.
Redevelopment increasingly requires multiple sources of capital.
The Marietta project illustrates why real estate development is no longer simply a matter of finding an investor willing to finance construction.
Complex redevelopment projects often require several sources of capital, each with different financial and regulatory requirements.
A conventional bank loan may cover part of the construction cost. Private investors may provide equity. Historic tax credits can reduce eligible project costs, while economic-development grants may support expenses that would otherwise make the investment financially impractical.
These funding sources are not interchangeable.
Loans must be repaid. Equity investors generally expect a financial return and may receive ownership interests. Grants frequently carry eligibility restrictions and performance obligations. Tax credits depend on qualifying expenditures and compliance with applicable rules.
The timing of each source can also create complications.
A developer may have an approved tax credit but still need financing to cover construction expenses before the credit can be claimed. Grant payments may depend on project milestones or documented expenditures.
Consequently, assembling capital requires more than identifying programs. It requires a financing structure that accounts for cash flow, construction schedules, investor expectations and the conditions attached to each funding source.
For first-time developers, the process can be particularly challenging.
Architectural studies, environmental assessments, engineering reports, legal services and financial projections can require substantial expenditures before construction financing is secured.
Those preliminary costs can prevent otherwise promising projects from advancing.
Public incentives deserve public scrutiny.
While redevelopment incentives can help attract investment, the economic benefits should be measured rather than assumed.
The Marietta project is expected to create new residential and commercial space and return long-vacant properties to productive use.
However, the announced $10 million development cost does not establish how much private capital has already been invested, how many permanent jobs will ultimately be created or how much additional tax revenue the project will generate.
The announcement also does not provide an independent economic-impact study or establish whether the planned apartments will be affordable to existing residents.
These distinctions are important whenever public incentives support private development.
A successful project may generate construction employment, attract businesses, increase property values and improve surrounding commercial activity. But the scale of those benefits depends on actual occupancy, operating performance and local economic conditions.
Redevelopment can also introduce challenges, including higher commercial rents and rising property values that place pressure on existing residents and businesses.
Public agencies and developers can better evaluate results by tracking completed investment, permanent employment, business occupancy, tax revenue and neighborhood conditions after construction.
Those measures provide a more reliable assessment of economic impact than projected investment figures alone.
A financing model with national implications
The use of historic tax credits to encourage private investment is well established.
According to the National Park Service, the federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program has helped leverage more than $127 billion in private investment and supported the rehabilitation of more than 50,000 historic properties since 1976.
The program’s history demonstrates the scale of investment that can be associated with historic rehabilitation incentives, although individual projects vary considerably in financial performance and community impact.
For cities with aging commercial districts, the broader opportunity lies in identifying properties where rehabilitation can meet genuine market demand.
That may involve converting vacant buildings into apartments, creating affordable commercial space for small businesses or adapting former industrial properties for new economic uses.
But public financing alone cannot turn every vacant building into a successful investment.
Developers must still demonstrate that the completed property can attract tenants, generate sufficient income and remain financially sustainable.
Local governments and community institutions must also consider whether proposed projects align with neighborhood needs and long-term development priorities.
The Glass Press project remains in the development stage, and its ultimate performance will depend on construction, financing, tenant demand and ongoing operations.
Nevertheless, the announced financing arrangement provides a useful example of how public incentives can help support private redevelopment.
For business owners, emerging developers and community institutions considering property investments, the lesson extends beyond historic preservation.
The ability to identify an opportunity is only the beginning. Increasingly, successful redevelopment depends on understanding how conventional financing, private investment, tax incentives and economic-development programs can work together.
In communities where valuable buildings have remained vacant for years, that knowledge could make the difference between a property that continues to deteriorate and one that becomes economically productive again.