Brownfields '97 - Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 - Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
rownheds
Partnering For A Greener Tomorrow
Track Six:
Sustainabk Reuse
PURPOSE OF THE TRACK
The brownfields program strives for sustainability as it seeks to address the issue
of property reuse. Listen as experts explain how to create livable communities
and partnerships between public and private entities. Discuss the role that eco-
industrial parks, "smart growth"" practices, green businesses, innovative technologies,
transit-oriented development, and pollution prevention are playing in building a
sustainable future.
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
(6A) Brownfields and Beyond: Incentives for Sustainable Practices
Thursday, September 4,1997
8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
Description: Win-win situations for communities and businesses are the object of every deal. Experts will
examine local incentives that result in environmentally friendly practices. Come learn about innovative incentives
for implementing pollution prevention practices, infill development, and transit-oriented development.
Location: Room 2203
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Robert Wolcott (Moderator)
Mr. Scott Bernstein
Mr. Stephen O. Noble
Mr. Timothy W. Warman
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation
Center for Neighborhood Technology
PNC Bank
American Farmland Trust
MR. ROBERT WOLCOTT
Robert Wolcott is deputy assistant administrator for the Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation at U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In that capacity, he is the senior career manager of a 400-person office
which oversees a wide spectrum of multimedia environmental programs, economic analysis, strategic planning,
environmental statistics, and economic sector analyses and initiatives. Prior to serving in this position, Mr. Wolcott
headed a variety of divisions in the EPA Policy, Planning and Evaluation Office, including the divisions of Economic
Analysis, Natural Resources, and Water and Agriculture Policy. From 1983 to 1985 he served as senior policy
advisor to Administrator William Ruckelshaus, and prior to that he directed the Public Interest Economics
Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based economic research and education organization. Mr. Wolcott is trained in
economics, business and philosophy.
MR. SCOTT BERNSTEIN
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. STEPHEN O. NOBLE
Stephen O. Noble is the head of environmental services at PNC Bank which provides expertise to the lending
officers on how to understand and mitigate environmental risks. He has been developing environmental
policies/procedures in the banking industry since 1989. Mr. Noble holds a Master of Business Administration in
finance from the Graduate School of Management at Rutgers University and a Bachelor of Science in civil
engineering from Lafayette College. He is a licensed professional engineer with six years experience at the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Mr. Noble is also an experienced lending officer whose largest real
estate loan was for the acquisition financing of an abandoned structural steel plant in 1990. Today that property
would be known as a "brownfield"
MR. TIMOTHY W. WARMAN
[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 6A: BROWNFIELDS AND BEYOND: INCENTIVES FOR SUSTAINABLE
PRACTICES
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
AN ENVIRONMENTAL BANKER'S PERSPECTIVE
ON BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
by Stephen O. Noble, P.E.
Vice President and Manager
Environmental Services
PNC Bank, N.A.
Recently, a lender came to me and said that he wanted to run a property past me.
When I found out the name of the owner, it had a familiar ring. So I pulled out my list of
contaminated properties in New Jersey and voila! It was a 16 acre abandoned urban site
that had been occupied by an industrial user for the past 40 years. In fact, the owner had
buried his hazardous waste in the back. Both soil and groundwater were severely
contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organics, heavy metals and PCBs.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) had required the
owner to post over $3 million in financial assurance to provide for the anticipated clean-
up. This is a property that only its mother could love.
So, what do I say to the lending officer? Although the property is lousy collateral,
I need to know more about the borrower and their plans for the site. There may be a way
to structure the deal to make it bankable.
From a broader perspective, what does it take to make brownfields redevelopment
happen? First and foremost, one must respect the old real estate maxim. The three most
important criteria for real estate are: location, location, location. I have had the pleasure
of being a member of the Brownfield Working Group in Louisville, Kentucky. One of
their first activities was to create an oversized map of the City with each of the abandoned
industrial sites highlighted hi red. The benefits of each location virtually jump off the
map, such as: the proximity to highways, the surrounding resources (hospitals, churches,
libraries, shopping centers), the current zoning, etc. Location, like beauty, is hi the eyes
of the beholder. The map was an excellent tool to help prospective buyers and developers
consider the possibilities.
I heard about a mayor of a small city south of Philadelphia who organized a yacht
trip up the Delaware River. He invited the local developers and captains of industry to
join him, and then took them past the abandoned industrial waterfront sites. The trip had
the desired effect. The different perspective on these sites' location stirred their
imaginations as to what could be done with supposed wastelands.
The Four Obstacles To Brownfield Redevelopment
There are four primary obstacles that a developer must overcome with a
brownfield that do not exist in a greenfield. The first obstacle is potential liability. This
is best characterized by the following: How could the developer be sued? Let us count
the ways. One, they could be sued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
-------
Two, they could be sued by the state regulators. Three, they could be sued by the
city or municipality. Four, they could be sued by third parties (neighbors, tenants,
employees, etc.). The most important source of this potential liability is the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA),
which established strict, joint, several and retroactive liability for anyone deemed a
responsible party by the EPA. In effect, potential liability is the Mt. Everest of obstacles.
The second obstacle is cost. The estimated cost to cleanup a brownfield site is
sometimes a very elusive number. When it is, it creates uncertainty in the developer's
budget, the appraised value and the mind of the lender. This is due to the horrific
possibility that the final cleanup number may be several times the original estimate.
The third obstacle is time. The length of time involved in getting environmental
signoffs from the regulatory agencies can act as a deal-killer before the deal even gets off
the ground. Time, for the developer, is money. All properties have carrying costs, i.e.,
taxes, utilities, etc. If it takes too much time to get the necessary approvals, the carrying
costs can overwhelm any potential profit.
The fourth obstacle is bad science. This is when the regulatory agency is
indecisive, for the wrong reasons. For example, they want more sampling after the
contamination has been clearly delineated, or they want the excavation reopened because
one out of six soil samples was slightly elevated. When this happens, one begins to feel
like Sisyphus, who was condemned to spend an eternity in Hades trying to roll a heavy
rock up a hill only to have it roll down again when it neared the top.
What Are The Primary Environmental Risks For A Lender?
Direct environmental liability is an issue for a lender both during the credit
relationship and in foreclosure. This comes from the potential to be determined an
"owner" or "operator" of a previously contaminated site. Most Federal and State
environmental laws leave this door open and experience has taught lenders that such
liability can be expensive. The interest paid on commercial and real estate loans do not
begin to compensate banks for the litigation and/or remediation costs resulting from
contamination caused by others. For this reason, a lender may require certain
environmental indemnification and covenants in order to reduce these risks.
Even so, direct environmental liability is not a lender's primary focus.
The primary focus is on the creditworthiness of the borrower. Whatever has the
capability of impairing a borrower's ability to repay their loan represents a risk to the
lender. It is noteworthy that our borrowers must contend with at least thirty federal
environmental regulations and numerous state-specific environmental regulations and
sometimes local environmental ordinances. There are even times when borrowers find
themselves in the midst of a compliance nightmare, i.e., compliance with one regulation
puts them out of compliance with another. Therefore, lenders must think through these
exposures from the borrower's point of view.
-------
What Are The Borrower's Environmental Exposures?
The first exposure is the one that gets all the publicity: direct liability for a
cleanup. This is when a borrower has been determined by a regulatory agency to be a
responsible party who must contribute toward the cleanup of a site.
The second is the impairment of collateral value. Collateral is a lender's
secondary source of repayment; the first is the borrower's checkbook. Hence, collateral
value is a lender's insurance. Unfortunately, the market value of real estate collateral is
dependent on the buyer's perceptions and value can be driven down by the buyer's
perception of contamination on-site, next door, or even in the groundwater beneath the
site.
The third exposure is cash flow. This is primarily the legal and/or consulting fees
necessitated by addressing an environmental concern. Sometimes, legal expenses can
even exceed cleanup costs, so a lender must be mindful of the potential of this out-of-
pocket expense.
The fourth is a cloud over the collateral. For the most part, this is when there is
an open case file at a regulatory agency regarding an environmental problem at the site in
question. When a property shows up in an environmental database, research must be
done to ensure that it is not listed because of an unresolved concern or unfinished cleanup
at the site.
The last exposure is enforcement. This can run the gamut from an OSHA
violation due to misplaced fire extinguishers to an environmental crime that lands the
borrower in jail.
Mitigation Of Environmental Risks
In order to evaluate the viability of a brownfield deal, it is imperative to
understand those measures that act to reduce environmental exposures to a manageable
level.
The first category is "regulatory" which includes no further action letters,
covenants not to sue, prospective purchaser agreements, letters of no association and deed
restrictions. All of these are capable of closing off some of the potential liability from the
EPA or a State agency; however all are dependent on regulatory approval over which the
borrower and the lender have little control.
The second category is "property" which includes renovation, demolition and
change in use. Oftentimes, the renovation or demolition of a site cleans up a multitude of
environmental concerns. A change hi use (e.g., from commercial to industrial) can go a
long way toward alleviating the level of concern at a brownfield.
-------
The third category is "legal", which includes indemnifications, representations,
warranties and loan agreements. Due to the ambiguous nature of potential environmental
liabilities, these measures often serve to protect both the borrower and the lender. An
indemnification is the most important measure and, increasingly, they are being tied to an
environmental insurance policy to ensure that the indemnification will have value when it
is needed.
The last category is "financial" which includes escrow funds, insurance, letters of
credit, additional collateral and substitute collateral. All of these measures serve to
improve the certainty that the lender will be repaid on time with interest. Escrow funds
are the most meaningful and are used when the lender wants certainty that a cleanup will
be completed and collateral value maintained. When used in this way, escrow funds are
essentially self-insurance. Environmental insurance is the next best option which can
provide the same certainty without tying up the borrower's capital.
In conclusion, how would I advise the lending officer who presented me with the
property at the beginning of this article? My orientation would be toward reducing the
four obstacles of brownfield redevelopment: liability, cost, time and bad science. The
aforementioned mitigation measures would be used judiciously to prevent, as much as
possible, potential liabilities, undefined costs, open-ended tune frames and indecisive
regulators. Expert use of these measures can reduce the inherent risks of brownfields
lending to a level that is, in a word, "bankable"
NOTE: Any viewpoints expressed within this article are the author's own and are not necessarily those of PNC Bank
Corp. or any of its affiliates, officers or other employees.
© 1997 Stephen O. Noble. All Rights Reserved.
-------
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(6B) Smart Growth Approaches for Urban Redevelopment
Thursday, September 4,1997
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Description: Smart growth is becoming the hallmark of good planning. Local, state, and federal smart growth
approaches will be featured, and the link between smart growth, development and quality of life will be explored.
Leam first hand how these new efforts could make the difference in your community!
Location: Room 2202
Speakers and Affiliation:
Ms. Marta Goldsmith (Moderator)
Mr. John Freece
Mr. Glen E. Sibley
Ms. Harriett Tregoning
The Urban Land Institute
State of Maryland
Cheslock, Bakker. & Associates, Inc.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation
Ms. MARTA GOLDSMITH
As Vice President for Land Policy at the Urban Land Institute, Ms. Goldsmith is responsible for all research,
education and outreach programs in the policy area. These include ongoing work in brownfields, smart growth,
urban revitalization, regionalism and tax policy. She also directs the Advisory Services program which brings teams
of real estate and land use experts to communities in need of assistance. Assignments in the last year have
included brownfields reuse in Cleveland and Kenosha, base reuse in California and New York and growth
management in Atlanta and Las Vegas.
MR. JOHN FREECE
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
i1
MR. GLEN E. SIBLEY
Glen Sibley is senior vice president of Cheslock, Bakker & Associates, Inc., a commercial real estate investment
banking firm headquartered in Stamford, Connecticut. The firm has proven capabilities in commercial and
multifamily mortgage finance and securitization. He is responsible for business development among the firms' major
commercial real estate developer, investor, insurance company and investment banking clients. Mr. Sibley's career
spans more than twenty years and includes experience in commercial real estate, commercial mortgage finance and
environmental issues affecting commercial real estate transactions.
Prior to joining Cheslock, Bakker, Mr. Sibley was senior vice president of ERIC Group, Inc., where he pioneered
insurance coverage for environmental risk in commercial real estate mortgage backed securities (CMBS), for REIT's
and for other commercial real estate portfolios. Previously, as director of marketing for BCE Development Properties
he was responsible for more than $750 mm in office and retail lease transactions, was a member of the team which
negotiated a $180 mm loan on a single office building, and was the developer of the 766,000 square foot World
Trade Center/Denver.
Mr. Sibley served as director of Downtown Denver, Inc., The Greater Denver Corporation, the Denver (Olympic)
Games Committee, as vice chairman of Denver's World Trade Center, and as president of the Historic Paramount
Foundation. He is an active full member of the Urban Land Institute, serves on its Environmental Committee as well
as being its liaison to the National Realty Committee.
Articles authored by Mr. Sibley have appeared in Urban Land. Corporate Real Estate Executive. Real Estate Forum.
Building Owner and Property Manager. The Journal of Attorneys and Executives in Commercial Real Estate, and
others. He is a frequent speaker on matters of commercial real estate asset securitization and environmental risk in
commercial real estate transactions.
Mr. Sibley received an Master of Business Administration from the University of Denver and holds bachelor's
degrees in business administration and economics from the University of Puget Sound. He is based in Denver,
Colorado.
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. HARRIETT TREGONING
[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
(6C) Creating Livable Neighborhoods and Communities
Wednesday, September 3,1997
3:45 p.m. -5:15 p.m.
Description: Is your neighborhood truly livable? Learn strategies to revitalize downtowns and bring grocery
stores into older urban neighborhoods. Explore how good community design can build neighborhood integrity.
Location: Room 2202
Speakers and Affiliation:
Ms. Ann F. Finnegan (Moderator)
Mr. Paul Christensen
Mr. Robert E. Lang
Ms. Shelly Poticia
Grow America Fund
Neighborhood Progress, Inc.
Fannie Mae Foundation
Congress for the New Urbanization
Ms. ANN F. FINNEGAN
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. PAUL CHRISTENSEN
Paul Christensen is the Brownfields Program director at Neighborhood Progress, Inc. (NPI) in Cleveland, Ohio. NPI
is a community and economic development organization that works with community groups to revitalize Cleveland's
inner-city neighborhoods. In addition, Mr. Christensen serves as project director for a community Brownfield
Technical Assistance Program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Great Lakes
Environmental Finance Center. Prior to these positions. Mr. Christensen worked for the international management
consulting firm of McKinsey & Co., where he served corporate clients on issues of strategy, operations, and
environmental management. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in economics from Dartmouth College and received his
master's degree in business administration from Cornell University.
