| From: | lschnapf@aol.com | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Date: | 29 Jun 2007 22:58:40 -0000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reply: | cpeo-brownfields | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject: | [CPEO-BIF] Re: Brownfields Digest, Vol 34, Issue 25 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There have been news reports that the MI brownfield program is out of $$. I am not sure if this is accurate but if so, presumably it would still be viable if it had been more careful about the sites that were provided with financial assistance. For example, the state Economic Development Corporation decided to allow a developer to retain $4.5 million in brownfield tax credits even though sampling has determined that the site had very little contamination. The $60 million Petoskey Pointe development involves is slated to take up an entire city block downtown. Petoskey Pointe developers hired environmental consultant AKT Peerless to conduct soil samples in May 2005. Three of the 10 soil borings showed high concentrations of tetrachloroethylene. Peerless estimated that up to 10,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil would have to be removed from the site. The Emmet County Board of Commissioners approved the report but the state Department of Environmental Quality questioned the sampling results. Peerless responded in April that the PCE detected in the soil was attributable to laboratory contamination and did not accurately reflect PCE concentrations in the soil on the property. Approximately six weeks later, the erroneous information was used in the application to the brownfield application to the MEDC. In addition to the tax credit, the developers asked the state to reimburse the estimated $450,000 in remediation costs using statewide school funds to be captured through the One month later, Peerless submitted a revised soil removal estimate to DEQ that indicated the total contaminated soil to be removed would be less than 1,000 cubic yards. In August, the volume of contaminated soil was reduced again to less than a few hundred cubic yards.
Despite the dramatic reduction in the amount of contamination, MEDC indicated it would not rescind the brownfield tax credit. Agency officials indicated that it deciding whether to approve the tax credit, the MDEC considers several factors such as public benefit, job creation, the area's level of unemployment in addition to the extent of the contamination. Since the Petoskey Pointe project is estimated to create 115 full-time jobs, the agency concluded the project should still qualify for the brownfield tax credit.
Still, if a brownfield is a site where the contamination complicates re-use, seems that money should be to limited to sites where the environmental issues are truly the impediment and not just because of general economic issues. Larry Schnapf
55 E.87th Street #8B/8C New York, NY 10128 212-876-3189 home 212-756-2205 office 212-593-5955 fax www.environmental-law.net website -----Original Message----- From: brownfields-request@list.cpeo.org To: brownfields@list.cpeo.org Sent: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 3:21 pm Subject: Brownfields Digest, Vol 34, Issue 25 Send Brownfields mailing list submissions to
brownfields@list.cpeo.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
brownfields-request@list.cpeo.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
brownfields-owner@list.cpeo.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Brownfields digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Methane detector (Lenny Siegel)
2. Gilbert Paper site, Menasha, Wisconsin (Lenny Siegel)
3. RE: Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan
(Evans Paull)
4. Re: Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan
(Lenny Siegel)
5. Denver's (CO) Cherokee-Gates project (Lenny Siegel)
6. Maryland military job growth (Lenny Siegel)
7. RE: Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan
(Joe Schilling)
Attached Message
Ground gas gizmo boosts brownfield building
PhysOrg.com June 25, 2007 An invention from the University of Manchester spin-out company that monitors dangerous methane gas lingering underground could lead to greater development of brownfield sites. The Gasclam is being developed by Salamander Ltd, which was founded by lecturer Dr Stephen Boult and spun-out of the University of Manchester in 1996. Now the product has scooped the Innovation Technology prize in the Northwest Business Environment Awards 2007. Measuring only 600mm long and 45mm wide, the Gasclam is designed to sit inside small boreholes on potential development sites and provide constant monitoring of harmful gases, such as methane, which can cause explosions. The Gasclam improves upon existing assessment technology by allowing continuous collection of information about the movement and build-up of underground methane. ... For the entire article, see http://www.physorg.com/news102001690.html -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org Attached Message
Developer-financed TIF key to Gilbert site project in Menasha
