Brownfields '97 — Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 -- Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
       Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
                Track Three:
       Finance is an integral component of the brownfields program. Learn where to
       find money and how to get it, by exploring tools available to local governments,
       environmental banking, investment opportunities, due diligence requirements,
       site assessments, the role of foundations and nonprofit organizations, and leveraging
       of public financing with private financing. Learn how die private sector views the
       cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields and how to attract new businesses to
       your community.
Brownfields '97 — Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 -- Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3A) Closing the Gap: How
    Non-Profits Fit in the Brownfields Equation
    Thursday, September 4,1997
    3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

    Description: There is a gap in service between public- and private-sector support for brownfields.  Panelists will
    explore the role that non-profit organizations can play in addressing local brownfields needs.
    Location:  Room 2203

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Keith Welks (Moderator)
    Ms. Martha Matsuoka
    Ms. Ellyn McKenzie

    Dr. Charles W. Powers
    Mr. Bruce Rasher
Center for Land Renewal
Urban Habitat Program of Earth Island Institute
Sixteenth Street Community Health Center of Milwaukee,
Institute for Responsible Management
Consumers Renaissance Development Corporation
   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


   Ellyn McKenzie is currently assistant director of the Department of Environmental Health at the Sixteenth Street
   Community Health Center. The center serves residents of the culturally diverse near the south side of Milwaukee.
   Its mission is to provide health care, health education, and social services to individuals who, because of cultural,
   financial or language barriers, would be without or have difficulty accessing these services.

   Ms. McKenzie has held a number of public policy and communication outreach positions within Wisconsin state,
   local government, and the private sector. She directed legislative affairs activities and an issues management
   campaign for Zigman, Joseph, and Stephenson, a Milwaukee based public relations firm. She also was lead lobbyist
   for the Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives (WFC) serving WFC members on healthcare, mutual insurance,
   housing, and credit union issues. In the mid-1980's, Ms. McKenzie served as Governor Earl's State Senate liaison
   and provided staff assistance to the governor on national environmental issues. She served as the governor's staff
   representative to the National Governors' Association of Energy and Environment Committee, the Alliance for Acid
   Rain Control, and the Center for Clean Air Policy Analysis chaired by Governor Earl.  She also served as the
   governor's representative to the National Groundwater Policy Forum.


   Charles W. Powers, Ph.D. is president of the Institute for Responsible Management, a non-profit organization in New
   Brunswick, New Jersey which is focused primarily on charting and facilitating information exchange among the more
   than 100 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brownfields pilots. Dr. Powers, who is also a professor of
   environmental and community medicine  at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, has been
   addressing issues related to hazardous waste since 1984. He has created a series of national organizations which
   address both technological and social issues related to controversial problems in public health and the environment.
   He has been executive director of the  Health Effects Institute, president of Clean Sites, Inc. chief environmental
   officer and vice president for public policy at Cummins Engine Company and  has held faculty appointments at Yale,
   Harvard, Tufts, and Princeton universities.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow

  Mr. Rasher has more than 20 years' experience as an environmental professional responsible for a variety of
  environmental programs, such as air quality, remediation management and due diligence for Consumers Energy, the
  nation's fourth largest combined electric and gas utility.  He holds the positions of director of brownfields
  redevelopment for the utility and vice president, secretary and treasurer of the nonprofit Consumers Renaissance
  Development Corporation, and is responsible for providing brownfields education, community assistance and
  transaction facilitation services in cooperation with the State of Michigan and the  Michigan Municipal League. Mr.
  Rasher is also chairman of the Edison Electric Institute's Manufactured Gas Plant Subcommittee. Mr. Rasher has
  served as a local elected official for more than 10 years, with experience in community planning, public utilities and
  economic development, and is currently serving his second term as the mayor of the City of Marshall, Michigan.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                         DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
                     PANEL 3A: CLOSING THE GAP: HOW
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                 Brownfields '97
                        Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

                              September 3-5,1997
                              Kansas City, Missouri
                           Brownfields Redevelopment
                         Tools for Environmental Justice
                                   City of Dallas
                               Brownfields Program
                              Involvement Approach
                                 For copies contact:
                                    Beverly Negri
                               EPA Brownfields Liaison
                              Telephone- (214) 665-8157
                                 Fax- (214) 665-6660
Reprint permission is given to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and its contractors, to include this paper in
the Brownfields '97 participants binder.

                                     City of Dallas
                              Brownfields Program

                      Community Involvement Approach

Designed to assist citizens and businesses to acquire a comprehensive understanding
of the barriers surrounding the assessment, cleanup, revitalization and reuse of

Encourage community participation in the identification of potential redevelopment

          Assist in determining resolutions for the City's Brownfields challenges and
redevelopment barriers.

Provide neighbors living in the vicinity of a brownfields redevelopment site the
opportunity to understand and comment on the potential environmental cleanup and
planned site reuse.

Reach out to  commercial, private, neighborhood and industry in order to educate,
inform, receive feedback and input from Dallas citizens.

                         Citizen Advisory Focus Groups

Initially, four environmental justice neighborhoods were identified as the target areas
for the initial series of the Citizen Advisory Focus Group meetings. After consultations
 with the neighborhood leaders, the target neighborhoods increased in number - six
 neighborhoods - and geographic size (see attached map).

The Brownfields Program staff met with several well-known and respected
environmental justice leaders in the City to discuss the strategy for the most inclusive
 community participation.

In order to ensure the meeting agendas, dates and locations were determined by the
community members, several minority Spanish-speaking facilitators were hired by the
 City to assist in capturing and recording information and ideas generated in all of the

In each target neighborhood, a series of two or three meetings involving neighborhood
leaders were held prior to the larger community meetings, for a total of 19 leaders
meetings, in order to determine the specific agenda interests in each community and
the best locations and times for the meetings.

In Phase I, six large community meetings were held in the target communities in areas
across the City.

            City held the Citizen Advisory Focus Group leaders and large neighborhood meetings

 - inform the citizens about the Brownfields Program;
 - convey information on other City programs that address environmental-economic
  neighborhood concerns;
 - ask community members to identify potential redevelopment sites in their
 - collect neighborhood-specific environmental/economic concerns; and
 - include the neighborhoods as partners in the Brownfields Program.

 After the first phase of meetings, the Brownfields staff compiled an informational
 database of the potential redevelopment locations along with a listing of other
 environmental concerns raised by the participants.

 The Brownfields Staff contacted all of the owners of the community-identified potential
 redevelopment sites to discuss the communities reuse suggestions and concerns and
 also offer the property owners the assistance and possible incentives of participating in
 the Brownfields Program.

 In Phase II, the Brownfields Program staff scheduled a second round of large
 community meetings and invited all of the original community leaders, meeting
 participants and other additional citizens to attend the second round of large
 community meetings.

 The meetings agendas included the results of the informational database followup, the
 results of contacting the owners of the potential redevelopment sites and the next
 actions of the Program.

 A second series of Citizens Advisory Focus Groups in new target neighborhoods is
 tentatively planned for late fall 1997.

                         City of Dallas Brownfields Forum

 Forum participants include environmental liability insurance reps, banking regulators,
 mortgage loan officers, environmental lawyers, environmental consultants, business
 associations, developers, realtors, Chambers of Commerce, Federal Deposit Insurance
 Corporation, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, EPA, Housing and
 Urban Development private citizens, environmental justice representatives,
 neighborhood associations, private non-profit development associations and
 environmental activists.

 Forum participants were selected to ensure that the Forum has a wide and diverse
 representation as possible.

A majority of the work is accomplished in subcommittees, but all products and
decisions are brought back to the Forum for final approval.

       •          All Forum meetings are open to the public and anyone may participate.

                        Site Pre-development Community Meetings

                  All developers or property owners who participate in the Dallas Brownfields Program
       and have sites that are located in, or near, residential neighborhoods are required to
       hold neighborhood meetings before they cleanup their sites or start construction.

                  The pre-development meetings are designed to inform the neighborhoods about the
       environmental contamination cleanup and redevelopment planned on the sites.

                     These meetings give the citizens the opportunity to be aware of what impacts
       planned project might have on their community.
control* 1-97:PtfMlEJ:7-2397


       Advisory focus groups serve three important functions in environmental
management and economic community revitalization:

             identifying the stakeholders' and public's interest in environmental
             management and economic revitalization in the community; making
             diverse views known to decision makers; and incorporating local
             concerns in the decision-making process.

Achieving a clean neighborhood environment and robust community involves the
government, the private sector, the people in the community and special interests.

       There will be a balance of interests in the membership of any Brownfields advisory
focus group. The groups will include:

             private citizens public interest groups public officials representatives of
             organizations with economic interest in redevelopment of sites or businesses.
The size of each focus group will be determined on a case-by-case basis by the complexity of
the job to be done and the number of interested people. Time, interest and a pertinent agenda
are the essential ingredients for an advisory focus group that expects to function successfully.
       Active efforts will be undertaken to ensure that citizens in the area have been informed
and suggestions for special invitations to potential advisory focus group members are received
from the impacted parties. Activities undertaken by the City to ensure active citizen participation
will include announcements to the news media, written notices to interested organizations,
public appearances and direct contacts.

       The responsibility of the advisory focus groups is to "advise". The primary function of the
focus groups is to provide elected and appointed City officials with information and suggestions
for revitalization locations. The advisory focus groups must understand their specific
neighborhood issues and concerns. The groups should provide practical, well thought-out
recommendations. If needed, each focus group should have City provided technical expertise
available at the meetings. Each focus group should have an understanding of local conditions in
their specific community. It is important to remember the advisory focus groups represent the
public. Advisory focus groups must understand and accept their role - they are advisors only
and do not have decision-making authority. The purpose and goals of the Brownfields
Initiative will be explained at each public meeting.

   Organization of Advisory Focus Groups

      Meetings will be scheduled as needed and the City will have an agenda for each
      meeting. A schedule of meetings will be established across the City's political
      boundaries. Technical assistance may be provided if the City believes that a focus
      group might desire expert advice from someone other than the City staff.
      Recommendations made by the advisory focus groups will be presented to the City
      decision-makers. Hardcopy survey forms may be passed out to focus group participants
      at the meetings in order to provide written responses and suggestions to the City.
      Preparation of various memoranda and short reports presenting the views and
      recommendations of the groups will be visible to all parties involved through meetings,
      postings, press releases and other efforts.
City responsibilities

The City will:

       Ensure adequate advance meeting notices are given to the community and other
       interested parties. Identify public interest groups, economic interests and public officials
       who are interested in or affected by each specific neighborhood's Brownfields Initiative.
       Convene advisory focus groups that are representative of the impacted communities.
       Explain to all meeting participants the function and responsibility of the advisory focus
       groups. Use "Robert's Rules of Order1 as the bylaws for all meetings. Receive
       neighborhood/community suggestions as to the meetings dates of the advisory focus
       groups. Attempt to ensure that any community representatives live in the area(s)
       impacted. Provide information, technical skills, and staff support to each focus group
       meeting.  Establish procedures on issues such as when and where written materials will
       be made available for advisory focus group participants, how long will participants have to
       review materials and how comments will be received by the City. Direct attention to
       ensure the advisory focus groups are dealing with the appropriate issues. Select from
       each current and future issue, its agenda of work for each separate meeting. This should
       be done with a clear understanding from the City as to how the advisory focus groups will
       be most helpful.

Consider carefully the advisory focus groups recommendations and ideas. Transmit the advisory
focus group's recommendations to the decision-making officials. Monitor the recommendations of
advisory focus groups to ensure the recommendations are being given adequate considerations and
follow up. Plan for, if needed, subsequent meetings in selected communities so decisions can be
communicated to the public.

Advisory Focus Group Responsibilities

The Advisory focus groups will:

Be knowledgeable of the specific needs and values of their respective communities.
Observe "Robert's Rules of Order" in all meetings.
Serve as informational links between the community and the City.
Provide the City officials with well-thought out recommendations.
Communicate ideas, views, concerns, desires, etc. from his/her neighborhood and/or businesses to
the City staff.
Encourage constructive communication and understanding among all parties. This give and take will
help to develop:
a mutual respect for various viewpoints;
* a willingness to take considerations into account;
* the abilities to arrive at recommendations that best serve the public interest
while protecting the environment.
Accept the responsibility of representing as clearly and accurately as possible his or her ideas. Listen
carefully to the views of others.

Citizen Focus Groups Meeting Protocol

When the Focus  Group meetings are scheduled, a simple protocol will be followed. The City will:

Use local community contacts to help determine best place to hold meetings, ex. local schools or
community centers, YMCA, etc. Have City BF outreach person generate interest before meetings
start by visiting local neighborhood and association meetings, Chambers of Commerce meetings,
PTA Associations, etc. Use neighborhood networks to get word out about meetings. Pass out flyers,
by hand, in impacted neighborhoods, post announcements in local businesses. Have 12/13 local
community Group meetings. Use appropriate City protocol when planning meetings:

all meetings are opened to public;
written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of all meetings shall be given;
minutes shall be taken at all meetings; and
a meeting notice shall be posted in City Hall in a readily accessible place to  the public at all times
for at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Use non-City employed facilitator. Keep sign-in list of attendees (include phone numbers). Have
local Council members attend meetings. Explain what the BF Initiative is all about, including BF
Forum role. Have, if possible, several Forum reps available to answer community questions. Ask
meeting participants to think about local BFs, and pass out a prestamped BF survey - survey

contents name of company, industry, etc. if known address of site and immediate cross streets type
of business name, address & phone number of respondent
Ask for return mailings of survey by 12:00 P.M. one week beyond meeting date.

After Meetings
Compile list of suggested neighborhood BFs and after considering economic viability, add site(s) to
inventory. Take suggestions to Forum for feedback and possible inclusion. Reconvene community
groups for follow up meetings once final inventory decisions are made.