MR. ROBERT E. LANG _______^_^__________________^_^______
Robert E. Lang is senior editor of the journal Housing Policy Debate and heads urban and regional policy research
at the Fannie Mae Foundation in Washington, DC. He is also book review editor for the Community and Urban
Sociology Newsletter, published by the American Sociological Association. Mr. Lang will shortly receive a doctorate
degree in urban planning and sociology from Rutgers University. He also attended Princeton University's School of
Architecture. Mr. Lang has taught sociology and urban studies at Rutgers University, where he was cited for
teaching excellence. He was a research associate at both the Center for Urban Policy Research and the Rutgers
Regional Report. Mr. Lang's specialties include urban revitalization, metropolitan growth and regulatory issues,
community and urban sociology, housing policy analysis and land use planning. He has authored over two dozen
publications on topics ranging from the marketing of central city housing to rural land use issues in the American
West.
Ms. SHELLY POTICIA
[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
(6D) Back to the Future with Eco-lndustrial Parks
Thursday, September 4,1997
10:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
Description: "Waste not, want not" is an ancient term that applies to today's eco-industrial parks. Well planned
eco-industrial parks help inner cities build a competitive edge and provide healthy and sustainable reuse of
brownfields, whether on contiguous parcels or at separate sites throughout the city. Experts will examine the ins
and outs of getting an eco-industrial park project off the ground and talk about how to keep them working. Find
out how you can attract them to your home town!
Location: Room 2203
Speakers and Affiliation:
Dr. Ed Cohen-Rosenthal (Moderator)
The Honorable Peter Clavelle
Dr. Suzanne Giannini Spohn
Mr. Timothy E. Hayes
Cornell University
City of Burlington, Vermont
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation
Joint Industrial Development Authority of North Hampton
County, Virginia
DR. ED COHEN-ROSENTHAL
Ed Cohen-Rosenthal's career has been marked by a commitment to building innovative union-management
partnerships to better the workplace, business and community environment. He is currently director of the Work and
Environment Initiative (WEI). He serves on the faculty of the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor
Relations as a senior extension associate in Programs for Employment and Workplace Systems (PEWS).
He has consulted extensively to unions, companies and government agencies around the world on union-
management relations, environmental improvement strategies and participatory systems. His international
experience spans the globe including Asia, Australia, Eastern, and Western Europe, Scandinavia, Central and South
America and the Caribbean. He served on the President's Council for Sustainable Development Ecological
Industrial Park Task Force and was on the 1993 Globescope Steering Committee. In conjunction with the University
of Michigan, he studied employee participation in energy and natural resources conservation in the U.S. and Japan
in the early 1980s. He authored a report for the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions on the role of labor and management in North America for environmental improvement. He facilitates the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Dialogue on Jobs and the Environment.
Mr. Cohen-Rosenthal holds a Bachelor of Arts in philosophy from Rutgers College and a master's degree in
education from Harvard University.
THE HONORABLE PETER CLAVELLE
Burlington Mayor Peter Clavelle has been involved in city management and public service for more than 25 years.
During six years as Burlington's Director of Community and Economic Development (1983-1989), Mr. Clavelle
developed nationally recognized programs in housing, job creation and training, and neighborhood preservation. In
1989, Mr. Clavelle was elected mayor of Vermont's largest city, continuing Burlington's tradition of pragmatic,
progressive politics. His major accomplishments during his first two terms as mayor (1989-1993) include the
construction of a new sewage treatment system (the largest environmental protection project ever in Vermont), the
adoption of a plan for waterfront revitalization, the purchase of nearly 60 acres of waterfront land for the city's
Waterfront Park and Urban Reserve, and the implementation of community-based policing. In 1993 he founded
Burlington Associates, a consulting firm specializing in community development policy and planning. Elected again
in 1995 and re-elected in 1997, Mr. Clavelle is now serving his fourth two-year term as mayor of Burlington,
continuing his efforts to achieve sustainable economic development and an inclusive city government representing
the interests of ordinary people.
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. SUZANNE GIANNINI SPOHN
Suzanne Giannini Spohn is the team leader for Industrial Ecology at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Division of Urban and Economic Development in the Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation.
Ms. Spohn serves on the Federal Inter-Agency Working Group on Materials, which was formed in response to
recommendations of the President's Council on Sustainable Development. She also serves on EPA's Risk
Assessment Forum and the President's Council on Sustainable Development Working Group for Eco-lndustrial
Parks.
Ms. Spohn represented EPA at the Second World Congress on Zero Emissions in Chattanooga, Tennessee, the
Department of Energy-sponsored Workshop on Database Needs for Implementing Industrial Ecology in San Ramon,
California, Green Village Expo '96, the Southeastern Sustainable Communities Exposition in Charleston, South
Carolina, the Workshop on Eco-lndustrial Parks in Cape Charles, Virginia, co-sponsored by the President's Council
on Sustainable Development and the Port of Cape Charles Sustainable Technologies Industrial Park, Improving the
Bottom Line Through Environmental Efficiency Conference in Brownsville, Texas.
Ms. Spohn is currently working on several projects, including developing an eco-industrial park decision support
model, Developing Industrial Ecosystems Tool (DIET), to optimize the mix of facilities at specific eco-industrial parks,
creating an inventory of federal databases useful in materials flow analyses (for the Federal Inter-Agency Working
Group on Materials), and running the Eco-lndustrial Parks Webpage for the $mart Growth Network, a voluntary
partnership to promote metropolitan development that serves economy, community and environment.
Before joining EPA in 1990, Ms. Spohn was on the faculties of Columbia University School of Public Health, the
University of Maryland School of Medicine, and York College of the City University of New York. She worked as a
microbiologist at E.R. Squibb & Sons pharmaceutical company. She holds two patents and has numerous
publications in books and professional journals.
Ms. Spohn holds a doctorate in zoology from Rutgers University and a Bachelor of Arts with honors in biology from
New York University.
MR.TIMOTHY E. HAYES
[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
(6E) Deconstruction vs. Demolition in Site Preparation
Wednesday, Septembers, 1997
3:45 p.m. -5:15 p.m.
Description: Removing old structures from brownfields sites adds cost in the site preparation phase.
Deconstruction, dismantling, and recycling can help save costs, create jobs and new businesses, and be a
sustainable environmentally friendly business practice. Experts will discuss how to determine whether a
deconstruction program will work in your community and how to get one started. Case studies will give you ideas
for turning those decrepit lemons into lemonade!
Location: Room 2218
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Peter A. Yost (Moderator)
Ms. Kivi Leroux
Ms. Patricia Marvin
National Association of Home Builders Research Center
The Materials for the Future Foundation
Marvin Company
MR. PETER A. YOST
Peter A. Yost is Assistant Director of the Structures and Environmental Systems Division of the National Association
of Home Builders (NAHB) Research Center of Upper Marlboro, Maryland. He is a graduate of Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University and the University of New Hampshire. His master's thesis research in resource
economics, at the University of New Hampshire, involved a cost analysis and feasibility study of recycling gypsum
wallboard waste. This research resulted in the development and implementation of a regional gypsum waste
recycling program. As a former remodeling contractor for seven years, he brings practical field experience in
residential construction to complement his academic training in resource efficiency issues. Mr. Yost's work at the
Research Center currently includes project management of construction and demolition waste management studies.
Mr. Yost regularly consults with manufacturers on building product and process development, particularly within the
Advanced Housing Technology Program. Mr. Yost is a board member of the Used Building Materials Association
and a member of the American Society for Testing and Materials.
Mr. Yost's past speaking engagements range from NAHB's Annual Convention to the American Society for Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) to the Energy Efficient Building Association (EEBA).
Ms. KIVI LEROUX
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. PATRICIA MARVIN
[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
(6F) Hidden Assets: Capitalizing on Transit Access
Friday, Septembers, 1997
10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.
Description: Existing transit infrastructure makes brownfields more attractive to developers. Experts will
examine how to leverage existing and new transit investments and make communities more livable, creating new
jobs, public and private services, and recreational amenities. The panel will provide advice on making the most of
your transportation assets.
Location: Room 2217
Speakers and Affiliation:
Dr. Richard Mudge (Moderator)
Ms. Vicky L. Diede
Ms. Jill Kruse
Ms. Jacqueline Leavy
Apogee Research, Inc.
City of Portland, Oregon
Surface Transportation Policy Project
Neighborhood Capital Budget Group
DR. RICHARD MUDGE
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
Ms. VICKY L. DIEDE
Ms. Diede has been working for the City of Portland, Oregon for the last seven years as the manager of the Central
City Streetcar Project. Prior to that, she worked in the private sector in sales, marketing and business and product
development. Ms. Diede brings organizational and coordinating skills to the development and implementation of
projects involving varied audiences, interests and complexities.
Ms. JILL KRUSE
Jill Kruse is the research coordinator at the Surface Transportation Policy Project (STPP). Prior to STPP, she
received her master's degree in community and regional planning from the University of Texas at Austin. She has
authored papers on various aspects of transportation policy, including land use, social equity, safety, women's travel
issues, and international transportation. Her contributions include Mean Streets: Pedestrian Safety and Reform of
the Nation's Transportation Law. She is currently engaged in developing a Smart Growth Toolkit, which will provide
local decision makers with information on various growth management tools. Ms. Kruse holds a bachelor's degree
from the University of California at Berkeley.
Ms. JACQUELINE LEAVY
[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 6F: HIDDEN ASSETS: CAPITALIZING ON TRANSIT ACCESS
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
NEIGHBORHOOD CAPITAL BUDGET GROUP
343 South DMritorn. Suit. 910, Chkago. ffiMte 60604 . TWtphon* (312) 939-7NB - Put (312) 939-74M
ABSTRACT
wring West PuDman:
A Chkago Neighborhood Organizes for Its Own Realization
A Paper Prepared by
The Neighborhood Capital Budget Group
343 S. Dearborn, Sate 30?
Chicago, imnob «0<04
Submitted to:
The linked States Environmental Protection Agency's
"Brownfields '97 Conference, Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow"
September 3-5, 1997
Kansas City, Missouri
For more information/ or to obtain a copy of NCBG's paper, contact:
Jacqueline C. Leavy
Executive Director or
John Paul Jones
Director of Community Outreach
Neighborhood Capital Budget Group
Itmhutltt rti
-------
PERMISSION TO PUBLISH
The Neighborhood Capital Budget Group, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) corporation incorporated in
the State of Illinois, hereby grants permission to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, to reproduce NCBG's paper," Rediscovering West Pullman: A Chicago
Neighborhood Organizes for its Own Revitalization."
-------
ABSTRACT
The Neighborhood Capital Budget Group is a nine-year-old. 501 (c)(3) city wide organization.
NCBG's mission is "to assure the quality of our unban infrastructure, in order to ensure the
quality of life for our communities." Formed in 1988 by community organizations and local
economic development groups. NCBG gives residents of Chicago's neighborhoods a voice in
their governments' decision making about public works expenditures, and builds coalitions to
empower low- and moderate-income communities to direct their own revftalization. NCBG has
reformed the City of Chicago's capital budgeting policies, increasing city investment in
neighborhood infrastructure by $1 billion since 1992. NCBG was also the lead agency in
organizing for the rehabilitation of the CTA Green Line, and has championed transit oriented
community economic development throughout the City.
In this paper, NCBG recounts a case history of a community organizing campaign that
combined a brownfields issue, with a community driven campaign for transit oriented
community economic development and revftalization of an abandoned industrial site in the
heart of their neighborhood.
The community of West Pullman is located on the far southeast side of the City of Chicago.
Before World War II, the area was home to a host of heavy machinery and other manufacturing
operations. The industrial area was bounded on the south by a commuter rail line. Farther to
the south, a residential community sprang up, primarily single family homes.
But by the late 1960s, most of the industrial companies had moved to the suburbs. Two of the
historically most important employers, International Harvester and Dutch Boy Paint were among
the companies to leave. They left behind a legacy of underground contaminants,
unemployment, and a hole in the middle of the neighborhood.
In the early 1990s, neighborhoods throughout Chicago began to call for a commitment to retain
living wage manufacturing jobs, and policies to attract new job creating businesses which would
not negatively affect the environment. The public tends to associate the call for industrial
development incentives to private industry, or organizations representing companies, while
community residents are associated with calls for environmental dean up.
In West Pullman, residents saw the need for both job creation and environmental remediation.
They realized their community had hidden assets. The Community leaders of the Victory
Heights section and other community activists through West Pullman joined together to call
attention to the hole in the community: Land zoned for industrial development, awaiting
redevelopment, and representing an undeveloped asset. Community residents took the lead in
calling for both environmental remediation and industrial redevelopment.
In this paper, NCBG recounts the history of the community residents' local organizing
-------
campaign, their collaboration with the Capital Budget Group, and their victory in winning
recognition of their vision for revitallzation of West Pullman. Not only did the City of Chicago
have to recognize the abandoned industrial land as a prime site for industrial redevelopment,
the City and environmental agencies also agreed to invest $25 million in the dean up of the
site
The real story is just beginning: Community leaders are continuing their active role in designing
and overseeing the rebirth of the area. Community organizing and coalition building continue to
be vital to the effort. This case history explains the nuts and bolts of that organizing campaign.
Moreover, it demonstrates how a community that wanted to make the most of its assets-even
when the powers that be couldn't see the promise for future growth-were able to prevail. In
West Pullman, in collaboration with NCBG, community leaders are integrating infrastructure
planning, land use and transportation planning, industrial revitalization for living wage jobs, and
environmental restoration.
-------
Brownfields'97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(6G) An Ounce of Prevention: Avoiding Brownfields
Thursday, September 4,1997
8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
Description: Practitioners will share keys for getting businesses involved in local pollution prevention programs
and ways to achieve results.
Location: Room 2217
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Dan Stapleton (Moderator)
Mr. Isao Kobashi
Mr. J. Kelly Mowry
Mr. Edwin R. Smith
GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.
