Environmental Real Estate

Link: http://www.newsday.com/business/realestate/ny-bzdeve114141721feb11,0,4837130.story?coll=ny-realestate-headlines

A three-level retail complex, topped with 1,000 apartments and plenty of parking, will transform the polluted site of an old Con Edison facility along the Flushing waterfront, according to development plans released this week.

The $600-million project will likely be the first step in a far broader effort to improve the downtown and waterfront areas of Flushing, officials said yesterday. Pending an environmental cleanup, it has all the necessary approvals.

The Muss Development Company of Forest Hills will develop the 14-acre site, which used to house a Con Edison fueling and maintenance facility.

Atop the 750,000 square feet of retail space, and parking for 2,650 cars will be six residential buildings with one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments.

Two anchor tenants, which will take up 300,000 square feet, have already signed on. While Muss senior vice president Stan Markowitz would not confirm their identities, he did note that both already have a presence in New York City. That means Wal-Mart is not one of them.

The project, at College Point Boulevard and Roosevelt Avenue, is expected to generate 5,000 construction jobs and 2,000 permanent jobs, eventually producing $28.5 million in annual tax revenue.

"It's major by Flushing standards, and major by New York City standards," said city Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing). "We have a site that's been dirty for decades, and now it's going to be cleaned up ... and readied for use by both businesses and residents."

Markowitz said the developer will need six to nine months to clean up the site, so construction won't begin until later this year. The first retailer is expected to open at the end of 2007.

Besides job growth, Liu also touted the increase in retail choices.

With the upside comes concerns over traffic and crowding issues, already a factor there.

"Anytime there's development, particularly on this scale, there's going to be more traffic," Liu said. "We'll try to mitigate it."

Community advocates are watching the plans carefully, and expect to meet with the developer soon.

"I'm certain the board will raise the construction concerns, the traffic concerns and anything else that goes with it," said Marilyn Bitterman, district manager at Community Board 7.

Representatives from Flushing's civic groups were not available for comment.

Also at issue are the height of the buildings, the impact on existing local businesses and the need for affordable housing. Markowitz said the developer is addressing those factors.

"We're very sensitive in all of the communities where we operate, but especially in a place like this," he said. "We want people to be comfortable."

Queens politicians and business leaders said the project will likely be a boost for the area's economic development.

"It can be a wonderful, attractive waterfront someday," said Seth Bornstein, the director of economic development for the Queens borough president's office. "Now, it's not."

The complex "is a tremendous vote of confidence" for the larger redevelopment effort in Flushing, said John Young, the Queens city planning director.

By Randi F. Marshall
Newsday www.newsday.com
http://www.newsday.com/business/realestate/ny-bzdeve114141721feb11,0,4837130.story?coll=ny-realestate-headlines

Link: http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=02-11-05&storyID=20707

The states’ leading toxics agency has ruled that Campus Bay poses “an imminent or substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or to the environment because of a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance.”

The finding is contained in a 33-page site investigation order issued late Wednesday by Barbara J. Cook, the Berkeley-based regional branch chief for the State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).

One of the first tangible results of the order will be a new fence going up around the site in the next 15 days marked by signs declaring “Caution: Hazardous Substances Area. Unauthorized Persons Keep Out.”

The order also calls for:

• Removal by April 30 of all contaminated marsh soils now stockpiled on the site along with any other sediments left there in 2004.

• Repairs to the thin cement-and-shredded-wastepaper cap covering the 350,000 yards of contaminated ash and soil already buried on the site.

• Thorough examinations of past site conditions and remediation efforts.

• Preparation of a new site assessment to include toxins and contaminants now present on the site.

• Risk and potential exposure assessments.

• Implementation of a public participation program.

Cook’s action comes just as Richmond City Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin is putting the finishing touches on a proposed Feb. 15 City Council resolution calling on the state to give the DTSC jurisdiction over all of Campus Bay as well as the seriously contaminated Richmond Field Station immediately to the west.

“This order reinforces the urgency of the need for one agency alone to take the lead on both sites because of the profound nature of the toxicity,” McLaughlin said.

“It’s an outstanding step toward figuring out what happened in the past, what’s actually there now, and whether remediation steps already taken are adequate,” said Sherry Padgett.

The chief financial officer for Kray Cabling, Padgett works immediately to the east of the site and is a member of Bay Area Residents for Responsible Development, the group which has led the charge of more regulation.

“They’re asking questions which should have been asked a long time ago,” she said.

Ethel Dotson, a Richmond resident and a critic of Campus Bay, has already obtained 80 signatures from the community calling for formation of a Community Advisory Group, the public participation spelled out in DTSC regulations.

Dotson is scheduled to present the list at the same Richmond City Council meeting that will consider McLaughlin’s resolution.

“We welcome the DTSC’s action,” said Doug Mosteller, a project manager for Cherokee Investment Partners—the financial firm which has teamed with Marin County developer Russ Pitto to develop the South Richmond site and has proposed to build a 1330-unit housing project at Campus Bay.

Noting that “the Campus Bay site is highly contaminated,” said East Bay Democratic Assemblymember Loni Hancock, “to protect human health, the site must be cleaned up to a standard that fits the proposed use.

“The public must have confidence in DTSC to make decisions which will lead to an acceptable cleanup. If DTSC needs a site investigation to achieve this goal, then I support this order.”

The toxics agency’s order reinforces the suspicions of activists who have been protesting the conduct of ongoing work at the site, as well as the plans to build housing directly above a buried hazardous waste dump on the site.

According to the order, “The public at risk includes those people who work at or visit the site, those who excavate into contaminated soil or groundwater, and/or persons who otherwise come into contact with, inhale or ingest contaminated air, soil or groundwater” including those who work at business near the suit, San Francisco Bay Trail users and pupils and employees at the Making Waves program.

Cook said there was no evidence of any exposure for the Making Waves pupils, who meet in a building at the site that formerly served as offices of one of the chemical manufacturing companies that heavily polluted the site over a hundred-year span that ended in 1997.

The widely acclaimed after-school program is immediately adjacent to the 350,000-cubic-yard concrete-and-paper-pulp-capped hazardous waste dump where Cherokee-Simeon Ventures proposes to build the high-rise condo complex.

“A lot of things happened at the site, and we need to know what are the current soil and water conditions so we can understand how the site can be restored to a condition safe for development,” Cook said

The order spells out levels of contaminants identified at the site before the commencement of site remediation efforts. The new DTSC order requires a reexamination of the site to determine the present levels of hazardous substances.

“This order is the first step,” said Cook, “looking at what’s there now and creating a basic risk assessment. We don’t know what remains and what’s been hauled offsite.”

The original survey found well over 100 hazardous compounds, including:

Soil Contaminants

• Arsenic, which is both a lethal poison and a carcinogen at lower doses, at levels up to 3.4 times higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s baseline standards defining the threshold for classification as hazardous waste.

• DDD, a pesticide and a poison when consumed, at levels up to 2,800 times the baseline.

• DDT, an illegal pesticide and known carcinogen which can be fatal when swallowed, at up to 2100 times the federal baseline.

• Lead, a metal linked to a whole range of neurological problems in children and a poison with wide-ranging effects, at up to 18 times the federal baseline.

• Toxaphene, a lethal insecticide which can be absorbed through the skin as well as swallowed and inhaled, at levels up to 46 times the baseline.

Water Contaminants

• Arsenic, at up to 4,500 times the acceptable groundwater baseline.

• Chloroform, a carcinogen lethal at high exposures, at levels up to 340 times baseline.

• Copper, a possible carcinogen and potential cause of birth defects, at up to 29.2 times baseline.

• Cis-1,2-dichloroethene, a chemical with anesthetic properties, at up to 146.7 times baseline.

• Mercury, a neurotoxin known to cause birth defects, at up to 2.9 times baseline.

• Nickel, a metal known to cause cancer and other health problems, at up to 54 times baseline.

• 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, a carcinogen, narcotic and liver poison, at up to 120 times baseline.

• Tetrachloroethene (also known as perchloroethene, or PCE), a known carcinogen and live and kidney poison at levels of up to 20 times baseline.

• Toluene, a known carcinogen used in paints, thinners, nail polish and adhesives and other products, at levels 47.3 times baseline.

• Tricholorethene (TCE), a known carcinogen that also causes liver and kidney damage, at 1,140 times the water table baseline, and

• Vinyl chloride, which causes both cancer and genetic mutations, at 108 times baseline.

No definitive site examination has occurred since the ensuing cleanup of upland soils under the supervision of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, which handed site jurisdiction to DTSC following scathing criticisms at a Nov. 6 legislative hearing called by Assemblymember Hancock.

The board retains supervision over the cleanup of the site’s shoreline marsh area and for all of UC Berkeley’s Field Station immediately to the west.

“A lot of the insecticide and other hot spots have been cleaned up,” said Doug Mosteller, engineering project manager for Cherokee, a venture capital firm that specializes in restoring contaminated sites—so-called brownfields—to conditions where they are safe for development.

Cherokee and Simeon Properties, a development and property company headed by Russell Pitto of Marin County, created Cherokee-Simeon, a special purpose company for brownfield development in the Bay Area.

Cherokee-Simeon is also the developer picked by the UC Berkeley to develop the university’s seriously contaminated Richmond Field Station as a corporate/academic research facility featuring two million square feet of new buildings.

DTSC will have the final say on whether the housing project can go through.

Asked about the future of site, Mosteller said Cherokee-Simeon is concentrating on the current site remediation efforts and will consider development projects only after the DTSC’s concerns are fully addressed.

By RICHARD BRENNEMAN
Berkeley Daily Planet www.berkeleydailyplanet.com
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=02-11-05&storyID=20707

Link: http://www.globest.com/news/216_220/newyork/131215-1.html

It’s full steam ahead for plans to revitalize this Queens neighborhood. Working with the city’s master plan, Muss Development Co.’s affiliate CE Flushing LLC is designing a mixed-use project on a 14-acre brownfields site that is expected to cost approximately $600 million to realize.

Submissions are due in mid-March for plans to revitalize the 48-acre Willets Point area. According to a spokesperson for Muss, the plan will complement and not compete with plans for the Willets Point area. Last summer, the city revealed a preliminary framework for revitalizing the Downtown community that calls for improved transportation facilities and a connection to the waterfront. According to the New York City Economic Development Corp., the ultimate goal of the plan is to create an expanded Flushing core, with the river linking Downtown to Willets Point and creating a cohesive whole. Possible uses for the site, according to the EDC, include an entertainment district, a regional retail center, a hotel and conference facility, amusement and recreation as well as office, industrial, park and residential developments.

The 3.2 million-sf Muss initiative includes a 725,000-sf retail center and approximately 1,000 residences. New York City-based Perkins Eastman is designing the project. Acco Retail tenants already have committed to more than half of the total net space available. According to a Muss spokesperson, two anchor tenants who both already have multiple locations in New York City have committed to 300,000 sf. The retail shopping areas are slated to open in the fall of 2007 and the apartments will follow in the spring of 2008.

According to Amanda Burden, chair of the City Planning Commission, in 1998, the commission first acted to rezone this site and others in the surrounding area for commercial and residential use in collaboration with the Flushing Task Force. Joshua L. Muss, president and CEO of CE Flushing LLC says, “The development of this long-underutilized land will provide a major economic stimulus to the region.” The project is expected to generate 5,000 construction jobs and more than 2,000 permanent jobs, as well as approximately $28.5 million in annual tax revenues to the city and state.

The $265-million expected total cost of the Willets Point project excludes land, but includes parking, infrastructure and open space costs. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said improving and investing in the five boroughs is a critical component of his strategy. Those collaborating on the framework for Flushing included various city and state agency representatives, community leaders, while the planning firm of Cooper Carry Inc. and Economics Research Associates led the consultant team. Other members of the team included Jeanne Giordano Inc., Thomas Balsley Associates, Eng Wong Taub, and Geto & de Milly.

By Barbara Jarvie
www.globest.com
http://www.globest.com/news/216_220/newyork/131215-1.html

Link: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1393435,00.htm

Developers are turning against John Prescott's plan to build homes on recycled industrial land in towns and cities, according to research.

The deputy prime minister wants to restrict building in the countryside and use brownfield sites to provide homes as well as stimulating an "urban renaissance".

But analysts revealed yesterday that many companies opt for greenfield sites because the risks are lower and the returns higher, despite a widening price gap between rural and urban areas which has seen a 226% rise in greenfield land values in eight years.

The property consultants Savills say the case for reusing industrial sites has been further undermined by a European court of justice ruling.

This could mean that many sites earmarked for development, often contaminated and needing reclamation, will have to be reclassified as "landfill".

Consequently, any developer would have to apply for a permit, which Savills say would trigger a "whole range of legal and financial obligations" that could make building costs prohibitive.

Ominously for Mr Prescott, areas earmarked for development by the government in the 40-mile Thames Gateway corridor from London eastwards to Kent and Essex could fall into this category, along with many other sites around the country.

"Apart from the extra costs associated with developing a 'landfill' site, there are other serious implications to take into account," said Yolande Barnes, head of Savills' research arm.

"A potential buyer, for example, may find difficulties securing a mortgage on a property built on a registered 'landfill' site; this, in turn, could threaten the viability of a development and, ultimately, render some of this type of land virtually worthless."

This could "put a spanner in the works" for the government committed to building 60% of housing on brownfield, or recycled land. "The implications are enormous," she said.

By contrast, Savills say many developers prefer greenfield sites, despite the huge rise in land values, because they are straightforward and produce better returns at lower risk. In high-demand areas, such as the east of England around Cambridge, land costs more than £2m an acre.

Savills' findings could have wide implications for the development of townships in the south of England, already earmarked for 200,000 extra homes in Mr Prescott's sustainable communities plan for England. Ms Barnes warned that, irrespective of the government's drive, it was clearly "unrealistic" to not build in the countryside.

Her warning comes as an American urban specialist warns of a crisis of confidence in cities outside London.

Writing today in a Guardian supplement to mark the forthcoming sustainable communities summit in Manchester, John Norquist, the former mayor of Milwaukee, says: "The focus is too much on pathology and not enough on the value of such cities."

Mr Norquist, now head of the Congress for the New Urbanism, also warns against the "infection" of sprawl around British cities and criticises the "architectural establishment" for its obsession with iconic buildings (the so-called "wow factor"), to the exclusion of serving peoples' everyday needs.

by Peter Hetherington

The Guardian (UK)

Link: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/sddt/20041201/lo_sddt/portokshiltonbayfronthotelplan

The coastal permit for the planned 1,200-room Hilton Hotel on the Campbell Shipyard site next to the Convention Center was unanimously approved by the San Diego Unified Port District commissioners.


Financing the projected $334 million project may be the only big hurdle left.


The hotel, with a 32-story tower, will include 5,360 square feet of retail; 14,447 square feet of restaurant space inside; and an 11,695-square-foot freestanding restaurant outside; 106,751 square feet of meeting room and ballroom space; a 23,082-square-foot health club and swimming pool; a new 4.3-acre park with a plaza and fountains; and a new water taxi dock.


The hotel sits on a 10.22-acre site and is being designed in a style intended as a natural extension of the Convention Center. The tower will be a modular design, with its guestrooms grouped within glass and aluminum panels. The hotel podium base will be terraced back to the ballroom levels to provide maximum views, and open terrace areas will overlook the water.


The hotel will be connected to a newly constructed $24 million 2,000-space parking garage. The hotel will be allowed to use 800 of those spaces.


Nearly a year ago, CNL Hospitality Properties Inc. of Orlando, Fla. announced it would acquire the Hilton when it is built. CNL paid $385 million for the Hotel del Coronado last year.


The developing partnership is a joint effort of Hilton, Portman Holdings of Atlanta and Hensel Phelps Construction of Greeley, Colo. The architects are John Portman & Associates of Atlanta and Joseph Wong & Associates of San Diego.


Hotel consultant Robert Rauch, who said it was about time the coastal development permit was given the green light, said it is always difficult to finance a 1,000- to 1,200-room convention hotel without public subsidy.


"The lenders ask who is responsible in the event of a default," Rauch said. "If you have a project that costs $250,000 a room, that's just a huge undertaking."


Rauch said Hilton might help itself by putting some money into the project.


"The debt market is only loaning 60 percent of project costs," said Roger Zampell, Portman Holdings senior vice president. "Then the project has to make economic sense."


Zampell said his firm and Hilton are fortunate that this project will be developed here.


"We couldn't do this deal anywhere but here," Zampell said. He expects the project to be conventionally financed.


For a time it appeared that environmental problems could doom the project, but after millions of dollars spent by the port to clean up the land portion, and a commitment to cap the contaminated water portion of the site, the plan was allowed to move forward.


Barring an appeal to the California Coastal Commission, or any last ditch litigation, the project could conceivably get under way sometime next year. The hotel is expected to take about two years to complete.


The project can come none to soon for the Convention Center Corp.


April Boling, Convention Center Corp. vice chair, said more than 55 conventions and $1 billion has been lost to the local economy since 1999 because the hotel wasn't built.

Link: http://www.bostonglobe.com

Framingham residents someday may get clean drinking water and lower water bills from the Birch Road wells. But town officials say the land around the wells must be protected to ensure the success of the $20 million project. And they're looking closely at a proposal for 685 units of housing on nearby land.


The town stopped using the wells in the 1970s in favor of water from the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority. But water prices have risen so much since then that officials say the wells, which would pump an estimated 4 million gallons a day from the ground, will save the town more than they will cost.


"If we're able to do it, it's going to pay itself back many times over," Town Manager George P. King Jr. said last week in a phone interview. He emphasized that the $20 million price tag is a rough estimate, because testing and engineering work have not begun in earnest.


Hoping to keep pollution from possibly seeping down into the underground aquifer that feeds the wells, officials are taking a close look at the proposal for the Villages at Danforth Farm.


The project, which is also slated to include some retail, is to go before the Planning Board on Tuesday. The land is owned by New England Sand and Gravel but is being purchased in stages by National Development as each phase of the development is ready to go, according to Andrea Carr-Evans, a Planning Board member.


Carr-Evans said she hopes developers will assent to "green" rules, such as limiting the use of artificial fertilizer, or using none at all, on landscaping, for example.


The town began the well-reactivation project in the spring after Town Meeting approved $300,000 to start the process. Then, during last month's town meeting, members approved the next step, which was to protect a half-mile radius around the wells, known as a "Zone 2" in state regulatory parlance.


Development is restricted in that area. For example, a new service station probably will not be permitted because of the threat to water quality, said Carr-Evans, who lives in the restricted area.


There was some concern at last month's Town Meeting that residents would be restricted in ways they would find objectionable. But officials assured members that they are unlikely to notice the change residents already there are grandfathered and can continue to use fertilizer on their yards. Residents who seek a building permit to do work on their homes, however, might trigger more questions than usual.


The Villages at Danforth Farm is mostly inside the "Zone 2" area.


Christine Long, chairwoman of Town Meeting's standing committee on public works, said she would attend the Planning Board hearings on the project with an eye toward water protection.


"It's going to protect that district from pollution," said Long, referring to the Zone 2 restrictions. "In order for us to reactivate those wells, it's necessary."


The next step for the well project, which is still a decade away from being completed, will be to conduct tests, which will indicate the quality of the water and where it's coming from. That information is expected to lead to some adjustments in the Zone 2 restricted area.


In the 1980s, the land was contaminated by the Air Force, which conducted tests there on a material to be used for repairing runways damaged by bomb blasts. That material contained tetrachloroethylene, which leached into the soil and ground water, according to a consultant who conducted studies for the Air Force . After years of studies, the state Department of Environmental Protection cleared the site, and no further cleanup action is required, according to department spokesman Joseph Ferson.
by Lisa Kocian 508-820-4231 or lkocian@globe.com. Boston Globe: Nov 25, 2004. pg. 3

Document URL: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=309&VInst=PROD&VName=PQD&VType=PQD&sid=1&index=13&SrchMode=1&Fmt=3&did=000000748327491&clientId=13371

Link: http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13140849&BRD=1601&PAG=461&dept_id=478677&rfi=8

The Rockville Centre Planning Board effectively denied Chase Partners' proposal to build a 349-unit apartment complex on Banks Avenue last Wednesday, when it issued a statement of findings saying the developers could build a smaller 230-condo complex, or nothing.

The final decision of the Planning Board will not be made until the case is reviewed by the Nassau County Planning Commission.

The board found during its environmental review of the project that the apartment complex was just too dense for the land, and would exacerbate current traffic problems.

Michael Faltischek, the developer's attorney, said his clients were "disappointed, to say the least." He said there is nothing in the record to "objectively" support the Planning Board's findings. "I don't know what it is that they think they're doing," he said.

Chase Partners sued the village and planning boards in September because the developers thought the case, which has been before the Planning Board since April 2003, was moving too slowly. The suit calls for the judge to find the village at fault for the delays and allow the developer to build. The village has filed a motion to dismiss the case, which was scheduled to be heard in New York Supreme Court on Friday.

It took more than six hours of deliberations during two sessions for the Planning Board to develop its statement of findings, which has been referred to the Nassau County Planning Commission for review. The commission is expected to render its own findings on the plan soon, which may allow the RVC Planning Board to render its final decision at its Oct. 19 meeting.

Planning Board member Bill Croutier voted against the statement of findings, saying he felt the developers have failed to adequately answer many questions about the project. He was especially angry that the applicant did not reveal the details of its cleanup plan for chemical contamination at the site. But he praised his fellow board members for doing an "excellent job" of coming up with a proposal that would have the least intrusive effect on the village.

Fellow board member Catherine Pucciarelli said she was against the project from the very beginning, and criticized the Village Board for putting the Planning Board in a difficult position by passing a zone-change law in 2003 that allows apartment complexes to be built in the proposed area. She said she voted for the statement of findings, which allows for a 230-unit condo project, because it is "the lesser of two evils."

Residents, who have been against the project from the beginning, said they were gratified by the results. Andrew P. Karamouzis, a resident and an attorney for the opposition, said he shared Croutier's criticism of the developers for not answering "many of the serious concerns raised by the Planning Board or village residents. Rather, the developer and his representatives exhibited an 'entitlement' mentality throughout the process, with little, if any, regard for the overall welfare of the village or its residents."

Karamouzis called on Mayor Eugene Murray and the rest of the Village Board to repeal the zone-change law. "Otherwise, there will be many other ill-conceived projects just like this one in the near future threatening the quality of life in our village," he said.

Most of the Planning Board members thanked residents for their input, but at least one found their participation troublesome. Ed Oppenheimer said some of the residents were "ill behaved," and that they "hindered the process."

The developer had included a 275-unit condo alternative in its final environmental impact statement, but said it really didn't want to go that route.

In its statement, the Planning Board said a reduced-scale condo alternative was preferable for many reasons. It would generate less traffic; condo owners' school taxes would be in the same payment class as homeowners', thus reducing any financial impact on residents caused by the need to expand a school or hire more teachers; and it would help abate the noise of air conditioning units and other ventilation elements, because there would be fewer of them.

The statement also calls for the developer to pay for an expert, chosen by the village, to monitor the cleanup of contamination at the site. Chase has volunteered to do the cleanup as a participant in the state's Brownfield Cleanup Program, which allows the public to participate in hearings to decide on the best approach to getting rid of the chemicals.

Faltischek said he still believes the judge hearing Chase's suit will rule in his client's favor, and that the apartment complex will be built as proposed. "Reducing the size of the project isn't supportable by any set of objective facts," he said.

by Angela Marshall

Herald Newspapers Online