Follow up Meetings
Before follow up meetings start, have BF outreach person generate interest by visiting local
neighborhood and business association meetings, PTA meeting, etc. Contact all participants at first
neighborhood meetings. Use neighborhood networks to get word out about meetings. Pass out
flyers, by hand,  in impacted neighborhoods, post announcements in local businesses. Use
appropriate City protocol when planning meetings; a. all meetings are opened to public; b. written
notice of the date, hour, place and subject of all meetings shall be given; c. minutes shall be taken  at
all meetings; and d. a meeting notice shall be posted in City Hall in a readily accessible place to the
public at all times for at least 72 hours before the meeting.

   n n e r-Cl ty~N ews
Dallas'  economic development department

will begin series of neighborhood meetings

The City of Dallas Economic Development Department will begin a series of Citizen
Advisory Focus Group meetings in five neighborhoods in south, east and west Dallas
in January 1997 to inform citizens about several of the environmental programs in
place within the City of Dallas and to collect input regarding several environmental

The Citizen Advisory Focus  Group meetings are included as part of the City of
Dallas's Environmental Justice grant from the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). The goal of the meetings is to open lines of communication between
the City and the community regarding environmental issues and develop methods to
maintain communication among City departments and the community.

The Economic Development Department staff is currently  establishing  lines of
communication with community leaders in each of the five target neighborhoods to
organize preliminary planning meetings. These preliminary planning meetings will
enable City staff to identify the needs  and interest of each neighborhood for the
subsequent  Citizen Advisory Focus Group meetings. These  preliminary planning
meetings will take place between December  1996 and Feb.  1997.  The  Citizen
Advisory Focus Group meetings will tentatively take place from Feb. through April 1

A number of environmental programs have been identified and will be presented to
the community leaders, including the City of Dallas Brownfields Program, Healthy
Communities, Recycling, Environmental  Health,  Water Quality and Household
Hazardous  Waste  Collection. The community leaders  will also assist  in  the
development of a survey which will be distributed at the Citizen Advisory Focus
Group meetings. They survey will be  used to gather citizen input and concerns
regarding environmental programs and services.

A series of five follow-up Citizen Advisory Focus Group meetings will be conducted
in the same neighborhoods from June through September. These meeting will allow
the City staff to report back to the citizens about information obtained from the initial
round of meetings.

                    Citizens Advisory Focus Group Neighborhoods
                                 and Brownfields Sites

A. J«fl«*an North End
B. Coniolld«*>d Cutting*
C. Mcgdatn*
D. American P*IM
E. Wboten fcWato
F. C«Wu»
G. Lairy Jofinaofi
   Rvcraatton Cantor
a DART SutMtetton

1. Llttto Hmloo
2. WwtDaUa*
4. Ewlng Av*. * CeHntti SL
S. F«» South Dalta.
i. South DtHmt
J. Sundown
K. C«ntom«M Addltton
l_ DallM FIra Station »34
U.  Nml Air Station
N. MoComma* BtuH
O.  WMtEMte*
  TraMng Iratthito

                  1032 S. Cesar E. Chavez Drive
                     Milwaukee, Wl 53204
             Ph: 414-672-1315 Ext. 372 Fax: 414-672-9190
         Contact: Ellyn McKenzie, Environmental Projects Coordinator
        Prepared for Distribution by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                          at the
       Brownfields '97 Conference - Kansas City, Missouri September 3-5, 1997

                Brownfield Oversight Community Action Project

Sixteenth Street Community Health Center's Involvement in Brownfield

Since 1969, the Sixteenth Street Community Health Center (SSCHC), a community
based human service agency, has provided quality, cost-effective health care to clients
who have no other access to services due to the difficult economic, cultural and
linguistic barriers they face. SSCHC focuses on education, prevention and early
intervention and strives to provide people with health education, medical care and other
services on an ongoing basis to help them avoid more severe, chronic health problems.
In addition to medical services, the SSCHC building provides space for other
organizations to provide services such as Milwaukee County Social Services, Legal
Aid, Latino Health Organization and the federal nutrition program for Women, Infants
and Children (WIC). The SSCHC conference room is also available to groups within
the community for special events and meetings. However, the SSCHC is not simply  a
building where people come to receive services, but is an anchor and participant in
community affairs.  In the name, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, the
emphasis is on "Community Health"  as a primary goal/objective more so than on
"Health Center" as a location for services.

Through this emphasis on the health of the community as a whole, the SSCHC
Department of Environmental  Health has become the coordination point for a
Brownfield Oversight Community Action Project. The Brownfield project is built on the
foundation of a comprehensive environmental justice initiative undertaken in 1995
which catalogued environmental hazards in the neighborhood served by the clinic that
could pose a health threat to children.  Two Brownfield sites were identified - Try
Chem and 1906 S.  3rd Street  - both had boarded up buildings and were covered with
gang symbols and graffiti. The Try Chem property had been the object of an EPA
Emergency Response Action in the late 1980's but remained vacant and tax
delinquent. The 1906 S. 3rd Street site had been acquired by the City of Milwaukee
through tax foreclosure, but extensive contamination was feared and prevented the City
taking steps to redevelop the property.

Advocate/Facilitator - What We Learned

By assuming the role of advocate and facilitator for Brownfield redevelopment, the
SSCHC, City and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) have learned
about the benefits that can be gained from community based involvement.  Additionally,
one of the project sites, the 1906 S. 3rd Street property,  has been successfully
redeveloped, allowing a local manufacturing firm to expand operations. The Try-Chem
site continues as a  Brownfield, although there is significant local interest in continuing
to improve the property. Following is a brief assessment of the benefits of non-profit
involvement in Brownfield redevelopment and a more specific description of the
properties and the SSCHC role in the process.

1) There Are Public Health Concerns. There are thousands of properties in the State
of Wisconsin, (hundreds in Milwaukee) which remain vacant because of contamination
from past industrial use. Boarded up, abandoned buildings attract children and gang
activity. Vacant sites are convenient locations for illegal dumping.  In the case of the
3rd Street property in our project, over 1000 tons of PCB contaminated soil was
removed from the site and friable asbestos and flammable materials removed from the
building. Despite fencing and warning signs, frequent trespassing occurred on the site.
An important benefit of increased Brownfield redevelopment will be decreased
hazardous exposure for children who play on these sites.

2) Economic Development/Job Creation Brownfield remediation can be an important
part of creating jobs in urban, central city areas, where unemployment is high.  The
return of family supporting jobs to this disadvantaged neighborhood would undoubtedly
result in health benefits for community residents. Plus, returning vacant, underutilized
sites to productive use, supports the municipality and the overall health of the

3) Need to Provide Community Residents with Information  Particularly in the case
of severely contaminated sites where emergency clean-up work is done, it is important
to provide accurate information to neighborhood residents about any associated  health
risks or exposure concerns - associated with the site, or clean up activities. Local
governments, elected officials or municipal health departments can perform this role.
However, government ability to respond quickly to changing developments and
capacity to provide information that is easy to understand in a language other than
English may be limited.  A credible community based agency has a number of
advantages in this regard, and can assign priority to this type of outreach activity that
government offices may not be able to do.

4) Community Involvement Necessary for Neighborhood Friendly Development
Providing information about the extent of contamination, explaining the process for
cleaning up the site and discussing potential development options with neighbors or
community residents reaps many rewards.  Neighbors are likely to be more supportive
of development and can help guide the process if they are involved in the process from
the beginning. Again, in the case of the 3rd Street property, neighborhood residents
surprised City and Department of Natural Resources personnel by indicating their
strong opposition to the property becoming a park or greenspace. This urban
neighborhood was wary of open unattended spaces and strongly promoted industrial or
commercial activity on the site.

5) Community Involvement Facilitates Marketing of Sites Even if properties
located in urban areas are cleaned up and made ready for development, parcels may
be small and unsuitable for large scale major developments. Expansion of facilities
already operating in the neighborhood is an important market for new development -
and facilities already operating in the neighborhood will of course be an easier sell than

attracting new development in from areas outside the neighborhood.  In central city
urban areas, existing businesses, community based agencies and service providers
have an already established base and are logical entities to expand operations when
sites become available.

The Project

In February of 1996, the SSCHC became a partner with the City of Milwaukee in a
proposal to the WDNR's Brownfield Environmental Assistance Program (BEAP).
Through the BEAP, WDNR was granted authorization from the USEPA to re-program
Superfund dollars to provide technical assistance to municipalities to  conduct Phase I
and II Environmental Assessments on Brownfield properties.  Eleven  municipalities
participated in the 1996 BEAP project.  The two sites selected in Milwaukee were
picked in part, because of the SSCHC partnership with the City in the project.

Site  Descriptions and Status

1906 S. 3rd Street

The 1906 S. 3rd Street is a former tannery warehouse, that has been used as a
foundry, tannery and for waste and metal reclamation activities as well as for the
storage of 55 gallon drums of unknown substances.  The 1.3 acre parcel is located in a
once heavy manufacturing area of Milwaukee.  The site posed a health and safety
threat to trespassers and the site had become a favorite site for illegal disposal of other
wastes and debris.  Soil at the site was contaminated from past uses  and groundwater
contamination was suspected.  The property is adjacent to marina development on the
Kinnickinnic River.  Located in  Census Tract 166, the population of neighborhood
residents is 53% Hispanic, 40% White, 3% Native American and 3% African American.
47% of the population live below the poverty level. In August 1996, the US EPA
conducted an emergency removal of contaminated materials at the site. The cost was
approximately $400,000 with over 100 drums crushed and disposed of, 41 cubic yards
of lead contaminated ash, 6 drums of flammable liquids, 2 drums of organic solids, 8
bags of friable asbestos, 54 trucks of contaminated soil - roughly 1,000 tons removed
from the site.  1,000 tons of clean rock and gravel have been brought in for backfilling.

In large part because an existing structure formed a barrier over much of the site, the
property has been able to be redeveloped. A local manufacturing firm is in the process
of acquiring the property, the building has been extensively remodeled and by the end
of the summer approximately 20 employees will be working at the site. It should be
noted that the owner of this company was willing to proceed with the purchase of the
property, under terms approved by the WDNR, even though contamination remains on
the site. This owner also was able to finance this expansion on his own. These two
barriers to redevelopment might have stymied other prospective purchasers.

Try Chem

The former Try Chem site was used for paint stripping, electroplating and as a chemical
manufacturing and storage facility for over 100 years.  Disposal of hazardous materials
into the sewer system and into an open pit inside the building resulted in the owner of
the property being charged, convicted and jailed for improper disposal of hazardous
substances. Within a block of a residential neighborhood the site was an eyesore, an
attractive nuisance to young children, a magnet for gang activity and a potential health

Demographic/socio-economic data for Census Tract 157 where Try Chem is located
indicates approximately 4,000 residents,  including more than 500 children under age
five and 1500 children under the age of 18. The population is 75% non-white (63%
Hispanic, 9% Asian, 24% White and 3% African American).  46% of the population is
below the poverty level. In 1987 and 1988 US EPA removed over 50 barrels containing
various hazardous substances and pumped out several plating tanks containing
unidentified liquids and sludge. The Try-Chem building had been fenced off and
boarded up several times, but vandals regularly removed the fencing and frequently
trespassed on the site. The  property has a high development potential because of its
location near major highways, other industries and an under-employed population.

Through the Phase I and II process, as groundwater monitoring wells were installed
and soil samples were collected, it became necessary to  raze the building on the site.
This demolition, in and of itself, has been a positive step  forward from a neighborhood
perspective. There no longer is a boarded up abandoned building as a place for
children and gangs to explore. Staff from the SSCHC Department of Environmental
Health continue to work with the City to attract additional  resources to continue work at
Try Chem.  A key impediment to re-development of this property are tax liens filed
against the property including a lien for the previous Superfund action.

The Role SSCHC Played

The involvement of SSCHC in this project has added several important dimensions to a
complex process which would be lacking  without a link to a community based agency.

1) The SSCHC served and continues to serve as a point of contact for the community
to provide information and answer questions about the contamination and removal
actions on the properties.  The SSCHC responded to numerous individual inquiries
from community residents, assisted the City Health  Department with door to door
distribution of materials and organized and hosted two  public meetings to discuss the
project and provide visibility for the remedial work. SSCHC provided translation
services for these meetings,  prepared background materials and provided assistance in
translating question and answer sheets and signs for posting at the properties.

2) The SSCHC serves as a point of contact for the various state, local and federal
governmental agencies involved in work on these properties.  The coordination of
testing activities done by DNR, Division of Health and EPA was greatly enhanced by
having a central location for the transfer of information.  Regular meetings with
everyone at the table - government professionals with community residents - have
provided a convenient way to jointly produce timelines which everyone can use and
understand.  Further, the SSCHC had the ability to phone and follow-up, or continually
tweak the process to assure that communication occurred between agencies and
individuals working on the property.

3) The SSCHC demonstrated the capacity to recruit and involve additional partners as
well as advocate for additional resources for the project. Even though the BEAP
properties were the object of a new pilot program, the WDNR's work was spread
equally amongst the  12 pilot sites throughout the State. The City had numerous other
priorities to address.  SSCHC was able to keep the focus on these properties and
greatly facilitated the process by doing so.

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3B) More Than Just the Money:  The Emerging Role of Foundations
    Friday, Septembers, 1997
    8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.

    Description: Foundations are beginning to increase their emphasis on communities to include cleanup and
    redevelopment of brownfields. Panelists will explore the cutting-edge efforts of foundations in the brownfields

    Location: Room 221OA
    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Andrew McElwaine (Moderator)
    Mr. George Brewster
    Mr. Toby Clark
    Ms. Nan Stockholm
                                Heinz Endowments
                                California Center for Land Recycling
                                Clean Sites, Inc.
                                Self-employed consultant
   Andrew McElwaine is a program officer and Director of Environmental Programs at the Pittsburgh-based Heinz
   Endowments.  The Endowments are one of the nation's largest philanthropic organizations.  Their mission is to
   support progress in community development, the arts, education, health, human services and the environment.