Santa Clara County, California
Gull Industries
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
MR. DAN STAPLETON
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. ISAO KOBASHI
Mr. Kobashi is currently program manager for the Santa Clara County Pollution Prevention Program. In this capacity
he is responsible for the development of county-wide pollution prevention policies and programs. Under his
direction, the county has taken a leadership role in developing partnerships with the metal finishing, auto repair, dry
cleaning, printing, electronics and printed circuit industries that have resulted in greater understanding and adoption
of pollution prevention measures by individual firms. He is currently investigating the role market-based forces such
as insurance, banks, and property managers can play in preventing pollution and brownfields.
Mr. Kobashi holds a bachelor's and master's degree in economics from San Jose State University.
MR. J. KELLY MOWRY
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. EDWIN R. SMITH
Mr. Smith is a brownfields coordinator in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Region 5 Office. He is
currently on loan to the Northwest Indiana Brownfields Redevelopment Project serving as its director. Mr. Smith has
directed several brownfields "risk transfer" projects for the Common Sense Initiative Federal Advisory Council, Iron
and Steel and Metal Finishing Sector Subcommittees. These include the development of a Model State/Local
Brownfields Redevelopment Authority Statute for Iron and Steel properties, a Brownfields Site Transition Manual for
Metal Finishers in the State of Illinois, and a study of Insurance Industry Products available to transfer risk from
brownfields sites. Mr. Smith has a Bachelor of Science in chemical engineering from the University of Illinois and a
Master of Science in environmental engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.
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
(6H) Made for Each Other! Brownfields and Sustainable Development
Friday, September 5,1997
8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
Description: Redeveloped brownfields can be vital cornerstones for urban sustainable redevelopment and entire
metro areas! This panel will explore the growing role metropolitan area stakeholders play in revitalizing urban
areas.
Location: Room 1201
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Nick Bollman (Moderator)
Mr. Jonathan Bamett
Dr. Curtis W. Johnson
Mr. Jonathan Weiss
The James Irvine Foundation
City College of New York
Metropolitan Council
Office of Vice President Albert Gore
MR. NICK BOLLMAN
Nick Bollman is senior program director for the James Irvine Foundation, a private foundation "for the people of
California." He is located in the Foundation's San Francisco office, and has statewide responsibility for its activities
in sustainable communities.
From 1987 to 1993 Mr. Bollman was program officer in community and youth development at The William and Flora
Hewlett Foundation. Before coming to California in 1987, Mr. Bollman was director of the Task Force on Human
Services, the "council of executives" of the nonprofit human service sector in New York City, and deputy director of
the Community Council of Greater New York.
A1967 graduate of Harvard College, Mr. Bollman has a Master of Arts from New York University in history and
philosophy of education.
Active with a number of grantmaker collaborations and nonprofit organizations, Mr. Bollman currently serves as chair
on services committee of president's HIV/AIDS Advisory Council (national group).
MR. JONATHAN BARNETT
Jonathan Bamett has been the urban design advisor to the city of Cleveland since 1981, and Norfolk since 1987. He
has similar long-term consulting arrangements with the cities of Charleston, South Carolina, Pittsburgh and Kansas
City. He is currently an advisor to the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust on plans for the downtown cultural district, the
Kansas City Economic Development Corporation on new investment in the Country Club Plaza, and is preparing an
action plan for downtown Miami for Dade County and the City of Miami.
His work in suburban areas includes: the master plan for Wildwood, a 67-square-mile city in St. Louis County,
Missouri; the master plan for Daniel Island, Charleston, South Carolina (with Cooper, Robertson & Partners,
Duany/Plater-Zyberk); design and development prototypes for the New York Regional Plan Association's Third
Regional Plan, and the award-winning Highway 111 corridor plan for Indian Wells, California, where Mr. Bamett was
a consultant to Johnson Fain Pereira.
Mr. Bamett is also a professor of architecture and director of the Graduate Program in Urban Design at the City
College of New York, and he has been the William Henry Bishop visiting professor at Yale, the Eschweiler Professor
at the University of Wisconsin, the Kea Distinguished Visiting Professor at the University of Maryland, and the Sam
Gibbons Eminent Scholar at the University of South Florida.
Books about Urban Design written by Mr. Bamett include Urban Design as Public Policy, Introduction to Urtan
Design, The Elusive City: Five Centuries of Design, Ambition and Miscalculation, and The Fractured Metropolis:
Improving the New City, Restoring the Old City, Reshaping the Region.
A magna cum laude graduate of Yale, Mr. Bamett also holds a Master of Arts from the University of Cambridge and
a Master of Architecture from Yale. He is a fellow of the American Institute of Architects and a member of the
American Institute of Certified Planners.
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
DR. CURTIS W. JOHNSON
Curtis W. Johnson is a writer on urban affairs for newspapers in the U.S., in partnership with columnist and author
Neal Peirce. He is also president of the Citistates Group, a network of consultants and journalists focused on
regions at the platform for economic competition and the laboratory for social analysis and action. Also, Dr. Johnson
is the chairman of the board of the Metropolitan Council, a regional government in the Twin Cities metropolitan area,
which plans and approves land use, water quality, affordable housing plans, urban revitalization strategies,
transportation investments, parks and open space, and provides direct services for transit and sewer treatment.
Formerly, Dr. Johnson served as the president of three colleges and the chief executive of a major citizen-based
public policy research organization.
MR. JONATHAN WEISS
[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
(61) Community Visioning for Smart Growth
Friday, September 5,1997
8:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.
Description: Community leaders will discuss how they have integrated brownfields redevelopment, pollution
prevention, green business, and development of environmental technologies into their city's vision for growth.
Examples that can work in your community will be shared.
Location: Room 2202
Speakers and Affiliation:
Dr. Roland Anglin (Moderator)
Ms. Edna Bell
Mr. Michael Cordes
Mr. Ben Starrett
The Ford Foundation
Wayne County, Michigan
Metro East St. Louis Eco-lndustrial Park
State of Florida
DR. ROLAND ANGLIN
Roland Anglin received a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. His graduate work and dissertation focused on
economic development in poor communities in the United States. After graduate school, Dr. Anglin joined the faculty
at Rutgers University in New Jersey where he taught courses on public policy, public management, and community
development. He left Rutgers to join the staff of the Ford Foundation, where he served first as the program officer
responsible for community development. More recently, he was asked to become deputy director for Community
and Resource Development which is part of the Asset Building and Community Development Division at the Ford
Foundation. Dr. Anglin still writes and publishes in the field of urban studies and public policy. He sits on the boards
of numerous journals and professional associations.
Ms. EDNA BELL
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. MICHAEL CORDES
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. BEN STARRETT
Ben Starrett serves as the administrator of the Strategic Planning and Policy Coordination Unit in the Office of the
Secretary at the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). He has held this position since 1989 and has
served with DCA since 1984. In his position, Mr. Starrett serves as a policy advisor to the Secretary of Community
Affairs on diverse issues, including growth management, energy efficiency, emergency management, housing, and
economic and community development. Prior to joining DCA, Mr. Starrett worked for the Florida Legislature and for
the City of Miami Springs, Florida.
While at DCA, Mr. Starrett has served as staff director of the Governor's Task Force on Urban Growth Patterns and
also as executive director of the Governor's Disaster Planning and Response Review Commission. He has worked
with numerous other blue-ribbon panels charged with balancing Florida's explosive population growth with the
protection of its environment and the promotion of sustainable economic development. Among his current
responsibilities, he is responsible for DCA's long-range planning and serves as the DCA's economic development
liaison and military base reuse coordinator.
In addition, Mr. Starrett currently serves as staff director for the Urban Issues Committee of the Governor's
Commission for a Sustainable South Florida. In this role he is coordinating Florida's efforts to implement the
Committee's recommendations for improving urban quality of life. A key focus of his work is trying to overcome
barriers to infill development and redevelopment in Southeast Florida's historic urban corridor, thereby reducing
development pressures on the threatened Everglades Ecosystem. As a key strategy to overcome these barriers, Mr.
Starrett has helped to create the Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership, which is a multi-agency partnership formed
to address and resolve brownfields problems in a 100-mile long urban corridor stretching from Dade to Palm Beach
Counties.
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 61: COMMUNITY VISIONING FOR SMART GROWTH
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
ABSTRACT
Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership:
A Regional Smart Growth Strategy
L. Benjamin Starrett, Administrator
Strategic Planning and Policy Coordination
Florida Department of Community Affairs
prepared for presentation at Brownfields '97 conference
September 4-5,1997
Florida is engaged in a comprehensive effort to reshape urban development patterns in
Southeast Florida. This initiative, known as "Eastward Ho!," is a pivotal strategy for reducing
development pressures on the threatened Everglades Ecosystem. Part of this effort is an
Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership, which brings together state, federal and local government
agencies, developers, community organizations, and others to address and resolve Brownfields
issues in Southeast Florida's historic eastern growth corridor. This corridor runs approximately
100 miles north/south and ranges from 5-10 miles east/west, spanning much of Dade, Broward,
and Palm Beach counties. Because of the size of the area (about 750 square miles), the approach
to Brownfields issues is from a regional perspective. This perspective is unique in that it seeks to
link the regional Brownfields efforts to transit interconnectivity and to the entire regional growth
patterns initiative. This presentation will focus on the nature of these links, and the opportunities
presented by the growing national focus on Brownfields for Florida's efforts to develop in
patterns that are compatible with ecosystem restoration and an improved quality of life.
for information on ordering copies of this presentation, please contact Ben Starrett at (850) 922-1600
-------
d Jiol Qrownfietds
Qartnership
& Collaborative, Approach to fiction
fefouary 1997
Xgport of the. first Meeting
The first meeting of the Eastward Ho! Brownfields
Partnership was held February 6-7,1997 in West Palm
Beach, Florida. Over 70 professionals - representing
the environment, urban planning, housing, economic
development, and community participation - attended
the kick-off meeting.
Objectives of the Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership
kick-off meeting included the following:
Achieve a common understanding of ongoing
activities in the Eastward Ho! Corridor.
Learn about successful Brownfields and urban
redevelopment activities in other parts of the
country, and understand what it takes to create an
enduring partnership.
Identify opportunities to link Federal programs with
revhalization efforts.
Agree on how various Federal, state, and local
agencies can participate in the Partnership.
Develop a collaborative approach to revitalizing the
urban corridor and creating sustainable
communities.
Ensure that stakeholders are fully involved in
Eastward Ho!
Chuck Powers did a marvelous job facilitating the
workshop. He gave us the benefit of his knowledge
about Brownfields throughout the two days, while
skillfully elucidating the insights emerging out of our
guest speaker's presentations and the participants'
discussions.
In his opening remarks, Chuck noted that when he first
heard about the work on Brownfields being organized in
South Florida, he thought Those folks have got
something." By basing the clean up of contaminated
properties on health, welfare, environmental factors,
and economic reuse, the Partnership can reach out
across boundaries to create a broad base of support.
He reminded participants that the outside "experts" that
have been brought in to discuss the redevelopment of
Brownfields should be seen as people with experiences
that can be drawn upon and adapted for use in South
Florida. And, because Brownfields cleanup is an
incredibly complex process, the Partnership must tap
the right resources in the right way and focus on the
broader concept of redevelopment and sustainability.
(See insert for additional facilitator comments.)
'What are 'BrownfiekCs andlVfuit is tfu
'Eastward'ttol 'Brownfiekts Tartnersfiip?
Brownfields are abandoned, idle, or under-used
industrial and commercial properties where expansion
or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived
contamination.
The Brownfields National Partnership is based on
the principle that contaminated properties can be
cleaned up and put back into productive use. It is a new
effort to link environmental protection with economic
development and community revitalization in order to
put in place a program that differs from programs of the
past - one that meets the needs of communities by
bringing public and private organizations together to
solve the problems of environmental contamination.
The Brownfields National Partnership seeks to
protect public health and the environment by cleaning
contaminated properties, creating jobs, providing
opportunities for private investment, and expanding
local economies. Spearheaded by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), many
Federal agencies have joined together to work with
communities to achieve these goals.
The Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership is an
effort to put the national principles into practice at the
regional and local levels in South Florida.
Pagel
-------
"It is time to get organized and focused. In two years, we need to be able to devolve from the Washington and Tallahassee levels, and to
have Browntields and Eastward Ho! regionally driven by the local constituency." ~ Ben Starrett
For more information about the Brownfields National
Partnership, contact:
Barbara Caprita or Matt Bobbins
U.S. EPA Region 4
Waste Division
Atlanta Federal Center, 10th Floor
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
phone: 404-562-9969 fax: 404-562-8628
e-mail: capritabarbara@epamail.epa.gov
robbins.matt@epamail.epa.gov
Participating Organizations
The first meeting included representatives from:
Broward Count/ Department of Natural Resources Protection
Center for Neighborhood Technology
City of Miami
Cuyahoga County, Ohio
Dade County Department of Environmental Resources
Management
DEEOCO
Duwamish Coalition
Earthwise Productions, Inc.
FAU/FlUs Joint Center for Environmental and Urban
Problems
Rorida Department of Community Affairs
Honda Department of Envitonmental Protection
Honda Department of Transportation
Rorida Governor's Office
Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Rorida
Growth Management Institute
Institute for Responsible Management
Legal Environmental Assistance Fund
Local Initiatives Support Corporation
The McArtfiur Foundation
National Audubon Society
National Park Service
The Nature Conservancy
Northeast/Midwest Institute
Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources
Management
P.B.C. Workforce Development Board, Inc.
South Florida Regional Planning Council
South Rorida Water Management District
Southern Environmental Business Council
Treasure Coast Regional Planing Council
US Army Corp of Engineers
US Department of Agriculture NPS
US Department of Agriculture NRCS
US Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
US Department of Defense
US Department of Energy
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
US Environmental Protection Agency
US General Services Administration
What is 'Eastward'Mo!?
The Eastward Ho! initiative grew out of a
recommendation made by the Governor's Commission
for a Sustainable South Florida (GCSSF) in its October
1995 initial report. The initiative focuses on
encouraging infill, development, and redevelopment of
lands not adjacent to the Everglades. The underlying
concept is to redirect growth away from southeast
Florida's remaining environmentally sensitive prime
water resources and prime agricultural lands, and into
eastern areas that have been passed over,
underutilized, or allowed to deteriorate.
GOAL OF THE EASTWARD HO!
BROWNF1ELDS PARTNERSHIP
The goal of the Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership
is to develop a strategic, collaborative approach to
Brownfields, using Eastward Ho! as the template and
linking environmental protection with economic and
community revitalization consistent with emerging
concepts of sustainable development.
