I
                                        5
                                        \
~
Revitalizing Mothballed Properties

                        Challenges, Success Stories, & Solutions
                          1          i  ^^^^^^^ ^^

-------
Prepared by:

Environmental Management Support, Inc.
(Contract No. EP-W-07-054)
8601 Georgia Avenue, Suite 500
Silver Spring, MD 20910
www.emsus.com

The Ferguson Group
1130 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
www.fergusongroup.us

The Horinko Group
2300 N St. NW, Suite 2130
Washington, DC 20037
www.thehorinkogroup.org
Prepared for:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
Washington, DC 20460

-------
                                                                                             MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES   I    Mi
CONTENTS
Challenges & Opportunities atMothballed Properties
10 Contributors to Success at Mothballed Properties
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization                     5

     Corporate Strategies	7

       Car Company Revs Up Old Manufacturing Sites
       for Revitalization	7

       Ohio Development Team Overcomes Barriers to Reuse of
       Mothballed Waterfront Property	9

       Manufacturer Takes a Prevention Approach to
       Mothballed Properties	11

       Chemical Company  Ranks Sites and Reaches out to
       Regulators for Reuse of Underutilized Properties	13

       Pennsylvania Buyer-Seller Agreement Facilitates Reuse of
       Old Manufacturing Site	15

     Local Leadership	17

       Vacant Site to Become Rochester Sports Complex	17

       Milwaukee Master Plan Renews Old Industrial Valley	19

       Environmental  Extension Center Helps Seattle Small
       Businesses on Contaminated Properties	21

       West Virginia Small  Cities Create A Commerce Corridor .  . . . 23

       Colorado Brownfields Foundation Helps Mom & Pops
       with Environmental Stewardship Program	25

       Innovative Building Reuse Program Spurs Revitalization
       of North Carolina Small Towns.                          .27
X

-------
   Challenges & Opportunities at Mothballed Properties
CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES AT MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
       Amothballed property is a property where
       the owner is unwilling or unable to transfer
       the property or put it into productive reuse.
Mothballed properties cause blight to neighborhoods
inhibit economic development and revitalization
threaten public health and the environment, discour-
age productive reuse of infill areas, and contribute to
urban sprawl. Whether these properties are controlled
by large corporations or mom & pop owners, whether
they involve parties striving for a cooperative outcome or
are owned by disengaged or absentee landowners, moth-
balled properties can hinder productive reuse and vitality
in communities across America.

The United States Conference of Mayors reports that
mothballed brownfields remain the toughest brownfields
barrier facing local leaders. The National Brownfield
Association study, "Bringing Corporate Brownfield
Properties to Market,"concludes that many property
owners are seeking additional comfort and redevelop-
ment assistance before transferring these properties.

A study by the National Center for Neighborhood and
Brownfields Redevelopment at Rutgers University on
the impact of mothballed industrial properties on urban
redevelopment, finds that 40 percent of cities in its study
have at least one mothballed brownfield. The  study also
concludes  that about half of the municipalities with
mothballed properties consider these properties to be
a barrier to urban redevelopment. The Rutgers study
found that the revitalization of mothballed properties
is particularly important for communities dealing with
potentially contaminated properties located in prime
downtown redevelopment areas, along waterfronts, and
near important public facilities such as schools.

A number of factors and challenges confront property
owners, local communities, and other parties striving to
deal with mothballed properties. These challenges can
include: the need for expertise and information; sites
where cleanup costs outweigh property values; slow
real estate markets; concerns about long term envi-
ronmental and legal liability; lack of confidence in the
monitoring and enforcement of institutional controls
at remediated sites; insufficient coordination between
state and federal regulatory programs; questions about
the proper accounting and reporting of environmental
financial liabilities; and, at times, uncooperative prop-
erty owners.

Despite these challenges, success stories are emerg-
ing. These stories show property owners working
in collaboration with local communities, regula-
tors, redevelopers, and other stakeholders that can
overcome barriers to reusing properties preventing
mothballing or transforming properties that were
previously mothballed.

•  General Motors  is entering into new partner-
   ships with local governments, redevelopers, and
   regulatory agencies to move previously moth-
   balled properties into revitalization on a more
   expedited timeframe.

•  Hemisphere Development is partnering with
   local governments and the Ohio EPA to rede-
   velop an old, 1,100 acre chemical manufacturing
   facility mired in litigation for 24 years into a
   mixed use waterfront redevelopment and sports
   center on the coast of Lake Erie.

•  The State of Wisconsin established a compre-
   hensive, streamlined "Remediation and Rede-
   velopment" program that consolidates cleanup
   authorities under one state program with a single
   point of contact, resulting in time and cost savings
   during the cleanup and redevelopment process,
   effectively reducing the extent to which properties
   are mothballed.

•  The DuPont Corporation is working with the
   City of Rochester, New York to convert a 100
   year old chemical manufacturing plant, fenced
   and vacant for 13 years, into a sports and recre-
   ational complex.

•  The Colorado Brownfields Foundation  is pro-
   viding technical assistance to help small busi-
   nesses and individual property owners understand
   and address issues needed to facilitate the transfer
   and reuse of contaminated properties.

This report showcases a few of the many examples
of projects  where stakeholders are establishing ef-
fective partnerships  to bring sites that were previ-
ously mothballed back into productive use. The

-------
                                                                             MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES      2
report also identifies "10 Contributors to Success"
for the revitalization of mothballed properties.

These success stories show that the cleanup and
revitalization of mothballed properties can benefit
all parties - overcoming liabilities and producing
value for property owners, creating redevelopment
opportunities for buyers, and bringing new vitality
for local communities and the economy.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency launched
an effort to foster the revitalization of mothballed
properties at the EPA National Brownfields
Conference in Boston, Massachusetts in 2006. In
October 2007, EPA convened more than 75 prop-
erty owners, redevelopers, community leaders, and
federal, state, and local officials in Washington, DC
to discuss tools and resources needed for successful
mothball revitalization.

This report builds on the ongoing EPA effort to pro-
vide  assistance on this important issue. This report
highlights innovative approaches and real success
stories in the revitalization of mothballed properties.
The highlighted projects include just a few of the
many examples of successful revitalization projects
underway across the country.

-------
   10 Contributors to Success at Mothballed Properties
 10 CONTRIBUTORS TO SUCCESS AT MOTHBALLED  PROPERTIES
   /4  t contaminated properties in communities
  Z_m  across America, certain tools and approaches
JL JLoften contribute to the successful revitalization of
mothballed properties:

1. Reuse First— Revitalization of contaminated prop-
   erties often is more successful when the property
   owner works upfront with potential buyers, rede-
   velopers, the local community and other interested
   parties to identify a potential reuse, rather than
   focus solely on the remediation and regulatory chal-
   lenges.

2. RecruitRedevelopers - Redevelopers who get
   involved or obtain the property at the front end of
   the process can help overcome challenges at moth-
   balled properties.
                             potential buyers and redevelopers early in the pro-
                             cess, and the formation of partnerships with state
                             federal, and local government authorities.

                           5. Take Advantage of State Tools & Resources — State
                             environmental and economic development officials
                             are essential partners with effective tools in  the
                             revitalization of mothballed properties. These tools
                             include voluntary cleanup programs; state fund-
                             ing; buyer-seller agreements for site transfer and
                             liability clarification.

                           6. Coordinate Cleanups - Using a team tactic to co-
                             ordinate and integrate state and federal cleanup
                             requirements  into a "One Cleanup" approach can
                             expedite the cleanup and redevelopment process
                             by avoiding bureaucratic duplication, conflicting
                             requirements, and delays that can thwart action
                             at contaminated properties.
                   • Zon
                     industrial
                   • Parcels
                     from 1-10
                     acres
       CAll
414-274-
3. Local Leadership —The leadership of local govern-
   ment officials is critical to moving mothballed sites
   where the owner is unable or unwilling to sell or re-
   use the property. Local tools include reuse planning,
   market catalyzation, deal facilitation, support in at-
   tracting public and private funding, and acquisition
   and assembly of properties.

