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 programs—loans and loan
 guarantees, grants, and technical assistance—to 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 1997—only 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

-------