The Eastward Ho! Corridor stretches 85 miles along the
eastern side of South Florida between the Florida East
Coast (FEC) and the Chesapeake Seaboard (CSX)
railroad tracks. The Corridor contains Southeast
Florida's "historic industrial core," three major
downtowns, three deepwater seaports, and three
international airports. (See map, page 3.)
Currently, 44% of the region's population resides in this
corridor. Of the projected two million "new" residents of
South Florida in the next 20 years, nearly four out of five
are expected to settle outside the Eastward Ho!
Corridor. To alter these projected patterns of
development will require a coordinated, aggressive
effort to remove social, economic, regulatory, and
financial barriers to infill, development, and
redevelopment in the Eastward Ho! Corridor. The
Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership is an important
part of this effort.
For more information about Eastward Ho!, contact:
Isabel Cosio Carballo
South Florida Regional Planning Council
3440 Hollywood Blvd. Suite 140
Hollywood, FL 33021
phone: 954-985-4416 fax: 954-985-4417
e-mail: isabelc@sfrpc.com
Page 2
-------
"We're looking for a norm/south solution to an east/west problem. We need to create dialogue between the east and the west sides of the corridor so
everyone can see Eastward Ho! as a common issue that can lead to better solutions and an increased sense of community.' - Frank Peterman
WHAT IS A "SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITY"?
A sustainable community is one which seeks improved
public health and a better quality of life for all residents
by limiting waste, preventing pollution, maximizing
conservation, promoting efficiency, and developing
local resources to enhance the local economy.
(Governor's Commission, 1995.)
'What is Already §oing on in the 'Eastward
Mo! Corridor?
Q Broward County: Gary Stephens, Deputy
Director of the Broward County of the Department of
Natural Resource Protection noted that:
1) Redevelopment of Brownfields is about areas --
not about individual parcels of land.
2) Brownfields provide a framework for addressing all
contaminants in the area.
3) Brownfields provide an opportunity for the
environmental community and EPA to assess and
clean up areas of the country. However, the
Brownfields program focuses primarily on community
redevelopment - not environmental protection.
3 Dade County: Doug Yoder, Assistant Director
of the Dade County Department of Environmental
Resources reported that Dade County has created a
Brownfields Task Force that is working to identify and
inventory Brownfields sites, and to develop a community
outreach program. Of the 3,300 contaminated sites in
Dade County, half involve petroleum contamination and
the vast majority lie within the Eastward Ho! Corridor.
The "carrots" for redevelopment include liability
protection, and tax abatements and incentives. He
suggested that we need to make it easier for the
development interests to do what we want with regards
to Brownfields redevelopment, such as offering one
comfort letter, and linking environmental reclamation
with economic development and transportation.
Q STATE OF FLORIDA: Joe McGarrity, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, noted that the
State of Florida focuses its efforts on Superfund sites,
and does not currently have a formal Brownfields
program. However, legislation will be under
consideration during the Spring session of the Florida
Legislature, and major issues include:
Program Definitions: How does a Brownfields
program differ from a voluntary cleanup program?
Program Eligibility: Who can receive assistance?
Liability: What types of liability should apply?
Cleanup Criteria: What standards should apply?
Project Oversight: Who is responsible for
monitoring?
Communication and Local Government Interest: Is
the process acceptable? Will local governments
assist in the process?
Eastward Ho! Corridor
County Boundaries
\.-' Railroad Tracks
~ Eastward Ho! Study Arui
Unincorporated Land
_ within the Study Area |
' Atlantic Ocean
Local Governments
an'tfrin the Study Area
PALM BEACH COUNTY
Atlantis
Boca RJ ton
Boynton Beach
Cloud Lake
Delray Beach
Glen Ridge
Golf
Golf View
Gulfstream
Haver Hill
Hypoluxo
Lake Clarke Shores
Lake Worth
Lanrana
Mangonia Park
Palm Springs
Riviera Beach
West Palm Beach
BROWARD COUNTY
Dania
Davit
Deerneld Beach
Fort Lauderdale
Hallandale
Hollywood
Indian Reservation
Lauderdale Lakes
Lauderhill
Lazy Lake
Miramar
North Lauderdale
Oakland Park
Pembroke Park
Plantation
Pompano Beach
Tamarac
Wilton Manors
DADECOUNTY
Biscavne Park
Coral Gables
El Portal
Hialeah
Medley
Miami
Miami Shores
Miami Springs
North Miami
North Miami Beach
OpaLocka
Pinecrest
South Miami
Virginia Gardens
West Miami
Page3
-------
"The question is how to provide regulatory incentives in the eastern part of the Corridor along with urtan growth boundaries to the west.' - Doug Yoder
Q US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY: Matt
Bobbins. EPA Region IV (Atlanta), noted that the
nation's governors and mayors have come to recognize
that Brownfields are important Local governments in
South Florida should not wart for Federal grants, but
should form a partnership now and get busy! EPA is
anxious to work with local governments to develop a
vision for the future, and to provide the resources and
technical assistance needed to achieve that vision.
federoC Partners
Representatives from six Federal agencies made brief
presentations about programs they have in place or are
developing that can help communities redevelop their
urban areas.
US EPAOSWER ............................ Ben Hamm
US EPA Region 4 ........................... Matt Robbins
US EPA Transportation Partners.... Lee Ellis
US EPA Smart Growth Network ..... Harriett Tregoning
US HUD HQ .................................... Paul Galons and
Kevin Neary
US HUD Region 4 ........................... Amarilis Amoros
US Army Corps of Engineers .......... Peter Besrutschko
USDA NRCS ................................... Thaddeus Hamilton
GSA ................................................ Paul Martin
US DOC NOAA ............................... Kenneth Walker and
Christine Eustis
Elizabeth Collaton of the Northeast - Midwest Institute
described other agencies' programs, including the US
Department of Commerce Economic Development
Administration which has emphasized its interest in
assisting the Partnership; the National Park Service
Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program;
and the US Department of Transportation's Federal
Transit Administration. An addendum to this report will
be available in the near future listing Federal programs
and Federal and regional contacts, thanks to Ms.
Collaton's generous offer.
ELIZABETH COLLATON of the Northeast - Midwest
Institute has studied Brownfield experiments in different
cities across the country. She presented the highlights
of the lessons learned from successful reuse projects
based on recent Institute research and analysis of
individual case studies. Successful Brownfields
redevelopment involves:
'Brownfiefds Cleanup antLlir&foi ^Rfvito&sation.
Across tfie 1LS. -Chicago, lOmois
THE CHALLENGE AND THE OPPORTUNITY
SCOTT BERNSTEIN, President of the Center for Neighborhood
Technology, spoke about a revitalization effort in Chicago,
Illinois, and presented his insights about the challenges and
opportunities facing southeast Florida.
Brownfields are a regional problem that transcend the ability
of local governments. However, one mammoth regional
government is not the solution either. To form a partnership
based on Community-based Regionalism, we must
Characterize Brownfields as a regional issue.
Focus issues broadly and develop a broad base of
support and
Build collaborative relationships among Federal and
state agencies while building local capacity, including in
the private sector, to get the right division of labor.
Throughout the country, transportation decisions have led to
urban disinvestment In the Eastward Ho! corridor, we have
an opportunity to develop a strategy for urban reinvestment
that encourages Brownfields redevelopment around transit
stations. What we need is a steadfast vision, an ability to
prove that there is a benefit to choosing the right location, and
a commitment to develop the tools and policies that lead to
the right choices to locate in the right places.
Scott specifically noted the five key principles articulated by
the Chicagoland Transportation and Air Quality Commission,
which are 1) Make the most of existing transportation facilities
before constructing new ones: 2) constrain sprawl through
public investments targeted to existing communities and
transit rather than new roads: 3) adopt a system of regional
tax base sharing: 4) create a new, democratically
representative regional transportation and land-use planning
agency which invests equitably throughout the region; and 5)
complement regional planning with community planning.
Lessons Learned
The context for Brownfields is community reinvestment
Commit to get the tools to do the job.
Develop a steadfast vision and process to broad-based
engagement
Create and area-wide or regional framework.
Give the community standing in decision-making.
Recognize that a sustainable community is defined by
the capacity to act together.
Identify the benefit to reinvestment relative to cost
Franchise the opportunities for environmental protection
and sustainability.
Unlock the imagination of the people.
For more information contact:
Scott Bernstein
Center for Neighborhood Technology
2125 W. North
Chicago, IL 60647
phone: (773) 278-4800 x135 fax: (773) 278-3840
Page 4
-------
'Eastward 5tol
-------
and creatively about how best to link economic
development with ecological wisdom at a regional level.
There is a palpable connection between saving the
Everglades on the western border of the South Florida
tri-county area and achieving infill of the broad expanses
of urban contamination and decay to be found along the
eastern corridor of the participating counties. And the
impending population explosion forecast for this region
raises the stakes dramatically.
Achievements of the 'Eastward'y{ol
-------
"We need to use the mass media to communicate to people that they cannot continue to Sve this way and save the Everglades. Our message should
convey the benefits of changing our behavior to both people and the environment.' - Audrey Pete/man
Local Institutional and Organizational Capacity
Presence of active local governments (e.g. cities
that act as Brownfields "brokers")
Consolidation of resources/expertise in one group
(e.g. legal, engineering, finance, planning, etc.)
Strong public/private partnership
Strong project leadership
Good Federal/state/local coordination
Meaningful Community Involvement
Collaboration between local governments and the
Brownfields committee organization, including a
formal feedback mechanism
Community visioning for sustainable growth
Job training tailored to existing and expected jobs
Legal and Regulatory Certainty
Liability relief for innocent purchasers
Cleanup standards tiered to land use
Simplified voluntary cleanup programs
Financial Assistance
Location of the property (e.g. need an inventory of
sites coupled with identification of important
ecosystems/business trends/or other significant
indicators to help target resources most effectively)
Ability to piggy-back onto infrastructure funding and
other local development projects
For more information about these case studies,
contact:
Elizabeth Collator!
Northeast Midwest Institute
2180 Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003
phone: (202) 544-5200 fax: (202) 544-0043
e-mail: ecollaton@nemw.org
At the conclusion of the Eastward Ho! Brownfields Kick-
Off Meeting, the participants agreed on four areas
worthy of further exploration:
The Organizing Principle: Community-Based
Regionalism
There should be a stable vision for the region, and a
local construct that is recognized as taking the lead.
liimurnfieids Cleanup and "Urban %eoitafizatian
Aaoss tfie. 1LS. Ckoe&md, Ofao
COMUUNfTY-BASED EFFORTS ARE THE KEY TO SUCCESS
VIRGINIA Avon is Manager of Environmental Planning for the
Cuyahoga County Planning Commission. She provided
insights on the importance of community involvement in
decisions about redevelopment
Brownfields redevelopment needs a strong community-based
system working in parallel with government agencies. A dual-
track organizational scheme is stronger, more enduring, and
helps avoid the appearance that it is government-driven.
Cuyahoga County formed a broad-based coalition, and, rather
than sweeping divisive issues under the nig, created panels
of affected and knowledgeable people around these issues to
keep dialogue going.
The Cuyahoga group has achieved some positive results over
the past 12 -18 months, including passage of several laws
and changes to key regulations. Next steps include going
back to the neighborhoods, teaching people what the laws
mean, and showing people what's likely to happen - including
use of G1S as a tool that allows people to see the connection
between specific parcels of land.
Virginia noted that the impediments they faced were the cost
of redevelopment liability issues, and the lending strategies
of the financial institutions. She also described how difficult it
is for local government to put in place a management
structure for intergovernmental work. Finally, she noted that
land assembly of little, narrow pieces of property is very
transaction-driven work.
Lessons Learned
Educate people to highlight the issue and gain support
Develop a broad mission statement
Use a community-based process that parallels the
bureaucratic process, and integrate the two.
Recognize that land use is a local decision and so is the
control of redevelopment
Understand that environmental justice is central to what
is going on.
Government can act as a facilitator for local, community
projects.
A State Revolving Load Fund is a powerful tool
Recognition and support from the state and Federal
governments helps a lot
For more information contact
Virginia Aveni
Cuyahoga County Planning Commission
323 Lakeside Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44113
phone: (216) 443-3000 fax: (216) 443-3737
e-mail: ccswd@netexchange.com
Pages
-------
"We need to inventory our assets, place a value on them, and then develop policies/actions to leverage the value of the assets that are
recovered through Brownfields redevelopment." - Scott Bernstein
One monolithic organization, however, is not the
answer. The key to success is to create a two-tiered,
interlocking system. At the Federal and state levels, we
need to figure out how to better coordinate the delivery
of services in a seamless way. And, at the local level,
we need to build the ability of communities to articulate
their needs and values and to take advantage of the
many Federal programs and resources. Conceptually,
the structure is a series of modes and nodes:
Outcomes and
Learning
Vision and Strategy
Everglades/
Sustainable Lifestyles
Implementation and
Political Structure
Values and
Needs
The Strategy: Create a Vision, Place Value on the
Region's Assets, and Keep Score
Land use is always a local decision, and final decisions
will always be made at the local level. The core
question is: how do we change the incentives and
rewards for developing in the right place? One strategy
is to identify the natural resources that are local assets
and that are essential to long-term sustainability, and
then go through a process to:
Create a steadfast vision for the region
Inventory the assets
Capture the benefits/value added
Develop policies that leverage the assets/value
(e.g. create incentives/rewards for developing in the
right places)
Keep score
A conceptual framework for building an inclusive
community-based region for genuine progress was
developed by some of the participants. The mission of
the so-called South Florida Compass Network would
be to assure that the South Florida economy collectively
uses community, economic and ecological assets to
achieve prosperity and sustainability for all. Such a
network would achieve this through the development of:
Scorekeeping systems which value local assets;
Market development to use these scores to capture
the value of sustainable development locally; and
Community-based planning, investing, and
governing to assure a fair distribution of the benefits
achieved.
Cleanup and Urban fievitafizatim
Across the 113. - Seattle, Washington
BROWNFIELDS REVITAUZATION is LINKED TO REGIONAL
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
TOM BOYDELL described the Duwamish Coalition's
efforts to foster redevelopment throughout an industrial
area that crosses multiple jurisdictions.