Despite denial of brownfield grant, hopes still high for development By Michael King Appleton Post-Crescent (WI) June 28, 2007 MENASHA - Hopes for an $875,000 brownfield grant to help demolish the former Gilbert Paper mill have been dashed for now but the developer and owners still want to proceed. City officials are proposing creation of a new tax incremental financing district for the 16-acre site between Ahnaip Street and a north channel of the Fox River below the Menasha dam. On Wednesday, the city Plan Commission and Menasha Redevelopment Authority reviewed the proposed TIF No. 11 and development agreements for a $1.4 million office building, demolition of the former paper mill buildings, renovation of the lower level of the law office at 430 Ahnaip St. and refurbishing of the former mill's warehouse. The new TIF will be developer-financed and markedly different from 10 other city TIF districts due to the city's current financial constraints. Under the proposal, developer Randy Stadtmueller of Gilbert Development Co. and the property owners will borrow money up front, not the city. ... For the entire article, see http://www.postcrescent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070628/APC0101/706280552/1003/APC01 -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org Attached Message
I'm going to come to the defense of the liberal definition of a brownfields site in Michigan. I have cited Michigan's Brownfields Redevelopment Authorities (BRA) as a model for State-assisted TIF financing for brownfields http://www.nemw.org/ER%20W07-TIF.pdf . And I continue to believe that other states should emulate this model. There have been a number of Michigan BRA projects that have been called into question because the TIF benefit exceeds the remediation costs, sometimes by many multiples. Scandalous? Not really - we all know that brownfields projects typically have other non-cleanup-cost impediments. When I worked in Baltimore, I did an analysis of the incentives we used to close gaps on brownfields projects and the non-brownfields sources exceeded the brownfields sources (site testing and remediation) by about 5 to 1. The difference is that in Michigan they can use one source (BRA - TIF) to cover a variety of gaps; whereas in Baltimore we had to cobble together a variety of sources. Brownfields projects and greyfields projects get blurred here, but does it really matter? We're still getting smart growth, jobs within existing communities, and retooling "Obsolete properties" (the justification for the brownfields designation, in this instance.) Are Michigan communities giving away too much? There's no way to know without a rigorous but-for analysis. But at least there is nothing automatic about the tax breaks in Michigan's BRA-TIF model. You have to assume that localities are sufficiently motivated to protect local revenues, which is another reason that TIF is a great tool for brownfields - it's inherently conservative, while, at the same time, it's potentially lucrative enough to close pretty big gaps. Evans Paull, Senior Policy Analyst Northeast Midwest Institute 50 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 202-464-4004 202-329-4282 (cell) epaull@nemw.org www.nemw.org http://www.nemw.org/brownfields.htm -----Original Message----- From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org [mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:50 PM To: Brownfields Internet Forum Subject: [CPEO-BIF] Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan [Apparently, in Michigan a Brownfield is any site that a developer wants a subsidy for, even if it isn't likely to be contaminated. - Ls] Mission Street apartments to be rebuilt By MARK RANZENBERGER Mt. Pleasant Morning Sun June 28, 2007 The old Western Islands apartment complex in Mt. Pleasant will be the latest student apartment complex to be torn down and replaced with fewer, but newer apartments. The complex, in the 1500 block of South Mission Street, is owned by RCS Equities, a company connected to United Investments, the largest student landlord in the Mt. Pleasant area. The complex dates back to the 1960s. City commissioners this week, on a 5-2 vote, approved declaring the project a brownfield redevelopment project, allowing the owner to gain a tax break for redeveloping the project. The decades-old complex does not appear to be contaminated; instead, it qualified as a brownfield by being declared "functionally obsolete" by the city assessor. ... For the entire article, see http://www.themorningsun.com/stories/062807/loc_mission.shtml -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org _______________________________________________ Brownfields mailing list Brownfields@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields Attached Message
I think it's important, for a number of reasons, that public subsidies, be they tax credits, tax-increment financing, grants, loans, or whatever be carefully targeted to purposes established by statute. Otherwise, they may be distributed unfairly. They may serve as political or personal pay-offs. They may promote undesirable projects. They may deplete the resources available for projects that "deserve" the support.
