In case you have not noticed by now, I am truly an advocate of infill development. I think my fascination with this particular development was highlighted in this interview by CNN with Richard Florida. In the video he highlights how America bounced back after the Great Depression. The recovery was due in part to the flight from inner cities to the suburbs. That flight was a gift and a curse in that it took our best and brightest, along with their wealth, to the emerging suburbs. We effectively built our way out the Depression. Fast forward 75 years, here we are again at a crossroads where everyone from the President to economists are trying to figure out how we recover.

“[We] must get back into the game…[we'll] be condemned to high unemployment and sluggish growth, if the 35% of the economy real estate represents is not engaged.” Patrick Doherty, Washington Monthly

What do I propose? I’m so glad you asked.

America can recover by rebuilding our cities.  The Urban Land Institute noted that there is a demand for attached housing to the tune of 25 million units by 2025; that translates into 3 million acres of infill sites scattered throughout America prime for redevelopment and new uses. If history is any indicator, we will recover-the question is how we will recover. Over the last decade we’ve seen a migration back to the city and the trend is continuing for a number of reasons. Some would argue because my generation, the Echo Boomers or Millennials, want to be near “life” and that tends be in urban centers. The game has changed. We no longer solely prefer the housing options our parents and grandparents had.

Progress has been made to raise awareness about the need to curb carbon emissions by changing the way buildings are built. I applaud the USGBC, Southface and others who are championing high performance building. I propose we shift gears. Now that we understand “green building” as means to curb emissions, we need to understand infill development as alternative to suburban sprawl. Many local governments don’t have policies in place that encourage infill development whereby developers opt for the lesser expensive suburban model.

“There’s a frequent obstacle: neighbors’ opposition to infill development and the extra density it adds. But neighborhood doubts can often be satisfied by collaborative planning and prospects of quality redevelopment near transit stops, as well as attractive makeovers of obsolete shopping centers and low-grade strip commercial corridors. Plus, downtowns, universities and medical centers are new magnets for quality redevelopment.”

From “Compact Real Estate: The Stimulus We Need” Citiwire.net

Construction jobs were halved in Florida, Nevada and Arizona. What if we took the charge to build more sustainable cities? What if we built out half of the 3 million acres with walkable, transit oriented developments? Millions would be put back to work. Instead of putting lipstick on a pig, yes, I’m talking about GM, let’s redirect those funds to help cities incorporate policies that incentivize developers to pursue infill developments.

There is a stimulus package for you.

What is Infill Development?

Infill development is the process of developing vacant or under-used parcels within existing urban areas that are already largely developed.  Most communities have significant vacant land within city limits, which, for various reasons, has been passed over in the normal course of urbanization. A successful infill development program focuses on the completion of the existing community fabric.  It should focus on filling gaps in the neighborhood. Following are 5 reasons why this form of development is needed now.

1. Infill development contributes to a more compact form of development which is less consumptive of land and resources

Many developers are bypassing vacant urban area land for less expensive land beyond our cities edges.  Our current patterns of sprawling, low-density development at the urban fringe are consuming land (including farmlands, wetlands, and other resource lands)  at a much faster rate than population growth.

2. Infill development offers increased mobility for those who can’t or prefer not to drive. It is also an important part of the equation for minimizing traffic congestion.

In-city living offers other transportation choices in addition to the automobile.  Filling in the gaps creates higher average densities, which in turn support more frequent transit service.  Residents who live near where they work, shop, or pursue other activities often can choose to walk, and carpools may be easier to arrange.  Such choice is particularly important for those who can’t drive including elderly, youth, or low income residents who lack a car.  Communities are learning that they cannot build their way out of traffic congestion.  New highways or lane additions typically fill up as fast as they are built as a result of the extended commutes and more frequent vehicle trips required by spread-out development.

3. Fully utilizing existing facilities and services before considering costly service extensions to outlying areas offers savings for local government budgets.