The economy of the Seattle-Tacoma area still depends
largely on its natural resources, and Brownfields
redevelopment emerged as part of the region's overall
growth management strategy to protect these natural
resources - including the critical linkage between
ground and surface water. One key task involves
mapping and analyzing groundwater pathways as an
organizing principle for the Brownfields redevelopment
strategy. The Coalition hired consultants to survey the
industrial area to identify issues, and 203 properties
were identified and examined.
The Duwamish Coalition is a massive enterprise: 275
members meeting on a monthly basis, and
subcommittees focusing on five issue areas
(Brownfields, water quality/environment, transportation
/infrastructure, regulatory issues, and job training).
These subcommittees are open, frequently share
projects across committee lines, and make
recommendations to the Steering Committee, which
reviews for consistency only - no second-guessing!
Lessons Learned
Create a shared vision for the region (but respect
the constraints of those who have to implement!).
Stress on-going development of goals.
Cultivate openness, localness, and learning.
Foster interagency coordination.
Establish a broad coalition of support, and avoid
"takeover" by any one group.
Coordinate cleanup and reuse: don't clean up
without a designated reuse.
Risk Based Corrective Action is the basis of a new
state-wide regulatory framework.
Tax revenue bonds don't work but allowing a tax
deduction for the full cost does.
It would be helpful if a public development
authority could do land assembly.
For more information contact:
Tom Boydell
Seneca Consulting Group/Duwamish Coalition
615 14th Ave. East Suite 101
Seattle, WA 98112
phone & fax: (206) 328-9452
e-mail: tomboydell@msn.com
PageG
-------
"You never get away from jurisdictions! boundaries. What you do is just put the lines aside for now and tap into the needs of the
community."- TomBoydeU
A corollary framework was suggested in the meeting.
Termed the South Rorida MAP (Metropolitan Action
Project), its mission would be to develop systems for
governmental accountability to our citizens and
communities. The mission of this project would be
achieved by.
Building community leadership and organizing
capacity;
Developing sister city relationships between urban
and suburban communities around planning and
action;
Ensuring that the tools developed by the Compass
Network are used for community benefits
Examples of the kinds of indicators that might be
included in the South Rorida Compass include:
Infrastructure costs
Fiscal costs
Equity (e.g. who pays)
Quality (e.g. education)
Dislocation
Perceptions of land available for development
Collocation with existing hubs
Degree of regional cooperation
Man-hours for permitting process
Dollars dedicated to transportation infrastructure
Match between jobs and housing
Mixed land use, mixed income
Home ownership
Code enforcement
Crime/safety
The Template: A Regional Assessment of
Brownfields
Traditionally, Brownfields have been approached on a
site-by-site basis. In the Eastward Ho! Corridor, we
need to develop a regional approach to redevelopment.
This is a very complex and difficult task that has never
been undertaken before. It involves conducting a site
assessment on a regional basis, performing triage, and
then linking up with the development community. Steps
include:
Determine the purpose of the assessment
Reach agreement on the assessment criteria
(including an MOA among the counties)
Map important resources (especially ground and
surface water)
Educate the lending community
Link with existing infrastructure
Harmonize databases among counties
Involve economic development and planning
departments
Screen sites based on established criteria
Market the exercise and the results with the real
estate and development communities
The Framework: Laws and Regulations as
Incentives
The success of Eastward Ho! and Brownfields
redevelopment depends on finding solutions to liability
issues and creating incentives for investors and
developers. Key features of a workable solution
include:
Clear reporting requirements
Mutual agreement on cleanup standards
Liability authority/risk
Coordination/interaction on permitting
Incentives/disincentives
For more information on the EPA South Florida
Urban Initiative, contact:
Betsy LaRoe
South Rorida Field Staff - US EPA
c/o F1U University Park Campus
OE Building, Room 148
Miami, FL 33199
phone: 305-348-1659 fax: 305-348-1667
e-mail: laroe.elisabeth @ epamail.epa.gov
Karen Metchis
South Florida Project Officer - US EPA
Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and Communities
401 M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
phone: (202)260-7069 fax: (202)260-7875
e-mail: melchis.karen @ epamail.epa.gov
alendars
The Second Meeting of the
Eastward Ho! Brownfields Partnership
will be held
June 12-13, 1997 in Miami, Rorida
PREVIEW
Regional Assessment Getting our Hands Dirty
Scorekeeping: Creating a Market for Eastward Ho!
Organizing for Community-based Regionalism
Update on Liability Issues
Transportation Partners: The Backbone
Page?
-------
Id 'pooMA||OH
On
pA|g
Rcviulizins Southeast Florid*'* Urtun Core
'Eastward'3-iol ftrownfiztds
Partnership
ft. CottaBorative Approach to fiction
February 1397
Loof^Inside, to find:
* 'What is ike. "Eastward Mo! 'Broumfieids Tartnersfap?
Currently Underway in Soutfieast yforida
* Outcomes of 'the. 'Eastward '9tol Qrownfidds
Tartnersfap %fcl&Dff Meeting
> Lessons in UrBan Revita&zation Tresented
By "Experts from Ground tfie. Country
-------
Brown-fields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields'97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(6J) Whafs In It For Me?: The Competitive Advantage of Brownfields
Friday, Septembers, 1997
10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.
Description: Case studies will examine how the barriers to development can be quantified, the costs managed,
and sites innovatively reused to make brownfields competitive against greenfields sites.
Location: Room 1202A-B
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Charles Bartsch (Moderator)
Mr. Jay Grover
Mr. Tom Stolle
Mr. James White
Northeast-Midwest Institute
Chiron Corporation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3
Community Development Agency
MR. CHARLES BARTSCH
Charles Bartsch is a senior policy analyst at the Northeast-Midwest Institute, specializing in economic development
issues. He is the co-author of numerous publications on brownfields opportunities, including the Institute's
pioneering New Life for Old Buildings: Confronting Environmental and Economic Issues to Industrial Reuse (1991).
Most recently, he has written a series of papers on brownfields financing, including Financing Brownfield Reuse:
Creative Use of Public Sector Programs, and has co-authored (with Elizabeth Collaton) the landmark Coming Clean
for Economic Development and Brownfields: Cleaning and Reusing Contaminated Properties (the latter published by
Praeger). Mr. Bartsch's writings on economic development and brownfields issues have been published in
Economic Development Quarterly, CUED's Economic Development Commentary, Public Utilities Fortnightly, and
Issues in Science and Technology, among others. Mr. Bartsch has testified several times before Congress on
various aspects of the brownfields issue, and worked closely with key staff to identify appropriate federal strategies
to meet specific brownfields needs. In addition, he has spoken on brownfields redevelopment and finance issues at
dozens of conferences around the country, before lenders, lawyers, state and local officials, and others interested in
promoting brownfields reuse.
MR. JAY GROVER
Jay Grover is director of environment, health and safety for Chiron Corporation, a leading biotechnology company
headquartered in Emeryville, California. Chiron develops products that diagnose, prevent, and treat human disease,
and has approximately 7,500 employees worldwide. Mr. Grover has 20-plus years of research and management
experience in the biotechnology industry and has been with Chiron since 1991. He has a Bachelor of Arts in
biological science from University of the Pacific, a Master of Arts in environmental biology from University of
Colorado, and a master's degree in business administration from University of California, Berkeley. He has a broad
management background and has held a variety of positions in addition to environment, health and safety (EH&S),
including corporate services, information systems, facilities development, real estate, and community and
government relations. Prior to his current responsibilities as head of corporate EH&S, Mr. Grover managed the
environmental impact/entitlements process for Chiron's long-range facilities development program, which resulted in
the securing of regulatory approvals for a 2.2 million square foot, 25 year suburban infill project to develop a state-of-
the-art biotechnology R&D/administrative campus on a 25 acre industrial site adjacent to Chiron's headquarters
facilities, and, as part of his EH&S responsibilities, now oversees the environmental remediation activities
accompanying the development and buildout of that project.
MR. TOM STOLLE
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
MR. JAMES WHITE
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.]
Brownfieids '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 6J: WHAT'S IN IT FOR ME?: THE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF
BROWNFIELDS
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
-------
NORTHEAST w
Washington. D.C. 20003
MIDWEST TEL: 202.544.5200
_ FAX: 202.544.0043
-LIN ij 111 LJ 1 Ci http://www.nemw.org
FINANCING BROWNFIELD REUSE:
CREATIVE USE OF PUBLIC SECTOR PROGRAMS
by
Charles Bartsch
Produced for use of participants in Brownfields '97
The legacy of the nation's industrial past is evident in communities all across the
country. Often abandoned, usually contaminated industrial sites dot the cityscape. They
pose significant challenges for local elected officials and economic development
agencies. Bringing new activity to these "brownfield" sites can be a costly proposition.
The complicated process and legal hurdles of acquiring, cleaning, and reusing these sites
can be expensive hi terms of site preparation expenses and fees, and costly in terms of
time delays. Site evaluation processes, testing, possible legal liabilities, and other factors
serve to deter private participation hi activities to bring old industrial sites back to
productive use. In many situations, the private development and financial sectors are not
able or willing to act on their own to ensure that the full economic potential of site reuse
will be achieved.
In most areas, adequate private financing to carry out both cleanup and
redevelopment activities is simply not available. In practice, financial institutions coping
with concerns over environmental liability and contaminated project sites are making a
number of determinations that influence then- lending policies. Some are changing the
focus of their lending targets, in practice, cutting off financing for certain types of
businesses, such as those that routinely handle toxic substances -- service companies such
as dry cleaners and auto body shops, as well as manufacturers such as high technology
metal fabricators, semiconductors, and tool and die shops. And nearly all financiers now
require additional documentation that can significantly increase transaction costs, by
requiring thorough environmental assessments (which can easily cost $50,000 or more),
as well as necessary cleanup as a condition of loan approval.
Governments at all levels can find creative ways to help enterprises overcome the
obstacles that environmental contamination brings to the economics of the site reuse
process; such actions range from regulatory clarification for liability stemming from loan
workouts to direct financial assistance programs. For decades, federal agencies have used
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 1
-------
or sponsored public finance mechanisms to stimulate economic activity in certain
geographic areas or industries. Now, publicly-driven economic development initiatives
are reaching into new sectors and incorporating new concerns, such as environmental
improvement. Brownfield reuse strategies and techniques are rapidly evolving. This
paper describes key federal programs that are now helping communities meet the
challenges of brownfield redevelopment; it also points out some of the current difficulties
that prospective program users face, and how such programs could be given a creative
brownfields "spin", urging them to cross traditional spheres of activity to tackle complex
new situations like contamination, cleanup, and related liability concerns.
Federal Financing Tools: Fitting Existing Programs to Brownfield Needs
HUD PROGRAMS
Existing programs such as those offered by HUD can play a critical role in local
economic development, and such efforts need to incorporate brownfield project
circumstances into their guidelines. Cities and towns across the country use HUD
resources to support a wide variety of financial assistance programsloans and loan
guarantees, grants, and technical assistanceto help spur economic revitalization and
growth. HUD initiatives will continue to play an important role in state and local
strategies to encourage the renovation and reuse of older industrial facilities, even as the
issues influencing their reuse evolve to focus on environmental concerns. In spite of
program changes and limitations, HUD efforts harbor considerable potential for future
use.
Community Development Block Grants. The CDBG program is one of the most
useful federal initiatives remaining to provide direct funding for activities that support the
reuse of industrial sites. Distributed by HUD according to formula, CDBG resources can
be used to finance the rehabilitation of privately owned buildings and sites, covering
specific costs related to labor, materials, construction, or renovation. They also can pay
for services such as entrepreneurial counseling, preparation of work specifications, loan
processing, and site inspections.
Block grant funds are particularly well-suited to the "new generation" of industrial
site reuse projects, which bring a much stronger focus on environmental concerns. Large
and small cities can use CDBG funds for grants, loans, loan guarantees, and technical
assistance activities. Specifically, HUD has determined that eligible CDBG expenses
include both the costs of environmental reviews, as well as the actual cleanup of
identified hazards.
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 2
-------
In 1994, HUD proposed changes in its CDBG regulations to increase the
program's flexibility at the local level and to make it more suitable to projects that
involve environmental problems impeding site reuse activities. In particular, the
department suggested that the occurrence of "economic disinvestment" due to
environmental contamination would quality areas for designation as "blighted," and
therefore be eligible for CDBG assistance. Such a rule change permits communities to
help rescue valuable industrial and commercial properties before they deteriorate to the
point of no return; intervening before such levels of deterioration take place can reduce
cleanup and redevelopment costs significantly.
In the past, CDBG's potential as an economic development tool has been
constrained by regulations both hi the written rules themselves, and in their
interpretation and implementation by specific HUD field offices. Many communities
have struggled with rules requiring localities to provide extensive documentation in order
to prove that their efforts were in fact helping low- and moderate-income persons. Others
have faced difficulties in carrying out brownfield-related activities because of HUD
program monitors' narrow interpretations on the "appropriateness" of such projects.
Much of this documentation is difficult to compile in a timely way, leading to delays that
derail projects. In response to such complaints, HUD now is moving in a direction that
makes it easier to use CDBG for economic development purposes and that streamlines the
documentation required to justify such use.
Section 108 Loan Guarantees. A related HUD program, known as Section 108
loan guarantees, enable local governments to finance physical and economic development
projects too large for front-end financing with single year CDBG grants. Under Section
108, localities issue debentures to cover the cost of such projects, pledging their annual
CDBG grants as collateral. The debentures are underwritten and sold though public
offering by a consortium of private investment banking firms assembled by HUD, which
guarantees each obligation to ensure a favorable interest rate. Local governments can use
their annual CDBG allocations to pay off these obligations, although most use income
generated from the development project for some or all of the payments.
Activities undertaken with money from loans guaranteed under Section 108 must
meet the basic requirements of the CDBG program. Among the eligible activities are
property acquisition, clearance or rehabilitation of obsolete structures, construction of
public improvements such as water and sewer facilities, and site improvements ~ which
can include removing hazardousd wastes and toxic substances. Chicago is one of the first
cities to tap the Section 108 program on a significant scale for resources to use in
preparing identified brownfield sites for redevelopment; some $50 million in guarantees
will be used, starting in late 1996, to assemble, clean, and prepare multi-acre sites for new
industrial uses a market demand that city officials have identified and would like to
help fill.
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 3
-------
Several years ago, Congress extended HUD's Section 108 authority to states, to
use for development projects in small cities that do not get an annual CDBG entitlement
that can be pledged as collateral. Basically, states can pledge their own allocation on
behalf of their small cities. To date, though, few states have secured Section 108 benefits
for their small communities, and no state has used Section 108 for brownfield purposes.