I don't have an opinion about the Mt. Pleasant apartment development, but it seems strange that a property would qualify for Brownfields subsidies simply because it is "functionally obsolete." If tax-increment financing in Michigan works like it does in California, the entity deciding to allocate tax revenues to the project is not the only government agency losing revenue in the short term. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Michigan's lax Brownfields definitions have depleted the state's grant fund for Brownfields. BNA's Environmental Due Diligence Report (January 24, 2007) reported, "A state fund that provides grants for cleaning up contaminated properties and for other environmental projects is just about out of money, according to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. Funding under the Clean Michigan Initiative, set up through a $675 million bond issue authorized by voters in 1998, is 'running out at this point,' ..." Lenny Evans Paull wrote: > I'm going to come to the defense of the liberal definition of a > brownfields site in Michigan. I have cited Michigan's Brownfields > Redevelopment Authorities (BRA) as a model for State-assisted TIF > financing for brownfields http://www.nemw.org/ER%20W07-TIF.pdf . And I > continue to believe that other states should emulate this model. > > There have been a number of Michigan BRA projects that have been called > into question because the TIF benefit exceeds the remediation costs, > sometimes by many multiples. Scandalous? Not really - we all know that > brownfields projects typically have other non-cleanup-cost impediments. > When I worked in Baltimore, I did an analysis of the incentives we used > to close gaps on brownfields projects and the non-brownfields sources > exceeded the brownfields sources (site testing and remediation) by about > 5 to 1. The difference is that in Michigan they can use one source (BRA > - TIF) to cover a variety of gaps; whereas in Baltimore we had to cobble > together a variety of sources. Brownfields projects and greyfields > projects get blurred here, but does it really matter? We're still > getting smart growth, jobs within existing communities, and retooling > "Obsolete properties" (the justification for the brownfields > designation, in this instance.) > > Are Michigan communities giving away too much? There's no way to know > without a rigorous but-for analysis. But at least there is nothing > automatic about the tax breaks in Michigan's BRA-TIF model. You have to > assume that localities are sufficiently motivated to protect local > revenues, which is another reason that TIF is a great tool for > brownfields - it's inherently conservative, while, at the same time, > it's potentially lucrative enough to close pretty big gaps. > > Evans Paull, Senior Policy Analyst > Northeast Midwest Institute > 50 F Street, NW > Washington, DC 20001 > 202-464-4004 > 202-329-4282 (cell) > epaull@nemw.org > www.nemw.org > http://www.nemw.org/brownfields.htm > > -----Original Message----- > From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org > [mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:50 PM > To: Brownfields Internet Forum > Subject: [CPEO-BIF] Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, > Michigan > > [Apparently, in Michigan a Brownfield is any site that a developer wants > > a subsidy for, even if it isn't likely to be contaminated. - Ls] > > Mission Street apartments to be rebuilt > > > By MARK RANZENBERGER > Mt. Pleasant Morning Sun > June 28, 2007 > > The old Western Islands apartment complex in Mt. Pleasant will be the > latest student apartment complex to be torn down and replaced with > fewer, but newer apartments. > > The complex, in the 1500 block of South Mission Street, is owned by RCS > Equities, a company connected to United Investments, the largest student > > landlord in the Mt. Pleasant area. The complex dates back to the 1960s. > > City commissioners this week, on a 5-2 vote, approved declaring the > project a brownfield redevelopment project, allowing the owner to gain a > > tax break for redeveloping the project. The decades-old complex does not > > appear to be contaminated; instead, it qualified as a brownfield by > being declared "functionally obsolete" by the city assessor. > > ... > > For the entire article, see > http://www.themorningsun.com/stories/062807/loc_mission.shtml > -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org Attached Message
Downtown, Not Just for Yuppies