Building expensive new facilities while existing facilities have existing capacity is wasteful duplication in an era of belt tightening. Many local jurisdictions traditionally have averaged the costs of services across all users rather than charging the full cost of serving more distant development.  This has made outlying development relatively less expensive for the developer, while straining local government budgets. In addition, we are racing to construct expensive, new schools in outlying areas at the same time that we agonize over closing and finding new uses for inner city schools.  Growth at the cities’ edges has come at the expense of central cities.  Older buildings in core areas have been abandoned, existing utilities are underutilized and, in general,  new investment has been redirected to the outlying areas.  Infill development also bolsters local government budgets by putting under- utilized vacant land back on the tax roles.

4. Renewed infill and investment in our central cities is crucial to the overall economic health of the surrounding region

Infill development brings increased numbers of residents to support in-city city commercial centers.  A more efficient business climate can result from employment centers located in close proximity  rather than in scattered sites.  The health of central city downtowns is intertwined with that of the region as a whole.  For a region to be well-positioned to compete in a global economy, it must have at its vortex a thriving central city which can provide the vitality and draw to fuel the region’s economy.

5. Infill development can bring new opportunity and improved qualify of life for in-city residents

The migration of higher-income residents, together with the best jobs, educational opportunities and services from many central cities, has left low-income residents isolated.  It can be very difficult for them to learn about and travel to distant jobs, especially if dependent on transit that requires multiple bus transfers, or carpooling to scattered job sites.  Reduced population and average income in cities also produces fewer tax dollars to support public services, and local businesses.  Fewer opportunities and positive role models, can contribute to loss of hope, increased anti-social behavior and crime.  These trends further fuel middle-class migration from cities.  In contrast, in-city neighborhoods offer living opportunities in neighborhoods with distinctive character and more opportunity for social interaction than sprawl development typically provides.  Infill development can return jobs, purchasing power and new amenities to an urban neighborhood.

East Point Plaza, Suffolk, VA (Streetview Rendering)

Rebuilding the fabric of inner cities has been a passion of mine since understanding the power of design and infill development-more specifically small-scale infill development. Small-scale infill can be classified as projects comprising less than 100 housing units and fewer that 10,000 square feet of commercial space. There a several definitions for this type development but it is my personal favorite. In the recent issue of Urban Land Magazine (City Futures, March/April 2010), Sam Newberg wrote an excellent piece entitled “Little Infill”. In his piece, he notes that 20 million attached housing units will be needed by 2025 and that some 3 million acres of greyfield sites will become available for redevelopment.

“They [small infill developments] are favorites of the planning and development industry for their compact urban scale, innovative design, and positive impact as catalysts for their neighbors.” Sam Newberg, Joe Urban, Inc.

I’ve long championed infill development, especially in smaller, less developed cities. Migration patterns have already begun shifting back to urban centers and smaller cities are positioned to take advantage of these trends. Small mixed-use infill projects do not fit most institutional investor business models. To date, I haven’t seen any REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) that focus on this segment of the market. Project cost can vary widely dependent upon product and construction type. Location also is a large factor. Cities where infill development is more prominent, financing may be less of a challenge to secure versus others where suburban (greenfield) projects are given priority. Greenfield projects are understood, safe and, in the bank’s view, offer less risk.

In an interview with Tom Powell, advertising executive and developer, he provided insight into how he found success in his development East Point Plaza. The project houses his ad agency’s offices, has 32 apartment units, street level retail and has a programmable plaza. Powell needed more space for his ad agency and his search lead to this development. “It was a once in a lifetime opportunity”, says Powell. East Point is the first private investment into the Fairground community in several decades. The project cost $4.1 million to restore. It’s Downtown Suffolk, VA location is literally ‘on the other side of tracks’ and pushes redevelopment into an underserved community. Powell noted the tax credit application process took longer than actual construction which began March 2009. Occupancy permits were issued in January 2010. Commonwealth Architects served as lead designer and produced a very innovative and efficient design both the community and city embraced.

