Urban Brownfields Make Way for Research-Oriented Mixed-Use Communities
McGraw Hill Construction Continuing Education Center, Nancy B. Solomon, November 2009
Urban brownfields have become increasingly attractive sites for redevelopment; companies seeking to create the next designer drug or the slickest software are transforming the areas into a new kind of urban research park. Woven into the fabric of a mixed-use, walkable community, these research parks stand in sharp contrast to more traditional ones, which are typically sited on sprawling suburban campuses and relatively isolated from the hubbub of daily commerce. Given the important role that research and technology play in today's highly competitive global economy, interest in such urban research parks is bound to increase.
Cleanup costs and liability risks historically associated with brownfield redevelopment have lessened now that the assessment and cleanup tools are largely in place, the regulatory framework has improved, and developers have become more familiar with the process. "Local governments have also become more effective at making these sites shovel-ready," says Christopher De Sousa, associate professor at the School of Architecture and Urban Planning, and Department of Geography at UW-Milwaukee and co-director of the Brownfields Research Consortium. In many urban districts, public money is typically part of such a redevelopment process.
Although the specifics of each project vary, urban brownfield research parks share certain similarities. The redevelopments, for example, tend to be located near a hospital or university or both (e.g., University Park at MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts; South Lake Union between downtown Seattle and Lake Union, Washington; Piedmont Triad Research Park in Winston-Salem, North Carolina).
Various developers stress the value of collaborating early on with all stakeholders to get their input and buy-in and downplay the technical challenges of remediating their respective sites. However, no matter what the targeted use, De Sousa believes that the main challenge facing urban brownfield redevelopment in the US "is the ease with which we can still develop on greenfields."
Read the complete article and take the continuing education test here.
Showing posts with label redevelopment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label redevelopment. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Superfund Site to Become Climate Change Think Tank
San Francisco and the United Nations partner on global warming center
Heather Knight, San Francisco Chronicle, July 30, 2009
San Francisco's Hunters Point Shipyard will be the future home of a UN-sponsored think tank to study solutions to global warming and other environmental crises plaguing the planet.
The 80,000-square-foot United Nations Global Compact Center will include office space for academics and scientists, an incubator to foster green tech start-ups, and a conference center. The center is expected to cost $20 million. Lennar Corp., the developer partnering with the city to rebuild large swaths of the shipyard and Candlestick Point, will donate the land and infrastructure. The city hopes the remainder of the funds will come from corporate sponsorship, state and federal grants, and foundation money.
The partnership between San Francisco and the United Nations dates to June 26, 1945, when the UN Charter was signed at the city's War Memorial Veterans Building. Four years ago, mayors from around the world gathered at City Hall to sign the UN Global Compact, a set of 21 urban environmental accords. San Francisco and Milwaukee are the only two American cities that signed the compact.
Read the complete story here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/29/MN7O1913JU.DTL
Heather Knight, San Francisco Chronicle, July 30, 2009
San Francisco's Hunters Point Shipyard will be the future home of a UN-sponsored think tank to study solutions to global warming and other environmental crises plaguing the planet.
The 80,000-square-foot United Nations Global Compact Center will include office space for academics and scientists, an incubator to foster green tech start-ups, and a conference center. The center is expected to cost $20 million. Lennar Corp., the developer partnering with the city to rebuild large swaths of the shipyard and Candlestick Point, will donate the land and infrastructure. The city hopes the remainder of the funds will come from corporate sponsorship, state and federal grants, and foundation money.
The partnership between San Francisco and the United Nations dates to June 26, 1945, when the UN Charter was signed at the city's War Memorial Veterans Building. Four years ago, mayors from around the world gathered at City Hall to sign the UN Global Compact, a set of 21 urban environmental accords. San Francisco and Milwaukee are the only two American cities that signed the compact.
Read the complete story here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/29/MN7O1913JU.DTL
Thursday, July 2, 2009
NIMBY or YIMBY?
As both Berkeley and Oakland debate their downtown plans, there is growing recognition that the fight against global warming requires greater urban density.
Robert Gammon, East Bay Express, July 1, 2009
Environmentalists who think globally say suburban sprawl and the destruction of rural farmland must stop. But the lack of urban growth in Berkeley and in parts of Oakland during the past few decades also has contributed to suburban sprawl and long commutes. And all those freeways choked with cars are now the single biggest cause of greenhouse gas emissions in the region. Some activists who have fought developers for years are now embracing them and calling for so-called "smart growth" or "infill development" — dense urban housing near mass transit. They note that downtown Berkeley and Oakland, along with the major transportation corridors between the two cities, are nearly perfect for transit-oriented development.