In Denver, thanks to low-income and environmental justice activists, a new mega-project will include affordable housing and good jobs. Tara McKelvey American Prospect June 18, 2007 online Tim Lopez walks along the 800 block of south Lincoln Street in the Baker neighborhood of Denver on a clear May afternoon. Trucks roar along a nearby highway, and the street is littered with broken flagstone, cigarette butts, and a flattened Miller High Life can. The block ends at Interstate 25, two blocks from an abandoned plant, Gates Rubber Factory, and when the wind dies down, the air smells faintly of sewage. The most disturbing thing about the neighborhood, 44-year-old Lopez explains, is not the noise, smell, or litter. It is hidden in the grass. "It's a monitoring well," says Lopez, pointing to a metal plate sunk in the soil near the street. "They drill for groundwater and test for TCE," a suspected carcinogen called trichoroethylene. In October 2002, fumes from TCE, an industrial solvent, were discovered in the area, and this block, says Lopez, turned out to be "one of the most contaminated areas." Lopez says executives with Cherokee Denver LLC, a real-estate development company that owns the factory and the surrounding 50 or so acres, as well as city officials, were initially sanguine. "The company was saying, 'There's not a problem,' and the city was saying, 'There's not a problem,'" he recalls. "We were saying, 'There's a problem.'" ... For the entire summary, see http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=downtown_not_just_for_yuppies There is a charge for the full article. -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org Attached Message
[This is the type of article I normally only send to CPEO's Installation Reuse Forum, focused on military base realignment and closure (BRAC), but I think it's significant because Maryland still has time to direct some of its anticipated military population growth to depopulated areas of existing urban centers, primarily the city of Baltimore. Brownfields planning, such as the projects centered around Johns Hopkins University, could revitalize neighborhoods filled with abandoned but recoverable housing stock, making it possible for the new arrivals to live in established communities, not just new sprawl. - LS]
Region readies for job influx New numbers dwarf BRAC estimates; officials seek ways to deal with impact By Phillip McGowan Baltimore Sun (MD) June 29, 2007 Predicting that new employees at an expanding Fort Meade will settle as far away as Carroll County and the Eastern Shore, senior government officials from six counties have formed a regional bloc to measure the impact and secure funding for roads, schools and mass transit. At the first meeting of the Fort Meade growth management committee Wednesday at Anne Arundel Community College in Arnold, representatives from across the Baltimore region were presented with growth figures that dwarfed previous state estimates for job creation. The Army post's expansion due to the base realignment and closure process, known as BRAC, and other factors could generate 61,000 jobs and 38,500 households throughout the region, according to the numbers released at Wednesday's meeting. The committee's numbers do not have a timeline. ... For the entire article, see http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/annearundel/bal-ar.brac29jun29,0,1069585.story?coll=bal-local-arundel -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org Attached Message
One the one hand, I do agree that all of the key players (state and local govts, the developers, and the community) could benefit from a more careful examination of the use and eligibility of BFs grants and incentives. Perhaps there could be some general principles or criteria so that selected projects are those that in fact really need the assistance and/or the project will produce holistic benefits for the developer and the community. On the other hand, one of the great things about the comprehensive and broad definition of BFs in the Michigan law is it allows for the revitalization of vacant and abandoned properties that might not meet the technical definition of BFs. Such a broad scope should encourage more area-wide approaches to neighborhood revitalization instead of just an isolated project here and there. Joe Schilling FYI...I will difficult to reach until July 15th taking care of our new twin boys (Thomas and Jack) who arrived safe and sound on June 19th. I will respond to e-mails every few days during this period, depending on sleep.... -----Original Message----- From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org [mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 12:58 PM To: Brownfields Internet Forum Subject: Re: [CPEO-BIF] Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant,Michigan I think it's important, for a number of reasons, that public subsidies, be they tax credits, tax-increment financing, grants, loans, or whatever be carefully targeted to purposes established by statute. Otherwise, they may be distributed unfairly. They may serve as political or personal pay-offs. They may promote undesirable projects. They may deplete the resources available for projects that "deserve" the support. I don't have an opinion about the Mt. Pleasant apartment development, but it seems strange that a property would qualify for Brownfields subsidies simply because it is "functionally obsolete." If tax-increment financing in Michigan works like it does in California, the entity deciding to allocate tax revenues to the project is not the only government agency losing revenue in the short term. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Michigan's lax Brownfields definitions have depleted the state's grant fund for Brownfields. BNA's Environmental Due Diligence Report (January 24, 2007) reported, "A state fund that provides grants for cleaning up contaminated properties and for other environmental projects is just about out of money, according to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. Funding under the Clean Michigan Initiative, set up through a $675 million bond issue authorized by voters in 1998, is 'running out at this point,' ..." Lenny Evans Paull wrote: > I'm going to come to the defense of the liberal definition of a > brownfields site in Michigan. I have cited Michigan's Brownfields > Redevelopment Authorities (BRA) as a model for State-assisted TIF > financing for brownfields http://www.nemw.org/ER%20W07-TIF.pdf . And I > continue to believe that other states should emulate this model. > > There have been a number of Michigan BRA projects that have been called > into question because the TIF benefit exceeds the remediation costs, > sometimes by many multiples. Scandalous? Not really - we all know that > brownfields projects typically have other non-cleanup-cost impediments. > When I worked in Baltimore, I did an analysis of the incentives we used > to close gaps on brownfields projects and the non-brownfields sources > exceeded the brownfields sources (site testing and remediation) by about > 5 to 1. The difference is that in Michigan they can use one source (BRA > - TIF) to cover a variety of gaps; whereas in Baltimore we had to cobble > together a variety of sources. Brownfields projects and greyfields > projects get blurred here, but does it really matter? We're still > getting smart growth, jobs within existing communities, and retooling > "Obsolete properties" (the justification for the brownfields > designation, in this instance.) > > Are Michigan communities giving away too much? There's no way to know > without a rigorous but-for analysis. But at least there is nothing > automatic about the tax breaks in Michigan's BRA-TIF model. You have to > assume that localities are sufficiently motivated to protect local > revenues, which is another reason that TIF is a great tool for > brownfields - it's inherently conservative, while, at the same time, > it's potentially lucrative enough to close pretty big gaps. > > Evans Paull, Senior Policy Analyst > Northeast Midwest Institute > 50 F Street, NW > Washington, DC 20001 > 202-464-4004 > 202-329-4282 (cell) > epaull@nemw.org > www.nemw.org > http://www.nemw.org/brownfields.htm > > -----Original Message----- > From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org > [mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 1:50 PM > To: Brownfields Internet Forum > Subject: [CPEO-BIF] Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant, > Michigan > > [Apparently, in Michigan a Brownfield is any site that a developer wants > > a subsidy for, even if it isn't likely to be contaminated. - Ls] > > Mission Street apartments to be rebuilt > > > By MARK RANZENBERGER > Mt. Pleasant Morning Sun > June 28, 2007 > > The old Western Islands apartment complex in Mt. Pleasant will be the > latest student apartment complex to be torn down and replaced with > fewer, but newer apartments. > > The complex, in the 1500 block of South Mission Street, is owned by RCS > Equities, a company connected to United Investments, the largest student > > landlord in the Mt. Pleasant area. The complex dates back to the 1960s. > > City commissioners this week, on a 5-2 vote, approved declaring the > project a brownfield redevelopment project, allowing the owner to gain a > > tax break for redeveloping the project. The decades-old complex does not > > appear to be contaminated; instead, it qualified as a brownfield by > being declared "functionally obsolete" by the city assessor. > > ... > > For the entire article, see > http://www.themorningsun.com/stories/062807/loc_mission.shtml > -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org _______________________________________________ Brownfields mailing list Brownfields@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields _______________________________________________ Brownfields mailing list Brownfields@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields _______________________________________________ Brownfields mailing list Brownfields@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields |
Follow-Ups
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prev by Date: RE: [CPEO-BIF] Novel "Brownfields" designation in Mt. Pleasant,Michigan Next by Date: [CPEO-BIF] Mendon, New York - development on a "midnight" dump | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-BIF] Maryland military job growth Next by Thread: [CPEO-BIF] Re: Brownfields Digest, Vol 34, Issue 25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||