Loft unit at East Point Plaza

East Point Plaza and other projects like it will become more popular as the migration back to cities continue. There may be a learning curve in many communities where density is often looked upon negatively. However, if cities begin to educate and show their support of infill development, developers are likely to fall in line. In my experience developers often take the most profitable route toward a project and if there are incentives in place to make small-scale infill more attractive, we’ll be seeing more of it in our cities. Are there are any communities in your city that have been impacted positively by an infill project?

I have spoken on many occasions at Construction Law Musings and elsewhere about the risks and rewards for contractors found in sustainable construction. The rewards were fairly apparent. New markets, government incentives and the desires of owners to be “green” clearly point toward a need for contractors to get into the sustainable building game.

However, when I was first writing my Eeyore like thoughts most of the thoughts of all us construction attorneys were speculative. Whether because wholesale “green” construction was relatively new or because the court process was relatively slow, there were not many ways to test if our, shall we say “less optimistic,” predictions were going to come to pass.

For better or worse, several of the more dire predictions have come true. One major green construction debacle is the Destiny USA litigation. I cannot possibly set out all of the various issues as well as my friend and colleague Chris Cheatham does in his e-book about the project and its aftermath (.PDF). I highly recommend this e-book and the posts found at Chris’ Green Building Law Update blog for those of you interested in how the IRS, the USGBC and the Green Bonds Program interact to cause many a pitfall for construction and design professionals.

Another scenario that has always been at the back of my mind is the potential liability found in the engineering aspects of these construction projects. As I have said before, contractors, subcontractors and engineers are all interacting with new building materials or using tried and true materials in new ways. This type of innovation is both laudable and risky. Without years of engineering data or an eye toward the potential future issues, AEC professionals can get caught in a liability bind.

This scenario came to a head in the case of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation building in Montgomery County, MD. In that case (described well at GBLU), the Foundation wanted “green” building materials in their local headquarters. The Foundation then used “green” Parallams in the construction of the roof truss system (among other elements of the building) in order to meet its goal. Despite assurances from the supplier of the parallams, a Weyerhauser subsidiary, that these beams would survive exposure to the elements, the parallams began to rot and the building became potentially unsafe. Needless to say litigation ensued.

At the risk of sounding like I’m saying “I told you so,” these scenarios are just the sort of scenarios that my colleagues and I have been discussing. I am far from happy to be among a group of folks that have been shown to be correct. I am fully behind the move to sustainable building and do not want to see these hopefully isolated incidents put a damper on that laudable movement. However, these examples show the need to anticipate risks and work with construction attorneys, architects and engineers knowledgeable in the practical and legal aspects of risk management in sustainable building.

On a more optimistic note, and despite the title of this post, I do not believe that the sky is falling. If anything, these incidents should give us the ability metaphorically get our umbrellas up and anticipate these risks better in the future. With the added knowledge that these cases provide, we can carefully move forward to a future in construction with a strong sustainable base.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1ZeXnmDZMQ

“Commercial real estate is perhaps the most compelling investment opportunity in the United States right now, it is a $5 trillion business where one percent is minority.” Quinton Primo III of Capri Capital Partners L.L.C. “  ~ from Black Enterprise

Under Construction

The real estate industry, from a development perspective, is singly the least diverse industry on the planet.  You could also say one of the most vital. There are proportionally more minority accountants, doctors and lawyers than minority management-level commercial real estate professionals (less than 1% of 125,000 – source REAP).

I think part of that rests in the fact that it’s primarily controlled by a few white males. Literally, a small fraternity controls the majority of the world’s real estate. There is some historical significance to this as most property was held by white owners and has been passed down throughout generations. It largely remains that way today. One percent of real estate wealth is held by minorities. No wonder heavily populated urban areas suffer  steeper declines compared to more diverse cities. Women are also significantly underrepresented in commercial real estate as well.