Greenbelt Alliance, an environmental group that has been fighting suburban sprawl for decades, recently pinpointed the inner East Bay as one of the region's top potential growth areas. The group estimates that the inner East Bay, west of the hills, could accommodate at least 106,000 new housing units by 2035. The group based its estimate on data from the Association of Bay Area Governments and UC Berkeley's Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
But for the inner East Bay to grow the way it should, it will have to overcome the region's well-developed not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) sensibilities. In Berkeley and North Oakland, in particular, residents who view themselves as environmentalists have been blocking dense housing developments for decades. They have complained about traffic, overcrowding, and the potential destruction of neighborhood character.
In Berkeley, where NIMBY sentiment is especially strong, a group of developers and activists who advocate for smart growth sometimes refer to themselves as YIMBYs (Yes, In My Backyard). "Our goal is to shift the idea of what it means to be an environmentalist when living in a city, away from the protection of land to the more efficient use of land," explained Erin Rhoades, the volunteer executive director of Livable Berkeley. For several years, her group has been battling a small but very vocal coalition of city residents who simultaneously view themselves as green while staunchly opposing urban housing development.
There are far fewer NIMBYs in Oakland when it comes to downtown issues. The Oakland City Council is scheduled to debate its new downtown plan on July 7. In downtown Oakland, the biggest impediment to growth over the years hasn't been NIMBYism but crime. The widespread perception that downtown is dangerous has stymied development. But in recent years, Oakland's Uptown area, just north of downtown, has launched a comeback, particularly since the renovation of the historic Fox Theater.
Read the complete article in the East Bay Express.
Robert Gammon, East Bay Express, July 1, 2009
Environmentalists who think globally say suburban sprawl and the destruction of rural farmland must stop. But the lack of urban growth in Berkeley and in parts of Oakland during the past few decades also has contributed to suburban sprawl and long commutes. And all those freeways choked with cars are now the single biggest cause of greenhouse gas emissions in the region. Some activists who have fought developers for years are now embracing them and calling for so-called "smart growth" or "infill development" — dense urban housing near mass transit. They note that downtown Berkeley and Oakland, along with the major transportation corridors between the two cities, are nearly perfect for transit-oriented development.
Greenbelt Alliance, an environmental group that has been fighting suburban sprawl for decades, recently pinpointed the inner East Bay as one of the region's top potential growth areas. The group estimates that the inner East Bay, west of the hills, could accommodate at least 106,000 new housing units by 2035. The group based its estimate on data from the Association of Bay Area Governments and UC Berkeley's Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
But for the inner East Bay to grow the way it should, it will have to overcome the region's well-developed not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) sensibilities. In Berkeley and North Oakland, in particular, residents who view themselves as environmentalists have been blocking dense housing developments for decades. They have complained about traffic, overcrowding, and the potential destruction of neighborhood character.
In Berkeley, where NIMBY sentiment is especially strong, a group of developers and activists who advocate for smart growth sometimes refer to themselves as YIMBYs (Yes, In My Backyard). "Our goal is to shift the idea of what it means to be an environmentalist when living in a city, away from the protection of land to the more efficient use of land," explained Erin Rhoades, the volunteer executive director of Livable Berkeley. For several years, her group has been battling a small but very vocal coalition of city residents who simultaneously view themselves as green while staunchly opposing urban housing development.
There are far fewer NIMBYs in Oakland when it comes to downtown issues. The Oakland City Council is scheduled to debate its new downtown plan on July 7. In downtown Oakland, the biggest impediment to growth over the years hasn't been NIMBYism but crime. The widespread perception that downtown is dangerous has stymied development. But in recent years, Oakland's Uptown area, just north of downtown, has launched a comeback, particularly since the renovation of the historic Fox Theater.
Read the complete article in the East Bay Express.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Flint Goes Back to Nature
US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive
Tom Leonard, Telegraph.co.uk, June 12, 2009
The US government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature.
Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40%, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area.
The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County, which includes Flint. Mr Kildee has now been approached by the US government and a group of charities who want him to apply what he has learned to the rest of the country.