4. Craft Creative Corporate Strategies - Increasingly,
   many companies are engaging in strategies that
   consider idled sites to be potential assets that can
   be moved into appropriate reuse to the benefit of
   both the company and the community. Innovative
   corporate strategies include the integration  of en-
   vironmental and real estate teams to move stagnant
   properties, the outsourcing of site revitalization to
                           7. Leverage Federal Funding & Support —
                             Together with local, state, and private resources
                             the federal agencies support the revitalization of
                             potentially contaminated properties with funding
                             outreach, training, and technical assistance. Federal
                             tools include EPA assessment and cleanup grants.
                             Other federal funding resources available to address
                             redevelopment include Brownfields Economic De-
                             velopment Initiative (BEDI) and Section 108 fund-
                             ing from the Department of Housing and Urban
                             Development, Public Works and Economic Devel-
                             opment Facilities Grants from the Department of
                             Commerce's Economic Development Administra-
                             tion, and the federal brownfields tax incentive.

-------
                                                                              MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES      4
8.  Assist the Mom & Pops - Mothballed properties
   owned by individuals and small entities exist in
   nearly every community in America. Coopera-
   tive outreach and education, reuse plans that
   spark market opportunities, and the leveraging
   of public funding can overcome the challenges at
   these properties. Nonprofit organizations, busi-
   ness assistance centers, local and regional support
   agencies, business associations, and other nongov-
   ernmental entities often are well suited to assist
   mom &pop owners  of potentially contaminated
   properties.

9.  Reduce Risks — The public and private sectors are
   using a variety of institutional control mainte-
   nance and assurance  tools, environmental insur-
   ance protections, and liability transfer strategies
   to reduce risks for hesitant sellers of mothballed
   properties.

10.Create Comfort - While not needed  in the major-
   ity of contaminated property transactions, state
   and federal authorities can provide a number
   of policy, legal, and enforcement tools to help
   prospective purchasers of contaminated properties
   reach a level of comfort regarding potential li-
   ability at these properties, therefore increasing the
   likelihood that the properties will be redeveloped.
   These tools include the bona fide  prospective pur-
   chaser protections of federal law, state voluntary
   cleanup programs, prospective purchaser agree-
   ments, liability status clarifications, comfort let-
   ters, "Ready for Anticipated Use" determinations,
   and federal settlements and state  agreements for
   cooperative sellers.

For more information on tools and approaches for
potentially contaminated properties, see www.epa.
gov/brownfields.

-------
   Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization
PROFILES OF SUCCESSFUL MOTHBALLED PROPERTY REVITALIZATION
      The tools and approaches that contribute to the
      revitalization of mothballed properties emerge
      from the tales of success stories from across
America. This section showcases examples of cases
in which previously mothballed  properties were
converted into new vitality and opportunity. The
first series of case studies highlights Corporate
Strategies for redevelopment and prevention of
mothballed properties. The second series describes
situations where Local Leadership, from  both
governments  and nonprofits, drove redevelopment
of underutilized sites.

CORPORATE STRATEGIES
1.  Car Company Revs Up Old Manufacturing Sites
   for Revitalization
2.  Ohio Development Team Overcomes Barriers to
   Reuse of Mothballed Waterfront Property
3.  Manufacturer Takes Prevention
   Approach to Mothballed Properties
4.  Chemical Company Ranks Sites and Reaches out to
   Regulators for Reuse of Underutilized Properties
5.  Pennsylvania Buyer-Seller Agreement Facilitates
   Reuse of Old Manufacturing Site
                                                  LOCAL LEADERSHIP
                                                  1. Vacant Site to Become Rochester Sports
                                                     Complex
                                                  2. Milwaukee Master Plan Renews Old Industrial
                                                     Valley
                                                  3. Environmental Extension Center Helps Seattle
                                                     Small Businesses on Contaminated Properties
                                                  4. West Virginia Small Cities Create A Commerce
                                                     Corridor

-------
                                                                         MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES   I   6
5.  Colorado Brownfields Foundation Help Mom
   & Pops with Environmental Stewardship Pro-
   gram

6.  Innovative Building Reuse Program Spurs
   Revitalization of North Carolina Small Towns

-------
   Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Corporate Strategies
                                        CAR COMPANY REVS UP
                          OLD MANUFACTURING SITES FOR REVITALIZATION
       General Motors (GM) has large manufacturing
       properties throughout the United States. As the
       industry has changed over past decades, many of
its properties ceased operating, and some are sitting idle
and contaminated. While traditionally the GM approach
at these sites was to conduct remediation with in-house
technical staff while a separate real estate staff worked
later to sell the sites, GM is adopting a new approach
in which GM partners with local governments and the
private sector to move these sites toward revitalization
on more expedited timeframes at the beginning of the
process. Success stories are beginning to emerge, including
the revitalization of former GM sites in two cities —
Anderson, Indiana and Baltimore, Maryland.

ANDERSON, INDIANA

For most of the 20th Century, Anderson, Indiana was a
booming economic and industrial area. In 1918, GM head-
quartered its Delco Remy division in Anderson and the
City became a leading electromechanical technology center.
GM and automotive parts manufacturing in the City
reached its peak in the early 1970s providing more than
27,000 jobs. Today, however, GM has divested nearly all of
its interests in Anderson. GM is selling operating business-
es, shuttering, and in some cases completely demolishing its
former manufacturing facilities. Key properties in the center
of Anderson are idle. The final GM plant closed in 1996.
Given the extent of GM's pullout from Anderson, the
City's future may depend in large part on its ability to
revitalize the former GM properties. Local leadership is
contributing to a collaborative partnership with GM that
includes a commitment to moving properties toward revi-
talization. GM's commitment is encouraging the devotion
of City staff and resources to these challenges.

An example of this collaborative partnership is the efforts
made to revitalize the plant that GM closed in November
2006. GM agreed to transfer 300 acres in the downtown
area to the City of Anderson. This property was subject
   The redevelopment represents a

   new way of thinking about unused

  properties for General Motors.

to a RCRA corrective action remedy that was completed,
thereby preparing the area for potential reuse. The sale and
transfer agreement creates an arrangement under which the
risk of contamination is allocated between GM, the City,
and the redevelopers. Residential reuse is prohibited under
institutional controls, and GM is granted the ability to
review and consent to redevelopment plans to ensure that
reuse is consistent with the Agency approved remediation.
In August 2007, the City of Anderson entered into an
agreement with a redevelopment firm, P&L Investments
and its partner the Value Recovery Group, to redevelop the
property for new commercial and light industrial economic
investment. The redevelopment agreement includes an
innovative approach under which the developer will share
profit revenues with the City on a scale determined by how
many local jobs are created- the more jobs, the more profit
the developer retains.
Anderson credits ERAs Brownfields Program with con-
tributing to its emerging success by offering the City an
opportunity to leverage public dollars to attract private in-
vestment. The City used EPA Brownfields assessment grant
funding to build the capacity to manage its challenges and
leverage private funding sources. EPA funding was used to
conduct outreach to community stakeholders and to attract
additional investment. Anderson officials also point to
their participation in the EPA Brownfields Conference as
instrumental in introducing City officials to federal, private
sector, and finance partners that are now investing in the
revitalization effort.
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1.  Recruit Redevelopers - Anderson entered into
     an innovative agreement where the redevelopers
     profits are dependent on job creation, providing
     incentives for job growth in the community.

  2.  Leverage Federal Grant Dollars — Anderson
     leveraged EPA Brownfields funding and assis-
     tance, using these resources to open opportunities
     to work with local stakeholders, finance partners,
     and regulatory agencies.

-------
                                                                                   MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
CHESAPEAKE COMMERCE CENTER IN

BALTIMORE, MARYLAND

GM formed a partnership with redevelopers and local,
state, and federal officials to convert an old auto assembly
plant in Baltimore into a $140 million business park in an
expedited time frame.

GM owned and operated an assembly plant in Baltimore
for 68 years. When GM shut down the plant in 2005, the
company met with EPA Region 3 and Maryland Depart-
ment of Environment (MDE) representatives to ensure
them that GM would retain a developer who would take
on responsibility for the cleanup of the site as part of the
redevelopment. GM officials also assured regulators that
GM would stay involved in the cleanup process to ensure
the developer met all remedy commitments. EPA Region
3 s Facility Lead Program and MDE's Voluntary Cleanup
Program provided a favorable framework to facilitate this
revitalization project.

GM focused initially on finding a developer with experi-
ence in redevelopment of potentially contaminated proper-
ties. In January 2006, GM selected  Duke Realty Corpo-
ration as the developer for the Baltimore property. GM
and Duke Realty focused on establishing a collaborative
approach to property cleanup with  EPA and MDE. Duke
proposed a comprehensive cleanup matrix and master
schedule as part of a facility lead RCRA cleanup approach.
The state and EPA Region 3 regulators responded by set-
ting up an intergovernmental team to develop a streamlined
cleanup process that met both federal and state program
goals. This collaborative group focused on the cleanup
matrix, the master schedule, and the commercial reuse
scenario to drive decisions on the remedy and institutional
and engineering controls.

