Proceedings : Brownfields : Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow, Track Five: Redevelopment


Vownfields '97 - Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 - Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
           rownneds
       Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
                 Track Five:
              Redevelopment
     PURPOSE OF THE TRACK
       Successful redevelopment is a keystone of the brownfields program. Discuss how
       to put together successful real estate ventures, attract small and minority-owned
       businesses, develop waterfronts and former railyards, and address competing
       community interests. Learn how the brownfields program is redeveloping federal
       properties, assisting rural communities, and improving public transportation.
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
(5A) Leveling the Playing Field: Minority and Small Business Redevelopment
Friday, September 5,1997
10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

Description: Small businesses are the bedrock of healthy brownfields revitalization efforts. Yet, in the rush to
attract new enterprises, small and minority-owned businesses often are overlooked. Learn about exciting new
opportunities and programs designed to meet their needs.
Location: Room 221OA

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. John Rosenthal (Moderator)
Mr. Samuel A. Carradine, Jr.
Mr. John C. Chambers
Mr. Anthony W. Robinson
National Conference of Black Mayors
National Association of Minority Contractors
Guild, Inc.
Minority Business Enterprise Legal Defense and Education
Fund
MR. JOHN ROSENTHAL
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]

MR. SAMUEL A. CARRADINE, JR.

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

MR. JOHN C. CHAMBERS

Mr. Chambers' practice with Guild, Inc./Brownfields Business Information involves litigation, counseling, and lobbying
on a variety of environmental issues, including hazardous waste management, remediation, recycling, and corrective
action; Clean Air Act permitting; environmental justice; green labeling; insurance coverage; Superfund;
environmental due diligence; compliance audits: rulemaking petitions; citizen suits; as well as civil and criminal
enforcement proceedings.

MR. ANTHONY W. ROBINSON

Attorney Anthony W. Robinson is president of the Minority Business Enterprise Legal Defense and Education Fund,
Inc. (MBELDEF), which was founded and established in 1980 by former Maryland Congressman Parren J. Mitchell to
act as a national advocate and legal representative for the minority business community.

Mr. Robinson is a member of the Maryland Bar, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Judicial Court, and
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

He received a Bachelor of Science in political science from Morgan State University and a Juris Doctorate from
American University School of Law.

Mr. Robinson's area of specialization has been in civil rights, particularly employment discrimination, and in minority
business legal and advocacy issues. He successfully handled major class action litigation involving the Baltimore
City Police Department. Major landmark decisions include the following cases: Vanguard Justice Society. Inc. v.
Hughes. 471 F. Supp 670, (D. MD 1979) (Vanguard I); Vanguard Justice Society. Inc. v. Hughes. (Unpublished, filed
June 14,1982, D. MD) (Vanguard II); and Andrew Clairborne v. U.S. Department of the Army (D. MD 1981).

In 1975, Mr. Robinson was co-founder of the Baltimore, Maryland, law firm of Singleton, Dashiell and Robinson, P.A.
In 1976, he was appointed by the governor of Maryland to the Maryland State Inmate Grievance Commission, where
he served as a commissioner for a period of 8 years and as chairman for 5 years. From 1976 through 1986, he
served as special counsel to United States Congressman Parren J. Mitchell. He also served as a legal counsel for
the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from 1972 to 1975.
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 5A: LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD:  MINORITY AND SMALL BUSINESS
                              REDEVELOPMENT
 Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

-------
BROWNFIELDS'97

 Community Participation in
 Brownfields Redevelopment
         JOHN C. CHAMBERS
        MICHELLE A. MEERTENS
           Guild, Incorporated
          4307 Jefferson Street • Suite 105
           Hyattsville, Maryland 20781
        Tel.: 301-779-2300 • Fax:301-864-3011
     Nationwide: 800-992-7099 • E-mail: guild30l@aol.com
 John Chamber* grant* permission to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agamy
      to reproduce this paper for the BrawnfleMs *97 binder.

-------
          Community  Participation  in

          Brownfields Redevelopment

                        JOHN C CHAMBERS
                       MICHELLE A. MEERTENS

Brownfields redevelopment involves a collaborative process affecting the in-
terests of a variety of stakeholders, including investors, developers, financial
institutions, and community members. Though all these parties have signifi-
cant vested interests in brownfields redevelopment, more attention has tradi-
tionally  been paid to business interests. This focus is an understandable
consequence of the need to encourage more business investment, but the in-
terest of the community in me process of redevelopment is important and
should not be overlooked.
    The United States Environmental Protection Agency  (USEPA) recog-
nized the importance of community participation when it issued its Brown-
fields Action Agenda.(Action Agenda) in January 1995.1 The Action Agenda
outlines  USEPA's future plans and strategies to  help states and localities
carry out brownfields redevelopment. The Action Agenda delineates
USEPA's intentions to clarify liability and cleanup issues, create partnerships
and promote outreach, and conduct job development and training.2 The main
focus of the Action Agenda, however, is USEPA's Brownfields Economic Re-
development Initiative (Brownfields Initiative). The Brownfields Initiative is a
pilot program under which USEPA gives funding to states and local munici-
palities to assist them in conducting environmental assessments of selected
brownfields sites. This process is forward looking and is designed as a pre-
lude to the eventual cleanup and redevelopment of these brownfields sites.
    One of the most important aspects of the Brownfields Initiative is the call
for active community involvement. USEPA^hopes to use the brownfields pilot
program as a way to identify effective working models for meaningful public
participation, which can then be implemented around the country.3 To this
end, USEPA makes the adequate planning for, and actual participation of, the
community one of the criteria it uses when it selects brownfields grant recipi-
ents. Before and after the grant is awarded, USEPA performs community in-
volvement checks by telephone to get updates on the level of community
participation at various brownfields sites around the country.* USEPA also
promotes public participation in the Brownfields Initiative by publicizing ac-
tivities and providing assistance to local organizing groups so they can hold
public dialogues and town meetings. This coordinated effort is significant be-
cause it  recognizes the necessity of giving individuals a true voice in a pro-
cess that will affect the future of their communities.5 According to USEPA
officials, "Itjhe US. EPA is committed to building partnerships with states,
cities and community  representatives  to develop strategies for promoting
public participation and community involvement in brownfields decision
    Although the Brownfields Initiative approaches community participa-
tion with renewed vigor, the concept of involving the community in the pro-
cess of environmental remediation is not a new one. For example, there are
provisions for public participation under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). Federal law
requires that USEPA provide public notice of plans for removal or remedia-
tion within a specified number of days and that it set aside an adequate pe-
riod of time for publk comment7 In addition, technical-assistance grants are
available for local communities to ensure that participation is knowledgeable

-------
and meaningful.8 These provisions, however, have traditionally been tinder-
utilized. For instance, since 1988, USEPA has awarded only 151 technical-
assistance grants to local communities.9 Many individuals and community
leaders have charged that despite CERCLA's public-participation provisions;
community involvement has been minimal.10 Thus, although the government
has put form the concept of community involvement in environmental resto-
ration projects, it has never been manifested in its fullest potential.
    The Brownfields Initiative makes active public participation paramount
The goal of this chapter is to examine community involvement in the Brown-
fields Initiative. It will discuss die concerns about the Brownfields Initiative,
which have been  expressed by communities near brownfields sites. It win
also evaluate the  effectiveness of the mechanisms for community involve-
ment that have been used to date.
       The Community Perspective: A Historical Grounding


 During the past few decades, urban centers, have undergone a huge transfor-
 mation. Many of the large institutions and manufacturing companies that
 once employed a great percentage of the surrounding population are no
 longer in business or have relocated. The removal of these blue-collar jobs left
 many people  out of work. Additionally, because many of them lacked the
 requisite educational background and training, they were unable to compete
 for skilled-service positions. The result was a dramatic increase in the level of
 unemployment. Correspondingly, poverty levels rose.  Thus, the end of the
 industrial era played a major role in creating the conditions that are now a fa-
 miliar part of the inner-dty landscape.
     Despite these depressed conditions, many urban residents maintain the
 hope for positive change to better themselves and their communities. One
 source of hope for revitalization and change has always come from the collab-
 oration of developers, property owners, and financial backers with "a plan."
 The "plan" has often taken the form of new housing, retail stores, infrastruc-
 ture, and even waste-disposal facilities or industrial factories. Too frequently,
 however, the plan for revitalization and change materializes without creating
 any benefits for the community. New facilities are built using outside labor,
 not labor from the community. If the new facilities are retail oriented, the
 community often patronizes die stores, but the stores infrequently give any-
 thing of benefit back to the community. If these newly constructed facilities
 include housing, they often serve to "improve" the community so much that
 they start a process of gentrification. This process ultimately pushes out the
 poor because they can no longer afford to live there. If the new facilities in-
 volve the placement of waste-disposal facilities or industrial factories, these
 operations are often the source of additional environmental hazards.
     These  historical experiences form the backdrop for the myriad  of re-
 sponses many urban communities have to  the Brownnelds Initiative  These
 responses are  valid expressions of concern. Though the optimists in these
 communities see great potential for the Brownfields Initiative to generate
 positive change, the cynics remain skeptical about whether that potential will
 ever be realized. Some fear that the project will not only fail to produce any
 tangible benefits for their communities, but possibly harm mem as welL If the
 Brownfields Initiative is to achieve its goal of revitalizing urban communities
 with active community involvement and participation, local-community con-
 cerns must be taken into consideration.

-------
                       Community Concerns

                       Economic Development

One of the major concerns for urban communities is stimulating economic de-
velopment There is a widespread feeling that cities must begin to make bet-
ter use of economic resources and become better able to compete to survive.
Many people feel that urban residents can no longer afford to depend on big
outside institutions to create low-skilled jobs. The industrial era has ended.
Most large institutions and manufacturers have relocated their plants else-
where, often abroad where labor is less costly. The majority of available work
in the marketplace, therefore, is skilled labor. Consequently, many feel that
community members must learn marketable skills to compete on an equal
footing for these jobs. In addition, the community must learn to create and
maintain its own businesses. These businesses should be owned and operated
by community members. In this way, urban communities can begin to achieve
greater economic self-sufficiency.
    Many  community  leaders view brownfields as  viable  tools to help
achieve economic self-sufficiency for urban communities. Brownfields rede-
velopment offers the opportunity to bring contracts and jobs into the commur
nity. These resources and opportunities can be helpful, provided  they are
given to the people of the community and not to outsiders. Unfortunately,
many communities too  frequently have had negative experiences with out-
side developers who have promised revitaiization. Consequently, mere is the
fear that the Brownfields Initiative will become just another "get rich" tool for
wealthy investors and developers. Positive-thinking community leaders, how-
ever, want to ensure that this does not occur.
    One  of the ways communities can reap economic benefits from the
Brownfields Initiative is through  jobs,  skills training,  and career develop-
ment. Much of the work that accompanies a brownfields project is contract
driven. The initial  work is oriented toward environmental assessment  The
later work is oriented toward planning, surveying, and construction. Com-
munities want to ensure they will  get first priority at receiving these jobs. In
addition, many community leaders would like the brownfields project to pro-
vide them with funding so they can organize programs to give community
members who currently do not have the requisite skills the proper training to
enable them- to work. If communities are  given the proper education  and
skills, they can begin to take care of these sites themselves. Providing mem-
bers of the community with concrete skills and experience is one tangible
benefit the Brownfields Initiative  can give to communities, which they can
use long after the brownfields pilot project is complete.
                            Gentrification

Another concern many leaders in the community have voiced is the possibil-
ity of gentrification. Many communities that were once blighted and de-
pressed have lived through "redevelopment" and "revitalization" that, while
serving to better the neighborhood, also served to push out the poor because
they could no longer afford to live there. "I see it happening now in West
Oakland,"11  commented Allen Edson, a community leader at the African-
American Development Association in Oakland, California. Mr. Edson is an
active participant in the area's local brownfields project. He was speaking

-------
about A community in the San Francisco area currently undergoing rede-
velopment The neighborhood, as he described it, is poor, mostly African-
American, with an extremely high unemployment rate. According to Edson,
the community is favorably located, very near  San Francisco, and metro
accessible. "(N]ow we're seeing young Asian families and young white cou-
ples beginning to move back into the area ... and the people there are being
pushed out.. ."&
    Communities in the urban center are not only aware of the gentrification
effects of redevelopment, they  are cognizant of the underlying factors that
cause it to happen. For instance, Edson comments, "One other thing mat I've
noticed is that the target cities [of the Brownfields Initiative] are [located] on
the prime  real estate. Emeryville is on the Bay. Richmond is on the Bay. San
Francisco,  East Palo Alto, they're all on the Bay. Stockton is on the River....
So you have developers and real estate [people]  speculating and chomping
on the bit	[Our] inner cities are under siege."13 In addition, he noted, be-
cause communities are .frequently prevented from playing an active role in
the process, they are helpless to affect it.
    Though Edson admits mat the Brownfields Initiative has been good at
giving the community a forum in which to voice concerns, according to him,
an active role in the process means more than just a chance to have views
aired. The community most be given a real chance to participate on an active
level This chance to participate is something Edson claims he has not seen.
According to him, the community is, and has been, at the bottom of the peck-
ing order in the Brownfields Initiative. He says all the meetings to date have
been dominated by developers, investors, and lawyers. In addition, he notes
that all the money given out by the Brownfields Initiative so far has been
given to the states, cities, and municipalities, not to the communities. From
nis point of view,  the community has not yet seen any tangible benefit from
the Brownfields Initiative and he fears the worst. What he would like to see is
money or resources given to the communities for technical assistance so that
they can begin to understand and control the process themselves^ instead of
being passive participants along for the ride. For community leaders like Ed-
son, the only effective difference between brownfields redevelopment and
any other redevelopment thus  far is that the community is more aware of
what is happening; but it is not necessarily more able to affect it
                        Environmental Justice
Another primary concern for individuals who live in communities near
brownfields sites is environmental justice. Studies have shown that, histori-
cally, a disproportionate amount of waste-disposal facilities and industrial
factories have been located in neighborhoods of color. Many urban commu-
nities are located near more than one of these facilities. For instance,  the
community of Bay View/Hunter's Point,  California, another brownfields
community in the San Francisco area, is the location of not one, but two, Su-
perfund sites in addition to its brownfields pilot site.14 Calling attention to
these perceived injustices and finding ways to rectify them has been the aim
of the environmental justice movement  The importance of environmental
justice was recognized by President Clinton in his Executive Order 12398, in
which he stated that one of the goals of his administration was that "[n]o seg-
ment of the population, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income,
as a result of US. EPA's policies, programs, and activities, suffer dispropor-
tionately from adverse human health or environmental effects, and that all
people live in clean, healthy and sustainable communities."19

-------
    Many people in brownfieids communities see the Brownfieids Initiative
as a way to rectify past environmental injustices. They would like to trans-
form abandoned brownfieids into productive greenfields. In the opinion of
many community members, redeveloping a brownfieids site to facilitate fur-
ther industrial use does nothing to rectify past environmental injustice. The
determination of the future use of a site is, therefore, a very important deci-
sion. Differences in circumstances and needs may color each decision. For in-
stance, while one community may need or desire affordable housing, another
may need or desire a community center, a recreational park, or office space.
Despite minor differences in circumstances, however, most members of the
environmental justice movement  feel very  strongly that brownfieids sites
should be redeveloped to support positive,  environmentally dean uses. Al-
though mis goal is a worthy one, it often runs counter to the primary mone-
tary interests of developers and investors, because it increases the level of
cleanup required. This additional remediation has the effect of increasing the
cost of a project  mat may have little potential for making a profit Thus, there
is often tension between the concerns of the community in obtaining the most
environmentally safe and healthy use of the site and the concerns of develop-
ers in obtaining the largest possible profit
              Community Health and Cleanup Standard*


Another primary area of concern for individuals living in communities near
brownfieids sites is community health and cleanup standards. The health of
the community is a paramount concern for most local residents. No one
wants to live in an area beset by health hazards. As noted above, however, a
great number of urban communities exist in neighborhoods that are saturated
with brownfieids sites. An important concern for these communities is the
proper cleanup of these sites and their return  to an environmentally safe,
non-health-threatening condition. The determination of cleanup standards,
therefore, is very significant
    The cleanup standards set for a brownfieids site dictate how environ-
mentally safe it has to be before any redevelopment can take place. Most
members of the community  want the brownfieids sites in their neighbor-
hoods to be returned to the cleanest possible condition, regardless of the
planned future use. They want the  cleanup standards to be set high. Many
community members, however, are extremely skeptical of the likelihood of
this occurring. They fear that environmental standards will be lowered, not
heightened, to decrease the cost of cleanup and to encourage investors to par-
ticipate in brownfieids redevelopment They fear mat their health and the fu-
ture health of the community will be sacrificed in favor of cutting costs and
making a profit
    Unfortunately/ this fear cannot'-be -alleviated by the application of a uni-
versal environmental standard of cleanup for all brownfieids sites. The pro-
cess of determining the appropriate standards is something that must be
accomplished on a case-by-case basis. The final decision is made by whatever
governmental municipality has authority over the site. Several factors con-
tribute to the determination of the appropriate environmental cleanup stan-
dard. For  instance, considerations  of cost affect the determination of the
appropriate environmental standard for a site. Because the grant funding
currently being provided by USEPA is slated for environmental assessment
purposes only, the actual cleanup costs must be absorbed by investors, devel-
opers, or  the  communities  themselves.  Given these considerations, the

-------
amount of money available to conduct a cleanup will be limited. This, in turn,
naturally affects how thorough a cleanup job can be undertaken. The present
state of contamination is another factor that affects the determination of the
appropriate environmental standard for a site. The more polluted the site, the
greater the cost of cleanup. Last, the intended future use affects the determi-
nation of the appropriate  environmental standard for a site. Not all future
uses require an environmental cleanup to the site's original pristine state. Al-
though many community  members would like every brownfields site to be
returned to this heightened level of cleanliness, this approach is not practical.
Thus, there are several factors to be considered in the determination of the ap-
propriate environmental standard for the cleanup of a brownfields site.
    Regardless of these different factors, however, the determination of the
appropriate environmental standards should not be made without represen-
tation from the community. It is safe to assume that the interests of business
will always be represented. The interests of the community, however, will be
represented only if community members are given the opportunity to partici-
pate up front and axe properly equipped to engage in meaningful and knowl-
edgeable interaction. To do this, nowever, "the community must understand
the process itself," says John A. Rosenthall, Director of Environmental Justice
at the NAACP National Office.16
    One of the tasks Rosenthall frequently undertakes is conducting work-
shops and seminars on brownfields and brownn" elds-related issues for com-
munities and community leaders around the country. According to him, one
of the first things about which communities must be made aware are the ram-
ifications of having a brownfields site in their neighborhood. The community
must be informed of the risks posed by brownfields sites. Moreover, it must
be informed of federal  policies relating to brownfields  sites,  as well as the
funding and technical-assistance resources available to help. Once a commu-
nity becomes aware of the issues involved with brownfields redevelopment
and begins to participate actively in the planning process, there is a greater
chance that an acceptable agreement on cleanup standards can be reached.
                 Current Methods of Participation

There is no single method of public participation universally used in brown-
fields redevelopment Each community, therefore, elicits public participation
differently. Some of the more common methods of public participation, how-
ever, are the pubic dialogue and the working group.