   Prior to joining the Endowments' staff, Mr. McElwaine served as a staff member at the President's Commission on
   Environmental Quality. He was senior environmental counselor at the E. Bruce Harrison Company.  He has also
   served as director of congressional affairs at the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc., directing the legislative
   program of the nation's largest recycling organization.

   During most of the 1980's, Mr. McElwaine served as a legislative assistant and subcommittee staff director for the
   late U.S. Senator John Heinz (R-PA). He assisted the Senator on environmental issues, and served as a staff
   member of Project 88, the Senator's landmark environmental policy analyses which proposed to integrate economic
   incentives into environmental policy-making.

   Mr. McElwaine is a graduate of Duke University with a degree  in political science and earned his master's degree at
   George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. He is pursuing a doctoral degree in environmental policy and history at
   Carnegie Mellon University. He serves on the Boards of the Great Lakes Protection Fund, the Pennsylvania
   Organization of Watersheds and Rivers, the Consultative Group on Biological Diversity, the Dollar Energy Fund, the
   Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation,  and the Friends of the National Parks at Gettysburg.  He is also a member of
   numerous other civic, environmental, and historic organizations. He is a resident of Allegheny County,
   Pennsylvania, is married and has  two children.


   George Brewster is a graduate of Columbia Law School and Bard College.  In a twenty-three year career as a real
   estate investor and developer, he has been involved in  projects as diverse as a 500-acre master-planned community
   in North Carolina, a mixed-use waterfront infill  development in  the Bay Area, a 4,300-unit multi-family nationwide
   investment portfolio, the development of a 580,000 square-foot headquarters complex for VISA International,
   programming of corporate meeting facilities for Pacific Gas & Electric, and the evaluation, acquisition and asset
   management of the $1.2 billion Bell Savings real estate portfolio.

   Mr. Brewster was co-founder of BayGroup Property Advisory Services and has served as vice president and director
   of real estate of Calmark Asset Management, and vice president of Bankers Mortgage Corporation, as well as
   general manager of its development subsidiaries. He is author of The Ecology of Development (Urban Land
   Institute, 1996) and numerous articles on alternative development models and the integration of the built and natural
   environments. Mr. Brewster is a member of the Environmental Forum and Environmental Council of the Urban Land
   Institute and has been executive director of the California Center for Land Recycling since its inception in 1996.
Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
  The California Center for Land Recycling (CCLR) was created as a partnership between the Trust for Public Land
  and The James Irvine Foundation. Its mission is to encourage and facilitate the reuse and recycling of land and
  building resources in already-urbanized areas.


  [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


  [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                         DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Sufiomobie Communititi
                                                      JUNE 1997
The CCLR staff has grown to seven with the addition of several new members. Clay
Carter has come aboard as a Project Advisor for the Project Learning Program. Sam
Obregon is the Administration Manager, and is responsible for all accounting and
administrative functions. Romany Hall is the Project Associate currently supporting the
Project Learning Program. Isaac Shikuma is the first CCLR Project Intern. EPA
liaison, Bret Moxley, will be staying on for the next two years, as Redevelopment and
Remediation Advisor for the Project Learning Program. Finally, Edith Pepper, formerly
of the Northeast Midwest Institute, joins CCLR for the summer to develop a paper on
the status of Brownfields in California.
                   Project Learning Program
                   In February, the Project Learning Program sent its Request for Proposals (RFP) to
                   approximately 3,000 community development corporations, private developers,
                   counties, cities and redevelopment agencies, and community organizations throughout
                   California. The CCLR objectives specified in the RFP were to facilitate specific site
                   redevelopment, engage in a collaborative learning process, encourage policy reform,
                   and identify financing strategies. .CCLR will seek to add value to each project and
                   provide appropriate assistance to the project sponsor in bringing the projects closer to
                   fruition. CCLR will document its work and the lessons learned with case studies, and
                   distill tools for use in brownfield redevelopment within California and beyond. CCLR
                   received 27 proposals from a wide variety of organizations representing a great
                   diversity of project types from locations throughout California. Two initial projects have
                   been selected and three to five more will be chosen within the next month.
                   Information and Outreach Program
                   The first iteration of the CCLR website is complete and is up and running at
          The website contains general information on CCLR, its
                   three programs,, other James Irvine Foundation grantees, and The Trust for Public
                   Land. There is an email link to CCLR from the site and a section that highlights our
                   latest news and  activities. Additional links to related organizations will be added, and
                   information and resources will be expanded as the site undergoes enhancements. Look
                   for that expanded site later on this year.

                   CCLR's executive Director has made several presentations on the mission and
                   programs of CCLR, including an overview of CCLR and redevelopment  at the Infill
                   Development of Contaminated Land conference sponsored by UC Davis and luncheon
                   presentations at Lambda Alpha and EDAW. CCLR will testify at a Congressional Field
                   Forum on June 21st and will co-sponsor EPA Brownfields '97 in September, and
                   "Getting our Communities Back on their Peer in November.
                   The CCLR Working Group has been assembled and has held five working sessions. The
                   Group isj comprised of members with varied yet complimentary backgrounds, including
                   representatives from the legal, regulatory, community advocacy and housing, land
                   conservation, for-profrt development, and environmental consulting.communities.
 Program of The Truw for Public Law! •  116 Jjlew Montgomery, Suite 524, San Francisco, California 94105,415/495-5660, Fax 415/882-7666

  LAND                                   Pact sheet,
                The California Center for Land Recycling  (CCLR, or "see-clear) is a new program
                of the Trust for Public Land, a private nonprofit land  conservation organization
                headquartered in San Francisco.   CCLR has  been awarded a three year,  $2
  J>luttBna6idCoimtu"unei million grant  by the  James  Irvine  Foundation as  part of its Sustainable
                Communities initiative.

                CCLR will work with community based organizations, private developers, lenders
                and regulators to encourage and facilitate the redevelopment of brownfield sites
                throughout California.  Projects selected for involvement will be those whose reuse
                is community supported, environmentally responsible and economically feasible.

                Brownfield sites are abandoned, idle, or  underused land and buildings,  most of
                which are in urban locations, whose use or redevelopment is impeded by real or
                perceived environmental problems.  It has been estimated that there are as many
                as 500,000 brownfield sites in the U.S.,  with a current market value of between
                $500  and $750 billion.  Abandoned and underused sites result in a loss of tax
                revenue,  jobs, housing and recreational opportunities in the community.  Vacant
                buildings and lots foster crime, inhibit the development of surrounding parcels, anjd
                can pose health risks to the community, adding to the decline of urbanized areas.
                Elimination ojf contamination and the prevention of new uses which create pollution
                are vital issues of environmental justice.

                Uses  for brownfield sites include housing, commercial, mixed-use and industrial
                projects, as well as-the creation of parks and recreational areas and restoration of
                wildlife hab'tat and ooen space.  Redevelopment of brownfield sites offers the
                opportunity to  revitalize neighborhoods and cities through the  creation of new
                housing and jobsj increased tax base,  and improvement in the quality of life. By
                making cities safer and more livable, brownfield redevelopment also decreases
                pressure  for expansion of development into rural "greenfield" areas, helping to
                preserve  ooen space  and habitat around  our cities.   Barriers  to brownfield
                redevelopment include long term liability  issues for  owners,  developers and
                lenders; uncertain clean-up standards and costs; and a complex and confusing
                regulatory environment

                The role of CCLR is to facilitate redevelopment of brownfield sites by providing an
                integrated package  of services tailored  to  the specific  needs of the  project,
                including  advisory and consulting  services  in feasibility,  planning, remediation,
                financing, development and project management Beginning in early 1997. CCLR
                wilt seleet and develop a number of demonstration sites to prove the feasibility of
                this approach.   CCLR will develop and work for the Implementation of  policies
                which  encourage brownfield redevelopment, and share its knowledge, experience
                and resourjces   with public  and  private  sector  organizations  involved  in
                redevelopment. Including grantmaking related to specific projects.
A Program of The Tnisc for Public Land • 116 New Montgomery, Suite 524. San Francisco, California 94105.415/495-5660, Fax 415/862-7666

Northeast/Midwest Institute Congressional Field Forum

Testimony by George B. Brewster, Executive Director
California Center for Land Recycling
June 21,1997

My name is George Brewster and I am a real estate developer and investor, as
well as an environmentalist. After having been involved in some $2 billion of
projects ranging from single family houses to high rise office buildings, I
concluded that conventional land use and development practices are not only
unprofitable, but also socially and environmentally irresponsible.  I joined the
California Center for Land Recycling as its executive director because I am
convinced that a new model for land use and development is
both needed and eminently possible.

The California Center for Land Recycling (CCLR, or "see-clear" for short) is a
non-profit bom in 1996. It was conceived by.The Califomians and The Land
Project, a broad spectrum group of business, public sector, non-profit and
funding organizations concerned with land use policy which is underwritten by
the James Irvine Foundation. The mission of CCLR is to encourage and
facilitate the reuse and recycling of land and buildings in already-urbanized areas
of California, as a long term strategy to conserve land resources and create
sustainable communities which meet the long term needs of the community, the
economy & the environment

The implementation of this strategy is through neighborhood-driven decision-
making, and regional planning policies.  Programs include intermediary and
advisory services for site-specific projects; development of information resources
and networks; and the creation of policy reform proposals which will help level
the playing field between brownfield and greenfield development.

Creating the vision and implementing this new approach will require leadership
from the public, private and non-profit sectors.  Non-profits such as CCLR and
other organizations can provide a vital link between the public and private
sectors, particularly in light of decreased levels of federal funding and the
devolution of planning and regulatory functions from the federal to the state level.
In recent years there has been a proliferation of NGO's  involved in sustainability,
land  use and urban revitalization issues, making more resources and capacity
available to forge new collaborations and solutions. At the same time,


philanthropic institutions have more resources available to direct at these issues,
and a growing interest in investing in them.  These trends present an
opportunity to refbcus attention on regional planning, statewide growth
management and regulatory reform.
Framing the Brownfields Issue

The Western United States have a somewhat different brownfield problem than
the industrialized Northeast and Midwestern states. Those states are typified by
the large concentrations of obsolete industrial facilities that are the legacy of the
Industrial Age, a time when the West was just being settled. The situation in the
West Is more the result of Manifest Destiny, the nineteenth-century belief that the
U.S. would inevitably expand to the Pacific Coast, and which gave rise to a view
of Western land as a limitless resource, to be conquered and exploited with

the West has developed and urbanized rapidly since its settlement, and
especially following the end of WWII.  Today 86% of all Westerners live in urban
areas, compared to New York's 80%, and 6 of the 15 fastest growing cities in the
nation are located in the thirteen Western states.  The pattern of urbanization in
the West as been one of boom, sprawl, abandonment boomtowns become
sprawling urban areas, leading to the abandonment of downtown cores as
growth moves to the outer fringes of the metropolitan region.

California is in the vanguard of this trend, and Los Angeles has come become for
many the touchstone of what they don't want as their future. The primary
characteristics of Los Angeles, as well as the other Western cities which are
following its pattern, are the consumption of land at rates far greater than the
underlying population growth, and the creation of blighted urban cores
characterized by concentrations of poverty, a shortage of work and educational
opportunities, and high rates of crime and disease.  The sprawl pattern of
development, spreading ever outward and leaving hollowed out "donut cities' at
the core, reflects the underlying belief that land in the West is limitless, that it
can be used up and thrown away. It is not only unsustainable, it is also socially
and environmentally irresponsible, leaving in its wake ruptured ..."bonds of
community, compassion, culture and place," according to Mark Sagoff of the
Institute of Philosophy and Public Policy at the University  of Maryland.

Brownfialds, in the sense of contaminated and abandoned industrial and
commercial sites, are one by-product of the sprawl pattern of growth. But
deteriorated and abandoned apartment buildings and shops, and garbage-
strewn vacant lots are also by-products of sprawl, it's waste product If you will.
Perhaps the more Inclusive term "urtianflelds" better describes these vast land
resources in close-in locations, with existing infrastructure and services, that are

today treated as trash but which instead could be recycled and reused.
Recycling land and buildings in already-urbanized locations, in a way which
produces pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use neighborhoods, can meet the need for
quality communities for all income levels, while helping to preserve undeveloped
land outside the urban area.

The biggest obstacle to such a new model of development is the
institutionalization of sprawl during the post-WWII period. While sprawl Is
sometimes referred to as unplanned development, it might be more accurate to
call it subsidized development, because the social, environmental and economic
implications of locating new development at increasing distances from the urban
core are almost completely ignored in its pricing. The result is to "...stimulate
overconsumption of housing in costly-to-serve circumstances, and to subsidize
the more costly locations with less costly ones," according to James Frank (The
Costs of Alternative Development Patterns," Urban Land Institute, 1989).

The planning practices, land use and building codes, governmental incentives
and financing structures which were created to address the needs of post-war
America have ossified into an institutionalized web of incentives for sprawl
development and pose currently-insurmountable barriers to brownfield
development. Although our needs have changed, our policies have remained
 Obstacles to Brownfield Redevelopment

 The obstacles confronting brownfield redevelopment illustrate how a fragmented
 approach to legislation and regulation can exacerbate, rather than resolve, the
 problem. Those obstacles can be summarized as the four C's: Lack of certainty,
 lack of clarity, lack of coordination, and lack of cash.  Lack of certainty is
 evidenced in permitting processes, entitlements hassels, and cleanup standards.
 Lack of clarity runs throughout the regulatory environment, including liability
 Issues and overlapping jurisdictions.  Lack of coordination between
 governmental age'ncies and programs to encourage brownfield development and
 discourage greenfield development Is endemic. Lack of cash is reflected by the
 almost total absence of meaningful incentives for private sector investment.