Mr Kildee said he will concentrate on 50 cities, identified in a recent study by the Brookings Institution as potentially needing to shrink substantially to cope with their declining fortunes, including Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Memphis.
Karina Pallagst, director of the Shrinking Cities in a Global Perspective program at UC Berkeley, said there was "both a cultural and political taboo" about admitting decline in America. "Places like Flint have hit rock bottom. They're at the point where it's better to start knocking a lot of buildings down," she said.
Flint, 60 miles north of Detroit, was the original home of General Motors. The car giant once employed 79,000 local people but that figure has shrunk to around 8,000. Unemployment is now approaching 20% and the total population has almost halved to 110,000.
The local authority has restored the city's attractive but formerly deserted center but has pulled down 1,100 abandoned homes in outlying areas. Mr Kildee estimated another 3,000 needed to be demolished, although the city boundaries will remain the same. Already, some streets peter out into woods or meadows, no trace remaining of the homes that once stood there. The city is buying up houses in more affluent areas to offer people in neighborhoods it wants to demolish. Nobody will be forced to move, said Mr Kildee.
"Much of the land will be given back to nature. People will enjoy living near a forest or meadow," he said.
Read the complete story here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html
Tom Leonard, Telegraph.co.uk, June 12, 2009
The US government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature.
Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40%, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area.
The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County, which includes Flint. Mr Kildee has now been approached by the US government and a group of charities who want him to apply what he has learned to the rest of the country.
Mr Kildee said he will concentrate on 50 cities, identified in a recent study by the Brookings Institution as potentially needing to shrink substantially to cope with their declining fortunes, including Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Memphis.
Karina Pallagst, director of the Shrinking Cities in a Global Perspective program at UC Berkeley, said there was "both a cultural and political taboo" about admitting decline in America. "Places like Flint have hit rock bottom. They're at the point where it's better to start knocking a lot of buildings down," she said.
Flint, 60 miles north of Detroit, was the original home of General Motors. The car giant once employed 79,000 local people but that figure has shrunk to around 8,000. Unemployment is now approaching 20% and the total population has almost halved to 110,000.
The local authority has restored the city's attractive but formerly deserted center but has pulled down 1,100 abandoned homes in outlying areas. Mr Kildee estimated another 3,000 needed to be demolished, although the city boundaries will remain the same. Already, some streets peter out into woods or meadows, no trace remaining of the homes that once stood there. The city is buying up houses in more affluent areas to offer people in neighborhoods it wants to demolish. Nobody will be forced to move, said Mr Kildee.
"Much of the land will be given back to nature. People will enjoy living near a forest or meadow," he said.
Read the complete story here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Salt Pond Development Plans
A push for thousands of homes on bayland site
Jane Kay, SF Chronicle, May 19, 2009
DMB Associates of Scottsdale, Arizona, and Cargill Salt are expected to submit their plan to build as many as 12,000 houses on Cargill's 1,433-acre bayland property in Redwood City today, touching off a battle over development of one of the largest remaining chunks of restorable wetlands on San Francisco Bay.
The companies plan to design construction below sea level given projections of rising bay waters-up to 16 inches by 2050 and 4.5 feet by 2100. The plan envisions about 700 acres of houses and industrial and commercial development. Roughly 250 acres would be dedicated to parks, including an extension of the Bay Trail and other public access, and 440 acres would be returned to tidal marsh.
The developers hope to get approval from the city, the Bay Conservation Development Commission, and a host of agencies to break ground in 2013. The project would take 25 years to build.
Read the complete article here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/19/BAQC17MN5P.DTL
Jane Kay, SF Chronicle, May 19, 2009
DMB Associates of Scottsdale, Arizona, and Cargill Salt are expected to submit their plan to build as many as 12,000 houses on Cargill's 1,433-acre bayland property in Redwood City today, touching off a battle over development of one of the largest remaining chunks of restorable wetlands on San Francisco Bay.
The companies plan to design construction below sea level given projections of rising bay waters-up to 16 inches by 2050 and 4.5 feet by 2100. The plan envisions about 700 acres of houses and industrial and commercial development. Roughly 250 acres would be dedicated to parks, including an extension of the Bay Trail and other public access, and 440 acres would be returned to tidal marsh.
The developers hope to get approval from the city, the Bay Conservation Development Commission, and a host of agencies to break ground in 2013. The project would take 25 years to build.
Read the complete article here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/19/BAQC17MN5P.DTL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)