This tool has considerable potential to help small cities many with little capacity of
their own work to bring new use to contaminated properties.
Community Development Block Grant "Float". Generally, CDBG recipients are
unable to use their entire block grant allocations hi the year received; long-term, larger
projects (such as infrastructure construction) approved for funding take more than a year
to plan and carry out. According to HUD rules, funds not needed to meet current project
costs remain in the federal treasury until the city actually needs them; it is not unusual for
CDBG funds awarded one year to be drawn down a couple of years later as big capital
projects move towards completion.
When a city can show that previously awarded CDBG funds will not be needed in
the near term, it may tap its block grant account on an interim basis using what HUD
calls a CDBG "float" to finance short-term, low interest construction financing for
projects which create jobs. Any developer, not-for-profit agency, or private company
which can obtain an irrevocable letter of credit from a lender is eligible to apply for such
financing. (The letter of credit satisfies HUD's concern that the funding will be available
for its originally planned purpose.)
Proceeds may be used to pay all costs for the purchase of land and buildings, site
and structural rehabilitation -- including environmental remediation - or new
construction. Float funds can also finance purchase of machinery and equipment.
Maximum loan size is determined by the amount of funds hi a jurisdiction's CDBG
account available to cover the float. Float loans can not be extended for more than two
years; the interest rate is limited to 40 percent of the prevailing prime rate. A few
municipalities, notably Chicago, have financed small-scale (ranging from $25,000 to
$50,000) brownfield cleanup activities in targeted neighborhood areas via the CDBG float
mechanism.
Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities. Empowerment zones (EZs)
and enterprise communities (ECs) are geographic areas targeted to receive special federal
treatment and incentives in order that private investment and other economic activity
might be attracted to them. Depending on the plan developed for each area, benefits can
include financial, regulatory, as well as technical assistance.
In December 1994, HUD and the Department of Agriculture named 95 enterprise
communities (65 urban ECs and 30 rural ECs), as well as nine empowerment zones (six
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 4
-------
urban EZs and three rural £23). Designation brings several benefits to the selected areas,
including $100 million in social service grants for each of the urban EZs, $40 million to
each rural zone, and $3 million to each EC. In addition, designated communities can
compete for as much as $2.5 billion in new tax incentives to induce investment in the
targeted distressed areas. These incentives include:
new tax-exempt facility bonds, available in both EZs and ECs, which provide
businesses with up to $3 million to finance construction of new facilities or
expansion of existing ones, and to acquire equipment and machinery;
employer wage credits for companies located in EZs of up to $3,000 per year
per employee; these credits offset the salaries and training costs for employees
who both work and live in the zone; and
a $20,000 increase in so-called Section 179 expensing to allow EZ-based
companies to take greater depreciation deductions for equipment in the year it
is acquired (bringing the allowable annual total up to $37,500).
Applicant jurisdictions were required to specify how they would use these
resources to confront economic distress and unemployment. Many applicants identified
the problem of brownfields and stated that overcoming associated barriers was a critical
element of their local economic revitalization strategy.
HUD REALITY CHECK
HUD programs can be highly versatile tools to stimulate private investments in
targeted distressed areas, such as those with a concentration of largely abandoned,
obsolete industrial facilities, but prospective reusers should consider the following when
contemplating the use of HUD resources for brownfield projects.
In many jurisdictions, CDBG resources have simply not kept pace with the
demand for them. This may make it difficult for new activities, such as
brownfield initiatives, to work their way into the local priority setting process
as decisions on allocations are made. Furthermore, additional pressures could
be exerted by long-time local CDBG recipients, such as local development and
community service organizations; many of these have traditionally received
block grant funds to assist them with their operations, and they may need to be
asssured that new brownfield activities will not unfold at their expense.
Section 108 may be the most flexible federal resource available to support
brownfield site reuse activities, but the program requires the commitment of the
city (or the state on behalf of a small city) to make good on the guarantee if the
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 5
-------
project does not pan out as envisioned. In practice, this commitment means
that future CDBG allocations will be reduced to cover the debt; many local
officials, concerned about the political fallout from such a situation, do not
pursue the program. The programs' track record suggests that, in fact, a well-
conceptualized project based on solid market analysis has every likelihood of
paying back the guarantee with absolutely no cost to the city; convincing local
officials of this becomes the brownfield challenge.
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (SEA) PROGRAMS
Small business operators often find it difficult to secure the debt and equity capital
they need at affordable terms. This is especially true when lenders consider Superfund
liability issues. Past court interpretation of liability provisions has made lenders wary,
and this fear makes them reluctant to provide the resources that small companies need to
clean up properties and modernize buildings and operations. Some lenders have
suggested, informally, that concerns over contamination-related risks translate into at
least two interest points for such loans. Therefore, some local brownfield reuse
advocates have started to explore SBA programs as a possible source of the affordable
financial resources needed to bring about brownfield reuse.
The agency's mission is to give small enterprises access to long-term financing,
terms of six years or more. Interest rates vary by program; some are significantly
subsidized, others carry rates of prime plus one or two (still a bargain, though, in
brownfield terms). SBA is authorized by statute to offer several financial assistance
programs. In recent years, though, most agency assistance has taken the form of loan
guarantees. Last year, nearly 90 percent of all SBA financial assistance was delivered
through the following two programs.
General business loan guarantees the Section 7(a) program. Section 7a) is
SBA's largest program; last year, more that $7 billion in private sector loans were
guaranteed. This program was devised to reduce the underwriting risk that often makes
financial institutions reluctant to lend to small businesses. SBA works with private
lenders to help small businesses gain access to capital they need to finance plant
construction, coversion, and expansion as well as acquire equipment, facilities, materials,
and supplies. The lender plays the main role in program delivery; the Section 7(a)
guarantee is essentially a federal pledge to cover most or the outstanding loana balance in
the event of a default. SBA can guarantee up to 90 percent of loans less than $ 155,000,
and 85 percent of loans between that amount and the program cap, now $500,000.
Depending on the use of loan proceeds, terms range from seven years at prime plus 2.25
percent (for working capital) to 25 years at prime plus 2.75 percent (for building
construction or acquisition).
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 6
-------
In December, 1993, SB A launched its LocDocumentation (LowDoc) program as a
pilot spin-off of the Section 7(a) loan guarantee effort. LowDoc was designed to
encourage more lenders to consider handling SBA-backed loans of less than $100,000. It
streamlines the application process by using a single-page SBA form, and providing a
rapid response from the agency usually just a few days. Based on the immediate
success of the pilot, SBA elevated LowDoc to full program status in December 1994.
Today, loans receive a 90 percent guarantee under Section 7(a) authority. Loans can be
extended for terms up of to 25 years, and at rates not more than 2.75 percentage points
over prime; lesser terms can bring lower interest rates.
Development company guarantees the Section 504 program. Section 504
helps finance small business activities by providing long-term capital for fixed assets;
assistance is delivered by SBA-certifled local development companies, who issue
debentures backed by SBA. This program brings the financial advantages of large
businesses to smaller operations. Large businesses finance land acquisition, buildings,
facilities, or equipment by issuing long-term bonds or debentures or obtaining bank loans
~ obligations that they pay back from earnings. Small firms are often not able to secure
such financing arrangements on their own. ruecompanies proceeds provide companies
with long-term, fixed asset financing.
SBA licenses locally based certified development companies (CDCs), which are
private organizations chartered to channel investment capital to small businesses; they
operate the Section 504 program within their service territories. SBA guarantees the
timely payment of 100 percent of the debentures they issue. Debentures can support up to
40 percent of a project's total cost, up to a $750,000 maximum SBA share. Debenture
maturity can extend for 20 years. All debentures must be collateralized to the extent that
SBA decides is reasonable to assure repayment. The guarantee reduces investors' risks,
which in turn lowers the debenture's rate of interest and attracts purchasers. A private
financial institution must provide 50 percent of the project financing (but the lender then
gets to take a first mortgage position); the CDC secures the 10 percent balance of project
funds. These might come from the borrower as equity, or from a non-federal economic
development program. In practice, SBA-backed subordinated loans improve a company's
creditworthiness in two ways. First, they lower the amount of capital that private
financiers must invest in a single project. Second, they give the private lender first claim
on assets in the event of a default by a borrower; this can be a critical factor in addressing
risks commonly associated with brownfield lending. Secondary loans can be especially
helpful to project developers that must secure significant levels of capital.
SBA REALITY CHECK
To date, SBA programs have not directly addressed brownfield scenarios; in
fact, some bank officials have complained that SBA program officials are more
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 7
-------
conservative and more rigid over contamination and liability concerns than the
private lenders themselves. SBA generally only looks at clean deals. Clearly,
prospective borrowers should not view SBA as a way to avoid the due
diligence investigations that private financiers demand. However, SBA
programs could be successfully linked with state voluntary cleanup programs,
recognizing the liability assurances they provide. In addition, SBA guarantee
programs and subordinated lending programs could in conjunction with state
assurances enhance brownfield lending by helping stabilize the value of the
site and facilities used as collateral. To date, though, such links have not taken
place.
TAX CODE PROVISIONS
A couple of existing federal tax incentives could contribute to infill projects at
contaminated properties. As indicated below, private investors and public development
officials can use federal tax code provisions as elements in innovative development
finance packages.
Industrial Development Bonds (IDBs). When referring to bond financing for
economic development purposes, public and private officials and practitioners usually
mean "IDBs." In virtually every state, cities, public agencies, development authorities,
and similar entities are authorized to issue tax-exempt, private activity industrial
development bonds. The Treasury Department defines a state-wide volume cap on bond
issuances each year the greater of $50 per capita or $200 million. Companies and
local jurisdictions favor IDBs as a source of financing since the interest they bear is not
taxable, which reduces the yield that investors demand, which lowers a project's cost of
capital.
Since IDBs are targeted to manufacturing projects, they can play an important part
hi certain types of brownfield reuse projects or a business retention strategy aimed at
existing city areas. The issuing authority process allows jurisdictions to channel
investment capital, if they so choose, to certain locations and for specific types of
projects. IDBs support the economic development process by allowing jurisdictions to
offer expanding and new companies affordable financing that might not be otherwise
available. IDB proceeds help private companies acquire buildings, equipment, and other
components needed for an industrial project. In legal parlance, they are "revenue bonds."
In other words, the company is responsible for repaying the debt. These bonds are
payable from and secured by the revenues of the projects they finance; if the company
defaults, the bondholders, and not the local taxpayers, absorb the loss.
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Page 8
-------
The popularity of IDBs stems from their versatility as a development finance tool.
Issuing agencies or authorities have numerous options for structuring an IDE; they can be
issued for long or short terms, and can carry a fixed interest rate or a floating one
typically one quarter to one third less than the prime borrowing rate. From a local
development perspective, IDBs have the advantage of giving small and inexperienced
business borrowers access to securities markets.
Some jurisdictions use pooled or umbrella issuances to offer IDE financing for
smaller projects. Such bonds are issued by states on behalf of a number of companies
that individually would be too small to participate in the regular bond program.
Generally, eligible projects are bundled as a package and issued as part of a single bond
offering (typically in the $8 million to $10 million range). Pooling reduces the risk for
bond purchasers and enables small manufacturers to raise needed funds. Currently,
umbrella bond programs are available in about half the states.
Rehabilitation Tax Credits. Congress devised rehabilitation tax credits in the
1970s to discourage the unnecessary demolition of sound older buildings and to slow the
loss or relocation of businesses from older urban areas. Across the country, the credits
have helped attract redevelopment capital into all types of projects in blighted and
ignored areas not ordinarily considered for investment.
This incentive offers to investors a credit against their total income, which is taken
for the year in which the renovated building is put into service. Rehabilitation of certified
historic structures qualifies for a credit equal to 20 percent of the costs of the work;
rehabilitation work on nonhistoric structures built before 1936 qualifies for 10 percent.
Much of the practical value of rehabilitation tax credits was undermined by the
1986 Tax Reform Act, which included new limits on passive losses and passive credits
that generally result from real estate activity. These restrictions reduced the benefits of
investment and the pool of investors able to take advantage of the tax credit benefits. The
1986 tax act defined "passive" income to include most real estate income, and specified
that losses and credits from one type of activity generally can be applied against income
only from the same type of activity. Thus, most taxpayers are prohibited from using real
estate-generated losses and tax credits a passive-income activity to offset taxes
owed on interest, dividends, business income, and other active income.
The rehab tax credit is well-suited for packaging with other economic
development grant and loan programs; it can be an ideal complement to a brownfield
redevelopment initiative in an older industrial area. According to data compiled by the
National Park Service (which monitors rehab tax credit claims), about half of all projects
claiming rehab incentives also tied other public-development programs into their
Charles BartsMNortheast-Midwest Institute Page 9
-------
financing packages. Property tax abatements and low-interest loans are the most
commonly used companion incentives.
In short, Congress originally intended for rehab credits to help level the economic
playing field and balance the development costs between older established (and often
declining) areas and emerging, newly built suburban centers. This goal, of course, is the
same one advanced by proponents of brownfields cleanup and reuse.
TAX INCENTIVES REALITY CHECK
IDBs can be very versatile, but the costs of issuance rarely dip below $ 100,000,
no matter how small the project. In practice, IDBs are simply not feasible for
projects needing less than $1 million in investment capital.
The Treasury Department absolutely insists that IDB projects be manufacturing
in nature, which limits their applicability in many circumstances.
Rehabilitation tax credits have the most impact when knowledgeable local
development staff help package and market them with other programs, as well
as offer technical support. Developers and site owners often find the
certification process complicated and time consuming, and are uncomfortable
with the potential financial impact of a denial of tax-credit certification.
Capable local development officials can help the site owner prepare a complete
application that minimizes processing delays.
The Challenge: Linking Financial Resources to Brownfield Needs
In spite of numerous barriers, brownfield reuse opportunities are real. Dozens of
diverse projects have been documented, ranging from an old Uniroyal tire factory in
Sacramento that was cleaned and converted into an office/retail complex, to a Soo Line
railyard in Minneapolis that is being redeveloped as a light industry park, to an
abandoned multi-user industrial tract in Worcester, Massachusetts transformed into a
large medical center. Many such projects have creatively tapped existing federal program
resources, and have been carried out in a way that makes economic sense, and that builds
on the competitive advantage that specific sites boast. Such success stories suggest that
liabilities can be worked out, that financing can be secured, and that cleanup can be
accomplished in short, that brownfield redevelopment can be achieved.