 The involvement of the private sector is critical in addressing the challenges of
 urban revitalization. Healthy economic growth is both a precondition to, and a
 fBSMP 8f< sustainable eemmunities.  Private investment Is the engine that can
 fuel sustainable growth; policies which encourage soetally and environmentally
 responsible Investment are as important as public seed capital to leverage
 private investment    Fortunately, Increased public interest and media attention
 has created a growing awareness among business leaders of environmental

issues, and there are signs of more willingness within the business community to
assume responsibility for leadership in social equity issues.

The role of government should be to provide leadership in implementing new
policies to encourage urban revrtalization, and to provide resources for
communities to help themselves, together with incentives for business to act with
a long term view, in order to balance economic growth with environmental
protection and social equity.

Approaches to overcoming the obstacles must view brownfields in the context of
the larger challenges to urban revitalization, and should:
   Be place-based and regional in scope;
   Take a long term view of social, economic and environmental needs;
   Be holistic in concept and integrated in implementation;
   Encourage community-driven decision making and problem solving;
   Facilitate public/private collaborations and encourage civic entrepreneurial
   Help level the playing field between greenfield and brownfield development;
   Provide economically feasible alternatives to conventional patterns of growth.

What we need to do now is to change our thinking, to recognize and deal with
the problems created during the post-war period, and to create new solutions
that address today's problems without creating new problems tomorrow. This
will require system-wide changes in policy and practice. When policy is
understood as a major cause of sprawl, land use reform becomes an appropriate
subject for corrective legislative action.

Some directions for such policy reform are:
•  Systemic, coordinated reform in policies related to growth, use
   regulations, tax structures and financing mechanisms.
•  Implementation of programs which provide incentives for private sector
   investment and development in already-urbanized areas, and which
   discourage additional development in greenfield areas.
•  Reduction of obstacles such as outmoded zoning and building codes,
   cumbersome entitlements and permitting procedures, and the regulatory,
   liability and financial hurdles faced by BF sites, including:
      •  CERCLA reform to remove Superfund liability for purchasers,
         developers and lenders of BF sites, liberalize the VCP program to
         eliminate re-openers, and provide for regulatory clarity, certainty and

         Federal models for voluntary state growth management programs
         based on regional scale, long term planning and which discourage
         sprawl and encourage inner city investment; which reform local codes
         and zoning to encourage compact, pedestrian-friendly and transit-
         oriented development; and which provide for community-based
         decision-making processes. Such models must be accompanied by
         incentives for state adoption;
         ISTEA reauthorization in a form such as the Chafee/Moynihan bill,
         which would double CMAQ spending and boost enhancements;
         Economic incentives, such as the brownfield tax incentive bill (Senate
         bill S.235 and House H.R. 505); and
         Banking regulation reform to overcome the practice of "building-
         monoculture" imposed by underwriting procedures and portfolio
         policies which have the effect of encouraging sprawl development by
         not being able to accommodate the greater diversity of project and
         financing types in the urban environment.

I urge you to keep the larger picture in mind and to work toward comprehensive
reforms which will encourage reuse of urbanfields of all types to achieve urban
revitalization. It is vital that we create private sector incentives that will be as
effective in overcoming urban decay today, as the incentives created in the
1950's were in stimulating sprawl development

What seems to be needed is a comprehensive Urban Recovery Plan, a Marshall
Plan for the American cities of the 21 * century.  Such a plan would provide a
framework and resources at the national, state and local levels to link and
integrate land use, economic development, and conservation planning to
stimulate economic recovery, resource conservation and community-building.
I urge you to think in terms of the whole fabric of our metropolitan areas, and to
see brownfields as part of the urbanfields challenge, as an opportunity to change
the way we accommodate growth and to create a new model for growth and
development, grounded in the principles of stewardship and sustainabilHy which
can meet the needs of the 21" century.

iwnfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
 (3C) A New Kind of Business:  The Cherry Pickers, Packagers, and Deal Makers
 Friday, September 5,1997
 10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.

 Description: Take a look at the new types of business engendered by the brownfields movement, including
 major property packagers who clean up and sell large parcels, cherry pickers who stick with the prime easy deals,
 and innovative venture capitalists.
 Location: Room 1203B

 Speakers and Affiliation:
 The Honorable Elliott P. Laws (Moderator)
 Mr. Barry Hersh
 Mr. Michael J. Murphy
 Mr. Lewis Norry
Ration Boggs, L.L.P.
Dames & Moore/Brookhill
Environmental Strategies Corporation
Norry Management Corp.
Elliott P. Laws, the former Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is a partner in both the environmental, health and safety, and the public
policy practice groups of Ration Boggs, L.L.P.  He specializes in issues relating to economic redevelopment of
contaminated properties, brownfields, environmental policy and legislation. In his position al EPA, Mr. Laws was
responsible for the national solid and hazardous waste management programs, the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) program, belter known as Superfund, and the national
Brownfields Program, as well as the Agency's underground storage lank and chemical emergency planning and
prevention programs. Prior to his appointment to EPA, Mr.  Laws was a partner specializing in environmental law and
legislation, and municipal representation al Ration, Boggs & Blow, focusing primarily on CERCLA, air, water, and
recycling issues.


Mr. Hersh joined Dames & Moore/Brookhill at its inception in May 1996, and he manages site acquisitions and
redevelopments.  This joint venture company, between a major engineering firm and a substantial real estate group,
was created to acquire, remediate, and redevelop contaminated properties. The initial focus has been the reuse of
industrial and retail facilities throughout the United States. In March 1997, Dames & Moore/Brookhill completed the
first portfolio acquisition of 24 environmentally-tainted assets in 12 states for $72,000,000.

Mr. Hersh holds a Bachelor of Arts in urban and environmental studies from the City University of New York, and a
master's degree in urban planning from the Wagner School of New York University. He is a member of the
American Institute of Certified Planners, the Urban Land Institute, and NACORE.


Mr. Murphy is a co-founder and the chairman and chief executive officer of Environmental Strategies Corporation
(ESC), a full-service environmental consulting firm with headquarters in Reston, Virginia. He also founded and
serves as chief executive officer of Industrial Recovery Capital Holdings Company, a contaminated property
investment, acquisition, remediation and redevelopment firm. He has extensive experience in environmental
consulting and senior corporate and senior corporate management related to environmental programs. He has been
extensively involved in the development of risk analysis, environmental policy, and technical risk assessment
programs.  He was formerly appointed to the Expert Advisory Consultation on Environmental Risk Management of
the World Health Organization, European Office, Copenhagen. He testified on waste policy issues before the United
Kingdom (UK) House of Lords Conference to assist in the debate on establishing UK waste policy.
rownficlds '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
  Mr. Murphy has assisted numerous clients in the development of strategy in dealing with the Comprehensive
  Environmental Response. Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Superfund liabilities and remedial
  investigations and feasibility studies.  He has also worked in the application of various scientific disciplines and
  procedures in assessing liabilities associated with the merger or acquisition of commercial properties and facilities.
  Law firms and investment banking organizations have relied on this approach before the final transfer of assets.

  Mr. Murphy was instrumental in developing the procedures used for pollution liability insurance risk assessments for
  the insurance industry and has lectured widely on these procedures. Mr. Murphy directs the strategic planning effort
  on diverse environmental issues before governmental agencies for representatives of private industry. Mr. Murphy
  has served on the boards of directors of private and public companies in the United States.

  Mr. Murphy received his Master of Science cum laude in natural sciences from the State University of New York
  (Roswell Park Memorial Institute Division) and was awarded a National Institutes of Health predoctoral fellowship
  and an American Cancer Society grant. Mr. Murphy received his Bachelor of Science from the State University
  College of New York at Buffalo.


  Lewis Norry is president of Norry Management Corp., a third generation family-owned real estate development firm,
  specializing in the redevelopment of older industrial properties.

  Since joining  the company in the mid 1980s, Mr. Norry has successfully directed the Norry Company into the
  redevelopment of brownfields properties—those impacted by environmental issues such as actual or perceived

  The company's most notable brownfields project is Western Select Properties, a 1.6 million square-foot former AT&T
  manufacturing facility in Indianapolis, Indiana.  The Norry Company has redeveloped the property into a multi-tenant
  industrial and office complex that is more than 90 percent occupied. Tenants include The Indiana Department of
  Environmental Management, whose offices and laboratories are now in this facility.

  As a result of the company's involvement in this specialized area of real estate development, Mr. Norry has become
  involved in brownfields policy and often speaks for and consults on the economics and marketability of brownfields.
  He has spoken to such diverse groups as The Great Lakes Coalition, EPA Region 5, the United Nations
  Environmental Programme and the City of Indianapolis. He also serves on the City of Indianapolis Brownfields
  Redevelopment Advisory Group.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3D) Location! Contamination? A Model for Real Estate Decision-Making
    Wednesday, Septembers, 1997
    3:45 p.m. -5:15 p.m.

    Description:  Let's make a deal!  This highly interactive session will demystify the cleanup and redevelopment
    decision-making process for office and industrial property and provide a model that can be applied to most private
    transactions. Three project proposals will be presented to a simulated board of directors — that's you, the
    audience! The panelists, an attorney, an engineer and a real estate professional, will present overviews, then
    open the discussion for the board, who will vote to select the prime site. Afterwards, check in with bankers on the
    panel for more financing ideas.
    Location:  Room 1202A-B

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Ronnie E. Duncan (Moderator)
    Mr. Gregory R. Hansen
    Mr. Douglas Skowron
Sevell & Duncan Realty Services, Inc.
Liberty Property Trust
The Galbreath Company
   Mr. Duncan is a principal and co-founder of Sevell & Duncan Realty Services, Inc., a Boca Raton, Florida-based
   regional commercial real estate firm.  He today is active in the several regional offices of the firm, especially those
   located in Fort Meyers and Port St. Lucie, Florida and Atlanta, Georgia.

   Mr. Duncan was formerly director of Florida Development for the Office/Industrial Properties Division of the Edward
   J. DeBartolo Corporation. Mr. Duncan was responsible for all facets of the division including land acquisition, design
   planning, development and project management, architectural review, construction administration and complete
   project marketing and property management of major commercial properties.

   Currently, Mr. Duncan is a national director and vice president of public affairs, a national director for the National
   Association of Industrial and Office Properties (NAIOP), and vice president of public affairs for the State of Florida
   Chapter of NAIOP. He also serves as a member of the NAIOP National Board of Directors and represents all
   national members as a part of the Executive Committee.

   Mr. Duncan is a member of the Business Advisory Board for Florida Atlantic University and a former member of the
   professional teaching faculty of NOVA University, based in Davie, Florida.  Mr. Duncan is on the advisory board of
   and committed to the enhancement Daily Bread Food Bank of South Florida. He also serves as a member of the
   Community Development Board, Morton  Plant Mease Hospital and Health Care System.


   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


   Mr. Skowron assembled a development team and proposal responding to a national request for proposal (RFP) and
   was selected to develop a 100-acre brownfields site on Pittsburgh's south side. He directed an urban design firm
   and redevelopment authority in  developing a master plan for mixed-use urban campus including office and research
   facilities, flexspace, retail/entertainment,  and residential apartments totaling approximately 2 million square feet. He
   assisted in assembling a tax-increment financing package to develop structured parking and infrastructure, and he
   currently leads a marketing effort to recruit office/light industrial tenants and develop suitable buildings for their use.
   Mr. Skowron also serves as consultant on other brownfields projects.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields 97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                         DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
 Brownfiolds 97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Creating a Future for Environmentally
Analysis of Real Estate
September 3-5,1997
  hx= (jeJbi'eath. Company
 JL"*"^^™™*™1  ^i *™™*™"™™™™""^"™"™™"™""**  ^i ""^"^™""™" I ""^""""""^r

The Galbreath Company
Page 1
Location Variables for a Site
 Labor Force
 Adjacent Uses
 Transportation Access
 Population Density
 Traffic Count
 Quality & Character of Surrounding

The Galbreath Company
Location Variables, cont...
^Completion of Time 18-24 Months
  Labor Market - Availability of Skills

The Galbreath Company
Site Issues
• Highway Access
v Full Utility
' Topography/Soil Conditions
^ Relatively Free of Environmental Issues
• Compatible Surrounding Land Use
v' Proper Zoning
v Controlled Ownership
v Realistic Development Plans

The Galbreath Company
  Quick Access to Limited Access Highway
  Labor Availability
  Airport Hub
  Access to Suppliers/Customers
  * Shopping
  •> Golf/Recreation
  Campus Environment
  Large Footprint - 30,000 SF

The Galbreath Company
                                   Page 5
High Traffic Volumes
Buying Power of Surrounding Neighborhoods
• Watch for Clean-up Standards
Apartment vs. Single Family
Amenities - Convenience to Shopping
Existing Neighborhood Fabric

The Galbreath Company
Economic Development Alliance
 Building Alliance
 *- IDC's, Redevelopment Authorities, CDC's
 *~ Give Them Stake in Your Success
 ^Gain Access to Public Resources
 - Pull Market to Your Site

The Galbreath Company
Economic Development Alliance, cont.
  Public Private Partnership
  *• Private Seed Money to Leverage Public
  ^Community Planning & Participation
  »• Development Agreement
  ^Rights and Responsibilities

The Galbreath Company
Sources & Use of Funds
 >• Site Preparation
 > Construction
 >- Soft Costs
• Sources
 >- Cost of Capital
 >• Loans
 >• Grants

The Galbreath Company
Market Analysis
^ Supply
 * Existing Supply of Space
 *• Vacancy Rates
 *• By Type - Flex, Warehouse, Retail
v Demand
 ^Absorption Rates
 *• Specific Tenants
 * Rent Comparables
 ^ Sale Comparables

The Galbreath Company
Revenue Projections
  Rent Projections
  Sales Projections
  Mixed-Use Campus. Whole Greater than
  the Sum of the Parts.

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow  • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3E) Financing 201: Funding Options for Municipalities and the Private Sector
    Wednesday, Septembers, 1997
    3:45 p.m. - 5:15 p.m.

    Description:  An advanced offering for more experienced brownfields practitioners, this session is not for the
    novice. Tax increment financing (TIP), general obligation and revenue bonds, and Small Business Administration
    financing are among the topics to be discussed. Bring your financing questions!