                          Public Dialogues
The public dialogue is an effective method of eliciting community participa-
tion because it gives community members an opportunity—in a structured
format—to interact and voice their concerns regarding brownfields redevel-
opment to USEPA, government officials, and other stakeholders.  The Na-
tional Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), a subcommittee of
USEPA, made extensive use of the pubic-dialogue format in the summer of
1996, in an attempt to encourage and elicit public participation in brownfields
redevelopment. NEJAC held five major dialogues in selected cities near
brownfields pilot projects across the country. These dialogues were held in
Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, Oakland, and Atlanta. The dialogues were day-
long events structured in two tiers. First, citizens were provided with an op-
portunity to voice their concerns about brownfields redevelopment, as well

-------
 as their visions and ideas about comprehensive ways to revitalize their com-
 munities. Second, representatives from government agencies were asked to
 address how their respective organizations might assist the community in
 achieving these visions. Finally, the dialogue provided several structured op-
 portunities for interactive discussion and debate. Many community leaders
 who attended the dialogues thought they were very SUCCESSFUL The discus-
 sions were well publicized beforehand and many members of the community
 attended. Furthermore, the atmosphere of the dialogues was respectful and
 the community members who spoke were made to feel mat their views, opin-
 ions, and concerns were significant and worthy of consideration. It was in die
 course of the discussions mat many of the above-mentioned issues and con-
 cerns were raised.
     The success and effectiveness of the public-dialogue format in general
 and the NEJAC public dialogues specifically, are demonstrated not only by
 how the dialogues have elicited community comment on several brown-
 fields-related issues, but also by how they have elicited community comment
 on the very process of community participation itself. For instance, during
 the NEJAC public dialogues, several suggestions about how to improve com-
 munity involvement were offered. USEPA has already made use of some of
 these ideas.17 Furthermore, in the wake of the dialogues, NEJAC published a
 report entitled Environmental Justice, Urban Remtaiaation, and Brownfields: The
 Search far Authentic Signs ofHopt, which not only summarizes the proceedings
 but identifies recommendations for specific action on all the topics and con-
 cerns that were raised.1'
    In its report NEJAC made several recommendations on the issue of pub-
 lic participation. For instance, NEJAC recommended the creation and support
 of structured mechanisms for community participation, such as public dia-
 logues and community advisory boards at all levels of brownfields redevel-
 opment (that is, national, regional, and local). NEJAC also encouraged the
 support and promotion of substantive public participation. Substantive partic-
 ipation, as defined by NEJAC includes participating in relevant activities
 such as reviewing research projects and developing grant proposals. Accord-
 ing to NEJAC, such involvement is necessary and much more valuable than
 merely having access to information or having an opportunity to provide
 comment In addition, NEJAC recommended mat innovative and  nontradi-
 tional methods of outreach be used to disseminate educational information to
 the community. For example, in addition to the normal use of posters, and
 advertisements in local papers, community newsletters, and electronic mail
 NEJAC recommended making use of existing social and cultural networks.
such as schools, churches, and civic organizations. NEJAC also recommended
holding meetings in more accessible locations, at more convenient times, and
perhaps providing day care and transportation. Most importantly, however,
NEjACs  report stressed that the community members must be educated
enough to not only understand the process, but influence it
                          Working Groups
Another method of soliciting public participation is the use of the working
group. The working group consists of a small number of community leaders
who work in dose connection with USEPA and other government officials to
represent the community's interests in the remediation and redevelopment
process. Although the public dialogue is an effective way to achieve active
community participation and discussion in a brainstorming format because it
usually involves a great number of people, it is not the most conducive mech-
anism for decision making. In contrast, the working group io a much more

                                B

-------
flexible and efficient tool. Community leaders who participate in working
groups represent the community by remaining; in contact with its members
and relaying their concerns and opinions back to the working group.
The working-group format is used by several brownfields projects
around the country. For instance, in Bay View/Hunter's Point, California, a
working group of approximately fifteen members comprises community
leaders and officials from the USEPA and state and local governments. This
group meets once a month to discuss current issues related to local brown-
fields development. The community members of this group regularly keep
the larger community apprised of events and relay any arising needs or con-
cerns back to the group for discussion or evaluation. According to commu-
nity leaders, this format is an effective one for decision making and policy
planning.
Conclusion
All parties acknowledge that the goal of community involvement in brown-
fields redevelopment is an important and worthy one. The traditional view
that community participation is satisfied by a mere opportunity to review
and comment on government decisions and policies is defunct A question re-
mains, however, about the level of community participation that USEPA's
Brownfields Initiative can truly achieve. The public dialogues that took place
during the summer of 1996 proved, th^t successful community participation is
possible. Yet, in the opinion of many (NEJ AC included), this level of partici-
pation is not enough. The mere opportunity to air opinions and
early in the process does not amount to substantive community participation.
Substantive community participation can be achieved only when the commu-
nity is properly educated and given an active role in the actual planning and
decision-making process. Although the groundwork for such participation
exists in mechanisms such as working groups and advisory committees, their
use in many brownfields projects is still formative. Additionally, many com-
munity leaders and citizens have varying degrees of optimism about their
success. One thing is certain, however. The vision of a community driven and
directed urban revitalization will be achieved only with great commitment
and perseverance on the part of all stakeholders.
Notes

1. EPA. Administrator Announces Relief Package for Cities and Towns, EPA ENVTL.
NEWS, Jan. 25,1995, at 1.
2. The Broumfields Action Agenda, U5. EPA web-site document http://www
.epk.gov/sweiosps/bf/ascii/action.txt, at screen 1 (accessed Jury 25,1996).
3. Answers to frequently Asked Questions, U.S. EPA web-rite document http:/ /www
-------
8. Reform of the- Superfund Act of 1995: Hearings on HJL 2500 Before the House Sub-
comm. an National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs of the Carnm. on
Government Reform and Oversight, 104th Cong. (1966) (statement of John C. Martin, Inspec-
tor General).
9. Id.
10. Reform of the Superfund Act of 1995: Hearings on H.R. 2500 Before the House Sub'
canon, on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs of the Cornm. on
Government Reform and Oversight, 104th Cong. (1996) (statement of Florence T. Robinson,
North Baton Rouge Environmental Association, Louisiana Environmental Action Net-
work, Mississippi River Basin Alliance Communities at Risk Network) ("The major stake*
holder in the Superfund process has been denied meaningful participation and input in
the decision-making process of Superfund. Public participation needs to come earlier, re-
sources need to be provided to the community to effectively participate and communttiea
need to be given access to and-4ejcisidn-lnaking power regarding their sites. The entire
process, from beginning to end must include community participation.'').
See alto Al Knight, Mining and the Environment "Disaster" at Summitville Was after the EPA
Arrived, DENVER POST, Apr. 28,1996, at E-01; Jennifer Oulette, Superfund: A Call for Change,
Responsible Care, 249 CHEMICAL MAXKEITNC REP., SR10,1996.
11. Telephone Interview with Allen Edson, AfricsjvAmerican Development Associa-
tion (Aug. 7,1996).
12. Id.
13. Id.
14. Telephone Interview with Romel PascuaL Urban Habitat (Aug. 6,1996).
15. Exec. Order No. 12,898,3 CF.R. 859 (1995).
16. Telephone Interview with John A. Rosenthau, Director of Environmental Justice,
NAACP (Aug. 13,1996).
17. Telephone Interview with Katherine Dawes, Environmental Protection Specialist
USEPA Office of Solid Waste tc Emergency Response (Aug. 16,1996). One of the recom-
mendations offered at the public dialogues was to emphasize the adequate planning for,
and actual participation of, the community as a criterion for receiving USEPA funds.
USEPA incorporated mis suggestion in its most recent round of grant awards by revising
its grant-application brochure to clarify and explain its concept of community participa-
tion and by instituting telephone checks on levels of community involvement before and
after the granting of a brownfields funding award.
18. The interim draft version of this document is available at the U.S. EPA web site,
http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/ascii/nejacbm.txt (accessed July 25,1996).
10
-------
Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(SB) Wet and Wild: Waterfront Revitalization Reusing Brownfields
Friday, Septembers, 1997
8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.

Description: Wading through the challenges of waterfront cleanup and redevelopment can be a daunting task.
Unique costal zone issues and the ways in which communities have overcome them will be featured.
Location: Room 221OC

Speakers and Affiliation:
The Honorable John K. Bullard (Moderator)

Mr. Peter Mclnemey
Mr. James Ribbens
Mr. Doug Thiel
Mr. Kenneth Walker
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
City of Wyandotte, Michigan
State of Michigan, Department of Environmental Quality
BASF Corporation
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
THE HONORABLE JOHN K. BULLARD
Since 1993, John K. Bullard has been Director of the Office of Sustainable Development and Intergovernmental
Affairs for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Mr. Bullard has served as a principal liaison for NOAA Administrator D. James Baker to the President's Council on
Sustainable Development (PCSD) and has represented NOAA and the Department of Commerce on the interagency
steering committee for the Clinton Administration's Brownfields Initiative.

As a former Mayor of New Bedford, Massachusetts, Mr. Bullard has been intimately involved in the issues
surrounding brownfields redevelopment. This involvement has intensified during his tenure at NOAA/Commerce,
particularly because of the emphasis which the PCSD and its Task Forces has placed on brownfields issues as part
of a comprehensive strategy to promote sustainable communities.

In addition to these activities, Mr. Bullard serves as a trustee of the New Bedford Harbor Trust, which is charged with
the redevelopment of a major Superfund site in that New England coastal community.

MR. PETER MCINERNEY

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

MR. JAMES RIBBENS

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

MR. DOUG THIEL

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

MR. KENNETH WALKER

Description: Former railyards offer great opportunities for redeveloping large tracts of prime-location real estate.
This panel will give developers, investors, and communities insight into getting railyards back on track.
Location: Room 1203B

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. David Clark
Ms. Wendy S. Saunders
Mr. Scott Slagley
The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway
City of Sacramento, California
Commonwealth Atlantic Properties
MR. DAVID CLARK
David Clark is a professional engineer who, for the last 20 years, has been involved with environmental matters for
the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) (formerly Santa Fe) Railway. He oversees cleanups of shops.
derailments and lease sites on BNSF Railway properties in the western 30 states of the United States. His duties
include managing the environmental aspects of all land sales and purchases.

Ms. WENDY S. SAUNDERS

Ms. Saunders currently serves as Senior Management Analyst for the Sacramento City Manager. As a consultant to
the City of Sacramento, Ms. Saunders assisted in the development of a series of mechanisms to facilitate
redevelopment of Southern Pacific's Sacramento Railyard, a state Superfund site, including a Memorandum of
Understanding with the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Department of Toxic Substances
Control regarding post-remediation responsibilities during the course of redevelopment.

Based upon issues drawn from the Southern Pacific experience, Ms. Saunders wrote the City of Sacramento's
successful Brownfields Pilot Project application, and is responsible for its implementation.

Prior to work related to hazardous materials issues, Ms. Saunders served at the City of Sacramento's redevelopment
agency as project manager for several catalyst downtown Sacramento redevelopment projects, including the $100
million downtown plaza renovation and the $40 million central library.

Ms. Saunders holds a master's degree from the University of California at Davis's Graduate School of Management.

MR. SCOTT SLAGLEY

Description: A cleaned-up property in the middle of your town is a promise for the future. Making the most of it
is both an opportunity and a challenge that can tear a community apart. A debate between those proposing
competing uses will underscore the controversy.
Location: Room 1203B

Speakers and Affiliation:
Dr. Charles W. Powers (Moderator)
Mr. Hanan Bowman
Ms. Martha C. Brand
Ms. Deirdre Menoyo
Institute for Responsible Management
Mill Site Conversion Project
Leonard Street and Deinard
Conservation Law Foundation
DR. CHARLES W. POWERS
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.

MR. HANAN BOWMAN

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

Ms. MARTHA C. BRAND

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

Ms. DEIRDRE MENOYO .

Description: Federal facilities and brownfields share many common features. Representatives of federal
agencies, community representatives, developers, and national policy experts will discuss the links between
cleanup of federal facilities and brownfields.
Location: Room 2201

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. James Woolford (Moderator)

Mr. Richard Gsottschneider
Mr. Seth D. Kirshenberg
Mr. Robert T. McDaniel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response
RKG Associates, Inc.
Kutak Rock
City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee
MR. JAMES WOOLFORD
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]

MR. RICHARD GSOTTSCHNEIDER

Mr. Gsottschneider has 25 years experience as a consultant to the real estate industry. He is an economist and
financial analyst by training, and has worked on a variety of brownfields projects, including the reuse planning of 18
former military bases and the reuse of many older buildings in urban areas. Mr. Gsottschneider is currently working
with the City of Lawrence. Massachusetts on an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funded Brownfields
Initiative to evaluate redevelopment options for 25 million square feet of mill buildings.

MR. SETH D. KIRSHENBERG

Mr. Seth D. Kirshenberg is an Associate in the national real estate and finance group of the law firm of Kutak Rock in
Washington, D.C. His practice focuses on assisting local governments to finance, reuse, and redevelop brownfields
properties and closing military installations and downsizing Department of Energy facilities. Further, he works with
Congress, the Administration and federal agencies to assist his clients. Mr. Kirshenberg serves as the Executive
Director of the Energy Communities Alliance (EGA), a national organization representing local governments affected
by the downsizing of Department of Energy facilities.

Previously, Mr. Kirshenberg served as the Director of Economic Development for the International City/County
Management Association (ICMA), an organization of professional city and county administrators. He assisted local
governments with brownfields, Superfund and military base reuse issues through direct consulting and representing
them in the public policy arena.

Mr. Kirshenberg regularly speaks at national conferences on brownfields issues including property conveyance,
environmental cleanup, and financing, and has published numerous articles on redeveloping federal facilities,
brownfields, and Superfund. He recently co-authored several books including:

• Brownfields Development: A Guide for Local Governments, September 1997
• Brownfields: Options and Opportunities ~ ICMA MIS Report, June 1997
• Military Base Reuse: A Navigational Guide for Local Governments, March 1997
• Cleaning Up After the Cold War The Role of Local Governments in the Cleanup and Reuse of Federal
Facilities, 1996

Mr. Kirshenberg holds a Juris Doctorate degree from the Washington College of Law at the American University and
a Bachelor of Science in business administration from the University of Florida. His bar affiliations include those of
the Florida and the District of Columbia Bar.
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. ROBERT T. MCDANIEL
Mr. McDaniel serves as City Manager of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the municipality which hosts the U.S. Department of
Energy's (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). The ORR is a 35,000-acre complex with three major DOE facilities.
The entire ORR lies within the city limits of Oak Ridge.

As city manager, Mr. McDaniel interacts frequently with the DOE on issues related to the cleanup and reuse of the
ORR. He is responsible for many of the municipal services that will be needed as brownfields sites are developed,
and eventually transferred to the city.

Prior to his service in Oak Ridge. Mr. McDaniel spent 17 years as a city manager in Texas, where he also has
experience as an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator in Region 6 Dallas Office.

Mr. McDaniel serves on the Board of Directors of the Energy Communities Alliance, a consortium of local
governments located adjacent to or near DOE sites.
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
Brownf ields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT
PANEL 5E: ATTENTION DEVELOPERS: UNCLE SAM WANTS YOU!!!
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
Seth Kinhenberg
KUTAKROCK
202-828-2400
Brownflelds/Federal Facility Comparison
Brownfidds
Abandoned, idled or under-utilized property
Usually in an urban area
Unknown Potentially Responsible Parties
(PRPs)
Local government actively involved in reusing
the site
Unknown level of contamination
Uncertain liability for new owner -Perception
of potentially unlimited liability for future
owner/financier
Potential stigma associated with reusing
property
Little or no funding for remediation
Easily transferable On most states)
HMI«* nrnt.pj"'! fl BQr<^nfi^trfii'> frr\n\ K^ino
JYCUoC plULCbUt y CCI UIC4U» ItUIIl UVUIg
devdoped
Environmentally sound method to promote
development in an area
Usually a small facility or property

Only regulated by federal government if
potentially large amount of contaminants found
on-site
Federal Facility (DOD and DOE)
U.S. government owned property with
potential to become abandoned, idled o
utilized
Both urban and rural
Known PRP - a federal agency
Local government actively involved in i
the rite at all closing bases and at many
sites
Extensive Environmental Assessment r
before the property is transferred
DOD - Certainty of liability for new ow
provide new owner with indemnificatioi
contamination and economic loss on th«
when the property is transferred (sectio
DOB - liable for all contamination at ttu
Potential stigma associated with reusing
pi upd iy
Funding for remediation that is protect!'
human health and the environment
Difficult timely process to transfer
Reuse protects "greenfields" from being
developed
Environmentally sound method to prom
development in an area
Usually a large facility or property
Regulated transfer by federal and state
government

1C
under*

eusing
DOE
squired
ner-
for
site
1330)-
site

eof

ate

-------
Reuse of Department of Energy Brownfields:
Opportunities and Challenges for Local Governments

Robert T. McDaniel
City Manager
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

The U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation (RR) is a 35,000-acre complex
located within the city limits of Oak ridge, Tennessee. Three major facilities-the Oak Ridge
National laboratory, the Y-12 production plant, and the K-25 gaseous diffusion plant—are
situated on the site. Approximately 9% of the ORR contains some level of radiological or
chemical contamination.

In 1995 the DOE established a reindustrialization program at the K-25 facility, changing
the name of the site to the East Tennessee Technology Park. The goal of the program is to lease
buildings and equipment to private companies at a reduced rate., in exchange for cleaning up the
buildings to "brownfields" standards. The program is intended to provide long-term job creation
and reuse of facilities that otherwise would be left idle or undergo a costly decontamination and
decommissioning program.

This presentation describes the potential opportunities for the reuse of federal facilities at
the ORR from a local government perspective. The challenges associated with reuse, such as
regulatory compliance, ownership, liability, and municipal service provision are also discussed.
Recommendations for enhancing the local government role in the reuse of federal facilities are
offered.
-------
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5F) Roads Less Traveled: Brownfields and Transportation
Thursday, September 4,1997
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Description: Access to transportation for workers and consumers is a key to successful revitalization projects.
Learn how to take advantage of transportation resources! Speakers will help you connect your brownfields project
to transportation systems, processes, and opportunities available to every community.
Location: Room 2217

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. J. Randle Schick (Moderator)
Ms. Elizabeth Collator)
Mr. Douglas MacCourt
Ms. Jacqueline Davis-Wellington
State of Illinois, Department of Transportation
Northeast-Midwest Institute
City of Portland, Oregon
St. Louis County, Missouri
MR. J. RANDLE SCHICK
J. Randle Schick is an Assistant Chief Counsel for the Illinois Department of Transportation. He is a graduate of the
University of Illinois School of Law. Mr. Schick was the 1996 chairman of the Environmental Law Section Council for
the Illinois State Bar Association. He is a member of the Transportation Research Board's (TRB) Committee on
Environmental Issues in Transportation Law and Task Force on Waste Management In Transportation. He is the
recent author of Risk-Based Cleanup Objectives, Land Use and Transportation published by TRB.

Ms. ELIZABETH COLLATON

Ms. Collaton brings ten years of experience in hazardous and solid waste issues to her current position with the
Northeast-Midwest Institute as senior policy analyst for Pollution Prevention and Waste Reduction. She tracks state
and federal policies affecting brownfields cleanup and redevelopment, as well as opportunities to develop "smart
growth" policies at the local, state, and federal levels by analyzing the interplay of land use, transportation, and
economic development decisions. She is co-author with Charles Bartsch of Industrial Site Reuse, Contamination
and Urban Redevelopment: Coping with the Challenges of Brownfields (December 1994), Coming Clean for
Economic Development: A Resource Book on Environmental Cleanup and Economic Development Opportunities
(November 1995), and Brownfields: Cleaning and Reusing Contaminated Properties (January 1997). Ms. Collaton
holds a bachelor's degree from McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

MR. DOUGLAS C. MACCOURT

Mr. MacCourt is the environmental manager for the City of Portland, Office of Transportation, where he advises city
bureaus on environmental compliance. He has managed land use, environmental and natural resources issues in
the planning, design and construction of transportation projects, and represents transportation interests in
environmental matters to government agencies, legislative organizations and Native American tribes. He directs the
Portland Brownfields Initiative to promote the redevelopment of contaminated property in the enterprise community
of north and northeast Portland and in neighborhoods along the Portland waterfront. A graduate of Humboldt State
University's College of Natural Resources and the University of Oregon Law School, Mr. MacCourt is a member of
several state and national organizations developing regulatory and funding strategies for brownfields redevelopment
and other environmental issues.