The challenge that the federal governments faces now is to provide the tools that
make the economics of brownfields work. At the same time, it is important to emphasize
that incentives can make a site economically viable, but that the public sector alone can
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Miawest Institute Page JO
-------
not carry the brownfield reuse load. Redevelopment on a wider scale can only be
achieved if public policies and programs foster a climate that invites private investment in
these projects.
Charles Bartsch/Northeast-Midwest Institute Pa8e
-------
THE CHIRON LIFE SCIENCES CENTER PROJECT: A "BROWNFIELDS" SUCCESS STORY
Jay £. Grover
Director, Environmental Health & Safety
Chiron Corporation
Emeryville, California
Contamination of soil and groundwater from releases of hazardous substances has hindered
the redevelopment of industrial properties across the United States. Such properties, now
commonly referred to as "brownfields," usually require too much time and money to remediate
to make redevelopment attractive or feasible. This problem has recently received the attention
of elected officials, community groups, private industry, and regulatory agencies. Initiatives to
overcome these obstacles involve streamlining the regulatory approval process and promoting
the development of risk-based cleanups based on planned land uses.
The Chiron Life Sciences Project in the San Francisco Bay Area is an example of a successful
"brownfields" project. Focused, risk-based cleanup objectives have made remediation and
redevelopment feasible. Chiron, a leading biotechnology company headquartered in
Emeryville, California, faced an urgent need to expand its R&D and administrative facilities,
and desired to remain in its existing urban setting rather than relocate to' a new suburban
location. The challenge for Chiron was to begin building its new 2.2 million sq. ft state-of-the-
art research and administrative campus quickly and cost-effectively, to secure the necessary
regulatory approvals and obtain lender financing, and to remediate the soil and groundwater
contamination resulting from 75 years of past industrial uses on 25 acres of urban industrial
property. Without the cooperative development and regulatory approval of a risk assessment
and remedial program that could be implemented in an expedient and cost-effective manner,
this site would not have been selected for the project Chiron would have relocated, and the
site would likely have remained in its blighted and underutilized state.
The remedial program developed for the Chiron Life Sciences Project is innovative in several
respects:
Phased investigation and remedial design were based on a strategic approach from the
start to integrate environmental and human health protection into project planning.
Site characterization work was limited to gather only data needed for development of a risk
assessment with pre-defined data density and data quality objectives.
Comprehensive health and environmental risk assessment included several features to
target efforts and expenditures and to provide flexibility for "hot spots" encountered during
construction.
Planning, design and construction of new structures take into account contamination and
incorporate remediation needs.
Practical risk-based soil remediation goals were pre-determined for a broad range of
chemicals potentially encountered during construction, including chlorinated hydrocarbons,
heavy metals and PCBs.
Management of construction-derived soil is facilitated with biddable construction
documents.
Risk management plans are being utilized to address long-term liabilities and contingencies
associated with contaminated soils remaining on-site.
-------
NORTHEAST
MIDWEST
INSTITUTE
Lessons from the Field
UNLOCKING ECONOMIC POTENTIAL -
WITH AN ENVIRONMENTAL KEY
by Edith Pepper
The following summary has been prepared for use of
participants at the Brownfields '97 conference.
For additional information about any of the case studies referenced, please
contact Charles Bartsch or Elizabeth Collaton at the NE-MW Institute.
For information on purchasing a copy of Lessons from the Field,
the complete case studies and analysis, please contact Tim Kay
at the NE-MW Institute.
-------
Introduction
Property Transactions Among Case Studies
The 20 case studies examined ia this book represent three main types of
property transactions: purchaser driven, public-sector driven, and private-
sector driven. Far aost of the projects, local government played a critical role.
Purchaser Driven: Redevelopment by Purchaser with Strong
State and Local Assistance
(city-coordinated transfer of privately-owned loud)
' Medical City, Worcester, Massachusetts
- Southwest Harbor Project, Seattle, Washington
- Carol Cable, Warren. Bhode Island
- Aeetex Detroit. Michigan
Northeast Retail Project, Minneapolis, Minnesota
American Axle & Manufacturing (th* project's parkway segment),
BuSalo. New York
(dty-foordinaud transfer of city-atoned land)
Louisville Dryer Company. LaoumB», Kentucky
. Scott Peterson Meats, Chicago. Illinois
- Madison Equipment. Chicago, Illinois
Holden-Leonard Mill, Bennington, Vermont
Public-Sector Driven: Redevelopment by Local or State Government
on Privately-Owned Brownfields
- Lawrence Gateway Project, Lawrence, Massachusetts
- Circle F Factory, Trenton, Mew Jersey
Private-Sector Driven: Redevelopment by Private Entity on. Pri-^ately-
Owned Brownfield.
(city played key rait)
Southern Pacific Bail Yard. Sacramento, California
(dty played minor role)
' TTn^.r. & HaOingsworth Shipyard/Roundhouse, WiLcbgton, Delaware
Ernst Steel Site, Cheektowaea, New York
Boss's Landing and Aquarium, Chattanooga. Tennessee
American Axle & Manufacturing (the project's paint facility segment),
Buffalo, New York
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
End Uses for Case Study Sites
(I Sites
I &
[| 4
1 3
II 2
1
1
1
Names of Sites
Acete*, Detroit, Michigan
Madison Equipment, CXJeajo, IL
Louisville Dryer Co, Louisville. XT
Scoct Peterson Meats, Chicago, H,
Karian & Kollmgs«r«rth Shipyard.
Wilmington. DC
Amp-iran Axle & Mfg., Buffalo. NY
Southwest Harbor. Seattle. WA
Carol Cable. Warren. M
Oregea Mill Sites. 7 Oregon Counties
Texaco Tank farm, SL Paul MN
Bryan: Electric Bridpport. CT
Holden-Leoaard M3H, Benmnfion, VT
Ernst Steel, Cbeelrtowsjx NY
tVor^MA Retail Center, Mimaeapalis,
MN
KOSI'J landing and Aquarius.
Chacaaoo ja, TX
Liwrenee CaUway Project. Lawrence,
MA
BASF Sooth Works, Wyandotte. MI
Circle F Project, Trenton. NJ
Federal Ceutthonse / Southera Parifie
RaUyard, Saaramenco, CA
Medical City. Worcester. MA
Starting
Use of
Property
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
Industrial
r^fin^frial
ladustriil
adustrial
End Use
of Property
Industrial
(Note: shree of these
proieets Madison
Equipment Louisville
Dryer Co., and Aeeus
were expansionx
and* by neighboring
husuieiMS.)
Light Industry, Offices,
Business Park
Comaereial, Skoppinff
Center
Beexvational. Tran*- I
portaeion 1
^ _ __J
HaH Residential. Half
Industtial
Mixed Use Commer-
cial. Bcndential. tathic-
trial
Hotpital
1 Tecal II
1 20 II
Midwest
BASF South Works, Wyandotte, Michigan
This project involved transforming a defunct, 84-acre
chemical manufacturing plant along the Detroit River into a public
recreation area and a nine-hole golf course. Through a combination
of pubic and private funding (the city utilized tax^ncrement financ-
ing, state grants, and bonds), the city was able to. revitalize the
waterfront and the once-blighted neighborhood around BASFs plant.
This redevelopment has precipitated a domino effect of economic
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Introduction
growth throughout downtown Wyandotte. BASFs project highlights
the importance of a strong public/private partnership, as well as
illustrates how a large company can use brownfield cleanup to
bolster its corporate image.
Acetex Corporation, Detroit, Michigan
In the early 1990s, Acetex Corporation, a Detroit-based
textile manufacturing enterprise, sought to expand its operations by
acquiring an adjacent property, H&H Wheel Service, Inc. Acetex
planned to build a new $5-million distribution facility on the two-acre
site, creating over 100 new jobs in the process. But H&H Wheel was
reluctant to sell its property unless the firm could be cleared of all
liability (environmental conditions at the site were not yet known)
and absolved of any costs associated with cleanup. The deal was
finalized after a year of negotiating, during which the Detroit SEUS
Team, an inter-agency brownfield task force, played a pivotal role.
In 1995, EPA awarded the City of Detroit a $200,000 Brownfields
Pilot Site grant in support of the REUS Team's ongoing activities.
Scott Peterson Meats, Chicago, Illinois
In 1993, Scott Peterson Meats approached the City of Chicago
with a proposition. The company was interested in acquiring an
adjacent, abandoned property on which it would provide secure
parking for its employees. If the city could arrange the deal, Scott
Peterson Meats promised to expand its existing operations and hire
new employees, thus providing a stable business presence in an
increasingly blighted neighborhood. By May 1995, only 13 months
after the project began, the city had remediated the site and
prepared to turn it over to Scott Peterson Meats. This project
illustrates how carefully targeted public spending can leverage
significant private investment. The city spent only S370.000 to clean
and grade this site; Scott Peterson Meats, in turn, invested S5.2
million in a new smokehouse and hired 100 new local employees.
This case study also points to the effectiveness of Chicago's
BrownSelds Program, an innovative policy-development initiative.
Madison Equipment, Chicago, Illinois
Madison Equipment, a 70-employee firm in Chicago's East
GarSeld Park neighborhood, sought to acquire an abandoned
building in the early 1990s to accommodate its business expansion
needs. The city agreed to complete a site investigation (which
revealed significantly less contamination than officials had feared)
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
and to transfer the property to Madison for Si dollar. In return,
Madison pledged to rehabilitate the building and hire at least 6-8
workers from the federal Empowerment Zone in which it's located.
Expending only $3,000 in public funds, the city was able to eliminate
a community eyesore, assist a strong neighborhood business in its
expansion efforts, and create new jobs.
Crosby Lake Business Park (Texaco Tank Farm),
St. Paul, Minnesota
The St. Paul Port Authority had long sought to redevelop
Texaco's 40-acre tank farm, located in a commercial/industrial cor-
ridor in southwest St. Paul. After scaling back its presence m the
region, Texaco removed several above-ground feanlfg in. the 1980s. In
spring 1993, the port authority, Texaco, and the Minnesota Pollution,
Control Agency formally began to discuss the site's future use.
During negotiations, Te;caco agreed to remediate the site and then
sell it to the port uthority for roughly fair market value. The port
would grade the site and provide infrastructure improvements,
creating a new business park in the process. The port authority
spent S6.2 million to purchase and improve the site, costs that are
slated to be recovered within ten years. Officials estimate that the
new complex will create 350 jobs and generate 5640,000 in new
annual property taxes. Ten of the 40 acres were deeded to the St.
Paul Parks and Recreational Department as part of the Mississippi
River Open Space Area. Participants emphasize that the success of
project hinged on a strong public/private partnership.
North-east Retail Project (Johnson Street Quarry),
Minneapolis, Minnesota
By the 1990s, the once-active Johnson Street Quarry had
become a blighted, under-utilized property that contributed to the
economic decline of northeast Minneapolis. In 1993, the Ryan Com-
pany, a local developer, approached the city with a plan. If the
Minneapolis Community Development Agency (MCDA) acquired
various quarry parcels and conducted necessary reme-diation, Ryan
would purchase the site for twice its market value (which, even then,
would be significantly less than the public costs to prepare the site)
and build a 420,000-square foot discount shopping mall. As of late
1996, all properties had been acquired arid remediation had begun.
Project costs are expected to total nearly $60 million, divided
between public and private sources. Despite high expenditures, the
MCDA views the deal as public funds well spent. Benefits include
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Introduction
extensive environmental cleanup, blight elimination, creation of
1,700 full- and part-time jobs, tax-base enhancements (both property
and sales), and stabilization of a neighborhood that had been
declining. The city will recoup its costs within 15 years through
property taxes and revenues generated from the tax increment
finance district. This project involved extensive community involve-
ment, as well as strong public/private cooperation.
Northeast
Holden-Leonard Mill, Bennington, Vermont
In 1986, backed by state and federal loans, the Southern
Vermont Development Council bought the defunct Holden-Leonard
Mill and planned a series of renovations. Three years later, however,
the project stalled when U.S. EPA alleged the presence of hazardous
contamination on site. Since 1989. the mill has remained in limbo
while EPA has debated listing the site on the-National Priorities List
(NFL), a register of the country's most serious hazardous waste sites.
Mase Securities International (MSI), currently a tenant in the
Holden-Leonard MU1, is eager to purchase the site but will not
proceed until all environmental and liability issues have been
resolved. In April, 1996, EPA Region 1 issued a "comfort letter" to
the mill's new owner, the Vermont Economic Development Authority,
indicating that no further steps would be taken to list the site on the
NFL, thus removing a crucial barrier to the site's redevelopment At
the same tune, MSI has been able to benefit from Vermont's new
voluntary cleanup law, which provides liability relief for third parties
upon, completion of an approved cleanup plan. To date, MSI has
created over 200 new jobs in Bennington and has made significant
renovations to the historic building.
Fallon/St. Vincent Medical City. Worcester, Massachusetts
In 1992. two of the largest health care providers in Worcester
merged with the hope of building a S200-million integrated health
facility in an urban setting. Eager to attract the hospital, city
officials immediately created an institution to oversee the endeavor
the Worcester Redevelopment Authority and began targeting
properties within a 24-acre blighted area for acquisition. By 1996, all
structures had been demolished and the graded property was con-
veyed to the purchaser for 56.4 million with a Covenant-Not-to-Sue.
Total public expenditures on the project were $42 million, split
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
between the state and the city. City officials expect to see a huge
return on, their investment. Once operational, the facility will
provide nearly 3,000 new jobs and will generate $875 million in total
direct economic impacts within the first ten years (§1.9 billion in
indirect economic impacts). This case study illustrates how strong
public/private cooperation can save time and produce immense cost-
savings. It also demonstrates the importance of establishing an
effective institutional framework in this case, the Worcester
Redevelopment Authority to oversee brownfield redevelopment
activities.