    Location: Room 1203C
    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Randy A. Muller (Moderator)
    Mr. David R. Campbell
    Mr. Michael H. Elam
    Ms. Karen H. Lennon
Bank of America
Bank of America
Rudnick & Wolfe
SomerCor 504, Inc.
   Mr. Muller, as vice president and manager of the Environmental Services Group in Chicago, is responsible for the
   ongoing environmental risk management for all commercial lending and trust activities originating in Chicago. The
   group reviews all levels of environmental information for fiduciary, pretending and preforeclosure situations in
   regards to technical, legal, and regulatory concerns. The portfolio is made up of typically industrial assets located
   throughout this country and  overseas. Most recently he has spent considerable time working in concert with various
   public and private entities to pass legislation and to develop technical and financial methodologies to expedite
   redevelopment of potentially contaminated properties (brownfields).


   Mr. Campbell joined Bank of America's (BofA) public finance group in 1996, where he concentrates his efforts in
   expanding the Banks' credit relationships with public entities throughout the Midwest. Prior to this, he served as a
   community development leader with both BofA and Comerica Bank.  Mr. Campbell also has experience in
   commercial lending and single and multi-family housing development.  He holds both a Master of Arts in public
   policy and a master's degree in business administration from the University of Chicago.  His publications include
   Communities in Transition, a study of neighborhood redevelopment in Chicago.


   Michael H. Elam is a partner at the law firm of Rudnick & Wolfe, and a chair of Rudnick & Wolfe's Environmental
   Practice Group.  Mr. Elam is a graduate of Macalester College (B.A., 1976) and Indiana University (J.D., 1980), and
   he studied international and environmental law at Universite Libre de Bruxelles in Belgium.  His practice spans all
   aspects of environmental law, including  regulatory counseling and compliance, corporate and real estate
   transactions, major litigation and international matters.

   Mr. Elam's extensive background at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), spanning ten years, provides
   him with valuable experience and insight into resolving clients' complex environmental issues. Prior to becoming an
   attorney, Mr. Elam collected and analyzed environmental samples for the State of Indiana and was a physical
   scientist for the EPA. His legal experience includes work at both EPA's Washington headquarters as well as its
   Region 5 Chicago office.- In Washington, Mr. Elam was the special assistant to the Assistant Administrator for
   Enforcement, where he worked on special projects for EPA, the Department of Justice, and Congress. At the EPA's
   Region 5 Office of Regional Counsel, he became senior attorney and represented EPA in some of the nation's most
   visible and complex environmental litigation. He subsequently became acting deputy regional counsel, responsible
   for managing over 80 attorneys providing legal services for all environmental matters in the five-state area of Illinois,
   Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

   Mr. Elam is actively involved with environmental matters in all 10 EPA Regions and internationally. He has
   significant first-hand experience with investigations and cleanups, as well as risk avoidance, risk allocation and
   dispute resolution, including negotiations, alternative dispute resolution, and litigation. Mr. Elam is particularly well
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow  • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
  known for his work with the use or reuse of "brownfields" (contaminated) property. This includes counseling clients
  and participating in governmental policy development with respect to all aspects of acquiring, selling, developing,
  lending and leasing of properties or businesses that have environmental issues associated with them, as well as
  implementing public private partnerships which require a wide range of diverse talents and disciplines working
  together.  These projects include current and former petroleum refineries, railroads and steel facilities, as well as
  with "volume* transactions, which encompass multiple properties in numerous states, such as current or former
  service stations or dry cleaners. Mr. Elam has effectively employed the evolving interest in brownfields to assist in
  addressing regulatory, Superfund and natural resource damage claims.  Mr. Elam regularly speaks to public and
  private groups across the country and internationally concerning all aspects of environmental law.


  Karen Lennon is president and founder of SomerCor 504, Inc., a non-profit company certified by the Small Business
  Administration to originate 504 program loans in the six-county Chicagoland area. In addition to her SomerCor
  duties, Ms. Lennon serves on the Board of Directors of the Chicago chapter of the National Association of Women
  Business Owners, as well as the Board of the Economic Development Council of Chicago.

  Prior to forming her own company, Ms. Lennon was with a regional bank, purchasing suburban banks for the holding
  company and creating venture capital and investment management subsidiaries. Other work experience includes
  consulting with Inland Steel Company and serving as in-house counsel for the Illinois Housing Development

  In addition to her law degree, Ms. Lennon has a Master of Business Administration from the University of Chicago
  and a master's degree in mathematics from the University of Illinois.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                         DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
                               PRIVATE SECTOR
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

 Brownfield Financing

A Compendium of Three Years of
        Randy A. Muller

        Bank of America

"I gotta' Brownfield I want
        to redevelop."
  Do you really "got" it?
  • Control
  • Clear Title
  • County vs. City Control
  • Eminent Domain and Property Assembly
  • Reasons for Private Party Reluctance to Sell
    (Perpetual Liability vs. Liability Ignorance
    vs. Unrealistic Expectations)

"I gotta' Brownfield I want
to redevelop."
(Part II)
 Who are You?
 • A Developer/Speculator
 • A Going Business Concern
 • A Municipality

There Must be a Credit
Worthy Entity for the Bank
to Lend to...A Borrower
Who has the Capacity and
the Character to Repay the

I "Do" have Control and
Clear Title...Now I need a
 Not so Fast... What about Site
 Characterization - Defining the
 Risk/Value ?

Can't I Pay for the
Investigation from the

Not Likely .. .Let's Look at Different
  Types of Loans. First, for Developers
  and Going Business Concerns...

Real Estate Secured Loans

The Favorite of Developers and Speculators -
Developing with Someone Else's Money
(Least Commitment to Sustainable
Limited Typically to 70% of the Unimpacted
Property Value (Deal Killer)
Environmental Due Diligence Must be Done
Prior to Loan Commitment
Must have "Committed" Demand
(Although Changing)

Small Business Loans - 7a
            and 504

Either Federal Government Guarantees of 70%
or Relinquished 50% Equity First Lien
As Little as 10 % Down
Long Term Amortization at Attractive Rates
51% Owner Occupied - No Developers or
Speculators, Demand Established
Environmental Due Diligence Must be Done
Prior to Loan Commitment

Asset Based Lending -
Equipment, Inventory

and/or Receivables
• Typically Insufficient Inventory or
  Receivables If Property is Under Utilized
• Existing Equipment Often Contaminated or
• Typically Requires Significantly Less
  Environmental Due Diligence (Gash Flows
  vs. Collateral Value)
• Demand Already Established

Now Let's Look at

General Obligation Bonds

• General Credit Strength of the
  Municipality is Evaluated Relative to
  Likelihood of Repayment
• No Environmental Due Diligence
  Required by Lender (Municipal Liability

Revenue Bonds
Legislatively Dedicated Municipal Tax
Revenue (i.e.., Special Assessment District)
Provided to Repay the Bond
No Environmental Due Diligence Required
by Lender (Municipal Liability Concerns

Tips for Approaching Your

• Don't Mention the Word "Brownfield"
• Identify the Type of Loan You Want, Be
• Identify the Potential Risks, How You
  Determined the Extent of the Risks, and
  Your Methodology to Mitigate
  (Remediation) or Transfer the Risk
  Indemnities, Escrows, Insurance, etc..)

Every Redevelopment Risk
Environmental, Socio-
Economic, etc.) Has an
Incremental Cost
Associated with It...

Adequately Defining All
the Risks and the
Incremental Costs
Associated with the
Solutions is the First Step
to Getting Financing...

Making Sure That the
Revenues Sufficiently
Cover the Costs is the

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3F) Are the Fields Always Greener? A Different Approach for Conservation Organizations
    Friday, September 5,1997
    10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.

    Description: Relatively new players in the brownfields scenario are non-profit environmental and conservation
    organizations. They can partner with public agencies to acquire, finance, and sometimes remediate brownfields
    for mixed use, including public parks and greenways. This panel will feature case studies in some of our largest
    cities where green spaces are bringing both economic and environmental benefits to communities.
    Location:  Room 1205

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Ms. Kathy Blaha (Moderator)
    Mr. Michael W. Groman
    Mr. Tom Hahn
    Ms. Joyce Rowley
Trust for Public Land
Pennsylvania Horticultural Society
Scenic Hudson, Inc.
  Kathleen Blaha is Vice President for National Programs for the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and currently directing
  TPL's Green Cities Initiative, a systematic effort to strengthen urban park and open space programs. In support of
  TPL staff working in over twenty cities across the country, Ms. Blaha is working to develop new parks, particularly in
  underserved areas, create better management capacity, and create new funding sources.

  Ms. Blaha has worked for fourteen years with TPL on real estate transactions and conservation services, first in the
  southeast as associate regional manager, then as acting regional manager for the midwest office, relocating to
  Washington, D.C. in 1992 to work in national programs to develop an urban initiative for TPL.

  Before coming to TPL, Ms. Blaha worked first as a land and water resources planner for the regional Council of
  Governments in Raleigh, North Carolina, and later helped to create the Triangle Land Conservancy, a private land
  trust in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina.

  Ms. Blaha has a  Bachelor of Arts in geography from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio (1979) and a master's degree
  in regional land use planning from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (1981).  She currently sits on the
  board of her local land trust, the Severn River Land Trust in Annapolis, Maryland.


  Mr. Groman manages the Community Greening Department of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society's "Philadelphia
  Green" program. The program promotes urban horticulture by helping community volunteers to plant street trees,
  create gardens on vacant lots, and implement various other greening projects throughout the City of Philadelphia.
  To date, over 2,000 projects have been established.  Mr. Groman oversees the implementation and administration of
  the program's various community greening initiatives.  He works closely with the Society's vice president to support
  overall program planning and development. He also interfaces with city agencies, institutions and other non-profits
  to promote community gardening as part of the neighborhood revitalization process. Mr. Groman has been with the
  Society for ten years.

  Formerly, Mr. Groman was a project manager with BCM Engineers, Inc., providing environmental planning services
  to various municipalities in the Philadelphia/South Jersey  region. He also worked as a community planner with the
  Montgomery County Planning Commission. He received a Bachelor of Science in environmental resource
  management from Pennsylvania State University and a master's degree in regional planning from the University of
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

  Thomas Hahn is the executive director of CorLands, the non-profit land acquisition affiliate of Openlands Project.
  Based in Chicago, CorLands undertakes a wide variety of real estate transactions aimed at preserving open space
  for public use. Since its inception in 1978, CorLands has preserved over 5,000 acres of land with a total value of
  $50.000,000. Recent clients of CorLands include the Chicago Park District, the City of Chicago and the Cook
  County Forest Preserve District. Mr. Hahn will participate in a panel discussion entitled The Fields Are Always
  Greener A Different Approach for Conservation Organizations and will discuss his recent experiences regarding
  open space acquisition issues in highly urbanized settings.


  Joyce Rowley is a Land Projects Manager at Scenic Hudson, Inc. in Poughkeepsie, New York, where she has
  worked for the past three years. Ms. Rowley received a Bachelor of Science in geology from the University of
  Connecticut in 1982 and a master's degree in community planning at the University of Rhode Island in 1991.  Prior to
  joining Scenic Hudson, she worked in  municipal planning for eight years, and, at the U.S. Department of Agriculture
  (USDA) Soil Conservation Service for four years.  At Scenic Hudson, she spearheads the Urban Initiative program,
  working to provide public open space in the built environment.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                        DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
Brownfields '97	Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow


                          A CASE STUDY OF
The New Kensington neighborhood is located in eastern North Philadelphia.

This area, encompassing approximately 100 city blocks, contains over 1100

abandoned vacant lots which foster short dumping, vandalism, and crime,

and present an atmosphere of blight and despair. The problems that

abandoned vacant land pose to neighborhoods like New Kensington in

Philadelphia and to other older industrial cities throughout the country are

described in a study produced by the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society in

1995 entitled Urban Vacant Land, Issues and Recommendations.

The New Kensington neighborhood is the site of a model program initiated by

PHS and the City's Office of Housing and Community Development to

establish a neighborhood-based open space management system to address

the growing problem of vacant land.  The city will assess its replicability in

other neighborhoods throughout the city. The objective of the program is to

create an effective system for managing and maintaining every vacant parcel

and public open space site in the target area within a 5 year implementation

period.  It relies on input and support from the local residents, businesses,

institutions, and city agencies  and identifies a neighborhood-based

organization, the New Kensington Community Development Corporation, as

the central facilitator of the system. The program is supported by the City

the central facilitator of the system.  The program is supported by the City

Planning Commission, the City Redevelopment Authority, and two City

Council members-one representing the district covering New Kensington and

the other at large.  It is funded by the City's Office of Housing and

Community Development.

The objective of the presentation is to describe the 3 strategic elements of

the system:

• initiating community greening projects

• streamlining the city's Sideyard Program

• developing an Open Space Committee

The presentation will also focus on the accomplishments of year 1 of this

innovative program and address current activities with particular emphasis on

the neighborhood garden center project.
For additional information on this program contact:

Michael W. Groman
The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society
100N. 20th Street
5th Floor
Philadelphia, PA  19130-1495
Telephone # (215) 988-8800
Fax #(215) 988-8810

       Roles for Land Trusts in the Built Environment
The Fields Are Always Greener: A Different Approach for Conservation Organizations
                                     For additional copies, please contact:
                                       SCENIC   Joyce Rowley, AICP
                                                Land Projects Manager
                                                Scenic Hudson, Inc.
                                                9 Vassar Street
                                                Poughkeepsie, NY  12601

                                                Phone: 914.473.4440
                                                Fax:   914.473.2648
           Roles for Land Trusts in the Built Environment
                            September 1997


      In the Hudson River Valley, decades of neglect and suburbanization have left
urban waterfronts in disarray: abandoned and often contaminated industrial sites
occupy prime shoreline.  Scenic Hudson, a 35-year-old environmental organization
based in Poughkeepsie,  is developing an urban initiative program that identifies
riverfront "brownfields" with strategies for acquisition, remediation, and environmentally-
friendly reuse of the most promising sites.  In the queue are: transforming an industrial
warehouse and lumberyard in the Village of Irvington into a village park, revitalizing an
abandoned textile mill in  Beacon for a mix of passive recreation and commercial use,
and creating a unique "conservation and development template" for the re-use of a
former major oil storage facility and coal yard at the Beacon Waterfront.  The outline
below describes the process of working in urban areas from a land conservation

Urban Natural Resource Opportunities, Goals and Benefits:

      Historically, urban areas have been under served for creation of new parks and
other public amenities. These features are considered luxuries for most cities
struggling  to keep pace with everything from crumbling infrastructure to overcrowded
schools, understaffed police forces,  housing for the homeless, all at a time when tax
revenues are lowest. Land trusts can fill the gap, can offer staff and resources to help
create new parkland and new partnerships, and perhaps leverage a return to investing
in our cities.