Ms. JACQUELINE DAVIS-WELLINGTON

Ms. Davis-Wellington is currently a project manager with the St. Louis County Economic Council, St. Louis, Missouri,
and the acting executive director of the Cornerstone Partnership, an educational facility in Wellston, Missouri
designed to train economically disadvantaged, inner-city youth in machining and manufacturing technology. In her
capacity with the Economic Council, Ms. Davis-Wellington provides municipalities and older commercial and
industrial districts with technical assistance for redevelopment activities.
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
Ms. Davis-Wellington has fifteen years of construction, environmental, and redevelopment project management
experience in both the public and private sectors. She holds a Bachelor of Science in business administration from
Washington University in St. Louis and a Master of Science in urban policy analysis from Southern Illinois University.
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 5F: ROADS LESS TRAVELED: BROWNFIELDS AND TRANSPORTATION
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
m Portland Brownfields Initiative
_.'^
Community Strategies to Recycle Land
A Pilot Project Sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative
1
Presented by Douglas C. MacCourt, Director
Portland Brownfields Initiative
City of Portland, Oregon
Transportation Engineering & Development
1120 SW Fifth Avenue, Room 808
Portland, Oregon 97204-1971

Phone: (503) 823-7052
Fax: (503) 823-7371
E-mail: dcm@syseng.ci.portland.or.us
Internet: http://www.brownfield.org
-------
KEY PLAYERS
FINANCING
H£tftot Cfrt ^ t^fe't fe ft .tiJfVhrifc £tth ^Ofe'&^^'&itilfettk
i§niway Aditiinsstfation
Department of Transportation
Poirt of Portland
City of Portland
80% Federal
20% State/Local Match
THE PROJECT
Highway and Two Brtdps to
Deteriorating Two-Lane Roadway
Through Ir^dlustrlal Prof3^«nd Kn»wn Brownffelcte
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
THE PURPOSE
* Connect 1-5 to Deep Water Ports In Rivergate
Industrial Area
* Opem Over 3,000 Acres Industrial Zoned Land
it Mmstei %000 New Family-Wage Jobs by 2008
* Remove Safety Hazard Around Railroad Bridge
Opportunities on Alignment
THIOiJECTlVE
» Protect Adjacent Wetlands and Blue Heron Rookery

* Remove Bottleneck by Building New Road
ThrougH Contaminated Business
Brownfields *97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive, Portland, Oregon
-------
PRELIMINARY ROADWAY ALIGNMENT
Idemification of Potential Concerns
Site Assessment
Slate Statute and Written Agreements
LEVEL II ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
* Combined Environmental/Geotechnical

m Utilize Existing Wells/Split Samples with Property Ownens

* Property Owners Install Wells with 0% Location I nfo

» Dmftl^eportelo Property Owri^rs for Review
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
LEVEL HA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Results
• Impact di) Roadway Design Clarified

* Regulatory Issues Focused
LEVEU1B ENVIRONMENTAL TASKS

* Tast Impact of Fill on ^Migration of Contaminants
* Groundwater Recovery Model from RosKiway Edge
. * Modified Health Risk Assessment
* Rfek Assessment for Human and Biological Receptors
from Capping Hot Spots on 0ns Property
Brownficlds '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
« Limit Intrusive Work
» Building Longer/Higher
« Use Separation Liners
it Alignment Modtficatton
K Shallow Storm System/Utilities in Clean Fill
* AH Excavation, Trees & Plants Remain on Property of Origin
* Concrete Plugs in Trenches
ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY
m Condemnation Protection for Local Government

* Appraise aslf Clean

* Easement vs, Fee Simple Title

» Legal Documents
Brownfields *97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive, Portland, Oregon
-------
REGULATORY CONCERNS .

* Liability Exemption '.

* Exacerbation of Contamination

* impact or* Roadway from Futum Cleanup Astlvfii&s
CONSTRUCTION
* Address Bond Underwriters Concerns
* Contract Specs to Include:
~ Mandatory F^*By Meeting for HAZMAT/Oter
- Health and Safety Issues an Anticipated Eld Item
- Organic Material Retained on Property of Origin
- RestHcted Access Until Property Ssciim with
Separation Fabric
- Dust Controlln HA2M AT Areas
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
LESSONS LEARNED
« Value of Partnership Agreements on Brownfieids Projects
if Ui^erstancling and Solving the Customms;
Constant Communication
* Connote Sp*sc$ to Control Problems
* Tal^r^ Nloi^ Risk Eneoufagsd Mom Oma^vit^
Redevelop Brownfields
Ripple-Effect on Private Investment
WtoM ftor f*ub!fe Wote F^roje^ to Conlainlnat^ Ai^ts
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland, Oregon
-------
IMPACT OF N. MARINE DRIVE PROJECT ON RIVERGATE
ACTIVITY
riod
1963 - 1993
1993 - 1996
Rivergate Sales
Acres Sold
508 acres sold
172 acres sold
Rate
17 acres/year
43 acres/year
Rivergate Sales and Leases (includes Marine Terminal Leases)
Period Acres Sold/Leased Rate
1963 - 1993 766 acres 25 acres/year
1993 - 1996 237 acres 60 acres/year
Land Sales/Leases:
Improvements:
Total:
Private Investment 1993-96
$28 million
$288 million
$316 million
Year
1990
1993
1994
1995
1996
Land Price Appreciation
Land Price/Acre
$75,000
$86,500
$92,500
$125,000
$141,570
% Change from Prev. Yr.

15.3%
6.9%
351.4%
132.6%
Developer/lnstitutional/REIT Interest "Spec Market" Development in
Rivergate Since 1994
Spieker Properties 27 acres (new development)
Security Capital
Harsh Investment
7 acres (purchase of existing project)
7 acres (new development)
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
PacTrust 6 acres (new development)

Mabek 6 acres (new development)
Brownfields '97
Portland Brownfields Initiative
North Marine Drive. Portland. Oregon
-------
Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5G) Planning for Success: How Redevelopment Planning Processes Can Work for Your Town

Thursday, September 4,1997
10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

Description: This panel provides the keys to unlocking the doors of redevelopment planning. Learn how to
position your project in the confusing array of local, regional, state, and federal planning processes to gain
community support and financial backing.
Location: Room 1201

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. James C. Schwab (Moderator)
Mr. Ed Gilliland
Mr. Paul Raetsch

Ms. Joan Roessler
American Planning Association
National Council for Urban and Economic Development
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
MR. JAMES C. SCHWAB
James C. Schwab, AICP, is a senior research associate for the American Planning Association (APA), and from
1992-1996 was the editor of APA's research newsletter, Environment & Development. Since 1990, he has been the
editor of another APA newsletter. Zoning News. He is the author of Deeper Shades of Green: The Rise of Blue
Collar and Minority Environmentalism in America, published in 1994 by Sierra Club Books, and of the 1993 Planning
Advisory Service Report (No. 444) published by APA, Industrial Performance Standards for a New Century. He has
also written several newsletter and magazine articles on the subjects of brownfields and sustainable development,
and is currently the principal investigator for APA's Casey foundation-funded research project on neighborhood
collaborative planning.

MR. ED GILLILAND

Ed Gilliland is the Director of Publications and Advisory Services for the National Council for Urban Economic
Development (CUED). He has ten years of economic consulting experience with cities, counties, quasi-public
agencies, multi-jurisdictional coalitions, and private clients. He has focused on strategic and comprehensive
planning, economic development, downtown revitalization, public/private partnerships, financial analysis, funding
strategies, transportation economics, economic impacts, and land use. He has published case studies for the
funding and redevelopment of properties in blighted areas. Mr. Gilliland holds a Master of Business Administration
from the University of Virginia, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration.

MR. PAUL RAETSCH

Paul Raetsch is the chief of the New England Division of the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration (EDA), Philadelphia Regional Office. Mr. Raetsch also served as a member of the Economic
Development and Jobs Working Group of the President's Council on Sustainable Development.

Mr. Raetsch is responsible for managing all of EDA's Economic Development Assistance Programs in the New
England region. This includes working with over 50 regional, county, state, city or Indian economic development
planning agencies. He also has overall policy guidance responsibility for the Economic Development Planning grant
program in the Philadelphia region. This involves working with approximately 100 urban, state and regional planning
organizations throughout the northeast. Mr. Raetsch manages the Technical Assistance, Defense Adjustment,
Public Works infrastructure and Economic Adjustment grant programs for the region. Each year over $15 million are
awarded to economic development assistance grants designed to help communities overcome economic and
employment problems in New England.

Prior to holding this position, he was the chief of the Planning and Technical Assistance Division in the Regional
Office. He also served three years as the U.S. Department of Commerce's Deputy Representative of the Secretary.
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. Raetsch has taught political science courses in urban policy and development, American government,
introduction to political science, public administration, and public policy analysis for Rutgers University, the University
of Southern Colorado and Burlington County College.

Mr. Raetsch earned both a Bachelor of Arts in political science and a Master of Regional Planning from the
Pennsylvania State University.

Ms. JOAN ROESSLER

[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
PANEL 5G: PLANNING FOR SUCCESS: HOW REDEVELOPMENT PLANNING
PROCESSES CAN WORK FOR YOUR TOWN
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
PLANNING FOR SUCCESS
Can Redevelopment Planning Work for Your Town - An Evolution
September^ 1997
Brownfields '97, Kansas City. Missouri
Paul Raetsch
Economic Development Administration
Philadelphia Region
Curtis Center. Suite 140 South
Independence Square West
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215)597-1072
EPA may reproduce this paper for the Brownfields '97 binder
-------
Plan; Method or scheme of action, procedure, or arrangement; project, program,
outline or schedule. Webster New Collegiate Dictionary.

Comprehensive Plan: The physical manifestation of putting down on paper the
hopes, dreams and goals a community hold for itself. It functions much like a road
map; it is a means to an end. Michael Chandler,

Planning: Visualizing a better future and going after it. Martin Meyvrson.

Scholars debate "when" planning began in this country. Penn's 1682 Plan for Philadelphia is
usually cited as the first city plan. Daniel BumhanTs Plan for Chicago in 1909, an offshoot of the
City Beautiful movement is often cited as the beginning of modern metropolitan regional planning
in the United States, even though it was not formally adopted by the City and had been
commissioned by the Commercial Club. Hartford is credited with having created in 1907 the first
permanent planning board in the United States. Cincinnati became the first city to formally adopt
a comprehensive plan with a legal connection to zoning. Perhaps what is most important is not
when planning started in the United States, all cities were planned. They were just planned
differently For instance, throughout the first century, the private sector did the planning.
However, it is important to understand general trends in planning in this country.

Urban planners in most cities have been concerned with "redevelopment planning" and, more
recently, with forming "public private partnerships." To put this in context, we should remember
that when this nation became free, cities lost their independence. The "public" was not involved
in urban planning and development. Penn's Philadelphia and other towns and villages in colonial
America were planned because they were municipal corporations. The owners of the towns had
them planned with large squares and public places. The quaint Colonial villages we love were
planned and built by municipal corporations. After the Treaty of Paris in 1783 and the adoption
of the Constitution in 1789, cities in effect became creatures of the states, and were powerless to
control or regulate land use decisions. The Constitution was silent on cities, towns, townships
and counties. It was up to the states to give their political subdivisions power. Since most of the
country shared Jefferson's well known disdain for cities, the states did not offer any powers to the
cities. Iowa Chief Justice John Dillon coined "Dillon's Rule" which stated that all cities' charters
and powers are given and taken by the states. Thus planning and land regulation, which would
control private market decisions, were not powers held by America's cities.

The first national effort to overcome "Dillon's Rule" for municipal planning was initiated by the
Commerce Department in 1928 under Secretary Hoover (rather surprising considering his
political philosophy extolling free markets). The Department proposed a Standard City Planing
Enabling Act for adoption by the states. This model ordinance suggested that cities set up
separate Planning Commissions, outside of the city political structure. Thus while planning would
be separate from political factions, it would also be separate from potential strength. The states
fairly rapidly adopted local planning legislation, but by the late 1950's most cities had moved their
independent Planning Boards into Commissions appointed by and often reporting to the Mayor
and Council. Planning Departments evolved to staff the planning functions. And planning and
-------
zoning were usually separated. Should planning commissions be independent? Should
professional planners be independent? Should planners be remain out of politics? Can they?

We have experienced an evolution in the ideology of planning. Cities were creatures of the states,
and the state was not interested in interfering with the private economy. The American patriots
fought hard to win freedom and liberty. There legacy and philosophy was that government had
no role in interfering with private business decisions. Laissez Faire carried on almost uncontested
as a political philosophy well into the twentieth century. The 1912 case of Eubank v City of
Richmond, in which the court affirmed a setback requirement, is cited as the first Supreme Court
case affirming the concept of land use regulation. In 1926 the Court established the
constitutionality of zoning in Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty. It had taken 150 years from the
Declaration of Independence for the basic building block of enforceable planning and zoning to be
established. Americans do not want our personal economic liberties constrained by the state. It is
at least partly a result of this attitude that we now face the major problem of redevelopment
planning, particularly "brownfields."

In 1943 the National Resources Planning Board (NRPB) was abolished by Congress, with a
prohibition that no federal agency could assume its national planning functions. Thus ended a ten
year experiment at national planning that has not been attempted since. The state planning
programs that had been established and funded by the NRPB all were ended by the states soon
after the federal funding disappeared. Again, planning lost because it was seen as interfering with
private decisions. The planning concept, to include land regulation and development restrictions,
was not truly accepted in this country until Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954 was enacted.
For the first time the federal government provided financial support for general purpose planning.
The Act required that communities prepare a Comprehensive Plan that included at a minimum; a
land use plan, a thoroughfare plan, a community facilities plan, a public improvements program
and zoning and subdivision ordinances. However, the Comprehensive Plan element of federal
urban programs became an optional portion of Community Development Block Grants. If
communities decided to fund planning, the function was retained. If planning was considered
either a luxury or excessive interference in the private market, comprehensive planning functions
and programs were deleted or weakened. Urban Renewal planning evolved into Model Cities
planning, the true beginning of Redevelopment Planning.

Shifts in federal direction towards planning took a major leap forward with Lyndon Johnson's
Great Society programs. Section 204 of the Model Cities and Metropolitan Development Act
provided for Metropolitan Planning Agencies to review local projects for conformance to regional
plans. Thus was born the A-9S Review requirements which were designed to strengthen regional
planning agencies. This mandate became a victim of the Reagan "New Federalism" drive to get
government off our backs and end the power of "planners, middlemen and grantsmen." Johnson
also created the Economic Development Administration in 1965 with a requirement that all
projects be consistent with a locally developed Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP).
An incentive was included in the legislation to encourage regional economic development
planning by multi county Economic Development Districts (HDD). Funding was provided for the
EDD planning activities, and extra funding provided for projects that resulted from that regional
planning process. This program was targeted under both the Nixon and Reagan federalism
-------
philosophies, but it survived. The EDA survived primarily because EDA consistently supported
local planning efforts, resulting in strong local support. The EDA planning program was designed
as a planning and implementation partnership, aimed at showing that planning should be
implemented and that its priorities should be controlled by local decision makers. The EDA, and
its companion Appalachia Regional Commission, planning programs have survived because of
those two elements: local priorities, and control and results through implementation.

As we near the end of the century, we planners are faced with a dilemma. Over two dozen
existing federal programs have a planning requirements or provide federal assistance to prepare a
plan. Almost all are directed at single and specific purposes, many are focussed on
redevelopment. All were created in part to fulfill Meyerson's charge for planning to "visualize a
better future and go after it." What is missing from the listing seems to be federal support for the
comprehensive planning needed to coordinate these many separate visions. To carry out the work
of a planner, a person must believe that there is a "common purpose" or "public good" that we
can define and strive for. We are optimists, we believe that we can do good. Our values tell us
that freedom is opportunity, not just the absence of restraint, and that planning and regulation are
necessary to provide opportunity for all, to provide for "common purpose," But whose definition
will we pursue, whose vision is right? We must consider brownfields, environmental justice,
neighborhood gentrification, and finally citizen empowerment.

One reason that federal funding for comprehensive planning disappeared may be that the federal
vision was not what each of our communities perceived as their own common good or ideal.
Regional planning and review was eliminated as a federal mandate because this seemed to violate
the concept of Federalism. However, redevelopment planning is occurring at the municipal and
neighborhood levels. Planning Commissions are making choices, determining future investments,
controlling development, providing infrastructure and, in accordance with an original text book
definition of planning, "allocating scarce resources within their boundaries." We can be optimistic
because planners arc being heard, their recommendations are considered.

A final debate that has not stopped since Alan Altshuler suggested it in his 1965 The City
Planning Process, is the degree that planners should be involved with the political process. Few
believe that planning can be isolated from politics, few would want it to be. Plans and planning
recommendations can only be implemented by decisions made thought the political process. The
fact that so many specific planning programs are funded at the federal level should not disturb us.
The federal interests in specific issues justifies federal assistance to assist states and localities
address those issues. The key to achieving the better future that we believe can be reached is to
convince elected officials of those decisions.

Of all the lessons learned from the Overall Economic Development Program process required by
the Economic Development Administration, the clearest is this: local officials must be involved in
the planning process, and that this involvement assures success of the program. Regional and
local planning programs that seem to flounder, with the stereotypical plans that "sit on the shelf
are those that have become isolated from local officials and the private sector leadership.
However, there is a problem. Not all planners or planning commissions see involvement as a
strength. Almost all students that I have challenged to review local plans have met with great
-------
resistance from local officials. In New Jersey, local comprehensive plans are mandated by state
law, and must be updated every five years. Yet rarely will local elected officials or planning board
members share the plans. They are available only in the Planning Board offices, if then. If this is
typical throughout the nation, then we in the profession have a problem. The best way to educate
elected officials on the wisdom of our vision is if the public agrees with us. Our function is to
lead, and we must lead with the general public as well as trying to convince elected officials. The
public must see the "good" in the public good. In EDA we are now accepting the plans
developed under the Empowerment Zone concept as meeting the OEDP requirements. I am
convinced that the "empowerment1 in the planning process is the most important element of the
EZ/EC initiative, the most significant effort at redevelopment since Model Cities.

Planning will continue into the next century, and I am convinced that redevelopment planning and
implementation must become more aligned. As resources get scarcer, planning will focus on
problems that need to be addressed. Our challenge is to make sure that individual problems are
seen and challenged in a comprehensive manner. And this approach must be at the local as well as
multi jurisdiction level.
-------
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5H) Uncle Sam's Attic: A Treasure Trove of Federal Properties
Thursday, September 4, 1997
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Description: Heightened government downsizing is providing an unparalleled opportunity to target underutilized
and/or excess federal property for productive reuse in support of community redevelopment and rehabilitative
initiatives, like Brownfields and EZ/EC. Find out about these properties and what the federal government is doing
to facilitate reuse.

Location: Room 2218
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Brian Polly (Moderator)
Mr. John Martin
U.S. General Services Administration
U.S. General Services Administration
MR. BRIAN K. POLLY
Brian K. Polly is the Assistant Commissioner for Property Disposal at the General Services Administration (GSA).
Before his appointment in January 1995, Mr. Polly was the Assistant Commissioner for Procurement and Public
Utilities, also at GSA. Prior to joining the GSA in 1986, he served as the Procurement Executive and the Director of
Contracts Management at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Polly formerly served as the Director of the Contracts Division of the Joint Cruise Missiles Project (JCMP). He
was also the Director of Plans at the Programs and Policy Division of JCMP and the Acquisition Policy Advisor to the
Director of the JCMP.