Lawrence Gateway Project (Oxford Paper Site),
Lawrence, Massachusetts
Like many industrial cities across the country, Lawrence,
Massachusetts, has in recent years witnessed a steady decline in
manufacturing. Many residents believe that the key to future growth
lies in either revitalizing the city's once-thriving mills or at least
reusing the valuable waterfront property on-which. they stand. One
of Lawrence's most prominent brownfields is the mammoth Oxford
Paper plant, located at the entrance or "gateway" to the city's
historical district. In 1994, officials launched an initiative to
redevelop the Oxford site that involved "piggy-backing" the project
onto a nearby highway project, thus enabling the city to draw on
Massachusetts Highway Department funds. Plans call for demolition
of existing Oxford buildings, construction, of road interchanges, ""3
creation of a public park. This project has been successful on many
fronts. Officials were able to streamline permitting and oversight
activities by creating two interagency task forces. The project was
propelled forward by a strong public/private partnership between the
city and GenCorp, Oxford's neighbor. In addition, city officials made
public participation a priority from the outset. la its first two years,
the Lawrence Gateway Project has leveraged over 5160 million in
public and private investment for Lawrence's historic district.
Carol Cable Site, Warren, Rhode Island
This project involved redevelopment of a 240,000-square-foot
cable manufacturing factory in a small town of population 11,000.
The facility closed down in 1990 and was remediated under state
supervision, but residual contaminants remained on-site (the
company was unable to achieve the state's stringent water quality
standards). In fall 1995, Display World, Inc. expressed, an interest in
purchasing the site, but not until the state resolved all environmen-
Uortheast-Midwest Report
-------
Introduction
tal issues and provided liability releases. State officials made it a
priority to meet Display World's needs in a timely fashion. Strong
inter-agency coordination helped decrease costs and reduce tLme-
frames associated with the project. Most importantly, Rhode Island's
1995 brownfield law made the transaction possible by providing the
purchaser with necessary liability sign-off. Also critical was the
recent adoption of state cleanup standards that allow for the use of
institutional/engineering controls to satisfy remedial requirements.
Display World purchased the property for §175,000 and then
proceeded to invest $500,000 in the facility. The company brought 75
existing jobs to the area and plans to create 50 new ones.
Bryant Electric Plant, Bridgeport, Connecticut
Westinghouse's Bryant Electric plant shut down in 1988 after
operating for 90 years in Bridgeport's West End. The closing of the
500,000-square-foot facility exacerbated the neighborhood's already
bleak economic situation. In the early 1990s, the city began working
with Westinghouse and area businesses to discuss plans for revitaliz-
ing the entire West End, using redevelopment at the Bryant Electric
site as a catalyst A plan emerged whereby the city agreed to acquire
seven acres of property around Bryant Electric, essentially forming
a large business park. An important step in this process was the
1994 formation of the West End Community Development Corpora-
tion (CDC), a non-profit development group. In just two years, the
CDC has succeeded in organizing many different voices within the
West End, developing a strong vision for growth, and providing the
institutional framework necessary to implement community goals.
Westinghouse has spent over $1 million, to date on remediation at its
site, while the city and the CDC (backed by state funds) have
invested over S14 million in Bryant Electric and the West End, as a
whole. According to city officials, the targeted developer plans to
create 300-400 new jobs and invest S20-S50 million in the Wast End.
Circle F Factory, Trenton. New Jersey
The 1990 closing of the Circle F factory left a gaping hole in
Trenton's East Ward. For. over 100 years, the facility had been the
heart of this neighborhood; now the area was becoming increasingly
mired in economic decline. Working with the property owner, the
city devised a solution that involved dividing the.£ircle F factory in
WK and developing the parcels separately (one would contain light
industry; the other would be transformed into seniors' housing). For
the residential portion of the project, the city selected Lutheran
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
Social Ministries (LSM), an experienced non-profit developer. In
June 1995, LSM applied for and received federal Low-Income
Housing Tax Credits an innovative financing mechanism, that can
assist brownfield projects. Additional remediation took place in fall
1995 and construction of 75 new senior housing units began at the
end of that year. Residents are slated to move in by winter 1997.
American Axle Plant and Northeast Buffalo Parkway,
Buffalo. New York
La February 1994. American Axle & Manufacturing bought
a struggling automotive plant in Buffalo, with the hope of investing
nearly 5100 million at the site. Company officials pledged to retain
1.000 jobs and add 600 more good news for Northeast Buffalo,
which had weathered a major GM-plant closing four years earlier.
Without improved truck access to the American Axle site, however.
the company could not follow through with its plans to increase
operations and bring on new employees. City officials recognized
that this was not only a problem for American Axle; poor infrastruc-
ture Had caused numerous area industries to relocate to the suburbs.
Officials decided to transform into a highway an old, rarely used
stretch of Conrafl tracks traversing Northeast Buffalo (the road
would be called the Northeast Buffalo Parkway). American Axle's
$100-million investment helped leverage 56.5 million in public funds
for the deal. With construction of the highway slated to begin in
1997, benefits to the surrounding neighborhood already can be seen.
The defunct GM plant now has been transformed into a light
industrial park that could employ 200 people in the near future.
Most importantly, -however, city officials believe that the presence of
these viable industries and improved highway access will trigger a
revival of the Northeast Buffalo neighborhood.
Ernst Steel Site, Cheektowaga, New York
Before dosing down in 1980, the Ernst Steel site had
operated for over 30 years in Cheektowaga, New York, a town located
just outside the Buffalo city line. By 1990, the Buffalo suburbs had
expanded outward, completely surrounding Ernst Steel, but the site
remainedjdle and undeveloped due to concerns over environmental
contamination. In 1994, the Henderson Development Company
bought the property out of bankruptcy court with, tHe intention of
building a discount shopping center. The company struck a deal with
Erie County officials: If the county provided tax breaks on another
project Benderson was initiating' (construction of a nearby hotel), the
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Introduction
developer would agree to completely remediate the Ernst Steel site,
which had become a glaring eyesore in this heavily commercialized
area. Benderson also wagered that the project's long-term economic
benefits would far outweigh the short-term cleanup costs. To defray
remediation expenses, the company successfully employed a new
technology, on-site soil-washing. Redevelopment of the Ernst Steel
site has resulted in many positive impacts, including elimination of
blight, creation of 150 full- and part-time jobs, and tax base enhance-
ment (sales taxes will be SI million per year; property taxes between
$300,000 and $500,000 per year).
The Roundhouse Property
(Harlan & Hollingsworth Shipyard), Wilmington, Delaware
The roundhouse is an old railroad turnstile located in
Wilmington's former Harlan & Hollingsworth Shipyard. Closed in
the 1950s, various shipyard buildings have been dispersed over the
years. Many of the structures now axe abandoned or under-utilized,
and environmental contamination is widespread. The 1.6-acre
roundhouse property is no exception. When the current owner
decided to sell the property, the interested buyer stipulated that
environmental issues needed to be resolved up front. Both parties
decided to enter Delaware's voluntary cleanup program in order to
conduct remediation, obtain liability sign-off, and apply for state
financial assistance. The Delaware Department of Natural Re-
sources and Environmental Control pursued an innovative funding
source for the project: federal Superfund dollars funneled through
the state. The buyer plans to construct a public storage facility
which will create new jobs and provide a stable business presence in
the neighborhood. This case study illustrates how brownfield
activities can dovetail successfully with a city's broader redevelop-
ment visions.
West
Oregon Mill Site Conversion Project.
Seven rural areas in Oregon
During the 1960s and 1990s, over 120 timber ""M« shut down
in the Pacific Northwest, displacing 55.000 worker*s~and devastating
many timber-dependant communities. For years these mill sites sat
idle and undeveloped while chemical hazards posed environmental
and public health concerns. In 1994, a group of public agencies and
Northeast-Midwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
private-sector groups joined forces in an effort to redevelop seven
rural mill sites. The initiative, known as the Oregon Moll Site
Conversion Project, received financial backing from both U.S. EPA,
under its Brownfields Pilot Site Program, and the Economic Develop-
ment Administration. During its first two years, the project has
focused on organizing community participation and assessing the
environmental conditions at each site. Thus far, two sites already
have changed hands and should be cleaned up and redeveloped by
fall 1997.
Southwest Harbor Project, Seattle, Washington
In 1993, an Oakland-based steamship company, American
President Lines, Ltd. (APL), asked the Port of Seattle to compete
with other west coast ports to develop a combined marine cargo and
intermodal terminal yard that would be large enough to handle
APL's increasing Pacific Rim trade. To meet APL's needs, the
terminal had to be fully operational by 1997only four years away.
Seattle-port officials were anxious to keep APL's existing 1,500 jobs
and to secure 1.500 additional jobs through the terminal expansion.
The project also would provide a catalyst for the remediation of other
properties in the Duwamish corridor, a heavily industrialized area
with known contamination problems. The port identified 145 acres
around APL's existing terminal and initiated negotiations with
current property owners (hurdles included assessing environmental'
conditions, determining necessary remediation, and accurately
gauging property values). The project involved unprecedented
coordination between local, state, and federal agencies. It also
required extensive public participation. As of summer 1996, all
buildings had been demolished and most remediation was complete
on APL's new terminal property.
Federal Courthouse (Southern Pacific Bail Yard),
Sacramento, California
The 2.6-acre federal courthouse project is located on Southern
Pacific's 244-acre railyard facility in Sacramento. The $142 million,
380,000-square-foot courthouse facility, which will contain office*,
parking, and many other services, is slated to produce more than
1,000 construction jobs and 200 permanent jobs. Jt is the single
largest construction project in the City of Sacramento's history. A
major challenge associated with this project was the presence of doed
restrictions, which required direct state oversight of aU excavation
activities a daunting mandate given the limited resources of the
tforthcast-Muiwest Report
-------
Introduction
state environmental agency. Through extensive public/private coop-
eration, an innovative third-party oversight entity was established,
known as the Environmental Oversight Authority. Creation of this
institutional entity allowed redevelopment to proceed where it
otherwise might have been deemed logistically and economically
impossible. In July 1995, EPA awarded the city a $200,000
BrownSelds Pilot Site grant to support the Environmental Oversight
Authority and other aspects of the railyard redevelopment.
South
Boss's Landing and the Tennessee Aquarium,
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Chattanooga, once considered a leading industrial power*
house, paid a high price for its economic prosperity. By the late
1960s, it was named one of the most polluted cities in America. In
the decades since, however, Chattanooga haVmade a swift comeback.
A key step in <**« process has been the cleanup and reuse of former
industrial properties. In the 1980s, a public/private non-profit
development company KiverValley Partners was formed to
manage the city's redevelopment plans. The company initially
focused its efforts on a stretch of old industrial property along the
Tennessee River and raised nearly $17 million in private funds to
support acquisition, environmental assessments, and construction of
a new aquarium and public plaza. According to company officials.
the Tennessee Aquarium has been a catalyst for more than $150
minion in public and private investment throughout Chattanooga.
Louisville Dryer Company (Ni-Chro Plating, Inc.).
Louisville. Kentucky
The -Ni-Chro Plating facility in Louisville's West End had
been abandoned for several years when state officials discovered that
the site presented an immediate threat to public and environmental
health. The U.5. EPA conducted an emergency removal of contami-
nants and, because the prior owner was bankrupt, placed a lien on
the property for $168,000. Seven years later, in 1994. the Louisville
Dryer Company expressed an interest in purchasing the Ni-Chro
Plating property in order to accommodate its business expansion
a move that would create new jobs and add to the local tax base, both
of which the city was eager to support. In 1995, when U.S. EPA
awarded Louisville a $200,000 Brownfields Pilot grant, the city
Northtast-Afidwest Report
-------
Lessons from the Field
decided to dedicate this money to the Ni-Chro Flaring project, which
essentially would serve as a "demonstration site" for implementation
of city-wide brownfield policies. As of late 1996, the city and the
Louisville Dryer Company were negotiating a final sale price for the
property. This project is poised to become a brownfield success story
neighborhood blight is being eliminated at the same time that 40-
50 new jobs are being created.
Northtast-Midwctt Report
-------
Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow Brownfields '97 Partnering for a Greener Tomorrow
(6K) Forging the Partnership:
Friday, September 5, 1997
10:30 a.m. -12:30 p.m.
How HUD Can Help
Description: Learn how HDD's programs can be powerful tools in revitalizing brownfields. Explore options for
using HUD's$4.6 billion Community Development Block Grants and HUD's $1.3 billion Section 108 loan
guarantee program. Learn how HUD's Economic Development Initiative, Lead Hazard Control Grants, and
EZ/EC Incentives can be used to carry out a broad range of brownfields-related activities, such as property
acquisition, cleanup, site preparation, real estate development, business loans, and job training. Hear from HUD
and local officials about cutting-edge local efforts that are using these resources to address brownfields. See
HUD's exciting new geographic information system - "Community 2000" - and learn how it can support your
brownfields revitalization efforts.
Location: Room 1203C
Speakers and Affiliation:
Mr. Robert W. Hickmott (Moderator)
Mr. Richard Burk
Mr. Don Green
Mr. Gary Ultican
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of the Secretary
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of Community Viability
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of Community Planning and Development
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Kansas City Regional Office
MR. ROBERT W. HICKMOTT
Robert W. Hickmott serves as counselor to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Andrew Cuomo. He
is a senior member of HUD's management and policy-development team and serves as a senior advisor to the
Secretary on intergovernmental relations and external constituencies.
Prior to joining HUD in March 1997, he was the associate administrator for congressional and legislative activities,
he served as the principal advisor to Administrator Carol M. Browner on all congressional and legislative issues, and
helped develop and implement the Administration's environmental agenda.
Before joining the Clinton Administration in January 1993, Mr. Hickmott was deputy executive director for the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign. From 1989 to 1991 he was an associate with the law firm of Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher and Flom. From 1987 to 1989. Mr. Hickmott was chief of staff for Senator Timothy E. Wirth for
Senate Campaign. He has also held positions as political affairs director for Congoleum Corporation from 1983 to
1984; executive director, National Business Council, Democratic National Committee, 1980 to 1983; public affairs
counsel, E.I. duPont Company, Wilmington, Delaware, 1978 to 1981 and director of alumni/admissions programs,
Boston University Alumni Affairs Office, 1976 to 1978.
Mr. Hickmott graduated summa cum laude from Boston University School of Public Communications with a Bachelor
of Science in public communications in 1976.
He received his Juris Doctorate from Georgetown University Law Center in 1988. Mr. Hickmott is a native of
Wilmington, Delaware.
MR. RICHARD BURK
[Biography was not available at time of printing. Please refer to conference addendum.}
MR. DON GREEN
[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
MR. GARY ULTICAN
[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
------- |