      Some of the mutually beneficial opportunities include:

      **• Protecting special places in the city such as forgotten creeks and wetlands

      **- Educating the public and bringing in disenfranchised neighborhoods into the
         public planning process

      *»• Providing public access that otherwise would not be available

      *•- Making vusual or physical linkages with other conservation areas, and
         connecting trails through heritage areas
Urban Land Conservation

Similarities to "normal" land trust work:

      **•  Conservation tools apply to urban areas. For example, if a pedestrian
         easement can be worked into an existing brownfield or adaptive re-use
         project, it is much less expensive than fee acquisition but can accomplish
         many of the same goals.

      *+  Partnerships with other non-profits, municipalities, and state agencies.

      **-  Fund-raising from support base which is often easier in urban areas.

      **-  Acquisition requires due diligence:  title, survey, phase I environmental audit


      **•  Land costs are much greater per acre, parcels are smaller.  Some assembly
         may be required.

      »*-  Closing and associated costs are higher too: attorney fees, title search,
         survey tend to be higher due to complexity of the history of the site.

      »•  Environmental audit costs to be anywhere up to 10x higher.

      *-  Transaction likely to be more complex - need indemnifications, detailed
         environmental clean-up agreements.

      **  With public partners, the transaction may fall into public domain, eliminating
         some of the confidentiality of terms.

      >*•  Expect to do a lot of explaining. For example: What's a land trust? Why can't
         we pave to the edge of the creek? What about taxes?  While these questions
         may arise in any area, the level of environmental education needed is much
         greater.  For example, while we can explain why a stream corridor buffer is
         needed, the response is often, "But we're in an urban area, and we like a
         'hard edge' at the riverfront" or "historically, that's how it's always been done"
         Remember, the attempt to bring a natural edge to an area that has been
         urbanized for anywhere  up to 200 years will take extra effort.
Organizational Questions to Ask:

      *•<  Financially, can we do it? Acquisition and due diligence are 2-3 times the cost
         of non-urban sites.

      **  Can we partner?  City, local, county and state organizations have park staff


         and are often looking for this type of project to help revitalize their
         neighborhoods.  Also, urban areas have other, non-land trust partners, who
         may have volunteers to help: housing non-profits, community resource non-
         profits, etc.  The city government will identify these for you.

More Questions to Ask:

      *•-  Does it work?  Is there sufficient community support to take care of the
         property after it's built and to champion it if it is vandalized or misused?

      **•  Does the city administration want it? Are there local or municipal plans that
         need to be followed?  Zoning ordinances, other regulations?  Do they have
         the ability to police and maintain it?

      **  What are the tax impacts? Is there a  positive tax impact? Can we show the
         community that the clean up of a site, even if as a tax-exempt park, increases
         the property values in the surrounding neighborhood?

      *>  Can we protect ourselves financially if something goes wrong? This applies
         more to contaminated sites but any site in an urban area needs to be treated
         with care.

If the Site is a Brownfield:

      >*-  Is there a known technology for remediation? How brown is it? Who will pay
         for clean-up?  Is a principal party still around?

      *>  How clean is clean? What levels or standards apply? Will deed restrictions
         be needed? Will permanent monitoring occur, and if so, by whom?

      *•<  How is the contamination issue handled in the appraisal? Most likely the
         appraisal will assume a clean site.

      *•-  Prior to acquisition, can you secure a covenant not to sue or "no further
         action" letter by the appropriate government agency?

      * Will the owner grant indemnification protecting you against future liability?

      »*•  Can you get an environmental clause in the contract of sale structured to
         allow termination of the contract if the contamination either can't  be well-
         defined, or the cost to remediate it is beyond a set dollar amount?  (The last
         is usually determined  by what the owner is willing to spend to clean-up any
         new found problems.)

Selecting a Site

      ** Ideally, a resource inventory will identify key historic, ecologic, or scenic
         parcels which need intervention by a conservation organization. Inventory of
         known contaminated sites may already exist through state environmental

      **- However, the first project may be outside of the inventory such as an offer of
         donated land through community urban renewal efforts, which becomes
         available when the community learns that the land trust is a potential partner.
$$ Funding $$

      **• Municipal governments may have acquisition funding through Community
         Development Block Grants (CDBG funds), Industrial Development Agency
         (IDA) monies, and will have access to alphabet soup of federal housing and
         urban development grants, most of which give "extra points" for a public
         access or public amenity component.

      *•-  Private sources: foundations and fundraising. Key into foundations with
         community development element and interest in your geographical area.

      *+ State funding: in New York, Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) grants,
         administered by Department of State are available for municipal parks and
         historic preservation projects.  They're looking for innovative, partnering
         grants and are available to land trusts.

      *»• To date, EPA Brownfields program, and the NYS Brownfields component of
         the Clean Air Clean Water Bond Act are not available to non-profit land trusts.
         However, non-profits can receive funding through the municipality as a
         contractor/consultant who facilitates the process or performs the inventory of
         sites, etc.

Scenic Hudson, Inc. is a 35-year-old not-for-profit environmental organization dedicated to protecting the
          ecosystem, unique landscapes, and historic fabric of the Hudson River Valley.
EPA is granted the right to reproduce this document for purposes of distribution for the EPA Brownfields
'97 conference.

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3G) Grant Writing
    Thursday, September 4,1997
    10:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.

    Description: This session will teach you how to write an effective grant application.  It is designed for the
    neophyte and will be particularly helpful to small cities and rural communities and organizations and institutions
    with little experience in the area.
    Location:  Room 1203B

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Mosi Kitwana (Moderator)
    Mr. John Rosenthal
International City/County Management Association
National Conference of Black Mayors
   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3H) Still Banking on the Banking Industry
    Thursday, September 4, 1997
    8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.

    Description: Investment capital is the key to making cities thrive through brownfields cleanup and
    redevelopment.  This panel will help developers, cities, and consultants understand what makes capital providers
    tick. Hear industry leaders explore the lending preferences of various institutional investors and their impact on
    the parties who do the deals.
    Location:  Room 1203A

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Lawrence Jacobson (Moderator)
    Mr. Bruce Alexander
    Mr. William McKinstry
    Mr. James P. O'Brien
    Mr. Glen E. Sibley
Mortgage Bankers Association of America
Bank One Colorado
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association
Baker and McKenzie
Cheslock, Bakker, & Associates, Inc.
   Lawrence Jacobson is the Director of Commercial Real Estate Finance (CREF) at the Mortgage Bankers Association
   of America (MBA), Washington, D.C. Mr. Jacobson is a staff representative of the MBA's CREF Environmental
   Issues Committee. The Environmental Issues Committee is comprised of mortgage bankers, commercial bank
   lending and underwriting professionals, life insurance company investment officers, environmental consulting
   professionals, environmental liability insurance providers, real estate attorneys and representatives from information
   technology companies.

   In the July, 1995 issue of Mortgage Banking magazine, Mr. Jacobson co-authored the article entitled "EPA's
   Brownfields Initiatives" with David Slutzky.  This article describes the importance of the EPA's policy initiatives aimed
   at expediting the redevelopment of environmentally impaired properties.

   Mr. Jacobson is also responsible for the MBA's largest annual conference, the Commercial Real Estate
   Finance/Multifamily Housing Conference, and staffs the CREF Technology Initiatives Committee. Mr. Jacobson has
   been at the MBA since 1990. Prior to joining MBA, Mr. Jacobson worked for the Federal Deposit Insurance
   Corporation (FDIC) in Washington, D.C. as an information technology analyst.

   Mr. Jacobson received a  Bachelor of Arts from Lafayette College, Easton, Pennsylvania, in 1981.


   [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]


   As chief environmental officer for Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association (TIAA), Mr. McKinstry is responsible
   for environmental matters as they affect the investment division. TIAA is the world's largest pension fund with over
   $185 billion in assets, divided between stocks, bonds, mortgages and real estate. With over $25 billion invested in
   over 2,000 properties consisting of commercial mortgages and owned real estate, a strong environmental program is

   Mr. McKinstry was instrumental in the development of TIAA's environmental policy in 1987, and has since acted as
   the environmental coordinator charged with overseeing compliance for all commercial real estate investment.

   Mr. McKinstry received his bachelor's degree in architectural engineering - construction management from the
   Pennsylvania State University and  is finalizing a master's degree in environmental engineering at the Stevens
   Institute of Technology. He  resides in New City, New York, with his wife and two daughters.
  Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

  As a partner in the banking, finance and major projects group of the law firm of Baker and McKenzie in Chicago, Mr.
  O'Brien concentrates his practice on environmental and energy law matters, including permitting, approvals,
  enforcement and compliance.  Mr. O'Brien has represented clients before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  (EPA) and almost all of the state regulatory agencies. In addition, Mr. O'Brien has prosecuted and defended civil
  and administrative actions before federal and state tribunals.

  Mr. O'Brien also serves as  counsel in major project transactions, such as power generation and waste recycling
  facilities.  Both on behalf of project sponsors and lenders, Mr. O'Brien has led the counsel team moving projects
  through financial closing, construction and operation. As part of that work, Mr. O'Brien has managed complex
  environmental permitting and transaction issues.

  Mr. O'Brien has spoken widely and has written more than twenty articles on environmental and energy topics.  Mr.
  O'Brien has been called upon to testify as an expert witness before the U.S. Congress on proposed environmental

  Mr. O'Brien graduated from the University of Notre Dame with a Bachelor of Science in physics, and received his
  Juris  Doctorate, Order of the Coif, from the  University of Wisconsin. Mr. O'Brien is a member of the Federal Trial
  Bar for the Northern District of Illinois, the American College of Real Estate Lawyers, and is admitted to practice
  before a number of federal  courts and the states of Illinois and Wisconsin.


  Glen  Sibley is senior vice president of Cheslock, Bakker & Associates, Inc., a commercial real estate investment
  banking firm headquartered in  Stamford,  Connecticut. The firm has proven capabilities in commercial and
  multifamily mortgage finance and securitization. He is responsible for business development among the firms' major
  commercial real estate developer, investor, insurance company and investment banking clients.  Mr. Sibley's career
  spans more than twenty years  and includes experience in commercial real estate, commercial mortgage finance and
  environmental issues affecting commercial  real estate transactions.

  Prior  to joining Cheslock, Bakker, Mr. Sibley was senior vice president of ERIC Group, Inc., where he pioneered
  insurance coverage for environmental risk in commercial real estate mortgage backed securities (CMBS), for REIT's
  and for other commercial real estate portfolios.  Previously, as director of marketing for BCE Development Properties
  he was responsible for more than $750 mm in office and retail lease transactions, was a member of the team which
  negotiated a $180 mm loan on a single office building, and was the developer of the 766,000 square foot World
  Trade Center/Denver.

  Mr. Sibley served as director of Downtown Denver, Inc., The Greater Denver Corporation, the Denver (Olympic)
  Games Committee, as vice chairman of Denver's World Trade Center, and as president of the Historic Paramount
  Foundation. He is an active full member of the Urban Land Institute, serves on its Environmental Committee as well
  as being its liaison to the National Realty Committee.

  Articles authored by Mr. Sibley have appeared in Urban Land. Corporate Real Estate Executive. Real Estate Forum.
  Building Owner and Property Manager. The Journal of Attorneys and Executives in Commercial Real Estate, and
  others.  He is a frequent speaker on matters of commercial real estate asset securitization and environmental risk in
  commercial real estate transactions.

  Mr. Sibley received an Master of Business Administration from the University of Denver and  holds bachelor's
  degrees in business administration and economics from the University of Puget Sound.  He is based in Denver,
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                          DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brnwnfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

                                                                                                                             JULY 7. 1997
Lenders Leverage  Legal Protection
On Contaminated Properties
Lending on cleaned-up brownfield sites can be good business
for both financial institutions and borrower/operators.