The developer and its partners also  committed to conduct-
ing early and substantial community outreach on the site
redevelopment vision. As described by EPA Region 3
Administrator Donald Welsh, "Although it may require
more effort at the outset, by working collaboratively with
the owners, developers, and the impacted neighborhoods,
EPA can streamline the environmental cleanup process so
redevelopment takes less time to complete, but still ensure
the highest environmental standards."

The groundbreaking for the Chesapeake Commerce Cen-
ter took place in the summer of 2006. Duke Realty plans
to invest more than $140 million in the redevelopment of
the site. When the redevelopment is complete, there will
be 16 buildings encompassing 2.8  million square feet. The
project is expected to create thousands of newjobs over
the next 10 years.

The redevelopment of its Baltimore property represents a
new way of thinking about unused properties for General
Motors. Historically, GM held onto unused properties and
typically conducted remediation with in-house resources
during and after site transfer. In this case, GM worked
collaboratively with outside parties to allow a redeveloper
to take on cleanup and redevelopment responsibilities. GM
retains certain responsibilities and remains liable under
CERCLA and RCRA as a responsible party. However,
allowing the developer to conduct the remediation with
Agency oversight reduced GM's future liability risks to an
acceptable level.
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1.  Coordinated Cleanups — A coordinated cleanup
     plan, meeting both federal and state program
     goals, significantly expedited redevelopment.

  2.  Recruit Redevelopers - The redeveloper assumed
     many remediation responsibilities and collabo-
     rated with federal and state regulatory agencies in
     order  to reduce decision times on the remedy and
     institutional and engineering controls.

  For more information, contact: Fred Zehnder at
  (313) 665-6616 or frederick.j.zehnder@gm.com.

  www.gm.com/corporate/responsibility/
  environment/plants/brownfield redev/index.jsp


-------
   Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Corporate Strategies
                  OHIO DEVELOPMENT TEAM OVERCOMES BARRIERS TO REUSE
                           OF MOTHBALLED WATERFRONT PROPERTY
      The Diamond Shamrock Painesville Works
      property in Lake County, Ohio was mothballed
      and mired in litigation from 1977 until 2001.
In 2001, Hemisphere Development entered into
a partnership with area municipalities, the Ohio
EPA, Lake Metroparks, and other public stakehold-
ers to create a plan for addressing the liability and
cleanup issues and transforming the old industrial
property into a mixed use and recreational facility.

Located on 1,100 acres  on the coast of Lake Erie
and the Grand River, the former chemical plant op-
erated from 1912 through 1977, where it produced a
variety of products including soda ash, baking soda,
chromium compounds, carbon tetrachloride, hydro-
chloric and sulfuric acids, chlorinated wax, and coke.
The land was  the site of various activities over the
years, including a 500 acre settling pond, a chro-
mium production facility and a landfill.

The  site spans three separate municipalities with
overlapping jurisdiction over regional development
issues. In 1980, U.S. EPA initiated action to remedy
chromium contamination at the site, resulting in
  One critical aspect in freeing the
  site from its mothballed status
  was to change the direction of
  the cleanup and reuse plans.
the construction of a 120 acre clay cap over the im-
pacted area. The Ohio EPA began enforcement ac-
tivities for the rest of the site in 1989. The site was
proposed for inclusion on the Superfund National
Priorities List, which guides EPA in determining
which sites containing hazardous substances war-
rant further Superfund investigation and remedia-
tion. Parties responsible for hazardous substance
releases at the site were embroiled in years of litiga-
tion that prevented movement at the site.

One critical aspect in freeing the site from its
mothballed status was to change the direction of
the cleanup and reuse plans. The original plans
were initially  focused on achieving an industrial
reuse in a region that is not expecting any signifi-
cant additions to the manufacturing sector. Instead,
Hemisphere and its partners envisioned the site for
a prime, mixed use, waterfront revitalization that
could command a substantial increase in property
value, thereby providing an  incentive to the prop-
erty owners and other liable parties to move toward
site transfer. This potential  increase in property
value - contrasted with the  years of litigation cost
and controversy - motivated the parties to get the
property into the redeveloper's hands.

Under this arrangement, the former owners and other
responsible parties will be responsible for cleanup
costs to levels required for industrial use. The redevel-

-------
                                                                               MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                   10
oper will handle the incremental costs associated with
bringing the cleanup to residential reuse standards. In
addition, because the previous site owners had concerns
about their degree of control over the property during
remediation and redevelopment, the arrangement is
based on the redeveloper entering into a 99 year lease
that gives the previous owners a degree of comfort and
control due to their retention of ownership. Under the
terms of the lease, the redeveloper has the right to pur-
chase the property once redevelopment is completed
and site users and development tenants are established.
The deal is backed with negotiated indemnity and envi-
ronmental insurance instruments.

Another key to the successful transfer of the property
was the collaboration among the redeveloper, the  site
owners, and regulatory authorities. The State of Ohio
assumed lead enforcement authority with the support
of EPA Region 5. The remedy was planned to fulfill
both state and federal regulatory obligations, as well as
prepare the site to participate in the  Ohio Voluntary
Action Program as soon as the enforcement remedy is
completed. Participation in the Ohio Voluntary Clean-
up Program is critical, because it ensures that the  rede-
veloper is eligible to obtain substantial funding from
the "Clean  Ohio Fund" to cover the incremental costs
associated with cleaning up the property to residential
cleanup standards.
                                                      Hemisphere's development plan was the catalyst to
                                                      settling this costly and complex multiparty Superfund
                                                      case, as well as a long standing regulatory enforcement
                                                      action, in an expedited fashion. The redeveloper will
                                                      complete the majority of required remedial activities
                                                      in 2008. Completion of these activities will lead to the
                                                      implementation of one of the largest shoreline redevel-
                                                      opment projects on the Great Lakes and the construc-
                                                      tion of significant recreational amenities.
                                                       CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
1. Reuse First - The developer changed the focus
   of redevelopment from unrealistic industrial
   use to a profitable mixed use development,
   causing previously litigious owners to recognize
   the value in cooperation.

2. State Tools and Resources — The developer
   is working closely with the state of Ohio to
   expedite the clean up process and obtain much-
   needed remediation funds for the project.

For more information, contact: Todd Davis,
Hemisphere Development at (216) 464-4105 or
tdavis@hemispheredev.com.

www. hemispheredev. com/case/lakeview. html


-------
11
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Corporate Strategies
                        MANUFACTURER TAKES A  PREVENTION APPROACH
                                   TO MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
         The Honeywell company initiated a proactive
         approach to the redevelopment of its closed
         facilities. Given historical operations, some
   formerly operated facilities require remediation.
   Rather than mothball these properties, Honeywell
   is actively working to bring them into constructive
   reuse. Honeywell's contributions to the successful
   reuse of its properties include working with local
   communities and businesses to identify a new use
   before cleanup begins, and treating remediation and
   re-use as linked objectives.
   When evaluating a closed facility, Honeywell inte-
   grates its remediation, real estate, communications,
   and government relations teams to engage the sur-
   rounding community and identify redevelopment
   opportunities that can resolve the challenges such
   properties typically face: achieving regulatory environ-
   mental closure while revitalizing the property in line
   with community objectives as soon as practicable. This
   is different from the traditional cleanup model where
   remediation of the site is often done without consid-
   eration of an end use. Under that approach, the goal
   is to complete remediation and then to identify a new
   end use for the cleaned up, but vacant, property. This
   traditional model ignores the fact that cleanup stan-
   dards and approaches can vary depending on the new
                                                 The company is able to create
                                                 a flexible remediation and re-
                                                 development plan that considers
                                                 the needs of the community and
                                                 identifies a viable end use for
                                                 the property.
                                                     end use. Failure to integrate remediation with redevel-
                                                     opment can unnecessarily delay the remediation of a
                                                     site and may ultimately increase remediation costs. By
                                                     integrating the remediation, real estate, government
                                                     relations, and communications functions, Honeywell
                                                     is able to create a flexible remediation and redevel-
                                                     opment plan for its closed properties. This approach
                                                     considers the needs of the community and identifies a
                                                     viable end use for the property — thereby lessening the
                                                     likelihood that properties will be mothballed.