The essence of real estate development is identifying a need and filling it. Whenever I hear someone say, “This area needs a supermarket,” or “We really need a drug store,” I can only think to myself how many would-be developers exist who could benefit from mentoring.  It’s a catch 22: you need minorities in development to mentor other minorities in development, but if the numbers of minorities aren’t increasing, the gap will only continue to widen. By 2030, it’s projected that America will have to build another 200 billion square feet of space to accommodate growth for an expected 70 million, and a great majority of that growth will be from non-whites.

As urban renewal becomes more pronounced, we’ll need a cross-section of real estate minds to address our ever-changing demographics. Chances are your community – no matter the cultural makeup – was developed by someone who does not look like you or share the same value systems you do; a need was identified and filled. Many communities are accustomed to being part of a charette. However, what communities are not used to is being apart of the implementation process once suggestions are made and adopted by a given city.

I think we should inspire, educate and empower community level leaders with the resources they need to redevelop their own communities. The response was quite astounding on Ava Bromberg’s new model that seeks to leverage strip malls into vehicles of economic activity. For example, Abyssinian Development Corporation (ADC) is the largest community development organization of its kind and demonstrates the power of community engagement – they have a portfolio of over $350,000,000.

Detour: Level Playing Field

The need is much greater than many realize but the conversation has largely been non-existent because so few are affected. I’ve chaired several industry committees and have witnessed, personally, the underrepresentation of women and minorities within the industry. On any given day, you’ll find a number of minorities who practice residential real estate. They often lack the knowledge on how to structure projects and thus pass them on to someone who has the knowledge capital to deliver a project. This isn’t an indictment, we need skilled professionals in real estate but the lack of information sharing has reached critical mass.  Just as social media has allowed communities to be formed online, I believe communities can be rebuilt offline utilizing a similar platform – create the conversations, share solutions and implement the best ideas.

I’m pulling back the curtain to say the secret is out – anyone can develop real estate, it’s not an elite club meant for a few. The question then becomes a matter of how to connect the many dots. I’ve met with some prominent minority developers with businesses that range from a few million to a few billion dollars, but none of them offered solutions to lift up the next generation of real estate leadership. Social media has allowed for the brokering of ideas a world over; Aribra seeks to accomplish a similar feat in the built space. Is this about economic benefit? Absolutely not. It’s about taking our communities back. A lot of people bemoan capitalist organizations that effectively strip other countries of their natural resources. This could happen for any number of reasons; some are political, some are not. Whatever the reason, there is no need for our communities to be exploited by developers, most who don’t live there and are solely looking for economic returns instead of leveraging already existing assets.

The following are organizations that have sought to address the issue of diversity in commercial real estate.  I’ve found them to have successful inclusion programs.

a. CCIM’s Cultural Diversity Education Program (CDEP)

b. Project REAP [Real Estate Associate Program]

c. Commercial Real Estate Women (CREW)

It’s our time.

Green Building is all the rage. From the latest version of LEED, LEED 3.0, to discussions of “LEEDigation.”

By Tracy Taylor, Triple Pundit

Not only are smart growth communities good for your quality of life, they are good for your pocketbook as well.  According to Market Acceptance of Smart Growth, a recent report by the EPA, smart growth communities not only see stable market prices over time, but they often see greater retail appreciation than the average suburban development.  Given all the grim news surrounding the housing market over the past years, this is a welcome bit of news to add to the already long list of benefits of smart growth.

Smart growth – what was once the buzzword of the future has already changed the way our neighborhoods look, the way our communities interact, and the way our residents feel about the place they call home.  Characterized by the centralized parks and open spaces, walkable lunch spots and coffee shops, and businesses within minutes of houses, smart growth communities encourage healthier lifestyles and a sense of community.  Less money is supposedly spent on gas, less gas equals less emissions, and less emissions equals cleaner air.  And of course, exercise increases as cars are kept parked in driveways and residents set off on foot or bike for their shorter commutes.

Full | Triple Pundit: EPA Smart Growth Developments Enjoy Stronger Resale Appreciation

If you haven’t seen Professor Albert Bartlett’s lecture ”Arithmetic, Population and Energy: Sustainability 101,” then you should. Seriously, here’s the link, go watch it. It’ll take a while, but you can come back.

OK, got the picture?

So, this is really what we are up against, ourselves. More specifically, it is our growth in terms of population numbers and resource depletion that threatens our continued existence. The planet itself will be fine. Sure, it may suffer to the point that causes our own extinction – or at least drastically reduces our population numbers – but the planet will rebound and “shake us off like a bad case of flees, a surface nuisance” to use George Carlin’s words.

We are essentially lying to ourselves and perpetuating the myth that we can grow our way, however smart, out of this problem. We simply can not. Think about it, we’re saturated with the gospel of growth. Fortunately for us, Bartlett has taken the time to skip ahead and read the ending. We also know intuitively that growth inevitably turns to decline and yet, we desperately cling to the false belief that sustained growth is not only good, but somehow possible.

Architects certainly have our own share of culpability to bare, and green architecture as a response doesn’t seem adequate to the challenge that Bartlett lays out for us. This dilemma requires broad public policies which address the core challenges that growth presents, not just a more polite strategy for growth.

We first need to reassess the language we use to describe what it is we should be doing. Instead of growth, we should be discussing matters in more of a metabolic framework in which both constructive and destructive processes are considered in the maintenance and optimization of our activities across the urban-wilderness spectrum.

The closer our artificial economy reaches the scale of the whole planet, the more essential it is that it conform to the Earth’s metabolic behavior. Only in this way will we achieve the balance necessary for our continued existence.

I certainly do not outright object to strategies like infill development, adaptive reuse, or sustainable design, but I think it’s important for us to step back and see the bigger picture at times. What do you think about how we frame the subject of growth in light of Bartlett’s research?

-

Tommy Manuel is an architect, planner, writer, and artist working in South Carolina and New York City. You can follow him on Twitter @TommyManuel.

After decades of declining productivity, the facility design and construction industry is beginning to benefit from powerful technologies that are poised to transform the way we design, construct and operate buildings. These technologies are commonly referred to as “BIM,” the acronym for Building Information Modeling. I personally prefer VDC, or Virtual Design and Construction, but let’s stick with BIM for the sake of conformity.  

The benefits of BIM are so compelling that they have ushered in whole new project delivery methods, relationships and workflows. Many A/E firms and construction companies have begun to embrace BIM, and are seeing substantial improvements in productivity, construction quality, budget and schedule control.

At the heart of BIM is 3D computer modeling, which greatly enhances the ability of project stakeholders to visualize, collaborate and coordinate their efforts toward the shared goal of completing a project efficiently. Construction prefabrication, decreased materials waste, and enhanced energy modeling applications all dovetail nicely with virtual models.  The lifecycle view of the sustainability world also rings true with BIM, as the model is well-suited for use as a virtual, real-time, as-built owner’s manual, throughout the lifecycle of the facility. Thus the marriage of BIM and sustainability is a potential virtuoso performance in the making.

As facility owners and managers have become savvier of the opportunities for cost savings and operational efficiencies afforded by BIM, they have moved towards mandating that their new facilities utilize BIM, just as many have with LEED. Because “BIM” means various things to differing parties, those owners who have also established standards to define processes, requirements and protocols, have realized the greatest benefits. In doing so, they have defined a roadmap that should not only produce a better, cheaper, faster facility, but also deliver a final, as-built BIM–a digital asset which will provide the foundation for 21st Century facility management.

Among the early-adopting agencies now requiring BIM for all their projects are the GSA, US Army Corps of Engineers, NASA, Veterans Administration, State of Texas, State of Wisconsin and Indiana University. Many others have now followed suite, and the National Institute of Building Sciences and its buildingSMART Alliance have played a leading role in blazing the trail, in development of standards and fostering software interoperability, a major challenge facing the nascent industry.