   For eight years the abandoned concrete
pipe manufacturing facility stood vacant and
decaying on a 26-acre site on the west side of
Dallas. The soil was contaminated with petro-
leum hydrocarbons, as was the ground water
underneath it. The seven buildings on the site
were in need of substantial repair. It was a
blight on the community and die minority.
neighborhood that surrounded it
   For some dine Ed Ostrovitz had been eye-
ing the property, scrutinizing its condition, its
environmental damage, and its possibilities.
In March 1996, Ostrovitz submitted a contract
to purchase the property, contingent upon
the seller's removing  storage tanks, both
above and below ground, and remediating the
   With financing from Comerica Bank-Texas
and support from state and federal environ-
mental agencies, Ostrovitz was able to bring
the property back to life and locate a wood
pallet recycling business at the site. The
project benefited from the brownfields pro-
 Senate Moves
 Multifamily Sec. 8
gram, an initiative by the U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency to remove some 25,000
sites from the federal Superfund program.
  The true beauty of the brownfields pro-
gram is there are some great locations in the
city dial people haven't touched for years,"
Ostrovitz said. The location will generate sub-
stantial savings in long-term trucking costs, a
necessary part of the company's business. He
said the savings are a fair trade-off for the ex-
tra bureaucratic hassle of environmental regu-
lations and the cost of renovations.
  "I could have taken the same amount of
money and gone to a greenfield site and built
from scratch and not have any of those prob-
lems," he said.
  "He's our  local American hero,"  said
Beverly Negri, EPA brownfields liaison for the
City of Dallas. "Ed has brought in business-
made an eyesore look a lot better." Plus, she
said, Ostrovitz' business will provide employ-
ment to those in the community.
  Under a voluntary program in Texas, prop-
erty owners document their cleanup activities
at brownfield sites. After inspection, a certifi-
cate is  placed on the property deed that re-
leases future owners and lenders of liability.
   The involvement of financial institutions
is key to the redevelopment of environmen-
tally troubled properties. According to Negri,
lenders are being drawn to these deals be-
cause of legislation relieving them of liability,
voluntary state programs and rules that re-
duce their risk in these brownfield transac-
   "Since the lender liability legislation came
through last September, die concerns about
liability have significantly diminished," said
Lawrence Jacobson, director of commercial
real estate at die Mortgage Bankers Associa-
tion of America. The economic viability of
the transaction is a greater concern."
   In September 1996, reforms to the federal
Superfund law were enacted as part of an
omnibus appropriations bill. Under the re-
vised law, lenders can conduct pre-loan activi-
ties, loan servicing activities, workout, and re-
organization and foreclosure  activities
(provided die lender has not participated in
management activities prior to foreclosure)
without becoming liable  for the cost of
   Linda demons, an environmental coordi-
nator for Comerica, said: "We don't lend on
contaminated property unless the property
meets certain criteria. The contamination
must be defined, delineated, and die cost of
remediation established." Even after cleanup,
some properties continue to carry the stigma
of contamination that turns off future buy-

               See Brownfields, Page 21
              Cityscape  Corp.
              Setting the Paa  in Mortgage Lending
 Brokers Advised

 To Brace

 For Changes

 Ideas from other industries
 could help originators prepare
 for the future.

   ATLANTA— Looking into a crystal ball
 in an attempt to predict the future is noth-
 ing new for most mortgage brokers who live
 everyday with the concern of what the years
 ahead will bring.
   With increased competition, a reliance
 on technologies that have revolutionized
 the industry, and the need to work together
 to find common ground on issues, brokers
 face many changes in the future.
   Industry experts shared their perspec-
 tives on the future of the mortgage indus-
 try and the importance of keeping up with
 technology innovations on June  23 at the
 annual National Association of Mortgage
 Brokers convention.
   "It's a win-win situation to forecast what
 the future will bring," said Jim Cotton, vice
 president of marketing at Freddie Mac. "No
 one ever remembers who forecasted wrong,
 only who forecasted right. As brokers, you
 need to have an idea of where the market
will be four to five years from now because
 it's the only way that you will survive. In or-
 der to make the right decisions, though, it
will be necessary for you  to look at the
 trends occurring right now and the past his-
tory of the industry."
   Cotton said brokers should not just look
                                                                                                                         hn<:inr l«nl* •>(

        STATE FINAi

(imtinnrti from page )

crs and prevents them from reaching mar-
ket value.
   "On Ed's property we said the market
value could fluctuate by 15 percent because.
of stigma," demons said.
   The Ostrovilz deal was one of three con-
taminated properties Comerica financed in
1996. "We've always made loans on contami-
nated properly if we had a good estimate for
cleanup cost and a plan to implement  it,"
said demons.
   To date, there have been no problems on
any of the redeveloped properties financed
by Comcrica. That's partly because the bank,
like other lenders that finance  brownfield
projects, does extensive due diligence that
includes interviews with borrowers, attor-
neys, state EPAs and, in some instances, hav-
ing a consultant reinspect property and sub-
mil a technical report.


   "As an environmental coordinator, what
I'm responsible for is protecting the bank's
collateral value," said Gary Martyr of Bank
One, Dallas.
   Because the bank could end  up owning
die property and having to face up to envi-'
ronmental laws, Bank One will  only make
loans when the property's value is more than
the cost of remediation. For example, an
inspection of Fort Worth office warehouse
being sold for $800,000 revealed bore holes
in the building's slab, suggesting that a pre-
vious environmental study had been done.
Further investigation found that equipment
buried in the slab had leaked solvents into
the soil that had never been cleaned.
   The  new  information  diopprd   the
building's value to $400,000, and with  the
cost  of remediating  the pollution the loan
became undesirable. "You're  looking at
$100,000 left on an $800,000 building," Mar-
tyr said. "What if the economy in the area
lakes a dive and you  lose?"
   As in Texas, other states have initialed
voluntary cleanup programs to encourage
brownfield redevelopment.
   "We are lucky to be located in Pennsylva-
nia," said Dolores Selby, assistant vice presi-
                                    Lemkr protection dauta are Helping to revive brownfield rites.
dent of Mellon Bank in Pittsburgh, referring
lo the state's brownfields program. Before
the program was created, regulatory agen-
cies did not have cleanup standards or a re-
quired time frame lo review and respond lo
brownlicld redevelopment cases, Selby said.
"In many cases  (regulators would] change
their mind," Selby said. "Under new legisla-
tion it really requires agencies to respond in
a timely manner.
   Mellon has completed approximately a
dozen loans under the brownfield program.
Selby noted that because the liability protec-
tion is applicable  only to identified issues,
lenders must conduct a comprehensive study
of the site.
   Once financing is provided, borrowers
have lo meet certain deadlines. In one case,
Selby said, the buyer and the seller had a
schedule of issues to  meet within 180 days
or lose a substantial escrow. Because of that,
the bank was able to proceed with the financ-
ing by making a business decision, the bol-
loin line in lending money.


   "We look for loans that will be paid back,"
said Randy Muller, vice president and man-
ager of environmentally services at Bank of
America, Chicago. "We don't run from any-
thing in particular.
   "Our key  is a short term," said Muller of
the bank's commercial financing arrange-
ments thai run three lo seven years on these
   "Essentially we take a look at the level of
environmental impairment and put it in
terms of the  cleanup. If there is residual
value in the property that will facilitate the
credit, we will consider taking the property,
either as collateral or as an abundance of
   An abandoned dry cleaning facility in
southern Illinois is representative of typical
brownfield projects for Muller's branch. In
this case the perceived cleanup costs were
between $2.5 million and $6 million.
   "We went  in and were actually able to
work with the state environmental agency
and gel the property put back on  line for
$20,000," Muller said. With help from Illi-
nois Power, the bank used computer mod-
cling lo prove that contaminated  ground
water trapped in a clay pocket would not
move off the  properly. Further drilling in
boundary sites did not show contaminated
   In Portland, OR, a former dairy process-
ing plant was redeveloped by the las Ange-
les branch of Bank of America into a low-
income housing and retail center.
   "Pan of the property had underground
storage  lank problems," said Evan Henry,
senior vice president of environmental ser-
vices. "We were able lo work with the respon-
sible parties lo gain legal protections and
work with the regulatory agencies to make
sure they were clear on  the requirements
going forward, and ultimately able to rede-
velop that property. It took extra work, and
extra time analyses characterizing all the
environmental issues, but dial's a vciy suc-
cessful project."
   Ivooking lo future environmental redevel-
opment projects, Henry said. "I believe for
the success of brownfields the municipality
and redevelopment agencies—those who
have the most to gain—must take on the
primary responsibility for those things thai
restrict brownfield redevelopment: gather-
ing information, taking on liability, or put-
ting in the necessary funding lo gel things
   The bottom line is lo  provide financing
for creditworthy borrowers, either real estate
secured or unsecured. "In so far as we want
to be a competitive and high quality lender,"
Henry said, "We have to have the skills lo
market  that  and  include environmental
Continued from pagr 16

needed lo put offices in them, but they are
perfect for residences. People are starting lo
feel very comfortable  working  and living
Hnu'nfnu'ii  Tlii*: wlmlr prrn lt;is Iwrn immv

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow  • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (31) Malls, Strips, and Shopping Centers: The Art of the Deal
    Thursday, September 4,1997
    10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.

    Description: Meet the heavy hitters who make it possible for the rest of us to "shop until we drop!" Developers
    from some of America's finest shopping centers discuss the advantages of using brownfields rather than greener
    pastures for malls, outlet centers, discounters, and the newer warehouse outlets.  Learn how these developments
    benefit local communities as panelists describe the elements that entice developers to one property rather than
    Location:  Room 1203A

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. John E. Ayres (Moderator)
    Mr. Peter J. Hopley
    Mr. C. Lincoln Jewett
    Mr. William H. McCabe
GZA GeoEnvironmental Technologies, Inc.
BJ's Wholesale Club
North American Realty Advisory Services, L.P.
New England Development
  John Ayres is a certified professional geologist and a Senior Principal with GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA).  His
  experience with GZA spans 30 years, during which he has served in various capacities ranging from staff geologist
  to president. Mr. Ayres initiated GZA's entry into the environmental and hazardous waste fields in 1978 and
  managed the technical and business development aspects of the firm's practice in these areas for several years. He
  has been the principal-in-charge for over one thousand projects involving environmentally impaired properties,
  including sites in  twenty states and five countries. Mr. Ayres is an active member of several professional and trade
  organizations and is presently chairman of the International Council of Shopping Centers' Toxic Waste and
  Brownfields Task Force.


  [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


  For more than 20 years with North American Realty Advisory Services, L.P., Mr. Jewett has participated in several
  hundred "brownfield-type" consulting projects for Fortune 1,000 corporations, utilities, and financial institutions
  throughout the United States and Canada.  Mr. Jewett focuses on "motivating, redeploying, and divesting" corporate
  land and building assets at optimum return, at minimum cleanup cost, and at no new equity investment or risk.

  From 1948 to 1964, Mr. Jewett was employed by Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, MA, an international management
  consulting, research, and engineering firm.


  Mr. McCabe is the partner involved in analyzing the land, acquiring the land and obtaining all permits necessary to
  construct a regional shopping center. He is also responsible for reviewing and determining subsequent
  environmental issues that develop after the mall has been completed.  A number of earlier malls were built on sites
  that today would be classified as brownfields. Groundwater, soils and  air pollution issues have only been focused on
  in the past ten years so that existing properties require constant reinvestigation. Because of this experience with
  these types of issues, Mr. McCabe is comfortable in considering developing a brownfields site.
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                          DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

                   Divesting Corporate Real Estate
                Having Contamination Constraints.
                                 "THE TROIKA SOLUTION"

The Reuse-Vision

The keystone element for divest-
ing property having contamina-
tion constraints is a documented
reuse-vision. Involving the
synchronous, parallel participa-
tion of (1) real estate marketers,
(2) environmental engineers,
and (3) legal counsel.

We call it "The Troika Solution" -
after the Russian sleigh pulled by
3 horses, abreast.

The Use-Based Strategy

The first task to set the stage for
marketing the property is to

  1. For what new use, or uses,
     could the property be
     marketed, that are:

      - Market supportable;
      - Physically doable;
      - Financially viable;
      - Politically feasible, and
      - Environmentally

 2. For that use, or uses, what is
    the degree, time-span, and
    cost of clean-up.

 3. What economic development
    benefits, new jobs, and tax
    revenues would be created
    for the community, from
    such new use, or uses.

This task defines the reuse-target
to aim toward.
Harnessing Governmental
& Community Support

When the documented
reuse-vision, for creating new jobs
and tax revenues, is presented to
the economic development
agencies, elected officials, and
community groups, it harnesses
positive support.

Regulatory agencies then
expedite approvals for, say,
rezoning, off-site improvements,
variances, clean-up schedules,
and incentives for new users or

Also, the corporate owner
receives positive press, rather than
being massacred in the media.

It's a win-win situation for all

Here's an Example:

A surplus 100-acre, manufacturing
facility had some contamination
"going all the way down to China."

We saw its potential as a multi-user
industrial/office park. And docu-
mented this reuse-vision, on paper.

Clean tracts and buildings were sold
or leased first, to users and
developers, generating cash to offset
remediation costs on the mildly-
contaminated tracts.  In turn, these
tracts were sold, or leased, providing
cash for clean-up of the heavy
contamination. This  "bootstrap"
operation achieved $35 million for
our client, offsetting clean-up costs.

 The Troika Solution:

•  Overcomes the contamination

•  Creates optimum dollar

•  Offsets remediation costs;

•  Insurance can be obtained
    that transfers risk and creates
    financing opportunities for

•  Puts a "positive light" on the

•  Reduces the time-span to a
    divestment, via sale, lease,
    joint-venture, donation, or
    combination; and

•  New jobs and tax revenues
    are produced for the

We've completed 850 such
assignments. We welcome your
inquiries on how The Troika
Solution could be applied to your
needs — at no new capital
investment or risk.
100 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017
212-883-0500 Fax 212-883-05:0
C. Lincoln Jewett
Executive Vice  President

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3J) Blazing New Trails:  State Financing Initiatives
    Thursday, September 4,1997
    8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.