Before joining JCMP, Mr. Polly held various positions within the major weapon system acquisition field with the Naval
Materiel Command, the Naval Sea Systems Command, and the Naval Ordnance Systems Command.

Mr. Polly has been certified as a contracts manager by the National Contracts Manager Association. He also is a
program member of the Procurement Executive Council and a past member of the Civilian Agency Acquisition
Council, the Small Business Innovation Task Force, and the Policy Committee of the Federal Executive Institute
Association. Mr. Polly is a member of the Defense Environmental Response Task Force (DERTF) chaired by the
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security. Mr. Polly holds a Master of Public Administration
from Northern Colorado University and a Bachelor of Arts from Millersville State College.

MR. JOHN MARTIN

Description: Environmental jobs represent one of the fastest growing employment sectors in America.
Brownfields redevelopment is creating jobs today and will be a major factor in the workforce of the future.
Meeting the training and workforce development needs of tomorrow will be focus of this panel.
Location: Room 2203

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Irwin Pernick (Moderator)
Ms. Lorrie Louder
Ms. Sherry Nikzat
Ms. Kizetta Vaughn
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Port Authority of St. Paul, Minnesota
City of East Palo Alto, California
United Brotherhood of Carpenters Health and Safety Fund
of America
MR. IRWIN PERNICK
In his current position as associate deputy assistant secretary for policy in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA), Mr. Pernick supervises a multi-disciplinary staff responsible for conducting policy analyses and cross-cutting
high priority special studies on VA health care, benefits, and management policy and program plans and objectives.
As counselor to the VA Secretary from 1989-92, inter alia, he launched an effort to increase assistance to homeless
veterans and coordinated VA's interagency representation in the areas of homelessness, substance abuse, and
AIDS. One of VA's homeless assistance endeavors, the Comprehensive Work Therapy program, will be a
centerpiece in VA's participation in Brownfields. Prior to coming to VA, Mr. Pernick spent more than 26 years as a
foreign service officer with the Department of State, where he focused on political-military, political, and public affairs
questions and worked on issues bearing on Canada, Western and Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia.

Ms. LORRIE LOUDER

Lorrie Louder is the director of industrial development for the Saint Paul Port Authority, responsible for the
amendment of all Port Authority activities relative to new industrial business park development (brownfields),
industrial site remediation, provision of financing for expanding manufacturing companies in the City and Metro East,
customized job training, client contact with all Saint Paul manufacturers, and provision of a range of business
services to Saint Paul manufacturers (site selection, real estate development consulting, assistance through city
regulatory processes, customized job training).

Previously, Ms. Louder held the position of deputy director for the Office of Real Estate Management for the
Massachusetts Division of Capital Planning and Operations. Her responsibilities included real estate disposition
activities for a portfolio of state-owned properties and developer negotiations regarding reuse of these properties.
Ms. Louder also served as director of the Neighborhood Revitalization Division at the Minneapolis Community
Development Agency. She was responsible for industrial redevelopment and soil remediation activities, commercial
and single family/multi-family residential projects, small business financing, and property management.

Ms. Louder holds a master's degree from University of Minnesota a well as an undergraduate degree from Boston
College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts. Ms. Louder is also certified by the National Development Council in Real
Estate Development and Business Credit Analysis.

Ms. SHERRY NIKZAT ^

Sherry Nikzat has been with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the past seven years. Ms. Nikzat
was the first EPA brownfields coordinator for the Region 9 office and is currently on loan to the City of East Palo Alto
as part of the EPA Brownfields Initiative. Her position in East Palo Alto, where she serves as the Environmental and
Economic Development Coordinator, is collaboratively funded by EPA and the U.S. Department of Housing and
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
Urban Development. Prior to working for EPA, Ms. Nikzat spent five years with the U.S. Department of Labor.
working in unemployment insurance and job training programs.

Ms. KIZETTA VAUGHN

Kizetta Vaughn, Director of Environmental Justice for the United Brotherhood of Carpenters (UBC) Health and Safety
Fund of America, administers their NIEHS Minority Worker Training Program and other environmental justice
programs sponsored by the UBC. On behalf of the Carpenters and the International Brotherhood of Painters and
Allied Trades, Ms. Vaughn has been successfully involved, during the past 2% years, in creating construction skills
pre-apprenticeship training programs, including environmental worker training, in approximately 25 U.S. urban
centers, for economically disadvantaged inner-city youth. She is a former Public Housing Authority Executive
Director and has extensive working experience in providing housing and employment services for low-income
families.
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 51: A PIECE OF THE ACTION: REDEVELOPMENT JOBS FORECAST
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
Job Training in East Palo Alto

The San Francisco Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and
the City of East Palo Alto are forging new relationships with DePaul University,
Opportunities Industrialization Center West (OICW) and private industry to provide
technical training and employment opportunities for disadvantaged youths in East Palo
Alto.
The program includes "piloting" an initial training and job placement program in which
DePaul University will provide 60 hours of hazardous material worker training for
approximately 30 youths. An additional 180 hours of training will be devoted to lead and
asbestos abatement and conducting underground storage tank cleaning and removal.
Funding for the DePaul training was provided by U.S. EPA?s Headquarters office
through an existing grant that the university has with the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences. This training will be expanded by a week to include
Allies Staffing training for hydroblasting for storage tank cleanup, safety awareness,
proper use of personal protection equipment and proper lifting techniques. As part of this
training, U.S. EPA staff will provide training on the Agency's program for responding to
releases of hazardous substances that present serious threats to human health and the
environment. Through OICW, the trainees will also receive training that will help prepare
them to enter the workforce and provide them with limited general education
requirements. Allies Staffing will administer a drug testing and monitoring program and
provide physicals for the students. At the end of the training program, students will be
certified to fill entry-level positions in the hazardous materials cleanup field. The class
room training will be followed by 90-days of paid on-the-job training during which time
students will be assigned to do environmental work at sites in the area.

Background
This job training and placement program is an integral part of U.S. EPA's national
Brownfields initiative. "Brownfields" sites are abandoned, idled or underused industrial
and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or
perceived environmental contamination. Frequently, these properties, once the source of
jobs and economic benefits to the entire community lie abandoned for fear of the
contamination and liability it implies.
The Ravenswood Industrial Area in East Palo Alto was identified in May 1996 by U.S.
EPA as a high priority regional Brownfields pilot project. Past efforts to redevelop the
130-acre complex were hampered by the perception that there was widespread
contamination at the site that could cost up to $30 million to clean up. Earlier, in 1996,
U.S. EPA?s Region 9, in partnership with the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board and the City of East Palo Alto, conducted a comprehensive soil and groundwater
investigation at the Ravenswood Industrial Area that showed that contamination there
-------
was far less than originally expected. Though no official cost estimates have been
developed, the Regional Water Quality Control Board staff believe that the actual cleanup
costs are more likely in the $2 million to $5 million range.
Current Status
The classroom portion of the job training program will begin on August 11 and end on
September 19. Following this training, the 30 students will begin 90 days of on-the-job
training (OJT) under the employment of Allies Staffing, an out-sourcing job placement
firm that specializes in environmental cleanup services. Allies Staffing will put these
students to work during the 90 day OJT period. This will allow students the opportunity
to apply what they have learned in the classroom to a real-world situation. At the
conclusion of OJT, graduating students wishing to seek more permanent employment will
be available for hire by end-users to fill entry-level or other technical positions.

Contacts
For additional information on this program, contact the following:
Sherry Nikzat Thomas Mix
City of East Palo Alto U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency
(415)853-3100 (415)744-2378

Craig Jenkins Jim Tutor
OICW Allies Staffing
(415) 462-6300 (707) 748-0233
-------
PANEL PRESENTATION OUTLINE

Background information on the Carpenters' Health & Safety Fund's experience and involvement
in the NIEHS funded Minority Worker Training Program:

MWT program has been conducted by the Carpenters Health and Safety Fund for the past
3 years and has provided environmental worker training coupled with pre-apprenticeship
construction skills training to over 300 minority youth between the ages of 18-25. The
Carpenters Union working in conjunction with the International Brotherhood of Painters
and Allied Trades have created program partnerships in four target cities during this time:
Los Angeles, Memphis, New Orleans, and Minneapolis. Recently, Oakland, CA was
included. Through collaborative programming with each city's union affiliates, public
housing authorities, Private Industry Councils, community colleges and/or Historical
Black Colleges, local union signatory contractors, the MWT program provided
community outreach, recruitment and assessment, life skills counseling, remedial
education and GED training or testing, basic construction skills training, lead abatement,
asbestos abatement or hazardous waste worker training and direct entrance into the
unions' apprenticeship programs.

Specific Program Elements Essential to Ensure a Modicum of Success:

• Involvement in community planning
• Formation of partnerships, specifying partners' responsibilities and commitments
of resources
• Identification of potential employers during planning process
• Involvement of partners in recruitment, assessment and selection of Program
participants
• Development and implementation of thorough life skills training program
• Development of mentorship program
• Development and implementation of strategic marketing/public relations program

Why connect the MWT program to community economic development initiatives and how:
Program marketing and to whom
Connecting community human and financial resources involved in Brownfields
redevelopment activities
-------
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5J) Done Deals That Work
Thursday. September 4,1997
10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.

Description: Real estate and development experts share their successful experiences. Come hear what it takes
to close the deal on a variety of different properties. See real examples of brownfields redevelopment through the
eyes of the people who make them happen.
Location: Room 1202A-B

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Ned Abelson (Moderator)
Ms. Beth Barton
Mr. Todd S. Davis
Mr. Joseph M. Manko
Goulson & Storrs
Updike. Kelly, and Spellacy, P.O.
Hemisphere Corporation
Manko, Gold, & Katcher
MR. NED ABELSON
Ned Abelson is a Director at Goulston & Storrs in Boston, where he concentrates his practice on environmental law.
He provides general representation concerning environmental matters to the firm's brownfields, real estate and
corporate clients, and handles the environmental aspects of the many different transactions in which they are
involved. A considerable amount of his practice involves property subject to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan
(the "MCP"). Mr. Abelson is a member of the American Bar Association Brownfields Task Force and the Liability
Subcommittee of the Massachusetts Brownfields Advisory Group. He also is a member of the Chicago Brownfields
Forum Model Loan Package Group, which developed a model brownfields documentation lending package, and is
chairman of the Environmental Subcommittee of the International Council of Shopping Centers ("ICSC"), for which
Mr. Abelson regularly reviews proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and federal brownfields legislation. He currently co-chairs the Boston
Bar Association Recycling Task Force and is a participating member of the Massachusetts Environmental Justice
Network. Mr. Abelson regularly writes articles concerning environmental matters and has spoken on hazardous
waste issues at seminars given by ICSC, NAIOP, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), PLI, Associated
Industries of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education, the Boston Bar Association, and other
organizations. Mr. Abelson graduated maana cum laude from Brown University and received his law degree from
the University of Pennsylvania. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa.

Ms. BETH BARTON

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

MR. TODD S. DAVIS

Todd Davis is President of Hemisphere Corporation, a company that acquires and redevelops environmentally
distressed real estate. Mr. Davis also is a partner in Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP and is the co-
chairman of the firm's Environmental Practice Group. Mr. Davis is an author of an extensive treatise on redeveloping
brownfields sites nationally, entitled'Brownffe/ds. A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property
(American Bar Association 1997). He is also vice chairman of the American Bar Association's Brownfields Task
Force.

MR. JOSEPH M. MANKO

Mr. Manko was U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Region 3 general counsel from 1973 to 1975, and
has practiced environmental law ever since. He teaches environmental law at the University of Pennsylvania and
University of Vermont Law School, is the chairman of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council and a member of
Pennsylvania 21st Century Environmental Commission. He has negotiated dozens of brownfields transactions and
cleanup liability protection agreements with regulatory agencies in Pennsylvania and New Jersey and EPA's Regions
2 and 3. Mr. Manko also lectures and has written a number of articles on state and federal brownfields policies.
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 5J: DONE DEALS THAT WORK
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
GOULSTON & STORKS
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
COUNSELLORS AT LAW
400 ATLANTIC AVENUE
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-3333
(617)482-1776
TELECOPY/FAX (617) 574-4112

WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL (617) 574-4082
e-mail: nabelson@goulstotTS.com

THE MASSACHUSETTS CONTINGENCY PLAN:
A PRIVATIZED WASTE SITE
CLEANUP PROGRAM THAT WORKS

Ned Abelson

July 22,1997

The Massachusetts Contingency Plan (the "MCP") is a leading example of a
privatized waste site cleanup program. The MCP in largely its current form became
effective October 1,1993, and can be found at 310 CMR 40.0000 si seq. This
program has become a national model, and in 1995 received one of the Innovations
Awards given by the Council of State Governments. These awards are given to
recognize "the best and most creative practices in state government which have the
potential to be adopted by other states."

Both the regulated community and the people at the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection (the "DEP") who implement the MCP
would agree that the new program has largely been a success and is a better way of
addressing the cleanup of hazardous waste sites. Set forth below is a description of
the problems that led to the creation of the current MCP, the program that was
developed in response to those problems, a summary of several highlights from the
program, as well as issues in the current system that need further attention, and a
brief status report regarding Brownfields programs in Massachusetts.
Note: This article was first published in connection with the RTM Communications Brownfields
Conference in Washington, D.C. on April 17 and 18,1997 entitled "Financing New Opportunities
in the Redevelopment of Brownfields and Implementing Environmental Risk Management in
Financial Transactions."
-------
The Problem

In 1983, Chapter 21E of the Massachusetts General Laws was enacted. This
statute is the Massachusetts equivalent of CERCLA, and was enacted in response to
the public's demand that the state address the cleanup of oil and hazardous material
disposal sites in Massachusetts.

Unfortunately, the public did not provide the state with the resources
necessary to accomplish this and so in short order a significant backlog of cases
developed. The state was unable to oversee many of the sites that were brought to its
attention, and only the worst sites got much attention at all. Political connections
became more important than usual (even in Massachusetts), and the merits of a
particular location became less important.

From a transactional perspective, two problems were particularly significant.
First, as noted above, if a site did not have significant contamination issues, then
getting the agency's attention was very difficult, if not impossible. Second, the
notification provisions in the statute and in early versions of the MCP were
interpreted both by the DEP and the private bar as meaning that if any oil or
hazardous material were identified at a site (i.e., one part per billion would be
enough), then notification to the DEP was required. As buyers, sellers, and lenders
became more sensitive to issues involving oil and hazardous waste, the number of
site assessments performed increased, and so did the number of sites for which
notification to DEP was required. The backlog continued to grow and, as time
passed, things only seemed to be getting worse.

A Solution

Amendments to Chapter 2IE were enacted in 1992 and revisions to the MCP
were implemented in 1993, all with the aim of privatizing the waste site cleanup
program to the extent feasible. The concept was simple: the government did not
have the resources to address each and every site, and many of the sites in the MCP
system were not significant enough for it to make any sense for the government to
address them. Further, there was general agreement that many of the least
contaminated sites were so mildly affected that they should not be in the MCP
system at all.

Now, instead of needing input from DEP, a property owner, tenant, lender, or
other interested person can turn to their Licensed Site Professional. These
individuals, often referred to as LSPs, are licensed by an independent Board of
Registration, have their own professional organization and, most importantly, issue
-------
opinions regarding cleanup end points and recommendations concerning how to
proceed at specific sites pursuant to the regulations. These opinions have become
accepted in commerce, and are relied on now both by private parties and the agency.
As a result, DEP's limited resources are focused on the most significant sites, on site
discovery efforts, and on policy issues. (In fact, DEP has been able to focus so much
effort on policy issues that those in the private sector have begun to have difficulty
keeping up with the flow of policy documentation emanating from DEP.)

The 1993 MCP also provides a number of means by which to exit the system
once a disposal site has been reported. Essentially at any point in the system, once
applicable risk based cleanup standards have been met (which, in some cases, means
that no cleanup is required), a completion statement can be filed with the agency and
at that point there is no need to proceed further through the MCP. In addition, the
regulations include incentives to take advantage of these exit possibilities sooner
rather than later.

As a result of putting the new MCP in place, many more site are moving
through the system and private parties have the ability to affect and hi some cases
control the timing of the relevant work. The result is that the backlog of sites has
been reduced dramatically, the type of site entering the system makes more sense,
and things for the most part seem to be working.

Additional Highlights

1. Notification Requirements. One of the problems with the previous
Massachusetts waste site cleanup program was the ridiculously low notification
thresholds that applied, regardless of the nature of the contamination and regardless
of the nature of the site. This problem has been addressed in both regards under the
current MCP. Instead of an absolute rule that everything has to be reported, there are
now "Reportable Concentrations" and "Reportable Quantities" specified in the
regulations for a long list of hazardous materials and different types of oil. In
addition, there are different reporting standards for different locations, and the
regulations differentiate between these locations based on the sensitivity of the area
from the perspective of a potential environmental receptor.

2. Incentives for Early Action. As noted above, the MCP now includes
several incentives to take early action. Certain fees apply only after specified time
periods have run, and the regulations include the opportunity to take action before
those time periods have run so as to avoid the need to pay the otherwise applicable
fee. In addition, there are means by which private parties may take risk reduction
measures early in the process to address contamination issues. Here the incentives
-------
include that if doing so eliminates the risk associated with the site, then it may be
possible to close out the site after having done so. If that is not the case, however,
the party responsible for the site still gets "credit" for having taken this action when
later in the process it is necessary to classify the site, which essentially involves
prioritizing the site based on a score sheet set forth in the regulations. Further,
although an application of sorts must be filed before taking these preliminary risk
reduction measures, more often than not specific comment is not received back from
DEP and the private party is able to proceed following the expiration of the
applicable presumptive approval period. This time period is ordinarily twenty-one
days.

3. Risk Based Cleanup System. The MCP is now largely a risk based
system. All sites do not have to be cleaned up to background or residential
standards. Three different types of risk characterizations can be used to assess the
level of risk at the particular site. The first is more conservative and general. It
involves the use of "cookbook" numerical standards, which are based on specific
regulatory provisions. These provisions describe how to determine which category
the site is in, based on its proximity to environmental receptors, and how to use
tables in the regulations, which set forth the relevant concentrations of oil and
hazardous materials that need to be satisfied in order to conclude that the site does
not present a significant risk. A second method of risk characterization is provided
pursuant to which particular numerical standards can be modified based on site
specific information. There is a also a third risk characterization approach that is
entirely site specific but much more involved, which can be worth the effort in some
cases, particularly if the site were not likely to pass muster using the more simple
risk characterization approaches.

4. Activity and Use Limitations. Another innovation in the MCP
program is the use of Activity and Use Limitations ("AULs"). AULs are title
restrictions that restrict the use of a site and are imposed voluntarily by the property
owner. The reason the property owner is inclined to do so is that, in exchange for
putting the AUL of record, the owner will not have to cleanup the site to more
conservative, residential standards. AULs provide notice of the existence and
location of contamination at the property, as well as any use restrictions that are
required based on that contamination in the opinion of the LSP for the site.

Although initially in the real estate community there was a fair amount of
resistance to their use, now both land owners and lenders have become sufficiently
accustomed to AULs that they are not deal breakers simply due to their existence.
Rather, the question is (as it should be) what is the nature of the contamination at the
site that is the reason for the AUL.
-------
5. Flexibility. One further benefit of the current MCP is its flexibility.
The ability to use exit ramps from the program at different times has been described
above, as has the ability of a private party to select which risk characterization
method to use. In addition, the regulations rely on the LSP's judgment at each step
in the process to determine the scope and the nature of the work to be performed to
comply with the relevant regulatory requirements. This is the case with respect to
initial reports, more detailed site investigation reports, remediation feasibility
analyses, and completion statements filed with the agency. Similarly, the exact
nature of the restrictions, obligations, and permitted activities set forth in an Activity
and Use Limitation is also left to the LSP. As a result, one of the most important
things to do in bringing a site through the MCP process is to be sure to be aware of
all of the available options at each step so that the best decisions can be made
regarding how to proceed.

Remaining Problems

1. Conservative LSP Decision Making. So far, so good - it may even
sound too good to be true. Well, the MCP isn't perfect and, in fact, there are a
number of areas where improvement is possible. First, because LSPs have been
given so much responsibility under the new program, many private parties feel that
LSPs are now more conservative in their decision making than before. That in and
of itself is fine, but property owners feel that the costs associated with that
conservative decision making are not necessarily appropriate. Naturally, DEP often
feels that LSPs are not conservative enough, and so there is a healthy tension here.
One obvious yet important result from all of this is that it is always very important to
carefully select the LSP with whom you work.

2. Complicated Regulations. All of the flexibility in the new regulations
has also come at a price. The 1988 MCP was about l/8th of an inch thick, while the
current MCP more closely resembles the Boston phone book. The regulations are
now much more complicated. Because of this alone, consulting costs endured by
property owners for both LSPs and attorneys have increased. In many cases, this
additional cost may actually be worth it, in that by relying on these consultants, a
private party can move through the system much faster than before and, as a result,
save considerably in other areas of a project which may be time sensitive.
Nonetheless, there is no doubt that the regulations now are more complicated than
before.

3. Regulation Changes. The regulations also change frequently, at least
so far. Most of these changes are for the better, but it is still unsettling to LSPs,
-------
attorneys, and their clients to need constantly to be aware of what proposals are
floating around, when draft regulations are becoming final, and if the latest and
greatest in fact is. As a result of feedback from the regulated community, at this
point DEP is actually planning to try not to change the regulations too much in the
near future. Skeptics would anticipate this will mean that the same regulated
community will then begin pointing out specific changes that are needed, and that is
probably true. In any event, this problem does illustrate the nature of the process of
trying to improve the regulations.

4. Audits. LSPs are not free to simply interpret the MCP as they please
and go on their merry way. Appropriately, the MCP includes provisions pursuant to
which the DEP may audit the work of LSPs that has been submitted. No one argues
with the merits of that.

Initially, the MCP provided that DEP could audit a site for five years from
when the site was closed out. This means that if it takes several years to close the
site out, the audit window was quite long, particularly from when the work may have
started.

The five year audit period quickly led to many complaints from the private
sector. The problem was that if closing out the site did not really mean that the site
was closed out, then the parties to a transaction would be left with too much
uncertainty as to the final status of the site. Lenders were even more anxious about
this possibility. DEP, on the other hand, wanted to be sure that it would be able to
get to all the sites it in fact wanted to audit, and was concerned that it would not have
enough personnel to accomplish this; thus, the five year window.

As it turns out, one of the recently enacted amendments to the MCP changes
the audit window from five years to two. DEP found that it was not auditing much
of the work that was submitted that was more than two years old, and so felt
comfortable giving that up. Private parties were happy with the change, but had
suggested that instead one year would be more appropriate.

Massachusetts Brownfields Efforts

A little more than two years ago, Massachusetts launched a pilot Brownfields
redevelopment program known as the Clean Sites Initiative. This program was
developed by several state agencies, including the Executive Offices of Economic
Affairs and Environmental Affairs, the Department of Environmental Protection and
the Office of the Attorney General, all working with a number of private sector
representatives. The Initiative attempted to encourage the redevelopment of
-------
contaminated sites in designated Economic Target Areas by limiting potential
liability under Chapter 21E (the Massachusetts Superfund Statute) by means of a
Covenant Not to Sue.

Under the Massachusetts program as it currently exists, the applicant, who
must be a potential buyer or tenant, must agree that known contamination will be
assessed and remediated as required by the MCP. Once these steps have been taken,
the state agrees not to sue the new owner or tenant if more contamination is found.
The covenant does not, however, bar claims brought by third parties other than the
Commonwealth, and it does not relieve the new owner or tenant from responsibility
for new releases that occur after the initial cleanup has been completed and the
Covenant Not to Sue has taken effect. Passive releases, such as the leaching of
contaminants from drums previously buried at the site by others, are generally not
considered "new releases" under the program, and the Covenant protects against
them.

1. Eligible Projects. Currently for a project to be eligible, it must be
located within an Economic Target Area, as designated by the Massachusetts
Economic Assistance Coordinating Council. Thirty-three areas have been
designated to date, and a list of them is available as part of the Clean Sites Initiative
application package. Copies of the package are available from the Massachusetts
Office of Business Development and from DEP Regional Service Centers.

A project not located within a designated Economic Target Area may still be
eligible if the Department of Economic Development determines that the project
presents an "exceptional economic development opportunity". In practice, this
standard has been fairly easy to satisfy, and the relevant determination has focused
on whether jobs will be created.

In order to be eligible, the relevant project must also involve the reuse or
redevelopment of a contaminated property for commercial or industrial activities.
Thus far, residential projects have not been included in the scope of the pilot
program.

As noted above, the applicant must be a prospective owner or tenant of the
relevant property, and cannot be a Potentially Responsible Party (a party with
potential liability under Chapter 2 IE) with respect to the cleanup of the site. As part
of the application, the applicant must certify that it is willing and able to ensure that
the site will be addressed pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 2 IE and the MCP.
-------
Applications are submitted to the Massachusetts Office of Business
Development, where they are first reviewed. The forms are then reviewed by DEP
and the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. The application materials note
that the agencies have established the goal of processing applications within thirty
calendar days of receipt. This time-frame assumes that a complete application is
submitted initially. The agencies' intent here is laudable in that the agencies are
specifically attempting to allow applicants to learn whether they will receive a
Covenant before taking title or executing a lease concerning the subject property.
Practice indicates, however, that there is still a fair amount of value to be gained by
chasing the application once it lands at the state's offices.

2. The Covenant Not to Sue. Once an application has been approved, the
Office of the Attorney General will issue a Covenant Not to Sue as part of a form
agreement. In addition, DEP will issue a Certificate of Completion promptly upon
receipt of a Response Action Outcome ("RAO") Statement under the MCP, which
indicates that a Permanent Solution has been achieved. An RAO Statement is the
equivalent of a completion statement that is filed with DEP by the private party upon
satisfying the relevant requirements of the MCP.

The Covenant covers those releases that are fully described in the RAO
Statement. As noted above, it does not cover any subsequent, new releases of oil or
hazardous materials. The Covenant is void if any false statements or certifications
are contained in the application or if the applicant fails to perform any obligations
contained in the RAO Statement.

The Certificate of Completion that is issued confirms that DEP has received
the RAO Statement for the site. It does not imply DEP's approval of the adequacy
of the cleanup actions taken at the site, and it does not block DEP's ability to audit
the site pursuant to its authority under the MCP. In addition, there are two reopeners
that apply to the Covenant:

a. Before the cleanup is completed, if DEP finds that response actions
have not been conducted in substantial and material compliance with the
MCP, or

b. After the cleanup is completed, if DEP finds that the response actions
that were performed did not meet the standard of care in effect at the time
they were performed.

Further, if a DEP audit finds violations of applicable MCP requirements, DEP
will make a decision regarding whether these violations warrant reopening the
-------
Covenant. If that happens, the Covenant holder will have an opportunity to correct
the identified violations to keep the Covenant in effect.

The Covenant can be obtained prior to the submission of an RAO Statement
concerning the property if the cleanup proceeds in substantial compliance with the
MCP, any past fees or costs are paid, and the applicant ensures that the steps
necessary to achieve the RAO Statement are completed.

3. Status of the Massachusetts Clean Sites Initiative. The state agencies
that put together the Clean Sites Initiative program assembled a group known as the
Brownfields Advisory Group, which staff made up of private sector representatives
from the following areas: real estate and development, business and industry, the
lending community, the environmental justice movement and neighborhood groups,
as well as representatives from the environmental engineering and legal fields and
municipal representatives. The charge of this group includes evaluating and
improving the existing program, creating financial assistance mechanisms and
clarifying liability issues, all in an effort to encourage further Brownfields
redevelopment in Massachusetts.

The output from the Brownfields Advisory Group was a report, which
included draft financing legislation for Brownfields projects and a number of
suggestions regarding the liability provisions in Chapter 2IE. Subsequently, the
financing proposals were filed with the Massachusetts legislature as draft legislation.

In addition, there are now at least three Brownfields legislative proposals
before the legislature in Massachusetts. These proposals have been submitted by
Representative Peter Larkin, Governor William Weld and Attorney General Scott
Harshbarger. All three attempt to encourage the redevelopment of Brownfields,
although their specifics differ, in some cases significantly. At present, it appears
likely that the legislature will at least seriously consider these proposals and may in
fact pass something this year. Predicting exactly what will happen in the
Massachusetts legislature is, of course, more uncertain than any hazardous waste
problem encountered to date*

4. Analysis. Many private parties initially argued that the Massachusetts
Clean Sites Initiative did not go far enough, particularly with respect to liability
concerns. For example, some argued that the Initiative provided no real benefits
because the Commonwealth merely agreed not to sue the private party if the private
party satisfied the requirements of the MCP (i.e., in that case, there would be no
reason to sue). Nonetheless, the program does represent a good first step. In
addition, in some cases, the program can provide very real protection. An example
-------
would be when contamination is found later even though the contamination was not
found during the initial environmental site assessment, provided the appropriate
standard of care was followed in performing the initial assessment.

Perhaps the better view is to consider that the Clean Sites Initiative in its
current form can be used as one of several risk reduction and credit enhancement
techniques in connection with a Brownfields project, rather than viewing the
program as the only solution for one of these sites.
10
-------
PERFECTING THE MODEL:

ANALYSIS OF OHIO'S LARGEST PRIVATE

BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
Todd S. Davis
Kevin D. Margolis
Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff Hemisphere Corporation
2300 BP America Building 2300 BP America Building
200 Public Square 200 Public Square
Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2378 Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2378
phone: (216)363-4500 phone: (216)771-5900
fax: (216)363-4588 fax: (216)363-4599
-------
PERFECTING THE MODEL: ANALYSIS OF OHIO'S LARGEST
PRIVATE BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT

Todd S. Davis
Kevin D. Margolis"

There are an estimated 130,000 to 450,000 contaminated commercial and industrial sites
("brownfields") around the country, according to the U.S. Government Accounting Office.1 The sheer
enormity of the brownfields dilemma has drawn this issue into the national spotlight, provoking the U.S.
Conference of Mayors to declare the situation an emergency. No community is immune. However,
despite the recent attention devoted to this issue and the rise of voluntary cleanup programs in 30 states
across the nation, few significant brownfield redevelopment projects have been completed.

Hemisphere Corporation was founded by a group of environmental attorneys to acquire and
redevelop brownfield sites. Since early 1996, Hemisphere has acted in the capacity of environmental team
leader on Ohio's largest private brownfield redevelopment This project can serve as a model for
sophisticated brownfield redevelopment transactions across the nation.

Hemisphere's project responsibilities included:

coordinating all environmental work;
negotiating all regulatory issues with state officials;
securing low interest public financing;
negotiating significant private financing with traditional lending sources;
orchestrating environmental insurance coverage; and
coordinating public relations associated with the project

Project History

The project entails redeveloping a 19-acre site located in a northern suburb of a major Ohio city.
Numerous attempts to investigate and redevelop the site had been made over the period of approximately
15 years. Before entering the project, five environmental consulting firms had previously conducted both
Phase I and Phase II environmental site investigations at the property. These costly environmental
investigations each led to the conclusion that the environmental issues at the site involved too great a cost
to resolve and created too great a risk of future environmental liability. As a result, the site remained an
underutilized industrial property in a largely residential and commercial retail area. In essence, the
environmental issues relating to the site precluded any serious attempts at site redevelopment

With the enactment of Ohio's Voluntary Action Program (the "VAP"), the development team
reconsidered acquisition and redevelopment of the site. The more flexible approach to environmental
cleanup, termination of future environmental liability through the issuance of a Covenant Not To Sue, and
financial incentives provided by the VAP contributed to a new environment for the project team to move
forward with a plan for site acquisition and redevelopment
This article appears in the Spring 1997 edition of Journal of Environmental Regulation and Permitting
published by John Wley & Sons, Inc. and is reprinted with the pubfeher's permission.

* Todd S. Daws and Kevin D. Margolis are principals in Hemisphere Corporation, a company dedicated to
acquiring and redeveloping contaminated property. They are also partners in the Environmental Practice Group of
Benesch. Friedander. Coplan & Aronoff LLP, a large fuB-service law firm based in Cleveland, Ohio. For copies of their
book, Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property (American Bar Association
1997). please cal (800) 285-2221.
-------
Environmental Issues

By any definition, the site would be referred to as a brownfield site. Since 1914, the site had been
used by a variety of commercial and industrial businesses. A large manufacturing building on the site was
abandoned years ago by a bankrupt manufacturing company. The building foundation of a burned out
metals refurbishing manufacturer rested near this abandoned structure. Former tenants at the site
included a plastics manufacturer, an asphalt plant, warehouses and several machine shops. While a few
tenants still occupied several older structures on the property, the vast majority of the site was vacant and
underutilized.

Historically, the site, in part, was used to dump foundry sand, construction debris and other fill
materials. The primary environmental issues at the site included:

• historical fill material (foundry sand deposited throughout the site that contained
lead and other heavy metals);

• perched groundwater in several well-defined areas of the site impacted by
solvents and dissolved metals; and

• asbestos contained in building materials throughout the site.

Current plans for redevelopment anticipate converting the site into a major commercial shopping
center with a number of significant tenants. The total anticipated size of the project is approximately
320,000 square feet These development plans call for the developer to invest approximately $30 million
in demolition, environmental remediation and construction activities at the site. This redevelopment will
create nearly 400 full-time and part-time jobs at the developed site. Additionally, approximately 350
tradespersons will be involved in different aspects of site work and construction.

Risk-Based Remediation Activities

Based on the litany of previous environmental site investigations, anticipated cleanup costs
associated with the project were estimated to be in the range of $8 to $13 million. Under the VAP, the
environmental team utilized a risk-based approach to remediation. This risk-based approach
demonstrated that remediation could be conducted through both engineering and institutional controls,
resulting in savings of approximately $8 million in anticipated remediation costs.

Creative Financing and Investment Incentives

Financing of the project calls for a sophisticated public/private partnership. Hemisphere secured a
$5.3 million low interest loan for all remedial activities provided by two different Ohio public agencies: the
Ohio Water Development Authority and Ohio EPA's Water Pollution Control Loan Fund. The public funds
are available at a low interest rate and will be subordinated to the first major private brownfields loan
provided by one of Ohio's largest construction lenders. The financial mix will include approximately 20%
equity, 20% low interest public financing' and 60% traditional private financing. This blend of investment
demonstrates a significant investment by the developer and appropriate level of encouragement by
governmental authorities, while still providing adequate security to the traditional lending source on the
project Further, it allows the government to leverage its limited investment funds dedicated to brownfields
redevelopment by a factor of nearly 6 times. This type of coordinated financing effort should serve as a
model for future brownfield redevelopment projects.

Other financial incentives available with the project include a $500,000 income tax credit to the
developer. Additionally, the project will take advantage of a guaranteed 10 years of tax abatement on the
increased value of the real estate due to the remediation.

Hemisphere coordinated and manuscripted a package of environmental insurance to cover all
contractors working on the project during the development process. This package of insurance will also
-------
incorporate environmental liability coverage to address the threat of contingent liabilities both during and
after the development process.

Dramatic Results

The results of the project will be dramatic. These results include:

• a release of liability from the state of Ohio in the form of a Covenant Not To Sue;

• an indication from EPA of its intent not to "second guess" Ohio environmental
regulators in the form of an EPA "comfort" letter;

significant financial incentives for the project in the form of low-interest loans and
tax abatement; and

• the creation of 400 full-time and part-time jobs and 350 construction jobs.

A dedicated development team and a creative plan can make available new opportunities through
state voluntary cleanup laws, which will undoubtedly encourage the successful redevelopment of
brownfield sites. Thus, developers and property owners need not view these projects as
"environmental nightmares," but rather as merely another brand of sophisticated real estate
transaction.
ENDNOTE

1. U.S. Government Accounting Office, Community Development — Reuse of Urban Industrial Sites,
(GAO/RCED-95-172) (June 1995).
-------
DO YOU OWN CONTAMINATED PROPERTY?
REAL ESTATE SERVICES
No commercial real estate transaction should be closed without a careful analysis and understanding of potential
environmental liabilities. In fact, many commercial properties simply cannot be transferred due to associated envi-
ronmental problems.

Barriers to transferring these distressed properties are a result of:
• Tremendous costs to property owners who want
to resolve their environmental liabilities but can-
not because of overwhelming legal and environ-
mental remediation expenses.

• Complex and confusing federal and state regula-
tory and liability schemes that property owners
have difficulty understanding.

• Lending institutions' refusal to provide financing
for acquisitions or development of properties
that have a risk of environmental liabilities.

• Fear that transferring the property to a buyer not
qualified and prepared to address environmental
issues will result in liability to the seller years in
the future.
hemisphere
ACQUISITION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY DISTRESSED REAL ESTATE
Hemisphere acquires environmentally distressed property from owners who will be unsuccessful in the tradition-
al real estate market Hemisphere's principals are nationally recognized experts in redeveloping brownfields sites.

ENVIRONMENTAL WORKOUTS
Many environmentally stressed loans or transactions need a partner to bridge the environmental gaps.
Hemisphere can provide capital and form strategic alliances to successfully restructure transactions blocked by
environmental liabilities. Hemisphere also can provide environmental gap financing for remediation projects on
qualified properties.
HEMISPHERE CORPORATION • 2300 BP AMERICA BUILDING • 200 PUBLIC SQUARE • CLEVELAND, OHIO 44114-2378* 216.771.5900
IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS • 312.409.0061
-------
DO YOU NEED THE RIGHT STRATEGIC PARTNER?

BROWNRELDS CONSULTING SERVICES
On a selective basis, Hemisphere will partner with property owners, professional service firms, acquisition groups
and other stakeholders to deliver critical leadership and business advice in structuring the best possible brown-
fields redevelopment strategy. Literally, Hemisphere's principals "wrote the book" on successfully completing
brownfields transactions entitled Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide To Redeveloping Contaminated Property
(American Bar Association 1997). This treatise addresses all legal, financial, and scientific aspects of the brown-
fields redevelopment process, including a detailed discussion of all state voluntary cleanup programs.
Hemisphere's practical experience provides invaluable insight in anticipating and overcoming barriers typically
associated with brownfields transactions. We have demonstrated this experience as an advisor in the following
capacities:

PROPERTY POSITIONING
For a number of years, Hemisphere has served as the
national brownfields disposition advisor for a large
public manufacturing company in transactions across
the United States. Hemisphere's team consults with
the company's top executives and real estate profes-
sionals to quantify and aggressively manage environ-
mental liabilities in the most cost-effective manner
practicable. Our involvement has not only saved the
company millions of dollars in proposed environmen-
tal consulting fees and remediation costs but also has
facilitated the sale and lease of many previously
"unmarketable" facilities.

ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS ADVISOR
Hemisphere served as the Environmental Team Leader for Ohio's largest private brownfield redevelopment This
project involved the redevelopment of a 25 acre industrial site into a 287,000 sq. ft retail shopping center. Despite
studies conducted by 5 previous consulting firms, environmental concerns had precluded this development for
nearly 15 years. During this engagement, Hemisphere's responsibilities included:
• Creating a project strategy to address all environmentally related development issues
• Managing all environmental consulting firms
• Negotiating all environmental regulatory issues with relevant governmental authorities
• Securing public financial incentives including low-interest public financing and tax abatement
• Negotiating financing with the project's primary lending institution
• Orchestrating environmental insurance coverage
• Coordinating the public relations program

Hemisphere's flexible team-oriented approach can be the key to your brownfields business needs.
hemisphere
HEMISPHERE CORPORATION • 2300 BP AMERICA BUILDING • 200 PUBLIC SQUARE • CLEVELAND. OHIO 44114-2378 • 216.771.5900
IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS' 312.409.0061
-------
NOW AVAILABLE
From the ABA Section of Natural Resources, Energy, and Environmental Law
BROWNFIELDS

A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property
Todd S. Davis and Kevin D. Margolis
with a preface by Vice President Al Gore

Redeveloping abandoned and contaminated property known as "brownfields," is instrumental to the economic
revitalization of our nation's cities. Whether you are a property owner, developer, regulator, lender, state or local
government official, real estate or environmental lawyer, you have a stake in die redevelopment of brownfields.

This new book, from the ABA Section of Natural Resources, Energy, and Environmental Law, takes a
comprehensive look at the complicated issues surrounding brownfields redevelopment. Timely and practical, the book
provides you with insight into key issues and outlines effective strategies for implementing brownfields redevelopment.
It also includes a detailed examination of all recently enacted state Voluntary Cleanup Programs.

The book is divided into four parts. Part 1 explains critical background information to put the "brownfields
issue" in context. Part 2 details the most important legal, business, financial and political issues associated with
redeveloping contaminated real estate. Part 3 discusses both the basic science and the newly emerging risk-based science
used to appropriately and cost-effectively address contaminated property. Finally, Part 4 offers a detailed look at the
most important elements of each state Voluntary Cleanup Program.

1997 6x9 728 pages paper
PARTIAL TABLE OF CONTENTS
Defining the Brownfields Problem • Overview of Federal and State Law Governing Brownfield Cleanups • Hie
Clinton Administration's Brownfields Initiative • Doing the Brownfields Deal » Acquisition Considerations for
Brownfields Properties • Valuing Brownfields • Creative Financing Strategies for Redeveloping Brownfields
•Deductibiliry of Environmental Remediation Costs • Environmental Insurance in the Brownfields Transactions
•Hiring the Right Laboratory • Rebuilding Communities through Brownfields Development • Science of Brownfields
•Role of Risk Assessment in Redeveloping Brownfield Sites • Remediation Strategies for Brownfields Redevelopment
YESI Please send me copies of Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property (SSSOOS6) @

O $149.95 regular price O $ 139.95 ABA SONREEL section member price
S Subtotal
$ ..TaxfDC--5.75%,IL~8.75%,MD~5%)
S 5.95 Handling
S .. Total
Acct# Exp.Date
Name:
firm/Ore:
Address:
Citv/State/Zip:
Phone number
O Check enclosed payable to ABA
O Bill Me
O VISA O MasterCard
O American Express
Signature
MAIL TO

PHONE:
FAX:
EMAIL
Website:
American Bar Association
Publication Orders
P.O. Box 10892
Chicago, IL 60610-0892
800/285-2221 (M-F 7:30*m to 530pm)
312/988-5568 bnytime)
abasvcctr@abanet.org
http://www.abanet.oix
(incax we have a question about your order)

Thank you for your order. Source Code: DM597
-------
"Real World" Insights Into
Brownfield Transactions: Case Histories

Joseph M. Manko, Esquire

Brownfields '97
Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow

Kansas City, MO
September 4, 1997
I. Background.

A. Defining a Brownfield.
1. Abandoned, idle or underutilized industrial and commercial
facility.

a. often located near rivers or railroads.

b. contaminated by prior usage.

c. balancing cleanup costs with locational value (can it be
"bought right"?).

2. Extent (General Accounting Office (GAO)) Estimates.

a. 425,000 to 450,000 sites.

b. CERCLIS covers 37,000 sites (but see NFRAP, infra).

c. $650 billion cleanup costs.

3. Usage changes.

a. heavy industry no longer needed.

b. commercial reuse potential.

(1) power/strip centers.

(2) office buildings/campuses.

1 74807 7/31/97
-------
B. Impact of Environmental Law.

1. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) - 1980.

a. Strict liability as "responsible persons."

(1) current owners of operators (§107(a)(i)).

(2) former owners or operators "at the time of
disposal" (§107(a)(2); §ee, U.S. v. CDMG Realty
Co.. 96 F.3d 706 (3d Cir. 1996).

b. Limited defenses (§§107(b)(3) and 101(35)) - the
"innocent owner."

c. N.Y. v. Lashins Arcade Co.. 91 F.3d 353 (2d Cir.
1996): "in connection with a contractual relation."

2. State Superfund Laws.

a. Pennsylvania - Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (HSCA)
(mirrors CERCLA for responsible persons) - 1988.

b. New Jersey - Spill Compensation and Control Act (strict
liability for persons "in any way responsible") - 1976.

C. Economic Impact.

1. Loss of municipal real estate tax base (and jobs).

2. Targets for vandals, arsonists, thieves and graffiti artists.

3. Retard the gentrification and revitalization of a blighted area.

4. Directs developers to "plow under greenfields."
n. Problems in Redeveloping Brownfields Prior to Brownfield Legislation and
Policies.

A. Liability.
74807 7/31/97
-------
1. Cannot get a lender to lend since lender may become liable and
collateral is "iffy."

2. Generally no seller to indemnify and/or clean up.

3. Insurance coverage unavailable ("pollution exclusion clauses" -
PA vs. NJ).

B. How Clean is Clean?

1. Lack of federal or state standards (in PA) (cf, ISRA in NJ).

2. Technology can detect beyond what remediation can achieve.

C. Government Protection.

1. Unavailable without statutory authority.

2. Fear of enforcement on voluntary cleanups.

3. Searching for ways to give cleanup liability protection.

a. no further action (NFA) letter from state.

b. consent order and agreement (CO&A) - using
enforcement tools.

HI. New Brownfield Programs.

A. Federal (EPA).

1. Prospective Purchaser Policy - 1989.

a. looks good on paper; not so good in practice.

(1) Publicker site (see attached articles).

(2) Hatboro water system.

b. expensive and time consuming - can EPA do better?

c. "new" policy (July 3, 1995) - is it helping?

3 74807 7/31/97
-------
2. Lender liability.

a. Fleet Factors - power to control borrower.

b. EPA Guidance Memorandum; Kelly v. EPA. 15 3d 1100
(D.C. Cir. 1994), cert, denied, 25 F. 3d 1088 (D.C.
Cir. 1994), cert, denied, American Bankers Ass'n v.
Kellv. 115 S.Ct. 900(1995).

c. Congress' September 30, 1996 action (Asset Conversion,
Lender Liability and Deposit Insurance Protection Act
("Lender Liability Act")).

d. EPA Guidance Memorandum: Policy on Interpreting
CERCLA Provisions Addressing Lenders and
Involuntary Acquisitions by Government Entities, 62
Fed. Reg. 36423 (July 7, 1997).

e. Michigan v. Tiscomia. 44 ERC 1951 (6th Cir. 1996)

3. Highlights of 1995-6 Brownfield Policies.

a. $10 million for 50 demonstration projects (e.g., Phoenix
Steel site).

b. Policy Towards Owners of Property Containing
Contaminated Aquifers, 60 Fed. Reg. 34,890 (July 3,
1995).

c. Guidance on Agreements with Prospective Purchasers of
Contaminated Property, 60 Fed. Reg. 34,792 (July 3,
1995).

d. "Comfort" letters (4 types) (Reeds Van Service).

e. CERCLIS pruned (removing sites where "no further
remedial action planned) (NFRAP).

f. certain tax incentives also offered.

B. Pennsylvania (DEP).

1. Senate Bill 11
74807 7/31/97
-------
2. Acts 2, 3 and 4: overview.

a. Act 2.

(1) three cleanup standards.

(a) background (Rhoads Metals).

(b) statewide health standards.

(2) three protection programs.

(a) NFAs.

(b) buyer/seller CO&As - only affords a
covenant not to sue; no contribution
protection (covers multi-party situations).

i) grants DEP's covenant and third
party contribution protection.

ii) simple letters, but;

iii) only issued when remediation is
complete.

(3) funding (Acts 2 and 4).

b. Act 3.

(1) lenders (sample letter attached).

(2) IDAs and RDAs (not covered by federal Lender
Liability Act - Berwick).

(3) trustees.

c. Act 4.

5 74807 7/31/97
-------
3. Limitations.

a. at this time, no federal release (DEP is working with
EPA on a memorandum of understanding ("MOU") -
federal legislation (probably needed).

b. reopeners.

c. too long to wait - amend §5 to allow protection once
remediation obligation is in enforceable vehicle (e.g.,
CO&A).

d. Multi-site agreements (Penn Fuel Gas).

C. New Jersey.

1. Limitations in ISRA.

2. Pending legislation.

IV. Structuring the Deal.

A. Contractual Protection.

1. Stages of protection: letter of intent to agreement of sale.

a. due diligence period.

(1) access.

(2) adequate time.

(3) right to opt out.

b. seller's cooperation.

(1) buyer/seller agreement.

(2) Act 2.

c. seller's identity is critical (governmental "seller:" defense
restoration (PIDC), bankruptcy, trustee, etc.).

6 74807 7/31/97
-------
d. types of contractual protection.

(1) representations, warranties and covenants.

(2) indemnities.

(3) releases.

(4) exclusive or non-exclusive remedies?

(5) escrows.

(6) conditions to closing.

(a) governmental protection letter.

(b) execution of buyer/seller agreement.

B. Environmental Assessment.

1. Multiplicity of uses.

a. contractual document (attachment to agreement of sale).

b. cost recovery (supra).

c. governmental cleanup liability protection - only protected
for contaminants disclosed (and then remediated).

2. Hire the best environmental consultants/contractors.

3. Hire the best environmental attorney.

C. Potential Funding.

1. Federal and state grants and loans (Penn's Landing).

2. Other responsible persons.

V. Unregulated Contamination and Obligations.

A. Property Management Issues.

7 74807 7/31/97
-------
1. Indoor air quality.

2. Interior contaminants.

a. transformers (PCBs).

b. asbestos containing materials (ACM).

c. lead paint.

B. Disclosure Obligations.

1. Statutory (site-specific or non-residential statewide health
standards require deed disclosure).

2. Common law (Strawn v. Canuso in New Jersey).

3. Financial disclosure (SEC, financial statements).

VI. Conclusions.

A. A good environmental team is a must.

B. Put a "happy face" on the project.

C. When needed, get political support (e.g., Publicker),

D. Need for legislative help.

1. Federal brownfields legislation.

a. politics at play.

b. tied into or separate from CERCLA re-authorization.

E. Need for EPA to be more "worldly" in applying brownfields policies
(Renaissance properties).

F. Need for states and EPA to sign MOUs.

G. Location, Location, Location.
74807 7/31/97
-------
CORPORATE LEGALTIMES
FEMUART Ittt
Seaport From Brownfield - And at a Bargain Price
Holt's Dream for
Philadelphia Site Comes
True With EPA Help

•Y MARK BUTLER
SEVEN YEARS and a
commitment of $4.3
million ago, Thomas J.
Holt Si. called his attor-
neys and said he bad an
option to buy a 40-acre
piece of Philadelphia's
beleaguered waterfront.
He intended to build a marine terminal to
coax shipping up the Delaware River,
revive the city's seaport heritage, bolster its
sagging economy and expand his own con-
siderable port holdings on the Pennsylvania
and New Jersey sides of the river.
Holt, a one-time steve-
dore who operates the
nearby Packer Marine
Terminal and owns Holt
Hauling and Warehouse
Systems in Gloucester
City, NJ., had big plans
for the old Publicker
Industries site-a S250
million, world-class sea-
port for cargo and cruise
ships. Eventually, per-
haps, a hotel. And jobs
...as many as SCO.
To an aging East Coast
city mired in a recession, those were sweet
words indeed-if Holt could pull it off.
It took seven years, but Holt did it He is
the proud owner of what was once one of the
most polluted industrial sites in America and
he has paid what will amount to approxi-
mately 20 percent of the cleanup cost
Through an agreement with EPA,
Delaware Avenue Enterprises, a subsidiary
of Holt Cargo Systems Inc., took posses-
sion of the site Jan. 9. The land had been
held in trust for several years. "It was not
so much a risk but a challenge as to how
long it would take," Holt says.

TURNINQ WASTED LAND INTO *$«
Increasingly, developers and government
agencies alike are looking closely at U.S.
cities and their dilapidated industrial land
and seeing potentially productive, tax-pro-
ducing sites.
In Philadelphia. Holt climbed out on a
iimb by seeking to develop the site, and the
government responded by agreeing to pro-
tea him-for a large payraent-from legal
action to clean up the Publicker land once
he assumed ownership through the utiliza-
tion of a Prospective Buyer Agreement.
At a time when pristine land and money
can be scarce, these agreements have
become increasingly common. In 1987,
though. Holt was pretty much on its own.
"This is a movement whose time has
finally come," says Joseph M. Manko, a
partner at Manko, Gold & Katcher, Bala
Cynwyd, Pa., a former EPA official and
Holt's legal counsel for the project. "If we
had started this today, it wouldn't have taken
seven years."
For more than a century, Publicker oper-
ated a liquor and industrial alcohol manu-
facturing plant at the site where Skol
Vodka, Old Hickory Bourbon and Inver
House Scotch were made. When the dis-
tillery shut down, the site became a chem-
ical storage facility. In 1986, Publicker
sold the site to Overland Corp., which
shortly thereafter declared bankruptcy and
abandoned the facility.
In 1987, a major fire at the site drew the
attention of the EPA, which conducted an
emergency cleanup to reduce the risk of
future fires and explosions. That same
year. Holt hatched his plan. Two years
later, Publicker was placed on the Super-
fund National Priorities List
To date, the EPA has spent more than S18
million to remove hazardous materials,
including asbestos, and
dean up the site. Before it's
done, the federal agency
estimates that it will spend
several million more.
On a recent raw winter
day. with a tangle of
rusted pipes and tanks as
a backdrop, city, state
and federal officials
gathered at the Publicker
site in the shadow of the
Walt Whitman Bridge to
announce the deal and to
honor Holt for being, in
the words of Philadelphia Mayor Ed Ren-
dell, "among the very best entrepreneurs in
the Delaware Valley."
Manko was among the VIPs standing
before the cameras that day.
"I have to tell you that it was a good
feeling," says Manko, who concentrates
his practice in environmental law. "But I
also kept thinking, 'Now, we've got to get
the [construction] permits..."'
By comparison, clearing the way for
demolition and construction should be easy.
, NOTEY
It's never easy to be a pioneer. In 1987,
Prospective Purchaser Agreements were
untested federal regulations designed to
spur the revitalization of America's urban
centers while protecting developers from
legal action in the cleanup of a site's envi-
ronmental problems.
Increasingly, officials are looking at these
"brownfield" sites as opportunities, not eye-
sores. Brownfields have also garnered sup-
port from government officials because
they can preserve green belts and park land.
"We're committed to a common sense
approach to liability issues at these sites."
EPA Regional Administrator Peter H. Kost-
mayer noted in prepared remarks. "It makes
more sense to dean up sites in urban areas
and return them to productive use, rather
than force business to develop pristine 'green
field' sites in the suburbs and exurbs."
In addition to the 52 million he paid to
purchase the land, Holt has agreed to pay
EPA and the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources (DER) a total of
$23 million so he won't be held liable for
the hazardous waste left by the former prop-
erty owner. The money goes toward offset-
ting deanup costs. Meanwhile, EPA has
filed suit against Publicker in federal court
seeking additional funds to dean the site.
The agreements are gaining support
around the country, although Kostmayer
says that in EPA Region 3, which includes
Pennsylvania, they are being used more
widely. They had gained critical support in
Washington recently as well, although
with the recent shift in power, it remains
unclear how the agreements will fare.
"They certainly are growing in number,"
says Kostmayer, a former member of
-------
THE NATIONAL
LAW JOURNAL
BusinessV\&tch
MONDAY, OCTOIEfc 21, 1996
OI994* TMt HIW TOKK LAW PUSLU1IIMC CO.
Interest in Brownfields
Abounds Despite Problems
A hot market exists for these polluted sites, although the
federal program to spur development is largely untested.
BY MARIANNE LAVELLE
NATIONAL LAW JOUINAL STAFF tEroiTEX
THE CHEMICAL TANKS that once leaked
or sizzled beneath Philadelphia's Walt
Whitman Bridge are gone. But ships are
not yet bustling cargo into the port that
was envisioned nine years ago for this
strategically located but long-forsaken
land on the Delaware River.
Cleanup of the explosive mix that
made this one of the nation's most dan-
gerous sites occurred only because of
recent government efforts to reduce the
legal risks for purchasers of such aban-
doned industrial real estate. But the still-
fallow state of the property is testimony
to the obstacles that plague such pro-
jects, despite federal and state officials'
efforts to revive similarly barren urban
tracts, known as brownfields.
An estimated 500.000 acres of un-
used, polluted brownfields exist across
the United States—some owned by com-
panies in bankruptcy, others abandoned
by solvent corporations and still others
taken over by local governments after
real estate tax liens were levied.
The federal program attacking the
brownfields problem began in 1993. but
its pace has accelerated in the past year
as the Clinton administration has touted
it as a key element of its economic as well
as environmental policy.
The brownfield initiative encourages
businesses and communities to turn old
polluted sites into homes for safe and
sustainable businesses." President Clin-
ton said this year.
Under the program, the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency is. on a case-by-
case basis, working out agreements with
Toft Case: Joseph M. Manko negotiated with the EPA to obtain the first weaver of
liability ever for his client, an innocent purchaser of this Pa. brownfield site.
prospective purchasers of contaminated
property to insulate them from EPA law-
suits for cleanup. The agency also is giv-
ing grants to cities to help them study the
potential for brownfields development.
And since 1994. more than 20 states
have passed legislation to encourage the
purchase and redevelopment of environ-
mentally troubled land by lowering
cleanup requirements, granting waivers
from liability or offering tax or other in-
centives to purchasers.

No Public Consensus
But no government program seems
capable of fully erasing the stigma that
originally orphaned this polluted land.
"We're still short of a public consen-
sus to carry the day on the old questions
of'How clean is clean?' and what level of
liability is appropriate for new pur-
chasers and lenders." says Jennifer L
Hernandez, of the San Francisco office of
Washington. D.CL's Beveridge & Dia-
mond.
In other words, federal and state offi-
cials are willing to accept that many of
these properties will never be pristine.
Regulators may agree that innocent pur-
chasers of land should not pay for the
predecessors' misdeeds, but they are un-
certain how to waive liabilities without
freeing owners of proper responsibilities.
The site on Philadelphia's waterfront
illustrates both the program's promise
and its problems. Publicker Industries
Inc., a Greenwich. Conn.-based alcohol
and chemical manufacturer, once pro-
duced Skol Vodka. Old Hickory-Bourbon
and alcohol-based cleansers . and sol-
vents there, but ultimately shut down the
distillery and began usingthe-location to
store chemical waste. In 1986. Publicker
sold the plant to a firm that went bank-
rupt after two demolition workers were
kjlled-in an explosion. The site was then
placed on the Superfund list of priority
cleanup sites, deemed by the EPA to pose
a "potential catastrophic threat to public
health and the environment"
Despite the site's obvious problems,
Thomas J. Holt, owner of Holt Cargo Sys-
tems Inc. of Gloucester City, NJ., wanted
to buy the property to expand his port
business across the Delaware River.
Such a move might have seemed folly
under the 1980 Superfund law. which
holds all past and present owners and
operators of property strictly liable for
cleanup, whether or not they contributed
-------
Monday, October 21,1996
THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL
PAGE 2 OF 2
to the pollution. But the Holt company's
attorney. Joseph M. Manko. of Bala Cyn-
wyd. Pa.'s Manko. Gold & Katcher. knew
that the law has always given the EPA
flexibility to negotiate waivers of liability
for innocent purchasers. The agency had
never used that authority, however, as
Mr. Manko found in years of effort to
work out an such an agreement

Sealing the Deal
Only after the Clinton administration's
brownfields initiative began in 1993 was
Mr. Manko able to seal a deal. The Holt
company, which had purchased an op-
tion to buy the property for $2 million in
1987. would-pay the EPA and the Penn-
sylvania Department of Environmental
Resources a S2.38 million premium in
exchange for a waiver of cleanup liabili-
ty, a sum determined by the EPA to re-
flect the property's increased value due
to the government's work at the site.
Cleanup began, and local politicians
praised the program as one that would
rejuvenate the city's port
Not everyone was happy, however.
Publicker. the company liable for most of
the S18 million cleanup of the mess that
accumulated during its stewardship.
protested to the EPA that the waiver
violates the Superfund law. The EPA set-
tled with Publicker. but cleanup stalled
again when Congress slashed the
agency's funds in the 1995 budget battle.
The Holt company, anxious to move
forward with the long-delayed port facil-
ity, stepped in to finish up. Now. Mr.
Manko says he is negotiating with the
EPA yet again: the agency is assessing
the quality and the cost of the work that
the Holt company did and wfll apply that
amount to oflset the $2.3 million premi-
um the company owes to the EPA.
Mr. Manko says it has been a long and
frustrating process for his_ client: "If (he]
could build a port some* other place, he
would have." But he believes that much
of the difficulty stemmed from being the
first test case, in addition to the high lev-
el of contamination at the site.

Red Hot "—
Despite the problems, developers and
investors seem undeterred in their at-
tempts to purchase brownfields. There's
a red-hot market out there—a very ac-
tive industry looking for contaminated
property with the specific purpose of
buying it at a discounted price, fixing it
up and reselling it." says Daniel Riesel. of
New York's Sive. Paget & Riesel.
Many sites are in ideal locations—
with waterfront or highway access-
made unattractive only by pollution. The
market appears healthy, even though
government liability waivers do not pro-
tect property owners from suits by neigh-
bors or prior owners who retain liability.
Mr. Riesel says the most important
factor spurring the market has been gov-
ernment acknowledgment that, as he
puts it. "You don't need to clean up an in-
dustrial park to the level—necessary for
a residential area."
Nonetheless, even industrial uses may
require a significant investment in clean-
up, says Ms. Hernandez, (hie of her
clients is the city of Emeryville. Calif..
which just approved a major facility ex-
pansion for Chiron Corp., a biotechnolo-
gy firm, on contaminated land. "The con-
cept that you can put a biotech clean
room for a laboratory on something
'dirty* is no more acceptable than putting
it in the middle of the moon." she says.
Ms. Hernandez, after working on many
projects, says she had concluded that the
legal and economic issues raised by
brownfields development are identical to
those that come up in a real estate deal
"Lenders want to know if the property
is going to be clean enough to have value
to serve as security for a loan." she said.
"All the talk about liability reform and
Superfund reform...is not that critical to
the success of the brownfields program."
According to Mr. Riesel. brownfields
property purchasers also need to consid-
er the community aspects of redevelop-
ment: "An issue often overlooked is pub-
lic reception to having the site
redeveloped with less than total cleanup.
Developers should also anticipate that
communities might prefer converting an
industrial site into parkland, rather than
another commercial use."

Seed Money
Some think that development could be
accelerated by a program like the $2 bil-
lion brownfields tax incentive that Presi-
dent Clinton proposed last spring. Be-
cause that program was not enacted, the
EPA has since taken a more modest ap-
proach to spurring brownfields develop-
ment, working out individual deals and
providing seed money to assess contami-
nation at abandoned inner-city sites.
On Oct 1. EPA Administrator Carol
Browner announced 16 new grants to
cities totaling $2 million, bringing to 76
the number of pilot brownfields projects
being funded by the EPA.
The EPA also will sponsor its second
national conference on brownfields op-
portunities and the regulatory and fi-
nancing possibilities on Oct 21-22 in St.
Louis. Steve Kidney, editor of a
Washington. D.C.-based newsletter
called The Brownfields Report, co-spon-
sor of the EPA conference, says that de-
spite the difficulties, brownfields devel-
opment is hot
Noting that Pennsylvania Gov. Tom
Ridge and New Jersey Gov. Christine
Todd Whitman are among those who
have championed brownfields develop-
ment, he said that "politically, on the na-
tional level, this is an ideal issue, particu-
larly Tor the Clinton administration but
also for moderate Republicans." QD
-------
CORPORATE LEGALTIMES
nwi
FEMUAIIY ItM
Seaport From Brownfield - And at a Bargain Price
Holt's Dream for
Philadelphia Site Comes
True With EPA Help

•YMAMtmnUK
SEVEN YEARS and a
commitment of $4.3
million ago, Thomas J.
Holt ST. called his attor-
neys and said he had an
option to buy a 40-acre
piece of Philadelphia's
beleaguered waterfront
He intended to build a marine terminal to
coax shipping up the Delaware River,
revive the city's seaport heritage, bolster its
sagging economy and expand his own con-
siderable port holdings on the Pennsylvania
and New Jersey sides of the river.
Holt, a one-time steve-
dore who operates the
nearby Packer Marine
Terminal and owns Holt
Hauling and Warehouse
Systems in Gloucester
City, NJ., had big plans
for the old Publicker
Industries site-a S2SO
million, world-class sea-
port for cargo and cruise
ships. Eventually, per-
haps, a hotel And jobs
...as many as 500.
To an aging East Coast
city mired in & recession* those were sweet
words indeed-if Holt could pull it off.
It took seven yean, but Hob did it He is
the proud owner of what was once one of the
most polluted industrial sites in America and
he has paid what will amount to approxi-
mately 20 percent of the cleanup cost
Through an agreement with EPA,
Delaware Avenue Enterprises, a subsidiary
of Holt Cargo Systems Inc. took posses-
sion of the site Jan. 9. The land had been
held hi trust for several years. "It was not
so much a risk but a challenge as to how
long it would take," Holt says.

T1MMINQ WASTED LAND WTO tt$
Increasingly, developers and government
agencies alike are looking closely at U.S.
cities and their dilapidated industrial land
and seeing potentially productive, tax-pro-
ducing sites.
In Philadelphia. Holt climbed out on a
iimb by seeking to develop the site, and the
government responded by agreeing to pro-
tect him-for a large payment-from legal
action to clean up the Publicker land once
he assumed ownership through the utiliza-
tion of a Prospective Buyer Agreement
At a time when pristine land and money
can be scarce, these agreements have
become increasingly common. In 1987,
though. Holt was pretty much on its own.
This is a movement whose time has
finally come," says Joseph M. Manko, a
partner at Manko, Gold & Katcher, Bala
Cynwyd, Pa, a former EPA official and
Holt's legal counsel for the project. -If we
had started this today, it wouldn't have taken
seven years."
For more than a century, Publicker oper-
ated a liquor and industrial alcohol manu-
facturing plant at the site where Skol
Vodka, Old Hickory Bourbon and Inver
House Scotch were made. When the dis-
tillery shut down, the site became a chem-
ical storage facility. In 1986, Publicker
sold the site to Overland Corp., which
shortly thereafter declared bankruptcy and
abandoned the facility.
In 1987, a major fire at the site drew the
attention of the EPA. which conducted an
emergency cleanup to reduce the risk of
future fires and explosions. That same
year. Holt hatched his plan. Two years
later, Publicker was placed on the Super-
fund National Priorities List.
To date, the EPA has spent more than SIS
million to remove hazardous materials,
im*h«d"w asbestos, atv^
dean up the site. Before it's
done, the federal agency
estimates that it wiD spend

-------
FEBRUARY 199$
CORPORATE LEGAL TIMES
Congress himself. "We have done four in
the region." In the last session of Congress,
however, the Clinton administration had
proposed legislation that would have made
obtaining an agreement easier but the bill
didn't make it through. "If we simply had
the language, we could churn out more."

"I think this ini-
tiative holds
special appeal
for the new
Republican
majority in
Congress," says
EPA Regional
Administrator
Peter H.
Kostmayer.
Around the country, thus far, 17 brown-
field deals have been signed, Kostmayer
says, creating an estimated several thou-
sand jobs and making more than a thousand
acres of once-fallow land productive again.
Kostmayer. a Democrat, is confident that
the agreements will enjoy substantial Con-
gressional and Republican support this year.
"I think this initiative holds special
appeal for the new Republican majority in
Congress," he says. "It's job-development
oriented, not at government expense, and
[the cost] is shifted back into the private
sector.
"We're really talking about the No. 1
issue in the country and that's putting peo-
ple to work." he adds. "In Philadelphia,
this one agreement will mean 700 perma-
nent jobs and about 200 temporary [con-
struction and demolition] jobs."
Meanwhile, EPA has plans to award
Philadelphia S200.000 which is earmarked
to begin site selection and environmental
assessments on as many as 10 new brown-
field sites in the city, Kostmayer says.
Funds are expected to be allocated for sim-
ilar work in Pittsburgh as well.
INSURANCE AOAINST SUITS
Getting the Publicker agreement was any-
thing but easy, however, because when Holt
began the process, the Prospective Pur-
chaser Agreement "was an unknown proce-
dure that turned out to be a quagmire, which,
seven years later, works." Manko says.
For Holt, though, going this route was
the only way to get the final papers signed.
The agreements are designed to help EPA
plan for the costs of cleanup. The prospec-
tive buyer pays a negotiated amount over
and above permit costs in return for a
covenant in which the government agrees
not to sue the buyer for site-related cleanup
issues. This son of "insurance policy" also
provides protection against suits from third
parties. Absent such an agreement, new
owners could be held jointly and severally
liable for cleanup costs under CERCLA, even
though they did not contribute one ounce of
toxics to the site.
For Holt, the timing was of two-fold
importance. "We had an option to buy the
site as-improved and everything on it," says
Manko. "Every day. people were stealing
pipes, copper, everything they could."
The government was unimpressed by
that dilemma and for the next several years
Holt had to get approval on the deal from a
host of federal and state agencies.
Some said it was too early-that there
was no history of Prospective Purchaser
Agreements to follow. Others wanted stria
appraisals. Others were concerned about
environmental hazards.
Holt offered to pay to clean up the site
himself then, saying that he could do it
faster and cheaper. Frustration was push-
ing Holt to do nearly anything to complete
the deal, which appeared to hold advan-
tages for all parties involved.
But the government would not be rushed.
Brian M. Nishitani, assistant regional
counsel for the EPA, explains it this way:
"We knew very little about the environ-
mental damage at the site. There were no
other models, certainly none as complex. It
was the level of contamination and the
type of proposal... it was not just the EPA
that was involved here.
"Publicker took us over six years and
there are a couple of sites in this region that
were done in six to 12 months," he says.
Nishitani says, "It's very difficult for the
government as a whole to assess the site and
[determine] to what extent we can allow the
developer to come in and do the work."
CALATMM
Nonetheless, Holt persevered and ulti-
mately cleared a number of major hurdles.
If all goes well, the first ships should dock
there in within five years.
The reward was not without its trials.
Holt says.
"It got extremely frustrating in the last
several months," he says. An effort at that
time to bring legalized gambling was driv-
ing the cost of real estate at an alarming
rate. "I was concerned that I would find
myself competing against someone who
wanted to use the site for a different pur-
pose than I wanted.
The value of raw land for a casino is S2
million an acre," he says. "I didn't want to
wind up paying an exorbitant price that
would kill the project." .
Manko, believes that sheer determina-
tion on Holt's pan was the catalyst that
finally got the deal signed.
"I think you can say that my client exhib-
ited a high degree of patience," he says. "He
wanted to build a port in 1987 not in 1994."
EDITOR'S NOTE
THIS IS the first of a series of stories
focusing on companies in the Delaware
Valley area and attorneys who service
them. The region has a diverse array of
companies and has an active business lit-
igation docket in the Delaware courts.
-------
Brownfields'97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5K) Brownfields Over the Border
Wednesday, September 3,1997
3:45 p.m. - 5:15 p.m.

Description: Brownfields problems do not stop at the borders of the United States. Around the world, developed
nations are beginning to face up to the same tough issues that we here in North America are dealing with. Share
your views with brownfields stakeholders from Canada, the Netherlands, and Germany and learn first hand from
their revitalization experiences.
Location: Room 2201

Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Dale Medearis (Moderator)

Ms. Beth Benson
Mr. Thomas Grohe
Mr Evert Verhagen
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
International Activities
Toronto Waterfront Regeneration Trust
International Building Exhibition Emscher Park
Project Westergasfabriek, Amsterdam
MR. DALE MEDEARIS
Dale Medearis has a bachelor's degree in international relations from the University of Redlands, a master's degree
in government administration from the University of Pennsylvania, and is currently pursuing an additional graduate
degree in geographic science. During the period 1994-1996. as a Federal Chancellor's Fellow of the Alexander von
Humbolt Foundation and a John J. McCloy Fellow of the U.S. Council on Germany, he studied and evaluated land
use management and contaminated site cleanup in Germany and the European Union. In his present assignment
as special assistant to the Assistant Administrator in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of
International Activities, he coordinates the international elements of EPA's Brownfields program by analyzing the
applicability of Dutch, English, German and other OECD 'best practices' models in the U.S. Mr. Medearis also has
coordinated EPA's environmental assistance programs in Eastern Europe and Asia, worked on state and federal
environmental technology cooperation in EPA's Region 3 office, and he represents the City of Alexandria at the
Northern Virginia District Planning Commission as a volunteer.

Ms. BETH BENSON

In her capacity as a project director at the Waterfront Regeneration Trust, Ms. Benson is working with landowners,
banks, the insurance sector, developers, community representatives, and regulators to help implement cost-effective
solutions to assist in the restoration and reuse of brownfields sites found along the north shore of Lake Ontario. She
is currently managing the development of an area-wide soil and groundwater management strategy for Toronto's
port lands, an area of 425 acres situated on the shoulders of downtown Toronto.

Prior to joining the Waterfront Regeneration Trust in 1993, Ms. Benson was at the City of Toronto's Department of
Public Health where she was involved in site remediation, air quality, drinking water and polychlorinated biphenyl
management issues.

Ms. Benson's graduate work at the University of Toronto dealt with the environmental fate of radioactive Cesium-137
in arctic ecosystems.

MR. THOMAS GROHE

Since the start of the International Building Exhibition Emscher Park (IBA) in 1989, in Germany's Ruhr region, Mr.
Grohe has been responsible for supervising soil remediation, economic redevelopment, and "ecological oversight,"
of contaminated industrial areas. At IBA, Mr. Grohe has endeavored to merge economic restructuring with
environmental revitalization by promoting "a new industrial landscape" for Germany's Ruhr area. Key features of this
new industrial landscape include "consensus oriented" long-term regional land use and economic cooperation,
public/private partnerships, as well as an emphasis on concentrated investment at targeted "landmarks."
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. EVERT VERHAGEN ^

Mr. Evert Verhagen is a senior project manager for the district council Westerpark of the City of Amsterdam.

He has worked as an assistant to the manager in Amsterdam's notorious high rise area, Bijlmermeer. In 1986 his
book on Bijlmermeer was published.

He started working for the district as the manager for public works in 1990. He is now responsible for the
Westergasfabriek project. This derelict gas factory in the center of Amsterdam will be decontaminated, the grounds
will be turned into a park, and the historical buildings will be a home to the Dutch cultural avant garde.
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 5K: BROWNFIELDS OVER THE BORDER
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
Emscher Park

Emscher Park, Germany

Ecological and urban renewal of urban areas

Abstract

The International Building Exhibition Emscher Park was established in 1989 as a structural
programme of the Land North-Rhine/Westphalia scheduled to run for ten years. Its task is to
achieve the ecological and urban renewal of the northern Ruhr district. Its aim is to 'tidy up the
Ruhr district's backyard'. This highly depressed area in the Ruhr was in danger of being
permanently excluded from future social and economic developments. Within the framework of a
rapid and short-lived industrialization, industrial estates (coal-energy and chemical plants) were
established, which have now been transformed into derelict industrial sites. The International
Building Exhibition aims to initiate and supplement thinking on the Emscher Park area. The
basic principles include the creation of a sustainable project, a limited number of master plans
with key concepts underpinning a clear hierarchy of operational projects, and a large number of
working groups to foster and develop the innovations.
Policy Goals

The economic recovery of this extensive industrial area is central to the policy goals of the
project and, is intrinsically linked to the capacity for stimulating the restructuring of the
environment, using the word in its broadest sense of natural and urban environments.

Project Status
Seven master plans have been developed: Emscher Landscape Park; landscape and
environmental recovery of watercourses; leisure area on the Rhein-Herne Canal; industrial
legacy; activities in the park; innovations in relation to housing; and development of social and
cultural activities. Currently 92 projects are being developed and implemented on five sites in the
'area between Duisburg and Kamen.
-------
Background Information

The Emscher Park Building Exhibition is not an exhibition in the classical sense, but a process
with many activities. In this process of structural change, the International Building Exhibition is
working together with many bodies on a broad basis: with the local authorities, industry,
associations, pressure groups and the people. The councils of the 17 local authorities of the
Emscher region voted to join the building exhibition at its creation. In this complex framework,
the IB A GmbH acts as a coordinator. The IBA is institutionalized in the Steering Committee and
in the Board of Trustees. The Committee decides on the admission of projects to the exhibition,
and the Trustees bring together representatives from public life who promote the Building
Exhibition and support its initiatives.
Implementation

Strategy

In order to renew and upgrade the northern Ruhr district a structural programme was set up in
1989 to last for ten years. This programme aims to ensure that innovative ideas are generated.
Ideas are transferred into feasible plans which are subsequently implemented. Thus a number of
master plans are developed, as well as a great number of operational projects and working groups
to foster and develop the innovations.

Activities

The 17 local authorities of the Emscher region and various groups that cooperate on the project
are currently developing and implementing 92 projects in the following fields:

modernization of coal mining settlements and construction of new housing, with a focus
on quality of life and environmental issues;

Working in the Park': developing new corporate buildings on derelict land, to enable the
creation of new economic poles;

preservation and re-use of industrial monuments as witnesses of history;

landscaping of the Emscher area into a park connecting all 17 urban areas, with
pedestrian and cycle paths, and thematic areas;

ecological restructuring of the Emscher river and its 350 km of tributaries.
-------
Partners

The responsibility for the individual projects remains with the 'developers', which in most cases
are the local authorities and in some cases private companies or pressure groups. No additional
funds have been made available to finance the projects of the IB A Emscher Park. The project is
financed from the existing aid programmes of the Land combined with structural development
aid from national government and the European Union. These programmes are focused on urban
renewal and business and housing aid, as well as funding for training schemes. It is hoped that
this fusion of funding mechanisms and the interlinking of investment schemes will enhance
policy impact.

Analysis

Results

The Emscher Park project displays many highly innovative facets in terms of working methods,
project objectives, and contracting authorities' contract specifications. Many of the projects are
close to completion.

Barriers and Conflicts

Public participation has been a continuing concern of contracting authorities, although the
mobilization of local residents varies greatly between the different projects.
Lessons Learned

The entire Emscher Park project contains a wealth of innovative elements that may serve as an
example to areas with similar industrial histories. These include:

increased public awareness of the historical significance of their surroundings;

successful land use planning based on multi-disciplinary working involving planners,
economists, ecologists, architects and artists;

planning process goals set to attain a realistic optimum, rather than Utopian ideal.
Further information

IBA Emscher Park
M. Grohe
'Tel:+49-209 717 030
-------
Fax:+49-20971703298
References
Innovations for the improvement of the urban environment; a European overview; Dublin
1993.

Urban environment and Sustainable Development; success stories; Heidemij Advies BV,
Arnhem NL.
Acknowledgments

The original text for this project summary was developed by Beture Setame (September, 1994).
Revision by EURONET, 1996.

[HornePagelfGuidance! fSearchl ICitvListl [Documents! fNewl [Feedback!

© EURONET/ICLEI Consortium, 1996. See Impressum.
-------
TIME AND SPACE ON THE WESTERGASFABRIEK IN
AMSTERDAM, HOLLAND
Drs E.H. Verhagen
Projectmanager Westergasfabriek
Information:
Projectbureau Westergasfabriek,
Haarlem me weg 8-10, 1014 BE Amsterdam
tel 31-20-5810425 fax 31-20-5974401
westergas@wxs.nl
-------
TIME AND SPACE ON THE WESTERGASFABRIEK IN AMSTERDAM, HOLLAND

A. Mental maps
In 1974 Gould and White published a study about mental maps. It dealt with how people
perceive and experience their world. Upper middle class inhabitants of Los Angeles, for
instance, had a completely different knowledge about places within their city than, for instance,
black inhabitants of Avalon or Hispanics of the Boyle Height district.

In my opinion Brownfield projects are about mental maps. So my story about the
Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam to be held on the Brownfields conference will deal with how we
put our project on the map.

The Westergasfabriek was a closed off derelict factory site in the city centre. Situated in the
heart of a former working class area nobody went there because there was nothing to go to.
Yes, there were fifteen beautiful buildings but they were forgotten in this unknown and
uncharted area. Our project brought the place to life, we gave it a heart and tried to give it a
soul. And the mental map of the people who went there forever changed. And as a result the
area started to change.
A mental map is not made up by what is, but by what happens.

So we made happenings possible, we let the buildings to a wide variety of cultural activities.
Striking a delicate balance between avant garde, and popular culture, fashion shows and fun
fairs, we put the Westergasfabriek on the map. Not only in Amsterdam or the Netherlands, but
also the cultural mental map of Europe and hopefully starting the 4th of September 1997 on the
mental map of a lot of interested Americans.

B. The project
To understand the project it is essential to have a sense of the scale and the goals of the
project. You have to know something of the history. After that we will deal with what we did to
put it on the map; and how we intent to keep it there.

The Gas factory site
The site of the former Westergasfabriek covers 13.5 hectares. There are a total of 22 buildings
on the site, 13 of which are listed as industrial monuments. The buildings occupy more than
16,000 m2 of floor space.

Project goals
The project has the following goals:
we want to preserve a proper green infrastructure within the urban area;
we want to reuse the industrial monuments;
we want to improve the living conditions in the adjacent old working class neighbour-
hoods;
therefore we want to create new jobs;
and:
we want to give Amsterdam an extra impetus in the area of culture and tourism.
We do this by:
using the site and the buildings for a new purpose, according to a triple theme of park,
culture and activity.

C. The things that where
The British Imperial Continental Gas Association began in 1883 to construct a new gasworks on
the periphery of Amsterdam, right outside Haarlemmerpoort. The new plant, the second in
Amsterdam, was called the 'Westergasfabriek'.
Almost all the buildings were designed by the architect Isaac Gosschalk and date from the
period 1883-1885; some buildings were also added later. Gosschalk followed the 19th-century

-2-
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

fashion of imitating the architecture of the past by designing his buildings in 'neo'-Holland
Renaissance style. The exterior of the buildings is richly, if eclectically, decorated, with details
taken from a variety of different architectural styles ornamenting the facades.

In addition to the creative use of various different styles of architecture, the complex is laid out
in a very rational and well-conceived manner, especially in the way the various buildings are
positioned with respect to one another. The use of material is also functional and progressive:
Gosschalk used steel supporting structures and roofs which in several places have deliberately
been left visible. A hard German brick was selected instead of the usual Dutch variety because
it would retain its pigmentation much longer.

Gosschalk's aim in building the Westergasfabriek was '...to wed the strictest utilitarian demands
of manufacturing to shapes which are pleasing to the eye.' The result was a unique combination
of architectural attractions, picturesque groupings of building masses and exceptionally subtle
and refined details, measured by both Dutch and international standards. The complex can be
considered a milestone when it comes to integrating industrial building and architectural design.

When the gas production process changed at the beginning of the 20th century, a number of
new buildings were added, such as the Watergasfactory now called the Transformatorhuis, and
an extra gasholder. Gas production ceased in the 1950s with the transition to blast-furnace gas.
Thereafter the buildings were used 'temporarily' by the Municipal Power Company, which left
the site for good in 1992.

Demolition
Thirteen of the buildings on the site were saved from demolition in 1989 when they were listed
as historic buildings.
One of these buildings was of course the foundations of what had once been the 'biggest
gasholder in Europe', a unique building measuring 15 m in height and covering 3000 m2 of floor
space; a veritable cathedral of the industrial age.
Another is the Zuiveringsgebouw, once described in an English-language architectural guide as
'one of the most surprising buildings from the age of the 'neo' styles'. Of all the buildings on
the site, this one appeals most to the imagination.

C. What is

1. Call for ideas
At the end of 1991, the district council decided to issue a call for ideas: anyone with a good
idea for using the Westergasfabriek buildings was invited to submit it. The 331 (!) responses
were judged on their originality and creativity. A special committee selected four plans from
those submitted. These plans were scrutinised on their feasibility. The decision was made to
give a cultural destination to the area.

2. Temporary use
The district council had already decided in 1992 to lease the buildings to interested parties for
the time being on a temporary basis. The emphasis was to be on culture in the broadest sense
of the word. Their intention was to avoid a situation in which the buildings would be vacant for
a long period of time while the city itself suffered a critical shortage of structures such as these.
The use of the buildings became a huge success: it soon became clear that there was much
interest in most of the buildings. In the four years since the decision to lease them out, over
300 performances, exhibitions and concerts have been held on the site.
At the moment, sixteen of the buildings are usually being let to some outside party. There is
even a waiting list for some of the buildings. A number of them - for example the Gasholder and
one of the purification halls, are used for short-term projects. Since October 1992, these too

- 3 -
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

have served as venues for the widest possible variety of events.
The Transformatorhuis has been leased to the Amsterdam Theatrical Society for two years now.
Das Arts, part of the Amsterdam drama school, is located in three smaller buildings on the west
side of the site. Peter Sellers, the famous American drama director is now working with
DasArts. One of the two purification halls is occupied by a film studio, Studio Wenck, which
occasionally employs the surrounding workshops for the stage scenery and costumes. 'Allegria
the movie' by Cirque Du Soleil is filmed there. At the head of the Zuiveringsgebouw is the West
Pacific Cafe, an American type cafe and restaurant which has led the way with its activities
since the very start of the temporary leasing period. People can eat and dance in the same room
where once the gas factory workers ate their meals. The Laboratorybuilding has for the last four
years served as the European headquarters of Cirque du Soleil from Canada. Various theatrical
companies which are considered among the best in the Netherlands give performances on the
site: these include the Amsterdam Theatrical Society, mentioned above, but also De Trust,
Orkater and Hollandia. The Holland Festival discovered it as a potential festival venue. They
arranged to have a new Dutch opera Antigone performed there. Karl Heinz Stockhausen held
the world premiere of his Helicopter String Quartet here.
From fashion show to multi-media exhibition, and from opera performance to house and techno
parties by MTV. All of these activities have found their way to the Westergasfabriek site,
bringing the public along with them.
Large-scale events such as pop concerts, balls or demonstrations often take place in the
Gasholder. Its relatively isolated location on the site means that the surrounding residential
neighbourhoods are not disturbed by these events. There were performances of Cavalleria
Rust/cana and // Pagliaci. KPMG management advisers and accountants used the Gasholder
twice as a management centre, BMW launched its new 500 series there, and it was a fantastic
venue for the photography exhibition, 'Bridge over Europe', which can now be seen in the
arrival hall of Kennedy Airport.
A number of visual artists have their ateliers in the smaller rooms and buildings. The Patchwork
artists collective, for example, makes wedding gowns and Buddha images. And every year there
is a fun fair.

3. Cultural activities
We realised that the strength of the Westergasfabriek lies in the fact that cultural activities take
place there almost continuously at different locations. This is culture with a capital, but also
with a lower-case, 'c' as weel as art with a capital and a lower-case 'a'. The catering on the
site is an equally unique, but not overpowering, binding element. Anyone looking for a fast-food
joint will be sorely disappointed.
All this attracts people with the widest imaginable range of interests to the site.

The new use made the Westergasfabriek also popular among the local residents, as became
clear in a study carried out in January 1996. Students at Holland Polytechnic conducted a
survey among area residents which showed that, of the 191 people surveyed, more than 90%
had heard of the gasworks at one time or another, 73% knew what was going on there, and
almost 40% had been there in the past year. Which was remarkable since the public only had
had limited access to the site since 1992-1993.
When asked about the image of the place, the respondents generally stated that they
considered the site a familiar and fascinating area, that they considered the events that took
place there up-to-date, and that the whole radiated a pleasant atmosphere. Almost three-quar-
ters of the local residents questioned believes that the Westergasfabriek makes the
neighbourhood a more attractive place.
-4-
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

D. Things that will be

1. Recent plans: the project fields of interest
Drawing on the success of the temporary use we devised a strategy for the future. The strength
of this strategy lies in its almost holistic approach. This is not just a project of demolition and
renewal or the maintenance of an important historical relict, it is a project that stretches beyond
these borders, a project that tries to integrate the different needs of today's people. This is one
of the very important things that we learned when we visited the projects of IBA-Emscherpark
in Germany.

Access The Westergasfabriek site has always been a sealed-off area. Its location between the
railway line and the boat canal meant that it was an enclave within the city. That is often the
case with industrial complexes that are being considered for some other use. The site must still
find a place for itself within the urban network.
Ecology These closed of areas often have developed a unique ecology. This area is situated at
the end of the green western outskirts which penetrate deep into the city, bringing the
periphery closer to the city centre than at any other point. It is an essential element of an
important ecological transitional zone.
Soil decontamination The site of the former Westergasfabriek is heavily polluted. Until recently,
such sites were usually subject to a large-scale clean-up, projects that sometimes involved sums
up to hundreds of millions of guilders. This area, however, will set an example of a different,
more sober but nevertheless effective approach in which the pollution will be insulated (possibly
in stages), making the problem both technically and financially manageable.
Living The future development of Westerpark and the site of the former Westergasfabriek are of
vital importance to the quality of the living environment. They give the area an important
additional value, making it a more attractive place to live and, in particular, to continue to live.
New residential areas are being built nearby.
Park Amsterdam enjoys a considerable reputation when it comes to parks. The Vondel Park is a
very well known Dutch park and the Amstel Park, part of the green city outskirts to the south
along the River Amstel, is of exceptional quality. The Gaasperplas Park was constructed in 1982
in Amsterdam Zuidoost (the Southeast suburbs of Amsterdam) for a famous once in every en
years flower exhibition. These and many other parks that enrich the city satisfy the city-
dweller's desire for greenery in his immediate surroundings. They make a valuable contribution
to the built-up environment. After Westerpark is completed, the western part of the city within
the ring road will have a more than 50 hectares park and in this way also be able to satisfy this
desire for greenery.
Historic monuments There are thirteen historic buildings on the Westergasfabriek site which
have all been listed. Identifying new, and mainly cultural, ways of using these buildings raises
the project to the international level and guarantees that these buildings will be preserved.
Work The temporary leasing out of the buildings on the Westergasfabriek site has demonstrated
that there is here a market for cultural and other various pursuits. Such activities not only create
jobs on the site itself, but have a positive effect on the image of the surroundings. The present
Municipal Executive has made the creation of additional jobs a policy priority.
Culture A flourishing artistic and cultural life, one in which a variety of people and groups
participate, is essential to a city such as Amsterdam. In Amsterdam we have learned during the
last twenty years that they also appear to be effective ingredients for attracting businesses and
tourism. Moreover, they provide the foundation for an open urban living environment in which
everyone has the opportunity to take part in a multifaceted cultural life.

By coming to grips with the themes mentioned above, it will be possible to create a project
which is unique for Amsterdam and the Netherlands and which can serve as an example in
many different ways.
- 5 -
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

2. A new park for Amsterdam
The former factory site will become the heart of the much larger Westerpark. The park is going
to serve a dual purpose: visitors can feel safe there, but it should also arouse feelings of
freedom in them.

To select a landscape architect we asked twelve bureau's to answer the question: what is a
park and what will a park be like in the 21st century. We then organised a competition between
the five architects whose answer we liked best.
The competition was won by an American landscape architect, Mrs Kathryn Gustafson. Mrs
Gustafson divides her time between her offices in Paris and London and living and working in
Seattle, Washington.

The plan for the park by Kathryn Gustafson also deals with time and space. A central axis
representing time organises spaces and activities. From east to west you will travel from old to
new. The east symbolises tradition, the west renewal. In the old days the people working on the
factory already called it 'The West'.

The heart of the park will be an exhibition grounds. It is situated in the upper right corner of the
park and calls to mind the horn of plenty: it seems like culture is spilling out of it, filling the park
with activities.
The structure of the park is almost basic: a straight axis parallel to the old canal crossed by a
diagonal like Broadway; a festival of lights linking cultural activities.

The park will make large-scale fairs and events such as pop concerts and theatrical perfor-
mances possible. But the park also offers a great variety of spaces suited for other uses.
It will provide the perfect environment for the buildings. Park and buildings will be fully
integrated and their functions are mutually reinforcing.

It will be possible to walk, play games, daydream and relax in this park. The foliage will offer
respite from the densely urbanised neighbourhoods and the historic buildings on the site. The
park will satisfy the need for nature and space of the surrounding neighbourhoods.

3. Culture and activity
Theatre, film, music and visual art will predominate in the buildings themselves. There are
performances and events, as well as the opportunity to organise private functions. While cate-
ring is not the main activity, it is going to be an essential part of the concept.

The people who use the buildings are not just those who make or present cultural products. The
core of this group is involved in cultural enterprise: distribution, organisation, catering, building
scenery and supplying special effects. There is also room available for training.
In addition to its public attractions, the site also provides accommodation to organisations that
support cultural activities, such as shops and a small number of offices.

It goes without saying that the lessees are able to pay their rent. In addition, there will be
accommodation made available to start-up cultural organisations. The rent will be fixed
according to a sliding scale.

The usable floor space in the buildings will be optimised for future leasing. That will increase
employment further for secondary firms.

The training programmes organised on the site only generate a limited number of jobs, but they
do strengthen the dynamic quality of the site and its unique character. By grouping important
categories of cultural activities together in the same accommodation, they become mutually

-6-
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

reinforcing and are more likely to co-operate and project a positive image.

One important advantage of combining public activities and cultural enterprise is that the public
and activities are spread out over the day and the evening. The way the buildings are used
hence makes an important contribution to the value of the park for its users.

Neighbourhood interest
Attracting cultural enterprise not only generates more jobs for the city of Amsterdam as such,
but in particular it stimulates the economy of the adjoining neighbourhoods. A wide variety of
activities will take place on the site and inside the buildings whose aim is in part to attract
neighbourhood residents to the site. A number of activities intended especially for the neigh-
bourhood will be visibly represented on the site.

Festival grounds
The park and buildings make an excellent venue for festivals. In the future the Westergasfabriek
site will also accommodate multiple-day music festivals.
The park can also offer the Canadian based Cirque du Soleil a place to set up their 'grande
chapiteau' and is a suitable location for the annual spring fair.
The interiors of the buildings will be designed in such a way that they can be used flexibly.
Various rooms can be used for any larger events.

Education
Schoolchildren will be welcome to visit the site and learn about the history of gas production
and the historic buildings there in a relatively secure, park-like environment. In addition, they will
be allowed to see how theatrical companies, film-makers and artists use the site. The complex
is a culture factory, a theatre workshop, and a large artist's studio, all rolled into one and open
to all.

International base
The Westergasfabriek site could become an international meeting place for artists from around
the world. Indeed, space is being set aside for such encounters. One specific idea is to
introduce an 'artist-in-residence' programme, but other types of guest accommodation are also
being considered. There is also the possibility of exchanging productions which are created for
unique locations.

Gasholder
The Gasholder is to serve as a multi-functional space which can accommodate a wide range of
different activities. The Gasholder, a unique building offering 3000 m2 of floor space, already
plays an important role during festivals that take place on the site. Other lessees on the site will
also use the Gasholder, with extra space being available for operas, balls, house parties,
business parties and presentations, pop concerts and exhibitions.

Character
Thanks to the combination of historic buildings and for-profit cultural activities in the surroun-
dings of a park, the project has the potential to develop into an unique location with its own
special identity. The interlacing of historic monuments and culture gives the site a sophisticated
urban character. In addition to improving living conditions in the neighbourhood, the park is also
valuable for the cultural organisations on the site. They will be able to use the public space for
their performances or exhibitions, an opportunity which adds to the dynamic and
unconventional nature of the site.

Used in this way, the gasworks need not necessarily compete with similar centres in
Amsterdam or elsewhere. It has its own special identity, one which will attract a wide variety of

- 7-
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

visitors.
The site will give its surroundings a centre, a source of stimulation: a place to be proud of.

The gasworks site is dynamic, lively, adventurous and exciting. It is the right place to go
searching for the unexpected, the serendipitous. It is never quite finished. The historic buildings,
permanent and by definition static, house a world of continuous change.
And change is consequently one of the fundamental features of the culture park that the
Westergasfabriek site is to become. The result is a paradox, of course. No one can capture
change; change must be stimulated, even forced if necessary.

E. Summary

To give new life to a derelict contaminated site it proved to be essential to give the public a
reason to visit the site. For Amsterdam space proved to be the keyword. Space for a new park
and space for cultural activities. We believe we can keep the site interesting for the public by
striking a course while setting new goals for ourselves as we change.

Designing the plan around this core of space and time makes it possible to reinforce and
preserve the nature of the landscape and the idea of the urban periphery.
Cultural enterprise gives the thirteen historic buildings and other structures on the site a new,
dynamic use. The activities that take place on the site will have a positive impact on the
immediate environment.
The area will finally get the park that it has been waiting for over one hundred years. The new
infrastructure will ensure that the area is accessible and usable by both lessees and visitors.

F. Change

Change and innovation are the key words in developing the site further. Although certain goals
have been set, there is no final target. It is the direction that is important, not the final
destination. The project has all the qualities of a road movie in the best American tradition. The
point is not to arrive, but to be on the road, going somewhere.

The journey is the thing, then, the symbol of motion, of life itself. Arrival is static, the end,
death. Revitalization and change drive the process. Cultural enterprise is the new source of
energy powering the Westergasfabriek.

Anyone visiting the new Westergasfabriek with this in mind will be making a journey. And why
undertake a journey, why visit other countries or other places, if not to discover what else is
possible?
-8-
-------
Time and space at the Westergasfabriek in Amsterdam, Holland

Norman E. Endlich

On behalf of Dale Medearis EPA I send you my paper for the Brownfields conferece.
I hereby grant EPA the permission to reprduce the paper for the Brownfields 97 binder.

drs E.H. Veragen
Amsterdam
July 28 1997
- 10-
-------
Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow • Brownfields '97 — Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(5L) Little Town Blues: Challenges to Small Cities and Rural Communities
Friday, September 5,1997
8:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m.

Description: Small towns can have big dreams. Hear local officials and others discuss ways to overcome the
special difficulties faced by small communities. Limited human resources, environmental justice issues, funding
issues, and consensus-building are among the issues considered by a panel of experts in redevelopment of small
towns.
Location: Room 1203B

Speakers and Affiliation:
The Honorable Phillip Singerman (Moderator)

Mr. Scott E. Holmes
The Honorable Robert B. Ingram
Mr. Jonathan L. Markley
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration
Lancaster County, Nebraska Health Department
City of Opa Locka, Florida
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration
THE HONORABLE PHILLIP SINGERMAN
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]

MR. SCOTT E. HOLMES

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

THE HONORABLE ROBERT B. INGRAM

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

MR. JONATHAN L. MARKLEY