                                                     A project in  El Segundo, California is representa-
                                                     tive of Honeywell's mothball prevention approach.
                                                     Honeywell owned a 56  acre chemical facility on

-------
                                                                          MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                 12
a South Bay location only a few miles from the
Pacific Ocean and Los Angeles International
Airport. The facility began operation in the 1920s
and ceased operation in 2003. The main industrial
activities at the site included sulfuric acid produc-
tion, pesticide packaging and distribution, phthal-
ic anhydride production, solvents packaging, and
refrigerants production. The more than 70 years
of operation resulted in both groundwater and soil
contamination with volatile organic compounds.
Honeywell's remediation, real estate, communica-
tions, and government relations teams worked in
partnership with a developer and local govern-
ment officials to identify potential end uses for
the property. The real estate group set an ambi-
tious time table to redevelop the property. With
the time line for redevelopment set to drive the
remediation, Honeywell and  its partners identi-
fied several key technical elements essential to the
success of the redevelopment, including achieving
expedited site characterization using a dynamic
work plan (known as the TRIAD approach) and
the use of real time measurement technologies to
accelerate and improve the cleanup process. The
planning resulted in a two phase development
strategy. Phase I consisted of redeveloping 43
acres to feature a retail and restaurant center that
opened in 2006. Phase II included the remaining
13 acres, which is targeted to be developed into an
industrial/commercial center at a later time.
As a result of the coordination and close coop-
eration among the entire project team, including
Honeywell, the developer, and regulatory agencies,
Phase I of the project met its ambitious remedia-
tion and redevelopment schedule. The remediation
of the Phase  I areas was completed and approved
by the regulatory agencies by the end of 2005,
only two years after the factory was closed in
2003. The  newly constructed retail center opened
for business in November of 2006.
                                                    CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1. Creative Corporate Strategies - Honeywell
    views idle properties as assets to be moved into
    appropriate reuse to the benefit of the commu-
    nity and the company.

  2. Reuse First — Honeywell works upfront with
    the local community and other allies to identify
    reuse  opportunities for company properties.

  For further information, contact Evan Van Hook,
  Honeywell at (973) 455-4132 or
  evan.vanhook@honeywell.com.

  www.honeywell.com/hser/environmental-
  remediation-program.html

-------
13
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Corporate Strategies
              CHEMICAL COMPANY RANKS SITES AND REACHES OUT TO REGULATORS FOR
                               REUSE OF UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES
         The Dow Chemical Company is working
         jointly with EPA Region 5 on a project to
         encourage reuse of Dow's underutilized
   properties. The Dow Brownfields Reuse Project
   seeks to engage government regulatory officials
   in a pro-active process to strategically direct
   Dow's contaminated sites into tailored regulatory
   programs to allow the implementation  of timely
   remedies that match reuse goals.
   To promote the productive reuse of contaminated
   properties, Dow approached EPA's Office of Solid
   Waste and Emergency Response and EPA Region
   5 in November 2006 with a proposal to remediate
   and make their sites available for reuse in a way
   that is sustainable, protective of human health and
   the environment, creates assets for communities,
   and is cost effective for the company.

   EPA and Dow held several formal meetings and
   conference calls to move forward on the initiative.
   A prime objective of the collaboration is to deter-
   mine  a strategy under which Dow  can voluntarily
   bring idled and contaminated facilities into the
   cleanup program that is the most optimal for a
                                                Site strategies integrate
                                                remediation and reuse goals
                                               for  each of the facilities.
                                              given property. Some properties may be best ad-
                                              dressed by a RCRA facility-lead corrective action.
                                              Other properties, if not subject to RCRA or state
                                              permitting requirements, may be easily entered
                                              into a state-led voluntary cleanup program. The
                                              effort is designed to  seek consensus on the most
                                              optimum regulatory  approach, convene appro-
                                              priate personnel and resources from the regula-
                                              tory agencies and Dow to conduct the regulatory
                                              process, and seek expedited timeframes for remedy
                                              and reuse.
                                              Dow and EPA agreed on three Dow facilities
                                              located in EPA Region 5 to use as pilots for the
                                              project. Dow is evaluating potential site strate-
                                              gies that integrate remediation and reuse goals for
                                              each of the facilities. In addition, Dow is working


-------
                                                                           MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                 14
with EPA to outline a process to document the
"life cycle" of steps and decisions associated with
closing and revitalizing a facility. The decision
process is intended as a tool for use in determin-
ing a range of factors, such as reuse potential and
environmental issues to sort other Dow facilities
for reuse potential.

Dow's use  of this decision process is leading to
progress with reuse plans under development by
Dow at their Bay City, Michigan and Crest Hill,
Illinois facilities.

The Bay City site is a RCRA facility-lead cor-
rective action project that has progressed to the
remedy selection phase. The reuse plan will likely
include multiple land uses including recreational,
residential, environmental habitat, and light in-
dustrial. Dow also is looking at ways to provide
access  to a historic lighthouse, which is an im-
portant cultural resource  to the community. EPA's
RCRA corrective action project manager is work-
ing closely on this project to ensure that all re-
quirements are met, while providing the flexibility
for the proposed reuse of the property.

The Crest  Hill facility is a small facility with a
landfill as the primary environmental concern.
The facility is subject to RCRA corrective action
and will become a facility lead voluntary cleanup.
Dow and EPA Region 5 are in discussions with
                                                   the Mayor of Crest Hill, who is excited about the
                                                   potential redevelopment of this facility, which is
                                                   located on the main road into town. The  parties
                                                   believe that the issues related to the Crest Hill fa-
                                                   cility are manageable and a final remedy decision
                                                   could come in 2008.

                                                   Dow and EPA Region 5 are discussing the use
                                                   of the company's ranking and regulatory tool to
                                                   expand the company's sustainability project to
                                                   include one or more additional facilities.
                                                     CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
1. Coordinated Cleanups - Dow is working
   with EPA regional offices to voluntarily
   bring facilities into the most appropriate
   regulatory programs in order to build con-
   sensus on cleanup approaches and minimize
   delays while cleaning up properties to ap-
   proved levels.

2. Creative Corporate Strategies — Dow is
   actively engaged in a corporate initiative
   to proactively remediate contaminated and
   underutilized properties.

For more information, contact Vicki Rupp at
Dow at (989) 636-1000 or VRupp2@Dow.com.

www.dow.com/commitments/sustain.htm

-------
15
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Corporate Strategies
                  PENNSYLVANIA BUYER-SELLER AGREEMENT FACILITATES REUSE
                                    OF OLD MANUFACTURING SITE
          The Pennsylvania Department of Environment
          (PADEP) uses a successful approach at po-
          tentially contaminated sites when the owner
    is hesitant and uncertain about the risks of selling:
    Buyer-Seller Agreements with liability protections.

    In January 2006, PADEP entered into a Buyer-Seller
    agreement with Murata Electronics North America,
    Inc. (Murata Electronics), a Japanese firm considering
    the sale of a contaminated property in State College,
    Pennsylvania, and a Pennsylvania-based firm, Spectrum
    Control, Inc., a company interested in buying the prop-
    erty. The transfer of cleanup responsibility and future
    environmental liability in a manner satisfactory to all
    involved parties was the key to completing a  transac-
    tion that resulted in a robust cleanup effort as well as
    the creation and retention of hundreds of jobs.

    Murata Electronics owned and operated a ceramic
    manufacturing facility on the 54 acre site since  1956.
    At the peak of operations, the 250,000 square-foot
    facility employed 1,200 people. Manufacturing opera-
    tions at the facility were shut down in 2004 and the
    final 300 employees were laid off. Murata Electronics
    retained ownership, but they vacated the building and
    fenced off the property.
   Murata Electronics is the Responsible Party of record
   relative to the contamination and cleanup obligation.
   Remediation of the site was ongoing since 1988.
   Groundwater is contaminated with PCE and TCE
                                                 that was used in manufacturing processes at the site
                                                 from  1958 to 1980. At the time of the Buyer-Seller
                                                 agreement, PADEP estimated the remaining cost
                                                 of cleanup for the known contamination at approxi-
                                                 mately $1,500,000.

                                                 Spectrum Control, a ceramics and electronics manu-
                                                 facturing firm, was looking to relocate their Louisiana
                                                 manufacturing operations that had been destroyed
                                                 by Hurricane Katrina. The idle facility owned by
                                                 Murata Electronics was a solution for Spectrum
                                                 Control - the location was ideal since they were
                                                 already operating in other Pennsylvania locations
                                                 and they could reuse most of the equipment Mu-
                                                 rata Electronics left onsite. Time was  of the essence
                                                 because Spectrum Control had to be back in opera-
                                                 tion as soon as possible to meet production obliga-
                                                 tions  - including deliveries that would keep its other
                                                 Pennsylvania facilities in operation. Because over
                                                 100 new jobs would be created and  hundreds of
                                                 existing jobs would be retained by the relocation of
                                                 Spectrum Control's Louisiana operations, a success-
                                                 ful and  timely transaction was of high importance to
                                                 the Pennsylvania Governor's office.

                                                 However, Murata Electronics was  a reluctant seller
                                                 given its ongoing environmental liabilities. To sell the
                                                 property, Murata Electronics needed assurances that
                                                 it would be released of all environmental cleanup and
                                                 third  party liability. As the buyer, Spectrum Control
                                                 was willing to buy the property "as is,"  assume the
                                                 environmental liability obligations and complete the
                                                 remediation.

                                                 Early in the transaction negotiations, insurers were
                                                 unwilling to underwrite the types of environmental
                                                 insurance policy needed to satisfy the seller's require-
                                                 ments. Potential insurers felt there was not enough
                                                 technical information available to adequately under-
                                                 write  a policy. The insurance companies also were
                                                 uncertain that PADEP would be willing to forego the
                                                 typical liability transfer mechanism of putting cleanup
                                                 funds in an escrow account that PADEP controlled
                                                 and instead rely on a traditional environmental insur-

-------
                                                                              MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                    16
ance instrument. Without the appropriate insurance
coverage, the deal could not happen.

After a complex negotiation process involving
PADEP, Murata Electronics, Spectrum Control, and
the insurer, a Buyer-Seller agreement was established
and agreed upon. Murata Electronics was allowed to
end its remediation obligations at the facility. Spec-
trum Control was allowed to assume liability, and to
continue working to remediate the site to achieve a
release of liability under Pennsylvania's Act 2 brown-
fields statute and program. After the insurer agreed to
underwrite the transaction, PADEP agreed to accept
the insurer's risk management structure rather than
requiring that remediation funds be secured in an
escrow account.
Under the Buyer-Seller agreement, Spectrum Con-
trol's liability was capped by PADEP at $4 million
for previously identified contamination and related
ongoing remedial obligations. Spectrum Control also
purchased a Cost Cap and Pollution Legal Liability
insurance policy to address risks that went beyond
cleanup obligations and other sources of potential en-
vironmental liability, such as cleanup costs associated
with unknown contamination and third party claims.

Murata Electronics and PADEP were listed as addi-
tionally insured parties under the policy. The insurer's
ability to extend coverage to both the regulatory
agency as well as to the seller was a critical part of the
transaction. By being afforded status as an insured
party on the policy, PADEP was satisfied  that reme-
dial obligations would be met by privately secured
funding. Should the new owner fail, however, to
execute its remedial obligations or become financially
insolvent, the Commonwealth can invoke its rights
under the policy to receive insurance coverage for the
cleanup of the site, thereby removing the possibility
that PADEP is left with financial obligations related
to cleanup.

By extending coverage to Murata Electronics, the
transaction could proceed because third party liabil-
ity concerns were addressed.  Protection from third
party claims was essential to the transaction because
the seller would not sell the property without this
protection. In this case, the environmental insur-
ance policy provided an additional level of liability
protection not afforded under the Commonwealth's
Act 2 release of liability.

The funds to purchase the insurance policy came from
the private parties engaged in the transaction. The
liability transfer allowed the transaction to proceed
while satisfying the  regulatory authority that the
cleanup would be completed without the use of tax-
payer dollars.

Today, site remediation is moving along as planned.
In fact, cleanup efforts were greatly expedited fol-
lowing the transfer of ownership.  The manufacturing
facility is operating in full swing, employing over 100
Pennsylvanians, and saving hundreds of other jobs.
Moreover, the revitalized operation is back on the  tax
rolls for the community of State College.
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1. Create Comfort - PADEP's buyer-seller
     agreement with liability protection provided
     assurances the owner needed to transfer the
     contaminated property.

  2. Reduce the Risks — By being listed as an
     insured party on the environmental insurance
     policy, PADEP was satisfied that remedial
     obligations would be met.

  For more information, contact Tracey Vernon,
  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Pro-
  tection at (717) 772-5906 or tvernon@state.pa.us.

  www. depweb. state.pa.us/dep/site/default. asp

-------
17
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                                       VACANT SITE TO BECOME
                                      ROCHESTER SPORTS CENTER
          As a result of local government leadership,
          and the use of risk management tools and
          institutional controls, a DuPont owned
   property that was closed for 13 years is on the
   verge of being redeveloped as a public recreational
   complex. DuPont is the owner of a 9.9 acre site in
   northwestern Rochester, New York. The site began
   as a fairground in the 1870s and was purchased by
   the Defender Photo Supply Company, a photo-
   graphic film and paper manufacturing firm. Du-
   Pont purchased the business and property in 1945
   and continued production at the property until
   1995. The manufacturing plant was demolished in
   1996 and the site remains vacant.
   For almost 10 years there was little interest from
   entities in the community to redevelop the site, and
   it remained fenced off. In 2006, local youth sports
   organizations began expressing a desire to use the
   site as public athletic fields. The City of Rochester
   School District started to discuss the possibility of
   turning the site into athletic fields and a parking
   lot. The renewed community interest encouraged
   the City of Rochester to approach DuPont to begin
   redevelopment negotiations.
                                                  The institutional controls provided
                                                  the framework for an agreement
                                                  that will alleviate concerns about
                                                  losing control of the site and
                                                  dramatically reduce the risk
                                                  associated with property transfer.
                                               The prior use of the site presented an impediment to
                                               redevelopment during initial negotiations. The soil at
                                               the property was contaminated with the byproducts of
                                               photographic film production - a process that pre-
                                               dominantly uses silver and small levels of cadmium,
                                               lead, and mercury.  Given these  challenges, the reuse
                                               of the property hinged on DuPont's ability to reach
                                               an acceptable redevelopment agreement with the City.

                                               In response to DuPont's concerns regarding potential
                                               environmental risks at the property, the local gov-
                                               ernment explored whether the City could take over
                                               ownership  or liability to provide the certainty DuPont
                                               sought. Because both DuPont and the City are long
                                               established and stable entities, the parties are more
                                               confident about negotiating to reduce risks and liabil-
                                               ity concerns at this long idled property.

                                               The City will implement institutional controls as part
                                               of the remedy to provide the level of certainty regard-
                                               ing future risks and liability sought by DuPont. By
                                               instituting  deed restrictions and environmental ease-
                                               ments that run with the land, DuPont and Rochester
                                               can address long term concerns not always covered by
                                               indemnification agreements. Institutional controls most
                                               often are not dependent on the continued involvement
                                               of the party who owned the property at the time of
                                               remediation. The responsibility to monitor institutional
                                               controls generally is transferred upon land sale. In-

-------
                                                                              MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                  18
damnification agreements generally are not affected by
the property sale.  The City of Rochester, being a local
government, can provide an additional layer of protec-
tion in the case of institutional controls because the
local government  has the internal structure to oversee
land use permits and can restrict what happens to the
property, adding additional certainty to any future use.

DuPont and  the City reached an agreement in prin-
ciple where DuPont will clean up the site and then
donate the property to the City of Rochester. In addi-
tion, DuPont executed a Brownfield Cleanup Agree-
ment on May 17,2007 with the State of New York.
The remedy and land transfer agreement will provide
for institutional controls, such as a deed notice restric-
tion requiring restricted residential reuse (to limit the
number of parties responsible for monitoring compli-
ance with institutional controls) and environmental
easements. DuPont will indemnify the City for envi-
ronmental costs provided the City accepts the prop-
erty donation, determines appropriate recreational use
and ensures all property restrictions are enforced. The
indemnification by DuPont will be reduced, if not ter-
minated, if the City transfers the property to another
party in the future. This reflects DuPont's concerns
with regard to indemnifying parties that may have
uncertain financial futures.
                                                     The institutional controls provided the framework for
                                                     an agreement that will alleviate DuPont's concerns
                                                     about losing control of how the site is used in the fu-
                                                     ture.  Further, Rochester's local leadership in creatively
                                                     working to structure a negotiation that satisfies the
                                                     interests of both parties was important in moving the
                                                     negotiation process forward. Remedial selection for
                                                     the site is expected in late 2008 or 2009, construction
                                                     in 2009-2010, and property transfer expected in 2010.
CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
1. Local Leadership — The City approached
   DuPont to develop  a plan for reuse of the
   property to meet community needs.

2. Reduce Risk-The land transfer agreement
   utilizes institutional controls to limit end uses
   to reduce DuPont's risk of liability.

For more information, contact Mark  Gregor,
City of Rochester at (585) 428-5978  or
mgregor@cityofrochester.gov.

www.ci.rochester.nv.us/des/index.cfm

-------
19
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                                    MILWAUKEE MASTER PLAN  RENEWS
                                           OLD INDUSTRIAL VALLEY
          The City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin's 1,500 acre
          Menomonee Valley experienced rapid growth
          from the 1920s to the early 1950s, serving as a
    major industrial center for the area. Surrounding the
    numerous industrial facilities, neighborhoods sprang up
    allowing many of the workers to live near their places of
    employment. As is the case in many Midwestern areas,
    the decline of United  States manufacturing forced the
    businesses of the once thriving area to close, leaving
    contaminated properties within walking distance of the
    city center.

    In the 1990s, the City of Milwaukee expressed inter-
    est in revitalizing the Menomonee Valley and returning
    jobs to the community. In 1998, the City of Milwaukee
    completed a master plan to redevelop the five-mile long
    and half mile wide valley. The City partnered with the
    Menomonee Valley Business Improvement District, the
    Milwaukee  Economic Development Corporation, the
    Menomonee Valley Business Association, and numerous
    other local entities to form the nonprofit Menomonee
    Valley Partners, Inc. to implement the land use plan.
    The land use plan relies upon, and uses, federal, local,
    and state tools for cleanup. Federal tools include Com-
    munity Development Block Grants, HUD Economic
    Development Initiative grants, CongressionaUy directed
    spending, and Environmental Protection Agency re-
                                                   sources including Brownfields grants. Local leadership,
                                                   private investment, tax foreclosure, and the use of eminent
                                                   domain were identified as important tools and used when
                                                   necessary. Since the implementation of the land use plan,
                                                   two additional local tools assisted in the redevelopment.
                                                   First, the establishment of an overall Valley land use plan
                                                   created momentum toward redevelopment and resulted in
                                                   increasing property values in the Valley. Property owners
                                                   in the Valley, including several mom & pop businesses,
                                                   are taking advantage of the rise in property value and are
                                                   becoming willing to  sell now that there is a market, thus
                                                   speeding up redevelopment. A second local tool is the
                                                   use of the Menomonee Valley Partners organization as
                                                   an acquirer of property, as some owners may look more
                                                   favorably on transferring their property to an entity other
                                                   than the government.
                                                   The State of Wisconsin has a number of tools to re-
                                                   develop potentially contaminated properties that are
                                                   contributing to the development of the master land use
                                                   plan and ongoing cleanup of mothballed properties in
                                                   the Menomonee Valley. Tax increment financing (TIF)
                                                   is used on sites to fund site acquisition and cleanup. TIFs
                                                   allow for a local government to credit property owners
                                                   for the expected rise in property value from redevelop-
                                                   ment. That expected credit enables the owner to receive
                                                   a bond to pay for redevelopment up front. Menomonee

-------
                                                                                MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                     20
Valley projects also took advantage of Wisconsin De-
partment of Natural Resources (DNR) programs and
expertise. The DNR's Brownfields Environmental As-
sessment Program awarded funds for site assessment and
cleanup. DNR's Sustainable Urban Development Zone
funds assisted with investigation as well. DNR continues
to provide extensive technical assistance to complete all
environmental work in advance of development. As a
result, when the City finds an interested purchaser for
a parcel,  the parties need to work only with the DNR
on the appropriate placement of the buildings (to  act as
a barrier to residual contamination on site) and request
an exemption to build on the historic fill. This strategy
saves new businesses thousands of dollars in direct
and indirect costs, since most of these businesses have
very short windows in which to finance, purchase, and
build. A  further tool available to local government in
Wisconsin is a State-established liability exemption for
local governments who acquire property through use of
eminent domain or tax receipt foreclosure. This enabled
Milwaukee to acquire property without becoming a po-
tentially  responsible party for cleanup.
Many of the above tools assisted in the redevelopment
of the largest mothballed properties in the Menomonee
Valley - the 130 acre former Milwaukee Road Railyards.
The rail yards were vacant for over 20 years before the
redevelopment plan was instituted. The City faced owners
unwilling to sell the property that was contaminated with
asbestos,  oil, and PCBs. Eventually an agreement was
reached. City grants, EPA grants, HUD grants, CDBG
funds, DNR grants and technical assistance, $16 mil-
lion in TIFs, and $39 million in private investment came
together to purchase and redevelop the property. Cur-
rently, there is a business park for light industrial users on
approximately half of the site that is projected to create
over 1.2 million square feet of building space and 1,200
jobs. The other half of the  property will be greenspace.
Redevelopment in the Menomonee Valley is still ongo-
ing. Successful projects include the construction of
Miller Park, home of the Milwaukee Brewers. The Valley
is also the site of the 12 mile Hank Aaron State Trail
along the Menomonee River. Over the next 10 years the
Menomonee Valley Partners are projecting three mil-
lion square feet of new construction in the once blighted
Menomonee Valley. At this time, 18 redevelopment
projects are underway including a unique Harley-Da-
vidson museum, trails, greenspaces, and light manufac-
turing. The Harley-Davidson museum is a $60 million,
110,000 sq. ft. project located on a former Morton Salt
industrial site that houses the museum, a retail store,
banquet space, and a restaurant. Phase II will include
space for the Harley-Davidson corporate archives, a
restoration shop and additional museum exhibits. Phase
III plans include office space and other growth needs.
Harley-Davidson incorporated the Menomonee Valley
Sustainable Design Guidelines in their development.
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1.  Reuse First-The City of Milwaukee and
     the Menomonee Valley Partners developed
     a comprehensive land reuse plan to spur
     redevelopment.
  2.  State Tools & Resources — Wisconsin pro-
     vides technical assistance, grants, tax increment
     financing, and limited governmental liability to
     aid redevelopment.
  For more information, contact David Misky,
  Milwaukee Department of City Development at
  (414) 286-8682 or David.Misky@milwaukee.gov.
  www. renewthevallev.org/

-------
21
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                        ENVIRONMENTAL EXTENSION CENTER HELPS SEATTLE
                        SMALL BUSINESSES ON CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES
     /^  n innovative nonprofit environmental as-
    /-* sistance center in King County, Washington
   JL  jLis helping small businesses and mom & pop
   owners make their potentially contaminated prop-
   erties available for sale and revitalization.
   The Environmental Coalition of South Seattle
   (ECOSS) is a nonprofit educational organization
   designed to assist businesses and the community
   with environmental and economic development
   issues. ECOSS established an Environmental
   Extension Service that works cooperatively with
   government, businesses, and community and envi-
   ronmental interests in the Puget Sound Region.

   The Environmental Extension Service helps small
   businesses understand and address issues related to
   contaminated properties. It helps small businesses
   navigate the road to property cleanup, which can be
   confusing and may seem to be unnecessarily expen-
   sive and time consuming. Moreover, the Extension
   Service helps businesses understand that by finding
   and eliminating contamination, they can reduce
   their legal liability and preserve the value of their
   real estate.
                                              ECOSS has established an
                                              En vironmental Extension
                                              Service that works cooperatively
                                              with the government, businesses,
                                              and community and environ-
                                              mental interests in the Puget
                                              Sound Region.
                                             The Extension Service provides free consultations
                                             and assistance. The assistance tailored individually
                                             for each business includes research and assessments
                                             on a property's contamination history, referrals
                                             to environmental consultants, interpretation of
                                             consultant reports, recommendations on cleanup
                                             strategies, recruitment of tenants for newly cleaned
                                             properties, help in developing and implementing
                                             stormwater management plans, assistance with en-


-------
                                                                               MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                  22
vironmental compliance, and help accessing public
sector grants and technical assistance.

The King County/Seattle Brownfields Showcase Initia-
tive, supported by the EPA Brownfields Program and
assessment grants, helped launch the Environmental
Extension Service's brownfields assistance work.

Since ECOSS started helping small businesses deal with
problem properties, the center developed an inventory of
potentially contaminated properties in King County, con-
ducted initial inspections of more than 170 sites, started
96 environmental site assessments, completed 50 assess-
ments totaling 250 acres of properties, saved businesses
more than $250,000 in costs, and leveraged more than
$11 million in Brownfields cleanup grants and revitaliza-
tion funding.
ECOSS helped mom &pop owners of potentially con-
taminated properties on numerous successful revitaliza-
tion projects. When Jun and Susan Despi immigrated
from the Philippines to Seattle, they started the Delite
Bakery. Their bakery was so successful that the business
needed to expand. But plans went awry when they un-
wittingly bought the contaminated Kwik Cleaners dry
cleaning site and were unable to address the contami-
nation issues with their family lawyer. ECOSS assisted
by finding the family a good environmental attorney,
helped find and hire a cleanup consultant, and obtained
cleanup funding through an old insurance policy. To-
day, the family is proud that "Despi's Delite Bakery" is
a popular and thriving bakery for the neighborhood.
                                                     At the North Coast Chemical site located in a low
                                                     rent, depressed industrial area in the County, the out
                                                     of state landlord heard about ECOSS and met with
                                                     ECOSS officials at a community presentation. The
                                                     landowner worked with ECOSS to address problems
                                                     at the site, removing the polluting tenant, establishing
                                                     a work plan for cleanup, and helping find and hire a
                                                     trustworthy cleanup contractor.

                                                     Through community based efforts, environmental assis-
                                                     tance centers, such as ECOSS are making a difference
                                                     for mom & pop owners of contaminated sites across
                                                     the nation.
                                                       CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
1.  Assist the Mom & Pops - ECOSS assists mom
   & pop owners navigate the road to cleanup by
   providing information on the tools available for
   remediation and redevelopment.

2.  Federal Grants — EPA Brownfields Program
   assessment grants provided the seed money
   to begin the program and continue to support
   ECOSS assistance to small businesses.

For more information, contact Emery Bailey,
Environmental Coalition  of South Seattle at
(206) 767-0432 or emery@ecoss.org.

http://ecoss.org/about/index.htm


-------
23
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                                 WEST VIRGINIA SMALL CITIES CREATE
                                        A COMMERCE CORRIDOR
          The cities of Charles Town and Ranson, West
          Virginia are revitalizing a blighted corridor
          in the center of their adjacent downtowns
   into a new "Commerce Corridor" of mixed use de-
   velopment. Technical assistance from private sector
   organizations, supported with EPA Brownfields re-
   sources, are critical to this success. These resources
   are helping small owners of mothballed properties
   and redevelopers realize the potential for transfer
   and redevelopment of their properties.
   Two key parcels at the center of the corridor were
   mothballed for decades, held by families unable and
   uninterested in sale or redevelopment. One site is a
   century old industrial scrapyard that was tainted with
   lead, petroleum, and other metals. The second is a
   granary complex subject to state emergency removal
   actions due to petroleum and pesticides contamination.
   The family and individual owners of these sites were
   reluctant to revitalize based in part on lack of experi-
   ence in real estate and development of contaminated
   properties, lack of collaboration with the local govern-
   ment, and a listless downtown market for reuse.

   The cities of Charles Town and Ranson engaged
   these property owners, local developers, and the
   broader community in a process to create a reuse
                                                    The cities used EPA and other
                                                    resources to create a plan for
                                                    matching the highest and best
                                                    market uses for these sites to the
                                                   physical conditions of the sites
                                                    and the surrounding develop-
                                                    ment context.
                                                vision for this corridor, to educate stakeholders on
                                                opportunities, and to prime the market for reuse.
                                                Charles Town and Ranson sought and obtained U. S.
                                                EPA assessment grant funding to support the endeavor.
                                                The cities worked with property owners to convince
                                                them of the value of conducting environmental assess-
                                                ments on the properties to understand and manage the
                                                risks at the sites. The localities also worked with a local
                                                developer on strategies to overcome challenges at these
                                                properties.  The site owners and interested redevelopers
                                                agreed to allow the performance of Phase I and Phase
                                                II assessments on these properties.

                                                The cities used EPA and other resources to create a
                                                plan for matching the highest and best market uses for
                                                these sites to the physical conditions of the sites and
                                                the surrounding development context. The community
                                                conducted planning charettes, highest and best use
                                                analyses, market feasibility studies, and reuse planning.
                                                The owners of the properties and other stakehold-
                                                ers were invited to participate in all  of these activities,
                                                helping them realize the potential opportunities for
                                                revitalization.

                                                A key step was securing assistance from the Urban
                                                Land Institute (ULI), a nonprofit research and
                                                education  institute focused on urban revitalization.
                                                ULI convened a "technical assistance panel" (TAP)

-------
                                                                           MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                 24
of 10 experts in the fields of development, finance,
real estate, and contaminated properties from the
mid Atlantic region. The ULI TAP engaged the
cities and community stakeholders to define a
set of issues and objectives for analysis. The TAP
convened in the community for three days, met
with stakeholders, debated reuse prospects, and
established a set of reuse recommendations. Several
weeks after the onsite forum, ULI provided a com-
prehensive 25 page report with reuse recommenda-
tions. The report confirmed and enhanced the reuse
planning already conducted by the community.
At the beginning of the localities' efforts, one com-
munity official asked a local developer whether
he would work with the owners of the mothballed
properties to seek redevelopment. The local de-
veloper replied, "those sites are contaminated and
worthless. Why would I want to get involved in
another Love Canal?" At the conclusion of the ULI
forum, that same developer, who attended all of the
reuse planning activities in the community together
with the site owners, remarked "I  am convinced
that this project holds the future to the Charles
Town community. I am investing and moving for-
ward." He formed a dynamic development team for
the reuse of the former industrial scrapyard, created
a remedial plan in cooperation with state officials,
and prepared the site for redevelopment. In August
2007, the City of Charles Town approved final site
development plans for a "Gateway Center" that
will house high tech commercial office tenants. A
groundbreaking is planned for 2008. This developer
also purchased a vacant lumber yard in the corridor
and converted it into a 35,000 square feet com-
mercial office and warehousing operation.  In the
meantime, other redevelopers who see progress in
Charles Town are engaging in talks with the family
that owns the granary about expanding the com-
mercial redevelopment in the area.

In this case, small property owners, an inexperi-
enced local government, and reluctant investors
who had  given up on this downtown corridor came
together  to create a reuse vision that is now being
implemented. This transformation in thinking was
fueled by U.S. EPA Brownfields grant resources
enabling  private sector organizations like the Urban
Land Institute to  conduct reuse planning, outreach,
education, and environmental assessments to cre-
ate a market for revitalization and give parties the
confidence  to move forward.
                                                    CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1. Reuse First— Creation of a reuse plan
    convinced site owners and developers  there
    would be a market for the redeveloped prop-
    erty and provided the certainty the parties
    were seeking.

  2. Federal Grants - Charles Town and Ranson
    used EPA Brownfields assessment funding to
    reach out to the site owners and the broader
    community to conduct assessments and edu-
    cate stakeholders on opportunities for reuse.

  For more information, contact Charles Town
  Councilwoman Ann Paonessa at (304) 728-2887
  or annpwv@frontiernet.net.

  www.charlestownwv.us/section.aspPsection id=44

-------
25
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                     COLORADO BROWNFIELDS FOUNDATION HELPS MOM & POPS
                            WITH ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM
          The Colorado Brownfields Foundation (CBF)
          is a nonprofit organization servicing urban,
          suburban, and rural Colorado to promote
   the cleanup and reuse of environmentally impaired
   sites, including mothballed properties. CBF assists
   in finding solutions to mothballed properties by
   providing technical assistance to owners, buyers,
   and local governments seeking to revitalize these
   properties.
   CBF's Environmental Stewardship Program assists
   communities and property owners facing critical
   issues related to potentially contaminated  prop-
   erties but lacking the specialized expertise and
   financial resources to address them. CBF can loan
   a brownfields coordinator to a project to inven-
   tory redevelopment opportunities, provide strate-
   gic information on land reuse models, coordinate
   environmental  related services, identify funding
   options, and act as an intergovernmental liaison.
   CBF's Environmental Due Diligence Grants pro-
   vide environmental services to local governments to
   support public-private real estate transactions and
   support redevelopment for public benefits. CBF
   brings seminars, workshops, and conferences to
   communities to educate stakeholders and project
                                               managers on strategic approaches to redeveloping
                                               potentially contaminated properties.

                                               Additionally, CBF administers several specialized
                                               programs including the Colorado Historic Byways
                                               Initiative, an interagency state program that pro-
                                               vides environmental assessment and cleanup ser-
                                               vices to local economic development projects along
                                               Colorado's Scenic Byways and Historic Districts.
                                               CBF also works to help clean up environmental
                                               contamination associated with clandestine meth-
                                               amphetamine labs, focusing on homes that are
                                               abandoned, in foreclosure, or otherwise veiled to
                                               potential occupants.

                                               CBF coordinated a public-private partnership to
                                               clean up and reuse  the Former Buckshot Indus-
                                               tries property in Crowley County, Colorado (pop-
                                               ulation 6,000). The eight acre site is the former
                                               location of a family owned highway construction
                                               business and was blighted by a combination of
                                               illegal dumping, diesel fuel spills, and clandestine
                                               methamphetamine  production.
                                               Buckshot Industries ceased operation in the mid
                                               1990s when the owner's two sons inherited the
                                               family business. In place of the road construction

-------
                                                                              MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                    26
business, the brothers started a methamphetamine
production lab — a process with hazardous byproducts.
In addition to the toxic methamphetamine chemi-
cals, the site also contained rusty drums leaking
diesel fuel left over from previous road construc-
tion. Asbestos debris accumulated on the property
due to the brothers operating an illegal dump in
addition to their methamphetamine laboratory.

The site eventually became subject to tax liens by
the County Treasurer. At the tax sale there were no
potential purchasers and the county itself declined to
convert the Treasurer's liens into title, citing the envi-
ronmental issues. It appeared that the property could
remain mothballed for some time into the future.
In 2007, CBF assisted in encouraging a local manufac-
turer of hand-crafted cabinetry to consider using this
property for an expansion of its operations. The manu-
facturer contemplated relocating out of the County, but
after discussions with Crowley County Commissioners,
it decided  to take possession of the Treasurer's liens with
full title after cleanup was complete.
CBF was instrumental in putting this agreement into
place and saving the property from continued status as
a mothballed property. First, CBF coordinated with
the Colorado Department of Public Health & En-
vironment to characterize site conditions. CBF also
developed the terms of the  agreement.  In addition to
transferring fee title following cleanup, it delegated
cleanup responsibilities for contaminated diesel soils
to the County. The cabinetry company agreed to
clean up the dump site and asbestos debris. CBF
itself will clean up the methamphetamine laboratory.
The County waived all entitlement fees for the prop-
erty and offered to provide earth moving equipment
and operators for cleanup activities. As a side benefit
and cost savings measure, the local Voluntary Fire
Department will receive free training from the State
in assaying and disposing of unknown containerized
liquids as part of the methamphetamine lab cleanup.
The agreement also specifies that jobs will be kept
on the site for three years or the business will incur
financial penalties.
The retention and expansion of this local business is
economically significant because it entails the creation
of jobs and puts the property back on the tax rolls.
CBF estimates reuse of this once  tax delinquent and
vacant site would add about $250,000 in payroll to the
community, contribute almost $6,000 annually to the
County's tax rolls, and over $1,000 in annual taxes to
the local school district. Unfortunately, at the time that
this report was being published, a Colorado wildfire
destroyed this revitalized property, and the community
will need to work again to redevelop.
  CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
  1. Assist Mom & Pops — CBF provided the
     expertise to the cabinetry company and local
     government to understand the human health
     impacts of environmental conditions and to
     develop a strategy to clean up and reuse this
     site.
  2. Local Leadership - The local government,
     through the use of assuming cleanup costs
     and waiving fees, committed to developing
     an agreement whereby the cabinetry com-
     pany would remain in the community.
  For more information, contact Jesse Silverstein,
  Colorado Brownfields Foundation at
  (303) 962-0942 or jesse@ColoradoBrownfields-
  Foundation.org.
  www.coloradobrownfieldsfoundation.org/

-------
27
Profiles of Successful Mothballed Property Revitalization - Local Leadership
                    INNOVATIVE BUILDING REUSE PROGRAM SPURS REVITALIZATION
                                  OF NORTH CAROLINA SMALL TOWNS
           North Carolina is in the midst of a 30 year
           economic restructuring as a result of man-
           ufacturing closures and job losses. Many
   communities lost their economic base as manu-
   facturing plants closed, the number of small farms
   declined and locally owned businesses, including
   main street stores, disappeared. The hardest hit
   small towns saw their tax bases erode, making it
   difficult to provide basic services and nearly im-
   possible to plan for new growth and  development.
   Whether an empty storefront on Main Street or a
   shuttered factory out on the highway, vacant build-
   ings serve as daily reminders of the economic hard-
   ships being pressed upon small towns throughout
   North Carolina. They are a source of discourage-
   ment to local residents and to anyone considering
   starting a new business. But these buildings also
   represent a town's potential. Restored, renovated,
   and equipped, they can once again become thriv-
   ing centers of commerce, creating jobs and adding
   much-needed tax base for struggling communities.

   A nonprofit center based in Raleigh called the
   North Carolina Rural Economic Development
   Center (Rural Center) helps create economic
   revitalization in  the state's 85 rural counties by

                                               conducting research into rural issues; advocating
                                               for policy and program innovations; and building
                                               the productive capacity of rural leaders, entrepre-
                                               neurs, and community organizations. The Rural
                                               Center operates a "Building Reuse and Restoration
                                               Program" that assists communities and small busi-
                                               nesses in transforming the potential these buildings
                                               represent into economic reality. Grants provided by
                                               the Rural Center help local governments prepare
                                               the buildings for reuse by new and expanding busi-
                                               nesses. The Rural Center oversees the program that
                                               received  $40 million in funding from the North
                                               Carolina General Assembly.
                                                                                                              +



-------
                                                                           MOTHBALLED PROPERTIES
                                                28

The Building Reuse program provides predevel-
opment grants of $25,000 to cover the costs of
studies and other activity necessary to secure
commitments from a business or investors for the
reuse of vacant and blighted buildings. Develop-
ment grants of up to $400,000 are awarded to
projects ready for reuse and must be matched by
at least an equal amount  of private and public
funds. Awards are limited to local governments
in rural counties or the most economically dis-
tressed urban areas, with  priority given to towns
with fewer than 5,000 people.

For example, a Rural Center grant is helping the
City of Albemarle, North  Carolina reuse a 42,000
square feet manufacturing facility that closed in the
early 1970s into a mix of offices, retail, and living
space. The Rural Center also provided $250,000 to
the Town  of Forest  City for  the reuse of the Cone
Mills/Florence textile plant  as a mixed use develop-
ment with a total investment of $20 million. The
complex, with a restaurant, bookstore, movie the-
ater, meeting facilities, hotel, museum, and housing,
will create 50 jobs and spur the redevelopment of
other historic buildings near the former mill.

An important role of the North Carolina Rural
Center's programs with respect to mothballed
properties is that the Building  Reuse effort helps
create "market pull" in localities that struggle with
economic stagnancy. The  predevelopment and res-
toration grants help create community consensus
on reuse plans, identify highest and best uses for
                                                   particular sites, and create interest by potential in-
                                                   vestors and redevelopers in reuse. These issues are
                                                   typically more complex for contaminated proper-
                                                   ties. Such economic development momentum can
                                                   be critical in providing confidence to the  individu-
                                                   als and businesses who own these long vacant sites
                                                   that there is value in taking on the challenges of
                                                   cleanup and restoration. With hope for real estate
                                                   and market opportunities created by the proactive
                                                   efforts that are enabled with Rural Center grants,
                                                   property owners often become less reluctant to
                                                   discuss site transfer.
                                                    CONTRIBUTIONS TO SUCCESS:
1. Assist Mom & Pops - The Rural Center pro-
   vides assistance to small businesses for building
   reuse and revitalization.

2. State Tools and Resources — State funds pro-
   vide grants for predevelopment and develop-
   ment projects  for communities to identify reuse
   opportunities.

For more information, contact Billy Ray Hall,
North Carolina Rural Center at (919) 250-4314
or brhall@ncruralcenter.org.

www.ncruralcenter.org/
                                                            •

-------
a
Mothballedproperties are a challenge in communities across America. America is up to the challenge of
revitalizing these sites through new innovative approaches and public-private collaboration.
                                                    Stephen Johnson, EPA Administrator

                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5105T)
EPA 560-R-08-003
October 2008
www. epa.gov/brownfields/

-------