    Description: Some of the most creative brownfields financing strategies are coming from the states, and many
    were in place before the term brownfields was used. This panel captures some of the exciting initiatives being
    undertaken by state legislatures and how different states are implementing them.
    Location:  Room 1204A-B

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Ms. Mary Gade (Moderator)
    Mr. Thomas Boydell
    Ms. Darsi Foss
    Mr. David A. Munro
State of Illinois, Environmental Protection Agency
Seneca Consulting Group
State of Wisconsin, Department of Natural Resources
State of New York, Department of Law
   [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]


   [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]

   Ms. DARSI Foss	

   [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]


   [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow  • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3K) Banking Over the Rainbow: Turning Brownfields into Gold
    Friday. Septembers. 1997
    10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

    Description: This is an opportunity to hear what goes on behind bankers' closed doors. What makes a bank
    want to participate in one deal over another?  How do banks and their partners really view brownfields properties?
    Leam about the competing pressures banks must cope with, how they balance their bottom lines with community
    responsibility, deal with the effects of lender liability reform, and more!
    Location:  Room 221 OB

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Raymond Natter (Moderator)

    Mr. Clement Dinsmore
    Mr. Evan Henry
    Mr. Robert O. Zdenek
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of the Comptroller
    of the Currency
Self-employed consultant
Bank of America
New Community Corporation
  [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]

  MR. CLEMENT DINSMORE                                        	          	    	    	

  Mr. Dinsmore is a self-employed consultant and teacher specializing in the creation of financial programs with
  environmental goals. This year he is teaching courses at the University of Virginia, School of Architecture, on
  recycling brownfields sites and financing sustainable development.  Mr. Dinsmore has served on the Chicago
  Brownfields Forum, the Baltimore Brownfields Industrial Redevelopment Council, and the Maryland Voluntary
  Cleanup Program Task Force. He has written articles on  brownfields issues for Federal EPA Region 2, Federal
  EPA's Environmental Financial Advisory Board, the Urban Land Institute, the Lincoln Institute for Land Policy, the
  Journal of Urban Technology, and the National Low Income Housing Coalition. He has testified on brownfields
  legislation before committees of the Ohio and New York legislatures.


  Mr. Henry, as Senior Vice President and Manager of the Environmental Services Department of Bank of America, is
  responsible for assessment of environmental risks associated with the commercial lending practices of the bank.
  Mr. Henry earned a Bachelor of Science degree in geology from Tufts University, followed by a Master of Science
  degree in hydrology from the University of New Hampshire.  Prior to joining Bank of America, Mr. Henry gained
  approximately ten years of professional experience with environmental consulting firms providing hazardous waste
  assessment and cleanup advice to commercial, industrial and governmental clients. Mr. Henry is a Registered
  Geologist and a Registered Environmental Assessor in the state of California. Mr. Henry has been a panelist at
  numerous professional seminars and conferences and has authored several papers on lender environmental
  polices. Under Mr. Henry's direction, Bank of America has cosponsored national conferences on the environmental
  issues in lending and real estate transactions.


  [Biography was not available at time of printing.  Please refer to conference addendum.]
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
                         DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

                                 SEPTEMBERS, 1997
[The Federal Environmental Protection Agency is granted permission to reproduce this paper for the
Brownfields '97 conference in Kansas City.]

Clement Dinsmore
3726 Veazey Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20016-2229

202-244-6648 [phone]
202-244-9224 [fax]


        Thank you, Ray.

        Ray and I confirm that bipartisan collegiaiity can work in the United States Senate.  Senator Jake
Garn with Ray's aid took the lead on the lender liability issue beginning in 1991.  After much discussion
within the Banking Committee and with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ray with my
support was able to include  effective lender and fiduciary liability protection  language in the Senate
Superfund reform bill that was reported out of committee in 1994.  With the failure of Congress to enact that
legislation a two year delay occurred before somewhat different legislation  passed last September.

        The lender and fiduciary liability subject lead me into Brownfields.  Beginning in 1992 Banking
Committee Chairman Donald Riegle, for whom I worked, advocated funding for Brownfields recycling.  The
Chairman introduced similar bills in 1992  and 1993. Ultimately, we struck a bargain with the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee on the terms of the voluntary cleanup title-Title Ill-of the 1994
Superfund reform bill. The title incorporated funding and leveraging ideas that we advocated.


        While the  Congress was considering Superfund reform, the States were actively engaged in
reforming their hazardous substance laws. Prior to the 1993-1996 period many States had amended their
laws to clarify the liability exposure of lenders and fiduciaries.  But, in their more recent actions States have
altered their laws more substantially to limit the potential sources of financial risk to lenders and fiduciaries.

        I will not attempt a national survey of the States' actions. Instead, I will highlight the actions of
several States.

        Pennsylvania in 1995  enacted its  Economic  Development Agency,  Fiduciary,  and Lender
Environmental Liability Protection Act as part of a three bill package designed to facilitate the recycling of
Brownfields in that State. Mellon Bank's counsel led the effort on lender and fiduciary liability protection.
They took what Ray and I had developed in the Senate and went several steps further. Significantly, the
Pennsylvania legislation:

        'requires proof either of direct causation or exacerbation of contamination by a lender, orjhe
        lender's knowing and willful compulsion of borrower action that causes contamination;

        •requires proof that a  fiduciary controlled  the  property that  caused or was  the site of the
        contamination,  and the contamination resulted  from the fiduciary's gross negligence or willful
        misconduct; and

        •protects both lenders and fiduciaries against the claims of third parties and not simply those of the

        Illinois and Michigan in 1995 also amended their laws to limit significantly the potential liability of
lenders and fiduciaries.  The Illinois legislation:

        •protects fiduciaries and lenders from liability to the State orttiird parties, unless the lender following
        foreclosure or fiduciary directly causes contamination;

        •requires proof that the persons  allegedly liable  proximately caused or  contributed  to  the
        contamination; and

       'limits the recovery by the State gjr_a third party to a person's proportionate share of cleanup costs.

       The Michigan legislation:

       "requires proof that an alleged owner or operator, including a lender following foreclosure, is
       responsible for the activity causing the contamination;

       'like Illinois requires apportionment of cleanup costs;

       'protects lenders in a manner resembling EPA's lender liability rule that the Congress codified in last
       fall's CERCLA and related Solid Waste Disposal Act amendments; and

       'protects fiduciaries against personal liability, although they may be liable for their negligence as
       well as for gross negligence and willful misconduct.


       I will briefly note several significant differences between the lender and fiduciary liability protection
provisions of the 1994 Superfund reform bill that did not pass and the Asset Conservation, Lender Liability,
and Deposit Insurance Protection Act of 1996.

       The 1996 amendment codified the EPA's April 1992 lender liability rule. Unlike the 1994 bill it does

       'impose a dollar cap on liability, if incurred;

       'condition liability  protection  upon compliance at  loan origination with environmental  risk
       assessment guidelines issued by the EPA Administrator in consultation with the Treasury Secretary;

       'limit the liability of various Federal credit and banking regulatory agencies acting in various
       capacities, including as receiver or conservator for a financial institution.

       The 1996 amendment,  unlike the 1994 legislation, also:

       'exposes a fiduciary to liability in both its fiduciary and personal capacities, if the fiduciary through
       negligence causes or contributes to a release of a hazardous substance;

       'creates liability for the fiduciary that engages in negligence rather than a failure to exercise due
       care, which in some States may require proof of more than negligence; and

       'excludes from protection persons that become fiduciaries of contaminated property with the intent
       of avoiding CERCLA liability.

        The flood of State legislative actions in recent years responds to, and creates, political expectations
that hazardous substance regulatory programs will work more effectively and efficiently and Brownfields will
be recycled.

       Realizing these expectations with  respect to properties that may number in the hundreds of
thousands and are most highly concentrated in older, urban centers is difficult in an economic and political
context, where with few exceptions:

       America's population is becoming more widely dispersed;
       economic activity is not simply becoming dispersed within the United States but around the globe;
       the most highly developed economies-all countries with substantially more intense land use and
       population density than American practice-are also developing or altering their policies concerning
       the recycling of former industrial sites.

       While the States, Federal EPA, and local communities throughout the United States have embarked
upon many exciting initiatives and achieved much with respect to  developing a public consensus that
contaminated, previously urbanized land should be recycled rather than lie fallow, there are many, additional
factors that complicate the successful realization of this goal.

       These factors include the existence of multiple, Federal, State, and local environmental and land
use regulatory regimes in addition to those relating to the management of hazardous substances.
The Clean Air Act, for example, has significant effects upon the ability of local communities to reuse vacant,
industrial sites for new industrial uses or commercial uses that generate substantial automobile or truck

       I will focus on one of these complicating factors.  That is the  increasing mobility of capital and the
related competition for capital that communities burdened with Brownfields face.

       Bankers and investors among you are more familiar than I with the global changes occurring in the
intermediation of capital that enable you and me to extend credit or invest equity in companies or projects
anywhere in the world. The dynamics are  illustrated by the increasing allocation of consumer savings-
particulariy now in a mature, bull market-to mutual funds that invest in companies-small, medium, and
large-doing business in other countries.  Savings management and its related fee income are the focus of
attention of most commercial banks in this country.

       The dynamics, also,  are illustrated by the emergence of the real estate mutual fund industry-
especially the real estate investment trusts.  In recent years the equity capitalization of this sector has
mushroomed, and with their capital growth REITS have rapidly expanded their geographical scope of
investment opportunities. Only a few years ago, for example, the Oliver Carr Company was a developer
of several office buildings in downtown Washington, D.C.. Today CarrAmerica Realty Corporation manages
a $1 billion plus portfolio of suburban office  buildings throughout the  United States.

       The point is that you and I through our bank, a mutual fund, a REIT, or other investment vehicle can
move our savings capital anywhere in the United States or the world that appears opportune to us or the
managers of our funds.
       In contrast, the communities most burdened with Brownfields are immobile. Their Brownfields sites
don't move, and their populations, including available labor, often chose not to move. These communities
do not have the same scope of economic opportunities, as we and those now intermediating our savings
capital do.

       I will provide one illustration, before I close.  The City of Philadelphia has many, vigorous community
development organizations.  Each has a clearly defined geographical focus. If Brownfields sites exist within
a CDC's community, as they usually do throughout the City, the revitalization of the community will require

the cleanup and reuse of the sites.  As long as the community's  population choses to remain, their
opportunities are limited by the Brownfields' reality.

       The same is not true for the major financial institutions and corporate citizens of Philadelphia that
have created partnerships with the local CDCs. State corporate income tax credits have helped encourage
the development of these partnerships, which are doing many wonderful things.  But, the reality remains that
you and I, if we were depositors or otherwise customers of Philadelphia's participating banks, could elect
to direct our savings to alternative investments that focused on opportunities elsewhere than the local
communities in the City that are struggling with the reality of Brownfields.


       The prospect for successful recycling of Brownfields  is highly variable. It depends upon many
factors that are highly local.  Federal EPA is helping to enhance the creative dynamic of local communities
and their constituencies that desire to reuse the Brownfields in their midst.

       There, also, are many, common, non-local factors that affect the prospect for recycling Brownfields.
These include current, public attitudes regarding the use of land, water, air, energy, human and non-human
habitats, and other  natural resources.  The feasibility of  reuse of many Brownfields, especially those
concentrated in our urban centers, will be affected by whether public attitudes change to recognize both the
economic and environmental values of a more efficient use of our natural resources, including our previously
urbanized land.

       Market mechanisms that recognize both these values may be emerging.  One that may emerge
more quickly than previously anticipated is auto congestion pricing.  The rapid institutionalization of the E-Z
Pass toll system-with the involvement of Chase Bank-within the New York City metropolitan region and
from New York City to Washington may be a harbinger of congestion pricing's arrival on the Mid-Atlantic
coast.  Substantial investment in the energy efficiency of commercial and residential buildings in our cities
may be another, favorable dynamic that suggests increasing  recognition of the economic and environmental
values of  efficient use of resources.  There are others-including introduction of the location efficient,
residential mortgage that I hope the lenders among you soon will originate and sell to Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.

       Thank you.

Brownfields '97 — Partnering for  a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
    (3L) Industry Update:  Where Industry Sits on the Brownfields Issue
    Friday, Septembers, 1997
    8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.

    Description: Is industry changing its position on brownfields? This panel will bring together representatives of
    different companies that have quite different views about buying, selling, and expanding to contaminated
    Location:  Room 1205

    Speakers and Affiliation:
    Mr. Jerry Prout (Moderator)
    Mr. Roger Platt
    Mr. Bernie J. Reilly
FMC Corporation
National Realty Committee
    DuPont Company
   [Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]


   Roger Platt is national policy counsel for National Realty Committee (NRC), which serves as Real Estate's
   Roundtable in Washington for national policy issues.  NRC members are America's leading real estate owners,
   advisors, builders, investors, lenders and managers.

   Working closely with NRC's Environmental Policy Advisory Committee, Mr. Platt communicates to Congress, the
   Clinton Administration and federal agencies NRC's views on environmental issues impacting real estate, such as
   regulation of wetlands and stormwater runoff, Endangered Species Act requirements, liability for hazardous waste
   cleanup costs and indoor air quality controls. In addition, he is responsible for advocating NRC's positions on
   federal telecommunications  policies.  Mr. Platt serves as staff liaison on environmental and telecommunications
   issues to NRC's Executive Committee.

   Prior to joining NRC in 1994, Mr. Platt acted as a consultant to President Clinton's newly formed Corporation for
   National and Community Service. Previously,  he was a senior associate at the San Francisco law firm of Coblentz,
   Cahen, McCabe & Breyer, where he specialized in real estate and urban land-use issues.

   Before joining Coblentz, Cahen, et al., Mr. Platt was an associate in the real estate department at Bianchi, Paxton,
   Engel, Keegin & Sherwood,  a law firm in San Rafael,  California, where he  represented a variety of residential and
   commercial real estate companies.

   Mr. Platt is a graduate of Harvard University and the University of San Francisco School of Law. He is a frequent
   contributor to American Bar Association and other journals covering federal environmental and land use policies. He
   is a member of the California and District of Columbia bar associations and serves on the  board of directors of the
   Center for Watershed Protection.


   Mr. Reilly is an attorney at the DuPont Company where he has been responsible for environmental issues for over
   20 years.  He coordinates DjjPont's response to the legal issues at its Superfund sites and is responsible for the
   environmental issues at the DuPont plants in New Jersey and Indiana.  He also participates with the members of the
   Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) in adopting positions and lobbying Superfund reform.  He chairs the
   CMA Superfund Liability Work Group and has presented the CMA testimony to several Congressional
   Subcommittees. He also is  a member of the Superfund Settlement Project, and is a member of the team at DuPont
   working to get its older, vacant sites remediated and back into productive use.
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow